Communion in the hand...END IT!

[AmbroseSJ]

<<<< It only seems normal because ‘obedience’ and ‘the magisterium’ are used to hush objections: How can The Church do any wrong? Be quiet, listen to the new hymns and offer it up (offering up something that occurs as part of Mass???) >>>>

Mal: One of the things I have noticed in this discussion is the false perception that we are to blindly obey our superiors because they are our superiors in all things. Now certainly there have been many treatises on this discussion itself - but many have misinterpreted the purpose for Obedience. Obedience can be blind only if that obedience is given to those maintaining fidelity to the Deposit of Faith. This point cannot be stressed enough. Many of the Modernist novelties implemented since Vatican II were implemented falsely. We have seen instances of Clown Masses - Liturgical Dance - Bhuddism - Cultural deviations and the like and are we to likewise sit back and be blindly obedient to such things as well? Where does it end? If one takes the time to understand that Obedience is given for fidelity to the Teachings of Holy Mother the Church protected by the Holy Ghost and for that reason alone - then our understanding takes on new meaning. Yes we are to obey. But we are not to obey false Shepherds who come to us dressed as sheep but inwardly are as ravening wolves. The simple fact remains - Communion in the Hand is a modernist novelty and opposing a modernist novelty is not an act of disobedience. In fact - worshipping GOD in tradition is not an act of disobedience either. Catholic restoration is not an act of disobedience. Revisiting the Athanasian Creed confirms this. We are to keep the Faith whole and undefiled. And refusing to accept modernist novelty given in a misinterpreted methodology and rush to embrace false ecumenism with the non catholic religions in place of fidelity to Orthodoxy - especially as it relates to the Blessed Sacrament isnt disobedience. It is ultimately obedience to Almighty GOD.

Pax

You are wrong to equate obedience to our lawful superiors with blind (and sinful obedience.) Jesus told his disciples do what the Pharisees teach, but do not imitate them. That is how much stress Jesus put on obedience. His act of redemption was accomplished by obedience to lawful, yet wrong and even sinful superiors.

CITH is not a heresy or an abuse of any kind. It is a discipline of the Church how we receive Communion. If the Church permits CITH, then IT IS PERMITTED by all affected Catholics. To try and teach others that this is sinful or wrong is a lie.

I can fully sympathize with Catholics, especially older ones that remember the old ways (which I do myself) and are horrified by the changes that they see around them. Many of these changes are wrong, and are not taught by the Church, but are obtruded into local churches by ignorant or worse clerics and laity. But some of them are absolutely legitimate and CITH is one of them.

 

[michaeldaniels]

You can’t quote those…they don’t agree with the heretical modernist view LOL j/k nice post

Gal3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek,there is neither bond nor free, there is neither Male nor Female,for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

Gal3:29 And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.

And Likewise :

1 Corinthians Chapter 11

Women must have a covering over their heads. He blameth the abuses of their love feasts and upon that occasion treats of the Blessed Sacrament.

11:1. Be ye followers of me, as I also am of Christ.

11:2. Now I praise you, brethren, that in all things you are mindful of me and keep my ordinances as I have delivered them to you.

11:3. But I would have you know that the head of every man is Christ: and the head of the woman is the man: and the head of Christ is God.

11:4. Every man praying or prophesying with his head covered disgraceth his head.

11:5. But every woman praying or prophesying with her head not covered disgraceth her head: for it is all one as if she were shaven.

11:6. For if a woman be not covered, let her be shorn. But if it be a shame to a woman to be shorn or made bald, let her cover her head.

11:7. The man indeed ought not to cover his head: because he is the image and glory of God. But the woman is the glory of the man.

11:8. For the man is not of the woman: but the woman of the man.

11:9. For the man was not created for the woman: but the woman for the man.

11:10. Therefore ought the woman to have a power over her head, because of the angels.

A power… that is, a veil or covering, as a sign that she is under the power of her husband: and this, the apostle adds, because of the angels, who are present in the assemblies of the faithful.

11:11. But yet neither is the man without the woman, nor the woman without the man, in the Lord.

11:12. For as the woman is of the man, so also is the man by the woman: but all things of God.

11:13. You yourselves judge. Doth it become a woman to pray unto God uncovered?

11:14. Doth not even nature itself teach you that a man indeed, if he nourish his hair, it is a shame unto him?

11:15. But if a woman nourish her hair, it is a glory to her; for her hair is given to her for a covering.

 

[Malleus_01]

You are wrong to equate obedience to our lawful superiors with blind (and sinful obedience) Jesus said do what the Pharisees teach, but do not imitate them. That is how much stress Jesus put on obedience. His act of redemption was obedience to lawful, yet wrong and even sinful superiors.

Mal: The same Pharisees who required washing of hands which of course the Apostles did not do. The same is true today. The Apostles didnt fast while Jesus was with them either. The Pharisees condemned that as well. Because the Pharisees strained the gnat and swallowed the camel. CITH is an INDULT. What part of that do you not understand. Its NOT and never has been LAW. So you can hardly equate the two.

