Tongue/Hand/Precious Blood

[bear06]

Mysty101:

I would be very careful here—We are warned about private interpretation, especially when there is a higher authority which refutes it. A Pope is definitely a higher authority than a Pastor or Cardinal.
Jesus said,
He did not say “only if you make an infallible pronouncement”.

People are free to dislike it all they want. In fact, we don’t even have to do it. It’s when you say that the Pope is in error that you’re in dangerous waters.

As a Cardinal, this man is supposed to be submissive to the Pope in ALL things but sin. I can easily whip out a bunch of saints writings on obedience to their superiors which have never been contradicted by the Holy Father!

 

[misericordie]

bear06:

Which part of the post are you referring to? Sorry, can’t answer until I get that.

Communion in the hand.

 

[misericordie]

bear06:

People are free to dislike it all they want. In fact, we don’t even have to do it. It’s when you say that the Pope is in error that you’re in dangerous waters.

As a Cardinal, this man is supposed to be submissive to the Pope in ALL things but sin. I can easily whip out a bunch of saints writings on obedience to their superiors which have never been contradicted by the Holy Father!

Well, this proves my point: So you do beleive that ALL which is ever said by a pope, MUST be done, no disagreement allowed, even if it is NOT an INFALLIBLE, dogmatic, doctrinal, or ex-cathedra statement?? NOT EVEN THE CHURCH SAYS THIS.:nope: .

 

[misericordie]

misericordie:

Well, this proves my point: So you do beleive that ALL which is ever said by a pope, MUST be done, no disagreement allowed, even if it is NOT an INFALLIBLE, dogmatic, doctrinal, or ex-cathedra statement?? NOT EVEN THE CHURCH SAYS THIS.:nope: .

AND WHO HAS EVER SAID HERE THAT “the pope is in error”???:banghead:

 

[bear06]

misericordie:

AND WHO HAS EVER SAID HERE THAT “the pope is in error”???:banghead:

Hey, if nobody is in error then you must think Communion in the hand is okey dokey! No error, then what’s your beef.? If you have a beef then it must be with the Pope since he’s got the say on disciplinary matters. I actually don’t expect you to say it because then your proverbial slip would be showing!

 

[bear06]

misericordie:

Well, this proves my point: So you do beleive that ALL which is ever said by a pope, MUST be done, no disagreement allowed, even if it is NOT an INFALLIBLE, dogmatic, doctrinal, or ex-cathedra statement?? NOT EVEN THE CHURCH SAYS THIS.:nope: .

Where did I say that you must receive Communion in the hand? In fact, I think I said that one doesn’t have to do this if they don’t want to. Now, if you’re not saying the Pope is in error as you claim (honestly, why all the talk on infalliblity?) then this does not apply to you since I said it was dangerous to say the Pope was in error. If shoe doesn’t fit, don’t wear it!

Now in the case of the CARDINAL, let me provide you with some quotes which I actually think apply to all of us but I’m sure some on this loop would limit to the religious. It all comes down to unless you think the Pope is sinning you must be obedient. You certainly must see that they apply at least to the religious even though some specifically say faithful.

If then any shall say that the Roman Pontiff has the office merely of inspection or direction, and not full and supreme power of jurisdiction over the universal Church, not only in things which belong to faith and morals, but also in those things which relate to the discipline and government of the Church spread throughout the world; or assert that he possesses merely the principal part, and not all the fullness of this supreme power; or that this power which he enjoys is not ordinary and immediate, both over each and all the Churches and over each and all the pastors of the faithful; let him be anathema" (Pastor Aeternus,).Ch. III; Denz. 1831)

Hence we teach and declare that by the appointment of our Lord the Roman Church possesses a sovereignty of ordinary power over all other Churches, and that this power of jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff, which is truly episcopal, is immediate to which ail, of whatsoever rite and dignity, **both pastors and faithful, both individually and collectively, are bound, by their duty of hierarchical subordination and true obedience, to submit, not only in matters which belong to faith and morals, but also in those that appertain to the discipline and government of the Church ** throughout the world; so that the Church of Christ may be one flock under one supreme pastor through the preservation of unity, both of communion and of profession of the same faith, with the Roman pontiff." (Pastor Aeternus, Ch. III; Denz. 1827)

