P
PacoG
Guest
I was not saying it was liturgically legal. I was just trying to offset the paranoia that referring to the pope as the “Bishop of Rome” was some sinister plan.
- Status
B
benedictgal
Guest
The rubric for when a pope dies is that you only mention the name of the bishop, since the pope is deceased. This was what happened (or, in most cases, what should have happened) when Blessed John Paul II died.
S
Spirithound
Guest
And likewise, when a diocese is “between bishops”, none but the pope are mentioned.
B
benedictgal
Guest
Unless, said bishop remains Apostolic Administrator, as the case was when the bishop of Corpus Christi was named Archbishop of San Juan and still retained apostolic authority over Corpus Christi.
R
retired464
Guest
My own parish seems to follow the instructions but I’ve been at a number of other Masses where they are varying changes I believe to be in error. Where I have written to ask and report them I have gotten very meek and insufficient replies from the Bishop, and later found to changes. I believe they are not giving direction to the churches. This is most distressing when the Priest chooses to change the wording of the Gospel at the reading. While I understand his position, and perhaps this is a hint as to what will come later (with the revisions) I don’t like it. (He changed the passage that says the disciples were in the locked room because of their fear “of the Jews” to their fear “of the religious leaders.” I agree that the original (as we best have it from John) is the basis of a lot of persecution of “the Jews,” which most of the disciples were, and is an unfortunate writing/variation/translation of the events being depicted, but all the Priest has to do is read the line as published and approved. Changing it is a start of revision of the church and can lead (and has led) to worse changes.
Am I being too fussy when I see Eucharistic Ministers self administering the Eucharist?
Am I being too fussy when I see Eucharistic Ministers self administering the Eucharist?
S
Spirithound
Guest
NO! Only the priest has the right to self-communicate. (unless this is what you meant…because only priests are Eucharistic Ministers. Lay people can be Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion.)
P
ProVobis
Guest
I agree, but someone pointed out to me that at a communion service, there is at least one person who is allowed, in fact, to self-communicate. I hope this is inaccurate.
M
m134e5
Guest
The words the priests are instructed to say are “our pope”, by changing that phrase to “the bishop of Rome”, he is showing a preference for his own words to the prescribed words. Why would he change these specific words in this way? He drops “our”, so he doesn’t seem to want to claim the Pope. He also drops “Pope”, which is the traditional title for the bishop of Rome, given to distinguish him as the successor of St. Peter. By dropping this title, he seems to want to distance himself from the suggestion of solidarity with Benedict XVI. I have learned that a person’s choice of words say A LOT more than what the words themselves literally say.
I remember nothing being said at all during the interregnum. The priests simply skipped the part about the pope and went on to the part about the bishop.
There is nothing theologically wrong with the statement that the Pope is the bishop of Rome (after all, that’s what he is), but the point is that is not what is in the missal. Why would the priest say something other than what was written? It seems to me he had a problem with what was written- it seems he wants to avoid acknowledging the Pope’s authority over the Church.
S
Spirithound
Guest
If it is in the prescribed rubrics then I am at peace with it, however I can envision a procedure by which the leader of the service gives Holy Communion to another person, and then he receives from this second person.
O
oknazevad
Guest
From what I’ve seen, that’s what is supposed to happen. The leader of the service distributes the host to one of the others assisting the distribution, who then gives the host to the leader of the service.
J
Jim_Roberts
Guest
T
TheMc
Guest
I have to ask: Where are you getting your information? Both things he did were wrong. He is not following the text of the Mass, which is strictly prohibited.
B
benedictgal
Guest
He did do wrong. The priest does not have the right to make edits to the official text of the Roman Missal. The phrase “these or similar words” does not appear in any of the Eucharistic Prayers nor in the Doxology. Please cite your sources, as Redemptionis Sacramentum clearly states that this is not supposed to happen.
The priest needs to say the black and do the red.
- Status