What the Catholic Church Is...And Is Not

If you read the Facebook comments on the articles published here one of the things you’ll find is folks who profess to be Catholic but seem to have a strange idea of what that word means. They also seem to have different notions about the nature of the Church established by the Lord Jesus Christ and their place in it. In writing this I’m going to share some of these comments without “naming names” so to speak. The purpose here is not to demean or intimidate anyone but to identify attitudes and mistaken notions, However, if the shoe fits, as they say…

What the Church is

First and foremost, as I said in the opening, the Church is the organization established by the Lord Who also assigned men to the task of leading His Church. They then established “Apostolic Succession” as a means of replacing themselves in the event of their death…an almost guaranteed surety in the first 300 years of the Christian Era. They established a hierarchy within the Church all the way from Priest to Pope. This hierarchy over time gathered in Councils and determined the rules that govern worship, etc.

These decisions became part of what is known as “Sacred Tradition”. Eventually, the Scripture was canonized and that, too, is part of that Tradition. Tradition is sacred…but it isn’t written in stone and it has been modified from time to time at the discretion of the Magisterium and in accordance with Scripture.

An example of this can be found right in the Book of the Acts of the Apostles. In the early days of the Church Gentiles who became believers were required to be circumcised and keep the Jewish dietary laws and rituals. That was the existing tradition.  In Acts 15 the Church met in the very first Council at Jerusalem and determined that this was no longer the case. The only rules they put down for the Gentiles was to avoid meat offered to idols, things strangled and blood. Thus existing tradition was changed… as was (and is) their right.

What the Church is NOT

What the Church is not is a democracy. We don’t get to make up the rules for ourselves. For instance, I saw one commenter make the statement, “Receiving the Eucharist in the hand is an abomination.” What is and is not an “abomination” is not determined at our level with the Body of Christ. If my name doesn’t have the words “Bishop” or “Cardinal” in front of it, I don’t get to make that judgment. More than that, to make such a statement is to accuse the Magisterium of the Church of teaching and encouraging a grievous sin. [The Council of the Church called Vatican II made the decision that it is proper for us to receive the Host either in our hand or on our tongue.] Note: I found that this sentence is in error. Communion on the hand did not originate with Vatican II but came about later. That doesn’t invalidate the practice but just means that my statement of its origin was wrong.  Here is an article on the subject that shed light on it for me: Truth About Communion in the Hand While Standing. My thanks to one of our readers, Cyril Augustine Yee Kelvin from Malaysia, for bringing it to my attention.

The Church is also not the church of “private revelation” or “private interpretation”. It’s one thing to say “I prefer to receive the Host on my tongue.” That’s fine…the Church allows for that choice. It’s something else altogether, however, to say “The Holy Spirit told me in my mind to receive it on the tongue.” This infers that you have a better communication with God than the hierarchy of the Church does.  The ultimate consequence of such a statement is that God is telling you one thing but telling the Church something else entirely. And how do you know this voice in your head is the Holy Spirit?

Side note here: I find the whole controversy about receiving on the tongue versus in the hand a bit absurd. Is your tongue somehow removed from your body and more sanctified than the rest of it? On what basis does one say that the hand is not consecrated but the tongue is? Reverence is a condition of the heart and should be a result of preparation well before Mass even begins. It shouldn’t just suddenly occur when your mouth is open and your tongue hanging out.

Summary

We have a certain liberty in Christ within the guidance provided by the Magisterium of the Church. Hand or tongue, Latin or Novus Ordo are personal preferences and none of them are profane with the right attitude. It's when your personal preference becomes a means of judging others and of puffing yourself up to be more than you are in God's sight that sin enters. "Reverence" is in the heart, not in the ritual, according to Saint Paul in 1 Corinthians 11. A tongue used in rebellion against the leadership that God has ordained for His Church is no more sanctified than the unwashed, unconsecrated hand. If "on the tongue" helps you to be more reverent more power to you. I spend a lot of time before Mass preparing my heart and mind. Reverence is not a problem if one does that. Focus on Christ and why we are there and we won't have time to see what sister so-and-so or brother so-and-so are doing.