Our Lady of Akita & Communion on the Tongue

[Dai_Yoshida]

Paul Folbrecht, thank you for your excellent post. I have great interest in Our Lady of Akita since my family happens to be from Aomori just north of Akita. Since my resources are limited, the tidbits you provided was very helpful. I will try to budget for this book.

Please do not let those poster who are critical of the traditional form of receiving Communion bother you. I’m not sure why they are so uncharitable. I can only pray for them. I have seen many unkind extraordinary ministers giving Communicants a hard time. It is a very sad thing indeed.

Again, thank you and God bless you.

 

[I_Believe]

What about his opinion that the expanded use of the TLM was an “act of tolerance”???

I don’t think H.H. meant the his SP was the throwing of a bone to the traditionalists. Or, we must tolerate the bothersome. I think he was speaking in Prudence.

More along this line of thought…
"Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions."
and…**
"Tradition means giving votes to the most obscure of all classes, our ancestors. It is the democracy of the dead. Tradition refuses to submit to that arrogant oligarchy who merely happen to be walking around. "**
Both quotes by Gilbert K. Chesterton

Just mho of course, but the SP was not about an acknowledgement of the trad cause, but an acknowledgement that the Mass for All Ages was never abrogated and it remains an option for those who embrace it.

If Paul VI, GRHS, would have presented a similar MP around 1970
or so, then we would certainly not see the division we see today. (Water under the bridge of course)

Even with the SP of BXVI, the wounds are slow to heal. 35 + years of stigma must surely have taken it’s toll, as the bitterness of some reveals.

Christ willed unity in His Name, and it’s time the traditionalists also act in tolerance. How can I, as a traditionalist, albeit a johnny come lately, justify distancing myself from catholics that don’t hold my views ? I can’t tell a catholic who receives in the hand that it’s wrong, when they have never received any other way. I can’t tell a parent whose little girl is an altar server that they are wrong for allowing it. These things are allowed, whether I think they should be or not. The most I should do, is point them to the example set by BXVI and let them know they have a choice.
And pray. Pray that our priests understand why BXVI feels as he does about the issue. If we don’t follow his lead, whose do we follow ?

Likewise, those who distance themselves from the trad mindset, should understand that, disobedience aside, those who wave the flag of the “remnant”, are sincere. The trad’s concern is the salvation of souls, and their minset is indeed compatible with Tradition.

Both sides have work to do. The trad clergy should realize that regularization doesn’t equal a threat to their deep Faith, and that the benefit of freeing their flock from the stigma of perpetual disobedience will do their souls more good than harm. When the Sons of the Most Holy Redeemer accepted regularization, it wasn’t a compromise of Faith. Their Faith is not weakened by the move. It’s a move toward the Will of Christ. Apostate churchmen have been a thorn in the side of the Church from the beginning, and to point to today’s apostates is not a valid reason to distance themselves from Rome. Not as long as there those there who are not apostate.

The rest have an obligation to know apostacy and dissidence when they see it, and reject it.

And thanks to anyone who weathered my rant.

 

[Paul_Folbrecht]

Thanks for that informative reply, I Believe. (That topic was actually covered here not long ago which was one reason I left it…)

 

[Paul_Folbrecht]

Then why did you post this in the forum dedicated to the celebration of the TLM? If you wanted to discuss this as it is in the ordinary liturgy, then that would have been the appropriate forum, would it not?

I think you have a point there. I’d have no problem with it being moved. I posted here because this general topic is one that is dear to many people of a more traditional/orthodox bent and it’s been discussed here before.

I can’t help but, noting, though, that the forum is full of “officially somewhat off-topic” threads yet this is the only one you’ve chosen to police (that I’ve noticed, anyway).

 

[dang71]

I’m not sure what your mother’s confused and incorrect theological assumptions have to do with this topic.

because all of the pre-vatican2 priests that she grew up with exhorted the “rule” that we should receive communion only on the tongue, and it should NOT touch any teeth. my father, who grew up on a completely different continent, told me the priests he grew up with also taught the same thing. i guess pre-vatican2, the only worthy part of the body that could touch Jesus was the tongue. i wonder what part of the bible teaches that?

Just two rhetorical questions for now: should men and women be physically separated at Mass, as was done in the early Church? Should we not say the Creed since it wasn’t written until the 4th century?

i believe the point you are making here is that traditions grow and evolve. but you must agree, just because communion on the tongue has been a tradition, doesn’t mean that all people must practice this way, or that other ways of receiving communion are wrong. pre-galilean priests believed the world was flat, should we follow along and think the earth is a table? how many churches during the middle-ages didn’t even have seats or kneelers, should we do away with seats and kneelers too?

