Frequent Holy Communion

Frequent Holy Communion

First, let’s start with two quotes from the Council of Trent:

 

“If anyone says that in the Mass a true and real sacrifice is not offered to God, or that the act of offering is nothing else than Christ being given to us to eat: let him be anathema” (Denz. 948).

 

“The Holy Council wishes indeed that at each Mass the faithful who are present should communicate, not only in spiritual desire, but sacramentally, by the actual reception of the Eucharist.”

 

That “de fide” statement from Trent is clear and concise. However, let’s expound on it just a little bit. Fr. Cekada, in his book, “Work of Human Hands,” describes the situation and attitude of frequent Holy Communion before the Second Vatican Council:

 

“The two-fold rite (second Confiteor and Ecce Agnus Dei) expresses the distinction between the role of the priest at Mass and that of the faithful who are present. The priest receives Communion because this is an integral part of the Sacrifice. Reception by the faithful present, though praiseworthy, is not integral to the Sacrifice itself, and the rubrics of the traditional Mass reflected this. In many places, moreover, it was not customary to distribute Holy Communion to the faithful during Solemn Mass or Pontifical Solemn Mass, either because doing so would have greatly lengthened the time for the service or because many people found it easier to Communicate at an earlier Low Mass, due to the fasting rules.”

 

Now we come to St. Pius X and his desire for frequent Communion in the Catholic world. “Without specifying how often the faithful should communicate, Christ simply bids us eat His Flesh and drink His Blood, and warns us, that if we do not do so, we shall not have life in us (John 6, etc.).”[1] In the early Church at Jerusalem, Holy Communion was received everyday. This was so for number of different reasons. Tertullian, St. Cyprian, St. Jerome, and St. Ambrose mention frequent Communion, and Fr. Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P. beautifully teaches that, “nothing is more gratuitous and desirable than the Beatific Vision, and in this life nothing is more so than Holy Communion.”[2]

 

The prescriptions for worthy reception by St. Pius X are:

• Being in a state of grace (free from mortal sin)
• Observance of the Eucharistic Fast.
• Right Intention. (e.g., receiving not out of vanity or because everybody is receiving).
• Dispositions. (e.g., Disposition of body: suitable dress, external cleanliness, Eucharistic fast, proper preparation to receive the Blessed Sacrament & proper thanksgiving after receiving the Blessed Sacrament. Disposition of soul: freedom from excommunication and personal interdict, freedom from mortal sin, actual devotion, cf. Prümmer, Handbook of Moral Theology, pg. 269-270).

 

Dispositions used to be highly debated but as Fr. Dominic Prümmer, O.P. states in his Moral Theology manual, “After the promulgation of this decree (Sac. Cong. Conc., Dec. 16, 1905), all ecclesiastical writers are to cease from contentious controversy concerning the dispositions required for frequent and daily Communion.”

 

In the crisis of mass apostasy of today, it seems these prescriptions of frequent reception have fallen into disuse, and parishes, in general, don’t follow all the prescriptions. Couple that with the current state of the Holy See, the mass apostasy mentioned above, which we are witnessing today, and the decadence of post-modern society, some say it’s a dangerous time for the practice of frequent/daily reception of Holy Communion. When St. Pius X and a few other popes before him (Clement(?), Pius IX, Leo XIII) were advocating frequent reception of Holy Communion, the Western world at the level of the faithful (obviously not entire countries at this point) were still Catholic and completely believed in the True Presence of Our Lord Jesus Christ in the Blessed Sacrament - Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity. That’s obviously not the case anymore. Belief in the True Presence had dwindled drastically ^[3] and enemies of the Church are always trying to find opportunity to commit sacrilege against the Blessed Sacrament and steal Our Lord from the tabernacle. And these terrible, sacrilegious instances are multiplying. So, personally, I wouldn’t mind seeing Holy Communion Services Outside-of-Mass again and making that a semi-norm, and having special catechetical sermons on Frequent Communion in order safeguard the practice. Frequent Communion should be the norm, and it’s a wonderful and necessary teaching for the interior life of a Catholic, and everybody should be in a position to practice frequent Holy Communion. However, at the same time the Blessed Sacrament needs to be protected. And in order for there to be frequent Holy Communion there needs to be the proper education of what all the requirements are for it, and the proper environments for it.

 

Also, what helps me with practicing frequent Holy Communion is the frequent recitation of the Litany of Reparation.[4] I absolutely love it and, once and while, I offer my Communions in reparation for all the sacrileges, profanations, impieties, blasphemies, and crimes committed against Our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament. Making multiple Spiritual Communions throughout the day is also praiseworthy and can help one with maintaining the proper dispositions for receiving Holy Communion. Fr. Prümmer states,

 

“A spiritual Communion is the desire for receiving the Eucharist sacramentally when there are obstacles making this impossible. All ascetical writers strongly recommend the exercise of making a spiritual Communion,  as productive of many fruits from the act of charity inspiring it”[5]

 

And St. Thomas Aquinas defined a spiritual Communion as “an ardent desire to receive Jesus in the Most Holy Sacrament and in lovingly embracing Him as if we had actually received Him.” Also, “Our Lord showed St. Catherine of Siena two chalices, saying, “In this golden chalice I put your sacramental Communions. In the silver chalice I put your spiritual Communions. Both are quite pleasing to Me.”” From these two Saints and the moral theologian Fr. Prümmer, it can be seen that it is very wonderful to make frequent Spiritual Communions. And this will help cultivate affections and thereby aid in our intentions and dispositions for Holy Communion. 

 

And of course, sixty to seventy years ago, Holy Communion Services outside-of-Mass were common, there was also no Holy Communion on Good Friday, and the precept of the Church to receive at Easter also included Christmas (so twice a year in total). These practices helped inculcate a proper notion of receiving Holy Communion not only frequently but worthily as well. And so the pre-55 liturgy in general, will help educate the Faithful and they will see what has always been taught in Dogmatic Theology, that “the Mass can be validly offered without the distribution of Holy Communion to the faithful, or even the presence of the congregation or even the Mass-server. We note that the Protestants’ feast theory corresponds to their heretical rejection of the private Mass.”[6]

 

So, instruction from the clergy on this topic will be good for frequent reception of Holy Communion and not drive people away from it, because it will make them realize how special it is and that there is something truly wonderful and awesome going on.  Because I think we want people to practice frequent Holy Communion for the right reasons and in the right way, and I think the right reasons and right way haven’t been taught, nor observed, for a long time because of the current state of Catholic schools, with their lack of catechism and the downward spiral of liberal, post-modern society.

 

It is important to fully understand the prescriptions of St. Pius X, and so we present, in full, the Saint’s prescriptions from the Sacred Congregation of the Council from Dec. 16, 1905:

 

1.     Frequent and daily Communion, as a practice most earnestly desired by Christ our Lord and by the Catholic Church, should be open to all the faithful, of whatever rank and condition of life; so that no one who is in the state of grace, and who approaches the Holy Table with a right and devout intention (recta piaque mente) can be prohibited therefrom.

 

2.         A right intention consists in this: that he who approaches the Holy Table should do so, not out of routine, or vain glory, or human respect, but that he wish to please God, to be more closely united with Him by charity, and to have recourse to this divine remedy for his weakness and defects.

 

3.   Although it is especially fitting that those who receive Communion frequently or daily should be free from venial sins, at least from such as are fully deliberate, and from any affection thereto, nevertheless, it is sufficient that they be free from mortal sin, with the purpose of never sinning in the future; and if they have this sincere purpose, it is impossible by that daily communicants should gradually free themselves even from venial sins, and from all affection thereto.

 

4.       Since, however, the Sacraments of the New Law, though they produce their effect ex opere operato, nevertheless, produce a great effect in proportion as the dispositions of the recipient are better, therefore, one should take care that Holy Communion be preceded by careful preparation, and followed by an appropriate thanksgiving, according to each one's strength, circumstances and duties.

 

5.   That the practice of frequent and daily Communion may be carried out with greater prudence and more fruitful merit, the confessor's advice should be asked. Confessors, however, must take care not to dissuade anyone from frequent or daily Communion, provided he is found to be in a state of grace and approaches with a right intention.

 

6.      But since it is plain that by the frequent or daily reception of the Holy Eucharist union with Christ is strengthened, the spiritual life more abundantly sustained, the soul more richly endowed with virtues, and the pledge of everlasting happiness more securely bestowed on the recipient, therefore, parish priests, confessors and preachers, according to the approved teaching of the Roman Catechism should exhort the faithful frequently and with great zeal to this devout and salutary practice.

 

7.     Frequent and daily Communion is to be promoted especially in religious Institutes of all kinds; with regard to which, however, the Decree Quemadmodum issued on December 17, 1890, by the Sacred Congregation of Bishops and Regulars, is to remain in force. It is to be promoted especially in ecclesiastical seminaries, where students are preparing for the service of the altar; as also in all Christian establishments which in any way provide for the care of the young (ephebeis).

 

8.    In the case of religious Institutes, whether of solemn or simple vows, in whose rules, or constitutions, or calendars, Communion is assigned to certain fixed days, such regulations are to be considered as directive and not preceptive. The prescribed number of Communions should be regarded as a minimum but not a limit to the devotion of the religious. Therefore, access to the Eucharistic Table, whether it be rather frequently or daily, must always be freely open to them according to the norms above laid down in this Decree. Furthermore, in order that all religious of both sexes may clearly understand the prescriptions of this Decree, the Superior of each house will provide that it be read in community, in the vernacular, every year within the octave of the Feast of Corpus Christi.

 

9.   Finally, after the publication of this Decree, all ecclesiastical writers are to cease from contentious controversy concerning the dispositions requisite for frequent and daily Communion.

 

The Church has always supported and taught the frequent reception of Holy Communion and Daily Holy Communion throughout history. Daily Holy Communion is particularly recommended for religious and seminarians.[7] Fr. Garrigou-Lagrange, and other spiritual authors support frequent Holy Communion/Daily Holy Communion, even Popes previous to St. Pius X. The “issue” is not the teaching itself but the culture that has developed in post-modernity which makes the implementation of Frequent/Daily Holy Communion difficult. The fact that the majority of American Catholics don’t believe in the true presence is one of the examples of how the circumstances around frequent Holy Communion has changed. In order to continue supporting and enforcing the teaching of frequent Holy Communion it is suggested that Pastors of Souls keep these six suggestions in mind: 

 

1.   Pastors of souls must inculcate the culture that once permeated around the beautiful teaching of Frequent Holy Communion.

 

2.   Pastors of souls must teach and preach the conditions and rules of receiving Holy Communion frequently and not take for granted that just because the parish is traditional or conservative that all the Faithful know the rules and conditions, and practice them.

 

3.      In accordance with the decree of the Sacred Congregation of the Council, have Pastors of souls help those who are unsure, or confused, or are in need of guidance, and to consult their confessors in confession, or in spiritual direction, thereby inculcating the culture centered around Frequent Communion.

 

4.     Also, in accordance with the decree of the Sacred Congregation of the Council, Pastors of souls should read, in the vernacular, the prescriptions for frequent Holy Communion from the pulpit, every year, within the Octave of Corpus Christi.

 

5.  Reinstitute Holy Communion Services Outside-of-Mass to give the Faithful ample opportunity and the option to receive Holy Communion outside-of-Mass and to safeguard the requirements for frequent/daily Holy Communion; as well as recommend the preference for receiving Holy Communion within Mass as far as this is possible by recommending that they receive at a Low Mass if fasting is difficult or if the Solemn Mass/Pontifical Mass will have a large amount of Faithful.

 

 

© Stefano Pio, 2026

---

[1] Catholic Encyclopedia, 1913 ed.

[2] Cf. Summa Theol. IIIa, q. 79, a. 1 ad 2um.

[3] Recent Pew Polls suggest that 84% of Catholics in the United States do not believe in the dogma of the True Presence.

[4] https://vultuschristi.org/index.php/2016/02/litany-of-reparation/

[5] cf. Prümmer, Manual of Moral Theology, pg. 269.

[6] “Since many faithful today seem to view the Mass as a “commemorative meal” or “feast” in line with this Protestant theory, we consider it useful briefly to examine this view: first in relation to the element of the meal or feast, then in relation to the element of commemoration.

Now one of the names by which the Catholic Church calls the Mass is “Supper”, because it was “instituted during the salutary mystery of the Last Supper” as the Catechism of Trent explains (in the section on the names of the Mass at the beginning of the treatment of the Blessed Eucharist), but it is not essentially a supper but a sacrifice, as we have shown above.

In consequence of the definitions of Trent, the Mass may only be described as a supper if the sacrifice is identical with a supper. This in fact could accord with a problematical, minority theological opinion espoused for example by St. Robert Bellarmine, who argues that the Holy Communion of the celebrant constitutes the destruction of the Divine Victim.

But clearly we are not justified to present as Catholic doctrine a minority view, and a minority view which is problematic at that; and much less are we justified in defining it in the very same terms as were used by the Protestant heresiarchs.

The common opinion of the theologians, including St. Thomas Aquinas, is rather that the sacrifice consists in the Consecration alone (Summa III 82.10). As for the Holy Communion, St. Thomas argues that it is a participation in the effect of the sacrifice (Summa III 83.1). We may therefore conclude that the Holy Communion is an integral, rather than an essential, part of the Mass. This also corresponds to the statement in Mediator Dei (562) that “ad…sacrificii integritatem habendam requiritur solummodo, ut sacerdos caelesti pabulo reficiatur: for the integrity of the sacrifice it is only necessary that the priest is restored by the heavenly food.”  

We cannot define the Mass as a “supper” or a “meal” then; much less can we describe it as a “feast”, for a feast requires the participation of a number of people, whereas the Mass can be validly offered without the Communion, or even the presence, of the congregation or even the Mass-server. We note that the Protestants’ feast theory corresponds to their heretical rejection of the private Mass (cf. the Council of Trent S.22 ch.6, can. 8).

In regard to the commemorative element of the Mass, the fact that it commemorates the Last Supper clearly has no bearing on its essence; and the Council of Trent declares that the Mass both commemorates and renders present the Sacrifice of Calvary (S.22 cap.1): “…Sacrificium, quo cruentum illud semel in cruce peragendum repraesentaretur, eiusque memoria in finem usque saeculi permaneret…”, but anathematizes any-one who should say that it is a mere commemoration of the Sacrifice of the Cross (S.22 can.3): “… Si quis  dixerit Missæ Sacrificium… nudam commemorationem sacrificiii in cruce peracti…Anathema sit”.”  – Don Pietro Leone. Cf. the Council of Trent S. 22 ch. 6, can. 8.

[7] Sacred Congregation of the Council, Dec. 16, 1905, no. 7.