Common Cups-How Long Do Indults Take?

[OhMalley]

What “below?” Where did you get said “below?” This is a done deal. It’s actually more than just RS. The USCCB questioned RS and received a prompt answer. They were also told that the Holy See would not approve anything that would effectively contravine RS on this matter. Once again: usccb.org/liturgy/q&a/chalice.shtml

This is not an on-going debate with the Holy See. To suggest “When and how to pour the cups is one of the many issues Rome is curently reviewing” is simply not true. Just another urban legend floated to keep people off-balance and wondering.

Since there is a discrepancy between the above and below, what should I say to the Pastor on Friday to help him understand that it is a wise choice to make the change?

When and how to pour the cups is one of the many issues Rome is curently reviewing. The US Bishops have requested what are known as indults to allow certain local practices to continue. While various offices have expressed many opinions on these matters, the process has not yet concluded. Once it does our Bishop’s office will issue definitive directives, at which time I will implement them. Until that time, I have chosen to wait until we get the final word in order to avoid confusion among the liturgical ministers. I would not want to implement a number of changes only to have to change them back in a relatively short space of time.

---

I’m meeting with the Pastor Friday. I’ll copy the Comittee on Divine Worship’s directives and take them with me, but he is probably just going to get mad because I’m arguing the point. Any other advice before I go in to get drawn and quartered this Friday?

 

[OhMalley]

GRRRRR :banghead:

Why can’t priests just follow the rules?? As mentioned in another thread (also started by the OP), we have this going on at our parish. Last Monday was the welcoming Mass for Archbishop Carlson for our deanery, and, just like the 125th anniversary Mass that then Archbishop Burke celebrated with us, the rubrics were followed: the wine was poured into the chalices prior to the consecration. Then, come Sunday, it was right back to business as usual

Why? Why the insistance on consecrating in the big glass pitcher? The only explanation I’ve gotten is “Fr. B likes it better that way”. Ok, WHY??? So the choir can make up 12 extra verses for the Lamb of God while they’re (and by “they” I mean either the Deacon or EMHC-which I’m sure is also not allowed-never the priest) pouring? What reason could there possibly be, other than just flat out disobedience: “Rome said it, Rome can’t tell ME what to do, I’m in charge of THIS parish!”

Ok, sorry for the vent . But this is just driving me insane!

In Christ,

Ellen

You know that is something that would really fire me up – if things were “cleaned-up” for the bishop and then allowed to revert to illicit practice once he was gone. That is terribly bad form, but it’s also something that’s likely to get cleaned-up sooner or later too.

In my diocese the former bishop allowed us to pour the Pecious Blood in defiance of the Holy See based on a published letter by the cardinal of our ecclesiastical province. I don’t think my current bishop wants to metaphorically slap both on the face by demanding we follow the Church. Your situation would fire me up. Mine makes me ill…

 

[cknick]

what “below?” where did you get said “below?” this is a done deal. It’s actually more than just rs. The usccb questioned rs and received a prompt answer. They were also told that the holy see would not approve anything that would effectively contravine rs on this matter. Once again: usccb.org/liturgy/q&a/chalice.shtml

this is not an on-going debate with the holy see. To suggest “when and how to pour the cups is one of the many issues rome is curently reviewing” is simply not true. Just another urban legend floated to keep people off-balance and wondering.

below was the letter the pastor sent to me as to why he continues the practice.
I’ll try to stay strong and just re-iterate the need for change i guess.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

GRRRRR :banghead:

Why can’t priests just follow the rules?? As mentioned in another thread (also started by the OP), we have this going on at our parish. Last Monday was the welcoming Mass for Archbishop Carlson for our deanery, and, just like the 125th anniversary Mass that then Archbishop Burke celebrated with us, the rubrics were followed: the wine was poured into the chalices prior to the consecration. Then, come Sunday, it was right back to business as usual

Why? Why the insistance on consecrating in the big glass pitcher? The only explanation I’ve gotten is “Fr. B likes it better that way”. Ok, WHY??? So the choir can make up 12 extra verses for the Lamb of God while they’re (and by “they” I mean either the Deacon or EMHC-which I’m sure is also not allowed-never the priest) pouring? What reason could there possibly be, other than just flat out disobedience: “Rome said it, Rome can’t tell ME what to do, I’m in charge of THIS parish!”

