Archbishop says Stop Communion in the Hand & Move the Tabernacle back

[mlchance]

Emphasis added:

“Among the liturgical innovations produced in the Western world, two in particular tend to cloud the visible aspect of the Eucharist, especially as regards its centrality and sacredness: the removal of the tabernacle from the center and the distribution of communion in the hand.”

Communion in the hand isn’t a liturgial innovation. It is a time-honored practice of ancient pedigree approved of by the Church.

GoLatin:

In reply to FuzzyBunny116’s post above, lay people handling the Holy Eucharist takes away from the sacredness.

No, it doesn’t. If the Sacrament has been properly performed, the Bread and the Wine are gone, replaced by Christ Jesus. Nothing can take from His sacredness.

– Mark L. Chance.

 

[cyprian]

KCT:

We need better catechesis. Telling everyone how to receive will not automatically make them understand what the Eucharist really is.

—KCT

So true.

 

[Dr.Bombay]

mlchance:

Communion in the hand isn’t a liturgial innovation. It is a time-honored practice of ancient pedigree approved of by the Church.

– Mark L. Chance.

True. There are many other time-honored practice of ancient pedigree. Which ones would you like to see at your local parish?

• Saying Mass in dark, smelly underground crypts
• Preaching the Gospel in Jewish synagogues
• Only going to confession once in your lifetime
• Waiting until your deathbed to be baptized
• Walking on your knees to Rome as part of your penance

Or were you only looking for time-honored practices of ancient pedigree that don’t require you to step too far outside your comfy, 21st Century Western cocoon?

 

[Polvskoy]

mlchance:

Emphasis added:

Archbishop Jan Pawel Lenga
“Among the liturgical innovations produced in the Western world, two in particular tend to cloud the visible aspect of the Eucharist, especially as regards its centrality and sacredness: the removal of the tabernacle from the center and the distribution of communion in the hand.”

Communion in the hand isn’t a liturgial innovation. It is a time-honored practice of ancient pedigree approved of by the Church.

– Mark L. Chance.

How is time honored if it was reborn in the 1960’s after 1600 years of dormation? It had been rejected rightfully so by the bishops of the past and was only brought back by the Dutch bishops, the bishops of the most morally corrupt nation in the world.

Oh yes and bishops are against your false proposition. Do you think that you have the right to lecture bishops?

What will happen when handcommunion is banned? I here that the Anglicans and Lutherans will continue to do that, so they might have some room for pro-sacrilege people.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Polvskoy:

How is time honored if it was reborn in the 1960’s after 1600 years of dormation? It had been rejected rightfully so by the bishops of the past and was only brought back by the Dutch bishops, the bishops of the most morally corrupt nation in the world.

Error of genesis, ie., it was the Dutch bishops thought it up, ergo, it was bad. Bad logic. No proof that it was “rightly” or “wrongly” rejected by the bishops of the past, communion on the tongue merely became the norm. Communion in the hand was still the more ancient practice.

Oh yes and bishops are against your false proposition. Do you think that you have the right to lecture bishops?

Not all the bishops are against it AND it is currently permitted by the Holy See.

What will happen when handcommunion is banned? I here that the Anglicans and Lutherans will continue to do that, so they might have some room for pro-sacrilege people.

You commit a grave sin against those who prefer to recieve in the hand, accusing them of being pro-sacrilege, esp. in light of the fact that the Holy See allows it. If communion in the hand is banned, I rather imagine that most of those people will remain loyal to Holy Mother Church and bow to Her will in obedience. Don’t rejoice overmuch at the notion of schism.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Dr. Bombay:

True. There are many other time-honored practice of ancient pedigree. Which ones would you like to see at your local parish?

• Saying Mass in dark, smelly underground crypts
• Sorry, didn’t we HAVE to do that? Persecution, lions, arenas, etc?
• Preaching the Gospel in Jewish synagogues
• Right, don’t think the Jews would welcome that much, but how do you connect that to reception of Communion in hand?
• Only going to confession once in your lifetime
• Right you are, bad idea, glad it’s gone, still like that good ol’ apostolic Communion in hand thing, though.
• Waiting until your deathbed to be baptized
• Personal choice, not recommended by the Church.
• Walking on your knees to Rome as part of your penance
• Well, I’ve been looking for something aerobic…

Or were you only looking for time-honored practices of ancient pedigree that don’t require you to step too far outside your comfy, 21st Century Western cocoon?

