Priest allowing woman to bless at mass.

[SyroMalankara]

Because the decision is the Presider’s. When I am the one presiding and when I was the parish priest, the decision was mine…within what the norms allowed.

Why on earth would I invite a Sub-deacon of an Eastern Church to fulfill a ministry that I can give to one of my own parishioners? I absolutely wouldn’t.

If I am taken ill, I would ask someone from the friary, the monastery or a neighboring parish if they could help – but not to sprinkle holy water, as in this example. That would be beyond ridiculous. To the contrary, I would be seeking ways to involve the laity of my parish in lay ministry

Fortunately, the renewed liturgy in the Roman Rite has made provision for an expansive involvement of the laity – and I have extended that to the fullest I judged possible.

I didn’t know a school Mass has parishioners. Some Lutheran and Anglican communities make use of the widest provision available to them - “lay consecration”. They celebrate their version of a Communion Service with no ordained clergy at all. I understand we don’t recognize the ordination of their ministry as Catholics, but one would hope the communities in question would appreciate their own offices of ministry. The ‘widest usage’ priests may see this development evolve among many who witness lay persons ‘assisting fully’ regularly. At some point, a few ‘most active’ might think, ‘I did it with Fr.WideUse, now he’s stuck in traffic, I can cover.’ Pretty soon after that, ‘oh we don’t need Fr.WideUse this time, let’s save the call and let Joe ActiveLaymen do it’.

Just my opinion, which with €5, will get one a bowl of pasta bolognese.

 

[Mintaka]

It’s sorta kinda permissible, but it’s stupid.

Unless Father can’t walk very well, it also says, “Father could sprinkle all of you, but Father can’t be bothered with it. Reminding you of your Baptism and blessing you in an ancient way? Not important to the Church. The people of the parish or the school? Not important to Father. Let’s just get this over with.”

If Father really understood the entire history and meaning of sprinkling people, he wouldn’t want to delegate it; and if he did delegate it, it would be to another member of the clergy.

Also, splitting up the aspersion duties among several people, and not having them all processing together, is a violation of the whole idea of having a processional sprinkling ritual. So there’s the other half of the meaning gone.

Why do it at all, if Father doesn’t want to do it right?

 

[Rosebud77]

I didn’t know a school Mass has parishioners. Some Lutheran and Anglican communities make use of the widest provision available to them - “lay consecration”. They celebrate their version of a Communion Service with no ordained clergy at all. I understand we don’t recognize the ordination of their ministry as Catholics, but one would hope the communities in question would appreciate their own offices of ministry. The ‘widest usage’ priests may see this development evolve among many who witness lay persons ‘assisting fully’ regularly. At some point, a few ‘most active’ might think, ‘I did it with Fr.WideUse, now he’s stuck in traffic, I can cover.’ Pretty soon after that, ‘oh we don’t need Fr.WideUse this time, let’s save the call and let Joe ActiveLaymen do it’.

Just my opinion, which with €5, will get one a bowl of pasta bolognese.

I thought that lay people with the decline in the number of priests, are to involve much more in church life?

 

[ComplineSanFran]

I didn’t know a school Mass has parishioners. Some Lutheran and Anglican communities make use of the widest provision available to them - “lay consecration”. They celebrate their version of a Communion Service with no ordained clergy at all. I understand we don’t recognize the ordination of their ministry as Catholics, but one would hope the communities in question would appreciate their own offices of ministry. The ‘widest usage’ priests may see this development evolve among many who witness lay persons ‘assisting fully’ regularly. At some point, a few ‘most active’ might think, ‘I did it with Fr.WideUse, now he’s stuck in traffic, I can cover.’ Pretty soon after that, ‘oh we don’t need Fr.WideUse this time, let’s save the call and let Joe ActiveLaymen do it’.

Just my opinion, which with €5, will get one a bowl of pasta bolognese.

In the Anglican Church, one does not have a consecrated Eucharist without a priest or Bishop doing the consecrating. A congregation can distribute communion without a priest, but the consecration has already been done.

 

[Rosebud77]

In the Anglican Church, one does not have a consecrated Eucharist without a priest or Bishop doing the consecrating. A congregation can distribute communion without a priest, but the consecration has already been done.

 

[alphomega]

? It doesn’t seem so sad or abusive.
Others are not describing it thus.

.

When I reply it is with the history of the Church in mind not just the last 50 years and in ordinary not extraordinary circumstance. There are many valid rites in the Church. I am familiar with only a few. The ones I’ve been involved with (the N.O. exculed) have very strict rubrics that must be followed. I use the word “abusive” generally not legally. So, from my point of view it abuses the tradition of the Mass (as I understand it) and that makes me sad. As far as others agreeing or not… Doesn’t matter to me. We don’t have to agree to believe.

