Visiting other Catholic Churches

[MomblessedX3]

I was recently on vacation and attended 2 different Catholic Churches. The first Church was very similar to my own Catholic Mass and used wine at the alter but administered grape juice in the cup. I found this to be very odd. My kids really liked it but it was disturbing to me.

The second Chruch was my hometown church that has changed immensely since I grew up there. They don’t kneel. The only time they kneeled was after communion. Is this common? In addition the tabernacle was no where to be seen. I thought they needed to be on or near the alter. Is this also common?

I would like to know of others traveling experiences. I always believed that Catholic Churches were supposed to ‘be the same’ so that visitors know what to expect.

Your thoughts and experiences are appreciated.

 

[SuscipeMeDomine]

Are you sure that first church was Catholic? I have never heard of giving grape juice in a Catholic church. You can’t consecrate grape juice so all it would be is just plain old grape juice…a snack to go along with the Eucharist. I’m not one to scream “liturgical abuse” every time I turn around, but that would definitely lead me to talk with the priest after Mass and follow up with the bishop.

Standing during the Eucharistic prayer is not approved but it happens. As far as the tabernacle, if you search the forum you’ll see that it’s a topic that comes up regularly. Many newer or renovated churches have moved the tabernacle to a chapel rather than have it at the altar.

 

[NewUlm1976_2000]

Are you sure that first church was Catholic? I have never heard of giving grape juice in a Catholic church. You can’t consecrate grape juice so all it would be is just plain old grape juice…a snack to go along with the Eucharist. I’m not one to scream “liturgical abuse” every time I turn around, but that would definitely lead me to talk with the priest after Mass and follow up with the bishop.

Standing during the Eucharistic prayer is not approved but it happens. As far as the tabernacle, if you search the forum you’ll see that it’s a topic that comes up regularly. Many newer or renovated churches have moved the tabernacle to a chapel rather than have it at the altar.

I have heard that some dioceses stand all the time (west coast?). Otherwise it is quite common to stand if you are in a temporary location for mass (e.g. gym). Otherwise kneelers are very common in the upper Midwest. The duration of kneeling does vary a bit from parish to parish or even mass to mass.

Tabernacle locations also vary in location from church to church. The common locations I have seen are either in the front center, front left, front right, or in a special side prayer room open to all.

 

[JenDid]

I have heard that some dioceses stand all the time (west coast?). Otherwise it is quite common to stand if you are in a temporary location for mass (e.g. gym). Otherwise kneelers are very common in the upper Midwest. The duration of kneeling does vary a bit from parish to parish or even mass to mass.

Tabernacle locations also vary in location from church to church. The common locations I have seen are either in the front center, front left, front right, or in a special side prayer room open to all.

Here is Western Washington, we have been instructed by our archbishop to kneel during the Eucharistic prayer, but following the Agnus Dei we are to remain standing. People are “allowed” to do whatever they wish after communion–stand, sit or kneel. When I sent an email to the archdiocese asking about why we were not allowed to kneel following the Agnus Dei, I was told that was what was directed in the GRIM (hope I got all those initials right–they seem apt under the circumstances). Although people at my church were unhappy about it, they have obeyed the bishop’s directive. But visiting the east coast last month, we went to a church where the congregation still kneels at the usual times. I thought the bishops were trying to bring more consistancy to the liturgy. I’m curious to hear what others are experiencing.

 

[japhy]

The first Church … used wine at the alter but administered grape juice in the cup.

Are you sure of that? The liquid in the chalice you drank from tasted like simply juice and not actually wine? If that is the case, and they didn’t use wine for the other chalices, then what was in those chalices was just juice and it was not consecrated. That’s a serious abuse if it’s true.

They don’t kneel. … In addition the tabernacle was no where to be seen.

In a Roman/Latin Rite parish, if there are kneelers (and it sounds like there were, since they knelt later), the people should kneel during the Eucharistic Prayer. Also, depending on what the Bishop says, they might also be supposed to kneel after the Agnus Dei, the Lamb of God sung right before Communion; some Bishops say to remain standing, which the GIRM – one of the liturgical documents of the Church – gives them the right to decide on.

As for the “missing tabernacle”, those became more and more common over the past few decades (particularly in the US). Tabernacles were removed from sanctuaries and put off to the side (or in their own chapel) for a number of reasons. Following the Second Vatican Council, it was decided that a (non-empty) tabernacle (that is, containing already-consecrated hosts, the Blessed Sacrament) on the altar detracted from the moment of the Mass – the consecration – when Jesus first becomes present in the eucharistic species on the altar. This was a preference, not a mandate… this was also around the time that priests were standing on the opposite side of the altar as the faithful (also not a mandate!).

