Has Anyone Here Ever Actually Triggered the Elimination of Abuses with a Letter or Meeting with Clergy?

[JReducation]

I’m not sure why you didn’t just immediately go consume the host yourself but that aside, there is apparently a huge difference between you and I.

I wanted the immediate problem fixed and I took care of it – I consumed both chunks of hosts. But just as important and this is where you and I differ, I want:

#1.) To find out what caused the chunks of hosts to be on the floor.

#2.) To take corrective action so it doesn’t happen again.

I didn’t consume the host because there was a deacon there. That’s the deacon’s role. He is the regular minister of the Eucharist.

I don’t have to find out every detail about how something happens, unless it happens repeatedly.

JR

 

[adrift]

I’m not sure why you didn’t just immediately go consume the host yourself but that aside, there is apparently a huge difference between you and I.

I wanted the immediate problem fixed and I took care of it – I consumed both chunks of hosts. But just as important and this is where you and I differ, I want:

#1.) To find out what caused the chunks of hosts to be on the floor.

#2.) To take corrective action so it doesn’t happen again.

You may not self communicate so it would have been an abuse for him to consume the host by himself.
You are right on the next two points. These aren’t just chunks they are the body of Christ.

 

[Spiller]

I believe this to be true. **Fortunately, this is not an everyday occurrence. ** I have been a Catholic for a very long time and I have had the very good fortune of being around the most devout and respectful priests and religious.

I have never seen this kind of “abuse” that people on CAF seem to see everywhere, as if it were our daily bread.

I’m glad I haven’t. Maybe it also has something to do with my community. Our friars are very good men, as are our seculars and our sisters. They each have their quirks, but if quirks were a material sin, many of us would be smelling the sulphur by now.

JR

Finding chunks of hosts on the floor is not an everyday occurrence. Enduring liturgical deformations and delicts most certainly is – at least around here. This just pushed it over the line

 

[Spiller]

You may not self communicate so it would have been an abuse for him to consume the host by himself.
You are right on the next two points. These aren’t just chunks they are the body of Christ.

Poppycock! Don’t be silly! In that sort of circumstance you are INDEED allowed to consume the host! ARGH!!

 

[JReducation]

Finding chunks of hosts on the floor is not an everyday occurrence. Enduring liturgical deformations and delicts most certainly is – at least around here. This just pushed it over the line

If that’s the case, the follow canon law. Write your bishop a letter and explain your concerns. Take them up the chain of command.

JR

 

[Spiller]

If that’s the case, the follow canon law. Write your bishop a letter and explain your concerns. Take them up the chain of command.

JR

The chain begins with my pastor.

 

[adrift]

Poppycock! Don’t be silly! In that sort of circumstance you are INDEED allowed to consume the host!

Please provide documentation that this is allowed. It would be a rare circumstance that there would be a prolonged time that there would be no access to a priest. You are not allowed to self communicate.

 

[JReducation]

Poppycock! Don’t be silly! In that sort of circumstance you are INDEED allowed to consume the host! ARGH!!

It is not necessary if you have the ordinary ministers of the Eucharist available.

I thought you said that this happened during mass. If that was the case, then there was a priest and maybe a deacon on hand.

If there is a deacon and priest on hand, pointing it out to them and letting them take care of it, would have been enough.

This is where we cross the line and we get into the clericalization of the laity. It is not the laity’s role to do what the ordinary cleric should do, unless there is no cleric present.

If the laity assumes the duty of the cleric while the cleric is present, this is the clericalization of the laity.

The two states must always be clearly distinguishable.

I’ll give another example. If I see a dying person who has not been baptized and there is an ordinary minister of baptism present, there is no need for me to do the baptizing. I can point out to the problem to the ordained minister.

I have baptized children, when there was no ordained minister to do so, during my years in the missions. Those are exeptions, not the norm.

The same applies to rescuing the Eucharist from the floor.

JR

 

[benedictgal]

This is what I was saying about your actions. I was not speaking against you. I was applauding you.

