Friday, April 17, 2020
Thursday, April 16, 2020
Lauds for Easter Monday and the rest of the octave. (3/x)
Lauds for Easter Monday and the rest of the octave. (2/x)
Lauds for Easter Monday and the rest of the octave.
Then it's the second antiphon, "Et ecce terræmótus" with Psalm 99, "Iubiláte Deo."
Lauds for Easter Monday and the rest of the octave. (1/x)
After the "Deus in Adiutorium" you dive right into the first antiphon, "Angelus autem Domini" with Psalm 92, "Dominus regnavit".
Wednesday, April 15, 2020
Deus in adiutorium
| Festive Tone |
When do you use which tone?
There are 2 ways to get the hour started: 1) festive; 2) ferial.
Festive:
Matins, Lauds & Vespers of I & II Class feasts (including Sundays throughout the year)
Ferial:
All other hours.
| Ferial Tone |
This Day
Tackling Easter Week's Office.
It's uniquely complicated, understandably.
Where to start?
"Haec Dies" is repeated close to 50 times this week. No reason, if you're really keeping after it not to have it [the chant] down by the end of the week. Akin to "Per Intercessionem Sancte Blasii, episcopi et martyris, etc…"
Also, psalm tones for the little hours for the octave are indicated on Easter Sunday.
That's it for starters.
Maybe not so tough after all.
Sunday, March 29, 2020
Friday, February 14, 2020
Scrupulously Clean
[Leaving this here for the record, especially so I can find it later]
Instruction of the S. C. Sacr. to the Most Reverend Ordinaries Regarding 'Certain Faults to Be Avoided and Certain Requirements to Be Observed in Performing the Sacrifice of the Mass and in Distributing and Reserving the Sacrament of the Eucharist (S. C. Sacr.) AAS 21-631.
Our Lord and Savior left an admirable pledge and a tower of strength for the salvation of the souls of men when He instituted the Most August Sacrament of the Eucharist, and commanded them to come to Him in these words: "Amen, amen I say unto you: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink His blood, you shall not have life in you. He that eateth My flesh, and drinketh My blood, hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day" (John vi, 54, 55).
It is for this reason that Holy Mother Church has always been solicitous in exhorting the faithful to be frequently nourished with this heavenly bread, even as were the first Christians, who "were persevering in the doctrine of the Apostles, and in the communication of the breaking of bread, and in prayers" (Acts ii, 42). To this end also the Sacred Congregation which is in charge of the interpretation of the laws of the Council of Trent, on 20 Dec., 1905, issued a Decree "regarding the daily reception of the Most Blessed Eucharist," beginning with the words Sacra Tridentina Synodus,1 to which was added the Decree of the S. C. Sacr., of 8 Aug., 1910, "regarding the age of those to be admitted to first Communion," beginning with the words, Quam singulari.2 Added impulses of no slight moment also were given to the promotion of this salutary practice by the Eucharistic Congresses which, first instituted by Leo XIII of happy memory, have since been celebrated everywhere with solemn ceremony, and have done wonders to enliven the faith and foster the piety of the people.
Meanwhile the Church has always used the greatest care to prevent abuses from creeping into the consecration, reception, and reservation of so great a Sacrament. Wherefore, this Sacred Congregation which is in charge of the discipline of the sacraments, having learned in the course of its work that there were some abuses to be corrected in this regard, or some laws and prescriptions already enacted which ought to be recalled into practice, has decided to decree, enact, and declare the following, first as regards the preparation of the matter for the Sacrament of the Eucharist; and secondly as regards its reception and administration; and thirdly as regards the reservation of the Blessed Sacrament during the last three days of Holy Week.
I
For since this Sacrament is made up not only of form, but also of matter, it is necessary that this latter be most carefully preserved in its substance. Now, the matter which by divine institution, in virtue of the words of consecration, serves in the divine Sacrifice and in the consecration of the Sacrament of the Eucharist, is twofold; namely, bread and wine.
Of the substance of this matter, the Code, in c. 815, § 1, declares: "The bread must be pure wheat bread, and freshly made, so that there be no danger of corruption"; and § 2 of the same canon declares: "The wine must be natural wine of the grape, and not corrupted." It follows that bread made of any other substance, or to which has been added so great a quantity of any other substance than wheat that according to common estimation it cannot be said to be wheat bread, cannot be valid matter for the performance of the Sacrifice and the consecration of the Sacrament of the Eucharist.
Similarly that wine, or rather liquor, cannot be regarded as valid matter, which is extracted from apples or other fruits, or which is made chemically, although it have the color of wine, and may be said in a way to contain its elements; nor wine to which water has been added in a greater or equal quantity.
In fact, matter is to be regarded as dubious, and hence is not to be used, if a notable quantity of any other substance has been added to the wheat or to the wine, even though that other substance be not present in greater or equal quantity; for it is criminal to expose so great a Sacrament to the danger of nullity.
To this end those who prepare this matter should be thoroughly acquainted with the Decrees of the Holy Office of 4 May, 1887, 30 July. 1890, 15 Apr., 1891, 25 June, 1891, and 5 Aug., 1896.1
It will be well to repeat those provisions which more closely concern our subject:
"The Bishop of Carcassonne proposed to the Sacred Congregation two remedies to be used either when the wine was diluted with too much water, or when the wine itself was changed so as to become very weak or be in danger of corruption: (1) that there be added to the natural wine a small quantity of alcohol carefully prepared by the proprietors themselves from true wine (v.g., 15 to 20 per cent), and that the danger of corruption be thus averted; (2) that the wine be boiled up to 65 degrees; for then, when it cools, although diminished in quantity, it is free from all danger of corruption.
And the Bishop asked whether these procedures could be used in wine for the Sacrifice of the Mass, and which of the two were preferable.
The Sacred Congregation replied on 4 May, 1887: Use the boiled wine."'
Again, the Vicar Apostolic of Tche-li in China reported: "Since it is difficult to buy pure wine in Europe, and still more difficult, after one has bought it at a rather high price, to transport it to China, without having it fraudulently adulterated in transit, it has for many years seemed to the missionaries of this vicariate to be safer and easier to make wine for the Sacrifice of the Mass in this country itself. But the grapes which can be obtained in the northern part contain too little sugar; so that the wine made from them for the Sacrifice of the Mass has but a weak content of alcohol and hence can scarcely be preserved from corruption, especially in view of the long and intense heat of the summer which is very likely to cause the wine to spoil.
"This difficulty is obviated and a wine is obtained which can safely be used and is besides not displeasing in appearance, taste, and bouquet, if to one hundred pounds of freshly bruised grapes are added ten pounds of cane sugar (sugar made from a grassy plant botanically called saccharum officinarum, or in French canne a sucre), and if this mass is then fermented in the usual way. When the fermentation ceases there is obtained from every hundred pounds of this mass (containing, as above explained, nine pounds of sugar), sixty-seven pounds of wine, which contain, as may be concluded from chemical calculation, practically not more than four and one-half pounds (that is about one-fifteenth part by weight of the entire mass) of alcohol made from the sugar. In other words, by the above process there is obtained a true grape wine which contains about six or seven per cent of alcohol which is from another source, that is, which is not produced from the grapes....
"And now, a doubt having arisen, we humbly ask: (1) Whether this practice of obtaining wine for the Sacrifice of the Mass is safe; (2) whether it is valid; (3) what if this wine has been used in Masses which are due in justice?"
The Sacred Congregation replied on 25 June, 1891: "It is better to add to the wine which is intended for the Sacrifice of the Mass, spirits or alcohol which has been made from grapes, in such quantity that, added to that which the wine already naturally contains, it will not exceed twelve per cent. This admixture should be made when the so-called tumultuous fermentation has begun to go down; et ad mentem: the mind of the Sacred Congregation is that if the missionaries are unable themselves to obtain grape alcohol from the wine of the country, let them add raisins to the wine or wines of the country and ferment the whole mass together."'
Therefore, if the bread or the wine is corrupt or in any other way substantially changed, it is evident that the substances which result from these changed or corrupted qualities can no longer be suitable matter for the consecration of the Eucharist. For this reason care must also be taken that the wine which is prepared for the Mass be not allowed to remain too long in the bottle or cruet so that it easily turn sour; also that part of the 'wine be not furtively drawn off and water substituted for it.
When the words of consecration have been pronounced by a legitimate minister, and when valid matter has been used, Christ our Lord is already present entire under both species, and indeed under every part of either species, as the Council of Florence declared in the Decree pro Armenis, which was confirmed by the sacred Synod of Trent (Sess. 13, can. 3); a truth which the Angelic Doctor had already beautifully expressed in these words,
memento tantum esse sub fragmento quantum toto tegitur.
For this reason the Rubrics of the Roman Missal enjoin upon the priest who celebrates that whenever any fragment of the host falls on the corporal or the paten or adheres to his fingers, he must pick it up carefully, even though it be very small.
Hence it is not to be wondered at that according to the old laws grave penalties were provided against a priest if through his negligence a drop of the Precious Blood were spilled.
Wherefore, it is already clear what great care priests ought to take to perform this great Sacrament rightly, to see that the matter of both kinds, that is, the bread and the wine, be prepared under every safeguard, especially in these times when an insatiable thirst for gain basely tempts many persons to adulterate many substances in such a way that instead of serving for the nourishment of the body they rather do it harm.
For many substances are now chemically synthesized, which have the appearance of the genuine article, without the natural substance; and the same result is produced by fraudulently substituting one thing for another in such a way that the fraud is often hard to detect even by chemical analysis.
Now, in order to be sure of the genuine matter of the bread and wine which is absolutely required in consecrating so great a Sacrament, it will certainly be better, unless the priest have both of these substances made at home, to obtain them from persons who are very expert in them and who actually grind the wheat or press the wine from the grapes; and who, besides, being above all suspicion, can safely certify that they have absolutely without any fraud, made the hosts from wheat alone, and pressed the wine from grapes alone.
II
In the administration of the Sacrament of the Eucharist no less care is to be taken that no fragments of the consecrated hosts be lost, since in every one of them the entire Body of Christ is present. Hence, care must especially be taken that particles be not easily separated from the hosts and fall to the ground, where, alas, they would be mixed with the dirt and trodden under foot!
To prevent such accidents it is necessary that the hosts be also well made, and made by persons who are not only of irreproachable honesty but have some experience in making them, and who have the proper equipment. Hence, in some places the function of preparing hosts and wine for the Sacrament has, with commendable forethought and with happy results, been assigned to religious of both sexes.
And what the Rubrics of the Missal enjoin upon the priest about to celebrate; namely, that in preparing the chalice he remove carefully any fragments that may be adhering to the host, should also be done before the particles which are intended for the Communion of the faithful are placed in the ciborium by the person charged with that office. For this purpose it will be well not to throw the particles in a heap into the ciborium, but to place them all nicely in it.
So that the priest may more easily collect the fragments from the corporal, the latter must be free from those little pieces of wax which usually fall from the candles which are lighted upon the altar, for when the particles are mixed with these they can sometimes hardly be distinguished. And so care must be taken that the corporal which is to receive the most sacred Body of Christ be kept always white, and free from every stain; so, too, the altar cloths, the pall, and the linen cloth which is used to wipe the chalice, must be clean.
But to prevent particles from falling on the ground, either directly or from the communion cloth, when the priest gives Communion to the faithful, a very prudent practice has arisen during nearly the last fifty years, of using a small paten made of metal, which is placed under the chin of the communicant. For particles are held in such a paten more easily and safely than on the communion cloth, and they can more easily be seen and picked up by the priest.
And the Sacred Congregation of Rites, when it was questioned on this practice on 16 March, 1876, gave no adverse judgment, but replied non esse interloquendum; and hence this practice began to gain ground in many places and has become widespread.
The sacred particles of the Eucharistic Sacrament are sometimes scattered through another cause, when on a special occasion, either by permission of the Holy See or when the law gives the Ordinaries the faculty of permitting it, Mass is said in the open air, and the wind may be blowing. To prevent the scattering of the fragments, care should be taken that the altar where Mass is to be said be protected by panels on three sides; or that an awning be put up over the altar coming down on three sides in the form of a shrine; or that protection be afforded in some other way consistent with the reverence due to so great a Sacrament.
III
As regards the reservation of the Blessed Sacrament on the last three days of Holy Week, it is reserved for the celebration of the Mass of the Presanctified, and to give Communion to the sick.
a) The Sacred Host for the Mass of the Presanctified is to be reserved in a chapel in the church, decorated as beautifully as possible with candles and draperies, which, however, should not be black or mournful, and flowers, without relics or representations of the saints or the Blessed Virgin or St. John the Evangelist, and without any statues representing the scenes of the Passion.
The tabernacle where the chalice with the Sacred Host is to be deposited should be so constructed that the chalice is not seen by the adorers, and should be locked; it is not allowed to place seals over the door of the tabernacle. This is provided for by the Rubrics of the Roman Missal and the Decree. of the Sacred Congregation of Rites.
In Decree n. 3939, Romana, of the S. C. Rit., we have the following: "Whether in the decoration of the aforesaid altar (namely, that of the repository), it is permitted to use statues or pictures of the Blessed Virgin, St. John the Evangelist, St. Mary Magdalene, and the soldiers," etc.
Reply: "In the negative. Bishops may tolerate such representations where an old custom exists; but they should see to it that no new customs in this matter are introduced" (15 Dec., 1896).
And n. 2873, Narnien: "To whom is the key of this little door (that is, the key to the door of the tabernacle in which the Blessed Sacrament is reserved on Holy Thursday) to be given?"
Reply: "According to other Decrees, it is to be given to the canon or priest who is to celebrate on the following day" (7 Dec., 1844).
To the same effect are Decrees nn. 635, 813, 912, 2335, 2830, 2833, 2904, and 579.
b) For giving Communion to the sick, in parish churches and other churches from which the Blessed Sacrament is usually taken, some consecrated particles are to be reserved in a ciborium, and as regards the reservation of this ciborium, the following should be observed.
According to the mind of the Rubrics, this ciborium should be kept outside the church, that is, near the sacristy in a fitting and convenient place, where the Blessed Sacrament is to be kept with becoming reverence, not, however, exposed for the adoration of the faithful, but only kept for the purpose of giving Communion to the sick.
Such a fitting and convenient place is a chapel near the church, or the sacrarium itself, or some small compartment of the sacrarium which is safe and suitable; or even a suitable place in the parish house, which is separated from domestic and profane uses and remote from all danger of irreverence. There let the tabernacle be prepared; it should be closed with lock and key, and before it a lamp should be kept burning all the time. The reposition should be made on Holy Thursday itself.
