From the feeder:


And the baths…

Someone either didn’t make it… or did…

From a reader. My emphases:
I thought you would find the following interesting. I was at a meeting at my NO parish last night and found this small book obviously being used by the youth ccd director. I’m sure it is very typical of what is used in most NO parishes.
As I flipped through it, I found the following "aside" in the section on receiving Communion (typed as printed).
Receiving Communion "In the Old Days"
The Communion Fast began at midnight and included everything–even water! Catholics approached the Communion rail, a marble or wooden divider between the sanctuary and the benches or pews in the larger section of the church. They ascended one or more steps, knelt on the top one, placed their hands under a cloth, which was draped over the rail, and formed a flat space in the cloth with their thumbs and forefingers (to hold the consecrated host if it should slip from their tongue). The priest approached each person from the right, accompanied by an acolyte or altar server, who carried a small plate called a paten, which was placed under the person’s chin (again, to catch the host if it should slip). The priest would hold up the host in front of each communicant and say, in Latin, "Corpus Domini nostri Jesu Christi custodiat animam tuam in vitam aeternam," which means, "May the Body of our Lord Jesus Christ preserve your soul into eternal life." Then he would place the host on the person’s tongue and move on to the next person. Only priests were allowed to distribute Communion. If there were many receiving Communion and only one or two priests, the distribution could take…quite some time.
Too much ceremony and too many precautions based on fear? Perhaps. But it did instill reverence for the sacredness of receiving Communion. It was difficult to think of receiving Communion as ordinary and routine.
From Liguouri, "Handbook for Today’s Catholic Teen"
A reader sent a question. I consulted a canonist for the answer:
Can you discuss the role that parishes play for most Catholics in worship? In particular, I wanted to know the duty that people had to join their territorial parish, the responsibilities people have to their parish, etc. Did this change in the 1983 Code of Canon Law? Often, those of us who care about liturgy become nomads. That’s clearly not what the Church wants. Yet, we have some truly awful parishes out there. What are our responsibilities here?
Many years ago I remember hearing the late Msgr. Richard Schuler talk about this topic. He reflected on the fact that the new, 1983 Code described a parish as a "portion" of the people of God. Since Msgr. Schuler was pastor of a "national" parish rather than a territorial parish, he paid attention to these things.
In many places in the wealthy, developed world we are very mobile. We are not so restricted anymore to the nearest church. Given that people have the right to the Church’s worship according to the book and sound teaching, they often seek what meets their needs.
Still… there has to be some way of figuring out jurisdiction. Right? In the 1983 Code parishes are mainly territorial. The lines are drawn on the world’s map.
Here is where I start working from what the canonist sent.
People belong to the territorial parish in which they reside unless they belong to a personal parish. These later can be national or ethnic or for some chaplaincy such as military, university students…. TLM goers….
The canonist pointed out that there is nothing about the obligation of the faithful to attend or support their territorial parish.
Canon 222 provides that the faithful have an obligation to provide for the needs of the Church – not specifically their parish Church, and, of course, c. 214 establishes that the faithful have the right to worship according to the legitimate provisions of their own rite.
The canonist continues with my emphases:
All of the obligations that speak about parishes are geared towards the obligations of a pastor – he is to ensure that the faithful living in his parish (and indeed EVERYONE living in his parish) have the Gospel proclaimed to them, that the faithful receive religious instruction, that the sacraments are celebrated worthily and frequently, that the sick are visited and comforted – canons 528 and 529 are, in my opinion, two of the most beautiful canons in the Code – and two canons which every pastor of a parish should read on a daily basis.
So, for all the liturgical nomads … there’s no reason to feel guilty for not attending one’s territorial parish, particularly if it is a locus of liturgical abuse. Yes, there can be heroism in suffering in silence, and there can be great virtue in being a leaven to bring about change in one’s territorial parish, but the canonical burden is upon the pastor – not the faithful (who are often guilted into feeling that they should stay worshiping in a parish that fails to provide for their legitimate spiritual needs). I think there can be a balance between a consumerist approach, wherein one shops for the parish that best fits one’s needs, and a martyr approach that says I need to stay put, even though I leave Mass every Sunday more angry and depressed than when I entered.
I would think it a salubrious action to inform one’s territorial parish that one will be attending and participating in the parochial and sacramental life of St. Fidelissimus parish rather than St. Smileyhugs parish, and to give the specific reasons (more faithful liturgy, orthodox preaching, better catechetical programs for the kiddies, specific devotions), and maybe copy it to the bishop or vicar forane. The pastor should be aware of how many parishioners he’s losing out on by letting Sr. Go-Go Boots do liturgical dance. As always, letters should be carefully thought out and crafted, and not done with high emotion – scripta manent!
