Implied accusation of disobedience

[ConstantineTG]

Off topic a bit…but wouldn’t chastity for a priest be a changeable rule?

It is. But in the case of obedience, they should abide by the rule until the competent authority revokes it unless they are granted an indult by said authority as is the case with Protestant ministers/priests who are converting to the faith.

add:
You just brought an excellent idea. There is a disciplinary rule against married priests in the Latin Rite. But tradition supports married priests for hundreds of years before it was suppressed. Does this mean married men can claim to this old tradition to justify being admitted to the priesthood? Doesn’t the current law have more force than the Custom of married priests?

Granted that today its been a long time since this has been enacted as a discipline, what about the day or the first year or decade that the discipline was established? Is it rightful for a married man to claim his eligibility into the priesthood because of Custom? I guess a deeper question is if Canon Law of the past carried the same law it does today.

 

[ProVobis]

But in the case of obedience, isn’t it you either are obedient or are not? Is there a lot of grey areas in between?

Need to ask first, obedient to whom or to what? If your mother says yes but your father says no, then it’s a mixed bag and issues other than obedience weigh in.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Need to ask first, obedient to whom or to what? If your mother says yes but your father says no, then it’s a mixed bag and issues other than obedience weigh in.

So you go to the higher authority, grandma, who’ll spoil you and say “Yes”

Seriously though, is the CDWDS really saying something different than what the Conference of Bishops are saying? Or what the CDWDS is saying is just a reinforcement of what the Conference of Bishops are saying, but a clarification that a specific deviation from the norm is not warranted a grave punishement of denial of Communion? This long debate is between the two differing viewpoints of the people here. One says CDWDS overruled the Conference of Bishops, the other says that the CDWDS’s statement supports the Bishop’s rightful choice.

For one thing, is the CDWDS in the business of overruling Bishops who make decisions rightful to their authority? While we’re arguing obedience amongst ourselves, we should also look at the leadership and realize that Church politics is not the same as regular government politics where people just pull rank to get what they want.

 

[ProVobis]

You just brought an excellent idea. There is a disciplinary rule against married priests in the Latin Rite. But tradition supports married priests for hundreds of years before it was suppressed. Does this mean married men can claim to this old tradition to justify being admitted to the priesthood? Doesn’t the current law have more force than the Custom of married priests?

Here is where the concept of tradition or things being handed down come in. I mentioned on another thread Apostolic Succession depends on the tradition principle. In other words, there are no gaps in real succession.

Once a practice either dies of itself or outrightly banned, there is a gap created and you no longer have anything handed down per se. Therefore it is not a custom that is protected by canon law, IMO. The custom of married priests in this sense needs to be resurrected but it can’t have the force of law that we call traditional, if I understand the word correctly.

 

[Thomas_Casey]

Please state your point and do not try to convince the other person that you’re right and he or she is wrong. That’s not the purpose of this forum.

Also, refrain from scolding each other. The only people who can scold here are the moderators. Unless the other person asks for your oponion, do not say, “you’re wrong.” You can say that you disagree or that you have a different understanding of something. You can even go as far as saying that X means B, which makes your point without speaking about the other person.

I’ve deleted several posts because of this type of exchange.

We can have this discussion without the arguing. Thank you for your cooperation.

Thomas Casey
Moderator

 

[Famule]

There is more to uniformity than the physical world. People don’t even acknowledge the spiritual world anymore. What about uniformity with the past and all of those people who are now a part of the spiritual communion of saints?

Lex orandi, lex credendi. As a large part of the people’s worship has gone to a more outwardly protestant feeling form, it has so shaped their beliefs. Now people think that inidividual conferences have more power than the Bishop of Rome. A very protestant belief. People arguing in favor of standing before Our Lord. This is very sad. I hope the tide turns. There is not much else to say here.

