|
作者
|
內容
|
|
Cecil
|
Posted -
2002/10/28 上午 10:20:04
|
|
|
這本是慕道斑課提,但很多老教友也弄不清,不如討論一下。
有些堂區由信眾'用手'取聖體,到聖血爵蘸酒後自己放入口。有些堂區,發聖體的神父或聖體員將聖體蘸了聖血後,放進信眾口中。
前者對於地方淺窄的聖堂很不適宜:上次陳主教的就職祁福彌撒,祭台後一些座位的信友領時就亂龍過亂世佳人!
大彌撒往往人多，何不統一用後一個法子？有禮儀上限制嗎？似乎，宗座更主張人用口領的哩！
|
|
靚仔
|
Posted -
2002/10/28 下午 01:01:07
|
|
|
我覺得不是方法的問題,而是安排上的問題.
如給我選擇,我會揀成杯飲,但很多教友不喜歡.
這裡純粹是喜好的問題.
|
|
Cecil
|
Posted -
2002/10/28 下午 05:00:20
|
|
|
人人飲一啖都幾好氣氛,但仍解決不了地方少而人多的問題就是了。
|
|
靚仔
|
Posted -
2002/10/28 下午 05:30:22
|
|
|
地方少而人多不是問題的徵結,而是爭先恐後,及安排的問題.試問如果一行一行的出去領,又如何會產生混亂?
香港人的心態是很難理解的,教堂內已算很好的了.
|
|
Augustine
|
Posted -
2002/10/30 下午 02:05:40
|
|
|
It will be difficult (for hygienic reasons at least for me) to use the same cup for so many people. even it is wiped after the seep.
So uncomfortable...
I have seen in some other Christian churches, eg. the Baptists, who use small glass cups, one for a person. And contained in large piles of plates(hard to tell unless you've seen it).
That would be much better and easier accepted.
|
|
Cecil
|
Posted -
2002/10/30 下午 03:56:30
|
|
|
I would just want to ask: is it the case that the host seeped with the blood could not be taken by the hand?
Personally, I would like to see more faithful receiving the holy communion by mouth instead of by hand. It is ackward, chaotic and most importantly, the hand is not really that clean (unless you happen not to brush your teeth at all - never!)
|
|
Augustine
|
Posted -
2002/10/31 下午 12:50:59
|
|
|
Of course not.
But this is up to the local pastor's discretion and taste.
|
|
靚仔
|
Posted -
2002/10/31 下午 06:04:25
|
|
|
一個送聖體員,不論是常規還是特派的,都不應將"已"摻有聖血的聖體放於/交到領聖體者的手中.
送聖體員的手為衛生的原故,當然應該洗干淨.領受者的手嘛,你自己吃,你自己想吧!
我反而不大介懷,除非他的手真是污漕得很離譜.
當我們是罪人時,上主已先愛了我們.
他因愛我們的原故,願意降生於污穢的馬糟中.
他會介懷我們的手嗎?只要不是存心玷污聖體,我想上主較我們大方得多.
|
|
靚仔
|
Posted -
2002/10/31 下午 06:12:23
|
|
|
福音派的新教徒對聖體的理解和我們不同,他們一人一杯無甚問題,因為他們喝的始終只是葡萄汁,在他們的理解中也確實只是葡萄汁.所以餘下的倒掉便可.
我們卻要全數喝下,如果用他們的方式,執事們便要逐杯洗,及逐杯喝,每人的口水尾也嘗透,真是有些那過....
好彩我不是執事.(只是說說笑)
|
|
Augustine
|
Posted -
2002/11/1 上午 11:41:02
|
|
|
Ha Ha ya, and they probably got diabetes, because of the high sugar content of the grape juices......
|
|
去非
|
Posted -
2003/9/11 下午 05:06:09
|
|
|
我有一段長時間是每主日都口領聖血的﹐感覺很好﹐比沾一點好多了。而且﹐我本身從未試過因此而遇上衛生的問題。人多倒會是問題。
|
|
歸一
管理人員
|
Posted -
2003/9/11 下午 05:43:39
|
|
|
以上的所謂好與唔好，純粹是感覺；正如靚仔師兄所言，我們往往在禮儀一事上，過份強調效率而忘記了禮儀的目的。聖堂人多也不一定要用高效率的方法，如果要最好效率，就是不來聖堂﹗
|
|
去非
|
Posted -
2003/9/11 下午 06:00:37
|
|
|
“純粹是感覺”倒是真的﹔有一次我母親與我一起去望彌撒﹐她還叫我不要用口領聖血。在她而言﹐口領聖血絕不是“感覺好”的事兒。人太多方面﹐我覺得反而是“分配”的問題﹐有些人會較為大口的喝﹐到後來可能會不夠聖血。如果這樣﹐聖堂便要多備聖血﹔有些神父可能覺得毋須這樣做﹐那就只有拉倒了。
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2003/9/11 下午 07:31:24
|
|
|
記得聖禮部以往曾有一篇覆文（Notitiae 34 [1998] 5-6），當中好像曾經說過：在兼形共融時（communio sub utraque specie，即兼領聖體聖血），當口領而非手取。
原文已在小弟家中散佚了。未知有沒有人能夠把它引回來呢？
|
|
去非
|
Posted -
2003/9/14 下午 11:51:58
|
|
|
Edward兄﹐你說的那篇覆文不知是否能在梵帝崗的網頁找到﹖我試過search梵帝崗網站的英文文獻﹐卻好像沒有你說的那篇覆文﹖
|
|
Cecil
|
Posted -
2003/9/15 下午 05:43:41
|
|
|
That was in Latin. EWTN doesn't seem to have it either. May be the OFM.org website has it, but if it does, it is in Latin (I don't understand the words, so I don't know if that document is the 1998 Notitiae.)
