P
poche
Guest
Was this in a church that is in full communion with the Catholic Church?
Did you speak to the priest and ask him why?
Did you speak to the priest and ask him why?
- Status
My two cents of speculation here. I think the priest most likely did not think you wanted to receive Holy Communion because you were not at the altar rail.
Even if he had only two consecrated hosts, as mention by someone else, he could split one in half to share it with you, so I don’t think that would be a reason. Most likely: he didn’t know that you wanted to receive Holy Communion.
Even if he had only two consecrated hosts, as mention by someone else, he could split one in half to share it with you, so I don’t think that would be a reason. Most likely: he didn’t know that you wanted to receive Holy Communion.
Last edited:
T
tafan2
Guest
I will second this. It had nothing to do with it being a private mass. You may have been expecting a cue from him as to when to come up, he was likely simply looking to see if you were approaching. Cues from the priest would be less common in a EF mass. It is almost assuredly a misunderstanding.
Last edited:
M
mrsdizzyd
Guest
It was likely the priest’s private mass. Priests are required or encouraged to say mass everyday, but they don’t have to be public.
Our priest does this all the time. In cases like this, he would only consecrate the number of hosts he needed. In your case, 2. One for him and one for his server.
Our priest does this all the time. In cases like this, he would only consecrate the number of hosts he needed. In your case, 2. One for him and one for his server.
Last edited:
G
giuseppeTO
Guest
For a private Mass, the priest would most likely not have brought the tabernacle key with him, assuming there were even Consecrated hosts available. He would have consecrated just the priest’s host and a host for the server. It is not usual during a private Mass for the priest to give Communion to anyone who happens to be there (without a prior arrangement). If it were, he would bring the tabernacle key with him just in case. He was not denying you Communion - it is just not customary during a private Mass.
Again, that wouldn’t be an issue because the consecrated host could be split. Most likely he didn’t realize the OP wanted to receive Holy Communion.
C
Cor_ad_Cor
Guest
In addition to all that’s been said, there’s never a requirement (EF or OF) for the laity to receive at Mass. The priest could simply receive himself and move on, skipping the entire congregation if he chose to. (Might not be wise, but it would be licit.)
S
SndChsr
Guest
Really? That’s the first time I hear that. I was under the impression that the reception of the the Holy Eucharist was the entire point behind Mass…assuming one is in the state of grace of course.
T
twf
Guest
Not the entire point, no. The sacrifice offered to God on the altar is essential to our salvation and wellbeing…even if we don’t receive.
S
SndChsr
Guest
I thought that the sacrifice AND reception of the Eucharist are both equally important. “He who does not eat my flesh and drink my blood…”
C
Cor_ad_Cor
Guest
The priest must receive, and he does so on behalf of everyone present. If the rest of us get to, that’s a blessing, but not specifically required except once per year per Church precept.
I
ioannes_pius
Guest
It is possible for Holy Communion not to be distributed to the faithful at mass.
M
mrsdizzyd
Guest
Not only was it possible, but it was the norm in some parts of the world in centuries past. I wouldn’t be surprised to find out that it is still the norm in some far flung places.
S
SndChsr
Guest
Thank you for the explanation!
T
tafan2
Guest
Where and when was this the norm?
M
mrsdizzyd
Guest
I remember reading that in medieval Europe going to mass was not a guarantee that you would receive the Eucharist. I have also read in some writings of the saints that they had to make arrangements to receive the Eucharist in spite of the fact that they attended mass daily.mrsdizzyd:
Where and when was this the norm?
T
tafan2
Guest
I certainly believe there were times and places where receiving communion was much less frequent and perhaps there were times when few people received. I have read quite a bit about medieval Catholocism and never read that the norm was to not distribute to the faithful.
As far as some of the saints goes, they were likely in monasteries. I could certainly believe that there have been monasteries in the middle ages were members would have had to request communion.
As far as some of the saints goes, they were likely in monasteries. I could certainly believe that there have been monasteries in the middle ages were members would have had to request communion.
M
mrsdizzyd
Guest
Surprisingly enough, these were active religious not cloistered. I was surprised myself, but I have also read many accounts of communion not being readily available historically. Perhaps using the word “norm” is putting too fine a point on it. Perhaps “commonplace” is more accurate?
T
tafan2
Guest
Commonplace would be more accurate. The rule of receiving once a year (I think the 4th lateran Council) came about because of it. I will say, there were always people who advocated frequent communion, for example, the Angelic Doctor:
http://www.newadvent.org/summa/4080.htm#article10
I guess I had two issues with your post, the fact that communion was not even offered, and that this was the norm. I will certainly grant you that receiving communion rarely was commonplace. But I never heard it wasn’t offered.
http://www.newadvent.org/summa/4080.htm#article10
I guess I had two issues with your post, the fact that communion was not even offered, and that this was the norm. I will certainly grant you that receiving communion rarely was commonplace. But I never heard it wasn’t offered.
M
mrsdizzyd
Guest
You prompted me to check my memory. Here is one of the places I saw this mentioned.
http://www.ewtn.com/library/liturgy/zlitur576.htm
I know there have been others. I’m one of this people who is always reading or researching something, but I don’t often keep track of references unless I’m working on some piece of writing.
Last edited:
- Status