D
Daprato
Guest
Not true. The indult is by country, not individual diocese.
- Status
S
stmaria
Guest
Even Pope Paul VI who promulgated the New Mass was against communion in the hand until he caved in to the liberals.
Memoriale Domini Pope Paul VI
ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CDWMEMOR.HTM
“Indeed, in certain communities and in certain places this practice has been introduced without prior approval having been requested of the Holy See, and, at times, without any attempt to prepare the faithful adequately.
It is certainly true that ancient usage once allowed the faithful to take this divine food in their hands and to place it in their mouths themselves.
Soon the task of taking the Blessed Eucharist to those absent was confided to the sacred ministers alone, so as the better to ensure the respect due to the sacrament and to meet the needs of the faithful. Later, with a deepening understanding of the truth of the eucharistic mystery, of its power and of the presence of Christ in it, there came a greater feeling of reverence towards this sacrament and a deeper humility was felt to be demanded when receiving it. Thus the custom was established of the minister placing a particle of consecrated bread on the tongue of the communicant.
This method of distributing holy communion must be retained, taking the present situation of the Church in the entire world into account, not merely because it has many centuries of-tradition behind it, but especially because it expresses the faithful’s reverence for the Eucharist. The custom does not detract in any way from the personal dignity of those who approach this great sacrament: it is part of that preparation that is needed for the most fruitful reception of the Body of the Lord.[6]
When therefore a small number of episcopal conferences and some individual bishops asked that the practice of placing the consecrated hosts in the people’s hands be permitted in their territories, the Holy Father decided that all the bishops of the Latin Church should be asked if they thought it opportune to introduce this rite. A change in a matter of such moment, based on a most ancient and venerable tradition, does not merely affect discipline. It carries certain dangers with it which may arise from the new manner of administering holy communion: the danger of a loss of reverence for the august sacrament of the altar, of profanation, of adulterating the true doctrine…in view of the gravity of the matter and the force of the arguments put forward, the Holy Father has decided** not to change the existing way **of administering holy communion to the faithful”
A
ASimpleSinner
Guest
The fact it fell into wide disuse is telling. Communion in the hand was not even a norm in many Protestant communities before the 1970s.
Kneeling was also widely to be found and in some cases Protestant communities - such as these methodists - still do it today.
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
http://www.central-methodist.co.uk/images/Thums/alter.jpg
I can’t say that standing in the hand is wrong… I can say that kneeling on the tongue has a great deal of merit and the symbolism and catechesis of it is of venerable origin. It bears more consideration than it is frequently afforded, and I am happy to report the trends I have seen among seminarians is to look favorably upon it.
Dare we hope the communion rails will be restored where they have been ripped out? That the faithful will return to recieving on the tongue in greater numbers? (I have not recieved in the hand of from an EM in over a decade…)
I hope so.
P
palmas85
Guest
Which particular Church are you talking about? Jerusalem, Antioch, Rome, Alexandria, Thesalonica? They all received differently. The only real constant was that they received not a bite size portion, but rather a substantial loaf that was taken home, usually wrapped in white cloth, for consumption throughout the week. Good reason for receiving in the hand. It was later when the reality of Transubstantiation was more fully understood and appreciated and to combat horrifcic acts of sacrilige that were occurring frequently that reception on the tongue was introduced.
It is always good to look at things the way they really were, not because we think they support our personal position.
H
HenryV
Guest
It’s by the Episicopal Conferences and they are mostly by countries and not by dioceces and that’s why.
D
dixieagle
Guest
:clapping: :clapping: :clapping:
A
ASimpleSinner
Guest
I would like to see a citation for this to better understand this thinking.
Still, I stand by my thinking that certain developments - while not be sacrasanct just becaue they became tradition - became venerable traditions for a reason.
H
HenryV
Guest
I do not think it is irrevrent to take communion by the hand, but the Church thinks it is unless you have a proprer understanding of it.
Why Jesus, will they treat you like this?
Most holy God have mercy on us.
Why Jesus, will they treat you like this?
Most holy God have mercy on us.
L
LumberGumRubber
Guest
Is it true that in some parts of the globe, that the wafer is square instead of rectangular, and what is the significance? All postings will be welcomed and for those who do not see this particular question, please advise me immediately. Thanks.
A
ASimpleSinner
Guest
Eastern Catholics who use leavened bread (which is most of them) have elements that for lack of a better image are shaped like “small croutons”…
I don’t know of any parts of the world that use square hosts - but that doesn’t mean anything, I learn 10 new things a day!
I have seem many Latin parishes were a singular large host is consecrated during weekday Masses and broken into pieces that are square…
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
P
palmas85
Guest
Read books that cover the history of the early church, particulary those of the Church fathers. Don’t limit yourself to Cyril of Jerusalem, as do most of the reception in the hand advocates do There you will find info pertaining to reception in the early church. remember though that reception in every Church was different and in many cases involved more than bread being used.
