I
IesumPerMariam
Guest
And the quote I posted which she was referring to was from a Local Council, which does not enjoy the charism of infallibility anyway.
- Status
A
Annabelle_Marie
Guest
So…if it’s preferable to receive from a priest why have deacons at all???
A
Annabelle_Marie
Guest
You asked questions. I answered them. How that qualifies as “looking down my nose” I cannot understand. No…you actually didn’t answer them…you threw out a bunch of quotes out of context.
And I do not trust my own opinions, which are worthless. I only adhere to what those far more intelligent and far more holy than me have taught for millenia. But only some and not others?
As far as what the Lord would be pleased with, I will quote the holiest American theologian of the 20th Century, the Servant of God Fr John Hardon: "Whatever you can do to stop Communion in the hand will be blessed by God.” Well hold the presses…that TRUMPS everythingAgain…another quote…out of context…
A
aemcpa
Guest
That is a very good question that should be the basis for a new thread. I would be interested to hear your thoughts on that question.
C
CesarAugustus
Guest
And some Bishops have written books against it, and thankfully Archbishops like Cardinal Cipriani have banned receiving in the hand in their Dioceses:
Blessings!
O
OxygenMan
Guest
It’s amazing how much vitriol comes out of these forums.
I
IesumPerMariam
Guest
A quote from the Ecumenical Council of Trent’s Decrees on the Most Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist explaining that the distribution of Holy Communion is reserved to the priest by Apostolic Tradition is not answering the question about who is to distribute Holy Communion?
A quote from the Summa Theologiae explaining why the priest is the minister of Holy Communion is not answering the question about who is to distribute Holy Communion?
A quote from an encyclical of Bl John Paul II explaining that the priest is the ordinary minister of Holy Communion because he has been fully consecrated to God is not answering the question about who is to distribute Holy Communion?
Umm, yeah. As Catholics, we are not allowed to make up our own religion, so it stands to reason that we would use quotes to explain the Faith.
L
larsont7
Guest
A quote from the Ecumenical Council of Trent’s Decrees on the Most Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist explaining that the distribution of Holy Communion is reserved to the priest by Apostolic Tradition is not answering the question about who is to distribute Holy Communion?
A quote from the Summa Theologiae explaining why the priest is the minister of Holy Communion is not answering the question about who is to distribute Holy Communion?
A quote from an encyclical of Bl John Paul II explaining that the priest is the ordinary minister of Holy Communion because he has been fully consecrated to God is not answering the question about who is to distribute Holy Communion?
Umm, yeah. As Catholics, we are not allowed to make up our own religion, so it stands to reason that we would use quotes to explain the Faith.
J
JamesCaruso
Guest
I receive on the tongue by a priest or EMHC. I bow reverently before I receive. Many in my church bow before receiving. I try to do so enough ahead of time so that I don’t create a delay, since many people are usually in line for communion even on weekdays.
I see some people genuflect or receiving kneeling. I admire this act of reverence, but in the case of kneeling to receive, I think it causes delays. At one parish where I sometimes attend Mass, occasionally a priest will actually call the congregation to the communion rail and dispense communion only on the tongue in the old Latin Rite style. I like this; it’s what I grew up with and I think it facilitates a more reverent disposition for communion, not that you cannot be reverent when standing or when receiving on the palm.
I also fold my hands in prayer form, as the priest and altar boys do in the Mass, when I am in line for communion and when I return from communion. This is not uncommon in my church. It is, however, uncommon in some other churches I attend. Many Catholics don’t like to make a show of piety, and this is good up to a point. I do think, and its just my personal opinion, that we should show some outward sign of reverence when we are receiving the Lord of all the Universe, and mindful that the heavenly hosts are there invisibly as the Mass is being celebrated. When the priest is very reverent, and when certain things are done that promote an atmosphere of reverence, such as the use of incense, I think it facilitates more reverence on the part of the people.
