Bishop Suspends Ef Mass

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='Maximilianus' date='09 December 2009 - 09:20 PM' timestamp='1260415248' post='2017193']
Looks like the ban was lifted

http://www.fsspalberta.org/Calgary/Calgary_Home.html

The lower right corner of the page reads,
"Please note:
Restrictions have been lifted and normal Mass times have been resumed"
[/quote]
Rexi made a thread.

Now we're trying to figure out if all flu restrictions are gone, or just inasmuch as it affects the celebration of the Extraordinary Form. Diocesan website doesn't mention it.

[jeffpugh]

[quote name='Maximilianus' date='09 December 2009 - 10:20 PM' timestamp='1260415248' post='2017193']
nevermind...Rexi beat me to it.
[/quote]
Alleluia. Now only if I knew what the climate's like for the archdiocese of Toronto... as I stated earlier, the Oratorians are allowing Communion in the hand but strongly urging spiritual communion

As for the FSSP... dunno.

[Slappo]

I am surprised that this particular aspect of reception in the hand was not brought forth:

It is a dispensation in the United States that reception in the hand is permitted. It is the universal norm that reception be on the tongue. A bishop cannot ban the universal norm for the sake of a particular dispensation. Also consider this: Reception on the hand would not be permitted at all if it were not for this dispensation, and if this dispensation did not exist, the bishop does not even have the authority to give his own diocese one.

Therefore, the only reason reception in the hand is permitted is due to a dispensation beyond the authority of the bishop.
If this dispensation did not exist, the bishop could not grant such a dispensation in his diocese.
If the bishop does not have the authority to grant such a dispensation, then how could you possibly imagine he had the authority to ban the universal norm of the Church?

[Nihil Obstat]

I'm eager to see if there will be any more pastoral letters on the subject.

[Nihil Obstat]

This is the website if you want to keep up to date.
[url="http://www.rcdiocese-calgary.ab.ca/"]Roman Catholic Diocese of Calgary[/url]

[jeffpugh]

[quote name='Slappo' date='10 December 2009 - 04:53 PM' timestamp='1260481981' post='2017835']
I am surprised that this particular aspect of reception in the hand was not brought forth:

It is a dispensation in the United States that reception in the hand is permitted. It is the universal norm that reception be on the tongue. A bishop cannot ban the universal norm for the sake of a particular dispensation. Also consider this: Reception on the hand would not be permitted at all if it were not for this dispensation, and if this dispensation did not exist, the bishop does not even have the authority to give his own diocese one.

Therefore, the only reason reception in the hand is permitted is due to a dispensation beyond the authority of the bishop.
If this dispensation did not exist, the bishop could not grant such a dispensation in his diocese.
If the bishop does not have the authority to grant such a dispensation, then how could you possibly imagine he had the authority to ban the universal norm of the Church?
[/quote]
I know. But once a bishop goes ahead and orders over his head, everyone at the bottom has to respectfully scramble and do so until the matter is taken up above the bishop by a layman.

Edited December 11, 2009 by Sacred Music Man

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Slappo' date='10 December 2009 - 04:53 PM' timestamp='1260481981' post='2017835']
I am surprised that this particular aspect of reception in the hand was not brought forth:

It is a dispensation in the United States that reception in the hand is permitted. It is the universal norm that reception be on the tongue. A bishop cannot ban the universal norm for the sake of a particular dispensation. Also consider this: Reception on the hand would not be permitted at all if it were not for this dispensation, and if this dispensation did not exist, the bishop does not even have the authority to give his own diocese one.

Therefore, the only reason reception in the hand is permitted is due to a dispensation beyond the authority of the bishop.
If this dispensation did not exist, the bishop could not grant such a dispensation in his diocese.
If the bishop does not have the authority to grant such a dispensation, then how could you possibly imagine he had the authority to ban the universal norm of the Church?
[/quote]

Amen.

[Donna]

Slappo!