![[Breviarium Romanum (1911)]](http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_B0nScPaCYsQ/SRCDmhX-U1I/AAAAAAAAAXk/Uo47Yl0_lO8/s400/BrevRomanum.png)
![[Divinum Officium (1960)]](http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_B0nScPaCYsQ/SRCDqrrObOI/AAAAAAAAAXs/7ckRut2STpE/s400/DO_button.png)
![[Liturgia Horarum]](http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_B0nScPaCYsQ/SRCDvqQqh9I/AAAAAAAAAX0/hlYQo4Xp8rk/s400/LH_button.png)
![[Universalis]](http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_B0nScPaCYsQ/SRCDzm5qn4I/AAAAAAAAAX8/CmJTMXpGMpA/s400/Universalis.png)
Some say the "consecrated hands for consecrated things" slogan is a myth.
Well, this "myth" comes from a certain Thomas Aquinas, an obscure, backwards, low-grade medieval theologian, who must be wrong, because everything before 1969 was wrong(!).
The dispensing of Christ's body belongs to the priest for three reasons. First, because, as was said above (Article 1), he consecrates as in the person of Christ. But as Christ consecrated His body at the supper, so also He gave it to others to be partaken of by them. Accordingly, as the consecration of Christ's body belongs to the priest, so likewise does the dispensing belong to him. Secondly, because the priest is the appointed intermediary between God and the people; hence as it belongs to him to offer the people's gifts to God, so it belongs to him to deliver consecrated gifts to the people. Thirdly, because out of reverence towards this sacrament, nothing touches it, but what is consecrated; hence the corporal and the chalice are consecrated, and likewise the priest's hands, for touching this sacrament. Hence it is not lawful for anyone else to touch it except from necessity, for instance, if it were to fall upon the ground, or else in some other case of urgency.
By the way, a myth is essentially "truth in allegorical form". Lord, save us from liturgical commentators.
Of course in some regions deacons' hands were consecrated (see Epistle of Gildas and Pontifical of Egbert of York), but the ministry of deacon was always pertaining the chalice.
The deacon, as being nigh to the priestly order, has a certain share in the latter's duties, so that he may dispense the blood; but not the body, except in case of necessity, at the bidding of a bishop or of a priest. First of all, because Christ's blood is contained in a vessel, hence there is no need for it to be touched by the dispenser, as Christ's body is touched. Secondly, because the blood denotes the redemption derived by the people from Christ; hence it is that water is mixed with the blood, which water denotes the people. And because deacons are between priest and people, the dispensing of the blood is in the competency of deacons, rather than the dispensing of the body.
As for the doctrine, Cardinal Ferdinando Antonelli himself, once said, I remember it well: “How come that we make liturgists who know nothing about theology?”
Well, this "myth" comes from a certain Thomas Aquinas, an obscure, backwards, low-grade medieval theologian, who must be wrong, because everything before 1969 was wrong(!).
The dispensing of Christ's body belongs to the priest for three reasons. First, because, as was said above (Article 1), he consecrates as in the person of Christ. But as Christ consecrated His body at the supper, so also He gave it to others to be partaken of by them. Accordingly, as the consecration of Christ's body belongs to the priest, so likewise does the dispensing belong to him. Secondly, because the priest is the appointed intermediary between God and the people; hence as it belongs to him to offer the people's gifts to God, so it belongs to him to deliver consecrated gifts to the people. Thirdly, because out of reverence towards this sacrament, nothing touches it, but what is consecrated; hence the corporal and the chalice are consecrated, and likewise the priest's hands, for touching this sacrament. Hence it is not lawful for anyone else to touch it except from necessity, for instance, if it were to fall upon the ground, or else in some other case of urgency.
Summa Theologica, p.III q.82 a.3
By the way, a myth is essentially "truth in allegorical form". Lord, save us from liturgical commentators.
~~*~~
Of course in some regions deacons' hands were consecrated (see Epistle of Gildas and Pontifical of Egbert of York), but the ministry of deacon was always pertaining the chalice.
The deacon, as being nigh to the priestly order, has a certain share in the latter's duties, so that he may dispense the blood; but not the body, except in case of necessity, at the bidding of a bishop or of a priest. First of all, because Christ's blood is contained in a vessel, hence there is no need for it to be touched by the dispenser, as Christ's body is touched. Secondly, because the blood denotes the redemption derived by the people from Christ; hence it is that water is mixed with the blood, which water denotes the people. And because deacons are between priest and people, the dispensing of the blood is in the competency of deacons, rather than the dispensing of the body.
ST III q.82 a.3
As for the doctrine, Cardinal Ferdinando Antonelli himself, once said, I remember it well: “How come that we make liturgists who know nothing about theology?”
- Msgr Bartolucci
How eloquent therefore, even if not of ancient custom, is the rite of the anointing of the hands in our Latin ordination, as though precisely for these hands a special grace and power of the Holy Spirit is necessary! To touch the sacred species and to distribute them with their own hands is a privilege of the ordained, one which indicates an active participation in the ministry of the Eucharist.
Dominicanae cenae, John Paul II, 1980
~~*~~
How eloquent therefore, even if not of ancient custom, is the rite of the anointing of the hands in our Latin ordination, as though precisely for these hands a special grace and power of the Holy Spirit is necessary! To touch the sacred species and to distribute them with their own hands is a privilege of the ordained, one which indicates an active participation in the ministry of the Eucharist.
Dominicanae cenae, John Paul II, 1980
(as seen on Rorate Cæli)
No comments:
Post a Comment