What may a person say when receiving Communion?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Apryl
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Apryl

Guest
In light of the thread on DISTRIBUTING Communion, I am now curious about the person RECEIVING Communion in mass.

I think it’s been established (at least to my satisfaction) that you don’t break the norms of what you say when dispensing the Body and Blood of Christ (it’s not about you, or your relationship with the communicant, but about THEIR relationship with God).

However, what about when receiving? I have head some people that, upon “The Blood of Christ” being said, they respond with ‘May it cleanse my soul’, which I think is a wonderful thought, btw - or else they respond ‘Let it be so’, which sounds like something from days of old.

Hmmm… should there be some limit to what is said?

Yes, I know the response is supposed to be, simply ‘Amen’, but it’s not like any one is telling any one anything.

Or are they?

(Boy, as a Cradle Catholic, I have a lot of questions on communion, don’t I?)
 
Hi Apryl,

The response instructed by the bishops is “Amen” (which is an affirmation that you believe in the real presence.)

Lux
 
Apryl said:
Yes, I’m aware.

But is there anything that says that’s the ONLY thing to be said?
Click to expand...
The fact that it’s instructed by the Bishops of itself means that it’s the only thing that should be said - we’re bound in obedience to our Bishops.

Although ‘Amen’ actually means ‘let it be so’ - so the person who said that was very close to the mark!
 
Another response approved by our bishop is, “I believe!”
 
Catholic_Wife said:
Another response approved by our bishop is, “I believe!”
Click to expand...
Sorry, your bishop doesn’t have the authority to approve that on his own.

All such changes require a recognito from the Vatican.

If your bishop did not obtain that approval, he is being disobedient.
 
Hi again,

Here’s the GIRM instruction-
161. If Communion is given only under the species of bread, the priest raises the host slightly and shows it to each, saying, Corpus Christi (The Body of Christ). The communicant replies, Amen, and receives the Sacrament either on the tongue or, where this is allowed and if the communicant so chooses, in the hand. As soon as the communicant receives the host, he or she consumes it entirely.

Lux
 
Hi Brendan,

The bishop does have some authority in the postures and responses of the congregation, but it is not up to a lay person to interpret documents. However, we were directed on how to address something, if we perceive it as an abuse.
The Document “Redemptionis Sacramentum” by JP II does tell us
6. Complaints Regarding Abuses in Liturgical Matters
  1. In an altogether particular manner, let everyone do all that is in their power to ensure that the Most Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist will be protected from any and every irreverence or distortion and that all abuses be thoroughly corrected. This is a most serious duty incumbent upon each and every one, and all are bound to carry it out without any favoritism.
  2. Any Catholic, whether Priest or Deacon or lay member of Christ’s faithful, has the right to lodge a complaint regarding a liturgical abuse to the diocesan Bishop or the competent Ordinary equivalent to him in law, or to the Apostolic See on account of the primacy of the Roman Pontiff.290 It is fitting, however, insofar as possible, that the report or complaint be submitted first to the diocesan Bishop. **This is naturally to be done in truth and charity. **(emphesis mine)
And the Catechism does tell us that we must respect the clergy
From the Catechism
1269 Having become a member of the Church, the person baptized belongs no longer to himself, but to him who died and rose for us.76 From now on, he is called to be subject to others, to serve them in the communion of the Church, and to “obey and submit” to the Church’s leaders,77 holding them in respect and affection.78 Just as Baptism is the source of responsibilities and duties, the baptized person also enjoys rights within the Church: to receive the sacraments, to be nourished with the Word of God and to be sustained by the other spiritual helps of the Church.79

Lux
 
Lux_et_Tenebrae said:
Hi Brendan,

The bishop does have some authority in the postures and responses of the congregation, but it is not up to a lay person to interpret documents. However, we were directed on how to address something, if we perceive it as an abuse.
The Document “Redemptionis Sacramentum” by JP II does tell us
6. Complaints Regarding Abuses in Liturgical Matters

183. In an altogether particular manner, let everyone do all that is in their power to ensure that the Most Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist will be protected from any and every irreverence or distortion and that all abuses be thoroughly corrected. This is a most serious duty incumbent upon each and every one, and all are bound to carry it out without any favoritism.
  1. Any Catholic, whether Priest or Deacon or lay member of Christ’s faithful, has the right to lodge a complaint regarding a liturgical abuse to the diocesan Bishop or the competent Ordinary equivalent to him in law, or to the Apostolic See on account of the primacy of the Roman Pontiff.290 It is fitting, however, insofar as possible, that the report or complaint be submitted first to the diocesan Bishop. **This is naturally to be done in truth and charity. **(emphesis mine)
And the Catechism does tell us that we must respect the clergy
From the Catechism
1269 Having become a member of the Church, the person baptized belongs no longer to himself, but to him who died and rose for us.76 From now on, he is called to be subject to others, to serve them in the communion of the Church, and to “obey and submit” to the Church’s leaders,77 holding them in respect and affection.78 Just as Baptism is the source of responsibilities and duties, the baptized person also enjoys rights within the Church: to receive the sacraments, to be nourished with the Word of God and to be sustained by the other spiritual helps of the Church.79

