A First Communion dream in doubt

The white dress from Sears is hanging in her closet, near the long veil and the matching purse.

[John Smith]

That is ridiculous

[Rocky Mountain]

I'm not sure I follow, what's ridiculous?

[Paul N]

The parents should have nothing to fear, because when the priest properly consecrates the bread and wine, it is now changed into the Body and Blood of CHRIST. Were is their FAITH?

[Paul N]

The Eucharist should never be taken in the hand.

[rocky mountain]

Do you think that when Christ instituted the Eucharist He placed the elements on the tongue of all those gathered?

[Crance]

Paul N wrote:

The Eucharist should never be taken in the hand.

According to the USCCB it can be:

http://www.nccbuscc.org/liturgy/girm/bul5.sht...

Peace

[Paul N]

To rockey:

The answer to your question is no, the Apostles at the Last Supper were established in the power of the priesthood. Their hands were cleaned of all sin at the washing. From that time on, their hands were consecrated.

The Apostles received communion with the greatest reverence, shedding copious tears and adoring the body and blood of our Lord, whom they were receiving. They distributed the sacramental bread among themselves to partake of it.

At the first Mass of St. Peter, the disciples were allowed to give out communion to 1,000 of the 5,000 present. It was on the tongue, only the disciples were allowed to receive the blood of Christ as it was up until Vatican II.

[Paul N]

To: Crance:

You are correct, the Bishops bent the arm of the pope for this. Pope John Paul requested that all that receive from him, did so on the tongue.

Our Lady of Fatima said in the end, many would receive the Lord unworthy with no reverence. In the Mystical "City of GOD", Our Blessed Mother says to invoke the intercession of the angels, all the saints and call upon the Holy Mother of God to obtain grace from the Lord.

[Crance]

Paul N wrote:

To: Crance:
You are correct, the Bishops bent the arm of the pope for this. Pope John Paul requested that all that receive from him, did so on the tongue.
Our Lady of Fatima said in the end, many would receive the Lord unworthy with no reverence. In the Mystical "City of GOD", Our Blessed Mother says to invoke the intercession of the angels, all the saints and call upon the Holy Mother of God to obtain grace from the Lord.

Paul,

You're not assuming that the Pope allowed this against his will are you?

Also, are you assuming that everyone who recieves on the tongue does so reverently? I am a Eucharistic Minister and can tell you that that is not the case!

Paul, if the church allows for this, we are bound to respect their laws and not confuse the faithful!

Peace

[Paul N]

To Rockey;

The modern conception of biography/ autobiography was change about 1640, the book was written or started in1637. Most of the people in the world at that time could not read or write, so they could never write thier own autobiography. Since the publishers, Mary of Agreda, the Holy Mother of God and other references call it the autobiography of the Blessed Virgin Mary, so will I.

I purposely entered this forum because I knew you would reply to whatever I had to say.

Have a blessed night.

[Paul N]

To Crance:

The answer is YES to question one. Rockey might disagree with me but that is what I have read.

It was a sacrilege for a person to handle the body of Christ that did not have consecrated hands. Only priests have that.

A few years back, they changed the definition of The Eucharistic Minister to exta-ordinary or special minister.

The second reason of receiving holy communion in the hand is wrong is that particles of the Host fall to the floor, stay in the hand etc. They then get stomped on by peoples feet....they are still the body of Christ.

It was Pope Paul VI that said satan entered the Church. It was also Pope Paul that okayed communion in the hand in 1977 in the U.S.

I hope you seen my posts about the book, the "Mystical City Of God," you and Rockey should get a copy. Unfortunately the book is out of print but there is one set on ebay for sale for 60 bucks. I would buy it but I already have 3 and 4 of the abridged. The full set has 3 times the info.

Your last comment I will answer later.

