Priest says we can't kneel down
#31
(06-17-2013, 10:03 AM)Felix E Wrote: No the Catholic Church doesn't approve of it. It never has. Some documents issued seem to approve of it - but that is about it. Get this, the indult specifies that it must be done reverently (forget the exact wording). And CITH can never be done reverently. It almost always involves objective sacrilege. That to me sounds like the Holy Ghost protecting the Church as if to say "When you all look back on this you'll see that despite all that was happening I was still in charge".

An indult is an approval. And this indult happens to be almost universal. Furthermore, all the Popes since it has been approved, have allowed the option in their Masses, not to mention personally have dispensed communion in said manner. In fact, Benedict XVI said he wasn't at all opposed to CITH. If that isn't approval, then I don't know what is.

As for sacrilege, you can't just restate your conclusion. You have to prove things. I'll help. You have to prove that the hands of lay people cannot ever touch the Eucharist in normal circumstances, and that furthermore the Church could not approve such a thing either. And you must explain how the hand of a human touching the Sacrament is sacrilegous, but the tongue is not.

(06-17-2013, 10:03 AM)Felix E Wrote: You're making the same mistake that someone on CAF made with me: not knowing the difference between objective and subjective sacrilege. I am not saying people receiving CITH are in mortal sin or commit mortal sins - that can only be known to God who knows if they are receiving with due care and reverence. But objectively speaking it can be called sacrilege.

I'm not mixing anything up. I am saying it is not intrinsically (objectively) sacrilegous.

(06-17-2013, 10:03 AM)Felix E Wrote:
Quote:That word [sacrilege] is used too loosely in regard to CITH, and it does great damage to people's faith.
How? How so more than CITH?

It turns touching the Lord with the hand into an evil act in itself, even if the utmost reverence, care, and solemnity were taking place. It creates a distorted sense of the situation. We are wholly unworthy, but through our created nature in the image of God, and our redemption as Christ's adopted sons, we could touch the sacrament. It turns shoulds into musts. And it turns the Catholic Church into an unreliable and dangerous Church. Not a here and there problem, but a universal from the top problem. History, teaching, and current Church legislation, don't agree with that.

(06-17-2013, 10:03 AM)Felix E Wrote:
Quote:The tongue is a much more inferior member of the body to touch the Lord with than the hand.
Scrip, this is liberal kool-aid. There is no theological or philosophical proof or standard of what body part is inferior or superior. The liberals say this all the time and it's a red herring and doesn't even make sense.

Well, there are a few stories of people being healed by touching the Lord with their hand. I guess it depends if you brushed your teeth before Mass. Even if you want to call it kool-aid, it points out that stating the opposite is unproven also (i.e., the tongue is superior to the hand). He did say, "Take and eat."

(06-17-2013, 10:03 AM)Felix E Wrote: If people use the word worthy then yes I agree. But the better word would be qualified or something similar. Priests and deacons are qualified to touch Our Lord's Body for the purpose of giving Communion. And even then, they will only take Him between two fingers - and they will go through a big ritual to cleanse their finger tips before and afterwards. They're given a mandate by the Church on behalf of God. It would be like some ancient Jew going into the temple and walking into the Holy of Holies and saying "well nobody is worthy to go here so thus we're all equal and let's all go in here!"

I don't disagree, but the new covenant is vastly more accessible than the ancient Holy of Holies. You couldn't look upon God without dying. Now we look, we eat, we taste, we touch, etc. There's a difference between mystery and being inaccessible except to the few. I'm not arguing against safeguards and hierarchy, but against the propsition that CITH is intrisically sacrilegous.

(06-17-2013, 10:03 AM)Felix E Wrote: But he doesn't. Watch the video of the CITH experiment and tell me if there is any occasion where CITH can be done without sacrilege.

Now I must ask you to define sacrilege.

(06-17-2013, 10:03 AM)Felix E Wrote: No, you pointed out something untrue: you said a Priest receives Communion in the hand.  And consider that in that video someone is taking pains to be careful - your average joe Catholic strolls up with unwashed hands, gets given Our Lord by a 'minister' who holds Our Lord with a few fingers and the Host is pushed onto the hand and then with ANOTHER hand someone will carelessly take the Host and place it in his own mouth!

Ah, I thought we were talking objectives not subjectives.

(06-17-2013, 10:03 AM)Felix E Wrote: More liberal kool-aid! Our forebearers did not receive CITH - I have done a lot of studying on this, and the only conclusion anyone can make is that if it did ever happen (which it did, very rarely it seems) then it was not done in the same way as it is done today with careless impiety. Not only that, but even if it were true that it was a widespread practice in the early Church period - so what? Quite obviously we woke up and realized something serious.

Well, it is relevant to your argument. That's why  mentioned it. CITH in the early church, though not universal, was most certainly a fact. There's not point in denying that. The Church doesn't eventually forbid things that aren't happening.
Reply
#32
Blessed John Paul II, writing in his last Encyclical, Ecclesia de Eucharistia ("The Church comes from the Eucharist"), n. 61

“By giving the Eucharist the prominence it deserves, and by being careful not to diminish any of its dimensions or demands, we show that we are truly conscious of the greatness of this gift. We are urged to do so by an uninterrupted tradition, ...which from the first centuries on has found the Christian community ever vigilant in guarding this ‘treasure.’ Inspired by love, the Church is anxious to hand on to future generations of Christians, without loss, her faith and teaching with regard to the mystery of the Eucharist. There can be no danger of excess in our care for this mystery, for ‘in this sacrament is recapitulated the whole mystery of our salvation.”

Blessed John Paul II, Dominicae Cenae, Feb 24, 1980

“In some countries the practice of receiving communion in the hand has bee introduced... However, cases of deplorable lack of respect toward the Eucharistic species have been reported, cases which are imputable not only to the individuals guilty of such behavior, but also to the pastors of the Church who have not been vigilant enough regarding the attitude of the faithful towards the Eucharist.”


Dietrich von Hildebrand, The Devastated Vineyand, p 67-68, 1973

“Unfortunately, in many places Communion is distributed in the hand. To what extent is this supposed to be a renewal and a deepening of the reception of Holy Communion? Is the trembling reverence with which we receive this incomprehensible gift perhaps increased by receiving it in our unconscentrated hands, rather than from the consecrated hands of the priest? It is not difficult to see that the danger of parts of the consecrated Host falling to the ground is incomparably increased, and the danger of desecrating it or indeed of horrible blasphemy is very great. And what in the world is to be gained from all this?”


St. Augustine, Enarrationes in Psalmos 98, 9

“No one eats that flesh without first adoring it; we should sin were we not to adore it.”
Inaestimabile Donum, 11

“The Church has always required from the faithful respect and reverence for the Eucharist at the moment of receiving it.”


Fr. Anthony Cekada, Work of Human Hands, 2010

“Like it or not, therefore, the gesture of communion in the hand now conveys just one idea: I repudiate the dogma of transubstantiation.”


Rev. Anthony Cekada, Work of Human Hands, 2010

“Communion in the hand is a built-in sacrilege that destroys the faith - and it has worked its evil everywhere.”
Prophet of The People: A Biography of Padre Pio, Dorothy M. Gaudiose (Page 202)

“Then he uncovered the chalice, but before he offered the unconsecrated wafer on the paten, he ran his fingers around the Host to make sure there were no loose particles.”


From 7 Secrets of the Eucharist by Vinny Flynn

“In 1916, as a year of preparation for Our Lady's appearances at Fatima, the Angel of Peace appeared three times to Lucia, Jacinta, and Francisco.

The most dramatic scene is the third visit, when the angel comes with the Eucharist. Suspending the Host and the chalice in the air, he throws himself prostrate on the ground and has the children repeat the following prayer three times:

‘Most Holy Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, I offer You the most precious Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus Christ, present in all the tabernacles of the world, in reparation for the outrages, sacrileges, and indifference with which He Himself is offended. And, through the infinite merits of His most Sacred Heart and the Immaculate Heart of Mary, I beg of You the conversion of poor sinners.’

An angel prostrates himself on the ground! We stand in line with our minds filled with distractions, walk up and receive Communion, return to our pews, and go back to "business as usual," thinking about the football game, or the bills we have to pay, or what we're going to do after Mass.

But an angel, a pure spirit, who lives constantly in the intimate presence of God, prostrates himself before the Eucharist in adoration!

That's a pretty strong message.”


Dietrich Von Hildebrand in Communion in the Hand Should be Rejected.

“There are really no serious arguments for communion in the hand. But there are the most gravely serious kinds of arguments against it.”


Pope Benedict XVI (Joseph, Cardinal Ratzinger) ‘The Spirit of the Liturgy’ (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2000)

“It may well be that kneeling is alien to modern culture - insofar as it is a culture, for this culture has turned away from the faith and no longer knows the One before whom kneeling is the right, indeed the intrinsically necessary gesture. The man who learns to believe learns also to kneel, and a faith or a liturgy no longer familiar with kneeling would be sick at the core. Where it has been lost, kneeling must be rediscovered, so that, in our prayer, we remain in fellowship with the apostles and martyrs, in fellowship with the whole cosmos, indeed in union with Jesus Christ Himself.”


Cardinal Llovera, Prefect for the Vatican’s Congregation for Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments - July, 2011

“It is the sign of adoration that needs to be recovered. I think the entire Church needs to receive Communion while kneeling.”


Cardinal Llovera, Prefect for the Vatican’s Congregation for Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments, 2008

“What does it mean to receive Communion in the mouth? What does it mean to kneel before the Most Holy Sacrament? What does it mean to kneel during the Consecration at Mass? It means adoration, it means recognizing the Real Presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist; it means respect and an attitude of faith of a man who prostrates before God because he knows that everything comes from Him… That is why it is not the same to place the host in the hand, and to receive Communion in any fashion; it is not the same to receive Communion kneeling or standing up, because all of these signs indicate a profound meaning.”


Father Andrew Wise and Father John Speekman - parish priests in Australia who introduced a worldwide petition to ban communion-in-the-hand (See "Articles" on this site - Australian Priests Initiate Worldwide Petition.)

“During the course of our parish ministry we have become increasingly uneasy with the practice of Communion on the hand. We have come to the conclusion that what started out as a seemingly good idea has actually been found to encourage a certain carelessness, and not only among the laity.”

“It has also been our experience that because of the inherently 'routine' action of placing something in someone's hand this carelessness is, in fact, very 'catechesis resistant”

“It is our hope that this blog will stimulate discussion and awareness of what many in the Church see as a problem needing urgent reform.”

David Martin, Our Lady’s Workers of Southern California, April, 2012

“Communion in the hand is a major spike through which the Lord today is being re-crucified in His Church.”


Fr. Benedict Groeschel, C.F.R., EWTN Talk

“Also, I want to state very clearly that the experiment of giving communion in the hand has been a disaster.”


Most Rev. Juan Rodolfo Laise, Bishop Emeritus of San Luis, Argentina - Communion in the Hand: Documents & History (English translation - 2011)

“All that has been elaborated on until now permits us to realize that the history of the reintroduction of communion in the hand is nothing other than the triumph of an act of disobedience. The consideration of the details of this history makes evident to us the gravity of this disobedience: in fact, it is very serious above all because of the very matter which it concerns; very serious because it implies the open resistance to a clear, explicit and solidly founded directive of the pope; most serious by its universal extension; most serious because those who did not obey were not only the faithful or priests, but in many cases bishops and entire Episcopal conferences; most serious, because not only did they remain unpunished but they obtained a resounding success; most serious, in short, because it has succeeded in having the state of disobedience remain hidden, making it such that one might believe, on the contrary, that they were adopting a proposal that came from Rome.”

Click here to order..."Communion in the Hand: Documents & History" - Laise, Most Rev. Juan Rodolfo [bishop emeritus of San Luis, Argentina]


Cardinal Llovera, Prefect for the Vatican's Congregation for Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments, July 22, 2009

“It is the mission of the Congregation for Divine Worship and Sacraments to work to promote Pope Benedict's emphasis on the traditional practices of liturgy, such as reception of Communion on the tongue while kneeling.”


Cardinal Caffarra, Archbishop of Bologna Italy, April 27, 2009

“Many cases of profanation of the Eucharist have occurred, profiting by the possibility to receive the consecrated Bread on one’s palm of the hand... Considering the frequency in which cases of irreverent behavior in the act of receiving the Eucharist have been reported, we dispose that starting from today in the Metropolitan Church of St. Peter, in the Basilica of St. Petronius and in the Shrine of the Holy Virgin of St. Luke in Bologna the faithful are to receive the consecrated Bread only from the hands of the Minister directly on the tongue.”


Michael Voris, RealCatholicTV, October, 2010

“... encourage the faithful to receive Holy Communion on the tongue. That's the way the Holy Father distributes communion. Holy Communion on the tongue is the way it was always done. Holy Communion in the hand is not, is not, a Vatican II mandate by any stretch.”


Albert Malcolm Cardinal Ranjith, November, 2007

“I mention, for example, a change not proposed by the Council Fathers or by the Sacrosanctum Concilium, Holy Communion received in the hand. This has contributed to some extent to a weakening of faith in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist. This, and the removal of altar rails and kneelers in church and the introduction of practices which oblige the faithful to sit or stand at the elevation of the Sacred Host, weakens the genuine significance of the Eucharist and the Church’s profound sense of adoration for the Lord, the Only Son of God.”


Bishop Joseph A. Fiorenza, 2001

“It is the grave responsibility of the Church to direct and regulate the celebration of the Eucharist and to protect this most precious gift from abuse and faulty teaching.”


Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, 2000

“The Spirit of the Liturgy" (Ignatius Press) "There are groups, of no small influence, who are trying to talk us out of kneeling," wrote then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. "'It doesn't suit our culture', they say (which culture?) 'It's not right for a grown man to do this -- he should face God on his feet'.”

Cardinal Ratzinger continued: “The kneeling of Christians is not a form of inculturation into existing customs. It is quite the opposite, an expression of Christian culture, which transforms the existing culture through a new and deeper knowledge and experience of God.”

“Kneeling does not come from any culture -- it comes from the Bible and its knowledge of God . . . The Christian Liturgy is a cosmic Liturgy precisely because it bends the knee before the crucified and exalted Lord. Here is the center of authentic culture - the culture of truth. The humble gesture by which we fall at the feet of the Lord inserts us into the true path of life of the cosmos.”


Bishop Juan Rodolfo Laise, San Luis, Argentina, 1997

“Although the Church recognizes legitimate change, it nonetheless considers that 'the temerity and daring of those who introduce novel liturgical practices, or call for the revival of obsolete rites out of harmony with prevailing laws and rubrics, deserve severe reproof'. We must keep in mind that reversing the course of a development and returning to a previous phase, is not a development but rather a corruption.”

“Therefore, to say that 'Communion in the hand is not a novelty', that 'we only do it as the Apostles, as the first disciples did, and as the Christians did for almost one thousand years’ with the purpose of 'dispelling fears', is not a valid argument. It is not true that we will 'only' do it as the Apostles did. As we have just seen, the return to an ancient manner is not in itself a reason for tranquility. Even less so when that manner was first abandoned and finally forbidden, due to its imperfection.”


Bishop Juan Rodolfo Laise, San Luis, Argentina, 1997

“With Communion in the hand, a miracle would be required during each distribution of Communion to avoid some Particles from falling to the ground or remaining in the hand of the faithful…. Let us speak clearly: whoever receives Communion in the mouth not only follows exactly the tradition handed down but also the wish expressed by the last Popes and thus avoids placing himself in the occasion of committing a sin by negligently dropping a fragment of the Body of Christ.”


Father John Hardon, S.J., November, 1997

“Behind communion-in-the-hand – I wish to repeat and make as plain as I can – is a weakening, a conscious, a deliberate weakening of faith in the Real Presence.”


Michael Davies, A Privilege of the Ordained, 1990

“The introduction of Communion in the hand was invariably followed by the introduction of extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion. Unlike the practice of Communion in the hand, which was accepted in the Church for some centuries, the use of extraordinary ministers during the Mass has no historical precedent. Not a shred of evidence can be brought forward to prove that Holy Communion has ever been distributed during the liturgy by anyone but a bishop, priest of deacon.”

Pope John Paul II, Interview, 1980

“There is an apostolic letter on the existence of a special valid permission for this [Communion in the hand]. But I tell you that I am not in favor of this practice, nor do I recommend it." (responding to a reporter from Stimme des Glaubens magazine, during his visit to Fulda, Germany in November 1980.)”


Pope John Paul II, Dominicae Cenae, Feb 24, 1980

“To touch the sacred species and to distribute them with their own hands is a privilege of the ordained...”

“But one must not forget the primary office of priests, who have been consecrated by their ordination to represent Christ the Priest: for this reason their hands, like their words and their will, have become the direct instruments of Christ. Through this fact, that is, as ministers of the Holy Eucharist, they have a primary responsibility for the sacred species, because it is a total responsibility: they offer the bread and wine, they consecrate it, and then distribute the sacred species to the participants in the assembly who wish to receive them. Deacons can only bring to the altar the offerings of the faithful and, once they have been consecrated by the priest, distribute them. How eloquent therefore, even if not of ancient custom, is the rite of the anointing of the hands in our Latin ordination, as though precisely for these hands a special grace and power of the Holy Spirit is necessary!”

