A Plea to All Catholics

Our Lady of Victory, Manhattan

I work on Wall Street in Manhattan.  Yes, it's that Wall Street.  I'm about a block away from the Stock Exchange and a couple of blocks from the Federal Reserve.  This area is not exactly a bastion of spirituality and Christian belief and practice.  But our Lord never leaves us desolate and abandoned, and Wall Street is no exception.  He has put a wonderful Catholic church, Our Lady of Victory, around the corner from my office.  This is a fairly new church by New York standards, having been built during World War II, thus the name "Our Lady of Victory."  The Church was founded by the great Francis Cardinal Spellman.  To this day, there is still a tradition in the church of praying for our military.

The main altar in our Lady of Victory

Our Lady of Victory is a very active church, with six daily Masses starting at 7:15 a.m. and the last one is offered at 5:15 p.m. (they have the main upper Church and also a chapel in the basement).  The Rosary is recited every day after the 8:20 a.m. Mass.  There are daily novenas after the noon Mass.  On Holy Days of Obligation they offer 21 Masses.  The Sacrament of Confession is offered three times every day (at 8:00 a.m., noon and 5:00 p.m.)   There is Eucharistic Adoration every day from 1:00 to 5:15.  They estimate that 22,000 people receive ashes there on Ash Wednesday.  I am very much looking forward to Lent because they are going to be offering talks on Vatican II every Thursday during lunch hour.

I try to go there as often as I can for Adoration.  And there is usually a fair amount of people there.  It really is inspiring to see high power businessmen kneeling in the pews and praying the Rosary.

But there is one thing that I find very upsetting at Our Lady of Victory and which, unfortunately, I find at far too many Catholic Churches.  It is the lack of reverence shown to our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament.  I was always taught that we must genuflect before the Tabernacle as a sign of reverence because the Lord and Creator of the Universe resides there.  And when the Blessed Sacrament is actually exposed, if you are physically able you should get down on both knees when getting in and out of the pews and whenever passing in front of the exposed Blessed Sacrament.

The Exposed Blessed Sacrament
Credit:  St. Hugh of Cluny Society

I would estimate that at least 95% of the people I see in Church never show any sign of reverence to the Blessed Sacrament.  They walk in and out of the Church as if it was any other building.  Some will give a slight bow of the head, but rarely more than that and sadly, that includes the priests.

This past week I found myself becoming very agitated when a man, after helping out at Benediction, held an animated conversation with a woman in the front pew.  He stood with his back to the Blessed Sacrament, touching and hugging the woman with whom he was talking, disturbing the rest of us who were trying to pray and worst of all, completely ignoring and disrespecting his Creator and Savior who was right in back of him.   When he finally finished his conversation, he passed in front of the Blessed Sacrament and gave a barely perceptible nod of his head.

Often I will see people walk into the Church during Adoration, completely ignore our Lord and walk up to the statue of our Blessed Mother.  I have no problem at all with giving reverence to our Blessed Mother, but to ignore Her Son for any reason, even if it is to give reverence to her, is the greatest insult you can give Our Lady.

Almost no one genuflects or kneels on entering or leaving the pews.

I would implore all Catholics to think about what they are doing.  Remember that the Blessed Sacrament is not just a piece of bread on the altar, but the One who gives us every breath we breathe, the one who formed us in the womb and causes our heart to beat, the one who created the universe and everything in it.  This is the same One who allowed Himself to be whipped and beaten on our behalf, who took up His Cross and carried it on Calvary, who allowed men to pound nails into His Sacred Body and who poured out His Precious Blood so that our sins could be forgiven and we could spend all eternity with Him.