 

[Graceful_Lamb]

In the Anglican Church, one does not have a consecrated Eucharist without a priest or Bishop doing the consecrating. A congregation can distribute communion without a priest, but the consecration has already been done.

We aren’t talking about the Anglican Church. We are talking about the Catholic Church.

 

[Oneofthewomen]

We aren’t talking about the Anglican Church. We are talking about the Catholic Church.

No, but his reply was to someone talking about the Lutheran & Anglican communities.

Why don’t people read?!

We have it, from a RC priest, that more than likely, what happened was in line with the rubrics.

It is a sad state of affairs when, given an answer they don’t like, by someone who KNOWS (a lot more that most of us) it is dismissed.

And we wonder why we have a vocations crisis in the US? Who would want to be a priest if you are going to be 2nd-guessed and accused of liturgical abuse by the “liturgy police” everyday?

 

[Reuben_J]

The Roman Missal has in Appendix II “Rite for the Blessing and Sprinkling of Water”:

“4. Afterward, taking the aspergillum, the Priest sprinkles himself and the ministers, then the clergy and people, moving through the church, if appropriate.”

So if someone who was not a Priest sprinkled some of the people, then the rubrics of the Roman Missal were not followed and so a liturgical abuse occurred.

In our cathedral this liturgical abuse occurred many times. The most recent one that I knew was last Easter vigil. Father was the only celebrant as the other priests and the archbishop had to celebrate in out-station parishes. Father was quite elderly and had a recent concussion after he suffered a nasty fall in the bathroom. He could still celebrate mass but sometimes his memory failed him, otherwise he was okay.

He had two EMHCs helping him to sprinkle holy water. Our cathedral has many rows of aisles back and front. It is a two tiers building with another section upstair. During Easter vigil we had to open the parish hall which was about hundred yards across the cathedral and also putting chairs along the corridors with big tv screens for another set of congregation because the cathedral was too full.

The service was long because of Baptism. It was either working Father to death in order to comply with the liturgical law or asking for help to sprinkle holy water. Father decided on the latter and God helped us for we had committed liturgical abuse.

 

[DeniseNY]

No, but his reply was to someone talking about the Lutheran & Anglican communities.

Why don’t people read?!

We have it, from a RC priest, that more than likely, what happened was in line with the rubrics.

It is a sad state of affairs when, given an answer they don’t like, by someone who KNOWS (a lot more that most of us) it is dismissed.

And we wonder why we have a vocations crisis in the US? Who would want to be a priest if you are going to be 2nd-guessed and accused of liturgical abuse by the “liturgy police” everyday?

I guess it’s easier to play at the priesthood on the internet than actually become one in real life.

 

[LightBound]

No, but his reply was to someone talking about the Lutheran & Anglican communities.

Why don’t people read?!

**We have it, from a RC priest, that more than likely, what happened was in line with the rubrics.

It is a sad state of affairs when, given an answer they don’t like, by someone who KNOWS (a lot more that most of us) it is dismissed.

And we wonder why we have a vocations crisis in the US? Who would want to be a priest if you are going to be 2nd-guessed and accused of liturgical abuse by the “liturgy police” everyday? **

 

[on_the_hill]

I guess it’s easier to play at the priesthood on the internet than actually become one in real life.

This is how I practice medicine, after all.

 

[SyroMalankara]

In the Anglican Church, one does not have a consecrated Eucharist without a priest or Bishop doing the consecrating. A congregation can distribute communion without a priest, but the consecration has already been done.

As GKC - an Anglican - on our forums likes to say, “montley” bunch. Deacons and laymen can in fact ‘consecrate’ in the Anglican Church:

sydneyanglicans.net/news/deacons/

Sydney resolute on deacons celebrating Lord’s Supper
15th Oct 2010
Jeremy Halcrow

That this Synod
(a) notes the advisory opinion of the Appellate Tribunal given in relation to questions posed by Dr Muriel Porter and 25 members of the General Synod, and
(b) affirms resolution 27/08 of this Synod, specifically the two statements, where Synod
(i) affirms again its conviction that lay and diaconal administration of the Lord’s Supper is consistent with the teaching of Scripture, and
(ii) affirms that the Lord’s Supper in this diocese may be administered by persons other than presbyters.

(Bishop Glenn Davies/Archdeacon Narelle Jarrett)

web.stpeters.org.au/presidency/laypresupdate.shtml
The Revd Dr John Davis, Vicar of St Peter’s Eastern Hill

The October session of the synod of the diocese of Sydney discussed and approved legislation to allow for certain lay people to be authorised to administer the service of Holy Communion. To put it another perhaps more familiar way, a person not ordained a priest was to be allowed to celebrate the mass. This created an extraordinary amount of interest and comment, certainly all around the Anglican world and in ecumenical circles.

