Pope Benedict and CITH

  • Thread starter Thread starter paperwight66
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

paperwight66

Guest
An interesting quote from ‘Light of the World’, the book-length interview published this week, and highlighted in The Tablet (www.thetablet.co.uk)

His Holiness said,

'I am not opposed in principle to Communion in the hand; I have both administered and received Communion this way myself…

The idea behind my current practice of having people kneel and receive Communion on the tongue was to send a signal and to underscore the Real Presence with an exclamation point. One very important reason is that there is a great danger of superficiality precisely in the kinds of mass events we hold in St. Peter’s. …I have heard of people who, after receiving Communion, stick the host in their wallet to take home as a kind of souvenir’.’.

The Tablet also reported that Queen Sophia of Spain did not kneel when it was her turn to receive from him during his recent visit to Spain, and that she also stretched out her hands. The Pope gave her CITH without comment (although the cleric standing by nearly had a fit).

The Pope saying he was ‘not opposed in principle to Communion in the hand’ will come as a surprise to some, I think.
 
paperwight66 said:
An interesting quote from ‘Light of the World’, the book-length interview published this week, and highlighted in The Tablet (www.thetablet.co.uk)

His Holiness said,

'I am not opposed in principle to Communion in the hand; I have both administered and received Communion this way myself…

The idea behind my current practice of having people kneel and receive Communion on the tongue was to send a signal and to underscore the Real Presence with an exclamation point. One very important reason is that there is a great danger of superficiality precisely in the kinds of mass events we hold in St. Peter’s. …I have heard of people who, after receiving Communion, stick the host in their wallet to take home as a kind of souvenir’.’.

The Tablet also reported that Queen Sophia of Spain did not kneel when it was her turn to receive from him during his recent visit to Spain, and that she also stretched out her hands. The Pope gave her CITH without comment (although the cleric standing by nearly had a fit).

The Pope saying he was ‘not opposed in principle to Communion in the hand’ will come as a surprise to some, I think.
Click to expand...
H.H. perhaps realized there would come a time when someone would do what this woman did. Obviously, he decided to give her CITH rather than disrupt the flow. An act of prudence perhaps.

This Bishop interviewed in the video linked to below, speaks on the history of receiving Holy Communion, and dispels some myths, so to speak, regarding the contention " the early Christians received in the hand, so it’s ok now"

Well, as the Bishop explains, it’s not ok, as far as the manner we receive CITH these days. He explains why in the interview.

“As a Bishop, I cannot be silent”
tl.gloria.tv/?media=2710

Remember, though CITH is now permitted via indult, the practice was not introduced by Rome. It was practiced by various parishes for quite awhile before reluctantly approved as a practice allowed via indult.
 
No surprise here as communion in the hand has been a licit practice since the 70s I believe.

I also heard that Benedict XVI was supposedly only administering on the tongue and kneeling now,but that is probably just a rumor.

For the last year I have received on the tongue kneeling as I had done as a child. There was something incredibly humbling about approaching Jesus this way,however after two elderly priests almost dropped the Host because there was no paten,I decided to bow deeply but stand,still receiving on the tongue though.

It really makes no difference as the church makes allowances for both methods as well as for those who still wish to kneel in reverence.
 
At_Trent said:
Remember, though CITH is now permitted via indult, the practice was not introduced by Rome. It was practiced by various parishes for quite awhile before reluctantly approved as a practice allowed via indult.
Click to expand...
Rome is the one that issues indults. So whether or not the practice originated from them the fact that it has been granted an indult means it has Rome’s “seal of approval”.
 
ConstantineTG said:
Rome is the one that issues indults. So whether or not the practice originated from them the fact that it has been granted an indult means it has Rome’s “seal of approval”.
Click to expand...
Traditionally, Rome introduces the rubrics and changes to the Liturgy. When polled, initially, the world’s Bishops voted no. Until the indult, it was a novelty introduced from the bottom rung of the ladder. Not quite how it usually works.

Watch the video and listen to the Good bishop explain why the current method of receiving CITH is not quite orthodox or in line with early the Church practice. Much is missing, and we receive in the wrong hand.

Yes, the current method is approved, but I have to wonder if haste didn’t replace the normal process of approving such a change in rubrics. 🤷

Sometimes popes lead by example rather than the iron fist of decree. H.H. knows what he’d doing 😉
 
We shouldn’t suspect anything against the Church. She has found greater good and benefit from allowing the indult than by denying it. Those who collectively made the decision on the whys and why nots are more knowledgeable about the situation than you and I, so lets just trust that they know what they are doing instead of encouraging doubt on the process which is encouraging doubt against the Church herself.
 