 

[At_Trent]

This weekend I attended the local parish’s OF with my family. I was sitting next to a very sweet lady who has noticed that I only receive Communion from the priest and was clearly concerned about me…

Where were you sitting ? Did you leave your pew and go to another line of communicants ? Walk past an EMHC to get in the priest’s line ?

Just trying to understand. If she was sitting next to you, wasn’t she in the same line as you ? If so, didn’t she also receive from the priest ?

I don’t understand why she asked in the first place(edit: yes I saw the explanation she gave in the OP), unless you were drawing attention by going to another line or something

 

[MarkThompson]

There is more to uniformity than the physical world. People don’t even acknowledge the spiritual world anymore. What about uniformity with the past and all of those people who are now a part of the spiritual communion of saints?

That’s for the Holy See and our bishops to concern themselves about; it’s not for each of us do figure out and decide individually what we think “tradition” amounts to and what rules we’ll adopt for ourselves. That would be a very Protestant belief.

Now people think that inidividual conferences have more power than the Bishop of Rome. A very protestant belief.

You know who else thinks that? Why, the Bishop of Rome! When the GIRM was issued, with the authority of an Apostolic Constitution, it ceded power to the bishops’ conferences to make the call on this issue. The same applies to Eucharisticum Mysterium, issued by the Sacred Congregation of Rites, which also believed the conferences should control the issue. I know it’s de rigueur here to issue condemnations of “Protestantism” at everything you disagree with, but it’s a pretty inappropriate slander here. The Holy See has deliberately I]granted local control over this issue.

 

[floresco]

I think maybe your friend just used an unfortunate choice of word with disobedience? But I would be concerned about a friend if they choose not to receive Jesus because of who delivered Him…I find that sad…

Yes, raising the subject of obedience only distracted me from more substantial issues. I think that there really is a problem if people are getting a message that it is more important to me whom I receive from than Whom I am receiving. If what I am doing is dishonouring the Blessed Sacrament, then I will have to change. I have been praying about this and I am going to talk to my spiritual director. Will you please pray for me too?

 

[Famule]

That’s for the Holy See and our bishops to concern themselves about; it’s not for each of us do figure out and decide individually what we think “tradition” amounts to and what rules we’ll adopt for ourselves. That would be a very Protestant belief.

You know who else thinks that? Why, the Bishop of Rome! When the GIRM was issued, with the authority of an Apostolic Constitution, it ceded power to the bishops’ conferences to make the call on this issue. The same applies to Eucharisticum Mysterium, issued by the Sacred Congregation of Rites, which also believed the conferences should control the issue. I know it’s de rigueur here to issue condemnations of “Protestantism” at everything you disagree with, but it’s a pretty inappropriate slander here. The Holy See has deliberately I]granted

local control over this issue.

I will not discuss this anymore with you. My points may have been quoted, but have been ignored. I rely on documents and Church authority, not what people happen to be doing. I also read into the entire issue, not just part of it. What I have stated in the previous post is pretty obvious to alot of people who have studied the old liturgy and the things that the Church has taught for centuries.

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

Yes, raising the subject of obedience only distracted me from more substantial issues. I think that there really is a problem if people are getting a message that it is more important to me whom I receive from than Whom I am receiving. If what I am doing is dishonouring the Blessed Sacrament, then I will have to change. I have been praying about this and I am going to talk to my spiritual director. Will you please pray for me too?

Of course I will pray for you…for God’s will for you…whatever that may be.

Blessings!

 

[floresco]

Where were you sitting ? Did you leave your pew and go to another line of communicants ? Walk past an EMHC to get in the priest’s line ?

Just trying to understand. If she was sitting next to you, wasn’t she in the same line as you ? If so, didn’t she also receive from the priest ?

I don’t understand why she asked in the first place(edit: yes I saw the explanation she gave in the OP), unless you were drawing attention by going to another line or something

I was in a situation in which I would have had to walk past an EMHC in a very visible and disruptive way to get to the priest so I did not go at all. She received from the EMHC and I remained kneeling at my place. I have been in this situation a few times and this woman, who usually sits near me, must have noticed.