After you have done that read books that cover the time frame from the 900’s to the 1200’s. They will explain in great detail the abuses that were cropping up as people became more and more aware that the Eucharist was indeed the full body and blood of Christ. They will also describe the abuses and strange beliefs that caused the Precious Blood to be withheld from the laity.
Thats what I did to find out the truth. It took some digging, but it gave me an appreciation for many things that I otherwise never would have known. Especialy what the white cloth was for!!
As to your statement about venerable traditions becoming traditions for a reason I don’t really have a clue what you are talking about.
A
ASimpleSinner
Guest
Here’s the clue: time tested things that lasted for well over 1000 years generally stood the test of time for a reason: it was wise.Read books that cover the history of the early church, particulary those of the Church fathers. Don’t limit yourself to Cyril of Jerusalem, as do most of the reception in the hand advocates do There you will find info pertaining to reception in the early church. remember though that reception in every Church was different and in many cases involved more than bread being used.
After you have done that read books that cover the time frame from the 900’s to the 1200’s. They will explain in great detail the abuses that were cropping up as people became more and more aware that the Eucharist was indeed the full body and blood of Christ. They will also describe the abuses and strange beliefs that caused the Precious Blood to be withheld from the laity.
Thats what I did to find out the truth. It took some digging, but it gave me an appreciation for many things that I otherwise never would have known. Especialy what the white cloth was for!!
As to your statement about venerable traditions becoming traditions for a reason I don’t really have a clue what you are talking about.
Now I would love for it to be the case that I could leisurely take the next few weeks off to read the books (or at least the genre) you vaguely suggest… But as it happens I do not. Maybe a more concrete reference to some specific texts that support your offering?
Thank you.
H
HenryV
Guest
The Eucharistic Lord is not to be taken lightly and the fragments are to be taken very good care of.
May God have mercy on us.
Blessed Mother Theresa pray for us.
H
homewardbound
Guest
As someone who has not yet taken their First Communion, and who knows all about proper care of the Eucharist and how important that is, I don’t get why “how” we receive this gift is so important. The important thing is that we DO receive it! Thats ALL that matters. Then again, maybe I’m just silly. I just sit at Mass and break into tears often that I am so unworthy of partaking in such an event, even to witness it, yet so many others who do actually get to consume and have life in them are far too worried about petty things like how the person in front of them is receiving to really focus and realize how amazing the Eucharist really is.
I really hope and pray that, once I am Catholic, I will not allow Communion to become so routine and blah in my mind that pointless arguments like this obscure my gaze on the Lord.
I really hope and pray that, once I am Catholic, I will not allow Communion to become so routine and blah in my mind that pointless arguments like this obscure my gaze on the Lord.
A
ASimpleSinner
Guest
Homeward welcome home… For the record, you are now of the Catholic Faith - arguably rather Catholic - and just need to get through your sacraments of initation!
The “hows” of it are important to many of us because it demonstrates an understanding of the “whys” and the “Whom”. Concepts and forms of sacred things for the Sacred, holy things for the Holy are important to Catholics who delve into their tradition.
Once you get a taste of traditional worship - it is hard to go back to "I’ve got my doctrine to keep me warm" as one blogger I know likes to say. It isn’t enough to us to be minimalists. The difference between prayer and worship with what is minimally allowed being adhered to versus the tradition that generations practiced and experienced… It is a world of difference.
The “hows” of it are important to many of us because it demonstrates an understanding of the “whys” and the “Whom”. Concepts and forms of sacred things for the Sacred, holy things for the Holy are important to Catholics who delve into their tradition.
Once you get a taste of traditional worship - it is hard to go back to "I’ve got my doctrine to keep me warm" as one blogger I know likes to say. It isn’t enough to us to be minimalists. The difference between prayer and worship with what is minimally allowed being adhered to versus the tradition that generations practiced and experienced… It is a world of difference.
L
LumberGumRubber
Guest
Thank you for your reply. If one happens to jam the wafer between ones’ teeth, and gets lodged there over night, what would this entail? Did someone mention a curse?
A
ASimpleSinner
Guest
What does that even mean?
H
HenryV
Guest
You should’nt throw pearls to swine and what’s holy to the dogs.
I hope the pope puts an interdict over the US.
I hope the pope puts an interdict over the US.
P
palmas85
Guest
I hope that one day you do realize just how important it is to show the proper respect to Christ.
L
LumberGumRubber
Guest
Sorry for the confusion … let’s say one woofs this wafer into ones’ mouth and jams it between their teeth. Would this mean they are biting God or jamming God between their teeth and if so, would it entail a curse, i.e. all their teeth would fall out.
Your kind response will be so much appreciated. Thanks.
- Status