We see only a white piece of bread with our eyes, but the reality is that in the Blessed Sacrament our Lord is with us in all of his great glory and majesty.  He who is more powerful than all of creation, more brilliant than the brightest star, who is perfect goodness and love, has come down to us under the appearance of bread so that we can spend intimate time in His Presence.  And He is not alone on the altar.  The angels and saints bow continuously before Him, crying out "Holy, Holy, Holy,"

St. John the Apostle was transported to the Heavenly Throne of Christ in a vision, and this is how he describes it (Revelation 1:12-17):

12 When I turned to see who was speaking to me, I saw seven gold lampstands. 13 There with the lampstands was someone who seemed to be the Son of Man. He was wearing a robe that reached down to his feet, and a gold cloth was wrapped around his chest. 14 His head and his hair were white as wool or snow, and his eyes looked like flames of fire.15 His feet were glowing like bronze being heated in a furnace, and his voice sounded like the roar of a waterfall. 16 He held seven stars in his right hand, and a sharp double-edged sword was coming from his mouth. His face was shining as bright as the sun at noon.  17 When I saw him, I fell at his feet like a dead person.

Credit:  mudpreacher.org

Notice the last verse:  "When I saw him, I fell at his feet like a dead person."  To be in the glorified presence of our Lord and Savior was so overwhelming that St. John passed out as if dead.  If we could see past the veil of the appearance of bread in the Blessed Sacrament, we too would be as overwhelmed as St. John was.

Because Our Lord has such a great desire to be intimately with us, He humbles and veils himself under the appearance of a small piece of white bread.  We enter into the Presence of the Blessed Sacrament with our faith, seeing Him not with our physical eyes but in a spiritual sense.  Our physical demeanor in the presence of the Blessed Sacrament has a direct effect on our belief and obedience to our Lord.  "Lex orendi, lex credendi" means how we pray is how we believe.  Prayer is not just the words we use but involves our whole being, and part of prayer is our bodily expression.  If we want to cultivate a true reverence for our Lord and Savior, we must manifest this in our outward appearance.

Physically genuflecting and kneeling in front of the Blessed Sacrament will actually help you grow in holiness and in love of Jesus Christ.  And don't we owe Him at least this much for the very fact that He, as Creator, has given us our physical existence and then poured out His Precious Blood on the Cross so that we may inherit eternal life with Him as well?

Please show the proper respect when entering into the presence of the Lord.  He has humbled Himself to come to us under the appearance of bread.  The least we can do is bend our knees in reverence and respect to Our Creator and Savior.

Credit:  www.hrsl.org

SOUR GRAPES? PRIEST PLACED ON "ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVE"

Father Marcel Guarnizo

Just yesterday I posted about the situation with Father Marcel Guarnizo, who denied communion to a self-professed lesbian.  It has also come out that she doesn't even pretend to be a practicing Catholic but labels herself a Buddhist.  Well, this just gets curiouser and curiouser.  Fr. Marcel Guarnizo has now been placed on Administrative Leave by Auxillary Bishop Knestout, who originally reprimanded Fr. Guarnizo in this situation.  Msgr. Knestout says that he has "has received several complaints against Fr. Guarnizo claiming intimidating behaviour on his part against parish staff and others, and 'that is incompatible with proper priestly ministry.'"  Msgr. Knestout give us no details whatsoever as to what he is referring.  Hmmmmm.

Ed Peters, an expert on Canon law, gives this explanation:

Bp. Knestout’s March 9 letter on Fr. Guarnizo

Most of the lesbian/Communion controversy has been a dis-edifying parade of misleading commentary being proffered about misapplied laws. I don’t write here to correct these many errors, as their partisans (whether ‘left’ or ‘right’) don’t seem especially interested in what the law actually says, but I am happy to offer some observations on Msgr. Knestout’s letter of March 9 for those who are trying to understand what is, and is not, at work in this matter.

1. Fr. Guarnizo has not been suspended (suspension is a canonical penalty levied only upon guilt for crimes, per c. 1333), but he has been placed on “administrative leave”, a term not found in the Code, but nevertheless serving as a practical description of a situation in which, usually, one is not permitted to function as a cleric for so long as a wider situation requires resolution. A priest’s faculties for confession, preaching (homilies), witnessing weddings, etc. can be restricted a couple of different ways, and there is no reason to think that those ways were not satisfied in this action (although direct discussion of them is lacking).