 

[ProVobis]

I was in a situation in which I would have had to walk past an EMHC in a very visible and disruptive way to get to the priest so I did not go at all. She received from the EMHC and I remained kneeling at my place. I have been in this situation a few times and this woman, who usually sits near me, must have noticed.

Others were receiving from the priest so why did she single you out, I wonder. Perhaps she knew you were attending the EF and was testing you?

 

[At_Trent]

I was in a situation in which I would have had to walk past an EMHC in a very visible and disruptive way to get to the priest so I did not go at all. She received from the EMHC and I remained kneeling at my place. I have been in this situation a few times and this woman, who usually sits near me, must have noticed.

Ok, so you opted to do a Spiritual Communion instead of causing a distraction. Well, imho, you did well. Prudence is a virtue

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

Others were receiving from the priest so why did she single you out, I wonder. Perhaps she knew you were attending the EF and was testing you?

Oh my goodness! Why is it always about that? Maybe she was just concerned for her? Can’t we believe the best in people? Especially fellow Catholics?

 

[floresco]

Others were receiving from the priest so why did she single you out, I wonder. Perhaps she knew you were attending the EF and was testing you?

There are only a handful of people who kneel to receive Communion at this parish. I have probably called attention to myself by being one of them and so my actions come under more scrutiny.

 

[MarkThompson]

I will not discuss this anymore with you.

I can see why not.

My points may have been quoted, but have been ignored. I rely on documents and Church authority, not what people happen to be doing. I also read into the entire issue, not just part of it.

LOL, you haven’t relied on anything except one impromptu interview you got off of YouTube!

What I have stated in the previous post is pretty obvious to alot of people who have studied the old liturgy and the things that the Church has taught for centuries.

A very Protestant point of view: “I figured out tradition on my own from the original documents, thankyouverymuch, and now I will see if the Church matches up to the expectations I have for it.”

 

[Canto]

in the RS it is clearly stated that the local Conference of Bishops choose the appropriate posture for receiving Communion. So the authority falls on the local Bishops, not the Pope or the CDWDS.

Once they have chosen the posture it has to be **approved **by the CDWDS and they can say no can’t they?

The Norm is to recieve Communion on the tonue. If you recieve Communion on the hand are you being dissobedient? No, becuase the Holy See allows a special indult in some places.

The Norm in the US is to recieve Communion standing. If you recieve Communion kneeling are you being dissobedient? No, becuase the Holy See allows standing only provided those who wish to kneel are free. - Why would the Holy See allow the faithful to be dissobedient to their Bishops?

 

[Canto]

The norm in Australia is to stand (it used to be kneeling). So if I and other Aussies choose to kneel some might say we are being dissobedient to our wonderful Bishops.

Well here is Pope Benedict praying Mass at St Mary’s Cathedral in Sydney, just the other year, and is Pope Benedict following the Australian norm? Nope.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Once they have chosen the posture it has to be **approved **by the CDWDS and they can say no can’t they?

It has to receive Recognitio, to be more specific

The Norm is to recieve Communion on the tonue. If you recieve Communion on the hand are you being dissobedient? No, becuase the Holy See allows a special indult in some places.

The difference here is that the GIRM is absolutely clear that COTT and CITH are both allowed in the US. There is no mention of kneeling in the GIRM.

The Norm in the US is to recieve Communion standing. If you recieve Communion kneeling are you being dissobedient? No, becuase the Holy See allows standing only provided those who wish to kneel are free. - Why would the Holy See allow the faithful to be dissobedient to their Bishops?

They are not. But its not Rome’s pastoral duty to correct the flock of each Bishop. That is why the clause says that those who kneel are to be addressed pastorally later on. Its up to the Bishop and his Priests to address the pastoral needs of their flock.