However, moving tabernacles off of altars was also frequently accompanied by moving them away from altars and even outside of the sanctuary! It can be a rather disconcerting feeling to enter a church and not readily see the “sanctuary lamp” denoting the location of the tabernacle and the Blessed Sacrament therein.

Blessed Sacrament chapels are excellent, but sometimes they are so far from the sanctuary (or even the nave, the main body of the church building) that the tabernacle seems remote or even hidden.

More recently, though, the Church has been reaffirming the traditional placement of the tabernacle in the sanctuary behind the altar. Pope Benedict wrote this in his apostolic exhortation Sacramentum Caritatis (article 69) last year:In considering the importance of eucharistic reservation and adoration, and reverence for the sacrament of Christ’s sacrifice, the Synod of Bishops also discussed the question of the proper placement of the tabernacle in our churches. The correct positioning of the tabernacle contributes to the recognition of Christ’s real presence in the Blessed Sacrament. Therefore, the place where the eucharistic species are reserved, marked by a sanctuary lamp, should be readily visible to everyone entering the church. It is therefore necessary to take into account the building’s architecture: in churches which do not have a Blessed Sacrament chapel, and where the high altar with its tabernacle is still in place, it is appropriate to continue to use this structure for the reservation and adoration of the Eucharist, taking care not to place the celebrant’s chair in front of it. In new churches, it is good to position the Blessed Sacrament chapel close to the sanctuary; where this is not possible, it is preferable to locate the tabernacle in the sanctuary, in a sufficiently elevated place, at the centre of the apse area, or in another place where it will be equally conspicuous. Attention to these considerations will lend dignity to the tabernacle, which must always be cared for, also from an artistic standpoint. Obviously it is necessary to follow the provisions of the General Instruction of the Roman Missal in this regard. In any event, final judgment on these matters belongs to the Diocesan Bishop.

Here is a further sampling of things the Church has said over the past few decades concerning the tabernacle’s location:

2004: “’[T]he Most Holy Sacrament is to be reserved in a tabernacle in a part of the church that is noble, prominent, readily visible, and adorned in a dignified manner’ and furthermore ‘suitable for prayer’ by reason of the quietness of the location, the space available in front of the tabernacle, and also the supply of benches or seats and kneelers.” (Redemptionis Sacramentum, n. 130)

2002: “In accordance with the structure of each church and legitimate local customs, the Most Blessed Sacrament should be reserved in a tabernacle in a part of the church that is truly noble, prominent, readily visible, beautifully decorated, and suitable for prayer. … It is more in keeping with the meaning of the sign that the tabernacle in which the Most Holy Eucharist is reserved not be on an altar on which Mass is celebrated. Consequently, it is preferable that the tabernacle be located, according to the judgment of the Diocesan Bishop, a) either in the sanctuary, apart from the altar of celebration, in a form and place more appropriate, not excluding on an old altar no longer used for celebration; b) or even in some chapel suitable for the faithful’s private adoration and prayer and which is organically connected to the church and readily visible to the Christian faithful.” (GIRM nn. 314-315)

1999: “… the loving concern that the tabernacle - in which the Eucharist is kept - be placed on an altar or in a part of the church that is clearly visible, truly noble and duly adorned, so that it is a centre of attraction for every heart in love with Christ.” (“Safeguarding the Bread of life come down from heaven”, n. 2)

1980: “The tabernacle in which the Eucharist is kept can be located on an altar, or away from it, in a spot in the church which is very prominent, truly noble, and duly decorated, or in a chapel suitable for private prayer and for adoration by the faithful.” (Inaestimabile Donum, n. 24)

1967: "Where the eucharist is allowed to be reserved in keeping with the provisions of law, only one altar or location in the same church may be the permanent, that is, regular place of reservation. As a general rule, therefore, there is to be but one tabernacle in each church and it is to be solid and absolutely secure.

Chapel of Reservation: The place in a church or oratory where the eucharist is reserved in a tabernacle should be truly a place of honor. It should also be suited to private prayer so that the faithful may readily and to their advantage continue to honor the Lord in this sacrament by private worship. Therefore, it is recommended that as far as possible the tabernacle be placed in a chapel set apart from the main body of the church, especially in churches where there frequently are marriages and funerals and in places that, because of their artistic or historical treasures, are visited by many people.

