|
Post by tth1 on Jun 30, 2023 13:32:49 GMT
I came across an image* showing the times of services in Westminster Cathedral (London, UK) in they year 1911. I noted that after the times of Sunday Masses it says, “Holy Communion is given after each Mass in Chapel of Blessed Sacrament”. Is this because (1) Holy Communion was not usually given at Mass and those who wanted to receive it would have to go to this chapel after Mass OR (2) does it mean that Holy Communion would have been available to those who had not attended the Mass. Although I am asking the question and waiting for an answer in the interim I have to speculate it was number 1. As Mass is obligatory on Sundays I cannot think of a reason why a person would need to receive Holy Communion outside of Mass and they could have received it at Mass.
|
|
|
Post by tisbearself on Jun 30, 2023 19:29:09 GMT
In those days, for those who weren't priests,going to Mass and receiving Holy Communion were two different things.
Having the faithful troop up to receive Communion as part of the Mass was often not done, especially at a large church like a cathedral. It was usually offered outside of Mass time, such as after Mass.
Catholics were obligated to attend Mass every Sunday and HDO. Catholics were only obligated to receive Communion once a year at Easter. Many Catholics had been taught that non-priests generally weren't worthy to receive Communion frequently, or they were more aware of sins they might have committed and not yet been absolved from, and so they did not always receive each Sunday or HDO. If they did receive, they were very conscious of needing to go to confession and be absolved beforehand.
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Jun 30, 2023 19:48:32 GMT
To be fair, in those days it was far more difficult to receive communion, even if one were otherwise worthy, due to the fast from midnight onwards. To be expected to fast in that fashion, and to go to Mass (sometimes a considerable journey) not having had anything to eat or drink (not even water), was a pretty big "ask". So I have to imagine that a lot of people didn't receive regularly for that reason. And, to be sure, people were more keenly aware of personal sin in those days than today (not that this is saying much). Indeed, many people would not go to communion on Sunday, unless they had been to confession the day before. How things have changed.
The fast nowadays is nominal (one hour), and at least among Anglo Catholics (not to be confused with "Anglo-Catholics") in the US, people generally judge themselves worthy to receive, or rather, do not judge themselves unworthy. Among Hispanics and some other ethnicities, they are far more reticent about receiving communion, and possibly half the congregation at any given Mass do not receive. I saw this at Mass just this past Sunday, a Spanish Mass was the only one I could get to, and an entire family in my pew didn't receive. I walked around to the pew in back of me, to keep from forcing all of them to scoot aside for me, I thought that would be kind of horsey of me to do that, when I had an easy alternative.
|
|
|
Post by tisbearself on Jun 30, 2023 23:37:45 GMT
I think I posted this book “From Altar-Throne to Table” last time we had a discussion on this topic, but even though the number of pages one can see is limited, it does talk about the communion practices in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. It notes that priests gave communion before Mass or after Mass, and that receiving once a month was considered frequent Communion, and that often confessors didn’t even let people receive that often. While there were a lot of pushes for more frequent Communion from the Jesuits and via the Sacred Heart - Nine First Fridays devotion, it appears that the US, which had less Jansenist influence, was quicker to pick up on the frequent communion practice than Europe. books.google.com/books?id=E3ZaJeZj-AsC&pg=PA1&source=gb_mobile_entity&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&gboemv=1&gl=US#v=onepage&q&f=false
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Jul 1, 2023 0:08:25 GMT
I think I posted this book “From Altar-Throne to Table” last time we had a discussion on this topic, but even though the number of pages one can see is limited, it does talk about the communion practices in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. It notes that priests gave communion before Mass or after Mass, and that receiving once a month was considered frequent Communion, and that often confessors didn’t even let people receive that often. While there were a lot of pushes for more frequent Communion from the Jesuits and via the Sacred Heart - Nine First Fridays devotion, it appears that the US, which had less Jansenist influence, was quicker to pick up on the frequent communion practice than Europe. books.google.com/books?id=E3ZaJeZj-AsC&pg=PA1&source=gb_mobile_entity&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&gboemv=1&gl=US#v=onepage&q&f=falseThere was also this from the Baltimore Catechism #3:Q. 911. How shall we know how often we should receive Holy Communion?
