I
I_Believe
Guest
lol, I know what you meant. I was referring to ultra modernists and those who blindly follow them. Which is unfair to wolves really
Perhaps minions would be a better word to describe them than wolves is.
“The hour has come .... abandon the practice of Communion standing and in the hand”
- Status
Perhaps minions would be a better word to describe them than wolves is.
I
I_Believe
Guest
I don’t understand why people still speak God’s name in vain either, especially when disregarding His merciful quality.OMG I didn’t know anyone still had those sorts of attitudes.
I
I_Believe
Guest
Well, spades are spadesHa. Good one
E
EasterJoy
Guest
It is established historically that the faithful took the Blessed Sacrament to their homes. The early Popes were on board with that. Later ones forbade the practice, and on firm ground. Both usages have their place, then.
Let the bishops examine it, by all means. I will do as directed and let others do the same. Beyond that, I think my opinion is not required. Let us pray for those of whom so much *is *required.
W
wow
Guest
I’m sorry, I don’t get what you mean. You stated the following is what is confusing to me.
Return to kneeling is ok but to return to taking Communion in the hand is an error?
I don’t think returning to the way tradition was handed down from the early Church is an error. The early Church followed the way they were taught by the Lord.
Until the Pope says accepting Communion in the hand is wrong I don’t think we should be divided on this point. This is just my opinion.
J
JReducation
Guest
EasterJoy
I believe that you have struck a very important point here. The laity is not being asked to cast their vote on the renewal of the liturgical renewal.
Maybe it’s an American thing. We’re so used to a democratic society where we have a voice and vote on almost everything that we often forget that the Church does not always function that way.
From what I saw this week, I believe there is nothing to fear. The Holy Father seems to be drawing an interesting line. He’s trying to preserve tradtions and at the same time he trying to show that the changes in the liturgy can fit comfortably into the tradition of the Church without rupture.
I believe that he’s really calling for discipline, not a discontinuation of the OF. His letter to the bishops regarding the Motu Proprio was clear that the OF cannot be abandoned.
His actions during the masses that he celebrated this week included such actions as communion in the hand, celebrating mass in English and so forth.
And yet, his presence, the simplicity and depth of his message drew people into the reflection of the scripture readings of the mass, which led them to a reverent approach to the Eucharist.
I believe that when you prepare people with a simple, but profound reflection of the Word in the Liturgy of the Word, you can transition smoothly and reverently into the Liturgy of the Eucharist.
This reverence is part of the tradition of the Church.
In this sense, I believe that he showed us that the liturgy in the OF can conform to tradition, without being a regression to the past.
I’m not sure if this is comming out clearly. I hope so.
JR
L
lovesMary
Guest
I think that we all have a practically unlimited supply of logs to keep us busy for a lifetime!
I
I_Believe
Guest
J
Jeanette_L
Guest
Amen and Amen.
E
EasterJoy
Guest
Me, too.
E
elt1956
Guest
I think we had better be VERY sure those logs are out.
L
latinmasslover
Guest
I didn’t say anything about the early Church, I was referring to the Last Supper. Is there any evidence to support the common claim?
L
latinmasslover
Guest
lol, I know what you meant. I was referring to ultra modernists and those who blindly follow them. Which is unfair to wolves really
Perhaps minions would be a better word to describe them than wolves is.
love ya
D
Deacon_Ed_B
Guest
So as not to get into a round robin argument, is there any evidence to show that there is not. At a passover meal it was common for each person to feed himself or herself. Not for the host to put the food in each persons mouth. Everyone keeps saying, lets do it like the early Church. But when its pointed out that thats what the early Church commonly did, all of a sudden a specific, non provable (either way) is brought up. Smooth move if you can pull it off. As a passover meal, this was the most significant in our salvation history, as this was the passing over from the Old Covenant to the New.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B
D
DustinsDad
Guest
Only those who think we have to “rediscover” truth. I.E. protestants (no offence).
If we trust the guidance of the Holy Spirit over the centuries and millenia, we won’t feel the need to second guess so many traditonal practices that arose after contemplating Divine Truths, and that even came from Apostolic Tradition:
And whereas such is the nature of man, that, without external helps, he cannot easily be raised to the meditation of divine things; therefore has holy Mother Church instituted certain rites, to wit that certain things be pronounced in the mass in a low, and others in a louder, tone. She has likewise employed ceremonies, such as mystic benedictions, lights, incense, vestments, and many other things of this kind, derived from an apostolical discipline and tradition, whereby both the majesty of so great a sacrifice might be recommended, and the minds of the faithful be excited, by those visible signs of religion and piety, to the contemplation of those most sublime things which are hidden in this sacrifice.
Trent, Session XXII, Chapter V
Well, then the fairquestion is “why question Communion in the Hand?”
The answer is twofold:
*]Because of how it came about.
*]Because of the resulting (or at least strikingly coinciding) loss of faith in the the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist with said practice.
Peace in Christ,
DustinsDad
W
wow
Guest
Maybe we should rephrase your question abit before trying to answer.
Why did the same Holy Mother Church, at a later time, change it to allow taking Communion in the hand?
Throughout this thread people, who see nothing wrong with taking Communion in the hand, have stated they would do however the Church decrees.
M
MrS
Guest
“why question (…fill in…) replacing,… (…fill in…)…?”
Sadly your two “answers” can be applied to a lot of the “changes” in the liturgy these past forty years.
Too much of the liturgy has been changed in favor of “active participation”. And too many of the clergy have supported it.
.
E
EasterJoy
Guest
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I think that if you go to Redemptum Sacramentum, there is a distinction drawn between the communicant’s choice between kneeling and standing (the communicant may choose either) and between receiving on the tongue or in the hand (on the tongue having to be made available, as a right, and whether the choice of in the hand is to be made available or not being up to the congregation of bishops, with the blessings of the Holy See).
E
EasterJoy
Guest
- Status