List of abuses and disappointments after 8 months in a new diocese

[Phemie]

The Commemoration is the part of the Eucharistic Prayer where the priest prays for the Pope and the local Bishop

If they are dropping that part, that is a SERIOUS abuse

I see, yes, editing the Eucharistic Prayer is definitely a no-no.

 

[bpbasilphx]

Tabernacles off to the side of the altar instead of in the prominent center of the sacristy

What’s the point in reserving the Sacrament in the sacristy? Or did you mean to say “sanctuary”?

 

[Joab_Anias]

Please, please, contact your Bishop!!!

Jumping the gun I would think. Haven’t discussed it with my Pastor yet.

 

[Joab_Anias]

A couple of comments:

Most of this list falls into the category of “disappointments.” Sorry for your disappointment but:

1. Disappointment means you are allowing your personal preferences to displace the authority of the One True Church.
2. There is a focus on self-gratification.

You might want to consider whether these constitute a sin on your part.

Time is never better spent than at Mass. Why would anyone want to, and more to the point how can anyone, spend that time with their mind on anything other than the presence of the Lord and His great sacrifice.

Your mind should be in a constant state of prayer: adoration, contrition, thanksgiving, and supplication. And nothing else.

Thanks you for much wisdom.

Peace.

 

[Joab_Anias]

This is often the procedure at daily Mass.

The priest consecrates just enough for those present at that morning’s Mass. The best way to make sure the right number of hosts are consecrated is to follow this procedure: As the members enter church for the Mass, they move one wafer from the supply “pile” to the paten. Then when the gifts (bread and wine) are brought up during Mass, it is the paten that is brought up, containing the wafers that the members put in – one per person.

That way, the exact number of hosts needed are consecrated, no short and no excess.

(In case you are wondering, at Sunday Mass enough Communion is consecrated to allow excess to be available for the sick for the week, and that excess is stored in the tabernacle.)

Not proceedure where I have attend daily Mass but perhaps its because the number of attendees are much smaller or I am just not realizing someone is counting. As an EMHC I have had a bit of experience in the estimation process and at daily Mass if enough isn’t consecrated then we have the reserve.

I don’t think you are saying that at daily Mass you have attended there has been a cardboard box full of bits of thick golden bread with a note saying if you want to receive take out of this box and put in the other? I am beginning to see this is as possibly a valid consecration but it still was unsettling for me at the time. Perhaps my problem as you mentioned above. Thanks.

Peace.

 

[Joab_Anias]

I see, yes, editing the Eucharistic Prayer is definitely a no-no.

I always thought changing the bread was too.

 

[Joab_Anias]

The use of leaven bread is a matter of Licity, not validity. Leaven bread is still valid matter; f it wasn’t the Eastern Catholic Churches could not use it - but they do, and it becomes the Eucharist. Valid Matter is Valid Matter.

What you say sounds logical except for one thing; for bread to be leavened doesn’t it need to contain yeast or if thick something more than wheat and water? I have read in church documents that the host must contain nothing but wheat and water. (Unsure why any additions makes it either illicit or “invalid” matter).

If its not to much trouble can you please clarify and or substantiate that with some Church documents for my edification please.

Thanks in advance,

Peace.

 

[Brendan]

If its not to much trouble can you please clarify and or substantiate that with some Church documents for my edification please.

.

No problem

Council of Florence - Session 6

Also, the body of Christ is truly confected in both unleavened and leavened wheat bread, and priests should confect the body of Christ in either, that is, each priest according to the custom of his western or eastern church

Council of Florence - Session 8

Also that the body of the Lord is effected in leavened or unleavened wheat bread;

 

[chicago]

Can it be thick and still be only wheat and water and nothing else?

Wheat, water, and flour are the legitimate ingredients. Sure. There’s no reason that unleavened bread necessarily has to look like a wafer.

How is someone to know this by looking at it when they walk into the Church and see two cardboard boxes with a note that says; if you want communion take a piece from one box and put it in the other. Maybe I over-reacted but whats a conscientious practical Catholic to do in such a case; walk out or take the chance the sacrament is going to be licit and partake in a possible defamation of it? I was shocked and dumbfounded and am still sorting this out two days later. Though to most it probably didn’t phase them but to me it feels like a violation of pastoral duty that effects me personally. Is that feeling unreasonable perhaps?

Thanks for your reply and peace.

Some people suggest that if the host has air pockets, it is leavened. I’m not able to figure that out when eating it. And how I would know before Mass? Well, I probably wouldn’t without asking.

I would agree that offering a type of host/bread which is atypical of what most are familiar can cause problems (whether it is licit or not.) For this reason, I don’t think it unreasonable that some would be concerned. And I believe that (if a parish is going to do this) that there ought to be some sort of public explanation readily available in the bulletin, or on a sign, or whatever. After all, they pastor and staff certainly must get questioned about it periodically, one would think.

What can one do (beyond asking about it?) One doesn’t have to receive, so if it would give more peace to abstain on the occasion, that would be alright. OTOH, if one simply received communion under the supposition that this was most likely valid matter (even if the licity is questionable), then I don’t think it would necessarily hurt, either. Even if, for some reason, it was not a validly celebrated Eucharist, then the graces received with your sincere reception are still equal to that of a real communion, because “the Church supplies” for the inadequacy. Now, if this is something happening on a regular basis and it causes you consternation, then go ahead and ask in order to discover what the real deal is and in the hope of resolving matters for yourself, even if not for the parish (which might be set in its ways and not open to hearing anything different.)

 

[chicago]

(Unsure why any additions makes it either illicit or “invalid” matter).

If something goes beyond and breaks with the law, then it is simply illicit (against the law), even if it is still valid. For a Eucharistic consecration to be valid, the matter must essentially be plain old wheat bread. If what is added substantially changes the very matter, then it no longer qualifies as what is essential and necessary for the celebration.

It is sort of like saying, “We need a woman to fill this role. The woman should be under the age of 30.” What is essential for the role is that a woman fills it. It is appropriate (for whatever reason of the role) that she be a young women. But if the woman who ends up filling the role is 35, then (while it doesn’t meet the standard of “under 30”) it still suffices as a woman - and one who may well appear young, at that.

 

[Phemie]

I always thought changing the bread was too.

Depends on how you change it. I’ve baked bread for Mass before. Strictly wheat flour (whole wheat & all purpose) and water, kneaded and rolled into a ball then flattened into a 1/2-3/4" thick round, thicker than a nice thick pancake and baked. It was chewy, but tasty and no act of faith was required to believe that it was bread.

That said, chapati, a type of Indian bread, is made in the same way but instead of being thick it is rolled out very thin and cooked over a hot fire or lightly oiled frying pan. Again, licit and valid for Communion and very obviously bread.

 

[Joab_Anias]

Got a reply from Fr. this morning which was much sooner than expected. According to him the bread was only wheat and water. Its a relief to know this and even a bit so that he is aware of what I was feeling.

So now I feel like a fool that I missed out on communion on Holy Thursday because I was so confused by the boxes of bread and left. I am still not sure I did the wrong thing though as it is a liberty not provided for anywhere that I know of.

Also that I probably have a scruples problem which is brought into a better light and though it wasn’t fair to spring this on me the way it was which confused me, (especially these days with so many reports of abuses) I just don’t immediately know what to expect sometimes.

I have lived a life of not knowing what was going on most of my life and its led me into a many a sin and much brokenness so since returning to God have tried to make a point of following Mass as explicitly as I can. Maybe I would be better off if my right hand didn’t know what my left was doing but I am afraid to drop back into that darkness for a second. I don’t know what this all means for me. If I am judgmental or need to go to a TLM Mass to appreciate the NO more.

Friday and tonights 3.5 hrs Vigil were flawless until communion when again the EMHC’s were filling chalices and helping themselves all over the altar. Before we talk about EMHC’s helping out, please know there were 3 deacons, the Celebrant and only 6 EMHC’s in the sanctuary tonight when there is usually about 12. I saw no need for an EMHC to come up and reach in front of Fr. and take the wine picture and fill the chalices. I assume the EMHC knows no better. Why is Fr. allowing this? Any opinions on this are welcomed.

By the way, an even dozen new parishioners were welcomed into the Church tonight and a commemoration to the Holy Fathers intentions was included for the first time that I have heard!

Peace.

 

[Joab_Anias]

Depends on how you change it. I’ve baked bread for Mass before. Strictly wheat flour (whole wheat & all purpose) and water, kneaded and rolled into a ball then flattened into a 1/2-3/4" thick round, thicker than a nice thick pancake and baked. It was chewy, but tasty and no act of faith was required to believe that it was bread.

That said, chapati, a type of Indian bread, is made in the same way but instead of being thick it is rolled out very thin and cooked over a hot fire or lightly oiled frying pan. Again, licit and valid for Communion and very obviously bread.

Ok, but why change it at all? Whats the objective or purpose?

 

[Joab_Anias]

I would agree that offering a type of host/bread which is atypical of what most are familiar can cause problems (whether it is licit or not.) For this reason, I don’t think it unreasonable that some would be concerned. And I believe that (if a parish is going to do this) that there ought to be some sort of public explanation readily available in the bulletin, or on a sign, or whatever. After all, they pastor and staff certainly must get questioned about it periodically, one would think.

I am wondering what motivation my pastor could have for even doing so in the first place.

I know the last time I saw it, about 12 years ago now, it was highly encouraged by a Franciscan Nun who was working under our elderly pastor at the time. Needless to say, I was in a very old, small and traditional parish at that time and it didn’t set well with allot of people though I didn’t know enough to even question it back then. It only happened the once and never occurred again so I suspect there was a stir about it. I actually spoke about this incident with my last spiritual director who was the replacement pastor at that same church and he said to do this with the matter was a big no-no.

So which is it, do our priests have the liberty to do this at their discretion or not?

Thanks and peace?

 

[Joab_Anias]

A couple of comments:

Most of this list falls into the category of “disappointments.” Sorry for your disappointment but:

1. Disappointment means you are allowing your personal preferences to displace the authority of the One True Church.
2. There is a focus on self-gratification.

You might want to consider whether these constitute a sin on your part.

I have not reacted but held these things in my heart. Where is the line between sin and expecting an orthodox NO Mass?

Time is never better spent than at Mass. Why would anyone want to, and more to the point how can anyone, spend that time with their mind on anything other than the presence of the Lord and His great sacrifice.

I agree. When I see these things I go right back to whats going on with the Altar and the presences of the Lord in the Church. When I walk in and see it or its right on the Altar and I know what the GIRM says its hard to miss it but I do my best to go on.

Your mind should be in a constant state of prayer: adoration, contrition, thanksgiving, and supplication. And nothing else.

I was thinking about this at the Vigil tonight while the drums were pounding and the instruments were elevating from the choir that filled one whole side of the church and thinking to the Lord, Lord do you wish me to be able to unite my mind to you through all this noise or is all this noise designed to distract my mind from hearing your still small voice? The inclination I get is distraction, emotionalism and entertainment value but I am not sure. All I know is that I want to be able to pray always. If there had been one verse of Latin in the whole of Easter Vigil I may have appreciated that. I don’t know. All I know is that I don’t know at this point but won’t give up or stop receiving my Lord from where the Lord has me until I see something invalidated and illicit and am shut out about it. I am using the rest of these things to fuel and to edify my own spirit in discerning where the truth lays.

Peace.

 

[Phemie]

Ok, but why change it at all? Whats the objective or purpose?

It was traditional in several of my former parishes to have ‘real bread’ for the Mass of the Lord’s Supper. At one parish we used it at every Sunday Mass. The only instruction we had to give was 'yes, it’s ok to chew."

As some priests have been known to joke, communion requires two acts of faith: 1) that you are receiving Jesus 2) that you are receiving bread. With home baked bread at communion you only need one act of faith.

 

[Joab_Anias]

It was traditional in several of my former parishes to have ‘real bread’ for the Mass of the Lord’s Supper. At one parish we used it at every Sunday Mass. The only instruction we had to give was 'yes, it’s ok to chew."

As some priests have been known to joke, communion requires two acts of faith: 1) that you are receiving Jesus 2) that you are receiving bread. With home baked bread at communion you only need one act of faith.

Thanks for the reply but that doesn’t really answer my question of; why change at all?

Should the Pastor establish new traditions?

 

[blessedtoo]

OP,
I think we can all understand the feeling of disappointment when it comes to the liturgy and it’s celebration so please do not allow sanctimonious comments that question your committment to prayer and contemplation to disturb you. While we all strive to be saints, we are, alas, still human and given to distraction. I would pose the question this way: Why else do the priests introduce these innovations into the Mass EXCEPT to grab our attention? And when they do, we are made to feel guilty because we are not focused enough on the Lord? Give me a break.

I’ve been back to the Church for 5 years after a 30 year absence. One of the first daily “Masses” I went to looked more to me like a high priestess ceremony, with a bevy of women on the altar reading scripture and leading the faithful in prayer. I kept waiting for the priest to come out (perhaps he was late???) and, with my heart pounding, decided he wasn’t coming and that I must have stumbled into some sort of psuedo-Catholic worship service. When the female lector brought out the consecrated hosts and blessed them at the altar, I decided I would not receive because it all looked so unfamiliar to me. I didn’t know what I was participating in. Of couse, I found out later it was a Communion service and yes, I did feel rather foolish. But I still believe I did the right thing considering the grave reservations I had and the strangeness (to me) of the service.

I moved from my beloved Parish (against my will!) last year and it has taken me 10 months to find a suitable parish. My choices in my new neighborhood included 2 Churches without kneelers, or a Church with huge screens on either side of the altar (which flashed the Microsoft logo accidentally during one Mass). I finally found one thirty minutes away from my home and while it’s a challenge for me to get there, it is worth the sacrifice because I know I will RECOGNIZE it as a Catholic Mass. You do not have to apologize for wanting to celebrate the Mass you know and love.

 

[Joab_Anias]

OP,
I think we can all understand the feeling of disappointment when it comes to the liturgy and it’s celebration so please do not allow sanctimonious comments that question your committment to prayer and contemplation to disturb you. While we all strive to be saints, we are, alas, still human and given to distraction. I would pose the question this way: Why else do the priests introduce these innovations into the Mass EXCEPT to grab our attention? And when they do, we are made to feel guilty because we are not focused enough on the Lord? Give me a break.

I’ve been back to the Church for 5 years after a 30 year absence. One of the first daily “Masses” I went to looked more to me like a high priestess ceremony, with a bevy of women on the altar reading scripture and leading the faithful in prayer. I kept waiting for the priest to come out (perhaps he was late???) and, with my heart pounding, decided he wasn’t coming and that I must have stumbled into some sort of psuedo-Catholic worship service. When the female lector brought out the consecrated hosts and blessed them at the altar, I decided I would not receive because it all looked so unfamiliar to me. I didn’t know what I was participating in. Of couse, I found out later it was a Communion service and yes, I did feel rather foolish. But I still believe I did the right thing considering the grave reservations I had and the strangeness (to me) of the service.

I moved from my beloved Parish (against my will!) last year and it has taken me 10 months to find a suitable parish. My choices in my new neighborhood included 2 Churches without kneelers, or a Church with huge screens on either side of the altar (which flashed the Microsoft logo accidentally during one Mass). I finally found one thirty minutes away from my home and while it’s a challenge for me to get there, it is worth the sacrifice because I know I will RECOGNIZE it as a Catholic Mass. You do not have to apologize for wanting to celebrate the Mass you know and love.

I’d like a good answer to why then innovations are being made.

Peace.

 

[chicago]

Thanks for the reply but that doesn’t really answer my question of; why change at all?

Should the Pastor establish new traditions?

Well, it might be suggested that the wafer like hosts with which most of us are most familiar was at one time an innovation. Why should we accept that change over something even more traditional, then?

That said, I think that the idea is to offer a bread which has a more readily identifiable appearance as something we associate at bread. (Which is what is called for, technically, in the liturgical regulations.)

Of course, a fair amount of this baking thicker bread came out of the experimental era when people were very touchy-feely and trying all kinds of junk (coke and pretzels masses, for instance.) This is something which has managed to last and grow some because it maintains some semblance of legitimacy and desire of those who like to do it or even be involved in the bread baking.