Revoke the U.S. Indult on Standing for Holy Communion

[Matariel]

Excuse me, but we’re getting off subject.

 

[ProVobis]

Nothing earthshaking but better than nothing:

Pope will suggest, not order, liturgical changes: chief Vatican liturgist March 03, 2010

Pope Benedict XVI hopes to bring about a “reform of the reform” by suggesting rather than requiring changes in the liturgy, the papal master of ceremonies has revealed.

In a revealing interview with John Allen of the National Catholic Reporter, Msgr. Guido Marini, the Vatican’s chief liturgist, said that the **Pontiff would strongly encourage practices such as administering Communion to the faithful kneeling and on the tongue, the central placement of a crucifix on the altar, and the celebration of Mass ad orientem. **But these would be “proposals,” the liturgist said; he does not anticipate formal papal directives to change the liturgy.

Msgr. Marini emphasized that liturgical changes should take place “organically,” not through sudden shifts. He returned to that theme in discussing the wider use of the extraordinary form: the traditional Latin Mass. The Pope’s goal, he said, “is that the two forms of the Roman rite look upon one another with great serenity, realizing that both belong to the life of the church and that neither is the only true, authentic expression. But rather, the two forms of Roman Rite can mutually enrich each other.”

The papal liturgist-- who noted that he himself had not used the phrase “reform of the reform”-- emphatically rejected the idea that the Pope’s proposals represent a retreat from the liturgical reforms of Vatican II. “A ‘rollback’ wouldn’t make sense,” he said, “because it’s not how the life of the Church works.”

catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=5608

 

[Matariel]

Nothing earthshaking but better than nothing:

catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=5608

Why won’t he forcibly implement these changes? Frankly, I don’t think very many priests and bishops are going to implement any changes from the Holy Father’s example, even though they should.

In America, even, in some places, some errant priests are suspicious that the Holy Father is trying to superimpose a so-called “pre-Vatican II” mindset on the Church.

But of course the Church did not change at Vatican II; it was a pastoral council, not a doctrinal one. Some people thought that Vatican II called for liturgical experimentation (“folk” Masses, lay infringement on priestly functions, etc.) even though the council certainly NEVER called for any of that, and just those kind of things have been repeatedly condemned by the Vatican, the Pope, and the CDF.

 

[Canto]

Why won’t he forcibly implement these changes? Frankly, I don’t think very many priests and bishops are going to implement any changes from the Holy Father’s example, even though they should.

In America, even, in some places, some errant priests are suspicious that the Holy Father is trying to superimpose a so-called “pre-Vatican II” mindset on the Church.

But of course the Church did not change at Vatican II; it was a pastoral council, not a doctrinal one. Some people thought that Vatican II called for liturgical experimentation (“folk” Masses, lay infringement on priestly functions, etc.) even though the council certainly NEVER called for any of that, and just those kind of things have been repeatedly condemned by the Vatican, the Pope, and the CDF.

Some Priests may see what the Holy Father is doing/saying and change/revert

Some Priests affraid to change previously, may use the Holy Father as a defence and change/revert

Some who are set in their ways though won’t give a second thought to what the Holy Father does it would seem

Personally I would like a document that offically states Mass toward the east and Communion on tounge kneeling at Altar rail or kneeler, and enforces the GIRM and Vat II which said the people should be able to chant or at least say their parts of the Mass in Latin.

 

[ChurchTorch]

Even more than calling it an indult, I would be extremely reluctant to call a decision, properly and officially delegated to the Conference of Bishops, an abuse. :twocents:

Nor would I call what is an indult (reception in the hand), lawfully granted by the Holy See, an abuse.

Maybe that’s just me.

tee

I would sure agree with you.

 

[Matariel]

Even more than calling it an indult, I would be extremely reluctant to call a decision, properly and officially delegated to the Conference of Bishops, an abuse. :twocents:

Nor would I call what is an indult (reception in the hand), lawfully granted by the Holy See, an abuse.

Maybe that’s just me.

tee

I was mistaken; it’s not an indult, reception in the hand is. It remains the traditional mode of reception. Some national episcopal conferences, including the American, had asked the Vatican for permission to give Communion in the hand. In 1977 this permission was granted to the U.S. bishops, and since then Communion in the hand has been an option in the U.S.

