E
- Status
E
ElToro
Guest
That is the norm for SOME Eastern Rite Catholic churches. Remember the old saying “when in Rome, do as the Romans…” on your next visit…I’m a Byzantine Catholic, and once when I visited a Latin Rite parish, I went up to Communion with my hands crossed across my chest, because that is the norm for receiving the Eucharist in the Eastern Rite church.
Imagine my dismay when the priest just made the sign of the Cross over me, then turned away without giving me Communion!
S
Stylites
Guest
In both cases they are good things which the pious call wrong.
P
Phemie
Guest
You can’t possibly believe that on one hand Rome says
Redemptionis Sacramentum 106. However, the pouring of the Blood of Christ after the consecration from one vessel to another is completely to be avoided, lest anything should happen that would be to the detriment of so great a mystery. Never to be used for containing the Blood of the Lord are flagons, bowls, or other vessels that are not fully in accord with the established norms.
and on the other hand says “Bishops feel free to ignore this if you think you know better.” It doesn’t work that way, Cardinal Mahony notwithstanding. His book makes a big deal about pouring the Precious Blood. Excuse me for thinking this had a lot to do with his decision to ignore RS.
T
TheMc
Guest
Very true. That’s why one is included at the end of Mass. Feel free to get one there, or after Mass in the sacristy, but not in the communion line.
E
ElToro
Guest
I have to wonder if God the Son rolls his eyes at such discussions or does He weep?
Just imagining that people argue against the practice of a priest bestowing a blessing onto someone in the context of Holy Communion is stunning.
“Because (they believe) the Church prohibits the practice!” “The Church has said so!” “It’s an abuse!” “I hate this abomination!” “I am going to write to the papal nuncio!” The accusations get mighty old after a while.
All these nattering nabobs of negativity need to experience is one thing. They need to distribute holy communion just one time as duly commissioned EMsHS when one of two things happens. Either a small child steps-up (usually right in front of their parents) with a huge smile, sparkling eyes and arms crossed as you watch their face get even more radiant as you take a moment to pray for them in very close proximity of the Blessed Sacrament. Even more powerful is the adult with a mix of terrible anxiety and hope on their faces. Just watch as they come very close to the Blessed Sacrament for what might be the first time in their lives or at least the first time in quite a while. Watch the peace that comes to their faces while you pray for them in the close presence of the Blessed Sacrament.
It will make you wonder if they are possible converts taking a look on their journey or are they possible reverts who felt too intimidated to approach a priest? Even the walk-up for communion is a huge thing, a huger stresser for many so be kind.
In many ways I can’t think of a more appropriate place for a blessing of those who cannot receive communion then at this point in the Mass.
Just imagining that people argue against the practice of a priest bestowing a blessing onto someone in the context of Holy Communion is stunning.
“Because (they believe) the Church prohibits the practice!” “The Church has said so!” “It’s an abuse!” “I hate this abomination!” “I am going to write to the papal nuncio!” The accusations get mighty old after a while.
All these nattering nabobs of negativity need to experience is one thing. They need to distribute holy communion just one time as duly commissioned EMsHS when one of two things happens. Either a small child steps-up (usually right in front of their parents) with a huge smile, sparkling eyes and arms crossed as you watch their face get even more radiant as you take a moment to pray for them in very close proximity of the Blessed Sacrament. Even more powerful is the adult with a mix of terrible anxiety and hope on their faces. Just watch as they come very close to the Blessed Sacrament for what might be the first time in their lives or at least the first time in quite a while. Watch the peace that comes to their faces while you pray for them in the close presence of the Blessed Sacrament.
It will make you wonder if they are possible converts taking a look on their journey or are they possible reverts who felt too intimidated to approach a priest? Even the walk-up for communion is a huge thing, a huger stresser for many so be kind.
In many ways I can’t think of a more appropriate place for a blessing of those who cannot receive communion then at this point in the Mass.
E
ElToro
Guest
I am aware that “Rome” places local authority in bishops and not the CA Liturgy forum.
P
Phemie
Guest
So you think Rome promulgates Redemptionis Sacramentum, tells the laity specifically that ignoring 106 is a grave abuse that should be reported and then tells the bishops ‘Boys, do what you want’?? You’ll convince yourself of anything.
