Would you leave if the church mandated communion on the toungue and kneeling?

[bmadamsberry]

Well in my mind, I would still be a part of the Catholic Church – just – irregular.

That’s not quite how it would work. If you joined a group ‘which will always celebrate the EF,’ that would be a schismatic group like the Sedevacantist.

Furthermore, one would have to think very hard before directly disobeying the Church.

While I don’t think this would ever happen, it does bring up an important point. Often, people’s allegence is given to something other than the Church (like a particular form of the Mass, a particular person, etc.)

 

[TrueLight]

That’s not quite how it would work. If you joined a group ‘which will always celebrate the EF,’ that would be a schismatic group like the Sedevacantist.

Furthermore, one would have to think very hard before directly disobeying the Church.

While I don’t think this would ever happen, it does bring up an important point. Often, people’s allegence is given to something other than the Church (like a particular form of the Mass, a particular person, etc.)

No, I wouldn’t be a Sede, but another group would become more attractive.

We’re not allowed to pit forms against one another, but for some, the Extraordinary Form of the mass is the Mass of all Ages, even though they accept the Novus Ordo as valid. That’s all I’m saying.

I really don’t know what I would do, but I would be lying to myself if I said I wouldn’t be committed to maintaining the EF.

 

[Cristiano]

No, I wouldn’t be a Sede, but another group would become more attractive.

We’re not allowed to pit forms against one another, but for some, the Extraordinary Form of the mass is the Mass of all Ages, even though they accept the Novus Ordo as valid. That’s all I’m saying.

I really don’t know what I would do, but I would be lying to myself if I said I wouldn’t be committed to maintaining the EF.

First of all the EF is NOT the Mass of all Ages, it is simply a form of the Mass. Any Mass independently of the form is the Mass of all Ages. I would stop using propaganda slogans when dealing with Church matters.

Second, if you do something that is banned by the Church you put yourself outside of the Church even if you are not joining a sedevacante group. There are quite a few Catholics that like the OF but the put themselves outside of the Church because of disobedience.

Preference for something that is allowed is good, adherence to something that is banned is evil. I see quite a few Catholics committed to abortion, euthanasia, contraception, female ordination but that does not simply make them Catholics with an opinion.

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

No, I wouldn’t be a Sede, but another group would become more attractive.

We’re not allowed to pit forms against one another, but for some, the Extraordinary Form of the mass is the Mass of all Ages, even though they accept the Novus Ordo as valid. That’s all I’m saying.

I really don’t know what I would do, but I would be lying to myself if I said I wouldn’t be committed to maintaining the EF.

I think its sad when we become so attracted to the “wrapper” and clutching so tight that we are willing to lose the pearl of great price.

Look, if the church mandated receiving communion by painting myself blue and standing on my head…then that is how I would do it. I’m just not going to do it because so and so poster here says so.

I think reverence has to come from the heart…and not just gestures. Any gesture has the chance to become meaningless. Just the other day, a priest at the daily Mass had to remind people that they need to say “Amen” …and we have people that receive communion both ways.

 

[TrueLight]

First of all the EF is NOT the Mass of all Ages, it is simply a form of the Mass. Any Mass independently of the form is the Mass of all Ages. I would stop using propaganda slogans when dealing with Church matters.

Second, if you do something that is banned by the Church you put yourself outside of the Church even if you are not joining a sedevacante group. There are quite a few Catholics that like the OF but the put themselves outside of the Church because of disobedience.

Preference for something that is allowed is good, adherence to something that is banned is evil. I see quite a few Catholics committed to abortion, euthanasia, contraception, female ordination but that does not simply make them Catholics with an opinion.

I totally get what you’re saying.

I just gave my opinion as I assume the poll was not a lure/bait/trap and that the OP actually wants honest answers. And since we are really not allowed to discuss some things on the forum, I will leave it at that.

Now… back to the original question. If it were flipped around and I was told that I would have to take communion in the hand, then I would deal with it.

 

[bmadamsberry]

I would be angry if the Extraordinary Form became the only form, and yet people (in disobedience) continued to celebrate the Ordinary Form. I would be just as upset if people continued to celebrate the Extraordinary Form if the Ordinary Form became the only form.

It’s not a matter of preference. You can totally and completely support one form of the Mass over the other, as long as you always submit to the Church! So if the Church says they are both valid, then they are both valid. If the Church says you can do one form but not the other, then it is perfectly fine to fight for bringing back the other form… as long as you submit to the Church. One can submit and still disagree.

 

[Newbie2]

The poll question begs the question, “IF the church mandated…would all priests/parishes go along with the mandate?”

 

[bmadamsberry]

The poll question begs the question, “IF the church mandated…would all priests/parishes go along with the mandate?”

It’s a good question. It could easily become ‘just another liturgical abuse’ (funny how that sounds when it comes to receiving on the tongue), which (refering to liturgical abuses) bishops have so lovingly allowed to continue.

 

[promethius]

First of all the EF is NOT the Mass of all Ages, it is simply a form of the Mass. Any Mass independently of the form is the Mass of all Ages. I would stop using propaganda slogans when dealing with Church matters.

Thank you! The EF was not the Mass of all ages. It wasn’t even the FIRST form of the mass. It is not the Mass to end all masses, is not the last Mass, and will be followed by many forms of the Mass. It is not more valid than the other forms of the Mass used by the eastern rites.

