Mystified by Adoration

[CradleCath]

I have been a practicing Catholic all of my life, and participating in the celebration of the liturgy is very important to me, particularly the liturgy of the Mass. It is in the context of the Mass that I understand the Eucharist: we do what Christ did in the Upper Room, at the Last Supper. We give thanks to God, together, corporately. In imitation of Christ and at his command, we offer bread and wine through the person of the celebrant. We consume the consecrated gifts and go forth united as Christ’s people…his Church. All of this makes perfect sense to me.

I must confess, however, that I have difficulty recognizing the value of “Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament”: when the priest takes one of the consecrated hosts, and displays it behind the glass of a monstrance, as the faithful kneel and make adoration.

You have, by now, been supplied many links re. the history of this practice. I’d like to add that Eucharistic Adoration is one of the few pious practices that has become more popular since the Novus Ordo was promulgated. During the last 20 yrs., it has grown even more in popularity.

The Novus Ordo, as prayed today, leaves little “room” for EA. The priest is speaking, speaking, SPEAKING continuously, the Lectors, Readers & Extraordinary Ministers of the Eucharist are moving about, we have all of those quaint practices going on…joining of hands during the Lord’s Prayer, shaking hands at the Kiss of Peace, etc., & there is little quiet time that is so crucial to **interior **participation. As people began to suffer from this fact, Eucharistic Adoration has become more & more important.

It is in the context of the Mass that I understand the Eucharist: we do what Christ did in the Upper Room, at the Last Supper.

Actually, the Eucharist in the context of the Mass, is a Sacrifice offered to God & not a celebration or “re-enactment” of the Last Supper. The Eucharist at Mass is Calvary. I’ve read many books about the Mass both pre & post Vatican II. “Calvary & the Mass” by Futlon J. Sheen is the best:

southwellbooks.com/calvary-and-the-mass-2228-p.asp

 

[zab]

Cat, that was a beautiful post!
Alll that I have to say to the OP is that there may be things about our faith that we do not fully understand but we believe them because we believe in Jesus and in the Church that He founded. Not even our Blessed Mother immediately understood all things. When the angel appeared to her and told her that she was going to have a Son, she did not doubt the power of God like Zacharias who believed his wife was too old to have a son. Mary did not doubt, she just did not understand how it could happen when she had no relations with a man. But God revealed it to her how it was going to happen. In your quiet moments whereever you are, you can speak to God seeking to understand things that you do not understand and He will eventually reveal these things to you. But there is no better place to bring your concerns and questions than before Jesus Himself iin the Blessed Sacrament.

 

[Pregustator]

JL: The questions you need to ask yourself would be, In imitation of Christ and at his command, DO WE OFFER **BREAD AND WINE **through the person of the celebrant? OR DO WE OFFER THE REAL BODY, BLOOD SOUL and DIVINITY, OF our risen Lord and God Jesus Christ UNDER THE APPEARANCE of bread and wine?". Is this bread, before me, or is the GOD, BEFORE ME, UNDER THE APPEARANCE OF bread?"

Those aren’t the questions I need to ask myself, thank you. I understand the doctrine of transubstantiation, as I suspect does most everyone participating on this forum.

If you answer, it is God before me under appearance of bread and wine. Then you need to ask, can Adoration of God VISIBLY PRESENT under appearance of bread and wine ever be out of context?

Yes, it is entirely out of its proper context, isn’t it? The proper context of the Eucharistic meal and sacrifice is the liturgy of the Mass. Any time the Sacrament is reserved in the tabernacle it is out of its proper context as well, but there is a practical pastoral necessity involved in that case. Ultimately, however, the species reserved in the tabernacle are meant for consumption in the context of what we understand Eucharist to be.

Should we just ignore the VISIBLE PRESENTS OF GOD among us, because it is reserved for the those who cannot come to mass?

No. That is why we genuflect when we pass a tabernacle, right? That seems proper and fitting and correct. But opening the tabernacle, placing one of the hosts into a monstrance and having everyone then stare at it seems, to me, odd and, again, completely out of context. We adore the consecrated species from a previous Eucharist but make no Eucharist in doing so. It’s rather as if one were to go to a restaurant and ask an entree to be brought out only to look at it for an hour, with no intention of consuming it. One would say that the entree was out of its proper context, used that way.

But there is no better place to bring your concerns and questions than before Jesus Himself iin the Blessed Sacrament.

Why? Does God somehow respond to our prayers more fully if we are located in front of consecrated Eucharistic species than otherwise? I find that a hard thing to fathom considering that God is everywhere present and hears our prayers wherever we offer them.

 

[Pakesh]

I had a couple of stumbling blocks coming into the Church, things I found hard to agree with. One was the True Presence. I didn’t believe, to put it bluntly, that Jesus was in a consecrated host - body, blood, soul and divinity. Knowing that this was THE most important doctrine to Catholicism, I shared this with my RCIA director. He suggested I come spend an hour at Adoration one night, and pray for the Lord to reveal Himself to me in a way that would increase my faith.

At Adoration in my parish, we have not just the host in a monstrance, but a chalice of the Precious Blood as well. Toward the end of my hour, starting to feel a bit discouraged that I didn’t feel any different, all of the sudden, I felt a chill come over me. I could smell blood, and it was so strong, I could almost taste it. Then I heard a voice say “This is my blood.” I was startled, but believe me - I never have since doubted the True Presence.

Since then, I’ve tried to spend one hour a week with Our Lord. Both as a way of saying thanks, and because there’s just something about being in the same room with Him. I don’t believe He doesn’t hear my prayers when I’m anywhere else, but it’s like calling home vs. visiting. Sure, my mom appreciates a phone call every day, but I know a weekly visit means a lot more to her.

What a wonderful and amazing experience the Lord Blessed you with!!! Thanks for the great post:thumbsup:
God Bless,
Pakesh

 

[japhy]

But opening the tabernacle, placing one of the hosts into a monstrance and having everyone then stare at it seems, to me, odd and, again, completely out of context. We adore the consecrated species from a previous Eucharist but make no Eucharist in doing so. It’s rather as if one were to go to a restaurant and ask an entree to be brought out only to look at it for an hour, with no intention of consuming it.

Except that restaurant food is meant simply for consuming, not for adoring or worshiping. The Eucharist, being the substantial presence of Jesus Christ, is not meant simply for consuming. That being said, adoration and other Eucharistic devotions are ordered towards the reception of the sacrament, whether they are forms of preparation, meditation, contemplation, etc.

Have you read any of the documents of the Church which defend, explain, or promote Eucharistic Adoration? Here are some quotes you might find helpful:

This Sacrament, whether as the theme of devout meditation, or as the object of public adoration, or best of all as a food to be received in the utmost purity of conscience, is to be regarded as the centre towards which the spiritual life of a Christian in all its ambit gravitates; for all other forms of devotion, whatsoever they may be, lead up to it, and in it find their point of rest. (Leo XIII, Mirae Caritatis 14)

The Sacred Councils teach that it is the Church’s tradition right from the beginning, to worship “with the same adoration the Word Incarnate as well as His own flesh,” and St. Augustine asserts that, “No one eats that flesh, without first adoring it,” while he adds that “not only do we not commit a sin by adoring it, but that we do sin by not adoring it.” It is on this doctrinal basis that the cult of adoring the Eucharist was founded and gradually developed as something distinct from the sacrifice of the Mass. The reservation of the sacred species for the sick and those in danger of death introduced the praiseworthy custom of adoring the blessed Sacrament which is reserved in our churches. This practice of adoration, in fact, is based on strong and solid reasons. For the Eucharist is at once a sacrifice and a sacrament; but it differs from the other sacraments in this that it not only produces grace, but contains in a permanent manner the Author of grace Himself. When, therefore, the Church bids us adore Christ hidden behind the eucharistic veils and pray to Him for spiritual and temporal favors, of which we ever stand in need, she manifests living faith in her divine Spouse who is present beneath these veils, she professes her gratitude to Him and she enjoys the intimacy of His friendship. (Pius XII, Mediator Dei 130-131)

Moreover, the Catholic Church has held firm to this belief in the presence of Christ’s Body and Blood in the Eucharist not only in her teaching but in her life as well, since she has at all times paid this great Sacrament the worship known as “latria,” which may be given to God alone. (Paul VI, Mysterium Fidei 55)

There should be no doubt in anyone’s mind “that all the faithful ought to show to this most holy sacrament the worship which is due to the true God, as has always been the custom of the Catholic Church. Nor is it to be adored any the less because it was instituted by Christ to be eaten.” (Sacred Congregation of Rites, Eucharisticum Mysterium 3f)

The celebration of the eucharist in the sacrifice of the Mass is the true origin and purpose of the worship shown to the eucharist outside Mass. The principal reason for reserving the sacrament after Mass is to unite, through sacramental communion, the faithful unable to participate in the Mass, especially the sick and the aged, with Christ and the offering of his sacrifice. In turn, eucharistic reservation, which became customary in order to permit the reception of communion, led to the practice of adoring this sacrament and offering to it the worship of latria that is due to God. This cult of adoration is based on valid and solid principles; furthermore, the Church itself has instituted public and communal forms of this worship. (Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship, Eucharistiae Sacramentum preface)

I could quote a bunch more, but you can find them all here. I’d really recommend reading some of them.

 

[lizaanne]

I must confess, however, that I have difficulty recognizing the value of “Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament”: when the priest takes one of the consecrated hosts, and displays it behind the glass of a monstrance, as the faithful kneel and make adoration.

Please allow me a question that may help me to understand the difficulty you are having. If Jesus Christ is truly present before us in the Eucharist, what difference would there be if He was sitting on the step of the sanctuary in His human form? Would you be more comfortable with worshiping Him just because He is there in human form? Why does this make any difference if He is just as much there under one form as He is under another?

~Liza

 

[malphono]

Pregustator;7167311:

What I am wondering is, apart from making sentimental people feel good, what, actually, is the point of it? Or is that the point? Because to me, it seems like Adoration takes the Eucharist completely out of context and does something with the species that was not intended.

I’d like to add that Eucharistic Adoration is one of the few pious practices that has become more popular since the Novus Ordo was promulgated. During the last 20 yrs., it has grown even more in popularity.