Very sound reflections.
"But Father! But Father!" some of you… yes, I can hear you … are exclaiming, "You can’t leave us hanging! What are those canons you mentioned? Tell us now, for we are too lazy to look them up ourselves!"
Can. 528 §1. A pastor is obliged to make provision so that the word of God is proclaimed in its entirety to those living in the parish; for this reason, he is to take care that the lay members of the Christian faithful are instructed in the truths of the faith, especially by giving a homily on Sundays and holy days of obligation and by offering catechetical instruction. He is to foster works through which the spirit of the gospel is promoted, even in what pertains to social justice. He is to have particular care for the Catholic education of children and youth. He is to make every effort, even with the collaboration of the Christian faithful, so that the message of the gospel comes also to those who have ceased the practice of their religion or do not profess the true faith.
§2. The pastor is to see to it that the Most Holy Eucharist is the center of the parish assembly of the faithful. He is to work so that the Christian faithful are nourished through the devout celebration of the sacraments and, in a special way, that they frequently approach the sacraments of the Most Holy Eucharist and penance. He is also to endeavor that they are led to practice prayer even as families and take part consciously and actively in the sacred liturgy which, under the authority of the diocesan bishop, the pastor must direct in his own parish and is bound to watch over so that no abuses creep in.
Can. 529 §1. In order to fulfill his office diligently, a pastor is to strive to know the faithful entrusted to his care.
Therefore he is to visit families, sharing especially in the cares, anxieties, and griefs of the faithful, strengthening them in the Lord, and prudently correcting them if they are failing in certain areas. With generous love he is to help the sick, particularly those close to death, by refreshing them solicitously with the sacraments and commending their souls to God; with particular diligence he is to seek out the poor, the afflicted, the lonely, those exiled from their country, and similarly those weighed down by special difficulties. He is to work so that spouses and parents are supported in fulfilling their proper duties and is to foster growth of Christian life in the family.
§2. A pastor is to recognize and promote the proper part which the lay members of the Christian faithful have in the mission of the Church, by fostering their associations for the purposes of religion. He is to cooperate with his own bishop and the presbyterium of the diocese, also working so that the faithful have concern for parochial communion, consider themselves members of the diocese and of the universal Church, and participate in and sustain efforts to promote this same communion.
Have you ever seen a priest/celebrant during Mass receive Communion after everyone else?
I have. And the answer I was given was… I am not making this up… "It is rude not to serve your guests first."
No kidding.
The April Newsletter of the USCCB’s Committee on Divine Worship is out.
In this newsletter there is published an English version of a response to a dubium. Here it is with some added emphases:
Dubium on the Priest Celebrant Receiving Communion After the Faithful
In the November-December 2008 issue of Notitiæ (vol. 45, pg. 609), the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments published their response to a dubium on the possibility of the priest celebrant receiving Holy Communion at Mass after or at the same time as the lay faithful. For the benefit of our readers, an unofficial translation is provided here:
Question: Whether it is permitted for the Priest celebrant to communicate only after he has distributed the Holy Eucharist to the faithful, or whether he may distribute the Holy Eucharist and then afterwards communicate together with the people.
Response: No, to both questions.
Certain practices of this kind in particular are being introduced, namely, where the Priest celebrant communicates only after he has distributed the Holy Eucharist to the faithful, or, by the same thinking, he waits until after the Holy Eucharist has already been distributed to communicate together with everyone else, namely, the faithful, as though feasting together at the Eucharistic table.
In all the Rites of the Church, an order is found which has been handed on for approaching Holy Communion: first, the Bishop or the Priest celebrant communicates, and then the other ministers according to their hierarchical rank, and finally, the people. The Priest communicates first, not because of any human superiority, but on account of the nature and dignity of his ministry. For, the Priest acts in the person of Christ on account of the integrity of the sacrament and because he presides over the assembled people: “So, as Priests join themselves with the action of Christ the High Priest, they daily offer themselves wholly to God, and as they are nourished by the Body of Christ, they partake of love from the heart of him who gives himself as food to the faithful” (Presbyterium ordinis, no.13).
In the edition of the Missale Romanum promulgated by the Servant of God, Pope Paul VI, the communion of the faithful follows immediately upon the communion of the Priest, establishing it in this way as a unique action, different from the form in the edition of the Missale Romanum which appeared in 1962, in which the communion of the Priest is separated from the communion of the faithful through the recitation of the Confiteor [The Second Confiteor was removed in the 1962MR. I believe it remained only in the Holy Week section of the Missal (Good Friday – but that is neither Mass nor the usual sort of liturgy) and in the Pontificale for ordinations (as a commenter, below, clarified).] and of the prayers, the Misereatur, Indulgentiam, Agnus Dei and the Domine, non sum dignus.
