The Lord Jesus with His Apostles during the Celebration of the Holy Eucharist
-
fr. abe
nanalilito na po talaga ako kung alin ang tama ang TLM o ang new MASS kasi napansin ko sa latin mass ng SSPX ang pari lang ang nag bibigay ng communion , pero sa new mass pati young lay minister o kung minsan pati yung madre ay maka pag bigay din ng communion sa mass. fr. sana e post mo to para maliwanagan ako at para na din sa iba naming mga CFD na kasamahan
- Fr. Abe, CRS said...
-
[fr. abe nanalilito na po talaga ako kung alin ang tama ang TLM o ang new MASS]
PAREHONG TAMA.
ANG SANTA IGLESIA AY MARAMING RITO NG MISA. MERONG LATIN MASS [TRIDENTINE LATIN MASS AT THE NEW MASS - THE PAULINE MASS]. MERON DING BYZANTINE GREEK MASS AT ABOUT 21 NA IBA PA.
YUNG MGA NAGSASABI NA TLM LANG ANG TAMA WAG MONG PANIWALAAN YON. MGA SIRA ANG ULO NON. MGA MANLOLOKO.
[kasi napansin ko sa latin mass ng SSPX ang pari lang ang nag bibigay ng communion, pero sa new mass pati young lay minister o kung minsan pati yung madre ay maka pag bigay din ng communion sa mass.]
ANG BATAS NA PINATUTUPAD NG SSPX AY LUMANG BATAS. DAHIL DUMAMI NA ANG CATOLICO, WE ARE NOW 1.1 BILLION HINDI NA KAYA NG MGA PARI NA SILA LANG ANG NAGBIBIGAY NG COMUNION TULAD NG DATI. DAHIL DITO GINAMIT NG SANTA IGLESIA SA PANGUNGUNA NG SANTO PAPA AT MGA OBISOPO NA SIYANG SUCCESSORS OF THE APOSTLES NA MAGDAGDAG NG ISANG MINISTERIO SA SIMBAHAN PARA TUMULONG MAGBIGAY NG HOLY EUCHARIST. ITO AY ANG MGA LAY MINISTERS.
ANG LAY MINISTERS AY HINDI LAY 'ONLY'. THEY ARE MINISTERS OF THE CHURCH HABANG SILA AY AUTHORIZED NA MAGLINGKOD SA SIMBAHAN BILANG EXTRAORDINARY MINISTERS OF THE HOLY EUCHARIST.
HINDI TUTUO YUNG CLAIM NG MGA SSPX NA PARI LANG ANG PWEDENG HUMAWAK NG HOLY EUCHARIST DAHIL ANG MGA DIAKONO AY MAY SPECIAL NA PERMISSION DIN NA HAWAKAN ITO.
DATI MGA APOSTOL LANG AT MGA OBISPO ANG NAGMIMISA. NUNG DUMAMI NA ANG MGA CATOLICO NAG ORDINA SILA NG MGA PARI. LATER NUNG DUMAMI NA NAMAN SILA PUMILI SILA NG MGA DEACON AT PINATUNGAN NG KAMAY. NGAYONG SOBRANG DAMI NA NG MGA CATOLICO MINABUTI NG SIMBAHAN NA MULING PUMILI NG MGA LALAKING MAGIGING KATUWANG NG MGA PARI SA PAGBIBIGAY NG HOLY COMMUNION.
ANG SANTA IGLESIA NA MAY AUTHORITY NA ORDINA NG OBISPO, PARI AT DIACONO AY MERON DING KAPANGYARIHANG MAGBIGAY NG AUTHORIZATION FOR SPECIAL MINISTERS OF THE HOLY EUCHARIST.
THE LAY MINISTERS ARE TEMPORARY MINISTERS BECAUSE THEIR AUTHORIZATION IS NOT PERMANENT AS THAT OF PRIESTHOOD. WHEN THEIR TENURE AS LAY MINISTER ENDS THEIR ROLE AS SPECIAL MINISTERS ALSO ENDS. AND THE CHURCH WHO CAN BESTOW PERMANENT AUTHORITY ALSO HAS THE POWER TO GIVE AUTHORIZATION TEMPORARILY. BESIDES, THE CHURCH DIDN'T MAKE THEM TEMPORARY PRIESTS OR DEACONS. THEY ARE NOT ALLOWED TO CONSECRATE. ONLY PRIESTS COULD CONSECRATE THE BREAD AND THE WINE INTO THE BODY AND BLOOD OF CHRIST.