Ok, sorry for the vent . But this is just driving me insane!

In Christ,

Ellen

Have you let the dioces know what you describe in your first paragraph?

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

below was the letter the pastor sent to me as to why he continues the practice.
I’ll try to stay strong and just re-iterate the need for change i guess.

Remember that it is not your responsibility to correct your pastors actions, you can ask and show him the documentation. If he chooses not to follow them you should direct it to the Diocese and Bishop. Otherwise you are going to get yourself in a bind with your pastor.

 

[cknick]

Remember that it is not your responsibility to correct your pastors actions, you can ask and show him the documentation. If he chooses not to follow them you should direct it to the Diocese and Bishop. Otherwise you are going to get yourself in a bind with your pastor.

Okay-I’ve already forwarded him the documentation. Is it his responsibility to go to the Bishop and request clarification once I’ve given him everything?

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

Okay-I’ve already forwarded him the documentation. Is it his responsibility to go to the Bishop and request clarification once I’ve given him everything?

If he refuses to change anything and says this to you, there would be nothing wrong with you going to the Bishop and letting him address the issue with the pastor. Once you have brought it to their attention respectively, there is nothing else you can do.

 

[OhMalley]

below was the letter the pastor sent to me as to why he continues the practice.
I’ll try to stay strong and just re-iterate the need for change i guess.

The reason I am being so direct on this matter is due to just how much this issue was beat to death within the Church. This is precisely the sort of garbage that makes me question of the Church from time to time. To summarize:

• USCCB passed norms which include pouring the Precious Blood. The Holy See (the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith) approved said norms.
• Pouring was used with permission in USA.
• USCCB notes variance between their approved norms and the newly released RS and asked Holy See what to do.
• Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith modified existing approval of USCCB norms and directed American bishops to follow RS and stop the practice of pouring Precious Blood.
• USCCB questions whether the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (“the Vatican”) has the authority to change the USCCB norm.
• The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith underscores its authority to make such changes in light of legislation like RS.
• USCCB considers reasserting their already approved norms (which include pouring.) They are told that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith must approve any change which it’s clearly not about to do.
• Done deal.

Yet people still claim that this matter is up in the air!

 

[cknick]

BUT THE BISHOP IS CONSECRATING IN THE DECANTER TOO, SO BASICALLY I’M IN DISAGREEMENT WITH THE BISHOP. WILL THAT JEOPARDIZE THE SALVATION OF MY SOUL IF HE LOOKS AT ME WITH DISDAIN AND THINKS i’M BEING DISOBEDIENT TO HIS AUTHORITY?

 

[OhMalley]

BUT THE BISHOP IS CONSECRATING IN THE DECANTER TOO, SO BASICALLY I’M IN DISAGREEMENT WITH THE BISHOP. WILL THAT JEOPARDIZE THE SALVATION OF MY SOUL IF HE LOOKS AT ME WITH DISDAIN AND THINKS i’M BEING DISOBEDIENT TO HIS AUTHORITY?

Nope. I would also guess nothing is going to change if that’s the case. Sometimes I think some bishops are acting like schoolboys on this matter. Almost as if they cannot handle taking direction from the Holy See.

 

[cknick]

Nope. I would also guess nothing is going to change if that’s the case. Sometimes I think some bishops are acting like schoolboys on this matter. Almost as if they cannot handle taking direction from the Holy See.

The pastor said to me once “It doesn’t matter how bad what you think your husband said, it’s your job to be obedient to his authority.”

He feels the same way about his role to be obedient to the Bishop. Another time he said to the congregation “The Bishop gets what he wants, no questions!”

I’m thinking he probably feels the same way about my role in being obedient to his authority, too.

If the Bishop says to consecrate in the decanter, he is going to do it, and who am I to question. It is my job to be obedient and follow him, whatever method is used. (I have a feeling that is the attitude I’m going to face today.)

 

[kage_ar]

For every thing there is a time and a season. You have presented the documents, you have contacted the Bishop. Perhaps now wait and pray.

 

[OhMalley]

The pastor said to me once “It doesn’t matter how bad what you think your husband said, it’s your job to be obedient to his authority.”