Has next to nothing to do with the issue of communion in the hand. Cheers, Dr. Bombay! Haven’t had time to sign on of late (wicked busy at work, preping for 30 4th graders). Pray for me!

 

[Dr.Bombay]

JKirkLVNV:

Has next to nothing to do with the issue of communion in the hand. Cheers, Dr. Bombay! Haven’t had time to sign on of late (wicked busy at work, preping for 30 4th graders). Pray for me!

Well, Kirk, people want to point to Communion in the hand as being so wonderful solely because it was an ancient practice. I was just pointing out some other ancient practices and asking why they shouldn’t be adopted as well.

I guess it’s just our own personal preference what we choose to reject or accept from good ol’ apostolic times, eh? And please spare me the “Rome has approved” argument. Communion in the hand, along with girl altar boys, started as an abuse. Therefore, it logically follows, approval from Rome is irrelevant. The sole criteria for re-introducing an ancient practice should be that it was an ancient practice. Eventually, Rome will catch up and issue an approval.

30 4th graders??? That’s gotta count off some time in Purgatory for ya. I’ll keep you in my prayers.

 

[mlchance]

Dr. Bombay:

True. There are many other time-honored practice of ancient pedigree. Which ones would you like to see at your local parish?

It isn’t about what I’d like to see. It’s about what the Church approves of, and about me not thinking I’m better fit to make those judgments than the Church.

Which pretty much renders the rest of your catty little post moot and unworthy of any further comment except this one: http://home.houston.rr.com/mchance3/rolleyes.gif.

– Mark L. Chance.

 

[Dr.Bombay]

mlchance:

It isn’t about what I’d like to see. It’s about what the Church approves of, and about me not thinking I’m better fit to make those judgments than the Church.

Which pretty much renders the rest of your catty little post moot and unworthy of any further comment except this one: http://home.houston.rr.com/mchance3/rolleyes.gif.

– Mark L. Chance.

Sorry, pal. But it’s all about what you’d like to see. As I mentioned before, since Communion in the hand started as an abuse, approval from the Church is irrelevant. You’ll do what you please and if that means the Church doesn’t approve, too bad. She’ll catch up with your wisdom eventually.

And I’ll presume from you lack of response, that you really don’t want too many ancient practices re-introduced today. Just the ones that aren’t too difficult.

Meow.

 

[MrS]

Dr. Bombay:

Sorry, pal. But it’s all about what you’d like to see. As I mentioned before, since Communion in the hand started as an abuse, approval from the Church is irrelevant. You’ll do what you please and if that means the Church doesn’t approve, too bad. She’ll catch up with your wisdom eventually.

And I’ll presume from you lack of response, that you really don’t want too many ancient practices re-introduced today. Just the ones that aren’t too difficult.

Meow.

and the doctor weighs in and writes another prescription to ease the pain of realityhttp://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/15/15_8_6.gif

 

[netmilsmom]

Dr. Bombay:

Sorry, pal. But it’s all about what you’d like to see. As I mentioned before, since Communion in the hand started as an abuse, approval from the Church is irrelevant. You’ll do what you please and if that means the Church doesn’t approve, too bad. She’ll catch up with your wisdom eventually.

And I’ll presume from you lack of response, that you really don’t want too many ancient practices re-introduced today. Just the ones that aren’t too difficult.

Meow.

The same people who scream about the ancient church are the same who came onto the Headcovering thread bellowing that women should not cover their heads. Well, lets look at all of it that made the ancient church.

I think that we should be getting back to those things Historically Catholic and stop looking to the ancient church to guide us.

And BTW, I saw a new one at our parish today.
A woman was standing for the Our Father with her fingers pointed up, elbows tucked to the waist and palms toward her.

WHAT’S that???

 

[Dr.Bombay]

netmil(name removed by moderator):

The same people who scream about the ancient church are the same who came onto the Headcovering thread bellowing that women should not cover their heads. Well, lets look at all of it that made the ancient church.

I think that we should be getting back to those things Historically Catholic and stop looking to the ancient church to guide us.

And BTW, I saw a new one at our parish today.
A woman was standing for the Our Father with her fingers pointed up, elbows tucked to the waist and palms toward her.

WHAT’S that???

