Over the past few months, the articles in the Catholic Weekly from Dr Philippa Martyr have had me writing either rebuttals or questioning the assumptions upon which the assertions in her articles were made. Even though they didn’t make it to publication here, they have caused me to reflect deeply.

In particular, could this part of her response be true?
"Perhaps I should have also said in my limited 750 words that the laity also need to learn to be less trigger-happy. What you're describing are not major challenges to faith and morals, like having all the laity 'co-consecrate' or things of that sort. They're minor liturgical hiccups that irritate you personally."

You need to know that I was speaking of the breaking of the one cross per altar rule and the replacement of the homily with a few brief words prior to the penitential rite. On the surface level maybe they do look like minutiae.

Lay co-consecration is serious because it is a strong ideological statement about the priesthood of all believers, and a denial of what pertains only to the ordained priesthood.

Yet a brief stroll through the Scriptures shows that God takes unlawful acts very seriously.

In Leviticus 10:1-2 we have two of Aaron’s sons taking a short cut by using ordinary fire for their incense censers instead of fire from the perpetual flame on the altar. God caused the unlawful fire consumed them immediately.

In Numbers 16 we have a lay rebellion, Korah who was descended from Levi but not from Aaron, said to Moses and Aaron, ‘You take too much on yourselves! The whole community and all its members are consecrated, and the Lord God lives among them. Why set yourselves higher than the community of the Lord God?’ What was God’s response? When all the rebels were gathered together in one place, the earth split open and swallowed them all.

And lest we think this was just a caution for Old Testament times, read 1 Cor 11:28-32: ‘Everyone is to recollect himself before eating this bread and drinking this cup; because a person who eats and drinks without recognizing the Body is eating and drinking his own condemnation. In fact that is why many of you are weak and some of you have died. If only we recollected ourselves, we should not be punished like that. But when the Lord does punish us like that, it is to correct us and stop us from being condemned with the world.’

We might then ask, well why hasn’t God done something dramatic about it? The answer might be in 1 Samuel chapters 2 and 3. Here we have the sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, who were scoundrels at the altar of God. It continued for some time. Eli did warn them that sinning against God was truly serious. Then God sent an adult prophet to prophesy judgment on Eli for permitting it to happen, as well as on the two culprits. Later God spoke through the boy Samuel and warned Eli again. When Samuel had grown up, then God’s judgement came swiftly onto the whole family of Eli.

So if God hasn’t acted yet, then He has been sending warnings to both bishop and priest, and when the cup of iniquity is full, God will then act in swift judgement.

But in the meantime, there is a punishment from God that St John of Avila writes about eloquently in ‘Audi, Filia’, it is the utter misfortune of being left by God in your own errors. Because if you are in error, and you don’t know that you are in error, how can you possibly get out of that error? Ponder that until the full horror of that finds a place in your heart.

It is truly a mercy from God when He shines a light into our hearts, let’s us perceive what is wrong, and invites us to change in order to grow closer to Him.

To escape the consequences of error – if God has withdrawn from you -, someone would have to take pity upon you; and plead with God assiduously for your conversion. All of us should be afraid of this punishment; and pray with King David ‘Do not deprive me of Your holy spirit’ Psalm 50(51)11 and ‘God, examine me and know my heart, probe me and know my thoughts; make sure I do not follow pernicious ways, and guide me in the way that is everlasting’ Psalm 138(139):23-24.

So let’s now go through the breaking of the one cross per altar rule and the replacement of the homily with a few brief words prior to the penitential rite and determine whether they are minor liturgical hiccups or not.

The General Instruction of the Roman Missal (G.I.R.M.) has a lot to say about the relationship between the cross/crucifix and the altar. See Appendix A below.

Here we pause for a little and consider that if such precise instructions have been laid out by the Church Universal, then ipso facto these instructions have to be far from trivial.

G.I.R.M 308. 'There is also to be a cross, with the figure of Christ crucified upon it, either on the altar or near it, where it is clearly visible to the assembled congregation. It is appropriate that such a cross, which calls to mind for the faithful the saving Passion of the Lord, remain near the altar even outside of liturgical celebrations.'

In some churches this is done by having a crucifix suspended above the altar, and the processional cross placed on a side wall out of general sight when the entrance procession is over.

When there is a suspended crucifix, then having an additional small portable upright crucifix on the altar to aid the devotion of the priest is not licit. Possibly it would be licit in such cases to have a small crucifix laying flat on the altar – but it wouldn’t be a good thing. It is the crucifix either on or near the altar that denotes that this particular table-like structure is indeed an altar. There is a one-to-one correspondence of crucifix to altar, and this is underlined in the rubrics for the entrance procession when, if there is incense, only the cross and altar are incensed.

This lack of a devotional crucifix on the altar for the priest underscores that in the Mass we are publicly worshipping God, and that the Church – presumably after much argy-bargy in centuries past – came down on the side of clear visible signs for the people of God, and not on the personal preferences of the priest.

Can you now see that an important liturgical principle is at stake here? Liturgy is a public solemn act of worship of God by the Head (Jesus) and members (us) of the Body of Christ. In it is no room for private devotional preferences.

Pope Francis in Desiderio Desideravi 48 says this: 'The rite is in itself a norm, and the norm is never an end in itself, but it is always at the service of a higher reality that it means to protect.'

All of us are custodial servants of this profound gift of Liturgy. It is God’s work, we are but participants by His grace.

