Adoration Confusion

[mwscott]

Just because something is not explicitly noted in the rubrics, that is not to say that we have carte blanche to do as we please. The rubrics do indicate that the deacon, priest or bishop should be doing this as far as the Benediction aspect is concerned. Furthermore, I noted that the Monstrance bearing the Blessed Sacrament should not be handled by anyone other than the ordained. Now, there are rare instances where an EMHC is allowed to remove the luna bearing the Blessed Sacrament, but, this should not happen on a regular basis. Furthermore, even when the luna is removed, the priest hold the vessel within the humeral veil and replaces the Blessed Sacrament back into the Tabernacle.

Again, with all due respect, I believe that you are confusing the act of distributing Holy Communion with that of Exposition, Adoration and Benediction. These are two entirely different matters.

I guess I am just confused with your reasoning. What is the difference between repositioning the Blessed Sacrament during Mass and repositioning the Blessed Sacrament during the Rite of Exposition and Benediction. At Mass the priest or deacon is not required to use the humeral veil when bringing a pyx or ciborium from the Tabernacle to the altar (whether or not the tabernacle is in a chapel or on the altar) but during Exposition he is forbidden to touch it? It doesn’t make sense to devalue the rubrics like that, instead we should honor the rubrics for what they are, a means to see the wonder of the sacraments and rites of the Church.

Lets stop arguing about it and just enjoy the beauty of the Real Presence.

And yes, I do make an act of Adoration when I receive the Eucharist, or whenever I see a tabernacle for that matter. Its always the Blessed Sacrament.

 

[Newbie2]

Just because something is not explicitly noted in the rubrics, that is not to say that we have carte blanche to do as we please. The rubrics do indicate that the deacon, priest or bishop should be doing this as far as the Benediction aspect is concerned. Furthermore, I noted that the Monstrance bearing the Blessed Sacrament should not be handled by anyone other than the ordained. Now, there are rare instances where an EMHC is allowed to remove the luna bearing the Blessed Sacrament, but, this should not happen on a regular basis. Furthermore, even when the luna is removed, the priest hold the vessel within the humeral veil and replaces the Blessed Sacrament back into the Tabernacle.

Again, with all due respect, I believe that you are confusing the act of distributing Holy Communion with that of Exposition, Adoration and Benediction. These are two entirely different matters.

No, I am not confusing the two.

So which is it, the Monstrance should not be handled by the ordained at all or just not on a regular basis? Or just the luna and not the monstrance? I’m not clear on your answer.

Do not the rubrics include prohibitions? i.e. if something is important not to do, do they for the most part specify such a thing?

 

[Penitant]

Sixty years ago altar boys occasionally carried the empty monstrance or other sacred vessels out to the altar or back to the sacristy. We were always required to put a cloth around the vessel. It was strongly forbidden to touch the metal.

However, like many rules of the good sisters, I suspect the reason was more practical than theological; they didn’t want fingerprints on their freshly polished metal work.

Actually, you’re touching on something important here.

It is the tradition of the Church that those of lower rank do not directly touch those things which belong to a higher rank. So, for example, in the old Mass, a subdeacon wears the Humeral veil while holding the paten, a acolyte wears the Humeral Veil while holding the Bishop’s Mitre, and a priest would wear it during Benediction and when carrying viaticum to the sick.

As you said, anyone other than a priest who had to handle the ciborium would use a cloth (we use a purificator where I am) when holding it for the exact same reason.

Pax Tecum,
Zach

 

[Claire_from_DE]

A similar situation arose last year at a conference I attended. It was because some people misinterpreted what the priest said prior to the procession. When others saw that the first people were touching the monstrance (reverently) they thought it was OK. Unfortunately, the photo was published in our diocesan paper and no one wrote in to correct the impression. I heard that this was done later at a youth conference too.

I think the priest will make himself very clear at this year’s conference as he is very obedient to the church.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

. . . Furthermore, even when the luna is removed, the priest hold the vessel within the humeral veil and replaces the Blessed Sacrament back into the Tabernacle. . . .

I noticed this morning that one of our priests, who is very devout, wraps the pyx, containing the luna, in the ends of his stole while returning it to the Tabernacle.

