QUAERITUR: Purifying fingers after handling the Eucharist… not.

Posted on 19 February 2012 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

ablution cupFrom a reader:

I went to a well said Latin low Mass this morning. The celebrant and a deacon gave communion to the faithful. The celebrant followed the rubrics after communion to consume the sacred particles and rinse his fingers. However, the deacon just simply went back to his seat in the sanctuary. There could have been sacred particles on his fingers. In the old days I believe the sacred ministers of communion would have rinsed their fingers in the sacrarium in the sacristy.
The New Mass rubrics are so sloppy on this, but would you know if any minister of communion should also rinse his fingers as does the celebrant after communion in the EF Mass? What about keeping the index finger and thumb together until these have been rinsed.

First, let’s make a couple distinctions. It is okay for deacons to distribute Communion in the Extraordinary Form. Also, had the helper been a priest or a bishop, rather than a deacon, the question about purifying one’s fingers would be the same. This isn’t something about deacons. That said, in the past, permanent diaconate formation in some places has not always been very… thorough. I have met deacons, great and willing and good-hearted men, who knew very little about what was going on. I have met a few whose knowledge would put 90% of the priests I know to shame. Alas, the former group is larger than the later. I think the numbers are shifting in the right direction. But I said this wasn’t about deacons qua deacons.

The additional Minister of Communion ought to have purified his fingers. Even if he didn’t think he had any particles on his fingers, he should have purified his fingers. Why? But people (like you) are often very attentive to everything that happens – or doesn’t happen – in a sanctuary. Had he purified his fingers, you wouldn’t have been distracted by the fact that he did not and we should never have met.  Decide for yourself whether that last point is good or bad.

Now, let’s grant the fellow the benefit of the doubt: maybe he just forgot.  Though it is entirely possible the deacon just didn’t know to do this, perhaps he just forgot!

Don’t climb all over him. Don’t assume he doesn’t believe in the presence of the Lord in Eucharist, or that he is a secret Lutheran, blah blah blah. If the deacon does this regularly, however, perhaps a discreet mention of the fact to the priest some time down the line could clue Father in on a point which, on his own, he could let the deacon/other minister know about.

People have a learning curve when it comes to recovering all the details. Some were fortunate enough to absorb it by osmosis or by really good training. Others slowly pick it up.

Anyway, if someone doesn’t know what we are talking about, there ought to be a small cup of water, normally with a cover, next to the door of the tabernacle. It is called an “ablution cup”.

Someone should do a study, with a graph of course, of the presence of and use of an ablution cup against the rigid imposition of Communion in the hand.

When one handles the Blessed Sacrament, and one is not the celebrant at Mass who will purify his fingers in the normal course of events, you use that small cup and small linen towel, to make sure that no particle of the Eucharist has remained on your fingers.  The ablution cup could also be used for a Host which may need to be dissolved before putting the liquid down the sacrarium.  Then there’s the not-so-legendary-maniple-pin-transfixed-enormous-chalice-invading-spider …

The Eucharist is not less the Eucharist in the Ordinary Form than it is in the Extraordinary.  But, alas, I have seen some shockingly relaxed practices concerning handling the Eucharist in some places. We would do well to recover traditional discipline in this matter, a discipline which leads not to soul-crushing anxiety or scrupulosity, but to reverence and awe at what we are privileged to do.

Furthermore, I think Communion in the hand should be abolished. So there!

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, ASK FATHER Question Box, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, Our Catholic Identity | Tagged , , , ,
22 Comments

QUAERITUR: Ashes, Very Small Children, and You – An annual discussion.

Posted on 19 February 2012 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

ashes and babiesFrom a priest:

Reverend and Dear Father,

Ash Wednesday is soon to be upon us, and I am faced with the situation I am often faced with: whether to impose ashes on cute, angel-faced infants.

It never fails that, as the faithful come up for ashes, they bring children.

I don’t see the purpose of imposing ashes on babies, who are unaware of not only sin, but what the ashes represent (as well as what the formula spoken means).

I know, if I don’t impose ashes on them, I’ll get bad looks from both sides of the ecclesiological spectrum.

Is there a reason I can cling to why babies should receive ashes?

I hope a few priests will jump in with their experience and thoughts on this matter.

Father, you are right that, looking at it with the cold eyes of reason, there is little point to imposing ashes on an infant.  Sure there is the cuteness factor.  More importantly, you will  avoid the ridiculous discussions you will have to endure if you don’t put ashes on the precious bundle of joy.  Inevitably someone will be upset that little Stupor Mundi didn’t get the ashes, especially because we live in an age when everyone has to “get theirs”, and in particular if it’s free.  No reason will be involved in these discussions, by the way.  You’ll have to deal with emotions, usually “mom’s”, and you cannot win on that field.  So, Father, unless you have lots of time and patience, just put the ashes on the kids.

On the other hand, our Catholic identity is rooted in more than what we grasp from the light of reason. Deep memories and emotions, implanted impressions, also play their role.  I have some really early memories.  You just never know what ineffable memory might be planted!  Seriously.

It seems to me that if it is obvious that mommy or daddy want darling precious to have ashes, then go with that. Put the ashes on the kid and move on (I am assuming that you are moving along the altar rail where people are kneeling like the good Catholics they ought to be).

If you are not sure if mommy or daddy expects Her Cuteness to get smeared with the gritty burnt vegetable remains which could get her wittle eyes, then ask about it.   You could ask something like, “Do you want some of this harsh and gritty burnt vegetable ash near her sensitive eyes or not?”

On second thought, how about, “And your child?”

I would advise, that if the ashes are put on a bit thick on the child’s forehead that you watch carefully that you not get any in the child’s eyes.  After that you can, if the image isn’t a bit ironic, wash your hands of the matter…. which come to think of it you’ll be doing before Mass continues.  I digress.  Just don’t you get ashes in the child’s eyes.  The parent’s eyes, on the other hand….

“But Father! But Father!”, I can hear some people shouting.  “Clearly you think ashes shouldn’t be put on babies.  How old is old enough for the ashes? Do we have to wait for 1st Holy Communion?”

First, I didn’t say babies should not be given ashes.  Read again what I said above about deep memories.  I wasn’t kidding about that.  I am not being merely pragmatic.  However, I would add that if little Stupor Mundi is old enough to say “sorry” to Jesus before beddy-bye, she is also old enough to start learning about penance and self-denial and what the ashes stand for: We are dust and unto dust we shall return.

Hmmm… now that I think of it, if a parent has to look at the smudge on baby’s head and think about death, that could be a good thing.

Reverend and Dear Father, since this is a sacramental, and not a sacrament, I think we can have some leeway.  And before anyone brings it up by shouting “But Father!”, this is not quite like the “blessing for babies at Communion time” issue: that moment is for Communion, not blessings.  Dealing with the fallout (get that “ash” image?  heh?) might be the same, they are not the same problem.

Finally, if you are going to make the decision not to put ashes on babies, may I recommend making a good confession before Ash Wednesday?

If you survive, let us know how it went.

Posted in "But Father! But Father!", "How To..." - Practical Notes, ASK FATHER Question Box, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, Mail from priests, Our Catholic Identity | Tagged , , , , ,
49 Comments

Catholic Herald notes

Posted on 19 February 2012 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

In the digital edition of the UK’s best Catholic weekly, The Catholic Herald, I saw a great pieces.

First, and I think this is only on the full, digital edition and not on the website, there is an article by Edward Pentin about the reaction of Robert Card. Sarah of the Pontifical Council “Cor Unum” to efforts by UN head Ban Ki Moom to press a homosexual agenda in African countries.

Catholic Herald

I didn’t see this reported anywhere else.  If it was, I missed it.  But the liberal re-engineering efforts march on, in goose-stepping unity across the globe.

“African bishops must react”, to such a move, the Guinean cardinal told me, adding: “This is not our culture. It’s against our faith.” He said that it is “not possible to impose on the poor this kind of European mentality.”

Perhaps there is a diocese open in the USA which could use the clear language offered by Card. Sarah.
Then there is an article asking which sort of hospital chapel you prefer? The photos give you a sense of the article.

hospital chapels

There is also an article about how priests are remaining in the Syrian city Homs even as violence escalates… and the world watches and does nothing.

Also, there is a good article by my friend Msgr. Andrew Wadsworth, Executive Secretary of ICEL, about what Lent is about.  He uses prayers from various days during Lent to illustrate his point: Lent: A time to go to war – with yourself.  WDTPRS has shown for years the military imagery which is clear in the Latin texts of many of our orations for Mass.

I find the full edition of the Catholic Herald online to be very interesting, especially because they are more advanced in the kulturkampf against the Church and against natural law (reason) in the UK than we are in the US.  Perhaps you would too.

Posted in Our Catholic Identity, REVIEWS | Tagged , , , , , ,
11 Comments

Feast of the Chair of Peter – transferred

Posted on 19 February 2012 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

The Feast of the Chair of Peter was transferred in the Vatican Basilica to today. It is normally on 22 February. This year the Feast, important in the Vatican Basilica for obvious reasons, would conflict with Ash Wednesday.

20120219-095636.jpg

A shot of the Roman Curia wall calendar.

20120219-095700.jpg

I wish all those who belong to the Ordinariate of the Chair of Peter a fine day.