Whenever we start thinking of ourselves as masters of the liturgy, with the ability to change parts of it at will according to personal preference, instead of thinking of ourselves as grateful servants, then we have got it very wrong.

Here we come to the missing homily, and this is generally a weekday issue and not a Sunday issue. Yes G.I.R.M. 66b says this, itself a quotation from ‘Inter Oecumenici’:
‘There is to be a homily on Sundays and holy days of obligation at all Masses that are celebrated with the participation of a congregation; it may not be omitted without a serious reason. It is recommended on other days, especially on the weekdays of Advent, Lent, and the Easter Season, as well as on other festive days and occasions when the people come to church in greater numbers.’

And G.I.R.M. 43b
'They should, however, sit while the readings before the Gospel and the responsorial Psalm are proclaimed and for the homily and while the Preparation of the Gifts at the Offertory is taking place; and, as circumstances allow, they may sit or kneel while the period of sacred silence after Communion is observed.'

What is happening locally? First one, and when he left us, now a second priest, has started giving brief remarks prior to the penitential rite, while we are still standing, and then no homily at all, on weekdays. We normally range between 20 and 50 persons for weekday Masses, with greater numbers on Wednesdays and Fridays.

What does that mean in practice? We are standing to listen to commentary on readings which have yet to be read to us, and by the time they are read to us, we have either forgotten the commentary or are scratching our heads to connect the commentary with the readings, unless we have hearing aids and thus have only experienced gibberish. It can become a good guessing game of ‘which readings do the commentary relate to’ – but that isn’t breaking open the Word of God, is it?

There is good reason why the Church places the homily after the readings.

But it goes deeper than that on at least two levels.

The first level of these came home to me when I was visiting an elderly gentleman parishioner in the local hospital. He had been in and out of hospital for the previous few weeks. He was completely alert, albeit a bit uncomfortable, so I was surprised when he kindly and firmly said ‘What I need now is Jesus, only Jesus’. To my even greater surprise he died a few hours later. But what he said has stayed with me, and has resonated with me for over 25 years.

What our frail elderly who show up at Mass every morning need beyond anything else is Jesus, only Jesus. They need their hearts to be refreshed by the wonder of who Jesus is in every homily. Mind you, so do the rest of us as well.

Evangelii Gaudium 135b: ‘The homily is the touchstone for judging a pastor’s closeness and ability to communicate to his people. We know that the faithful attach great importance to it, and that both they and their ordained ministers suffer because of homilies: the laity from having to listen to them and the clergy from having to preach them! It is sad that this is the case. The homily can actually be an intense and happy experience of the Spirit, a consoling encounter with God’s Word, a constant source of renewal and growth.’

Evangelii Gaudium 137: ‘It is worth remembering that “the liturgical proclamation of the Word of God, especially in the eucharistic assembly, is not so much a time for meditation and catechesis as a dialogue between God and His people, a dialogue in which the great deeds of salvation are proclaimed and the demands of the covenant are continually restated”. The homily has special importance due to its eucharistic context: it surpasses all forms of catechesis as the supreme moment in the dialogue between God and His people which lead up to sacramental communion. The homily takes up once more the dialogue which the Lord has already established with His people. The preacher must know the heart of his community, in order to realize where its desire for God is alive and ardent, as well as where that dialogue, once loving, has been thwarted and is now barren.’

The second level is that breaking open the Word of God is the way our hearts are touched and changed; and unless they are touched and changed our reception of Jesus in Holy Communion remains unchanged too.

Romans 10:13b-15a,17 says it all: ‘For everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved. But they will not ask His help unless they believe in Him, and they will not believe in Him unless they have heard of Him, and they will not hear of Him unless they get a preacher, and they will never have a preacher unless one is sent. So faith comes from what is preached, and what is preached comes from the word of Christ.’

Homilies don’t have to be long, they can be extremely brief if only they go some way towards connecting our hearts to Jesus, and opening them in gratitude to the Father. Being in a receptive posture helps too, that is why sitting is important. Remember that standing for those who are frail or unwell or in joint pain is an ordeal.

What isn’t acceptable is a pastor who no longer has an assistant priest being perfunctory about the Mass in order to get on with all his other duties, thereby reducing any homily to an introductory commentary and saving time by returning to the altar (instead of to the presidential chair to sit), thus reducing the time after communion to a minimum, and giving out the concluding prayers from the altar.

Shouldn’t something else get sacrificed instead of preparation to preach the Word of God? Peter and the Apostles thought it of such importance that they appointed deacons to take care of food distribution and other matters. Acts 6:1-6.

If there is anything else in his life for which it is considered necessary to consistently take short cuts in the Mass, then something is seriously wrong. Once in a while, as long as good reason is proffered, is quite a different matter.

It smacks of being master of liturgy instead of being a grateful servant of the liturgy, cutting the liturgy according to personal preference and availability for other things. In some ways this is more dangerous than our lay co-consecration friend. Why? Because the majority of priests and people will sense and abhor the wrongness of lay co-consecration. And because those priests who don’t consider preaching a homily to be an honoured privilege will think it a great idea – and copy him! And because those who don’t mind the shortest Mass possible, will also think it a great idea.

Nothing any of us can do each day can shine even a candle to the magnitude of what the Lord God does in the Mass each day.