He feels the same way about his role to be obedient to the Bishop. Another time he said to the congregation “The Bishop gets what he wants, no questions!”

I’m thinking he probably feels the same way about my role in being obedient to his authority, too.

If the Bishop says to consecrate in the decanter, he is going to do it, and who am I to question. It is my job to be obedient and follow him, whatever method is used. (I have a feeling that is the attitude I’m going to face today.)

He probably does expect strict obedience from you. My former pastor did too and was shocked when he didn’t receive it from both me and many others. The problem wasn’t that he didn’t earn it. The problem was that he had squandered the obedience that priests automatically get…

I seriously doubt your bishop directs your pastor to pour the Precious Blood. When visiting your bishop might do things that way himself but I truly dount he requires your pastor to ignore the Holy See.

Someone else gave you some great advice. You’ve taken action, now sit back and pray on the matter.

 

[cknick]

He probably does expect strict obedience from you. My former pastor did too and was shocked when he didn’t receive it from both me and many others. The problem wasn’t that he didn’t earn it. The problem was that he had squandered the obedience that priests automatically get…

I seriously doubt your bishop directs your pastor to pour the Precious Blood. When visiting your bishop might do things that way himself but I truly dount he requires your pastor to ignore the Holy See.

Someone else gave you some great advice. You’ve taken action, now sit back and pray on the matter.

I met with the pastor today. He yelled at me for questioning him on the indults and asked where do I come off saying that there have been no more indults, and the Holy see has not given his final answer about it, etc. I told him that the faithful have the right and the responsibility to ensure that our clergy is following the magisterium. He disagreed quite vehemently. I tried to tell him that my intentions were good.

I’m not arguing with him anymore. He is so angry.

He did explain to me why the other priest said mass according to RS. He said he is under the Abbot’s direction, and not under the Bishop’s. For himself, he is being obedient to the Bishop and the Bishop said he doesn’t want him to change anything right now.

He is so mad at me. I don’t want to face him like that ever again.

 

[twf]

cknick:
You did the right think. The Church does NOT require blind obedience. St. Catherine of Sienna strongly rebuked the Pope of her day when he was in the wrong. St. Paul strongly rebuked St. Peter when he was in the wrong. It is our duty out of charity to correct those in authority when they are led astray (or are leading others astray). Since you know what the Church has actually mandated in this matter, it would be wrong for you to follow your priest’s (or bishop’s) direction. While you do owe them obedience, you do not owe them obeidence under the following two conditions:

1. If they direct you to do something which contravenes the natural or divine law (I.e. instruct you do to something immoral)
2. If they direct you tod o something which contradicts the directions of a higher authority.
   #2 is something St. Thomas Aquinas goes into…when a lower authority contradicts a higher authority, it is ALWAYS our duty to obey the higher authority. In this case, the Pope is clearly the higher authority. Throughout the history of the Church, many bishops, who like all men have freewill, have abused their holy office and fallen into sin or heresy. That’s why Christ gave the Church an authority above that of the local bishop. If we were always bound to follow the local bishop, who is a fallible man, the faithful of any heretical bishop would have no choice but to leave Holy Mother Church! There was a time when the majority of bishops were Arian heretics (that is, they denied the divinity of Christ)…if the faithful had obeyed their bishops, they would have been renouncing their Faith and their eternal salvation!

 

[cknick]

cknick:
You did the right think. The Church does NOT require blind obedience. St. Catherine of Sienna strongly rebuked the Pope of her day when he was in the wrong. St. Paul strongly rebuked St. Peter when he was in the wrong. It is our duty out of charity to correct those in authority when they are led astray (or are leading others astray). Since you know what the Church has actually mandated in this matter, it would be wrong for you to follow your priest’s (or bishop’s) direction. While you do owe them obedience, you do not owe them obeidence under the following two conditions:

1. If they direct you to do something which contravenes the natural or divine law (I.e. instruct you do to something immoral)
2. If they direct you tod o something which contradicts the directions of a higher authority.
   #2 is something St. Thomas Aquinas goes into…when a lower authority contradicts a higher authority, it is ALWAYS our duty to obey the higher authority. In this case, the Pope is clearly the higher authority. Throughout the history of the Church, many bishops, who like all men have freewill, have abused their holy office and fallen into sin or heresy. That’s why Christ gave the Church an authority above that of the local bishop. If we were always bound to follow the local bishop, who is a fallible man, the faithful of any heretical bishop would have no choice but to leave Holy Mother Church! There was a time when the majority of bishops were Arian heretics (that is, they denied the divinity of Christ)…if the faithful had obeyed their bishops, they would have been renouncing their Faith and their eternal salvation!

