Only taking Communion from a Priest is heresy?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ForGood
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Anna_Claire said:
Don’t quote me Trent…we’ve moved on in case you haven’t heard.
And it’s not a heresy…please come up with a better word. Wow…your beliefs are waaaayyy out there.
Click to expand...
would you please reference to when the church moved on, can’t seem to find it. i think you will find it is your belief’s that are way out there.
 
I have heard priests say - from the pulpit, maybe? I don’t recall exactly - that they thought it was wrong in some sense to do this. But I have found myself lately doing it when I am able to without attracting a lot of attention. I do not think it is wrong.

There is an abuse of extraordinary ministers these days, and a deacon/priest/bishop is the normal minister of holy communion, so I think it of kind of as “voting with my feet” to help discourage the practice. Maybe that’s inappropriate, and I’m open to being convinced otherwise, but that’s how I’ve been tending to think lately.

Certainly it’s not a heresy unless you are thinking what Christiano said would be a problem (i.e. the sacrament is affected by who distributes it), or if you are obstinately refusing to follow instructions from a legitimate authority. But what “line” you go to - if there even is one, as some parishes use the communion rail - should not make any difference.
 
I have changed lines recently to the line with the priest for a separate reason.

I was carrying my grandson (9 months) and knew he would be blessed when I reached the priest.

The EMHC can ask that God bless him but they cannot do it. Only the priest can actually bless him.
 
Originally Posted by Brendan
“*I receive from the priest because he is Christ in persona Christi. So it is recieving the Eucharist from the hands of Christ Himself.”
*

No it is not…think about how foolish this sounds.

It’s not Holy Orders that makes anyone holy…it’s Baptism. The priest has a specific job when celebrating the Eucharist. We need the priest…no Eucharist without an ordained priest. But… he’s not better than us… “in persona Christi” doesn’t make him holier when distributing communion. He acts as Christ when he presides only. When distributing communion all ministers are equal. Christ is present in all who are present…every person present. Lay people, lay ministers are holy as well and to question their disposition is to me sinful. Do you really believe the priest’s disposition is always perfect? Anyway…at this point in the liturgy, we are expressing our unity as the Body of Christ, through him, with him and in him…in unity. We are all one in the assembly.
 
ForGood said:
Last night in a class I’m auditing on Church history - we were discussing the Church today and different topics came up regarding changes and communion, litury, etc. It was brought up how so many people jump communion lines to receive from only the priest and not an extraordinary minister.

I’m guilty of this one but I didn’t say anything because everyone else was saying how it’s terribly wrong to do so and that its against the Church’s teaching. It doesn’t matter who’s hand you get the communion from, be it Bishop or beggar???

Would someone please explain this to me? Personally, I receive from only the Priest whenever possible because that’s the way I like to do so. I recieve in the hand b/c I’m too selfconscious to do otherwise when I would really prefer to receive on the tongue, at a rail, kneeling. I know that’s not going to happen.

It was also mentioned that jumping lines for communion is actually heresy because the person doing so is going against the Church’s teaching. I’m so confused.

If someone doesn’t care either way and recieves however, fine, I don’t tell them they are doing it wrong. But, if I prefer to receive the way I do, why do people feel the need to tell me I’m wrong? :confused:
Click to expand...
I don’t think it’s heresy…but you might want to question your motives and your heart.

I always find it a real blessing if I receive from our priest…but when I don’t…I have learned to not freak out…it should be more about who we are receiving then from WHOM…no?

That said…if you want to sit on the priest side so you can only receive from him…then go for it. I do think the line hopping is rude though…because I’m sure a lot of people would like to do that…but for our parish…we have 3 Masses to get through on Sunday…with one priest. I know our priest generally goes to the right side on Sundays…I always sit on the left…that’s how I grew up. But occassionally he switches…and I’m blessed!

Just something to think about… But I don’t think it is heresy at all…but maybe a touch of disobedience? Only you can search your heart for those answers.
 
Anna_Claire said:
Originally Posted by Brendan
“*I receive from the priest because he is Christ in persona Christi. So it is recieving the Eucharist from the hands of Christ Himself.”
*

No it is not…think about how foolish this sounds.

It’s not Holy Orders that makes anyone holy…it’s Baptism. The priest has a specific job when celebrating the Eucharist. We need the priest…no Eucharist without an ordained priest. But… he’s not better than us… “in persona Christi” doesn’t make him holier when distributing communion. He acts as Christ when he presides only. When distributing communion all ministers are equal. Christ is present in all who are present…every person present. Lay people, lay ministers are holy as well and to question their disposition is to me sinful. Do you really believe the priest’s disposition is always perfect? Anyway…at this point in the liturgy, we are expressing our unity as the Body of Christ, through him, with him and in him…in unity. We are all one in the assembly.
Click to expand...
That is actually not true, the Church has taught that the priest is in persona Christi throughout the Holy Mass. In fact, it is an excercise of the entire character of the priesthood
Priests, although they do not possess the highest degree of the priesthood, and although they are dependent on the bishops in the exercise of their power, nevertheless they are united with the bishops in sacerdotal dignity. By the power of the sacrament of Orders, in the image of Christ the eternal high Priest, they are consecrated to preach the Gospel and shepherd the faithful and to celebrate divine worship, so that they are true priests of the New Testament. Partakers of the function of Christ the sole Mediator, on their level of ministry, they announce the divine word to all. They exercise their sacred function especially in the eucharistic worship or the celebration of the Mass by which acting in the person of Christ…
Click to expand...
Lumen Gentium 28

To claim otherwise would be to either deny Vatican II, or deny that the offering of Holy Communion to the faithful is not part of the Mass. Which one do you hold to?