Obedience lovingly undertakes to do ail that is commanded it with simplicity and without ever considering whether the command is good or bad, provided that the person who orders has authority to order, and that the command serves to unite our mind to God." (St. Francis de Sales -Spiritual Conferences, XI, p 179)

When, in my opinion and judgment, the Superior bids me to do something which is against my conscience or sinful, and the Superior thinks the contrary, I ought to believe him unless he is manifestly wrong." (St. Ignatius - Monumenta Ignatian, series 1a, XII, 660).

And from Padre Pio:

You did a wicked thing . . . We must respect the decrees of the Church. We must be silent and suffer." (Ibid, p. 180).

They are wrong and you are right, but still you must obey." (Ibid, p. 297).

 

[bear06]

misericordie:

UMMMMMMM, again, it is NOT an INFALLIBLE pronouncement, why???

I’m still not sure exactly what you are getting at. Are you making a statement and then asking a question. I agree that neither Aquinas or the Pope has made an infallible pronouncement on Communion in the hand. It’s a matter of discipline. Soooooooo, what’s the question again? You’ll need to rephrase it.

Thanks!

 

[misericordie]

bear06:

Where did I say that you must receive Communion in the hand? In fact, I think I said that one doesn’t have to do this if they don’t want to. Now, if you’re not saying the Pope is in error as you claim (honestly, why all the talk on infalliblity?) then this does not apply to you since I said it was dangerous to say the Pope was in error. If shoe doesn’t fit, don’t wear it!

Now in the case of the CARDINAL, let me provide you with some quotes which I actually think apply to all of us but I’m sure some on this loop would limit to the religious. It all comes down to unless you think the Pope is sinning you must be obedient. You certainly must see that they apply at least to the religious even though some specifically say faithful.

And from Padre Pio:

All these quolts you LONGLY state to go around as you have been for days, in CIRCLES and repetitious. These are about DOCTRINE. However, again you tend to make EVERY word said out of a pope’s mouth is ABSOLUTE TRUTH, EVEN when he is NOT defining a dogma, doctrine, ex-cathedra, etc. As if a BLIND following of every word a pope says in the above examples: WE are back to the football and catfish argument: if the Pope say tommarow he likes Catfish, and football, then MUST!!! We all as catholics Like those too??? In your opinion, and they way you interpret the power of the papacy, yes. If this is true, WHY is there even something called EX CATHEDRA(FROM THE CHAIR OF THE POPE)?? If ever word, even on food is to be followed, then why does the Church herself distinguish?? i.e., ex-Cathedra etc??
Again is this what you are saying??? If not state so, and if yes, don’t deny it.:dancing:

 

[bear06]

All these quolts you LONGLY state to go around as you have been for days, in CIRCLES and repetitious. These are about DOCTRINE.

I think you seriously need to read the quotes again. The first two deal with doctrine as well as DISCIPLINES which I so carefully highlighted for you. The ones from the saints have nothing to do with doctrine. I somehow doubt Padre Pio is going to tell his sister that she is right and that they are doctrinally wrong!

However, again you tend to make EVERY word said out of a pope’s mouth is ABSOLUTE TRUTH,

Can you quote where I said this? In fact, can anyone? I’m pretty sure that misericordie will ignore this challenge as always! So now miscericordie is back to repeating the same bogus things in the hopes that someday they will be true.

EVEN when he is NOT defining a dogma, doctrine, ex-cathedra, etc. As if a BLIND following of every word a pope says in the above examples: WE are back to the football and catfish argument: if the Pope say tommarow he likes Catfish, and football, then MUST!!! We all as catholics Like those too???