When people on this thread want to be more Catholic than the Pope, there is not much left to the imagination. There is nothing to read into.

Actually, I was saying that you don’t sound like the kind that is in this group.

JR

First of all, no one is claiming to be more Catholic than the Holy Father. That is an insult to those of us who geniunely care about the integrity of the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

Second, when writing a letter to the priest and/or bishop regarding liturgical/sacramental abuse, it is very important to cite the documentation appropriate to the situation at hand. Without such citation, the priest and/or bishop could assume that the person making the complaint is acting on the basis of personal opinion. These citations are very important and shouldn’t be regarded wiht such flippant disregard.

Third, those of us who do have legitimate complaints make them under the guidelines provided by Redemptionis Sacramentum. You forget that it is the right of the faithful to have the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass (and the other sacraments) celebrated according to the rubrics and norms prescribed by the Church. This is not acting more Catholic than the Pope. Incidentally, the current Supreme Pontiff of the Church played a major role in writing Redemptionis Sacramentum. Why would the former Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger issue a document that gives the faithful the right to address such abuses if this wasn’t an important thing?

Pacificism may have worked for Woody Allen in Love and Death, but, it certainly doesn’t apply to maintaining the integrity of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. May I remind you of something that Francis Cardinal Arinze said in an address at a liturgical conference in November, 2007:

1. Harm Done by Non-Observance of Liturgical Norms

Looking at things from a different perspective, we can appreciate negatively the importance of the observance of liturgical norms if we list some of the damages which can be introduced by ignoring these norms.

Liturgical abuses can confuse the congregation and occasion uncertainty, perplexity, scandal, opposition and factionalism. In more severe cases, they can obscure the Catholic faith and prevent the people from sharing fully in the celebration of the mysteries of Christ. To ignore liturgical norms can also reinforce a false understanding of freedom. In ecumenical efforts it introduces problems and sometimes a wrong presentation of the Catholic faith.17

To ignore liturgical norms can in a subtle way introduce secularization and gradual banalization into the liturgy. In this short-sighted vision, a church building may no longer be seen as a sacred place. Do the people then come to church for Mass as to a “meeting” like in a stadium or congress hall? Do they talk in church as if it were not appreciated as a sacred place separated from secular daily events? Does this tendency regard the norms on the use of liturgical vestments as triumphalism? Does it lead to a type of secular leveling down which prefers to say cup instead of chalice, plate instead of paten, dress instead of vestment, and president instead of priest celebrant?

To ignore liturgical norms can gradually introduce such erosions.

Turning a blind eye to liturgical abuse is just as bad as ignoring liturgical norms.

 

[Spiller]

Please provide documentation that this is allowed. It would be a rare circumstance that there would be a prolonged time that there would be no access to a priest. You are not allowed to self communicate.

You are so terribly wrong and confused. No documentation necessary. It’s simply the right thing to do. Simple common sense.

I found the first chunk of host more than 45 minutes before anyone else would be at church. Should I have reposed it in the tabernacle until I could give communion to the first person that arrive – or perhaps they could give it to me?

I hope your comments are meant to be a joke because I think they are chilling…

 

[Spiller]

It is not necessary if you have the ordinary ministers of the Eucharist available.

I thought you said that this happened during mass. TWO CHUNKS!!! If that was the case, then there was a priest and maybe a deacon on hand.

If there is a deacon and priest on hand, pointing it out to them and letting them take care of it, would have been enough.

This is where we cross the line and we get into the clericalization of the laity. It is not the laity’s role to do what the ordinary cleric should do, unless there is no cleric present.

If the laity assumes the duty of the cleric while the cleric is present, this is the clericalization of the laity.

The two states must always be clearly distinguishable.

I’ll give another example. If I see a dying person who has not been baptized and there is an ordinary minister of baptism present, there is no need for me to do the baptizing. I can point out to the problem to the ordained minister.

I have baptized children, when there was no ordained minister to do so, during my years in the missions. Those are exeptions, not the norm.

The same applies to rescuing the Eucharist from the floor.