CITH is not a heresy or an abuse of any kind. It is a discipline of the Church how we receive Communion.

Mal: I disagree. The fact that 30% of Catholics today according to Jimmie Akin that dont believe in the Real Presence is evidence that it is an abuse. What fruit can you demonstrate that the Church is better off since the institution of the practise? Are there increased devotion amongst the faithful because of it? Mass attendance increasing? Religious vocations on the rise? An embrace by laity of modesty attention and devotion now as opposed to then? What are the fruits? You keep talking about its merits - so start naming the merits. By the fruits shall you know. The only fruit I see is rotting. It is a lack of discipline. And because it is - belief in the Real Presence is suffering - especially amoung the youth.

If the Church permits CITH, then IT IS PERMITTED by all affected Catholics. To try and teach others that this is sinful or wrong is a lie.

Mal: To ignore an obvious problem by blankleting it with blind obedience to lawful authority is how the Pharisees bacame the Pharisees. Over time - they implemented heavy burdens that were the invention of man and never were of GOD. This practise is doing damage to the Faith. Especially the Dogma of the Real Presence. Its time Catholics started acting like Catholics.

I can fully sympathize with Catholics, especially older ones that remember the old ways (which I do myself) and are horrified by the changes that they see around them. Many of these changes are wrong, and are not taught by the Church, but are obtruded into local churches by ignorant or worse clerics and laity. But some of them are absolutely legitimate and CITH is one of them.

Mal: The Jimmie Akin is wrong about the waning belief in the Real Presence and we should all become ostriches and let the Youth believe whatever it is they want to believe about the Blessed Sacrament. Put the Host in your pocket. Leave it in the Pews . Drop it on the Floor. Give it to Non Catholics. All the wonderful things that have been reported. And then you say there is nothing wrong? You do realize it is JESUS right? The Real presence?

 

[spn82756]

This is so sad. We shouldn’t obey THE pope…but we should listen to armchair popes that know better.

 

[AmbroseSJ]

Malleus 01:

The Jimmie Akin is wrong about the waning belief in the Real Presence and we should all become ostriches and let the Youth believe whatever it is they want to believe about the Blessed Sacrament. Put the Host in your pocket. Leave it in the Pews . Drop it on the Floor. Give it to Non Catholics. All the wonderful things that have been reported. And then you say there is nothing wrong? You do realize it is JESUS right? The Real presence?

What I have noticed in this thread, and many like it, are that many COTT people are fanatics and have no sense of proportion.

Like the Pharisees, the COTT people are putting all of their emphasis on an external thing which supposedly defiles them, rather than promoting reverence and worthy reception, no matter HOW communion is received. It is what’s inside a man that either defiles him or makes him worthy, not an external thing like CITH.

COTT people are indifferent to the priest shortage and the sacrifice that has required of everyone. They have no comment on receiving the Sacred Blood at communion, or how that is given. They are in denial, or indifferent to the fact that CITH was practiced in the early Church for centuries. They blame all the ills in the Church on this one practice. In short they are entirely driven by prejudice, short sightedness and ignorance.

 

[Patrick_Eastin]

I want to remind everyone that this is the Traditional Catholicism forum (and, no, I am not going to debate about what “traditional” means). On the Traditional Catholicism forum one should expect to encounter traditional views. If those views are offensive to some of you, then this subject should be taken up on the Liturgy and Sacraments forum where CITH proponents can post to their hearts content.

I have just read this entire thread from start to finish and many of the posts from either side of the argument border on ad hominem attacks. Rather than attempt to clean up this thread, I am going to close it for that reason.

I repeat again. This is the Traditional Catholicism forum and you can expect traditional views. I meant what I said in my Sticky note of December 31st:

Non-traditional Catholics, Catholics of other rites, and non-Catholics are welcome to participate in the TC forum, however, they will not be allowed to dominate conversations or to push agendas which are not in keeping with the purpose of this forum.

 

[michaeldaniels]

Hey buddy…I can at least bring out a positive in all of this…at least all the topics we are debating are all sanctioned and accepted Catholic practices, etc… Yay…now we can work on our charity and insults, which I am also guilty of at time…however, the problem I still have is with self proclaimed non-practicing anti-Catholics being EMHCs!!! I am sorry…this is freaking me out…and what adds insult to injury is that they feel no hypocrisy whatsoever in what they are doing…We can debate “in the hand” vs. “on the tongue” till we are blue in the face…but the true enemy of The Church is the aforementioned person and those like them…we should put aside our differences on these issues for another day because in the end, both practices are allowed…and the fact that I despise CITH will not change that…however, we have open, material heresy taking place in our Church…serving in and around our Altars…that my friends needs to stop. That is what we should all be fighting against. Anyone else agree?

This is so sad. We shouldn’t obey THE pope…but we should listen to armchair popes that know better.