Posted on 04/23/2008 7:45:48 AM PDT by NYer
Apr. 22, 2008 (CWNews.com) - The American magazine Catholic Response has published an English translation of a provocative article, originally published in the official Vatican newspaper, calling for an end to the practice of receiving Communion in the hand.
The article by Bishop Athanasius Schneider of Karaganda, Kazakhstan, originally printed in L'Osservatore Romano, examines the historical record of Catholic practice, concluding that the early Church quickly developed the practice in which lay people Communion on the tongue while kneeling. Only ordained ministers were allowed to touch the consecrated Host with their hands.
By the 6th century, Bishop Schneider writes, the Church had formed a consensus that Communion should be received on the tongue, of reverence for the Eucharistic Lord. Pope Gregory the Great chastised priests who resisted that consensus, and it was become an "almost universal practice" in the early Church, the author says.
Kneeling to receive Communion was also a pattern established early in Church history, Bishop Schneider reports. That posture, too, was seen as a means of expressing reverence for Jesus in the Eucharist, and "the most typical gesture of adoration is the biblical one of kneeling."
By administering Communion on the tongue, priests were able to foster greater devotion to the Eucharist; Bishop Schneider remarks that that form is "an impressive sign of the profession of faith the in the Real Presence."
He adds the argument that this form of distributing Communion can prevent accidents. The author cites St. Cyril of Jerusalem, who exhorted priests to use extra caution "so that no even a crumb of the Lord's Body could fall to the ground."
The article published in L'Osservatore Romano, and now translated in Catholic Response, summarizes the more complete argument that Bishop Schneider put forward in his book, Dominus Est. That book, released in Italy earlier this year, drew special notice for two reasons. It was published by the official Vatican press, and a preface was contributed by Archbishop Macolm Ranjith, the secretary of the Congregation for Divine Worship, who said it was "high time to review" the policy of allowing laymen to receive Communion in the hand.
There is no DNA from Christ.
Perhaps ...
I think folks should refrain from using expressions like "dyed-in-the-wool" unless they can
1) Spell them correctly.
2) Correctly identify the original meaning and context.
As the FR Religion Forum Resident Pedant, I expect you all to toe the line on this matter.
;'}
We could begin a neverending discussion on this topic, however; there are claims that DNA has been extracted from this "blood".
Dear Swordmaker and Shroudie - to the best of your knowledge, have tests ever been conducted between the blood type on the Shroud of Turin and the five globules of coagulated blood in Lanciano, Italy - cf: MIRACLE LANCIANO.
I'm starting to believe that Catholicism is the relentless pursuit of answers to unanswerable questions. There is so much that God has not revealed to us. Rather than decide "this is how it must be, so let's insist it is so", I accept that there are many things we are not told.
Do you mean that as a compliment?
Is that really your best?
Do you mean that as a compliment?
Well no, of course not.
Much like life! ;-)
Why is it a Eucharistic miracle if it happens all the time?
The one I referenced above is a miracle in the sense that it was a one time event. There was a physical transformation of a host into actual flesh and wine into physical blood. That is not the same as transubstantion. The dogma of transubstantiation teaches that the whole substance of bread is changed into that of Christ’s body, and the whole substance of wine into that of his blood, leaving the accidents of bread and wine unaffected. In the above miracle, the accidents were physically transformed.
True! But I prefer not to second-guess God
Why would it ever happen, if transubstantion does not require it?
Recall the Resurrected Christ appeared to the Apostles. Thomas was not there and when they told him, what was his reaction?
So the other disciples said to him, "We have seen the Lord." But he said to them, "Unless I see the mark of the nails in his hands and put my finger into the nailmarks and put my hand into his side, I will not believe."
John 20:25
We all know the how this turns out. One week later, Jesus again appears but this time Thomas is present. Jesus insists that he place his finger in the wounds. Thomas finally acknowledges Jesus - "My Lord and My God!" And how does our Lord respond?
Jesus said to him, "Have you come to believe because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and have believed."
John 20:29
It is no different with the Real Presence of our Lord in the Eucharist. It defies human reason and some people, like Thomas, can't believe unless they see hard, physical proof. At Lanciano, our Lord performed a miracle to convince the doubting priest. Why He chose that moment in time, I do not know.
(guys, guys, the testing was done in 1971....No DNA testing at all available then, that took the 1990s to begin. The website did say it was type AB, a type rare in the region of Italy, but common in Palestine.)
Frankly I’m not a believer on this one, and I think something else is going on, as to what, I have no idea. AD 800 is a VERY long time ago too, even in Europe.
Is Jesus Christ Lord of all and do I rest fully in Him? Yes. So I find myself indifferent to relics...
Regardless of how you view the miracle of Lanciano, it was ancillary to my post #104. The focus of this thread is Communion on the Tongue as opposed to Communion in the hand, in the Catholic Church. As Catholics we believe in the Real Presence and post #104 provides the Scriptural basis for our beliefs. The miracle of Lanciano is interesting but not dogma.
Also, I repeat, I doubt the earliest Christians would recognize the present day Catholic practice of the Eucharist.
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.