Standing/kneeling are equally universal norms, apparently.

 

[CradleCath]

But you do kneel at the EF and receive on the Tongue, you also have the right to do so at the OF if you wish.

That sentence gave me a good laugh. Several years ago ONE person, in the Novus Ordo parish I belonged to then, tried to kneel…the priest looked right over him, beckoned the next in line to step forward & the person who knelt was not given Communion.

I have an issue with people wanting to force their view of piety on everyone else.

Maybe it’s like the issue I have when Eastern Catholics, who receive the Body of Christ that has been dipped into the Blood of Christ, from a spoon…accusing Latin Catholics of “forcing” their own brand of piety on others.

As I said, I don’t think revoking the indult, at this time, is a good idea. We would have a full-scale rebellion right now. We’ve already got a “half-scale” rebellion about the revival of the TLM & the ban on gay priests.

 

[ProVobis]

Personally I would like a document that offically states Mass toward the east and Communion on tounge kneeling at Altar rail or kneeler, and enforces the GIRM and Vat II which said the people should be able to chant or at least say their parts of the Mass in Latin.

I think the ideal time to change this at local parishes is when the new translation comes out. People make a lot of associations in their heads and maybe they could accept this just whole package as they did when the New Mass was promulgated 40 years ago. At some point they will be told from the pulpit when the new translations are coming and the priest can throw in some “By the way, the Pope wants us to receive on the tongue” and if they have communion rails or kneelers or whatever, “…and kneel.” My penny’s worth.

 

[Canto]

I think the ideal time to change this at local parishes is when the new translation comes out. People make a lot of associations in their heads and maybe they could accept this just whole package as they did when the New Mass was promulgated 40 years ago. At some point they will be told from the pulpit when the new translations are coming and the priest can throw in some “By the way, the Pope wants us to receive on the tongue” and if they have communion rails or kneelers or whatever, “…and kneel.” My penny’s worth.

Kill 2 birds with 1 stone I believe the saying is. Just tell them this is to more fully fulfil Vat II. If there are a few coughs - tell them to read Sacrosanctum Concilium (Vat II’s liturgy doc) - they’ll be suprised!

I don’t get how hard for example ad orientum (toward the orient/east) is. If father has his back to us then conversly he has his back to the Lord. We don’t stare at the Priest at Mass as he acts in Persona Christi so let him face east. Pope Benedict noted it was a unity of position - Priest and people turning and facing the Lord.

Communion on the tonuge. For gosh knows how long people didn’t have a problem with it. How many people check their hands to make sure their are no fragments there? St Paul says at the name of Christ every knee should bend, how much more hin is actual presence.

Chant. The simpler chants aren’t that hard. There are free resources all over the net. That’s how I learnt.

And incesne and the Sanctus Bells at consecration. And sacred silence and…

Mass is our entering into eternity not the shopping mall.

The Pope doesn’t want these things because he’s an old timer. He wants them for good reason. There is a lot of theology and beauty and meaning behind these things, things Vat II never abolished.

Have I ranted long enough

 

[ProVobis]

I don’t get how hard for example ad orientum (toward the orient/east) is. If father has his back to us then conversly he has his back to the Lord. We don’t stare at the Priest at Mass as he acts in Persona Christi so let him face east. Pope Benedict noted it was a unity of position - Priest and people turning and facing the Lord.

Many churches are configured so that it may be difficult. As would communion kneeling if they don’t have a communion rail; otherwise you’re asking people to kneel on a hard floor in some cases. So I can understand his “suggesting” rather than mandating in those cases. However, I hope that the language is a lot stronger against communion in the hand because that wouldn’t require any architectural changes.

 

[CradleCath]

Kill 2 birds with 1 stone I believe the saying is. Just tell them this is to more fully fulfil Vat II. If there are a few coughs - tell them to read Sacrosanctum Concilium (Vat II’s liturgy doc) - they’ll be suprised!

I don’t get how hard for example ad orientum (toward the orient/east) is. If father has his back to us then conversly he has his back to the Lord. We don’t stare at the Priest at Mass as he acts in Persona Christi so let him face east. Pope Benedict noted it was a unity of position - Priest and people turning and facing the Lord.

 

[Malleus_01]

Malleus: Bears repeating. What does ther Pope think about Kneeling and Recieving on the Tongue?

