Abuses and Irregularities in EWTN Masses?

[palmas85]

I’ve got a question I’ll throw out here. Why in the world would someone even want to go up and receive a blessing during Holy Communion? You’ll receive one anyway at the end of the Mass and you can always ask the Priest if you need another one, so why even do it? It really seems strange to me that people would even do such a thing.

I have seen it done for years but never understood it at all.

So could someone tell me why they do it?

 

[Lee_M]

I found the specific YouTube video where Cardinal Arinze addresses blessings during communion.

In effect he explicitly says it is up to the local bishop. He even says why this wasn’t addressed in RS.

youtube.com/watch?v=-YorjE844mc

This will be thrown out because it doesn’t support the others’ opinions. Cdl. Arinze’s public statements are only good when it supports their opinion.

 

[Lee_M]

I’ve got a question I’ll throw out here. Why in the world would someone even want to go up and receive a blessing during Holy Communion? You’ll receive one anyway at the end of the Mass and you can always ask the Priest if you need another one, so why even do it? It really seems strange to me that people would even do such a thing.

I have seen it done for years but never understood it at all.

So could someone tell me why they do it?

Why do people have local customs? That’s why they are called local customs. If you can always ask the priest for another blessing and it is part of the local custom, then why not do it then?

 

[benedictgal]

All I know is this…In 1989 JP II on a a visit to Sweden gave the blessing to Lutheran Archbishop Werkstrom and Bishop Svenungsson WHILE they were in the communion line.He even spoke about that event in his general audience address on Jan 23,1991.So that’s the end of the story for me.and apparently my priest and bishop agree.It’s the salvation of my soul here and their’s too.It’s not like I’m one of those pro-choice politicians who are actually getting in line and receiving the Host.

You mean receiving Our Lord.

However, the salvation of your soul does not depend on receiving a blessing in the Communion line. It depends on reconciling yourself with Christ and His Church. The blessing, as well-intentioned as it may be, is a poor substitute for one’s inability to receive Our Lord.

That is why there are prayers associated with making a Spiritual Communion. This kind of practice has been around, as far as I can tell, for generations. Great saints like Don Bosco advocated the practice when one was unable to receive Our Lord.

With all due respect, I noticed some sense of “triumphalism” in your tone when you reported what you did. Please know that I do not want to sound as though I am making a judgment, but, I offer this in fraternal correction. It’s as though we want to go up because we see the rest of the folks in the pews going up to receive Someone that we can’t. We want to be part of the group, but, for whatever reason, we can’t. Therefore, we will do anything to take some part in it, even if it’s just to receive a blessing. That is poor catechesis. When we take actions that are against what the Church teaches, this also includes taking a political stand that is squarely in oppositoin to the Church’s, we are the ones who put the distance and the restriction, not the Church.

Now, I am going to pose the question to you: if folks who are in an invalid marriage who cannot receive Holy Communion stand in line to receive a blessing, what about those Catholics who aer in favor of abortion and choose to receive a blessing? They aren’t receiving Holy Communoni becaue, just like the persons involved in an invalid marriage, they aren’t allowed to do so.

As I said, I’m not one to pass judgment. I sin like everyone else, sometimes even worse. But, even sinners have a pretty good idea of what should and should not be done.

Would you be so kind as to post the reference Pope John Paul II made to his actions? I looked up the document in question; however, in the Italian text of the catechesis, where he spent his time talking on Christian Unity (in light of the fact that it was two days prior to the Feast of the Conversion of St. Paul), he did not reference the evnet you mention. The Italian is the most complete because it is the text of the entire catechesis.

 

[benedictgal]

Why do people have local customs? That’s why they are called local customs. If you can always ask the priest for another blessing and it is part of the local custom, then why not do it then?

However, there is an issue even with the local custom, since you walk a very fine, fine line between that and inculturation, which is a whole other can of worms. The issue of the blesing in lieu of receiving Our Lord seems to have inflitrated various parts of the country, thus, it is not really a local custom anymore.

 

[Rickwood]

I found the specific YouTube video where Cardinal Arinze addresses blessings during communion.

In effect he explicitly says it is up to the local bishop. He even says why this wasn’t addressed in RS.

youtube.com/watch?v=-YorjE844mc

Well you just hit a home run. Thank you.

Begin watching at 2:30. The cardinal does not give a trivial yes/no answer. He eloquently and thoroughly underscores what some of us here have been saying – that processing up for a blessing is not prohibited by either the GIRM or RS.

Take a close look benedictgal and company. Even if you reject the cardinal’s interpretation of the documents there is one thing that is intrinsically clear – neither the GIRM or RS even address this matter…

Disseminating erroneous personal opinions like “if it’s not in the GIRM or RS then it’s an abuse” does harm. It can truly impact other people’s spiritual health in the most negative of ways. I find that gravely unacceptable.