THE SSPX HAS NO VALID REASON TO DENY THE RIGHT OF THE CHURCH TO CREATE MINISTRIES IN THE CHURCH. REFUSAL TO RECOGNIZE THE LAY MINISTERS IS AN ACT OF DENIAL OF THE AUTHORITY OF THE CHURCH AND OF THE POPE.
TUNGKOL NAMAN SA MADRE. ANG MADRE AY ISANG CONSECRATED PERSON. SIYA AY HINDI ORDINARIONG CATOLICO. KAPAG KONTI ANG LAY MINISTERS AT MARAMING TAO O KAYA AY WALANG LAY MINISTERS AT NAG-IISA ANG PARI ANG MGA RELIGIOUS AY PWEDENG TUMULONG. KASI CONSECRATED SILA AT MAY SAPAT NA CATECHESIS TUNGKOL SA HOLY EUCHARIST.
ANG PROBLEMA SA SSPX YUNG MGA KAWALANGHIYAAN NI WILLIAMSON AT NI LEFEBVRE OK SA KANILA PERO YUNG MGA MABUBUTING BAGAY NA TULAD NG LAY MINISTERS AT NG MGA MADRE MINAMASAMA. ANG PROBLEMA AY NASA KANILANG UTAK. ISIPIN MO ANG MANGYAYARI SA ATING MGA PAROKYA NA MAY 3 MISA SA LINGGO AT 7 MASSES SA MGA KAPILYA, TIGNAN MO KUNG ANO ANG MANGYAYARI KUNG PARI LANG ANG MAGBIBIGAY NG COMUNION. PWEDE YON NUON DAHIL KONTI PA LANG ANG KAPILYA AT MGA PAROKYA PATI ANG MGA TAONG NAGSISIMBA. NGAYON AY NAPAKARAMI NA. ANG PARISH NAMIN SA ALABANG AY MAY 6 MASSES EVERY SUNDAY. AT BAWAT ISA HANGGANG SA LABAS ANG TAO. SA MAIN CHURCH PA LANG YON. E YUNG MGA MISA PA SA KAPILYA.
[fr. sana e post mo to para maliwanagan ako at para na din sa iba naming mga CFD na kasamahan]
YES, BROTHER. SORRY FOR BEING LATE. MARAMING CONCERN.
YANG MGA SSPX ANG MGA DEMONIO. KASI WALA SILANG AUTHORIZATION TO CELEBRATE THE MASS. KAYA ILLEGAL OR ILLICIT ANG MISA NILA.
REMEMBER NA KAMING MGA PARI KAILANGAN NAMIN NG 'FACULTY' FROM THE BISHOP. WE MUST HAVE PERMISSION TO CELEBRATE THE MASS AND TO HEAR CONFESSION. ANG MGA SSPX AY WALANG 'FACULTY'. KAYA MGA ILLEGAL SILA. MGA TRAIDOR SA SANTA IGLESIA.
.jpg)
![ST. JEROME EMILIANI [1486-1537]](http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_6dKQTchkJaA/R0lo013dyBI/AAAAAAAAB_4/XzUAPDESwwQ/s1600/St.+Jerome+in+prayer,+small_1.jpg)
When a bishop is excommunicated (Lefebvre)he lost the authority to pass on apostolic succession.
ReplyDeleteGood day po father, ang altar server po ba pwedeng magbigay ng communion? kasi po altar server ako then one time kulang po ang lay minister kaya tinawag ako ng pari tapos pinatong nya ang kanyang kamay sa ulo tapos nag recite cya ng prayer tapos po nun nakapagbigay na po ako ng communion. pero ang sabi nung pari para lang daw po sa mass na un ndi po daw permanent.
ReplyDeleteI WILL ANSWER YOUR QUESTION IF YOU WILL GIVE ME YOUR REAL NAME, THAT OF YOUR PARISH AND THE PARISH PRIEST.
ReplyDelete[When a bishop is excommunicated (Lefebvre)he lost the authority to pass on apostolic succession.]
ReplyDeleteYES. BUT THE ORDINATION IS STILL VALID. THAT'S THE TRUTH EVEN THOUGH IT IS UNFORTUNATE.