ConstantineTG said:
We shouldn’t suspect anything against the Church. She has found greater good and benefit from allowing the indult than by denying it. Those who collectively made the decision on the whys and why nots are more knowledgeable about the situation than you and I, so lets just trust that they know what they are doing instead of encouraging doubt on the process which is encouraging doubt against the Church herself.
Click to expand...
So a practice, a liturgical abuse actually, born of disobedience, has brought nothing but good ?
After the Second Vatican Council some dioceses in the world started to make their own rules about receiving the Communion in the hand, disobeying the laws of the universal Church. Witnessing this practice without approval, the Vatican stated that it feared that this disobedience would lead to “…both the possibility of a lessening of reverence toward the august sacrament of the altar, its profanation, and the watering down of the true doctrine of the Eucharist” (Memoriale Domini).
Click to expand...
Therefore in 1968 Pope Paul VI graciously sent out a questionnaire to all the bishops of the world asking if there should be a prudent change in the Church’s practice on how Communion would be distributed. The poll numbers came back overwhelming against Communion in the hand. Hence the Vatican concluded: “The answers given show that by far the greater number of bishops think that the discipline currently in force should not be changed. And if it were to be changed, it would be an offense to the sensibilities and spiritual outlook of these bishops and a great many of the faithful” (Memoriale Domini
catholic.org/national/national_story.php?id=31755
Click to expand...
We don’t make this stuff up Constantine. It is an indult of appeasement. An acceptance of disobedience. There is no other way to describe it.
 
At_Trent said:
Traditionally, Rome introduces the rubrics and changes to the Liturgy. When polled, initially, the world’s Bishops voted no. Until the indult, it was a novelty introduced from the bottom rung of the ladder. Not quite how it usually works.

Watch the video and listen to the Good bishop explain why the current method of receiving CITH is not quite orthodox or in line with early the Church practice. Much is missing, **and we receive in the wrong hand.**Yes, the current method is approved, but I have to wonder if haste didn’t replace the normal process of approving such a change in rubrics. 🤷

Sometimes popes lead by example rather than the iron fist of decree. H.H. knows what he’d doing 😉
Click to expand...
“Wrong hand”?
 
Newbie2 said:
“Wrong hand”?
Click to expand...
In those parts of the ancient Church where communion in the hand was common practice, one received the Body of Our Lord in the right hand. Typically today, one receives in the left hand.
 
RyanBlack said:
In those parts of the ancient Church where communion in the hand was common practice, one received the Body of Our Lord in the right hand. Typically today, one receives in the left hand.
Click to expand...
Exactly. And the host was not touched by the left hand, it was taken form the right hand by one’s mouth during a profound bow. Men’s hands were then purified. Also women had to place white cloth over their hand before receiving. The host never touched their hand.

All this is lost, and no wonder. Low man on the totem pole decided “hey, let’s do this”. No research, no discernment, no consultation with liturgical experts. Not all that shocking considering all the customizations to the Novus Ordo Missae that were happening in such swift and non-organic fashion. 🤷

It’s appalling once one is made aware of what is so wrong about it all. Do we in the pews sin and commit sacrilege when we receive CITH ? No, not when it’s all we know. But where do we go once we do know and are made aware of the fact that Communion on the tongue, kneeling, is in fact the norm and has been for centuries ? Once we know that the practice so common today was born of blatant disobedience, and also knowing the Bishop of Rome is trying to tell us something, what will we do ? Just say "whatever " ?

Kyrie eleison

We do have a choice. Rome has given us such.
 
At_Trent said:
So a practice, a liturgical abuse actually, born of disobedience, as brought nothing but good ?
Click to expand...
Bro. JR had made this point in the past. The Church sees a bigger advantage to legalize CITH and get those outside the law to within the law, than to keep it outlawed and let those who practice it fall into disobedience. Think of it as an act of mercy from the Church. But as it stands today, it is allowed and deemed respectful and in-line with Tradition.
At_Trent said:
We don’t make this stuff up Constantine. It is an indult of appeasement. An acceptance of disobedience. There is no other way to describe it.
Click to expand...
And I am not making this up. The ultimate authority is the Church. What she says, goes. The Church has spoken that CITH is to be accepted. Who are we to say otherwise? You can’t make a person who receives CITH today feel about it because what they do is perfectly acceptable. Of course granted that their diocese allows for it.