The Novus Ordo, as prayed today, leaves little “room” for EA. … & there is little quiet time that is so crucial to **interior **participation. As people began to suffer from this fact, Eucharistic Adoration has become more & more important.

In former times, Adoration was not nearly as ubiquitous as it is now. Yes, there was the Forty Hours, and there was Benediction and Exposition, but those were more in the way of special events, which is far different from the “perpetual Adoration” as it is seen today.

One has to ask: why the difference? It seems to me the above quote hits the mark with regarding the popularity of “perpetual Adoration” in present practice.

 

[laszlo]

Try this…

ewtn.com/library/homelibr/historea.txt

Very good compendium.

As for myself I went to adoration all of my life, and it always meant me a special quiet time with Jesus, either is I just recited the rosary or other oral prayer (recently the Breviary) or as contemplation.

 

[Pregustator]

Please allow me a question that may help me to understand the difficulty you are having. If Jesus Christ is truly present before us in the Eucharist, what difference would there be if He was sitting on the step of the sanctuary in His human form? Would you be more comfortable with worshiping Him just because He is there in human form? Why does this make any difference if He is just as much there under one form as He is under another?

~Liza

Well, I think, of course, there would be a tremendous difference, wouldn’t there? Were Jesus Christ to appear in his human form, would I feel more comfortable worshipping him? Well, no, actually, because I don’t think anyone’s instinct, at that moment, would be to initiate formal worship. I mean, if Christ appeared as you say, sitting on the steps of the chancel, I don’t think the pastor would then go and get two candleabra to light on either side of him, light incense and start singing Tantum Ergo. I think that anyone would, more than likely, just start crying, having not much to say at all, at first, but the interaction would be human, at any rate, involving the normal modes of touch, ocular exchange, verbal conversation, &c.

Were Christ present to us in his human form, there would be a reason to look upon him and to contemplate him. Here is, one would acknowledge, the Jesus of Scripture as the Apostles knew him, as Mary beheld him, as the disciples saw him. Here is the historical Christ that died on the Cross, rose from the dead, and appeared to his disciples. One would want to ingest his appearance, his human features, and see what he really looks like.

It has to be acknowledged that an appearance by Jesus Christ in his human form presents a scenario hugely different from Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament. Yes, Christ is, indeed, present in the Sacrament, body, blood, soul, and divinity, but to view those consecrated species does not really constitute the same experience, does it? The host isn’t going to look at you, or approach you, or physically touch you, or talk to you, or embrace you, or wipe away your tears. Unless you imagine that Christ walked the earth as a small, circular piece of bread, the appearance of the host is not going to, in and of itself, fill you with awe (and in making that point in that way, I mean no disrespect).

I just do not see Christ intending for his Eucharistic presence to be worshipped quite in this way. In fact, it doesn’t even seem that his Eucharistic presence was meant to obtain outside of the Liturgy…really…if you think about it. He gives himself to us in our Eucharist as food and drink. This necessarily implies consumption. To me, to worship Christ under these temporary forms outside of the context of Eucharist seems…weird. I don’t say idolatrous (how could it be?), I don’t say wrong, but I do maintain that it does seem wholly out of context, and outside of its purpose.

I make bold to say, here, that I suppose I’m looking for something of an honest dialogue here, and not this sort of thing:

“I am a supporter of Eucharistic Adoration, you should be too, and here are the quotes of four different popes that show you that we are right and you are wrong! Who can argue with a quote from a pope after all!”

Let me just say that although I am not persuaded that this practice serves a real purpose except to confuse people about the actual nature of the Eucharist, I am not saying that I am absolutely right, and that Eucharistic Adoration is wrong. That would be quite arrogant and presumptuous of me, in light of the popularity of the practice. This, I hope, will not become a matter of Eucharistic Adoration proponents viewing my question as an attack on their “thing”, and tossing out quotes in an effort to discount, on paper, my concerns. “The document saith, and I quote…” That’s not useful.

If you’re just going to say, “I value it because this pope said this…”, I will say, with all due respect, that you have yet to demonstrate why you understand and value this practice. Thank you for telling me what Pope Pius XII, for example, thinks (maybe), on the one hand. On the other hand, however, he isn’t posting in these forums and I can’t press him to expand upon the point that one has quoted him as making. And what about all the popes in history that never adored the Eucharist in this way because, for one thing, it never occurred to them?

 

[Pregustator]

There should be no doubt in anyone’s mind “that all the faithful ought to show to this most holy sacrament the worship which is due to the true God, as has always been the custom of the Catholic Church. Nor is it to be adored any the less because it was instituted by Christ to be eaten.” (Sacred Congregation of Rites, Eucharisticum Mysterium 3f)

No, it isn’t to be adored any the less, but that doesn’t speak to the fact that, outside of the Eucharistic celebration, the Eucharist makes no sense. If the consecrated wafer is displayed in a monstrance, should it be adored any the less than when elevated after the consecration at Mass? No. That isn’t what I have said, however. My question is, why put it in the monstrance to begin with? Why have this practice? Is proximity to the physical presence of Christ the answer? Is it a reaction to disbelief in the Church’s doctrine? If the latter, is it a praiseworthy reaction? What good is to be derived from gazing at the Eucharistic species outside of the Eucharist? Christ intended for the Eucharistic species to be consumed in the context of the ritual meal, his final Pasch, his Last Supper, his first Eucharist…our Eucharist, the Mass.

