Calgary Bishop Suspends Latin Mass

[ElizabethE]

My Bishop - Diocese of Fresno, California - imposed directives for the duration of the Swine Flu season. We were told not to come to Mass if ill, not to bring sick children, and not to shake hands if ill. Besides these common sense instructions, we were also told we could not receive the Sacred Body on the tongue, because, “Doing so can contaminate the entire ciborium if a finger touches an infected person on the tongue or mouth, and then returns to the ciborium.” The Precious Blood may not be distributed, although I did see a bride and groom receive, recently. Extraordinary Ministers are to use an alcohol based (70%) antibacterial hand sanitizer before and after distributing the Eucharist. Holy water fonts have not only been emptied, as directed, but in my parish the fonts’ removable bowls have been stored away to prevent unauthorized refilling. I’m bringing some from home, just for my personal use. I feel that being reminded of my Baptism and cleansing my soul of venial sins before the reception of Holy Communion are more important than cleansing my hands with Purell. However, I do understand that our Bishop feels he has a moral obligation to protect the flock entrusted to him. I suppose one might argue that his job ought to be limited to seeing to our spiritual health and safety. I would point out that any Bishop who allowed a parish to gather for Mass in a structurally unsound church would be considered foolish and irresponsible, at best, and would certainly be held liable for injuries if the building failed while it was occupied. Surely, if a Bishop is aware of a potentially life-threatening endangerment, he must act to protect the physical safety of his flock to the best of his ability, making use of professional and qualified advisers. I know it all seems extreme, but I give thanks to the Lord for sending us a Bishop who takes every aspect of his pastoral responsibilities seriously. Now, entirely suspending a Latin Mass is more difficult to understand, without knowing all the circumstances.

 

[odopa]

Unfortunately, this whole swine flu thing is so confusing, because the data is inconsistent. This does not help. In the parish where I volunteer we had three funerals this year due to swine flu. I guess that it can be more prevalent in some places than it is in others.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

Here in sydney the concern was so great that yes the bishop of parramatta sent a circular round. The following measures were taken:

1. no holy water at the entrance of the church ( for the sign of cross)
2. no shaking of hands during sign of peace
3. no receiving of the host on the tongue.
   I admit I found it very strange and a bit unhappy with the orders yet I absolutely agree with JR that we need to obey and follow, be humble and court peace in everything we do. Few weeks ago the bans were lifted and life is back to normal. Now I add more reverence when doing any of the above gestures. I never thought i would miss it, but I did.

let us obey our leaders, that is a true sign of humility.

Peace and love
odopa

 

[JReducation]

My Bishop - Diocese of Fresno, California - imposed directives for the duration of the Swine Flu season. We were told not to come to Mass if ill, not to bring sick children, and not to shake hands if ill. Besides these common sense instructions, we were also told we could not receive the Sacred Body on the tongue, because, “Doing so can contaminate the entire ciborium if a finger touches an infected person on the tongue or mouth, and then returns to the ciborium.” The Precious Blood may not be distributed, although I did see a bride and groom receive, recently. Extraordinary Ministers are to use an alcohol based (70%) antibacterial hand sanitizer before and after distributing the Eucharist. Holy water fonts have not only been emptied, as directed, but in my parish the fonts’ removable bowls have been stored away to prevent unauthorized refilling. I’m bringing some from home, just for my personal use. I feel that being reminded of my Baptism and cleansing my soul of venial sins before the reception of Holy Communion are more important than cleansing my hands with Purell. However, I do understand that our Bishop feels he has a moral obligation to protect the flock entrusted to him. I suppose one might argue that his job ought to be limited to seeing to our spiritual health and safety. I would point out that any Bishop who allowed a parish to gather for Mass in a structurally unsound church would be considered foolish and irresponsible, at best, and would certainly be held liable for injuries if the building failed while it was occupied. Surely, if a Bishop is aware of a potentially life-threatening endangerment, he must act to protect the physical safety of his flock to the best of his ability, making use of professional and qualified advisers. I know it all seems extreme, but I give thanks to the Lord for sending us a Bishop who takes every aspect of his pastoral responsibilities seriously. Now, entirely suspending a Latin Mass is more difficult to understand, without knowing all the circumstances.

The Tridentine mass was not suspended. They were asked to distribute communion in the hand, not suspend the mass. The FSSP said that they couldn’t do that. One thing led to another. But the issue has been resolved.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Brendan]

I’m very happy to hear that this is a closed issue now. But reading comments from other sites, I am disappointed that no one gives any credit to the bishop for the resolution. It takes two parties to resolve a problem. In this case, one of them is the bishop.

We do know that the FSSP appealed the bishop’s decision to Rome. Do we have any indication that it was an action on the part of the bishop, and NOT the result of a sucessful appeal that decided the issue.

 

[JReducation]

We do know that the FSSP appealed the bishop’s decision to Rome. Do we have any indication that it was an action on the part of the bishop, and NOT the result of a sucessful appeal that decided the issue.

As I said above, the bishop could have chosen to do battle and he did not. One thing that he could have done is to ask the FSSP to leave his diocese, he could have suspended them, he could have taken it to court. He did none of the above. What it says to me is that he and the FSSP deserve credit for dealing with this without a scandal and resolved it quickly. It takes two sides to solve a problem.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF