Posted on 09/23/2002 10:50:50 PM PDT by NYer
I remember when I was a kid, quite a few people would not be receiving Communion and would remain kneeling in the pew. I did this myself at Mass up until I went back to Confession a few years ago. One of the reasons that we need EEM's (well, I honestly don't think we need EEM's in most cases) is because Confession has fallen by the wayside and now everyone goes to Communion all the time.
Regardless of the amount of parishioners (generally not that many) there are always two EEM's distributing Holy Communion. My parish is always "advertising" for more. We have two priests in residence and I never understood why the one not celebrating Mass doesn't come over for Communion. That's what they used to do years ago.
OK, here is a problem that I have been wrestling with for over a week. What do we do with this stuff? Do you show your priest? Do you write letters? I mean, I have a lot of "abuses" in my parish, and when do I stop and take a breath and just accept them? I do not want to become like the holier than thou Catholic who notices every little transgression and voices her opinion. I'm afraid I will get lost in the "battle" and lose site of Him. Just how important are these things?
Any advice or pearls of wisdom from any of you are welcome.
Did I convert you?
<> No. I was describing as errors those unauthorised things introduced into the Liturgy.
When one strives to remove unauthorised actions, additions etc, one is not reforming a reform, one is correcting errors - errors for which Pope John Paul II apologised in an Encyclical.
I know the phrase "reform of the reform" has a certain memetic quality to it but, imo, it misses the mark as it appearts to be the case that what the R of R" is focused on are unauthorised additions to the Liturgy not the authentic reform qua reform.<>
In our parish, glass bowls constitute the ciboria. It is the priest who places the consecrated hosts in them. However, it is an extraordinary minister who pours the Precious Blood into glass chalices.
While I do not know this for a fact, I tend to believe that the glass "bowls" and "chalices" were purchased at the local A.C. Moore Craft Store. On more than one occasion, I have found our pastor shopping there.
<> LOL ok<>
Chalice, Rubrics
Are there any requirements for the creation of a chalice to be used in the Roman Catholic Mass. Does it have to be made of certain materials, does it have to be a certain height?
The General Instruction of the Roman Missal and Inaestimabile donum both speak about the proper construction of the chalice:
From the GIRM: 290:"Vessels should be made from materials that are solid and that in the particular region are regarded as noble. The conference of bishops will be the judge in this matter. But preference is to be given to materials that do not break easily or become unstable."
291:"Chalices and other vessels that serve as receptacles for the blood of the Lord are to have a cup of nonabsorbent material. The base may be of any other solid and worthy material."
294:"Vessels made from metal should ordinarily be gilded on the inside if the metal is one that rusts; gilding is not necessary if the metal is more precious than gold and does not rust."
295:"The artist may fashion the sacred vessels in a shape that is in keeping with the culture of each region, provided each type of vessel is suited to the intended liturgical use."
From Inaestimabile donum, n. 16: "Particular respect and care are due to the sacred vessels, both the chalice and paten for the celebration of the Eucharist, and the ciboria for the Communion of the faithful. The form of the vessels must be appropriate for the liturgical use for which they are meant. The material must be noble, durable and in every case adapted to sacred use. In this sphere judgement belongs to the Episcopal Conference of the individual regions.
Use is not to be made of simple baskets or other receptacles meant for ordinary use outside the sacred celebrations, nor are the sacred vessels to be of poor quality or lacking any artistic style."
Based on these instructions, the chalice cannot be made out of glass or ceramic, two substances that are not durable. The cup of the chalice must not be made out of wood as this is an absorbant material or any other material which deteriorates easily. The exact form of the chalice is up to the individual artist but it must be suited to holding the Precious Blood. Therefore it needs a wide enough base to prevent tipping and a deep enough cup to prevent the liquid from spilling as the chalice is moved. I would also recomend, practicaly speaking, that the chalice should have a node in the middle of the stem to allow for easy handling.
<> Can other Prelates undetake a Reform of the Reformed Reform or will this Reform of the Reform be Unreformable? <>
<> I lost it years ago. <>
The Precious Blood can be in glass. It is okay.
Okay I think I was mistaken. The precious blood must be in a metal chalice but I have seen priests use glass pitchers from which they pour the wine into the chalice. Which seems fine because it is just wine until it is consecrated.
One problem I have is in designating a "movement" the Reform of the Reform. It implies, to me, a potentially endless series of quarrels and arguements over which of the potentially endless reformers will have the last word. My question about whether or not the reform of the reform can itself be reformed is serious. At what point does one relinquish their particular preferences in Liturgy for the greater good- comity within the communion.
If successfull, do the current reformers of the reform think there will not be others who think their particular prejudices, opinions, biases, in regards the Liturgy insufficeintly informed and yet will be satisfied to let that reform of the reform stand or will they not be encouraged to institute a final and perfect, in their minds, reform? ,> Four decades is enough. Faithfully implement the Pauline Rite with authentic translations and end the Liturgical Wars.<>
I used to think that was the solution too. But unfortunately, it's too late for fond hopes. The liturgical experts have so entrenched their control over the New Mass that all the directives from Rome will not remove them, nor their abuses.
In any event, why should they follow Liturgicam Authenticam or the revised General Instructions of the Roman Missal? All they have had to do in the past was go ahead with their adjustments and wait for Rome to fold.
Many of the questionable practices associated with the New Mass--Communion in the hand, laymen administering the Sacrament, altar girls--began as flagrant violations of the new rite's liturgical norms, only to be approved by Rome later as faits accomplis.
The New Mass was intended to bring a renewal of grace, faith and unity to the Church. It has visibly failed in these respects. Let the process of authentic liturgical development begin again.
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.