In addition, I questioned no ones disposition. If you believe so, please feel free to quote me and we can discuss. Tthe disposition of the person of the Priest, or any layperson is unimportant. What I was referring to is the Person of Christ, present in the priest during Mass that is distinct in essence and degree from the lay person.
 
Brendan said:
I receive from the priest because he is Christ in persona Christi. So it is recieving the Eucharist from the hands of Christ Himself.

That, and we don’t use EMHC’s in our parish much at all. 😉 The only ones are a Chaldean Sub-Deacon who is in our parish, and any of our seminarians who are home for the weekend and who have been installed as Acolytes. In that case, our bishop has asked them to assist in at their parishes as EMHC’s
Click to expand...
Brendan, a priest is not “Christ himself”.

The priest acts in the person of Christ, represents Christ, and carries the authority of Christ. The priest stands in place of Christ, but the priest is not Christ himself.

Reference 1548 in the Catechism.

-Tim-
 
Timothy
Only to the apostles, and thenceforth to those on whom their successors have imposed hands, is granted the power of the priesthood, in virtue of which they represent the person of Jesus Christ before their people, acting at the same time as representatives of their people before God…. 68. The august sacrifice of the altar, then, is no mere empty commemoration of the passion and death of Jesus Christ, but a true and proper act of sacrifice, whereby the High Priest by an unbloody immolation offers Himself a most acceptable victim to the Eternal Father, as He did upon the cross. “It is one and the same victim; the same person now offers it by the ministry of His priests, who then offered Himself on the cross, the manner of offering alone being different.” . The priest is the same, Jesus Christ, whose sacred Person His minister represents. Now the minister, by reason of the sacerdotal consecration which he has received, is made like to the High Priest and possesses the power of performing actions in virtue of Christ’s very person.
Click to expand...
Pius XII - Mediator Dei,

It is that very last line that I am referring to. Yes, the person of the priest does not change, but the mark of sacerdotal orders enables Christ to act through the priest as if it was Himself.

That is why the sacrifice of the Mass, indeed the whole Mass, is an offering of Christ by Christ.

And the action of offering the Eucharist to me by the priest differs from that of an EMHC. The action is, as +Pius stated, “an action of Christ’s very person”, one that is enabled by the charater of sacerdotal orders.
 
Corki said:
in fact there are some times when it is ONLY licit to receive from a priest such as for one’s First Communion.
Click to expand...
Can you elaborate on this please? Not arguing against it, just not familiar with it.

.
 
TrueLight said:
That’s how she always posts to people.
Click to expand...
Yes, I’ve been accused of many things, but never NICE.:blushing:

Congratulations TrueLight!

I remember well your coming to these forums with your concerns with Holy Mother Church! Your conversion story, I think you should write a book.

God bless you!
 
Like said:
Yes, I’ve been accused of many things, but never NICE.:blushing:

Congratulations TrueLight!

I remember well your coming to these forums with your concerns with Holy Mother Church! Your conversion story, I think you should write a book.

God bless you!
Click to expand...
See, you are NICE! 😃

Thanks for the kind words.
 
I’m fine with trying to get more lay participation, but that starts with getting their intellect and prayer into the Mass rather than having them just sit through it bored. I can understand that goal and it is laudable. However, using Communion as a tool for greater participation just seems so irreverent to me. EMHC’s were instituted not for greater lay participation, but out of necessity. The position has been abused and excused into greater practice for this end and it concerns me. It ought to concern all Catholics because using the Eucharist for this end isn’t the way to treat It with the greatest respect possible.

And isn’t there something about the priests hands being consecrated?
“Secondly, because the priest is the appointed intermediary between God and the people, hence as it belongs to him to offer the people’s gifts to God, so it belongs to him to deliver the consecrated gifts to the people. Thirdly, because out of reverence towards this sacrament [the Blessed Sacrament], 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. Hence it is not lawful for anyone to touch it, except from necessity, for instance if it were to fall upon the ground, or else in some other case of urgency” (SummaTheologica, III, Q. 82, Art. 13).
Click to expand...
With that in mind, I can completely understand wanting to switch lines to only receive from the ordained. There is absolutely nothing wrong with it, especially in a parish that overuses EMHC’s, which is basically everywhere.
 
smndtupidisaftr said:
And isn’t there something about the priests hands being consecrated?

.
Click to expand...
Certainly there is. But they are consecrated to offer the Holy Sacrifice.

As has been pointed out many times. a deacon’s hands aren’t consecrated, but he, too, is an Ordinary Minister of Holy Communion, as are priests and bishops.
 
felsguy said:
Can you elaborate on this please? Not arguing against it, just not familiar with it.

.
Click to expand...
Redemptions Sacramentum #87
[87.] The First Communion of children must always be preceded by sacramental confession and absolution.**Moreover First Communion should always be administered by a Priest **and never outside the celebration of Mass. Apart from exceptional cases, it is not particularly appropriate for First Communion to be administered on Holy Thursday of the Lord’s Supper. Another day should be chosen instead, such as a Sunday between the Second and the Sixth Sunday of Easter, or the Solemnity of the Body and Blood of Christ, or the Sundays of Ordinary Time, since Sunday is rightly regarded as the day of the Eucharist. “Children who have not attained the age of reason, or those whom” the Parish Priest “has determined to be insufficiently prepared” should not come forward to receive the Holy Eucharist. Where it happens, however, that a child who is exceptionally mature for his age is judged to be ready for receiving the Sacrament, the child must not be denied First Communion provided he has received sufficient instruction.
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top