SgCatholic Because it was done very quickly in the blink of an eye (he gave the Host with his left hand and the tongue of the recipient was already there to receive our Lord). It is clear that receiving by the hand, leaves itself open to abuse, since it shows the person who receives this way, can do whatever he likes with the Sacred Host. I can't guess the interpretation of the second guy receiving on the tongue. God Bless
I wear veils, chapel caps, and hats. I use a bobby pin to keep veils in place. My recommendation is to put one on at home while praying. Then you can get used to it and also see if it slips off easily. Someone commented on being worried others will think they are trying to be holier than others if wearing a veil. I would say that it is not your business to know or care what others think of you, and the sooner you worry ONLY what God thinks of you, the quicker you will advance in holiness.
I like this idea This is not something I worry about. It's just that being a convert only several years ago, it's not often that I see women wearing veils in church, except for the girls during First Holy Communion. Some Indian women tend to pull their saree shoulder pieces (or throws) up to cover their heads at mass. When I went to Japan, I was intrigued to see that nearly all the women covered their heads; with a chapel cap at the very least. That got me thinking and reading up a little about it. And I discovered that it used to be the norm before Vatican II.
It was the norm. Women covered their heads, not necessarily with a veil; one could wear a headscarf or a hat. I do care what God thinks of me but so far tbh I haven't felt that he's asked me to wear a veil. Our local parish still has a folk Mass feel about it, whether I like it or not (I don't) and I have never felt the Lord asking me to cover my head. I have a perfectly good headscarf if for some reason I need to. For the TLM I would wear a veil, no question. Personally, the way things are at, I would rather see the return of the communion rail and communion on the tongue - a return to reverence in the matter of the Eucharist, directly.
Even to this day, if I stop to pray near a statue of the Blessed Mother, or even while driving in the car, I remove my hat. Something my Dad drilled into me. Safe in the Refuge of the Immaculate Heart!
My veil has never fallen off. I don't fix it in any way. Have not tried it at an outdoor Mass, though.
I agree also, but I was thinking lately with all the women protesters out there how glad I am that I do cover my head. It is a contradiction to their screaming and demanding, and perhaps if us holy women take the initiative start treating the Eucharist and Mass with extreme reverence, both in our actions and our dress, perhaps we could get them to bring back the altar rails and kneeling while receiving on the tongue. Just a thought....we could start our own "movement" for Jesus and Mary's sake...
https://catholicdigestt.com/devil-says-receive-communion-hand/ This is what the Devil Says About Those Who Receive Communion in the Hand catholicdigestt November 11, 2017 Father Gabriele Amorth was the official exorcist of the Holy See for decades, until his death in September of this year. Fr. Amorth said in the year 2013 that he would have held some 160,000 exorcisms. And some of his exorcisms became known through the book “Confessions of Hell to the exorcist Fr. Gabriele Amorth”. And we want to share a conversation during an exorcism in 1975 that talks about communion in the hand. Fr. Gabriele Amorth – Tell only the truth in the Name of the Precious Blood, of the Holy Cross, of the Immaculate Conception … Demon (A) – We worked for a long time, down there (points down) until we got Communion in hand to be put into practice. Communion in the hand is very good for us in hell; Believe! Fr. GA – We command you in Name (…) to say only what Heaven commands you! It says only the truth, the whole truth. You have no right to lie. Get out of this body! Go! Demon – ELA (Virgin Mary) (points up) wants me to say … Fr. GA – Tell the truth, in Name (…). Demon – SHE wants me to say … that if SHE, the great LADY, still lived, would receive Communion in her mouth, and on her knees, and would bow down deeply (show how the Blessed Virgin would proceed). Fr. GA – In the Name of the Blessed Virgin … tell the truth! Demon – I have to say that you should not receive Communion in your hand. The Pope himself gives Communion in the mouth. It is not his will to give Communion in his hand. This comes from your Cardinals. Fr. GA- In Name (…) tell the truth! Demon – From them passed to the Bishops, and then the Bishops thought that it was a matter of obedience, that they had to obey the Cardinals. Hence, the idea passed to the Priests and also they thought that they had to submit because the obedience is written in capital letters. Fr. GA – Tell the truth. You do not have the right to lie in Name (…). Demon – One is not obliged to obey the bad ones. It is to the Pope, to JESUS CHRIST, and to the Blessed Virgin that we must obey. Communion in the hand is by no means dear to God.
I too wish they would bring back altar rails. I have problems kneeling. The altar rail allows me to easily kneel and raise myself without losing my balance. Not everyone is young and spry.
I have many friends who kneel to receive but like you it is the gettingbup that is difficult. I try to genuflect before receiving but can't do that too easily either. I have been receiving on the tongue for quite awhile. For some reason I just felt strange taking Our Lord into my hands. I always worried about tiny fragments of his sacred Body falling or getting lost. Some priests really don't like to do it but fortunately our priests don't seem to mind. Great blessing.
