What is Considered Legitimate in Mass

[BernadetteM]

I attended another parish last night. My own parish is very traditional and follows the Missal exactly.

I was wondering if it is appropriate to have only one small candle lit by the side of the altar and if one looks over the altar table, one can see what looks like a tabernacle behind the table, however, everyone only bowed before the altar and pew.

The priest did not distribute the Body of Christ, but stood off to the side and distributed the Precious Blood. It looked like a man dressed in white, but didn’t appear to be a priest along with several women distributed both the Host and Blood, even though there were not that many in the congregation.

I saw a laywomen who was passing out the Blood, drink all that remained in the chalice.

No music and only one hymn at the end of Mass was sung if you knew it by heart.

I noticed that the congregation was mostly women and found that odd, as my traditional parish is full of men and only males are allowed on the altar. Also although it might not be an abuse, I thought we were not to hold hands during the Our Father, that was done and that everyone held their hands up several times in the orans position.

Any help on whether these actions were acceptable or not would be appreciated.

Yours in the Hearts of Jesus and Mary

Bernadette

 

[peter26]

Two candles are required, one at either end of the altar. Any other candles are optional.

The priest must distribute the Precious Body unless unable to do so due to health reasons.

A laywoman (or a layman unless an instituted acolyte) consuming the remaining Precious Blood is not permitted.

From the GIRM

1. When the distribution of Communion is over, the Priest himself immediately and completely consumes at the altar any consecrated wine that happens to remain; as for any consecrated hosts that are left, he either consumes them at the altar or carries them to the place designated for the reservation of the Eucharist.

Lack of music is not an abuse and may well depend on when the organist or other musician can come to Mass.

People should not hold hands during the Our Father and the laity (this includes servers) should not use the Orans position at any time during the Mass.

 

[runningdude]

The missal neither requires holding hands during the Our Father, nor prohibits it. It is simply not addressed.

 

[Padres1969]

Is it normal for a tabernacle to not be anywhere in the main body of the church? I visited a Catholic Church on Tuesday near my house (I’ve been doing the rounds of all the Christian Churches in my relatively new neighborhood to familiarize myself with them and the Feast of the Immaculate Conception seemed an appropriate time to visit the Catholic Church). But I found it odd that the church did not have a tabernacle visible anywhere the congregation could see it. The church itself was clearly a post Vatican II church with no remnant high altar or high altar present which was not something I’d seen before. The tabernacle if they have one appears to be in the sacristy off to the side of the altar but out of view of the congregation and not accessible to them.

I’ve been to plenty of Catholic churches in my time by they were almost always either more historic churches that originally had the Tridentine mass (so they either still had a high altar even if not being used), they were like my old Catholic church which was designed in the 60’s during and immediately after Vatican II as changes were being promulgated through the RCC so they had what I’d call a remnant high altar that was used primarily to hold the tabernacle, or they were like my old diocese cathedral which had the tabernacle out of view on the back side of the bishop’s cathedra but it was still easily viewed and accessible to the congregants.

Seeing a Catholic Church with no apparently accessible or visible tabernacle struck me as very odd. Almost like a Protestant church.

As for the OP’s Eucharistic minister drinking the remaining blood/wine, at least it was being consumed after being blessed. I’ve heard tell of leftover blessed blood/wine, being poured back into the bottle it came out of before mass (containing unblessed wine) so as not to “waste” it.

 

[SMH_2015]

Wow, my parish does most of these.

I noticed that the congregation was mostly women and found that odd, as my traditional parish is full of men and only males are allowed on the altar.

This strikes me as odd…because how could you allow for the service of female alter servers or Eucharistic ministers if they couldn’t stand on the alter…? I’ve never heard of this being “illegitimate.”

 

[BernadetteM]

Two candles are required, one at either end of the altar. Any other candles are optional.

The priest must distribute the Precious Body unless unable to do so due to health reasons.

