So this is what we teach our young people today
-
I attended a mandatory meeting yesterday for my younger son's upcoming first communion. It wasn't much different from the one I had to attend with my oldest-sign in, pick up required papers, sit down and listen to stuff that doesn't apply to my family, be ignored by all the cliquey moms, watch everyone feverishly write out checks and fill out forms for their professional photos and DVD's of the "big day". No biggie, I'm used to it-UNTIL I heard things like this from both the religious education instructor and one of the priests:
"Thanks for coming today, and you know, I really just want to stress the importance of coming to church with your children, it's the best way to help them learn and participate. I KNOW things are SO different today and everyone has sports and dance and so many things going on, but just TRY to come even if its only once a month."
Um, priorities??
And then I heard this:
"We try to explain things on a level the kids understand, (at this point she is discussing transsubtantiation) and that's just a fancy theological word for the bread and wine actually being Jesus."
Now, I had to suffer through a sermon at my work church once that also discussed it, and the pastor kept saying over and over "something just HAPPENS", there's no word for it."
YES THERE IS A WORD! And why can't the children learn it?!
So my mind started wandering at this point until she was telling us how the kids should hold their hands to receive the host, and a scene from last week's Mass came up. An older gentleman received communion on the tongue, most people don't at our church. So I decided to ask, because I was genuinely curious and knowing my kid that he would be as well, why we don't all do it this way anymore. (And honestly thinking it was more practical for children who are clumsy and prone to drop things). She gave a nice explanation but her eyes were like "and just WHY are you inquiring about that?"
Whew. Just needed to unpack all of that..sorry for the rant.
Thanked by 1ClergetKubisz -
Yes, the dumbing-down continues. Children are capable of so much more, and the opportunities to catechize are so brief nowadays that there should be much more packed into the First Communion instruction. A lot of those poor kids will have to go for a long time---maybe for the rest of their lives---with a very deficient understanding of the Eucharist.
When our children were small, we were fortunate to take them to a weekly Children's Mass at our parish for many years, but this wasn't your typical Children's Mass. During the homily, our venerable old pastor would take out a chalkboard a la Bishop Sheen and give us all an in-depth instruction on the basics of the Faith. The highlight at the end of the sermon was when he pulled out a wad of $1 bills (donated by a parishioner every week) and offer $1 to anyone who could answer his questions.
It was something to see little kiddos spelling "transsubstantiation", "circumincession" and
"concomitance" and giving definitions as well. (He always spelled transubstantiation with two s's as in the original Latin.) Even though Mass was sometimes over an hour long and the sermon always about 40 minutes long, nobody minded in the least and the kids would listen to his sermons with rapt attention, hoping to earn their $1 at the end. -
That sounds wonderful, Julie! I guess it's hard to overcome feeling like an outsider at these events. I just came in and sat down, no point in taking the photography forms because we cannot afford to have that done. Everyone is chatting about clothes and catering and how many people they're inviting, but I guess if you're only intending on having your child take communion once in their life then you want "stuff" to remember it by. We're more into experiences I guess...
-
Our church does have a special Children's liturgy session during the 10:45 Sunday Mass, (something I forgot about in a previous discussion here) but we never attend that one because of schedules. So much the better...
-
Well, Aquinas himself said everything he ever wrote was just so much straw!
-
That's all of a piece with everything else I've seen in the Diocese of Youngstown. Is there anywhere besides Queen of the Holy Rosary and St. Columba that's doing it well?
-
Last year this 5th grader said to me, "We've been HAUNTED by that word [transubstantiation] for YEARS."
-
Jeffrey: I have no idea, haven't ventured out to see for myself. Would love to check out Queen of the Holy Rosary, have played there many times, but it's too far away. We are "stuck" where we are anyway, and I know that up and leaving isn't the answer-but fighting the culture of anti-intellectualism at my specific church will be more than an uphill battle, more like a vertical ascent to outer space. But man did land on the moon and things can get better, I just need to find the way "in"...Thanked by 1Jeffrey Quick
-
^having a migraine-type day and realized that isn't exactly coherent, sorry in advance for my foggy thoughts^Thanked by 1noel jones, aago
-
Well, Aquinas himself said everything he ever wrote was just so much straw!
