Posted on 05/23/2004 12:03:34 PM PDT by Lilllabettt
Hi everybody! I'm a pretty well-addicted lurker here at the Religion Forum, and I always enjoy the bantering and even the fist fights. Yesterday at Confession grumpy, fatty Father omitted the Act of Contrition and changed the words of Absolution. Today at Mass, when Consecration came, Father elevated a bowl full of unleavened bread, instead of the host itself. Then we had a bunch of guitar playing girls do interpretive dances up on the alter. By the time the army of Extraordinary MInsters of the Eucharist stomped up on "stage" (I swear this was more of a performance than a Mass,) I had already decided: I've had it up to here. Time to abandon tubby and his sinking ship for another parish. Anyone know of an orthodox Roman Catholic parish in the Cleveland/ Akron area my sister and I could attend? Some place in union with Rome where the faithful do NOT come to church dressed for the beach. This might be a little tough, seeing how the diocsese is ruled by the "we're queer we're here get used to it" bishop, Anthony Pilla. But if anyone can do it, the militants at Free Republic can! Thanks in advance, guys! You're the best.
There are 3 Society of St Pius X churches in Ohio. All recognize Pope John Paul II.
CINCINNATI
Saint Pius X Catholic Church
513-541-0662
1662 Blue Rock Street
Sunday 9:00am
Saturday 8:30am CLEVELAND
Saint Peregrine Church
440-333-3139
22953-65 Detroit Road
WESTLAKE
Sunday 8:30am & 11:00am
Saturdays 6:00pm
1st Friday 7:00pm
YOUNGSTOWN
Our Lady Of Sorrows Church
330-545-0307
525 Lawrence Avenue
GIRARD
Sunday 4:00pm
Monday 8:00am
The SSPX clergy are NOT in union with John Paul II.
In addition to the SSPX chapels already posted, there are 3 indult Latin Mass locations that you may wish to consider:
St. Rose of Lima
Detroit Ave at 117th
(on the border of Cleveland and Lakewood)
Sunday 10:00 AM
Immaculate Conception Church
4129 Superior Ave.
Cleveland, OH 44103-1129
(216) 431-5900
Sun 12 noon
This church is less than 2 minutes off I-71 near the Cleveland State campus.
Queen of the Holy Rosary
291 Scoville Dr.
(Exit Vienna on Route 11)
Vienna, OH 44473
(330) 856-4204
This is also right off the highway and it is an exclusively Latin Mass parish served by priests of the Fraternal Society of St. Peter. The other locations are bi-ritual, meaning that the host you receive at communion may have been consecrated by "Fr. Tubby" and his dancing girls.
The internet has a listing for a Latin Mass in Akron, but I know nothing about it, and it is listed as only 2 Sundays a month, which makes it virtually useless.
In addition to investigating the locations posted, my suggestion is to turn your back on "Fr. Tubby" and his dancing girls and the troops of EMs, shake the dust from your sandals, and don't go back. Don't make the mistake of Lot's wife by looking back to Sodom and Gommorah. You'll be turned into a pillar of salt. Or at least into a vulgar felt banner.
The short answer is "No." The longer answer is "It depends on how 'improper' was the matter."
For any sacrament, you need 3 elements: form, matter, intention. If any of the 3 is missing, then no sacrament. For example, the "matter" of Holy Orders is a baptized male. If you tried to ordain a woman -- no sacrament.
The "matter" for the eucharist is unleavened wheaten bread and pure grape wine. Unleavened bread is required in the Roman Rite, however, leavened bread does not by itself invalidate the consecration. But if there is a "significant amount" of any ingredients other than wheat flour and water, then it does invalidate the sacrament due to lack of valid matter.
So if your "eucharist" contained more than a microscopic trace of molasses or other ingredients, then it was invalid. The children only received bread, not the body and blood of Christ. This is not surprising for occasions of First Holy Communion. It seems that these are staging grounds for abuses that will then be spread to the rest of the parish.
By the way, I'm in the Richmond Diocese, sympathies accepted!
I've heard of truly horrific abuses in your diocese. Your description of the event, plus your description of your pastor and his general modus operandi ought to make you stop and consider whether you are attending a Catholic parish. Are you really getting the same Catholic faith and practice as was shared by all the great saints of the past 2000 years? Or you being given an ersatz substitute, just like being given invalid bread in place of the body and blood of Christ?