From the text of the letter, I cannot tell whether Guarnizo is prohibited from celebrating Mass even in private (he is certainly prohibited from public celebration), although the trend in such cases is to allow for private celebration. This question could easily be addressed between Knestout and Guarnizo, and probably has already been answered.

2. A vicar general almost certainly has sufficient authority to issue such a letter (c. 479 § 1); one may expect the Cardinal to be informed of this action in a timely manner (c. 480).

3. As a parochial vicar, Guarnizo has considerably fewer procedural rights to office than would a pastor. Compare a pastor’s rights under c. 522, etc., and c. 1740 etc., with those of a parochial vicar, per c. 552. All associate pastors know this.

4. Guarnizo is not “incardinated” in the Archdiocese of Washington (c. 265 etc.); the situation of an “extern” priest is inherently more tenuous than is the situation of locally incardinated clergy, it being a function more of contract (express or implied) than of law. All extern priests know this.

5. Little in Knestout’s letter suggests that this action is being taken in response to the lesbian/Communion controversy (though one may be sure that the pro-lesbian camp will claim victory, and the pro-Guarnizo camp will decry the ‘mistreatment’ of the priest).

The allegations of “intimidating behavior” by Guarnizo are not recited in Knestout’s letter, but three questions would occur to me: (a) is this just a pile-on by people looking to kick Guarnizo while he is down?, or (b) are there long-standing legitimate complaints against Guarnizo that the recent controversy made more likely to surface? , or (c) did Guarnizo’s post-controversy conduct in the parish render him intemperate with others, provoking what are really recent complaints? Such are the things that an investigation is designed to, well, investigate.

6. The letter expresses the hope that Guarnizo will be able to return to priestly ministry. + + +

So, I noticed some hits coming from WaPo, and I clicked back to see what was sending readers my way. Now, I’m confused.

A Washington Post news blog by one Michelle Boorstein states that “Specific details about why the Rev. Marcel Guarnizo was barred from ministry – a severe penalty – were not immediately available.” The words “a severe penalty” are hot-linked to my post above.

But, the very first point of my post above is that Guarnizo is NOT under a penalty (let alone, a severe one, a description of suspension that I never used).

Ever wonder why so few professionals try to blog complex current events? It’s because we usually end up wondering, how on earth can our crystal clear statements be so completely misunderstood and/or misrepresented? Sigh.

I would probably get in trouble for posting this anywhere else, but since this is my blog, I can only say that in IMHO, it sure seems like "sour grapes" on the part of Msgr. Knestout.  He penalizes this priest and gives only the vaguest of explanations.  Dr  Peters seems to be trying to be as fair as possible in explaning this process, but it just doesn't add up to me.  As I posted previously, I certainly didn't think there would be an apology forthcoming from Msgr. Knestout, but it never entered my mind that he would go this far.  I hope and pray that Fr. Guarnizo just plays it cool and lets things work out as they should.  If he is in the right, it will be shown.  This is could be a very good learning situation for all. 

Is the following the manner in which bishops would like communion to be distributed?

When Political Correctness Rules

Please enjoy this culturally, ethnically, religiously
and politically correct cartoon responsibly.  Thank you.

A few days ago I posted about a priest who was reprimanded for refusing to give communion to a woman who had introduced herself and her lesbian lover to him immediately before the funeral Mass for her mother.  To me, reprimanding the priest in this situation is political correctness run amok in the Church.  The bishops seem much more concerned about hurt feelings than concern for souls or desecration of the Blessed Sacrament.

Lifesitenews.com has now posted an article giving background on the priest involved.  This article shows even more clearly that the bishop acted much too quickly without full awareness of the facts of this matter.  How I pray for the day when the bishops are more concerned about souls than political correctness. 

