Communion at Mass from Tabernacle

[Phemie]

BYOH - Bring Your Own Host?

A couple of earlier posts mentioned the practice of people placing a host in a paten or ciborium as they enter the church. I like that idea. The count would be much closer, and you could just add some for a cushion so that you don’t run out (which would be bad). Then no one would have to be stressed trying to get an accurate attendance count as Mass is beginning.

For years that’s how it was done in our parish. There was a basket of hosts and a pair of tongs. You used the tongs to pick up a host to drop in the ciborium. At the Offertory, whoever was bringing up the ciborium might add 5 or 6 to be on the safe side.

 

[nagyszakall]

I think you’re reading in a meaning that does not match the accepted practice.

There are also “preferences” for Latin and Gregorian Chant, and nobody in the Vatican seems really concerned that almost no one follows those. There is also a “preference” to use the Graduale Romanum and even less parishes use that.

The point is that “preferable” is not a “must”, not only is it not a command but it can be virtually ignored for pretty much any reason (it doesn’t even need to be a grave reason, because otherwise it would say “except for a grave reason”).

Practice accepted by whom?
If you read Sacrosanctum Concilium 116, for example, you’ll find that it calls for a “pride of place” for Gregorian Chant “while other kinds of sacred music ,] are by no means to be excluded,” which is very different from saying that it is to be preferred. For this reason, I can’t accept your example in regard to the manner of distributing communion.
While I agree with you that preferable is not a must (which is what I’ve been saying also) and that it doesn’t require a grave reason to opt for the other manner of distributing communion, I still uphold that parishes should make an effort toward the preferable when possible.

 

[Corki]

Our parish priests prefer that communion be given with hosts that have been consecrated during the same Mass, but we also use consecrated hosts from the Tabernacle. We make our best guess for attendence when counting out hosts before Mass and try to not let the ciborium become too full. But, better to have too much than to run out!

This is pretty much what our priest does too. And the “ratio” depends a lot on which Mass it is. Father is pretty concientious about leaving hosts too long in the tabernacle. If he knows there is a good number already consecrated, he will use more of them at the first Mass of the day. Conversely, by the time he reaches the last Sunday Mass, he is less concerned about moving hosts out of the tablernacle and more concerned with making sure he consecrates enough to have some to put in the tablernacle for his Monday rounds.

I really don’t see why this is a problem. I might be concerned if the faithful ONLY ever received hosts that were previously in the tabernacle.

 

[japhy]

I think that’s the best way to put it: it’d be nice to do, and the symbology is nice, but in the end you’re still receiving Jesus.

Symbology? I’m sure the word you were looking for was “symbolism.”

Anyway, it’s clear from the quotes others have provided that, at least since Pope Benedict XIV (in Certiores effecti) the Church has strongly promoted and recommended receiving Communion in newly-consecrated hosts. This was reiterated by Pius XII and Vatican II, and is found in our current liturgical regulations.

This strong preference of the Church – “it is desirable”, says the GIRM – should hold sway over our personal preferences. Just because the parish we grew up in (or the parish we’re at now) has regular recourse to the tabernacle for Communion doesn’t mean it should continue that way.

If neither of these two ways is “bad”, I think we should prefer what the Church prefers. It’s no use saying “Well, Gregorian chant is preferred and no one uses it” or “Chalice veils are praiseworthy and no one uses them”, etc., because that’s poor justification, which is to say, it’s no justification.

What could someone actually have against making less regular recourse to the tabernacle for Communion?

 

[curlycool89]

Symbology? I’m sure the word you were looking for was “symbolism.”

Sorry, that’s right. I think people got the just of it.

What could someone actually have against making less regular recourse to the tabernacle for Communion?

I don’t have anything against using it less, I just don’t see a way to do it logistically speaking.

There’s really only 2 ways to do it for Mass (unless you do the counting thing). You either under-consecrate and supplement from the tabernacle (with respect to Phemie’s idea, I don’t think any priest can generally and regularly look at a congregation and look at how many hosts there are and figure out if he’s short or not with any more accuracy then a guesstimation), or you over-consecrate and you have to store the extras. If you go for 2 (to make sure everyone can receive from the new hosts), then you continually fill up the Tabernacle (let’s face it, outside of Mass it doesn’t get drawn down much), and eventually you’re going to have to do something drastic like having everyone receive from the Tabernacle during a Mass just to draw it down.

Maybe I should mention where I approach this problem from. I just graduated in environmental engineering, and one of the things we do is drinking water production, which includes piping and reservoirs (storage). Logistically, I see this as a storage issue, when storage is low you add extra, and when storage is high you draw it down to keep it at a happy medium. Hosts consecrated - hosts given out = storage, and just like a lake or reservoir the storage is not infinite, and therefore storage has to be a negative number at least some of the time (negative meaning “storage used”).

The second point is that there’s a lot of guesswork that goes on. Let’s face it, 99% or our sacristans and priests are not mathematicians, statisticians, or engineers (I would venture that most diocesan priests have little to no university level mathematical training whatsoever). When hosts are put out, it’s usually done according to the “well, that looks like enough” standard. Nobody is taking the time to see if we’re regularly putting out too many or too few because there’s no time to do so because everyone is doing 100 extra tasks. Maybe this shows that we need to re-prioritize things, but in the grand scheme this is going to end up far down the list of demands (like where does this fit in relative to “people want more confession time” and “people want better music” and “people want access to a priest practically 24/7”?)

