After Easter Mass this morning being confronted by liberals.

[BayernAnhaenger]

Interesting. There were no altar rails at St. Peter’s when I attended a Papal Mass a couple of years ago. I never really considered the Pope to be liberal.

Peace

Tim

There’s also no pews at St. Peter’s.

There are no altar rails there, per se, because of the unique nature of St. Peter’s (it’s also one of the few churches where the celebrant faces ad orientam (literally) and versus populum).

 

[tee_eff_em]

If more people stood up for correct Church teaching and confronted the liberal or modernist challenge in their parish we’d still have altar rails. The "spirit of Vatican II’ has been wrongly misinterpreted to push their hidden agenda and righting the ship will not be painless. The laity need to support their pastor, but have a duty to speak out against liturgical abuses. If people had done so in Germany during the 16th century, Luther may not have started his protest.

You’re welcome. :tiphat:

tee

 

[Orogeny]

There’s also no pews at St. Peter’s.

There are no altar rails there, per se, because of the unique nature of St. Peter’s (it’s also one of the few churches where the celebrant faces ad orientam (literally) and versus populum).

But, why? If altar rails are the “correct” way of distibuting Holy Communion, isn’t this an abuse? Did you know, they even let you receive on the hand! Even worse, the Mass was not said in Latin!

Peace

Tim

 

[Ockham]

But, why? If altar rails are the “correct” way of distibuting Holy Communion, isn’t this an abuse? Did you know, they even let you receive on the hand! Even worse, the Mass was not said in Latin!

Peace

Tim

The only way to receive Communion from the Pope is while kneeling and on tongue. That’s what I was referring to by mentioning altar rails in our churches.

 

[BayernAnhaenger]

But, why? If altar rails are the “correct” way of distibuting Holy Communion, isn’t this an abuse? Did you know, they even let you receive on the hand! Even worse, the Mass was not said in Latin!

Peace

Tim

Sarcasm! Oh yay!

Anyways, if you look you’ll find almost every side chapel in St. Peter’s Basilica has altar rails. The only two that I think don’t have it are the Altar of the Chair of St Peter, and the Papal Altar. My guess as to why these don’t have altar rails, is because only the Pope is permitted to say Mass at the Papal Altar. And, in times BEFORE the Second Vatican Council, the Popes didn’t always say Mass at the Papal Altar, and if they did, I don’t think they distributed to the laity.

I do know they let you receive in the hand. It’s a travesty, and something that ought not be done.

And, with Pope Benedict XVI, he is restoring the Latin to the liturgy.

 

[Orogeny]

The only way to receive Communion from the Pope is while kneeling and on tongue. That’s what I was referring to by mentioning altar rails in our churches.

Well, I wasn’t one of the fortunate ones chosen to receive from the Pope, but I can tell you that no one knelt to receive where I was and very few received on the tongue.

Peace

Tim

 

[Orogeny]

I do know they let you receive in the hand. It’s a travesty, and something that ought not be done.

Perhaps you should write a letter to His Holiness about that. Straighten him out, so to speak.

And, with Pope Benedict XVI, he is restoring the Latin to the liturgy.

He didn’t use any and he was the presider. Maybe he is exempting himself?

Peace

Tim

 

[BayernAnhaenger]

Perhaps you should write a letter to His Holiness about that. Straighten him out, so to speak.He didn’t use any and he was the presider. Maybe he is exempting himself?

Peace

Tim

His Holiness is working on the Communion in the hand business. You can only receive kneeling and on the tongue from him. I think he’s got that all set.

Also, a priest does not merely preside at Mass. He was the priest at Mass.

His Masses, as a whole, have a lot more Latin in them. He has to move slowly, or else the liberal wing of the Church will either die of shock, or leave, and he doesn’t want to see a schism.

 

[Orogeny]

His Holiness is working on the Communion in the hand business. You can only receive kneeling and on the tongue from him. I think he’s got that all set.

But clearly he hasn’t indicated that he will make this binding on any other priest.

Also, a priest does not merely preside at Mass. He was the priest at Mass.