Thank you. I think I’m just really hurt right now. It wil take some time.

 

[Aramis]

cknick: Rebuke but obey. That IS a hard road, but your pastor seems to be on a harder one…paved with good intentions, they say…

Ellen:
Deacons were permitted to pour the flagon under the indult; they in fact, still do, only now only before the consecration.

The deacon is the ordinary minister of the Blood, and the priest the Ordinary Minister of the Body. Were pouring allowed still, it would be the deacon’s proper task; since the indult ended, it is no longer permitted.

As it stands, the norm has returned in full to the older tradition: multiple chalices, filled and then simultaneously consecrated.

The ancient norm of contact consecration by commingling the precious Blood with wine is only extant now in very limited circumstances (the Byzantine Rite Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts, where the Body was previously soaked in the Blood, then carefully dried, and is added to wine for distribution). That ancient norm, as done in old, would violate the “No Pouring” order in RS.

 

[cknick]

I hope that you have better luck with the USCCB Committee on Worship than I have had. When I have called them, the administrative assistant tries to send me back to my diocese, even though I have told him that we have no office of worship down here. It’s almost as though I have to pull teeth to get any information. Now, the CDWDS, on the other hand, is most helpful, even though I have to wake up at 3AM CST to contact them. They are extremely resourceful and you can’t get any higher authority than the CDWDS, short of contacting the Office of the Supreme Pontiff itself.

YOU WERE CORRECT-HERE IS THE RESPONSE…

Due to our limited staffing, we regret that we are not able to respond personally to individual requests for information. Please note that answers to many general questions about the Liturgy are found on our website, usccb.org/liturgy.

For more particular resources, you may wish to contact your local parish or your diocesan liturgy office or liturgical commission.

 

[OhMalley]

cknick: Rebuke but obey. That IS a hard road, but your pastor seems to be on a harder one…paved with good intentions, they say…

Ellen:
Deacons were permitted to pour the flagon under the indult; they in fact, still do, only now only before the consecration.

The deacon is the ordinary minister of the Blood, and the priest the Ordinary Minister of the Body. Were pouring allowed still, it would be the deacon’s proper task; since the indult ended, it is no longer permitted.

As it stands, the norm has returned in full to the older tradition: multiple chalices, filled and then simultaneously consecrated.

The ancient norm of contact consecration by commingling the precious Blood with wine is only extant now in very limited circumstances (the Byzantine Rite Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts, where the Body was previously soaked in the Blood, then carefully dried, and is added to wine for distribution). That ancient norm, as done in old, would violate the “No Pouring” order in RS.

I don’t believe the Sacrament under the appearence of bread must be soaked in the Sacrament under the appearence of wine and then “carefully dried.” One species under the appearence of bread is reserved, period. It is then mixed with fresh wine at the LPG.

 

[OhMalley]

I met with the pastor today. He yelled at me for questioning him on the indults and asked where do I come off saying that there have been no more indults, and the Holy see has not given his final answer about it, etc. I told him that the faithful have the right and the responsibility to ensure that our clergy is following the magisterium. He disagreed quite vehemently. I tried to tell him that my intentions were good.

I am very sorry this happened to you. Even if you were not tactful he should not have raised his voice. That’s terribly bad form.

I’m not arguing with him anymore. He is so angry…

Good not to argue with him.

He did explain to me why the other priest said mass according to RS. He said he is under the Abbot’s direction, and not under the Bishop’s. For himself, he is being obedient to the Bishop and the Bishop said he doesn’t want him to change anything right now.

He is so mad at me. I don’t want to face him like that ever again.

We had a pastor for a short time. He was mean and he verbally abused people in front of others. It was really horrible. One day he really tore into me (I was the one who had to knock on the sacristy door to wake him) and I very harshly returned the favor. Soon he was gone and my confessor reminded me that difficult times are opportunities to grow in Christ and that I had squandered one. He was right. Hang in there and re-double your prayers…