Pope Benedicts wishes for communicants

[ImmaculataFides]

ByzCath is correct, it is only the Body of Christ so long as you can identify it as bread. That is what the Church teaches.

Woah woah woah, slow down there. Christ is literally present wherever the physical properties remain of what had been bread and wine1.. It’s got nothing to do if whether you personally can identify it as bread. That sounds incredibly close to heresy.

From the Thirteenth Session of the Council of Trent; “ON THE MOST HOLY SACRAMENT OF THE EUCHARIST”:

CANON III.-If any one denieth, that, in the venerable sacrament of the Eucharist, the whole Christ is contained under each [Page 83] species, and under every part of each species, when separated; let him be anathema.

 

[ByzCathCantor]

I actually find that hard to understand. Especially when it comes to how we receive communion. We have a choice in how we may receive. No one can force someone to receive on the tongue, and no one can force us to receive in the hand. So if we choose one way over the other, doesn’t that make us a proponent? What am I missing?

By your actions, are you actively promoting one thing in favor of another or others?

If you go to the grocery store and buy one brand as opposed to another, does that mean you are actively suggesting to everyone else in the store that they do the same, as your choice is purported to be superior?

Being a proponent suggests a level of advocacy that is greater than just the simple, passive activity of displaying a preference in a public manner.

 

[Brooklyn]

By your actions, are you actively promoting one thing in favor of another or others?

If you go to the grocery store and buy one brand as opposed to another, does that mean you are actively suggesting to everyone else in the store that they do the same, as your choice is purported to be superior?

Being a proponent suggests a level of advocacy that is greater than just the simple, passive activity of displaying a preference in a public manner.

Ok, I understand what you are saying. You’re saying that we are not telling other people that because we prefer one way, they need to do it the same way. But to use your analogy, if I buy one brand over another, I am saying that is the brand I prefer. In that sense, I am promoting it, even if I’m not running around the store telling people to buy it. Actions do speak louder than words, an old cliche, but true.

If I receive on the tongue, my actions tell people that I feel this is the preferred way. The same is true for receiving in the hand. So I will still have to disagree with you. Our actions do promote our preferences.

 

[ByzCathCantor]

If I receive on the tongue, my actions tell people that I feel this is the preferred way. The same is true for receiving in the hand. So I will still have to disagree with you. Our actions do promote our preferences.

I understand your point, but actions don’t always reflect a true preference.

For example, most of the time nowadays when I go to Mass in the Latin Church, it is at my uncle’s parish. They have a very traditional priest from Eastern Europe who knows me and my background well, and knows that I’m Eastern Catholic, inherently traditional and would tend toward preferring to Communion on the tongue, kneeling. Yet everyone in the parish receives Communion in the hand. While as an Eastern Catholic I am used to standing while receiving the Holy Eucharist (as is custom in the Eastern Church), I prefer to receive kneeling and via Communion on the tongue when in the Latin Church, as was prevailing practice in the local RC church we frequented with family while growing up. However, in this current parish setting, it just seems to awkward to do so on many levels. So, when I yield to conformity and receive Communion in the hand there, does that mean I am now a proponent, just because I happened to have received that way?

I suppose in this case if I stubbornly insisted on kneeling and receiving Communion on the tongue, as a known Eastern Catholic visitor and despite the prevailing practice of this parish and its laity, it could certainly be argued that I was actively promoting that manner of reception and am thus a proponent.

However, it would be difficult to argue that in conforming instead to the prevailing practice of Communion in the hand, that I had now become a proponent of that manner of reception.

 

[TimothyH]

Ok, I understand what you are saying. You’re saying that we are not telling other people that because we prefer one way, they need to do it the same way. But to use your analogy, if I buy one brand over another, I am saying that is the brand I prefer. In that sense, I am promoting it, even if I’m not running around the store telling people to buy it. Actions do speak louder than words, an old cliche, but true.

If I receive on the tongue, my actions tell people that I feel this is the preferred way. The same is true for receiving in the hand. So I will still have to disagree with you. Our actions do promote our preferences.