After all, He said ‘This is My body’ full stop. Not 'well, yes, this is My body, but only if you choose to eat it. It is NOT, unlike My Body in human form, worthy in and of itself of adoration." If He appeared before us in human form we would certainly adore and worship His sacred body, no? He is no less really present, and worthy and fit to be adored as such, in Eucharistic form.

But Christ didn’t just say “this is my body,” full stop. Prior to those words, “He broke the bread, gave it to his disciples and said, 'take this, all of you, and eat it…”

Christ is, indeed, no less really present in the Eucharist. I imagine, in fact, that he is most profoudly present in the Eucharist. But the Eucharist, despite bringing to us Christ’s body and blood, is no less really food and drink, meant to be consumed in the ritual meal context that he instituted in the Upper Room, that is to say the Mass.

 

[japhy]

To me, to worship Christ under these temporary forms outside of the context of Eucharist seems…weird.

Although I know what you mean why you say “temporary forms”, the very word “temporary” calls to mind one of the factors that led to the formalizing of worship of the Eucharist. I’ll jump ahead to a later comment of yours:

My question is, why put it in the monstrance to begin with? Why have this practice? Is proximity to the physical presence of Christ the answer? Is it a reaction to disbelief in the Church’s doctrine? If the latter, is it a praiseworthy reaction? What good is to be derived from gazing at the Eucharistic species outside of the Eucharist?

When a doctrine is challenged, it is often the case that the doctrine is more clearly spelled out, and certain practices or disciplines are established or curtailed. One erroneous belief about the Eucharist is that it is a temporary presence that lasts only as long as the Mass, and that any consecrated elements not consumed become bread and wine again. The ancient practice of reserving the Eucharist (for the sick and home-bound, for hermits, etc.) shows that erroneous belief wrong, but it might not have been enough. It could be misconstrued to mean that the bread is the Eucharist so long as it is about to be eaten.

Worship is given to God in the Eucharist because it is His substantial presence. Pope John Paul II described the Eucharist in a three-fold manner: “It is at one and the same time a Sacrifice-Sacrament, a Communion-Sacrament, and a Presence-Sacrament.” (Redemptor Hominis 20) You keep saying the Eucharist is meant to be eaten, but you are neglecting the Eucharist’s first purpose, which is to be a sacrifice offered to God. It is reprehensible to consecrate the Eucharist outside the context of Mass (there’s your phrase!). The Eucharist is a sacrifice first, a communion second, and a lasting presence third.

I’ll continue that “presence” thought in a moment…

Let me just say that although I am not persuaded that this practice serves a real purpose except to confuse people about the actual nature of the Eucharist…

Your wording makes it sound like you think adoration was instituted for the purpose of confusing people, which makes it diabolic in nature. I’m sure that’s not what you meant, but that’s what your words sound like.

No, it isn’t to be adored any the less, but that doesn’t speak to the fact that, outside of the Eucharistic celebration, the Eucharist makes no sense.

You keep saying that. Perhaps it is better to say, “apart from the Eucharistic celebration” rather than “outside the Eucharistic celebration”. Certainly it makes sense when a person receives Communion outside of the Mass (e.g. the sick and the homebound). But the Mass (the Eucharistic celebration) is the necessary context from which the Eucharist comes. Apart from the Mass, there is no Eucharist, but the Eucharist abides outside of the Mass.

Eucharistic adoration puts us more concretely into that presence. It is not unlike the adoration that we offer when the Host and Chalice are elevated; it is just prolonged. Adoration fits Vatican II’s criteria for legitimate devotions: “devotions should be so drawn up that they harmonize with the liturgical seasons, accord with the sacred liturgy, are in some fashion derived from it, and lead the people to it, since, in fact, the liturgy by its very nature far surpasses any of them.”

1. 
   *]Adoration is never “out of season” – although you could make the case for it at certain times more than others, e.g. Annunciation, Advent, Christmas, Holy Thursday, etc.
   *]Adoration is in accord with the liturgy because it prolongs and continues the acts of adoration of the Sacrament found in the Mass itself.
   *]Adoration is derived from the liturgy because the presence of the Blessed Sacrament in the tabernacles of churches around the world is entirely dependent upon the offering of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, the most supreme liturgy of the Church.
   *]Finally, spiritual union with Christ through worship of his Real Presence in the Eucharist cultivates a deeper desire for sacramental union with Christ by reception of Holy Communion at Mass, which leads the person to participate more devoutly in the Mass so as to be able to receive Communion worthily.
   
   The Church (in her saints and in her magisterial teaching) strongly encourages time spent in prayer before the Blessed Sacrament not only because it renders to God the worship due Him, but also because of its spiritual benefits. I’ll provide some more quotes in another post.

 

[OraLabora]

There are many different religious practices that benefit some people more than others, and the Catholic Church, meant to be universal, reflects this fact. Many people benefit by having a sensible (i.e., something that can be sensed via sight, hearing, etc.) object to aid them in contemplation or meditation: thus the widespread use of icons, incense, candles, and so on.

