Gathering around the altar for consecration

[Luvtosew]

So do most of your Parishes have weekday evening Masses, here they are in the mornings on weekdays as far as I know.

 

[opus101]

So do most of your Parishes have weekday evening Masses, here they are in the mornings on weekdays as far as I know.

Around here there are morning, noon, afternoon and evening daily Masses.

 

[Ohana]

Here’s another: catholicdoors.com/faq/qu440.htm

Thank you for these references. I checked one out - the Archbishop’s statement, and see that there has been some catechesis on this. I did look up the GIRM online and will get back to that also. We had been going through the GIRM in our previous diocese, but that was a few years ago, before the current changes. One isnever too old to learn, but gotta say, a lot of this is where I came in, andI really liked a lot of the changes of Vatican 2.

I am not getting ready for my family for Christmas - lots of cooking, etc. Our younger son comes tomorrow after his work in another state. I am going to really enjoy my family for a few days then get back to this. I have it on my subscribed threads.

Merry Christmas to you all.

 

[opus101]

Merry Christmas, Ohana!

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

No one is using Jesus’ feelings to defend anyone’s own viewpoint. We are using simple facts, which indicate circumstances clearly contrary to the Roman Missal, to the GIRM, and to tradition in order to label the events in the original post as abuses. It seems like the only thing that constitutes liturgical abuse anymore is if the priest stomps all over the consecrated hosts or something. People perceive nothing is wrong anymore, that we can do whatever we want, and that is why we get into messes like this.

If it isn’t already crystal clear that the laity standing around the altar isn’t a liturgical abuse worthy of gawking at and reporting immediately, then I don’t know if I can explain it in any other way.

Are you talking about

the priest stomps all over the consecrated hosts or something

???

I did not see any other abuses…where did you see the priest stompina all over the consecracted Host “or something”. what is something?

As for the Last Supper, the first mass, it was around the table.

I guess you are venting your feelings and you have a right to do so.

Your evidence, though… you offer evidence that is good and that is bad.But… It is a pity that the ones that are good are false and the ones that are bad are true.

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

Which abuses were specifically reported is irrelevant to my statement. What is relevant is that the Holy Father is aware of them. His Motu Propio Summorum Pontificum permitting universal use of the traditional missal was born from this awareness.

Read here

If you complain, you should offer proof.
If it is the Holy Father who did it, he does not a sacristan to explain His Words. WE know what the Holy Father says.

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

A number of posts have said that the priest must consume the Eucharist in order for the Mass to be valid. What happens if a priest finds himself in the state of mortal sin? Does he cancel Mass for that day? With the shortage of priests, it could be hard to find another priest to go to confession to. Or did I misunderstand something?

I am not sure but i doubt that the priest should consume the Eucharist.
Nevertheless, if he celebrates mass he is not in “mortal sin” whatever that means.

 

[YoungTradCath]

Are you talking about ???

I did not see any other abuses…where did you see the priest stompina all over the consecracted Host “or something”. what is something?

As for the Last Supper, the first mass, it was around the table.

I guess you are venting your feelings and you have a right to do so.

Your evidence, though… you offer evidence that is good and that is bad.But… It is a pity that the ones that are good are false and the ones that are bad are true.

“Or something” refers to anything that would be as bad as stomping on hosts.

No, I’m not venting my feelings. On second thought, if calling a liturgical abuse a liturgical abuse is simply venting my feelings, a relegation so common these days, then I suppose I am venting my feelings.

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

When studying theology we were taught that in one school of thought there were two religious (not architectural) “spaces” - the “synagogue” and the “upper room.” The “synagogue” is where the assembly attends to the Word of God and the Upper Room where the Last Supper is reenacted. The various postures and gestures of the congregation and the celebrant represent this. From this point of view it makes no sense to leave people in the “synagogue” when Jesus welcomes them to the “upper room.” This is not possible with a large congregation, but it is entirely possible with a small one.

In Orthodox Liturgy, the separation you mentioned is even greater.

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

The necessity of him consuming the Eucharist as consecrated in that particular mass overrides that.

overides? like a bulldozer…

 

[TrueLight]

I must be missing something here - if the priest needs to consume the Eucharist, how can he do that if he is in a state of mortal sin?

This might be helpful.

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

I think your misunderstanding the fact that the Apostles who gathered around the Altar table of the Last Supper with Jesus were essentially the first Priests in recorded Christian history after Jesus died on the Cross and later Ascended into Heaven.

Indeed; Jesus’s martyred apostles where Eucharistic priest beginning with Saint Peter our first Pope.
After Jesus ascended into Heaven the Apostles mission was to preach to the world and carry on what Jesus asked of them.

**This is my body, which is given for you. Do this for a commemoration of me. In like manner the chalice also, after he had supped, saying: This is the chalice, the new testament in my blood, which shall be shed for you. **

Priests? How do you know? They could say mass then? After saying mass, Peter betrayed and Judas sold Him. Did you hear them making eucharist before the ascent of jesus to Heaven.

But suppose you are right. Then the separation between the prople and the priest began right after the Last Supper. Right the next day, Priests were in the altar and the audience one km down. Which proof you have of that? did you read the Epistles of the Apostles and the narration of their Eucharist? You should do it! Then, you would know what abuses were…

Small details, the Apostles were priests or bishops?

Big confusions, no?

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

I’m just wondering why the OP hasn’t called the Church she went to and ask to speak with the Priest or even the secretary and find out more about what happened at the Mass.

Effective, fast and timely.
This way we just vent our feelings … what is good for the liver, they say…

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

I see some real differences of opinion in this thread. Could those of you who see this participation in the Mass as totally illicit, wrong, an abuse, reportable, etc., please cite your reference for such an opinion. That might clarify the matter. It would also be good if anyone has documentation for the right of the celebrating priest to alter the circumstances under which the Mass is offered. I think that priests, particuilarly pastors, have quite a bit of latitude, but I may be wrong.

What are you talking about?

I think that priests, particuilarly pastors, have quite a bit of latitude, but I may be wrong

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

It didn’t work, sorry. Hopefully this one will: catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=1364

The Bishop refers to the practice as a “liturgical error”, and quotes documents.

Quote from the Bishop text:

Consulting the General Instruction of the Roman Missal, we find that the sanctuary is identified and set off as a place for the priest celebrating the Mass, the concelebrants, and designated ministers of the liturgy (acolytes, readers, servers)

Now suppose that the only audience were “the concelebrants, and designated ministers of the liturgy” and a young boy or a 5 year old child in the audience. Was he forbidden to go up… ???

Not dreaming. In the old times, I was for years altar boy and circunstances like these arose dozens of times. those were the times when we had 20 masses being celebrated at the same time in the same Church, Tridentine Way, in Latin …

I think the Bishop is exagerating and giving no freedom to the priest. I participated in masses in the jungle, dozens of times. what should we do? Create a ditch between the priest and the military audience?

His Excelence, whom I respect, is Bishop of Atlanta. Nevertheless the world does not finish in Atlanta. there are 2000 Bishops and 1 million priests…

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

Here’s another: catholicdoors.com/faq/qu440.htm

The central word in the quote is the word “presbiterium”.
I searched in Google and the best I found was here:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presbyterium
Maybe there are better definitions.
The word is tricky.
In Jansenist times, you see in the Churches in Europe, there was a grid between the priest and the faithful. Only the priest could enter there.
In Judaism, the same, with the holy of Holies.
The same in Orthodox Liturgy and Tridentine mass. I was altar bor for tridentine masses for years and it was such a reverence.
Nevertheless, the V II changed that. It turned the altar facing people and the difference between altar and assembly diluted.
Now, it seems, some people want to divide in milimeters the place where people should stay.
It seems a waste of time, of patience, of concentration in what really matters: THE EUCHARIST, the Sacrifice of Jesus for us.
It seems to me that this subject is taking priority over the BODY AND BLOOD of Christ. It seems to me that some people (pardon me if I am wrong) do not pay attention to Eucharist to memorize those crazy details.
Usually, I close my eyes, for I cannot concentrate on what the Priest and Audience Pray with my eyes open. sincerely in the end, I do not know who was where nor I do ever care. What I care is where Jesus is and that absorbes me so much of my energy that have stenghth for no more.

 

[Filii_Dei]

I would point out that we are neither Jewish or Eastern Catholic. I respect those traditions but fail to see how they can be directly translated into Roman Catholicism.

And I would point out that Catholic tradition draws its roots from Jewish custom. It is true that the Church has replaced Judaism such that we are not bound to the its laws to the extent that Jews were. However, Our Lord was first a Jew, and it is from Jewish tradition that we find basis for our Catholic tradition. For instance, the holy day of Sunday reflects the keeping of the Sabbath. Likewise, just as the Holy of Holies of the Temple of Jerusalem was a space sanctified by the presence of the Ark of the Covenant, our church sanctuaries are sanctified by the act of consecration which is performed upon the altar, as well as the Real Presence of the Lord.

Also, the Eastern churches (I did not specify Eastern Catholic) are cited because they provide us with a useful cross-reference to better understand elements common to both liturgies. Remember, both the Eastern and Western churches are not two entities that arose separately and one day decided to unite. In the beginning, we were one church, and despite a millenia apart, both East and West have retained the Jewish tradition of reserving the sanctuary only for the clergy. This only serves to underline how important it is for us to respect the sanctuary, and not to freely intrude whenever we wish. And in any case, I only mentioned them as an example of the limit that we as laity can do, which is to stand outside the sanctuary, but to go no further.

We may be neither Jews nor Eastern Christians, but they are not irrelevant in this discussion, for they provide insight into the reason and rationale behind our tradition.

I wish you a blessed Christmas.