Where such a fitting place is not available, the sacred ciborium is to be kept from the Mass of Holy Thursday until the Mass of the Presanctified in the "sepulcher" itself, as the repository is commonly called, behind the chalice; but from the Mass of the Presanctified until the Mass of Holy Saturday, in some more remote and secret chapel of the church, where a lamp should be kept burning. If there is no suitable place except the chapel of the "sepulcher," the ciborium should remain in the "sepulcher," until Holy Saturday. A lamp should be lighted before the "sepulcher," and the other lights should be extinguished, even those that were used for decoration of the "sepulcher" being now removed. If in any church the solemnities of Holy Thursday are not held, the sacred ciborium may be kept in its altar until sunset of Holy Thursday; and from that time until Holy Saturday it should be put in one of the places above indicated.
For the rest, it is left to the prudent discretion of the Bishops, whenever any difficulty arises in the observance of these prescriptions, to decide which of the places mentioned is more suitable; and if any considerable abuses creep in regarding this matter, to take care that they be done away with.
Wherefore the Sacred Congregation, at the plenary session of 23 March, 1929, after full consideration and discussion, decided to make the following prescriptions to the Most Reverend Ordinaries:
1. After giving due consideration to the remarks, precepts, and decisions herein contained, let the Ordinaries as soon as possible require that they be most carefully observed by the rectors of churches, and under their leadership by others who serve at the altar, so that the Sacrifice of the Altar be safeguarded from all danger of nullity and from every occasion of irreverence.
2. Let them also see to it that in all dioceses or cities or towns, according to the nature of the place, there be some fit persons who are above all suspicion, especially religious of both sexes, from whom the rectors of churches may secure, unless they already have it at hand, matter of both species for the Sacrifice and Sacrament of the Eucharist, such as can be used with a safe conscience.
3. Likewise as regards the making of hosts, rectors must be watchful that no particles such as easily adhere to the hosts remain there; they should see to it that these be removed carefully and cautiously before Mass, and that if a large number of hosts are to be put out, they be at least gently shaken in a sieve.
4. They should exercise a very vigilant supervision to see that none but fresh hosts be consecrated, and that the sacred particles reserved in the ciborium be frequently renewed (canon 1272; Roman Ritual, tit. IV, cap. 1, n. 7); and to this end they should strive to have the tabernacles where the Blessed Sacrament is kept, protected as far as possible from dampness or extreme cold; for humidity tends to make the hosts lose their crispness, while cold makes them brittle.
5. In distributing Holy Communion to the faithful, in addition to the white linen cloth spread before the communicants, according to the Rubrics of the Missal, the Ritual, and the Bishops' Ceremonial, a paten should be used, which should be of silver or gilded metal, but not engraved on the inside, and which should be held by the faithful themselves under their chins, except in the case where Holy Communion is given by a Bishop, or by a prelate in pontificals, or in a solemn Mass, when a priest or deacon who is in attendance may hold the paten under the chins of the communicants.
6. The faithful should be carefully instructed not to incline or invert the paten while they hold it under their chins or hand it to the priest or to another communicant, in such a way that any particles that may be on it will fall off and be lost.
7. Any fragments which may be on the paten after the Communion of the faithful, when it has been distributed during Mass, must be carefully brushed into the chalice with the finger; if Communion has been given outside of Mass, they should be carefully brushed into the ciborium. It is not, however, the mind of the Sacred Congregation to condemn the patens, of whatever form they may be, which are now used in certain churches, provided they be made of metal, not engraved on the inside, and be suitable to catch the sacred fragments.
8. Finally, let the Ordinaries strive to have the rectors keep the altars scrupulously clean, together with the sacred furnishings, especially those which serve to receive the sacred Species: and let them take notice that the observance of the above prescriptions is a grave burden upon their consciences.
9. As regards the reservation of the Sacred Hosts for the Communion of the sick on the last three days of Holy Week, Ordinaries of places should bear in mind the intention of the Rubrics and of the Decrees of the Sacred Congregation of Rites; the hosts are not reserved for public veneration; in fact, that is prohibited; yet every effort must be made that, especially as regards the place, the Sacrament of the Eucharist be not deprived of the tribute of due honor and elegance.
The Eminent Fathers, moreover, ordered that the Ordinaries of places, within a year after the receipt of this Instruction, inform this Sacred Congregation what measures they have taken in pursuance of the prescriptions herein contained and for the correction of abuses that may have become confirmed.
In the audience of 25 March, 1929, His Holiness, Pius XI, having received the report from the undersigned Secretary of this Sacred Congregation, approved this Instruction and ordered it published; and ordered that it be sent to all Ordinaries of places and regular prelates, so that they might communicate it respectively to priests and to members of religious institutes.
Annotations of the Secretary, Officially Published
1. It is indeed a pleasure to observe how rapidly devotion toward the Most Blessed Sacrament of the Eucharist has grown in our time since the celebration of those noted congresses everywhere for the commemoration of that life-giving and wonderful institution which so clearly manifests the boundless charity of Jesus Christ for the salvation of men. For, as the Supreme Pontiff, Leo XIII, wrote, "There is nothing more effective to encourage , Catholics both to the vigorous profession of their faith and to the exercise of truly Christian virtues than the nourishment and increase of popular devotion toward that admirable pledge of love which is 'the bond of peace and unity."1
2. Hence, it is not to be wondered at that the same Pontiff left nothing undone to promote Eucharistic Congresses in various parts of the world. Witness his Letter of 16 May, 1881, when the First International Eucharistic Congress was held in the city of Lille, from the 28th to the 30th of June of that year, in which he gave utterance to his joy on that occasion and with special benevolence bestowed his apostolic blessing upon all who attended that Congress. Moreover, on the 22nd of August of that year, on receiving a report of the Congress from its President, the Pontiff wrote him a letter in which he offered inducements for the greater and greater propagation of such congresses, in these words: "Continue therefore, beloved sons, in your work; go on increasing the number of your members; propagate the institution in which you are enlisted, and strive to enkindle in all hearts the fire of divine charity which He came to cast upon earth, and which He especially desired to enkindle through the Sacrament of the Eucharist."
3. Again on the 28th of May, 1892, he sent an Encyclical to the Bishops of all the world, "On the Most Blessed Eucharist" beginning with the words, Mirae caritatis.
4. The Supreme Pontiff, Pius X, in like manner ordered the publication of that Decree of 20 Dec., 1905, which can never be sufficiently extolled, in which he commended to the faithful the daily reception of the Most Blessed Eucharist, and gave them timely injunctions for receiving it in a holy and salutary manner. Moreover, on 7 Aug., 1910, he desired another Decree to be issued regarding the age at which boys and girls should be admitted to their first Eucharistic Communion, ordaining that Holy Communion could and should be given to them when they attained the age of discretion, that is, the beginning of the use of reason.
5. We know that both of these Decrees were confirmed by the Rescript of the Supreme Pontiff, Benedict XV, issued by the Secretariate of State pursuant to the audience of 26 June, 1916, which was entitled De Eucharistica puerorum utriusque sexus Communione ad mentem Summi Pontificis die 30 mensis Julii solemni ritu promovendal on which occasion a general Communion of children was ordered, to the end that the dreadful war which was so cruelly devastating nearly all Europe should end at last and leave the world in peace. It will be worth while to quote the tenor of that Decree: "His Holiness Benedict XV, by Divine Providence Pope, who has nothing more at heart than the pious and exact observance of the Decrees, Sacra Tridentina Synodus, and Quam Singulari, which were issued by order of his Predecessor of happy memory, Pius X . . . deigned to issue the following order: that all and each of the Ordinaries of places in Europe should make a supreme effort that on the 30th of the coming month of July, which will be a Sunday, in the churches and oratories of each one's diocese, all the children of both sexes receive Holy Communion for the intention of the Holy Father as solemnly as possible, all things to the contrary notwithstanding."
6. Finally the Supreme Pontiff, Pius XI, now gloriously reigning, in order to foster and increase more and more that same devotion to the Most Blessed Eucharist, on 24 May, 1922, solemnly blessed and was present at the Twenty-Sixth International Eucharistic Congress. Well known, too, are the words which the same Supreme Pontiff pronounced in the Allocution held on 17 Dec., 1928, regarding these Eucharistic Congresses: "Everyone knows how much and how wonderfully the other International Eucharistic Congresses which have been held have contributed to arouse in the people the spirit of faith, to foster piety, and to restore the Christian manner of life."'
7. And on 20 Dec., 1908, on the occasion of the celebration of the fiftieth anniversary of his priesthood, he most lovingly gave Communion to the little ones in the Oratory of St. Peter, who were receiving Our Lord for the first time.
8. Finally, on 25 July of this year, 1929, in thanksgiving to the Good Lord for the treaty entered into between the Holy See and the King of Italy, a treaty which was the harbinger of peace between the two powers, there occurred a most joyous event. That evening the common Father of the faithful marched forth at last in solemn state from the great Basilica of St. Peter's, accompanied by very many men of the highest rank and by a great number of students for sacred orders, and bearing in solemn procession the Host of Peace, amid transports of joy from the immense throngs assembled.
Nature herself, through the mild evening air and the lingering sunlight, seemed to join in the general rejoicing.
9. And therefore, while it is a matter of congratulation that splendid results have been obtained from this reawakened devotion to the Most Blessed Eucharist, prudence dictates that so great a Sacrament be protected from dangers of irreverence. To this end this Sacred Congregation which is in charge of the discipline of the sacraments, mindful of the precepts laid down by the Code of Canon Law, by the Councils, and especially by that of Trent, in regard to the reception of this great Sacrament, has issued this Instruction. For the reverence that is required in handling and receiving this Sacrament is declared by the Roman Catechism which was issued in pursuance of the Decree of the Council of Trent in these notable words:
"Just as among all the sacred mysteries which Our Lord and Savior commended to us as most certain means of grace, there is none that is comparable to the Most Blessed Sacrament of the Eucharist: so, too, there is no graver punishment to be feared from God for any crime than that which must be feared if a thing which is full of all holiness, or rather which contains the Author and Source of holiness Himself, were treated by the faithful without sacredness and without religious observance."'
10. Rightly, therefore, did this Sacred Congregation endeavor by this Instruction to provide norms for treating sacredly and receiving religiously this divine Sacrament; norms which concern the altar where the Holy Sacrifice is offered, the table where the Eucharist is received, the tabernacle where the Sacred Host is kept, and the matter from which it is consecrated, to wit, bread and wine; bread which must be made of wheat, and wine pressed from grapes. Hence, the making of these materials is to be carefully looked to in order to avoid all danger of invalidity or irreverence, just as the very cloths which cover the altar, and the other articles which are used upon it, are required to be perfect and clean.
11. For the same reason the Sacred Congregation ceaselessly urges the ministers of the altar to remove the danger of loss of the sacred fragments in distributing Communion to the faithful; and hence it orders that a paten be used. They must also take care to provide for proper custody of the Most Blessed Eucharist during the triduum of the Passion of Our Lord, that is, by seeing that the reservation be made in a sacred and religious manner.
12. It is left to the prudent initiative of the pastors to see to it that especially in churches situated in large cities, the altar where the tabernacle which contains the Blessed Sacrament is, be easily distinguished by the faithful from all the other altars, by some certain and conspicuous mark, for the sake of avoiding irreverence toward it; and the pastors should for this purpose instruct the faithful that when they enter a church they should show their greatest reverence, as is only right, to the Blessed Sacrament.
13. Finally, the Most Reverend Ordinaries, both those of places and those of persons, and priests both secular and religious, are earnestly requested to use their most diligent efforts to see that none of the provisions of this Instruction, looking to the sacred and religious treatment of the Blessed Sacrament, be disregarded, to the injury of that great Sacrament to which all the others are subordinate. To this end let all strive in accordance with these prescriptions, which are now confirmed by His Holiness, Pius XI, through his supreme authority.
D. Jorio, Secretary.
AAS 21-631; S. C. Sam, Instruction, 26 March, 1929. Periodica, 18-305 (Pauwels).
[see also: http://www.clsadb.com/document/8d61c13b-fbbf-40c3-9bfc-4f47f1556f33?backLink=%2Fsearch%2F%3Fq%3DThanksgiving%26volume%3D_%26order%3Drelevance%26page%3D4%26take%3D20]
Instruction of the S. C. Sacr. to the Most Reverend Ordinaries Regarding 'Certain Faults to Be Avoided and Certain Requirements to Be Observed in Performing the Sacrifice of the Mass and in Distributing and Reserving the Sacrament of the Eucharist (S. C. Sacr.) AAS 21-631.
Our Lord and Savior left an admirable pledge and a tower of strength for the salvation of the souls of men when He instituted the Most August Sacrament of the Eucharist, and commanded them to come to Him in these words: "Amen, amen I say unto you: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink His blood, you shall not have life in you. He that eateth My flesh, and drinketh My blood, hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day" (John vi, 54, 55).
It is for this reason that Holy Mother Church has always been solicitous in exhorting the faithful to be frequently nourished with this heavenly bread, even as were the first Christians, who "were persevering in the doctrine of the Apostles, and in the communication of the breaking of bread, and in prayers" (Acts ii, 42). To this end also the Sacred Congregation which is in charge of the interpretation of the laws of the Council of Trent, on 20 Dec., 1905, issued a Decree "regarding the daily reception of the Most Blessed Eucharist," beginning with the words Sacra Tridentina Synodus,1 to which was added the Decree of the S. C. Sacr., of 8 Aug., 1910, "regarding the age of those to be admitted to first Communion," beginning with the words, Quam singulari.2 Added impulses of no slight moment also were given to the promotion of this salutary practice by the Eucharistic Congresses which, first instituted by Leo XIII of happy memory, have since been celebrated everywhere with solemn ceremony, and have done wonders to enliven the faith and foster the piety of the people.
Meanwhile the Church has always used the greatest care to prevent abuses from creeping into the consecration, reception, and reservation of so great a Sacrament. Wherefore, this Sacred Congregation which is in charge of the discipline of the sacraments, having learned in the course of its work that there were some abuses to be corrected in this regard, or some laws and prescriptions already enacted which ought to be recalled into practice, has decided to decree, enact, and declare the following, first as regards the preparation of the matter for the Sacrament of the Eucharist; and secondly as regards its reception and administration; and thirdly as regards the reservation of the Blessed Sacrament during the last three days of Holy Week.
I
For since this Sacrament is made up not only of form, but also of matter, it is necessary that this latter be most carefully preserved in its substance. Now, the matter which by divine institution, in virtue of the words of consecration, serves in the divine Sacrifice and in the consecration of the Sacrament of the Eucharist, is twofold; namely, bread and wine.
