Catholic Church Not To Issue Liturgical Wine During Swine Flu Season

[VivienneJ]

There seem to be two concerns developping in this thread. One of the accuracy of the statement - that I’ll leave to those of you closer to that issue. The other is that of spreading illness person-to-person - that concerns me. DID ANYONE NOTICE WHAT MARYJK SAID??

If you are sick, you let people know by STAYING HOME. Do not come to Mass if you are sick. How hard is that to understand?

You DO NOT let people know that you are sick by holding your hand up to your face. Believe me I will not respect you for coming to church while you are sick.

You shouldn’t need the bishop to tell you to stay home. Common sense tells you to stay home when you are sick.

Physically sick with communicable illnesses means you should limit your contact with people.

Some people try real hard to make it to receive the Eucharist under all circumstances.
If you are really sick than yes, stay home. You don’t want to get sick at mass.

A minor common cold should not necessarily keep you away from Mass. That’s why God gave us an immune system.

A minor common cold is contagious. You should avoid passing it on to others. You do not know what other health conditions people around you suffer from. Flu (of any sort) can be at best extremely serious, at worst fatal to people with certain chronic health conditions. Again as Maryjk said, sick people should not go to church.

 

[Seatuck]

dioceseofbrooklyn.org/

Not a thing on the Diocese Website.
Anytime our Bishop writes us a letter or a new directive it is put in our bulletin, published in the Diocese Newspaper and put on the website. Very strange.

 

[JMJ_coder]

Well, we’ve replaced the handshake with a bow at the Sign of Peace and holding hands during the Lord’s Prayer has never happened in these parts.

Glad to hear about the hand holding. I’ve seen some parishes use other forms of the Sign of Peace – notably waving and European greetings. I do like very much the Maronite form of the Sign of Peace.

Purell prominently displayed at the back of the Church and no use of EMHCs for the time being.

Good and better.

And I don’t disagree, but isn’t there a document that says that you can’t switch to intinction solely to prevent Communion in the hand? Let’s face it, most who would like to see intinction would like to see it for precisely that reason.

I can’t think of such a document. Intinction is a valid option always – no reason needed – and Communion in the hand is a mere indult that can (and in the near future probably will) be revoked at any time.

 

[JFK]

dioceseofbrooklyn.org/

Not a thing on the Diocese Website.
Anytime our Bishop writes us a letter or a new directive it is put in our bulletin, published in the Diocese Newspaper and put on the website. Very strange.

Again, if you have any questions about the Bishops mandate; you are to direct your question to a Priest.

Originally reported on Lockergnome: lockergnome.com/jfk/2009/10/01/breaking-news-catholic-church-not-to-issue-liturgical-wine-during-swine-flu-season/

There you can tweet the announcement to Twitter.

 

[Phemie]

Sounds like you disagee with the Bishop as from your previous post seems to indicate.

Don’t care if you respect me or not or what I said.

That’s why we have healing masses.

Some people try real hard to make it to receive the Eucharist under all circumstances.
If you are really sick than yes, stay home. You don’t want to get sick at mass.

A minor common cold should not necessarily keep you away from Mass. That’s why God gave us an immune system.

You should stay home out of respect for your fellow parishioners. It’s got nothing to do with your immune system, you don’t know if others’ immune systems are compromised or not.

 

[maryjk]

Some people try real hard to make it to receive the Eucharist under all circumstances.
If you are really sick than yes, stay home. You don’t want to get sick at mass.

A minor common cold should not necessarily keep you away from Mass. That’s why God gave us an immune system.

Going to Mass while you are sick is selfish. If you would like to receive the Eucharist while you are sick, let your parish know and they can come to your home so you can receive.

 

[Phemie]

dioceseofbrooklyn.org/

Not a thing on the Diocese Website.
Anytime our Bishop writes us a letter or a new directive it is put in our bulletin, published in the Diocese Newspaper and put on the website. Very strange.

That’s your diocese. Not all update their websites with the same alacrity. Web master may be busy with other things.

