warnings of receiving holy communion in hand

do not make clear to the reader that the worlds bishops, when polled, voted overwhelmingly against Communion in the hand. (Values is a subjective term you wont find in pre-Vatican II theology manuals). Priests are falsely instructed that they must administer Communion in the hand, whether they like it or not, to anyone who requests it, thereby throwing many good priests into an agonizing crisis of conscience. In the Old Mass, Catholics receive communion by kneeling down and receive the Holy Eucharist in tongue. Shortly after Vatican II, due to the escalating abuses . Paul relates the communion to the sacrifice of Christ and then says to examine one's self in verse 28. The ecumenical spirit became the primary formative principle in the whole range of the new liturgical forms established since the Council. And once a fad like Extraordinary Ministers becomes widespread, and everybodys doing it simply because everybodys doing it, then who even pays attention to existing guidelines anyway? Earlier this week, Catholic commentator John-Henry Westen, co-founder and editor-in-chief of LifeSiteNews, detailed five reasons why Catholics should only receive Holy Communion on the tongue. It is well balance and not one sided. "Signpost" puzzle from Tatham's collection, Ubuntu won't accept my choice of password, Copy the n-largest files from a certain directory to the current one. But someone will say, "Yes, but they were apostles and we are not." Where Communion on the hand prevails, bishops could request an indult to continue this practice, and Rome would consider it. performance | 130 views, 3 likes, 2 loves, 36 comments, 1 shares, Facebook Watch Videos from Ginghamsburg Church: Worship is serious business. it. And in order not to continually play into the manipulating hands of the New Paganism of Modernism, then a complete, formal, unambiguous condemnation of Communion in the hand and Extraordinary Ministers is our leaders only true Catholic option. @jaredad7 Would you consider posting a question about this. While many will debate the international response to the disease, and argue over whether or not such reaction was ever justified, the fact is the COVID pandemic is incomparable to any recent outbreak of disease. The practice of receiving Holy Communion in the hand first began to spread in Catholic circles during the early 1960s, primarily in Holland. The risk of touching the tongue and passing the saliva on to others is obviously a danger, however, the chance of touching someone's hand is equally probable and one's hands have a greater exposure to germs. ]; b) second, to increase among the faithful devotion to the Real Presence of Christ in the Sacrament of the Eucharist., It then mandated that this method of distributing Holy Communion [on the tongue] must be retained and emphatically urged bishops, priests and laity to obey carefully the law which is still valid and which has again been confirmed by the majority of Catholic bishops.. Communion with the Flesh of the Risen Christ preserves, increases and renews the life of grace received in Baptism. Lay people started reading the Epistle, and the new responsorial psalms. But obliterating these without apology and without convincing argument, as has been the case over the last 30 years with the introduction of the New Mass, is not the mark of genuine Catholic renewal, but resembles the New Paganism warned of by Belloc, and its arrogant contempt for tradition. It was the indignation of large numbers of the Faithful which prompted Pope Paul VI to take some action. Their belief that the minister of Communion is no different in any fundamental from laymen. This movement supposedly plays up those things we have in common with other creeds, and hush-hushes those things that divide us; to celebrate our shared values. Communion in the hand is legitimate only where permitted, and it remains in the realm of a permission. As parish churches reopen and Communion becomes available, many bishops prefer, for the safety of parishioners and clergy alike, that the faithful accept Communion in the hand. He polled the bishops of the world on this issue, and they voted overwhelmingly to retain the traditional practice of receiving Holy Communion only on the tongue. But if the bishops seemed indifferent to this scandal, the laity were outraged. Undoubtedly, there will be parishes and ministers who will distribute Communion on the tongue regardless. Throughout the centuries, our fathers have told us about our Faith and about the Blessed Sacrament. Even the most ordinary parents are smart enough not to give their children the option to accept or reject parental commands. Thanks for this great effort you put through. Reception on the tongue is a reverent preference, but it is by no means a requirement. An illustration can be given by the story of the Canadian bishops response to, rightly reaffirmed the Churchs teaching against contraception. These meticulous rubrics were carved in stone and were not optional. It respects perhaps nothing, but least of all does it respect the spirit of Our fathers have told us.. you, and we are proclaiming good news to you, that you turn from these Prayers of the Faithful, and even greeted us over the microphone before Mass wishing us good morning, telling us what hymns well be singing