COVID-19 & The Mass

Dear Parishioners,

We are living in some difficult times. This past weekend, we introduced some more restrictions within the context of the liturgy in light of the spreading of the novel coronavirus. Some may still be confused, so I want to offer some clarity in this regard. On Friday, February 28th, an email came to me regarding the ongoing issue about health and the rituals at Mass. We published recommendations previously in this regard, and the USCCB made another provision. So, the archdiocesan Office of Divine Worship sent out this email with added recommendations.

“Further to a recent memo to all the bishops of the United States from the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) entitled ‘Liturgical Celebrations and Public Health Concerns’ and after consulting with the Archbishop the Office of Divine Worship now recommends that all parishes cease the distribution of the Precious Blood for the time being and that the Sign of Peace be eliminated or done without the chance of physical contact.”

So, going forward until further notice, we will continue not to use the chalice at the Rite of Communion. All are urged not to hold hands during the Our Father, and the Sign of Peace will be skipped during the Rite of Communion.

I know that many of you will understand and agree with this. I also understand that this may disturb some. These changes do not reflect an agenda or any hidden motives. The goal of these temporary changes is the greatest good for our people. It should go without saying that issues of health and safety are paramount. We want our communities to be healthy. This is basic ethics. And in as far as we can cooperate with such a goal and be faithful and lawful to the rites of the Liturgy, these changes to the liturgy are reasonable, measured, and temporary. 

Remember the proverb accredited to Benjamin Franklin: “An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.” These changes are simple compared to the potential of suffering that could come upon people who get infected. So, simple caution is warranted. I believe this not to be a knee-jerk reaction, but a simple act of wisdom for the good of our beloved communities.

On a personal note, and I have shared this with many, last year my 94 year old mother who lives at home and hardly ever gets out, went to Mass one Sunday last year in March. Three days later she was stricken by the flu which she contracted from participating in the one outing she had that week: Mass. We almost lost her. The most vulnerable to the cold, the coronavirus, and the flu are our elderly. As a Church, we want to be a welcoming community which means moving out of the way any obstacles that may be unsafe. 

Thank you for your faithful consideration in regards to this situation. Let us all join in solidarity with those who have become ill recently and, in a special way, those who have contracted the flu or may contract the coronavirus. May we remember that love of God and neighbor is the calling which we have all been given. I am proud that our parishes so easily rise to the help of others in times of need. This time, while difficult, will be another moment to shine!

Finally, click here for more details and information from the USCCB, our archdiocese, and the CDC.

Blessings,

Fr. William Holtzinger
Pastor (St. Anne, St. Patrick of the Forest, Our Lady of the River)
Administrator (St. Joseph, St. Francis Xavier)

Estimados feligreses, 

Estamos viviendo en tiempos difíciles. El pasado fin de semana, introdujimos algunas restricciones más en el contexto de la liturgia a la luz de la propagación del nuevo coronavirus. Algunos todavía pueden estar confundidos, por lo que quiero ofrecer algo de claridad al respecto. El viernes 28 de febrero, me llegó un correo electrónico con respecto al problema actual sobre la salud y los rituales en la misa. Publicamos recomendaciones previamente a este respecto, y el USCCB hizo otra disposición. Entonces, la Oficina Arquidiocesana de Culto Divino envió este correo electrónico con recomendaciones adicionales.

"Además de una nota reciente para todos los obispos de los Estados Unidos de la Conferencia de los Obispos Católicos de los Estados Unidos (USCCB) titulada 'Celebraciones litúrgicas y preocupaciones de salud pública' y después de consultar con el arzobispo, la Oficina de Culto Divino ahora recomienda que todas las parroquias cesar la distribución de la Preciosa Sangre por el momento y que el Signo de la Paz sea eliminado o hecho sin la posibilidad de contacto físico ". 

Entonces, avanzando hasta nuevo aviso, seguiremos sin usar el cáliz en el Rito de Comunión. Se insta a todos a no tomarse de las manos durante el Padre Nuestro, y el Signo de la Paz se omitirá durante el Rito de Comunión.

Sé que muchos de ustedes entenderán y estarán de acuerdo con esto. También entiendo que esto puede molestar a algunos. Estos cambios no reflejan una agenda ni ningún motivo oculto. El objetivo de estos cambios temporales es el mayor bien para nuestra gente. No hace falta decir que las cuestiones de salud y seguridad son primordiales. Queremos que nuestras comunidades sean saludables. Esta es la ética básica. Y en la medida en que podamos cooperar con tal objetivo y ser fieles y legales a los ritos de la Liturgia, estos cambios en la liturgia son razonables, medidos y temporales.