[rocky mountain]

Paul

Your piety is supported by conjecture and your own notion of what is reverent and right, both of which do not make it so.
Some day talk to your local dentist and he/she can tell you where particles that supposedly "disolve" end up.
You my friend mistake reverence for scrupulosity, Jesus asked for our hearts not meaningless sacrifices.
Our liturgy of the Eucharist is both Meal and Sacrifice-to deny that or to refuse to understand the theology of the Mass is wrongheaded.
I'm sure you get comfort for books like Mystical City of God, but don't let that comfort stand in the way of continued study of the Church and an understanding of the movement she makes to enhance people's participation in the most important ritual we have Holy Mass.
Eucharistic ministers are called Extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion.
An autobiography is by deinition self written. The literacy of people does not change that fact.

[rocky mountain]

Paul N wrote:

To Rockey;
The modern conception of biography/ autobiography was change about 1640, the book was written or started in1637. Most of the people in the world at that time could not read or write, so they could never write thier own autobiography. Since the publishers, Mary of Agreda, the Holy Mother of God and other references call it the autobiography of the Blessed Virgin Mary, so will I.
I purposely entered this forum because I knew you would reply to whatever I had to say.
Have a blessed night.

Let's be clear Paul I respond to your posts not our of concern for what you hold as true but more that you pass your own sense of truth off as held by the Church as doctrinal; i.e. incorrect scripture passages, passages from faddish books that may only help distort the church's teaching.
If you want to receive Eucharist on the tongue-that is your right but to denigrate those who do not see the value in that is wrong-pig headed, your own notion of piety.
None of us receive the Eucharist worthily--that is not the point. It is our spiritual food that is there-a gift from Jesus for our journey here on earth.

[rocky mountain]

Paul N wrote:

To rockey:
The answer to your question is no, the Apostles at the Last Supper were established in the power of the priesthood. Their hands were cleaned of all sin at the washing. From that time on, their hands were consecrated.
The Apostles received communion with the greatest reverence, shedding copious tears and adoring the body and blood of our Lord, whom they were receiving. They distributed the sacramental bread among themselves to partake of it.
At the first Mass of St. Peter, the disciples were allowed to give out communion to 1,000 of the 5,000 present. It was on the tongue, only the disciples were allowed to receive the blood of Christ as it was up until Vatican II.

Again Paul this is information from some books you hold as true not held that way by the Church proper. Jesus washed the feet of the Apostles-during the mass we wash our hands in a symbolic way to act in the stead of the people more worthily--see previous post.
The priest, the apostles are no better-no worse than you and I. I hope you can allow your heart and mind to be transformed, it is my prayer.

[Paul N]

To Rockey:

My reverence to GOD is not guess work but by examples of my elders, parishioners, parents, priests and the teaching of the Holy Roman Catholic Church.

[Paul N]

The Eucharist Is not a meal but the unbloodied Sacrifice that Christ Sacrificed on Calvery. Its Never considered a meal. Some Bishops did say that in their "Renew" programs about 6 years ago but they are wrong. When you say its a meal, you profane the temple of God by removing the sign of holiness.

[Paul N]

To Rockey:

Go back and read what I said about taking the Host in the hand. The particles fall to the floor and get trampled on by dirty feet. Is this what you want to do? That is the body and blood of God. I still say its a SACRILEGE.

Since you don't like me to quote from the bible, the Apostolic Digest or the autobiography of the Virgin Mary, I will include other books that I have and my book cases are full.

Christ said it was a sacriledge in a book by Professor Albert Drexel in Oct. of 1976.

[OBSERVING]

How can the Archdiocese not bend their "official church policies" for a 7 year old with health issues wanting to make her first communion? but on the other hand grant an annulment to a wealthy politician who was married for many years and has grown children so he can remarry in the church, by a priest which we all know you can't do if divorced. Could this be a double standard?,does wealth and power make a difference? it's no shocker that the archdiocese in MA. is losing support and having to close churches ,that's a real sin for the long time parishioners.Just maybe in the future Ted Kennedy will give them another generous sum.

[Paul N]

The solution for the child to receive The body of Christ is simple: the priest can break off a small piece of the Eucharist. This will not effect her body at all.

They say that 1 in every 130 people have this disase, what happen to all the catholics before they knew about this disease? Fifty years ago nobody complained about it to the priests. Why, because it's the body of Christ and not bread any more.

Are you from St. Theresa parish?

[Parker]

www.winepage.eu