Of the substance of this matter, the Code, in c. 815, § 1, declares: "The bread must be pure wheat bread, and freshly made, so that there be no danger of corruption"; and § 2 of the same canon declares: "The wine must be natural wine of the grape, and not corrupted." It follows that bread made of any other substance, or to which has been added so great a quantity of any other substance than wheat that according to common estimation it cannot be said to be wheat bread, cannot be valid matter for the performance of the Sacrifice and the consecration of the Sacrament of the Eucharist.
Similarly that wine, or rather liquor, cannot be regarded as valid matter, which is extracted from apples or other fruits, or which is made chemically, although it have the color of wine, and may be said in a way to contain its elements; nor wine to which water has been added in a greater or equal quantity.
In fact, matter is to be regarded as dubious, and hence is not to be used, if a notable quantity of any other substance has been added to the wheat or to the wine, even though that other substance be not present in greater or equal quantity; for it is criminal to expose so great a Sacrament to the danger of nullity.
To this end those who prepare this matter should be thoroughly acquainted with the Decrees of the Holy Office of 4 May, 1887, 30 July. 1890, 15 Apr., 1891, 25 June, 1891, and 5 Aug., 1896.1
It will be well to repeat those provisions which more closely concern our subject:
"The Bishop of Carcassonne proposed to the Sacred Congregation two remedies to be used either when the wine was diluted with too much water, or when the wine itself was changed so as to become very weak or be in danger of corruption: (1) that there be added to the natural wine a small quantity of alcohol carefully prepared by the proprietors themselves from true wine (v.g., 15 to 20 per cent), and that the danger of corruption be thus averted; (2) that the wine be boiled up to 65 degrees; for then, when it cools, although diminished in quantity, it is free from all danger of corruption.
And the Bishop asked whether these procedures could be used in wine for the Sacrifice of the Mass, and which of the two were preferable.
The Sacred Congregation replied on 4 May, 1887: Use the boiled wine."'
Again, the Vicar Apostolic of Tche-li in China reported: "Since it is difficult to buy pure wine in Europe, and still more difficult, after one has bought it at a rather high price, to transport it to China, without having it fraudulently adulterated in transit, it has for many years seemed to the missionaries of this vicariate to be safer and easier to make wine for the Sacrifice of the Mass in this country itself. But the grapes which can be obtained in the northern part contain too little sugar; so that the wine made from them for the Sacrifice of the Mass has but a weak content of alcohol and hence can scarcely be preserved from corruption, especially in view of the long and intense heat of the summer which is very likely to cause the wine to spoil.
"This difficulty is obviated and a wine is obtained which can safely be used and is besides not displeasing in appearance, taste, and bouquet, if to one hundred pounds of freshly bruised grapes are added ten pounds of cane sugar (sugar made from a grassy plant botanically called saccharum officinarum, or in French canne a sucre), and if this mass is then fermented in the usual way. When the fermentation ceases there is obtained from every hundred pounds of this mass (containing, as above explained, nine pounds of sugar), sixty-seven pounds of wine, which contain, as may be concluded from chemical calculation, practically not more than four and one-half pounds (that is about one-fifteenth part by weight of the entire mass) of alcohol made from the sugar. In other words, by the above process there is obtained a true grape wine which contains about six or seven per cent of alcohol which is from another source, that is, which is not produced from the grapes....
"And now, a doubt having arisen, we humbly ask: (1) Whether this practice of obtaining wine for the Sacrifice of the Mass is safe; (2) whether it is valid; (3) what if this wine has been used in Masses which are due in justice?"
The Sacred Congregation replied on 25 June, 1891: "It is better to add to the wine which is intended for the Sacrifice of the Mass, spirits or alcohol which has been made from grapes, in such quantity that, added to that which the wine already naturally contains, it will not exceed twelve per cent. This admixture should be made when the so-called tumultuous fermentation has begun to go down; et ad mentem: the mind of the Sacred Congregation is that if the missionaries are unable themselves to obtain grape alcohol from the wine of the country, let them add raisins to the wine or wines of the country and ferment the whole mass together."'
Therefore, if the bread or the wine is corrupt or in any other way substantially changed, it is evident that the substances which result from these changed or corrupted qualities can no longer be suitable matter for the consecration of the Eucharist. For this reason care must also be taken that the wine which is prepared for the Mass be not allowed to remain too long in the bottle or cruet so that it easily turn sour; also that part of the 'wine be not furtively drawn off and water substituted for it.
When the words of consecration have been pronounced by a legitimate minister, and when valid matter has been used, Christ our Lord is already present entire under both species, and indeed under every part of either species, as the Council of Florence declared in the Decree pro Armenis, which was confirmed by the sacred Synod of Trent (Sess. 13, can. 3); a truth which the Angelic Doctor had already beautifully expressed in these words,
memento tantum esse sub fragmento quantum toto tegitur.
For this reason the Rubrics of the Roman Missal enjoin upon the priest who celebrates that whenever any fragment of the host falls on the corporal or the paten or adheres to his fingers, he must pick it up carefully, even though it be very small.
Hence it is not to be wondered at that according to the old laws grave penalties were provided against a priest if through his negligence a drop of the Precious Blood were spilled.
Wherefore, it is already clear what great care priests ought to take to perform this great Sacrament rightly, to see that the matter of both kinds, that is, the bread and the wine, be prepared under every safeguard, especially in these times when an insatiable thirst for gain basely tempts many persons to adulterate many substances in such a way that instead of serving for the nourishment of the body they rather do it harm.
For many substances are now chemically synthesized, which have the appearance of the genuine article, without the natural substance; and the same result is produced by fraudulently substituting one thing for another in such a way that the fraud is often hard to detect even by chemical analysis.
Now, in order to be sure of the genuine matter of the bread and wine which is absolutely required in consecrating so great a Sacrament, it will certainly be better, unless the priest have both of these substances made at home, to obtain them from persons who are very expert in them and who actually grind the wheat or press the wine from the grapes; and who, besides, being above all suspicion, can safely certify that they have absolutely without any fraud, made the hosts from wheat alone, and pressed the wine from grapes alone.
II
In the administration of the Sacrament of the Eucharist no less care is to be taken that no fragments of the consecrated hosts be lost, since in every one of them the entire Body of Christ is present. Hence, care must especially be taken that particles be not easily separated from the hosts and fall to the ground, where, alas, they would be mixed with the dirt and trodden under foot!
To prevent such accidents it is necessary that the hosts be also well made, and made by persons who are not only of irreproachable honesty but have some experience in making them, and who have the proper equipment. Hence, in some places the function of preparing hosts and wine for the Sacrament has, with commendable forethought and with happy results, been assigned to religious of both sexes.
And what the Rubrics of the Missal enjoin upon the priest about to celebrate; namely, that in preparing the chalice he remove carefully any fragments that may be adhering to the host, should also be done before the particles which are intended for the Communion of the faithful are placed in the ciborium by the person charged with that office. For this purpose it will be well not to throw the particles in a heap into the ciborium, but to place them all nicely in it.
So that the priest may more easily collect the fragments from the corporal, the latter must be free from those little pieces of wax which usually fall from the candles which are lighted upon the altar, for when the particles are mixed with these they can sometimes hardly be distinguished. And so care must be taken that the corporal which is to receive the most sacred Body of Christ be kept always white, and free from every stain; so, too, the altar cloths, the pall, and the linen cloth which is used to wipe the chalice, must be clean.
But to prevent particles from falling on the ground, either directly or from the communion cloth, when the priest gives Communion to the faithful, a very prudent practice has arisen during nearly the last fifty years, of using a small paten made of metal, which is placed under the chin of the communicant. For particles are held in such a paten more easily and safely than on the communion cloth, and they can more easily be seen and picked up by the priest.
And the Sacred Congregation of Rites, when it was questioned on this practice on 16 March, 1876, gave no adverse judgment, but replied non esse interloquendum; and hence this practice began to gain ground in many places and has become widespread.
The sacred particles of the Eucharistic Sacrament are sometimes scattered through another cause, when on a special occasion, either by permission of the Holy See or when the law gives the Ordinaries the faculty of permitting it, Mass is said in the open air, and the wind may be blowing. To prevent the scattering of the fragments, care should be taken that the altar where Mass is to be said be protected by panels on three sides; or that an awning be put up over the altar coming down on three sides in the form of a shrine; or that protection be afforded in some other way consistent with the reverence due to so great a Sacrament.
III
As regards the reservation of the Blessed Sacrament on the last three days of Holy Week, it is reserved for the celebration of the Mass of the Presanctified, and to give Communion to the sick.
a) The Sacred Host for the Mass of the Presanctified is to be reserved in a chapel in the church, decorated as beautifully as possible with candles and draperies, which, however, should not be black or mournful, and flowers, without relics or representations of the saints or the Blessed Virgin or St. John the Evangelist, and without any statues representing the scenes of the Passion.
The tabernacle where the chalice with the Sacred Host is to be deposited should be so constructed that the chalice is not seen by the adorers, and should be locked; it is not allowed to place seals over the door of the tabernacle. This is provided for by the Rubrics of the Roman Missal and the Decree. of the Sacred Congregation of Rites.
In Decree n. 3939, Romana, of the S. C. Rit., we have the following: "Whether in the decoration of the aforesaid altar (namely, that of the repository), it is permitted to use statues or pictures of the Blessed Virgin, St. John the Evangelist, St. Mary Magdalene, and the soldiers," etc.
Reply: "In the negative. Bishops may tolerate such representations where an old custom exists; but they should see to it that no new customs in this matter are introduced" (15 Dec., 1896).
And n. 2873, Narnien: "To whom is the key of this little door (that is, the key to the door of the tabernacle in which the Blessed Sacrament is reserved on Holy Thursday) to be given?"
Reply: "According to other Decrees, it is to be given to the canon or priest who is to celebrate on the following day" (7 Dec., 1844).
To the same effect are Decrees nn. 635, 813, 912, 2335, 2830, 2833, 2904, and 579.
b) For giving Communion to the sick, in parish churches and other churches from which the Blessed Sacrament is usually taken, some consecrated particles are to be reserved in a ciborium, and as regards the reservation of this ciborium, the following should be observed.
According to the mind of the Rubrics, this ciborium should be kept outside the church, that is, near the sacristy in a fitting and convenient place, where the Blessed Sacrament is to be kept with becoming reverence, not, however, exposed for the adoration of the faithful, but only kept for the purpose of giving Communion to the sick.
Such a fitting and convenient place is a chapel near the church, or the sacrarium itself, or some small compartment of the sacrarium which is safe and suitable; or even a suitable place in the parish house, which is separated from domestic and profane uses and remote from all danger of irreverence. There let the tabernacle be prepared; it should be closed with lock and key, and before it a lamp should be kept burning all the time. The reposition should be made on Holy Thursday itself.
Where such a fitting place is not available, the sacred ciborium is to be kept from the Mass of Holy Thursday until the Mass of the Presanctified in the "sepulcher" itself, as the repository is commonly called, behind the chalice; but from the Mass of the Presanctified until the Mass of Holy Saturday, in some more remote and secret chapel of the church, where a lamp should be kept burning. If there is no suitable place except the chapel of the "sepulcher," the ciborium should remain in the "sepulcher," until Holy Saturday. A lamp should be lighted before the "sepulcher," and the other lights should be extinguished, even those that were used for decoration of the "sepulcher" being now removed. If in any church the solemnities of Holy Thursday are not held, the sacred ciborium may be kept in its altar until sunset of Holy Thursday; and from that time until Holy Saturday it should be put in one of the places above indicated.
For the rest, it is left to the prudent discretion of the Bishops, whenever any difficulty arises in the observance of these prescriptions, to decide which of the places mentioned is more suitable; and if any considerable abuses creep in regarding this matter, to take care that they be done away with.
Wherefore the Sacred Congregation, at the plenary session of 23 March, 1929, after full consideration and discussion, decided to make the following prescriptions to the Most Reverend Ordinaries:
1. After giving due consideration to the remarks, precepts, and decisions herein contained, let the Ordinaries as soon as possible require that they be most carefully observed by the rectors of churches, and under their leadership by others who serve at the altar, so that the Sacrifice of the Altar be safeguarded from all danger of nullity and from every occasion of irreverence.
2. Let them also see to it that in all dioceses or cities or towns, according to the nature of the place, there be some fit persons who are above all suspicion, especially religious of both sexes, from whom the rectors of churches may secure, unless they already have it at hand, matter of both species for the Sacrifice and Sacrament of the Eucharist, such as can be used with a safe conscience.
3. Likewise as regards the making of hosts, rectors must be watchful that no particles such as easily adhere to the hosts remain there; they should see to it that these be removed carefully and cautiously before Mass, and that if a large number of hosts are to be put out, they be at least gently shaken in a sieve.
4. They should exercise a very vigilant supervision to see that none but fresh hosts be consecrated, and that the sacred particles reserved in the ciborium be frequently renewed (canon 1272; Roman Ritual, tit. IV, cap. 1, n. 7); and to this end they should strive to have the tabernacles where the Blessed Sacrament is kept, protected as far as possible from dampness or extreme cold; for humidity tends to make the hosts lose their crispness, while cold makes them brittle.
5. In distributing Holy Communion to the faithful, in addition to the white linen cloth spread before the communicants, according to the Rubrics of the Missal, the Ritual, and the Bishops' Ceremonial, a paten should be used, which should be of silver or gilded metal, but not engraved on the inside, and which should be held by the faithful themselves under their chins, except in the case where Holy Communion is given by a Bishop, or by a prelate in pontificals, or in a solemn Mass, when a priest or deacon who is in attendance may hold the paten under the chins of the communicants.
6. The faithful should be carefully instructed not to incline or invert the paten while they hold it under their chins or hand it to the priest or to another communicant, in such a way that any particles that may be on it will fall off and be lost.
7. Any fragments which may be on the paten after the Communion of the faithful, when it has been distributed during Mass, must be carefully brushed into the chalice with the finger; if Communion has been given outside of Mass, they should be carefully brushed into the ciborium. It is not, however, the mind of the Sacred Congregation to condemn the patens, of whatever form they may be, which are now used in certain churches, provided they be made of metal, not engraved on the inside, and be suitable to catch the sacred fragments.
8. Finally, let the Ordinaries strive to have the rectors keep the altars scrupulously clean, together with the sacred furnishings, especially those which serve to receive the sacred Species: and let them take notice that the observance of the above prescriptions is a grave burden upon their consciences.