Yes, but Christ said that Aquinas had written well of Him.
I like a Aquinas a lot, but I'm inclined to take the opposition viewpoint on this issue. -
So? Great works of architecture, great art, great music, great cuisine, great literature etc., etc., are, no doubt, as straw, too. But in our condition, in this life, they are like a riverine valley bedight with floral splendour: where (or what!) would we be without such 'straw'? We, ouselves, are but straw: alle Menschen mussen Sturben!
-
When did Christ say that Aquinas had written well of Him? Is there a 13th century gospel I missed?Thanked by 1francis
-
It's a legend about an apparition of Christ to St. Thomas.
-
@MJO beautiful...and so very true. I shudder to think of my grandmother's body that lies in a grave a few miles from our home, and the ongoing family conflict about her meager earthly possessions-a conflict she would no doubt be offended by. She loved good food, her church, God, flowers, the music of Bela Bartok, and all the simple beauty life had to offer. Enjoy it now...Thanked by 1M. Jackson Osborn
-
Sorry if this is too far of a digression. On the issue of receiving in the hand vs. on the tongue and standing vs. kneeling, I would strongly discourage making waves about this for First Communion, but...
Once upon a time it was rather clear that in the USA you were more or less supposed to receive standing, and that while in the hand was normative on the tongue was tolerated. Thus great "pastoral" effort was expended to "encourage" everyone to receive in the hand while standing and to only bow as a sign of reverence.
Now, after the most recent changes in the General Instruction of the Roman Missal, and some clarification from the Vatican on various related questions, it is rather clear you have a real right to receive on the tongue if you choose (and that in the hand is, while the most common way, legally a special provision) and that while standing is the usual posture, the individual may choose to kneel to receive. Those who feel moved (or are visiting from places with different customs) now have equal rights afforded to the (outwardly) more reverent (or at least traditional) manner of receiving communion. There is no longer any allowance for heavy handed and undiplomatic brow beating of reverent communicants as once there appeared to be. (See the GIRM No. 160 & 161)
When I was prepped for First Communion, and in fact even well into my college days, I thought standing and in the hand were the only options, and that those who did otherwise were basically disobedient old timers that were being indulgently tolerated in their weird desires. Now I would greatly prefer that altar rails be universally available, that I should prefer to receive kneeling (but don't normally since it would cause a disturbance), and I greatly prefer to receive on the tongue (but usually don't, because most often I am stuck receiving from an "extraordinary minister" who is about a foot and half shorter than I am and acts all confused and awkward if you want to receive on the tongue). -
A good commentary! Actually, I think that the climate is much more tolerant than it was some years ago in this matter. I see people receiving in a variety of ways without any awkwardness or negativity whatsoever. One would be hard put, though, to find a new church with an altar rail. Why, even in many older churches they have been removed or simply disused. We do have altar rails in the Ordinariate, however, and everyone receives kneeling and by intinction on the tongue. I, for one, am more than a little disgruntled about this because it is centuries-old custom for Anglicans to receive in the hand while kneeling. One of our priests early on decided that we were going to be more Catholic than the pope and be 'spoon-fed', so this, without any precedent in Anglican usage, is now Ordinariate custom. Ironically, I can go to any strictly Roman rite parish and receive as I always did as an Anglican, but, thank you, not in my own Personal Ordinariate parish!
-
I take Communion however everyone else is taking it and am thankful for the privilege to receive so great a gift.
-
They do the same here in England... We have a 97 % lapsation rate of children attending 'Catholic' schools. I take my 6 children to the E.F. where we don't have those problems.Thanked by 1Daniel Bennett Page
-
@stephen: I am most definitely not "making waves" about how my child is receiving his first communion, just merely observing what I perceived to be a raised brow aimed at me because I was genuinely curious and chose to seek answers. Knowledge is power, can't have that now can we?