<<< “It could also be noted that the (Pope’s) preference for such form of distribution which, without taking anything away from the other one, better highlights the truth of the real presence in the Eucharist, helps the devotion of the faithful, and introduces more easily to the sense of mystery. Aspects which, in our times, pastorally speaking, it is urgent to highlight and recover.” >>>>

Gee , now where have we heard that before.

 

[ProVobis]

Malleus: Bears repeating. What does ther Pope think about Kneeling and Recieving on the Tongue?

Whatever he thinks, it won’t do much good if the bishops and others go running around and saying it’s still allowed. Seems like a major paradigm shift is in order and the Pope might not be able to do it on his own.

 

[iona_scribe]

Forgive me for what might be a slightly off-topic complaint, but…

I’m a convert; my family’s religious background is Lutheran, specifically ELCA. I hear the denomination has gone very liberal, but they still have a wonderful sense of decorum when it comes to liturgy. I remember receiving communion on the hand, as Lutheran theology permits, but we always did it kneeling at the altar rail!

(Not to mention magnificent organ music, altar servers in cassock and surplice, beautiful liturgical furnishings and architecture…but I digress…)

Oh how many times I’ve wished some of our Catholic churches could be half as Catholic as my old Lutheran church

pbase.com/kjosker/image/22526817

 

[Canto]

Has this been posted?

Congregation for Divine Worship: “…while this Congregation gave the *recognitio *to the norm desired by the Bishops’ Conference of your country that people stand for Holy Communion, this was done on the condition that communicants who choose to kneel are not to be denied Holy Communion on these grounds. Indeed, the faithful should not be imposed upon nor accused of disobedience and of acting illicitly when they kneel to receive Holy Communion”.

adoremus.org/0403HolySeeResponds.html

 

[Matariel]

As I said, I don’t think revoking the indult, at this time, is a good idea. We would have a full-scale rebellion right now. We’ve already got a “half-scale” rebellion about the revival of the TLM & the ban on gay priests.

I think that’s an exaggeration; but even if it was not, so be it. Doing the right thing isn’t always the same as doing the popular and politically expedient thing to do.

What is better or right will always triump over what is worse and wrong.

 

[Malkin71]

Many churches are configured so that it may be difficult. As would communion kneeling if they don’t have a communion rail; otherwise you’re asking people to kneel on a hard floor in some cases. So I can understand his “suggesting” rather than mandating in those cases. However, I hope that the language is a lot stronger against communion in the hand because that wouldn’t require any architectural changes.

This is where you have a Kneeler, a Patenand that the Tabernacle is in the center. Also, Bring back the Caommunion rail as well. How many Communion rails were smashed and destroyed because of ignorance? Also, Rome should make clear when New Church building are being built that should follow the Traditional Church. Not some “Circus Tent” or as Michael S. Rose puts in his book…“Ugly As Sin”!!!

 

[Matariel]

Has this been posted?

Congregation for Divine Worship: “…while this Congregation gave the *recognitio *to the norm desired by the Bishops’ Conference of your country that people stand for Holy Communion, this was done on the condition that communicants who choose to kneel are not to be denied Holy Communion on these grounds. Indeed, the faithful should not be imposed upon nor accused of disobedience and of acting illicitly when they kneel to receive Holy Communion”.

adoremus.org/0403HolySeeResponds.html

I personally have been genuflecting before recieving Holy Communion, but still stand; this is because I was afraid of reprecussions from the (illicit) Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion. But now I think it’s about time I returned to the practice of kneeling on the floor before our Eucharistic God. I shouldn’t fear reprecussions; the Vatican is behind me.

 

[ChurchTorch]

Maybe kneeling and on the tongue could be a great teaching tool.

If one has to acually get down on the knees for Jesus, and have the Priest (in persona Christi) place the host on their tongue, maybe they will see just how the Eucharist is the centre of the Church.

Still unsure, maybe then they will do some study and ask questions.

A priest does not “place the host on their tongue in persona Christi.” The priest stands at the altar of sacrifice (Calvary) in Persona Christi during the canon of the Mass.

 

[At_Trent]

Why not just ask your Pastor if it is ok to receive kneeling ? Better yet, note those who receive on the tongue, and ask them after Mass if they would like to kneel and receive. If the Pastor knows more than one desires it, he may say yes