A. We shall know how often we shall receive Holy Communion only from the advice of our confessor, by whom we must be guided, and whom we must strictly obey in this as well as in all matters concerning the state of our soul.We use the BC#3 in homeschool religion class (we are almost finished, one more lesson to go), and I navigate around such things by explaining more contemporary practice. There is no longer a concept of "receiving communion too often", aside from the limit of twice in one day that is present Church discipline. (There would be very few people who would have the potential opportunity to receive communion three or more times a day, aside from priests on Sundays who practice trination.)
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Jul 1, 2023 1:07:20 GMT
I think I posted this book “From Altar-Throne to Table” last time we had a discussion on this topic, but even though the number of pages one can see is limited, it does talk about the communion practices in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. It notes that priests gave communion before Mass or after Mass, and that receiving once a month was considered frequent Communion, and that often confessors didn’t even let people receive that often. While there were a lot of pushes for more frequent Communion from the Jesuits and via the Sacred Heart - Nine First Fridays devotion, it appears that the US, which had less Jansenist influence, was quicker to pick up on the frequent communion practice than Europe. books.google.com/books?id=E3ZaJeZj-AsC&pg=PA1&source=gb_mobile_entity&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&gboemv=1&gl=US#v=onepage&q&f=falseI skimmed over this selection, and just to go to show you, how all of my pistons don't fire properly sometimes, I had to ask myself "what's a bullock fly?". In this context, "fly" is a verb, not a noun.
|
|
|
Post by tth1 on Jul 1, 2023 13:31:19 GMT
I had a look at the possibility of purchasing "From Altar-Throne to Table: The Campaign for Frequent Holy Communion in the Catholic Church". I looked but I won't be purchasing. They want £107 for it? Even the Kindle edition is £66. I cannot see the justification for those prices.
|
|
|
Post by tisbearself on Jul 1, 2023 15:34:38 GMT
I had a look at the possibility of purchasing "From Altar-Throne to Table: The Campaign for Frequent Holy Communion in the Catholic Church". I looked but I won't be purchasing. They want £107 for it? Even the Kindle edition is £66. I cannot see the justification for those prices. It was the author's thesis and was published as an academic book. Unfortunately this tends to drive up the price, and if it has a limited print run, even more so. If you really want to read it, you might try contacting the author and ask if he knows where you can get a copy at a reasonable price. Sometimes this brings good results. Authors of Catholic books of this type are often more interested in the fact that someone wants to read about their subject, than in money.
|
|
|
Post by tth1 on Jul 2, 2023 13:07:39 GMT
... you might try contacting the author .... That's an excellent idea but one that's proving difficult to follow through. His brief bio on Amazon says he's a Christian Brother in the Department of Religion at La Salle University in Philadelphia. However, on checking their web site he's not listed as being on their faculty. Google searches aren't proving much help either. I suspect Joseph Dougherty is rather too common a name to help narrow things down. I may now try hunting him down through the Christian Brother web site(s). If that's fruitful I'll contact the brother and ask him.
|
|
|
Post by ratioetfides on Jul 2, 2023 19:07:56 GMT
... you might try contacting the author .... That's an excellent idea but one that's proving difficult to follow through. His brief bio on Amazon says he's a Christian Brother in the Department of Religion at La Salle University in Philadelphia. However, on checking their web site he's not listed as being on their faculty. Google searches aren't proving much help either. I suspect Joseph Dougherty is rather too common a name to help narrow things down. I may now try hunting him down through the Christian Brother web site(s). If that's fruitful I'll contact the brother and ask him. Give the common name of the religious, the province/region may be a good starting point: ercbna.org/Christian_Brothers.php?op=contact_us
|
|
|
Post by ralfy on Jul 3, 2023 6:31:07 GMT
|
|
|
Post by tth1 on Jul 10, 2023 13:41:06 GMT
That's an excellent idea but one that's proving difficult to follow through. His brief bio on Amazon says he's a Christian Brother in the Department of Religion at La Salle University in Philadelphia. However, on checking their web site he's not listed as being on their faculty. Google searches aren't proving much help either. I suspect Joseph Dougherty is rather too common a name to help narrow things down. I may now try hunting him down through the Christian Brother web site(s). If that's fruitful I'll contact the brother and ask him. Give the common name of the religious, the province/region may be a good starting point: ercbna.org/Christian_Brothers.php?op=contact_usThat's the first website I tried but he isn't listed there. Possibilities: (1) He's in another province or (2) he's no longer a Christian Brother.
|
|