I just checked our own diocesan website:

• The weekly newsletter which goes out by email / fax to every parish on Thursday afternoon has not been updated since Sept 17, so 3 weeks behind.
• The Bishop’s message regarding the latest scandal (child porn/laptop/bishop) which was just emailed/faxed to us to be read at every Sunday Mass this week is not there and I doubt very much that it will ever be.
• The message about Communion under both species and the Sign of Peace that we received at least 3 weeks ago is not there either.

Motto: don’t judge a poster’s comments based on what you don’t find on his diocese’s website.

 

[JFK]

Going to Mass while you are sick is selfish. If you would like to receive the Eucharist while you are sick, let your parish know and they can come to your home so you can receive.

What I did not get across in my previous posting is that people can easily make excuses for the most minor of things and justify not going to Mass.

There is a crisis of lack of attendance at Mass.

What people really need are three things.

1. More Exercise.
2. Attend Mass each and every Sunday – This is a commandment from God.
3. Attend Confession more often - probably more than once a year.

Otherwise, this is really a rather petty argument. If peoples immune systems are so compromised they are they ones (or their doctor) should be the ones advising people to stay home.

But you’ll never hear that at the pulpit.

 

[zab]

Again, if you have any questions about the Bishops mandate; you are to direct your question to a Priest.

Originally reported on Lockergnome: lockergnome.com/jfk/2009/10/01/breaking-news-catholic-church-not-to-issue-liturgical-wine-during-swine-flu-season/

There you can tweet the announcement to Twitter.

So was this your article by JFK?
It is not the mandate that is in question. What is in question is the use of the term “Sacramental wine.”

 

[JFK]

If you have any questions about this new policy you are directed to contact a Priest.

This Policy was enacted by the Bishop.

And whatever nomenclature was used is obviosuly not the point!

 

[VivienneJ]

What I did not get across in my previous posting is that people can easily make excuses for the most minor of things and justify not going to Mass.

There is a crisis of lack of attendance at Mass.

What people really need are three things.

1. More Exercise.
2. **Attend Mass each and every Sunday **-- This is a commandment from God.
3. Attend Confession more often - probably more than once a year.

Otherwise, this is really a rather petty argument. If peoples immune systems are so compromised they are they ones (or their doctor) should be the ones advising people to stay home.

But you’ll never hear that at the pulpit.

JFK, please note that attendance at Mass each and every Sunday is a commandment, but if you are ill you are released from that requirement.

Compromised immune systems: so you would expect all diabetics who were otherwise healthy to stay away from Mass just in case someone who is ill (and therefore excused from attending Mass) goes anyway and infects them? Likewise those with heart conditions; asthma; pregnant women; children under the age of 6 and the elderley over 65? Just to name a few that spring to mind immediately. And you complain that churches are empty and that more people should attend Mass.

 

[5Loaves]

The head of the Catholic Church for the New York Metropolitan area (a bishop) has issued a statement to all parishioners and dioceses in NYC – the Sacramental wine that is usually served during mass will not be issued out of health concerns during this year’s swine flu (H1N1) season.

OK here might be the confusion. The diocese of Brooklyn in not the archdiocese of NY althought Brooklyn and Queends are part of NYC.

That appears to be part of the confusion, the wrong local was given in the initial post, NYC. It doesn’t help that the website for the correct diocese is also out of date and has nothing recent in their news or bishop’s blog, as Phemie also notes.

Hopefully the phone is ringing there at the chancery to get something posted so the faithful can feel confident about the current policies of their Bishop.

 

[JFK]

What was received today is that the policy is in effect for Brooklyn and Queens in NYC.

I’ll see what I can do to correct the wording as more information becomes available.

Just to be sure – if the Bishop of Brooklyn makes an announcement the other boroughs in NYC will not be far behind.

The original message was put out to all Parishes in Brooklyn and Queens.

But there really is no confussion.

What is confusing is why so many of the faithful or not in Church, not calling their Priests and relying on a website for days old data.

 

[maryjk]

What is confusing is why so many of the faithful or not in Church, not calling their Priests and relying on a website for days old data.

Because I am not part of a NYC parish.

I saw my Pastor today, he hasn’t changed anything.

