C
ConstantineTG
Guest
Regardless. If we know whats right, then lets do it for righteousness’ sake. If we don’t then we apply another popular saying, ignorance is bliss.
- Status
D
Denversdad
Guest
LOL. Thanks, rough day getting schedules to sync. I needed a good laugh.
P
ProVobis
Guest
Okay, I’ll put my book down. Later.
C
ConstantineTG
Guest
I’m not contesting that. But people seem to have the impression because our hands are physically dirty we cannot touch the Host. But our mouths are dirtier than our hands. I’m disproving the point that our hands are unworthy because of the germs it contains.
So you’re not worried by the priest who’s touched the lectionary and whatever books are on the ambo, which have been touched by the other readers as well. And unless you’re first on the Communion line, the priest could have inadvertently touched a number of people’s mouths and tongues before you received.
I mean c’mon, are we supposed to turn into germophobes at the Communion line? Don’t forget that while our hands may have touched dirty things, it is also thorough our hands that we perform the works that Christ asks of us. We do not feed the hungry, clothe the naked, help the poor, heal the sick with our mouth. We do it with our hands. The same with our mouths, we can use it to sing and shout praises to God, or curse our neighbors. If we’re going to over analyze receiving Communion and break it down as if it was an exact science, then I’m afraid we have missed the point.
I schedule my mining outside of Mass
A
AlanFromWichita
Guest
Excellent point.
Besides, on my own forum I created an entire section specifically for one pro-COTT poster – spawned by this debate – and even gave him mod privileges – to go there and “make his case” about the microscopic aspects of all this and why CITH is unacceptable, and he didn’t get the case made and now has gone on haitus. I could drag out some of the evidence there that shows that when the priest breaks the host, tiny particles get sprayed all over the place – not just in the hands but all over the altar, the priest’s robe, and anything else nearby. If we want to analyze it to that level, I think we’ll find that neither COTT vs CITH is partial to watching out for the tiny fragments.
How about lectors who schedule it just before Mass so they can then present themselves in “good form?”I schedule my mining outside of Mass
A
AlanFromWichita
Guest
I thought it was interesting because the case was being made here that COTT is objectively better than CITH, and that CITH is just plain wrong and quite non-Catholic and all. Unless the Franciscans are not under the authority of Rome (and I’m asking) then it is germane. Maybe that wasn’t the exact focus of the thread but I believe I would have been misinformed on some of the details if I had only read the other posts in the thread and not seen a response by JR debunking them.
As far as the Franciscan mindset, such as not elevating friars above brothers, I find that all interesting, too, because I think Jesus was very inclusive, not exclusive, and He did not respect classes of people as in one’s better or more holy than the other. Individuals, yes. Classes, no. Except for the part about the Pharisees but that was not against the “ordinary” people he liked to befriend.
That makes me think of another aspect of this. If we are worried about touching Jesus after shaking hands with one another – and therefore keeping Jesus pristine – then why wasn’t Jesus worried about washing His hands or staying away from “icky” people?
Alan
O
Ockham
Guest
From what JR says the Franciscans do their own thing. In post number one I stated that as a given and didn’t wish to debate it. If you are interested in learning more about Franscians then I suggest starting a new thread.
P
ProVobis
Guest
L
Layman
Guest
I’m afraid I’m starting to tune out JR’s examples of what friars do. We’re laymen. We attend masses said by secular clergy. Also, I regret that Franciscans, along with Jesuits, are not now noted for riguor amongst the traditionalists I know.
I think this is, once again, picking and choosing bits and pieces from Church history, across its many rites and orders, to suit the agenda of a current, liberal consensus. The Vat. II reforms and subsequent changes were an iconoclasm. The result? Masses no adult man can take too seriously, occuring across Catholic Christendom. Why?** Because Catholics are making a Protestant error: they’re confusing ‘niceness’ with caritas.**
I am interested in knowing why CITH should be ‘sought’ by laypeople or secular clergy, given that COTT was/is the norm, with kneeling, from the hand of the presiding priest.
Perhaps there is no good reason other than, in the fire of revolution, in the false springtime of the 60’s, some clergyman thought it would be nice and it spread because of its novelty? Also, isn’t Holland predominantly Protestant? With the N.O., modern church interiors, ecumenism, the altar table, the vernacular and CITH, they could chum up with Protestant ministers much more comfortably? Hard to resist, if the dominant religion in your country is Protestant. Hey, Vat. II even seemed to give the green light to this!
P
ProVobis
Guest
The difference is that the Franciscans (as well as some Eastern rites, for that matter) have chosen a particular discipline and apparently they have no problems in relating that discipline to follow divine law of paying utmost respect to God. It hasn’t been proven that extending the practice of CITH to where it is today has in any way increased that respect. The fact that the Vatican has not enthusiastically championed the practice should tell us a lot.
(By the way, I had a lot more in my original reply but I was cut off after 20 minutes and lost everything; you know how that goes I’m sure.)
O
Ockham
Guest
The Dutch Church at the time was very radical. They put out their own catechism that the Vatican pulled due to unCatholic things like married clergy, etc. I have read that CITH was a protest banner of theirs to symbolically show their agenda. I haven’t read of any clergy being disciplined and certainly no one got excommunicated over their disobedience. Why the rest of the world got on the CITH bandwagon is beyond me.
L
legendashmore
Guest
Watch this, It is a very good explanation for COTT and trying to reinstill reverence forthe Body and Blood of Christ. It may be long, but it is worth it.
tl.gloria.tv/?media=2710
tl.gloria.tv/?media=2710
P
ProVobis
Guest
Good find.
A
AlanFromWichita
Guest
Oh, man. I hate it when that happens.
A
AlanFromWichita
Guest
You stated the Franciscans do it. I thought you were interested in examining the theological differences, and the theories of why they do things is part of that. Guess not, because the theories are apparently uninteresting to you. That fact they “do it” is in itself not very interesting – it is the whys and wherefores that I find interesting. I suppose I shall not use the “F-word” anymore in this thread.
There is an old theory in laboratory work for a “successful” result. That is, first draw the curve, then plot the points. Another one: discard data that do not support the main hypothesis.
C
ConstantineTG
Guest
Right. We must take utmost care of the Host, but there is just something as too much, over analyzing the issue.Excellent point.
Besides, on my own forum I created an entire section specifically for one pro-COTT poster – spawned by this debate – and even gave him mod privileges – to go there and “make his case” about the microscopic aspects of all this and why CITH is unacceptable, and he didn’t get the case made and now has gone on haitus. I could drag out some of the evidence there that shows that when the priest breaks the host, tiny particles get sprayed all over the place – not just in the hands but all over the altar, the priest’s robe, and anything else nearby. If we want to analyze it to that level, I think we’ll find that neither COTT vs CITH is partial to watching out for the tiny fragments.
Thankfully lectors do not distrubte Communion. Unless they happen to be EMHCs as well. But our EMHCs have a parish-provided big bottle of disinfectant gel. And they use this in full view of everyone, which is a good thing, right before Communion.
O
Oneofthewomen
Guest
OUCH!! Were we a bit grumpy last evening?!
I have quite enjoyed Br. JR’s (name removed by moderator)ut into this conversation.
It puts much about this debate into perspective for me.
It is obvious Ockham, that you do not believe that CITH is appropriate.
It is also obvious that while some in the Magisterium agree with you,
the only person (Our Supreme Pontiff- BXVI) who can actually change the situation, has not done so, and, as far as I can tell, has no plans to do so, at least in the near future.
I have been following this thread, and have read all the posts (yes, all 35+ pages!
).It has also become quite obvious that this is, indeed, * “just another CITH thread.”*
You have offered nothing new, and are now even telling others, who are trying to show you that the Roman Church has allowed CITH, for many reasons and for a very long time (doesn’t Francis pre-date Trent?
), that they are still wrong.The Chruch has her position. In the US (where I am), the indult is available.
I receive reverently, bow before hand, kneel for the consecration, and again after the Lamb of God (as stated in the GIRM, although it is the custom in my area to remain standing). I believe in the Real Presence (so much so that I often weep while receiving) and am a nearly daily Communicant. I receive the sacrament of reconcilliation at least monthly (more often, if necessary), and lead a deeply spiritual life.
The Chruch has said that I am free to choose, who are you, or anyone else here to say that we are wrong.
Can’t you just agree to disagree on this one?
M
MarkThompson
Guest
Right. For instance you might declare that many popes “ruled against” Communion in the Hand and that Church councils declared it prohibited – then when someone points out that the Franciscans had been doing it all along for 800 years so it can’t be that those popes and councils were establishing any sort of universal theological principle or even universal discipline for the Latin Church, you’d be forced to say, “Aaargh! No more discussing the Franciscans!”There is an old theory in laboratory work for a “successful” result. That is, first draw the curve, then plot the points. Another one: discard data that do not support the main hypothesis.
O
Ockham
Guest
It was in this thread that I found out about Archbishop Bernardin so that is indeed new. Did you know about his efforts to get CITH into the US GIRM?I I have been following this thread, and have read all the posts (yes, all 35+ pages!
It has also become quite obvious that this is, indeed, * “just another CITH thread.”*
You have offered nothing new, and are now even telling others, who are trying to show you that the Roman Church has allowed CITH, for many reasons and for a very long time (doesn’t Francis pre-date Trent?
I also found out that if you are aware of all the conditions of the indult it is a sin not to practice them. Did you know that?
The history of CITH was new to me prior to coming on this website. I’m willling to bet many if not most Catholics don’t know the full story. Is there anything wrong with knowledge?
However, if you don’t want to discuss this subject then maybe it’s a good idea to ignore it.
C
ConstantineTG
Guest
The thing is, we cannot discount something as invalid if its allowed somewhere within our Church. Is it acceptable to stand only during Consecration? Yes! Most if not all of the Eastern Churches stand. So we cannot discount standing as irreverent, unless we think a big portion of our own Church endorses irreverence.
That is why practices by Religious Communities and/or other sui juris Churches are important to anlayze. It helps us understand if that practice indeed is a bad practice or a good one. If it happens somewhere within our Church and most especially part of hundreds of years of tradition, then how can it be bad? How can it be an abuse for so long?
The truth is many never sought it. But once it was allowed then people just adopted what was allowed. I never sought for it, but I was travelling in the US about 10 years ago when I first came across it. Since everyone was receiving CITH, I followed what everyone else is doing. There was no deep theological analysis on my part. It was allowed then I just did it.
I hate to keep repeating the same thing over and over, but Bro. JR gave a very good explanation on why the Church allowed it. They saw some parishes or diocese doing it. They examined if its overall beneficial for the Church and the salvation of souls to stretch the boundaries of the discipline. Then they made their decision.
- Status