- Status
C
Corki
Guest
Not really. As the pastor, he can decide how he prefers the First Friday devotion be expressed in his parish. Maybe he just mispoke and it’s not forbidden. But it’s not the way he wants it. There is nothing wrong with a preference that adoration and Mass be separate.
Z
zab
Guest
There is a difference between something that is not permitted and something that should be done at a more appropriate time . He is the pastor. He can make the judgement call that Benediction should occur in a Eucharistic Service at a time other than immediately following the Mass.
Z
zab
Guest
Eucharisticum Mysterium- Sacred Congregation of Rites May 25, 1967
F
FrDavid96
Guest
Precisely. That’s how the rubrics direct that it be done (at least as one option). Adoration and Benediction after Mass is a perfectly legitimate way to do things.
Benediction immediately after Mass without a time for Adoration is not permitted, but Benediction and Adoration immediately after Mass is laudable.
T
TheMc
Guest
As far as I’m concerned, “Exposition merely for the purpose of giving benediction” would mean going straight into the tantum ergo directly after the o salutaris finishes, but if you were to say the rosary or even have a few minutes of silent adoration, that would certainly qualify.
Does that sound right?
F
FrDavid96
Guest
I think it’s pretty clear that that’s how the Church sees it.
As you wrote earlier, the rubrics specifically tell us HOW to do Adoration & Benediction immediately after Mass, so it’s a given that doing it this way is allowed. It wouldn’t make any sense for the Church to say “this is how you are to do this, but you’re forbidden to do it this way.”
C
Corki
Guest
The Bishop makes the judgement on what is permitted. But that doesn’t mean that the pastor **must **allow Mass and Adoration to be so closely timed.
F
FrDavid96
Guest
The bishop’s role is to regulate the Liturgy according to the norms established by the Church.
The bishop does not have any authority to go against what the Church requires in the approved liturgical texts.
We also need to keep in mind that just because something is permitted, is not the same as saying that it’s mandatory. Adoration after Mass is certainly permitted (indeed encouraged) by the Church, but no priest is required to schedule it this way.
The bishop does not have any authority to go against what the Church requires in the approved liturgical texts.
We also need to keep in mind that just because something is permitted, is not the same as saying that it’s mandatory. Adoration after Mass is certainly permitted (indeed encouraged) by the Church, but no priest is required to schedule it this way.
Z
zab
Guest
Thank you for this clarification. So, would you agree that the pastor has a right to determine when Eucharistic Worship outside the Mass should be done in his parish?
Z
zab
Guest
To sum up what we have discovered through reading of documents and from our priest board member, FrDavid96 :
- Exposition, Adoration and Benediction is permitted immediately following Mass
- “Exposition merely for the purpose of giving Benediction immediately following Mass is forbidden.” 66. Exposition for Short Periods
Even brief exposition of the Blessed Sacrament, held in accordance with the law, should be so arranged that before the blessing with the Blessed Sacrament reasonable time is provided for readings of the Word of God, hymns, prayers, and silent prayer, as circumstances permit.
Local Ordinaries will make certain that these expositions of the Blessed Sacrament are always and everywhere carried out with due reverence.
Exposition merely for the purpose of giving Benediction after Mass is forbidden. - The pastor has the right to determine when Eucharistic Worship outside the Mass should occur in his parish.
J
jjkadavil
Guest
I am member of Syro-malabar church which is one of the orientel churches in catholic church.
According to our tradition:
Holy Host is not meant for exposing in monstrance for adoration. It is to be consumed during the qurbana (mass). It is not meant to be kept (in tabernacle) if we keep that is strictly for someone sick for them to cosume it as soon as possible.
Why should there be adoration after mass? What what was mass for? What are we getting in that adoration what we did not get in the mass?
This type of adoration do not have a strong tradtional strength. It emerged some times in the 12th or 13th century.
In old testament pesha keeping “left over” was strictly prohibited. During the last supper Jesus divided and gave all the bread for disciples to eat.