Exclusive: Inside sources provide new info on priest censured for denying lesbian Communion

by Christine Dhanagom

• Fri Mar 02, 2012 15:27 EST

(Editor’s note: An earlier version of this story identified Barabara Johnson as the partner of Kathleen DeBold and written up in Metro Weekly. A homosexual activist organization contacted LSN to note that it is a different Barbara Johnson identified in the newspaper. We are investigating the matter.)

GAITHERSBURG, MD, March 1, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) - In the wake of international press coverage of a priest’s decision to deny a lesbian communion, and the woman’s subsequent demands that he be removed from the parish, a source close to the incident contacted LifeSiteNews with new information that he says will set the record straight. Among other things, the new information indicates that the woman did actually receive Communion at the Mass – but from an Extraordinary minister rather than the priest.

Fr. Marcel Guarnizo of St. John Neumann Catholic Church in Gaithersburg, Maryland, was reprimanded by the Archdiocese of Washington this week after denying communion to Johnson at her mother’s funeral. Johnson had informed the priest before the Mass that she was a lesbian, and was denied communion when she presented herself in line.

In a statement issued last week, the Archdiocese said that Guarnizo’s actions were against diocesan policy, and that “any issues regarding the suitability of an individual to receive communion should be addressed by the priest with that person in a private, pastoral setting.”

LifeSiteNews spoke today with Diego von Stauffenberg, a source who is close to the incident and who revealed detailed information about the nature of Fr. Guarnizo’s actions at the funeral. According to Stauffenberg the priest was confronted by Johnson for the first time moments before Mass began.

She was reportedly agitated by the fact that the funeral was being presided over by Fr. Guarnizo, who is well known for his outspoken defense of Church teachings. The priest has been on the front lines of local pro-life activism, leading prayer vigils at Dr. LeRoy Carhart’s late term abortion facility in Germantown.

Johnson initially came into the sacristy to discuss the details of the two eulogies that were supposed to be delivered, but left abruptly and returned with her brother and another woman, whom she introduced as her “lover.”

Following this introduction, Johnson made a second abrupt exit, this time with her lover reportedly blocking the door in an apparent attempt to prevent any further conversation between Fr. Guarnizo and Johnson.

The priest proceeded with the Mass, but decided to remind the congregation before Communion of what is required to be properly disposed to receive. Stauffenberg reports that when Johnson approached for Communion anyway, Fr. Guarnizo turned her away in a manner so discreet that the Extraordinary Minister standing a few feet away did not know what had occurred. Johnson then crossed over to the Extraordinary minister’s line and was given communion.

Moreover, says Stauffenberg, media reports that Fr. Guarnizo refused to be present during Johnson’s eulogy are inaccurate. Johnson had told Channel 9 News that “Fr. Marcel left the altar, and did not return until I finished my eulogy.”

She also told the National Catholic Reporter that Fr. Guarnizo not only did not attend the burial, but also did not make an effort to find another priest to do so, and that it was the funeral director who took the initiative in contacting another priest.

The truth, according to Stauffenberg, is that Fr. Guarnizo suffers from migraines which are triggered by stressful situations. He had a migraine during the funeral, and discreetly left after the first eulogy ended, looking for water to revive himself. When he returned to the sanctuary, Johnson was about five minutes into a eulogy that lasted around fifteen to twenty minutes.

After the Mass was over, he accompanied the body in procession down the aisle and out the door to the hearse, where he informed the funeral director that he would be unable to make the 11 mile drive from the Church to the cemetery on Aspen Hill. He personally arranged for the funeral director to contact another local priest, Fr. Paul Sweeney, who joined the family at the cemetery.

“Mrs. Johnson was given a Catholic funeral with all of the formality and all of the respect that the Catholic Church has to offer,” said Stauffenberg.

Most of the substantial details offered by Stauffenberg have been corroborated by another source who also contacted LifeSiteNews, but who wishes to remain anonymous. In addition, an email circulating in the Diocese which claims to have originated from a group of people who met with Father shortly after the incident says the following:

“Fr knew the lady was a practicing lesbian because she came into the sacristy and introduced her ‘lover’ to Fr just before the Mass. He quietly denied her communion (so quietly that the Euch minister next to him didn’t realize that he did), and the woman promptly went to the other line and received communion anyway! He left to use the restroom (he was getting a migraine) between the eulogies, but did finish the ceremony and escorted the casket out. He made arrangements for there to be another priest at the gravesite and there was. He felt that it was a matter of conscience to deny her communion since he had been informed that she was an active homosexual by her own admission.”

Another statement from the Archdiocese about the incident was published yesterday in the Washington Post. The statement noted that “no one is entitled to the Eucharist,” and that “any person who obstinately perseveres in manifest grave sin is not to be admitted to Holy Communion.”

The statement also said that situations which called for denial of communion “ideally” would be handled by “discussing the consequences of such sin with the person privately before actually denying them Communion.”

Is Reception of Communion a Right or a Privilege?

The confusion in the Church
makes my head ache

Why has it become so hard to identify sin in our world?  A woman at a funeral for her mother introduced herself and her lesbian partner to the priest before Mass, and when she presented herself  for communion, the priest denied her, saying she was involved in serious sin and he could not give her communion.  She became quite indignant, wrote a nasty letter to him, complained, and now the Diocese is reprimanding the priest!!!   This woman is in clear violation of Church teaching and the plain teaching of the Bible, and yet the priest is reprimanded? 

I make no pretense at being able to explain Canon Law.  But I do understand that reception of communion is not a right.  It is a gift given to us by our Creator, and unless we are in a state of grace, free of mortal sin, we are not qualified to receive.  The very fact that this is being disputed indicates, to me at least, that something is seriously wrong.

Here is the article from Lifesitenews.com:

Archdiocese of Washington reprimands priest for denying communion to a lesbian

GAITHERSBURG, MARYLAND, February 29, 2012, (LifeSiteNews.com) – A parish priest in Maryland, who denied communion to a woman who identified herself as a lesbian, has been publicly rebuked by the Archdiocese of Washington.

Barbara Johnson attended her mother’s funeral last Saturday and introduced her lesbian partner to the priest before Mass.

Fr. Marcel Guarnizo of St. John Neumann Catholic Church in Gaithersburg, Maryland, covered the Host as she approached and told her, “I can’t give you Communion because you live with a woman, and in the eyes of the Church, that is a sin.”

Afterwards, she wrote him a letter telling him, “I will do everything in my power to see that you are removed from parish life so that you will not be permitted to harm any more families.”  [She shows no sense of humility whatsoever.  She does not question herself and ask whether the priest may be right.  If she is a Catholic, she knows that homosexuality is condemned by the Church.  Yet she still feels that she has a right to communion.]

Auxiliary Bishop Barry Knestout wrote a formal letter of apology telling Johnson, “I am sorry that what should have been a celebration of your mother’s life, in light of her faith in Jesus Christ, was overshadowed by a lack of pastoral sensitivity.”  [First of all, a funeral should not be a "celebration of life".  The purpose of a funeral is to pray for the deceased.  Secondly, how about reminding this poor lost soul that she is in fact living contrary to God's law and that unless she repents and changes, she could very well lose salvation?  Isn't there any concern for her soul, or are we too concerned about hurting her feelings?] 

The Archdiocese of Washington issued a brief press release saying Fr. Guarnizo’s actions were inappropriate. “When questions arise about whether or not an individual should present themselves for communion, it is not the policy of the Archdiocese of Washington to publicly reprimand the person. Any issues regarding the suitability of an individual to receive communion should be addressed by the priest with that person in a private, pastoral setting.”  [Even when the sin is public?  She was there with her Lesbian lover.  If she told the priest, it is an almost sure thing that others knew as well.  It was a public matter.  And aren't we the least concerned about desecration of the Blessed Sacrament by giving it to someone who is in mortal sin?]  After receiving the letter of apology, Johnson said “I will not be satisfied” until Fr. Guarnizo is removed from the parish.