9. As regards the reservation of the Sacred Hosts for the Communion of the sick on the last three days of Holy Week, Ordinaries of places should bear in mind the intention of the Rubrics and of the Decrees of the Sacred Congregation of Rites; the hosts are not reserved for public veneration; in fact, that is prohibited; yet every effort must be made that, especially as regards the place, the Sacrament of the Eucharist be not deprived of the tribute of due honor and elegance.
The Eminent Fathers, moreover, ordered that the Ordinaries of places, within a year after the receipt of this Instruction, inform this Sacred Congregation what measures they have taken in pursuance of the prescriptions herein contained and for the correction of abuses that may have become confirmed.
In the audience of 25 March, 1929, His Holiness, Pius XI, having received the report from the undersigned Secretary of this Sacred Congregation, approved this Instruction and ordered it published; and ordered that it be sent to all Ordinaries of places and regular prelates, so that they might communicate it respectively to priests and to members of religious institutes.
Annotations of the Secretary, Officially Published
1. It is indeed a pleasure to observe how rapidly devotion toward the Most Blessed Sacrament of the Eucharist has grown in our time since the celebration of those noted congresses everywhere for the commemoration of that life-giving and wonderful institution which so clearly manifests the boundless charity of Jesus Christ for the salvation of men. For, as the Supreme Pontiff, Leo XIII, wrote, "There is nothing more effective to encourage , Catholics both to the vigorous profession of their faith and to the exercise of truly Christian virtues than the nourishment and increase of popular devotion toward that admirable pledge of love which is 'the bond of peace and unity."1
2. Hence, it is not to be wondered at that the same Pontiff left nothing undone to promote Eucharistic Congresses in various parts of the world. Witness his Letter of 16 May, 1881, when the First International Eucharistic Congress was held in the city of Lille, from the 28th to the 30th of June of that year, in which he gave utterance to his joy on that occasion and with special benevolence bestowed his apostolic blessing upon all who attended that Congress. Moreover, on the 22nd of August of that year, on receiving a report of the Congress from its President, the Pontiff wrote him a letter in which he offered inducements for the greater and greater propagation of such congresses, in these words: "Continue therefore, beloved sons, in your work; go on increasing the number of your members; propagate the institution in which you are enlisted, and strive to enkindle in all hearts the fire of divine charity which He came to cast upon earth, and which He especially desired to enkindle through the Sacrament of the Eucharist."
3. Again on the 28th of May, 1892, he sent an Encyclical to the Bishops of all the world, "On the Most Blessed Eucharist" beginning with the words, Mirae caritatis.
4. The Supreme Pontiff, Pius X, in like manner ordered the publication of that Decree of 20 Dec., 1905, which can never be sufficiently extolled, in which he commended to the faithful the daily reception of the Most Blessed Eucharist, and gave them timely injunctions for receiving it in a holy and salutary manner. Moreover, on 7 Aug., 1910, he desired another Decree to be issued regarding the age at which boys and girls should be admitted to their first Eucharistic Communion, ordaining that Holy Communion could and should be given to them when they attained the age of discretion, that is, the beginning of the use of reason.
5. We know that both of these Decrees were confirmed by the Rescript of the Supreme Pontiff, Benedict XV, issued by the Secretariate of State pursuant to the audience of 26 June, 1916, which was entitled De Eucharistica puerorum utriusque sexus Communione ad mentem Summi Pontificis die 30 mensis Julii solemni ritu promovendal on which occasion a general Communion of children was ordered, to the end that the dreadful war which was so cruelly devastating nearly all Europe should end at last and leave the world in peace. It will be worth while to quote the tenor of that Decree: "His Holiness Benedict XV, by Divine Providence Pope, who has nothing more at heart than the pious and exact observance of the Decrees, Sacra Tridentina Synodus, and Quam Singulari, which were issued by order of his Predecessor of happy memory, Pius X . . . deigned to issue the following order: that all and each of the Ordinaries of places in Europe should make a supreme effort that on the 30th of the coming month of July, which will be a Sunday, in the churches and oratories of each one's diocese, all the children of both sexes receive Holy Communion for the intention of the Holy Father as solemnly as possible, all things to the contrary notwithstanding."
6. Finally the Supreme Pontiff, Pius XI, now gloriously reigning, in order to foster and increase more and more that same devotion to the Most Blessed Eucharist, on 24 May, 1922, solemnly blessed and was present at the Twenty-Sixth International Eucharistic Congress. Well known, too, are the words which the same Supreme Pontiff pronounced in the Allocution held on 17 Dec., 1928, regarding these Eucharistic Congresses: "Everyone knows how much and how wonderfully the other International Eucharistic Congresses which have been held have contributed to arouse in the people the spirit of faith, to foster piety, and to restore the Christian manner of life."'
7. And on 20 Dec., 1908, on the occasion of the celebration of the fiftieth anniversary of his priesthood, he most lovingly gave Communion to the little ones in the Oratory of St. Peter, who were receiving Our Lord for the first time.
8. Finally, on 25 July of this year, 1929, in thanksgiving to the Good Lord for the treaty entered into between the Holy See and the King of Italy, a treaty which was the harbinger of peace between the two powers, there occurred a most joyous event. That evening the common Father of the faithful marched forth at last in solemn state from the great Basilica of St. Peter's, accompanied by very many men of the highest rank and by a great number of students for sacred orders, and bearing in solemn procession the Host of Peace, amid transports of joy from the immense throngs assembled.
Nature herself, through the mild evening air and the lingering sunlight, seemed to join in the general rejoicing.
9. And therefore, while it is a matter of congratulation that splendid results have been obtained from this reawakened devotion to the Most Blessed Eucharist, prudence dictates that so great a Sacrament be protected from dangers of irreverence. To this end this Sacred Congregation which is in charge of the discipline of the sacraments, mindful of the precepts laid down by the Code of Canon Law, by the Councils, and especially by that of Trent, in regard to the reception of this great Sacrament, has issued this Instruction. For the reverence that is required in handling and receiving this Sacrament is declared by the Roman Catechism which was issued in pursuance of the Decree of the Council of Trent in these notable words:
"Just as among all the sacred mysteries which Our Lord and Savior commended to us as most certain means of grace, there is none that is comparable to the Most Blessed Sacrament of the Eucharist: so, too, there is no graver punishment to be feared from God for any crime than that which must be feared if a thing which is full of all holiness, or rather which contains the Author and Source of holiness Himself, were treated by the faithful without sacredness and without religious observance."'
10. Rightly, therefore, did this Sacred Congregation endeavor by this Instruction to provide norms for treating sacredly and receiving religiously this divine Sacrament; norms which concern the altar where the Holy Sacrifice is offered, the table where the Eucharist is received, the tabernacle where the Sacred Host is kept, and the matter from which it is consecrated, to wit, bread and wine; bread which must be made of wheat, and wine pressed from grapes. Hence, the making of these materials is to be carefully looked to in order to avoid all danger of invalidity or irreverence, just as the very cloths which cover the altar, and the other articles which are used upon it, are required to be perfect and clean.
11. For the same reason the Sacred Congregation ceaselessly urges the ministers of the altar to remove the danger of loss of the sacred fragments in distributing Communion to the faithful; and hence it orders that a paten be used. They must also take care to provide for proper custody of the Most Blessed Eucharist during the triduum of the Passion of Our Lord, that is, by seeing that the reservation be made in a sacred and religious manner.
12. It is left to the prudent initiative of the pastors to see to it that especially in churches situated in large cities, the altar where the tabernacle which contains the Blessed Sacrament is, be easily distinguished by the faithful from all the other altars, by some certain and conspicuous mark, for the sake of avoiding irreverence toward it; and the pastors should for this purpose instruct the faithful that when they enter a church they should show their greatest reverence, as is only right, to the Blessed Sacrament.
13. Finally, the Most Reverend Ordinaries, both those of places and those of persons, and priests both secular and religious, are earnestly requested to use their most diligent efforts to see that none of the provisions of this Instruction, looking to the sacred and religious treatment of the Blessed Sacrament, be disregarded, to the injury of that great Sacrament to which all the others are subordinate. To this end let all strive in accordance with these prescriptions, which are now confirmed by His Holiness, Pius XI, through his supreme authority.
D. Jorio, Secretary.
AAS 21-631; S. C. Sam, Instruction, 26 March, 1929. Periodica, 18-305 (Pauwels).
[see also: http://www.clsadb.com/document/8d61c13b-fbbf-40c3-9bfc-4f47f1556f33?backLink=%2Fsearch%2F%3Fq%3DThanksgiving%26volume%3D_%26order%3Drelevance%26page%3D4%26take%3D20]
Saturday, February 08, 2020
Identity of a Christian.
Who you are: salt, light, city, lamp
What you do: special sauce for finger-lickin', you brighten (You Are My Sunshine), bustle, reveal.
Why you do it (apostolic, holy): help others see and worship God
___
Christian: teach, instruct, build up, foster, mature. Appetite, hunger for:
True teaching:
What does it mean to belong to God, to be a part of his Kingdom, to call God your Father?
"Man does not live on bread alone but on every word that comes forth from the mouth of God." Mt 4:4
"He began to teach them." MT 5:2
"They shall be taught by God." Jn 6:45, cf. Is 54:14
"A light to reveal [God] to the nations." Lk 2:32
Simple images: salt (flavor), light (brighten), city (order, kingdom), lamp (illuminate).
Purpose (mindset): Others (relation, apostolate); God (worship, holiness)
Who you are: salt, light, city, lamp
What you do: special sauce for finger-lickin', you brighten (You Are My Sunshine), bustle, reveal.
Why you do it (apostolic, holy): help others see and worship God
___
Christian: teach, instruct, build up, foster, mature. Appetite, hunger for:
True teaching:
What does it mean to belong to God, to be a part of his Kingdom, to call God your Father?
"Man does not live on bread alone but on every word that comes forth from the mouth of God." Mt 4:4
"He began to teach them." MT 5:2
"They shall be taught by God." Jn 6:45, cf. Is 54:14
"A light to reveal [God] to the nations." Lk 2:32
Simple images: salt (flavor), light (brighten), city (order, kingdom), lamp (illuminate).
Purpose (mindset): Others (relation, apostolate); God (worship, holiness)
Wednesday, February 05, 2020
Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion: General Principles
[just placing this here, for the record]
Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion: General Principles
Authored By: Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger
Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion: General Principles
Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger
Prefect, Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith
[Note: The following memorandum was sent by Cardinal Ratzinger to Cardinal McCarrick and was made public in the first week of July 2004.]
1. Presenting oneself to receive Holy Communion should be a conscious decision, based on a reasoned judgment regarding one’s worthiness to do so, according to the Church’s objective criteria, asking such questions as: "Am I in full communion with the Catholic Church? Am I guilty of grave sin? Have I incurred a penalty (e.g. excommunication, interdict) that forbids me to receive Holy Communion? Have I prepared myself by fasting for at least an hour?" The practice of indiscriminately presenting oneself to receive Holy Communion, merely as a consequence of being present at Mass, is an abuse that must be corrected (cf. Instruction "Redemptionis Sacramentum," nos. 81, 83).
2. The Church teaches that abortion or euthanasia is a grave sin. The Encyclical Letter Evangelium vitae, with reference to judicial decisions or civil laws that authorize or promote abortion or euthanasia, states that there is a "grave and clear obligation to oppose them by conscientious objection. [...] In the case of an intrinsically unjust law, such as a law permitting abortion or euthanasia, it is therefore never licit to obey it, or to 'take part in a propaganda campaign in favour of such a law or vote for it'" (no. 73). Christians have a "grave obligation of conscience not to cooperate formally in practices which, even if permitted by civil legislation, are contrary to God’s law. Indeed, from the moral standpoint, it is never licit to cooperate formally in evil. [...] This cooperation can never be justified either by invoking respect for the freedom of others or by appealing to the fact that civil law permits it or requires it" (no. 74).
3. Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. For example, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war, he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion. While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment. There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia.
4. Apart from an individual's judgment about his worthiness to present himself to receive the Holy Eucharist, the minister of Holy Communion may find himself in the situation where he must refuse to distribute Holy Communion to someone, such as in cases of a declared excommunication, a declared interdict, or an obstinate persistence in manifest grave sin (cf. can. 915).
5. Regarding the grave sin of abortion or euthanasia, when a person’s formal cooperation becomes manifest (understood, in the case of a Catholic politician, as his consistently campaigning and voting for permissive abortion and euthanasia laws), his Pastor should meet with him, instructing him about the Church’s teaching, informing him that he is not to present himself for Holy Communion until he brings to an end the objective situation of sin, and warning him that he will otherwise be denied the Eucharist.
6. When "these precautionary measures have not had their effect or in which they were not possible," and the person in question, with obstinate persistence, still presents himself to receive the Holy Eucharist, "the minister of Holy Communion must refuse to distribute it" (cf. Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts Declaration "Holy Communion and Divorced, Civilly Remarried Catholics" [2002], nos. 3-4). This decision, properly speaking, is not a sanction or a penalty. Nor is the minister of Holy Communion passing judgment on the person’s subjective guilt, but rather is reacting to the person’s public unworthiness to receive Holy Communion due to an objective situation of sin.
[N.B. A Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in evil, and so unworthy to present himself for Holy Communion, if he were to deliberately vote for a candidate precisely because of the candidate’s permissive stand on abortion and/or euthanasia. When a Catholic does not share a candidate’s stand in favour of abortion and/or euthanasia, but votes for that candidate for other reasons, it is considered remote material cooperation, which can be permitted in the presence of proportionate reasons.]
Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion: General Principles
Authored By: Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger
Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion: General Principles
Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger
Prefect, Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith
[Note: The following memorandum was sent by Cardinal Ratzinger to Cardinal McCarrick and was made public in the first week of July 2004.]
1. Presenting oneself to receive Holy Communion should be a conscious decision, based on a reasoned judgment regarding one’s worthiness to do so, according to the Church’s objective criteria, asking such questions as: "Am I in full communion with the Catholic Church? Am I guilty of grave sin? Have I incurred a penalty (e.g. excommunication, interdict) that forbids me to receive Holy Communion? Have I prepared myself by fasting for at least an hour?" The practice of indiscriminately presenting oneself to receive Holy Communion, merely as a consequence of being present at Mass, is an abuse that must be corrected (cf. Instruction "Redemptionis Sacramentum," nos. 81, 83).
2. The Church teaches that abortion or euthanasia is a grave sin. The Encyclical Letter Evangelium vitae, with reference to judicial decisions or civil laws that authorize or promote abortion or euthanasia, states that there is a "grave and clear obligation to oppose them by conscientious objection. [...] In the case of an intrinsically unjust law, such as a law permitting abortion or euthanasia, it is therefore never licit to obey it, or to 'take part in a propaganda campaign in favour of such a law or vote for it'" (no. 73). Christians have a "grave obligation of conscience not to cooperate formally in practices which, even if permitted by civil legislation, are contrary to God’s law. Indeed, from the moral standpoint, it is never licit to cooperate formally in evil. [...] This cooperation can never be justified either by invoking respect for the freedom of others or by appealing to the fact that civil law permits it or requires it" (no. 74).
3. Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. For example, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war, he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion. While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment. There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia.
4. Apart from an individual's judgment about his worthiness to present himself to receive the Holy Eucharist, the minister of Holy Communion may find himself in the situation where he must refuse to distribute Holy Communion to someone, such as in cases of a declared excommunication, a declared interdict, or an obstinate persistence in manifest grave sin (cf. can. 915).
5. Regarding the grave sin of abortion or euthanasia, when a person’s formal cooperation becomes manifest (understood, in the case of a Catholic politician, as his consistently campaigning and voting for permissive abortion and euthanasia laws), his Pastor should meet with him, instructing him about the Church’s teaching, informing him that he is not to present himself for Holy Communion until he brings to an end the objective situation of sin, and warning him that he will otherwise be denied the Eucharist.
6. When "these precautionary measures have not had their effect or in which they were not possible," and the person in question, with obstinate persistence, still presents himself to receive the Holy Eucharist, "the minister of Holy Communion must refuse to distribute it" (cf. Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts Declaration "Holy Communion and Divorced, Civilly Remarried Catholics" [2002], nos. 3-4). This decision, properly speaking, is not a sanction or a penalty. Nor is the minister of Holy Communion passing judgment on the person’s subjective guilt, but rather is reacting to the person’s public unworthiness to receive Holy Communion due to an objective situation of sin.
[N.B. A Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in evil, and so unworthy to present himself for Holy Communion, if he were to deliberately vote for a candidate precisely because of the candidate’s permissive stand on abortion and/or euthanasia. When a Catholic does not share a candidate’s stand in favour of abortion and/or euthanasia, but votes for that candidate for other reasons, it is considered remote material cooperation, which can be permitted in the presence of proportionate reasons.]
Tuesday, February 04, 2020
The Oath
"I shall maintain the observance of all ecclesiastical laws."
You can't become a pastor without calling God to witness your uttering these words. Observe the law. All the laws. You specify, in the same breath, "especially those contained in the Code of Canon Law."
If you don't know the law you're libel to break your oath and not know it. That would be dumb. The only thing dumber would be to break your oath and know it full well. That would be not just dumb, but willful.
Still, you got to know the law.
That's the premise.
Does the law have anything to say regarding priests celebrating mass multiple times in a day? Sure does. Is the law clear? Sure is. What's it say?
It's "not permitted." That simple? Just about.
Still, the law does make the following exceptions for when a priest can celebrate mass more than once a day:
1) When the law itself permits it (i.e. Christmas, Holy Souls, Holy Thursday);
2) With both the permission of the Ordinary and the shortage of priests, then twice-a-day or even on a Holy Day, thrice but only when there is (I) a just cause or (II) pastoral necessity.
No where is there the express provision for a fourth (or more) celebration.
You can't become a pastor without calling God to witness your uttering these words. Observe the law. All the laws. You specify, in the same breath, "especially those contained in the Code of Canon Law."
If you don't know the law you're libel to break your oath and not know it. That would be dumb. The only thing dumber would be to break your oath and know it full well. That would be not just dumb, but willful.
Still, you got to know the law.
That's the premise.
Does the law have anything to say regarding priests celebrating mass multiple times in a day? Sure does. Is the law clear? Sure is. What's it say?
It's "not permitted." That simple? Just about.
Still, the law does make the following exceptions for when a priest can celebrate mass more than once a day:
1) When the law itself permits it (i.e. Christmas, Holy Souls, Holy Thursday);
2) With both the permission of the Ordinary and the shortage of priests, then twice-a-day or even on a Holy Day, thrice but only when there is (I) a just cause or (II) pastoral necessity.
No where is there the express provision for a fourth (or more) celebration.
Tuesday, January 28, 2020
A question for Peter
The infrastructure of the internet, what's it consist of and who owns it? The principle elements of it, anyway. I know I own my laptop. You know you own yours. But for you, on your laptop to read something I wrote on my laptop—it got to you through the medium of the internet, my question is, who owns the internet? Who are it's primary stakeholders?
There are the various ISPs in the area, Atlantic Broadband in SoMD, for instance. But what do they provide? There's access, transit (whatever that is), domain registration, hosting services, colocation centers, etc.
If the internet is itself an integral part of the means of communication—which, of course it is—then it's a medium which is quite involved, highly technical, and of a size and scale which if it's a human scale then it's a human scale unlike man has ever seen.
Can it be said that the scale of the medium is, let's call it, so large as to be practically infinite?
What do I mean by the scale of the medium? Okay, let's simplify it. The scale of the medium of print—old fashioned ink and paper, not even Guttenburg—was relatively small. I'll call it a human scale. You needed paper, of some sort. Pen and ink. Sealing wax and seals (not flipper). Some scroll or binding means. Curriers. Post men. Scribes, monks. Tutors. Translators. Languages. Literacy. I'm sure I'm overlooking stuff, but you get the point. I'll call it a human scale. This scale likely still exists in the internet, more or less. But isn't it also a lot bigger? If so, it what way or how is it so much bigger? Can it's growth and development be said to have transcended the human scale? In a sense, not. It's a man made thing, after all.
Such a line of questioning also begs the question about the "human" scale of the older, print, medium. Aren't there ways in which it too was practically infinite in it's scale?
Another way to ask the fundamental question, how is the new medium fundamentally different from the old? And how is it the same? We're responsible for how we use it. I think it's important to make sure we understand, as best we can, what we're using.
How does the infinite scale of the new medium compare with the infinite scale of the old? Can one infinity be said to be more "human" than another? Or can one scale be more or less human? Is it the infinity or the scale, or neither or both that is or can be truly human?
There are the various ISPs in the area, Atlantic Broadband in SoMD, for instance. But what do they provide? There's access, transit (whatever that is), domain registration, hosting services, colocation centers, etc.
If the internet is itself an integral part of the means of communication—which, of course it is—then it's a medium which is quite involved, highly technical, and of a size and scale which if it's a human scale then it's a human scale unlike man has ever seen.
Can it be said that the scale of the medium is, let's call it, so large as to be practically infinite?
What do I mean by the scale of the medium? Okay, let's simplify it. The scale of the medium of print—old fashioned ink and paper, not even Guttenburg—was relatively small. I'll call it a human scale. You needed paper, of some sort. Pen and ink. Sealing wax and seals (not flipper). Some scroll or binding means. Curriers. Post men. Scribes, monks. Tutors. Translators. Languages. Literacy. I'm sure I'm overlooking stuff, but you get the point. I'll call it a human scale. This scale likely still exists in the internet, more or less. But isn't it also a lot bigger? If so, it what way or how is it so much bigger? Can it's growth and development be said to have transcended the human scale? In a sense, not. It's a man made thing, after all.
Such a line of questioning also begs the question about the "human" scale of the older, print, medium. Aren't there ways in which it too was practically infinite in it's scale?
Another way to ask the fundamental question, how is the new medium fundamentally different from the old? And how is it the same? We're responsible for how we use it. I think it's important to make sure we understand, as best we can, what we're using.
How does the infinite scale of the new medium compare with the infinite scale of the old? Can one infinity be said to be more "human" than another? Or can one scale be more or less human? Is it the infinity or the scale, or neither or both that is or can be truly human?
Monday, January 27, 2020
Profiteering & publishing the Word of God
I remember when JP2's interview came out in print, "Crossing the Threshold of Hope," in 1994. I recall, at the time, wondering about the format, an interview. It occurred to me at the time in a vague manner what I'll describe now as an awareness of a possible conflict of interest. I remember reading the beginning of the book—I was in high school, I must've been 15 or 16. I recall the prefatory remarks about the uniqueness of the format, even the historic. Something like, no Pope had ever gone on the record with a journalist before. I recall, faintly, being at the time impressed by that. I also recall, wondering how Mondadori (the journalist interviewing JP2) got the privilege.
Perhaps, as a native Washingtonian growing up 'inside the beltway' I had already become accustomed to the press pool, and dozens of reporters and even the mass media apparatus. This book seemed to favor private enterprise while treating on the matters of the catholic faith by the universal pontiff. I didn't bother to understand at the time how those ends could be reconciled. "I'll talk about the faith to you." "You right it down, sell it and make a lot of money." That's another way of putting it.
Also, as a teenager, I was also largely unaware of theology as a science—and thus as a profession. Or of best journalistic practices pertaining to the disclosures of bias or of financial interest. I'm sure everything was on the up and up with how that book was rolled out. It was a great book. The Pope had a very natural way of addressing concerns which the reporter presented fairly as being on the mind of many of the faithful and of the public at large.
Still, the issue remains, even if the case above merely suggested it as opposed to being an actual instance of it—it was not at all, as far as I can tell—an instance of profiteering. So, the question: what's the right way to publish concerns about the faith in a broad manner whereby the concerns of any conflict of interest can be completely alleviated?
It comes up again with the current publication of the Sarah & Benedict XVI book on celibacy. Amazon France was listing it as their number 1 best-seller at the time of it's initial release. Maybe it's as simple as a full-disclosure statement within the publication itself. But whatever it is, I think it would be a safeguard against anyone smearing the church, or any theologian, any journalist or publisher with the smear that they're profiteering.
Perhaps, as a native Washingtonian growing up 'inside the beltway' I had already become accustomed to the press pool, and dozens of reporters and even the mass media apparatus. This book seemed to favor private enterprise while treating on the matters of the catholic faith by the universal pontiff. I didn't bother to understand at the time how those ends could be reconciled. "I'll talk about the faith to you." "You right it down, sell it and make a lot of money." That's another way of putting it.
Also, as a teenager, I was also largely unaware of theology as a science—and thus as a profession. Or of best journalistic practices pertaining to the disclosures of bias or of financial interest. I'm sure everything was on the up and up with how that book was rolled out. It was a great book. The Pope had a very natural way of addressing concerns which the reporter presented fairly as being on the mind of many of the faithful and of the public at large.
Still, the issue remains, even if the case above merely suggested it as opposed to being an actual instance of it—it was not at all, as far as I can tell—an instance of profiteering. So, the question: what's the right way to publish concerns about the faith in a broad manner whereby the concerns of any conflict of interest can be completely alleviated?
It comes up again with the current publication of the Sarah & Benedict XVI book on celibacy. Amazon France was listing it as their number 1 best-seller at the time of it's initial release. Maybe it's as simple as a full-disclosure statement within the publication itself. But whatever it is, I think it would be a safeguard against anyone smearing the church, or any theologian, any journalist or publisher with the smear that they're profiteering.
Monday, January 06, 2020
Nullo Unquam Tempore THE SACRED CONGREGATION OF THE SACRAMENTS. INSTRUCTION
[This is reposted here h/t romanrite.com for accessibility purposes]
Nullo Unquam Tempore
THE SACRED CONGREGATION OF THE SACRAMENTS. INSTRUCTION on the careful custody of the Most Holy Eucharist.