I see some people genuflect or receiving kneeling. I admire this act of reverence, but in the case of kneeling to receive, I think it causes delays. At one parish where I sometimes attend Mass, occasionally a priest will actually call the congregation to the communion rail and dispense communion only on the tongue in the old Latin Rite style. I like this; it’s what I grew up with and I think it facilitates a more reverent disposition for communion, not that you cannot be reverent when standing or when receiving on the palm.
I also fold my hands in prayer form, as the priest and altar boys do in the Mass, when I am in line for communion and when I return from communion. This is not uncommon in my church. It is, however, uncommon in some other churches I attend. Many Catholics don’t like to make a show of piety, and this is good up to a point. I do think, and its just my personal opinion, that we should show some outward sign of reverence when we are receiving the Lord of all the Universe, and mindful that the heavenly hosts are there invisibly as the Mass is being celebrated. When the priest is very reverent, and when certain things are done that promote an atmosphere of reverence, such as the use of incense, I think it facilitates more reverence on the part of the people.
G
Greg_N
Guest
Are you trying to imply that receiving Communion from an Archbishop (in say, the Seville Cathedral during a Tridentine Mass), is equal in reverence to receiving It from an EHMC in a nursing home?
There’s got to be some kind of (teleological?) difference there.
A
agnes_therese
Guest
Why? The Eucharist is the Eucharist. Reverence is in the heart of the person who is receiving.
G
Greg_N
Guest
What if I was dressed as a clown.
A
agnes_therese
Guest
In other words, and to more fully answer Annabelle Marie’s question: Yes, aemcpa is saying that the Bishops are wrong, and that he knows better than our shepherds.
L
Lapey
Guest
I understand your point and agree, but going back to the outdated code to make your point causes your point to lose its punch.
The priest is the only person who is required to be at a Mass, NO-ONE else! The priests are ordained to the ministry of Jesus the High Priest. His hands and his hands only are consecrated with the authority to confect the Eucharist and absolve sins. He is the only Eucharistic minister present at Mass. These are all facts that are undisputed.
When I go to daily Mass at my home parish I do not distribute communion, only my pastor who distributes by intinction. I as a deacon am not required to distribute Holy Communion at Mass.
With all that said, the deacon is an ordinary minister of Holy Communion and is used first before acolytes and other EMsHC. There have been occasions where I have been given Holy Communion from EMsHC as a deacon, and I will receive from them when these rare occasions occur. This is the proper way to handle this as the Church sees it now.
The Church has given permissions for these things to take place and we must be obedient and not make a showing as to make ourselves the distraction for others or, as in the case of this thread which has run its course and now become uncharitable, a judgmental opportunity by some.
Many of the arguments being made are good ones for both sides, but what all of us have to realize is that we are not the authority and are in no position to enforce policy. If I had my way there would be almost no occasions where EMsHC would be used, hence the word “extraordinary”. But as long as the Church allows this and we are presented with times when we are to receive from them, we should without causing distraction or hard feelings; otherwise we should skip receiving because we may not be worthy in the first place.
These squabbles are just silly and yes, an occasion of sin. If your preference is “only from a priest”, okay, sit where you are in that line for Communion. But don’t come here and put everybody else down who doesn’t “do Catholic” like you do; Mr. and Mrs. High & Mighty Catholic. Simply go up and receive and then go kneel and pray for the Church to change Her disciplines to bring back the reverence in receiving. BTW, this paragraph is stated to all who take this discussion to non-charitable levels, both sides of the argument.
Now, the question is “How do you receive”, not how terrible you think others are who receive differently than you. Please keep this discussion at least a resemblance of a Catholic forum.
COTT & COTH are both accepted and approved in the USA; receiving from a Priest, Deacon, or EMHC are all approved and accepted ministers at this time. It does not matter what the 1917 Code of canon Law states, we are under the 1983 code.
L
Lapey
Guest
*Originally Posted by Council of Trent, Session XIII, Chapter viiiA quote from the Ecumenical Council of Trent’s Decrees on the Most Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist explaining that the distribution of Holy Communion is reserved to the priest by Apostolic Tradition is not answering the question about who is to distribute Holy Communion?