Monsignor Charles Pope, who blogs for the Archdiocese of Washington’s website, told LifeSiteNews.com, “One would presume a priest would have had more ongoing conversations with somebody of a private nature before one would publicly deny somebody communion.”   [I don't understand this.  The woman admitted to being involved in serious sin.  What am I missing?]

“There may be a time when a pastor has concerns about a parishioner and then speaks to them privately and advises them privately not to receive communion,” he said. “But we don’t have these confrontations at the altar rail.”  [I can understand not wanting to have confrontations at the altar rail, but it is also important to keep the Blessed Sacrament from being desecrated, which seems to the major concern of Fr. Guarnizo.]

Canon 915 of the Roman Catholic Church’s Code of Canon Law admonishes priests to deny Holy Communion to those who are “obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to holy communion.”

The New Commentary on Canon Law states: “Eucharistic Ministers are also to refuse holy communion when they are certain (1) that a person has committed a sin that is objectively grave, (2) that the sinner is obstinately persevering in this sinful state, and (3) that this sin is manifest,” or widely known to those present at the Mass. [As I already stated, if the woman was so bold to present herself and her Lesbian partner to the priest, it's a pretty sure bet that others knew as well.  Since that most probably is the case, doesn't giving her communion put the Church's approval on her clearly sinful relationship?]

The U.S. Council of Catholic Bishops established “engaging in sexual activity outside the bonds of a valid marriage” as such a sin in its 2006 publication “‘Happy Are Those Who Are Called to His Supper’: On Preparing to Receive Christ Worthily in the Eucharist.”

“Catholics who are conscious of committing any mortal sin must receive the Sacrament of Penance before receiving Holy Communion,” they wrote.

[See below]
The commentary on the 1983 Code of Canon Law, prepared by the Canon Law Society of Great Britain and Ireland, states, “before a minister can lawfully refuse the Eucharist, he must be certain that the person obstinately persists in a sinful situation or in sinful behavior that is manifest (i.e. public) and objectively grave.” [Is there any doubt in this situation?  The woman has a live-in Lesbian partner, and not only didn't try to be discreet about it, but openly bragged of it to the priest.  It would seem reasonable for him to assume that this was public knowledge.]

“Most canonists, including pastors and priests, interpret that not just as not just a quick conversation but something of a more substantial nature,” Monsignor Pope told LifeSiteNews.   [This is the problem.  Canon Law can be "interpreted" in different ways by different people.]

Dr. Ed Peters, a canon lawyer at Sacred Heart Major Seminary in Detroit, wrote “a few minutes conversation…would not suffice, in the face of numerous canons protecting the right of the faithful to receive the sacraments [emphasis on the word "faithful", which it would seem this woman was clearly not, and her prideful, revengeful attitude afterwards would seem to support this conclusion], to verify either the notoriety of the (objectively) sinful situation, or to verify the obstinacy of the would-be recipient.” However, Dr. Peters noted after a sufficient period of warning and instruction, a priest would be well within his rights to invoke Canon 915 and deny communion to an obstinate, sexually active homosexual.

“I don’t know that that can be determined by a brief interaction in a sacristy,” Msgr. Pope told LifeSiteNews.  [Again, who is the one who is suppose to make these judgments?  It seems that Canon Law only leads to confusion.]

Fr. Guarnizo may have been forcibly denied the opportunity to expand on his conversation. A commenter on Deacon Greg Kandra’s blog, who claimed to have been “in a meeting with Fr Marcel and heard the whole story,” wrote: “The woman in question brought her lesbian partner into the vesting sacristy just before the funeral Mass and made sure to introduce her partner to Fr. Marcel, introducing her as her ‘lover’. He told her then that she should not present herself for Communion.” A commenter claimed Barbara’s partner “blocked his way out of the sacristy when he attempted to speak with her further.”

The Catholic Church believes a faithful Christian has such an interest in receiving Holy Communion that it must only be denied only in extreme cases. “When in doubt, give it out,” Msgr. Pope said. [This seems to be very dubious reasoning.  Isn't protection of the Blessed Sacrament of any importance?]