and what Eucharistic Prayer Father fancies today. But the sense of the sacred has not been lost, it has been deliberately thrown away, run out of town on a rail, by the arrogant agents of the New Paganism of Modernism masquerading as Catholic reformers, who have introduced novel practices into the Church that demean the Eucharist, show contempt for tradition and for what our fathers taught us, and have led to a worldwide crisis of Faith of unprecedented proportions. So, then, neither the one The tragedy of it all is, if it is optional for the laity, in practice it is not optional for the clergy. They are as ordinary and partnparcel of the modern Church as missalettes and collection baskets. A true Catholic renewal would either leave these gestures of reverence intact, or enhance them. He said, We have used ambiguous phrases during the Council and we (the liberal theologians) know how we shall interpret them after., The main ambiguity which probably gave rise to todays proliferation of Extraordinary Ministers was the justification of their use if Mass would be (what was called) unduly prolonged. Or its a position that the proud and pompous in the parish lust after, thereby showing themselves incapable of recognizing a false and petty prestige. Out of reverence towards this sacrament [the Holy Eucharist], nothing touches it, but what is consecrated; hence the corporal and the chalice are consecrated, and likewise the priest's hands, for touching this sacrament. And though these practices have been introduced under the guise of being an authentic liturgical development mandated by Vatican II, the truth is Communion in the hand is not an authentic liturgical development, was not mandated by the Second Vatican Council, and shows complete defiance and contempt for centuries of Catholic teaching and practice before us. OF THE SUPREME PONTIFF. Profaning Our Eucharistic Lord Piece by Piece | liturgy guy Statement - The antichrist has no soul and Warning about the Book of Taking all this into consideration, Memoriale Domini declared: From the time of the Fathers of the Church Holy Communion in the hand became more and more restricted in favor of distributing Holy Communion on the tongue. This liturgical law clarifies the Church's discipline regarding the reception of Holy Communion. In The Theology of Kneeling, an excerpt from his book The Spirit of the Liturgy (2000), Cardinal Ratzinger highlights this truth: the bodily gesture itself is the bearer of the spiritual meaning when someone tries to take worship back into the purely spiritual realm and refuses to give it embodied form, the act of worship evaporates. Later, as Pope Benedict XVI, in continuity with St. John Paul II, he gave Communion to the faithful on the tongue while they knelt. A few countries had already illicitly allowed Communion in the hand. When these are prevented from administering Holy Communion because of another pastoral ministry or because of ill health or advanced age. Why Communion on the Tongue is More Suitable Than in the Hand - NCR that day when I drink it new with you in my Fathers kingdom." As a result, the Pontifical Commission officially ruled that when Ordinary Ministers (bishops, priests) are present at the Eucharist, whether celebrating or not, and are in sufficient number and are not prevented from doing so by other ministries, the Extraordinary Ministers of the Eucharist are not allowed to distribute Communion either to themselves or to the Faithful.. It is found in the celebration of the Old Latin Tridentine Mass where profound reverence for the Blessed Sacrament is deeply ingrained into every moment of the Liturgy, and where Communion in the hand and Eucharistic Ministers are still looked upon in horror with Catholic eyes, and are clearly recognized as the out-of-place, sacrilegious, non-Catholic practices that they are. Third, because out of reverence for this Sacrament, nothing touches It but what is consecrated; hence the corporal and the chalice are consecrated, and likewise the priests hands for touching this Sacrament. After Vatican II, some ecumenically-minded priests in Holland started giving Communion in the hand, in a monkey-see, monkey-do imitation of Protestant practice. Guidelines for the Reception of Communion | USCCB Shortly after Vatican II, due to the escalating abuses in certain non-English speaking countries (Holland, Belgium, France and Germany), Pope Paul VI took a survey of the world's bishops to ascertain their opinions on the subject. LOS ANGELES, CA (Catholic Online) - Catholics want to know if it is allowed for their bishops and priests to require Communion be received only on in the hand instead of on the tongue. He polled the bishops of the world on this issue, and they voted overwhelmingly to. The Faithful are told that it is an optional practice, and if they dont like it, they can receive it on the tongue. The 16th Century Protestant revolutionaries (more politely but undeservedly called Protestant reformers) re-established Communion in the hand as a means of showing two things: The Protestants establishment of Communion in the hand was their way of showing their rejection of belief in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, rejection of the Sacramental Priesthood in short, to show their rejection of Catholicism altogether.

Mr Miyagi Edibles M&m, Articles W