On the other hand, your diosece has at least 2 full-time Latin Mass parishes that have been approved by Bishop Sullivan. One is in Richmond and one is near Virginia Beach. If you are within driving distance of either location, I suggest that you should never again participate in the kinds of travesties you have described.
One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church huh:)....
Becky
Thanks very much for your clear and detailed answer, although it verified my fears and left me sad. The bread was obviously sweetened, so there must have been more than a miniscule amount of ...whatever it was. I guess there's no loophole, like "no improper matter unless otherwise approved by the local ordinary?" (I know there isn't, just my poor attempt at humor).
So, another question: if the wine was pure grape, and assuming that form and intent were present, was the consecration of the wine valid? Or does the improper matter of one invalidate the other?
You are right, the Richmond Diocese is notorious for its liturgical abuses. I'm still surprised that Bishop Sullivan allowed the Latin Mass. Sadly, however, I'm in the far western side of Virginia and Richmond and Virginia Beach are out of the question. In fact, the church I attend is the only one in the county and it's a 30-mile drive as it is. There is a Catholic Church that is another 20-30 miles further and I've heard good things about it, so that may be an option, at least in good weather.
I would love to attend a Latin Mass again. Even once! just to experience it, even though it would make me weep. As it is now, I'll be happy to find a Novus Ordo reverently celebrated.
Bishop Sullivan has retired and Bishop F.X. di Lorenzo (sp?) was installed in our Diocese this week. I don't know much about him, except that he was transferred from Honolulu and I recall some stories out of there that do not raise my expectations of good changes coming about from him. Hopefully, I'm wrong.
Again, thank you for the information and advice. Let's keep praying for our Church.
First of all, you both need to read the information at the following link. Above all, know that according to Vatican II document, Inaestimabile Donum "The faithful have a right to a true Liturgy" ... that would be you! I have been in your shoes and used some of the information at this link to stop additional abuses in my (former) NO parish. Unfortunately, the battle was lopsided. The parishioners were not only ignorant about the guidelines for a valid liturgy, they 'liked' the liturgy provided by the pastor, albeit illicit.
Is Your Mass Valid? Liturgical Abuse
As Maximilian suggested, I dusted off my sandals, compiled a list of catholic churches within a certain range of my home, and attended mass at a different one each week. The list included Roman and Eastern Rite churches - Novus Ordo, Indult Tridentine (DO NOT ATTEND AN SSPX CHAPEL!), Ukrainian and Maronite Catholic Churches. After several weeks, I stepped into the Maronite Catholic Church and left there with an overwhelming sense of peace. The following week, I had planned to attend the Ukrainian Catholic Church but opted to return to the Maronite Church. It is the ONLY Catholic Rite where the Consecration is in Aramaic, using the words and language of Our Lord at the Last Supper. The entire liturgy is chanted, incense is used (even in the low mass), and communion is by intinction. The priest - and ONLY the priest - dips the consecrated host into the Precious Blood, places it on the communicant's tongue (no communion in the hand) and says: "Receive the Body and Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ, for the remission of your sins and eternal salvation."
After 3 weeks, there was no turning back for me. The Holy Father encourages Roman Catholics to attend Eastern Rite liturgies. The Maronite liturgy goes back to Antioch where it was brought by Sts. Peter and James. Archaelogists have found that many old Maronite Churches were constructed directly over the foundations of ancient synagogues.
The following is a link to Eastern Rite Churches in Ohio. When you compile your list, be sure to visit some if not all of these. There are 22 liturgies in the Catholic Church - ALL of them 100% in communion with the Magisterium.
The Unofficial Directory of Eastern Catholic Churches in Ohio
Before departing on your faith journey, spend some time in prayer and ask our Lord to guide you on this path. I asked Him for 3 qualities - a valid liturgy, a holy priest and a welcoming community. Now I spend each night thanking Him for His response! God speed on your journey! Please keep us apprised of where it leads. I will keep you both in my prayers.
Pax et Bonum
Thanks again everyone! I've got a good list going now. Time to go Parish-hunting. My Mother tells me it used to be you could walk into any Catholic church in the world; you could count on what would be going on-- no surprises. Now you have to be careful ,or else you'll end up praying to the Goddess or something. Thing is, in my whole 19 years this is my first [serious] encounter with liturgical abuse. Father Tubby is a new addition to my [former] parish; I went away to college, came back for the summer and whoop-dee-do the liturgy had turned to crap. Blah. Oh well, no need to get depressed. I've read the story, finished the Book, and we win in the end.