[YES. BUT THE ORDINATION IS STILL VALID. THAT'S THE TRUTH EVEN THOUGH IT IS UNFORTUNATE. ]
ReplyDeleteis this true po? kahit tiwalag yung ordinasyon ay valid?
ano po implication nung ORDINATION IS STILL VALID?
maraming salamat po..
Fr. Abe,
ReplyDeleteI would like to bring to your attention the phrase "EXTRAORDINARY MINISTERS OF THE HOLY EUCHARIST" which you used to refer to Lay ministers. I am informed from reading Orthodox Catholic writers that this phrase is incorrect and can cause confusion and even lead to abuse.
There are NO "Extraordinary Ministers of the Holy Eucharist" for no lay person is given extraordinary authority or power to consecrate bread and wine. The Minister of the Holy Eucharist is the priest and no other; no extraordinary minister. However, there are "Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion." Lay MInisters are asked to assist the priest in Holy Communion and it is in area where they are granted extraordinary faculties. Hence, the proper and correct phrase to describe Lay Ministers should be "Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion".
Dear Bro. Forest-King,
ReplyDeleteIf the Church will use the title "Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion" there is no problem for me. I WILL USE THE OFFICIAL TITLE DESIGNATED BY OUR CHURCH.
Now, concerning the term Extraordinary Minister of the HOly Eucharist. It is not stated there that the Lay Minister can consecrate. Because not all Ministers can consecrate. Ministry means service NOT POWER TO CONSECRATE.
THE POWER TO CONSECRATE RESIDES IN THE ORDINATION TO THE PRIESTHOOD. SO IF WE CALL THE LAY 'Extraordinary Priest of the Holy Eucharist' then there is the danger.
ANYWAY, ITS NO PROBLEM BECAUSE THEY CANNOT CONSECRATE AND THEY ARE NOT PRIESTS.
[is this true po? kahit tiwalag yung ordinasyon ay valid?]
ReplyDeleteVALID ANG ORDINASYON IBIG SABIHIN TUNAY SILANG PARI O OBISPO. SUBALIT MGA PARI AT OBISPO NA NAGTRAIDOR SA SANTA IGLESIA DAHIL HINDI FULLY UNITED WITH THE POPE AT HINDI SUMUSUNOD SA CANON LAW NG SIMBAHAN.
[ano po implication nung ORDINATION IS STILL VALID?]
MALAKI.
UNA, VALIDO ANG SACRAMENTO KAPAG ISINAGAWA NILA. SUBALIT MALAKI ANG IMPLEKASYON NITO SA KANILANG KALULUWA DAHIL WALA SILANG AUTHORIZATION NG SANTA IGLESIA NA MAGDAOS NG MGA SACRAMENTO.
ANG PARI AY HINDI LANG UMAASA SA ORDINASYON. SIYA AY HUMINHINGI NG 'AUTHORIZATION' OR FACULTY SA KANYANG BISHOP. KAPAG WALA ITO ILLEGAL ANG ACTIVITIES NG PARI. TAKSIL SIYA SA SIMBAHAN.
IKALAWA, ANG PARING NAGMIMISA KAHIT WALANG LEGAL NA FACULTY AY MASAMANG EJEMPLO NG DISOBEDIENCE. IKAPAPAHAMAK ITO NG KANYANG KALULUWA DAHIL HINAHATI NIYA ANG KATAWAN NI CRISTO SA KANYANG HINDI PAGSUNOD.
salamat father..
ReplyDeletefollowup lang po..
ano po ang implication if yung pari na valid yung ordindation tapos nagsawa ng sacramento..??
ano po ang effect sa member?
DUON SA PARING NAGSASAGAWA NG ILLICIT MASSES OF COURSE HE IS SINNING BY HIS DISOBEDIENCE AND BY PERFORMING HIS DISOBEDIENCE IN PUBLIC.
ReplyDeleteON THE PART OF THE CATHOLICS WHO PARTICIPATE IN THE ILLICIT MASSES, THEY ARE CONSENTING TO THE REBELLIOUSNESS OR DISOBEDIENCE OF THE PRIEST PERFORMING ILLEGAL ACTIONS.
Fr.. kilala nyo po c Arman G. de Castro...