There are too many such documents that we do not have here in Hong Kong.
Even the English responsorial psalter, large parishes don't have it (like my parish). So they just 'read out' the response. Also, in English masses, either the liturgy booklet is sadly out of date (the Catholic Truth Society version is out of print, but still in use), or the different English versions of the scripture defies any justifiable choice (some like the New
American, some like the Jerusalem, and some others),to the dismay of lectors and commentators.
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2003/9/15 下午 09:19:16
|
|
|
那份文件是數年前小弟在教區禮委做「散工」時在該處的圖書館影印的。但畢竟歲月流轉，恐怕要在家裡「搜掠」一番，才能使它再見天日了。
靚仔兄在聖神修院的圖書館，若他有空和方便的話，亦可以幫忙找一找吧？
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2003/9/21 下午 06:24:11
|
|
|
今期Adoremus Bulletin出了以下一篇文章：
Communion by Intinction: A "New" Way of Receiving Communion in Both Kinds
有趣的是：書中的作者是反對「self-intinction」的。究竟此法在禮儀中是否恰當呢？
|
|
去非
|
Posted -
2003/9/21 下午 11:34:38
|
|
|
Edward兄所提供的文章可說是甚有意思﹐有多地方都是我以前經歷過但卻沒有注意到的。我在北美的經驗是大部份時間都用手領聖體及由杯中直接領聖血。而神父沒有準備給教友領聖血時﹐口領聖體的仍然是少之又少(五十人中也沒一個)﹔當我"初到貴境"之時﹐常以香港的習慣直接用口領聖體﹐神父總是用奇異的眼光望著我。我一向也以為這純粹是文化問題而已﹐原來這當中還涉及了Liturgical progressivists的影響。
"They (Liturgical progressivists) insist on "real" bread, which must be broken into fragments -- each of which is, in reality, the Body, Blood Soul and Divinity of Christ"
這是真有其事的。我一直以為沒什麼特別﹐原來內裡是有點文章。
"The GIRM specifically forbids "self intinction", stressing that Holy Communion must always be received from a minister"
嘿﹐不知這段文字是否真的屬實﹖
事情其實是有兩面的﹐美國(北美)方面是太過激進﹐忽略了dignity and reverence﹐但香港卻過於保守。香港教區可能要注意一下這一段﹕"Among the ways of ministering the Precious Blood as prescribed by the General Instruction of the Roman Missal, Communion from the chalice is generally the preferred form in the Latin Church, provided that it can be carried out properly according to the norms and without any risk of even apparent irreverence toward the Blood of Christ".
|
|
去非
|
Posted -
2003/9/23 下午 05:14:55
|
|
|
究竟“GIRM不容許教友用self-intinction的方法領聖血”這說法是否真確的﹖這方法在香港行之經年﹔如果這是屬實的話﹐不知教區方面會否“勒令”各堂區更正這領聖血的方法。
|
|
Cecil
|
Posted -
2003/9/23 下午 06:02:54
|
|
|
其實教會內不少禮儀措施都未必一定完全符合GIRM,所以聖禮部要在2000年和2002年兩度將之翻新.目的還不是 - 要人跟隨?
不過,我已聽到不少禮儀服務人員說不理會也成的了.
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2003/9/27 下午 01:22:36
|
|
|
小弟今天放假執屋，終於找到了該份文件。刊於教廷聖禮部的文件《Notitiae》vol. 34 （1998），pp. 273-274。
各位如果想看清楚文件的法語部分，則可將瀏覽器的編碼轉為「西歐語系」。
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2003/9/27 下午 01:23:21
|
|
|
RESPONSA AD DUBIA PROPOSITA
Ad quaestiones Congregationi de Cultu Divino et Disciplina Sacramentorum positas hic proponuntur praesertim ea quae in variis documentis circa rem ipsam inveniuntur.
[2.] UTRUM SACRA COMMUNIO SUB UTRAQUE SPECIE PER INTINCTIONEM DISTRIBUI POSSIT IN MANIBUS FIDELIUM?
R[esponsum]. Negative.
De modo sanctam Communionem ministrandi agitur Instructio Memoriale Domini, die 29 maii 1969, a Sacra Congregatione pro Cultu Divino edita. Instructio haec completur, in re pastorali, Epistula qua conceditur Conferentiis Episcopalibus indultum distribuendi fidelibus sacram Communionem in manu, cum omnes conditiones requisitae habeantur. Hanc Epistulam S. Congregatio pro Cultu Divino sua cuiusque lingua exaratam Indultum petentibus misit. Publici tamen iuris lingua gallica facta est (cf. Notitiae 5 [1969] 351-353), statuens, quoad ad dubium propositum: si Communio Sanguinis Christi fit per intinctionem, panis eucharisticus nequit poni in manibus fidelium: "Dans le cas de la Communion sous les deux esp鋃es distribu嶪 par intinction, il n'est jamais permis de d廧oser dans la main du fid鋩e l'hostie tremp嶪 dans le Sang du Seigneur". Ad hanc rem etiam pertinent ea quae scripta sunt sunt in Institutione Generali Misssalis Romani circa Ritum Communionis sub utraque specie per intinctionem, ubi implicite modus distribuendi super linguam indicatur: "Singuli communicandi accedunt, debitam reverentiam faciunt et stant coram sacerdote tenentes patinam sub ore. Sacerdos partem hostiae in calicem intingit et eam ostendendo dicit: Corpus et Sanguinis Christi; communicandus autem respondet: Amen, et a sacerdote Sacramentum recipit, ac postea recedit" (n. 246b). Ex contextu normarum evidenter apparet ne Sacra Communio per intinctionem in manibus fidelium distribuatur.
|