Tabernacle in the Middle of Altar or in Another Part of the Church: ‘The eucharist is to be reserved in a solid and secure tabernacle, placed in the middle of the main altar or on a minor, but truly worthy altar, or else, depending on lawful custom and in particular cases approved by the local Ordinary, in another, special, and properly adorned part of the church. It is also lawful to celebrate Mass facing the people even on an altar where there is a small but becoming tabernacle.’

Tabernacle on an Altar Where Mass is Celebrated With a Congregation: … Consequently, on the grounds of the sign value, it is more in keeping with the nature of the celebration that, through reservation of the sacrament in the tabernacle, Christ not be present eucharistically from the beginning on the altar where Mass is celebrated. That presence is the effect of the consecration and should appear as such.

The Tabernacle in the Construction of New Churches and in the Remodeling of Existing Churches and Altars: It is fitting that the principles stated in nos. 52 and 54 be taken into account in the building of new churches." (Eucharisticum Mysterium, nn. 52-56)

1964: "The Eucharist is to be reserved in a solid and secure tabernacle, placed in the middle of the main altar or on a minor, but truly worthy altar, or, in accord with lawful custom and in particular cases approved by the local Ordinary, also in another, special, and properly adorned part of the church. " (Inter Oecumenici, n. 95)

1963: “[T]here is to be an early revision of the canons and ecclesiastical statutes which govern the provision of material things involved in sacred worship. These laws refer especially to the worthy and well planned construction of sacred buildings, the shape and construction of altars, the nobility, placing, and safety of the eucharistic tabernacle… Laws which seem less suited to the reformed liturgy are to be brought into harmony with it, or else abolished; and any which are helpful are to be retained if already in use, or introduced where they are lacking.” (Sacrosanctum Concilium, n. 128 - Vatican II Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy)

I would like to know of others traveling experiences. I always believed that Catholic Churches were supposed to ‘be the same’ so that visitors know what to expect.

Would that the celebration of Mass were not so variant from church to church (or from Mass time to Mass time)!

 

[japhy]

Here is Western Washington … following the Agnus Dei we are to remain standing. … When I sent an email to the archdiocese asking about why we were not allowed to kneel following the Agnus Dei, I was told that was what was directed in the GRIM (hope I got all those initials right–they seem apt under the circumstances).

GIRM 43 says that in the US, “The faithful kneel after the Agnus Dei unless the Diocesan Bishop determines otherwise.” So yes, your Bishop has the authority to decide whether you adopt some posture other than kneeling after the Agnus Dei.

 

[JenDid]

GIRM 43 says that in the US, “The faithful kneel after the Agnus Dei unless the Diocesan Bishop determines otherwise.” So yes, your Bishop has the authority to decide whether you adopt some posture other than kneeling after the Agnus Dei.

Thanks for the correction about the GIRM. I don’t understand why a bishop would make that decision. If they want people to become more aware of Jesus’ Real Presence in the Mass, one would think they would want them to maintain that posture once the Real Presence has been confected. Does anyone know what the justification is for opting out of kneeling?

 

[Paul2274]

Code of Canon Law states:

ARTICLE 3: THE RITES AND CEREMONIES OF THE EUCHARISTIC CELEBRATION

Can. 924 §1 The most holy Sacrifice of the Eucharist must be celebrated in bread, and in wine to which a small quantity of water is to be added.

§2 The bread must be wheaten only, and recently made, so that there is no danger of corruption.

§3 The wine must be natural, made from grapes of the vine, and not corrupt.

Can. 938 §1 The blessed Eucharist is to be reserved habitually in only one tabernacle of a church or oratory.

§2 The tabernacle in which the blessed Eucharist is reserved should be sited in a distinguished place in the church or oratory, a place which is conspicuous, suitably adorned and conducive to prayer.

§3 The tabernacle in which the blessed Eucharist is habitually reserved is to be immovable, made of solid and non-transparent material, and so locked as to give the greatest security against any danger of profanation.

Hope this helps.

Paul

 

[puzzleannie]

I was recently on vacation and attended 2 different Catholic Churches. The first Church was very similar to my own Catholic Mass and used wine at the alter but administered grape juice in the cup. I found this to be very odd. My kids really liked it but it was disturbing to me.
.

not a Catholic Church, best check the bulletin. If you made a mistake, no harm and no sin, but it is often hard to determine if a church is really Catholic while travelling, as some protestant churches are also named for saints, and the form of worship is similar to our Mass.

kneeling practice seems to vary by diocese. It is mandated in the US to kneel from the end of the Sanctus to the great Amen (before the Our Father), however some bishops have instructed their people to ignore this, why I can’t say. The tabernacle can be placed in any worthy location which is plainly visible and accessible.

