What may a person say when receiving Communion?

[Lux_et_Tenebrae]

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

He said it is an option, not an instruction.

.

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.

That is very disrespectful, and far more wrong than saying “I believe” after Holy Commuion.

LuX

 

[AlexV]

I respect the office of the bishop. I do not have to respect episcopal abuse.

The response at Communion is Amen. That’s universal in our Rite. The bishop acted ultra vires by offering “options”. Rome has very clearly delineated where bishops have authority over the liturgy, and that response isn’t among them.

 

[Lux_et_Tenebrae]

Walk,

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.

And we are also told how to address alleged abuses, and that we must respect our Bishop.

Lux

 

[AlexV]

We are NOT told we must obey him in abuses.

If a bishop tells you to do something contrary to the rubrics, you are not obliged to do it until you receive clarification from Rome.

We are not obliged to obey in all circumstances.

 

[AlexV]

The sensus fidelium is what is needed here. Every Catholic knows you say “Amen” in the ordinary usage. If someone says otherwise, maybe you smile politely and nod and then ignore them. But you don’t change reality because someone came up with a new, creative innovation. Bishop or not. The bishop has no authority over that particular rubric.

 

[Walking_Home]

Walk,

And we are also told how to address alleged abuses, and that we must respect our Bishop.

Lux

---

As AlexV stated—respect the office of Bishop—But when a bishop on his own authority takes liberties with the Mass—it just shows that he does not respect his own office.

 

[Evan]

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.

Of course, the local bishop is this ‘Magesterium’. He is the successor to the Apostle. He is the head of the local Church. He is a mini-pope (ie, father of the faithful within his diocese). The principal of subsidiarity applies in most matters like this.

It is not a matter of obedience. Obedience only comes into play when one has authority over another. In this matter, does the Vatican have authority? It can claim such. That does not make it so. No bishop in Rome, save the Pope, has any authority over another bishop, in Rome or out of Rome. The Pope has authority in some matters, but not in others. He does not have universal authority (ie over all things).

Do not make the Pope into a mini-God.

 

[Lux_et_Tenebrae]

Would you defy your Bishop, if he gave you a direct instruction?

I know I wouldn’t. And you are obligated to obey unless it is a serious matter against faith(doctrine) or morals. The saints did it.

But enough of this–let’s agree to disagree

Lux

 

[japhy]

Given that the word “Amen” is translated “Amen” in the English version of the GIRM, it would appear the Bishops’ intent is to keep the response as simply “Amen”.

Any translation of the Latin liturgy into English, anyway, is not the responsibility of us, it is the job of ICEL (International Commission on English in the Liturgy) and Vox Clara. Their translation of the Latin liturgy into English is the one we are to use. Therefore, when the Missal says we respond “Amen”, we respond “Amen”.

 

[Walking_Home]

Would you defy your Bishop, if he gave you a direct instruction?

I know I wouldn’t. And you are obligated to obey unless it is a serious matter against faith(doctrine) or morals. The saints did it.

But enough of this–let’s agree to disagree

Lux

---

For the Church to issue documents pertaining to our Mass—it is a Serious Matter. If a bishop issues an instruction that has not received the recognitio from Rome—that instruction has no binding force on the laity. This is from the Church Herself.

So either we have a Church with a hiearchy–headed by the Pope/Apostolic See whose authority oversees the Church —OR-- a Church where each individual bishop and/or conference is their own authority above the Church.

RS–2004

[4.] “Certainly the liturgical reform inaugurated by the Council has greatly contributed to a more conscious, active and fruitful participation in the Holy Sacrifice of the Altar on the part of the faithful.”[10] Even so, “shadows are not lacking”.[11] **In this regard it is not possible to be silent about the abuses, even quite grave ones, against the nature of the Liturgy and the Sacraments as well as the tradition and the authority of the Church, **which in our day not infrequently plague liturgical celebrations in one ecclesial environment or another. In some places the perpetration of liturgical abuses has become almost habitual, a fact which obviously cannot be allowed and must cease.

[6.] For abuses “contribute to the obscuring of the Catholic faith and doctrine concerning this wonderful sacrament”.[14] Thus, they also hinder the faithful from “re-living in a certain way the experience of the two disciples of Emmaus: ‘and their eyes were opened, and they recognized him’”.[15] For in the presence of God’s power and divinity[16] and the splendour of his goodness, made manifest especially in the Sacrament of the Eucharist, it is fitting that all the faithful should have and put into practice that power of acknowledging God’s majesty that they have received through the saving Passion of the Only-Begotten Son.[17]

[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]

 

[Evan]

So either we have a Church with a hiearchy–headed by the Pope/Apostolic See whose authority oversees the Church —OR-- a Church where each individual bishop and/or conference is their own authority above the Church.]

