I really don’t like being repetitive although so many here do (it’s in the GIRM!..it’s in the GIRM!) but seeing as though so many have either not bothered to read or choose to ignore the Holy Father’s teaching on this subject, I’ll list it again.
*From the responses received it is thus clear that by far the greater number of bishops feel that the present discipline should not be changed at all, indeed that if it were changed, this would be offensive to the sensibilities and spiritual appreciation of these bishops and of most of the faithful. *
After he had considered the observations and the counsel of those whom “the Holy Spirit has placed as bishops to rule” (11) the Churches, in view of the seriousness of the matter and the importance of the arguments proposed, the Supreme Pontiff judged that the long received manner of ministering Holy Communion to the faithful should not be changed.
Code:
The Apostolic See therefore strongly urges bishops, priests, and people to observe zealously this law, valid and again confirmed, according to the judgment of the majority of the Catholic episcopate, in the form which the present rite of the sacred liturgy employs, and out of concern for the common good of the Church.
catholictradition.org/Eucharist/memoriale.htm
Pope Paul VI was on the seat of St. Peter when CITH resurfaced in Holland. It was considered a liturgical abuse. The Pope consulted his bishops who voted against CITH. The Pope, as God’s representative on Earth instructed the faithful not to practice CITH. Unfortunately, during the Age of Aquarius, rebellion was trendy and popular. CITH spread under the guise of “spirit of Vatican II” and forced upon most parishes in the Western world. Communion rails were ripped out, clamshell churches replaced those in the shape of the Cross, EMHCs stormed into the Sanctuary and CITH became the de facto norm.
I realize after reading many pages of this thread that personal preference and ego is involved here so I don’t expect instant conversions. However, my argument has always remained rational, historical, and logical. All I’ve seen in return is insults, false accusations, false claims of history, distractions, and avoidance of the issue.
CITH was a liturgical abuse ruled so by the Pope and bishops. Therefore it’s spread was contrary to Church teaching and laws. Once again I’ll say, you can’t have it both ways. You can’t base your entire argument on “it’s in the GIRM” when CITH’s very existence was contrary to the GIRM of the day and specifically forbidden by the Holy Church.