 

[VivienneJ]

What is confusing is why so many of the faithful or not in Church, not calling their Priests and relying on a website for days old data.

Because I am not part of a NYC parish.

I saw my Pastor today, he hasn’t changed anything.

Nor am I part of a NYC parish far from it

And, in spite of massive fears here where I live about swine flu, nothing has changed in church. But we have never held hands during the Our Father; we have always bowed to each other as the sign of peace; we have always recieved only under one species; most do receive on the tongue, a few on the hand, that has not changed either.

I take the same precautions in church as I do at work and out in public.

 

[Aramis]

Do you have a reference for that? I don’t think that the Catholic Bishop would refer to the Precious Blood as “Sacramental wine”.

While not directly relevant, some Eastern Rite liturgies have both a sharing of the eucharist AND a sharing of bread and/or wine as sacramental as an ablution of the mouth post-communing, so that one is certain one has actually consumed all of the precious body.

Note that it is relevant in a few diocese (Denver) due to Russian Rite parishes under the Roman Rite Bishop-Ordinary.

Thus, using the term Sacramental Wine may be inclusive of both Eucharistic use and the use as a sacramental.

NY does have some EC Parishes without hierarchs of their own Church Sui Iuris, and I suspect they may be under the Roman Bishop.

 

[JFK]

1010Wins.Com is reporting that a Long Island Women; age 55 has died of the Swine Flu Influenza.

For complete details of this breaking story visit: 1010wins.com/55-Year-Old-Long-Island-Woman-Dies-from-Swine-Flu/5352072

 

[Aramis]

I just checked, and indeed, there is a Russian Catholic parish in NY, which said, the RuCC is under the hierarchs of the local Roman Ordinaries.

Since the use of Liturgical Wine in two uses (To be consecrated the precious Blood, and to be shared unconsecrated to ensure the complete consumption of the Eucharist) is known within the Russian use of the Byzantine Rite, the wording may have been vague so as to be inclusive within the Diocese of NY.

 

[Chatter163]

And whatever nomenclature was used is obviosuly not the point!

Yes, it certainly IS the point. What was questioned here was the accuracy of your initial post, PRECISELY BECAUSE of its questionable wording, which caused some of us to doubt its veracity. Not only were the words “sacramental wine” used, it also referred to the Precious Blood being “issued” and later “served,” neither of which is accurate Catholic liturgical terminology.

The OP also stated that this directive came from “The head of the Catholic Church for the New York Metropolitan area,” which would be Archbishop Timothy Dolan, but then in later posts we find out that this directive was NOT from the Archbishop and Metropolitan, but from the Bishop of Brooklyn, which would be Bishop Nicholas DiMarzio. Later posts indicate that this directive applies only to parishes in that diocese, which is hardly the sweeping directive that was initially claimed. Again, the credibility of the original post is at issue.

When it was pointed out that this decree would only impact Brooklyn and Queens, rather than the Metropolitan area, as was originally implied, the glib reply was “Just to be sure – if the Bishop of Brooklyn makes an announcement the other boroughs in NYC will not be far behind.” It is nice to know that the OP prognosticates what the Archbishop of New York will do next. I am sure that Archbishop Dolan, as the Metropolitan of the Province of New York (the entire State of New York, with all of its suffragan dioceses), will be interested to hear that he will naturally follow the lead of the Bishop of Brooklyn.

The poor terminology and fuzzy wording made the OP quite doubtable, and that IS the point, and is why some posters questioned it.

 

[VivienneJ]

While not directly relevant, some Eastern Rite liturgies have both a sharing of the eucharist AND a sharing of bread and/or wine as sacramental as an ablution of the mouth post-communing, so that one is certain one has actually consumed all of the precious body.

Note that it is relevant in a few diocese (Denver) due to Russian Rite parishes under the Roman Rite Bishop-Ordinary.

Thus, using the term Sacramental Wine may be inclusive of both Eucharistic use and the use as a sacramental.

NY does have some EC Parishes without hierarchs of their own Church Sui Iuris, and I suspect they may be under the Roman Bishop.

This is really interesing to learn, thanks, Aramis.