Lex orandi lex credendi

[pnewton]

I do not see the correlation. Every church I have been in that communion is available in the hand also has Eucharistic adoration.

 

[Cat]

Our parish has LIFE TEEN MASS! :bigyikes:

And we’ve had a Perpetual Adoration Chapel for years. It is a beautiful, quiet place, and is extremely well-used.

And a lot of those who use it are those teens who go to Life Teen Mass. :bigyikes:

We also have an extremely contemporary design to the building, EMHCs (yes, wearing shorts and tank tops sometimes), Communion in the hand (but on the tongue or kneeling if a communicant wishes), and lots of good old forty year-old Haugen and Haas music!

But we have Perpetual Adoration. 24/7. In a separate chapel set aside only for Adoration.

I don’t think that there is any correlation between any of these things and irreverence towards Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament. From what I understand, the Perpetual Adoration Chapel was built because the parishioners wanted it built. (I wasn’t a Catholic back when the Chapel was built.) And it is obvious from the number of people who pay short visits, and set aside Holy Hours of Reparation, and sign up to be Adorers of Our Lord, that the “modern” Catholics want to adore Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament.

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

it is obvious from the number of people who pay short visits, and set aside Holy Hours of Reparation, and sign up to be Adorers of Our Lord, that the “modern” Catholics want to adore Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament.

Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

 

[eelpis]

Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

That’s good. We are Catholics and we adore Christ in the Blessed Sacrament.

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

That’s good. We are Catholics and we adore Christ in the Blessed Sacrament.

I know. I look forward to my adoration time early every Wednesday morning. I am alone most of the time with him, and it is so special
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

 

[Unitas]

I would remind you that our Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI gave Communion in the hand while here in the states. I would hardly say he is contributing to that which leads to a loss of belief in the true presence of Jesus in the Eucharist.

Not any more.

Just because a pope may tolerate something does not mean he agrees wholeheartedly that it is a good practice.

In discussing this with a convert to Catholicism, his description of receiving the Eucharist for the first time was that when the consecrated host was placed in his hand, that he was filled with an overwhelming awe of holding the Creator of all that is in his hand and that God humbles himself to come to each of us in this manner. This hardly contributes to a lack of belief, but when reflected upon tells us of our own insignificance before Almighty God.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

And there are myriads of ‘faithful’ who think it is merely a cracker.

My point still stands, It is not treated like it is important so people intuit that it is not. Suppressing the indult would enforce the belief that it is not just some wafer.

 

[Unitas]

Perhaps for you. The evidence says you’re the exception not the rule. Communion in the hand has done nothing but exacerbate the loss of belief in the True Presence.

**The Chaldean Catholic and the Assyrians have always received Communion in the hand, and have NEVER denied that this is the Body and Blood of Christ.

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

And there are myriads of ‘faithful’ who think it is merely a cracker.

You put these among the faithful.??? I think cafeteria Catholicism would be more descriptive. If they do not believe what the Church believes and teaches, they are not truly Catholic, thus not part of the faithful.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

 

[pnewton]

You put these among the faithful.???

It is always an error to overreach in grouping people. Traditionalist often roll people into the modern Catholic group that seldom darken the doors of a Church. On the other hand, Traditionalists often have to share the same label with schismatics and sedevacantists. Both tactics are unfair to the faithful.

 

[GerardP]

If you look at the issue historically, Communion in the hand was yet another innovation that undermined belief in the real presence in the Latin Church.

People went from a specific posture that was totally unique in their lives to the same posture at the cafeteria. Was the “table” form and the “Lord’s Supper” aspect a coincidence? No.

From that, three groups of attitudes emerged.

Those that lost the belief in the Real Presence and now are responsible for any number of horrors.

Those traditionalists that either discovered, or went back to the old practices when they realized what was happening.

Those that have grown up with an irreverent attitude around them and have with effort improved upon the impoverishment brought on in the 1970’s.

If they really have the belief in the Real Presence, and it grows as something sacred. They will eventually want to engage in the old practices exclusively.

Possibly that could be part of the “enrichment” the Pope talked about in Summorum Pontificum.

The traditional practices take the greatest pains both individually and collectively on the part of the priests and the laiety to protect the Blessed Sacrament from any profanation. A traditionalist can’t go to the conservative end of things without feeling the slide towards the liberal lack of reverence and care.

 

[SFD]

You put these among the faithful.??? I think cafeteria Catholicism would be more descriptive. If they do not believe what the Church believes and teaches, they are not truly Catholic, thus not part of the faithful.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

Interesting…so they lost membership in the Church by their own act. The belief you are referring to above (real presence) is a dogma of the Church…it is de fide. The “theological note” attached to willful denial of a de fide teaching is the loss of membership in the Church.

This is exactly what Pope Pius XII was stating here in that there are two ways to lose membership in the Church…schism, heresy, and apostasy (you separate yourself this way) AND also by the censure of the Church (an excommunication that causes loss of membership…in other words an excommunication that requires real Catholics to AVOID you):
Mystici Corporis Christi:

1. Actually only those are to be included as members of the Church who have been baptized and profess the true faith, and who have not been so unfortunate as to separate themselves from the unity of the Body, or been excluded by legitimate authority for grave faults committed. “For in one spirit” says the Apostle, “were we all baptized into one Body, whether Jews or Gentiles, whether bond or free.” [17] As therefore in the true Christian community there is only one Body, one Spirit, one Lord, and one Baptism, so there can be only one faith. [18] And therefore if a man refuse to hear the Church let him be considered – so the Lord commands – as a heathen and a publican. [19] It follows that those are divided in faith or government cannot be living in the unity of such a Body, nor can they be living the life of its one Divine Spirit.

