Deeply Rooted Tradition

  • Thread starter Thread starter Daniel27
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

Daniel27

Guest
Something I have noticed is that when the priest/deacon consecrates the Body and Blood of Christ in the mass, and holds it up high after saying “… do this in memory of me” that people take very different approaches to this. Some will staunchly refuse to look at the Eucharist and keep their heads down; were as other people seem to be like meerkats and refuse to lower their gaze. It seems that to do the opposite of what someone else does in this instance would be strikingly controversial for them.

Can someone please provide a clear answer as to whether one is meant to look or not?
 
I don’t think you should assume that people are refusing to look or not to look. They are probably just doing whatever they want. I also would not assume that it would be controversial for someone to do both.
 
Last edited:
You could look at the Host or Chalice. You could bow your head and pray.

What you should not do is focus on what other people are doing.

Also, the deacon cannot consecrate the Eucharist. It’s always the priest or bishop.

-Fr ACEGC
 
Last edited:
As far as I know, there is nothing in Da Rulz stipulating where we are supposed to be looking at the Elevation. Some people were taught early in their lives to look down in humility; that is their habit, and that is what they do.

As for me, I came into the Church only 15 years ago, and I wasn’t taught anything specific about where to look. In my thinking, when something is elevated, it is elevated to be looked at, so I look. Sometimes I’m half expecting a ray of fire to come out of the elevated Eucharist to strike me, but that’s a topic for another thread 😃

D
 
Daniel27 said:
Some will staunchly refuse to look at the Eucharist and keep their heads down
Click to expand...
I don’t bow my head at the elevation because I refuse to look at Christ. I bow my head down because I’m bowing to Christ. I imagine the Seraphim in heaven, who have two wings to cover their eyes because of their humility the awesomeness of God.
 
I keep my head bowed and do not look in reverence to Jesus.
Before I accept communion, I knee, though most bow.
Again I do this in reverence to Jesus.
Every knee will bend, every tongue confess, that Jesus Christ is Lord.
 
I was taught that looking at the Host and then the Chalice is the correct thing to do and that is the reason why the bell is rung at the Elevation: to attract our attention and remind us to look up. The pastor who found it necessary to remind his congregation of that, from time to time, is now the head of the liturgy department in his archdiocese.
 
That is what I was taught also.
And that once Mass was said in a tone and language they could hear and understand, the bells were no longer needed.
 
BartholomewB said:
I was taught that…
Click to expand...
I left the rest of the post off for a reason.

I’m fairly certain there is nothing in the G.I.R.M. regarding where the people should be looking at the times of the elevations.

As such, most of us will fall back on what we were taught in a religion class as children, what someone said in RCIA, what we heard in a talk or lecture, what some priest or deacon said in a homily, what someone wrote for a book or online forum, or perhaps on a some personal experience we had.

It seems to me that both looking down with humility and looking up with awe and/or love are all reasonable postures which reflect the breadth of our possible relationships with Christ.
 
Last edited:
So, why are the bells rung? What is their purpose at that time?

I was taught the same thing as @BartholomewB.
 
I’ve heard enough stories about how the bells came to be used that I have come to be suspicious of all of them.

Some of the reasons I’ve heard are that the bells go back to the days when western Catholics had the sanctuary screened. I’ve heard it is because Catholic commoners in the nave of the church, surrounded by their pigs and chickens, were too ignorant to know what was going on during the Mass. I’ve heard it was because Catholics were too busy praying their rosaries during Mass to pay attention to what was happening. In all those cases Catholics needed the bells to let them know that the consecration had occurred.

I’ve also heard that the sanctuary bells were just indoor versions of the exterior church bells.

(My parish --formed in the late 1980s-- has never had sanctuary bells so I have to pay attention to know that it is the time for the consecration.)
 
Last edited:
So, are you saying that we don’t really know? 🤔
Again, why at that particular time, if not to draw our eyes upward?
 
I like to look and then bow. I’ve never heard of a special ritual involving this part of the mass.
 
Daniel27 said:
other people seem to be like meerkats and refuse to lower their gaze
Click to expand...
a) saying people who are adoring the Eucharist are acting like meerkats is . . . startling, to say the least
b) “refuse” implies they’re not doing something they’re supposed to do. What’s your source for that?
 
Last edited:
The actual text of the rubrics for the priest in the Eucharistic Prayer states for the elevations, “He shows the … to the people” To me, someone can only show me something if I look, but I won’t argue that those who bow their heads are entirely in the wrong, either.
 
Elevation is to show the consecrated species to the assembly. The point of showing is for the people to look. That they are raised that high dates back to the time when the priest faced in the same direction as the people and the only way they could see is if he held them over his head. How we deal with what we are seeing is a personal thing. Some look, some bow their head in adoration and reverence. I do both, I first look then bow my head.
 
Just want to quickly say that people are picking up quite a lot on the tern I used “refuse” to mean something that I had not intended. To clarify: it is part of my local vernacular; it wasn’t meant as a negative, and for any one who is unapproving of it, I am sorry for any offence that may have been caused. I simply meant to say that those who opt to not look at the Eucharist seem definite on their stance, and would thus not change their ways.
 
puer.dei said:
saying people who are adoring the Eucharist are acting like meerkats is . . . startling, to say the least
Click to expand...
Apologies for any offence or insult that may have been caused by this remark; I completely see where you’re coming from in saying this when reading it over again. I was trying to put it into a hyperbolic way of expressing how people seem so definite on one way or the other (in my opinion). I’ll be more mindful next time of how I express things.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top