Sunday, June 27, 2021



We have enough words about the the Church’s doctrines and dogmas on the Real Presence. No more words that no one will read.

The problem is the Praxis in the manner the Mass is celebrated today.

1. Casual, sloppy liturgies

2. No attention to detail

3. Ad libbing 

4. No meaningful Eucharist Fast, I recommend recovering the 3 hour fast before Mass

5. Communion standing, in the hand, on the run.

#5 the biggest reason for loss and continued loss of belief in the real presence. There were no major issues with orthodox belief, Catholic piety, reverence and wonder and awe in the pre Vatican II Mass. What changed  is the problem.


Pierre said...

Father McDonald,

Number 5 nails it.

Mark Thomas said...

"4. No meaningful Eucharist Fast, I recommend recovering the 3 hour fast before Mass."

I don't believe that there is any great difference between three hours and one hour in regard to either Eucharistic Fast in question.

The ancient Midnight Eucharistic Fast that Pope Venerable Pius XII had tossed aside had, for centuries, impacted the Faithful in profound fashion. However, Pope Venerable Pius XII insisted that the traditional Midnight Eucharistic Fast had grown too burdensome for modern Catholics to handle.

Anyway, I doubt that a three-hour Eucharistic Fast would enhance "Catholic piety, reverence and wonder and awe..."

I would opt instead for the restoration of the ancient Midnight Eucharistic Fast.

It may prove helpful to study the tremendous holy success that the Church in Africa, and Asia, has enjoyed as the result of Vatican II/Novus Ordo Mass.

Thanks to Vatican II, as well as the Mass of Pope Saint Paul VI, Holy Mother Church in Africa, and Asia, abounds with "Catholic piety, reverence and wonder and awe..."

Father McDonald, thank you for your contribution to the restoration of "Catholic piety, reverence and wonder and awe..."

You are God's holy priest. You are a great blessing to your parishioners.

Thanks to your important blog, your positive influence within Holy Mother Church extends beyond your parish.


Mark Thomas

Stacheman said...

A Midnight fast doesn't work as well when Mass can be any time of day. I think a benefit of at least restoring the three hour fast is you actually have to think about it. The one hour fast essentially says "don't eat fifteen minutes before Mass begins." Also, unless you attend a late Mass or get up early to eat breakfast, it effectively becomes a Midnight fast for many Sunday Mass goers.

Chip said...

Lack of reverence always leads to loss of belief in authority.

This is basic. Obvious. Core to any teaching or training of near any type or to anything.

You want even a dog to know who is boss, you make it sit. When it loves its master, it sits only to please.

The NEED for kneeling for Holy Communion is so obvious it should need no explanation. This is GOD.

But, today, individual dignity is given a far higher place than that owed to God.

Or society. Parents let kids run amok. Teachers and schools let kids run amok. Lest their self-centered self-worth take a ding. And they mature not knowing how to cooperate with anyone to accomplish a single thing. All they know is self. Chaos, and we are seeing now the rotten fruit as society comes apart. A wild dog pack is what it is become.

Michael A said...

I agree. Best to just reference existing teaching because a new document will likely not hit the mark and create openings for misinterpretation. No Confession and receive Holy Communion could be squeezed into your list. The lines at the confessionals are short, but the lines for Communion are long. No sense of what worthy reception is makes it hard for a belief in the Real Presence.

Chip said...

Dare we mention silence in the presence of God, and that a house of prayer is for PRAYER and not socializing? And that only those who can do so should be in there in the first place, and not distracting others from their right to pray in a house of prayer? That all the rest of the church property and buildings are plenty enough space to do otherwise?

ooooooh....of course not. That is being a MEANIE.

Godly Godfrey said...

Why do we need another teaching document on Eucharistic Coherence ?

Well we don’t! The only reason it’s being suggested is because there’s a Democratic President and some Bishops want a stick to hit Biden with - and you know it!

Chip said...

Ungodly Ungodfrey, most bishops likely are Democrat voters due to convergence on other issues important to bishops. Biden has painted them into a corner by his behavior, him and others, and forced their hands, this most assuredly NOT an issue they have wanted to deal with for the longest time.

If you think most Catholics and most bishops are Republicans, to paraphrase Biden, "then you ain't Catholic."

Pierre said...

Godly Godfrey,

No they do not want to “stick it” to Biden. Biden brought it on himself by ignoring Church teaching. If Biden was for segregation ( although there is some historic evidence that he is) you would be frothing at the mouth, demanding the bishops do something

Tom Marcus said...

This begs the question: When the Church was a force to be reckoned with (Middle Ages, Renaissance, etc.) was it burdened with bureaucracy like it is now? I don't think we had bishops conferences. I don't think we had all these committees. I don't think we had "policy statements" on every concern under the sun. It strikes me, at least from my limited reading of history that the great bishops of the past did two things and did them forcefully and well: Teaching and Governing. If a bishop wants to open a window in the chancery today, he has to appoint a committee to study its feasibility and impact. Ridiculous.

The more the Church conforms itself to the world, the more...well, it's obvious.

Chip said...

In answer to "why a document", simply to reinforce publically that bishops and priest have NOT been doing their job in maintaining the holy discipline of the sacraments.

Something everybody knows, but nohody talks about, now officially being talked about. You cannot fix a problem by ignoring it.

Chip said...

Seems if you have any first of week beach plans, they best be indoor.