A laywoman (or a layman unless an instituted acolyte) consuming the remaining Precious Blood is not permitted.

From the GIRM

Lack of music is not an abuse and may well depend on when the organist or other musician can come to Mass.

People should not hold hands during the Our Father and the laity (this includes servers) should not use the Orans position at any time during the Mass.

Thanks, your response was very clear. This is what I had thought before attending this parish.

As to SMH 2015 response it was not clear as to what it means, I didn’t say that women could not stand near the altar or distribute the Holy Communion, (although I am not in favor of it). Actually I felt it was more Protestant than Catholic as far as many of the actions, yet the priest did say not change the words of the consecration, nor the Mass.

It is a parish where I belong to a very large women’s Bible study weekly and the members are lovely. I converted from TEC many years ago, love my parish and was surprised to find women or men Eucharistic ministers allowed to consume the Precious Blood as I had read that this is an abuse. I have never seen nor heard of anyone in the Catholic Church throwing away the remaining Blood, although I know some TEC and Lutheran churches do so. I guess that depends on whether that particular parish believes the the real presence of Jesus or just that He is present when they receive Him and is no longer present after.

God Bless

Bernadette

 

[peter26]

The missal neither requires holding hands during the Our Father, nor prohibits it. It is simply not addressed.

For the record I have found the answer to this one while looking for something else.

Can. 907 In the celebration of the Eucharist, deacons and lay persons are not permitted to say the prayers, especially the eucharistic prayer, nor to perform the actions which are proper to the celebrating priest.

 

[Tarpeian_Rock]

For the record I have found the answer to this one while looking for something else.

Can. 907 In the celebration of the Eucharist, deacons and lay persons are not permitted to say the prayers, especially the eucharistic prayer, nor to perform the actions which are proper to the celebrating priest.

I don’t understand your comment. “Holding hands” is not an action or gesture “proper to the celebrating priest.”

 

[ProVobis]

For the record I have found the answer to this one while looking for something else.

Can. 907 In the celebration of the Eucharist, deacons and lay persons are not permitted to say the prayers, especially the eucharistic prayer, nor to perform the actions which are proper to the celebrating priest.

I guess I missed this one. Like arms raised/extended?

 

[Gorgias]

I guess I missed this one. Like arms raised/extended?

“Arms raised/extended” would be a gesture, not an action, wouldn’t it?

 

[ProVobis]

“Arms raised/extended” would be a gesture, not an action, wouldn’t it?

Depends. The Latin is authoritative, not the English. May be something in between for all I know. A Canon lawyer could probably better answer your question, though I doubt much will come out of it.

 

[IrishAm]

A laywoman (or a layman unless an instituted acolyte) consuming the remaining Precious Blood is not permitted.

Asking for information (not challenging your statement, I promise) . . . I have served in many parishes over many years as an EMHC. When distributing the Precious Blood, if there is any remaining after all in “my line” have received, I have always been instructed to consume what is left before returning the cup/chalice to the side altar for cleansing by the priest or deacon. Is this not correct? May I have a source? Thank you!

 

[paperwight66]

Asking for information (not challenging your statement, I promise) . . . I have served in many parishes over many years as an EMHC. When distributing the Precious Blood, if there is any remaining after all in “my line” have received, I have always been instructed to consume what is left before returning the cup/chalice to the side altar for cleansing by the priest or deacon. Is this not correct? May I have a source? Thank you!

It’s certainly done here in the UK. After all, the contents retain their alcoholic properties, so draining four or more chalices could be problematic if the priest then has to drive.

 

[otjm]

Asking for information (not challenging your statement, I promise) . . . I have served in many parishes over many years as an EMHC. When distributing the Precious Blood, if there is any remaining after all in “my line” have received, I have always been instructed to consume what is left before returning the cup/chalice to the side altar for cleansing by the priest or deacon. Is this not correct? May I have a source? Thank you!

