Churches closed - Holy Mass request

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jaaanosik
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Where I am (Western Australia), only Aldi and IGA sell alcohol and groceries. Though it’s not the biggest selection. They also had restrictions on casket wines (which are the cheapest), and I saw many a staff member get screamed at for something out of their control.
 
Well I learned something new today. I didn’t know that Aldi was in Australia.
 
Well I learned something new today. I didn’t know that Aldi was in Australia.
Me too. I just learned about “casket wines”.
I don’t know, but can guess, what that genre is.
 
This is socialism ideology.
I grew up in socialism, I attended secret Holy Masses, we were attacked.
This is socialism ideology that St. John Paul II was fighting against.
People are blurring the “opposition to the governor” with “opposition to the Church”. The governor where I live is exceeding his authority. The bishop is not.

Think of the Church as a union. Think of the government-plus-media as an increasingly unfriendly employer. The employer tries to undermine the union by getting the members to distrust the union officers via the media.

In my city, the Laity responded to the governor’s restrictions on church services by protesting - not in front of the State office building - but outside the bishop’s office.

The bishops did contest the restrictions through the courts, and eventually got them overturned. In the meantime, a few priests and Laity were urging “wildcat” actions, independent defiance of governor and bishop, because “we gotta a right!”

Employers don’t mind wildcat strikes, because they are really actions against the union. The Church is powerful when it is united, and only then.
 
48.png
Tis_Bearself:
Mass with the proper precautions does not seem to be spreading it.
That is the vital factor, though. Because of distancing our parish can only have 60 present, instead of 300. What if all 300 felt their conscience meant they had to attend Mass or else their soul was in danger?
We have been told in our parish to practise charity as well as commonsense, and not hog places every Mass but either not go at all but follow on Yotube,. or else give others a chance by limiting attendance to once a month or so.
When we reopened we were allowed a maximum of 50 and had only one Mass, so I opted to go every second or third week in order to give other people a chance.

Now we are allowed 100, and have a Mass on Saturday evening and one on Sunday. Realistically, we can only fit in that many if we have bubbles of several people in attendance. At this morning’s Mass, most pews had mostly people who had to sit 6’ away from everyone else. That meant our 9’ pews had 2 people, one at each end, and the smaller pews had one person each. I’m not sure we had more than 50 but it’s unlikely we could have fit 10 more who required individual spacing.
 
48.png
TomH1:
Well I learned something new today. I didn’t know that Aldi was in Australia.
Me too. I just learned about “casket wines”.
I don’t know, but can guess, what that genre is.
We know it as boxed wine. It seems in Australia those remain low quality wines, if I can take Wiki seriously. In Canada you can find some pretty good boxed wines. We use them at the bar in our theatre. Easy to store and they last longer once opened.
 
Priests and extraordinary ministers bring Holy Communion to elderly and sick in normal times.
Now, … nothing.
I am not sure you comprehend how bad is this situation.
I know only too well how bad the situation is and how frustrating it is, as a priest not to be able to celebrate public masses or take communion to those who need it the most - been there, done that! Celebrating mass in front of a camera in an empty church is really not fun!

However, while there is a right to receive the eucharist (as with any sacrament) that right, as with any right, isn’t unlimited - you can’t just ask a priest to receive the Eucharist anytime you feel like it. Certainly, there are some communities in the world which only receive mass monthly, at that.

Aside from the sick and housebound, we’re supposed to receive the eucharist at mass because it’s a communal sacrament (hence “communion”). In other words, when we receive the Eucharist we don’t receive it as individuals but as members of a community - the Body of Christ - and so the idea that we exclude the vulnerable or place others at risk simply doesn’t fit with what our faith is all about.

Priests are still saying masses for their communities and, where public masses are allowed with limited numbers, doing their best to provide for as many people as possible. There’s a limit though to how many masses a priest can reasonably be expected to celebrate in one day.

Still, for what it’s worth, I do think that churches should be able to open for private worship (with restrictions on numbers) but in fairness, too many expectations do of course defeat the whole purpose of a lockdown.
 
However, while there is a right to receive the eucharist (as with any sacrament) that right, as with any right, isn’t unlimited - you can’t just ask a priest to receive the Eucharist anytime you feel like it. Certainly, there are some communities in the world which only receive mass monthly, at that.
We have one isolated parish with fewer than 100 residents for which our administrator is responsible. Due to only being accessible by boat or plane, a priest goes in for Christmas and Easter, weather permitting, and once in the summer. If weather cooperates, Fr. will go in for a funeral and for the very rare wedding.
 
Me too. I just learned about “casket wines”.
I don’t know, but can guess, what that genre is.
Wine in a box rather than in a bottle. In general, considered to be lower quality and that is reflected in the price. When I lived in Australia I knew someone who bought quite a bit of casket wine.

Is it worse than bottled? I suppose it depends on the drinker. I’ve always believed a wine is nice if you like it.
 
