A cup of really strong Mystic Monk Coffee can help you to wake up. This video could have the same effect on liberals (to whom I also recommend Mystic Monk Coffee – eventually – when they convert and are worthy).
He reallay starts revving up at about 7:50.
I received notice that a 1 year anniversary Requiem Mass will be celebrated on Tuesday, 28 March in New York City at the Shrine of Our Lady of Mount Carmel for the late Fr. John E. Halborg.
I met Fr. Halborg only a few times. He sometimes said Mass at Holy Innocents. However, I was moved to post about his death last year not just because he, like me, was a convert, but also because of the pretty awful way the living handled his funeral. They pretty much completely disrespected his clearly written wishes.
So, if you are in the area, please consider attending the Requiem.
In any event, please stop and say a prayer for this priest. Priests need prayers after their earthly lives, too.
From a reader…
Today at mass, after the priest had completed the Eucharistic Prayer, and we had moved past the Agnus Dei, one of the EMHCs noticed that the Chalices and Ciboriums with unconsecrated hosts (those meant for distribution to those at Mass) had not been placed on the altar.
Instead they had been on a table to the back left of the priest who presumably had no idea they were there (he looked quite shocked when the EMHC went to move them to the altar). They then proceeded to distribute communion as normal with those hosts and chalices that had not been on the altar during the consecration.
My question is: were those hosts consecrated, being behind the priest, and not on the altar? Would it matter whether he knew they were there?
I abstained from receiving lest I receive what was passed off as, but not really, the Blessed Sacrament, but I wondered what I should do.
Also, now that the leftover unconsumed hosts have been placed in the Tabernacle, what do I do if I return to Mass at the same Church. With my knowledge, must I be wary of receiving those possibly unconsecrated hosts, being passed off as the Eucharist? Thank you for your response!
Priests are trained, or ought to be trained, to have the intention, at least the moral intention, to consecrate the elements that are placed on the corporal upon the altar. Priests have it drilled into them, and they drill it into themselves, that if it is on the corporal, it gets consecrated. They don’t have to have a specific immediately conscious intention about each and every single host. A general, or moral intention is adequate.
The practice of priests making a act of intention before they go out to celebrate Mass should be revived. I warmly urge every priest (and bishop) who reads this to learn the Formula of Intention and even to print it, frame it, and locate it near where you put on your vestments. There are other good prayers for the priest’s preparation to say Mass, but I think this is the most important and basic. The Formula can be found in every copy of the traditional Missale Romanum. I also found it in the Latin 2002 Missale Romanum. I don’t happen to have to hand an English volume, but I’ll bet a translation is in the appendix. Here is the text:
| Ego volo celebrare Missam, et conficere Corpus et Sanguinem Domini nostri Iesu Christi, iuxta ritum sanctae Romanae Ecclesiae, ad laudem omnipotentis Dei totiusque Curiae triumphantis, ad utilitatem meam totiusque Curiae militantis, pro omnibus, qui se commendaverunt orationibus meis in genere et in specie, et pro felici statu sanctae Romanae Ecclesiae. | My purpose is to celebrate Mass and to confect the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ according to the rite of the holy Roman Church to the praise of almighty God and all the Triumphant Church (in Heaven), for my good and the good of all the Church Militant (on Earth), and for all who have commended themselves to my prayers in general and in particular, and for the favorable state of the holy Roman Church. |
| Gaudium cum pace, emendationem vitae, spatium verae paenitentiae, gratiam et consolationem Sancti Spiritus, perseverantiam in bonis operibus, tribuat nobis omnipotens et misericors Dominus. Amen | May the almighty and merciful Lord grant us joy with peace, amendment of life, room for true repentance, the grace and consolation of the Holy Spirit and perseverance in good works. Amen. |
Back to the specific question.
In my opinion, the priest did not validly consecrate the hosts in the ciboria that were left on the credence table.
It might have mattered should he have know about them, remaining on the credence table, but then he ought to have had them brought to the altar. In your description, you say that he was “quite shocked” when the ciboria were brought up, which indicates that he didn’t know of them and, therefore, didn’t intend to consecrated them. Hence, they were not consecrated.