The source would be the GIRM (General Instructions of the Roman Missal). Where the GIRM is discussing only Mass with a priest, it says that the Priest consumes any remaining. Where it discusses a Mass with a priest and a deacon, the deacon may receive.

The GIRM does not discuss EMHCs receiving any of the Precious Blood after distribution to the parish. It is thus proposed as prohibited.

FWIW, I have attended Mass numerous times at our local Trappist abbey - not a group I would consider to be on the wild-hair side of rubrics. As they try to only distribute the Hosts consecrated at that Mass, at the end of Communion if there are a few Hosts remaining, those are distributed at that point among the brothers and priests (who have already received). In speaking with my deacon, he pointed out that reception often is considered a “one time at one point in time” matter; that is, you receive one Host, and may take a sip of the Precious Blood, and that terminates your reception; his comment was that is not specifically stated anywhere - GIRM or other document - and that any reception by the EMHC at the end of distribution is still within the confines of the Mass, not a “second reception”.

I don’t provide this as a point of argument, but rather as an observation; it appears to be widespread throughout our archdiocese, and as best I know, the archbishops (current and past) have never commented upon it. And I am not aware of any other diocese or archdiocese making a point of it; perhaps they have, but it seems not to have risen to the point of emphasis anywhere that I am aware of.

It might also be pointed out that the faithful have a right to receive twice a day, the second reception being during a Mass.

Nowhere have I found any comment that receiving the Host, and then from the Cup, is considered to be receiving twice.

 

[otjm]

For the record I have found the answer to this one while looking for something else.

Can. 907 In the celebration of the Eucharist, deacons and lay persons are not permitted to say the prayers, especially the eucharistic prayer, nor to perform the actions which are proper to the celebrating priest.

This issue has been beat to death, but seems to have more lives than the proverbial cat.

The only official comment I have ever found concerning the issue of holding hands during the Our Father is that Rome has said it is “a liturgical act” (see, James Akin). That would imply, at the minimum, that Rome is aware of the practice.

And Rome has provided several iterations of the GIRM, and not once has it mentioned anything concerning the matter; as they are aware of it, one would presume that they would address the issue if they found it to be wrong. Nor was in mentioned in the directive correcting what were liturgical abuses.

Canon 907 on the face of it does not apply; it is not a matter of “proper to the celebrating priest”. That issue has been aligned with the related posture during the Our Father, the orans position. Arguments have been proposed that is illegal/illicit; but there are instructions for the priest to put his hands together, (usually seen as fingers aligned and pointing up or out) and no one seems to want to venture that the laity may not do that.

As a point, the GIRM does not provide instructions as to how the laity are to put their hands - palms together, fingers interlaced or out; holding the next person’s hand, orans or other positions. As Archbishop Chaput (then of Colorado) said publicly in a letter, Rome has not seen fit to instruct the laity either to hold hands or not hold hands, so there is no rule, period; and those who wish to not hold hands should be allowed to not do so; those who wish to hold hands should be allowed to do so, and both sides should in charity allow the other side to do as they see fit.

This holding hands has gone on since about 1965 (as I have a picture dating from then) and there may be a rule within Canon Law that anything coming up from the laity over that long a period becomes de facto permitted - at least, according to one Canon lawyer discussing the matter.

Not to make too fine a point of it, but I suspect that Archbishop Chaput knows more about Canon law than most of us in these forae (with the exception of a few who are also Canon lawyers).

 

[peter26]

It’s certainly done here in the UK. After all, the contents retain their alcoholic properties, so draining four or more chalices could be problematic if the priest then has to drive.

GIRM:

1. The sacred vessels are purified by the Priest, the Deacon, or an instituted acolyte after Communion or after Mass, in so far as possible at the credence table. The purification of the chalice is done with water alone or with wine and water, which is then consumed by whoever does the purification. The paten is wiped clean as usual with the purificator.

