Comments for galea salutis http://galeasalutis.net prudence, not pretense Wed, 07 Jan 2009 01:40:34 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6 Comment on Grassroots Campaign Plan by CT http://galeasalutis.net/2006/10/27/grassroots-campaign-plan/#comment-59 CT Wed, 24 Jan 2007 16:32:59 +0000 http://galeasalutis.net/?p=43#comment-59 Not really relevant any more, but the thieves also had the audacity to steal the "Vote No" sign off the lawn of the Archbishop's residence...go figure. Not really relevant any more, but the thieves also had the audacity to steal the “Vote No” sign off the lawn of the Archbishop’s residence…go figure.

]]> Comment on Communion under both species - The Law by galea salutis » Democracy in Florida http://galeasalutis.net/2006/10/13/communion-under-both-species-the-law/#comment-50 galea salutis » Democracy in Florida Mon, 30 Oct 2006 17:24:05 +0000 http://galeasalutis.net/?p=39#comment-50 [...] I spoke about this in my previous post. After resolving never to travel to Florida, I then skimmed down to the juicy part on page seven Although described in the Norms for the Distribution and Reception of Holy Communion Under Both Kinds in the Dioceses of the United States of America (NDRHC, no. 49), the practice of receiving Communion by intinction is discouraged in the Diocese of St. Petersburg. This practice seems to stand in contrast with Jesus’ command to “take and drink” (GIRM 2002, no. 281). The practice of receiving Communion by intinction also limits one’s capacity for receiving Communion in the hand. [...] [...] I spoke about this in my previous post. After resolving never to travel to Florida, I then skimmed down to the juicy part on page seven Although described in the Norms for the Distribution and Reception of Holy Communion Under Both Kinds in the Dioceses of the United States of America (NDRHC, no. 49), the practice of receiving Communion by intinction is discouraged in the Diocese of St. Petersburg. This practice seems to stand in contrast with Jesus’ command to “take and drink” (GIRM 2002, no. 281). The practice of receiving Communion by intinction also limits one’s capacity for receiving Communion in the hand. [...]

]]> Comment on Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion - The Law by digitus canonici http://galeasalutis.net/2006/10/17/extraordinary-ministers-of-holy-communion-the-law/#comment-57 digitus canonici Fri, 27 Oct 2006 15:46:55 +0000 http://galeasalutis.net/?p=41#comment-57 <p>Larry,<br /> You are correct. The priest is only able to appoint a laymen when he encounters a situation "at the liturgy" (Ecclesiae de mysterio), thus being a "single occasion." This is more limited than the bishop who can also appointed for a "specified time." My commentary here is a bit sloppy. Sorry about that. </p> Larry,
You are correct. The priest is only able to appoint a laymen when he encounters a situation “at the liturgy” (Ecclesiae de mysterio), thus being a “single occasion.” This is more limited than the bishop who can also appointed for a “specified time.” My commentary here is a bit sloppy. Sorry about that.

]]> Comment on Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion - The Law by Larry http://galeasalutis.net/2006/10/17/extraordinary-ministers-of-holy-communion-the-law/#comment-56 Larry Sun, 22 Oct 2006 16:00:08 +0000 http://galeasalutis.net/?p=41#comment-56 First, thank you for the research and information. It is very helpful to me. I would like for you to clarify somehting for me. Redemptionis Sacramentum No. 155: "Finally, in special cases of an unforeseen nature, permission can be given for a single occasion by the Priest who presides at the celebration of the Eucharist." In commenting on the above quote, you made the following statement. "So, the diocesan bishop may ask any laymen for a “specified time” or “one occasion.” The priest can also do so, but only in “special cases” which have an “unforeseen nature.”" I may have misunderstood your comment or Redemptionis Sacramentum No. 155 (or probably both), but it seems that the priest is restricted to giving permission for only a "single occassion." It doesn't appear to me that the priest has the authority under any condition to give permission to the lay faithful for "a specified time." Thank you again for your help. First, thank you for the research and information. It is very helpful to me. I would like for you to clarify somehting for me.

Redemptionis Sacramentum No. 155: “Finally, in special cases of an unforeseen nature, permission can be given for a single occasion by the Priest who presides at the celebration of the Eucharist.”

In commenting on the above quote, you made the following statement.