 

[junostarlighter]

recently i had the opportunity to attend adoration during a catholic youth camp. the priest processing the blessed sacrament in the monstrance stuck the monstrance out into the crowd of kneeling teens for them to reach out and touch the monstrance. hands and fingers were all over the monstrance and luna. is this acceptable?

please help. many of us who witnessed this were scandalized…

 

[Holly3278]

I would first bring your concerns to the pastor and if that doesn’t work, bring your concerns to the bishop. One of the two should be able to help you.

 

[JReducation]

recently i had the opportunity to attend adoration during a catholic youth camp. the priest processing the blessed sacrament in the monstrance stuck the monstrance out into the crowd of kneeling teens for them to reach out and touch the monstrance. hands and fingers were all over the monstrance and luna. is this acceptable?

please help. many of us who witnessed this were scandalized…

It should not be done, because the glass that protects the consecrated host can be accidently broken. The purpose of the monstrance is to expose the Eucharist while protecting it at the same time. Therefore, if you put the monstrance in a situation where it can be damaged, it defeats its purpose. There is also the chance that it can accidently slip out of the priest’s or deacon’s hands.

However, it is not a sacrilege or an abuse or sin, etc. If it is as you say that the youth were reverently kneeling, there is less of a chance that harm would come to it. But it is more prudent not to do so. In many cultures the monstrance is setup on an altar and people kiss their hand and then touch the base of the monstrance with the hand that they kissed. In many communities of enclosed nuns that have perpetual adoration the nuns do carry the monstrance in procession through the abbey. The rules about touching the monstrance are not etched in stone; though there are rules. Don’t get me wrong. For one thing, only the deacon or priest should load and unload the monstrance. But this does not sound like the case that you’re talking about.

My guess is that no bishop is going to come down hard on reverently touching it. But they may not like the idea that it is not in a stable place where it can’t be dropped or the luna accidently broken by an abrupt movement. It’s really the judgment call of the priest or deacon. They have to consider the crowd. It sounds, from what you’re saying, that it is a reverent kind of touching and that the youth were behaving appropriately. I don’t think that there is any harm done, even though it’s not something that I would do.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[benedictgal]

The only ones who are supposed to be handling the monstrance bearing the Blessed Sacrament are the deacon, priest and bishop. Not even they touch the monstrance directly as they should be using a humeral veil, wrapping the vestment around the stem of the monstrance and then wrapping the vessel once again around the luna.

Nothing in the rubrics for Exposition, Adoration and Benediction indicate that what the OP witnessed should even be happening:

[137.] Exposition of the Most Holy Eucharist must always be carried out in accordance with the prescriptions of the liturgical books.235

Just because Redemptionis Sacramentum does not outright say that it should be done does not give the celebrant the right to do this on his own initiative. Even though the teens may have been reverent, what the OP saw was not proper. You should address your concerns to the priest in a letter.

 

[TheDoctor]

Similar thread being debated here: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=361485 Did you guys all go to the same retreat?

 

[paperwight]

It should not be done, because the glass that protects the consecrated host can be accidently broken. The purpose of the monstrance is to expose the Eucharist while protecting it at the same time. Therefore, if you put the monstrance in a situation where it can be damaged, it defeats its purpose. There is also the chance that it can accidently slip out of the priest’s or deacon’s hands.

However, it is not a sacrilege or an abuse or sin, etc. If it is as you say that the youth were reverently kneeling, there is less of a chance that harm would come to it. But it is more prudent not to do so. In many cultures the monstrance is setup on an altar and people kiss their hand and then touch the base of the monstrance with the hand that they kissed. In many communities of enclosed nuns that have perpetual adoration the nuns do carry the monstrance in procession through the abbey. The rules about touching the monstrance are not etched in stone; though there are rules. Don’t get me wrong. For one thing, only the deacon or priest should load and unload the monstrance.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

And E.M.H.C. are permitted to, as well.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

The only ones who are supposed to be handling the monstrance bearing the Blessed Sacrament are the deacon, priest and bishop. Not even they touch the monstrance directly as they should be using a humeral veil, wrapping the vestment around the stem of the monstrance and then wrapping the vessel once again around the luna.

