The Manila Archdiocese, last Friday, recently released the revised oratio imperata for the swine flu as the Philippines has 23 confirmed cases at the time of the revision of this prayer and 33 at present according to the Department of Health. The revised prayer is continued to be said after Holy Communion at each Mass while kneeling down.
Cardinal Rosales also ordered that communion be received only by the hand and that not to hold hands during the Lord's Prayer in the mean time.
Banning temporarily hand holding during the Lord's Prayer creates an impression that it is actually required or prescribed by liturgical law for the faithful to do so during the Lord's Prayer. Why don't our local liturgical ministers make it clear to everyone that there is no law that requires the faithful to hold hands and the faithful is not expected to hold hands?
On receiving communion, however, the universal law is to receive on the tongue. The mode of receiving via the hand is an indult and that nobody can be denied if the communicant wishes to receive the Sacred Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of our Lord on one's tongue.
Can a local ordinary's directive supercede the universal law of the Church?
Will the Lord allow the most reverential mode of reception of His Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity be the means for the spread of this dreaded disease?
6 comments:
I agree with you that a bishop's directive cannot undo what is allowed by the universal law of the Church. That is why if a communicant wishes to receive the Body of the Lord on the tongue, he cannot be denied of his right to receive communion in this way. Besides, surely the Lord will not allow reverence for him be the further cause of the spread of a virus.
Well, the directive is just an option it does not have the weight of Dogma.
Pesonally, if I go to the Novus Ordo i will obey the cardinal, if I attend the TLM I obey the rubrics.
Can you point in the document that contains the instruction referring to the taking of communion? I am sure it is online but I really don't know where to find it and am interested in reading the actual statement of the Church.
As for me, I prefer taking it in the hand, as I was taught to do in my Episcopal Church, which is different from the method taught in the Catholic Church. However, I HATE, HATE, HATE the "bread line" communion.
I agree that taking it on the tongue is very reverent and also think that it is very irreverent to take it in your left hand, turn around, and as you are walking back to your seat, pick it up with your right and pop the host into your mouth like it is a Tic Tac.
I prefer: right hand over left while kneeling at the altar rail. When the host is placed into your right hand, you bow over and move both hands up to put the host into your mouth. You then wait for the wine or at the very least until the person AFTER you, to your left or right, has consumed. In other words, no chewing as you sprint back to your seat or out the church.
I just prefer looking at the host and making the conscious decision to consume. At that moment, it is me and God. All my senses are more engaged. Getting it stuck on my tongue, not being able to see the host, is less meaningful to me.
Unfortunately, "taking in the hand" has been mixed up with all sorts of other practices that have become the bread line communion. Instead of communion being the pinnacle of the mass, it is the anti-climax. The priest does his think at the altar and then the bells ring (one hopes) and everything breaks. It's like students rushing out of clash. Lots of activity with everyone running around. Terrible message.
Sorry, should be: The priest does his thinG at the altar and then the bells ring (one hopes) and everything breaks. It's like students rushing out of clasS. Lots of activity with everyone running around. Terrible message.
I also think that the Church needs to consider the pastoral needs of not only the congregation but also the LEMs and priests. I suppose that they don't want to touch someone's saliva or be coughed or breathed on.
God allows lots of evil things to happen. I don't think that we should test him. I am not sure if God would prevent the spread of H1N1 via communion. Maybe he is by this ruling.
Yeah, I definitely agree. No one should be dprived of the right to receive communion in the way he or she knows will give respect to the Eucharistic Lord.
I was denied of this opportunity in many masses here in the Archdiocese of Manila so I decided not to receive communion until this A(H1N1) virus surpasses (or at least the red alert be lowered). I would rather not receive communion than to defile my Lord's body with my mere mortal hands.
I enjoyed reading your blog thanks.
Post a Comment