ReplyDeletee2 po ang blog nya
http://armandecastro.wordpress.com/
Fr.. ang sabi po ni arman de castro..SI SAULO/PABLO ang nakarating sa ROMA at doon ay nanirahan ng higit kumulang sa 2 taon..at hindi daw po nakarating si pedro sa roma..pakiexplain nman po.
ReplyDeletehttp://armandecastro.wordpress.com/2010/10/30/hindi-nakarating-si-peterpedro-sa-roma/
Salamat poh!!
GOD BLESS
fr.abe
ReplyDeletethanks for the explanations, fr. marami na pong mga CFD na natutung mahalin ang TLM . gusto po sana naming mayrong regular na TLM .kahit every sunday man lang dito sa amin sa Davao. our secretary general kuya R. once requested it from our Bishop here pero hindi kami pinag bigyan.sana po matulungan nyo kami regarding dito. kasi marami na sa amin ang naga attend ng mass sa SSPX. ang dating namin para kaming nakikipag plastikan sa mga faithful ng sspx and what was the reason na ayaw ng bishop e grant ang request namin pls, help us fr. e post nyo po ito to clarify some of our CFD brothers.
Padre,
ReplyDeleteI really do not feel comfortable with that phrase. With your response, I tried to go back to my books. And, I realized that I read it in "Redemptionis Sacramentum", a Vatican Instruction "On certain matters to be observed or to be avoided regarding the Most Holy Eucharist". With all due respect, Father, let me refer you to this Instruction from the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments.
Said document tackled the issue of "The Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion" in Paragraphs 154-160. Said document referred to Lay Minister as "The Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion". Paragraphs 154 and 156 of said document explicitly prohibits us from using the phrase "Extraordinary Minister of the (Holy) Eucharist."
Dear Bro. Forest-King,
ReplyDeleteI already told you that I don't have problem with that terminology because I do not teach that lay ministers could consecrate. OF COURSE THEY CANNOT AND THEY MUST NOT.
The term lay minister is a popular term and commonly they are called Extraordinary Minister of the Holy Eucharist. Now, if the Holy See prefers to use the term EXTRAORDINARY MINISTER OF THE HOLY COMMUNION then THAT'S FINE WITH ME. Let us call them that. I am answering questions not as a living Encyclopedia of Theology wherein I give all EXACTLY the theological terms that you have in mind. I am here not to teach the already knowledgeable but to explain the faith without going into minutest details.
My explanation actually agrees with what the Redemptionis Sacramentum conveys THAT THE LAY MINISTERS ARE NOT PRIESTS. THEY CANNOT CONSECRATE. So, if you are well-verse in Redemptionis Sacamentum and prefer to use that terminlogy to inform the public, fine. I agree with you.
This is what we get when we support and help each other. When I answer questions and the Catholic readers feel that they know something that I didn't properly address they contribute their knowledge and for that we enrich each other. As you can here now, I am in theological agreement with Redemptionis Sacramentum but you are helping me remember an important terminology that I have overlooked.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH AND GOD BLESS.
[fr.abe
ReplyDeletethanks for the explanations, fr. marami na pong mga CFD na natutung mahalin ang TLM.]
That is good but I hope they will not hate the vernacular Mass.
[gusto po sana naming mayrong regular na TLM .kahit every sunday man lang dito sa amin sa Davao.]
I was told that the Cathedral is being renovated in order to accommodate the TLM.
[our secretary general kuya R. once requested it from our Bishop here pero hindi kami pinag bigyan.]
THE REASON IS VERY DEEP. IT IS NOT JUST A SIMPLE REFUSAL. OUR CHURCH AUTHORITIES ARE ALSO CAREFUL BECAUSE THE COMMUNITIES CELEBRATING THE TLM ARE BEING INFILTRATED BY SSPX TRAITORS.
[sana po matulungan nyo kami regarding dito.]
NO ONE WILL BE ABLE TO HELP YOU EXCEPT YOU YOURSELVES. CONTINUESLY REQUEST THE ARCHBISHOP OF DAVAO. THEN, BE OBEDIENT SONS AND DAUGHTERS OF THE CHURCH AVOID THE SSPX SO THAT THE BISHOPS AND THE LOCAL CLERGY WILL NOT SEE YOU AS A THREAT OR DANGER.
[kasi marami na sa amin ang naga attend ng mass sa SSPX.]