Care is to be taken that whatever may remain of the Blood of Christ after the distribution of Communion is consumed immediately and completely at the altar.

Now, clearly the GIRM and Canon Law allow for necessity, and if four chalices have to be “finished off” the priest may ask others to help him out of necessity, just as EMHCs can be used out of necessity. But the norm should be priest consumes any remaining precious blood.

 

[peter26]

As for the Our Father, the Orans position is a gesture reserved to those with Holy Orders and is used by the priest during the Our Father and therefore should not be used by laity. The issue of holding hands is more complicated legally speaking, but is thankfully something I have never seen in my area.

 

[ProVobis]

The only official comment I have ever found concerning the issue of holding hands during the Our Father is that Rome has said it is “a liturgical act” (see, James Akin). That would imply, at the minimum, that Rome is aware of the practice.

And Rome has provided several iterations of the GIRM, and not once has it mentioned anything concerning the matter; as they are aware of it, one would presume that they would address the issue if they found it to be wrong. Nor was in mentioned in the directive correcting what were liturgical abuses.

As there may be cultures which actually call for holding hands during Mass (but I don’t know this for a fact), or dancing or other “acts,” for that matter, I don’t see where this is an issue the Vatican even wants to address in the more universal IGMR.

The GIRM, as I understand it, has been interpreted by the bishop’s conferences from the IGMR for their own countries. It seems if the issue were that important or it can’t be resolved at the parish level, it would be up to the bishops to revise those rules, I would think.

But as you have pointed out, it’s a practice around since the 60’s. If there is a problem with it, there’s certainly not a matter of urgency to fix it.

 

[Brendan]

Asking for information (not challenging your statement, I promise) . . . I have served in many parishes over many years as an EMHC. When distributing the Precious Blood, if there is any remaining after all in “my line” have received, I have always been instructed to consume what is left before returning the cup/chalice to the side altar for cleansing by the priest or deacon. Is this not correct? May I have a source? Thank you!

In the US it is permitted under certain circumstances.

From the USCCB Norms for the Distribution and Reception of Holy Communion under Both Species

1. When more of the Precious Blood remains than was necessary for Communion, and if not consumed by the bishop or Priest celebrant, the Deacon, standing at the altar, “immediately and reverently consumes all of the Blood of Christ that remains, assisted, if the case requires, by other Deacons and Priests.” When there are extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion, they may consume what remains of the Precious Blood from their chalice of distribution with permission of the Diocesan Bishop

.

usccb.org/prayer-and-worship/the-mass/norms-for-holy-communion-under-both-kinds/

 

[otjm]

As for the Our Father, the Orans position is a gesture reserved to those with Holy Orders and is used by the priest during the Our Father and therefore should not be used by laity. The issue of holding hands is more complicated legally speaking, but is thankfully something I have never seen in my area.

Several years ago, the USCCB was considering making an official request to Rome to specifically allow this for the laity, but decided not to ask. And so the issue may or may not be reserved; the gesture has not, to the best of my knowledge, made it to the individual bishops/archbishops to address in their jurisdictions. One would think that if it was specifically reserved, that either a number of bishops, or even Rome, would have spoken up about the matter. Bishops have jurisdiction over the Liturgy in their diocese, to the extent that Rome has provided them alternatives. As to what Rome has set, they do not; it is also my understanding, that if Rome has not spoken on the matter (that is, the GIRM is silent), then they do not have authority to address the matter. Silence, however, is not proof that they lack authority…

As to the issue of holding hands, it really is not complicated at all. There simply are no instructions as to what the laity are to do with their hands, all of the commentary from all sorts of individuals to the contrary.

It is an issue that seems to sit in the craw of a number of individuals. That, most certainly, is understandable. And as Archbishop Chaput noted, those who don’t wish to should not be required or forced to, and should not be criticized for not doing so. Additionally, they should not have to give a reason why they choose not to.