Pseudo-literary salute to liturgy for the sake of God continued . . .

The liturgy under discussion is spelled out, encapsulated, here, in passages from “The Priority of Religion and Adoration over Communion,” by Peter Kwasniewski:

Whenever the Mass is celebrated more like a meal, versus populum [facing the people], without silence, without serious elevations and double genuflections, with a memorial acclamation breaking in on our acts of adoring faith, and an overall informal ars celebrandi [mode of celebrating], such things undermine the aforementioned Tridentine [16th-century Council of Trent] dogmas and weaken the sensus fidelium [what people believe].

In such circumstances, it is not surprising that holy communion becomes the high point of the service, indeed the only point; and if one does not receive, one is “left out.” Why go to Mass otherwise?

On the other hand:

But if the focus is the priestly offering of the holy sacrifice as an act of the virtue of religion – giving to God, in justice, the right worship that is His due, which every human being owes to Him perpetually, regardless of his state or condition – then anyone and everyone has a profound, compelling, inescapable reason to go to Mass.

In fact, Mass is the only way we can fulfill our debt to God of paying Him a worship with which He is perfectly pleased, and this even apart from whether or not we receive spiritual food in Holy Communion.

He says this, having quoted the Council of Trent on what the mass is about, much more than a ceremony in which we can receive Communion, as privileged and valuable as that is.

Bad, bad pseudo-literary salute to liturgy for the sake of God — with mucho benefits for men, women, and children but not pandering to their momentary interests . . .

Should we fit worship to the worshipers? (Bunch of worshipers coming, what do we have for them? Something special, please.)

Or worshipers to the worship? (Solid stuff here, take it or leave it, trust us, you will not regret it, even in this life.)

Consider the first. It’s the Protestant way and successful to a degree, here and there, now and then. And it’s better than flip-floppy nothing.

But for the really serious, you’ve gotta have more. You gotta have substance, not tailored to these and those, who in the grand scheme of things are here today, gone tomorrow. (Even the cleanest-living leave sooner or later.)

Give me men to match those mountains, said Sam Walter Foss, “Poet, Librarian and Friend to Man,” in 1894.

Give us worshipers to match this worship. Ask them, Are you up to the challenge? Can you stand the truth of the matter?

— to be continued . . . 



Communion in the hand(s) no safer than on the tongue? Attending mass without communion may be your best choice.

Noodling an issue . . .

Blithe Spirit

From UK’s Latin Mass Society’s spokesman, analyzing the situation with admirable sang froid:

  In [“extraordinary form,” Latin mass] celebrations, Holy Communion . . . may not be distributed in the hand, according to the universal liturgical law applicable to them.

Should the spread of COVID-19 necessitate suspension of distribution of Holy Communion on the tongue, this would mean suspension of distribution of Holy Communion to the Faithful in these celebrations.

You might call it a rock-and-hard-place situation. However:

The Communion of the Faithful is in no way necessary to the validity or [legitimacy] (in such circumstances) of the Mass.

Should prudence dictate the necessity for such a step, the Faithful should be encouraged to make a ‘Spiritual Communion’. One form of words for making such a Spiritual Communion is given below.

Standard solution, as if (in pre-Vatican 2 days) you ate or drank before (morning) mass and could not…

View original post 201 more words