C
CatholicSam
Guest
How is that being scrupulous?
I’m just saying that I know some people that ahve gone down the same road that you are going with reverence to the Eucharist which in an of itself is a great and meritorious thing. However, many of these well meaning catholics have ended up in some strange situations with scrupulosity concerning the distrobution of Holy Communion.How is that being scrupulous?
Thanks for your concernI’m just saying that I know some people that ahve gone down the same road that you are going with reverence to the Eucharist which in an of itself is a great and meritorious thing. However, many of these well meaning catholics have ended up in some strange situations with scrupulosity concerning the distrobution of Holy Communion.
Let’s make it a day-long briefing, shall we? You are coming from the view that the root cause is simple ignorance. I think instead that many know that they are not to partake but do so anyways. In this view, an hour-long briefing would be irrelevant and a waste of time.…At any rate, isn’t it worth it to read a long list of guidelines for *an hour *
You understand they would have to actively intend irreverance to the Holy Eucharist, right? The theme of the thread is people who are ignorant of the Church’s discipline regarding the reception of the Sacred Species? “Irreverance” has to be intended, I think, to be culpable. I do agree with Dave’s assessment, that those bent on it are going to rec. anyway, whether we rattle off the regs. or not.Thanks for your concernI think more people are in danger of the loss of heaven because of irreverance to the Holy Eucharist than in danger of scrupulously protecting Him.
Some undoubtably do, and as the church is so large and there are so many funerals and weddings, I guess it has to add up to “many”.I think instead that many know that they are not to partake but do so anyways. In this view, an hour-long briefing would be irrelevant and a waste of time.__________________
Yes, but this was the original context…Some undoubtably do, and as the church is so large and there are so many funerals and weddings, I guess it has to add up to “many”.
But at such events , there are people of all religious affiliations, and the protocol makes it look to the untrained eye as if receiving communion is the polite thing to do, to uninformed Jews, Hindus, etc.
Appearantly, the original poster has a beef with current canon law, and implies that currently, the lack of his proposed revision is dangerous or harmful to Christ’s body in some way.Why don’t we have a law mandating all priests and deacons to make an announcement regarding requirements for receiving Communion in the Catholic Church before every Mass and Communion service?
The last funeral I attended Father announced very nicely to all that reception of the Eucharist was for properly Prepared Catholics and if anyone wanted to receive a blessing they could come forward and they were to hold a finger up to their mouth and he would bless them only. The way he worded it was better than that but basically the same thing. I did not see anyone even go forward that were not Catholic.I went to a funeral yesterday and was so apprehensive about the non-Catholics unknowingly going up for Holy Communion, not knowing any better. I know in that case, I am sure they would not be guilty because they didn’t know they were not to receive. Why can’t we just make a general announcement before every Mass, just to be sure?
I have seen a lot of people say that you need to be directly irreverant for there to be any sin accrued, which very well may be the case. But, what then does Paul mean when he says, If you eat a drink without discerning the body and blood, you eat and drink damnation upon yourself. This seems to imply that it doesnt matter what your intentions are but rather what is important is correct knowledge of Truth.You understand they would have to actively intend irreverance to the Holy Eucharist, right? The theme of the thread is people who are ignorant of the Church’s discipline regarding the reception of the Sacred Species? “Irreverance” has to be intended, I think, to be culpable. I do agree with Dave’s assessment, that those bent on it are going to rec. anyway, whether we rattle off the regs. or not.
Christ is eminently capable of defending himself.It’s not that I feel superior to non-Catholics or others who should not receive Communion. I feel extraordinarily blessed and amazed that I am given the gift of the Eucharist. My concern lies with defending Christ. I wish the priests and deacons would make an announcement before Mass, as a previous poster suggested, that was not aggressive, but which pointed everyone in the direction of the guidelines. But wishing isn’t going to do any goodPraying will though!
Paul’s comment is generally accepted as meaning that if you are in a state of sin, you are not to receive Communion. It does not refer to someone who is Christian but not Catholic receiveing the Eucharist.I have seen a lot of people say that you need to be directly irreverant for there to be any sin accrued, which very well may be the case. But, what then does Paul mean when he says, If you eat a drink without discerning the body and blood, you eat and drink damnation upon yourself. This seems to imply that it doesnt matter what your intentions are but rather what is important is correct knowledge of Truth.
I believe that means without examining your concscience or, having examined it, determine to rec. Holy Communion knowing that you shouldn’t. And that would be genuine irreverance.I have seen a lot of people say that you need to be directly irreverant for there to be any sin accrued, which very well may be the case. But, what then does Paul mean when he says, If you eat a drink without discerning the body and blood, you eat and drink damnation upon yourself. This seems to imply that it doesnt matter what your intentions are but rather what is important is correct knowledge of Truth.
Are you a priest or a deacon? If so, we need more like youAs someone who frequently attends funerals, not only do people more than likely approach Communion not in the state of grace, but many people are so unchurched, they don’t even know the appropriate times to sit, stand, kneel or give oral responses during a mass.
I think with only 25% of the faithful regularly attending mass, we can surely believe that many of the unchurched are the ones who are attending funerals. This to me is one of the best times to do a little evangelization during my homily or funeral committals. All we can do as ordained ministers is to plant seeds, and pray that some will land on fertile soil. Then I leave it up to the grace and mercy of God how people approach his table for Communion.
Pray always!
That isn’t what we were proposing and you know it. We’re proposing that we NOT do what you proposed and have the priest and deacon read the guidelines off to the entire congregation before Mass or at some point therein. It’s been suggested, by Michelle Arnold and others here, that it would be sufficient to refer the congregation to the guidelines that are printed in the missalettes. If the entire thing is rattled off, every week, it almost assumes a liturgical character in and of itself, and it would be jarring in the liturgy. That’s all that’s being said. We have no less a concern or reverance for the Blessed Sacrament.Are you a priest or a deacon? If so, we need more like you
Several people on this thread are saying “Christ is capable of defending himself.” Yes, of course he is, silly people! What, do you think we can destroy Him by receiving Holy Communion unworthily or something? Gees! That’s not the issue here!! I, for one, am worried about OFFENDING GOD! If someone came up to my mother and gave her a slap across the face, heck, I’d be really mad! Even though I didn’t do anything myself, and I couldn’t really have done anything to foresee what would happen so that I could intervene… I’d still be really mad that someone offended her (even if she didn’t even have bruise after all was said and done). How much more am I, and other Children of God, going to be upset when our Heavenly Father and Creator is offended!!!
And you know what? Having a lukewarm attitude is said to be even more odious to God than having a soul full of sins! So I would be pretty careful about that “Oh well, God can look out for Himself, and it’s darn silly to get upset about people receiving the Holy Eucharist who shouldn’t” attitude.
What do you think we’re called to do acts of reparation for? Offenses to God, that’s what! And if it wasn’t a big deal to God, He wouldn’t be calling us to do acts of reparation. AND, if it’s a big deal to God, it sure is a big deal to me!
I’m sorry you’re having a hard time viewing this thread, JKirk:That isn’t what we were proposing and you know it.
Christ is eminently capable of defending himself.
I agree with your point of view on this subject, JKirkLVNV, but my question was “Why is it not law” for the priests and deacons to point out these guidelines? My question was NOT “What can priests and deacons do” which seems to be the question she answered.