The Neo-Catholic Dead-End

Daily Catholic ^ | October 24, 2002 | Thomas E. Woods, Jr.

[Land of the Irish]

"Mother Teresa looked to Christ Jesus for inspiration, not Buddha."

http://www.traditioninaction.org/RevolutionPhotos/A067rcMadreTeresaBudha.htm

[Diva]

to casually overthrow a practice that had had such a lengthy development was a terrible decision.

I have been told that the Communion in the hand was begun in Belgium by Cardinal Suenens without permission from Rome. If this is true it sounds calculated as Suenens was one of the younger and very progressive Cardinals at the Council.

[Diva]

Consequently the correct theological hermeneutic of the word "ordinary" when applied to the term "Ordinary Magisterium" is: "What the church has always taught through all time."

Thank you so much for the definition.

[Diva]

Re: "He left the Church in the 80s, it was too conservative for him." My what a tower of faith you have in that priest. Why he is so inspiring I just want to follow his every dictate. //sarcasm off//

Actually, I had very little faith in that priest, eventhough I wasn't a Catholic at the time I understood his teaching was very liberal...that was sort of the point of my post.

[Mark in the Old South]

No I do not think he poured the wine down their throats. You are making the same mistake with my remarks that you are doing with Scripture. I did not say I believed He gave the bread to them on the tongue and if you go back and study, I mentioned both possibilities.

This is the problem with some many people they read more into a line then is justified. Or they read what they want. As a result they love Scripture or early Church Fathers when it justifies Communion in the hand (CitH). But reject what advises against it. I notice no one in the CitH camp is searching for advise on acts of Penance, but just let one Church Father suggest a "let it all hang out" attitude and we would hear nothing but.

[Mark in the Old South]

I did all I could to let you know I knew that. Please note the //sarcasm off//

[Mark in the Old South]

Re: "If you're turning into a thread nanny, please let us know."

No that's my job. Stay on topic, sinkspur. Dismissed.

[Mark in the Old South]

Re: "Lord of the World."

Got it and I am starting into it. Hummmmm very interesting. I see it was written before World War ONE.

My Church has a copy in their lending Library.

[livius]

I think you'll be amazed at how much he foresaw. Another good book is Brian Moore's Catholics, also set in the future and not very optimistic.

[Diva]

Sorry didn't understand your post it sounded snotty to me.

[OLD REGGIE]

"This is the problem with some many people they read more into a line then is justified. Or they read what they want. As a result they love Scripture or early Church Fathers when it justifies Communion in the hand (CitH). But reject what advises against it..."

I have no interest whatsoever in latter-day "Tradition". I would be interested in any Scriptural advise against Communion in the hand.

What does Augustine have to say on the subject?

Whatever our Saviour would have us read of his actions and sayings he commanded his apostles and disciples, as his hands, to write. (De Consensu Evang. 1:ult)

Augustine ("De bono viduitatis", [The Advantage of Widowhood]2):

"What more shall I teach you than what we read in the apostle? For holy Scripture fixes the rule for our doctrine, lest we dare to be wiser than we ought . . . Therefore, I should not teach you anything else except to expound to you the words of the Teacher."

Of course you may be wiser than the Teacher.

[OLD REGGIE]

I have been told that the Communion in the hand was begun in Belgium by Cardinal Suenens without permission from Rome. If this is true it sounds calculated as Suenens was one of the younger and very progressive Cardinals at the Council.

No matter that Communion in the hand was instituted by Jesus? You will improve on Communion as taught by Jesus?

[Diva]

No matter that Communion in the hand was instituted by Jesus? You will improve on Communion as taught by Jesus?

All I said was that if true it would appear to be calculated, as the story goes he did not ask permission from Rome. Now, it could be that no permission is necessary, but I don't know. It would seem that to change a practice that was pretty universal (Communion on the tongue), in such a drastic fashion would require at least some sort of approval. Does anyone have more information?

The argument about Jesus giving the Host to them in thier hands is not indicated in the Bibilical text as far as I am aware. He took the bread, blessed it, broke it and gave it to them saying, "Take and eat this is my body." I do not know in what manner Jesus gave them the Host, I wasn't there.

[livius]

Neither you nor I, nor anybody else, knows what Jesus did about this; furthermore, the Apostles were - well, the Apostles. And prior to VatII, the Church had spent nearly 2,000 years working out a very developed theology of Communion, which was indicated by the practices surrounding its reception (and incidentally, which appear in the ancient rite of the Orthodox Church, where Communion is given under both species with a spoon). There was no justification for changing this practice, and in fact the Vatican initially assured that it wouldn't be changed.

That said, it's not that big an issue to me, because I think the entire NO has got to go. The practice of Communion in the hand only reflects the fundamental misdirection of the NO. And no, I don't think people who go to the NO, or even take Communion in the hand, are bad people or bad Catholics; they're just doing what is offered to them. But I think the rite itself is fundamentally flawed.

[Mark in the Old South]

Re: "Of course you may be wiser than the Teacher."

This type of argument does not impress.

Those who advocate Communion on the tongue are not teaching something contrary to the words of Christ. In fact they advocate this to reinforce the concept of the real presence. Now the same can not be said of those who advise Communion in the hand. They may believe in Transubstiation and they may not. As an example Luther, Knox, Calvin and Crammer did not believe in the real presence of Christ as understood by Catholicism and advised Communion in the hand. I do not suggest every person who does is a heretic but that is where this leads for some who do and I do suggest it is were some will find themselves over time.

[OLD REGGIE]

The argument about Jesus giving the Host to them in thier hands is not indicated in the Bibilical text as far as I am aware. He took the bread, blessed it, broke it and gave it to them saying, "Take and eat this is my body." I do not know in what manner Jesus gave them the Host, I wasn't there.

I am certain you are aware there was no such thing as a general purpose "host" in the time of Jesus. There was wine and bread. The "host" was and is a convenient invention of man.

According to Paul He gave the cup "in the same way" He gave the bread. You don't have to be there to suggest He gave them the "cup" on their tongue or down their throat.

You are hung up on man made "tradition". So be it.

[Diva]

Out of curiosity were you ever Catholic?

[OLD REGGIE]

Out of curiosity were you ever Catholic?

Yes. Why do you ask?