is it true?

  • Thread starter Thread starter nick817
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
N

nick817

Guest
is it true that the U.S. Bishops’ Committe on the Liturgy stictly forbade the priest to say " THIS IS the Body of Christ." I read this in a book called " The Problems With the New Mass" by R P. Coomaraswamy, M.D.
 
nick817 said:
is it true that the U.S. Bishops’ Committe on the Liturgy stictly forbade the priest to say " THIS IS the Body of Christ." I read this in a book called " The Problems With the New Mass" by R P. Coomaraswamy, M.D.
Click to expand...
Nick:

The Priest says it during the Prayer of Consecration, it’s absolutely necessary for a Transubstration (except in one or two Rites of the Catholic Church, where the phrse is implied), and doing so would bring cause them and the American Church to be excommunicated from the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, so I can’t see how even the USCCB could have done such a thing.

So, Nick, the answer is, “NO.” I would suggest the author you’re reading has violated the commandment against providing false testimony against another and just might be guilty of the sin of calumny.

I think this is a more balanced appraisal of what happened to the Liturgy and it’s translation:

Liturgical Translation: A Question of Truth
by Bishop Peter J. Elliot
In this article Bishop Peter J. Elliot, the new auxiliary bishop of the Archdiocese of Melbourne, Australia, examines the destructive effects of the International Commission for English in the Liturgy
catholicculture.org/library/view.cfm?recnum=7832

Also look here:

Online Edition - June 2007
Vol. XIII, No. 4
Liturgical Translation: A Question of Truth
by Bishop Peter J. Elliot

adoremus.org/0607LiturgicalTranslation.html

I know a priest does the Novus Ordo Ad Orientum IN LATIN, and has done it this way for most of the last decade.

I hope that starts to answer your question.

Your Brother in Christ, Michael
 
Yes, thank you, your 100% correct the Priest does say these words during the consecration. The book, sorry I forgot to say, was speaking in reference to the words spoken by the Priest or Eucharistic minister when the Eucharist is given to the laity. The implication being that the Bishops by making this edict were trying to change the idea of the Eucharist as being Christocentric " This is the body of Christ", meaning the real presence, towards something more focused on the congregation, " Body of Christ" in reference to the people as the body of Christ.
My question was, did the Bishops’ ever issue this order, and why?
 
nick817 said:
Yes, thank you, your 100% correct the Priest does say these words during the consecration. The book, sorry I forgot to say, was speaking in reference to the words spoken by the Priest or Eucharistic minister when the Eucharist is given to the laity. The implication being that the Bishops by making this edict were trying to change the idea of the Eucharist as being Christocentric " This is the body of Christ", meaning the real presence, towards something more focused on the congregation, " Body of Christ" in reference to the people as the body of Christ.
My question was, did the Bishops’ ever issue this order, and why?
Click to expand...
By the way the Eucharistic Minister IS the priest and only the priest. The Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion (EMHC) are NOT Eucharistic Ministers.
 
Two different rubrics have gotten confused here. During consecration, the priest always says “This is my body”. The rubric at reception of the Eucharist is: “The body of Christ”. The fact that the priest does not say “This is the body of Christ” has no significance: since the priest says “The body of Christ” while presenting the Host to the communicant, it means exactly the same thing. And the communicant’s response, “Amen” (lit. ‘truth’), which means “It is so”, is specifically an affirmation of this fact: the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist.
 
nick817 said:
is it true that the U.S. Bishops’ Committe on the Liturgy stictly forbade the priest to say " THIS IS the Body of Christ." I read this in a book called " The Problems With the New Mass" by R P. Coomaraswamy, M.D.
Click to expand...
Who is this guy and what are his credentials? The only reference I could find to this book was on a website that also sells books endorsing the Bayside prophecies, which according to this document archived on EWTN.com have been discredited and the dissemination of material regarding these prophecies is in opposition to the Holy See. Thus I wonder about the book you have referenced. Likely it has no imprimatur and is possibly not faithful to the Vatican.
 
thistle said:
By the way the Eucharistic Minister IS the priest and only the priest. The Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion (EMHC) are NOT Eucharistic Ministers.
Click to expand...
And a deacon is an ordinary minister of Holy Communion not a Eucharistic Minister.
 
Bayside stuff is no no acording to forum rules.

This thread ought to be shut fairly soon.
SeekerJen said:
Who is this guy and what are his credentials? The only reference I could find to this book was on a website that also sells books endorsing the Bayside prophecies, which according to this document archived on EWTN.com have been discredited and the dissemination of material regarding these prophecies is in opposition to the Holy See. Thus I wonder about the book you have referenced. Likely it has no imprimatur and is possibly not faithful to the Vatican.
Click to expand...
 
Hellisreal said:
Bayside stuff is no no acording to forum rules.

This thread ought to be shut fairly soon.
Click to expand...
Really?

Mods- I was not aware of this. Please remove my posts but don’t punish the OP by shutting down the thread.
 
Hellisreal said:
The OP should read the rules before posting.
Click to expand...
The OP is not the one who brought up a banned topic. I should have reread the rules. I’ve been here for more than 3 years, nearly 3000 posts, and should know better, but it seems like new topics are added to that list weekly. 🤷
 
SeekerJen said:
The OP is not the one who brought up a banned topic. I should have reread the rules. I’ve been here for more than 3 years, nearly 3000 posts, and should know better, but it seems like new topics are added to that list weekly. 🤷
Click to expand...
I copied and pasted this for you all:
From Catherine Grant:
I want to remind our participants of Content Rule 6:

Do not post material from unapproved private revelations.

Material from unapproved private revelations include:
Visions you’ve had
Messages God asked you to transmit
Messages from Bayside
Messages from Medjugorje

If you post material from unapproved private revelations, your account will be subject to the Enforcement Rules, which could include immediate suspension or banning of your account.
I guess you are okay. 👍

So is the OP.

It seemed to jog my memory somewhere- sorry to you both for any confusion I may have caused- but it was in your best interests I did what I did.🙂
 
nick817 said:
is it true that the U.S. Bishops’ Committe on the Liturgy stictly forbade the priest to say " THIS IS the Body of Christ." I read this in a book called " The Problems With the New Mass" by R P. Coomaraswamy, M.D.
Click to expand...
I would be careful of that book. When someone is writing a book called “The Problems With the New Mass,” you’re just asking to get a skewed point of view.
 
SeekerJen said:
Who is this guy and what are his credentials? The only reference I could find to this book was on a website that also sells books endorsing the Bayside prophecies, which according to this document archived on EWTN.com have been discredited and the dissemination of material regarding these prophecies is in opposition to the Holy See. Thus I wonder about the book you have referenced. Likely it has no imprimatur and is possibly not faithful to the Vatican.
Click to expand...
Someone sent me this book a few years ago. The author writes basically from an Ultratrditionalist viewpoint, and thoroughly dissects the Mass of Paul VI. There is no Nihil Obstat or Imprimatur. It is published by Tan. Much of the argument against the “NO” that is given by posters on Traditionalist Boards seem to echo what is in this book, sometimes almost word for word. (And I am not talking just CAF). I am beginning to think this is the primer for those who object to the “NO”. So if you read it, read it with that in mind–everything will sound very familiar to you if you have been on any Trad Boards. If you want to understand the Ultratraditionalist mindset, this is the book to read.

And I am not knocking the Traditionalists, just telling what the book is about. And it has absolutely nothing to do with Bayside.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top