The Holy Eucharist & the Abomination of Desolation

[Fauken]

It’s understandable over the centuries, since the Church was still growing, not everybody was able to go to Mass, thus no Holy Communion. Also, it’s understandable that those who were not worthy could not partake in Holy Communion.

That’s not what @Tis_Bearself is talking about. I suggest you read this by Pope Pius X:

Decree on Frequent & Daily Reception of Holy Communion | EWTN

Mind you, this came out about almost 120 years ago, which is relatively recent.

 

[YooHyuk]

This is a far fetched conclusion.

Where did I conclude this?

I do not know the answers. Which is why I am asking my fellow Catholic brothers & sisters.

You are starting to sound like a fundamentalist Protestant or Jehovah’s Witness. Not good.

Why? Because I’m asking questions about certain verses in the Bible? Is it wrong for me to ask? Would you also accuse the disciples of Christ when they asked of the end times of being fundamentalist Protestants or Jehovah’s Witnesses?

‘As He was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things happen, and what will be the sign of Your coming , and of the end of the age ?”’ - Matthew 24:3

 

[Tis_Bearself]

That’s not what @Tis_Bearself is talking about. I suggest you read this by Pope Pius X:

Decree on Frequent & Daily Reception of Holy Communion | EWTN

Mind you, this came out about almost 120 years ago, which is relatively recent.

Fauken is correct, the regular reception of Holy Communion, even by those who regularly confessed, tried to lead holy or even saintly lives, etc. is a relatively recent development. YooHyuk, I would suggest you familiarize yourself better with the history of the Church regarding Holy Communion.

As for the Church being “still growing”, it’s “still growing” today and there are still MANY areas in the world where they don’t have a priest able to say Mass every Sunday because either the government has suppressed the Church, or there are not enough priests to serve every little remote area on a regular basis.
And this has happened periodically in all kinds of places throughout every century.
During large parts of the 20th century we had people behind the Iron Curtain and even in Mexico who couldn’t just be going to Mass and receiving Communion when they felt like it. In Communist countries a few decades ago, people could get arrested for just having a Mary statue in their house, let alone go to Mass.

 

[YooHyuk]

That’s not what @Tis_Bearself is talking about. I suggest you read this by Pope Pius X:

Decree on Frequent & Daily Reception of Holy Communion | EWTN

Mind you, this came out about almost 120 years ago, which is relatively recent.

Thanks for the link!

Fauken is correct, the regular reception of Holy Communion, even by those who regularly confessed, tried to lead holy or even saintly lives, etc. is a relatively recent development.

This I did not know. In the Lord’s Prayer it does say “give us this day our daily bread” and I assumed in the past they have always offered Holy Communion “daily” to the laity who were not in mortal sin and whom could partake. Thanks, I will read more about it.

 

[VanitasVanitatum]

Panchamama was a one time event.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Here’s a book you might find helpful - a lot of it is available for free on Google Books. If you search for the word “Communion” in the book it will take you to parts about the history of Holy Communion in the Church.

One thing it discusses is how from the 10th to the 16th century, if you received Holy Communion six or seven times a year, you were considered to be a “frequent” communicant. A lot of people would just receive Spiritual Communion because receiving actual physical Communion required them to not only have made a good confession, but also to have gotten a special permission from their spiritual director. A layperson probably wouldn’t have gotten permission to receive more than a few times a year, unless they were some kind of a living saint, and even saintly people probably would have avoided receiving Communion very often because they would have thought they were not worthy. You can also be sure that many people had enough trouble getting approved to receive just once or twice a year.

Roman Catholic Worship: Trent to Today

 

[MagdalenaRita]

I’m not sure about chiming in here or not but I wonder if the question the OP is wondering is, has there ever been a time in history when the Eucharistic was not available to most of the world in such a way as what is happening right now?

My local priest and many other priests, say no. Over and over we are hearing this phrase from priests and bishops, “these are unprecedented times”. I just heard this phrase in a video from our bishop, so I don’t think the OP question is such a bad question. As he said, the apostles asked Jesus the same thing. There is nothing wrong with wondering about the end times.

No one knows the day or the hour but that doesn’t mean we can’t wonder or prepare our hearts. We should always be preparing our hearts for our own end times and the end times of the whole world.

 

[YooHyuk]

Panchamama was a one time event.

Good point! If it were the abomination of desolation it would remain there till the end.

there shall be in the temple the abomination of desolation : and the desolation shall continue even to the consummation - Daniel 9:27

 

[YooHyuk]

Here’s a book you might find helpful - a lot of it is available for free on Google Books. If you search for the word “Communion” in the book it will take you to parts about the history of Holy Communion in the Church.

One thing it discusses is how from the 10th to the 16th century, if you received Holy Communion six or seven times a year, you were considered to be a “frequent” communicant. A lot of people would just receive Spiritual Communion because receiving actual physical Communion required them to not only have made a good confession, but also to have gotten a special permission from their spiritual director. A layperson probably wouldn’t have gotten permission to receive more than a few times a year, unless they were some kind of a living saint, and even saintly people probably would have avoided receiving Communion very often because they would have thought they were not worthy. You can also be sure that many people had enough trouble getting approved to receive just once or twice a year.