@Adam: same here and I have no plans to change that, definitely not at my church.
@tom: you are privileged to be able to attend, I assume the EF is close to where you live. Ours is far away and it is impossible for us to go. So, good for you not having to deal with "those problems", not all are quite so fortunate.
-
LOL Melo. I was raised Methodist and they didn't do intinction, at least not at that church. I never even knew about it until I got the Presby job.Thanked by 1Andrew_Malton
-
I do not Take, I Receive.
And, while I am at it, are we receiving Communion,
or receiving the Eucharist, and Communion is the result? -
We are recieving the body, blood, soul and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ which is The "Thanksgiving" (Eucharist) while AT Communion [in the Lord], shared as the body of the Lord which is the Church.
That how I see it anyway. -
eft94530 +1
At the Divine Liturgy, the priest cries out, just before distributing the Lord's Body and Blood,
"Holy gifts to holy people!"
There is no more fitting description of our hope in the Lord. -
I do not Take, I Receive.
"Take, eat." -
Notably, priests do in fact take and self commune. The rest of us do not.
I would be all for intinction, I have experienced it in both a Ukrainian Catholic parish, and Melkite chapel, and once in a regular Roman rite parish.
As to the Anglican custom, I would be curious as to when kneeling in the hand became a norm and why. If it was connected with any of the efforts to obscure the real presence or sacrificial nature of the mass, I can see why some decided to change it. Plus that seems such an odd combination at first glance.
If your church has an altar rail, you could perhaps sell all the first communion parents (and the photographer) on the idea of receiving kneeling on the basis of how nice a picture it would make to have all the cute first communion kids kneeling together... it would be adorable... -
Kneeling in the hand? Did I miss something?
I have difficulty enough just trying to kneel. -
I would like to receive kneeling but can't unless there is altar rails to help me up again. I wonder if the pc crowd would be amenable to arguments about discrimination against the disabled?Thanked by 1Jeffrey Quick
-
No altar rails at my church..
-
rogue63: St Thomas transcended but did not deny the "straw."
Priorities. Our High Mass usually lasts an hour and ten minutes. Occasionally, I see someone leave at precisely one hour. I would only ask, would you leave a football game or a movie after an hour? -
Sorry, father. That is a confusing locution, isn't it. What was meant was that one kneels at the altar rail and receives the sacrament in the throne of his crossed palms, and then partakes of it therefrom. There is, though some would gainsay it, no disrespect in this. On the contrary, it is done with the most profound sense of awe and gratitude. Far more so for me than to be hand fed while I stick my tongue out. I rather doubt that Jesus went about the upper room putting the elements of that first eucharist on the disciples tongues. There was never a time in my life at which I did not believe that Jesus was objectively present in the eucharistic species. This is made plain as day even in the abrupt eucharistic prayers of the BCP. (What is really rather astonishing is not that millions upon millions of Anglicans do believe, but that many other millions don't. Their prayer books spell it out rather explicitly enough for a child to apprehend... not to mention our Lord's very words. For an Anglican to disbelieve what his prayer book says explicitly and our Lord proclaimed requires the determined and foolish explaining away of it by low church priests who will have none of it.)Thanked by 1ronkrisman
-
Ok, here's something I have asked some modern liturgists about and have not recieved a good answer:
A number of times I have visited Methodist churches. Many methodist churches feature altar rails and the all the people kneel when receiving and many receive on the toungue.
So, how come methodist folk, who don't believe that communion is Christ, receive kneeling at an altar rail, while Catholics who do believe in the real presence, stand (no altar rail in sight) and receive in the hand?Thanked by 1M. Jackson Osborn -
As an old friend once told me (then a Methodist), "You Methodists are just Catholics who haven't found their way home yet."
-
I think that Methodist do believe that Christ is present, just in a different way.
