Received on the tongue for the first time today

[avpadriga]

I am not being obtuse, but rather sincerely see far more orthodoxy than departure from the faith. I defy anyone to show me where the Vatican has declared this “obvious” apostacy that some here take as a given.

The most obvious apostasy that could lead anybody to excommunication if you participate and be a member of the Free Masons

 

[MissMichal]

The most obvious apostasy that could lead anybody to excommunication if you participate and be a member of the Free Masons

Wait, how did we get to Freemasons? I thought we were talking about those who desire to receive on the tongue and were apprehensive about it. Come on, folks…

 

[avpadriga]

Clearly the “original” way of receiving our Lord’s Body and Blood was not on the tongue as the first celebration of the Eucharist was at the last “supper”. And since most adults aren’t fed their supper but “feed” themselves, I think this starting point is fair to assume.

But needs change. And just as there were reasons to encourage and/or mandate communion on the tongue in the past, we are entering another similar period now. Perhaps not because the majority of people receiving in the hand are using the consecrated Host for malicious purposes, but more so because of the degredation of people’s understanding of the sanctity of the Blessed Body of our Lord in the Eucharist.

If you look back on the Jewish tradition, they welcome their guest by giving the bread that was dip in the wine directly to the mouth of their guest. On the last supper of our Lord Jesus Christ with His apostles He did dip the bread in to the wine.

Your brother in Christ

 

[avpadriga]

Wait, how did we get to Freemasons? I thought we were talking about those who desire to receive on the tongue and were apprehensive about it. Come on, folks…

Read the question so that you will understand the answer, Come on, folks…

 

[savienu]

Yet it belies the statement that was made about the entire Church in America.

Does this question often come up much during reception of communion?

I guess I am just weary of all the Catholic-bashing from both within and without the Church. Yes, I will acknowledge there are sinners in the Church. How many contracept is irrelevant. The Church will always be full of sinners and not all have arrived like some have. The question of how many acknowledge the Church’s teaching on contraception is the only pertinent measure. That has nothing to do with reception of the Eucharist. It sickens me to see this topic being turned to another chance to bash the Church.

It matters because orthodox, devout Catholics do not blatantly disregard Church teachings. The American Church is very, very, sick. Denying that does not help anything.

Oh, and I’m not bashing The Church. The Church is divine, and she is the bride of Christ. I am DEFENDING the Church from those who continue to disregard and spit on Her and Her teachings. Or are you claiming that American Catholics are “the Church”? The Church is made up of people in full Communion with Her. To say that most American Catholics are not in union with Rome is not “bashing the Church.” It is “bashing” those who flaunt and disregard Church teaching. Do you honestly not see the difference?

 

[pnewton]

Wait, how did we get to Freemasons? I thought we were talking about those who desire to receive on the tongue and were apprehensive about it. Come on, folks…

Because it is all about the Freemasons. (sometimes this place reads like a Jack Chick tract). Okay, since the issue is that the entire American Church is in apostacy I guess the point is that we are now honorary Masons, of secret Masons, or… something.

 

[savienu]

Because it is all about the Freemasons. (sometimes this place reads like a Jack Chick tract). Okay, since the issue is that the entire American Church is in apostacy I guess the point is that we are now honorary Masons, of secret Masons, or… something.

I can’t believe you are still stuck on the “all” thing. Is it not possible the person was employing DELIBERATE exaggeration to make a point?

 

[pnewton]

It matters because orthodox, devout Catholics do not blatantly disregard Church teachings. The American Church is very, very, sick. Denying that does not help anything.

Oh, and I’m not bashing The Church. The Church is divine, and she is the bride of Christ. I am DEFENDING the Church from those who continue to disregard and spit on Her and Her teachings. Or are you claiming that American Catholics are “the Church”? The Church is made up of people in full Communion with Her. To say that most American Catholics are not in union with Rome is not “bashing the Church.” It is “bashing” those who flaunt and disregard Church teaching. Do you honestly not see the difference?