1. Never did the Apostolic See omit to set before local Ordinaries the safeguards and cautions whereby the Most Holy Eucharist reserved in our churches, according to common law, or by indult, might be diligently guarded and kept safe from all profanation. The disciplinary precepts of canonical legislation, which in the course of time the Holy See took care to give, are now embodied in canon 1269 of the Code of Canon Law, as follows:-- (1) The Most Holy Eucharist must be kept in an immovable tabernacle, placed in the middle of the altar. (2) The tabernacle should be artistically constructed, solidly closed on all sides, becomingly adorned in accordance with the liturgical laws, used to contain no other object whatever, and should be so diligently guarded as to exclude all danger of sacrilegious profanation of any kind. (3) For some grave cause approved by the local Ordinary, it is not forbidden to have the Most Holy Eucharist kept at night outside the altar, on a corporal however, in a safer but becoming place, with due regard to the prescription of Canon 1271. (4) The key of the tabernacle, in which the Most Holy Sacrament is kept, should be guarded with the utmost diligence, its custody resting as a grave burden of conscience on the priest who has charge of the church or oratory. 2. Since this sacred Congregation has the commission to watch over the discipline of the seven Sacraments (Can. 249), and has already issued an Instruction under the date of May 26, 1929, [Footnote 1: Acta Ap. Sedis, vol. xxi, p. 631] "on some things to be avoided and observed in the celebration of the Sacrifice of the Mass and in the distribution and reservation of the Sacrament of the Most Holy Eucharist," it now considers it opportune to remind everybody who is concerned with the grave matter of keeping the Holy Eucharist, of the relative canonical prescriptions, adding brief explanations, and laying down other safeguards and means better adapted to the times in which we live, in view of the safest possible keeping of the Holy Eucharist, and its entire preservation from injury of any kind. 3. The faithful observance of certain canonical precepts of the Code of Canon Law is very conducive to the attainment of an end so noble and so desirable. First of all, be it remarked that two things are required sub gravi, in order that the Holy Eucharist may be reserved in a church: Firstly, that there be someone to take care of it; secondly, that a priest must regularly celebrate Mass once a week in the sacred place. (Can. 1265 §1). Now, even though the Apostolic See sometimes grants, on account of scarcity of priests, an indult for fortnightly Mass only, in view of renewing the sacred species, provided always that there be no danger of their corruption, it never on any account dispenses from the first law, but rather always insists that there be a person who shall attend day and night to the safe keeping of the Blessed Sacrament. [Footnote 2: Cfr. S.R.C. resp. diei 17 Februarii ad Episcopum Altonen. (decretum n. 3527).] Besides, there are three things to be kept in mind from the above Canon 1269. (a) The Most Holy Eucharist must be kept in an immovable tabernacle (§1), which is thoroughly closed (§2); (b) the tabernacle must be guarded so diligently that all danger of profanation is excluded (§2); (c) the key of the tabernacle is to be most carefully kept by the priest (§4). On each of these points a few remarks must be made. 4. (a) The tabernacle must be immovable and thoroughly closed. From this precept, in itself grave, the Bishop cannot dispense, nor can century-old or immemorial custom derogate, except in the case mentioned in paragraph 3. This is the first measure for the safe-keeping of the Blessed Sacrament. Absolute and complete closure necessarily demands that the tabernacle be made of solid and strong material. According to the liturgical laws, the material may be wood or marble or metal, [Footnote 3: Caeremoniale parochorum iuxta novissimas A.S. sanctiones concinnatum, art. vii. De tabernaculo, etc., n. 9 ad. 4.] but the last-mentioned material is the strongest of all. The main point is that the tabernacle be constructed of solid material, having its parts closely compacted together, and furnished with a lock strongly fixed to the door, and so designed as to ensure a completely safe locking. The hinges of the door must also be strong and well set. In some places the Bishops have prescribed that the tabernacle be entirely of metal, a measure which ensures particularly safe custody of the Blessed Sacrament and, as his Eminence Cardinal P. Gasparri teaches, [Footnote 4: De SSma Eucharistia, II, 263, n. 994.] must be absolutely observed, wherever it has been introduced. An excellent form of tabernacle is that which is a real strong iron safe, commonly known as cassaforte or coffre-fort, so that it cannot be pierced or broken by those instruments which are ordinarily used by thieves. It should be fixed by strong iron fastenings to the altar, adhering either to its lowest gradine or to the wall behind. These iron cases should be constructed either in the form of a ciborium, to be afterwards covered with marble and decorated with other ornaments, so that they exhibit the appearance of a work artistically finished, according to the terms of the second paragraph of the above-mentioned canon. Such tabernacles are called safes (Italian, di sicurezza). In order to remove all doubt regarding the observance of the liturgical laws in constructing these tabernacles, let attention be paid to the response of the S.C.R., given on April 1, 1908, in answer to a petition sent by a priest in the name of the Ordinaries of the ecclesiastical Province of Milwaukee in North America. The priest had offered for approval a new tabernacle, most solidly constructed, and so designed as to be in no way at variance with the rubrics of the Roman Ritual or the Decrees of the Sacred Congregation of Rites. The Sacred Congregation answered: "Let the response given by S.C.R. on a similar case, under date March 18, 1898, be communicated to the petitioner; namely, 'that the purpose of the inventor is laudable, and that the matter involved and the effectiveness of the device are subject to the judgments of the local Ordinaries themselves.'" A like ruling was given in a response to the diocese of Superior regarding a new tabernacle for the B. Sacrament. In order to proceed more safely in approving a certain tabernacle, the Bishop reverently asked the S.C.R.: "Whether any objection might be urged in the name of the liturgical regulations against the particular form of semi-circular door, which was set on ball-bearings, and turned without hinges; under this head was there any reason to prevent the Bishop from recommending the invention to his priests, or should the tabernacle be furnished with a door or doors set on hinges and turning on hinges?" The Sacred Congregation of Rites, having asked the vote of a Liturgical Commission, answered the proposed query on May 8, 1908, thus: "Per se there is no objection in the case, and for the rest of the matter is within the competence of the Bishop." Really the use of these very solid tabernacles is a very efficacious means for the safe keeping of the Most Holy Sacrament. This Sacred Congregation does not, however, impose the burden of acquiring such tabernacles on churches which have the ordinary ones, provided these are admittedly adequate for the secure custody of the Holy Eucharist; but it recommends them for churches which are henceforth to be built. It furthermore earnestly exhorts their Lordships the Bishops, in accordance with their zeal for the Blessed Sacrament, to watch and see that the ordinary tabernacles in use throughout their dioceses have the necessary solidity to preclude every danger of sacrilegious profanation. Tabernacles which do not guarantee the absence of that danger are to be removed with the utmost severity. 5. (b) The tabernacle is to be so carefully guarded that the danger of any sort of sacrilegious profanation be excluded. It is not sufficient that a custodian reside in the place, nor is it enough that the tabernacle be so strong that it can neither be pierced by a boring instrument, nor broken open by a chisel, and is so well provided with locks that it may not be opened even with skeleton keys: a third safeguard is required by law: careful custody. Now this watchfulness, which is to be continually maintained, embraces many cautions, both ordinary and extraordinary, according to the circumstances of places and times. As regards the custodian, although it is desirable that he be a cleric, and moreover a priest, it is not prohibited that he be a layman, as long as a cleric is responsible for the key by which the place of reservation is closed. He must remain near this place day and night, so that he may quickly make his appearance, as often as need arises; in other words, he must be constantly on the watch. He must never leave the church during the time that it is open to the faithful, and has few or none visiting it. This is all the more necessary in city churches, where thieves, unknown as such to the faithful, prowl around in the guise of strangers or beggars, and are ready to seize the moment when vigilance is slackened, in order to perpetrate with deft quickness and, as it were, in the twinkling of an eye, their sacrilegious thefts. Such as these visit sacred places, and take accurate observation, by way of doors, windows, lattices, entrances, especially less principal ones, in order to attempt the execution of their wicked purpose by night. If this is of rather rare occurrence in villages, where the presence of a strange and unknown person going round the church, and entering it is more easily noticed, and arouses suspicion in both priest and faithful, that circumstance does not free the parish priest or rector from the obligation of guarding the Blessed Eucharist, the method and mode of custody being left to his prudence, according to local conditions. He ought, for instance, to visit the church sometimes during the day, get trustworthy persons living in the neighbourhood to watch, assign the private Eucharistic visits of his parishioners to different hours of the day. A careful watch should be kept over workmen and others who, on account of service, or other causes, frequent the church or sacristy, or the priest's or custodian's house in the vicinity of church or sacristy. Nor is the watchful custody of the Blessed Sacrament, as prescribed by law, to cease at night when the church is closed. Special cautions are to be used for the night time. The ordinary cautions required by prudence, and constantly to be used for the custody of the Holy Eucharist, for the prevention of theft in regard to sacred vessels, pictures, alms, and church furniture are as follows:-- (1) all the portals of the church, within the limits of necessity and possibility, should have strong door-leaves fastened with strong locks and bolts, these being of such kind that they can be opened only from the inside, the windows being guarded by bars or iron grilles; (2) when the church is being closed in the evening, there should be a careful look round, lest any evil-intentioned person may be left within; (3) the duty of shutting the church should be entrusted to persons above suspicion, especially to persons not addicted to strong drink. To these precautions we may add another very commendable one, which is daily coming into wider use, and which is often very helpful in baffling the attempts of thieves. This is the placing of electric bells in suitable places -- bells which will ring if the doors are opened, or when these or the tabernacle or altar or table are touched, thus suddenly arousing the attention of the priest or custodian. There are also special electrical devices which suddenly light up the church, and immediately warn the custodian of the presence of thieves. Such devices, in order to be efficacious, must be cleverly and ingeniously hidden, so as to escape all suspicion on the part of thieves. They should also be inspected each day, so as to be kept in proper order. A special extraordinary provision is mentioned in the third paragraph of the canon cited above. For some grave cause to be approved by the Ordinary, it is not forbidden to keep the Blessed Sacrament at night outside of the altar, on a corporal however, in a safer but becoming place, with due regard to the requirements of canon 1271. This place is ordinarily the sacristy, provided that it is a safer and becoming place, or a very solid box, well closed (cassaforte), if that is to be preferred, inserted in some part of the church wall. If neither church nor sacristy provide the desired security, the Eucharist may be kept in some other safe place, even of a private character. In such cases, the parish priest should see to it that the Blessed Sacrament is kept with reverence and honour, and that the faith of the faithful in the real presence is not lessened. In this reservation of the Most Holy Eucharist the Sacred Species are not merely to be covered with a corporal, but must always be put in a vase or pyx. [Footnote 5: Cfr. cit. decr. Alton., not. 2.] Moreover, when they are being brought from the tabernacle of the church, or vice-versa, the priest must wear surplice and stole, and be accompanied by a cleric, carrying a light, at least regularly. The Rectors of churches must likewise take good care that pyxes or sacred vessels of great value are, as far as possible, not left in the tabernacles. That would only provoke and entice the greed of thieves. When such vessels are used on the occasion of certain solemnities, it is desirable that they be purified at the last Mass, and put in a safe place (not the sacristy). The particles which may be left over should be placed in an ordinary pyx. Let Rectors also abstain from decorating altars and sacred images (either sculptured or painted) with costly votive gifts, such as rings of gold and silver, chainlets, neck-laces, ear-rings, gems and such like. Images should not habitually bear such decorations when exposed for public veneration. If it is proper to do so on the occasion of some festival, the Rector should, at the conclusion of the festival, take these valuables away from the church and clearly make known the reason to the faithful. 6. (c) The key of the tabernacle must be most diligently kept by a priest. All the cautions mentioned up to the present will be in vain, if the chief caution, namely, the safe-keeping of the key of the tabernacle be neglected. The fourth paragraph of the above canon expressly mentions in respect to this point that a grave burden rests on the conscience of the priest to whom the key of the tabernacle is entrusted. In order to satisfy this obligation of most diligent custody in regard to the key, the Rector is solemnly warned that the key of the tabernacle must never be left on the table of the altar, nor in the door of the tabernacle, not even at the time when the divine offices are carried out in the morning at the altar of the Blessed Sacrament, or communion is distributed, especially if this altar is not in open view. When these offices are over, the key must be kept by the Rector at home, or always carried about by him, care being taken against losing it; or let it be kept in the sacristy in a safe and secret place, under lock and key, the second key being kept by the Rector as above. [Footnote 6: Cfr. Encycl. litt. iussu Benedicti XIV edit. a S.C.EE. et RR, die 9 Feb. 1751.] Let priests who are guardians of the B. Sacrament seriously consider that the obligation of keeping most diligently the key of the Sacred Ciborium is a grave obligation, as its scope and the very words of the law clearly show. The priest on whom the right and duty of keeping the key ordinarily and naturally rests is the Rector of the church or oratory; should he go away, he can, and ought, during his absence, entrust the keeping of the Blessed Sacrament to another priest. If he leaves the key in the sacristy under another key; he can give this latter to the sacristan during such time as he is absent, and the key of the tabernacle may be needed. Universal practice is manifestly in favour of this. If there is question of a cathedral or collegiate church, which is also a parish church, the keeping of the Holy Eucharist belongs to the chapter, and another tabernacle key must be kept by the Parish Priest (can. 415, §3, n. 1). The exclusive right of keeping the key of the tabernacle belongs to the Parish Priest, even if a confraternity be erected in the parochial church. In non-parochial churches, where the B.S. is kept by indult of the Holy See, it is to be guarded by chaplains or rectors, never by laymen, even though they be patrons. Without an Apostolic Indult lay people per se cannot keep the key of the tabernacle. 7. Special remarks must be made regarding the keeping of the key of the tabernacle in the churches of nuns or sisters, and in pious or religious houses of women. In view of the Statute of Canon 1267, whereby every privilege to the contrary being recalled, the Blessed Eucharist cannot be kept in a religious or pious house, except in the church or principal oratory, nor in the case of nuns, within the choir or enclosure of the monastery, local Ordinaries should bear well in mind, and insist on it, that the key of the Sacred Tabernacle is not to be kept within the enclosure. [Footnote 7: Cfr. Resolution of S.C.R., May 2, 1878, ad VI (decree 3448); H.E. Cardinal PETROUS GASPARRI, op. cit., 266, n. 998 {I have put the bold text here, as in the Latin, but not the translation, J.R. Lilburne}] Henceforth it is to be kept in the sacristy, so as to be obtainable at once, when need arises, and, when the church functions are over, and especially at night, it is to be placed in some safe, solid and secret receptacle under two keys, one of which is to be kept by the Mother Superior of the Community, personally or through a substitute, the other being entrusted to some nun, for instance, the sacristan, so that the offices of both are required in order to unlock the above-said place. Let their Lordships, the Bishops, give due attention to this ordinance, and rigidly insist on its execution, without any acceptation of persons, so that abuses and irreverences be avoided, which redound on the Blessed Eucharist. 8. Regarding the oratories of seminaries and ecclesiastical colleges, educational establishments for young people of both sexes, hospitals and hospices, which enjoy the power of keeping the Blessed Sacrament, the key of the tabernacle shall be given for keeping to their Rector or Moderator, if he be a priest, otherwise to the spiritual director or chaplain, who has been specially appointed to celebrate Mass, and carry out the sacred functions in the place. He must carefully see that the key does not come into the hands of other persons. 9. As regards private Oratories, which by Apostolic Indult enjoy the privilege of keeping the Blessed Eucharist, the key of the tabernacle is usually kept in the sacristy, under the care of the family, rather than of the chaplain [Footnote 8: H.E. Cardinal Gasparri, op. cit. II, 267, n. 999.]; but if the Bishop consider it preferable that the key should not be in the keeping of the indultary, let him give it to the priest who celebrates, especially if he says Mass there continually; or let him give it to the Parish Priest to be given each time, as convenient, to the priest who is to celebrate. Lay indultaries who have charge of the key are to be reminded, and clerics, of whatsoever dignity, must religiously consider how serious is their obligation to see that the key does not come into the hands of anyone, even of the family or family attendants. 10. The Sacred Congregation is not unaware that the aforesaid cautions will not fully secure their object, unless their Lordships the Bishops and local Ordinaries, while enjoining their observance on Parish Priests, Rectors of Churches, Moderators of Institutes of all sorts, and superioresses of nuns, also keep the following four most important points in view. (a) Especially during diocesan visitations, but also even outside of such visitations, as often as a case demands it, they should either personally or through suitable and prudent ecclesiastics, diligently inquire and secure ocular knowledge of the provision made for the safe-keeping of the B.S., not only in each parish, but also in each church or oratory which enjoys this right. As often as they find out that something is wanting in the safeguards rightly required, they must order them to be made good at once, a short time limit being given, under penalty of a pecuniary fine, or even suspension in the case of priests, or removal, according to the gravity of their negligence, to be incurred by those who have the duty of supplying all means of security. They must not relieve those persons of such a burden, under the plea that no profanation or unbecoming thing has happened heretofore. What has not been done up to the present may in the course of time by the malice of men be done, unless the necessary precautions are taken. (b) As often as sacrilegious robberies involving the violation of the Blessed Eucharist occur in his diocese (which God forbid), the local Bishop personally, as is best, or by an official of his Curia, specially delegated for the purpose, should always file a summary process against the Parish Priest or other Priest, secular or regular, even exempt, who was entrusted with the charge of the Blessed Sacrament. The acts of the process are to be sent to this Sacred Congregation, together with the vote of the Bishop. This should include an accurate description of the theft, according to its circumstances of time and place, and then a statement, based on acts of the process assigning the burden of guilt, through positive fault or negligence, to the responsible person. The Bishop should also propose the canonical penalties to be inflicted on the guilty, and then await the mandates of this Sacred Dicasterium. (c) Ordinaries should deeply consider the severity of the penalties which Canon 2382 lays down against a Parish Priest who has gravely neglected the safe-keeping of the Blessed Sacrament, even though his fault fall short of the actual violation of the B.S. These penalties go so far as deprivation of his parish. Seeing the end of the law, the Ordinaries should take care that other Rectors of churches, congrua conguis referendo, are punished with analogous penalties, if they have seriously neglected their duty in this matter. As far as may be required, the necessary and opportune faculties are given by this Sacred Congregation. To escape such penalties, the cause likely to be alleged by the Parish Priest, or others entrusted with the care of the Blessed Sacrament, namely, that such accidents as open tabernacles and the keeping of keys in unsafe places were due to the carelessness of some other priest, does not suffice. The Pastors and Rectors themselves bear the onus of diligently caring for the sacred vessels and Blessed Eucharist. It is their personal office to faithfully and diligently watch and see that, when the sacred offices were over, the tabernacle was not exposed to violation of sacrilegious robbery. Against the aforesaid priest and any other one guilty of similar negligence the same penalties are to be used, because by his negligence he was the occasion of this grievous crime. In order that local Ordinaries may be able to inflict these penalties, and proceed against delinquent religious of both sexes, even exempt, according to the apostolic prescriptions in this matter, we hereby, by virtue of the present Instruction, give them the necessary faculties cumulatively with the Major Religious Superiors. On these also the Sacred Congregation imposes a similar obligation, but reserves to the Bishop alone the faculty of filing the process, as described above. (d) The Ordinaries should diligently inquire whether the churches and oratories to which reservation of the B. Sacrament does not belong by common law (Cfr. can. 1265, §1, n. 1, 2) enjoy this faculty by Apostolic Indult granted by Brief in perpetuity or by Rescript for a time. As often as they find that this privilege has no lawful support, let them take care to remove it as an abuse. Besides, they should not be too easy in receiving and commending requests for the faculty to reserve the Blessed Eucharist in places which do not enjoy it by common law. Let them rather abstain altogether from doing so, unless very grave reasons be present, especially in private oratories and churches too far removed from the houses of the faithful, or situated in desert mountains, and wide country spaces, so that adequate provision for the safe-keeping of the Blessed Sacrament is not possible. It is more tolerable that sometimes even a notable part of the faithful be deprived of the means of adoring the Blessed Eucharist than that the same should be exposed to the probable danger of profanation. Nay, moreover, these present letters given power to the Bishops to revoke the faculty of reserving the Blessed Sacrament in churches and oratories which enjoy it by Apostolic Indult, as often as they perceive that grave abuses have crept in or all the conditions required for safe custody and due reverence and veneration of the Blessed Sacrament are not present. These are the canonical regulations and chief cautions which this Sacred Congregation has thought well to set before the local Ordinaries, that they in turn may commend them more urgently to Parish Priests and other guardians of the Most Holy Sacrament. Their execution will serve to root out abuses, if any such have crept in, or to guard against them, if they have not. Other regulations which may be suitable to particular circumstances of time and place for the better attainment of the same purpose are left to the zeal and industry of the Bishops themselves. To all such local Ordinaries we offer these helps, earnestly begging them in the Lord to leave nothing undone in order to safeguard the Most Holy Eucharist from the impious attempts of wicked men. "Than the Holy Sacrament the Church of God has nothing more worthy, nothing more holy, nothing more wonderful. In it is contained the chief and greatest gift of God, the Fountain and Author of all grace and sanctity, Christ our Lord." [Footnote 9: Roman Ritual, tit. iv, chap. I, n. 1.] Our Most Holy Lord Pius XI by divine Providence Pope, in an audience granted to his Excellency the Secretary of this Sacred Congregation, on May 7, 1938, graciously deigned to confirm and ratify with his Apostolic authority the above Instruction, already approved by the Eminent Fathers in plenary session of March 30. His Holiness ordered it to be published in the official organ of the Apostolic See, so that it be most religiously observed by all whom it concerns. Everything to the contrary notwithstanding. Given at Rome, from the Palace of the Sacred Congregation of the Sacraments, on the feast of the Ascension 1938. D. Card. JORIO, Prefect. F. Bracci, Secretary. Posted by J.R. Lilburne, 31 July 2002. The translation is from the Australasian Catholic Record, 1938, pages 290 - 300. The Latin texts is in Acta Apostolicae Sedis, Volume 30 (1938) pages 198 - 207.