Lutherans:
anglicanjournal.com/articles/bishops-respond-to-authorized-lay-ministry

anglicanjournal.com/articles/-elcic-approves-lay-communion-presiders-and-preachers

 

[SyroMalankara]

This is how I practice medicine, after all.

I practice law… from the armchair, of course.

 

[SyroMalankara]

I thought that lay people with the decline in the number of priests, are to involve much more in church life?

I agree! Doing the priest sacerdotal duty, or ‘encroaching’ (if you will) is not the way to be involved. Praying with the sick, visiting prisons, serving the poor and homeless, assisting the prayer groups, moderating Bible studies, helping pray the Hours, helping in hospital and orphages - Yes, Yes, Yes! Being jr. Priest or father-in-lieu? No.

 

[ProVobis]

I guess it’s easier to play at the priesthood on the internet than actually become one in real life.

If laity is to be involved, wouldn’t that include through the internet as well?

 

[Don_Ruggero]

The Roman Missal has in Appendix II “Rite for the Blessing and Sprinkling of Water”:

“4. Afterward, taking the aspergillum, the Priest sprinkles himself and the ministers, then the clergy and people, moving through the church, if appropriate.”

So if someone who was not a Priest sprinkled some of the people, then the rubrics of the Roman Missal were not followed and so a liturgical abuse occurred.

1. You have assumed that this occurred at the rite for the blessing and sprinkling of water. From he description, it seems much more likely that it happened in the context of the rite of blessing for students and teachers from the Book of Blessings…either incorporated into the Mass or not. In that case, recourse is had to the guidelines of the Book of Blessing, not to the GIRM
2. Not every variance of any rubric is a “liturgical abuse”. Such a mindset suggests/could suggest the need of pastoral accompaniment.

 

[GKC]

As GKC - an Anglican - on our forums likes to say, “montley” bunch. Deacons and laymen can in fact ‘consecrate’ in the Anglican Church:

sydneyanglicans.net/news/deacons/

Sydney resolute on deacons celebrating Lord’s Supper
15th Oct 2010
Jeremy Halcrow

That this Synod
(a) notes the advisory opinion of the Appellate Tribunal given in relation to questions posed by Dr Muriel Porter and 25 members of the General Synod, and
(b) affirms resolution 27/08 of this Synod, specifically the two statements, where Synod
(i) affirms again its conviction that lay and diaconal administration of the Lord’s Supper is consistent with the teaching of Scripture, and
(ii) affirms that the Lord’s Supper in this diocese may be administered by persons other than presbyters.

(Bishop Glenn Davies/Archdeacon Narelle Jarrett)

web.stpeters.org.au/presidency/laypresupdate.shtml
The Revd Dr John Davis, Vicar of St Peter’s Eastern Hill

The October session of the synod of the diocese of Sydney discussed and approved legislation to allow for certain lay people to be authorised to administer the service of Holy Communion. To put it another perhaps more familiar way, a person not ordained a priest was to be allowed to celebrate the mass. This created an extraordinary amount of interest and comment, certainly all around the Anglican world and in ecumenical circles.

Lutherans:
anglicanjournal.com/articles/bishops-respond-to-authorized-lay-ministry

anglicanjournal.com/articles/-elcic-approves-lay-communion-presiders-and-preachers

Ah, those wild and crazy Sydneyians. No idea how this now stands, but it was on and off for a number of years, starting back in 1999. As of the last I heard, in 2013, it was off again.

Anglicans are like a box of chocolates.Some more so than others.

 

[GKC]

I agree! Doing the priest sacerdotal duty, or ‘encroaching’ (if you will) is not the way to be involved. Praying with the sick, visiting prisons, serving the poor and homeless, assisting the prayer groups, moderating Bible studies, helping pray the Hours, helping in hospital and orphages - Yes, Yes, Yes! Being jr. Priest or father-in-lieu? No.

I like “father-in-lieu”.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

I agree! Doing the priest sacerdotal duty, or ‘encroaching’ (if you will) is not the way to be involved. Praying with the sick, visiting prisons, serving the poor and homeless, assisting the prayer groups, moderating Bible studies, helping pray the Hours, helping in hospital and orphages - Yes, Yes, Yes! Being jr. Priest or father-in-lieu? No.

Firstly, you grossly mischaracterize the involvement of the involvement of the laity in ministry. As a priest, I object to that.

Secondly, the determination of what is proper in the Latin Rite is not yours…not least of all because you are not a member of the Latin Rite. You owe obedience and submission to your hierarchs.

The decision of the other Churches is that of their hierarchies.