Yes, if your original premise was right, it would make sense. All you say assumes you are right about the state of the Catholic Church in America. This is the same begging the question I see over and over. Therefore I ask once again, where has the Holy Father of a Vatican official stated that the Catholic Church in America is “sick” of something like that. Unless they do, surely you understand that it is at least possible that you and the handfull of Catholics like you might be wrong.

 

[savienu]

Yes, if your original premise was right, it would make sense. All you say assumes you are right about the state of the Catholic Church in America. This is the same begging the question I see over and over. Therefore I ask once again, where has the Holy Father of a Vatican official stated that the Catholic Church in America is “sick” of something like that. Unless they do, surely you understand that it is at least possible that you and the handfull of Catholics like you might be wrong.

“He who has ears to hear, let him hear.” Matthew 11:15

Edit: I hadn’t realized that people like Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi were “Catholics in good standing” unless the Pope excommunicated them. I also hadn’t realized that 54% of Catholics voted for Barack Obama and are “Catholics in good standing.” I’m sorry, where does the Church teach one can be pro-abortion, pro-contraception and pro-gay marriage and still be a Catholic in good standing? The onus is on YOU. The Church tells us what we must do to be a faithful Catholic, to be CATHOLIC period. To deny that the majority of the American Church denies and disregards Church teaching is naive and ignorant. I’m having a hard time believing you really think the Church is a-ok. Please tell me you are just playing devil’s advocate?

 

[pnewton]

I can’t believe you are still stuck on the “all” thing. Is it not possible the person was employing DELIBERATE exaggeration to make a point?

Truth needs no exaggeration. It is possible that the person chose to damage the truth to make a point. Even at that, saying the majority of Catholics are in apostacy, or Masons, or in “large defiance to the Catholic Church” is a malicious and uncharitable assumption. Again, where has the Church stated this?

 

[savienu]

Truth needs no exaggeration. It is possible that the person chose to damage the truth to make a point. Even at that, saying the majority of Catholics are in apostacy, or Masons, or in “large defiance to the Catholic Church” is a malicious and uncharitable assumption. Again, where has the Church stated this?

American Catholics stated it THEMSELVES through their actions when 54% of them voted for the most pro-abortion politician in our history. Keep in mind, that number is 54% of CHURCH GOING Catholics. It was higher if you include all those lapsed, non-Church attending “Catholics.” Or are you going to claim that one can vote for that man and be a Catholic in good standing? I’m fairly certain the Church has made it abundantly clear that you can’t.

 

[edders]

American Catholics stated it THEMSELVES through their actions when 54% of them voted for the most pro-abortion politician in our history. Keep in mind, that number is 54% of CHURCH GOING Catholics. It was higher if you include all those lapsed, non-Church attending “Catholics.” Or are you going to claim that one can vote for that man and be a Catholic in good standing? I’m fairly certain the Church has made it abundantly clear that you can’t.

I think Catholics are entitled to vote for the Democrats if they want to. Being pro-choice is really a small part of their total policy package. You’re never going to agree 100% with any political party, but on the substantive issues like health care, the economy etc clearly a majority of Americans thought the Democrats deserved a chance. The Republicans are hardly the ‘pro life’ party they claim to be when you consider their record on the economy, war etc. Politics is a messy business and you shouldn’t judge people so harshly for making a complex decision.

 

[savienu]

I think Catholics are entitled to vote for the Democrats if they want to. Being pro-choice is really a small part of their total policy package. You’re never going to agree 100% with any political party, but on the substantive issues like health care, the economy etc clearly a majority of Americans thought the Democrats deserved a chance. The Republicans are hardly the ‘pro life’ party they claim to be when you consider their record on the economy, war etc. Politics is a messy business and you shouldn’t judge people so harshly for making a complex decision.

Thank you Edders, for demonstrating my point very clearly to pnewton.