The governing liturgical norm states: “A Priest must communicate at the altar at the moment laid down by the Missal each time he celebrates Holy Mass, and the concelebrants must communicate before they proceed with the distribution of Holy Communion. The Priest celebrant or a concelebrant is never to wait until the people’s Communion is concluded before receiving Communion himself” (Redemptionis Sacramentum, no. 97).
I add that Redemptionis Sacramentum should be periodically reviewed by priests, especially, and lay people.
The April Newsletter of the USCCB’s Committee on Divine Worship is out.
There is an interesting article about the new printing of the Missale Romanum. There are corrections of spelling, grammatical and typographical errors.
Holy See Issues Emended Missale Romanum, editio typica tertia
Since the year 2000, when Pope John Paul II issued the third typical edition of the Missale Romanum, nations throughout the world have been translating the text into the various vernacular languages. As the Holy See and various translators around the world worked on vernacular editions of the Roman Missal, a variety of minor errors were found in the Latin text which necessitated issuing a reprint. Therefore, on October 6, 2008, an emended edition of the Missale Romanum, editio typica tertia was published. The slight changes that have been made will be reflected in the final English translation of the Roman Missal.
This reprint corrects spelling, grammatical, and typographical errors, and other inaccuracies (such as the insertion at the beginning of the Apostles’ Creed of “unum,” as in the Nicene Creed). In some saints’ listings, the saint’s particular designation – such as martyr, religious, or virgin – was missing in the 2000 text. The emended Missale Romanum also includes three new dismissal formulas: Go and announce the Gospel of the Lord, Go in peace, glorifying the Lord by your life, and Go in peace. These formulas were incorporated into the approved Order of Mass English translation, and will take effect when the new Roman Missal is published.
By separate decree of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments (Prot. N. 652/08/L, published in Notitiæ vol. 45 [2008], pgs. 239-240), the Eucharistic Prayers for Masses with Children were removed from the Missale Romanum, [Hurray!] and will appear in the future as a separate ritual text. [Hissssss!] In its space now appears a Supplement, containing Collects for the memorials of St. Pio of Pietrelcina (Sept. 21), St. Juan Diego Cuauhtlatoatzin (Dec. 9), and Our Lady of Guadalupe (Dec. 12). Those three memorials were inserted into the General Roman Calendar after the initial 2000 publication.
The Supplement also provides the rubrics and prayers for celebrating an extended Vigil of Pentecost, similar to the way the readings are proclaimed at the Easter Vigil on Holy Saturday night. (An article on the extended Pentecost Vigil can be found on page 16 of this issue of the Newsletter.)
Two final emendations are of note. At the Chrism Mass, the rubric mandating the General Intercessions after the Renewal of Commitment to Priestly Service has been removed, returning the practice to what it was before the editio typica tertia was issued. Finally, a rubric in the General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM) affecting Bishops celebrating Mass outside their own Dioceses has been altered. In an unofficial translation, the relevant part of number 149 now reads: “If, however, the Bishop is celebrating outside his own diocese, after the words N., our Pope, he adds: and my brother N., the Bishop of this Church, and me, your unworthy servant” (emphasis added). This change to the GIRM took effect last November, and should be incorporated by Bishops as soon as possible if they celebrate Mass outside their Diocese. The complete list of emendations to the Missale Romanum, editio typica tertia is published in Notitiæ, vol. 45 [2008], pgs. 367-387.
I guess I’ll have to get a copy.
The April Newsletter of the USCCB’s Committee on Divine Worship is out.
Inter alia there is an article entitle, "Ten Questions on Influenza/Swine Flu and the Liturgy"
After Q&A about how influenza is transmitted, in #8 we are told that Ministers of Communion should "practice good hygiene". Newsflash.
However, we go on to read:
9. What about further adaptations or the restriction of options at Mass?
The Diocesan Bishop should always be consulted regarding any changes or restriction of options in the celebration of Roman Catholic Liturgy. However, the need for the introduction of widespread liturgical adaptations for the prevention of the transmission of influenza in the dioceses of the United States of America is not evident at this time.
"Hmmm…", muse I.
People all over the USA have been sending me notes from their own dioceses with recommendations that Communion be distributed only in the hand, namely that It not be given on the tongue.
I wonder, … if it is not evident at at this time that there should be any liturgical adaptations, and if it is not really possible to deny Holy Communion on the tongue (because of Redemptionis Sacramentum), I wonder if… when the risk of influenza abates… will there be letters coming from diocesan chanceries saying that it is okay to distribute Communion on the tongue again?
You can bet that there will be notes saying that it is okay to distribute Communion with both species.
you can bet that there will be notes saying that it is okay to give the Sign of Peace.
Will there be notes saying that Communion on the tongue is okay?
I’m just askin’…
I mentioned the other day that I had seen Mr. Indigo Bunting.
This morning he showed up again on the farther feeder, but I had the camera with the zoom handy.

