Top 5 Reasons People Think You Aren't Catholic

[ByzCathCantor]

Where is this codified? There is no such requirement within the Byzantine Ruthenian recension to my knowledge.

There aren’t many married priests within Metro Pittsburgh anyway.

It is absolutely the case in the Byzantine-Ruthenian Church that a priest will not celebrate the Divine Liturgy alone. The work of the people cannot be conducted by a single person. Any priest in the Metropolia would confirm that fact. The sacrifice is offered on behalf of the people (plural) present, and it would not be proper for a priest to offer the Holy Oblation on behalf of himself. Of course, in the case of a married priest, the presence of his wife alone in the congregation would be sufficient. Who would “approach with the fear of God and with faith” if it were the priest alone?

If I show up in Church to serve as Cantor in my current parish for a weekday DL, my priest will routinely joke that “we now have a quorum”, meaning that even if the family requesting the privately intended Liturgy does not show up, we can proceed as he has a congregation of at least one besides himself.

As for rules applicable to married priests, when we start ordaining them again, they’ll write them down, but there is long-standing tradition in this regard. The few married priests we do have would all confirm the veracity and applicability of the norms of Eucharistic abstinence followed by married priests in anticipation of celebration of the Divine Liturgy. I am a rarity for my generation in that I grew up in a parish with a married priest (with children), in the Eparchy of Passaic. As I considered a priestly vocation as a young man, this priest did advise me fully and honestly about the challenges and sacrifices of the married priesthood, which of course was closed at that point, but I was instructed nonetheless.

 

[ByzCathCantor]

It is “codified”, if you will, throughout the text of the Divine Liturgy itself.

“Come let us worship and bow before Christ …”

“Let us who mystically represent the Cherubim …”

“That we may receive the King of all …”

“Let us stand aright; let us stand in awe; let us be attentive to offer the holy Anaphora in peace.”

“We offer to You, Yours of Your own, in behalf of all and for all.”

 

[Peter_J]

It is absolutely the case in the Byzantine-Ruthenian Church that a priest will not celebrate the Divine Liturgy alone.

Does anyone happen to know whether this is also a rule in the Latin Catholic Church? It seems like I have heard that it is – or at least was. (On the other hand, I also seem to recall that Father Elijah, in the novel of the same name, sometimes has a mass all by himself. But then again, it’s been a while since I read it.)

 

[Phillip_Rolfes]

Does anyone happen to know whether this is also a rule in the Latin Catholic Church? It seems like I have heard that it is – or at least was. (On the other hand, I also seem to recall that Father Elijah, in the novel of the same name, sometimes has a mass all by himself. But then again, it’s been a while since I read it.)

With the pre-Paul VI Mass (aka “Extraordinary Form,” “Traditional Latin Mass,” “Tridintine Mass,” or [my least favorite title] the “Mass of the Ages”) it was possible for the priest to celebrate “private” Masses; i.e. Mass without a congregation. This was in part due to a lack/loss of the concept of concelebration (restored by the Franciscans) coupled with the obligation that priests celebrate Mass daily. Interestingly this same attitude led to the innovation of “side-altars.” The side-altar was set up so that many priests could celebrate Mass in the same church at the same time. So while you might have the “main” Mass taking place on the main/high altar, there would also be multiple Masses being celebrated on various side-altars.

Anyhoo, the misunderstanding of a “private” Mass is one of the liturgical abuses that Paul VI was attempting to correct with his revised Missal. The current form of the Roman Rite is deliberately not conducive to “private” celebrations.

 

[mardukm]

Dear brother Phillip,

With the pre-Paul VI Mass (aka “Extraordinary Form,” “Traditional Latin Mass,” “Tridintine Mass,” or [my least favorite title] the “Mass of the Ages”) it was possible for the priest to celebrate “private” Masses; i.e. Mass without a congregation. This was in part due to a lack/loss of the concept of concelebration (restored by the Franciscans) coupled with the obligation that priests celebrate Mass daily. Interestingly this same attitude led to the innovation of “side-altars.” The side-altar was set up so that many priests could celebrate Mass in the same church at the same time. So while you might have the “main” Mass taking place on the main/high altar, there would also be multiple Masses being celebrated on various side-altars.