Once again, why don’t you just provide some concrete examples instead of hiding behind football? This has nothing to do with liking something as I stated in post #100. If you don’t think it’s dangerous to say the Pope is in error in matters of discipline go right ahead. If you don’t think he’s in error than what’s the point of your argument again. No error than you should have no problem!

Again is this what you are saying???

Whether you agree or disagree, is anyone else having any trouble understanding what I’m saying? Just look at my last post and I’m saying the same thing as the second quote from Pastor Aeternus in post #105.

 

[misericordie]

bear06:

I think you seriously need to read the quotes again. The first two deal with doctrine as well as DISCIPLINES which I so carefully highlighted for you. The ones from the saints have nothing to do with doctrine. I somehow doubt Padre Pio is going to tell his sister that she is right and that they are doctrinally wrong!

Can you quote where I said this? In fact, can anyone? I’m pretty sure that misericordie will ignore this challenge as always! So now miscericordie is back to repeating the same bogus things in the hopes that someday they will be true.

Once again, why don’t you just provide some concrete examples instead of hiding behind football? This has nothing to do with liking something as I stated in post #100. If you don’t think it’s dangerous to say the Pope is in error in matters of discipline go right ahead. If you don’t think he’s in error than what’s the point of your argument again. No error than you should have no problem!

Whether you agree or disagree, is anyone else having any trouble understanding what I’m saying? Just look at my last post and I’m saying the same thing as the second quote from Pastor Aeternus in post #105.

You see all, I am trying to make it simple here for all by asking bear if he thinks that EVERY word the popeutters MUST we all agree as catholics, or if we don’t it is “dangerous.”? If not, then just say it, Yes, or NO??? Otherwise I will begin to just respond with oh uh here it comes::ehh: :yawn: :yawn:

 

[bear06]

If then any shall say that the Roman Pontiff has the office merely of inspection or direction, and not full and supreme power of jurisdiction over the universal Church, not only in things which belong to faith and morals, but also in those things which relate to the discipline and government of the Church spread throughout the world; or assert that he possesses merely the principal part, and not all the fullness of this supreme power; or that this power which he enjoys is not ordinary and immediate, both over each and all the Churches and over each and all the pastors of the faithful; let him be anathema" (Pastor Aeternus,).Ch. III; Denz. 1831)

Hence we teach and declare that by the appointment of our Lord the Roman Church possesses a sovereignty of ordinary power over all other Churches, and that this power of jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff, which is truly episcopal, is immediate to which ail, of whatsoever rite and dignity, both pastors and faithful, both individually and collectively, are bound, by their duty of hierarchical subordination and true obedience, to submit, not only in matters which belong to faith and morals, but also in those that appertain to the discipline and government of the Church throughout the world; so that the Church of Christ may be one flock under one supreme pastor through the preservation of unity, both of communion and of profession of the same faith, with the Roman pontiff." (Pastor Aeternus, Ch. III; Denz. 1827)

Are you denying Pastor Aeternus, misericordie? Is Communion in the hand a discipline? I know this is really hard for you to know that you have to show true obedience and submission to the Roman Pontiff when you’re not happy with what he’s doing. This has nothing to do with fish or football and everything to do with a discipline of the Church.

 

[misericordie]

bear06:

If then any shall say that the Roman Pontiff has the office merely of inspection or direction, and not full and supreme power of jurisdiction over the universal Church, not only in things which belong to faith and morals, but also in those things which relate to the discipline and government of the Church spread throughout the world; or assert that he possesses merely the principal part, and not all the fullness of this supreme power; or that this power which he enjoys is not ordinary and immediate, both over each and all the Churches and over each and all the pastors of the faithful; let him be anathema" (Pastor Aeternus,).Ch. III; Denz. 1831)

Are you denying Pastor Aeternus, misericordie? Is Communion in the hand a discipline? I know this is really hard for you to know that you have to show true obedience and submission to the Roman Pontiff when you’re not happy with what he’s doing. This has nothing to do with fish or football and everything to do with a discipline of the Church.