Am I being mean? Is this a minor liturgical hiccup? Poor father, he is looking after this whole big parish on his own, who knows how many sick calls, meetings and funerals are on his plate, and all the other calls upon his time and energy. But then I look at the 94 year old who is there rain, hail or shine; and I look at those who have chronically ill husbands at home; and I look at those who come in with a walker; or with the combination of walking stick and Parkinson’s; or who have got there despite failing lungs and failing kidneys; and I suspect that looking upon this combined hunger for Him, Jesus would set Himself to teach them at some length adapted to their capacity, Mark 6:34b.

When it comes to Liturgy nothing that seems to be minutiae actually is minutiae, nor a minor liturgical hiccup only due to personal irritation. More is always at stake than what appears to be on the surface.

Appendix A
GENERAL INSTRUCTION OF THE ROMAN MISSAL

49. When they reach the sanctuary, the priest, the deacon, and the ministers reverence the altar with a profound bow.
As an expression of veneration, moreover, the priest and deacon then kiss the altar itself; as the occasion suggests, the priest also incenses the cross and the altar.

75. The bread and wine are placed on the altar by the priest to the accompaniment of the prescribed formulas. The priest may incense the gifts placed upon the altar and then incense the cross and the altar itself, so as to signify the Church’s offering and prayer rising like incense in the sight of God. Next, the priest, because of his sacred ministry, and the people, by reason of their baptismal dignity, may be incensed by the deacon or another minister.

117. The altar is to be covered with at least one white cloth. In addition, on or next to the altar are to be placed candlesticks with lighted candles: at least two in any celebration, or even four or six, especially for a Sunday Mass or a holy day of obligation. If the diocesan Bishop celebrates, then seven candles should be used. Also on or close to the altar, there is to be a cross with a figure of Christ crucified. The candles and the cross adorned with a figure of Christ crucified may also be carried in the Entrance Procession. On the altar itself may be placed the Book of the Gospels, distinct from the book of other readings, unless it is carried in the Entrance Procession.

122. On reaching the altar, the priest and ministers make a profound bow.
The cross adorned with a figure of Christ crucified and perhaps carried in procession may be placed next to the altar to serve as the altar cross, in which case it ought to be the only cross used; otherwise it is put away in a dignified place. In addition, the candlesticks are placed on the altar or near it. It is a praiseworthy practice that the Book of the Gospels be placed upon the altar.

123. The priest goes up to the altar and venerates it with a kiss. Then, as the occasion suggests, he incenses the cross and the altar, walking around the latter.
​
308. There is also to be a cross, with the figure of Christ crucified upon it, either on the altar or near it, where it is clearly visible to the assembled congregation. It is appropriate that such a cross, which calls to mind for the faithful the saving Passion of the Lord, remain near the altar even outside of liturgical celebrations.

​The Gospel for this Sunday, the 20th Sunday of Ordinary Time, Year B, comes from a series of sections of Chapter 6 of St John’s Gospel, which began three weeks ago, and will conclude next week. Between last week and this week one verse overlaps, v51, acting as the conclusion to last week and the introduction to this week. In this Sunday’s section Jesus makes astounding claims and promises that offend the sensibilities of His hearers.

In 2021 we actually celebrate the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary this Sunday, but it seems important to complete this John 6 series.

There is no way for us earthly creatures to access the things of heaven; doing that is completely beyond our capabilities. A very poor analogy is that a cat cannot become a dog, no matter how hard it tries.

The only way for us earthly creatures to access the things of heaven is if citizens of heaven give them to us.

And Jesus is promising more than things of heaven, He is promising partaking in the divine life of God.

All through John 6 when Jesus says life, it is always a reference to ‘zoe’ life, eternally divine life, not to ‘bios’ life (physical life) nor to ‘psuche’ life (soul life).

He tells us that He is the living bread that descended from heaven, and that if anyone eats of this bread (of Him) then that person will live forever.

Why? Because divine life will then have become part of them, just like earthly food becomes part of us – as the saying goes ‘we are what we eat’.

Jesus then tells us ‘And this bread which I will give/offer for/on behalf of life of the world is My flesh (body)’.

The divine gift of this living bread will only be initiated through the passion and death of Jesus.

Only through His complete sacrifice of His body through His death can we be given this gift beyond all our comprehension.

At this point those listening to Jesus erupt in violent disputation.

He wants us to eat His flesh?

He wants us to cannibalize Him?

There are places in the bible where cannibalism is mentioned, corresponding to times of extreme desperation, usually as a result of famine and often in siege conditions. So being reduced to cannibalism was viewed as a horrible curse, and one of the worst punishments that God could give. It was also viewed as the physical horror that accompanies the spiritual horror of apostasy; two sides of the same coin.

To which Jesus responds ‘Amen, Amen, I tell you unless you eat (phagete) the flesh and drink (piete) the blood (haima) of the Son of Man, you have no life (zoen) in you’.

Yes! Yes!
And did I mention that you need to drink My blood as well?

Otherwise you will not (as in never) have divine life in you.

Not only that! If you eat My flesh and drink My blood you will not only share in the divine life of God – but on the last day your physical bodies will be raised back to life as well.

Yes! I really mean you have to eat Me!

‘Whoever eats (trogon)
to gnaw/crunch/ grind with teeth/munch My flesh
and drinks (drink, imbibe) My blood has eternal life
and I will raise him/her up (anastesto) at the last/final day.