While a primary purpose of the Eucharist is to be eaten (therefore it is confected from real food and drink), the fact of the Real Presence makes the consecrated Host a truly Divine Icon, so to speak. So it seems natural that if meditating on a picture of Our Lord, or a crucifix, is helpful to some, then the actual living flesh of Our Lord may be especially helpful as a sensible form to aid in spiritual communion with the Lord, which is what prayer is, after all.

Most of us are limited in our receptivity to the Divine Presence in many ways (but not all the same ways), so a variety of ways are available for us to pray. Besides the liturgies of the Church (Mass and the Divine Office), there are countless personal devotions, religious societies, sacramentals, blessings, pilgrimages, books, and so on. We each use those devotions that help us the most (and always under the wise guidance of the Church), and if others are helped by different devotions, then we happily encourage them, or ought to.

Yep, one great thing about the Church is that when one has a particular type of spiritual charism, rather than splitting off and founding a new “church”, we can invariably find a religious order within the Church that fulfills our charism. Same goes with spiritual devotions, there is a ton of varieties and all of them valid, reaching out more to some than others.

I for one am attracted to Adoration and the Liturgy of the Hours, less so to the Rosary. It’s OK to be that way. The Church is big enough for all and where one is weak, others strengthen us, and vice versa. We are all different members of the Body of Christ.

Christ is, indeed, no less really present in the Eucharist. I imagine, in fact, that he is most profoudly present in the Eucharist. But the Eucharist, despite bringing to us Christ’s body and blood, is no less really food and drink, meant to be consumed in the ritual meal context that he instituted in the Upper Room, that is to say the Mass.

Many folks though, cannot consume the Eucharist in the context of the Mass. The Church has always reserved the Eucharist in order to be able to bring the Viaticum to the dying, or communion to the ill and infirm who cannot get to Mass.

So in that context, there is a need to reserve the Eucharist. Which means that we have a unique opportunity to also spend time with Him. I do so at least once a week in the Chapel of the Blessed Sacrament in our abbey. The Host is not exposed, but I know He is in there in the tabernacle, and I feel so at peace when I spend time with Him there. Why hide Him off in some unaccessible location if we keep Him present for those who need Him but cannot come to Him due to illness, infirmity or being in their last hours?

 

[japhy]

I’ll provide some more quotes in another post.

“When, therefore, the Church bids us adore Christ hidden behind the Eucharistic veils and pray to Him for spiritual and temporal favors, of which we ever stand in need, she manifests living faith in her divine Spouse who is present beneath these veils, she professes her gratitude to Him and she enjoys the intimacy of His friendship.” (Pius XII, Mediator Dei 132)

“[D]o not allow – as some do, who are deceived under the pretext of restoring the liturgy or who idly claim that only liturgical rites are of any real value and dignity – that churches be closed during the hours not appointed for public functions, as has already happened in some places: where the adoration of the august sacrament and visits to our Lord in the tabernacles are neglected. …] Such conduct most harmful to Christian piety is like poisonous fruit, growing on the infected branches of a healthy tree, which must be cut off so that the life-giving sap of the tree may bring forth only the best fruit.” (Pius XII, Mediator Dei 176)

Pope John led by example and showed faith in the Real Presence of our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament, and demonstrated belief in the power of prayer in its presence. On the Feast of Corpus Christi in 1962, the eve of the Second Vatican Council, Bl. Pope John XXIII led a procession of the Blessed Sacrament and prayed before the Eucharist, saying: “O Jesus, look upon us from your Sacrament like a good Shepherd …] this is your flock, the flock that you have gathered from the ends of the earth, the flock that listens to your word of life, and intends to guard it, practice it and preach it.”

Earlier, in an earlier encyclical about St. John Vianney (the Curé d’Ars), Pope John XXIII encouraged priests to make Adoration of the Eucharist a frequent habit: “For the lengthy prayer of a priest before the adorable Sacrament of the Altar has a dignity and an effectiveness that cannot be found elsewhere nor be replaced. …] And a devotion to the Eucharist that is ardent, constant and that carries over into works also has the effect of nourishing and fostering the inner perfection of his soul and assuring him, as he carries out his apostolic duties, of an abundance of the supernatural powers that the strongest workers for Christ must have.” (Sacerdotii nostri primordia 48)

“[T]he Catholic Church has always displayed and still displays this latria that ought to be paid to the Sacrament of the Eucharist, both during Mass and outside of it, by taking the greatest possible care of consecrated Hosts, by exposing them to the solemn veneration of the faithful, and by carrying them about in processions to the joy of great numbers of the people. …] For it is not just while the Sacrifice is being offered and the Sacrament is being confected, but also after the Sacrifice has been offered and the Sacrament confected – while the Eucharist is reserved in churches or oratories – that Christ is truly Emmanuel, which means ‘God with us.’ For He is in the midst of us day and night; He dwells in us with the fullness of grace and of truth.” (Pope Paul VI, Mysterium Fidei 56, 67)

