“The hour has come .... abandon the practice of Communion standing and in the hand”

[latinmasslover]

What a disturbing response. Being fit to be a priest has nothing, absolutely nothing to do with a man’s physical sturdiness. You should be ashamed of yourself for even suggesting such a thing. Pray the Lord forgives such insensitivities and hardheartednesses from those who claim to love and serve him.

Blessed are the hands that bring us the Body and Blood of our Lord!

Please try to remain Christian by leaving out the personal attacks and sticking with the what was actually said, not an imagined mentality behind another’s words.

How would you feel about ordaining the schizophrenic? You support this, yes? And sending a physically weak priest with nasty allergies to a mission where he’s bound to be in the hospital recovering more than serving the people, because he wants to serve in that specific mission? How about a man who knows nothing of theology, but still wants to be a priest?

 

[latinmasslover]

Being that Jesus, on the cross said, “Father forgive them, they know not what they do,”, I wonder what he would feel like doing. Are we not to try and conduct our lives as would Jesus, or was Thomas Merton all wrong when he wrote “The Imitation of Christ”. .
Prayers & Blessings
Deacon Ed B

This the same Jesus that will say “Depart from Me, I knew you not”?

“Father forgive them, for they know not what they do.” The man I wanted to turn over my knee is a Catholic, has been told not to receive, and did it anyway. He knew better, and deserves a good, hard swat on that sacrilegious tongue (his presumptuous hands, too). I would love to do that myself, but I’m not his mother or Judge, therefore I’ll leave it to God.

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

Actually, it’s not unCatholic. Some people cannot do certain things. I would love to be a soldier, or a priest. Guess what? God created me a woman, therefore those options are out. I can moan and groan about it not being fair, but that’s just the way it is. It’s just as ridiculous for me to whine about that as it is for a man to picket the Vatican because he can’t give birth to children. A person wants to be a doctor, but let’s say their missing a couple fingers. A man wants to be a fireman but he’s too weak to run with his gear. A police officer with no aim (which doesn’t get better). A teacher with no patience. A 300 pound exercise instructer. A colonel who’s never been in battle. There are requirements everywhere, desire doesn’t cut it. Look in the Scriptures, where Jesus heals a man and that man wants to abandon all to follow Him. Jesus doesn’t allow it. Just because the desire is there doesn’t mean that one is called to -----whatever it is they want to do. Some need to accept their limitations and do what they can, not require exceptions to be made to fit their wants. I’m not saying the brothers mentioned have that mentality, as I’m sure they don’t. What they do is permitted, and I’m sure they’re very greatful for that. Why do Catholics feel the need to give in to every desire these days?!

Where do the exceptions stop? Should Rome permit confession over the phone? Why not permit us to fulfill our Sunday obligation by watching Mass on EWTN? Women priests? Married priests? Gay priests? Mass outside because building a church is too inconvenient? We need to think ahead and look at where an action will lead.

Your response shows an ignorance of the theology of the priesthood. If the man is called to orders by his ordinary or superior, he is called to be a priest, regardless of any physical disability. The recognized call to orders, in the church, is that call from the bishop or abbot or superior, and recognized in the church as the official call to orders. All the other things you mention have to do with occupations, not vocations. Don’t put them in the same category as they are not the same
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B.

 

[anamchara]

Should men be ordained who may have lost several fingers? Some are not fit to be priests because the physically cannot do what is required. I’m sure these priests are holy, and this situation is very saddening. However, there are other things they could do that would help the parish aside from offering Mass and distributing Communion. We all have crosses to bear.

Ok, not only is this thread ridiculous. But this post says it all and one of the biggest reasons I don’t post in this forum very often.

Fanatical religion driven to a certain point is almost as bad as none at all, but not quite… Will Rogers

 

[latinmasslover]

Your response shows an ignorance of the theology of the priesthood. I the man is called to orders by his ordinary or superior, he is called to be a priest, regardless of any physical disability. The recognized call to orders, in the church, is that call from the bishop or abbot or superior, and recognized in the church as the official call to orders. All the other things you mention have to do with occupations, not vocations. Don’t put them in the same category as they are not the same
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B.

Nevertheless, the comparisons are valid. Where do we draw the line? Should a priest be allowed to distribute if he’s got an uncontrollable “dropsy” tic?

