What may a person say when receiving Communion?

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

An option that only the Apostolic See has the authority to implement.
OK, but this particular bishop said it is an option. If you feel this is an abuse serious enough to address, then in conscience, you might want to make an official complaint.

I personally doubt he would be reprimanded or even corrected. I would be interested if anyone has that information.

Lux
 
Alex,
That community did not “disrespect” him. They taught a valuable lesson. As soon as he started the actual PRAYER, the few standing knelt right back down.
It is not up to the community to instruct the bishop.

Lux
 
I’ll give a better example.

About 15 years ago, a bishop visited a certain community. I was present.

At the time for the Eucharistic Prayer, he began by saying, “Let us stand as a priestly people in the ancient sign of respect and honor to our Lord.”

Some people were confused…they had (automatically) started to kneel. They looked at each other, curious. Some (very few, as I recall) did stand. Most remained kneeling. The bishop said, “I said…let us stand.” Some more now stood. Most did not. The bishop looked apoplectic. He said, “WE ARE A PRIESTLY PEOPLE, AND WE STAND TO HONOR OUR LORD!”

This time, nobody else stood…presumably because he didn’t use an imperative, despite his loud tone.

That community did not “disrespect” him. They taught a valuable lesson. As soon as he started the actual PRAYER, the few standing knelt right back down.
They taught him what? That they’re stubborn? Did they teach him WHY what he did was wrong? Not a bit. To this day he probably just thinks they’re old sticks-in-the mud and still knows no better really.
 
It was a college campus. The average age was 20.

They did teach him something. A priest at the college told me he never asked a congregation there to stand again.

You may call it “stubborn”…they would prefer to say they were celebrating the liturgy in faithful obedience to its norms and prescriptions.
 
I don’t know if there is such a thing as Papolatry but I think some people do suffer from Bishopolatry.

Our Primary obligation is Obedience to the TEACHINGS of the Faith. Not to the Hierarchy who may or may not follow them.

Clergy come and go in our lifetimes but the Teachings remain the same.

It is sad that people have to correct the Bishop about Liturgy whether by word, deed or example. But the sadness is that a Bishop will demand obedience to him but won’t to his Superiors (Holy See) by his actions or inactions to change what he ISN’T permitted to change.
 
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.
Amen.

(and you forgot, "You bet!)
 
OK, but this particular bishop said it is an option. If you feel this is an abuse serious enough to address, then in conscience, you might want to make an official complaint.

I personally doubt he would be reprimanded or even corrected. I would be interested if anyone has that information.

Lux

Saying YOU personally doubt he would be reprimanded–does not make his offense against the authority of the Church justifiable. It is up to the people who reside in the diocese— where priests and bishops take it upon themselves to dis-figure the Mass— to take the required action —even if this means notifying Rome.

It does NOT in any way or form help the Church — for people to use any measure to down-play, sweep under the rug the actions of laity, priests and/or bishops-- who undermind, dis-figure, take liberties with the Mass and the authority of the Church.
 
WH,

We are discussing a situation, and I am giving my opinion, and asking if anyone has any report of a bishop being reprimanded or corrected for a minor change.

Your anger and nastiness to me certainly doesn’t help the situation.

This bishop did not instruct anyone to do anything, but a priest in my parish told me that we are to obey if we are instructed to do something, and discuss or report it later, unless it is against faith (doctrine ) or morals. I would listen to a priest rather than you in this situation.

Lux
 
WH,

We are discussing a situation, and I am giving my opinion, and asking if anyone has any report of a bishop being reprimanded or corrected for a minor change.

Your anger and nastiness to me certainly doesn’t help the situation.

This bishop did not instruct anyone to do anything, but a priest in my parish told me that we are to obey if we are instructed to do something, and discuss or report it later, unless it is against faith (doctrine ) or morals. I would listen to a priest rather than you in this situation.

Lux

You give your opinion—I provide documentation. In case you were not aware—allowing an option that is not called for—is instruction. The bishop is instructing that it is OK by him to use the option.

Just to clarify again—any dis-figurement introduced to the Mass—
does contribute to obscuring the Catholic faith and doctrine.

RS–2004

[6.] For abuses “contribute to the obscuring of the Catholic faith and doctrine concerning this wonderful sacrament"…
 

Just to clarify again—any dis-figurement introduced to the Mass—
does contribute to obscuring the Catholic faith and doctrine.
RS–2004

[6.] For abuses “contribute to the obscuring of the Catholic faith and doctrine concerning this wonderful sacrament"…
I would not consider this option a dis-figurement
I would not consider this option obscuring but clarification of the Catholic faith.
I would not consider this option an abuse.
 
I would not consider this option a dis-figurement
I would not consider this option obscuring but clarification of the Catholic faith.
I would not consider this option an abuse.
So what would you consider disfigurement, obscuring or abuse?

(For a point of clarity. It helps when two people are using the same meanings for common terms)
 
This thread is indeed absurd.

It’s not brain surgery. The response in the ordinary form is “Amen”. Case closed.
 
So what would you consider disfigurement, obscuring or abuse?

(For a point of clarity. It helps when two people are using the same meanings for common terms)
Obscuring would be something that makes the truth of the sacramental action more difficult to discern for those who are not well educated in the faith.

Disfigurment would be something that makes the truth more difficult to discern even for the well educated.

Abuse would be actions that lead to or are disrespectful of the sacrament.

HOWEVER these definitions would be refined as examples of actions are presented to me. As St Augustine writes concerning time:

If no one ask of me, I know; if I wish to explain to him who asks, I know not.

That’s how I feel about most definitions.

But, we want to stick to the option given by a bishop to respond “I believe” when presented with an article of faith rather than the more cryptic “Amen” So lets not wander off into the great field of liturgical abuse etc.
 
I would not consider this option a dis-figurement
I would not consider this option obscuring but clarification of the Catholic faith.
I would not consider this option an abuse.

Since the Church has declared the proper response to be Amen–any other is a disfigurement, abuse, etc.
 
“Amen” isn’t cryptic. Where is the great sensus fidelium? This isn’t brain surgery.

The Church has explicitly said no one may change formulas on their own authority.

Again, it’s not hard. It’s actually quite simple. The only scary thing is how it takes half a dozen pages to answer the question of the thread, which is Amen.
 
“Amen” isn’t cryptic. Where is the great sensus fidelium?
This may be a case of sensus fidelium. If the faithful fail use use the option, there is no need for a clearer statement of believe. If huge masses of people in the diocese choose to say “I believe” the sense of the faithful would be that Amen is unclear.

Amen could mean “I hear ya, so what?” to some. If so, a clearer term would be in order.
 
Sorry, try again.

The Church has a liturgy. And that liturgy includes “Amen” at Communion for use in the ordinary form of the Roman Rite.

No other options are provided.

End of story.
 
No matter who, why, and/or how many—a response other then Amen is illicit.
 
No matter who, why, and/or how many—a response other then Amen is illicit.
As a lay person, when I am serving as a EMHE, is there anything I should do or say in response to anything from the communicant other than ‘Amen’?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top