Priestly obligation for communion in the hand to be available?

  • Thread starter Thread starter cathgirl
  • Start date Start date
C

cathgirl

Guest
I know during the pandemic normal rules aren’t being applied to Churches, if they are even open so consider the answer to this question outside of these extraordinary circumstances. I know that Priests are obligated to give communion on the tongue if that is what the recipient wants, but what about in the hand? Are TLM priests allowed to refuse?
 
But since the local bishop is the “guardian of the Liturgy” in his diocese, wouldn’t that mean that he has the authority to make exceptions to the rubrics - especially when there are unusual circumstances?
 
Phillip_Rolfes said:
But since the local bishop is the “guardian of the Liturgy” in his diocese, wouldn’t that mean that he has the authority to make exceptions to the rubrics - especially when there are unusual circumstances?
Click to expand...
He cannot change what he has no power to change. A bishop does not have absolute control over all the liturgy. He could not, for instance, get rid of the Liturgy of the Word in the Mass and skip right to the consecration in the name of guardianship.
 
Last edited:
Right. But how we receive Communion is a matter of discipline within the Liturgy, not part of the substance of the Liturgy itself. Wouldn’t it, therefore, be possible for the bishop to make exceptions?

For example. I’m a Maronite. Our normal way to receive Communion is by intinction (the priest dips the host in the wine and then places Communion on our tongue). But, because of this pandemic, our bishops have requested our priests to only give Communion under the form of the bread only and in the hand. This is done as a matter of prudential judgment.

Does a Roman bishop not have the same authority over the Liturgy in his diocese when it comes to matters of discipline and prudential judgment, regardless of whether the Liturgy is being offered according to the Ordinary or the Extraordinary Form?
 
Last edited:
Phillip_Rolfes said:
Right. But how we receive Communion is a matter of discipline within the Liturgy, not part of the substance of the Liturgy itself. Wouldn’t it, therefore, be possible for the bishop to make exceptions?

For example. I’m a Maronite. Our normal way to receive Communion is by intinction (the priest dips the host in the wine and then places Communion on our tongue). But, because of this pandemic, our bishops have requested our priests to only give Communion under the form of the bread and in the hand. This is done as a matter of prudential judgment.

Does a Roman bishop not have the same authority over the Liturgy in his diocese when it comes to matters of discipline and prudential judgment, regardless of whether the Liturgy is being offered according to the
Click to expand...
The EF does not allow for communion in the hand by the laity at all, whereas it is optional in the OF. There is no other way to receive it in the EF, and the EF, unlike the OF, is to follow the rubrics as they were in 1962, and communion in the hand by the laity was not allowed in 1962. It would be liturgical abuse, something the bishop has no power to compel.
 
So the EF has authority over the bishop and not the other way around?

And it would be liturgical abuse if it’s a temporary exception for the sake of stemming the tide of a pandemic?
 
Phillip_Rolfes said:
So the EF has authority over the bishop and not the other way around?

And it would be liturgical abuse if it’s a temporary exception for the sake of stemming the tide of a pandemic?
Click to expand...
More like the Vatican has authority over the Bishop, and Ecclesia Dei (which is now under the CDW I think, either way they’re the body that governs the rules with the TLM) has said it is to follow the rules as they were in 1962 per Summorum Pontificum. To combat the pandemic, the faithful are to make a spiritual communion instead, and prudently not attend Mass since the bishops have dispensed them of their obligation.
 
Last edited:
The Vatican, in the documents of Vatican II, has explicitly stated that the local bishop has authority over the Liturgy in his diocese, to regulate it. Again, I would assume that this applies to all matters of discipline within the liturgy, regardless of whether that means the Ordinary or the Extraordinary Form (just as the local bishop technically has the authority to suppress one or the other Form of the Liturgy within his diocese).

Personally, I’d rather receive Communion in my hands and thereby receive the actual Body and Blood of Christ, than make a spiritual Communion (although I recognize the goodness of that as well when there is no other alternative).
 
Phillip_Rolfes said:
The Vatican, in the documents of Vatican II, has explicitly stated that the local bishop has authority over the Liturgy in his diocese, to regulate it. Again, I would assume that this applies to all matters of discipline within the liturgy, regardless of whether that means the Ordinary or the Extraordinary Form (just as the local bishop technically has the authority to suppress one or the other Form of the Liturgy within his diocese).
Click to expand...
Pope Benedict XVI wrote Summorum Pontificum, which was obviously after Vatican II. He created the Ecclesia Dei commission. He said the TLM is to be governed by the rules as they were in 1962. Ecclesiae Dei operates in the authority of and on behalf of the Pope. Just as the Pope can overrule a bishop to grant faculties to priests, a Pope can overrule a bishop in regards to liturgy, which Benedict XVI did.
 
But this still doesn’t answer the question of a bishop’s prudential judgment in matters of liturgical discipline in extraordinary circumstances. We’re not talking about changing the Mass. We’re simply talking about one instance of liturgical discipline.
 
Phillip_Rolfes said:
But this still doesn’t answer the question of a bishop’s prudential judgment in matters of liturgical discipline in extraordinary circumstances. We’re not talking about changing the Mass. We’re simply talking about one instance of liturgical discipline.
Click to expand...
But you are talking about changing the Mass in regards to the TLM. You are trying to apply standards as they are today to as they were in 1962, when there was zero precedent for doing such a thing.

The TLM is basically frozen in time, in regards to the rules. You are trying to say that it should do something which took the likes and authority of Vatican II brought about, but as far as the TLM is concerned, there is no Vatican II.
 
Last edited:
In summary, the bishops cannot make the TLM distribute communion in the hand, because the Vatican has ruled that the TLM is subject to the rules as they were in 1962, and in 1962, lay people were not allowed to receive on the hand at all. There is no room for the bishops to use their own judgment on this, the Vatican has already spoken. It would require the Vatican (Ecclesiae Dei) to say that it is permissible.
 
Last edited:
So if a bishop, who has regulatory authority over the Liturgy in his diocese (which includes the Extraordinary Form), makes the prudential judgment to temporarily change a discipline in the Mass because of extraordinary circumstances (until such a time as those extraordinary circumstances pass) for the good of the souls in his diocese, then he is committing liturgical abuse? This seems to contradict the primary mission of the bishop himself, which is the salvation of those souls entrusted to him.
 
Phillip_Rolfes said:
So if a bishop , who has regulatory authority over the Liturgy in his diocese (which includes the Extraordinary Form), makes the prudential judgment to temporarily change a discipline in the Mass because of extraordinary circumstances (until such a time as those extraordinary circumstances pass) for the good of the souls in his diocese, then he is committing liturgical abuse?
Click to expand...
He has no power to change the TLM. If he wants to, he can write the Vatican and ask, but it is the Vatican who regulates the TLM, not the bishop.
Phillip_Rolfes said:
This seems to contradict the primary mission of the bishop himself, which is the salvation of those souls entrusted to him.
Click to expand...
The bishop does not have the power to do whatever he wants and disobey the Vatican. Disobedience of legitimate authority is no way to carry out his duties, and is wrong.
 
Why don’t you ask your bishop?

It’s not like he is travelling all over his diocese and visiting parishes now. He has a little time, just like all of us do. Actually, a LOT of time…sigh.
 
Yes; Communion on the hand is not permitted in the Extraordinary form under any circumstance (even with the virus) Also Pope Benedict was known for refusing people reception on the hand, and I believe Francis has done the same. I have been told that a novus ordo priest can refuse to give the Eucharist on the hand if he has reason to believe it is being stolen by Satanists, but I don’t have firm documentation; I guess it doesn’t matter too much though since in practice he would be forced to distribute on the hand anyway. I expect that we will see a lot more faithful Catholics being forced to receive in this way so pray, pray pray for good Holy Priests
 
You have to keep in mind that liturgical abuse isn’t a sin by nature of it being disobedience. Its so horrible that priests change the liturgy from how it was given to us by the Church because of what the signs and words represent. When the Priest decides that its ok for him to carry the Easter candle this is wrong because it ruins the symbolism of The pillar of fire (the Easter candle) and Moses (the Priest) leading the people through the red sea. I could give other examples, but the liturgy is from the Saints, not the current Bishop. We were learning in my Liturgy Class at Franciscan University that the Novus Ordo has to be interpreted as an organic continuation of the Traditional Mass. According to Ratzinger/Pope Benedict not even the Pope could totally disrupt the organic nature of the liturgy and impose something which had nothing to do with the tradition of the Church
 
As far as I know, the indult from the Vatican to distribute Holy Communion in the hand is only extended to the Mass of Paul VI, whereas the rubrics for the Mass of 1962 is governed by the liturgical laws in place at that time.

The Indult for Use of Roman Missal of 1962 (Congregation for Divine Worship, Oct 3, 1984) said, in part: “…the Supreme Pontiff, in a desire to meet the wishes of these groups grants to diocesan bishops the possibility of using an indult whereby priests and faithful, who shall be expressly indicated in the letter of request to be presented to their own bishop, may be able to celebrate Mass by using the Roman Missal according to the 1962 edition, but under the following conditions…c) These celebrations must be according to the 1962 Missal and in Latin. d) There must be no interchanging of texts and rites of the two Missals.”

So no, I don’t think the rubrics for the TLM can be changed to accommodate a member of the faithful who wants to receive on the hand.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top