Catholics in Costa Rica outraged by disrespect toward Eucharist [Catholic Caucus]

cna ^ | February 12, 2010

[NYer]

San Jose, Calif., Feb 12, 2010 / 07:08 pm (CNA).- Catholics in Costa Rica continue to express disgust following the actions of Deborah Formal, the girlfriend of presidential candidate Otto Guevara. Last Sunday, Formal broke off a piece of the Eucharist and placed it in her boyfriend's pocket.

The Costa Rican media has continued to air footage of the Mass which shows Formal receiving Communion, bringing a piece of it back to her seat, and giving it to Guevara.

Being divorced, Guevara did not present himself for Communion.

The video shows that as she approached the archbishop to receive Communion, the two briefly exchanged words. Formal said later she had requested permission from the archbishop to “share the blessing” of Communion with Guevara. She said she misunderstood the archbishop and thought that he had given her permission.

“It was never my intention to disrespect the Catholic Church,” she said.

Formal is seen receiving Communion in the hand, consuming a portion and carrying what was left back to her pew, where she leaned over and put it into Guevara’s shirt pocket.

“I tried to do something that would allow Otto to carry a part of God in his heart,” Formal explained.

After priests were notified of Formal's actions, they asked the presidential candidate to return the consecrated host. He returned it and it was immediately consumed by one of the concelebrating priests.

Numerous Catholics interviewed by the media expressed outrage over the actions of Formal, saying she displayed not only ignorance in describing the consecrated host as a “blessing” instead of as the Real Presence of Christ, but also complete disrespect for Communion and for the Eucharistic Host.

Archbishop Hugo Barrantes of San Jose called her actions “inappropriate and disrespectful,” although not sacrilegious.

[baa39]

“In the hand may have contributed to the laxness, but it started with disrespect, and that’s what really needs to be addressed.”

That’s a good point, and where did the disrespect start? Forget the issue of hand or tongue: what about kneeling? When we line up as if we’re in a queue to get a burger at McDonald’s, and the priest is slapping down the Host like it’s your change, and you can barely pause half a second when receiving due to the press of the line behind you — well, this does not have anywhere near the attitude or the inner experience of kneeling at the rail, and being permitted to take your time getting up from it. Standing and the rushed atmosphere and “keeping in place so we get back to our seats in the same order” all are very disturbing to receiving Communion, even if we receive on the tongue.

[mlizzy]

It's not about the manner of reception, it's about the attitude of the receiver.

Of course, you are right about that, but a totally respectful mass brings about a solid attitude in the receiver, or at the very least, helps in that regard.

When one attends a Tridentine Mass, or a Novus Ordo Mass with the rubrics from a Tridentine, you can easily delineate the strong difference between these type masses and a more "standard" version which is the most common mass today in the Catholic Church. Ways to make mass instantly more respectful.

Appropriate music (Gregorian Chant, yes!)
Incense
Silence
No female altar servers
No Eucharistic ministers, male or female
Communion on tongue at the altar
Respectful dress or be sent home
Confession available during, before and after the mass
No sign of peace (it's distracting)
No bringing up of the collection (distracting again)
Priest facing the altar (we should all be facing the Lord)
As many statues as the particular Church can afford

I feel spoiled rotten that I've come upon a church (within driving distance -- St. John Cantius, Chicago) that respects the Lord so highly during their mass. I'm so happy to attend a Tridentine there, but also the Novus Ordo Latin Mass done with full and utter respect in gear. Last Sunday, they had 15 altar servers at their Novus Ordo Mass (all boys/men, so all potential priests!), ranging in age from about 8 to 38. Spectacular!

[B Knotts]

To an extent I agree. Every time one of these stories surfaces, the major complaint is communion in the hand, not respect for it.

Let me make clear, I consider the two to be almost the same thing. Holy Communion in the hand has caused disrespect for same. Not in everyone, obviously...but it has really harmed people's understanding of Who we are receiving.

When the Pope distributes Holy Communion, note that the communicants are kneeling and receving on the tongue. This is no accident.

[bboop]

Oh, dear, you need to be in a more reverential church.

[bboop]

As a Lay Eucharistic Minister, in the side aisles, I will say — the people who come up to receive are SO reverential. I sometimes get choked up. It moves me, every time.

[sockmonkey]

Well, Otto came in third in the Presidential Elections in Costa Rica, so I guess he’s a former Presidential candidate.

[Steelfish]

This is what happens when orthodox discipline is not enforced. Begin excommunication proceedings promptly.

[annalex]

But the ceremony is germane here.

Consider this. Subjectively, there may not have been disrespect: the woman seems to be sorry and it is possible that she misunderstood. There as an act of material disrespect, but possibly no intention to disrespect.

This is where the ceremonial part begins to matter. With Communion in the hand the action signifies taking and carrying the Host away. The act of eating is separated from the carrying away. What traditionally, with receiving on the tongue, was virtually impossible to get wrong, now requires teaching.

[patriot preacher]

What traditionally, with receiving on the tongue, was virtually impossible to get wrong, now requires teaching.
______________________

But didn’t the Lord Himself instruct the Church to “make disciples,” not just consumers [so to speak]?

[annalex]

Yes, but we should not be putting obstacles in people’s way.

Catholicism is in great part about unity, — oneness — of symbol and fact. We do what we think, we think what we do. Of course, it can be explained, that even though you get to hold and carry the Host (the victim Who reconciled the world to Himself) you are not to do anything with it but eat it, because these were the words of Christ: “take it all of you and eat it, this is My body that has been given up for you”. But it has to be explained. The symbol and the fact are no longer one.

Let us try this mental experiment. We have, you and I, a meeting at a given public place, a Dairy Queen parking lot. We approach each other and you extend you hand for a handshake. I twirl like a derwish. I may have explained to you that when I twirl like a derwish I mean to greet you. It could be that in some cultures people twirl to say hello. But still, you would much rather that I simply shake you hand like you meant it to happen. This is because gestures and ceremony are a language. If you start substituting words and letters, you are garbling the message. Commuinion in the hand is meant the same, — it IS the same,— but these hands holding the Host are a garbled message, which now needs an extra layer of deciphering before it begins to work.

I reminded myself of a sad story. A Russian immigrant was stopped by a cop in a dicey neighborhood in the Bronx and asked for a driver’s license, because he ran a red street right. The Russian immigrant reached for his wallet. The Russian immigrant always kept his wallet in the breast pocket of his leather jacket, because that is where Russian people keep their wallets. So he reached for his wallet deep in the breast pocket of his leather jacket. The cop, however, had a different idea of what kind of stuff is carried in breast pockets of leather jackets. Everyone else in the Bronx kept his wallet in his hip pocket and his loaded Glock in his breast pocket. And so the Russian immigrant got shot through the head, because the cop misunderstood his body language.

It is life and death out there.

[antceecee]

After listening to program on Catholic channel on Sirius radio today, I don’t think the priests on these programs would care or would question the actions of this woman. It was pretty dismal listening to the prevarication of these so called representatives of Christ when it came to receipt of Holy Communion and actions, beliefs of the receiver.
Very sad.

[annalex]

(*) before it begins to work

It "works" as a sacrament, no matter what you do with it. But the message is garbled. The mystery is there, the mind is confused.

[wideawake]

"It's not about the manner of reception, it's about the attitude of the receiver."

The Catholic Church is open to all Catholics, not just the devout.

A devout Catholic would receive the Eucharist in the hand just as reverently as they would receive the Eucharist on the tongue.

But the majority - who receive the Eucharist simply as routine, whether they've gone to confession or not, whether they are paying attention or not - need the formality.

They need it for two reasons: (1) it is the only time they are fed anything directly by mouth - it stands out experientially. It separates the Eucharist from any other meal they eat.

(2) It almost eliminates the possibility for desecration.

[A.A. Cunningham]

As a Lay Eucharistic Minister,(sic)

Incorrect. You are an Extraordinary Minister of Holy Common not a Eucharistic Minister. The only Eucharistic Minister(s) at Mass is(are) the celebrant(s).

1. The Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion

[154.] As has already been recalled, “the only minister who can confect the Sacrament of the Eucharist in persona Christi is a validly ordained Priest”.[254] Hence the name “minister of the Eucharist” belongs properly to the Priest alone. Moreover, also by reason of their sacred Ordination, the ordinary ministers of Holy Communion are the Bishop, the Priest and the Deacon,[255] to whom it belongs therefore to administer Holy Communion to the lay members of Christ’s faithful during the celebration of Mass. In this way their ministerial office in the Church is fully and accurately brought to light, and the sign value of the Sacrament is made complete.

I suggest you read all of Redemptionis Sacramentum.

[Savonarola]

This was, objectively, a sacrilege and the bishop should have said so.
The woman who committed the sacrilege may, of course, not be judged too harshly by God because of her ignorance and apparent superstition. But who’s responsible for instructing the people of God in that diocese?

[dsc]

“In the hand may have contributed to the laxness, but it started with disrespect”

Communion in the hand was instituted *precisely*and*only* for the purpose of *engendering* disrespect.

Not for nothing did Pope St. Pius X call the modernists “enemies of the Church.”

[fortunecookie]

Of course, you are right about that, but a totally respectful mass brings about a solid attitude in the receiver, or at the very least, helps in that regard.

I agree (shuddering thinking of the 'living room' type Masses during my college years at a Catholic university.)

I feel spoiled rotten that I've come upon a church (within driving distance -- St. John Cantius, Chicago) that respects the Lord so highly during their mass. I'm so happy to attend a Tridentine there, but also the Novus Ordo Latin Mass done with full and utter respect in gear. Last Sunday, they had 15 altar servers at their Novus Ordo Mass (all boys/men, so all potential priests!), ranging in age from about 8 to 38. Spectacular!

You are indeed blessed! Your list is a great idea for so many parishes, like mine.

[fortunecookie]

“It was never my intention to disrespect the Catholic Church,” she said. Formal is seen receiving Communion in the hand, consuming a portion and carrying what was left back to her pew, where she leaned over and put it into Guevara’s shirt pocket.

Sigh. I'm guessing she knew he didn't go up for Communion because he was divorced? So much confusion as to respectful, reverent reception of the Sacrament, even among the faithful. It seems we have a lot to do - or rather, undo.

[Lukasz]

You both seems to miss the point here as well. The question of raising disrespect cannot be denied. However this is not a prime reason to ban Holy Communion on hand. This is anthropocentric perspective, exactly the problem of post Vatican II clergy. We should oppose such practice primary because parts of Eucharist wont be consumed and would stay on ones hand. We must treat real existence of Christ seriously to the end.