I’ll repeat:
Should Rome permit confession over the phone? Why not permit us to fulfill our Sunday obligation by watching Mass on EWTN? Women priests? Married priests? Gay priests? Reformed pedophiles? Mass outside because building a church is too inconvenient? We need to think ahead and look at where an action will lead.

I’m hurt for those priests, but that doesn’t change the fact: if you can’t do it, you can’t do it. I asked a question a while ago about an elderly priest being allowed to administer the Sacraments when he would (unintentionally) forget the formula. Obviously, he should not. Same thing today. There are other things they can do, it’s not like they have to give up the priesthood and everything that comes with it.

 

[latinmasslover]

Ok, not only is this thread ridiculous. But this post says it all and one of the biggest reasons I don’t post in this forum very often.

Fanatical religion driven to a certain point is almost as bad as none at all, but not quite… Will Rogers

You probably left this forum because, like this post, you couldn’t add anything useful, only a slam. Now that’s Christian charity.

 

[bobzills]

I’ll repeat:
Should Rome permit confession over the phone? Why not permit us to fulfill our Sunday obligation by watching Mass on EWTN? Women priests? Married priests? .

My opinion is no to the first three. For the fourth question on whether or not there should be married priests, I heard that Caridnal Mahony of Los Angeles has mentioned something to the effect that it might be worthwhile to look into this question. I know that in the Eastern Orthodox Churches they do permit a married clergy and also, that presently, married priests are permitted in the Roman Catholic Church under certain limited circumstances, such as for example, if an Eastern Oirthodox priest decided to come over with his wife to the RCC or an Eastern Church in communion with the RCC.

 

[Jeanette_L]

Please try to remain Christian by leaving out the personal attacks and sticking with the what was actually said, not an imagined mentality behind another’s words.

How would you feel about ordaining the schizophrenic? You support this, yes? And sending a physically weak priest with nasty allergies to a mission where he’s bound to be in the hospital recovering more than serving the people, because he wants to serve in that specific mission? How about a man who knows nothing of theology, but still wants to be a priest?

I wasn’t being un-Christian in protesting what seemed to be a very insensitive post toward holy men who have been called to the priesthood with less than perfect physical abilities, the uncharitable post here was not mine.

And what you said did not require any kind of imagination on my part whatsoever, I’m not sure what this means, you were very clear.

So it seems that what you are saying is that a priest who has a physical disability is in the same category as a schizophrenic, am I understanding this part correctly?

Being a priest is a spiritual calling above and beyond anything else, and this call is discerned by those in much higher positions than you or I, who consider much more than what is physically present in the man.

You know, come to think of it, Moses did not feel he was able to be what God had called him to be because he had a speech impediment and protested this calling to God himself, but God told him he was CALLED and God provided help, in the form of his brother Aaron. God will choose whom he will choose, and it has nothing to do with what you or I think is appropriate at all.

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

They will know we are Christians by our love. Would any of you say the things you posted on this thread to Jesus. If you say no, Why are you saying it about his Church, His Vicar, His sacrifice. To what end.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

 

[Joannm]

So, if the Pope had written the Preface, would you feel the same?

The writer has some level of position…secretary to the very commission that will explain the postures in worship… for those who will listen.

Actually, I would. It would be his opinion. If it were written in an official papal or Vatican decree that would be different.

 

[latinmasslover]

I
You know, come to think of it, Moses did not feel he was able to be what God had called him to be because he had a speech impediment and protested this calling to God himself, but God told him he was CALLED and God provided help, in the form of his brother Aaron.

This proves my point.

Moses had a speech impediment. Did God have him do the talking anyway? No, He gave him Aaron for this. The particular priests that have a difficult time distributing Holy Communion should be assisted by those who can do it, or they should stay back (as did Moses) while the other(s) (Aaron) do what needs to be done.

Am I making better sense? I know my earlier posts came off rather hard, I hope this conveys my thoughts better.

 

[CreatioNova]

Since I returned to the church a month ago, I’ve been to mass each week. Once in the NO form and 3 times in the EF form. I intend to go to the EF rite as often as possible.

When I attended the NO rite, I stood in line, and kept my hands closed in prayer and put out my tongue to recieve the Sacred Eucharist.