For My flesh is real/true (alethes) food/meal (brosis)
and My blood is real/true drink/beverage (posis)

Whoever eats (trogon) My flesh and drinks (pinon) My blood
remains (menei) abides/waits/stays in Me, and I in him.

Just as the living Father sent Me and I live because/through of the Father
so also who feeds on (trogon) Me will live because/through of Me.

This is the bread that came down/descended from heaven
Unlike your ancestors who ate (ephagon) and died (referring to the manna in the desert)
who eats (trogon) this bread will live (zesei) for ever.’

Yes! I really mean you have to eat Me!

There’s no other way for Me to give you My life, divine life, and bodily resurrection too!

In next week’s Gospel section we will see the various responses to these declarations of Jesus.

But He wants your response now.

Will you take Him at His word?
Will you remember the sign of the miracle of the feeding of the 5000, and trust in His word even if you can’t comprehend it?
Do you believe that He is the only Son of the Father, the only one who has descended from heaven, sent by the Father to give us eternal life?

Then you must eat Him; you must eat the flesh of Jesus and you must drink His blood.

How?

His offer is free, but it definitely is not cheap.
He paid for it with His life on the Cross.

Likewise, our response is free, but it isn’t cheap.
It requires total commitment to Jesus; and giving Him the Lordship of our lives.
It also requires a total commitment to His body, the Church, and all that She teaches in His name and in His authority. Always we are saved ‘as a people’ and not as individuals.

That’s what it takes to eat His body and to drink His blood in the bread and wine consecrated at a Mass offered by a validly ordained priest.

Only the Roman Catholic church, in her Latin rite and her Eastern rites; and the various Orthodox churches (Greek, Russian, Coptic etc) have valid ordinations that trace back to the Apostles present at the Last Supper prior to the crucifixion and death of Jesus.

When a validly ordained priest takes the bread and uses the words of Jesus ‘This is My body’, and takes the wine and used the words of Jesus ‘This is My blood’, the bread and wine become the body and blood, soul and divinity of Jesus Christ.
We believe this because Jesus said so.

And that is enough for us.

Is it enough for you?

Your answer has consequences.

And the stakes are far too high (divine life, bodily resurrection, union with Jesus) for you to even consider avoid answering, or to even consider delaying your answer.

If the answer is Yes
​
*Then seeking membership of a church with valid ordination has to become top priority for you.
*If you already have membership through Baptism, but have lapsed from attendance at the Eucharist (Mass), then you have to rectify that pronto, which includes a good confession first.
*If you already have membership through Baptism, and have some kind of regularity of attendance at the Eucharist (Mass), is your current commitment commensurate with the enormity of the gift? Recommit yourself to Him, to the Eucharist, and to His church, and ask Jesus to show you how He wants you to express that recommitment in concrete action.

The Gospel for this Sunday, the 18th Sunday of Ordinary Time, Year B, comes from a series of sections of Chapter 6 of St John’s Gospel, which began last week, and will continue for three more weeks. The only section missing from this series is the account of Jesus walking on the water, which takes place in verses 16 to 23. This Sunday’s section leads up to Jesus proclaiming, ‘I am the Bread of Life’.

To the request that Jesus would always give us the true bread from heaven, He replies: ‘I am the Bread of Life. Whoever comes to Me will never hunger (crave, be needy), whoever believes in Me will never thirst.’

How are we to understand this emphatic reply and this very great promise?

Obviously we get hungry and thirsty every day, otherwise we wouldn’t be motivated to eat and drink. Most of us don’t experience the poverty or the extreme environmental conditions that produce the deepest levels of hunger and thirst. But those who have experienced being reduced to such desperate levels never forget it - and are often haunted by those memories.

At those desperate levels, people become willing to do desperate things to satisfy those intense cravings, and will accept poor substitutes for true food and drink (eg rats and urine).

So what kind of hunger and thirst is Jesus talking about?

Could it be emotional hunger, spiritual hunger, or something else?

• Internet searches reveal that hungers of the heart include:
• Meaning and purpose in life
• Commitment and connection to something greater, something worthwhile in life
• Relationships of quality and depth
• Healing from life’s hurts
• Intimacy
• To be listened to, and to be really heard
• To be loved and appreciated
• To be accepted for who we are, and not just for what we do, or what we can do
• To belong
• Yearning for times of solitude
• Desire for deep peace, on the inside, and with everyone else, especially those closest to us

That is the human experience, isn’t it?!

There is an emptiness in our hearts that nothing in this material world can fill.

Often the more material things we have, including success, the deeper that emptiness feels. Many biographies include something along the lines of ‘I thought that if I got to the pinnacle of …… that this would make me happy; but it didn’t; I felt more lost and empty than ever’.

Here’s where those famous words of St Augustine make sense:

Great are You, O Lord, and exceedingly worthy of praise; Your power is immense, and Your wisdom beyond reckoning. And so we men, who are a due part of Your creation, long to praise You – we also carry our mortality about with us, carry the evidence of our sin and with it the proof that You thwart the proud. You arouse us so that praising You may bring us joy, because You have made us and drawn us to Yourself, and our heart is restless until it rests in You.

Other spiritual writers talk about a God shaped hole in our hearts, that can only be truly filled by Him, and Him alone.

Nothing else suffices, nothing else satisfies.

We do try and stuff that hole with sport, entertainment, work, partying, marriage, family, possessions, success, music, gardening, politics, study, and with addictively dangerous things too.

