I have read in some religious articles that the Lord our God desires the following, a. That women should not wear pants when they attend Holy Mass. b. That women should cover their heads when they attend Holy Mass. c. All should take the Holy Communion from a priest and not from a lay Eucharistic minister. d. They should not receive Holy Communion to the hand. e. Is it only the approved phrophecies that we need to heed as there are a lot of phrophecies. Some have condemmed Garabandal and Medjugory and it is leaving me a bit puzzled. I have asked some priests and they have given me answers that have left me confused as I am not sure if the priest is following the orders of the Holy Father... Please enlighten me by the grace of God.

God Bless, R.M.W.

-- Ramanie Weerasinghe (lilanw@yahoo.com), February 11, 2004

Answers

Many private revelations are asking the faithful to go back to the old traditions as Heaven is supposedly offended by the modernism that has now creeped in with things like the mass, watering down of devotion to Our Lady, Eucharistic devotions and more recently as Pope John Paul II said, "the clericalization of the laity."

With reference to Communion in the hand, I go by what Pope John Paul II and all the other past popes have said:

POPE PAUL VI (1963-1978). "This method [on the tongue] must be retained." (Apostolic Epistle "Memoriale Domini")

POPE JOHN PAUL II (1978- ). "To touch the sacred species and to distribute them with their own hands is a privilege of the ordained. (Dominicae Cenae, sec. 11)

"It is not permitted that the faithful should themselves pick up the consecrated bread and the sacred chalice, still less that they should hand them from one to another." (Inaestimabile Donum, April 17, 1980, sec. 9)

It is clear that that the church prefers the method of receiving on the tongue. Therefore even though it is not a grave sin to receive in the hand, we must follow what she really desires if we truly love her.

An approved mystic called Marie Julie Jahenny had revelations from our lord about the the modernisation of the mass

With reference to Medjugorje and Garabandal, I believe that these are true authentic private revelations. I visited Medjugorje in 2002 and found a sense of peace and the presence of Our Lady. There are many critics of these two apparition sites but it still remains that the Church has yet to pronounce its final judgment on them. Here is a good link to read. The position of the church on Garabandal can be found here

Whether you want to cover your head or not is up to you. If you believe that you should then go by your gut instinct. No one have the right to prohibit you in how you attend the Holy Sacrifice of the mass, provided you are not blatantly disrespectful. You are allowed to receive Holy Communion kneeling and no priest may refuse you on these grounds.

For anyone who thinks that all revelations are useless, let me quote for you what Pope Paul VI said on the end times:

"There is a great uneasiness, at this time, in the world and in the Church, and that which is in question is the faith. It so happens now that I repeat to myself the obscure phrase of Jesus in the Gospel of St. Luke: 'When the Son of Man returns, will He still find faith on the earth?' It so happens that there are books coming out in which the faith is in retreat on some important points, that the episcopates are remaining silent and these books are not looked upon as strange. This, to me, is strange. I sometimes read the Gospel passage of the end times and I attest that, at this time, some signs of this end are emerging."

"Are we close to the end ? This we will never know. We must always hold ourselves in readiness, but everything could last a very long time yet."

"What strikes me, when I think of the Catholic world, is that within Catholicism, there seems sometimes to predominate a non-Catholic way of thinking, and it can happen that this non- Catholic thought within Catholicism, will tomorrow become the stronger. But it will never represent the thought of the Church. It is necessary that a small flock subsist, no matter how small it might be”. Pope Paul VI - 1977

("The Secret Paul VI", by Jean Guitton, pages 152 and 153 and Reference (7), p. ix.)

-- Andrew (andyhbk96@hotmail.com), February 11, 2004.

Thank you Andrew. God bless

-- Ramanie Weerasinghe (lilanw@yahoo.com), February 11, 2004.

Dear Ramanie,

You can read "religious articles" that say just about anything. You can read "religious articles" in publications which have the word "Catholic" in their titles, which claim that His Holiness John Paul II is not the real Pope. The kinds of articles you mention are written by a small obstructionist element within the Church, who refuse to submit to the authority of the current Pope and Magisterium, insisting instead on quoting and following disciplinary directives of past Popes and Magisteria. There is no sound basis for such action. It is based on a misguided sense of reverence, mixed with nostalgic longings for what they grew up with. In so doing, they removing themselves from the mainstream of Catholic life as it exists in the world today.