REDEMTIONIS SACRAMENTUM
**CHAPTER VIII
**
REMEDIES
2. Grave Matters
[173.] Although the gravity of a matter is to be judged in accordance with the common teaching of the Church and the norms established by her, objectively to be considered among grave matters is anything that puts at risk the validity and dignity of the Most Holy Eucharist: namely, anything that contravenes what is set out above in nn. 48-52, 56, 76-77, 79, 91-92, 94, 96, 101-102, 104, 106, 109, 111, 115, 117, 126, 131-133, 138, 153 and 168.
T
TheMc
Guest
Actually, Bishops do not have all authority. No one on CAF is saying that we have the authority. All we are saying is that many are not obedient to the local authority.
T
TheMc
Guest
What is wrong with these accusations, when they are actually true? The Church really does prohibit this practice, and it shouldn’t be done, no matter how “emotional” or “spiritual” it is.
Z
zab
Guest
I wonder why there was no reference in RS to correct the practice of blessings in the Communion line when so many other issues were addressed.
T
TheMc
Guest
What is wrong with these accusations, when they are actually true? The Church really does prohibit this practice, and it shouldn’t be done, no matter how “emotional” or “spiritual” it is.
You portray the message that God frowns upon caring for the liturgy. Guess what: That is the most important thing we can do. It merits our care. Again, guess what: The lord gave his authority to the church, and the church also greatly esteems the liturgy. Who are we to argue?
You need to seriously consider changing your attitude.
I can: at the end of Mass, just before the dismissal. If you want an extra, you are always free to get one after Mass.
J
jmcrae
Guest
Think about this for a moment - can anybody here imagine Aaron, or Moses, giving a blessing to everyone at the Passover who did not partake of the Lamb of Passover, in order to make them feel better about being left out of being rescued from Egyptian slavery?
The Eucharist is our Lamb of Passover, and the priest is our Aaron, or our Moses.
The Eucharist is our Lamb of Passover, and the priest is our Aaron, or our Moses.
T
TheMc
Guest
Think about this for a moment - can anybody here imagine Aaron, or Moses, giving a blessing to everyone at the Passover who did not partake of the Lamb of Passover, in order to make them feel better about being left out of being rescued from Egyptian slavery?
The Eucharist is our Lamb of Passover, and the priest is our Aaron, or our Moses.
S
Stylites
Guest
Come to think of it, neither did Moses claim that children had to attend a catechism before they could be rescued from slavery.Think about this for a moment - can anybody here imagine Aaron, or Moses, giving a blessing to everyone at the Passover who did not partake of the Lamb of Passover, in order to make them feel better about being left out of being rescued from Egyptian slavery?
The Eucharist is our Lamb of Passover, and the priest is our Aaron, or our Moses.
Z
zab
Guest
Come to think of it, neither did Moses claim that children had to attend a catechism before they could be rescued from slavery.
J
jwinch2
Guest
While we are all being technical, the priest is acting in the person of Jesus, not Moses or Aaron. This is the new covenant here, not the old.Come to think of it, neither did Moses claim that children had to attend a catechism before they could be rescued from slavery.
B
benedictgal
Guest
It’s actually beyond the priest’s competency to determine. Rome has given five excellent reasons why this practice should not be done. While the CDWDS is not formulating new policy, it is merely restating what is already in the books.
B
benedictgal
Guest
However, only Rome has complete and full competency on the matter. This is beyond what the local bishop can do.
B
benedictgal
Guest
There is a common misunderstanding and misreadingf Jesus and his dispute with the Pharisees. Jesus disputed the forced adaptations of the priestly rutes hat the Pharisees were trying to force upon the faithful. These included ritual purifications and observances of the sabbath.
However, when it came to the rubrics of the cultic sacrificial worship of Ancient Israel, Jesus never had any issues with these liturgical practices. After all, His own Father dictated these norms and God spent no little time explicitly detailing to Moses just how, when, where and in what manner He was to be worshipped. Furthermore, these liturgical rituals foreshadowed Jesus own Sacrifice. Thus, Jesus completely respected these cultic sacrificial norms.
Just as God the Father was quite clear that the norms could not be tampered with when He spelled them out to Ancient Israel, He, through St. Peter and his successors, expects obedience, not deviance, when the Church, the New Israel, worships Him in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.
- Status