Lux
Click to expand...
If the Church did not want us to “interpret” documents—She would not give us access to the documents. The fact that the Church has entrusted to us the responsibility of following thru with RS–183 says that we need to be knowledgable about matters that affect us, our Mass, and the Church. The Church communicates with us by way of documents like RS–2004, responses to dubiums, etc.

RS–2004

[27.] As early as the year 1970, the Apostolic See announced the cessation of all experimentation as regards the celebration of Holy Mass[62] and reiterated the same in 1988.[63] **Accordingly, individual Bishops and their Conferences do not have the faculty to permit experimentation with liturgical texts or the other matters that are prescribed in the liturgical books. **In order to carry out experimentation of this kind in the future, the permission of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments is required. It must be in writing, and it is to be requested by the Conference of Bishops. In fact, it will not be granted without serious reason. As regards projects of inculturation in liturgical matters, the particular norms that have been established are strictly and comprehensively to be observed.[64]

[28.] All liturgical norms that a Conference of Bishops will have established for its territory in accordance with the law are to be submitted to the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments for the recognitio, without which they lack any binding force.[65]
 
Catholic_Wife said:
Another response approved by our bishop is, “I believe!”
Click to expand...
Brendan said:
Sorry, your bishop doesn’t have the authority to approve that on his own.

All such changes require a recognito from the Vatican.

If your bishop did not obtain that approval, he is being disobedient.
Click to expand...
CCC Paragraph 1062:
In Hebrew, amen comes from the same root as the word “believe.” This root expresses solidity, trustworthiness, faithfulness. And so we can understand why “Amen” may express both God’s faithfulness towards us and our trust in him.
Click to expand...
Therefore, when the GIRM says we are to respond with ‘Amen’ a word that is not English, but Hebrew, in a document not written in English, but Latin. It seem the bishop, who has final authority over all the Liturgies in his Diocese, can determine how to translate a foriegn word into English if no guidance has been offered from Rome. For many of us do not know what Amen means, I have never studies Hebrew. The catechism indicates it is related to belief, so “I Believe” seems a proper interpretation of the GIRM as approved by the Vatican and of the Hebrew word “Amen”.

In any case, if the bishop has approved it, then it can be used in his diocese. He has the authority from Jesus Christ, handed down from the apostles, to determine how we are to worship the Lord in a public (Liturgical) gathering.

It is not our Liturgy, but the bishop’s.
 
Evan said:
Therefore, when the GIRM says we are to respond with ‘Amen’ a word that is not English, but Hebrew, in a document not written in English, but Latin. It seem the bishop, who has final authority over all the Liturgies in his Diocese, can determine how to translate a foriegn word into English if no guidance has been offered from Rome. For many of us do not know what Amen means, I have never studies Hebrew. The catechism indicates it is related to belief, so “I Believe” seems a proper interpretation of the GIRM as approved by the Vatican and of the Hebrew word “Amen”.

In any case, if the bishop has approved it, then it can be used in his diocese. He has the authority from Jesus Christ, handed down from the apostles, to determine how we are to worship the Lord in a public (Liturgical) gathering.

It is not our Liturgy, but the bishop’s.
Click to expand...
False. It is not the bishop’s liturgy, but the Church’s. He is, as the most recent motu proprio stated, the “moderator” of the liturgy in his diocese, not the innovator or initiator of such. It is his job to oversee the faithful celebration of the two forms of the one Roman rite within his diocese in accord with the norms established by the Holy See. He has limited competence to set norms for his diocese, and those cases are all explicitly defined: changing the response of the communicant is not one of them.

As far as “translating” the “foreign word” of Amen into English, the bishop needs no guidance whatsoever from Rome on the matter - Amen does not get translated in English, just as it does not get translated in Latin (or German, or any other modern language, for that matter). If the bishop wants some guidance, he should consult the “translations” of Amen found elsewhere in the Mass, such as when Amen is translated “Amen” at the end of the Creed, or rendered as “Amen” after the doxology of the canon (which point is commonly referred to as the “great Amen”. Or perhaps when the Amen ending signs of the cross and blessings is translated as “Amen.” I’m sensing a pattern.
 
Hi Walking,

What about the rest of my post? Especially the manner in which to handle alleged abuses, and our responsibility to respect and obey our Bishop (unless it is a serious matter against faith or morals)?