Posted in Liturgy Science Theatre 3000 | Tagged , ,
3 Comments

Liberal social engineering is destroying us

Posted on 19 February 2012 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

National Review has a mordant piece by Mark Steyn. There are good points here. He links the so-called “social issues” (and if they go wrong, everything else must necessarily go wrong) and the partisan political mud fight, and the rapidly approaching collapse of the economy.

My emphases.

[…]

The U.S. economy shuts down in 2027? [During a House hearing, Rep. Paul Ryan – R-WI – had sketched out where the economy is headed.] Had you heard about that? It’s like the ultimate Presidents’ Day sale: Everything must go — literally! At such a moment, it may seem odd to find the political class embroiled in a bitter argument about the Obama administration’s determination to force Catholic institutions (and, indeed, my company and your company, if you’re foolish enough still to be in business in the United States) to provide free prophylactics to their employees. The received wisdom among media cynics is that Obama has engaged in an ingenious bit of misdirection by seizing on a pop-culture caricature of Republicans and inviting them to live up to it: Those uptight squares with the hang-ups about fornication have decided to force you to lead the same cheerless sex lives as them. I notice that in their coverage NPR and the evening news shows generally refer to the controversy as being about “contraception,” discreetly avoiding mention of sterilization and pharmacological abortion, as if the GOP have finally jumped the shark in order to prevent you jumping anything at all.

It may well be that the Democrats succeed in establishing this narrative. But anyone who falls for it is a sap. In fact, these two issues — the Obama condoms-for-clunkers giveaway and a debt-to-GDP ratio of 900 percent by 2075 — are not unconnected. In Greece, 100 grandparents have 42 grandchildren — i.e., an upside-down family tree. As I wrote in this space a few weeks ago, “If 100 geezers run up a bazillion dollars’ worth of debt, is it likely that 42 youngsters will ever be able to pay it off?” Most analysts know the answer to that question: Greece is demographically insolvent. So it’s looking to Germany to continue bankrolling its First World lifestyle.

But the Germans are also demographically exhausted: They have the highest proportion of childless women in Europe. One in three fräulein have checked out of the motherhood business entirely. A nation that did without having kids of its own is in no mood to maintain Greece as the ingrate slacker who never moves out of the house. As the European debt crisis staggers on, these two countries loathe each other ever more nakedly: The Greek president brings up his war record against the German bullies, and Athenian commentators warn of the new Fourth Reich. The Germans, for their part, would rather cut the Greeks loose. In a post-prosperity West, social solidarity — i.e., socioeconomic fictions such as “Europe” — are the first to disappear.

The United States faces a mildly less daunting arithmetic. Nevertheless, the Baby Boomers did not have enough children to maintain mid-20th-century social programs. As a result, the children they did have will end their lives in a poorer, uglier, sicker, more divided, and more violent society. How to avert this fate? In 2009 Nancy Pelosi called for free contraceptives as a form of economic stimulus. Ten thousand Americans retire every day, and leave insufficient progeny to pick up the slack. In effect, Nancy has rolled a giant condom over the entire American economy.

[…]

So, what we really need are free sterilizations, free abortifacients, free contraceptives and contrary-to-nature unions recognized as “marriage”. Under nationalized healthcare, I can imagine a One Child Policy.  After all, babies are expensive.

Furthermore, when we have all these things, liberals will force the Church to accept them (and never preach against them) under pain of fines and prosecution of her bishops and priests.

Hurray for the American Patriot Catholic Association!

American Patriotic Catholic Association

But first, we need to endure a couple more election cycles.  Then we can get down to work!

[wp_youtube]DIrUHVFkm9A[/wp_youtube]

Posted in Emanations from Penumbras, One Man & One Woman, Our Catholic Identity, Religious Liberty | Tagged , , , , , , , ,
19 Comments

1st Vespers of Quinquagesima

Posted on 18 February 2012 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

No frills Vespers from the Breviarium Romanum for the weary brethren.

Posted in PRAYERCAzT: What Does The (Latin) Prayer Really Sound L |
2 Comments

QUAERITUR: Priest walking around outside the confessional, able to see penitents.

Posted on 18 February 2012 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

confessionFrom a reader:

I went to make confession at a local parish, but saw the priest walking around near the confessional. Since it’s not a priest I wanted to make my confession to, I left to go to another church. On my way to the car, another woman came by and I told her which priest was hearing confessions. She ranted against priests walking around where they could see potential penitents in line or praying during posted confession times, and how she didn’t think privacy was taken seriously enough. She was deeply concerned. While less harsh, I, too, prefer to remain unseen before confession (especially if I am the only young woman and my voice could therefore identify me). I imagine there are many others who are made uncomfortable by being seen before confession, and might even skip the confession if they are (I’m not saying they should skip, but they might skip nonetheless).