He thinks he is an Oriole…
In the meantime, why did the sparrow cross the road?

Probably to laugh at the squirrel, here baffled by the baffler.

Neener neener neener.
As I was sitting at my desk, minding my own business, I heard the not unfamiliar sound of a bird flapping against my window pane, trying to get in. This one, however, was the first Oriole of the season, a couple feet away!
Several days I ago I put up a new feeder station with little cups for grape jelly and orange slices.
Nothing.
I waited.
They usually can’t resist grape jelly and oranges.
Nothing.
Then this critter decides to explore the tiny humming bird feeder next to my window and thus… the encounter.
He did, however, immediately thereafter find the grape jelly. I shot this photo, though that feeder is not too close to my house.

I will be on the watch.
I have also spotted an Indigo Bunting, but he has been scarce.
Meanwhile, the usual suspects are hanging around.

This one is, I think, a coach for the Goldfinch Eating Team.

They are engaged in a contest with the new team in town.

The PSET won this round.

This one suspected she was being watched.


This finch, however, was determined to be photogenic.

In the meantime, Mrs. Woodpecker scoops some nutty glop.

PENJING REPORT
I have been experimenting with multiple webcams… trying to get everything to work smoothly for the Z-Cam. As part of the experiment, I have set one up for Penjing, whom I have also put to work with some advertising.

"But Father! But Father!", you are surely saying. "That is the ugliest little webcam I have ever seen!".
Indeed. However, it has a 5 megapixel resolution and cost about $12! There is no microphone built it, which is fine. The only problem is that I can’t figure out how to control its brightness and contrast, etc., when I have the others plugged in. It is simply too light sensitive. It is perfect for the chapel cam, however. I might get a couple more with extensions. Id like to get a couple more angles on Mass, perhaps… experiment a bit.
In the meantime, Penjing has nothing special to say.