I will never stop challenging such inaccurate viewpoints.

 

[benedictgal]

I said priceless. Not worthless. Big difference. If the thread has little to no value, why are you wasting your valuable time responding? Second, RS doesn’t state that Deacons are allowed to distribute via intinction either, but we know that to not be the case.

Maybe because I am trying to address some inconsistencies, hypocracies and misinformation that the OP has stated. The thread is worthless because I suspect that there are some underlying issues involved and it has resulted in EWTN bashing and a vehement defense of idiosyncracies inserted into the Mass that just don’t belong there.

One cannot speak from both sides of the mouth. If that were the case, we’d have a case of Cybill on our hands.

 

[Lee_M]

Maybe because I am trying to address some inconsistencies, hypocracies and misinformation that the OP has stated. The thread is worthless because I suspect that there are some underlying issues involved and it has resulted in EWTN bashing and a vehement defense of idiosyncracies inserted into the Mass that just don’t belong there.

One cannot speak from both sides of the mouth. If that were the case, we’d have a case of Cybill on our hands.

There has not been any EWTN bashing. EWTN was used as an example that there are practices done during the Mass that are not written in the GIRM or RS. The OP stated he has nothing against with what EWTN has done. The question was, where are all the people who say “If it is not in the GIRM or RS, then it is an abuse”? It’s pretty simple. He was proving a point.

I think it is a valuable thread because it proves that you only use “If something is added that is not in the GIRM, then it is an abuse” when it benefits your opinion.

 

[Rickwood]

This will be thrown out because it doesn’t support the others’ opinions. Cdl. Arinze’s public statements are only good when it supports their opinion.

Sad but true.

Still if you actually listen to the cardinal’s comments he is not giving a simple personal opinion. He talks about the thought that went into the actual documents. The documents that some erroneously suggest prohibit such blessings…

 

[benedictgal]

Well you just hit a home run. Thank you.

Begin watching at 2:30. The cardinal does not give a trivial yes/no answer. He eloquently and thoroughly underscores what some of us here have been saying – that processing up for a blessing is not prohibited by either the GIRM or RS.

Take a close look benedictgal. Even if you reject the cardinal’s interpretation of the documents there is one thing that is intrinsically clear – neither the GIRM or RS even address this matter…

The GIRM didn’t address the matter because it was something that was never even considered. You form a line to receive Our Lord, not a blessing. As I do not have access to YouTube until I get home, I will see it.

But, then, japhy has written to the CDWDS to get clarification. It helps a lot to either side to get clarification from Rome one way or the other. In fact, I, too, will write since the more letters the CDWDS receives on the matter, the more likely it is that they will issue something concrete.

As I said, in this thread and in others, I am in firm agreemwnt with my prelate, though. We seem to have this mentaility that we have to be like everyone else and stand up to receive something. It’s as though we’ve forgotten the sacrednes of receiving Holy Communion and want to just stand in line because we see others doing so. We want to be included, but, we don’t understand why we can’t.

 

[Rickwood]

Maybe because I am trying to address some inconsistencies, hypocracies and misinformation that the OP has stated. The thread is worthless because I suspect that there are some underlying issues involved and it has resulted in EWTN bashing and a vehement defense of idiosyncracies inserted into the Mass that just don’t belong there.

One cannot speak from both sides of the mouth. If that were the case, we’d have a case of Cybill on our hands.

Why not take on Cardinal Arinze? Tell us where you believe he is wrong. We’re all waiting…

 

[benedictgal]

Sad but true.

Still if you actually listen to the cardinal’s comments he is not giving a simple personal opinion. He talks about the thought that went into the actual documents. The documents that some erroneously suggest prohibit such blessings…

That is not the case at all. I respect Cardinal Arinze. But, as I said before, it will help either side to see something concrete from Rome that addresses the matter once and for all.

 

[Rickwood]

The GIRM didn’t address the matter because it was something that was never even considered. You form a line to receive Our Lord, not a blessing. As I do not have access to YouTube until I get home, I will see it.

But, then, japhy has written to the CDWDS to get clarification. It helps a lot to either side to get clarification from Rome one way or the other. In fact, I, too, will write since the more letters the CDWDS receives on the matter, the more likely it is that they will issue something concrete.

As I said, in this thread and in others, I am in firm agreemwnt with my prelate, though. We seem to have this mentaility that we have to be like everyone else and stand up to receive something. It’s as though we’ve forgotten the sacrednes of receiving Holy Communion and want to just stand in line because we see others doing so. We want to be included, but, we don’t understand why we can’t.

Wow, you cannot admit to being wrong. The cardinal says differently.

Go listen to the video beginning at 2:30. The Cardinal clearly says that such matters WERE considered (be it the GIRM or RS) and specifically left out of the documents in favor of leaving the authority on such matters with the local ordinaries.