It is, as you have wonderfully pointed out, dangerous to elevate the particular form of a particular rite of the Mass so highly. I almost wish that they WOULD outright ban the EF until people stop doing things like calling it the Mass of the Ages, because the attitude that goes with those types of sayings is dangerous to the faith.

 

[TrueLight]

I would be angry if the Extraordinary Form became the only form, and yet people (in disobedience) continued to celebrate the Ordinary Form. I would be just as upset if people continued to celebrate the Extraordinary Form if the Ordinary Form became the only form.

It’s not a matter of preference. You can totally and completely support one form of the Mass over the other, as long as you always submit to the Church! So if the Church says they are both valid, then they are both valid. If the Church says you can do one form but not the other, then it is perfectly fine to fight for bringing back the other form… as long as you submit to the Church. One can submit and still disagree.

How would you fight for it, without celebrating it?

 

[bmadamsberry]

How would you fight for it, without celebrating it?

The same way that some people fight for getting rid of priestly celibacy (the-Father Ratzinger sent a letter, for example. He has since changed his theological opinion). One could send letters to the Vatican, requesting it. One could stage protests, etc. But when one moves into direct disobedience (i.e. trying to celebrate it), then one moves into a whole different level. There is a difference between disagreement and disobedience.

 

[Cristiano]

… I almost wish that they WOULD outright ban the EF until people stop doing things like calling it the Mass of the Ages, because the attitude that goes with those types of sayings is dangerous to the faith.

If any form of the Mass should be banned because people decide to do or to say stupid things then the OF would be at great risk too. Please keep the two things separate, thanks.

 

[promethius]

If any form of the Mass should be banned because people decide to do or to say stupid things then the OF would be at great risk too. Please keep the two things separate, thanks.

I agree. Anyone who thinks the OF is the “Mass of Ages” is in just as dire a need of catechesis as those who think that the Tridentine Mass is the end all be all of Catholic worship.

The problem is that I don’t hear nearly as many OFers going around talking about how they would directly disobey or become sedevacantist if the EF were restored or if the OF were changed to the NOF (New Ordinary Form?). I would much rather someone make a mistake like thinking they only need to bow in front of the tabernacle than that someone should abandont the true Eucharist altogether because they were too tied up in the wrapping paper it was given to them in.

 

[Cider]

I hear so much back and fort about this argument and just curious to see if people would actually leave for another church or stay if/when Rome mandates communion on the toungue kneeling. Please give response for your answer.

What a bizarre question, considering that it is the universal norm of the Church. I already receive kneeling on the tongue from the priest or deacon only, so I can’t vote in the poll.

 

[bmadamsberry]

I agree. Anyone who thinks the OF is the “Mass of Ages” is in just as dire a need of catechesis as those who think that the Tridentine Mass is the end all be all of Catholic worship.

The problem is that I don’t hear nearly as many OFers going around talking about how they would directly disobey or become sedevacantist if the EF were restored or if the OF were changed to the NOF (New Ordinary Form?). I would much rather someone make a mistake like thinking they only need to bow in front of the tabernacle than that someone should abandont the true Eucharist altogether because they were too tied up in the wrapping paper it was given to them in.

There are Ordinary Form people who say this (National Catholic Reporter is one such group)

 

[Cider]

This seems silly. For many of us kneeling is both painful and difficult. Probably few would leave, but more likely many, especially the older and infirm , would receive much less frequently like in the "good old days " before the entire congregation lined up like they do now. (On a side note, try to spell tongue correctly.)

Are you implying that there is not already an exception for the disabled? I can assure you that my parish where receiving kneeling at the altar rail on the tongue from the priest or deacon is the norm that there are already established exceptions for those that are unable to kneel.

 

[TrueLight]

The same way that some people fight for getting rid of priestly celibacy (the-Father Ratzinger sent a letter, for example. He has since changed his theological opinion). One could send letters to the Vatican, requesting it. One could stage protests, etc. But when one moves into direct disobedience (i.e. trying to celebrate it), then one moves into a whole different level. There is a difference between disagreement and disobedience.

Well said!

 

[PerfectTiming]

Would I leave? Of course not. Personally I never receive Communion on the tongue, mostly because I have weird personal space issues, but I’m not opposed to it. If someone would leave the Church over such a reason, I would tend to think they were looking to leave anyway and were just using it as an excuse.

Though I understand that people are entitled to their personal preference, I find it frustrating when there are those who regard the matter other than their own preference to be abhorrent and treat it as some grave sacrilege. The Church mandates that both are to be allowed and as Catholics we should (and must) accept that, regardless of our own preference. Anything less that such obedience is (in my opinion) tantamount to heresy: I realise this is a bit strong but disobedience is disobedience, no matter the subject.

 

[FromTheAshes777]

i’m still trying to figure out why communion on the tongue kneeling still isn’t the norm for the Latin Rite…why on Earth was it ever changed?

 

[ProVobis]

Several councils (Saragozza, Rouen, Constantinople, and Trent) and Pope St Sixtus I have either condemned or denounced the practice of touching the sacrament with laity hands. The Vatican has now left the matter to the bishops to determine whether to allow it for their countries. The bishops (and pastors) may simply remove the permission without the Vatican having to act.