CITH has not been around in the Latin rite for twenty centuries.
Pope Paul VI stated CITH may lead to a diminished belief in the Real Presence and forty years later guess what we’ve got?
There are valid reasons to distribute Holy Communion COTT. There are none that I’m aware of for CITH. As an RCIA instructor what reasons to you give?
I don’t give reasons. I explain that the norm is for the universal Roman rite - so, for example, traveling in a foreign country, they may not see CITH at all; I explain what an indult is and that CITH is by indult and that it can be withdrawn; and both methods are demonstrated.
History is not part of the introduction of reception; this is done just before Easter when they will be receiving for the first time.
I have heard over and over again that Paul 6 made the statement. He made more than one statement that I probably disagree with. Given the fact that for the last 800 years CITH didn’t cause loss of faith to the Franciscans, and that for the last 2000 years it didn’t do so in the Eastern rites provides logical grounds for considering that his statement doesn’t seem to be founded on reality so much as a personal opinion (assuming he actually made the statement - I cannot recall ever seeing it sourced). and being made pope doesn’t guarantee that his opinions have merit.
The short of it is that a small group of people really don’t like CITH and keep focusing on it, and blaming it for what is actually due to lack of catechesis. It is simply one more post hoc, ergo propter hoc argument that has not proof to it other than the fact that the occurances appear in the same general historical vicinity.
I have said it I am sure to the point of ad nauseum to some: the great majority of my parish receives CITH; we have a vibrant social ministry, have built the first Catholic grade school in 40 years in the diocese, have only the OF, and also have had Perpetual Adoration 24/7/363 for more than 15 years; one ordained, another who entered seminary for several years, and one sister who joined a habit wearing missionary group. maybe two vocations and a 3rd one giving a long look is no great shakes. But the bit about CITH being some sort of inducement to lose one’s faith, or induce lack of reverence to the Eucharist simnply doesn’t hold water.
CITH neither causes a lack of reverence nor induces it. Lack of proper catechetical training does - if one has no idea of what to be reverent about, the method of receiving Communion is not going to make a change.
You are entitled to your opinion, and the fact that you have an opinion contrary to mine does not disturb me nor make me think less of you. And I know enough by this point in my life to know that I am not going to change your opinion.
But your opinion is just that - an opinion. In a court of law, you would not have the better proof or the more consistent and provable facts. Post hoc ergo propter hoc is an all too common logical mistake made when one does little independent research, but rather relies on statement that coincide with one’s opinion.
A perfectly valid reason for receiving CITH is that it is a) an ancient form or reception that is at least as likely how both Christ gave Communion to the Apostles and the Apostles to the disciples as COTT; it has been a valid and consistent method throughout 20 centuries in the Church (and granted, not the Roman rite); it appears that it was practiced in the Roman rite for about 1800 of the 2000 years (as there appears to be evidence that it was practiced to some extent up to about 1000, and the Franciscans for the last 800). I fail to see that we need any other “valid reasons”. Many people find it to be spiritually enriching (e.g. my parish, and the other parishes in my archdiocese with Perpetual Adoration.
We are not ninnies; nor are we flaming liberals, nor Traditionalists. We are Catholics, we follow the Magisterium, and most of us receive CITH.
And I receive both ways.