 

[benedictgal]

Why not take on Cardinal Arinze? Tell us where you believe he is wrong. We’re all waiting…

Simply asking Cardinal Arinze for clarification is not taking anyone on, Rick. You have been most uncharitable in your responses and in your thread. You’ve been making a lot of comments in this thread without backing them up. Furthermore, you complain about EWTN and rant about what they are doing without even bothering to ask them why.

Since when does asking for clarification, in a spirit of filial inquiry, ever constitute questioning authority?

 

[Rickwood]

That is not the case at all. I respect Cardinal Arinze. But, as I said before, it will help either side to see something concrete from Rome that addresses the matter once and for all.

Oh my…

What’s more concrete then a video of the Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments? A notarized transcript?

I do know what the answer will be now that I have watched that video. If a response is received, it will say there is no prohibition on processing up to receive a blessing during communion from the Church – that the final authority on such matters is the local ordinary.

 

[benedictgal]

Wow, you cannot admit to being wrong. The cardinal says differently.

Go listen to the video beginning at 2:30. The Cardinal clearly says that such matters WERE considered (be it the GIRM or RS) and specifically left out of the documents in favor of leaving the authority on such matters with the local ordinaries.

However, there have been times when the local ordinaries (and even conferences) have completely botched things. Take the Australians, for example. In 2000, they were all taken to the sacramental woodshed by Pope John Paul II because the local ordinaries were allowing a wholesale use of General Absolution and other grave issues related to the Sacrament of Penance. It got the point that the CDWDS, at the request of Pope John Paul II, had to issue a document specifically spelling out how the Sacrament of Penance was to be administered.

I wouldn’t necessarily get too triumphal, Rick. There is probably more to this than meets the eye.

 

[benedictgal]

Wow, you cannot admit to being wrong. The cardinal says differently.

Go listen to the video beginning at 2:30. The Cardinal clearly says that such matters WERE considered (be it the GIRM or RS) and specifically left out of the documents in favor of leaving the authority on such matters with the local ordinaries.

Perhaps because the written word means a lot. You can reference the document, whatever position it will take. Having a document in hand is still worth something. We may live in an electronic age, but, a document, especially concerning something this important, is in black and white. It is concrete.

 

[mammallama]

Now, I am going to pose the question to you: if folks who are in an invalid marriage who cannot receive Holy Communion stand in line to receive a blessing, what about those Catholics who aer in favor of abortion and choose to receive a blessing? They aren’t receiving Holy Communoni becaue, just like the persons involved in an invalid marriage, they aren’t allowed to do so.

As I said, I’m not one to pass judgment. I sin like everyone else, sometimes even worse. But, even sinners have a pretty good idea of what should and should not be done.

Would you be so kind as to post the reference Pope John Paul II made to his actions? I looked up the document in question; however, in the Italian text of the catechesis, where he spent his time talking on Christian Unity (in light of the fact that it was two days prior to the Feast of the Conversion of St. Paul), he did not reference the evnet you mention. The Italian is the most complete because it is the text of the entire catechesis.

First of all the reason I get the blessing is because my parish priest suggested it.He welcomed it.And as for the info about JPII that came from Fr John Dietzen’s book of collected writings currently published under the title.“Catholic Q&A” won first place in the “popular presentation of the Catholic Faith” category of the 1992 Catholic Press Assoc Book Awards.

 

[Rickwood]

Simply asking Cardinal Arinze for clarification is not taking anyone on, Rick. You have been most uncharitable in your responses and in your thread. You’ve been making a lot of comments in this thread without backing them up. Furthermore, you complain about EWTN and rant about what they are doing without even bothering to ask them why.

Since when does asking for clarification, in a spirit of filial inquiry, ever constitute questioning authority?

You haven’t taken on the cardinal. To suggest I said you did is inaccurate.

I challenged you to take on Cardinal Arinze. Why not deconstruct what he said on the video and provide some evidence to back up where you believe he is wrong?

As it is his words strongly underscore the fact that there is no prohibition from the Church from processing up to receive a blessing during communion.

 

[benedictgal]

First of all the reason I get the blessing is because my parish priest suggested it.He welcomed it.And as for the info about JPII that came from Fr John Dietzen’s book of collected writings currently published under the title.“Catholic Q&A” won first place in the “popular presentation of the Catholic Faith” category of the 1992 Catholic Press Assoc Book Awards.

It doesn’t matter if the book got an award, the point is that, having read the complete text of the General Audience for that day, no such reference was made to that particular act. Perhaps, if you have that copy, you could post it.

Regarding the blessing, it is still that, a substitute. Have you ever tried remaining in your pew, kneeling and making a Spiritual Communion as the Church understands that to be. It entails asking the Lord to come into your heart. No physical activity is required as far as going up and getting a blessing is concerned.

In fact, it was taught to us back in grade school. From what I am reading in these threads, the practice seems to be routinely ignored in favor of everyone getting up and going in line.