Perpetual eucharistic adoration

[Sunflower15]

Unfortunately we live in a punitive oriented society. We want to punish anyone who thinks differently or who thinks outside of our box. This is not charity. This is a subtle kind of oppression. We see if on both sides of the aisle, left and right.

As to Eucharistic adoration, I’ve always felt that I’m in the presence of my friend and Lord. I love Eucharistic adoration. I’m glad that I belong to a religious community that stops everything once a day and the brothers all come in for an hour before the Blessed Sacrament. It’s wonderful to be in front of our Lord and it’s even more special when I’m with my brothers. I’m left with a feeling that we share a common faith and that the Lord is speaking to all of us at the same time.

I blows my mind to think that he hears each of us as if the others were not there thinking, talking or looking. Each of us is the only one there in his presence and yet, we are all there for him and his is there for us. But each of us is there alone with him at the same time. God’s inscruitable nature is incredible to adore and to contemplate in the Eucharist.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

YES!!! That is exactly how I feel!

I am scheduled twice a week, but usually go everyday for an hour, or more if I can. My sons joke that they’ll put in a mini fridge & microwave in the Perpetual Adoration Chapel for me, and that they’ll never see me again! Honestly, I cannot imagine a better place to live on the face of Earth than in a Perpetual Adoration Chapel!

Sometimes, an adorer won’t show up, and I stay alone with him for a while…I LOVE IT!!!

However, I also feel very happy when the Chapel is full and I tell Him: ‘See? All these people came in just to see YOU!’ And smile at Him… I especially like it when the Catholic school next door bring in the children for 15 min of Adoration… so wonderful!

And, the greatest mystery for me is how is it possible that as we all gaze at Him and individually pray/talk to Him…while we all feel we are in community…but ‘alone’ with Him at the same time…this is especially noticeable whenever someone comes in in despair, even crying…and walks in as if only He were there [regardless of whether the Chapel is full], and rushes to the front kneeler…everyone notices, and as we bow our heads, we ask Him to comfort that one person in greatest need at the time…and then the person gets up and leaves, not even noticing the rest of us…but feeling the community all the time…

I wish everyone could experience Adoration!

 

[fultonfish]

How many people have commented that when they entered the Eucharistic Adoration chapel, they actually felt the presence of a person there.

 

[ppeter]

It seems that some in this thread, in their zeal to protect McBrien’s right to teach anything so long as he is not actually censured for formal heresy, wish to deny other ‘Catholics in good standing’ their right and duty to protect themselves from the imminent spiritual danger he poses as well as their right and duty to warn their brothers and sisters of same.

I ask you ardent defenders of canon law whether a priest can be a false prophet without being effectively condemned for heresy by the Church.

‘11 But rather I wrote to you not to associate with any one who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or robber – not even to eat with such a one. 12 For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? 13 God judges those outside. “Drive out the wicked person from among you.”’(1Corinthians (RSV) 5)

I for one never accused him of heresy. My contention is that by reviling the established practice of the Church and of many of its saints he is spreading poison.

He claims to know what the future Church is meant to be, and furthermore that adoration of the Blessed Sacrament outside of Mass has no place in that future. He sows doubt about the Church’s well-established liturgical practice and the ecclesiastical authorities who establish and promote that practice.

If he simply refrained from personally participating in such acts of worship, it would be another matter.

So please, spare us the legalism, and respect the rights of those who refuse to honour or to associate with such a one and who warn others of his pernicious opinions.

 

[catharina]

It seems that some in this thread, in their zeal to protect McBrien’s right to teach anything so long as he is not actually censured for formal heresy, wish to deny other ‘Catholics in good standing’ their right and duty to protect themselves from the imminent spiritual danger he poses as well as their right and duty to warn their brothers and sisters of same.

I ask you ardent defenders of canon law whether a priest can be a false prophet without being effectively condemned for heresy by the Church.

‘11 But rather I wrote to you not to associate with any one who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or robber – not even to eat with such a one. 12 For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? 13 God judges those outside. “Drive out the wicked person from among you.”’(1Corinthians (RSV) 5)

I for one never accused him of heresy. My contention is that by reviling the established practice of the Church and of many of its saints he is spreading poison.

He claims to know what the future Church is meant to be, and furthermore that adoration of the Blessed Sacrament outside of Mass has no place in that future. He sows doubt about the Church’s well-established liturgical practice and the ecclesiastical authorities who establish and promote that practice.

If he simply refrained from personally participating in such acts of worship, it would be another matter.

So please, spare us the legalism, and respect the rights of those who refuse to honour or to associate with such a one and who warn others of his pernicious opinions.

That’s the reason that I’ve said it’s sufficient to ignore McBrien’s ‘teaching.’
He only sows doubt if we allow that. Obviously we are to pray for him.
Many have likely been praying for all at Notre Dame for some time.

 

[Teelynn]

This thread has gone off completely into the uncharitable and unjust domain. Fr. McBrien is wrong in his views on Eucharistic adoration. However, that does not make him a heretic, the “father of lies”, a Protestant, or an evil person.

Eucharistic adoration is not a dogma of the Church. It is a ritual and a pious practice. Fr. McBrien is not denying the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist. That would be heresy. In fact, he states that Christ is sacramentally present. In other words, he is ontologically present and the bread and wine undergo an ontological change, which is far deeper than a physical change. Unfortunately, he does not go on to explain the difference between a physical and a sacramental change, maybe because the article is about adoration, not about the sacrament of the Eucharist itself.

Though I strongly disagree with his opinion that adoration of Christ in the Eucharist is not really necessary, as a theologian I must agree that it is not a requirement of the Church. It is a devotion that is promoted by the Church. It is a devotion that has led many people to the altar of sanctity and therefore worth promoting. Thus I disagree with him as to its benefit.

But I do agree that it does not take the place of the liturgy, but it is the result of the liturgy and therefore there is a strong link between devotion to the Blessed Sacrament and the liturgy of the mass and the liturgy of the hours. In fact, in many communities, mine included, it is a custom to pray the Liturgy of the Hours before the exposed sacrament. Even when it’s not exposed, we pray it before the tabernacle. Only monks pray the liturgy of the hours in the chapter hall, where the sacrament is not present, because adoration is not part of the Benedictine and Carthusian traditions.

I can see where Fr. McBrien is coming from. He is using the ancient monastic traditions, which do not include adoration, even to this day. But he is ignoring that other religious and secular traditions have developed that do include adoration and have found it to be spiritually beneficial. It is this spiritual benefit that he ignores.

That being said, ignoring this does not make him a heretic, agnostic or even a rebel. The Church does not demand Eucharistic adoration. She strongly promotes it. There is a big difference. To attack this man as a heretic and as a malicious person is against justice and charity. I even noticed that some people took the liberty in their posts to drop his title and refer to him by his last name only, as if he were not a priest in good standing with the Church, which he is.

Let’s be balanced here. Father’s opinion is not one that many of us share. But it is an opinion that is allowed by the Church by the mere fact that it is not against any doctrine or dogma of the Church.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

Even though Fr. McBrien’s opinion is perfectly in line (technically) with Church teachings, this opinion article is a perfect example of the confusion within the Church today. Although we might all come away with different interpretations on any one article, mine is that of total disregard for spiritual help of Catholic Christians on the part of Fr. McBrien. His article reminds me of an attitude of a former Pastor of our parish that discouraged the recitation of the rosary saying that “We make too much of Mary”. This pastor even went so far as to ban the formal recitation of the rosary before Sunday morning Mass, claiming that it was a “distraction” for people that wanted to pray their own prayers before Mass. Now, one could rightfully argue that indeed the Church does not promote the “worship” of Mary in the same way that the Lord God is to be worshiped, And maybe it was true that it could have posed as a distraction to some. But this Pastor did NOTHING to promote this same very important devotion at a time more convenient for all. I believe attitudes such as these do not help in the spiritual growth of Catholic Christians. It’s like throwing the baby out with the bath water. Instead of promoting spiritual devotions as an invaluable “benefit” to be promoted but not ever to be replaced with the Mass, (common sense) these theological technicalities promoted by some are a hindrance, and I truly believe not only can they serve to stunt the growth of Catholic Christians, but they can also promote a steering the more vulnerable away from our faith altogether.

Long and short of it, Fr. McBrian is certainly not a heretic in the true sense of the word, but for sure, he does nothing to promote spiritual growth among Catholic Christians, which is what the Church is supposed to be doing. Attitudes such as these do nothing for the spirituality and growth of Catholics.

 

[TMC]

I see nothing doctrinally incorrect in Father McBrien’s article. His opinion on the value of Eucharistic Adoration is simply his opinion, and he does not claim that it is anything more than his opinion. My only complaint with the way he expresses his opinion is that he does not explain in more detail why he believes the practice is a step backward.