Anyhoo, the misunderstanding of a “private” Mass is one of the liturgical abuses that Paul VI was attempting to correct with his revised Missal. The current form of the Roman Rite is deliberately not conducive to “private” celebrations.

Private Masses could be done with the approval of the bishop according to an ancient Trullan Canon.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[mardukm]

As for rules applicable to married priests, when we start ordaining them again, they’ll write them down, but there is long-standing tradition in this regard. The few married priests we do have would all confirm the veracity and applicability of the norms of Eucharistic abstinence followed by married priests in anticipation of celebration of the Divine Liturgy. I am a rarity for my generation in that I grew up in a parish with a married priest (with children), in the Eparchy of Passaic. As I considered a priestly vocation as a young man, this priest did advise me fully and honestly about the challenges and sacrifices of the married priesthood, which of course was closed at that point, but I was instructed nonetheless.

The ancient rule of abstinence is Canon 13 of Trullo, which is explicitly based on a more ancient Latin Canon of Carthage (401 A.D., IIRC).

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[ByzCathCantor]

The ancient rule of abstinence is Canon 13 of Trullo, which is explicitly based on a more ancient Latin Canon of Carthage (401 A.D., IIRC).

Blessings,
Marduk

Indeed - thanks for this most useful cite and post! Blessings to you, brother!

 

[Peter_J]

With the pre-Paul VI Mass (aka “Extraordinary Form,” “Traditional Latin Mass,” “Tridintine Mass,” or [my least favorite title] the “Mass of the Ages”) it was possible for the priest to celebrate “private” Masses; i.e. Mass without a congregation. This was in part due to a lack/loss of the concept of concelebration (restored by the Franciscans) coupled with the obligation that priests celebrate Mass daily. Interestingly this same attitude led to the innovation of “side-altars.” The side-altar was set up so that many priests could celebrate Mass in the same church at the same time. So while you might have the “main” Mass taking place on the main/high altar, there would also be multiple Masses being celebrated on various side-altars.

Anyhoo, the misunderstanding of a “private” Mass is one of the liturgical abuses that Paul VI was attempting to correct with his revised Missal. The current form of the Roman Rite is deliberately not conducive to “private” celebrations.

Thanks, that does help.

 

[aragonjohn1]

1. I’m too evangelisticish
2. I “know” too much
3. I’m a little quirky
4. I am way too “kind” to be catholic
5. I’m pro-life and I “shouldn’t” be

 

[5Loaves]

I know, however, that in the East, the traditional eucharistic fast involves abstaining from marital relations the evening beforehand (as well as food), for both clergy and laity.

This is what I was taught and have always understood.
I know we’ve kind of joked about Wikipedia, but I have very often found it reliable on topics related to us in the East, Catholic and Orthodox. The entry there “Fasting → Eastern Orthodoxy and Greek-Catholicism” says

Fasting during these times includes abstention from:

• animal products, all dairy products, and—with the exception of some specific days—fish,

• oil (interpreted variously as abstention from olive oil only, or as abstention from all cooking oils in general), and

• red wine (which is often interpreted as including all wine or alcoholic beverages)

• sexual activity (where fasting is pre-communion)

[24]

 

[ByzCathCantor]

This is what I was taught and have always understood.
I know we’ve kind of joked about Wikipedia, but I have very often found it reliable on topics related to us in the East, Catholic and Orthodox. The entry there “Fasting → Eastern Orthodoxy and Greek-Catholicism” says

… yes, and in strict Orthodox tradition, these are the norms for all, including the faithful laity!

 

[Cavaradossi]

… yes, and in strict Orthodox tradition, these are the norms for all, including the faithful laity!

In cradle tradition… not so much.

Nevertheless, the clergy certainly know these rules and abide by them, even if the faithful are not always so well educated.

 

[Jegudiel]

It is absolutely the case in the Byzantine-Ruthenian Church that a priest will not celebrate the Divine Liturgy alone. The work of the people cannot be conducted by a single person. Any priest in the Metropolia would confirm that fact. The sacrifice is offered on behalf of the people (plural) present, and it would not be proper for a priest to offer the Holy Oblation on behalf of himself. Of course, in the case of a married priest, the presence of his wife alone in the congregation would be sufficient. Who would “approach with the fear of God and with faith” if it were the priest alone?