Lux
 
Andreas_Hofer said:
False. It is not the bishop’s liturgy, but the Church’s. He is, as the most recent motu proprio stated, the “moderator” of the liturgy in his diocese, not the innovator or initiator of such.
Click to expand...
Sounds like a states rights vs federal rights. Where is Jesus put that constitution??? 🙂 and WHO SITS ON THE SUPREME COURT???

Of course if the bishop has the authority from the Word of God, no-one on earth can take it away. No motu proprio, no papal document, no ecumenical council.

If he does not have the authority, then one would have to determine who does. In the early days of the Church, each bishop determined how to carry out the worship individually. Now, since we have good communication, does the patriarch or the pope determine the proper form? For, hierarchically, those would be the only two options. A council of bishops has no authority, it is a community of equals. And the GIRM is a General Instruction.

Historically, there has never been a time when the entire Church worshiped uniformly and rarely has any particular Rite been uniform. The popes have tried since (I’m guessing) the 5th century to, at least, get the Latin Rite to use one liturgy for the mass. I don’t think it has every succeeded.
 
The Pope and his Magesterium has the authority. It is very clearly legislated which things are left to the Diocesesan Bishop’s discretion and which things are not. The response when one receives Holy Communion is not one of the things the Diocesesan Bishop has discretion over. The translatation of the GIRM for the United States uses the word “Amen.” This translation was approved by the USCCB and submitted for final approval by Rome. When Rome approved the translation, it and its directives became binding law in the US. The GIRM says “Amen,” and thus so should the communicant. Because the GIRM does not grant the Diocesesan Bishop discretion to allow an alternate response, the Bishop does not have the authority to allow one. It’s that simple. Anyone who says otherwise is in error and is disobedient to the universal authority of the Supreme Pontiff of the Universal Church.
 
It’s scary, really, how some people think bishops are little popes, or maybe even little gods, in their dioceses.

It’s also scary how the sensus fidelium has been so ruined and/or lost.

The response is “Amen” in the ordinary usage. End of story. It’s a universal reply in the Roman Rite.

Not “I believe”, not “Yes your Lordship”, not “Sure thing!”

It’s Amen.

And this isn’t brain surgery to grasp.
 
Lux_et_Tenebrae said:
Hi Walking,

What about the rest of my post? Especially the manner in which to handle alleged abuses, and our responsibility to respect and obey our Bishop (unless it is a serious matter against faith or morals)?
Lux
Click to expand...
To be able to do that—we need to know the mind of the Church. She communicates Her mind to us thru the various documents She issues. If you read thru RS–2004—you will see that taking liberties with the Mass IS a serious matter—whether it originates from the laity, the priest, or even the bishops. We are to respect and obey our bishops when their mind—follows the mind of the Church—which is the reponsibility that the bishops are to carry out. When the bishops mind—falls away from the mind of the Church–we have the serious duty to address the issue–even if this means notifing Rome.

RS–2004
183. In an altogether particular manner, let everyone do all that is in their power to ensure that the Most Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist will be protected from any and every irreverence or distortion and that all abuses be thoroughly corrected. This is a most serious duty incumbent upon each and every one, and all are bound to carry it out without any favoritism.
 
Hi again,

But RS also tells us how to handle these alleged abuses.

Also the words of giving and receiving Communion were not even mentioned, nor are the laity told to correct their Bishop, but make any complaints to the proper authority “in charity and truth”

I don’t know how you understand this, but I don’t think that instruction would include attempting to define the bishop’s role on your own authority.

Lux
 
If an individual bishop tells you to say “I believe” at Communion, you are under no obligation to obey him.

And, I might add, one would think an individual bishop would have better things to do, what with clergy shortages and dioceses going bankrupt, than find yet another way to screw around with the liturgy beyond his authority.
 
I remember, incidentally, once in school, when the local bishop came to celebrate Mass for us. It was Advent.

He saw the purple altar hangings and pulpit hanging, and said, “Get rid of those. Blue is the color during Advent.”

My response: “No, Your Excellency, we are not getting rid of those. Purple is the color for Advent, we don’t have blue vestments, and if you brought your own, I guess they’re going to clash with the existing decor.”

His Excellency didn’t reply. But he wore purple.
 
Lux_et_Tenebrae said:
Hi again,

But RS also tells us how to handle these alleged abuses.

Also the words of giving and receiving Communion were not even mentioned, nor are the laity told to correct their Bishop, but make any complaints to the proper authority “in charity and truth”

I don’t know how you understand this, but I don’t think that instruction would include attempting to define the bishop’s role on your own authority.

Lux
Click to expand...
We do not define it on our “own” authority. The Church has define the bishops role for us and communicates this to us —thru the documents.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top