My eyes were closed - There was what appeared to be an horrifically long time pass before I felt the Eucharist placed on my tongue. I had the feeling I threw the priest a bit when I stuck my tongue out

One of the reasons I want to keep going to the EF rite is that I dont want to take the Eucharist in my hand. I prefer the reverence and devotion demanded by the Latin Mass. Personally I cant wait for the day all chruches have their alter rails replaced - if it ever happends!!!

 

[wow]

Mat 26:26 And whilst they were at supper, Jesus took bread and blessed and broke and gave to his disciples and said: Take ye and eat. This is my body.

It does not say, kneel and open your mouth…

How do you know those who take Communion in the hand are not showing the utmost reverence in their hearts to our Lord?

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

My parish celebrates the Novus Ordo, and there is no problem with people receiving in the hand or on the tongue. i honestly think so many people are so up tight about all of this that things are really being blown out of proportion.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

 

[wow]

My parish celebrates the Novus Ordo, and there is no problem with people receiving in the hand or on the tongue. i honestly think so many people are so up tight about all of this that things are really being blown out of proportion.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

I still would like to know why it bothers people so much. Either is acceptable to our Pope. If he changes that, I’ll be glad to follow his instuctions.

 

[CreatioNova]

No one can know the level of reverence in someones heart. Recieving in the hand is perfectly valid. BUT - there is more of a chance of disrespect or irreverance by this method, in my opinion.

 

[CreatioNova]

I should have added - recieving kneeling down, eyes closed, hands crossed, in silence, is more reverential for me, and thats why I prefer it - I have nothing against those who receive in the hand, shuffling along in a line, and receive under both species.

This is jsut my personal preference - nothing more.

 

[latinmasslover]

They will know we are Christians by our love. Would any of you say the things you posted on this thread to Jesus.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

I already have. Jesus, being the King of all hearts, knows that I’m not saying any of this because I desire perfection from everything. He knows that it is love for His Church that I speak it. He warns against scandal, and I’m a bit sensitive to anything that may cause scandal, which is why I’m a bit bold in this area. Nothing would please me more than to withdraw from all contradiction and go to “that desert place” with Him, but (at least for me…some are called to it) that would be cowardice/laziness.

God knows the heart, and I’m trying more every day (though I haven’t succeeded much, it seems) to look at the heart of a person rather than just the appearance of what they’re doing/not doing. The external doesn’t override the internal, but it’s still important. This is why we don’t use paper cups to hold the Blood of Christ, why we aren’t satsified with a barn for our church, why we dress up for Mass. Jesus doesn’t condemn the externals, He condemns the mentality that the externals justify, sort of a “works without faith” doctrine, so to speak.

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

No one can know the level of reverence in someones heart. Recieving in the hand is perfectly valid. BUT - there is more of a chance of disrespect or irreverance by this method, in my opinion.

You are correct, in your own opinion, and thats as far as it goes. other peoples opinion are just as valid, as long as they all agree with me…Sorry, just kidding, someone has to do something to lighten up all of this. Whatever opinion one person has is not going to be changed by someone else expressing his or hers. if honest inquiry is made as to the teaching of the church, that is a different matter and serious consideration should be given to what is posted. That said, God’s blessings on you all, In the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Amen Good night
Deacon Ed B

 

[latinmasslover]

Mat 26:26 And whilst they were at supper, Jesus took bread and blessed and broke and gave to his disciples and said: Take ye and eat. This is my body.

It does not say, kneel and open your mouth…

How do you know those who take Communion in the hand are not showing the utmost reverence in their hearts to our Lord?

Jesus also didn’t say: hold out your hand.

When I first came back to the Church that is exactly what I did, and I can’t tell you what an honor it was for me to be able to touch Jesus, to hold Him in my hand. Before placing Him in my mouth, I whispered “thank You,” kissed Him, and then consumed Him.

However, He is my God and Judge, not just my buddy and pal. The Church did away with this practice for a reason, and since it’s been permitted we have not seen reverence for Him increase.

John Paul II said that it is a privilege of the ordained to touch the sacred vessels, and as I recall, the vessels are not more sacred than the Body and Blood of Christ.

We cannot judge the heart of another, but watching (I’m speaking of nonCatholics observing the Mass) people kneel and receive on the tongue inspires more reverence than watching them receive in the hand and popping Him into their mouth like an M&M.