Oh, I can just hear the defenders on this one…

“Maybe she has severe arthritis and her arms and hands are frozen in that position. Don’t judge her!”

 

[netmilsmom]

Dr. Bombay:

Oh, I can just hear the defenders on this one…

“Maybe she has severe arthritis and her arms and hands are frozen in that position. Don’t judge her!”

I am not making fun of a proper prayer position (although I have my doubts about proper)
But it really did remind me of an “intentional grounding” call from the NFL.

 

[Dr.Bombay]

netmil(name removed by moderator):

I am not making fun of a proper prayer position (although I have my doubts about proper)
But it really did remind me of an “intentional grounding” call from the NFL.

I see. Well, as long as she doesn’t try to signal a safety or a false start during the Our Father, it should be ok.

 

[mlchance]

Dr. Bombay:

Sorry, pal. But it’s all about what you’d like to see.

Prove it.

Next, the truth comes out:
Dr. Bombay:

As I mentioned before, since Communion in the hand started as an abuse, approval from the Church is irrelevant.

Wow. “[A]pproval from the Church is irrelevant.” Absolutely amazing.
Dr. Bombay:

You’ll do what you please and if that means the Church doesn’t approve, too bad.

Prove it. Please provide evidence of things that I do that are contrary to Church teaching.
netmil(name removed by moderator):

The same people who scream about the ancient church are the same who came onto the Headcovering thread bellowing that women should not cover their heads.

Please provide a link to that thread to a message in which I scream about anything.

– Mark L. Chance.

 

[netmilsmom]

mlchance:

Please provide a link to that thread to a message in which I scream about anything.

– Mark L. Chance.

If you don’t see your name, please do not personal my posts.
I can see in the context of the discussion where I should have used the words “like this”. If you did not come onto the Headcovering thread, my statement was not about you.
However I will state that those who look to the ancient church for guidance are many times overriding the historically Catholic for that which is historically Christian. I am American but I am not one of the Pilgrims. I do not look to their lifestyles for my conduct today.

 

[GodSoldier]

bauerice:

I receive on the tongue anyway. The only way I will receive in the hand is if I can’t get in the line of the priest or deacon.

Why, is it “less holy” if you receive it from a Eucharistic Minister?

 

[msproule]

GodSoldier:

Why, is it “less holy” if you receive it from a Eucharistic Minister?

The priest and the deacon are the Eucharistic Ministers. Everybody else is referred to as Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion (EMHC).

I used to follow the same practice as bauerice. My reason was that EMHC in my area usually did not know how to properly place the Eucharist on the tongue. Quite often, they stood there like a deer in headlights, not knowing what to do.

However, now I receive on the tongue always. Furthermore, I try to present myself to the priest or deacon and not EMHC, if possible.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

netmil(name removed by moderator):

The same people who scream about the ancient church are the same who came onto the Headcovering thread bellowing that women should not cover their heads. Well, lets look at all of it that made the ancient church.

I think that we should be getting back to those things Historically Catholic and stop looking to the ancient church to guide us.

And BTW, I saw a new one at our parish today.
A woman was standing for the Our Father with her fingers pointed up, elbows tucked to the waist and palms toward her.

WHAT’S that???

Not so, Netmil(name removed by moderator)! I think it’s absolutely beautiful when a woman covers her head in church…makes ME as a guy feel humble. I just wish they’d use mantillas, not the little round things that make me want to set a lamp or a bowl of fruit on their heads.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Dr. Bombay:

And please spare me the “Rome has approved” argument. Communion in the hand, along with girl altar boys, started as an abuse. Therefore, it logically follows, approval from Rome is irrelevant. The sole criteria for re-introducing an ancient practice should be that it was an ancient practice. Eventually, Rome will catch up and issue an approval.

30 4th graders??? That’s gotta count off some time in Purgatory for ya. I’ll keep you in my prayers.

Point is, it didn’t start as an abuse…it WAS the original practice, with communion on the tongue as an “innovation.” I’m not arguing whether one SHOULD do one or the other…I’m arguing to allow it to continue as is in the American church and that it be allowed elsewhere. That is, however, merely my personal take on things.
I note, however, that lots of “traditionalists” only like the “traditions” established by Trent…we’ve had lots of councils and lots of popes.

Prayers MUCH appreciated, but not just for me, for my students as well. Who knows how much purgatory time they work off having ME as a teacher.