Fair enough. While he was the priest at Mass, he used italian, english, french, german and spanish. No latin.

His Masses, as a whole, have a lot more Latin in them. He has to move slowly, or else the liberal wing of the Church will either die of shock, or leave, and he doesn’t want to see a schism.

Right. He would probably prefer that change comes from below. Laity changing the wording in the Lectionary, for example.

Peace

Tim

 

[603304529]

But clearly he hasn’t indicated that he will make this binding on any other priest.Fair enough. While he was the priest at Mass, he used italian, english, french, german and spanish. No latin.Right. He would probably prefer that change comes from below. Laity changing the wording in the Lectionary, for example.

Peace

Tim

I’d say what Pope Benedict wants is a bit of obedience and recognition of his authority from some of the more blatantly modernist and liberal bishops - the ones that openly oppose him on so many issues - contraceptives, etc, and of course, the repeal of the “excommunications” of the SSPX bishops.

 

[Ockham]

30 Giorni: In an interview granted in Spain [in the journal La Razón] you have praised the pope’s decision to distribute the Eucharist, in the liturgies which he celebrates, only kneeling and only in the mouth. Are there changes to be expected in this regard in universal discipline of the Church?

Cardinal Cañizares: As is known, the current universal discipline of the Church requires that as a norm Communion is distributed into the mouth of the faithful. Then there is an indult that allows, at the request of episcopates, to distribute Communion on the palm of the hand also. This is worth remembering. The pope, then, to give greater prominence to the due reverence with which we must approach the Body of Christ, wished that the faithful who receive Communion from his hands do so on their knees. This seemed to me a beautiful and edifying initiative of the Bishop of Rome. The present norms do not require anyone to do the same. But neither do they prevent it.

adoremus.org/0409CDW_Kneeling.html

 

[Orogeny]

30 Giorni: In an interview granted in Spain [in the journal La Razón] you have praised the pope’s decision to distribute the Eucharist, in the liturgies which he celebrates, only kneeling and only in the mouth. Are there changes to be expected in this regard in universal discipline of the Church?

Cardinal Cañizares: As is known, the current universal discipline of the Church requires that as a norm Communion is distributed into the mouth of the faithful. Then there is an indult that allows, at the request of episcopates, to distribute Communion on the palm of the hand also. This is worth remembering. The pope, then, to give greater prominence to the due reverence with which we must approach the Body of Christ, wished that the faithful who receive Communion from his hands do so on their knees. This seemed to me a beautiful and edifying initiative of the Bishop of Rome. The present norms do not require anyone to do the same. But neither do they prevent it.

adoremus.org/0409CDW_Kneeling.html

Why doesn’t the Vatican withdraw the indult? Seems to me, this post confirms that there is nothing wrong with receiving in the hand.

Peace

Tim

 

[603304529]

The indult wsa given not to allow communion in the hand, but rather to legalise something that was already rampant. Could it be likened to the state legalising prostitution? “We don’t encourage it, but its happening anyway, so we may as well legalise it…”

All that is seen in Cardinal Cañizares words are “CITH is allowed” - what is ignored is “to give greater prominence to the due reverence with which we must approach the Body of Christ, wished that the faithful who receive Communion from his hands do so on their knees”.

What I’m saying is: what would the point be in withdrawing the indult!? It was put there in the first place because people were doing it anyway, without any regard for the rules.

Cafeteria Catholicism?

 

[Orogeny]

The indult wsa given not to allow communion in the hand, but rather to legalise something that was already rampant. Could it be likened to the state legalising prostitution? “We don’t encourage it, but its happening anyway, so we may as well legalise it…”

All that is seen in Cardinal Cañizares words are “CITH is allowed” - what is ignored is “to give greater prominence to the due reverence with which we must approach the Body of Christ, wished that the faithful who receive Communion from his hands do so on their knees”.

What I’m saying is: what would the point be in withdrawing the indult!? It was put there in the first place because people were doing it anyway, without any regard for the rules.

Cafeteria Catholicism?