Where is this documented?

If I show up in Church to serve as Cantor in my current parish for a weekday DL, my priest will routinely joke that “we now have a quorum”, meaning that even if the family requesting the privately intended Liturgy does not show up, we can proceed as he has a congregation of at least one besides himself.

As for rules applicable to married priests, when we start ordaining them again, they’ll write them down, but there is long-standing tradition in this regard. The few married priests we do have would all confirm the veracity and applicability of the norms of Eucharistic abstinence followed by married priests in anticipation of celebration of the Divine Liturgy. I am a rarity for my generation in that I grew up in a parish with a married priest (with children), in the Eparchy of Passaic. As I considered a priestly vocation as a young man, this priest did advise me fully and honestly about the challenges and sacrifices of the married priesthood, which of course was closed at that point, but I was instructed nonetheless.

 

[Jegudiel]

Re: Top 5 Reasons People Think You Aren’t Catholic

1. I’m too evangelisticish
2. I “know” too much
3. I’m a little quirky
4. I am way too “kind” to be catholic
5. I’m pro-life and I “shouldn’t” be

??

 

[Halyna]

OH NO, these responses are so technical, philosophical,theosophical. It comes down to 1 thing: Just plain IGNORANCE. You wanted 5 reasons, here they are:

1. Ignorance
2. unknowing
3. unaware
4. uninformed
5. untaught…these are all in Roget’s Thesaurus, for just plain ignorance.
   I volunteered to do charity work at a local Roman Catholic church. First, I could understand if the priest doesn’t know me, that I should produce my baptismal certificate. But I had to show him my confirmation and 1st Communion. I had to go through rigorous “screening”. It took me 9 months to be ‘approved’ and once I was finally ‘approved’ I was stalled for another 4 months. In other words, they’d take me if no one else would volunteer.
   When the RC changed certain parts of their terminology in the current mass (I find it almost humorous that the Nicene Creed, except for ‘consubstantial’ is exactly the same Nicene Creed as Eastern Rites profess. This priest, though I have a ton of respect for him, especially his catholic enthusiasm, has absolutely no knowledge of the church as one-holy-catholic-and-apostolic. They have no clue about the UNIVERSAL church.
   I went to a Roman Catholic high school. Day 1 the principal came to class (I was put in 1st row, 1st seat where as everyone else was in alphabetical order) and she called on me (a Franciscan nun), and told me “I’ll be watching you”. For what? I just got there? The other Ukrainian Catholic from my school was humiliated (do you know how that feels st day in a new school?) because he crossed himself ‘wrong’. “What is wrong with you boy, you are in 9th grade and you dont even know how to cross yourself?”. Sorry to tell you this Sr. E…but actually YOU are crossing yourself wrong - and I can prove it.
   However, all this changed when a son of the parish became an Eastern Rite priest and me and this other person I mentioned had to go through each home room and explain our rite, especially the communion. Now, this was not for the purpose of education, but more so the embarrassment, as this new priest was very well known in the parish.
   Eastern Rite Catholics have learned how to defend their faith, how to take the humiliation at the hands of (not heathens, not pagans) but brother Catholics.
   The Roman Catholic church needs so badly a seminar in the UNIVERSAL church.
   (off the cuff thought - African Roman Catholics do not have a mass anything like the American Roman Catholics, so how do they feel about that? )
   Now PLEASE, I am not bashing, but they truly need to LEARN what a universal catholic church really means.
   I have been studying Sr.Faustina’s diary and there are many reprobations concerning “spiritual pride”. And from what she says, one of the most deadly sins as it is hippocritical and for self esteem and not for God’s will.

 

[Peter_J]

It really varies. I mean, in some situations there are just no excuses, but in some situations there are, whether they be technical, philosophical, or whatever.

Halyna, if you don’t mind my asking, when was this? (I understand, of course, if you don’t wish to answer that, since many don’t like to reveal their age. )