@MJO, taking on the hand is a good way to recieve the Eucharist, but it's better to recieve on the tongue. The reason for this as I understand it, is that the priest takes out the Lord and places it on your tongue. If you recieve in the hand. There are more things that could go wrong and the Lord could end up on the floor.
Every time the Host is touched, tiny particles are removed and are either attached to your hand, fingers, etc. the priest is trained to deal with those particles we are not. So when we recieve in the hand and then just lower our hands, the Lord potentially falls on the floor or down the drain when we wash our hands or on the door knob or wherever else.
The priest washes the vessels and wipes his hands in cloths that are properly cleaned so that particles are properly taken care of. -
FYI... Every particle contains the whole Jesus, Body, blood soul and divinity.
I think I just talked my self into recieving on the tongue. I currently recieve in the hand. -
In last Sunday's bulletin, a sheet was enclosed that included the minutes of the February Parish Council Meeting. Here's once section of those minutes:
"Children in the First Communion program (First and Second grades) and young people in the Confirmation Program (9th and 10th grades) will not be allowed to receive these sacraments if they do not go to church. As they leave Mass, they are asked to pick up a bulletin and have Fr. D--- sign it. Excuses that people are busy and, therefore, cannot go to church are immature and will never be accepted."
I thought--for better or worse--this was a novel approach to the situation. It reminded me, though, of the days when, during the Easter season, as a person knelt for Communion, the altar boy would receive an "official" card from the communicant with his/her name on it, which served the purpose of the parish having a viable record that the person fulfilled his/her Easter duty.
-
@ghmus7 yep the Methodist church I grew up in had rails, we always knelt. Strange, isn't it? Lol CH I found my way home! Took 18 years but I got there lol!
-
@oldhymns: that is the right way to deal with the problem. Unfortunately, the proverbial crap would hit the fan if anyone suggested this at my church. All these yuppie parents who think they have to overbook their kids in dance, sports, and every other extracurricular activity would riot in the streets.
-
In many Lutheran synods communicants filled out a card every time they received at communion services. These cards were counted and kept on file. If a parishioner was lax in receiving he or she would be called in for counsel by the pastor. Further, in the older days they were required to make an appointment for confession before receiving at communion. They always kneel at the communion rail. I think that only Catholics could have come up with something so purely utilitarian as the communion line. Ditto, the only ones who would forbid rails in new churches and rip them out or disuse them in older churches.
-
I have been in more Protestant church building with communion rails than Catholic church's with them. That should be a shocking and offensive thing. If I were to go into a church without knowing its denominational affiliation, and discovered it had an altar against the wall (and no free standing ad populum altar) and a communion rail, I would have to assume it to be Lutheran or perhaps Anglican or some such, for it would almost certainly not be Catholic, even though it would look rather like a Catholic church from the 60s or earlier.
As to the mandatory attendance at mass for confirmation or first communion, in my experience there are many parents who will bring their kids to "mandatory" confirmation preparation classes, even years worth of them, but will not take the same kids to Sunday mass. It is an item of great consternation for priests and catechists. In many of these families neither the parents nor the kids go to mass (other than perhaps Christmas and Easter), but the parents require the kids to go to confirmation class and be confirmed, and then will let them drop out of all participation at church (which the parents have already done decades ago, and the kids are asking to do). Some places this has been common for several generations even, which I thought was mind boggling when I first learned of it. -
@stephen: hence the reason I stated in my original post that the "mandatory" parent meeting didn't apply to my family. We go regularly, my kids know how the Mass works, and they know how to conduct themselves. I could think of many other more productive ways I could have spent that weekday noon hour...
-
I think it is worth noting that the communicated symbology (for lack of a better phrase) of these different methods of communion distribution are not intrinsic.
For example, the everyone kneels at the rail method strikes me as an overly efficient batching method, which requires the priest and deacon (and/or other ministers) to shuttle back and forth within the sanctuary.
The line, to my eyes, is much more dignified.
Perhaps the best situation would be an incredibly inefficient line up to a single prie-dieu.
