No… trust me, really, I don’t.
It wasn’t my point that a priest is only a ‘functionary’; rather, as you point out, a priest is configured to Christ the Head of the Church – they do not become Christ or have the ‘hands of Christ’.
Got a citation for us, from PDV, that says that priests ‘have’ Christ’s hands, in a way that’s not metaphorical?
How about from +Benedict
w2.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/audiences/2010/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20100414.html
This doesn’t suggest that the priest ‘has’ Christ’s hands. Rather, it simply says that the priest “represents the Lord” and that it is the priest who “carries out these gestures.”
It is the priest who carries out the gestures, but it is the Lord who performs the act. " The Lord makes his own action present in the person who carries out these gestures"This doesn’t suggest that the priest ‘has’ Christ’s hands. Rather, it simply says that the priest “represents the Lord” and that it is the priest who “carries out these gestures.”
It’s a very pious thought, Brendan… but it’s not present in what the Church believes and teaches.
Hmm… no – there is an ontological change; but the priest is not changed into Christ Himself, as you’ve asserted. Rather, the ontological change is that a man is configured to Christ in his ordination to the priesthood. As the document Priests in the Early Church, at the Vatican website, states, “ordination… inserts [priests] into a Sacramental Order, which is universal and confers a new ontological participation to the ‘munera’ of Christ, which makes them capable of implementing these duties in his name and in the name of the Church, in any place, after having first received a concrete mandate from a Bishop.”
Just did this last Sunday. I will always choose to receive from an ordained minister in lieu of the lady who lives up the street, in particular because I receive on my tongue. If there is no option but an EMHC I most often do not receive. There is no requirement to receive and I’m comfortable with a spiritual communion rather than doing something I’m not comfortable with.
Here in Brazil the row-by-row procedure is unheard-of, as you say. People get up more or less at random, though there are some people who always like to be among the first to receive Communion, and there are others who prefer to be among the last. But we still see line-switching. There are always a handful of people who make a point of receiving from the priest, and sometimes a few people switch the other way, when they see the priest’s line getting longer and the other lines getting shorter.
A serious question…
Do you pester lane changers in your parish with these questions? They have a right to refuse.
If someone is on their deathbed I would certainly hope that it’s a priest that shows up. The lady up the street can’t hear their last confession or provide the Apostolic Pardon. When I’m dying, the eucharist will mean nothing if I am not in a state of grace.
You’re right about that. A perfect act of contrition is what you need if a priest can’t be found.
That is, it’s what you need if you’re in a state of mortal sin. If you’re not in a state of mortal sin, you don’t need perfect contrition or even the sacrament of reconciliation (strictly speaking) in order to attain to heaven.
My question was serious and really wasn’t addressed to you.
Yes, that’s what I meant. But just to be on the safe side, an act of contrition would not hurt, especially if one, among other things, presumes he will be judged favorably. Presumption, after all, is a serious sin, or so I’ve been taught.
I understood what he was asking. Pestering? Or just asking a question that is uncomfortable to answer, so it gets brushed off?
It was a serious question and I gave a serious answer.
This is an open forum that allows anyone to comment. That is the very nature and purpose of open forums. If you do not appreciate open discussion then the question should be asked in a private message.