A quote from the Summa Theologiae explaining why the priest is the minister of Holy Communion is not answering the question about who is to distribute Holy Communion?
A quote from an encyclical of Bl John Paul II explaining that the priest is the ordinary minister of Holy Communion because he has been fully consecrated to God is not answering the question about who is to distribute Holy Communion?
Umm, yeah. As Catholics, we are not allowed to make up our own religion, so it stands to reason that we would use quotes to explain the Faith.
Now as to the reception of the Sacrament, it was always the custom in the Church of God, that laymen should receive the Communion from priests; but that priests when celebrating should communicate themselves; which custom, as coming down from an Apostolical Tradition, ought with justice and reason to be retained. *
This is the quote you provided. This simply states that; one, laymen SHOULD receive from the priest; two, priests communicate themselves; three, this is “CUSTOM” and OUGHT to be retained.
To say these statements are not true would be stretching truth and forming your own religion in a sense, but saying these statements are law and the only ways which are approved in the LR Church is equally creative.
As long as these methods are approved discipline they are simply that, approved disciplines. Now get off the piety horse and see the Church for what She is, the holder of all truths, the full deposit of the faith, who by nature of being run by humans is imperfect; but by God’s Grace and guidance of the Holy Spirit will prevail until the end of the age.
The argument is over, “How do you receive” is the question, not what you think of others preferences.
L
Lapey
Guest
I think there is great difference. But this in no way means the Eucharist is any less the Eucharist. He is the same whether given to me by Pope E B16 or the little old lady who brings me the Eucharist while home sick.
I believe this is why we get at each other so much, we lose sight of what, Who we are receiving rather than who is giving. The Communion service at a room in a nursing home may be the only opportunity for a person to receive Jesus and to that person is more reverent at that time then anyone receiving in any cathedral from any bishop anywhere. It’s not a fair comparison; it’s ridiculous to see things this way. We are losing sight of Who He is in this argument.
This is the “most august” of sacraments the CCL says, and the CCC reads, “the source and summit” of our faith. I receive Him, the source and summit, the most august, every time I receive; no matter whose hands present Him to me.
Now, if there were enough Priests to insure I would receive from consecrated hands always, I would vote for that! But it is not the case. Many parishes in rural areas have deacons doing communion services most Sundays. What would you do in these cases if you say “only by the priest shall I receive”?
C
clem456
Guest
What if you were?
?
In the reading last Sunday God identifies himself as “I Am,who Am”.
We can do nothing to change that.
G
Greg_N
Guest
No one in this entire thread disputes that. Come on.
No, we’re not. The entire argument is based on whether or not we should heighten our level of reverence and respect for Him, over and above our own personal preferences (as per some of the excuses have been). I take there to be an objective level of respect which should be practiced when possible (i.e. taken on the tongue, from a priest etc.).
You should receive communion every chance you get (as long as you have the prerequisites to do so; absolution of sins etc.), but don’t you agree that along with receiving the sacrament, you should also take the opportunity to venerate and revere Him with the utmost respect?
This is what we are arguing about.
Stating the obvious my friend.
I
IesumPerMariam
Guest
And…? She had asked where the Church ever said that we SHOULD receive from a priest. Thank you for proving that I answered her question perfectly well. Your third point is incorrect. This does not state that it is merely a “custom,” but that it is “Apostolic Tradition,” and Apostolic Tradition is an essential component of the Catholic Faith (Scripture, Magisterium, Tradition, right?) Something that a dogmatic Ecumenical Council pronounces to be Apostolic Tradition that “ought to be retained”, well, it should be retained. It’s as simple as that.
Quite honestly, I couldn’t care less about anyone’s preference. I care about the Most Blessed Sacrament of Our Lord being treated with utmost reverence. I am terribly sorry if that offends you, but I will not change that to meet anyone’s approval save Christ Himself.
G
Greg_N
Guest
What if indeed.
(From the reading last Sunday).
Exodus 3:5: Do not come any closer," God said. “Take off your sandals, for the place where you are standing is holy ground.”
Do you get the point?
- Status