But our actions should not tell other people that they are wrong for not doing it our way.

I can drive around in a Chevy and get along with everyone who prefers to drive a Ford, or I can put one of those stickers on my truck with the picture of the kid urinating on the Ford logo, thereby calling attention to my preference and telling everyone who prefers to drive a Ford that they are stupid.

I can order steak without telling my wife that she is wrong for ordering salad.

I can recieve on the tounge without accusing everyone else in the Church of being less holy than I, without accusing everyone else of profaning the Blessed Sacrament, without accusing everyone else in the Church of sacrilege, of loving Jesus less, of being a sinner, lazy, irreverant and on and on.

Even if I think those things, I don’t have to say it.

-Tim-

 

[Brooklyn]

But our actions should not tell other people that they are wrong for not doing it our way.

I can drive around in a Chevy and get along with everyone who prefers to drive a Ford, or I can put one of those stickers on my truck with the picture of the kid urinating on the Ford logo, thereby calling attention to my preference and telling everyone who prefers to drive a Ford that they are stupid.

I can order steak without telling my wife that she is wrong for ordering salad.

I can recieve on the tounge without accusing everyone else in the Church of being less holy than I, without accusing everyone else of profaning the Blessed Sacrament, without accusing everyone else in the Church of sacrilege, of loving Jesus less, of being a sinner, lazy, irreverant and on and on.

Even if I think those things, I don’t have to say it.

-Tim-

This is exactly why, I think, that St. Francis of Assisi told us to preach always, use words if necessary. We should just do what we know to be right or best, and let others make up their own minds. I’m going a little heavy on the cliches today, but a man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still. People all have to come to their own decisions, and the truth is, our actions have far more influence than our words. We can all say whatever is convenient and whatever we think other people want to hear, but our actions will always tell the truth about what we really believe. I think politicians are the best example of that!

 

[JReducation]

Ok, I understand what you are saying. You’re saying that we are not telling other people that because we prefer one way, they need to do it the same way. But to use your analogy, if I buy one brand over another, I am saying that is the brand I prefer. In that sense, I am promoting it, even if I’m not running around the store telling people to buy it. Actions do speak louder than words, an old cliche, but true.

If I receive on the tongue, my actions tell people that I feel this is the preferred way. The same is true for receiving in the hand. So I will still have to disagree with you. Our actions do promote our preferences.

I don’t think that “promoting” is the word that I would use. I’ll give you a personal example. I came into Catholicism from Judaism. My first contact with Catholicism was prior to Vatican II. At the time, everyone received Communion on the tongue. That’s what I knew.

Fast forward a number of years. A big number!

When I entered my community, CITH was an established practice since 1209 and Communion on the tongue was a novelty allowed by the General Chapter of 1970. Having grown up with the other, I continued to receive on the tongue. However, I do not promote it because I do it.

In fact, I have been formation director and superior at different times. I always tell the brothers that the ordinary way for us to receive Holy Communion is on the hand and why it began, to dilute the distinction between the priest-friar and the non-clerical friars who were the majority. It was not a conscious design, but a product of a young community that stressed brotherhood and humility in every situation. Those first priests who joined the community did everything they could to disappear into the crowd of friars. This included giving Communion in the hand to their brothers. I actually promote tradition, not my way. I explain that I receive Communion on the tongue, because the option was available when I entered and it was what I had seen growing up as an outsider looking in. It felt comfortable to me.

In my teaching and sharing with others, I’m not promoting COTT. I’m promoting the traditional CITH and explaining why I choose to do it differently, “because it’s allowed.” If the rule disappeared tomorrow and we all had to go back to CITH, I would not shed tears over it either. It’s a matter of preference, not a matter of faith. Far be it for me to say that I have more faith than our Holy Father Francis who received Communion in the hand. That would be the height of the ridiculous.

As you can see, one can do something without promoting it. One need not compare things. There is nothing wrong with “It’s allowed and I prefer it; therefore, I take advantage of what’s allowed.”

