They ran out of the Host

[Peggy_in_Burien]

If this were true, then why allow priests to say Masses for themselves alone?

Of course, the priest offers the Holy Sacrifice to God for everyone’s benefit, whether you’re there or not, or whether you understand it or not, or whether you receive or not.

I was taught that the priest never says the Mass for himself, alone. He must always have at least a server to “hear” the Mass, even if it is a “private” Mass.

 

[TimothyH]

None of us is worthy to recieve the Bread of Angels.

If it is God’s will that we do not receive Jesus one day out of one thousand, then who are we to complain?

Perhaps there was someone in the Church in a state of sin and God was protecting that person by causing the sacristan to underestimate the number of hosts required? Maybe he was trying to teach someone that they don’t have a right to stand in God’s presence, let alone receive God into their own body.

I’m an altar server and one day Father just walked right past me. Forgot to serve me. It was God’s will.

If I really did what I was supposed to do with the graces from Eucharists I have already recieved then I would have been a saint one hundred times over by now. Half the time we receive the Eucharist and can’t even get out of the parking lot after Mass before we sin.

It’s God’s will. Forget it. The sacristan probably got chewed out big time by the priest anyway so don’t worry about it.

-Tim-

 

[Deo_Gratias42]

I was taught that the priest never says the Mass for himself, alone. He must always have at least a server to “hear” the Mass, even if it is a “private” Mass.

This isn’t true. Priests say Mass alone without a server quite often.

 

[ConstantineTG]

If this were true, then why allow priests to say Masses for themselves alone?

Of course, the priest offers the Holy Sacrifice to God for everyone’s benefit, whether you’re there or not, or whether you understand it or not, or whether you receive or not.

If this is true then why are we obligated to attend once a week?

 

[paperwight66]

For our own sakes, to keep us ‘in touch’, as it were.

 

[ProVobis]

If this is true then why are we obligated to attend once a week?

Seems irrelevant to the point. Are only Masses which you attend useful or beneficial? Are only Masses in which you receive important to the sacrament? There are Masses (and DL) going on all over the world at the same time. I would hope they all please God in the best way possible.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Seems irrelevant to the point. Are only Masses which you attend useful or beneficial? Are only Masses in which you receive important to the sacrament? There are Masses (and DL) going on all over the world at the same time. I would hope they all please God in the best way possible.

I was just arguing to your point earlier. You said people don’t need to be there for the Mass to affect us. So why be there at all? A priest can say Mass in private on a Sunday and we get the same benefit whether we’re in church or at home. That was your earlier point, right?