“So, the diocesan bishop may ask any laymen for a “specified time” or “one occasion.” The priest can also do so, but only in “special cases” which have an “unforeseen nature.””

I may have misunderstood your comment or Redemptionis Sacramentum No. 155 (or probably both), but it seems that the priest is restricted to giving permission for only a “single occassion.” It doesn’t appear to me that the priest has the authority under any condition to give permission to the lay faithful for “a specified time.”

Thank you again for your help.

]]> Comment on Communion under both species - The Law by Tony http://galeasalutis.net/2006/10/13/communion-under-both-species-the-law/#comment-49 Tony Thu, 19 Oct 2006 20:47:49 +0000 http://galeasalutis.net/?p=39#comment-49 <i>My friend, a devout Catholic, has celiac disease and is unable to consume the host. My daughter was also unable to digest wheat for many years. I am forever grateful to my pastor who began to offer the Eucharist under both species at Sunday Mass several years ago.</i> Our pastor orders ultra-low gluten hosts for the 4 celiacs in our parish. He consecrates them in a little velvet pouch, and they come up when the EMEs do to receive from him. (Hey! I just thought. Maybe I ought to say I'm celiac, and I can receive from the priest each and every week!!!; Just kidding) :) My friend, a devout Catholic, has celiac disease and is unable to consume the host. My daughter was also unable to digest wheat for many years. I am forever grateful to my pastor who began to offer the Eucharist under both species at Sunday Mass several years ago.

Our pastor orders ultra-low gluten hosts for the 4 celiacs in our parish. He consecrates them in a little velvet pouch, and they come up when the EMEs do to receive from him. (Hey! I just thought. Maybe I ought to say I’m celiac, and I can receive from the priest each and every week!!!; Just kidding) :)

]]> Comment on Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion - The Law by Tony http://galeasalutis.net/2006/10/17/extraordinary-ministers-of-holy-communion-the-law/#comment-55 Tony Thu, 19 Oct 2006 20:43:24 +0000 http://galeasalutis.net/?p=41#comment-55 <i>but no longer permitted them to carry the precious blood to the choir loft. One cantor was appalled! I explained my reasoning, even citing REdemptionis Sacramentum that every effort should be taken so as to avoid profanation of the Sacred Species</i> God bless you, Father. When I was "lofted", we would come down after Mass (after the closing hymn) to receive. In our new wrecktovated church, the choir area is up front and to the right of the sanctuary (physically a little lower than the sanctuary, but a little higher than the congregation; I don't like <b>that</b> particular symbolism). We now receive right before the communion hymn (since there are so few of us now, but that's a story for another day). But slowly, our pastor has been bringing us back in line. With the retired pastor, we had eucharistic ministers gathered around behind the altar during the fractioning rite. Father would break the host, then distribute it to each of the minsisters and himself. Then all of them would consume them at the same time (like co-priests). When our new pastor stopped that practice, and had the EMEs line up in front of the sanctuary one of the EMEs left our church because father "took her place on the altar away!". but no longer permitted them to carry the precious blood to the choir loft. One cantor was appalled! I explained my reasoning, even citing REdemptionis Sacramentum that every effort should be taken so as to avoid profanation of the Sacred Species

God bless you, Father. When I was “lofted”, we would come down after Mass (after the closing hymn) to receive.

In our new wrecktovated church, the choir area is up front and to the right of the sanctuary (physically a little lower than the sanctuary, but a little higher than the congregation; I don’t like that particular symbolism). We now receive right before the communion hymn (since there are so few of us now, but that’s a story for another day).

But slowly, our pastor has been bringing us back in line. With the retired pastor, we had eucharistic ministers gathered around behind the altar during the fractioning rite. Father would break the host, then distribute it to each of the minsisters and himself. Then all of them would consume them at the same time (like co-priests).

When our new pastor stopped that practice, and had the EMEs line up in front of the sanctuary one of the EMEs left our church because father “took her place on the altar away!”.