If someone in the past disobeyed and received CITH when it was not allowed, it is them who are disobedient. But one today who receives CITH in dioceses where it is allowed is not being disobedient and is practicing something allowed by the Church.
 
ConstantineTG said:
Bro. JR had made this point in the past. The Church sees a bigger advantage to legalize CITH and get those outside the law to within the law, than to keep it outlawed and let those who practice it fall into disobedience. Think of it as an act of mercy from the Church. But as it stands today, it is allowed and deemed respectful and in-line with Tradition.

And I am not making this up. The ultimate authority is the Church. What she says, goes. The Church has spoken that CITH is to be accepted. Who are we to say otherwise? You can’t make a person who receives CITH today feel about it because what they do is perfectly acceptable. Of course granted that their diocese allows for it.

If someone in the past disobeyed and received CITH when it was not allowed, it is them who are disobedient. But one today who receives CITH in dioceses where it is allowed is not being disobedient and is practicing something allowed by the Church.
Click to expand...
Good post.

I tire of posts that imply that CITH is somehow wrong, disobedient, disrespectful, an abuse, etc, etc, and bristle at the implication or suggestion that we who take CITH should change our ways.

No.

This is the way I learned it, this is acceptable, and I won’t change unless the “rules” change. I won’t be made to feel like a second class Catholic because I prefer CITH.

Go ahead and rail against Rome, COTT supporters. Leave the faithful alone. :mad:
 
ConstantineTG said:
Bro. JR had made this point in the past. The Church sees a bigger advantage to legalize CITH and get those outside the law to within the law, than to keep it outlawed and let those who practice it fall into disobedience. Think of it as an act of mercy from the Church. But as it stands today, it is allowed and deemed respectful and in-line with Tradition.

And I am not making this up. The ultimate authority is the Church. What she says, goes. The Church has spoken that CITH is to be accepted. Who are we to say otherwise? You can’t make a person who receives CITH today feel about it because what they do is perfectly acceptable. Of course granted that their diocese allows for it.

If someone in the past disobeyed and received CITH when it was not allowed, it is them who are disobedient. But one today who receives CITH in dioceses where it is allowed is not being disobedient and is practicing something allowed by the Church.
Click to expand...
Right, today one is not disobedient. At least we agree the practice was born of disobedience. That is all I’m saying. Some don’t know that and I think it should be known if one is going to discuss it.
 
Tigg said:
Altho the person in this video is rather annoying, this is the real reason I will not receive CITH:

youtube.com/watch?v=BiUqDa_Gzj0

Can any one deny this happens?
Click to expand...
It was interesting to see, but I think “rather annoying” is…an understatement. 😉

I think it does illustrate the possibility of such a thing happening.

But is there the possibility that an even smaller fragment could fall off the priest’s fingers, and bounce off the paten? Agreed such would be less likely than what the “experiment” showed.
I’m perfectly fine with CITH, even if this does occur, as long as everyone involved is taking precautions to minimize such an occurance.

I’m glad that he stressed the point that he was using unconsecrated hosts.
 
We really should not be using the way brother and sister Catholics receive the Holy Eucharist as a source of division. Pope Benedict has said as much. DOn’t ask me for a source right now, My guess is either in The Ratzinger Report or The Spirit of the Liturgy, or perhaps in God is Near. I just finished a paper on Benedict’s Biblical theology, and I distinctly remember reading his take on the issue, I just can’t remember where.
 
Newbie2 said:
I think it does illustrate the possibility of such a thing happening.

But is there the possibility that an even smaller fragment could fall off the priest’s fingers, and bounce off the paten? Agreed such would be less likely than what the “experiment” showed.
I’m perfectly fine with CITH, even if this does occur, as long as everyone involved is taking precautions to minimize such an occurance.

I’m glad that he stressed the point that he was using unconsecrated hosts.
Click to expand...
We will all individually be held accountable, due to our understanding and formed consciences. My reason tells me this does happen (I’ve seen it for myself) and my conscience tells me the best way to minimize the danger is COTT. I don’t judge anyone, but we all need to discern and pray!
 
Tigg said:
We will all individually be held accountable, due to our understanding and formed consciences. My reason tells me this does happen (I’ve seen it for myself) and my conscience tells me the best way to minimize the danger is COTT. I don’t judge anyone, but we all need to discern and pray!
Click to expand...
And if in our prayer and discernment we come to a different conclusion than you do?

Then what?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top