It is possible that the priest then spoke the words of consecration over those hosts. However, even in the context of Mass that’s not good. A priest mustn’t consecrate one species apart from the other. What he should have done, in my opinion, is simply explain to the people that the ciboria were left on the table, they were not consecrated and there would not be enough consecrated Hosts for everyone. He should explain that, yes, they were at Mass because he had consecrated and consumed his Host and Blood from the chalice and that they had fulfilled their obligation and he his obligation to say Mass for the intention offered. Done. That could have been a learning experience for many.
However, there is such a mania today that everyone must always go to Communion at every Mass, that Father was psychologically driven to do something else.
If the priest did not consecrate those hosts, and they were distributed, he would have committed a grave sin. Please, Lord, I hope he didn’t do that. Furthermore, if he put unconsecrated hosts into the tabernacle then he would cause people – albeit unwittingly – to commit acts of idolatry were they to venerate them. Please, Lord, I hope he didn’t do that. And he would sin again, sacrilegiously, by leaving them there and – quod Deus avertat – distributing them at another Mass! If Father knows for sure which ciboria are in question, he should take steps to correct the situation.
In any event, it is better simply to explain what happened and learn from it than too do something imprudent and, potentially, scandalous.
For your part, I would refrain from receiving Communion for a few days, at least if you see that hosts from the tabernacle are being distributed. Also, you would not be out of line to contact the priest and ask him about what you saw. Be calm, respectful, factual, and listen carefully to his explanation.
Today is the 1st anniversary of the death of Rita Antoinette Rizzo, better known as Mother Angelica, the foundress of EWTN and many other initiatives.
May those who carry on with her work not disgrace her memory.
Here is one of the defining moments of her ministry.
It was World Youth Day in Denver. There was a “stations of the cross” that was , quite frankly, blasphemous. Mother reacted strongly.
Please, all of you, pray for her. She would love that Masses are offered for her. She would love rosaries.
Was there a good point in the sermon you heard at the Mass to fulfill your Sunday obligation? Let us know.
For my part, for the TLM this morning, I spoke of the flow of Lent, from Pre-Lent to the Vigil and about how the Church liturgically dies. For the Novus Ordo, I reviewed necessary elements for making a good confession, including confession of all mortal sins in number and kind and therefore the need to make a daily examination of conscience. I spoke also about a firm purpose of amendment. Thereupon, a gave some suggestions for how to establish good habits (making an examination of conscience) and breaking bad habits (willingness to suffer and having a plan for doing something else).
And now, since this is Laetare Sunday, what vestments did you who belong to the Roman Rite see for Mass? Let’s have a POLL. Anyone can vote but you have to be registered and approved to use the combox. For more on the liturgical color rosacea, HERE
This is the very Feast of the Incarnation.
Today we celebrate that moment when our Lord elevated our humanity by taking our human nature into an indestructible bond with His Divinity.
In the Incarnation God opened for us the path to our “divinization”: His sharing of something of His own divine glory with us in the eternal happiness of heaven.
In the sin of our First Parents the whole human race sinned. In justice, therefore, a human being had to correct the offense. However, such a correction was entirely impossible for a mere mortal human. Such a correction required the intervention of one who was both man and God.
In the Incarnation, the Word made flesh – made man – Jesus the Lord and Savior not only begins to save us from our sins in His earthly ministry, but begins also the mysterious revelation of man more fully to himself (cf. GS 22).
Part of the Lord’s mission was also to teach man more fully who He is in the beauty of His own Person. However, He did not begin to do this only from the beginning of His public ministry. He began this from the very moment of the Incarnation.
Remember: From the instant of His conception, the Word made flesh begins to teach man more fully who man is.
Light from Light sheds light on the dignity of man, God’s image, from the instant of conception, from man’s humblest beginning.
Here are the Collects for this beautiful Feast of the Annunciation, Lady Day. Here are the “Opening Prayers” from both the older, traditional, Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite and the newer, post-Conciliar, Ordinary Form.
