fasting before communion

[FinnJames]

I know that Orthodox Christians are supposed to fast before receiving the Eucharist, but why do we do it?

Related questions for church historians:
Has the per-communion fast always been a part of Orthodoxy, or is it an innovation agreed on at one of the councils or later?
Was there once a time when liturgy started early in the morning rather than mid-morning (10 a.m. seems common)?

 

[HaydenTE]

The reason why we fast is to focus on our real hunger, our hunger for unity with Christ, by making it physical. I don't know where the pre-communion fast came from, but fasting itself was a big part of the Early Church.

 

[Iconodule]

I know some monasteries will typically celebrate the liturgy at the end of an all-night-vigil and it will be considerably earlier in the morning than parish practice. Whether this reflects a more ancient practice, I don't know.

 

[Second Chance]

The reason why we fast is to focus on our real hunger, our hunger for unity with Christ, by making it physical. I don't know where the pre-communion fast came from, but fasting itself was a big part of the Early Church.

Great answer. How close are you to becoming a catechumen?

 

[scamandrius]

I know that Orthodox Christians are supposed to fast before receiving the Eucharist, but why do we do it?

Related questions for church historians:
Has the per-communion fast always been a part of Orthodoxy, or is it an innovation agreed on at one of the councils or later?
Was there once a time when liturgy started early in the morning rather than mid-morning (10 a.m. seems common)?

I think you have a misunderstanding to the approach of the development of the Canons.  The Canons were codified to confirm and enforce existing practice, not to come up with a novel solution to a problem.  That may be how Canon Law works in the western churches but not in the Orthodox Church.

But, let's for a moment assume that a council, "innovated" something.  To me your use of the word "innovation" with regards to fasting suggests that fasting really wasn't that important or shouldn't be regarded as important until it was codified.  Innovation can often have negative connotations as something that misses the spirit at the expense of making the letter the more important. 

FAsting is important; is it vital to our salvation?  I'd say no.  I don't know quite how to read the tone of your post, but it sounds like your just dismissing it out of hand because it is in canon law. Do you not think the canons are good and useful for instruction and practice of the faith?

 

[LenInSebastopol]

I often am in error, but The Church continued a practiced tradition inherited from the Jewish Way that fasted and probably did so for various "reasons", so an inquiry may start in that region of The Book.
Have to ask did Greeks practice it as well?

 

[rakovsky]

I know that Orthodox Christians are supposed to fast before receiving the Eucharist, but why do we do it?

Related questions for church historians:
Has the per-communion fast always been a part of Orthodoxy, or is it an innovation agreed on at one of the councils or later?
Was there once a time when liturgy started early in the morning rather than mid-morning (10 a.m. seems common)?

Strictly speaking Matins are supposed to begin as the sun rises and the Six Psalms are prayed, starting with the one about rising in the morning. Right after matins comes liturgy. Our parish has liturgy at 9 AM.

If you go to sunrise Matins like the priest would, and it takes you serious time to get to church, like a half hour, then breakfast is not really an issue but a potential diversion.

Breakfast means BREAKING a FAST.

Orthodoxy is very very old.

 

[rakovsky]

If people are coming to church just to eat small morsels for satiating hunger, first of all you probably have a big problem besides just lack of caring about the Eucharist.

But second of all if that was the issue, then I think fasting maybe could be argued against on scriptural grounds. But that is not what you are supposed to do .

 

[HaydenTE]

The reason why we fast is to focus on our real hunger, our hunger for unity with Christ, by making it physical. I don't know where the pre-communion fast came from, but fasting itself was a big part of the Early Church.

Great answer. How close are you to becoming a catechumen?

I'm planning to start the processes soon. I only just found a parish that I can attend recently.

 

[Bob2]

I know that Orthodox Christians are supposed to fast before receiving the Eucharist, but why do we do it?

Related questions for church historians:
Has the per-communion fast always been a part of Orthodoxy, or is it an innovation agreed on at one of the councils or later?
Was there once a time when liturgy started early in the morning rather than mid-morning (10 a.m. seems common)?

Strictly speaking Matins are supposed to begin as the sun rises and the Six Psalms are prayed, starting with the one about rising in the morning. Right after matins comes liturgy. . Our parish has liturgy at 9 AM.

If you go to sunrise Matins like the priest would, and it takes you serious time to get to church, like a half hour, then breakfast is not really an issue but a potential diversion.

Breakfast means BREAKING a FAST.

Orthodoxy is very very old.

Sunrise is suppose to occur towards the end of Matins at "Glory to Thee who has shown us the light." That's part why I like when Matins is down in the evening and the 6 Psalms are read in darkness except for the readers candle and other lampadas/candles

Also 1st hour, 3rd hour, and 6th hour would be between Matins and Liturgy.

 

[scamandrius]

I know that Orthodox Christians are supposed to fast before receiving the Eucharist, but why do we do it?

Related questions for church historians:
Has the per-communion fast always been a part of Orthodoxy, or is it an innovation agreed on at one of the councils or later?
Was there once a time when liturgy started early in the morning rather than mid-morning (10 a.m. seems common)?

Strictly speaking Matins are supposed to begin as the sun rises and the Six Psalms are prayed, starting with the one about rising in the morning. Right after matins comes liturgy. . Our parish has liturgy at 9 AM.

If you go to sunrise Matins like the priest would, and it takes you serious time to get to church, like a half hour, then breakfast is not really an issue but a potential diversion.

Breakfast means BREAKING a FAST.

Orthodoxy is very very old.

Sunrise is suppose to occur towards the end of Matins at "Glory to Thee who has shown us the light." That's part why I like when Matins is down in the evening and the 6 Psalms are read in darkness except for the readers candle and other lampadas/candles

Also 1st hour, 3rd hour, and 6th hour would be between Matins and Liturgy.

Actually, I have heard that the Ainoi (Psalms 148-150) especially the verse "Praise Him, O sun and moon" is supposed to correspond roughly to the rising of the Sun.  WHen I spent time at the monastery, it was always timed perfectly and the first rays of sunlight started peering through the dome at that time. It was beautiful.

 

[FinnJames]

I know that Orthodox Christians are supposed to fast before receiving the Eucharist, but why do we do it?

Related questions for church historians:
Has the per-communion fast always been a part of Orthodoxy, or is it an innovation agreed on at one of the councils or later?
Was there once a time when liturgy started early in the morning rather than mid-morning (10 a.m. seems common)?

I think you have a misunderstanding to the approach of the development of the Canons.  The Canons were codified to confirm and enforce existing practice, not to come up with a novel solution to a problem.  That may be how Canon Law works in the western churches but not in the Orthodox Church.

But, let's for a moment assume that a council, "innovated" something.  To me your use of the word "innovation" with regards to fasting suggests that fasting really wasn't that important or shouldn't be regarded as important until it was codified.  Innovation can often have negative connotations as something that misses the spirit at the expense of making the letter the more important. 

FAsting is important; is it vital to our salvation?  I'd say no.  I don't know quite how to read the tone of your post, but it sounds like your just dismissing it out of hand because it is in canon law. Do you not think the canons are good and useful for instruction and practice of the faith?

Thank you, scamandrius, for using a request for information to throw the maximal negative light possible on the questioner. I'm exempt from fasting before mid morning communion for health reasons.

 

[Indocern]

I know that Orthodox Christians are supposed to fast before receiving the Eucharist, but why do we do it?

Related questions for church historians:
Has the per-communion fast always been a part of Orthodoxy, or is it an innovation agreed on at one of the councils or later?
Was there once a time when liturgy started early in the morning rather than mid-morning (10 a.m. seems common)?

Fasting means cleaning the body and spirit, fast days for orthodox christians are given directly by God.

 

[Mor Ephrem]

I know that Orthodox Christians are supposed to fast before receiving the Eucharist, but why do we do it?

Fasting is a form of spiritual preparation, like prayer, confession of sins, living according to the commandments, etc.  But fasting is among the forms of preparation that involve the body as well as the soul. 

Has the per-communion fast always been a part of Orthodoxy, or is it an innovation agreed on at one of the councils or later?

"Always"?  I'm not sure.  Very early on, it seems that the Eucharist was the final act, so to speak, of a community meal, so there would not have been a "pre-Communion fast" in the way we normally understand it.  But when the community meal was dropped (also relatively early), leaving only the celebration of the Eucharist, it seems that some sort of pre-Communion fast became attached to it.  I don't think any council mandated it and then it became a custom, I think it's more likely that it just became the practice and councils simply recognised it, if they addressed it at all. 

Was there once a time when liturgy started early in the morning rather than mid-morning (10 a.m. seems common)?

The time of the celebration has varied and continues to vary even until today based on pastoral and liturgical requirements.  Where I live, the earliest Sunday morning Liturgy I am aware of begins at 5am and the latest begins at 11am.  In between is a lot of 7am, 8am, 9am, and 10am.   

 

[Mor Ephrem]

I think you have a misunderstanding to the approach of the development of the Canons.  The Canons were codified to confirm and enforce existing practice, not to come up with a novel solution to a problem. 

Actually, both exist.

FAsting is important; is it vital to our salvation?  I'd say no. 

Perhaps you define "vital" differently, but assuming a typical dictionary definition, I disagree with you.  It is vital. 

 

[Iconodule]

The monastery closest to me as weekday liturgies at the convenient hour of 3:30 am.

 

[Mor Ephrem]

The monastery closest to me as weekday liturgies at the convenient hour of 3:30 am.

White Haven?

My local monasteries are much more reasonable. 

 

[scamandrius]

I know that Orthodox Christians are supposed to fast before receiving the Eucharist, but why do we do it?

Related questions for church historians:
Has the per-communion fast always been a part of Orthodoxy, or is it an innovation agreed on at one of the councils or later?
Was there once a time when liturgy started early in the morning rather than mid-morning (10 a.m. seems common)?

I think you have a misunderstanding to the approach of the development of the Canons.  The Canons were codified to confirm and enforce existing practice, not to come up with a novel solution to a problem.  That may be how Canon Law works in the western churches but not in the Orthodox Church.

But, let's for a moment assume that a council, "innovated" something.  To me your use of the word "innovation" with regards to fasting suggests that fasting really wasn't that important or shouldn't be regarded as important until it was codified.  Innovation can often have negative connotations as something that misses the spirit at the expense of making the letter the more important. 

FAsting is important; is it vital to our salvation?  I'd say no.  I don't know quite how to read the tone of your post, but it sounds like your just dismissing it out of hand because it is in canon law. Do you not think the canons are good and useful for instruction and practice of the faith?

Thank you, scamandrius, for using a request for information to throw the maximal negative light possible on the questioner. I'm exempt from fasting before mid morning communion for health reasons.

I wrote "I don't know how to read the tone of your post."  I didn't know something, I admitted I didn't know something and I made a n assumption. Get over yourself.

 

[scamandrius]

I think you have a misunderstanding to the approach of the development of the Canons.  The Canons were codified to confirm and enforce existing practice, not to come up with a novel solution to a problem. 

Actually, both exist.

FAsting is important; is it vital to our salvation?  I'd say no. 

Perhaps you define "vital" differently, but assuming a typical dictionary definition, I disagree with you.  It is vital.

Maybe I should have used the word "required."

 

[Mor Ephrem]

I think you have a misunderstanding to the approach of the development of the Canons.  The Canons were codified to confirm and enforce existing practice, not to come up with a novel solution to a problem. 

Actually, both exist.

FAsting is important; is it vital to our salvation?  I'd say no. 

Perhaps you define "vital" differently, but assuming a typical dictionary definition, I disagree with you.  It is vital.

Maybe I should have used the word "required."

Fasting is "vital" and "required". 

 

[Iconodule]

The monastery closest to me as weekday liturgies at the convenient hour of 3:30 am.

White Haven?

My local monasteries are much more reasonable. 

Yeah, them.

 

[Mor Ephrem]

The monastery closest to me as weekday liturgies at the convenient hour of 3:30 am.

White Haven?

My local monasteries are much more reasonable. 

Yeah, them.

I used to visit them a lot.  Wonderful place. 

 

[scamandrius]

I think you have a misunderstanding to the approach of the development of the Canons.  The Canons were codified to confirm and enforce existing practice, not to come up with a novel solution to a problem. 

Actually, both exist.

FAsting is important; is it vital to our salvation?  I'd say no. 

Perhaps you define "vital" differently, but assuming a typical dictionary definition, I disagree with you.  It is vital.

Maybe I should have used the word "required."

Fasting is "vital" and "required".

In a sense, I would agree, but I refrain from going "all in" so as not to risk sounding Pharisaical about it.

 

[Mor Ephrem]

I think you have a misunderstanding to the approach of the development of the Canons.  The Canons were codified to confirm and enforce existing practice, not to come up with a novel solution to a problem. 

Actually, both exist.

FAsting is important; is it vital to our salvation?  I'd say no. 

Perhaps you define "vital" differently, but assuming a typical dictionary definition, I disagree with you.  It is vital.

Maybe I should have used the word "required."

Fasting is "vital" and "required".

In a sense, I would agree, but I refrain from going "all in" so as not to risk sounding Pharisaical about it.

There's nothing Pharisaical about it.  Fasting is required, "vital to our salvation".  People require and are granted a blessing to lessen or even omit it for legitimate reasons all the time, but that exception proves the rule.  No one gets a dispensation because "it's not necessary". 

 

[Alveus Lacuna]

The monastery closest to me as weekday liturgies at the convenient hour of 3:30 am.

White Haven?

My local monasteries are much more reasonable. 

Yeah, them.

I'm gonna guess they must be an Athonite Monastery, maybe under Elder Ephraim?

 

[Iconodule]

The monastery closest to me as weekday liturgies at the convenient hour of 3:30 am.

White Haven?

My local monasteries are much more reasonable. 

Yeah, them.

I'm gonna guess they must be an Athonite Monastery, maybe under Elder Ephraim?

Yes, they are.

 

[Alveus Lacuna]

Yes, they are.

My experience of the original in Arizona was was more intense and harsh than I was expecting as an American. No one was unkind or anything, but the environment didn't strike me as very "nurturing" or "Medicinal/hospitalish" or whatever. But the friend I traveled with had a very different experience than I did.

 

[Iconodule]

I've never been to the Arizona monastery, but I've been to the White Haven monastery and also the men's monastery in Roscoe, NY and I never got a harsh vibe from them. The monastics I spoke with were all friendly and welcoming.

The White Haven monastery is about an hour away from St. Tikhon's, btw, so anyone who visits one might as well see the other if time allows.

 

[scamandrius]

I think you have a misunderstanding to the approach of the development of the Canons.  The Canons were codified to confirm and enforce existing practice, not to come up with a novel solution to a problem. 

Actually, both exist.

FAsting is important; is it vital to our salvation?  I'd say no. 

Perhaps you define "vital" differently, but assuming a typical dictionary definition, I disagree with you.  It is vital.

Maybe I should have used the word "required."

Fasting is "vital" and "required".

In a sense, I would agree, but I refrain from going "all in" so as not to risk sounding Pharisaical about it.

There's nothing Pharisaical about it.  Fasting is required, "vital to our salvation".  People require and are granted a blessing to lessen or even omit it for legitimate reasons all the time, but that exception proves the rule.  No one gets a dispensation because "it's not necessary".

I'm not trying to argue that it is not necessary.  I just don't know how to phrase it.