JR

 

[adrift]

You are so terribly wrong and confused. No documentation necessary. It’s simply the right thing to do. Simple common sense.

I found the first chunk of host more than 45 minutes before anyone else would be at church. Should I have reposed it in the tabernacle until I could give communion to the first person that arrive – or perhaps they could give it to me?

I hope your comments are meant to be a joke because I think they are chilling…

You can’t provide documentation because there is none. I am not confused. This is one abuse that is present. You do not have the right to give communion randomly. You should educate yourself if you are going to continue to serve at the altar. Your comments are chilling for the lack of respect for our Lord.

 

[JReducation]

The chain begins with my pastor.

Start there and work your way up. Just remember to avoid clericalization.

JR

 

[JReducation]

First of all, no one is claiming to be more Catholic than the Holy Father. That is an insult to those of us who geniunely care about the integrity of the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

Second, when writing a letter to the priest and/or bishop regarding liturgical/sacramental abuse, it is very important to cite the documentation appropriate to the situation at hand. Without such citation, the priest and/or bishop could assume that the person making the complaint is acting on the basis of personal opinion. These citations are very important and shouldn’t be regarded wiht such flippant disregard.

Third, those of us who do have legitimate complaints make them under the guidelines provided by Redemptionis Sacramentum. You forget that it is the right of the faithful to have the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass (and the other sacraments) celebrated according to the rubrics and norms prescribed by the Church. This is not acting more Catholic than the Pope. Incidentally, the current Supreme Pontiff of the Church played a major role in writing Redemptionis Sacramentum. Why would the former Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger issue a document that gives the faithful the right to address such abuses if this wasn’t an important thing?

Pacificism may have worked for Woody Allen in Love and Death, but, it certainly doesn’t apply to maintaining the integrity of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. May I remind you of something that Francis Cardinal Arinze said in an address at a liturgical conference in November, 2007:

Turning a blind eye to liturgical abuse is just as bad as ignoring liturgical norms.

No one has said that we should turn a blind eye. I for one have said about five times tonight that everyone is welcome to write a letter of concern. So what’s your point?

JR

 

[JReducation]

Spiller:
I don’t get what you want to say. You just sent me back my post. Did you accidently delete your response?

JR

 

[benedictgal]

No one has said that we should turn a blind eye. I for one have said about five times tonight that everyone is welcome to write a letter of concern. So what’s your point?

JR

My point is that you have criticized people as being more Catholic than the Pope. Furthermore, you tell folks to avoid clericalization. There is nothing wrong with writing a letter and citing the appropriate documentation to go along with the abuse you are reporting. You seem to think otherwise.

 

[Spiller]

I was distributing Holy Communion one time as an EMHC. Next to me also distributing Holy Communion was a priest. He dropped a host. I spied it first on the floor and it was a bit closer to me. I bent down, picked it up and consumed it.

That was the right thing to do. The noise about this non-issue is unreal.

 

[Spiller]

I don’t get what you want to say. You just sent me back my post. Did you accidently delete your response?

JR

I added something. Look closely.

 

[Spiller]

Start there and work your way up. Just remember to avoid clericalization.

JR

You should avoid being condescending and giving people poor advice…

 

[JReducation]

My point is that you have criticized people as being more Catholic than the Pope. Furthermore, you tell folks to avoid clericalization. There is nothing wrong with writing a letter and citing the appropriate documentation to go along with the abuse you are reporting. You seem to think otherwise.

I’m not sure if we’re communicating. I have said that there is nothing wrong with writing letters. If you want to add footnotes, do so. Look at the post that you are citing. I’m saying it again.

I have said to avoid clericalization. This is to be avoided at all costs. The two states must be kept separate. The laity is not to assume duties and roles that are proper to clerics. There is nothing uncatholic about that.

As to people being more Catholic than the Pope, you as well as I can read some of the posts that people place on these threads. You can’t deny that many seem to think that they know more than their bishops or clergy about Catholic law and liturgy.

This is an inversion of roles.

JR