MERGED: Priest Implies Support for Error During Mass

[Ockham]

HUH…CITH has been around since the VERY FIRST MASS. And in some Catholic Rites it is the norm not an indult. And as far as altar servers being girls…perhaps you should lecture the pope.

ST. SIXTUS I (115-125). Prohibited the faithful from even touching the Sacred Vessels: “Statutum est ut sacra vasa non ab aliis quam a sacratis Dominoque dicatis contrectentur hominibus…” [It has been decreed that the Sacred Vessels are not to be handled by others than by those consecrated and dedicated to the Lord.]

POPE ST. EUTYCHIAN (275-283). Forbade the faithful from taking the Sacred Host in their hand.

ST. BASIL THE GREAT, DOCTOR OF THE CHURCH (330-379). “The right to receive Holy Communion in the hand is permitted only in time of persecution.” St. Basil considered Communion in the hand so irregular that he did not hesitate to consider it a grave fault.

COUNCIL OF SARAGOSSA (380). It was decided to punish with EXCOMMUNICATION anyone who dared to continue the practice of Holy Communion in the hand. The Synod of Toledo confirmed this decree.

POPE ST. LEO I THE GREAT (440-461). Energetically defended and required faithful obedience to the practice of administering Holy Communion on the tongue of the faithful.

SYNOD OF ROUEN (650). Condemned Communion in the hand to halt widespread abuses that occurred from this practice, and as a safeguard against sacrilege.

SIXTH ECUMENICAL COUNCIL, AT CONSTANTINOPLE (680-681). Forbade the faithful to take the Sacred Host in their hand, threatening the transgressors with excommunication.

ST. THOMAS AQUINAS (1225-1274). “Out of reverence towards this sacrament [the Holy Eucharist], nothing touches it, but what is consecrated; hence the corporal and the chalice are consecrated, and likewise the priest’s hands, for touching this sacrament.” (Summa Theologica, Pars III, Q. 82, Art. 3, Rep. Obj. 8)

COUNCIL OF TRENT (1545-1565). “The fact that only the priest gives Holy Communion with his consecrated hands is an Apostolic Tradition.”

POPE PAUL VI (1963-1978). “This method [on the tongue] must be retained.” (Apostolic Epistle “Memoriale Domini”)

POPE JOHN PAUL II (197. "To touch the sacred species and to distribute them with their own hands is a privilege of the ordained. (Dominicae Cenae, sec. 11)

“It is not permitted that the faithful should themselves pick up the consecrated bread and the sacred chalice, still less that they should hand them from one to another.” (Inaestimabile Donum, April 17, 1980, sec. 9)

Related article: Rethinking Communion in the Hand

latin-mass-society.org/commwhy.htm

 

[pnewton]

I think this is one case I would call him in on and show him where women’s ordination was already pronounced as perpetually invalid by John Paul II. Any such statement supporting the possibility of women’s ordination is an attack on the papacy.

 

[diggerdomer]

Humble Christian Greetings,

Though a cradle Catholic, I have only recently come back to the Church. And despite still having much to learn about our wonderful and rich Faith, even my scant knowledge was enough for me to realize that I heard something seriously wrong during Easter vigil this past Saturday.

Right after several catechumens were baptized, the priest made a sort of joke about the altar boys being future priests, “but not our altar girl.” Then he added, “but that may change someday,” which statement actually received some applause.

But how could it change when Pope John Paul II taught infallibly that the Church does not have the scriptural authority to ordain women as priests? Needless to say, a priest’s implying otherwise during a solemn service made me cringe. Having pastors do and say whatever they want, instead of deferring to a higher authority, is one of the things I find detestable about Protestantism. I certainly did not expect this type of blatant doctrinal deviancy from a Catholic priest.

At this point, I would like to say that, personally, I would not mind having women as priests. But, though certainly a sinner, I am humble enough to realize that my personal feelings are meaningless when comes to deciding doctrine. Rather, the Catholic Church relies on the Word of God and on sacred tradition, as interpreted by the Successor of Saint Peter with the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

I would like ask for the advice of any faithful Catholic who may read this. Being in practice a newcomer to the Catholic Faith, who has not even been confirmed yet, it seems unfitting for me to rock the boat and make some sort of complaint? So what should I do? Find another parish? Is there a site that reviews parishes and discusses whether the pastors there are faithful to Catholic teachings?

God bless all,

F.K. Juliano

It’s not clear that it was taught infallibly, so there’s no need to go there. It has been taught authoritatively, but whether or not such teaching can change in the future is open to theological speculation.

 

[PraRFLEsEkHm]

Hi all

so, I just got back from Mass. I am highly upset, and worried ATM - but I am going to do my best to make sense anyway - lol.

So, I’m at Mass, the deacon gets up to read the Gospel, and say the Homily (after the proper form/blessing was given by our priest). Does so…then starts his Homily - He proceeds to teach “Judas was born to betray Christ, as Thomas was born to become doubting Thomas” Um - excuse me? Holy Mother Church does NOT teach predetermination. Predestination yes - which states…God KNOWS ALREADY what choice you will make before you even know you have a choice. This is (part of) what makes Him God. God does NOT ‘script’ our lives thereby making him a petty puppeteer.

THEN

Out or nowhere, this “The Eucharist was not known as the body of Christ for the first 1200 years” WHAT???

Can somebody please PLEASE give me an alternate possible meaning for these Heresies?

Or tell me what I should do? I don’t know which fact upsets me more - the fact that he taught it, and therefore someone also taught him that - or that Fr just sat there and didn’t say anything to correct it!!

HELP!!! Am I missing something? Please tell me I’m missing something!!

Pax

John

Hello all

So I talked with Father today about last weeks Mass. Actually we talked for awhile about theology in general

But - He agreed with me that the Judas/Thomas confusion could have been said better - but that the deacon definitely did NOT mean to imply pre-determinism.

Also, as far as the Eucharist is concerned…what the deacon was getting at - was that for 1200 years, the Eucharist, was not known as the Eucharist - as in the TERM Eucharist…it (He?) was known simply as the Body of Christ…and the believers in general, also known as body of Christ - made things confusing sometimes. So the term ‘Eucharist’ was instituted.

WHEW!!! I praised God for His Church, for leading me to it, Thanked Mother Mary for helping me along…Gave Glory to God all throughout Mass, and was close to tears more than once. SO HAPPY :extrahappy:

THANK-YOU ALL for your encouragement and support!!

Pax

John