]]> Comment on Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion - The Law by Dylan http://galeasalutis.net/2006/10/17/extraordinary-ministers-of-holy-communion-the-law/#comment-54 Dylan Wed, 18 Oct 2006 19:26:36 +0000 http://galeasalutis.net/?p=41#comment-54 You may also want to emphasize (in another post, perhaps) that "ordinary" and "extraordinary" do not refer primarily to the frequency of performing a ministry but rather to the propriety of performing it. "Extraordinary ministers" of something are not the proper ministers of it, i.e., they are not "within the order" of that ministry. The frequency ought to reflect the hierarchical nature of the ministries. Thus, extraordinary ministers would be seen truly as something "out of order." You may also want to emphasize (in another post, perhaps) that “ordinary” and “extraordinary” do not refer primarily to the frequency of performing a ministry but rather to the propriety of performing it. “Extraordinary ministers” of something are not the proper ministers of it, i.e., they are not “within the order” of that ministry.

The frequency ought to reflect the hierarchical nature of the ministries. Thus, extraordinary ministers would be seen truly as something “out of order.”

]]> Comment on Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion - The Law by Fr. Totton http://galeasalutis.net/2006/10/17/extraordinary-ministers-of-holy-communion-the-law/#comment-53 Fr. Totton Wed, 18 Oct 2006 16:19:55 +0000 http://galeasalutis.net/?p=41#comment-53 How did we get to this point? Incrementalism - little by little the extraordinary was phased in to become ordinary (in practice, if not in name) By now the faithful are so confused as to think that (and I have actually heard this said) the priest not extending the chalice to the lay faithful is a "liturgical abuse." I once arrived at a parish and immediately ended the former practice whereby the extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion would truck up the choir loft steps with hosts and a chalice containing the precious blood so as to distribute Holy Communion to the organist and cantor. I still allowed the hosts to be carried - in a closed ciborium, but no longer permitted them to carry the precious blood to the choir loft. One cantor was appalled! I explained my reasoning, even citing REdemptionis Sacramentum that every effort should be taken so as to avoid profanation of the Sacred Species (even by accident) She countered that the free exercise of her "right" to receive under both species ("as it is a fuller sign") was a higher value than protecting the Blessed Sacrament from profanation. In the end, she chose to descend from the choir loft in order to receive Holy Communion under both species. How did we get to this point?

Incrementalism - little by little the extraordinary was phased in to become ordinary (in practice, if not in name)

By now the faithful are so confused as to think that (and I have actually heard this said) the priest not extending the chalice to the lay faithful is a “liturgical abuse.”

I once arrived at a parish and immediately ended the former practice whereby the extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion would truck up the choir loft steps with hosts and a chalice containing the precious blood so as to distribute Holy Communion to the organist and cantor. I still allowed the hosts to be carried - in a closed ciborium, but no longer permitted them to carry the precious blood to the choir loft. One cantor was appalled! I explained my reasoning, even citing REdemptionis Sacramentum that every effort should be taken so as to avoid profanation of the Sacred Species (even by accident) She countered that the free exercise of her “right” to receive under both species (”as it is a fuller sign”) was a higher value than protecting the Blessed Sacrament from profanation.

In the end, she chose to descend from the choir loft in order to receive Holy Communion under both species.

]]> Comment on Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion - The Law by Tony http://galeasalutis.net/2006/10/17/extraordinary-ministers-of-holy-communion-the-law/#comment-52 Tony Wed, 18 Oct 2006 14:22:46 +0000 http://galeasalutis.net/?p=41#comment-52 : number of faithful coming to Communion is so great : that the very celebration of Mass would be unduly : prolonged And this is the universal loophole. What is "unduly prolonged"? 10 minutes? 30 minutes? 3 Hours? In our parish, the "Eucharistic ministers" (that's what we call them) have become a regular part of the Mass. I even remember a case where we had 7 concelebrating priests for a special Mass, and 6 of them sat down for the distribution of Communion. How did we get to this point, and how do we get back? : number of faithful coming to Communion is so great
: that the very celebration of Mass would be unduly
: prolonged

And this is the universal loophole. What is “unduly prolonged”? 10 minutes? 30 minutes? 3 Hours?

In our parish, the “Eucharistic ministers” (that’s what we call them) have become a regular part of the Mass. I even remember a case where we had 7 concelebrating priests for a special Mass, and 6 of them sat down for the distribution of Communion.

How did we get to this point, and how do we get back?