The popular blogger Fr. John Zuhlsdorf wrote no one should be surprised that questions persist about when to publicly deny someone communion.

Fr. Zuhlsdorf writes that “Many priests have received inadequate training in these matters of law and have been given even worse example by bishops who ought to be applying can. 915 is genuine cases of applicability,” he wrote. [Father Z also used this post to promote his own "stuff" for sale:  "Finally, while I have your attention, please go buy some can. 915 stuff."  Sigh.  Hard to take him seriously when he is always hawking his "Swag Store."]

Archbishop Donald Wuerl, Archbishop of Washington, waded into a similar controversy in 2009 when he said he would not deny House Speaker Nancy Pelosi communion, claiming to do so would amount to “Communion wielded as a weapon.” When asked, he said, “there’s a question about whether this canon [915] was ever intended to be used.”   [I rest my case about the confusion caused by Canon Law.]

Fr. Zuhlsdorf described Fr. Guarnizo’s actions as “well-meaning” but “premature,” adding he could not find fault with his motivation.

“He should be thanked for taking his role seriously and for wanting to uphold the Church’s teaching,” he wrote.

Fr. Guarnizo did not return messages left by LifeSiteNews.

When situations like this happen, and the Church hierarchy sides with someone clearly in violation of church teaching against a faithful priest,  is there any wonder that the laity in the Catholic Church just throw up their hands and make up their own minds about what is right and wrong?  Yet, it is just that which has led to the crisis in the Church, sinking attendance, lack of belief in the Real Presence.  Like the Protestants, far too many Catholics have become their own Magesterium.  Further, by making an "example" of this faithful priest, the Church hierarchy is telling the priests to be more concerned about hurting people's feelings than saving their souls. 

Blessed Mother, pray for us.

Help Yourself to Jesus - Part II

A couple of weeks ago I posted about my visit to a church in which two lay people came in, walked up to the Tabernacle and removed consecrated hosts.  I was completely shocked by this, and also by the fact that the key was left in the Tabernacle, which leaves it wide open to anyone who may want to take hosts. 

Well, I was back at that church today.  As I reported previously, the Blessed Sacrament is reserved in a side altar.  There is an altar railing in front of that altar, so I took advantage of that to pray there.  As I was kneeling there, one of those same people from a couple of weeks ago came in, opened up the Tabernacle, took some hosts and proceeded to leave.  I stopped him on his way out and asked why the key was left in the Tabernacle.  His response was that I was talking to the wrong person, I needed to ask the priest.  He said he assumed so that everyone would not need their own key!  I wanted to ask why lay people were allowed to go into the Tabernacle, but instead said, there are black masses you know, and anyone can come in and take these hosts . He responded, "I know."

Is there doubt in anyone's mind that reverence for the Blessed Sacrament in the Catholic Church has reached an all time low?   I really wonder how many actually believe in the Real Presence.  I have seen polls that say as little as 30% of Catholics believe in the Real Presence.  I have to say I have grave doubts about whomever is the pastor of the Church I was at today.  Why does he leave this Tabernacle and the Blessed Sacrament completely exposed, with no protection whatsoever? Does he care so little of this greatest gift we have been given - the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ under the appearance of bread?

Lord Jesus, have mercy on us all. 

Help Yourself to Jesus - A Definite Rant

One of the great things about living in New York City is that there is an abundance of churches.  It's hard to go more than just a few blocks without running into one.  On Sundays I normally go to Mass at one church that has another Mass shortly afterwards, and it is very difficult to stay and pray after Mass.  So lately I have been walking a few blocks to another stunningly beautiful church.  I don't want to give the name of the church or location just in case the wrong people get this information.  This church has a 9:30 Mass and then the church is usually empty until the next Mass at 12:30.

The church was built in about 1886 and has not been "renovated."  It retains its beautiful high altar, pictured: