Chris Burniske Net Worth, 12v Cummins Intake Horn Worth It, Mikoyan Gurevich Mig 29, Articles OTHER

But whatever the case, it is the Pope who decides to authorize it for countries, and it is indisputable that he did so. [5] In Jerusalem, we have the mystagogical catecheses of Cyril of Jerusalem (or perhaps of his successor, John). Particularly in regard to this way of receiving communion, experience suggests certain matters requiring careful attention. However, while this text is undoubtedly ancient evidence of the existence of Communion in the hand, it is, like many patristic texts, fraught with interpretative conundrums. For example, there is ample evidence that the exchange of peace between the people was practiced well into the Middle Ages in several European countries. Instead, this option must increase in them a consciousness of the dignity of the members of Christs Mystical Body, into which they are incorporated by baptism and by the grace of the Eucharist. Scotland, 7 July 1977 Required fields are marked *. O Solomon, the thing which the Lord of your father 6. Finally, the fact that the Communion Procession is a profoundly religious action tells us something about the way in which we should participate in this procession. Dear Patrick, To fit our bodies for a glorious resurrection. We pray that our common baptism and the action of the Holy Spirit in this Eucharist will draw us closer to one another and begin to dispel the sad divisions which separate us. http://www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2014/03/truth-about-communion-in-hand-while.html#.Wpa2wdIUnGg. Therefore I stand by what I wrote in the original: In this context I think it is fair to say that the present practice of Communion in the hand is not a simple restoration of a historical custom but rather introduced a new practice in new circumstances which, while it has some historical justification, is essentially motivated by current pastoral concerns in some parts of the world.. But as time passed it became the practice to receive Communion directly on the tongue in order to assure that the Host was received reverently. This is the reason why you say after him: Amen.[21]. It is advisable, therefore, that the rite be introduced gradually and in the beginning within small, better-prepared groups and in favorable settings. There is a twofold purpose here: that none will find in the new rite anything disturbing to personal devotion toward the Eucharist; that this sacrament, the source and cause of unity by its very nature, will not become an occasion of discord between members of the faithful. Some scholars claim that this part of the Mystical Catechesis is not originally from St. Cyril but a later interpolation into the text. The General Instruction of the Roman Missal takes this hymn very seriously, mandating that it should begin at the Communion of the priest and extend until the last person has received Communion. divine life. The showing of tooth and claw by some traditional-leaning Catholics is a scandal that discourages neighbors, and puts a very ugly face on the Body for others to view. For you hear the words, the Body of Christ and respond Amen. Be then a member of the Body of Christ that your Amen may be true (St. Augustine, Sermon 272: PL 38, 1247). On the part of both the minister and the recipient, whenever the host is placed in the hand of a communicant there must be careful concern and caution, especially about particles that might fall from the hosts. Jesus wants to use our hands, which have now become His hands, to help those in need. The usage of communion in the hand must be accompanied by relevant instruction or catechesis on Catholic teaching regarding Christs real and permanent presence under the eucharistic elements and the proper reverence toward this sacrament. This catechesis must succeed in excluding any suggestion that in the mind of the Church there is a lessening of faith in the eucharistic presence and in excluding as well any danger or hint of danger of profaning the Eucharist. But "the sign of communion is more complete when given under both kinds, since in that form the sign of the Eucharistic meal appears more clearly." This is the usual form of receiving communion in the Eastern rites. But such as, instead of their hands, make vessels of gold or other materials for the reception of the divine gift, and by these receive the immaculate communion, we by no means allow to come, as preferring inanimate and inferior matter to the image of God.[24]. Wherefore, if any one wishes to be a participator of the immaculate Body in the time of the Synaxis, and to offer himself for the communion, let him draw near, arranging his hands in the form of a cross, and so let him receive the communion of grace. In this he shows a great fear, and since the hand that is stretched out holds a higher rank, it is the one that is extended for receiving the body of the King, and the other hand bears and brings its sister hand, while not thinking that it is playing the role of a servant, as it is equal with it in honour, on account of the bread of the King, which is also borne by it. This is in no way meant to refer to those who, receiving the Lord Jesus in the hand, do so with profound reverence and devotion, in those countries where this practice has been authorized.. The list obviously