Posted on 12/13/2024 9:09:03 AM PST by ebb tide
That (receiving Holy Communion on the tongue, while kneeling) would be contrary to the norms and tradition of the church, which all the faithful are urged to respect and observe.
Cupich's "church" did not begin until VC II.
Cupich Barf Alert
Soupy is one of the worst of a bad lot.
Next step... people will continue to kneel. They will be called disobedient. People will be shamed for their devotion. There will be an edict against such rigidity and zealotry. All of this simply because people continue to show devotion to the Eucharist while the Church continues to move away from it.
The traditionalists aren’t the ones causing division.
We approach Holy Communion as the fully redeemed “Bride of Christ”, sanctified through His obedience and sacrifice, and an adopted son of the Father. Thus, with this in mind, standing is preferred.
That explains much ...
Perhaps it is time to revisit the norms. They were changed in order to introduce Communion while standing; they can, and should, be changed again to return to the previous norm.
Instead Cupcich focuses on the congregation as being the "Body of Christ" while you insist on the congregation as being the "Bride of Christ".
I don't believe either of you believe in the "Real Presence". You're to focused upon yourselves.
Allowances were made to tolerate Communion in the hand when it wasn’t the norm. Just following precedent. Also, the Vatican ruled on this, and kneeling is not to be forbidden.
Cupich will have to allow for personal discernment.
Indeed. This irreverent nonsense is a direct result of the liturgical revolution of the early 1970s; the widespread approval of "communion in the hand" came out of the Swine Flu scare of late 1970s. Revolutionaries, both ecclesiastical and secular, have been lying for a very long time.
Bloody dictators don't allow for personal discernment.
I’m just quoting Francis the Destroyer. They allow for discernment in every direction EXCEPT Tradition.
[In his view, processions are so crucial that nobody should “impede” or “disrupt” the “powerful symbolic expression” of the march to and from Holy Communion: ]
Well, like the hippies always say, the important thing is the journey, not the destination.
In the secular realm, “having a conversation” means sitting in silence while leftists, racists, and queers rant in your face.
In the ecclesiastical realm, “discernment” means sitting in silence while heretics, racists, and queers rant in your face.
Like the LGBT procession that Francis has approved to enter the Basilica of St. Peter during his “Jubilee” Year?
What's needed here is a procession of queers and other sinners entering the Cathedral, repenting of their sins, confessing their sins to a priest, and emerging as absolved sons of God.
This past summer I visited a friend and went to Sunday Mass with him and his family.
At Communion time I went up and since there were no kneelers, I stood and put out my tongue, but when no Communion was placed on my tongue, I opened my eyes and the Priests was standing there waiting for me to receive Communion in my hand, which I do not do.
I received my First Holy Communion in 1947...on my tongue and have continued to do so for over seventy years and will do so until my death.
The Priest waited, and I stood with my tongue out, until he gave me Holy Communion, on my tongue with a look of disgust.
If he was not a Priest, at Mass, I'd have knocked him out.
I have adjusted to the guitar solos, the English instead of Latin, but some Priests believe that they are God, but they are not.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.