Nullo Unquam Tempore
THE SACRED CONGREGATION OF THE SACRAMENTS. INSTRUCTION on the careful custody of the Most Holy Eucharist.
1. Never did the Apostolic See omit to set before local Ordinaries the safeguards and cautions whereby the Most Holy Eucharist reserved in our churches, according to common law, or by indult, might be diligently guarded and kept safe from all profanation. The disciplinary precepts of canonical legislation, which in the course of time the Holy See took care to give, are now embodied in canon 1269 of the Code of Canon Law, as follows:-- (1) The Most Holy Eucharist must be kept in an immovable tabernacle, placed in the middle of the altar. (2) The tabernacle should be artistically constructed, solidly closed on all sides, becomingly adorned in accordance with the liturgical laws, used to contain no other object whatever, and should be so diligently guarded as to exclude all danger of sacrilegious profanation of any kind. (3) For some grave cause approved by the local Ordinary, it is not forbidden to have the Most Holy Eucharist kept at night outside the altar, on a corporal however, in a safer but becoming place, with due regard to the prescription of Canon 1271. (4) The key of the tabernacle, in which the Most Holy Sacrament is kept, should be guarded with the utmost diligence, its custody resting as a grave burden of conscience on the priest who has charge of the church or oratory. 2. Since this sacred Congregation has the commission to watch over the discipline of the seven Sacraments (Can. 249), and has already issued an Instruction under the date of May 26, 1929, [Footnote 1: Acta Ap. Sedis, vol. xxi, p. 631] "on some things to be avoided and observed in the celebration of the Sacrifice of the Mass and in the distribution and reservation of the Sacrament of the Most Holy Eucharist," it now considers it opportune to remind everybody who is concerned with the grave matter of keeping the Holy Eucharist, of the relative canonical prescriptions, adding brief explanations, and laying down other safeguards and means better adapted to the times in which we live, in view of the safest possible keeping of the Holy Eucharist, and its entire preservation from injury of any kind. 3. The faithful observance of certain canonical precepts of the Code of Canon Law is very conducive to the attainment of an end so noble and so desirable. First of all, be it remarked that two things are required sub gravi, in order that the Holy Eucharist may be reserved in a church: Firstly, that there be someone to take care of it; secondly, that a priest must regularly celebrate Mass once a week in the sacred place. (Can. 1265 §1). Now, even though the Apostolic See sometimes grants, on account of scarcity of priests, an indult for fortnightly Mass only, in view of renewing the sacred species, provided always that there be no danger of their corruption, it never on any account dispenses from the first law, but rather always insists that there be a person who shall attend day and night to the safe keeping of the Blessed Sacrament. [Footnote 2: Cfr. S.R.C. resp. diei 17 Februarii ad Episcopum Altonen. (decretum n. 3527).] Besides, there are three things to be kept in mind from the above Canon 1269. (a) The Most Holy Eucharist must be kept in an immovable tabernacle (§1), which is thoroughly closed (§2); (b) the tabernacle must be guarded so diligently that all danger of profanation is excluded (§2); (c) the key of the tabernacle is to be most carefully kept by the priest (§4). On each of these points a few remarks must be made. 4. (a) The tabernacle must be immovable and thoroughly closed. From this precept, in itself grave, the Bishop cannot dispense, nor can century-old or immemorial custom derogate, except in the case mentioned in paragraph 3. This is the first measure for the safe-keeping of the Blessed Sacrament. Absolute and complete closure necessarily demands that the tabernacle be made of solid and strong material. According to the liturgical laws, the material may be wood or marble or metal, [Footnote 3: Caeremoniale parochorum iuxta novissimas A.S. sanctiones concinnatum, art. vii. De tabernaculo, etc., n. 9 ad. 4.] but the last-mentioned material is the strongest of all. The main point is that the tabernacle be constructed of solid material, having its parts closely compacted together, and furnished with a lock strongly fixed to the door, and so designed as to ensure a completely safe locking. The hinges of the door must also be strong and well set. In some places the Bishops have prescribed that the tabernacle be entirely of metal, a measure which ensures particularly safe custody of the Blessed Sacrament and, as his Eminence Cardinal P. Gasparri teaches, [Footnote 4: De SSma Eucharistia, II, 263, n. 994.] must be absolutely observed, wherever it has been introduced. An excellent form of tabernacle is that which is a real strong iron safe, commonly known as cassaforte or coffre-fort, so that it cannot be pierced or broken by those instruments which are ordinarily used by thieves. It should be fixed by strong iron fastenings to the altar, adhering either to its lowest gradine or to the wall behind. These iron cases should be constructed either in the form of a ciborium, to be afterwards covered with marble and decorated with other ornaments, so that they exhibit the appearance of a work artistically finished, according to the terms of the second paragraph of the above-mentioned canon. Such tabernacles are called safes (Italian, di sicurezza). In order to remove all doubt regarding the observance of the liturgical laws in constructing these tabernacles, let attention be paid to the response of the S.C.R., given on April 1, 1908, in answer to a petition sent by a priest in the name of the Ordinaries of the ecclesiastical Province of Milwaukee in North America. The priest had offered for approval a new tabernacle, most solidly constructed, and so designed as to be in no way at variance with the rubrics of the Roman Ritual or the Decrees of the Sacred Congregation of Rites. The Sacred Congregation answered: "Let the response given by S.C.R. on a similar case, under date March 18, 1898, be communicated to the petitioner; namely, 'that the purpose of the inventor is laudable, and that the matter involved and the effectiveness of the device are subject to the judgments of the local Ordinaries themselves.'" A like ruling was given in a response to the diocese of Superior regarding a new tabernacle for the B. Sacrament. In order to proceed more safely in approving a certain tabernacle, the Bishop reverently asked the S.C.R.: "Whether any objection might be urged in the name of the liturgical regulations against the particular form of semi-circular door, which was set on ball-bearings, and turned without hinges; under this head was there any reason to prevent the Bishop from recommending the invention to his priests, or should the tabernacle be furnished with a door or doors set on hinges and turning on hinges?" The Sacred Congregation of Rites, having asked the vote of a Liturgical Commission, answered the proposed query on May 8, 1908, thus: "Per se there is no objection in the case, and for the rest of the matter is within the competence of the Bishop." Really the use of these very solid tabernacles is a very efficacious means for the safe keeping of the Most Holy Sacrament. This Sacred Congregation does not, however, impose the burden of acquiring such tabernacles on churches which have the ordinary ones, provided these are admittedly adequate for the secure custody of the Holy Eucharist; but it recommends them for churches which are henceforth to be built. It furthermore earnestly exhorts their Lordships the Bishops, in accordance with their zeal for the Blessed Sacrament, to watch and see that the ordinary tabernacles in use throughout their dioceses have the necessary solidity to preclude every danger of sacrilegious profanation. Tabernacles which do not guarantee the absence of that danger are to be removed with the utmost severity. 5. (b) The tabernacle is to be so carefully guarded that the danger of any sort of sacrilegious profanation be excluded. It is not sufficient that a custodian reside in the place, nor is it enough that the tabernacle be so strong that it can neither be pierced by a boring instrument, nor broken open by a chisel, and is so well provided with locks that it may not be opened even with skeleton keys: a third safeguard is required by law: careful custody. Now this watchfulness, which is to be continually maintained, embraces many cautions, both ordinary and extraordinary, according to the circumstances of places and times. As regards the custodian, although it is desirable that he be a cleric, and moreover a priest, it is not prohibited that he be a layman, as long as a cleric is responsible for the key by which the place of reservation is closed. He must remain near this place day and night, so that he may quickly make his appearance, as often as need arises; in other words, he must be constantly on the watch. He must never leave the church during the time that it is open to the faithful, and has few or none visiting it. This is all the more necessary in city churches, where thieves, unknown as such to the faithful, prowl around in the guise of strangers or beggars, and are ready to seize the moment when vigilance is slackened, in order to perpetrate with deft quickness and, as it were, in the twinkling of an eye, their sacrilegious thefts. Such as these visit sacred places, and take accurate observation, by way of doors, windows, lattices, entrances, especially less principal ones, in order to attempt the execution of their wicked purpose by night. If this is of rather rare occurrence in villages, where the presence of a strange and unknown person going round the church, and entering it is more easily noticed, and arouses suspicion in both priest and faithful, that circumstance does not free the parish priest or rector from the obligation of guarding the Blessed Eucharist, the method and mode of custody being left to his prudence, according to local conditions. He ought, for instance, to visit the church sometimes during the day, get trustworthy persons living in the neighbourhood to watch, assign the private Eucharistic visits of his parishioners to different hours of the day. A careful watch should be kept over workmen and others who, on account of service, or other causes, frequent the church or sacristy, or the priest's or custodian's house in the vicinity of church or sacristy. Nor is the watchful custody of the Blessed Sacrament, as prescribed by law, to cease at night when the church is closed. Special cautions are to be used for the night time. The ordinary cautions required by prudence, and constantly to be used for the custody of the Holy Eucharist, for the prevention of theft in regard to sacred vessels, pictures, alms, and church furniture are as follows:-- (1) all the portals of the church, within the limits of necessity and possibility, should have strong door-leaves fastened with strong locks and bolts, these being of such kind that they can be opened only from the inside, the windows being guarded by bars or iron grilles; (2) when the church is being closed in the evening, there should be a careful look round, lest any evil-intentioned person may be left within; (3) the duty of shutting the church should be entrusted to persons above suspicion, especially to persons not addicted to strong drink. To these precautions we may add another very commendable one, which is daily coming into wider use, and which is often very helpful in baffling the attempts of thieves. This is the placing of electric bells in suitable places -- bells which will ring if the doors are opened, or when these or the tabernacle or altar or table are touched, thus suddenly arousing the attention of the priest or custodian. There are also special electrical devices which suddenly light up the church, and immediately warn the custodian of the presence of thieves. Such devices, in order to be efficacious, must be cleverly and ingeniously hidden, so as to escape all suspicion on the part of thieves. They should also be inspected each day, so as to be kept in proper order. A special extraordinary provision is mentioned in the third paragraph of the canon cited above. For some grave cause to be approved by the Ordinary, it is not forbidden to keep the Blessed Sacrament at night outside of the altar, on a corporal however, in a safer but becoming place, with due regard to the requirements of canon 1271. This place is ordinarily the sacristy, provided that it is a safer and becoming place, or a very solid box, well closed (cassaforte), if that is to be preferred, inserted in some part of the church wall. If neither church nor sacristy provide the desired security, the Eucharist may be kept in some other safe place, even of a private character. In such cases, the parish priest should see to it that the Blessed Sacrament is kept with reverence and honour, and that the faith of the faithful in the real presence is not lessened. In this reservation of the Most Holy Eucharist the Sacred Species are not merely to be covered with a corporal, but must always be put in a vase or pyx. [Footnote 5: Cfr. cit. decr. Alton., not. 2.] Moreover, when they are being brought from the tabernacle of the church, or vice-versa, the priest must wear surplice and stole, and be accompanied by a cleric, carrying a light, at least regularly. The Rectors of churches must likewise take good care that pyxes or sacred vessels of great value are, as far as possible, not left in the tabernacles. That would only provoke and entice the greed of thieves. When such vessels are used on the occasion of certain solemnities, it is desirable that they be purified at the last Mass, and put in a safe place (not the sacristy). The particles which may be left over should be placed in an ordinary pyx. Let Rectors also abstain from decorating altars and sacred images (either sculptured or painted) with costly votive gifts, such as rings of gold and silver, chainlets, neck-laces, ear-rings, gems and such like. Images should not habitually bear such decorations when exposed for public veneration. If it is proper to do so on the occasion of some festival, the Rector should, at the conclusion of the festival, take these valuables away from the church and clearly make known the reason to the faithful. 