“…cases of a deplorable lack of respect towards the Eucharistic species have been reported, cases which are imputable not only to the individuals guilty of such behavior, but also to the pastors of the Church who have not been vigilant enough regarding the attitude of the faithful towards the Eucharist. It also happens, on occasion, that the free choice of those who prefer to continue the practice of receiving the Eucharist on the tongue is not taken into account in those places where Communion in the hand has been authorized.”

Bishop Bernard D. Stewart, Sandhurst, Australia 1950-1979

“Children are known to have fiddled with the Sacred Host placed into their hands at Holy Communion; adults have been seen to pass the Blessed Sacrament from one to the other in a queue. Rightly does the Sacred Congregation ask whether such people who act like this really believe in the Real Presence of Christ. One must pass over in appalled silence the unspeakable abominations of demonism when the Sacred Host is sacrilegiously carried off to the satanic rituals of black masses. Sacrileges have occurred in the past and will occur in the future. But today the Holy See testifies that they are numerous and widespread; it also says that Communion in the traditional manner [on the tongue] is a better safeguard against adulteration of doctrine and profanation.”

Cardinal Carberry, March, 1977

“At one time it would have been unthinkable for anyone without anointed hands to touch the Sacred Species. In this century there has been a steady diminution of outward signs of respect for sacred objects. When I was a boy there was a scale of values. It was understood that anyone could handle a ciborium or monstrance, but only the priest could touch the chalice because it was consecrated. Until recent times we priests kissed each sacred vestment as we put it on, we genuflected before and after touching the Sacred Host. The new rubrics abolished the kissing and reduced genuflections to a minimum. . . the loss of outward marks of respect lead the simple-minded to lose their sense of reverence. Some have begun to ignore the Blessed Sacrament. They do not genuflect to the Blessed Sacrament and do not kneel in adoration when they come into church.”
Letter of the "Consilium" to Bernard Cardinal Alfrink, Archbishop of Utrecht, Netherlands,

October 12, 1965

“The Holy Father [Pope Paul VI] … does not consider it opportune that the sacred Particle be distributed in the hand and later consumed in different manners by the faithful, and therefore, he vehemently exhorts [that] the Conference offer the opportune resolutions so that the traditional manner of communicating be restored throughout the world.”

Dietrich von Hildebrand, 1889-1977

“Is it believable that instead of applying the most scrupulous care to protect the most sacred consecrated host, which is truly the Body of Christ, the God-man, from all such possible abuses, there are those who wish to expose it to this possibility? Have we forgotten the existence of the devil who wanders about seeking whom he may devour'? Is his work in the world and in the Church not all too visible today? What entitles us to assume that abuses to the consecrated host will not take place?”

Pope Pius X11, Vicar of Rome, 1939-1958

“The desire to restore everything indiscriminately to its ancient condition is neither wise nor praiseworthy.”

The Council of Trent, 1545-1565

“The fact that only the priest gives Holy Communion with his consecrated hands is an Apostolic Tradition.”

St. Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) Summa Theologica, Volume III, Q. 82, Art. 3

“The dispensing of Christ’s Body belongs to the priest for three reasons. First, because He consecrates in the person of Christ. But as Christ consecrated His Body at the Supper, so also He gave It to others to be partaken of by them. Accordingly, as the consecration of Christ’s body belongs to the priest, so likewise does the dispensing belong to him. Secondly, because the priest is the appointed intermediary between God and the people, hence as it belongs to him to offer the people's gifts to God, so it belongs to him to deliver the consecrated gifts to the people. Thirdly, because out of reverence towards this sacrament, 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. Hence it is not lawful for anyone to touch it, except from necessity, for instance if it were to fall upon the ground, or else in some other case of urgency.”

The Council of Rouen (650)

“Do not put the Eucharist in the hands of any layman or laywoman but only in their mouths.”

Saint Leo 1, Pope (440-461)

“One receives in the mouth what one believes by faith.”

St. Basil, Letter 93 (330-379)

“It is not necessary to show that it does not constitute a grave fault for a person to communicate with his own hand in a time of persecution when there is no priest or deacon.”

St. Basil the Great (330-379)

“The right to receive Holy Communion in the hand is permitted only in times of persecution.”

St. Paul, 1 Corinthians 10.17

“The one bread makes us one body, though we are many in number, the same bread is shared by all.”

St. Paul, 1 Corinthians 11:27

“Therefore whoever eats this bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily, will be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord.”

