Argument over the use of Latin
#31
Whenever I come across the following bible passage, I wonder if Jesus was making a prophecy about the current Eucharistic practice.

Jesus Predicts His Death a Second Time

"While everyone was marveling at all that Jesus did, he said to his disciples, 44 “Listen carefully to what I am about to tell you: The Son of Man is going to be delivered into the hands of men.” 45 But they did not understand what this meant. It was hidden from them, so that they did not grasp it, and they were afraid to ask him about it." (Lk 9:44-45)

It is kind of uncanny, isn't it?
Reply
#32
(06-12-2017, 04:07 PM)JosefSilouan Wrote: Whenever I come across the following bible passage, I wonder if Jesus was making a prophecy about the current Eucharistic practice.

Jesus Predicts His Death a Second Time

"While everyone was marveling at all that Jesus did, he said to his disciples, 44 “Listen carefully to what I am about to tell you: The Son of Man is going to be delivered into the hands of men.” 45 But they did not understand what this meant. It was hidden from them, so that they did not grasp it, and they were afraid to ask him about it." (Lk 9:44-45)

It is kind of uncanny, isn't it?

Probably not, since the early Church distributed Holy Communion in the palm of the hand.
Reply
#33
Even though the early Church in some places distributed in the hand, that does not mean it is the same thing as done today. Today Communion is received with irreverence, inattention, and with an overwhelming sense of the casual. The one Church with ancient roots that never stopped CITH is the Assyrian Church of the East. However, people don't just saunter up, stick out a paw, and cavalierly eat the species. The faithful first wave their hands through the smoke of incense to purify them, and then do not lift the Eucharistic species from their hand, but instead they bring their mouth to their hands, consuming directly off the hand, careful to make sure every particle is consumed. This is a world away from the average NO parish.

Even though CITH is not intrinsically sacrilegious, it has the effect of lessening reverence for the Eucharist. It would have the same effect if the Eastern Orthodox began adopting it. It's because the various Rites developed signs of respect to inculcate in the faithful the Real Presence and the surpassing holiness of the Eucharist. When those signs are taken away, it is natural for people to begin to think differently about the Eucharist. The Roman Rite adopted kneeling and Communion on the tongue to underscore its beliefs; adopting standing and CITH suggests something has changed, no?
Reply
#34
(06-12-2017, 08:20 PM)aquinas138 Wrote: Today Communion is received with irreverence, inattention, and with an overwhelming sense of the casual.

This, in my mind, is the crux of the problem with CITH; it leads to a gradual lessening of reverence.
Reply
#35
(06-12-2017, 08:43 PM)Jeeter Wrote:
(06-12-2017, 08:20 PM)aquinas138 Wrote: Today Communion is received with irreverence, inattention, and with an overwhelming sense of the casual.

This, in my mind, is the crux of the problem with CITH; it leads to a gradual lessening of reverence.
It also increases the odds of someone stealing a Host for sacrilegious purposes.  :(
Reply
#36
(06-12-2017, 02:58 PM)LaudeturIesus Wrote:
(06-12-2017, 09:42 AM)Dominicus Wrote:
(06-11-2017, 01:09 PM)birdy_b_sweet Wrote: I have never attended and Novus Ordo mass that even compares. However it is still the sacrifice of  Jesus so I will still receive communion kneeling down on the toungue by the priest as was always the way.

Not to be nitpicky but that wasn't always the way. People used to receive standing and in the hand in the Latin church, people still receive standing and by intinction in orthodox and eastern Catholic churches. Of course I still personally believe kneeling and on the tongue to be superior to the common NO practice.

Holy Communion was received in the palm of the hand in the early Church, but the distribution of Holy Communion in the hand became more restricted from the time of the Church Fathers in favor of distributing Holy Communion on the tongue. As it says on the Vatican's website: "The motivation for this practice is two-fold: a) first, to avoid, as much as possible, the dropping of Eucharistic particles; b) second, to increase among the faithful devotion to the Real Presence of Christ in the Sacrament of the Eucharist." It became the norm in the Latin Church to receive Communion kneeling as well.

To receive the Eucharist in Eastern churches I believe the communicant must stand in a line, arms crossed and wait for the priest to use that spoon-like instrument to dispense a Blood soaked leavened Host into the mouth of the communicant. In the Western Church, however, kneeling has been the prevailing sign of adoration and humility for centuries.

Oh I agree with you but I thinks its rather destructive when people wrongly say that that's "how it's always been". While it is of course more inherently reverent than receiving it in the hand as the NO allows, that does not nullify the fact that it took centuries for the change to take place.

The Eastern practice you refer to is called " intinction".
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)