No Communion for the congregation?

[tafan2]

Thanks for the article, it does seem like some type of invitation to receive (a bell for instance) was always used. Its just that people did not receive.

 

[mrsdizzyd]

Thanks for the article, it does seem like some type of invitation to receive (a bell for instance) was always used. Its just that people did not receive.

In some cases yes, but the article notes that many priest became lax and would not offer it unless it was around Easter for the annual requirement.

I’ve read some of St. Vincent de Paul’s writings, and he also lamented that in France the priests often did not fulfil their duties. Some never even offering confession. Some skipping parts of mass. Many celebrating mass while drunk. These widestread issues with the clergy are the main reason he started the Congregation of the Mission. Prior to his efforts, most priests in France had no formal training.

Bearing that in mind, I think you can see how communion might not even be offered to the people.

 

[phil19034]

It is very likely that there are plenty of consecrated host left from the Easter celebrations on Thursday evening, Saturday vigil or Easter Sunday in the tabernacle.

FYI - It sounds like it was a side altar. The priest was celebrating the Extraordinary Form, so he would not have been allowed to walk to the tabernacle to receive another host during the mass.

 

[phil19034]

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…”

True, but we only have an obligation to receive once a year, during the Easter season.

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

It is possible for Holy Communion not to be distributed to the faithful at mass.

That immediately reminded me of how Papal Masses used to be- only Pope and one other person would receive Eucharist.

I did not know this was practice in “normal” Masses too though. Interesting.

 

[babochka]

HeDa:

It is very likely that there are plenty of consecrated host left from the Easter celebrations on Thursday evening, Saturday vigil or Easter Sunday in the tabernacle.

FYI - It sounds like it was a side altar. The priest was celebrating the Extraordinary Form, so he would not have been allowed to walk to the tabernacle to receive another host during the mass.

But another host would not have been necessary. He could have just broken the host that he did have into two or more pieces.

 

[Sean]

This is kind of off topic but if FSSP priest have a church with multiple altars will those altars be used in the sacrifice of the Mass.

 

[phil19034]

This is kind of off topic but if FSSP priest have a church with multiple altars will those altars be used in the sacrifice of the Mass.

I think it would depend on how many priests they have, how many scheduled masses, etc.

 

[OldCAFMember]

mrsdizzyd:

Not only was it possible, but it was the norm in some parts of the world in centuries past.

Where and when was this the norm?

Until the 1950s, many parishes had communion only at the early Masses at Sunday morning, and never at the High Mass.

 

[tafan2]

Are you sure about this? Having grown up in a Catholic family, with nuns teaching me, a completely Catholic town, right at the time of the major liturgical reforms, I heard plenty of stories and comparisons with the traditional mass and liturgies. I never heard that it was a recent practice not to offer communion.

 

[OldCAFMember]

Are you sure about this? Having grown up in a Catholic family, with nuns teaching me, a completely Catholic town, right at the time of the major liturgical reforms, I heard plenty of stories and comparisons with the traditional mass and liturgies. I never heard that it was a recent practice not to offer communion.

Quite sure. This was extremely common. Google and see.

 

[tafan2]

Little busy, I tried a couple of googles and came up with nothing. Any hints on the text to search for?

 

[OldCAFMember]

http://www.ewtn.com/library/liturgy/zlitur576.htm

 

[tafan2]

That article has mainly been posted and commented on, it refers mainly to medival times, and even then there was some form of inviting the faithful to communion, perhaps a bell, although there were certainly times in the middle ages when no one received. But it says little about the first half of the 20th century, cerntainly not enough to draw the conclusion :

Until the 1950s, many parishes had communion only at the early Masses at Sunday morning, and never at the High Mass.

 

[poche]

I remember hearing my dad say that at the 12:00 or 12:30 masses there were always some very holy souls who would approach the altar rail for communion.

 

[Hoosier-Daddy]

A sincere thanks to all those who replied. This may have indeed been a private Mass…something I wasn’t even aware of. As mentioned before, I was under the impression that a priest cannot deny Holy Communion to anyone, especially at Mass.

Just as an aside. A priest is one of the only people who actually can deny communion. There are those who think they should do so more often.