But nothing fills that hole except God Himself.

Experiences of God help fill that hole better than everything else, but experiences are fleeting, and as nothing compared to God Himself.

Experiences of God give us only a taste of Him; and leave us craving for more.

Let’s remind ourselves of the kind of bread that Jesus wants to be for us. Those barley loaves were fresh, tasty, nourishing; crunchy on the outside, and satisfyingly a little chewy on the inside; the solid kind of bread an army can march on, the kind of bread that provides the essential nourishment for daily life, and the base upon which everything else is ‘icing on top’.

Only the real thing, the real God-thing satisfies; and that God-thing has been generously lavished upon us the Eucharist – in Jesus incarnate under the forms of consecrated bread and wine.
This is Himself, whole and entire, body, soul, blood and divinity, available to us whenever we come to Him through reception of Holy Communion.

Sacramental Holy Communion is the greatest gift God can give us - because it is Himself.

Spiritual Holy Communion, through which we express our longing, consciously or unconsciously, for the fullness of sacramental Holy Communion, is a real but partial participation through desire in that full reality.

During lockdown many of us have rediscovered spiritual communion through the prayers that are often provided at online Masses. There are many such prayers, usually written by Saints, used at those online Masses, but even our own prayers of the heart expressing our desire for sacramental union with Him are acceptable in His sight.

Over the years I have listened to my protestant brothers and sisters talk about how deeply meaningful and how profoundly they have been moved in their hearts on those Sundays when they have Communion in accordance with the various ordinances of their faith communities; and even (shudder) they ‘take’ communion outside those rites and ordinances. What they have been experiencing is spiritual communion; and it is real, valuable, grace-filled, yet it falls short of the fullness of sacramental communion.

Is it possible for a well made spiritual communion to be more grace-giving than a poorly made sacramental communion? Yes it is, but it wouldn’t happen very often.

In this way is Jesus our Bread of Life.
In this way Jesus satisfies the deepest hunger of our souls.
In the Eucharist.

That’s the Bread of Life, the kind of daily bread we primarily pray for unceasingly in the Our Father; a prayer that includes seeking God’s providence for all our other daily needs as well.

Lord Jesus, please give us that Bread, Your sacramental self, always. Please Lord may we never be deprived of You in sacramental Holy Communion via lockdown conditions – or any other conditions - ever again! May all the deprivations we face, and have faced, through pandemic lockdowns, only serve to awaken in us deeper hunger for You; deeper hunger for Your Eucharist, deeper hunger for You in the Eucharist, because absolutely nothing else can truly satisfy our hungry and thirsty hearts. Please Lord Jesus, lead our precious brothers and sisters in faith to full communion with You in the Holy Eucharist, please take away all the obstacles that are preventing their loving hearts from receiving You in full sacramental Communion. Amen.

In many countries, including Australia, we are now in the extraordinary situation of being without sacraments for the foreseeable future, due to efforts to minimise the effect of the coronavirus.

Being without Mass, sacramental Communion, Confession and the encouragement of worshipping together as a community and catching up with each other is going to be extremely difficult for everyone.

(In some places Confession and Eucharistic Adoration may still be possible, so check with your local diocesan and parish websites.)

These things are gold, but we do have access to silver, since the Church teaches that God answers our desires for these good things. For example you may remember you were taught there were three kinds of baptism, by water, by blood (martyrdom) and by desire.

In a similar way there is sacramental communion and spiritual communion. While there are many good prayers of spiritual communion, and learning at least one of them by heart is recommended, all it really needs is expressing to Jesus that you want to receive sacramental communion, but are unable to, asking Him to come and visit you in your heart spiritually instead.

The PDF below (one A4 page) explains more about spiritual communion:

My Jesus, I believe that You are truly present in the Most Holy Sacrament. I love You above all things, and I desire to possess You within my soul. Since I am unable now to receive You sacramentally, come at least spiritually into my heart. I embrace You as already being there, and unite myself wholly to You; never permit me to be separated from You.

It is also why we were taught that if we find ourselves in danger, a good Act of Contrition is the best thing to do. Again, the Act of Contrition is expressing to God our desire for His pardon and forgiveness, which is in essence a desire for Confession. There are many approved prayers of Acts of Contrition, find one you like best and commit it to memory.

My God, I am sorry for my sins
with all my heart. In choosing to do wrong and
failing to do good, I have sinned against You
whom I should love above all things.
I firmly intend, with Your help, to do penance,
to sin no more, and to avoid whatever leads
me to sin. Our saviour Jesus Christ suffered
and died for us. In His name, my God,
have mercy. Amen.

Like the prayer of Spiritual Communion, praying an Act of Contrition daily during this extraordinary situation until the churches reopen is a good idea.

Thankfully there are options online for Mass

https://www.ewtn.com/tv/watch-live televises Mass 4 times a day (in Australia currently that means at 3am, 10am, 3pm and 11pm) although for us in Australia it will be the Mass from yesterday, and these times will change by an hour when daylight savings ends on 5 Apr 2020

https://www.youtube.com/user/ShalomWorldWide is where you can access recorded copies of Pope Francis' daily Masses. It is likely to be in Italian and without subtitles, but you should be able to pick up enough words and gestures to follow along.

In Australia on the free-to-air tv Channel 10 at 6am on Sundays there is Mass For You At Home (30 mins), which you can always record and replay at a more convenient time.