“When the faithful adore Christ present in the sacrament, they should remember that this presence derives from the sacrifice and is directed toward both sacramental and spiritual Communion. In consequence, the devotion which leads the faithful to visit the Blessed Sacrament draws them into an ever deeper participation in the Paschal Mystery. …] They offer their entire lives with Christ to the Father in the Holy Spirit, and receive in this wonderful exchange an increase of faith, hope and charity. Thus they nourish those right dispositions which enable them with all due devotion to celebrate the memorial of the Lord and receive frequently the bread given us by the Father.” (Sacred Congregation of Rites, Eucharisticum Mysterium 50)

“Adoration of Christ in this sacrament of love must also find expression in various forms of Eucharistic devotion: personal prayer before the Blessed Sacrament, Hours of Adoration, periods of exposition – short, prolonged and annual (Forty Hours) – Eucharistic benediction, Eucharistic processions, Eucharistic congresses.” (John Paul II, Domincae Cenae 3)

“In many places, adoration of the Blessed Sacrament is also an important daily practice and becomes an inexhaustible source of holiness. …] Unfortunately, alongside these lights, there are also shadows. In some places the practice of Eucharistic adoration has been almost completely abandoned.” (John Paul II, Ecclesia de Eucharistia 10)

“The worship of the Eucharist outside of the Mass is of inestimable value for the life of the Church. …] It is pleasant to spend time with him, to lie close to his breast like the Beloved Disciple and to feel the infinite love present in his heart. If in our time Christians must be distinguished above all by the “art of prayer”, how can we not feel a renewed need to spend time in spiritual converse, in silent adoration, in heartfelt love before Christ present in the Most Holy Sacrament? …] This practice, repeatedly praised and recommended by the Magisterium, is supported by the example of many saints. Particularly outstanding in this regard was Saint Alphonsus Liguori, who wrote: ‘Of all devotions, that of adoring Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament is the greatest after the sacraments, the one dearest to God and the one most helpful to us.’ The Eucharist is a priceless treasure: by not only celebrating it but also by praying before it outside of Mass we are enabled to make contact with the very wellspring of grace.” (John Paul II, Ecclesia de Eucharistia 25)

 

[japhy]

I’ll provide some more quotes in another post.

“Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament is a form of Eucharistic cult which is particularly widespread in the Church and earnestly recommended to her Pastors and faithful. …] This adoration is a most apt way of expressing the connection between the celebration of the memorial of the Lord’s Sacrifice and his continued presence in the Sacrament of the Altar. …] Therefore, the devotion prompting the faithful to visit the Blessed Sacrament draws them into an ever deeper share in the paschal mystery and leads them to respond gratefully to the gift of him who through his humanity constantly pours divine life into the members of his Body. Abiding with Christ the Lord, they enjoy his intimate friendship and pour out their hearts before him for themselves and for those dear to them and they pray for the peace and salvation of the world” (Cong. for Divine Worship, Directory on Popular Piety and the Liturgy 164)

“[Eucharistic adoration] springs from Eucharistic action that, in itself, is the greatest act of adoration of the Church, which enables the faithful to participate fully, consciously, actively and fruitfully in the sacrifice of Christ, according to the desire of the Second Vatican Council, and refers to the same. Thus conceived, Eucharistic adoration keeps the faithful in their Christian love and service to others, and promotes greater personal sanctity as well as that of the Christian communities.” (2002 Synod of Bishops)

“Indeed in our age, marked by haste even in one’s personal relationship with God, catechesis should reacquaint the Christian people with the whole of Eucharistic worship, which cannot be reduced to participation in Holy Mass and to Communion with the proper dispositions, but also includes frequent adoration – personal and communal – of the Blessed Sacrament.” (Pontifical Council for the Interpretation of Legislative Texts, Safeguarding the Bread of life come down from heaven)

“In the Eucharist, the Son of God comes to meet us and desires to become one with us; Eucharistic adoration is simply the natural consequence of the Eucharistic celebration, which is itself the Church’s supreme act of adoration. Receiving the Eucharist means adoring him whom we receive. Only in this way do we become one with him, and are given, as it were, a foretaste of the beauty of the heavenly liturgy. The act of adoration outside Mass prolongs and intensifies all that takes place during the liturgical celebration itself.” (Benedict XVI, Sacramentum Caritatis 66)

That’s enough of quotes for now.

 

[Pregustator]

Although I know what you mean why you say “temporary forms”, the very word “temporary” calls to mind one of the factors that led to the formalizing of worship of the Eucharist…

But the Eucharistic species are temporary forms, nonetheless, and I mean by saying as much to state no more than the fact of the matter. Once the bread and wine are digested, Christ is no longer Eucharistically present; the same is true when unconsumed Eucharistic species deteriorate.

When a doctrine is challenged, it is often the case that the doctrine is more clearly spelled out, and certain practices or disciplines are established or curtailed. One erroneous belief about the Eucharist is that it is a temporary presence that lasts only as long as the Mass, and that any consecrated elements not consumed become bread and wine again.

To be clear, I do not hold this erroneous belief.

Your wording makes it sound like you think adoration was instituted for the purpose of confusing people, which makes it diabolic in nature. I’m sure that’s not what you meant, but that’s what your words sound like.

I’m not sure that my wording implies quite that much. Not everything that the Church leadership says or does is infallible, of course, and the Church may have devised this pratice in reaction to a challenge to her doctrines, without really considering matters carefully. I’m sure the Church did not purposely set out to confuse the flock with this practice. Of course it didn’t. But perhaps in their zeal to counter the doctrinal challenges at the time, our leadership instituted something inexplicable not only to heretics, but to many Catholics, as well.

