and you find that through COTT. good for youNo one, save God the Father Himself, I suppose, can diminish Christ. By changing over to CITH we have lost an opportunity to express humility before God and man in the presence of Jesus.
I want to be near the Presence. Adding mundane elements to the rite and removing sacred/taboo ones doesn’t help me accomplish this.
I’ve said nothing, AFAIK, about people who receive CITH. In fact, I’ve said I don’t know what’s going on in their minds. How can I?and you find that through COTT. good for you
other people find that in CITH
you know whats bad about this thread, is people forget the 8th commandment. “thou shalt not bear false witness.” are you 100% positive that what you say about those who receive CITH is what actually is going on in their minds when they receive? or are you merely painting a stereotype made by those who have never received CITH in their lives.
Alan, I think you’re over-thinking it. Actions have meaning. Now, the “Words are culturally defined so they mean what I want them to mean” afficionados will chime in at this point.
I say them, nay. It’s simple. **Want a tried-and-tested Mass developed over hundreds of years, attended by generations of your forebears or do you want to be an experimental subject of recent, massive changes to the central rite of your religion? **
The Church deals in centuries. 40 years? No biggie. A mere upset. We have three score and ten years, if we’re lucky. X number of masses per month, for Y number of years.
I do not have confidence that the changes to our religion are the work of saints. **Funny thing is: no one in authority is saying CITH is good, here’s why we should do it. It’s just … done. **
Had a stray thought while kneeling for Communion at an altar rail, at a TLM, in a pretty Church, with chant and vested servers: “Jesus is here. Why would anyone want to swap this for CITH?”
And, lo, an answer came …* (scroll down)*
.
.
.
.
.
“Because they’re out of their frickin’ minds!”
I want to folllow the teachings of the Magestrium, trusting that would not approve of something that was in error.
.
.
[Yes, yes, judgemental, Pharisee, etc. Heh.]
An interesting point. Which raises others:
a) Who is the Magisterium;
I think the overemphasis on CAN we do this misses the larger point of SHOULD we do this. Statistics show that belief in the Real Presence has suffered just a Dietrich Von Hildebrand predicted it would since the practise has been allowed. For that reason I oppose the practise. And no , I am not going to argue whether we CAN or not. Its a waste of time.“Being approved” is not the same as “an indult.” As my pastor explained to me, in the U.S. the option to receive communion in the hand is part of Church law, not an indult.
I hear this argument a lot and frankly I never see any evidence to prove it’s validity. Because one can establish a temporal relationship (correlation) it does not necessarily follow that it has been proven that one caused the other (causality). You would have to be willing to ignore the possibility that all of the other major societal changes since Vatican II have had no effect. I’m not willing to do that. Things are rarely that simplistic.I think the overemphasis on CAN we do this misses the larger point of SHOULD we do this. Statistics show that belief in the Real Presence has suffered just a Dietrich Von Hildebrand predicted it would since the practise has been allowed. For that reason I oppose the practise. And no , I am not going to argue whether we CAN or not. Its a waste of time.
Pax
Belief in the Real Presence started to suffer at the same time the Original Star Trek was taken off TV. . THEREFORE iit is incumbent of Catholics to demnd it be returned to TV!I think the overemphasis on CAN we do this misses the larger point of SHOULD we do this. Statistics show that belief in the Real Presence has suffered just a Dietrich Von Hildebrand predicted it would since the practise has been allowed. For that reason I oppose the practise. And no , I am not going to argue whether we CAN or not. Its a waste of time.
Pax
According to a 1992 Gallup Poll, only 30% of Catholic still believe in the Real PresenceI hear this argument a lot and frankly I never see any evidence to prove it’s validity. Because one can establish a temporal relationship (correlation) it does not necessarily follow that it has been proven that one caused the other (causality). You would have to be willing to ignore the possibility that all of the other major societal changes since Vatican II have had no effect. I’m not willing to do that. Things are rarely that simplistic.
Nothing that you have provided is any proof of your assertion that CITH is wholly or even partially responsible for a decrease in Catholics belief in the Real Presence. I can assert with logic and reason that a change in catechesis since VII is the direct cause. Or that priestly abuse is proof since how could God allow a priest who has just used his consecrated hands to abuse a child be capable of confecting the Eucharist? Or the popularity of televangelism and easy access to non-catholic teachings on the internet have caused Catholics to doubt the validity of the Eucharist. I could go on and on theorizing but I have no proof and neither do you.According to a 1992 Gallup Poll, only 30% of Catholic still believe in the Real Presence
The US Conference of Catholic Bishops have described the growing disbelief and irreverence towards the Real Presence of Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament as: “A grave situation”. (6/15/01)
A New York Times/CBS News Poll indicated that less that half of Catholics who attend Mass believe that the Eucharist is really the Body and Blood of Christ. (April, 1994)
“In some places, the practice of Eucharistic adoration has been almost completely abandoned…In various parts of the Church, abuses have occurred, leading to confusion with regard to sound faith and Catholic doctrine concerning this wonderful sacrament…The Eucharist is too great a gift to tolerate ambiguity and depreciation. It is my hope that the present Encyclical Letter will effectively help to banish the dark clouds of unacceptable doctrine, so that the Eucharist will continue to shine forth in all its radiant mystery…It is the responsibility of pastors to encourage by their personal witness, the practice of Eucharistic adoration…” -Pope John Paul II (Ecclesia de Euchararistia)
You dont have to take my word for it. It is my opinion that CITH contributes to this decline.