You might discuss their differences, their respective strengths.
COLLECT (1962MR):
Deus, qui de beatae Mariae Virginis utero Verbum tuum, Angelo nuntiante, carnem suscipere voluisti: praesta supplicibus tuis; ut, qui vere eam Genetricem Dei credimus, eius apud te intercessionibus adiuvemur.
LITERAL VERSION:
O God, who desired Your Word to take flesh from the womb of the blessed Virgin Mary the angel announcing it: grant to your supplicants; that we who believe truly in the Mother of God, may be helped in Your sight by her intercessions.
COLLECT (2002MR):
Deus, qui Verbum tuum in utero Virginis Mariae
veritatem carnis humanae suscipere voluisti,
concede, quaesumus,
ut, qui Redemptorem nostrum
Deum et hominem confitemur,
ipsius etiam divinae naturae mereamur esse consortes.
LITERAL VERSION:
O God, who wanted Your Word to take up
the truth of human flesh in the womb of the Virgin Mary,
grant, we beseech,
that we, who confess our Redeemer to be God and man,
may also merit to be the sharers of His divine nature.
This is of new composition, though there is a reference here to Letter 123 Ad Eudociam Augustam – “De monachis Palaestinis” of St. Pope Leo I, “the Great” (+461).
“Fides enim catholica sicut damnat Nestorum, qui in uno domino nostro Iesu Christo duas ausus est praedicare personas, ita damnat etiam Eutychen cum Dioscoro, qui ab unigenito Deo Verbo negant in utero Virginis matris veritatem carnis humanae susceptam.”
NEW CORRECTED ICEL VERSION:
O God, who willed that your Word
should take on the reality of human flesh
in the womb of the Virgin Mary,
grant, we pray,
that we, who confess our Redeemer to be God and man,
may merit to become partakers even in his divine nature.
At St. Raymond of Penafort Church in Virginia (which if I am not mistaken was built by my my friend Fr. James Gould), another Raymond, Card. Burke, answered a question about the Five Dubia submitted by the Four Cardinals about the infamous objectively murky bits of Amoris laetitia.
The Dubia That Won’t Die.
So far, Pope Francis has not given any clear answer to the Five Dubia, though surrogates (e.g., Card. Schoenborn, Card. Coccopalmerio, et al.) have thrown up smoke screens and misdirections which we were supposed to accept as adequate explanations of the objectively murky bits. Others have flat out denied that there are any obscurities or ambiguities, which is, of course, absurd.
Yesterday, Card. Burke responded to a question about what might happen if the Holy Father does not provide responses to the Dubia. There is a video.
The question was, what would the Four Cardinals do if the Pope does not respond to the dubia.
The Cardinal answers that they would have to correct the situation in a manner that draws from the constant teaching of the Church on the issues raised by the dubia, and that this teaching would be made known for the good of souls.
In other words, the Cardinals would issue a public restatement of the constant teaching of the Church in regard to the issues covered by the Five Dubia. Does this mean all four of the Four Cardinals? Cardinal Burke did not say, at least in the video clip, above.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Subscribe: RSS
As the Gorsuch Trials continue, this comes from the often amusing Eye of the Tiber:
Catechumen nominee Neil Schlesing said that “no man is above canon law” when pressed on whether Pope Francis could allow divorced and remarried Catholics to receive communion.
It was one of several exchanges Tuesday as Schlesing mostly deflected council members’ efforts to get him to reveal his views on the death penalty, global warming, and other controversial issues inside the Catholic Church.
As the grueling day of questioning wore on, council members and Schlesing engaged in a well-established tradition in recent confirmation Masses, as the nominee attempts to resist all requests to say how he feels about the Holy Father’s decisions, regardless of how many times he’s been asked.
Donohue also asked Schlesing what he would do if the pastor of the church asked him to deliver a speech about sin in front of the congregation.
“Mr. Council, I would have walked out the door,” Schlesing replied. “That’s not what Catholics do. My personal views, I tell you, Mr. Council, are over here. I leave those at home.”