The fact of the matter is that the Catholic Church has a history of over-reacting to attacks or perceived attacks (which have often turned out to be attempts at reform by well-intentioned Catholics), going over the top with her responses. If someone suggests that our Eucharist doctrine isn’t correct, well, we’ll show them: we’ll throw it right back in their faces by bringing the species in the tabernacle out, placed into a a gold monstrance, with incense and white gloves humeral veils and canopies and chant in a ceremony that looks and sounds more grandiose and worshipful than the Mass itself. And at the end, we will not consume the species, because the whole practice will be 100% unrelated to the Eucharistic celebration. And we’ll do this just because you say we shouldn’t! That seems to be the sort of reaction that may be responsible for Eucharistic Adoration such as we currently understand it.

One other problem I have with Adoration or Exposition is the guilt trip that some Catholics seem to relish laying upon one another in order to increase attendance to something non-liturgical that no Catholic is ever bound to attend at all. Invariably, Eucharistic adoration brochures feature a pitiful image of Jesus on the cover with the scolding words, “could you not spend one hour with me?” Fulton Sheen was famous for guilting other Catholics into attending Eucharistic adoration in this way. He isn’t the only one, of course, only one of the more famous adoration “guilters” that comes to mind. And I think that is wholly disordered, to place so much emphasis on this pious paraliturgical practice that, as a shepherd, you would encourage scruples and guilt over absence from it. I have a real problem with that approach to something so completely optional.

 

[thomas_jd]

Adoration is first seen in the Gospel of Luke2:10,11,12 “and the angel said said to them do not be afraid, for behold, I bring you good news of great joy which shall be to all the people: for today in the town of David a Savior has been born to you, who is Christ the Lord.” 13 and suddenly There was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly hosts praising God."
20 " And the shepard 's returned glorifing and praising God for all that they had heard and seen, even as it was spoken to them."
The Maji, wise men of the east, were next. Matthew 1:33,34 " and going further into the house they saw Mary his mother and they fell down and worshiped him."
These instances highlight some of the biblical recognition of Adoration in the New Testament.

St. Basil 329-379 was the first instance of Adoration that I am aware of: He broke the bread into three parts ne he consumed : two he gave to the monks :3 he suspended over the altar
" The act of Adoration outside of Mass prolongs and intensifies all that takes place at Mass" A extension of Holy Mass
Exerpts from a speech, last quotation was the Popes

 

[japhy]

perhaps in their zeal to counter the doctrinal challenges at the time, our leadership instituted something inexplicable not only to heretics, but to many Catholics, as well.

And yet numerous saints and bishops and priests have strongly recommended it. And I do not consider Eucharistic adoration to be “inexplicable”.

The fact of the matter is that the Catholic Church has a history of over-reacting to attacks or perceived attacks (which have often turned out to be attempts at reform by well-intentioned Catholics), going over the top with her responses.

I’ll grant that some of the reactions of the Church can be hard to swallow. But I do not think Eucharistic adoration is a severe reaction, as some might consider the old fast-from-midnight or the lack of concession of the Chalice to have been.

… a ceremony that looks and sounds more grandiose and worshipful than the Mass itself.

Perhaps when the celebration of the Mass is impoverished, Eucharistic adoration looks and sounds more grandiose. But it was not always so, and it need not be so. On the other hand, there are things that can be done during Eucharistic adoration that cannot be done during Mass, because those things are out of place at Mass. Eucharistic processions are not what Mass is about, Holy Thursday and Corpus Christi notwithstanding.

And at the end, we will not consume the species, because the whole practice will be 100% unrelated to the Eucharistic celebration.

Your caricature is unhelpful. Adoration is not unrelated to the Mass. And why must the Eucharist be eaten every time it is seen? Why can’t there be a mode of “interacting” with the Eucharist in between Masses?

the guilt trip that some Catholics seem to relish laying upon one another in order to increase attendance to something non-liturgical that no Catholic is ever bound to attend at all. … I think that is wholly disordered, to place so much emphasis on this pious paraliturgical practice that, as a shepherd, you would encourage scruples and guilt over absence from it. I have a real problem with that approach to something so completely optional.

Maybe Archbishop Sheen “guilted” Catholics into it because he knew of its surpassing value and he was unable to move them to consider it by other means. I don’t think I would speak of it as “relishing” it, though…

On a personal note, Matthew’s account of the Transfiguration (esp. Matt. 17:2) speaks to me as a sort of “prophecy” of adoration. “And he was transfigured before them, and his face shone like the sun, and his garments became white as light.” Jesus is present before us in another figure or likeness, that of bread; monstrances are almost always evocative of a sunburst; and the Host, while not the purest white, is white in color.

 

[po18guy]

I post this question with all due respect for those for whom this practice is important.

I gather that you do not fully embrace the True Presence of Jesus Christ in the consecrated Host. Once you are convicted that Christ is truly present in the Eucharist, not only is He present to you, but you are present to Him. I think this is the genesis of your doubt. Have you ever declined communion because you somehow felt unworthy? Saint Pail wrote of this in 1 Corinthians 10 and 11. He called it a “participation” in the Lord’s Body and Blood. So, it is not mere symbolism, but the actual Body and Blood, just as our Lord spoke at the last supper.