The first thing you should do is avoid publications in which such articles are published. There are plenty of good, solid orthodox Catholic publications you can read, without exposing yourself to material that is constantly critical and derogatory of the Pope, the Church, and the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. ALL of the points you listed as "puzzling" are actually very clearcut ...

There are NO specific regulations regarding what women or anyone else wear to Mass. Obviously, everyone's clothing should reflect an appropriate sense of reverence.

Women are NOT required by the Church to cover their heads. Either you follow the teaching of the Church, or you live in the past.

There is NO distinction between receiving communion from a priest or a duly appointed lay minister, provided the guidelines provided by Holy Mother Church are strictly adhered to. This is the teaching of the Church. Accept it, or try to live in the past.

Regarding reception of the Most Holy Eucharist on the tongue or in the hand, there is NO preference other than the individual recipient's preference. This is what the Church teaches. Accept it, or place your own authority above that of God's Church.

We are NOT required to heed ANY so-called private revelation. But we MAY accept that which has been approved by the Church. Garabandal and Medjugorge have NOT been approved by the Church, so while it is not a matter of serious sin to accept them, you do so at your own risk.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), February 11, 2004.

Go to this link.

http://www.catholic.com/newsletters/kke_030729.asp

It is Karl Keatings comments on Garabandal. His main point is this: Garabandal made a precise prediction that there would only be 3 more popes. John Paul II is the third. When he dies (not yet Lord, we still need him), and the next pope is elected, then Garabandal fizzles out. In essence, it's own internal logic will cause it to collapse.

Medjugory is still in the maybe catagory, but the winds are blowing in the 'no'-ward direction.

Pants: ridiculous.

Head coverings: St. Paul makes an argument for it, but his reasoning is steeped in the cultural meaning assigned to hair and headwear (this is perhaps the only occasion that the 'oh it was just his culture' argument is true.) The Church that has the authority to decide such disciplinary realities has stated that it is not necessary. End of story.

EMEs: Although, Extraordinary Ministers of the Eucharist (EME's) are sometimes abused and over used, the Church (who has the authority to decide such disciplinary realities) has approved their use. End of story.

Receiving on the tongue: If Rome wanted us to recieve on the tongue, then we would. The fact is that the competent authories in Rome have decided that receiving in the hand is okay. End of story.

And, as the last guy pointed out: you are not required to heed ANY apparitions. The Church approves some, essentially saying, if you want to believe this one you won't be in trouble. Both you mention are not approved. Garabandal is actually condemned by its local ordinary (who is the one normally to do such things). I worry about people who invest tooooo much in appartions. You would be better to look to the PUBLIC revalation for your faith. Invest in the Church, the bible, the magisteirum, in CHRIST. Then, if you want to pay a little attention to some approved appartion you are on better gound.

Dano

-- Dan Garon (boethius61@yahoo.com), February 11, 2004.

I would suggest to this lady a middle road. Do what is spiritually gratifying for your own soul. Wear a dress; wear some cap or hat or veil; and receive your Communion on the tongue where the priest hasn't ordered you otherwise.

Do these things as a believing Catholic for God's sake. To offer God alone your very purest intention. Never do something for the purpose of distinguishing yourself ''from the herd,'' as if you knew better. You do not ''know better.'' All we should mean by our personal carriage and behavior is: ''I love God, and I do this to please HIM first, my neighbor afterward. We don't criticize other Catholics, or feel this places anyone on a higher spiritual plane.''

You see, our neighbors are not in sin because of their preferences. You wouldn't presume to know their innermost spiritual life. They have no duty to you or to me; only to God.

The act of being there next to you & me, and worshipping Jesus and our Almighty Father in the Holy Spirit --makes them holy in God's sight. That's whether they conform to old ways or not. We are in church to worship-- to pray, if you will. Not to offer a great display of devotion before other folks.

That was one practice that Jesus Christ scorned in the Temple of Jerusalem. His opponents the Pharisees paraded around in such pride, always seeming SO correct; with open hatred for ''the rabble,'' whom they called ''dogs.'' Instead, they could have pleased Our Lord. Doing their best to conform to the Law, but with a pure intention. Not just for appearances.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), February 11, 2004.