G
grampsc
Guest
Christ cannot produce error. Anna, we should be rational in our approach to dissent, you are going far off track. We are all in this together including those of us who do err.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
E
EasterJoy
Guest
What has happened instead of destroying the Church is that changes were made that were urgently needed. Maybe the Church was not the worst, but it was not good enough. There were unacceptable chances being taken with children, chances taken with the profound depths of their being and even their relationships with God, and some children suffered greatly because of that. It would have been better had these changes had been made voluntarily, but I’m not sure that the will to do it could have been raised if the true extent of the damage had not been made known by all of us.It really has. It’s just trying to destroy the church.
E
EasterJoy
Guest
We’ve gone from whether a EMHC can deny you communion until you consent to eye contact to whether or not the current version of the Roman Curia is or is not according to the will of God.
We should not rush to judgement about what happened in this particular case, the minister may just have been momentarily uncertain about whether the communicant was ready to receive the host, but no minister of the Eucharist, ordinary or extraordinary, ought to deny the Eucharist to a communicant who won’t make eye contact with the minister.
Eye contact is not required by the rubrics, so excepting that the minister has to have some indication that the communicant will receive the host without dropping it, it cannot be required by the minister, period. Having said that, both ministers and communicants ought to exercise the greatest amount of charity in interpreting each other’s actions, communicating their own problems and needs, and correcting each other’s habits in charity.
The OP is a long-time parishioner and active in his parish. Knowing that eye contact is not a requirement of the rubrics, he might just say something to his pastor or whoever trains the extraordinary ministers. Having said this, if this odd behavior continues it would not be a strain on his charity to look up long enough to satisfy the weak conscience or lack of charity of his neighbor, the EMHC…or to simply avoid her line when he sees that she is helping Father at a particular Mass.
We should not rush to judgement about what happened in this particular case, the minister may just have been momentarily uncertain about whether the communicant was ready to receive the host, but no minister of the Eucharist, ordinary or extraordinary, ought to deny the Eucharist to a communicant who won’t make eye contact with the minister.
Eye contact is not required by the rubrics, so excepting that the minister has to have some indication that the communicant will receive the host without dropping it, it cannot be required by the minister, period. Having said that, both ministers and communicants ought to exercise the greatest amount of charity in interpreting each other’s actions, communicating their own problems and needs, and correcting each other’s habits in charity.
The OP is a long-time parishioner and active in his parish. Knowing that eye contact is not a requirement of the rubrics, he might just say something to his pastor or whoever trains the extraordinary ministers. Having said this, if this odd behavior continues it would not be a strain on his charity to look up long enough to satisfy the weak conscience or lack of charity of his neighbor, the EMHC…or to simply avoid her line when he sees that she is helping Father at a particular Mass.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.