Why Some Conservative Catholics Want To Stop

[XIX]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='19 August 2009 - 05:17 PM' timestamp='1250713054' post='1952777']
As Pope Pius XII said: "The liturgy of the early ages is most certainly worthy of all veneration. But ancient usage must not be esteemed more suitable and proper, either in its own right or in its significance for later times and new situations, on the simple ground that it carries the savor and aroma of antiquity."

Through the influence of the Holy Spirit the Western Church determined that communion in the hand was to be shunned out of reverence for the Lord's presence, and that judgment seems to me quite appropriate. It is a fact of history that -- until the 1970s -- both the Western and the Eastern liturgies developed in a manner that restricted the direct handling of the sacred elements to the clergy.
[/quote]
Is it just me, or is your first paragraph a direct refutation of your second paragraph?

[Dave]

Folks, c'mon now, this is about Pope John Paul II, not Communion in the hand!

[eagle_eye222001]

[quote name='Selah' date='19 August 2009 - 05:08 PM' timestamp='1250716097' post='1952828']
How can a person "stop" another from becoming a saint? Isn't that God's job?
[/quote]

The Catholic Church with the Teaching Authority given by Jesus, finds people on earth who have led lives to be modeled after. Just because the Church doesn't make one a saint does not mean that person is not in heaven. The purpose of declaring people saints is to help give us key figures to strive to act like here on earth.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Selah' date='19 August 2009 - 04:08 PM' timestamp='1250716097' post='1952828']
How can a person "stop" another from becoming a saint? Isn't that God's job?
[/quote]

Saints are canonized by a largely human process.

God's role in the process (besides causing the miracles needed for the canonization process to progress) is keeping the Pope from error when he says, "We decree and define that Blessed N. is a Saint."

[CatherineM]

[quote name='Resurrexi' date='19 August 2009 - 04:18 PM' timestamp='1250716727' post='1952836']
Saints are canonized by a largely human process.

God's role in the process (besides causing the miracles needed for the canonization process to progress) is keeping the Pope from error when he says, "We decree and define that Blessed N. is a Saint."
[/quote]

I thought that in order for humans to degree someone as a saint, there must be a couple of miracles. Those miracles are not performed by the saint, but rather by God. The saint can ask God for the miracle, but it is up to God's will if one will happen. So in a very real way, it is God who decides which person we recognize as a saint.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='XIX' date='19 August 2009 - 03:10 PM' timestamp='1250716227' post='1952831']
Is it just me, or is your first paragraph a direct refutation of your second paragraph?
[/quote]
It's just you.

The first and second paragraphs support each other, because the second merely speaks to the fact that the liturgy has developed over time, and that both the Eastern Church and the Western Church by about the 6th century restricted the direct handling of the Eucharistic elements to clerics, and that these developments were made under the influence of the Holy Spirit, who brought about a common universal practice, which has now been ruptured through the disobedience (later given hierarchical approval in the West) of members of the laity in the Roman Church beginning in the 1970s. Finally, the point of the quotation was to express the theological and liturgical principle that simple antiquarianism has no place in the Church's life of worship, which is a living reality that deepens over the centuries, and so any attempt to justify communion in the hand that is predicated upon 4th century practice is -- at least based upon what Pope Pius XII said -- illegitimate.

Edited August 19, 2009 by Apotheoun

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='CatherineM' date='19 August 2009 - 04:22 PM' timestamp='1250716966' post='1952840']
I thought that in order for humans to degree someone as a saint, there must be a couple of miracles. Those miracles are not performed by the saint, but rather by God. The saint can ask God for the miracle, but it is up to God's will if one will happen. So in a very real way, it is God who decides which person we recognize as a saint.
[/quote]

Did you miss the words "God' role in the process (besides causing the miracles needed for the canonization process to progress)"?

Edited August 19, 2009 by Resurrexi

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='CatherineM' date='19 August 2009 - 03:22 PM' timestamp='1250716966' post='1952840']
I thought that in order for humans to degree someone as a saint, there must be a couple of miracles. Those miracles are not performed by the saint, but rather by God. The saint can ask God for the miracle, but it is up to God's will if one will happen. So in a very real way, it is God who decides which person we recognize as a saint.
[/quote]
That is a very mechanistic view of the matter. In the ancient Church a person was glorified (i.e., canonized) only if his cult was widespread, and this took many years to become evident.

I see no reason to rush to judgment, and the impatience of those who support the canonization of John Paul II seems inappropriate.

[CatherineM]

I never said that I thought we should hurry.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='CatherineM' date='19 August 2009 - 03:45 PM' timestamp='1250718331' post='1952867']
I never said that I thought we should hurry.
[/quote]
My apologies. Only the first sentence was directed at your post.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='CatherineM' date='19 August 2009 - 04:45 PM' timestamp='1250718331' post='1952867']
I never said that I thought we should hurry.
[/quote]

Scardella did, though.

[thessalonian]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='19 August 2009 - 04:17 PM' timestamp='1250713054' post='1952777']
As Pope Pius XII said: "The liturgy of the early ages is most certainly worthy of all veneration. But ancient usage must not be esteemed more suitable and proper, either in its own right or in its significance for later times and new situations, on the simple ground that it carries the savor and aroma of antiquity."

Through the influence of the Holy Spirit the Western Church determined that communion in the hand was to be shunned out of reverence for the Lord's presence, and that judgment seems to me quite appropriate. It is a fact of history that -- until the 1970s -- both the Western and the Eastern liturgies developed in a manner that restricted the direct handling of the sacred elements to the clergy.
[/quote]

My point of the post was not to say that because St. Cyril approved of it, it should be done now. I am well aware that it is a false sense of piety to simply go back to what was done in the early church to determine what we should do today. My point was exactly that there should be calmer heads about all of this. It is my understanding that John Paul II was not in favor of the way that communion in the hand was implemented. Regardless John Paul II had the authority to make the allowances that were made. I personally want to go back to tongue only but I think it is way overboard to say that communion in the hand should be a reason for withholding his canonization. NONSENSE.

[Maggyie]

I think John Paul's dealings with the disgraced founder of the Legion of Christ are more of an obstacle to his canonization than issues like communion in the hand.

[thessalonian]

First of all it is not we that are hurrying or delaying. It is the magesterium, in particular the holy offices in the vatican that are responsible for his canonization. I have every confidence that the Holy Spirit will guide those offices to what is prudent and will canonize him in haste if that is what is good for the Church and will delay it if it should be delayed. If he is canonized, and I truly think he will be, quite quickly, we can be assured that the canonization was not a mistake. Canonizations are considered infallible as I understand. If they were not, then it would cast doudge on the whole matter of praying to saints.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Maggie' date='19 August 2009 - 03:57 PM' timestamp='1250719026' post='1952883']
I think John Paul's dealings with the disgraced founder of the Legion of Christ are more of an obstacle to his canonization than issues like communion in the hand.
[/quote]
That is just another one of the many reasons why there should be no rush to canonize him (n.b., there should be no rush to canonize anyone for that matter).