Fraternally,

Br.JR, FFV

 

[JReducation]

This is exactly why, I think, that St. Francis of Assisi told us to preach always, use words if necessary. We should just do what we know to be right or best, and let others make up their own minds. I’m going a little heavy on the cliches today, but a man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still. People all have to come to their own decisions, and the truth is, our actions have far more influence than our words. We can all say whatever is convenient and whatever we think other people want to hear, but our actions will always tell the truth about what we really believe. I think politicians are the best example of that!

LOL

Actually, he never said that. It was said about him; but that’s ok. The original statement by Brother Bernard of Quintavalle was, “Francis preached always and when necessary used words.”

But we all get what you mean.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[ringil]

I have to admire you for admitting your error and trying to learn from it. Unfortunately I don’t always do as well as you do and am quite stubborn. Bless you.

Indded, it’s a rarity around here.

 

[ringil]

If I receive on the tongue, my actions tell people that I feel this is the preferred way. The same is true for receiving in the hand. So I will still have to disagree with you. Our actions do promote our preferences.

I disagree with this. Your way tof thinking and conceptualizing is leading you to make this inference.

The way one receives need only be reflected of the way that individual prefers to receive at that time. I have begun to receive COTT some time ago but I do not believe that COTT is what I believe is the preferred method for others.

 

[curlycool89]

Woah woah woah, slow down there. Christ is literally present wherever the physical properties remain of what had been bread and wine1.. It’s got nothing to do if whether you personally can identify it as bread. That sounds incredibly close to heresy.

From the Thirteenth Session of the Council of Trent; “ON THE MOST HOLY SACRAMENT OF THE EUCHARIST”:

The quote again:

CANON III.-If any one denieth, that, in the venerable sacrament of the Eucharist, the whole Christ is contained under each [Page 83] species, and under every part of each species, when separated; let him be anathema.

There’s no contradiction. The Eucharist is contained under the species (bread or wine), therefore if there’s no species then there’s no Eucharist. If an extremely small particle of bread is indistinguishable from dust, then it is dust, not bread and no longer the species of bread, and therefore not the Eucharist (as Trent said).

 

[ringil]

The quote again:

There’s no contradiction. The Eucharist is contained under the species (bread or wine), therefore if there’s no species then there’s no Eucharist. If an extremely small particle of bread is indistinguishable from dust, then it is dust, not bread and no longer the species of bread, and therefore not the Eucharist (as Trent said).

And there is some serious “not seeing the forest for the trees” going on here.

The rubrics call for reasonable measures to safeguard the Eucharist as befits the theology. I believe that folks are simply taking this issue of “fragments” too far.

 

[Bookcat]

Hi thanks for reading, I have a feeling there would already be a thread somewhere about this but I couldn’t find it.
I have started receiving communion on the tongue when I heard and read that the Holy Father wishes to return to the custom of kneeling and receiving communion on the tongue.
Yes the Church allows in the hand also, but from what I have heard and read is he wants to return to the old way.
A Priest from a parish I attended last night in his homily pretty much spoke the homily about how receiving on the tongue is the "old way " and that people “don’t want to change”.
He pretty much said it’s wrong, though I was pleased that he added that however we receive Christ is good as long as we receive him.
I suppose the point is- does anyone care to join me in doing it as the Pope intends it to be done?
Does anyone have any idea why so many people aren’t accepting what the Pope had said.
I sincerely hope that this is not a sign of division in the Church between traditional customs and the newer version of the Mass… Because this is how it’s starting to seem.
What do you think ?

Your misinformed here. The Pope is not saying such.

If the ancient practice of Communion in the hand is permitted where one is --one may receive that way if one wishes. The Pope has NOT said otherwise. Rather even before he was Pope he noted not to make a fuss about it but that both ways can be done. The key is reverence.

 

[Bookcat]

From Cardinal Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI of course)

"…we know that until the ninth century Communion was received in the hand, standing. That does not of course mean that it should always do so. For what is fine, sublime, about the Church is that she is growing, maturing, understanding the mystery more profoundly. In the that sense the new development that began after the ninth century is quite justified, as an expression of reverence, and is well founded. But, on the other hand, we have to say that the Church could not possibly have been celebrating the Eucharist unworthily for nine hundred years. If we read what the Fathers say, we can see in what a spirit of reverence they received Communion…

We should be concerned only to argue in favor of what the Church’s efforts directed toward, both before and after the ninth century, that is a reverence in the heart, an inner submission before the mystery of God that puts himself into our hands…

Cardinal Ratzinger “God Is Near Us” Ignatius Press Pg 70-71 2001

And from: God and the World (Ignatius Press):

Communion in the hand, or directly in the mouth?

“I wouldn’t want to be fussy about that. It was done in the early Church. A reverent manner of receiving Communion in the hand is in itself a perfectly reasonable way to receive Communion.”

 

[TempleServant]

COTT is an acceptable, even preferred practice encouraged by the Church in areas that accept and allow CITH.
I am not sure where you are getting these quotes from, but I know no one who says prior to or upon receiving the consecrated host ITH "“We’re going to drop it.”

By ‘we’re going to drop it,’ I meant, the Catholic Church deciding to drop the practice of COTT, kneeling, and adopt CITH, standing.

If the bread is your god, it’s an odd thing to do.

Part of the problem is the disease of legalism: what we can get away with, according to the rules. What we want is mysticism: the appreciation that this is our god and how best we may honour him and humble ourselves before him.

Of course, it’s easy to drop, retain and profane the bread if it gets put in your hand. Thus, EMHCs now have to be vigilant.

 

[Brooklyn]

LOL

Actually, he never said that. It was said about him; but that’s ok. The original statement by Brother Bernard of Quintavalle was, “Francis preached always and when necessary used words.”

But we all get what you mean.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

Really? I had always heard that St. Francis said it. I did a google search and got 316,000 results in which this quote is used. I got nothing when I did your quote.

Whichever, I think it is excellent advice. I still contend that people learn much more from our actions than our words. Again using a cliche (but it does get the point across), talk is cheap.

 

[figs]

Really? I had always heard that St. Francis said it. I did a google search and got 316,000 results in which this quote is used. I got nothing when I did your quote.

Just goes to show ya, don’t believe everything you find on the internet

 

[JReducation]

Really? I had always heard that St. Francis said it. I did a google search and got 316,000 results in which this quote is used. I got nothing when I did your quote.

Whichever, I think it is excellent advice. I still contend that people learn much more from our actions than our words. Again using a cliche (but it does get the point across), talk is cheap.

Trust me, there are many statements that people attribute to famous people, that were never made or were made about them, not by them.

Example: George Washington, “Cannot tell a lie. I cut down the cherry tree.” or Mother Teresa: “The worse thing in the world is Communion in the hand.”

That last statement got so out of hand that it almost cost Mother’s beatification, until several sisters and other people who were there stepped up and said, “That’s not what she said.” The sisters pointed to their constitutions which allows them to receive “as the Church allows.”

Just goes to show ya, don’t believe everything you see on the internet

You got that right. Can we quote you on that?

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[Brooklyn]

I don’t think that “promoting” is the word that I would use. I’ll give you a personal example. I came into Catholicism from Judaism. My first contact with Catholicism was prior to Vatican II. At the time, everyone received Communion on the tongue. That’s what I knew.

Fast forward a number of years. A big number!

 

[Brooklyn]

Trust me, there are many statements that people attribute to famous people, that were never made or were made about them, not by them.

Example: George Washington, “Cannot tell a lie. I cut down the cherry tree.” or Mother Teresa: “The worse thing in the world is Communion in the hand.”

That last statement got so out of hand that it almost cost Mother’s beatification, until several sisters and other people who were there stepped up and said, “That’s not what she said.” The sisters pointed to their constitutions which allows them to receive “as the Church allows.”

You got that right. Can we quote you on that?

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

But the fact that your quote cannot be found anywhere really has me scratching my head, and that the popular quote can be found everywhere. Can you give me any proof of what you wrote? I’d like to correct myself if I’m wrong.