I read Fr. McBrien’s articles and columns from time to time. I often disagree with him, but just as often I agree with him. I realize he is at times controversial and that one of his books failed to receive the imprimatur. But nothing I have ever read from him suggests that he is a heretic. In fact, nothing I have ever read from him suggests he is anything but a dedicated and thoughtful priest and theologian. Like all dedicated people in all professions, he is not always right.

For all of those that insist that because they sometimes disagree with the good Father, Father must be a heretic or worse, I would remind everyone that he is two things that very people who post here are – he is a priest in good standing, and he is a Catholic Theologian who is authorized to, and does, teach the Faith in a Catholic institution. The Church is not in the habit of allowing heretics to teach the Faith.

Finally, even if Father McBrien were a heretic, he would still be entitled to better treatment then he is getting here. I can’t help but point out that while CA Forums has never been a model of charitable discourse, I think that the level of discourse has declined in the last year or so. Its getting so that one can hardly discuss anything between the shouts of outrage.

 

[manualman]

Perhaps I am uncharitable towards Fr. McBrien. I will ponder that.

But is it uncharitable to notice and wonder that he is erudite and energetic in endorsing questionable (if not positively heretical) ideas, but almost universally does a poor and vague job of describing actual authoritative catholic teaching? Is it REALLY a coincidence that he chose ‘medieval’ as the adjective to describe transubstantiation? Maybe if that were a rare occurence in his writings.

But it isn’t rare. It’s Fr. McBrien’s universal pattern. A thinking person almost can’t help but believe that he enjoys sowing as much confusion and chaos as he can, while still being careful enough that a good lawyer/theologian can prove he ‘isn’t heretical.’

JR, you’re a lot more charitable than I am, it’s true.

 

[Teelynn]

Perhaps I am uncharitable towards Fr. McBrien. I will ponder that.

But is it uncharitable to notice and wonder that he is erudite and energetic in endorsing questionable (if not positively heretical) ideas, but almost universally does a poor and vague job of describing actual authoritative catholic teaching? Is it REALLY a coincidence that he chose ‘medieval’ as the adjective to describe transubstantiation? Maybe if that were a rare occurence in his writings.

But it isn’t rare. It’s Fr. McBrien’s universal pattern. A thinking person almost can’t help but believe that he enjoys sowing as much confusion and chaos as he can, while still being careful enough that a good lawyer/theologian can prove he ‘isn’t heretical.’

JR, you’re a lot more charitable than I am, it’s true.

Charity is calling a spade a spade. It is true that we are not to attack Fr. McBrien personally, we are to pray for him. However, it is not charitable to allow to stand ideas and attitudes that foster confusion, and indifference to the devotions of our faith that happen to be the “opinion” of Fr. McBrien (and many others) for the sake of charity.
Don’t confuse charity with timidity in standing for the truth of our faith. These attitudes need to be confronted. We need to speak out** loudly** to negate these ideas of dogmatically correct but counterproductive theories that do nothing to promote growth in our faith. And we need to do it “CHARITABLY”… My motto is to: “Walk softly but CARRY A BIG STICK”.

 

[Corki]

For all of those that insist that because they sometimes disagree with the good Father, Father must be a heretic or worse, I would remind everyone that he is two things that very people who post here are – he is a priest in good standing, and he is a Catholic Theologian who is authorized to, and does, teach the Faith in a Catholic institution. The Church is not in the habit of allowing heretics to teach the Faith.

I am not wanting to add to any attack on Fr. McBrien’s character, nor do I call him a heretic but I offer one small correction. Fr. McBrien does teach theology and is authorized to do so by the University of Notre Dame. He is, however, teaching without the required mandatum, which he publically refused to sign.

Catholics who teach the theological disciplines in a Catholic university are required to have a mandatum granted by competent ecclesiastical authority.40

The mandatum is fundamentally an acknowledgment by Church authority that a Catholic professor of a theological discipline teaches within the full communion of the Catholic Church.

The mandatum should not be construed as an appointment, authorization, delegation or approbation of one’s teaching by Church authorities. Those who have received a mandatum teach in their own name in virtue of their baptism and their academic and professional competence, not in the name of the Bishop or of the Church’s magisterium.