Thanks! It sounds helpful!

 

[YooHyuk]

I’m not sure about chiming in here or not but I wonder if the question the OP is wondering is, has there ever been a time in history when the Eucharistic was not available to most of the world in such a way as what is happening right now?

Yes this is what I was wondering and if maybe it was related to some scripture in the Bible. I don’t know the answer so that’s why I asked through my original post.

 

[Mishakel]

No one knows the day or the hour but that doesn’t mean we can’t wonder or prepare our hearts. We should always be preparing our hearts for our own end times and the end times of the whole world.

It’s true nobody knows the day or hour but Jesus did say the worldly signs will point to the end being near.

The OP’s question concerning Daniel and unable to partake of mass doesn’t fit with what most theologians believe.

When in Daniel 9:27 it says “He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering” it’s referring to a specific person in the previous verse 26 “And the people of the prince who is to come
Shall destroy the city and the sanctuary.”

This current global pestilence isn’t a person nor is the sacrifice and offering a reference to the mass.

 

[MagdalenaRita]

Yes this is what I was wondering and if maybe it was related to some scripture in the Bible. I don’t know the answer so that’s why I asked through my original post.

So, from what I have heard priests and bishops say, there has never been a time when “public” Masses were no longer available and churches locked to the extent that they are. Ours are all locked here in our diocese. Yes, we can watch Mass online as private Masses are still happening and priests, thankfully, are still offering the Mass for us, but since online Mass does not fill one’s Sunday obligation, and it is not the same as being there, this should definitely be a time of concern and reflection.

I don’t know if there is a Bible verse that applies here or not. As @Mishakel said, it doesn’t seem that Daniel 9:27 applies. I understand that Bible verse to be referring to animal sacrifices.

The OP’s question concerning Daniel and unable to partake of mass doesn’t fit with what most theologians believe.

 

[YooHyuk]

This current global pestilence isn’t a person nor is the sacrifice and offering a reference to the mass.

Isn’t the ‘continual sacrifice’ referring to the Holy Eucharist? (not the Mass)

 

[YooHyuk]

So, from what I have heard priests and bishops say, there has never been a time when “public” Masses were no longer available and churches locked to the extent that they are. Ours are all locked here in our diocese. Yes, we can watch Mass online as private Masses are still happening and priests, thankfully, are still offering the Mass for us, but since online Mass does not fill one’s Sunday obligation, and it is not the same as being there, this should definitely be a time of concern and reflection.

Yeah it seems unprecedented.

 

[Lion_IRC]

MagdalenaRita:

I’m not sure about chiming in here or not but I wonder if the question the OP is wondering is, has there ever been a time in history when the Eucharistic was not available to most of the world in such a way as what is happening right now?

Yes this is what I was wondering and if maybe it was related to some scripture in the Bible. I don’t know the answer so that’s why I asked through my original post.

I’m glad you brought up this Op question. Thank you. Very interesting topic.

I’m perplexed by all the quibbling over whether or not Masses have technically been cancelled.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Because the Mass doesn’t somehow cease to exist or lose all value due to people not being at it in person other than the priest, and maybe one server or lector.

There have been times in history when Mass was literally totally cancelled, as in priests weren’t even permitted to say it. This is nothing like that.

 

[Fauken]

Because the Mass doesn’t somehow cease to exist or lose all value due to people not being at it in person other than the priest, and maybe one server or lector.

There have been times in history when Mass was literally totally cancelled, as in priests weren’t even permitted to say it. This is nothing like that.

Not to mention horribly confusing and makes things sound worse than it is.

 

[ioannes_pius]

Pachamama is a goddess revered by the indigenous people of the Andes.

The Andes and the Amazon are different regions.

 

[MagdalenaRita]

The Andes and the Amazon are different regions.

I think he is saying, correctly, that pachamama is found in both regions, since the regions are close to each other, Amazon meets the Andes.

Because the Mass doesn’t somehow cease to exist or lose all value due to people not being at it in person other than the priest, and maybe one server or lector.

I agree the Mass does not cease to lose it’s value because we are not there. It can be a means of conversion and spiritual growth and we can receive graces but it is not the same as being there in person. I have heard priests say when this is all over, they hope people remember the importance of attendance at Mass and not staying home to watch online.

Not to mention horribly confusing and makes things sound worse than it is.

Sometimes the best way to find out something is to ask.

 

[YooHyuk]

Here is an article that goes through various evidences:

I didn’t see any evidence given that the idol which is referred to as “Pachamama”, even the Pope referred to it as such, is actually a representation of Our Blessed Virgin Mary. Out of all the Blessed Virgin Mary statues of the Catholic Church I have never seen one which Our Blessed Virgin Mary was represented with no clothes. Seems disrespectful.
During the ‘ritual’, it did not seem like they were praying the Rosary.

I don’t see any evidence of this “Pachamama” being Our Blessed Virgin Mary. Regardless if they claim that it is.