 

[dang71]

just an FYI, i have actually been to Akita, and to the shrine to Our Lady there. very beautiful, and I would recommend the trip to anyone.

 

[Paul_Folbrecht]

just an FYI, i have actually been to Akita, and to the shrine to Our Lady there. very beautiful, and I would recommend the trip to anyone.

That goes to show I should never make assumptions about people. That’s very cool. I hope it is quiet, and prayerful, and not overrun with vendor sales and so forth (though some of those are just fine, of course).

 

[Paul_Folbrecht]

Thank you, moderators, for moving the thread to a more appropriate place.

 

[pnewton]

I can’t help but, noting, though, that the forum is full of “officially somewhat off-topic” threads yet this is the only one you’ve chosen to police (that I’ve noticed, anyway).

I don’t “police” anything. I post in every forum on this site and I have mentioned this very thing before. Yes, this is a topic somewhat of more interest to traditionalists, if what you were looking for was groupthink. But if you want a more cross section of Catholics, elsewhere gives a better group.

Here, I can more freely point out that the Catholic Church allows choice in the matter. Like the above poster who is discouraged by EMHC when he receives on the tongue, I do not like to see anyone pushing their practice on others where the Church allows freedom.

Still, there have been many holy men and women who feel strongly about the importance of receiving on the tongue. Mother Theresa also comes to mind tp stand in company with Sr. Agnes.

 

[Paul_Folbrecht]

Fair enough, pnewton.

I think I am about done posting in this thread. In the original posts, I did little more than directly post quotes from the relevant papal documents and events at Akita. If anyone has an issue with those things, I think they have an issue with these popes and with the events at Akita themselves, and how can I respond to that?

In the Traditionalist forum, where this was originally posted, some people claim that they fear that new Catholics will come there and read material from schismatic groups, and have their orthodoxy put into confusion or compromised. I can relate to that, since I believe obedience is the key to the faith and obedience to the Holy Father must be paramount to any Catholic. I also think that unorthodox influences from the modernist side are a far more pervasive and dangerous threat to the faith at these times, and that is why I post things like the material in this thread.

Best wishes everyone.

 

[dang71]

That goes to show I should never make assumptions about people. That’s very cool. I hope it is quiet, and prayerful, and not overrun with vendor sales and so forth (though some of those are just fine, of course).

it is really cool, way up on the top of a mountain. no vendors at all, at least when i was there, except the really cute, really old nun who was very determined to get me to buy the pamphlet i was more than happy to do this, just to support the convent there. here are some pictures:

galabad71.tripod.com

 

[mdgspencer]

It is important to follow the doctrine and teachings of the Church or we will do harm to ourselves. It is humility that can save us. Don’t follow someone who thinks they know better than the Church, whether you find this in a book or otherwsie. Taking communion on the tongue was introduced as a option of the Church in the 1960s. You have the right to avoid it yourself if you choose, but to say that communion on the tongue is evil comes from a proud refusal of the guidance of the Church. To proceed along these lines is to risk destroying your spiritual life in time.

 

[Paul_Folbrecht]

It is important to follow the doctrine and teachings of the Church or we will do harm to ourselves. It is humility that can save us. Don’t follow someone who thinks they know better than the Church, whether you find this in a book or otherwsie. Taking communion on the tongue was introduced as a option of the Church in the 1960s. You have the right to avoid it yourself if you choose, but to say that communion on the tongue is evil comes from a proud refusal of the guidance of the Church. To proceed along these lines is to risk destroying your spiritual life in time.

Did you perhaps mean to say “Communion in the hand”? Your post makes little sense as written.

If you did mean to say in the hand - nobody here said that was evil. Why are you putting words in our mouths? Why don’t you just read and contemplate what our Popes have had to say about the issue and worry about your own soul?

 

[mdgspencer]

Oops. Sorry,you are right. I meant communion in the hand.
The original posting quoted a book that stated that God wants people to receive communion on the tongue, and in fact, according to this book, people’s hands were injured by God because they put the host on their hands. I was referring to this positng.
I recall Saint Paul saying that even if an angel from heaven teaches something contrary to what we have passed on to you, it is something you should not follow it(Galatians 1:8). I suppose in this case the angel would be a delusion or the devil disguised as an angel. I think we should follow the teaching of the Church even when a seemingly supernatural event seems to show that we should reject the teaching of the Church, something that Saint Paul said.
But I doubt that this book’s teaching has something to do with what actually happened at Akita, or with what God was actually saying there, though.

Did you perhaps mean to say “Communion in the hand”? Your post makes little sense as written.