This is "right from the horse's mouth" and doesn't surprise me. Maria Simma said the holy souls told her the same thing. Maria said it is the worst thing to come from VII and offensive to our Lord. (Her book is called Get Us Out Of Here)
AED, I just asked this question on another thread and since you have posted something in relation to my question, I hope that you don't mind me asking it here. Was this, receiving communion in the hand, something that came out of Vatican II? I am not certain that it was. I think that ETWN states that it wasn't a direct result, https://www.ewtn.com/expert/answers/communion_in_hand.htm . Thank you in advance. UPDATE: SGCatholic answered my question on another thread and posted the following article which helps explain how receiving communion in the hand came about, https://www.romancatholicman.com/truth-communion-hand-standing/ This confirms what the ETWN link that I included states, that this practice did not come directly from Vatican II.
If that’s not enough to persuade one to receive on the tongue, I don’t know what would. It would also make anyone question the widespread use of EMHC outside the very restrictive guidelines laid down by Rome: http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/c..._redemptionis-sacramentum_en.html#Chapter VII 1. The Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion [154.] As has already been recalled, “the only minister who can confect the Sacrament of the Eucharist in persona Christi is a validly ordained Priest”.[254] Hence the name “minister of the Eucharist” belongs properly to the Priest alone. Moreover, also by reason of their sacred Ordination, the ordinary ministers of Holy Communion are the Bishop, the Priest and the Deacon,[255] to whom it belongs therefore to administer Holy Communion to the lay members of Christ’s faithful during the celebration of Mass. In this way their ministerial office in the Church is fully and accurately brought to light, and the sign value of the Sacrament is made complete. [155.] In addition to the ordinary ministers there is the formally instituted acolyte, who by virtue of his institution is an extraordinary minister of Holy Communion even outside the celebration of Mass. If, moreover, reasons of real necessity prompt it, another lay member of Christ’s faithful may also be delegated by the diocesan Bishop, in accordance with the norm of law,[256] for one occasion or for a specified time, and an appropriate formula of blessing may be used for the occasion. This act of appointment, however, does not necessarily take a liturgical form, nor, if it does take a liturgical form, should it resemble sacred Ordination in any way. Finally, in special cases of an unforeseen nature, permission can be given for a single occasion by the Priest who presides at the celebration of the Eucharist.[257] [156.] This function is to be understood strictly according to the name by which it is known, that is to say, that of extraordinary minister of Holy Communion, and not “special minister of Holy Communion” nor “extraordinary minister of the Eucharist” nor “special minister of the Eucharist”, by which names the meaning of this function is unnecessarily and improperly broadened. [157.] If there is usually present a sufficient number of sacred ministers for the distribution of Holy Communion, extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion may not be appointed. Indeed, in such circumstances, those who may have already been appointed to this ministry should not exercise it. The practice of those Priests is reprobated who, even though present at the celebration, abstain from distributing Communion and hand this function over to laypersons.[258] [158.] Indeed, the extraordinary minister of Holy Communion may administer Communion only when the Priest and Deacon are lacking, when the Priest is prevented by weakness or advanced age or some other genuine reason, or when the number of faithful coming to Communion is so great that the very celebration of Mass would be unduly prolonged.[259] This, however, is to be understood in such a way that a brief prolongation, considering the circumstances and culture of the place, is not at all a sufficient reason. [159.] It is never allowed for the extraordinary minister of Holy Communion to delegate anyone else to administer the Eucharist, as for example a parent or spouse or child of the sick person who is the communicant. [160.] Let the diocesan Bishop give renewed consideration to the practice in recent years regarding this matter, and if circumstances call for it, let him correct it or define it more precisely. Where such extraordinary ministers are appointed in a widespread manner out of true necessity, the diocesan Bishop should issue special norms by which he determines the manner in which this function is to be carried out in accordance with the law, bearing in mind the tradition of the Church.