I see all kinds of nonsense while travelling, a list would be too depressing.

 

[japhy]

I don’t understand why a bishop would make that decision. … Does anyone know what the justification is for opting out of kneeling?

Only your Bishop knows why he chose to change the posture. I don’t think I’ve seen an explanation before. Here is a guess:

The priest is standing at the altar when he consumes the sacrifice. EMHCs (extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion) enter the sanctuary and stand to receive Communion from the priest. If the rest of the people are kneeling at this time, then there’s not a uniform posture among the lay faithful (nor among all the people there, clergy included). By having the people stand, everyone’s standing. And since (by and large) American Catholics receive Holy Communion standing, and there seems to be some bit of a breakdown between the differences between the clergy and the laity, this way, everybody has the same posture during the reception of Holy Communion. This is, perhaps, even why some bishops or pastors go so far as to mandate (unjustly, as the CDWDS has pointed out – see the bottom half of that link, the letter classified as Prot. n. 855/03/L) that everyone stand throughout the whole Communion procession!

Long story short, my guess is that the priest/bishop (unwisely) seeks to lessen the distinction between the priest and the people.

Now, this argument might be totally pointless since it seems like most of the Catholic world is, in fact, standing after the Agnus Dei, since the universal version of the GIRM (the typical Latin edition) does not say anything about kneeling at this time!

Update: Ignore that last paragraph (the one I greyed out above). I was looking at an unofficial copy of the Latin GIRM. It turns out the official 2002 Latin GIRM says this: Ubi mos est, populum ab acclamatione Sanctus expleta usque ad finem Precis eucharisticae et ante Communionem quando sacerdos dicit Ecce Agnus Dei genuflexum manere, hic laudabiliter retinetur. The translation is “Where the custom exists, that the people, from the Sanctus through to the end of the Eucharistic Prayer, and before Communion when the priest says ‘Behold the Lamb of God’, remain kneeling, it is laudable to retain this custom.”

 

[puzzleannie]

the kneeling is not the big problem because disobedience to the norms does not make the Mass illcit. use of grape juice for communion is, because it could affect validity and licity of the sacrament.

 

[japhy]

use of grape juice for communion is [a big problem], because it could affect validity and licity of the sacrament.

Grape juice certainly affects the validity. People who drank from chalices containing grape juice drank… grape juice, nothing more.

 

[MomblessedX3]

Are you sure that first church was Catholic? I have never heard of giving grape juice in a Catholic church. You can’t consecrate grape juice so all it would be is just plain old grape juice…a snack to go along with the Eucharist. I’m not one to scream “liturgical abuse” every time I turn around, but that would definitely lead me to talk with the priest after Mass and follow up with the bishop.

Standing during the Eucharistic prayer is not approved but it happens. As far as the tabernacle, if you search the forum you’ll see that it’s a topic that comes up regularly. Many newer or renovated churches have moved the tabernacle to a chapel rather than have it at the altar.

Yes it was a Catholic Church. [Edited]. It is my sisters church. She says that that was the first Sunday that they had ever used grape juice and that they used it again last Sunday (yesterday). She thinks it is very bizarre too.

As for the standing during the Eucharistic prayer and the Eucharistic prayer itself (which the priest added a blessing for young children to) at that Church I have done some inquiring. I have learned that that church tends to do things their own way and have been reprimanded by the Bishop. I sure hope things change there for the better.

My sister was going to call her church to find out why they are using grape juice. I will keep you all posted. Thanks for the responses. I didn’t think grape juice was alright. But I do have a question and don’t know where to look…why can’t grape juice be consecrated?

 

[Ruthie]

Are you sure it wasn’t mustum? That is sacramental wine where the fermentation process has been stopped very early. I have never tasted it, but I imagine it would taste more like grape juice than wine.

Mustum is proper matter for the Sacrament, though its use is pretty rare. Perhaps your sister’s Church has a lot of sober alcoholics in the parish, or serving the altar.

Ruthie

 

[japhy]

Yes it was a Catholic Church.

A moderator has already edited your post, and possibly privately informed you: it’s against forum rules to post the identity of a parish engaging in alleged liturgical abuse. Please be more careful in the future. (I’m not scolding you, just letting you know how the board operates.)

But I do have a question and don’t know where to look…why can’t grape juice be consecrated?

For the same reason that women can’t be ordained, animals can’t be baptized, and two people of the same gender can’t be married: that’s not what Jesus instituted. God instituted a male priesthood, baptism of humans, marriage between one man and one woman… and the Eucharist under the forms of pure wheaten bread (leavened or unleavened… the Eastern and Western Churches differ in their tradition here) and wine from fermented grape juice (mixed with water). A sacrament that does not use the proper “ingredients” or elements is not a valid sacrament.