To stay on topic, even if for the reverence due God, fasting is ok, but still think nothing could be more helpful than silence/prayer in HIS house/not OURS, and kneeling to receive him in Communion.

Not being forced to sing before/during/after Communion and able to focus on who we are about to receive/are receiving/have received of greatest importance as well.

The fact is, God is routinely ignored the entire Mass and all the rest of the time by the majority, even in his own house. I doubt he is impressed, "these people honor me with their lips".

Fr Martin Fox said...

To the whole list: Amen, amen!!

On the issue of the fast: to make it simple, how about, "two hours before Mass begins"? The whole thing of before communion both makes the current fast barely a fast, and a challenge to calculate. Mass begins at 9 am, stop eating at 7 am; how hard is that?

And it would not be a problem to give people dispensations as needed.

Thoughtful Toby said...

The first words we utter after the Fraction Rite are, “Lord, I am not worthy.” Does the Church (meaning the priests and people) really mean it? Given all the fuss about 1 Cor 11:17-31, isn’t the vector that moralists present to us on abortion and other issues one that aims us toward worthiness? Does the fact we say “I am not worthy” make us suddenly worthy? If we follow the prescriptions of this letter, are we worthy? I realize there is a distinction between a worthy reception and a worthiness that strikes deeper at our being. A lot of people seem to confuse the two.

Human beings learn well, and maybe best, by example. I’ve never encountered a presider who declined to receive Communion at Mass. “I’ve committed a grave sin and I haven’t gone to confession so I can’t receive Communion. Or say the 5pm Mass.” Never seen that. Certainly I know that this reception cannot be omitted, by the book. Does that mean that clergy drive to the next parish on Friday night or early Saturday morning to go to confession so they can be “worthy”? Maybe that happens. I have no idea.

To the average lay observer, clergy appear to operate on a different layer of worthiness. And if they can’t, won’t, or don’t lead by example, should they expect to be heard? Especially bishops, who have much less contact with the ordinary faithful compared to parish priests.

Given the fact of human unworthiness, I have no problem with sinners receiving the sacraments. Despite doxing, most sins remain private and while they do affect other people, I figure we all need as much blessing via divine grace as we can get.

John Nolan said...

The three-hour fast came in at the same time as the general permission for evening Masses. Another factor was Pius X's encouragement of frequent Communion at the beginning of the 20th century.

In 1958 the principal parish Mass was sung, and typically at 11 a.m. That gave plenty of time for a leisurely breakfast finishing at a quarter to nine.

Casual, sloppy liturgies with no attention to detail are commonplace. Some of the worst examples I have come across were by priests who were formed before Vatican II. Some people like it. For many it is normative. Those who dislike it can grin and bear it, knowing that it fulfils their obligation; shop around to find something better (the idea of a territorial parish is now obsolete); or simply stay away altogether.

Anonymous said...

The problems start with our priests not being catechized in seminary. They set the example of behavior. If they preached about appropriate behavior and they also acted as if something special is going on at Mass things would start changing. Until clerical behavior is reformed our bishops are wasting time and nothing will change.

ByzRus said...


UK-Priest said...

Who said this?

“ Over the pope as the expression of the binding claim of ecclesiastical authority there still stands one’s own conscience, which must be obeyed before all else, if necessary even against the requirement of ecclesiastical authority. Conscience confronts [the individual] with a supreme and ultimate tribunal, and one which in the last resort is beyond the claim of external social groups, even of the official church.”

Maria Margolis said...

What is less known is that the bishops’ conference has also been publicly calling for the abolition of the death penalty for a quarter of a century, a position contrary to that of almost every single Republican politician, Catholic or not. Why? Because the Catholic Church does not (should not?) think of abortion and the death penalty as two separate issues: They are both part of the fabric of being pro-life from conception until natural death.

JR said...

If people fast for a certain time only because some Church law specifies how long it must be, they're missing the boat on why we fast. If the reason were explained to them, maybe at least the more devout people would -- on their own -- fast for three hours or even from midnight. Nobody will stop them from doing this. Also, I think "the Church" should be less concerned about how long someone fasts before Holy Communion and more concerned about the people who go to Holy Communion every week and have fasted from the Sacrament of Penance for years or even decades. I think the concept of sin should also be explained to the people and not worry that their feelings will be hurt or that Karen on the parish council will be offended. Lastly, the chattering and laughing and standing around socializing in church after Mass must stop. People have lost the sense of the sacred and that they are in God's House.

Anonymous said...

Fasting for a longer period before receiving communion doesn't make a person "more devout," even if they make the choice to do so on their own. Is the person who fasts FOUR hours even MORE devout? What about the FIVE hour faster or the six hour faster.

"But go and learn what this means: ‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice.’ For I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.” - Matthew 9:13 (NIV)

Anonymous said...

Anonymous at 10:43. You obviously did not understand what I wrote. I did not say that fasting for a longer time made anyone "more devout". More devout people probably understand the purpose of fasting better and because they do, and it's meaningful to them, choose a longer time.

Pierre said...

Marla Kavanaugh Margolis,

Nice try, but epic fail. The seamless garment ploy was just that, to provide political cover for pro abortion Catholic politicians. Quit politicizing every post. I thought Father McDonald was trying to discourage multiple noms de plume?

Anonymous said...

JR said - " If the reason were explained to them, maybe at least the more devout people would -- on their own -- fast for three hours or even from midnight."

Longer fasting neither makes on "more devout" not indicates that a person already is "more devout."