And you may disagree, but that's my point: "to my eyes."
It's important to remember that gestural meaning is culturally created and individually negotiated, not inherent.
However:
Given the obscene number of things liturgical over which I obsess, I try not to give distribution mechanics much worry.
And while I am extremely appalled at the common lack of concern over Eucharistic care and propriety, I find the obsession over microscopic particles of Jesus to be akin to missing the forest for the lichen. -
Adam, you might want to consider your point of view. You are speaking as though standing somewhere watching Communion happen. Think about what it would be like kneeling and waiting. It's actually quite nice.
-
I've experienced both. OR all three, if you consider individual kneeling and batch kneeling separately.
I was just pointing out -- this isn't dogmatic or inherent truth.
And --- as I said before --- I will gladly receive in whatever manner is available to me.Thanked by 1Kathy -
It's just interesting that you're thinking about how it looks. That makes sense to me when considering an entrance or recessionals, but at Communion seems aesthetically beside the point, particularly for a communicant, who is on the move and doesn't see anything for any length of time.
-
FidemInFidebus, it took me about 40 years to get there! :-)Strange, isn't it? Lol CH I found my way home! Took 18 years but I got there lol!Thanked by 1Patricia Cecilia -
When you read these responses to the question of kneeling and altar rails, I cant help thinking that the whole practice of standing and recieving in the hand was something imposed on the people by the liturgical dictators. Obviously if you build churches with nowhere to kneel, you are forcing communicants to stand. Did this really come from the people?
-
Well, you GET it to come from the people.
You send in experts (= people from out of town, = change agents) to have an open forum meeting. During this meeting you explain what Vatican II was getting at. NO KNEELING.
Then you take a survey.
If the survey still wants kneelers, have another open forum. Repeat as necessary.
Out of sheer exhaustion, the "majority" of parishioners surveyed--those who show up for the last huckster session--will in obedience to "the spirit of Vatican II--vote for no kneelers.
Easy enough to do. -
Ugh, Kathy, "manufactured consent". I'd like to think that the techniques of American power politics had been kept out of the Church, but I guess not. What's next, the Alinskyization of faithful priests?
-
Here's what I would vote for if I had any say in what my church did. I think they should put a kneeler in the center so the people who want to kneel while receiving just stay in the center and kneel. Then if someone doesn't want to kneel, they will step to the side and receive from a minister standing to the side (my church usually has 4 ministers for Communion). I think it would be simple and wouldn't force anyone to do anything they didn't want to. And some people can't physically kneel, so then they wouldn't feel bad.
Every once in a while someone genuflects before receiving or they kneel while receiving, and it really is awkward. I appreciate when people receive in the way they think is most reverent, but there's got to be a better way to do it.Thanked by 1PaxMelodious -
musiclover: That's what we have: two kneelers in the centre. If you wish to kneel you may. If you don't, you don't have too. It's all very civil and organized.Thanked by 1Adam Wood
Welcome to the MusicaSacra Forum!
To participate in the discussions on Catholic church music, sign in or register as a forum member, The forum is a project of the Church Music Association of America.
Categories
- All Discussions21,561
- General Music Discussion7,802
- Job Openings1,366
- Management of Music Programs839
- Choral Matters523
- Church Documents and Rubrics515
- CMAA Notes293
- Events668
- For Newcomers: Read First24
- Sacred Polyphony532
- Hymnody841
- Gregorian Chant: General2,619
- ↳ Graduale Romanum and Liber Usualis357
- ↳ Graduale Simplex55
- ↳ Semiology59
- Vernacular Plainsong682
- Anglican Use and Anglican Chant67
- Organ, Other Instruments and Repertoire420
- New Composition/Works in Progress1,235
- Recordings223
- Music for Hispanic Ministry155
- Music Education: Children208
- Music Education: General217
- News Items243
- Positions Wanted58
- General Discussion: Catholicism729
- Amusements173
- General Discussion1,014
- Opinions115