 

[japhy]

Are you sure it wasn’t mustum? That is sacramental wine where the fermentation process has been stopped very early. … Mustum is proper matter for the Sacrament, though its use is pretty rare.

The use of mustum is restricted to those person who cannot handle the alcohol content of normal wine; it is not permitted to use mustum for a general population.

 

[Ruthie]

Japhy, I was trying to be as charitable as possible, thinking that those who drink the leftover Sacrament might be the ones who can’t handle the alcohol content. That would mean the entire population would get it.

Or maybe just misusing mustum, rather than using invalid matter like grape juice… I hope…

Ruthie

 

[Paul2274]

The use of mustum is restricted to those person who cannot handle the alcohol content of normal wine; it is not permitted to use mustum for a general population.

Use of Mustum at Mass

ROME, 13 JUNE 2006 (ZENIT)
Answered by Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.

Q: I am a priest in a religious community. One of our confreres is an alcoholic and for many years has abstained from alcohol, even if there is just a little bit in pastry. He is really faithful to his promise and I admire him for that. When he presides over our Eucharist, he uses mustum and, of course, all the participants communicate with it. Some have doubts about that way of doing things and think it may be illicit for them. (When he concelebrates, he takes only the consecrated host.) What do you think? Perhaps might it be better to have a second chalice with wine, as it is done when there is a larger number of concelebrants. We are usually about five. — R.T., Quebec province

A: The question of the validity of the use of “mustum,” or grape juice, for priests suffering from alcoholism or for some other medical reason was finally resolved by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in 1994 in a letter signed by then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. Among other things this letter stated:

"A. The preferred solution continues to be communion ‘per intinctionem,’ or in concelebration under the species of bread alone.

"B. Nevertheless, the permission to use ‘mustum’ can be granted by ordinaries to priests affected by alcoholism or other conditions which prevent the ingestion of even the smallest quantity of alcohol, after presentation of a medical certificate.

"C. By ‘mustum’ is understood fresh juice from grapes or juice preserved by suspending its fermentation (by means of freezing or other methods which do not alter its nature).

“D. In general, those who have received permission to use ‘mustum’ are prohibited from presiding at concelebrated Masses. There may be some exceptions however: in the case of a bishop or superior general; or, with prior approval of the ordinary, at the celebration of the anniversary of priestly ordination or other similar occasions. In these cases the one who presides is to communicate under both the species of bread and that of ‘mustum,’ while for the other concelebrants a chalice shall be provided in which normal wine is to be consecrated.”

The document required furthermore that the ordinary must ascertain that the matter used conforms to the above requirements; that he grant permission only for as long as the situation continues which motivated the request; and that scandal be avoided.

The precise question in hand is addressed in points A and D. The priest in question should therefore not normally preside at a concelebration except for very special occasions. When such a situation arises, two chalices must be provided: one with mustum and another with ordinary wine.

Likewise, if the priest presides alone at a religious community Mass where Communion under both kinds is habitual for religious seminarians, then a second chalice with ordinary wine should also be provided. A deacon or at least an instituted acolyte should also be present to assure that the Precious Blood is fully consumed after Communion.

The reason why the principal celebrant in a concelebration may not avail of the permission to receive only under the species of bread probably derives from the necessity to assure that the sacrifice is completed before Communion begins. The sacrifice is completed only after the presiding celebrant has consumed both species.

This is also why the individual priest must also consume both species before Communion begins. The faithful’s exercise of their baptismal priesthood is carried out with and through the priest. Thus, their full participation in the holy sacrifice of the Mass through Communion would be incomplete if the priest fails to first complete the sacrifice by consuming both species. ZE06061322

Paul

 

[japhy]

Use of Mustum at Mass

ROME, 13 JUNE 2006 (ZENIT)
Answered by Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.

Fr. McNamara’s did not mention the 2003 revision to the rules regarding low-gluten hosts and mustum. It extends the permissions granted in the 1994 instruction (which required the Holy See to approve use of mustum for an individual member of the lay faithful).

 

[Jabronie]

GIRM 43 says that in the US, “The faithful kneel after the Agnus Dei unless the Diocesan Bishop determines otherwise.” So yes, your Bishop has the authority to decide whether you adopt some posture other than kneeling after the Agnus Dei.

So other than the obvious reason that a lot of bishops in the US seem afraid to act Catholic, why would a Bishop determine that we shouldn’t be kneeling at the usual times?