Okay, since you are now just going in cirlcles, (pride??) here is my version of the Socratic method: :yawn: :yawn:

 

[Mysty101]

misericordie:

Okay, since you are now just going in cirlcles,

No—just presenting in a few different ways , so perhaps you will respond to the issue, rather than evading it.

 

[maggiec]

amasimp:

I do not receive the Precious Blood because I am terrified. And not of germs…but of dropping it! I’m a huge klutz and I know one of these days I’m going to have a bad hand off and the Precious Blood of Our Lord will go all over the floor.

I don’t want to tempt fate on this case.

As for receiving on the tongue…well I’m old fashioned. I feel that only consecrated hands should touch the Sacred Host.

I agree with you on receiving on the tongue. As far as receiving the Precious Blood when I take the cup and drink from it I hold the rim and base to return it and don’t let go until the EMHC has a firm grasp.
Gods peace
maggiec

 

[misericordie]

maggiec:

I agree with you on receiving on the tongue. As far as receiving the Precious Blood when I take the cup and drink from it I hold the rim and base to return it and don’t let go until the EMHC has a firm grasp.
Gods peace
maggiec

First, is not it to correctly called THE CHALICE, not cup, wine glass, clay cup etc. Secondly, is it NOT BETTER if you recieve from the PRIEST?? Where is HE during distribution??

 

[misericordie]

Mysty101:

No—just presenting in a few different ways , so perhaps you will respond to the issue, rather than evading it.

Wow, you do seek EVERY oppurtunity to make yourself heard, poor Pastor of your parish I wonder what authority they have left HIM??
Secondly, I have addressed bear’s same points in about 15 previous threads, and he cannot state if HE agrees or disagrees that the Pop is to be OBEYED in every single word he ever utters, and I even asked bear by using an analogy(to to see if then he understands, as is recomended by the rules of pedagogy) and I mentioned three analogies: If the pope likes football, catfish, and hockey, and HE SAYS SO IN THE MICROPHONE, and in writing, does this mean ALL CATHOLICS are to like those three things too???
Thirdly, I was on my last post addressing a question to bear, and you rudely came into the seen to comment on something that was not even addressed to YOU=rude. I know one thing, if I ever become pastor, I will let all know that the PASTOR!!! Is in charge.

 

[maggiec]

misericordie:

First, is not it to correctly called THE CHALICE, not cup, wine glass, clay cup etc. Secondly, is it NOT BETTER if you recieve from the PRIEST?? Where is HE during distribution??

First, you are correct, it is a chalice not a cup, I suppose I was remembering the words"This is the cup of My Blood. Secondly, father is giving the Holy Body of our Lord to communicants while the EMHC is giving the chalice.
maggiec

 

[Mysty101]

misericordie:

Thirdly, I was on my last post addressing a question to bear, and you rudely came into the seen to comment on something that was not even addressed to YOU=rude. I know one thing, if I ever become pastor, I will let all know that the PASTOR!!! Is in charge.

Your post is on a public board—anyone may answer.
YOU=rude.

 

[misericordie]

maggiec:

First, you are correct, it is a chalice not a cup, I suppose I was remembering the words"This is the cup of My Blood. Secondly, father is giving the Holy Body of our Lord to communicants while the EMHC is giving the chalice.
maggiec

Oh okay, so I take it to really mean that father, oh I mean the EEMC, and the EEMC, I mean fr. are BOTH disregarding the LATEST Vatican dictates, that calls for the Priests to distribute Christ. For exp. If there is an old priest, or sick priest offering Mass, but there in the parish/rectory are two or anoither priest who live there, the at the time Communion is to be distributed, the other priest MUST help, not a EEMC. Now, they ARE allowed= In cases where there are for example 600 people in mass, and the priest is 86 years old and NO OTHER ORDAINED PRIEST lives at the rectory.:dancing::tiphat:

 

[Julian_Peters]

Thank you to all those who have participated in this discussion. This thread is now closed.