6. (c) The key of the tabernacle must be most diligently kept by a priest. All the cautions mentioned up to the present will be in vain, if the chief caution, namely, the safe-keeping of the key of the tabernacle be neglected. The fourth paragraph of the above canon expressly mentions in respect to this point that a grave burden rests on the conscience of the priest to whom the key of the tabernacle is entrusted. In order to satisfy this obligation of most diligent custody in regard to the key, the Rector is solemnly warned that the key of the tabernacle must never be left on the table of the altar, nor in the door of the tabernacle, not even at the time when the divine offices are carried out in the morning at the altar of the Blessed Sacrament, or communion is distributed, especially if this altar is not in open view. When these offices are over, the key must be kept by the Rector at home, or always carried about by him, care being taken against losing it; or let it be kept in the sacristy in a safe and secret place, under lock and key, the second key being kept by the Rector as above. [Footnote 6: Cfr. Encycl. litt. iussu Benedicti XIV edit. a S.C.EE. et RR, die 9 Feb. 1751.] Let priests who are guardians of the B. Sacrament seriously consider that the obligation of keeping most diligently the key of the Sacred Ciborium is a grave obligation, as its scope and the very words of the law clearly show. The priest on whom the right and duty of keeping the key ordinarily and naturally rests is the Rector of the church or oratory; should he go away, he can, and ought, during his absence, entrust the keeping of the Blessed Sacrament to another priest. If he leaves the key in the sacristy under another key; he can give this latter to the sacristan during such time as he is absent, and the key of the tabernacle may be needed. Universal practice is manifestly in favour of this. If there is question of a cathedral or collegiate church, which is also a parish church, the keeping of the Holy Eucharist belongs to the chapter, and another tabernacle key must be kept by the Parish Priest (can. 415, §3, n. 1). The exclusive right of keeping the key of the tabernacle belongs to the Parish Priest, even if a confraternity be erected in the parochial church. In non-parochial churches, where the B.S. is kept by indult of the Holy See, it is to be guarded by chaplains or rectors, never by laymen, even though they be patrons. Without an Apostolic Indult lay people per se cannot keep the key of the tabernacle. 7. Special remarks must be made regarding the keeping of the key of the tabernacle in the churches of nuns or sisters, and in pious or religious houses of women. In view of the Statute of Canon 1267, whereby every privilege to the contrary being recalled, the Blessed Eucharist cannot be kept in a religious or pious house, except in the church or principal oratory, nor in the case of nuns, within the choir or enclosure of the monastery, local Ordinaries should bear well in mind, and insist on it, that the key of the Sacred Tabernacle is not to be kept within the enclosure. [Footnote 7: Cfr. Resolution of S.C.R., May 2, 1878, ad VI (decree 3448); H.E. Cardinal PETROUS GASPARRI, op. cit., 266, n. 998 {I have put the bold text here, as in the Latin, but not the translation, J.R. Lilburne}] Henceforth it is to be kept in the sacristy, so as to be obtainable at once, when need arises, and, when the church functions are over, and especially at night, it is to be placed in some safe, solid and secret receptacle under two keys, one of which is to be kept by the Mother Superior of the Community, personally or through a substitute, the other being entrusted to some nun, for instance, the sacristan, so that the offices of both are required in order to unlock the above-said place. Let their Lordships, the Bishops, give due attention to this ordinance, and rigidly insist on its execution, without any acceptation of persons, so that abuses and irreverences be avoided, which redound on the Blessed Eucharist. 8. Regarding the oratories of seminaries and ecclesiastical colleges, educational establishments for young people of both sexes, hospitals and hospices, which enjoy the power of keeping the Blessed Sacrament, the key of the tabernacle shall be given for keeping to their Rector or Moderator, if he be a priest, otherwise to the spiritual director or chaplain, who has been specially appointed to celebrate Mass, and carry out the sacred functions in the place. He must carefully see that the key does not come into the hands of other persons. 9. As regards private Oratories, which by Apostolic Indult enjoy the privilege of keeping the Blessed Eucharist, the key of the tabernacle is usually kept in the sacristy, under the care of the family, rather than of the chaplain [Footnote 8: H.E. Cardinal Gasparri, op. cit. II, 267, n. 999.]; but if the Bishop consider it preferable that the key should not be in the keeping of the indultary, let him give it to the priest who celebrates, especially if he says Mass there continually; or let him give it to the Parish Priest to be given each time, as convenient, to the priest who is to celebrate. Lay indultaries who have charge of the key are to be reminded, and clerics, of whatsoever dignity, must religiously consider how serious is their obligation to see that the key does not come into the hands of anyone, even of the family or family attendants. 10. The Sacred Congregation is not unaware that the aforesaid cautions will not fully secure their object, unless their Lordships the Bishops and local Ordinaries, while enjoining their observance on Parish Priests, Rectors of Churches, Moderators of Institutes of all sorts, and superioresses of nuns, also keep the following four most important points in view. (a) Especially during diocesan visitations, but also even outside of such visitations, as often as a case demands it, they should either personally or through suitable and prudent ecclesiastics, diligently inquire and secure ocular knowledge of the provision made for the safe-keeping of the B.S., not only in each parish, but also in each church or oratory which enjoys this right. As often as they find out that something is wanting in the safeguards rightly required, they must order them to be made good at once, a short time limit being given, under penalty of a pecuniary fine, or even suspension in the case of priests, or removal, according to the gravity of their negligence, to be incurred by those who have the duty of supplying all means of security. They must not relieve those persons of such a burden, under the plea that no profanation or unbecoming thing has happened heretofore. What has not been done up to the present may in the course of time by the malice of men be done, unless the necessary precautions are taken. (b) As often as sacrilegious robberies involving the violation of the Blessed Eucharist occur in his diocese (which God forbid), the local Bishop personally, as is best, or by an official of his Curia, specially delegated for the purpose, should always file a summary process against the Parish Priest or other Priest, secular or regular, even exempt, who was entrusted with the charge of the Blessed Sacrament. The acts of the process are to be sent to this Sacred Congregation, together with the vote of the Bishop. This should include an accurate description of the theft, according to its circumstances of time and place, and then a statement, based on acts of the process assigning the burden of guilt, through positive fault or negligence, to the responsible person. The Bishop should also propose the canonical penalties to be inflicted on the guilty, and then await the mandates of this Sacred Dicasterium. (c) Ordinaries should deeply consider the severity of the penalties which Canon 2382 lays down against a Parish Priest who has gravely neglected the safe-keeping of the Blessed Sacrament, even though his fault fall short of the actual violation of the B.S. These penalties go so far as deprivation of his parish. Seeing the end of the law, the Ordinaries should take care that other Rectors of churches, congrua conguis referendo, are punished with analogous penalties, if they have seriously neglected their duty in this matter. As far as may be required, the necessary and opportune faculties are given by this Sacred Congregation. To escape such penalties, the cause likely to be alleged by the Parish Priest, or others entrusted with the care of the Blessed Sacrament, namely, that such accidents as open tabernacles and the keeping of keys in unsafe places were due to the carelessness of some other priest, does not suffice. The Pastors and Rectors themselves bear the onus of diligently caring for the sacred vessels and Blessed Eucharist. It is their personal office to faithfully and diligently watch and see that, when the sacred offices were over, the tabernacle was not exposed to violation of sacrilegious robbery. Against the aforesaid priest and any other one guilty of similar negligence the same penalties are to be used, because by his negligence he was the occasion of this grievous crime. In order that local Ordinaries may be able to inflict these penalties, and proceed against delinquent religious of both sexes, even exempt, according to the apostolic prescriptions in this matter, we hereby, by virtue of the present Instruction, give them the necessary faculties cumulatively with the Major Religious Superiors. On these also the Sacred Congregation imposes a similar obligation, but reserves to the Bishop alone the faculty of filing the process, as described above. (d) The Ordinaries should diligently inquire whether the churches and oratories to which reservation of the B. Sacrament does not belong by common law (Cfr. can. 1265, §1, n. 1, 2) enjoy this faculty by Apostolic Indult granted by Brief in perpetuity or by Rescript for a time. As often as they find that this privilege has no lawful support, let them take care to remove it as an abuse. Besides, they should not be too easy in receiving and commending requests for the faculty to reserve the Blessed Eucharist in places which do not enjoy it by common law. Let them rather abstain altogether from doing so, unless very grave reasons be present, especially in private oratories and churches too far removed from the houses of the faithful, or situated in desert mountains, and wide country spaces, so that adequate provision for the safe-keeping of the Blessed Sacrament is not possible. It is more tolerable that sometimes even a notable part of the faithful be deprived of the means of adoring the Blessed Eucharist than that the same should be exposed to the probable danger of profanation. Nay, moreover, these present letters given power to the Bishops to revoke the faculty of reserving the Blessed Sacrament in churches and oratories which enjoy it by Apostolic Indult, as often as they perceive that grave abuses have crept in or all the conditions required for safe custody and due reverence and veneration of the Blessed Sacrament are not present. These are the canonical regulations and chief cautions which this Sacred Congregation has thought well to set before the local Ordinaries, that they in turn may commend them more urgently to Parish Priests and other guardians of the Most Holy Sacrament. Their execution will serve to root out abuses, if any such have crept in, or to guard against them, if they have not. Other regulations which may be suitable to particular circumstances of time and place for the better attainment of the same purpose are left to the zeal and industry of the Bishops themselves. To all such local Ordinaries we offer these helps, earnestly begging them in the Lord to leave nothing undone in order to safeguard the Most Holy Eucharist from the impious attempts of wicked men. "Than the Holy Sacrament the Church of God has nothing more worthy, nothing more holy, nothing more wonderful. In it is contained the chief and greatest gift of God, the Fountain and Author of all grace and sanctity, Christ our Lord." [Footnote 9: Roman Ritual, tit. iv, chap. I, n. 1.] Our Most Holy Lord Pius XI by divine Providence Pope, in an audience granted to his Excellency the Secretary of this Sacred Congregation, on May 7, 1938, graciously deigned to confirm and ratify with his Apostolic authority the above Instruction, already approved by the Eminent Fathers in plenary session of March 30. His Holiness ordered it to be published in the official organ of the Apostolic See, so that it be most religiously observed by all whom it concerns. Everything to the contrary notwithstanding. Given at Rome, from the Palace of the Sacred Congregation of the Sacraments, on the feast of the Ascension 1938. D. Card. JORIO, Prefect. F. Bracci, Secretary. Posted by J.R. Lilburne, 31 July 2002. The translation is from the Australasian Catholic Record, 1938, pages 290 - 300. The Latin texts is in Acta Apostolicae Sedis, Volume 30 (1938) pages 198 - 207.
Monday, December 09, 2019
My morning schedule...
5:15 AM Up, Morning Offering, open church
5:30 AM Coffee, Read
6:05 AM Get dressed
6:40 AM In the Confessional for Lauds
6:50 AM Mental prayer
7:20 AM Prime
7:30 AM Go to school
7:40 AM School: Opening Prayer
7:50 AM Back at Sacristy set up for Mass
8:00 AM Mass
8:35 AM Thanksgiving/Terce/any post-Mass confessions
8:45 AM Bust a move
Tuesday, October 08, 2019
Current Morning Routine
5:20 AM Up, open church
5:35 AM Coffee, Calendar, Read
6:05 AM Get dressed
6:05 AM Get dressed
6:40 AM In the Confessional for Lauds
6:50 AM AM Mental prayer
7:20 AM Prime
7:30 AM Go to school
7:40 AM School: Opening Prayer
7:50 AM Back at Sacristy set up for Mass
7:40 AM School: Opening Prayer
7:50 AM Back at Sacristy set up for Mass
8:00 AM Mass
8:30 AM Thanksgiving/Terce/any post-Mass confessions
8:45 AM Bust a move
Wednesday, March 13, 2019
Morning Schedule (school days)...for now
4:45 AM Up, start coffee, pushups
4:55 AM get dressed
5:20 AM coffee, headlines, start blog post
5:20 AM coffee, headlines, start blog post
5:40 AM Open church, Matins
~6:05/15 AM Lauds
~6:15/25 AM Mental prayer
~6:45/55 AM Breakfast, coffee
7:18 AM Resume Eucharistic Fast
7:20 AM Prime
7:20 AM Prime
7:33 AM Go to school
7:40 AM School Opening Prayer
7:50 AM Back at Sacristy set up for Mass
7:40 AM School Opening Prayer
7:50 AM Back at Sacristy set up for Mass
8:00 AM Mass
8:30 AM Thanksgiving/Terce/any post-Mass confessions
8:45 AM Bust a move
Tuesday, March 05, 2019
Words
Instruct
Counsel
Admonish
Prompt
Temptation
Fast
Abstain
Penance
Pray
Resolve
Sin
Repent
Convert
Turn-about
Believe
Any chance I could turn these into a proper, coherent thought? If I could, it might result in a homily.
Tuesday, October 02, 2018
Sunday, September 09, 2018
Morning schedule, for now
For now:
4:30 AM Up, coffee
4:50 AM Matins
5:25 AM get dressed
5:25 AM get dressed
5:45 AM coffee, headlines
6:00 AM Lauds
6:15 AM coffee, breakfast
6:30 AM Mental prayer
7:00 AM Prime
7:30 AM Hear Confessions
8:00 AM Mass
8:35 AM Thanksgiving
9:00 AM Terce
9:10 AM Bust a move
So: moments of ‘free time’
7:15 AM-7:30 AM
8:40 AM-9:00 AM
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)