This ridiculous garbage is just what you would expect from Germany and from the ultra-liberal, modernist, Pray Tell.
This, in the time of Coronavirus
Private Mass Does Not Fit with a Contemporary Understanding of Eucharist
By Albert Gerhards, Benedikt Kranemann, Stephan Winter
[FROM THE BOTTOM OF THE POST: The liturgical scholars who wrote this text are Albert Gerhards (Bonn, retired), Benedikt Kranemann (Erfurt), and Stephan Winter (Münster). This article is reprinted with kind permission of katholisch.de. Translation awr. “awr” is the editor, a monk of the wacky St. John’s Collegeville.]
So priests celebrated Masses alone. In some pastoral letters it was stated, among other things, that these Masses take place vicariously for the people, with intercession for the needs of the community affected by the pandemic. In some places and in some social media this was welcomed and encouraged.
The Mass is not the private possession of the priest
But does this befit the circumstances and does it comport with a contemporary understanding of liturgy? Clearly not. It disregards e.g. division of roles, which of course for theological reasons should apply not only to the celebration of the Eucharist. In the liturgical reform of the Second Vatican Council it is expressly made clear that the liturgy is enacted communally and publicly by all the baptized (Sacrosanctum Conciliium, 7). Thus the Church came and comes entirely into its own when a local community gathers for worship in its differentiated membership, above all on Sundays and feast days. Private celebration in particular is not compatible with this understanding of Eucharist.
One sees the extent to which obsolete understandings surface again in the current crisis in some diocesan guidelines, local practices, and telltale language. Private Masses as described above are strongly encouraged – and admittedly, one can appeal to the church law in force (canon 904 in the 1983 Code of Canon Law). When such Masses are broadcast on social media, we see the painful and possibly fateful resurrection of things rightly done away with. Concerning what happens in secret in the sense of spiritual connectedness, we easily come to a double exclusion via social media presentation: within, the priest exclusively celebrating and communicating; without, the laity reduced to virtual presence and “spiritual Communion.”
One also comes across the suggestion in this connection to expose the Host in the monstrance in open churches; there are even videos of clergy processing through the city with the monstrance. A connection to the celebration of the Eucharist, which is a prerequisite for eucharistic devotion, is no longer present here. This is no longer acceptable today and does damage to the liturgy.
These … modernists say that private Masses and Eucharistic processions and Eucharistic adoration are doing damage to the liturgy. It is hard not to conclude that they don’t believe in the Catholic Faith.
I do not at the moment have the time to craft an longer expression – lacking inappropriate language – of my contempt for these despicable propositions or the willingness of people to post them in this time of need.
This is the embodiment of the modernist mentality: the reduction of the supernatural to the natural.
They even attacked making a “Spiritual Communion”.
Please… as you find sites with live streaming of Eucharistic adoration or of live private Masses, please say a prayer for these benighted souls. I don’t think they are malicious. But they are nevertheless acting as agents of the Enemy of the soul.
Fathers… multiply private Masses. We need MORE processions. We need MORE adoration.
Peter Kwasniewski responds to the dopey Germans. HERE