St Mary's Cathedral, Sydney, has promised to live stream their 1.10pm and 5.30pm daily Masses via both their website https://www.stmaryscathedral.org.au/ and their Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/stmaryscathedralsydney/

And these are only a few of the Mass options available online.

See what your local diocesan website is recommending or offering. For example, on Instagram @frjasonsmith will be live streaming a daily Mass.

Another thing that can be done is to join with the universal Church in praying the Divine Office (morning prayer, evening prayer, night prayer, or as much of it as you can manage).

For those who do not have copies of the prayer books at home to do this, some websites and apps make this possible to do.
https://divineoffice.org/welcome/
(although you will need to send them a request)
https://mycatholic.life/catholic-prayers/liturgy/ scroll all the way down for the link, it will be according to the USA liturgical calendar.

You can order the prayer books online
(for Australia)
https://www.paulinebooks.com.au/search/search.cgi?search=divine+office

If you are new at this choose the Morning and Evening Prayer (black cover) https://www.amazon.com.au/Morning-Evening-Prayer-Not-Available/dp/0007211333
If you have money to burn, get the 3 Volume Divine Office which contains the Office of Readings
If these books look too heavy for you, go for the Shorter Morning and Evening Prayer (red cover), which covers everything but doesn't have the richness of the liturgical seasons and saints feast days that the black cover has.
https://www.amazon.com.au/Shorter-Morning-Evening-Prayer-Icel/dp/0007219873

If the Divine Office feels too complicated for you, then there is something similar at http://disabilityandjesus.org.uk/ called An Ordinary Office http://anordinaryoffice.org.uk/ specifically designed for people with disabilities who cannot access church buildings. If you have a Twitter account you can pray it via @DisabilityJ

All of these prayer options can keep us plugged into the prayer life of the universal church, and in unity.
………………………
There are lots of your friends who need this information,
so please share it around.

In all this we remind ourselves that God is in control. If He has permitted us to go through this dearth of the sacraments, then it is only so that He can bring a much greater good out of it. We can look upon this time as an opportunity to deepen our faith and to deepen our desire for Jesus. The more we do this, the shorter the time of trial will be, since we believe that Jesus longs for sacramental contact with us much, much more than we long for sacramental contact with Him. Pray for your priests, that this time is transformative for the better for them too. If nothing else, we will never take the sacraments for granted again!

Our Lady, Help of Christians, pray for us
St Joseph, terror of demons, pray for us

Write Non Fiction In November : #WNFIN Day 20
​
Warning: enter Part 2 of this rant at your own risk. There'll be more liturgical and Catholic jargon, but hopefully some useful stuff as well.

On the plus side, our visiting knowledgeable person gave us some good reminders:

At the opening prayer at Mass (otherwise known as the Collect) after the 'Let us pray' there is a short pause for us to add in our own intentions silently before the priest goes on with the prayer – having gathered all those intentions in and transforming them into a united prayer. It is a good reminder, but most of us have shopping list lengths of intentions and there's really only time to remember one of them at the opening prayer. Practically, if you've got a long list, it has to be offered either before Mass starts, or while the gifts are being prepared (while all the to-ing and fro-ing with the bread, water and wine is going on), or both.

Are we really listening to the prayers we are saying Amen to? Because many of them promise that we will keep various commitments. How intentional are our Amen's?

During the Creed, whether we are praying the Nicene or Apostles versions, at the words that recall the Incarnation of Jesus we are to bow. At the solemnities of Christmas and at the Annunciation that bow becomes a genuflection. It is a good reminder. Remembering to bow at the right place is the hard part, but doing the bow transforms that long prayer of the Creed into something intentional and wonderful and away from rote and routine.

Now onto the less cut and dried stuff:

The renewed words of the Confiteor have 'through my fault, through my fault, through my most grievous fault' with the action 'all strike their breast'. You can interpret this rubric as one strike of the breast, but I don't think it precludes the three times that fits with the words which most people are doing. Three times helps focus my soul much better than once, and I hope they will one day knock enough sense into me to view sin in its true ugly light and do more to avoid it. For someone who loves, a single action of contrition is never enough.

Who or what do we bow to, especially if you are a reader coming up to proclaim the scriptures? Our knowledgeable person said forget the priest, bow to the altar. I've got a problem with that, and yet it isn't a simple black and white situation. How do we balance "Christ is present in the liturgy in four unique ways: These ways are: • especially, in the Eucharist broken and shared; • in the person of the minister; • in the Word of God; and • in the assembled people of God (Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, CSL #7)" with the words from the 5th preface of Easter, "Christ …showed Himself the Priest, the Altar and the Lamb of sacrifice". Note that those four unique ways do not include the altar, and yet when the incense is in use, the priest, the altar, the people, the paschal candle (if lit), the gifts, the Gospel and the cross all get incensed. On the other hand, outside the liturgy we reverence the tabernacle. For me, if the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy says that Jesus is uniquely present in the priest, then the priest gets the bow. Doing both altar and priest, or altar only, is a confusion that we don't need. All of the four unique ways either move or are moved during the liturgy, they are active presences not passive ones.

Our knowledgeable person also had a narrative for the priestly actions: at the presentation of the gifts: set them aside; at the consecration: show them, at the doxology; offer them. Low…medium…high. For centuries upon centuries the action of the priest during the consecration has been called the elevation. The newly consecrated bread and the newly consecrated wine are to be lifted up high enough for all of us to see and to adore. So no, this idea doesn't sit right at all.