“Communion in the hand should be rejected,” was published November 8, 1973 by Dietrich von Hildebrand Cardinal Ratzinger (Pope Benedict) wrote about Dietrich von Hildebrand in the year 2000: “I am firmly convinced that, when at some time in the future, the intellectual history of the Catholic Church in the 20th century is written, the name of Dietrich von Hildebrand will be most prominent among the figures of our time.”
Its my opinion and is shared by prominent Catholics. We can disagree. But I share the opinion of Dr von Hildebrand.
I have nothing to add to what I posted. I share the opinion of Dr Dietrich von Hildebrand over yours. If you want to know what that is - read what he wrote. Secondly - no one brought up VII , the Pedophilia Scandal , televangelism the internet or wild theories other than you.Nothing that you have provided is any proof of your assertion that CITH is wholly or even partially responsible for a decrease in Catholics belief in the Real Presence. I can assert with logic and reason that a change in catechesis since VII is the direct cause. Or that priestly abuse is proof since how could God allow a priest who has just used his consecrated hands to abuse a child be capable of confecting the Eucharist? Or the popularity of televangelism and easy access to non-catholic teachings on the internet have caused Catholics to doubt the validity of the Eucharist. I could go on and on theorizing but I have no proof and neither do you.
Thank you for this post, Andrew! Receiving Communion on the tongue strengthens the point that this truly is the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ. Additionally, I know that there are many so called Catholics today who even encourage their non-Catholic friends to receive the Eucharist! Going back to the kneeling posture and receiving Our Lord on the tongue definitely will draw more attention to the fact that this is not “just a remembrance” or a bit of bread that we receive to commemorate the Lord’s Supper. Why some bishops requested permission for Communion in the hand is is a true shame in my opinion.I don’t think that any of my friends and other people my age (I am 15) really know how sacred and holy the eucharist is. I had to explain to my friend who goes to CATHOLIC school, what it was because he thought it was just blessed bread. CITH never strengthened my belief in the true presence, and until I started receiving COTT I didn’t really realize that this was really God. My younger cousins who are making there first communions only learn how to receive on the hand and they were told COTT was something only that “old people” do. It is very hard for kids my age to see what the eucharist really is, and I believe that if communion on the tongue comes back it would make them see how holy the eucharist is. Communion on the hand allows some people to just walk away with the host then put it in their mouth when they get to there pew. Eucharistic Ministers don’t strengthen people’s belief in the true presence either. Trust me on this one, CITH is defiantly causing people to not understand the sacrament, well at least people my age.
I’m content that you now acknowledge your position as your opinion rather than fact as I believe you attempted to do previously by the use of statistics. I don’t disagree that Catholics have less belief in the Real Presence today but I think it is due to much more complex reasons than CITH or the NO Mass as others here would like to assert.I have nothing to add to what I posted. I share the opinion of Dr Dietrich von Hildebrand over yours. If you want to know what that is - read what he wrote. Secondly - no one brought up VII , the Pedophilia Scandal , televangelism the internet or wild theories other than you.
Pax
I"m not sure what personal attacks and abuse you are under. Please provide examples.Regardless, if you’re going to try to cite things as proof it is your burden to show that they are the actual root causes. If you can’t do that nobody is going to listen to you.
It wasn’t disobedient the second it was approved and isn’t disobedient now because that approval has not been withdrawn. To even make such claims diminishes your credibility in anyone’s eyes to which you would be trying to make your argument.
All this though is exactly why this is indeed “just another CITH thread.” Even in trying to support your position I get written off because I bring up that you need meaningful proof if you want to sway people to change. Instead it’s just more of the abuse for anyone who doesn’t accept your statements as gospel that need no further proof. I’ll not trouble you any further.
Layman;6836558:
The Magisterium allows it because it is appropriate.An interesting point. Which raises others:
It allows it in the US and other countries
Becuase they beleive that CITH is appropriate.
It is appropriate, because the Magisterium allows it.
The TLM can’t come soon enough to my family’s parish in Ireland. Or anywhere accessible, even, on a Sunday.
Alan, this post is an appeal to exaggerated absurdity. Let’s take it a step further…perhaps we should crawl from the doors of the Church to our pews. The point is COTT is more reverent than CITH and the universal norm of the Church for thousands of years. CITH is a modern Protestant practice that has not served us well.Why don’t we lie prone before the Eucharist for an hour before receiving it? Would that not be even more respectable? When is enough, enough? If the theory is not to miss an opportunity to show respect and humiliate ourselves, we can do that in excess even to the exclusion of ever getting to reach the Sacrament. Maybe we can fast for 40 days while lying prone; that would even make us more worthy, right? Uhh, then again maybe it doesn’t work that way. Maybe we can go through respectful and self-diminishing behavior until the cows come home and we are no more worthy anyway except through the love of Jesus.
A respectful sign, such as a deep bow. A respectful sign, such as kneeling. A respectful sign, such as lying prone. How about a respectful sign, such as working on our internals until the point we no longer have a desire to negatively judge others’ externals? Not saying that’s a “good thing,” just thinkin’ out loud … “what if?”
Alan