Vatican call to formalise Communion ritual

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rina_Badal
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
CallistusPM said:
18Aug.: St. Agapitus, M
But, for something as sacred as this, there should be a proper way.
Click to expand...
There is a proper way, and the Church tells us what that proper way is.

If the Church gives options then there are more than one proper way to do it.
 
CallistusPM said:
Yes, but sometimes the abuse is unintentional; the Ordinary Form of Mass (Novus Ordo) lends itself to more abuses.
Click to expand...
This is just an opinion and not a fact.

I disagree with your opinion that the Ordinary Form does such a thing.
 
One Of The Women said:
IMHO, mandating gestures of piety is an ill-conceived solution
to the problem at hand.

If we really want people to understand and appreciate the Eucharist
what we need is a lot more good & meaningful catechesis
and a lot less of “my way is better than your way…”.
Click to expand...
and a lot less of "my way is better than your way
Click to expand...
:hmmm: Which is why the Vatican is being called to formalize the Communion Ritual.
Click to expand...
IMHO if there IS only ONE way of receiving Holy Communion that best symbolizes humility and reverence. It stands in simple plain logic that you wouldn’t have this kind of discussion where the Faithful are divided over both prescribed norms of receiving Holy Communion.
Click to expand...
Until then the bickering will continue until there’s only ONE befitting resolution.
Click to expand...
Peace
Chris
Click to expand...
 
ByzCath said:
This is just an opinion and not a fact.

I disagree with your opinion that the Ordinary Form does such a thing.
Click to expand...
agreed. its the fault of the priests who abuse the ordinary form not the ordinary form itself
 
Julia_Mae said:
Priests don’t need to be turned away from us like they are huddled up in a secret ceremony. Jesus was having dinner with His Apostles, the Apostles and their presbyters just had meetings around a table. The way it’s done now is the ancient way - unless we get a way bigger table and all sit at it.
Click to expand...
you obviously dont know that they were actually having a religious service that involves eating, not “dinner.” big difference.

and dont forget that they were all on the same side of the table just like an ad orientem mass.
 
CallistusPM said:
Most surveys I have seen indicate a majority of Catholics do not believe in the Divine Presence/Transubstantiation. Unfortunately, this also includes some clergy. Perhaps, this is partially to blame for the “lack of importance” for the Sacred Eucharist???
Click to expand...
The statistic of how many Catholics don’t believe in the Real Presence seems to increase nearly every time it is re-told!

A further point, and absolutely vital: - one of the surveys quoted on CAF some time ago as ‘proof’ that Catholics don’t believe in transubstantiation any more, based this on the question,‘Do you believe that the bread and wine are changed into the physical presence of Jesus?’.

I would answer ‘no’ to that question, but I would give my life for the truth of the Real (sacramental) Presence. So would I be part of the number deemed by the survey-organisers to not believe in transubstantiation? Yes, I suppose, so although it would not be true.

A survey is only as good as the questions asked, and the interpretation of the anwers by those in charge. Slanting or just inaccuracies in the words used in survey questions twist the truth.
 
All that any of us have to contribute to making things better as concerns reverence to Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament,and to His presence in His own house, is our own example.
As we believe in His presence, let us behave accordingly.
 
I’ve always been curious whether Catholics think St. Cyril of Jerusalem’s famous description of how communion is to be received describes someone standing or kneeling? Or is it ambiguous?:

23:21. In approaching therefore, come not with your wrists extended, or your fingers spread; but make your left hand a throne for the right, as for that which is to receive a King. And having hollowed your palm, receive the Body of Christ, saying over it, Amen. So then after having carefully hallowed your eyes by the touch of the Holy Body, partake of it; giving heed lest you lose any portion thereof ; for whatever you lose, is evidently a loss to you as it were from one of your own members. For tell me, if any one gave you grains of gold, would you not hold them with all carefulness, being on your guard against losing any of them, and suffering loss? Will you not then much more carefully keep watch, that not a crumb fall from you of what is more precious than gold and precious stones?

23:22. Then after you have partaken of the Body of Christ, draw near also to the Cup of His Blood; not stretching forth your hands, but bending , and saying with an air of worship and reverence, Amen , hallow yourself by partaking also of the Blood of Christ. And while the moisture is still upon your lips, touch it with your hands, and hallow your eyes and brow and the other organs of sense. Then wait for the prayer, and give thanks unto God, who has accounted you worthy of so great mysteries.

To me, the “approaching” and “draw near also” implies standing, but maybe not…?
 
Do you think this is Pope Benedicts way of trying to change the way of the mass?
For me personally, after I left the Church of Christ then went to an Anglo-Catholic Church, the thing that I loved the most that they didn’t do in Catholic Church I started going to was the kneeling at altar rails. I do hope they do bring this back!
 
centurionguard said:
:hmmm: Which is why the Vatican is being called to formalize the Communion Ritual.
Click to expand...
Yet the Vatican is doing no such thing. This thread was started with a link to an article about a private comment made by a cardinal. It was no way made as a policy of the Vatican but a personal opinion of this one cardinal.
IMHO if there IS only ONE way of receiving Holy Communion that best symbolizes humility and reverence. It stands in simple plain logic that you wouldn’t have this kind of discussion where the Faithful are divided over both prescribed norms of receiving Holy Communion.
Click to expand...
An opinion that I and many others disagree with you on. It would also appear that the Church disagrees with you as it allows for more than the option you like.

It is also not “simple logic” as there are other ideas out there and the Church allows for more than one way to receive.

My suggestion is that one should focus more on what they are doing and leave others to themselves especially when those others are following what the Church allows for. Now if they start doing things the Church does not allow, like attempting to receive while standing on their heads, then do say something, but when they are doing as the Church allows it really is none of our business.
 
I should think the re-translated latin to english November Missal will be enough for the moment. I do see Pope Benedict is paying very close attention to this and the obiedience to following the change as he implimented.

Peace
 
ByzCath said:
Yet the Vatican is doing no such thing. This thread was started with a link to an article about a private comment made by a cardinal. It was no way made as a policy of the Vatican but a personal opinion of this one cardinal.

An opinion that I and many others disagree with you on. It would also appear that the Church disagrees with you as it allows for more than the option you like.

It is also not “simple logic” as there are other ideas out there and the Church allows for more than one way to receive.

My suggestion is that one should focus more on what they are doing and leave others to themselves especially when those others are following what the Church allows for. Now if they start doing things the Church does not allow, like attempting to receive while standing on their heads, then do say something, but when they are doing as the Church allows it really is none of our business.
Click to expand...
Then maybe you might opt to give an explanation by saying either this Cardinal’s personal opinion is worthless or that he does have a far better position in making a personal opinion on the subject in reference this thread topic far better than you or I are distantly qualified in giving our own opinions? All due respect given.
 
centurionguard said:
Then maybe you might opt to give an explanation by saying either this Cardinal’s personal opinion is worthless or that he does have a far better position in making a personal opinion on the subject in reference this thread topic far better than you or I are distantly qualified in giving our own opinions? All due respect given.
Click to expand...
While his personal opinion may have some weight behind it, it is still in no way the will of the Church or binding upon any one.

My opinion in this matter reflects what the Church Teaches.
 
FatHead said:
agreed. its the fault of the priests who abuse the ordinary form not the ordinary form itself
Click to expand...
19Aug.: St.John Eudes, C

You are correct in that it is the priests who take liberties with the Novus Ordo liturgy but that is because the rubrics of the New Mass are not as precise and exacting - there is much “wiggle room.” I have seen very few Novus Ordo Masses performed the same way; Tridentine Masses are universally similar; it didn’t matter where in the world you attended. The vernacular in a foreign country alone might turn visitors off with the new liturgy. At least we had English/Latin Missals and if you were fortunate enough to be a product of perochial schooling, the good sisters taught us what took place at Mass and the general meaning of the Latin form and why the priests “huddled with their backs to the congregations.” There are very symbolic, historic, traditional and sacred meanings for all of this and it is lost with the new liturgy. If you are a product of the neo liturgy, you would not understand and this is unfortunate.
 
Julia_Mae said:
It wasn’t “immemorial” and only of our fathers and grandfathers.

The actual practice was for the Mass to be in the common language. Hence: Greek changed to Latin. Then in the Dark Ages, we got stuck in the Latin.

Priests don’t need to be turned away from us like they are huddled up in a secret ceremony. Jesus was having dinner with His Apostles, the Apostles and their presbyters just had meetings around a table. The way it’s done now is the ancient way - unless we get a way bigger table and all sit at it.

Change is hard and it was WAY too much change too fast.

Personally, I wish they would give some dress norms and insist on silence in the nave for like the hour before, during and after Mass. No eating in the pews, because there’s only one food that matters. Let’s have some reforms that we so desperately need!!!

People who stick dirty kleenex in the envelope well should be excommunicated.
Click to expand...
" Only immemorial for our fathers and grandfathers . . . ." Suggest you read THE MASS by Father Adrian Fortescue.
 
“Personally, I wish they would give some dress norms and insist on silence in the nave for like the hour before, during and after Mass. No eating in the pews, because there’s only one food that matters. Let’s have some reforms that we so desperately need!!!”

Julia Mae this at one time was church teaching. I do not know what is being taught today, seems to be very basic. There is no eating or drinking of alcohol for 3-hours before Communion. Non-alcohol beverage 1-hr. Of course water does not break the fast. If or what changed? I do not know.

And your right, proper teaching of what we are doing is very important. If we can’t as a church put this into perspective. Then how would we reconcile a stricter state. The entire approach to the Eucharist as approved today should be the Priority of teaching, it is the Mass. The building is not the Mass, nor ever has been. However the illusional thinking seems to exist about this.

A great starting point is the weekly Mass News pamphlet. There should be a page donated weekly to proper church behavior. Especially in regards to the Eucharist.

Anyway…

I also don’t understand how one Cardinal, Bishop, Priest became the spokesman for the entire Catholic Church. We follow Pope Benedict XVI. And so does most everyone under him. Throwing names around to validate incorrect teaching is nonsense. There are Cardinals. Bishops and Priests who do not believe in Transubstantiation and their names are thrown around on this forum. Just yesterday I was reading a thread here in this regard. So one should validate their own incorrect thinking by another teaching in conflict with Rome?

Pope Benedict is moving to closer unity and consistancy of the english Mass. However its a time consuming process which doesn’t shock and scare followers away.

Peace
 
FatHead said:
you obviously dont know that they were actually having a religious service that involves eating, not “dinner.” big difference.

and dont forget that they were all on the same side of the table just like an ad orientem mass.
Click to expand...
They were having a meal together and I do know the difference. What makes you think they were all on one side of the table?
 
Knittycat said:
That is great! I wonder if they’ll start installing communion rails.
Click to expand...
I remember when we had very large congregation coming forward for Holy Eucharist in those days before 1965 when the Mass changed. When we had the communion rail all would come forward and kneel on the pad there and fill the entire long rail across the church. (There were golden doors in the center that were closed.) The priest would give the Holy Eucharist from one side to the other. (Normally only one priest giving Communion.) Communion changed in 1965 to the current Corpus Christi (or Body of Christ) and the communicant response of Amen. (I think it probably takes longer per person now, but they did add deputation of extraordinary ministers of the Eucharist in 1973 Vatican decree “Immensae Caritatis”.)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top