The purification rites after communion are where there is a lot of grey and difference from one place to another. In a perfect world it probably should take place at the credence table rather than at the altar (like in the kitchen rather than at the dining table). But that doesn't take much account of the degree of mobility (and health) the priest has, nor the amount of confidence he has that it will be done correctly out of his direct line of sight.

Another thing our knowledgeable person had to say was that when the last people have been to communion, those dispensing the precious blood should minister the remaining consecrated wine to each other. Yes, I agree that it is much better for the remains to be consumed standing still near the credence table, than while walking back to the credence table. No argument there. But there is an argument to say that the precious blood was ministered to the 'extraordinary ministers of holy communion' at the time the cup was entrusted to them (part 1) and that any remains are just a part 2 of that original action. The former definitely looks better, and may reinforce that we don't take but receive the Eucharist, the latter is usually a matter of practicality. For example: What if the other cup bearers were already empty and sitting down, and you are the only one left. This is not an unusual situation. Do you go seeking one of them and making a fuss to get them to minister the remainder of the precious blood to you, or to coax them to have the rest of it?

Our knowledgeable person told us off for having both a brazier of incense as well as a thurible during exposition of the Blessed Sacrament and benediction. On closer inspection the thurible was there to incense the monstrance at the beginning of exposition and then it went out in procession, only to return to incense the monstrance at benediction. It was active. The brazier was a passive presence of incense throughout the whole time, indicative that our prayers were rising the whole time. Maybe that wasn't as obvious because the Mass that day had extra solemnity and length and the time of exposition was shorter as a result.

Also getting a pasting was hymn choice. The green hymn books we have for exposition only contain a small selection of hymns, and an even smaller selection of them do we actually know how to sing. The green books are purpose designed for exposition/benediction. It was a day of major parish thanksgiving, so the sung version of the Te Deum (Holy God we praise Thy Name…) was appropriate, and more appropriate at the beginning than at the end so that more people could join in that thanksgiving. Tell me how the Church's official prayer of high thanksgiving (Te Deum) is inappropriate at Exposition/Benediction when 'Eucharist' translates as 'Thanksgiving'. Is it more or less Eucharist-y  than 'Jesus, my Lord my God my all'?

'Go the Mass is ended'. Our knowledgeable person's take on this is, 'If I said go, then Go!'. Jesus said 'Go' to the ten lepers He healed, but only the one who stopped to thank Him before 'going' was the one Jesus held up as an example we should follow. The Saints tell us that lingering with Him in prayer after Mass ends is the most fruitful time of prayer, and are we to be flung straight out into the secular car park after an encounter with the Lord? It doesn't quite work, does it? Yes, I know, a lot of people have already exited before during and after the 'Go', and for reasons of various validity, but that doesn't make it the most blessed or most perfect thing to do. We all eventually 'Go', but a recessional hymn of thanksgiving sung in unity beats an instrumental solo played during a mad scramble for the exit door. I want to be one of the ones who stopped to thank Him, don't you? And to do it in unity. 

End of rant.

Moral of story: Don't be hasty in making liturgical judgements. You normally don't have the full story and there are often very good counter arguments for why things have been done in a way that seems imperfect or lacking to you. Put love in first place because the essence of liturgy is love and not the liturgical correctness that brow beats a brother or sister in Christ.

Write Non Fiction In November : #WNFIN Day 19
​
Warning: enter this rant at your own risk. I'll try to keep it as civil as possible, but I'm likely to fail. As the old joke goes, at least with a terrorist you can negotiate, but not with a liturgist.

To any reader who doesn't have a good grasp of the Catholic Mass, I apologise in advance because there's going to be lots of unexplained jargon.

Yesterday a knowledgeable person gave a talk on liturgy. This talk followed on from a special occasion Mass at which this knowledgeable person was the principle celebrant.

During the Mass things felt a little 'off', initially I thought it was just due to the normal adjustments that happen with someone different leading. When the talk began, it then became obvious that there was more behind it. Said knowledgeable person hadn't really come to enter into the liturgical celebration of our special day with us, said person was counting in detail each liturgical infraction committed in his opinion. The talk was going to be a step by step run through of where we had blown it.

On so many levels this was wrong/anger inducing.

For starters the parish had been under the rule of another knowledgeable person for many years, one who was not afraid to publicly correct and infractions immediately. It seems both knowledgeable persons are probably not the best of mates, (grudges from one about the other giving poor grades in seminary etc), but you shouldn't take that out on the people.

Secondly there was no seeking to understand the reasons why the minutiae are done a certain way here.

Thirdly there was a delight in unsettling people, first of all in the liturgical celebration itself, ie. shaking them out of routine, and then introducing confusion into the minds and hearts of those present and leaving them wondering where the actual truth is – given that these two knowledgeable persons had quite differing interpretations of them.

Above all else it wasn't done in love. If it had been done in a Holy Spirit inspired way people would have left feeling uplifted and encouraged even if acknowledging that some changes could and should be made. After all the touchstone of when the Holy Spirit has been at work are love, joy , peace, patience, kindness etc – not the negative emotions, confusion and murderous thoughts that actually happened (some were inspired during the talk to air long held liturgical grudges about each other's habits).

You see, if it had been done in love there would have been some humble respect for the liturgical culture that had developed in this place, and a desire to learn as much from what God had been doing in and through us as to teach us.