Nothing in the rubrics for Exposition, Adoration and Benediction indicate that what the OP witnessed should even be happening:

Just because Redemptionis Sacramentum does not outright say that it should be done does not give the celebrant the right to do this on his own initiative. Even though the teens may have been reverent, what the OP saw was not proper. You should address your concerns to the priest in a letter.

When you post from Church documents it would be nice if you would supply a reference to which document your quote comes from so that others may look at the document in context.

Rubrics do not always cover everything for the laity. A reverent act is not always an abuse. There are many things that people do at Mass, such as kneel after receiving the Eucharist. That is not in the rubrics (at least if my memory is serving me correctly) so one could say that you should tell the priest this and get them to stop that “abuse”.

If this is done reverently and without causing problems I see nothing wrong with letting it occur.

After all, we are not the liturgical “abuse” police and this does not seem like that big of an issue.

 

[EvelynEVF]

Even in the new rite, the altar server holds the bishop’s mitre with a humeral veil, only for that purpose it has a different name. Iirc, it’s called a gimp.

In my parish, if the next person on the Adoration schedule doesn’t show up, we repose the Blessed Sacrament bare handed. The last person for the evening puts away the monstrance and candles in a cupboard in the sacristy, also bare handed.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Even in the new rite, the altar server holds the bishop’s mitre with a humeral veil, only for that purpose it has a different name. Iirc, it’s called a gimp.

In my parish, if the next person on the Adoration schedule doesn’t show up, we repose the Blessed Sacrament bare handed. The last person for the evening puts away the monstrance and candles in a cupboard in the sacristy, also bare handed.

It is the crozier that is held with a humeral veil, not the mitre, and not all bishops follow this practice.

Actually, none of the bishops that have been involved in ordinations or who have come to say liturgy in religious house where I live have followed this practice.

 

[JReducation]

When you post from Church documents it would be nice if you would supply a reference to which document your quote comes from so that others may look at the document in context.

Rubrics do not always cover everything for the laity. A reverent act is not always an abuse. There are many things that people do at Mass, such as kneel after receiving the Eucharist. That is not in the rubrics (at least if my memory is serving me correctly) so one could say that you should tell the priest this and get them to stop that “abuse”.

If this is done reverently and without causing problems I see nothing wrong with letting it occur.

After all, we are not the liturgical “abuse” police and this does not seem like that big of an issue.

Just to piggy-back on what Br. David is saying. I’ll repeat what I said before. Many enclosed communities of women, such as Carmelites and Poor Clares have perpetual adoration and even processions with the monstrance as they walk through the halls of the enclosure. They do not use humeral veils and they are not ordained. They are canonically lay women, even though they are monastics. The rubrics have exceptions to them and reasons for their existence.

In some cultures, this is a very common way of showing reverence and adoration. We gather about 800 to 1000 young people at our parish every Thurs from 6-9 pm. They kneel in the presence of the exposed Sacrament. Some kiss their finger and touch it to the base of the monstrance. The fact that they are there and feel this awe and need to be in touch with Christ is a sign of grace, not an abuse.

In our own religious houses, the friars do offer the bishop a humeral veil or gloves to hold his crossier or mitre. This custom is not observed in every situation. It depends on the bishop. Our Franciscan bishops do not like it and they do not use it. I have seen other bishops, especially those who are friars, who prefer the simplicity of their religious orders when they celebrate the liturgy. They avoid practices. I have seen this especially among Dominicans, Franciscans, Carmelites and Jesuits. At the same time, there is a great sense of reverence for the Eucharist and the articles involved in the celebration of mass or exposition of the Blessed Sacrament.

We have to be careful not to condemn people for being reverent in a way that is different.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Newbie2]

When you post from Church documents it would be nice if you would supply a reference to which document your quote comes from so that others may look at the document in context.

Rubrics do not always cover everything for the laity. A reverent act is not always an abuse. There are many things that people do at Mass, such as kneel after receiving the Eucharist. That is not in the rubrics (at least if my memory is serving me correctly) so one could say that you should tell the priest this and get them to stop that “abuse”.