While not a Catholic, I am rather surprised to read that some Parishes are becoming as we Protestants say, "the church of what is happenin' now!" I am disappointed actually, I thought at least the Catholic Church wouldn't fall prey to such blatant liberalism. I hope those who are in those kinds of Parishes would leave and go where traditional Mass is celebrated.
Thank you for the welcome and the links, I'll definitely check them out. I'm really a lurker at heart, but sometimes I'm sorely tempted to jump in, especially when I have a question -- you guys are very knowledgeable and ..well, just smart!
Most everyone I've talked to here seems very pleased with this priest. I've been unhappy, but as long as I believed the consecration was valid, I just bit my tongue. But no more. I'll check out the parish that's a little further away and if that isn't good, I'll just have to move! I do travel once a month to visit my folks, go to Confession, and attend a reverent Mass with a good priest(which they still have a few of in that Diocese, despite Bishop Adamec)! Your experience with the Maronite Church sounds heavenly. Who would have believed that the Roman Catholic Church would have deteriorated so badly. It's shocking, especially since most Catholics I know don't even know or care.
Thanks for your prayers -- I'll reciprocate in thanksgiving!
And Lillabett -- you'll be in my prayers too. The journey may be tough, but we know it's worth it.
Thanks for the info on DiLorenzo, now I'm even more depressed. I too prayed for the departure of our bishop, but maybe I was too hasty as DiLorenzo sounds just as bad or worse. Actually, from your description, they sound alike. Sullivan allowed just about anything and everything to go on, with a big smile. He was oh, so pleasant, and just basically ignored any complaints. His favorite topic was his dog. I'm sure our diocesan newspaper is filled with glowing reports about both of these guys -- but I'm not going to read it to find out. It regularly lines my trash container.
The Richmond Diocese is a large territory, so thanksfully we didn't get too many visits from our bishop. It's no wonder though that our priests are so lax -- no leadership.
I hope your new bishop is an orthodox guy, sounds like we're just getting more of the same.
You can go the USCCB.org site and click on dioceses. Then you can click on your diocese and there should be a list of parishes with addresses and phone #s and emails. Good luck.
On the other hand, I firmly believe we have a right and a DUTY to put our judgments forth on the infractions during the Mass. Consider writing it out and sending it to your priest along with a copy to the Vicar in charge of vocations (priests) -- this will probably not be the bishop.
You could also contact al_c I think he lives in your area.
This DiLorenzo guy sounds like a real swell fellow. There ought to be a list, you know, of which Bishops are orthodox and which are the namby-pamby sorts. Some might be debatable. McCarrick, for example. seems personally orthodox but what a wet noodle. then there are those [Mahoney] that scream: "oh yes I am a pretty boy. lets have a dragon dance." sigh. i always try to remind myself: a lot of the Bishops of the Middle Ages were leacherous jerks too.
You know that new document out of the Vatican, what was it called? I seem to remember it giving instructions on what the laity are supposed to do if their priests start getting creative. Does anyone know if I have any responsiblity to make a fuss over this? or can I just cut and run?
This article was also recently posted here:
Vatican says wine must be put in chalices before consecration
Catholic News Service ^ | May 19, 2004 | Jerry Filteau
WASHINGTON (CNS) -- Following up on its recent instruction on the Eucharist, the Vatican has ordered a change in U.S. liturgical norms.
It has ordered that any wine to be used for distributing Communion under both kinds be poured into the individual chalices during the preparation of the gifts, before it is consecrated.
It reversed a widespread custom, codified in U.S. norms approved in 2002, that called for distribution of the consecrated wine into the chalices at the time of the breaking of the bread, just before Communion.
Msgr. James P. Moroney, executive director of the U.S. bishops' Secretariat for Liturgy, said the revised norms are effective immediately, but it is up to each bishop to determine how to implement any liturgical change in his diocese.
Cardinal Francis E. George, chairman of the bishops' Committee on Liturgy, notified the bishops of the Vatican ruling and the corresponding changes in the U.S. norms in mid-May.
He sent them copies of a May 6 letter from Cardinal Francis Arinze, prefect of the Vatican Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments, modifying paragraphs 36 and 37 of the "Norms for the Distribution and Reception of Holy Communion Under Both Kinds in the Dioceses of the United States of America."
The original norms, adopted by the bishops in June 2001 and approved by the Vatican in March 2002, had said nothing about bringing additional chalices to the altar and pouring the wine into them in No. 36, which describes actions to be taken at the preparation of the gifts.