 

[Phemie]

Originally Posted by japhy

 

[malphono]

The second point is that there’s a lot of guesswork that goes on. Let’s face it, 99% or our sacristans and priests are not mathematicians, statisticians, or engineers (I would venture that most diocesan priests have little to no university level mathematical training whatsoever). When hosts are put out, it’s usually done according to the “well, that looks like enough” standard. Nobody is taking the time to see if we’re regularly putting out too many or too few because there’s no time to do so because everyone is doing 100 extra tasks. Maybe this shows that we need to re-prioritize things, but in the grand scheme this is going to end up far down the list of demands (like where does this fit in relative to “people want more confession time” and “people want better music” and “people want access to a priest practically 24/7”?)

I’d venture to say there’s a lot of “guesswork” going on, even with mathematicians, statisticians, and engineers. None of it (including the “water storage” analogy) is an exact science. Look, for example, at Greenwood Lake (between New York and New Jersey). The water-level was lowered because of the threat of hurricane Irene, and now (nearly a year later) the lake is still half dried-up, which has seriously impacted the lives of the local residents. 'Nuff said.

In any case, it seems to me that what comes into play more often, including in church, is experience. A priest (or a sacristan) does, believe it or not, get a “feel” for how many communicants there are likely to be on a given day.

 

[applesofgold]

Going to the Tabernacle for the reserved Blessed Sacrament should be something that is done only when it becomes obvious that the number of people waiting to receive Communion exceeds the number of Hosts remaining in the ciboria of the people distributing Communion. We should not be seeing an EMHC or priest routinely going to the Tabernacle at the Fraction Rite to retrieve previously consecrated Hosts.

But if there were extra hosts consecrated at the earlier mass, I think they should be used first otherwise you run the risk of having sacred hosts remaining indefinitely and turning stale in the tablenacle.

 

[curlycool89]

Sorry, that’s right. I think people got the just of it.

How odd, apparently the word I was looking for is “gist”, not jist. I blame the fact that I haven’t taken an english class in 5 years.

In any case, it seems to me that what comes into play more often, including in church, is experience. A priest (or a sacristan) does, believe it or not, get a “feel” for how many communicants there are likely to be on a given day.

Well yes, with experience can come a better idea, but in the end it’s still guesswork.

Having a Tabernacle just allows more flexibility and a greater margin of error because you can store the extra and withdraw some if you’re wrong. It allows for a safety net. If we didn’t have a way of storing extra, we probably would have developed more accurate methods out of necessity, or people in the back just wouldn’t get to receive half the time (that’s not really an option I’d like to see happen).

 

[Holly3278]

Our parish always uses consecrated hosts from the tabernacle.

 

[Filii_Dei]

While I agree with you that preferable is not a must (which is what I’ve been saying also) and that it doesn’t require a grave reason to opt for the other manner of distributing communion, I still uphold that parishes should make an effort toward the preferable when possible.

What about this suggests that parishes are not making an effort toward the preferable? The fact of the matter is that you can never consecrate exactly enough hosts, unless you suggest building gantries at the church doors. You will either have too few, or too many.

If you have too few, the shortfall has to be made up by the hosts stored in the tabernacle. If you have too many, the extras go into the tabernacle, and they have to be consumed in another Mass, lest the tabernacle becomes a veritable river of hosts. Hence, at the next Mass, they will intentionally consecrate fewer, so that they can use up the excess hosts. [edited]

This ensures that, regardless of how traditional a parish is, any parish worth their salt will have to use the tabernacle in any Mass, whether to deposit or withdraw. You cannot deny that fact. If you have some alternative, I would be glad to hear it.

Actually, the fact that priests attempt to gauge attendance at every Mass is already proof enough that they’re trying their best to achieve the preferable - that as many of the faithful commune from hosts consecrated at the same Mass. If they didn’t, they would just consecrate all the hosts at one Mass and distribute it over all the following Masses, and only consecrate more when they run low. [edited].

 

[Phemie]

[edited] This ensures that, regardless of how traditional a parish is, any parish worth their salt will have to use the tabernacle in any Mass, whether to deposit or withdraw. You cannot deny that fact. If you have some alternative, I would be glad to hear it.

If you end up with too many Hosts each communicant can be given more than one, or if there are some left over after everyone has received, they could be consumed, just as the Blood of Christ is, to avoid having an excess in the Tabernacle. Yes, at times it may become necessary use those that are in the Tabernacle but it should not be routine practice.

 

[japhy]

I’ve heard testimonies from people in parishes that have the ushers do headcounts of the people at Mass and how many receive Communion. After a few weeks of running the numbers, these parishes have been able to estimate the number of hosts necessary for a given Mass, and adjust the number (if necessary) before the bread and wine are brought to the altar.

When they’re a little short, they have recourse to the tabernacle. When they’re a little over, the priest (or other (E)MHC may consume the few remaining hosts. When they’re more than a little over, they reserve the rest.