The local Church is invested in the Bishop of that place.

We have a local Church headed by an Apostolic See (ie a Bishop (apostle) in his Cathedral (see) ).

We also have a Universal Church, headed by Christ who’s vicar on earth is the Pope.

In Catholicism we strive to have Both/And rather than either/or.

 

[LilyM]

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.

We don’t believe they’re mini-Popes. We DO believe that they are legitimate authority, like the civil authorities.

As such we’re bound to obey them in pretty much anything that isn’t sinful. The same as the civil authorities. And saying ‘I believe’ rather than ‘Amen’ is far from being sinful!

 

[AlexV]

This false obedience business gets tiresome, truly.

Bishops can’t ban universal options, AND they can’t change the liturgy as they see fit.

Their liturgical authority is restricted to those areas clearly defined by the Holy See.

That response isn’t one of those areas.

Similarly, a bishop who suddenly told his priests they could never use Eucharistic Prayer II, or IV, or I…can’t happen. He can’t ban universal options.

We are not obliged to obey a bishop in all areas except sin.

The response is AMEN. Not what an individual bishop decides to make it.

 

[AlexV]

And by the way, Evan, in matters liturgical the pope IS the final authority, He has the final say. Not the diocesan bishop.

 

[Lux_et_Tenebrae]

Yes, that is true,

but you are told the manner for adressing these alleged abuses, and it certainly isn’t using disrespectful language on a public forum.

Lux

 

[Lux_et_Tenebrae]

re-We are not obliged to obey a bishop in all areas except sin.]]

None of us ar authorities—why not ask the apologists on that one?

 

[LilyM]

We are not obliged to obey a bishop in all areas except sin.

The response is AMEN. Not what an individual bishop decides to make it.

Nothing false about my obedience, thanks Alex. Last I heard we are to obey ALL legitimate authority in pretty much all areas but sin - and so I do to the best of my meagre ability.

And if my Bishop conflicts with the Pope - the proper procedure, again unless it’s something obviously sinful, is to obey first and take it up with the Pope afterwards. Unless, of course, you happen to have your copy of the GIRM handy on the spot to thwack the Bishop over the head with

Surely you wouldn’t dare suggest that our bishops rank BELOW civil authorities or have less of a claim on our obedience?

 

[Walking_Home]

The local Church is invested in the Bishop of that place.

We have a local Church headed by an Apostolic See (ie a Bishop (apostle) in his Cathedral (see) ).

We also have a Universal Church, headed by Christ who’s vicar on earth is the Pope.

In Catholicism we strive to have Both/And rather than either/or.

---

That is true when** both are of the same mind**.

RS–2004

[14.] “The regulation of the Sacred Liturgy depends solely on the authority of the Church, which rests specifically with the Apostolic See and, according to the norms of law, with the Bishop.[34]

[15.] The Roman Pontiff, “the Vicar of Christ and the Pastor of the universal Church on earth, by virtue of his supreme office enjoys full, immediate and universal ordinary power, which he may always freely exercise”[35], also by means of communication with the pastors and with the members of the flock.

[16.] “It pertains to the Apostolic See to regulate the Sacred Liturgy of the universal Church, to publish the liturgical books and to grant the recognitio for their translation into vernacular languages, as well as to ensure that the liturgical regulations, especially those governing the celebration of the most exalted celebration of the Sacrifice of the Mass, are everywhere faithfully observed”

 

[AlexV]

There are limits on when we must obey civil authority.

Likewise, when we must obey religious authority.

Again, if a bishop tells you to do something that violates a rubric, in an area of the liturgy over which his authority does not extend to the level of lawful adaptation, you are NOT obliged to obey him.

If a bishop told a priest they may never use Latin, ever, without his written permission (it’s just happened in Michigan), a priest would not be bound by such an order.

It’s ultra vires.

Similarly, a bishop who told his priests never to use the Roman Canon.

Or a bishop who tells his people to answer “I believe” at Communion.

None of that is permitted by the liturgy.

I said nothing disrespectful. I stated liturgical realities. Nor are the laity dopes who need a bishop to explain every rule to them (or perhaps how secret rubrics allow them to commit apparent abuses).

 

[Prague]

Funny this is on here today. Sunday for some unknown reason when I received communion after the priest said the Body of Christ, I blurted out Thank You! Then I said Amen.
Our priest just chuckled. Have no idea where that came from, and really felt quite embarrassed.
After Mass I stopped and spoke with the priest, and he said he had never heard anyone say Thank You before, but not to worry as he was sure Our Heavenly Father probably said You Are Most Welcome!
Prague