Wow. Is that how the Church makes rules? “Yeah, I know that birth control and abortion are intrinsically evil, but, you know, most American Catholics use birth control and are pro-abortion, so let’s back off of our teaching and give them an indult.”? If receiving on the hand is wrong, the Church should ban it and discipline those who do it.

Peace

Tim

 

[603304529]

Wow. Is that how the Church makes rules? “Yeah, I know that birth control and abortion are intrinsically evil, but, you know, most American Catholics use birth control and are pro-abortion, so let’s back off of our teaching and give them an indult.”? If receiving on the hand is wrong, the Church should ban it and discipline those who do it.

Peace

Tim

It is how the church made the CITH rule. Fact. Incontestible fact.

ewtn.com/expert/answers/communion_in_hand.htm

 

[Orogeny]

It is how the church made the CITH rule. Fact. Incontestible fact.

ewtn.com/expert/answers/communion_in_hand.htm

So clearly it is not as grave a matter as some make it out to be, or the Church is in real error here.

Peace

Tim

 

[603304529]

So clearly it is not as grave a matter as some make it out to be, or the Church is in real error here.

Peace

Tim

Do some open minded research Tim, and look at the reasons for and against CITH.

I can see why someone would contest why they shouldn’t touch Our Lord with unconsecrated hands… but, why, oh why, do people so hotly contest their “right” to paw Our Lord?

It all seems to very backward to me!

 

[jfmarm81]

I’ve been reading all the posts here about recieving in the hand. I have a question. Does anyone know when recieving in the hand became the norm? I mean, did people do it before Vatican II? The reason I ask is because in all the parishes I have ever been to, many of the older parishoners recieve in hand. My father recieves on the tongue becase he is pre-Vatican II. I guess I just don’t understand how so many Catholics who obviously recieved on the tongue pre-Vatican II could change to recieving in the hand. Thanks for any help you can give.

 

[Ockham]

The pope, then, to give **greater prominence **to the due reverence with which we must approach the Body of Christ, wished that the faithful who receive Communion from his hands do so on their knees.

Why don’t you want to give the greatest prominence and reverence to our Lord Jesus Christ? Are you too proud to kneel before our Saviour? He suffered the most painful and humiliating death for our sins and asked that we receive Him in this Blessed Sacrament. Shouldn’t we take a little time and effort in external display in return?

Pope Benedict tried to place a non-liberal bishop in Austria and the incumbants nearly went into schism. Restoring Christ’s Church from the post-Vatican II chaos won’t be quick and easy. Just because CITH exists as an indult doesn’t mean you should automatically go about it.

I’m going to take some time to post links on this subject. Please take some time to read them with an objective mind and humble heart. Less than a year ago I received Communion standing, in-hand, and usually from an EMHC. Having taken some time to research and reflect on this recent trend I realized the error of my ways. So there is no judgement or polemics from me.

catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=8059&CFID=28788889&

www.ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CDWMEMOR.HTM

www.latin-mass-society.org/commwhy.htm

www.catholicapologetics.info/modernproblems/newmass/communion.htm

www.geocities.com/cath_apolo/Comion.htm?20097

www.catholicapologetics.info/modernproblems/newmass/Fathersoncom.htm

www.catholic-pages.com/mass/inhand.asp

 

[Ockham]

I’ve been reading all the posts here about recieving in the hand. I have a question. Does anyone know when recieving in the hand became the norm? I mean, did people do it before Vatican II?

That’s a very good question. I haven’t read much definitive accounts, but it seems it was something that started in Holland post-V2 and spread around. Paul VI decided to issue an indult rather than take a hard stand. It is for God to know whether that was the right decision or not. Having read as much as I can about this issue it seems quite simple to me. The proper way to receive the Blessed Sacrament is kneeling and on tongue. Of course you also should be fasting and in a state of grace.

Communion-in-hand while standing is something Protestants do because they don’t believe in transubstantiation. If you take your faith seriously then we should lead by example and help our stray bretheren return to the Church Christ founded and away from the man-made one they search for our Lord in now.