It is not right to concentrate the entire attention of mass to one point of transforming of bread and wine to the body and blood of Christ. The whole mass important. The whole Mass is the sacrament, not the body and blood of Christ. Mass is not a mere process to convert bread and wine to His body and blood.
Consumption of Holy Host is part of the Holy Mass. We cannot think about it separated from the mass.
Cheers, Jijoy
According to our tradition:
Holy Host is not meant for exposing in monstrance for adoration. It is to be consumed during the qurbana (mass). It is not meant to be kept (in tabernacle) if we keep that is strictly for someone sick for them to cosume it as soon as possible.
Why should there be adoration after mass? What what was mass for? What are we getting in that adoration what we did not get in the mass?
This type of adoration do not have a strong tradtional strength. It emerged some times in the 12th or 13th century.
In old testament pesha keeping “left over” was strictly prohibited. During the last supper Jesus divided and gave all the bread for disciples to eat.
It is not right to concentrate the entire attention of mass to one point of transforming of bread and wine to the body and blood of Christ. The whole mass important. The whole Mass is the sacrament, not the body and blood of Christ. Mass is not a mere process to convert bread and wine to His body and blood.
Consumption of Holy Host is part of the Holy Mass. We cannot think about it separated from the mass.
Cheers, Jijoy
E
Elizium23
Guest
Thank you for your view from a tradition of the Eastern Church. It is a great and venerable tradition and I hope that you retain and nourish it for a long time to come. However, this thread, and this forum, is chiefly about the Latin Church, and we have a different view of the Eucharist, which has validated worship of it outside of Mass. Adoration, Benediction, and Holy Processions are part of our venerable tradition and we will not be giving them up any time soon. In fact, they are “coming back into style” after some confusion sown by “the Spirit of Vatican II”.
O
otjm
Guest
No, InExposition and Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament are liturgically correct after Mass. Mass ends with the Prayer after Communion. There is no blessing or dismissal. The exposition host is then placed on the altar in the monstrance. Ideally there should be additional candles although the requirement for a minimum of twelve no longer applies.
At my Church we normally have Exposition after weekday Mass. On Corpus Christi and the Feast of Christ the King, we have a Blessed Sacrament Procession and Benediction at the end of Mass.
The priest from a nearby Anglican Church recently transferred to the Catholic Church, along with a number of his congregation under the Ordinariate dispensation. He temporarily joined our parish staff during his Catholic diaconate and following his ordination until an Ordinariate church became available. He was due to celebrate Mass on one of the days when we have a Blessed Sacrament Procession and Benediction so I produced for him full service notes with the traditional hymns and chants. This seems to have been reproduced and become the definitive work on the subject among the Ordinariate - without ever having been subject to an Imprimatur and Nihil Obstat.
When the Sacred Congregation for the Liturgy find out, I’m not sure whether I’ll be burnt at the stake by our Diocesan Archbishop or by the Ordinariate.
England I think it is hanged, drawn and quartered. And since they are Anglican…
Tut tut!
J
jjkadavil
Guest
Thanks for the words about my tradition. Actually the subject discussed is not pertaining to the tradtion. It is more about the dogma/doctrines of the catholic church which means all the individual churches should have same practices about this.
Following apostolic tradition is for the the sake of keeping the originality of Christianity and to understand and follow what Jesus taught in the sense He wanted us to do. Eastern church was founded in AD 37 by the apostles including St. Peter and St. Paul. Therefore if that church strongly holds a view about the monstrance adoration, the entire catholic church is obliged to look into that seriously.
Also in the Latin church, it is not a practice which has a base from the very beginning of the church. It infact appeared like ‘creative idea’ of worship. Actually it was something like that to defend our doctrine against the protestent, which happened in 13th century.
If we do not take the apostolic tradition seriously, we put the originality of our faith at risk. There could be a totally different practice of worship replacing the monstrance worship, may be after another 10 centuries. Because deviations always happen from immediately previous deviations. And what we have at the end may not have any connection to the original one.
I strongly believe, Jesus meant the Holy Host only to be consumed during the Holy Mass. That He gave us for Him to be part of our spiritual body.
- Status