In No. 37, on actions just before Communion, the 2002 norms said that after the celebrant breaks the eucharistic bread: "Other empty chalices and ciboria or patens are then brought to the altar if this is necessary. The deacon or priest places the consecrated bread in several ciboria or patens and, if necessary, pours the precious blood into enough additional chalices as are required for the distribution of holy Communion."
The difficulty with the norm arose with the April 23 publication of an instruction on the Eucharist, "Redemptionis Sacramentum" ("The Sacrament of Redemption"), by the divine worship congregation.
Paragraph 106 of the instruction said that "the pouring of the blood of Christ after the consecration from one vessel to another is completely to be avoided, lest anything should happen that would be to the detriment of so great a mystery. Never to be used for containing the blood of the Lord are flagons, bowls or other vessels that are not fully in accord with the established norms."
The previous paragraph of the instruction says, "If one chalice is not sufficient for Communion to be distributed under both kinds to the priest concelebrants or Christ's faithful, there is no reason why the priest celebrant should not use several chalices." In such cases it urges that the primary chalice be larger than the rest "by reason of sign value."
In an April 27 letter to Cardinal Arinze, Cardinal George noted that the U.S. particular law contained in the 2002 norms "is apparently in contradiction to" the new instruction and asked for a "clarification ... in a timely fashion."
Cardinal George also noted that at least one liturgical commentator had been quoted in U.S. news reports observing that as a matter of church law approved particular law prevails over an instruction from a Vatican congregation in the event the two are in conflict.
In his May 6 response Cardinal Arinze said, "The instruction's clear exclusion of any pouring of the precious blood after the consecration overturns certain presuppositions that seem to underlie the above-mentioned (U.S.) norms."
A modification of the norms would resolve the difficulty, he added. "Hence this congregation wishes to modify its original confirmation in regard to Nos. 36 and 37 of these norms."
In the revised version of No. 36, on the offertory procession and preparation of the gifts, two sentences were added to the paragraph.
After the gifts are brought up, the revised norm says: "If one chalice is not sufficient for holy Communion to be distributed under both kinds to the priest concelebrants or Christ's faithful, several chalices are placed on a corporal on the altar in an appropriate place, filled with wine. It is praiseworthy that the main chalice be larger than the other chalices prepared for distribution."
While the new instruction prohibits consecrating wine in a pitcher or flagon and then transferring it to chalices, it does not forbid use of such a larger container to bring the wine to the altar before it has been consecrated. In fact it implies such use by calling for the wine to be distributed at the altar into any additional chalices that are needed immediately after the presentation of the gifts.
The instruction "does not describe what a vessel for wine (at the presentation of gifts) should look like," Msgr. Moroney said, but in accord with general liturgy norms "it should be worthy of the sacred celebration."
In the revised version of No. 37 in the U.S. norms, on actions surrounding the breaking of the bread before Communion, all references to bringing up additional chalices and distributing of the consecrated wine into them are simply deleted.
The new No. 37 says that after the breaking of the eucharistic bread "other empty ciboria or patens are then brought to the altar if this is necessary. The deacon or priest places the consecrated bread in several ciboria or patens, if necessary, as required for the distribution of holy Communion. If it is not possible to accomplish this distribution in a reasonable time, the celebrant may call upon the assistance of other deacons or concelebrating priests."
A final sentence of the original No. 37 -- which said the distribution of the consecrated hosts and wine into multiple vessels before Communion "is usually carried out at the altar, so that the sharing of all from the one cup is signified" -- has also been deleted.
Msgr. Moroney said the new Vatican instruction "makes clear that all of its provisions are effective immediately. However, the diocesan bishop is in charge of the careful implementation of all liturgical matters. His guidance should be followed."
In the same mailing containing notice of the revised U.S. norms, the bishops also received a complimentary copy of the newly published English translation of the Vatican instruction, published under the auspices of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.
- - -
Editor's Note: Titled "Instruction on the Eucharist: 'Redemptionis Sacramentum,'" the 84-page book costs $9.95 and may be ordered from USCCB Publishing online at: www.usccb.org, or by phone at: (800) 235-8722.
**I am disappointed actually, I thought at least the Catholic Church wouldn't fall prey to such blatant liberalism. **
We are disappointed too, ladyinred. Bishops are being called on the carpet by the Pope and told either to shape up or ship out. Several dissident bishops have been replaced by orthodox bishops.
It will take a long time since we didn't get into this big mess overnight.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.