THE MASS OF SSPX IS ILLICIT. IT MEANS ILLEGAL. THE SSPX PRIESTS HAVE NO FACULTY TO CELEBRATE THE HOLY MASS AND TO HEAR CONFESSIONS. THEY ARE IN OPEN DISOBEDIENCE TO THE POPE AND AS CATHOLIC APOLOGISTS YOU SHOULD KNOW HOW TO ABOUT THIS KIND OF GROUP.
[ang dating namin para kaming nakikipag plastikan sa mga faithful ng sspx]
TALAGANG KA-PLASTIKAN ANG GINAGAWA NINYO KASI NANDUON KAYO E. KUNG DUON KAYO SA CATHEDRAL O SA PARISH NYO NAGSISIMBA HINDI KAYO MAIILANG KASI SARILI NYONG TAHANAN IYON.
[and what was the reason na ayaw ng bishop e grant ang request namin pls, help us fr.]
THE BISHOPS ARE CAREFUL ALSO. THEY DON'T WANT THEIR LOCAL TERRITORIES TO BE INFESTED BY SSPX AND SEDEVACANTISTS. HINDI NYA SIGURO ALAM NA NAPASUKAN NA KAYO. GET AWAY FROM THE SSPX AND THE SEDEVACANTISTS. THEY WILL ONLY POISON YOUR MIND AGAINST THE POPE AND THE VATICAN COUNCIL. THEY ARE TREACHEROUS AND VENOMOUS.
[ e post nyo po ito to clarify some of our CFD brothers.]
HERE IT IS.
WALA NAMAN SIYANG PINAKITANG TALATA NA NAGSASABI NA HINDI NAKAPUNTA NG ROMA SI SAN PEDRO.
ReplyDeleteI DON'T KNOW HIM.
ReplyDeleteBy reading the comments of an anonymous CFD from Davao:
ReplyDeleteI think the reason you were refused by the Bishop is that you have attended the SSPX mass before you request him to allow TLM in the cathedral. And for me that's an apparent disobedience. Obey first before you request. You set a bad example to the lay people. If the bishop grants your request he may be misinterpreted by the people -- that in order a request be granted, one must do something illicit first.
WELL SAID, DEAR ANONYMOUS.
ReplyDeleteI'm afraid I have to agree to Dear Anonymous statements. I would also like to add It is true that the ordinary form is experiencing abuses because unliturgical practices are introduced to its sacred rites. But looking for extraordinary form of the Roman mass as a solution to these liturgical abuses is cannot be feasible. Remember well that SSPX priests, who have been suspended to exercise their priestly ministry- are committing liturgical abuse when they celebrate the mass despite in this canonical discipline imposed by the Holy See. Therefore, I say it is a Hypocrisy of we criticize the mass of Paul VI when it is full of liturgical abuses but hails the mass of the illicit masses of sspx- they are just the same crime
ReplyDeleteFather I have red in "Memoriale Domini" that the communion in hand WAS PRACTICED IN THE ANCIENT TIMES:
ReplyDelete"It is certainly true that ancient usage once allowed the faithful to take this divine food in their hands and to place it in their mouths themselves."
I also learned that many trads are complaining that they were the one who took the bread from the ciborium themselves. Apparently According to the same source, this practice WAS ALSO USED IN THE ANCIENT FORM:
"It is also true that in very ancient times they were allowed to take the Blessed Sacrament with them from the place where the holy sacrifice was celebrated. This was principally so as to be able to give themselves Viaticum in case they had to face death for their faith."
The Full Document Entitled "Memoriale Domini" from the Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship
Issued on May 29, 1969. can be found here:
http://www.ewtn.com/library/curia/cdwmemor.htm
[at hindi daw po nakarating si pedro sa roma.]
ReplyDeleteHowever, surprisingly, Holy Scripture does, in fact, say that Peter was in Rome...
Peter wrote,
"The Church which is at Babylon, chosen together with you, greets you, and so does my son Mark." 1Pet 5:13.
Where is this Babylon? By the time the New Testament was written, the city of Babylon, in what is now Iraq, was of almost no importance. Its days of glory were long past in the Old Testament.
Christians were under constant persecution by both the Jews and the Romans from the very beginning and had to practice the faith underground in the homes of believers, and in the catacombs of Rome. In order to recognize one another as fellow Christians, they used code words and symbols. The fish symbol (icthos) was used for recognition, and Babylon was the code word for Rome.