Hence the name “minister of the Eucharist” belongs properly to the Priest alone. The word "complacent" or "ignorant" comes to my mind. What I mean by ignorant doesn't mean someone who is stupid, as ignorant does not mean stupid but someone who doesn't take the time to educate oneself to the Rubics or duties of their ministry. How many "Eucharistic ministers" do you know in any said Mass are actual Acolyte's Acolyte An acolyte is an assistant or follower assisting the celebrant in a religious service or procession. In many Christian denominations, an acolyte is anyone who performs ceremonial duties such as lighting altar candles. In others, the term is used for one who has been inducted into a particular liturgical ministry, even when not performing those duties. Wikipedia · Text under CC-BY-SA license
traditionalaltarboy.wordpress.com The Crises after Vatican II #3 – Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion | 7-9 minutes How many times have we seen an army of lay “extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion” gather around the altar during the communion rite? As Catholics who have a true love for Christ in the Eucharist, what are we to say about the practice that the laity is now given when it comes to distributing Holy Communion among the faithful? If Rome accepts it then it must be okay, right? I will begin with stating that this very practice was the result of the “Spirit of Vatican II” that rose as an abuse due to the fact that it was done out of disobedience to Pope Paul VI. We must remember that it was because of disobedience that sin was brought into this world through Adam and Eve. It was also because of Uzzah’s disobedience to God that he was struck dead. 2 Sam 6:6-7 states “When Uzzah touched something holy that he wasn’t supposed to touch, he was struck dead”. Since this was a practice that was done out of disobedience against Rome, can we honestly say this practice was inspired by The Holy Spirit, the very Breath in which Holy Mother Church breaths upon? Especially since this practice contradicts the Church’s instructions in the Catechism of Trent, Canon Law 1917, the Saints, the Popes, and even the Catholic theology of the Mass itself? Absolutely not since God cannot contradict himself, nor can His Church upon faith and morality. In fact, the practice of the laity dispensing the Blessed Sacrament is both sacrilege and grave error for the following reasons: * Leads to additional handling of the Holy Eucharist (two additional people may now touch It – the lay ‘minister’ and the communicant) and therefore there is greater danger of spillage, profanation, and sacrilege * Diminishes respect for the Holy Eucharist * Diminishes respect for the priesthood by placing lay persons on the same level as priests * Leads to loss of faith in the Real Presence * Has been condemned by popes and saints * Has been used as a tool by liberals and feminists who want to change the Church * Is often used where it is prohibited – and becomes the de facto “norm” rather than an “extraordinary” occurrence * Conforms to Protestant sensibilities – heretics who reject the Real Presence and the hierarchical priesthood * Leads to the deplorable situation of Holy Communion being taken to the sick by lay persons – thereby depriving the sick of the presence of the priest & the other sacraments in their critical hour of need – possibly leading to the loss of eternal souls! I will close with quotes from the Popes, Saints, and the Councils upon this matter. “To safeguard in every possible way the dignity of so august a Sacrament, not only is the power of its administration entrusted exclusively to priests, but the Church has also prohibited by law any but consecrated persons, unless some case of great necessity intervene, to dare handle or touch the sacred vessels, the linen, or other instruments necessary to its completion. Priests themselves and the rest of the faithful may hence understand how great should be the piety and holiness of those who approach to consecrate, administer or receive the Eucharist.” (Catechism of the Council of Trent) “To touch the sacred species and to distribute them with their own hands is a privilege of the ordained” (Pope John Paul II, 1980 A.D.) “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.” (Pope John Paul II, 1980 A.D.) “[L]aymen are officially incompetent to dispense any sacrament: and that they can baptize in cases of necessity, is due to the Divine dispensation, in order that no one may be deprived of spiritual regeneration.” (St. Thomas Aquinas, Doctor of the Church and “greatest theologian in the history of the Church”) (Interruption) Well what about those in Minor orders? It is because of the virtue of their institution that they can handle the Blessed Sacrament… “[A]lthough those [in minor] Orders are entrusted with certain spiritualities, they are not admitted to the immediate handling of sacred things, as those are who are in sacred Orders.” (St. Thomas Aquinas, Doctor of the Church and “greatest theologian in the history of the Church”) The dispensing of Christ’s body belongs to the priest for three reasons. First, because…he consecrates as 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 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 else to touch it except from necessity, for instance, if it were to fall upon the ground, or else in some other case of urgency.” (St. Thomas Aquinas, Doctor of the Church and “greatest theologian in the history of the Church”) “For just as temple, altar, vessels, and vestments need to be consecrated, so do the ministers who are ordained for the Eucharist; and this consecration is the sacrament of Order.” (St. Thomas Aquinas, Doctor of the Church and “greatest theologian in the history of the Church”) “There is nothing which belongs more to the Church and there is nothing Jesus Christ wanted more closely reserved for its shepherds than the dispensation of the sacraments He instituted.” (Pope Gregory XVI, “Commissum Divinitus”, 1835 A.D.) “Can. 1306 § 1 Care should be taken lest a chalice, paten, or, before cleansing, purificators, palls, and corporals that were used in the sacrifice of the Mass are touched by any other than by clerics or those who have custody of these things. § 2 Purificators, palls, and corporals used in the sacrifice of the Mass shall not be put into the hands of the laity, even religious, unless they have first been washed by a cleric constituted in major orders; and the water from this first washing shall be put into a sacrarium or, in its absence, into a fire.” (1917 Code of Canon Law) “We must also visit churches frequently and venerate and show respect for the clergy, not so much for them personally if they are sinners, but by reason of their office and their administration of the most holy Body and Blood of Christ which they sacrifice upon the altar and receive and administer to others. And let all of us firmly realize that no one can be saved except without the holy words and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ which the clergy pronounce, proclaim and minister. And they alone must administer [them], and not others.” (St. Francis of Assisi, emphasis added) (Resource: http://www.mycatholicsource.com)