SFD

 

[rwoehmke]

It might prove mind bending to actually look in the Scriptures and meditate on how Jesus related to people and how they related to him. Reverence is certainly important, but I think there are other facets to this relationship we have with our God. What does Jesus expect from those who love him?

 

[SFD]

It might prove mind bending to actually look in the Scriptures and meditate on how Jesus related to people and how they related to him. Reverence is certainly important, but I think there are other facets to this relationship we have with our God. What does Jesus expect from those who love him?

To keep His commandments.

 

[CassiusLonginus]

I think He told us when he forgave the adulteress and spared her a death by stoning…“Go, and sin no more”.

 

[Claire_from_DE]

I think the lack of respect for the Eucharist is partly due to the lack of good formation in religious education classes and even in some seminaries in the 70’s and 80’s in the confusion after Vatican II. Not due to the council itself but the way in which the implementation of its recommendations was almost hijacked by liberals and others with agendas.

 

[otjm]

My opinions:

1. Lack of available perpetual adoration

Actually, perpetual adoration is making a comeback; further, it was not wide3spread prior to Vatican 2.

1. The indult to legalize communion in the hand, along with the removal of “holy and venerable hands” has lessened the sense of the sacredness of the sacrament. The sense of the priest acting in persona christi has been seriously damaged. Familiarity breeds contempt.

How strange. Guess this is where opinion flies in the face of reality. I think my parish has had 24 hour perpetual adoration for 15 years now; and the vast majority of people in the parish receive in the hand. So also the other parishes around here I have visited which have 24 hour perpetual adoration.

Example: every knee will bend to the name of the Lord, yet we stand in His True Presence? Hmm…

and in the Eastern rite Churches they have been standibng for 2000 years. Now they are to be condemned for 2000 years of slacking?

1. The sub-standard prayers in the english translation of the new mass, as well as the removal and shortening of the latin text from the old, has led to a lessening in the quality of belief.

The age group which attends in greates numbers is the age group that was catechized prior to Vatican 2; the same group which should be most scandalized by the changes. The group which was not catechized properly - those starting in the 1970’s, are those of weakest knowwledge of their faith. Your comments are post hoc, ergo propter hoc.

Lex orandi lex credendi. If you give the people poorer quality prayers this will be reflected in poorer quality belief. This is obviously an issue seeing as the new translation is be worked on. This is also a big reason why trads promote the old mass so much, because it is our belief that the lex orandi is of a much superior quality than the new mass in practice. Therefore it will foster a greater quality of lex credendi in the faithful.

However, the facts seem to indicate otherwise. You complain of poor quality of prayers, but most people don’t get their catechesis from the Mass; they get it from class.

 

[SFD]

ojtm:

However, the facts seem to indicate otherwise. You complain of poor quality of prayers, but most people don’t get their catechesis from the Mass; they get it from class.

You keep repeating this but it is incorrect. Most Catholics do not have any catechism after their early schooling. They get their beliefs from the official prayer of the Church after that. This was true well before Vatican II.

The prayer determines the belief…that’s why protestants tend to ramble in prayer…making it up as they go along…their understanding or belief gets expressed in the prayer they make up.

SFD

 

[rwoehmke]

Actually, perpetual adoration is making a comeback; further, it was not wide spread prior to Vatican 2.

Ever hear of Forty Hours Devotion? The practice before Vatican II was to have the Blessed Sacrament be exposed for 40 hours in a particular parish. Then the next parish would pick-up and so on so that perpetual adoration took place in a diocese instead of a particular parish 24/7B:thumbsup:

 

[SFD]

30. For the full and accurate understanding of the Anglican Ordinal, besides what we have noted as to some of its parts, there is nothing more pertinent than to consider carefully the circumstances under which it was composed and publicly authorized. It would be tedious to enter into details, nor is it necessary to do so, as the history of that time is sufficiently eloquent as to the animus of the authors of the Ordinal against the Catholic Church; as to the abettors whom they associated with themselves from the heterodox sects; and as to the end they had in view. Being fully cognizant of the necessary connection between faith and worship, between “the law of believing and the law of praying”, under a pretext of returning to the primitive form, they corrupted the Liturgical Order in many ways to suit the errors of the reformers. For this reason, in the whole Ordinal not only is there no clear mention of the sacrifice, of consecration, of the priesthood (sacerdotium), and of the power of consecrating and offering sacrifice but, as we have just stated, every trace of these things which had been in such prayers of the Catholic rite as they had not entirely rejected, was deliberately removed and struck out.

 

[SFD]

Pope Leo XIII, Apostolicae Curae:
30. For the full and accurate understanding of the Anglican Ordinal, besides what we have noted as to some of its parts, there is nothing more pertinent than to consider carefully the circumstances under which it was composed and publicly authorized. It would be tedious to enter into details, nor is it necessary to do so, as the history of that time is sufficiently eloquent as to the animus of the authors of the Ordinal against the Catholic Church; as to the abettors whom they associated with themselves from the heterodox sects; and as to the end they had in view. Being fully cognizant of the necessary connection between faith and worship, between “the law of believing and the law of praying”, under a pretext of returning to the primitive form, they corrupted the Liturgical Order in many ways to suit the errors of the reformers. For this reason, in the whole Ordinal not only is there no clear mention of the sacrifice, of consecration, of the priesthood (sacerdotium), and of the power of consecrating and offering sacrifice but, as we have just stated, every trace of these things which had been in such prayers of the Catholic rite as they had not entirely rejected, was deliberately removed and struck out.

I see nobody is willing to touch this one.

SFD