The exchange with parish council member Lindsey Donohue came on the second day of Schlesing’s confirmation hearing to fill one of the final vacant seats for this round of confirmation classes.
People are asking me in email what I think of the Pope’s alleged statements to Chilean bishops making their ad limina visit. Apparently the Holy Father told them, as reported by the UK’s best Catholic weekly The Catholic Herald (for which I write a weekly column):
The Chilean bishops were speaking to the newspaper El Mercurio, which paraphrased their remarks and included a few direct quotations. Here’s the key passage:
¿Comunión a los divorciados? Con la misma decisión, el Pontífice negó que su objetivo con el sínodo al que convocó sobre la familia haya sido autorizar la comunión de los divorciados. Les habló de que no hay “moral de situación”, dicen otras fuentes. “Nos cuesta mucho ver los grises”, les habría dicho, cuando contó un caso personal, familiar suyo. “Tengo una sobrina casada con un divorciado, bueno, católico, de misa dominical y que cuando se confiesa le dice al sacerdote ‘sé que no puede absolverme, pero deme su bendición’”.
The Pope says a few separate things here:
The objective of the Family Synod was not to authorise Communion for the remarried (“autorizar la comunión de los divorciados”).
“It’s not a matter of ‘situation ethics’.” (“Les habló de que no hay ‘moral de situación.’”)
It’s difficult for us to see grey areas. (“Nos cuesta mucho ver los grises.”)
His niece is married to a divorced man who doesn’t take Communion, but tells the priest: “I know you can’t absolve me, but give me a blessing.” (“Sé que no puede absolverme, pero deme su bendición.”)
Some are taking this as an “indirect” response to the Five Dubia of the Four Cardinals aroused by the objectively murky bits of Amoris laetitia.
My response? What do I make of this? How to make sense of this thrashing bag full of cats?
If and when Pope Francis wants clearly to respond to the Dubia, he knows how to do it.
Moreover, I respond that today is a Friday in Lent. Say your prayers, pray the Stations, examine your consciences and…
GO TO CONFESSION!
The moderation queue is ON, of course.
Today, a Friday in Lent, I re-posted my recordings of different versions of the Stations of the Cross, one of which is the classic by St. Alphonsus Liguori. I did so, as I sipped from my glorious Pope Clement XIV (Ganganelli) mug.
Did you know that there is a connection between Pope Clement, Suppressor of the Jesuits, and St. Alphonsus, Doctor of the Church?
In 1772, the second year of Clement’s glorious reign, St. Alphonsus wrote to the Pope asking to be relieved of his duties as diocesan bishop. Clement responded that it was enough for him that Alphonsus govern from his bed: “His prayers do as much for his flock as all the activity in the world.”
When in 1773 Clement finally suppressed the Jesuits – did I mention that he suppressed the Jesuits? – Alphonsus wrote of how he prayed for the harassed Pontiff. And then on 21 September 1774, after saying Mass, Alphonsus had a prolonged ecstasy, lasting into the next day. When he came out of it, he said that he had been with Clement XIV as he lay dying. Hence, Alphonsus bi-located and was with Papa Ganganelli at his dead bed.
Just so that you can’t say that you hadn’t been told, I’ve made available some Papa Ganganelli mugs.
Coat of Arms by D Burkart
A Daily Prayer for Priests
They find you a pro-life agent in your area who commits to giving a portion of the fee to a pro-life group!
PLEASE subscribe via PayPal if it is useful. Zelle and Wise are better, but PayPal is convenient.
A monthly subscription donation means I have steady income I can plan on. I put you my list of benefactors for whom I pray and for whom I often say Holy Mass.
In view of the rapidly changing challenges I now face, I would like to add more $10/month subscribers. Will you please help?
For a one time donation...
Help Monks in Wyoming (coffee – UPDATED LINK) and Norcia (beer) and the wonderful "Soap Sisters" of Summit, NJ!
Please follow me on Twitter!
Visits tracked by Statcounter
since Sat., 25 Nov. 2006:
