......"Much of the music that has come up over the last 30 years will no longer be useable," said Father Alan Jurkus of St. Alphonsus Parish in Greendale, who sent out a letter this month notifying members of the coming changes.......
http://www.jsonline.com/features/religion/99995394.html
(thanks to Gregorian Rite Catholic for finding this!)
— I WANTED TO SEND A CLEAR SIGNAL. I WANTED IT TO BE CLEAR: SOMETHING QUITE SPECIAL IS GOING ON HERE! HE IS HERE!, THE ONE BEFORE WHOM WE FALL TO OUR KNEES! PAY ATTENTION!.......... (Pope Benedict XVI explaining kneeling Communion to Peter Seewald)
Thursday, August 5, 2010
Monday, August 2, 2010
Father Ray Blake's Blog answers the question!
Why do no Orthodox or any other early Apostolic splinter churches have Hand Communion ?
Finally an orthodox Christian from St. Mary Magdeline blog answers:
That's the way they have always done it!
Doesn't that just make sense? Why else would they resemble pre Vatican II Roman Catholics in this regard? The only logical explanation is that Communion on the tongue had to have been the general practice of the Catholic Church at whatever time the split of each group occured. In the case of the Copts, Armenians, and Nestorians....we are going back way into the 400s. Any other explanation means that separate churches, each one antagonistic to all the others, all independenty decided to introduce the same identical innovation. [here we count Communion directly on the tongue as the 'innovation']
Hence, in k.c.'s opinion, the oft repeated axiom that: "Hand Communion was commonly practiced in the Catholic Church up until the year 1000": is a big, fat, lie!
k.c.
listen to Scott........
I am an Eastern Orthodox Christian, and to my limited knowledge Eucharist given in the hand has never been a widespread or accepted practice in the Church. Certainly we Orthodox – Eastern or Oriental - would be horrified at the thought nowadays. St. Basil the Great in the 4th Century wrote very clearly that the practice was only justified during times of persecution, presumably because priests might not be available to distribute the Eucharist in person. The text implies that to receive in the hand under other circumstances, outside of persecution, would be a grave fault. Other references from the first millennium, including references from the Western Church, support the conclusion that the normal and accepted manner of reception of the Holy Eucharist was in the mouth, given by a spoon, as it is still today in the East, and in Eastern rites in communion with the Roman Catholics.It appears that only St. Cyril of Jerusalem (also 4th Century) mentions reception in the hand as if it might be an accepted and legitimate practice, and this is the passage that is typically trotted out as evidence from this early period.In other words, to answer the question, my belief is that the Eastern churches didn’t “abandon” the practice. I think the likelihood is that they never particularly condoned it, but allowed it as a necessary evil during times of extreme persecution. It became unnecessary after the Peace of Constantine in 313, as another contemporary reference appears to indicate.Here is a link with further information. http://www.catholic-pages.com/mass/inhand.aspI’m sorry I don’t have more information from the Orthodox point of view. It has never occurred to me that such a practice might have been legitimate at any time in the history of the Church. I will certainly look deeper into the history of the practice, particularly its history in our Church.....
Finally an orthodox Christian from St. Mary Magdeline blog answers:
That's the way they have always done it!
Doesn't that just make sense? Why else would they resemble pre Vatican II Roman Catholics in this regard? The only logical explanation is that Communion on the tongue had to have been the general practice of the Catholic Church at whatever time the split of each group occured. In the case of the Copts, Armenians, and Nestorians....we are going back way into the 400s. Any other explanation means that separate churches, each one antagonistic to all the others, all independenty decided to introduce the same identical innovation. [here we count Communion directly on the tongue as the 'innovation']
Hence, in k.c.'s opinion, the oft repeated axiom that: "Hand Communion was commonly practiced in the Catholic Church up until the year 1000": is a big, fat, lie!
k.c.
listen to Scott........
I am an Eastern Orthodox Christian, and to my limited knowledge Eucharist given in the hand has never been a widespread or accepted practice in the Church. Certainly we Orthodox – Eastern or Oriental - would be horrified at the thought nowadays. St. Basil the Great in the 4th Century wrote very clearly that the practice was only justified during times of persecution, presumably because priests might not be available to distribute the Eucharist in person. The text implies that to receive in the hand under other circumstances, outside of persecution, would be a grave fault. Other references from the first millennium, including references from the Western Church, support the conclusion that the normal and accepted manner of reception of the Holy Eucharist was in the mouth, given by a spoon, as it is still today in the East, and in Eastern rites in communion with the Roman Catholics.It appears that only St. Cyril of Jerusalem (also 4th Century) mentions reception in the hand as if it might be an accepted and legitimate practice, and this is the passage that is typically trotted out as evidence from this early period.In other words, to answer the question, my belief is that the Eastern churches didn’t “abandon” the practice. I think the likelihood is that they never particularly condoned it, but allowed it as a necessary evil during times of extreme persecution. It became unnecessary after the Peace of Constantine in 313, as another contemporary reference appears to indicate.Here is a link with further information. http://www.catholic-pages.com/mass/inhand.aspI’m sorry I don’t have more information from the Orthodox point of view. It has never occurred to me that such a practice might have been legitimate at any time in the history of the Church. I will certainly look deeper into the history of the practice, particularly its history in our Church.....
Saturday, July 31, 2010
Bishop Athanasius Schneider to visit UK in August
....The Latin Mass Society has announced that Bishop Athanasius Schneider ORC, Auxiliary Bishop of Karaganga in Kazakhstan, will be attending the forthcoming priests’ training conference to be held at Downside Abbey from Tuesday 10th to Friday 13th August. Bishop Schneider will celebrate a Solemn Pontifical Mass in the Extraordinary Form in the Abbey Church at Downside on Thursday 12th August at 11.00am. He will also deliver a lecture as part of the conference......
Thanks to Father Ray Blake for publicizing this!!
k.c.
sadly, there are many if not an overwhelming majority of 'conservatives' who still do not accept the importance of 'lex orandi'. Some negative comments have surfaced regarding Father's hosting Bishop Schneider.......
gemoftheocean said...
Phisiocrat - do be a bit careful and realize that in the western church for the 1st thousand years or so Communion was distributed in the hand.
To which your's truly must respond!
Gem!
Are you still at it??
If hand Communion were widespread until 1000 AD "or so", then why don't any of the Orthodox who split with us around that time, practice Hand Communion?
Why do none, absolutely none of the Apostolic groups, like the Nestorians, Armenians, or Copts who split with us since 400 AD or so, practice Hand Communion?
Do you know of any group which split off from us, except for the 16th CTY reformers, which practice Hand Communion?
k.c.
Thanks to Father Ray Blake for publicizing this!!
k.c.
sadly, there are many if not an overwhelming majority of 'conservatives' who still do not accept the importance of 'lex orandi'. Some negative comments have surfaced regarding Father's hosting Bishop Schneider.......
gemoftheocean said...
Phisiocrat - do be a bit careful and realize that in the western church for the 1st thousand years or so Communion was distributed in the hand.
To which your's truly must respond!
Gem!
Are you still at it??
If hand Communion were widespread until 1000 AD "or so", then why don't any of the Orthodox who split with us around that time, practice Hand Communion?
Why do none, absolutely none of the Apostolic groups, like the Nestorians, Armenians, or Copts who split with us since 400 AD or so, practice Hand Communion?
Do you know of any group which split off from us, except for the 16th CTY reformers, which practice Hand Communion?
k.c.
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
Thank you Father Ray Blake,
The Te Deum!
This is most likely the same tune to which St. Edmund Campion and his fellow martyrs, Sherwin and Briant, sang Te Deum when they learned that they were to be drawn and quartered.
It has been the song of martyrs and the joy of persecuted Catholics for well over a thousand years. It was well known throughout the Church prior to the great Wreckovation. The Te Deum needs to make a comeback!
k.c.
This is most likely the same tune to which St. Edmund Campion and his fellow martyrs, Sherwin and Briant, sang Te Deum when they learned that they were to be drawn and quartered.
It has been the song of martyrs and the joy of persecuted Catholics for well over a thousand years. It was well known throughout the Church prior to the great Wreckovation. The Te Deum needs to make a comeback!
k.c.
Thursday, July 1, 2010
Brazilian Blogger gets a pat on the back from our hero, Bishop Athanasius Schneider!!
(this is a google translation of Bishop Schneider's 24 April 2010 letter)
Praise our Lord Jesus Christ!
Dear Mr. Dr. Rafael Vitola Brodbeck and all friends of the blog SAVE THE LITURGY!
Having seen the goals of Your blog, I think they are commendable and very current. They try to walk with the authentic spirit of the Church, cultivating the "sentire cum ecclesia", ie thinking and how the Church. Divine Providence has given to our time the most precious gifts in the person of Pope Benedict XVI. The Pope shows in his teaching and practical examples to the whole Church in unequivocal and clear the true spirit of the liturgy.
Even before the pontificate Cardinal Ratzinger he left a rich education on the Sacred Liturgy, especially in his book "The Spirit of the Liturgy." If we love the Church, we follow with great docility liturgical teaching and the specific examples that pertain to the liturgy of the Supreme Pastor of the Church. I think this Pope had entered history as Pope angelic, like Pope and zealous lover of Divine worship.
The teaching and example of Pope Benedict XVI are the most authentic interpretation of liturgical spirit of Vatican II. God grant that every bishop and priests to meekly accept this liturgical teaching of the Pope and implement it in their churches. I want to encourage you all to continue this noble and vital goal for the church, which is living with abundant spiritual fruit liturgy and promote the sanctity and its authentic spirit in the Church of our times.
For that I thank and bless you in Christ and His Blessed Mother Mary,
+ Bishop Athanasius Schneider, ORC Auxiliary Bishop of Karaganda, Kazakhstan
Praise our Lord Jesus Christ!
Dear Mr. Dr. Rafael Vitola Brodbeck and all friends of the blog SAVE THE LITURGY!
Having seen the goals of Your blog, I think they are commendable and very current. They try to walk with the authentic spirit of the Church, cultivating the "sentire cum ecclesia", ie thinking and how the Church. Divine Providence has given to our time the most precious gifts in the person of Pope Benedict XVI. The Pope shows in his teaching and practical examples to the whole Church in unequivocal and clear the true spirit of the liturgy.
Even before the pontificate Cardinal Ratzinger he left a rich education on the Sacred Liturgy, especially in his book "The Spirit of the Liturgy." If we love the Church, we follow with great docility liturgical teaching and the specific examples that pertain to the liturgy of the Supreme Pastor of the Church. I think this Pope had entered history as Pope angelic, like Pope and zealous lover of Divine worship.
The teaching and example of Pope Benedict XVI are the most authentic interpretation of liturgical spirit of Vatican II. God grant that every bishop and priests to meekly accept this liturgical teaching of the Pope and implement it in their churches. I want to encourage you all to continue this noble and vital goal for the church, which is living with abundant spiritual fruit liturgy and promote the sanctity and its authentic spirit in the Church of our times.
For that I thank and bless you in Christ and His Blessed Mother Mary,
+ Bishop Athanasius Schneider, ORC Auxiliary Bishop of Karaganda, Kazakhstan
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)