As much as I respect Fr. McNamara, he is not the voice of the CDWDS. It is unfortunate that there are those who will not take the Holy See at its word and will still find ways to justify what amounts to an ilicit practice and circumvent what the Congregation has said.
Yet those who may be awaiting their chance to receive (RCIAers, kids before their first communion) seem to revel in this inclusivity. I reject your notion that it’s a false sense of inclusivity, and submit that in many cases this is/would be a beneficial practice to officially adopt.
You are right to point out that it is a good thing when people follow the rules about when not to receive. It would not be desirable for people to receive in a state of mortal sin (or for various other reasons not listed here).
:clapping:Yet those who may be awaiting their chance to receive (RCIAers, kids before their first communion) seem to revel in this inclusivity. I reject your notion that it’s a false sense of inclusivity, and submit that in many cases this is/would be a beneficial practice to officially adopt.
Baloney that it ONLY causes confusion.
I agree that it should not be a practice used as a permanent subsitution for the Eucharist i.e. for someone who for whatever reason chooses not to participate in that particular mass.
No it is not Protestantism to interpret it that way. With all due respect, you are the one who is going beyond the bounds of what is and what is not allowed and have made yourself the arbitrer.
I lean towards thinking that way as well.
Can you point out where in that letter or any other document they say “what is not allowed” or call the practice “illicit” or are those your words?
The fact that the letter notes that the practice is expressly discouraged should be enough of a red flag to indicate that it should not be done. Something that should not be done is ilicit.
Well first off there is no requirement that you receive every time you go to Mass, properly disposed or not. There have been many times when I have gone to Mass and due to something that happened during Mass, inattentiveness, mind wandering, sinful or impure thought whatever, I became not properly disposed and thus could not receive. Those actions were purely my own fault and I accept them as such. This curious notion that one has to receive each and every time you attend Mass is really strange to me. and i have no idea where the idea came from.
the letter says :
Just another inconsistance between the facts and the interpretation. I notice again and again you feel free to dismiss the parts you choose
I am only stating what the letter states. The proper location of the blessing is at the conclusion of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, not in the communion line. The letter clearly states that everyone will be able to partake of the blessing once Mass is over.
:clapping:I lean towards thinking that way as well.
If a little kid is begging to go up for a blessing, personally I think it’s counterproductive to encouraging their love of the Sacrament to tell them, “No, son, the the CDWDS has determined, for the time being, that this practice is not allowed”, (even though their parish Priest and Bishop condone the practice).
Merely my opinion.
I have been in the same parish, and active, for well over the requested 10 year period. I’m not sure what that signifies, though. I have disagreed with some things I have seen. Some I pursue, some I don’t. Liturgical dance came. It went. Blessings in the communion lines came, and mostly went. They ripped out the high altar, but eventually they purchased a new one. They buy new carpet last year, and then when a new pastor comes he wants it immediately changed. Sometimes they let sponsors be up there at the Easter Vigil with the catechumen, sometimes they don’t. Sometimes they wash men’s feet, sometimes women. For awhile there the priest consecrated the precious blood in a crystal pitcher, and then poured it into crystal cups. The list goes on and on, some more important, some less. Whatever. If it really matters, complain. Otherwise wait and see. It will change. Lots of what happens is due to confusion, ignorance, poor communication, forgetting, etc. The priest won’t be there forever. They do move priests. If the last one refused to let the choir sing in Latin or to hear a general confession, well, maybe the next one will allow it.
only when read in proper context
It also states “nor receive a blessing” so who are you to dismiss this part of the letter?
Why are you so insistent that this practice is legitimate, if Rome has already said that it is expressly discouraged? With all due respect, I am suspect that you are the one who is dismissing the word of the CDWDS in favor of an interpretation that goes along with what you support.
It should be understood that although this practice is prevalent in some parishes (and dioceses it seems) it’s totally unheard of in others. Certainly it was unheard of in any parish where I’ve worshipped over the last 30 years or so and I’ve worshipped in many since we moved often.
Rome has not said such again that is you who says such, I have no problem with what CDWDS actaully says which include their words and their context; which you dismiss.
You provide your interpretation of the writting not what the writing say, you dismiss all you chose to dismiss. The subject is actually under review which is not what you say however it is what the CDWDS says
No, you are the one putting spins into things. With all due respect, what part of the phrase “expressly discouraged” do you not understand? “Expressly discouraged” means that it should not be done. You are the one dismissing the words of the CDWDS. Your repeated assertions that they don’t say what they really say, as I read it, mean that you are favoring your own interpretation over what the authoritative documents of the Holy See have said. You have yet to cite sources supporting your view point.