Let's get down to brass tacks and provide some counter arguments to what the knowledgeable person was imparting, and some support for the good bits.

There's no question that the option to substitute the Apostles Creed for the Nicene Creed has been abused. It should only be an option in Lent and Easter where the link with the renewal of baptismal promises is closest, not as a way to save time.

There's no question that using Eucharistic Prayer II all the time, again because it is the quickest, is unhealthy for both priest and people.

Encouraging the reading of the scriptural texts prior to Mass is always a helpful thing to do.

Questioning the use of missals during Mass was dubious. For starters, you cannot expect the people to do their part with the entrance antiphons, communion antiphons etc on one hand and then to not use their missals for everything else. That's asking them to switch between two modes frequently, and to do it successfully.  The argument put forward was that reading the scriptures in their missals as they were proclaimed was more passive than just getting the input from the proclaimer. As a parent I know that a child doesn't have to be sitting still with their complete attention on me to be truly listening. They can listen to a story equally well by playing with a toy truck or in a sandpit, and for some the story will be imprinted better that way. We know that faith comes from what is heard, (Rom 10:17) so the audio part is more important than the visual part, and if reading along in the missal helps you to decode the proclaimer's accent, lack of audible volume, or lack of spoken punctuation, then go for it. Sure the proclaimers of the Gospel would feel better if all eyes were on them, but blanket judgements about what constitutes the more or most active ways of participation aren't possible – that's something for each individual to work out with God.

This almost fiendish desire to throw the congregation a curve ball and to mix up the elements of the ritual without prior warning is of concern. The other knowledgeable person liked to do that too. How petty to take delight in seeing people scrambling to find the right page because you decided to do a votive Mass with a special preface or one of the Eucharist Prayers for Reconciliation! Yes, the desire to shake up the routine a little and give us poor sods some variety from the treasury of the Church is laudable, but not at the expense of unity and good order. To lead the assembly in worship is to desire to serve God and to serve His people, not to show off how clever and in control you are and how insignificant and ignorant they are. The more loving thing to do, the thing that will bring greater unity and flow is to give the people a heads-up as to which proper, preface, Eucharistic prayer and Eucharistic acclamation you are going to use. When and how you give that heads-up is up to you.

Posture during the Our Father: Yes, some people like to hold hands as a symbol of unity as the Our Father is prayed. Some don't. As long as it is a free choice where's the problem? Others object to those who pray with their hands partially raised, saying that only the priest is allowed to use that posture. It is the ancient 'orans' posture of prayer, how all Jews prayed not just the Rabbis and Elders. Get over it. If it helps you enter into this prayer of Jesus more fully, go for it.

The trouble with most of these liturgical controversies is that it divides people into two groups, 'the clever ones who know what to do and what not to do' and 'the ignorant ones'. They destroy both love and unity, the two things that God most wants to see among us. Such schoolyard pettiness of 'I'm better than you' has no place in the sacred liturgy. The things that we must do are in the rubrics, they are non-negotiable and yet they need to be taught with sensitivity and kindness. For the rest, let love be the guide, the kind that seeks to understand why an action has been chosen, and to work together to value the good and to together to seek the best for all.
​
There's lots more… (sadly)... but that's enough for today.

This is a version of the homily of Bishop Peter A Comensoli at the 9.15am Mass for the 17th Sunday of Ordinary Time Year B at St John the Baptist, Woy Woy, 26 July 2015.

This is not a literal transcript, but it will give you the gist of his message.

Bishop Comensoli was at Woy Woy to install Fr Jack Robson as Parish Priest.

The Gospel reading was the John 6 account of the miracle of Jesus multiplying food for the crowd.

In the middle of this Gospel passage is a remark from Jesus that we often overlook, 'Get the people to recline/sit down'. Is this just Jesus acting with courtesy, or is it something more? When you a feeding a crowd at a family gathering the usual way is to put the food on the table and get people to line up to take what they want. With Jesus there was no scramble to feed a crowd. When Jesus got everyone to sit down He indicated that this was not going to be an ordinary meal, but that a feast was about to begin, a long, leisurely happy kind of feast. This was no sausage sizzle. The invitation was to become comfortable for a banquet.

There are many wedding banquet stories throughout the Bible. It was even expected that you put on a wedding garment to put off the sorrows of daily life and for a time to put on joy. All of those stories were understood as pointing to a time when the banquet of heaven would begin.

When the crowd had eaten and realized that they had been given more than enough, they knew that the future promise had arrived and that they were sitting at the banquet of the Lord Himself. At the Lord's banquet nothing will go to waste. We weren't there that day, but 12 full baskets of scraps were set aside. In a sense they were set aside for us, because their purpose was to nourish those who hope in the Lord.

Jesus issues invitations to His banquet through the ultimate gift of Himself on the Cross. That is why every celebration of the Mass is both a sacrifice and a feast. At the same time we are present at Calvary and on that hill in Galilee. God is with us, now and always in the Eucharist.

It is also remarkable that on this hill here were no distinctions between people. Everyone sat down on the grass, and sat together. If you were poor, if you were a servant, if you were broken or broken-hearted, you were all welcome. All had a place to recline and lay aside their burdens for a while.

Here we learn again from Jesus that all are to be welcomed. When Jesus offered Himself on the Cross He offered Himself for all sinners, not just for a few particular ones. It is fitting that we remember all this today, at this feast of the Lord.