If Peter had said he was writing from Rome, then no doubt, the Romans would have begun an intensive search for him.
"The blessed apostles, then, having founded and built up the Church, committed into the hands of Linus the office of the episcopate. Of this Linus, Paul makes mention in the Epistles to Timothy. To him succeeded Anacletus; and after him, in the third place from the apostles, Clement was allotted the bishopric. This man, as he had seen the blessed apostles, and had been conversant with them, might be said to have the preaching of the apostles still echoing [in his ears], and their traditions before his eyes. Nor was he alone [in this], for there were many still remaining who had received instructions from the apostles. In the time of this Clement, no small dissension having occurred among the brethren at Corinth, the Church in Rome dispatched a most powerful letter to the Corinthians, exhorting them to peace, renewing their faith, and declaring the tradition which it had lately received from the apostles, proclaiming the one God, omnipotent, the Maker of heaven and earth, the Creator of man, who brought on the deluge, and called Abraham, who led the people from the land of Egypt, spoke with Moses, set forth the law, sent the prophets, and who has prepared fire for the devil and his angels."
Iraneus, Against Heresies, Book 3 Chapter 3.
O THAT IS A VERY IMPORTANT DOCUMENT BRO. KIM.
ReplyDeleteSt Irenaeus, "Against Heresies", 3,1,1, 180 A.D., J208
ReplyDelete"...in their own dialect, while Peter and Paul were evangelizing at Rome, and laying the foundations of the Church."
St Irenaeus, "Against Heresies", chapter III,
"...the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; as also [by pointing out] the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops."
Eusebius, "History of the Church", 2,14,6, 300 A.D., J651dd
In the same reign of Claudius, the all-good and gracious providence which watches over all things guided Peter, the great and mighty one among the Apostles, who, because of his virtue, was the spokesman for all the others, to Rome."
Tertullian, "The demurrer against the heretics", chapter XXXII,1,
"...like the church of the Romans where Clement was ordained by Peter."
Who has the authority to ordain priests? Only Bishops do. Clement was ordained by the Bishop of Rome, Peter.
Saint Peter of Alexandria, "The Canonical Letter", canon 9, 306 A.D.
"Peter, the first chosen of the Apostles, having been apprehended often and thrown into prison and treated with ignominy, at last was crucified in Rome."
Eusebius, "The Chronicle" Ad An.Dom 68, J651cc
"Nero is the first, in addition to all his other crimes, to make a persecution against the Christians, in which Peter and Paul died gloriously in Rome."
Eusebius, "History of the Church", 3,2, 300 A.D., J652a
"After the martyrdom of Paul and Peter, Linus was the first appointed to the Episcopacy of the Church at Rome."
"En reponse a la demande," to presidents of those conferences of bishops petitioning the indult for communion in the hand, 29 May 1969: from the same Congregation tells us the responsibility when we receive the communion in our hand:
ReplyDelete"The option offered to the faithful of receiving the Eucharistic bread in their hand and putting it into their own mouth must not turn out to be the occasion for regarding it as ordinary bread or as just another religious article. Instead this option must increase in them a consciousness of the dignity of the members of Christ's Mystical Body, into which they are incorporated by baptism and by the grace of the Eucharist. It must also increase their faith in the sublime reality of the Lord's body and blood, which they touch with their hand. Their attitude of reverence must measure up to what they are doing."
The full text can be found in this link:
http://www.ewtn.com/library/curia/cdwmemor.htm
It is strange though that the Philippines is not included in the list who had the permission from Rome to receive the communion in hand. By nay chance father do you have any copy of that indult or have seen that?
Check my latest post, Father!
ReplyDeletehttp://mediasocietyandgod.blogspot.com/2010/11/why-pray-for-dead.html
In order, then, that the faithful who are in the state of grace and rightly and devoutly wish to share in the sacred meal may not be deprived of this sacramental aid and solace, Pope Paul VI has decided it opportune to authorize special ministers who will be empowered to give communion to themselves and others of the faithful, under the exact and specified conditions here listed.
ReplyDeleteI. Local Ordinaries possess the faculty enabling them to permit fit persons, each chosen by name as a special minister, in a given instance or for a set period or even permanently, to give communion to themselves and others of the faithful and to carry it to the sick residing at home:
a. whenever no priest, deacon, or acolyte is available;
b. whenever the same ministers are impeded from administering communion because of another pastoral ministry, ill-health, or old age;
c. whenever the number of faithful wishing to receive communion is so great that the celebration of Mass or the giving of communion outside Mass would take too long.