If this is done reverently and without causing problems I see nothing wrong with letting it occur.

After all, we are not the liturgical “abuse” police and this does not seem like that big of an issue.

I have to agree. If something is to be prohibited, it’s spelled out in the rubrics, no? Saying the rosary during mass is not prohibited. I’ve seen the same folks here on the forums support things that are not prohibited and at the same time condemn things that the rubrics are silent about. Seems like a double standard to me.

On the other hand, it’s no wonder why some new Catholics or Catholics-to-be get confused over the variety of ways we all worship.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

I have to agree. If something is to be prohibited, it’s spelled out in the rubrics, no? Saying the rosary during mass is not prohibited. I’ve seen the same folks here on the forums support things that are not prohibited and at the same time condemn things that the rubrics are silent about. Seems like a double standard to me.

On the other hand, it’s no wonder why some new Catholics or Catholics-to-be get confused over the variety of ways we all worship.

Actually some will argue, and there is some support of their view, that if it is not in the rubrics it is not to be done.

Also, the rosary is not to be said during Mass because one is to fully and actively participate in the Mass, you can not do so while performing a private devotion. No private devotions should be done during a public liturgy.

 

[benedictgal]

When you post from Church documents it would be nice if you would supply a reference to which document your quote comes from so that others may look at the document in context.

Rubrics do not always cover everything for the laity. A reverent act is not always an abuse. There are many things that people do at Mass, such as kneel after receiving the Eucharist. That is not in the rubrics (at least if my memory is serving me correctly) so one could say that you should tell the priest this and get them to stop that “abuse”.

If this is done reverently and without causing problems I see nothing wrong with letting it occur.

After all, we are not the liturgical “abuse” police and this does not seem like that big of an issue.

I quoted from Redemptionis Sacramentum.

With all due respect, I stand by the statements that I have made. No too long ago, I was having supper with my parochial vicar, who serves as a chaplain at one of our local hospitals. This medical center has a chapel where the Blessed Sacrament is exposed for roughly 12 hours ad day. One evening, after he had finished his rounds, he went to the chapel to put the oils away and reposit the pyx. He managed to walk in on one of the deacons, who is a member of the charismatic movement. The deacon was doing something similar to what the OP described. My parochial vicar, who is a very orthodox priest and about the most knowledgable prelate in the diocese about liturgy, was appalled at what he saw. He found the people touching the luna and the monstrance rather disconcerting.

Just because something is not explicitly stated in the documents, that does not give anyone, let alone the celebrant, the right to do so as he pleases. The problem, as I see it, with those defending the practice, is that they do not see that this leads to a slippery slope. There is a time and place for everything. Adoration is not the time to reach out and touch. The only ones who should be touching the monstrance bearing the Blessed Sacrament are the ordinary ministers of Communion/Benediction/Exposition, and these are the bishop, priest and deacon. EMHCs, under rare circumstances, can do this, but, even they should not be touching the luna with bare hands and they should not be imparting any blessings.

 

[benedictgal]

I have to agree. If something is to be prohibited, it’s spelled out in the rubrics, no? Saying the rosary during mass is not prohibited. I’ve seen the same folks here on the forums support things that are not prohibited and at the same time condemn things that the rubrics are silent about. Seems like a double standard to me.

On the other hand, it’s no wonder why some new Catholics or Catholics-to-be get confused over the variety of ways we all worship.

Again, just because it is not specifically spelled out in the GIRM, that does not mean that we are allowed to do something. No matter how well-intentioned the actions may be, we do not have carte blanche to do whatever we please during a public liturgy, and, Exposition and Benedction are indeed public acts of worship of the Most Holy Eucharist outside of the confines of the Mass.

Those who defend the practice and justify it by saying that there is nothing in the rubrics that says you can’t do this do not, in my opinon, understand the norms at all. It is not up to us to say that this can be done. The Constitution on Sacred Liturgy clearly states that no one has the right, on their own authority, to add anything to the liturgy, this includes the priest. This kind of attitude only serves to add confusion and further muddy the waters.

 

[Claire_from_DE]

Does the GIRM have rubrics for Eucharistic processions?