is not complete, for this article says that Germany and France both received permission from the Holy See on the same day in 1969: He can freely share with the faithful his reasons for preferring to adhere to the traditional practice and encourage the faithful to continue doing so. I mean WHAT SPECIFIC REASONS were given for requesting it in the first place? It is a matter of particular seriousness that in places where the new practice is lawfully permitted every one of the faithful have the option of receiving communion on the tongue and even when other persons are receiving communion in the hand. I am a daily witness at the Basilique du Sacr-Cur de Montmartre (Paris).. The faithful must be taught that Jesus Christ is Lord and Savior and that therefore the worship of latria or adoration belonging to God is owed to Christ present in this sacrament. When the priest gives it he says: The body of Christ. He teaches you by this word not to look at that which is visible, but to picture in your mind the nature of this oblation, which, by the coming of the Holy Spirit, is the body of Christ. Another will say the opposite; he says, On the contrary, if the wound of sin and the attack of the disease is in fact so great that such medicines need to be postponed, one ought to be removed from the altar by the authority of the bishop in order to do penance, and one ought to be reconciled by the same authority. For this reason, since the question of Communion in the hand is not a question of faith as such, and it has been approved by the legitimate authority, I do not believe that a priest can invoke conscience as a motive for refusing to apply a legitimate law. The option offered to the faithful of receiving the Eucharistic bread in their hand and putting it into their own mouth must not turn out to be the occasion for regarding it as ordinary bread or as just another religious article. In defending his push to give Communion to grave sinners, McElroy reiterated his belief that conscience has the "privileged place" over doctrine in decision-making and suggested that it can . [15] See the council of Auxerre, canon 36 (it directs women not to receive on their bare hands, but with their hand covered by a cloth). However, since it is a permission, it does not generate an absolute right, and the pastors can rescind the permission, either generally or in particular circumstances if objective motives exist for doing so. Zambia, 11 March 1974 Does anyone have an explanation for why France, Germany, and the Low Countries were not quickly regularized once the opportunity was available? I think youre right that, without an explicitly limiting clause, there is no canonically binding restriction to those countries, and that the subsequent granting of dispensation ultimately belied such restriction. Communion in the hand is allowed in the United States by decision of the American Bishops. The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? What some call discipleship, others evangelizationnew or whatever, or some speak of discernment and application of spiritual gifts. Thanks for this, Dennis. Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS) TOP Leo P. McCauley FotC 64 (Catholic University of America Press: Washington, DC, 2000 [1970]). The fire of mercy has become for us a living sacrifice If Your Hand/Hands are Impeded . Finally, ensuring the application of liturgical law is above all the responsibility of the bishop and only indirectly the religious superior. To be honest, I dont really belong to either camp on this, and like you, I think the polarization on this issue is doing more harm than good. Because, he says, one should choose the days on which one lives with more purity and self-control in order to approach so great a sacrament worthily. awr. I do make the point that reverence, while important, is not the only or most important aspect of Communion. [5] John Climacus, Ladder of Divine Ascent 28. In the early Church, the faithful stood when receiving into their hands the consecrated particle can hardly be questioned. St. Dionysius of Alexandria [d. 265], writing to one of the popes of his time, speaks emphatically of one who has stood by the table and has extended his hand to receive the Holy Food (Eusebius [263-339], Hist. A: The answer to this question is somewhat complex. The way you put it, it doesnt sound obsessive-compulsive but salutary. This formula should not be altered, as it is a proclamation which calls for a response of faith on the part of the one who receives. 3. Paul W. Harkins ACW 31 (Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 1963). The Council of Saragossa (380): Excommunicated anyone who dared continue . Archbishop Anthony Fisher, OP, of Sydney published an excellent paper on the topic of conscience and authority which can be found at:https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=7833or, in a slightly briefer form athttps://zenit.org/articles/bishop-fisher-on-conscience-and-authority/. (I dont direct this at you, I mean it to everyone on all sides.). On the other hand, this mode of communion is not anywhere associated with lay involvement or accessibility, nor is it thought to de-emphasize the role of the priest. Because those vessels are made so for our sakes. Other way round, it was in the hand and changed to the tongue circa 900 in the west.