Revoke the U.S. Indult on Standing for Holy Communion

Matariel · #1 Mar 3, '10, 10:45 pm

Is there anyway we can petition the Holy Father in Rome to revoke the indult given to the Bishops of the Church in the U.S. making standing during Holy Communion the norm? I believe it is of grave importance to change this, as I think many Catholics have lost respect for the Eucharist— inbetween bad catechesis and standing for Communion (some don't even bow, as is technically required) I think it's just gone downhill from there.

Phemie · #2 Mar 4, '10, 2:22 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matariel

Is there anyway we can petition the Holy Father in Rome to revoke the indult given to the Bishops of the Church in the U.S. making standing during Holy Communion the norm? I believe it is of grave importance to change this, as I think many Catholics have lost respect for the Eucharist— inbetween bad catechesis and standing for Communion (some don't even bow, as is technically required) I think it's just gone downhill from there.

Standing is the norm, not an indult. People are free to kneel if they wish but the GIRM shows that standing is the universal norm.

While the Holy Father prefers kneeling and requests that those receiving from him do so, that's not the norm.

**JRKH** · #3 Mar 4, '10, 2:42 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phemie

Standing is the norm, not an indult. People are free to kneel if they wish but the GIRM shows that standing is the universal norm.

While the Holy Father prefers kneeling and requests that those receiving from him do so, that's not the norm.

Are you sure about this?
I was watching the dedication mass for the Chapel at the FSSP seminary yesterday and I am sure that the commentators said that the norm is kneeling and that the US has an Indult for standing.

Peace
James

Like · #4 Mar 4, '10, 2:42 am

Check this out..
http://www.catholicculture.org/news/...m?storyid=5608

And scroll down a bit to click on link to National Catholic Reporter.

Canto · #5 Mar 4, '10, 3:07 am

Redemptionis Sacramentum:

[90.] “The faithful should receive Communion kneeling or standing, as the Conference of Bishops will have determined”, with its acts having received the recognitio of the Apostolic See. “However, if they receive Communion standing, it is recommended that they give due reverence before the reception of the Sacrament, as set forth in the same norms”.

[91.] In distributing Holy Communion it is to be remembered that “sacred ministers may not deny the sacraments to those who seek them in a reasonable manner, are rightly disposed, and are not prohibited by law from receiving them”. Hence any baptized Catholic who is not prevented by law must be admitted to Holy Communion. Therefore, it is not licit to deny Holy Communion to any of Christ’s faithful solely on the grounds, for example, that the person wishes to receive the Eucharist kneeling or standing.

[92.] Although each of the faithful always has the right to receive Holy Communion on the tongue, at his choice, if any communicant should wish to receive the Sacrament in the hand, in areas where the Bishops’ Conference with the recognitio of the Apostolic See has given permission, the sacred host is to be administered to him or her. However, special care should be taken to ensure that the host is consumed by the communicant in the presence of the minister, so that no one goes away carrying the Eucharistic species in his hand. If there is a risk of profanation, then Holy Communion should not be given in the hand to the faithful.

tee_eff_em · #6 Mar 4, '10, 3:44 am

Institutio generalis Missalis Romani

Quote:

160. Sacerdos deinde accipit patenam vel pyxidem, et accedit ad communicandos, qui de more processionaliter approprinquant.

Non licet ipsis fidelibus panem consecratum neque calicem sacrum per semetipsos accipere eo minus de manu in manum inter se transmittere. Fideles communicant genuflexi vel stantes, prout Conferentia Episcoporum statuerit. Cum autem stantes communicant, commendatur ut debitam reverentiam, ab iisdem normis statuendam, ante susceptionem Sacramenti faciant.

I do not think a decision properly within the competence of the Conference of Bishops can be called an indult.

tee

Revs96 · #7 Mar 4, '10, 4:14 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by tee_eff_em

Institutio generalis Missalis Romani

I do not think a decision properly within the competence of the Conference of Bishops can be called an indult.

tee

Indult or not it needs to go. Communion is treated too casually.

**puzzleannie** · #8 Mar 4, '10, 4:30 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matariel

Is there anyway we can petition the Holy Father in Rome to revoke the indult given to the Bishops of the Church in the U.S. making standing during Holy Communion the norm? I

no not until you reverse the architectural changes that ravaged churches 40 yrs ago--without btw any support from any V2 document--
return the communion rails and kneeling benches which placed you at the optimal position for receiving communion on the tongue
the two abuses, standing and receiving in the hand to together IMO, you can't change one without changing the other, and two generations later, going into the 3rd, it may be too late

tee_eff_em · #9 Mar 4, '10, 4:48 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by puzzleannie

the two abuses, standing and receiving in the hand to together IMO,

Even more than calling it an indult, I would be extremely reluctant to call a decision, properly and officially delegated to the Conference of Bishops, an abuse.

Nor would I call what is an indult (reception in the hand), lawfully granted by the Holy See, an abuse.

Maybe that's just me.

tee

PJM · #10 Mar 4, '10, 5:15 am

Quote:

=Matariel;6360317]Is there anyway we can petition the Holy Father in Rome to revoke the indult given to the Bishops of the Church in the U.S. making standing during Holy Communion the norm? I believe it is of grave importance to change this, as I think many Catholics have lost respect for the Eucharist— inbetween bad catechesis and standing for Communion (some don't even bow, as is technically required) I think it's just gone downhill from there.

Standing to receive Christ is an insignifiant issue in reguards the loss of Faith in the Real Presence, when compared to the abusive use of Ordinary ministers of the Eucharist [lay folk as asistant priest].

I do not deny the signifiance of removal of Communion rails; which opened the gates of desent and disobedience.

This is the REAL problem, the very foundation of the mass-exdous of the Mass, by millions of lost souls

Dear God have Mercy on us; save your Church!

Phemie · #11 Mar 4, '10, 5:28 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by PJM

Standing to receive Christ is an insignifiant issue in reguards the loss of Faith in the Real Presence, when compared to the abusive use of Ordinary ministers of the Eucharist [lay folk as asistant priest].

I take it that your use of the term "Ordinary ministers of the Eucharist" here is sarcasm directed at the abusive overuse of Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion.

malphono · #12 Mar 4, '10, 5:31 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by tee_eff_em

Even more than calling it an indult, I would be extremely reluctant to call a decision, properly and officially delegated to the Conference of Bishops, an abuse.

Nor would I call what is an indult (reception in the hand), lawfully granted by the Holy See, an abuse.

Maybe that's just me.

True, neither is an "abuse" in and of itself, but both can (and have) lead to abuses.

Regarding kneeling in particular, even though it's not an "indult" properly speaking, Redemptionis Sacramentum is clear that it is always an acceptable posture.

**ProVobis** · #13 Mar 4, '10, 5:35 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by tee_eff_em

Nor would I call what is an indult (reception in the hand), lawfully granted by the Holy See, an abuse.

Call it what you want but consider that technically it may not be allowed at all:

(References from http://www.tldm.org/News5/CinH2.htm)

Quote:

Pope Paul VI established several hurdles to slow this disobedient practice from spreading. In Memoriale Domini he stated four restrictions:

(a) the indult could only be requested if Communion in the hand was an already established custom (i.e., disobedient abuse) in the country, and

(b) if “by a secret vote and with a two-thirds majority” the episcopal conference petitions Rome,

(c) then Rome would grant the necessary permission,

(d) once the permission was granted, several conditions had to exist simultaneously (among these conditions, no loss of sacred particles and no loss of faith in the Real Presence), or Communion in the hand was not permitted, even with the indult. These conditions are outlined in “En réponse à la demande,” which is attached to the Memoriale Domini instruction.

tee_eff_em · #14 Mar 4, '10, 8:57 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by ProVobis

Call it what you want

I calls 'em like I sees 'em.*

Quote:

Originally Posted by ProVobis

but consider that technically it may not be allowed at all

Unless or until a legitimate authority revokes the current permission, technically it is allowed.
(* See? )

tee

**ProVobis** · #15 Mar 4, '10, 9:19 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by tee_eff_em

Unless or until a legitimate authority revokes the current permission, technically it is allowed.

So is driving a couple of miles over the speed limit. Or any other violation done in front of legitimate authority going unpunished or even completely ignored. But I'll concede the point for now. I did say it MAY not have been legitimately allowed; if there was someone to pressure them to disobey the Pope or skirt around his directives, then it's on their conscience. I don't wish to participate.