The mandatum recognizes the professor’s commitment and responsibility to teach authentic Catholic doctrine and to refrain from putting forth as Catholic teaching anything contrary to the Church’s magisterium.41

And before anyone starts the whole issue of universities run by orders not being under the authority of the local Bishop, the same document states:

The competent ecclesiastical authority to grant the mandatum is the bishop of the diocese in which the Catholic university is located; he may grant the mandatum personally or through a delegate.

usccb.org/education/excorde.htm

One of the main purposes of Ex Corde Ecclesia was to make sure that Catholic Universities and those who teach in them are in harmony with the Church. The mandatum is sort of the Church’s “Good Housekeeping Stamp of Approval”. Having it is a good thing, refusing to sign it is a red flag.

 

[canadianguy1143]

We are required to adore God as Catholics. God is present in the Eucharist. Therefore, Eucharistic adoration is required. Now we aren’t required to attend every opportunity to adore Eucharistic adoration just as we aren’t required to attend every Mass that our parish may offer. However, we can’t say that Eucharistic adoration is a step backward. To discourage Eucharistic adoration, which he is doing, is denying graces that souls may receive and depriving God of the honor that he is deserving. He has no right to deprive that.

 

[Sunflower15]

First of all, I would like to mention that I DO pray the Rosary and Divine Mercy Chaplet daily at a Perpetual Adoration Chapel.

Having said that, I don’t see why everyone feels so strongly that this priest/theologian should not teach or preach, simply because he does not agree with an ***optional devotion ***[or two] of the Catholic faith.

No Catholic is under obligation to pray the Rosary, nor to adore the Eucharist exposed in a monstrance, nor any other devotion -personal or public. It would have been an entirely different matter, had he shed ANY doubt as to the actual Presence in the Eucharist, but I see NO evidence of that whatsoever.

It is a VERY problematic situation to insist on what simply is NOT. And with passions bordering on hate, revenge or anger. It is unhealthy to YOUR soul, and has NO relevance to HIS.

Devotions are wonderful aids and those wise enough to use them, know this, but they are not required elements. And, those who do not employ them are NOT second-rate Catholics to be shunned nor even criticized publicly, and much less without Christian charity. To do this, means that the person accusing is actually less Catholic than the one not employing the devotion…

The good priest is at least wise enough to realize that all a Christian needs is contained in the Liturgy of the Mass…if you think thoroughly, it is true, since everything is contained in the Mass…in one way or another, in one symbol or another, even in the place that it is celebrated [for example, isn’t there a baptismal font in every church where the Mass is celebrated?]

The Catholic Mass is all encompassing and deceptively simple…it actually is not. It is a treasure, a masterpiece of our faith! :clapping:

I personally pray for an increase in Eucharistic Adoration, to the point that I put a clipboard with sheets containing tiny boxes asking for 1- the name of the adorer,2- the time in hrs. spend adoring for the intention of increased adoration, and 3- the parish/diocese for which the adoration was offered. Then, I put together over 200 hrs of adoration and presented all the pages within a small black binder to our parish pastor, along with an explanation and a few prayers for the Eucharist.

I believe that this approach is more Catholic/Christian and also more effective at increasing adoration than to put down people who have a right to not use what is optional to begin with.

What do you think? Can you start a similar project in your parish [if it offers Adoration]?

 

[Sunflower15]

I forgot to mention that our Orthodox brothers and sisters do not have this devotion to adore the Eucharist. It seems to not make sense to them to simply ‘gaze’ upon it. It is actually not exposed, but rather safeguarded within the Tabernacle, because from what I understand, they tend to not expose, but rather to ‘veil’, all that they find very holy or sacred.

Some Eastern Catholics, sort of go midway in between, they ‘expose’ the Host in a monstrance and then ‘veil’ it with a piece of cloth to show reverence. Interesting…

The fact remains that we all know that this is the Lord Himself, sacred, redeeming, holy, present, necessary for our salvation…

Let’s not ‘mess it up’ with hateful talk…or ‘uncharitable’ talk…

He -the Holy Presence- would not like this…

 

[rlg94086]

Having said that, I don’t see why everyone feels so strongly that this priest/theologian should not teach or preach, simply because he does not agree with an ***optional devotion ***[or two] of the Catholic faith.

I can’t speak for everyone else, but, for me, the problem is with the statement that it is “a step backward.” That is more than just disagreeing with an “optional devotion.” It is stating that the devotion is a negative. I can’t see a devotion to Our Lord as a negative.

I do admit though that Fr. McBrien’s previous works also give me an automatic distaste for anything he writes.

 

[lizaanne]

Check out The Vortex - this is an excellent commentary on the topic of this priest and his comments.

~Liza

 

[Sunflower15]

I can’t speak for everyone else, but, for me, the problem is with the statement that it is “a step backward.” That is more than just disagreeing with an “optional devotion.” It is stating that the devotion is a negative. I can’t see a devotion to Our Lord as a negative.

I have to admit that I agree with you on that one point. I do not understand, as he doesn’t explain, what he means by that…maybe it ‘came out wrong’ because he doesn’t really get into that…

I do admit though that Fr. McBrien’s previous works also give me an automatic distaste for anything he writes.

I haven’t read anything else by him…sorry!

 

[Sunflower15]

Check out The Vortex - this is an excellent commentary on the topic of this priest and his comments.

~Liza

Do you like listening to this guy? Michael Voris.

I can’t even get to the point of whether I agree or disagree with him, or whether what he says is true or false, I just plain can’t stand listening to him! :hypno: Too sensationalist!

What is he? Is he a theologian? Doesn’t seem to be a priest nor a brother…under what authority does he teach/preach? Whichever that is, he should be more humble, or more charitable, or more subtle at least…in traditional Catholic fashion.

He certainly is no Doctor of the Church…he can get down to our level…until he becomes one…which I doubt…

And, he seems to have such a strong anti-professor tendency from when he was his student, I can almost imagine that he got a bad grade on his class or something…like a vendetta of sorts…

Maybe he should be a football coach or a sales coach or …something other than a Catholic preacher…

Sorry…I can’'t stand the attitude of this guy!

 

[lizaanne]

Do you like listening to this guy? Michael Voris.

Yes - he is one of my best and closest friends.

~Liza

 

[rlg94086]

Yes - he is one of my best and closest friends.

~Liza

Well, sure, but that doesn’t mean you actually listen to him, does it?

Sunflower15,

You may not like his style, but Voris is accurate regarding McBrien. I can’t vouch for the rest of his work, because I am not a regular CatholicTV viewer. I might start watching more though…

 

[JReducation]

Perhaps I am uncharitable towards Fr. McBrien. I will ponder that.

But is it uncharitable to notice and wonder that he is erudite and energetic in endorsing questionable (if not positively heretical) ideas, but almost universally does a poor and vague job of describing actual authoritative catholic teaching? Is it REALLY a coincidence that he chose ‘medieval’ as the adjective to describe transubstantiation? Maybe if that were a rare occurence in his writings.

But it isn’t rare. It’s Fr. McBrien’s universal pattern. A thinking person almost can’t help but believe that he enjoys sowing as much confusion and chaos as he can, while still being careful enough that a good lawyer/theologian can prove he ‘isn’t heretical.’

JR, you’re a lot more charitable than I am, it’s true.

When I read the word “medieval” I simply remembered that the term was first used in the Middle Ages. In that sense, it is a medieval term. But we really don’t have a better one in modern English. There are other terms used in Greek that are clearer; but they have no translation.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[TMC]

I am not wanting to add to any attack on Fr. McBrien’s character, nor do I call him a heretic but I offer one small correction. Fr. McBrien does teach theology and is authorized to do so by the University of Notre Dame. He is, however, teaching without the required mandatum, which he publically refused to sign.

And before anyone starts the whole issue of universities run by orders not being under the authority of the local Bishop, the same document states:

usccb.org/education/excorde.htm

One of the main purposes of Ex Corde Ecclesia was to make sure that Catholic Universities and those who teach in them are in harmony with the Church. The mandatum is sort of the Church’s “Good Housekeeping Stamp of Approval”. Having it is a good thing, refusing to sign it is a red flag.

I don’t know if or how Father McBrien has obtained a mandatum, or what the exact requirements are at a university like Notre Dame. I do know that the Church is not shy about telling theologians they can’t call themselves Catholic Theologians. For example, the Church famously asked Father Kung to stop referring to himself as a teacher of Catholic Theology because of his denial of Papal infallibilty. (Note that the Church did this without calling Kung a heretic, and without impugning his character the way Fr. McBrien’s has been impugned here.) Since Fr. McBrien holds one of the most prestigous chairs in American theology, I don’t think he’s merely flying under the radar. Mandatum or not, its hard to dispute that the Church considers him a Catholic Theologian.