It may be that the priest needed to get up a move a bit because of a cramp in his leg or pain in his back from sitting or maybe the poor guy suffers from claustrophobia… whatever. I admit that there have been a couple times when, on a blistering hot, humid day and during a lull, I have open the confessional door or gotten out to stretch my legs and get some air.

That said, if you are conscious of mortal sins, and there is a priest ready to hear your confession, then make your confession!

In general, I think it is a good idea if priest confessors make as little eye contact, or any contact, with people in line. If getting in or out of the confessional a priest has to pass by people who are in a line (perhaps at a different confessional) or who are in church still doing their penance, in my opinion, he ought to keep him eyes down and do his best not to give people a sense that he is looking at them. Other than that, he should probably stay in the box. Younger priests out there – if you haven’t been told this at some point, you would do well to pay attention: make your way to and from the confessional with as little contact with people as possible.

Keep in mind that priests are bound by the Seal of Confession. They will not reveal anything you confess, whether they know you or not.

I think it is rather unlikely that a priest would radically change his opinion of you from what you confess. My experience is that I forget almost immediately what people have said. I don’t know why. It just happens that way. This same experience – of forgetting – has been backed up by other priests I know. It wouldn’t surprise me if a few priests chimed in under this entry to say the same thing.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, ASK FATHER Question Box, GO TO CONFESSION, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000 | Tagged , , ,
56 Comments

QUAERITUR: Confession to a priest who is a family member

Posted on 18 February 2012 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

confessionFrom a reader:

I thought I heard somewhere that a priest ought to avoid hearing the confession of a close relative, especially his parents. I presumed this was for practical and not canonical reasons, no? Thanks for your consideration and faithfulness.

There is no law that prohibits a priest from hearing the confessions of family members. That said, I recommend avoiding doing so. A priest can’t prevent anyone from getting into his confessional, but I would try to dissuade someone who is a close family member. The reason for this is, mainly, the Seal of Confession might thereafter make it hard for a priest as a family member to deal with some family matters. This may not be the case for all priests and their families, but it seems to me best to avoid the whole situation.

In a similar way, a priest or bishop shouldn’t hear the confessions of those directly under his authority. The Seal would make it very difficult to deal with any disciplinary matters which were not also public knowledge. If, for example, a bishop consented to hear the confession of one of his priests who, during the confession, revealed to the his bishop that he had done something which would otherwise require the bishop to remove the priest from his position or even from ministry, that bishop’s hands would be in a hard situation because of the Seal.

Of course there are exceptions to the rule of thumb, as in cases of true emergencies or danger of death, but in normal circumstances I would avoid hearing the confessions of close family members and perhaps even close friends.

Again, there is no law which forbids a priest from doing so, but it seems to me to be fraught with complications.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, ASK FATHER Question Box, GO TO CONFESSION | Tagged ,
13 Comments

Both funny and quite sad: women “priests” simulated “mass” video

Posted on 18 February 2012 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Sometimes you don’t want to look at road-kill, but you look anyway.

So it is too with this video of a simulated “mass” by some “women priests”.

It is at the same time both funny and quite sad.

The way they change the texts reveals the deep confusion in which these people wallow.

[wp_youtube]A4Vj_B52hIA[/wp_youtube]

Posted in Lighter fare | Tagged
70 Comments

Planned Parenthood child-rape records destroyed during HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius’ time as governor of Kansas

Posted on 18 February 2012 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

I’m shocked!  Is it possible that HHS Sec. Kathleen Sebelius, pro-abortion catholic who may not receive Holy Communion according to can. 915, in some way helped Planned Parenthood officials dodge prosecution for failing to report cases of child rape?

From LifeSite:

No charges will be filed in connection with a national scandal involving the destruction of Planned Parenthood records during HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius’ time as governor of Kansas.

The Obama official has come under heavy fire from pro-life groups who are pointing out how a state attorney general she appointed in Kansas destroyed documents related 107 criminal charges former Kansas Attorney General Phill Kline filed against the abortion business. The charges alleged that planned Parenthood failed to report cases of child rape on children on whom Planned Parenthood did abortions, that it failed to test whether an unborn child was viable (as required by state law) before doing a late-term abortion, and that it manipulated records it submitted to the state to cover up those crimes.

Because former attorney general Steve Six, the Sebelius appointee, destroyed the documents, a court dismissed all of the felony charges filed against Planned Parenthood because the evidence supporting those charges had been destroyed.

Late Friday, Shawnee County District Attorney Chad Taylor said  he will not file charges, according to the Associated Press.

Under Sebelius, the Kansas Health and Education Department fought access by Kansas Attorney General Phill Kline to original copies of abortion reports needed to prosecute Planned Parenthood.

[…]

There’s a lot more to read over there.

Posted in Emanations from Penumbras | Tagged , ,
9 Comments