S****nippets from
The Emasculation of the Priesthood
The celibate priest, is offered through his office an incomparable and unparalleled intimacy:
he alone could touch God.
The celibate priest no longer possesses the unique corporeal relationship with God. He is not denied the relationship, but
others have access to it. Consider a parallel situation: i.e., within the Sacrament of Matrimony. The possession of an exclusive bodily prerogative with one’s spouse is primary; in fact there exists no greater convergence between the Divine Law and the instincts of even fallen human nature than on this point.
The fact is that many priests
do have an instinctive reaction against the presence of the
non-consecrated hand touching the Body of God. A
non-consecrated hand in the tabernacle, or reaching for the Sacrament at the reception of Holy Communion, violates an
intimacy that was, before the engineering of liturgical “roles,” exclusively the
priest’s. A dynamic equivalent to what would fuel the emotions of a
husband who realizes another has shared the exclusive intimacy with the one to whom he has permanently committed himself, is present within priests. The sense of alienation is more intense for the traditional celibate priest because he is aware that his
spouse, the
Church, has arranged and promoted the nonexclusivity.
The change in Church practice that was the gateway to all of the above was Communion in the hand. Paul VI, in the very document that permitted the* radical* departure from tradition, *appealed *to the faithful to *keep *the original practice of receiving the Eucharist on the
tongue. His entreaty revolved around one main point: that it was an ancient and venerable practice; it was
tradition.
A “presider” at a priestless Communion service sits in the *priest’s *chair, proclaims the
Gospel, preaches a *homily *(supposedly composed by a priest or deacon, though seldom is this the case), goes to the
tabernacle, prays at the altar of
sacrifice and
distributes the Eucharist. This non-sacerdotal anomaly
talks like a priest, *acts *like a priest, appropriates the
sanctuary which for at least a millennium and a half had been the sacred domain of the *priest *and
clothes him or herself in priestly vesture. All of this is incompatible with the celibate priest’s identification with fatherhood (in his case, a spiritual one). It represents a radical departure from century upon *century *of Church history and experience, and offers liturgical approbation to the concept of a “
Fatherless” parish society.
While insisting that nothing has essentially been changed for the priest because he is still the one who consecrates, the liturgical engineers have made his presence optional at the most *intimate *moment of Holy Communion between the flock under *his *care and Our Lord. The majority of Catholics receive the Eucharist from the hands of a lay person. The act of shared intimacy that is at the heart of shepherding (“Feed my lambs, feed my sheep”) is
absent. The Church, echoing an increasingly feminized society, is telling priests:“Once you have consecrated, you are no long needed.” The act of the priest “feeding” the faithful with the Bread of Life incarnates his role as Its sole provider and, far more than the eye can see, forms *his *and his
people’s perception of his spiritual
fatherhood. The priest’s role was
never confined to the sanctuary, but what made him unique to his people was his unique relationship to the Eucharist .
The Latin Mass Magazine: The Journal of Catholic Culture and Tradition - Articles
. "To touch the sacred species and to distribute them with their own hands is a privilege of the ordained. (Dominicae Cenae, sec. 11)
It’s always Christ in the Eucharist because the Church tells us so.The Church also gives us instructions on how to receive Christ in the Blessed Sacrament.Right now, we have more than one option.