48.png
Jaaanosik:
This is socialism ideology.
I grew up in socialism, I attended secret Holy Masses, we were attacked.
This is socialism ideology that St. John Paul II was fighting against.
People are blurring the “opposition to the governor” with “opposition to the Church”. The governor where I live is exceeding his authority. The bishop is not.
It is different where I live.
Bishops work with government they closed the churches in ‘a good will’ …
There would be no point to go against government, there is nothing to complain about.

Netflix has ‘The 100’ series. The series is filled with moral dilemmas.
Season 1 Ep. 5 - there is a problem on the space station with the air supply, thousands of people are going to die. To solve the problem they need more time and the only way to get more time is that hundreds of people have to die. The leadership is hiding the facts, vacillating, very much confused, afraid of uprising. A video about the truth is leaked to the whole station, chaos is expected. The response is surprising, volunteers come forward, they choose to die on their own accord.
We might think this is naive, series script. No, watch HBO series Chernobyl. It is real.
That’s the God’s Natural Law at its best.

Taking away free will of people leads to disasters.
If bishops opened churches and asked people, please, limit numbers at the Holy Masses people would respond.
 
Last edited:
48.png
Jaaanosik:
Priests and extraordinary ministers bring Holy Communion to elderly and sick in normal times.
Now, … nothing.
I am not sure you comprehend how bad is this situation.

However, while there is a right to receive the eucharist (as with any sacrament) that right, as with any right, isn’t unlimited - you can’t just ask a priest to receive the Eucharist anytime you feel like it. Certainly, there are some communities in the world which only receive mass monthly, at that.
I do not see it that way. I see it in more humble way.
To receive sacraments is a privilege. God’s grace and mercy allow that.
Priests have a privilege to administer sacraments.
A privilege can be taken away from us. Many conditions are out of our control.
How the privilege is taken away from us matters though.
 
Last edited:
We have freedom of religion protected by Bill of Rights.
The very proof of the above – freedom of religion is recognized and protected by Bill of Rights.
It is recognized by all the people, by the society.
I have a question here…you keep bringing up the Bill of Rights. I thought that the decision in your case was made by your Archbishop…or are you saying that the government has come in and shut down your Parish/Diocese?
 
48.png
Jaaanosik:
We have freedom of religion protected by Bill of Rights.
The very proof of the above – freedom of religion is recognized and protected by Bill of Rights.
It is recognized by all the people, by the society.
I have a question here…you keep bringing up the Bill of Rights. I thought that the decision in your case was made by your Archbishop…or are you saying that the government has come in and shut down your Parish/Diocese?
Churches got closed by bishops in a good will act.
I was pointing out what God’s Natural Law is and how it is recognized even by the society.
This is the irony of the situation.
We have a freedom of religion and our bishops are taking it away from us.
If we took this to secular court, a case saying our bishops are taking away our freedom of religion we might win. Who knows.
I am joking, exaggerating. 🙂
… just to point out how confusing this is.
 
Last edited:
48.png
TC3033:
48.png
Jaaanosik:
We have freedom of religion protected by Bill of Rights.
The very proof of the above – freedom of religion is recognized and protected by Bill of Rights.
It is recognized by all the people, by the society.
I have a question here…you keep bringing up the Bill of Rights. I thought that the decision in your case was made by your Archbishop…or are you saying that the government has come in and shut down your Parish/Diocese?
Churches got closed by bishops in a good will act.
I was pointing out what God’s Natural Law is and how it is recognized even by the society.
This is the irony of the situation.
We have a freedom of religion and our bishops are taking it away from us.
If we took this to secular court, a case saying our bishops are taking away our freedom of religion we might win. Who knows.

I am joking, exaggerating. 🙂
… just to point out how confusing this is.
OK, that’s helpful.

In your situation, The Bill of Rights doesn’t apply. The Bill of Rights, specifically the 1st amendment, applies to/protects you from the government restricting your right to freely practice your religion…not your church hierarchy. In theory, you are freely practicing your religion by listening to/respecting the decision from your Church leader(s).
 
Last edited:
OK, that’s helpful.

In your situation, The Bill of Rights doesn’t apply. The Bill of Rights, specifically the 1st amendment applies to/protects you from the government restricting your right to freely practice your religion…not your church hierarchy. In theory, you are freely practicing your religion by listening to/respecting the decision by your Church leader(s).
I know, that was a joke, it does not apply here.
That’s the reason I am asking about the Church’s law regarding the Holy Masses.

If bishops open churches and they get attacked by government then Bill of Rights applies.
Why they would not do that?
The SCOTUS ruling for the NY state is good.
Governor Cuomo cannot close churches now or even in the future.
 
Last edited:
I know, that was a joke, it does not apply here.
Ok. The two times you brought it up…it sure didn’t sound like you were joking.
Why they would not do that?
You’d have to ask them. My guess is they’re utilizing the information provided by the CDC and department of health and making, what they believe, the best choice with the information they have.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top