I could tell you of miracles I have seen and experienced in prayer before our Lord in the Eucharist, occurrences that are supernatural in nature, but you might be lost to incredulity. Just know that Bishop Fulton Sheen is only one example of many spiritual greats who spent a holy hour with our Eucharistic Lord each day. Saint Benedict died while raising his arms in worship before the Blessed Sacrament. The tremendous blessing of Christ with us in the Eucharist is what confirms the Catholic Church as the one true Church which Christ established for our salvation. The problem is transitioning from unbelief to belief in the Eucharist. It took me years.

However, your difficulty is spiritual not intellectual. The solution will be provided by the Holy Spirit, not the words of fellow Catholics. Since many conversions have occurred in His Eucharistic presence, might I suggest that you go and spend time with Him in adoration? You are absolutely justified to ask, even demand Him to reveal His presence to you, as this is exactly how many hearts have been called to Him and His Church.

As He did to Thomas, our Lord calls out to us, “Do not persist in your unbelief, but believe”

 

[jlhargus]

Quote:
Originally Posted by jlhargus
JL: The questions you need to ask yourself would be, In imitation of Christ and at his command, DO WE OFFER BREAD AND WINE through the person of the celebrant? OR DO WE OFFER THE REAL BODY, BLOOD SOUL and DIVINITY, OF our risen Lord and God Jesus Christ UNDER THE APPEARANCE of bread and wine?". Is this bread, before me, or is the GOD, BEFORE ME, UNDER THE APPEARANCE OF bread?"

Pregustator; Those aren’t the questions I need to ask myself, thank you. I understand the doctrine of transubstantiation, as I suspect does most everyone participating on this forum.

Quote:
JL: If you answer, it is God before me under appearance of bread and wine. Then you need to ask, can Adoration of God VISIBLY PRESENT under appearance of bread and wine ever be out of context?

Pregustator; Yes, it is entirely out of its proper context, isn’t it? The proper context of the Eucharistic meal and sacrifice is the liturgy of the Mass. Any time the Sacrament is reserved in the tabernacle it is out of its proper context as well, but there is a practical pastoral necessity involved in that case. Ultimately, however, the species reserved in the tabernacle are meant for consumption in the context of what we understand Eucharist to be.

Quote:
JL: Should we just ignore the VISIBLE PRESENTS OF GOD among us, because it is reserved for the those who cannot come to mass?

Pregustator; No. That is why we genuflect when we pass a tabernacle, right? That seems proper and fitting and correct. But opening the tabernacle, placing one of the hosts into a monstrance and having everyone then stare at it seems, to me, odd and, again, completely out of context. We adore the consecrated species from a previous Eucharist but make no Eucharist in doing so. It’s rather as if one were to go to a restaurant and ask an entree to be brought out only to look at it for an hour, with no intention of consuming it. One would say that the entree was out of its proper context, used that way.

Quote:
NOT JL quote: But there is no better place to bring your concerns and questions than before Jesus Himself iin the Blessed Sacrament.

Pregustator; Why? Does God somehow respond to our prayers more fully if we are located in front of consecrated Eucharistic species than otherwise? I find that a hard thing to fathom considering that God is everywhere present and hears our prayers wherever we offer them.

JL: Since my post obviously upset you, which was not the intention, I will only make a comment on the last quote in your post. You have failed to correctly identify the person who posted those remarks, making it appear as though I posted it, which I did not. If you don’t yet know how to seperate QUOTES, please do another post.

 

[po18guy]

One other problem I have with Adoration or Exposition is the guilt trip that some Catholics seem to relish laying upon one another in order to increase attendance to something non-liturgical that no Catholic is ever bound to attend at all. Invariably, Eucharistic adoration brochures feature a pitiful image of Jesus on the cover with the scolding words, “could you not spend one hour with me?” Fulton Sheen was famous for guilting other Catholics into attending Eucharistic adoration in this way. He isn’t the only one, of course, only one of the more famous adoration “guilters” that comes to mind. And I think that is wholly disordered, to place so much emphasis on this pious paraliturgical practice that, as a shepherd, you would encourage scruples and guilt over absence from it. I have a real problem with that approach to something so completely optional.

I think that you are limiting your consideration of this devotion to the intellectual aspect, while missing or disregarding the spiritual. The intellectual depth of adoration is sharply limited. You believe that the Eucharist is the Lord Jesus. Period. Stop. This cannot satisfy your curiosity! This limit may also explain why you cannot fathom the devotion. In sharp contrast to the intellectual aspect, the spiritual rewards are infinite. The Church has declared that it is a good and holy practice to spend time with what you believe, and the Church teaches, to be Christ, in His Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity. I think that what you have understood in the intellectual realm, you have not yet begun to understand in the spiritual realm. Adoration is a purely spiritual matter, as you have already physically and intellectually consumed Christ at mass.

As to being “mystified” by adoration, yes! Every soul that has ever gathered before Him is either initially or ultimately mystified. We are bound to be mystified by an infinite God.