 

[maurin]

I think Catholics are entitled to vote for the Democrats if they want to. Being pro-choice is really a small part of their total policy package. You’re never going to agree 100% with any political party, but on the substantive issues like health care, the economy etc clearly a majority of Americans thought the Democrats deserved a chance. The Republicans are hardly the ‘pro life’ party they claim to be when you consider their record on the economy, war etc. Politics is a messy business and you shouldn’t judge people so harshly for making a complex decision.

The murder of innocent children isn’t a “substantive” issue? what is it, then? When Jesus said “suffer the children to come unto Me,” I don’t believe he meant to viciously murder them in the womb first.

 

[savienu]

The murder of innocent children isn’t a “substantive” issue? what is it, then? When Jesus said “suffer the children to come unto Me,” I don’t believe he meant to kill them in the womb first.

Maurin, you’re not be very inclusive right now. Remember, there’s more than one way to be a GOOD American Catholic and nothing at all is wrong with the American Church.

LOL

 

[maurin]

Maurin, you’re not be very inclusive right now. Remember, there’s more than one way to be a GOOD American Catholic and nothing at all is wrong with the American Church.

LOL

la la la la la la la la, feelin’ groovy! I got no deeds to do, no promises to keep. I’m dappled and drowsy and ready to sleep. Let the morning sun drop all it’s pedals on me! Life I love you, always groooooovy!

 

[damooster]

American Catholics stated it THEMSELVES through their actions when 54% of them voted for the most pro-abortion politician in our history. Keep in mind, that number is 54% of CHURCH GOING Catholics. It was higher if you include all those lapsed, non-Church attending “Catholics.” Or are you going to claim that one can vote for that man and be a Catholic in good standing? I’m fairly certain the Church has made it abundantly clear that you can’t.

I agree with savienu here; we embarrassed the Church, and ourselves, during the last presidential election.

This apparent support for pro-abortion was evident during RCIA when I walked in to the classroom and saw a big poster of Obama and a sign reading “Yes we did!” The class then turned in to a big celebration party for him. Even though I couldn’t stomach it, I stayed (albeit in the corner by myself). I was the only “non-liberal” in that class, which baptized 4 people and Confirmed 6 more. That’s 9 pro-abortion people being accepted in to the Church as Catholics (I was one of the baptized but not pro-abortion).

Getting back to the original discussion, I don’t see how all of this pertains to Holy Communion in the hand. Are we saying that only liberals receive in the hand?

 

[savienu]

I agree with savienu here; we embarrassed the Church, and ourselves, during the last presidential election.

This apparent support for pro-abortion was evident during RCIA when I walked in to the classroom and saw a big poster of Obama and a sign reading “Yes we did!” The class then turned in to a big celebration party for him. Even though I couldn’t stomach it, I stayed (albeit in the corner by myself). I was the only “non-liberal” in that class, which baptized 4 people and Confirmed 6 more. That’s 9 pro-abortion people being accepted in to the Church as Catholics (I was one of the baptized but not pro-abortion).

Getting back to the original discussion, I don’t see how all of this pertains to Holy Communion in the hand. Are we saying that only liberals receive in the hand?

No, I was trying to make a point to pnewton, who seems to think everything in the American Catholic Church is hunky dory and that it isn’t sick. The Church is sick, but I don’t think it necessarily has to do with receiving in the hand (although I think that that can contribute to people’s lazy attitudes about Christ and his real presence, I do know devout Catholic, pro-life individuals who receive in the hand. But they are the exception, not the rule.)

 

[edders]

The murder of innocent children isn’t a “substantive” issue? what is it, then? When Jesus said “suffer the children to come unto Me,” I don’t believe he meant to viciously murder them in the womb first.

If the US general election was a single issue referendum on abortion then Catholics would be right to pick clear sides. But I was just making the point, presidential elections are about multiple issues so it’s not fair to criticise Catholics thinking about other things, eg their job or their children’s education.

 

[savienu]

If the US general election was a single issue referendum on abortion then Catholics would be right to pick clear sides. But I was just making the point, presidential elections are about multiple issues so it’s not fair to criticise Catholics thinking about other things, eg their job or their children’s education.

Well, the Church disagrees with you, which means you are wrong.