St. Hippolytus, The Apostolic Tradition, 215 AD

“The Body of Christ is meant to be eaten by the faithful, not to be treated with irreverence.”

St. Sixtus I (circa 115)

“The sacred vessels are not to be handled by others than those consecrated to the Lord.”



http://communion-in-the-hand.org/quotations.html
Reply
#33
Now. let's list the quotes of Churchmen speaking on the positive aspects of CITH.
Reply
#34
I spoke in person with the priest today about not being able to receive communion while kneeling. I told him why we can't receive while kneeling?

The priest told me that the reason we can't receive while kneeling is that the bishops of the United States have stated that the norm for receiving Communion in the United States is standing. The priest told me that Holy Communion is not a private devotion, but rather something that we should do in uniformity. He also stated that standing is a sign of the resurrection, and thus we are acknowledging the resurrection of Our Lord.

I responded to the priest by stating that there were two documents, GIRM 160 and Redemptionis Sacramentum 90-91 that clearly state that although the norm is to stand up in the United States that does not exlude the possibility of receiving while kneeling. That for this reason individuals themselves have the right to receive while kneeling.

After I had told the priest about this, he simply restated what he had said in the top

Should I tell the bishop ???

It could just be that individual priest because another priest in my parish has let me kneel while receiving Holy Communion. So far it is only that priest that has not let me kneel.

Reply
#35
Yup, report him to the Bishop and tell your Bishop the conversation you had (and as an act of goodwill, let this Priest know that you are writing to the Bishop). Nobody can deny you Communion kneeling, especially for those made-up, modernist, bull***t reasons.
Reply
#36
(06-17-2013, 11:23 PM)ArturoOrtiz Wrote: I spoke in person with the priest today about not being able to receive communion while kneeling. I told him why we can't receive while kneeling?

The priest told me that the reason we can't receive while kneeling is that the bishops of the United States have stated that the norm for receiving Communion in the United States is standing. The priest told me that Holy Communion is not a private devotion, but rather something that we should do in uniformity. He also stated that standing is a sign of the resurrection, and thus we are acknowledging the resurrection of Our Lord.

I responded to the priest by stating that there were two documents, GIRM 160 and Redemptionis Sacramentum 90-91 that clearly state that although the norm is to stand up in the United States that does not exlude the possibility of receiving while kneeling. That for this reason individuals themselves have the right to receive while kneeling.

After I had told the priest about this, he simply restated what he had said in the top

Should I tell the bishop ???

It could just be that individual priest because another priest in my parish has let me kneel while receiving Holy Communion. So far it is only that priest that has not let me kneel.

I would provide the priest with the documents and after he has had time to go through them, ask to speak with him again.  Heck, I would even consider sending him the video of Cardinal Arinze that I posted above as some people are more likely to watch that then read the documents.  If that is not successful, I would definitely go the your bishop, and I would be upfront about doing so and polite about it with the priest. 
Reply
#37
I tried to show an excerpt of the two documents to the priest that I had on hand, but it seems like he wasn't interested in seeing them.

I will try sending the priest an email, but if that doesn't work then I guess the biship it is
Reply
#38
(06-18-2013, 12:54 AM)ArturoOrtiz Wrote: I tried to show an excerpt of the two documents to the priest that I had on hand, but it seems like he wasn't interested in seeing them.

I will try sending the priest an email, but if that doesn't work then I guess the biship it is

If you go that route, after what you have already done, I think you are entirely justified in going to the Bishop. 
Reply
#39
I'm just asking: How is it different when a traditional priest does now allow Holy Communion to those standing, or to women wearing pants? Doesn't the parish priest have the right to make his own guidelines at his church? OR does this only apply to diocesan priests who have a bishop over them?
Reply
#40
(06-18-2013, 10:28 AM)StrictCatholicGirl Wrote: I'm just asking: How is it different when a traditional priest does now allow Holy Communion to those standing, or to women wearing pants? Doesn't the parish priest have the right to make his own guidelines at his church? OR does this only apply to diocesan priests who have a bishop over them?

I think regarding kneeling, if it is according to the 1962 Missal, I think the customs and disciplines in place from 1962 are to be followed according to Summorum Pontificum.  On the other hand, the authoritative discipline of the Church for the 2002 Missal explicitly says communicants are not to be denied the sacrament for either kneeling or standing.  I think that's the difference there. 

I'm not sure what authority a priest has to deny communion to someone he deems to be dressed immodestly.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)