]]> Comment on Communion under both species - The Law by digitus canonici http://galeasalutis.net/2006/10/13/communion-under-both-species-the-law/#comment-48 digitus canonici Wed, 18 Oct 2006 12:19:52 +0000 http://galeasalutis.net/?p=39#comment-48 <p>Willi,<br /> "If the problem is that EMEs are poorly trained or the congregation is badly catechized, correct that problem."<br /> These are problems which we should attend to correcting, but not THE problem. THE problem is that the Church does not allow the current practice. This post has dealt with summarizing and citing those laws of the Church regarding this matter. My second post is my commentary/explanation and is my attempt to answer "why?" Of course, it doesn't matter too much what I have to say, since I am not the one making the laws; the Church is. In this post, I am not asserting anything new; I simply quote the Church's rulings and summarize them.<br /> "Don’t deny people the Eucharist." This is exactly what the Church is not doing when it regulates the distribution of Holy Communion under both kinds. In cases of allergy, there are approved low-gluten hosts available. Also, the Church has allowed those affected to receive under the species of wine, "A layperson affected by celiac disease, who is not able to receive, Communion- under the species of bread, including low-gluten hosts, may receive Communion under the species of wine only." (July 23, 2004 Letter from the CDW)<br /> " If you want to see a spectacle..." I have seen people with celiac disease communicate before, but never quite in the manner you described. There are, of course, many different ways to offer low-gluten hosts or the species of wine to such a communicant. Extending the use of both species to all, however, would not be a solution since a seperate chalice would still need to be prepared and kept from the normal wheat hosts and those who received them.<br /> "The mass comes to a complete halt and everyone stares and wonders why this person is so special." The reception of Jesus Christ in Holy Communion can never be an interruption to the Mass. It is out of His desire to stay with us that He instituted this great Sacrament. It can be a very easy distraction to focus on the thoughts of others, but what others may think can never take away from the reality--Christ coming to a soul out of love. Perhaps a discussion with the pastor could produce a new procedure that you would feel more comfortable with. In my parish, there are many older folks who have trouble walking. Without fail, the priest always approaches them and offers the Blessed Sacrament to them, sometimes first, sometimes last. The people in my parish have always been very understanding and kind-hearted about it. In the end, what is there to get upset about? No one is more deserving of the Eucharist than another; it is a gift. We are all lost sheep whose best hope is to cling to the Rock, the Church which he founded so that through the guidance of Mother Church we will be led to Christ. </p> Willi,
“If the problem is that EMEs are poorly trained or the congregation is badly catechized, correct that problem.”
These are problems which we should attend to correcting, but not THE problem. THE problem is that the Church does not allow the current practice. This post has dealt with summarizing and citing those laws of the Church regarding this matter. My second post is my commentary/explanation and is my attempt to answer “why?” Of course, it doesn’t matter too much what I have to say, since I am not the one making the laws; the Church is. In this post, I am not asserting anything new; I simply quote the Church’s rulings and summarize them.
“Don’t deny people the Eucharist.” This is exactly what the Church is not doing when it regulates the distribution of Holy Communion under both kinds. In cases of allergy, there are approved low-gluten hosts available. Also, the Church has allowed those affected to receive under the species of wine, “A layperson affected by celiac disease, who is not able to receive, Communion- under the species of bread, including low-gluten hosts, may receive Communion under the species of wine only.” (July 23, 2004 Letter from the CDW)
” If you want to see a spectacle…” I have seen people with celiac disease communicate before, but never quite in the manner you described. There are, of course, many different ways to offer low-gluten hosts or the species of wine to such a communicant. Extending the use of both species to all, however, would not be a solution since a seperate chalice would still need to be prepared and kept from the normal wheat hosts and those who received them.
“The mass comes to a complete halt and everyone stares and wonders why this person is so special.” The reception of Jesus Christ in Holy Communion can never be an interruption to the Mass. It is out of His desire to stay with us that He instituted this great Sacrament. It can be a very easy distraction to focus on the thoughts of others, but what others may think can never take away from the reality–Christ coming to a soul out of love. Perhaps a discussion with the pastor could produce a new procedure that you would feel more comfortable with. In my parish, there are many older folks who have trouble walking. Without fail, the priest always approaches them and offers the Blessed Sacrament to them, sometimes first, sometimes last. The people in my parish have always been very understanding and kind-hearted about it. In the end, what is there to get upset about? No one is more deserving of the Eucharist than another; it is a gift. We are all lost sheep whose best hope is to cling to the Rock, the Church which he founded so that through the guidance of Mother Church we will be led to Christ.

]]>