Excerpt from "Immansae Caritatis" —On Facilitating Reception Of Communion In Certain Circumstances, from the Sacred Congregation of the Sacraments, January 29, 1973
full text can be found here: http://www.ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CDWIMCAR.htm
Here's the link of that document father: http://www.ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CDWIMCAR.htm
ReplyDeleteIt is interesting to note that the document IMMENSAE CARITATIS referred to the Lay Ministers as SPECIAL MINISTERS FOR DISTRIBUTING HOLY COMMUNION and also as SPECIAL MINISTERS OF THE EUCHARIST.
ReplyDeleteTo CFD Davao Who Wanted to Have A TLM.
ReplyDeleteIsa rin ako sa nanalangin na sana magkaroon ng TLM mass sa Davao City para matupad na ang kagusthan ninyo ngunit ako ay nanalangin din na sana wala ng CFD na pumsok sa simbahan ng SSPX upang duon magsimba, kasi alam nating lahat na ang grupong ito ay wala paring Full Communion to the Holy See kaya illigal amg mass nila.
Kung wala pang TLM sa Davao City,mayroon naman tayong vernacular mass na accepted na ating Church Magesterium and we know already that this two form of mass are co equal in nature.
But we always pray also na ang SSPX ay lubos na bumalik sa Roman Catholic Church with the Full Communion to our Pope.
Broder Donato...
to CFD Davao . since you love TLM so much, you can always request to the Bishop or you can invite priests whom you know that can say the TLM . just coordinate with our secretary kuya R. to fascilitate everything. we'll always pray you'll be guided always in the rigth directions.
ReplyDeleteCFD member...
its true father about dun sa blog post nio regarding nuns... kasi po nung nakaraang YFC international leaders conference sa baguio na may 10,500 present people pati po mga madre at brothers ay nakikita ko pong nagbibigay po ng communion... akala ko nga po hndi sila authorized mag pa communion but because as what as you said on your blog ok lang po pla cla magpacommunion
ReplyDeleteIn the Document Immensae Caritatis for Lay Ministers the Holy See specified that consecrated women can distribute Holy Communion like the Abbess of Monasteries, the Mother Superior or in case of necessity the nuns in the barrios or chapels or parishes:
ReplyDeleteIV. The fit person referred to in nos. I and II will be designated according to the order of this listing (which may be changed at the prudent discretion of the local Ordinary): reader, major seminarian, man religious, woman religious, catechist, one of the faithful—a man or a woman.
V. In the oratories of communities of both men and women religious the office of distributing communion in the circumstances stated in no. I may rightly be assigned to the non-ordained superior of men religious or to the superior of women religious or to their vicars.
THAT IS VERY CLEAR.
If you are Roman Catholic, your church shared the same rich apostolic and doctrinal heritage as the Orthodox Church for the first thousand years of its history, since during the first millennium they were one and the same Church. Lamentably, in 1054, the Pope of Rome broke away from the other four Apostolic Patriarchates (which include Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem), by tampering with the Original Creed of the Church, and considering himself to be infallible. Thus your church is 1,000 years old.
ReplyDeletesorce:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h41JmCCH7AQ&feature=related
nabasa ko yan sa youtube..they said that church of rome ang humiwalay pero sabi nyo naman na ang orthodox ang humiwalay.. ano po ba ang katotohanan?salamat po....
The Pope is the Universal Pastor of the Church. He is not only the Pope of Rome but the Pope of the entire Church. THE POPE IS THE SUCCESSOR OF ST. PETER. That is the Faith of the Fathers of the Church.
ReplyDeleteThe Church of Rome is the First and the Highest of all the churches of the Universal Church. The Fathers are unanimous in recognizing the importance of the Church of Rome. Never did the Fathers of the Church exalt Constantinople or Alexandria or Antioch or Jerusalem as equal with the Church of Rome.
The Church of Rome is the guardian of the faith. Also, it possesses the power given to the Blessed Peter to bind and loose. I has the authority to declare Dogmas of Faith with full authority. That is why the Filioque is a dogmatically valid formula of faith. Besides, the Filioque was already sung by the Latin Church even before the Schism of 1054. That is why it is historically wrong that it was a later addition.