If you did mean to say in the hand - nobody here said that was evil. Why are you putting words in our mouths? Why don’t you just read and contemplate what our Popes have had to say about the issue and worry about your own soul?

 

[Paul_Folbrecht]

Oops. Sorry,you are right. I meant communion in the hand.
The original posting quoted a book that stated that God wants people to receive communion on the tongue, and in fact, according to this book, people’s hands were injured by God because they put the host on their hands. I was referring to this positng.

That is totally false; nothing insinuated anything of the kind. Sr. Agnes stigmata was not caused by reception in the hand! How did you possibly get that?

I recall Saint Paul saying that even if an angel from heaven teaches something contrary to what we have passed on to you, it is something you should not follow it(Galatians 1:8). I suppose in this case the angel would be a delusion or the devil disguised as an angel. I think we should follow the teaching of the Church even when a seemingly supernatural event seems to show that we should reject the teaching of the Church, something that Saint Paul said. I doubt that this teaching has something to do with what actually happened at Akita, but in any case, we should follow the Church.

Now you’re really all wet. Akita is a fully Church-approved private revelation! Sheesh. You are following the Church if you listen to Our Lady of Akita - although Sr. Agnes does obviously not speak authoritatively. However, you’re definitely following the Church if you listen to the Pope(s).

You have presented not [just] a weak argument, but a completely illogical one. Sorry. You’re the person speaking against Church teaching here. ** (And nobody said receiving in the hand is invalid!)**

 

[pnewton]

May I ask for a clarification? It was my understanding that the the receiving of the stigmata was not part of the apparition of Our Lady, but something that was reported by Sr. Agnes. And the words regarding communion in hand are the words of Sr. Agnes and she did not claim that Mary said them. Is this a correct understanding?

 

[mdgspencer]

I just checked into “Memoriale Domoni,” and it is true that in this document Pope Paul VI said that communion should be on the tongue only. However, I did find out too that a bit later the pope issued a rescript suspending this rule and allowing communion in the hand. I wonder if you are aware of this (which I grant may simply be a simple mistake on your part).

That is totally false; nothing insinuated anything of the kind. Sr. Agnes stigmata was not caused by reception in the hand! How did you possibly get that?

Now you’re really all wet. Akita is a fully Church-approved private revelation! Sheesh. You are following the Church if you listen to Our Lady of Akita - although Sr. Agnes does obviously not speak authoritatively. However, you’re definitely following the Church if you listen to the Pope(s).

You have presented not [just] a weak argument, but a completely illogical one. Sorry. You’re the person speaking against Church teaching here. ** (And nobody said receiving in the hand is invalid!)**

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Paul Folbrecht,
OK, I’m failing to see how Our Lady Of Akita, some how instructed us to stop receiving communion in the hand, but on the tongue.

According to the author of the book, who is of the traditionalist mind set, Sr Agnes reasoned that the stigmata was a sign that she was to start receiving communion on the tongue, but Sr Agnes nor the nuns actually state this as fact.

Also, the Pope’s have been witnessing Catholic receiving in the hand, at all of the services the preside over. Only Pope Benedict, has stated that those receiving from him, shall kneel and receive on the tongue, yet he doesn’t force anyone else to do the same.

To me, this is a mistake by Pope Benedict. If receiving on the hand while standing is incorrect, then correct it. If not, then allow Catholics to receive as is allow, even when receiving from him.

This has brought more division and confusion over the issue than helped.

If my Bishop says, Communion must be received on the tongue, I will comply.

Until that happens, I see it as a unnatural way of receiving. Jesus said, take and eat, not stick out your tongue and let it melt in your mouth.

Jim

 

[pnewton]

Paul Folbrecht,
OK, I’m failing to see how Our Lady Of Akita, some how instructed us to stop receiving communion in the hand, but on the tongue.

I don’t think she did, if I read the OP correctly. I believe it was Sr. Agnes, not Mary who said that.

 

[Paul_Folbrecht]

May I ask for a clarification? It was my understanding that the the receiving of the stigmata was not part of the apparition of Our Lady, but something that was reported by Sr. Agnes. And the words regarding communion in hand are the words of Sr. Agnes and she did not claim that Mary said them. Is this a correct understanding?

That is absolutely correct - I hope I did not come across as implying otherwise.

Furthermore, since Akita is a private revelation (though fully Church-approved), even if the teaching had come from Our Lady, it would not be binding.

As for me, I still consider the testimony and beliefs of Sr. Agnes to be of great import, but I believe the teachings of these Popes to be of even greater import.

I really hope the thread does not descend into any sort of hand-vs-tongue mudslinging. (Because, for one thing, that will get it deleted for sure, and I hope this information remains accessible in the forum.)