Recuerde el proverbio acreditado por Benjamín Franklin: "Una onza de prevención vale una libra de cura". Estos cambios son simples en comparación con el potencial de sufrimiento que podría afectar a las personas infectadas. Por lo tanto, se justifica una simple precaución. Creo que esto no es una reacción instintiva, sino un simple acto de sabiduría para el bien de nuestras queridas comunidades.

En una nota personal, y he compartido esto con muchos, el año pasado mi madre de 94 años que vive en casa y casi nunca sale, fue a misa un domingo el año pasado en marzo. Tres días después, se vio afectada por la gripe que contrajo al participar en la única excursión que tuvo esa semana: misa. Casi la perdimos. Los más vulnerables al resfriado, el coronavirus y la gripe son nuestros ancianos. Como Iglesia, queremos ser una comunidad acogedora, lo que significa apartar cualquier obstáculo que pueda ser inseguro.

Gracias por su fiel consideración con respecto a esta situación. Unámonos solidariamente con quienes se enfermaron recientemente y, de manera especial, con quienes contrajeron la gripe o pueden contraer el coronavirus. Recordemos que el amor a Dios y al prójimo es el llamado que todos hemos recibido. Me enorgullece que nuestras parroquias lleguen tan fácilmente a la ayuda de otros en tiempos de necesidad. ¡Esta vez, aunque difícil, será otro momento para brillar!

Finalmente, haga clic aquí para obtener más detalles e información de USCCB, nuestra arquidiócesis y los CDC.

Bendiciones,
P. William Holtzinger
Pastor (Santa Ana, San Patricio del Bosque, Nuestra Señora del Río)
Administrador (San José, San Francisco Javier)

Questions About The Eucharist. Part IV

Dear Parishioners,

Here is round four of Q & A’s related to the Eucharist.  If you didn’t catch the previous ones, check out my previous blog entries. This week, there is only one question since the answer is more involved.

Question: “When did the laity first start receiving from the chalice?”

Answer: Here’s a brief history.  The Liturgy in its earliest form always had both species offered to those present up to the late 11th and early 12th centuries. Due to practical and prudential judgement in view of cost, logistics, availability, the age of recipients, and especially the potential of spillage, etc. the offering of the chalice fell out of custom. Afterwards, it gradually became reserved for the priest himself since it was essential for the sacrificial nature of the Mass, though not necessary for others to receive both species since reception of either is reception of Christ’s true presence (Body and Blood). It eventually became the universal practice and even declared church law. In the Council of Trent (1570), it was explicitly forbidden to be given out to anyone other than a priest.  In 1963, the Fathers of the Second Vatican Council allowed a reintroduction of the Precious Blood to the faithful (see the document, Sacrosanctum Concilium, no. 55), and in 1970, the Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship allowed the bishops’ conferences to discern its use and practice. Already by that time it had been permitted for a bride and groom at a nuptial Mass or at a Mass for the reception of converts to the Faith. In 1984, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), decided to give the decision to the bishop of each diocese. So, some dioceses allowed it where others did not. Here in the Archdiocese of Portland in Oregon, it has been allowed and is offered at most parishes. Be mindful, however, that in churches or dioceses where the chalice is not being offered, it is not a violation of anyone’s rights, faith practice, or even of what Christ instituted at the Last Supper since we do receive Him in each individual species. You might remember a few years back when our Archbishop asked us not to offer the chalice due to the outbreak of the H1N1 virus.  The may be times when such a health situation, again, may warrant such a decision.  In developing countries, offering the chalice is impossible due to sheer cost. We can afford offering the Precious Blood, therefore we do. It has been profitable for our faith, and we are grateful for its allowance. For some, as already described in last week’s Q & A, who struggle with alcoholism, they may very well refrain from receiving from the chalice, yet still receive Christ’s true presence in the host.

Hope this helps.  Next week’s question: “When we receive only the host, should I bow when I pass the minister with the chalice?”  Do you think you could answer this one?  Return next week and find out.


Blessings,

Fr. William Holtzinger
Pastor

Vote With An Informed Conscience

Dear Parishioners,

It is that time again to do our part in the process of democracy: vote. Today like no other time, we are pressed to make an effort to vote. Here in Oregon, voting by mail couldn't be easier. Hopefully, you have all received your Voter's Pamphlet in the mail from which you can begin to understand some of the issues. It is a time for us all to remember that our nation was founded on "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Some, however, have pursued one's own well-being over that of others, especially the most vulnerable. As such, we need to keep the needs of the poor in the forefront of our hearts and minds.

The voting season has also marked an increase in mailings to my office from various political action committees or candidates. The Church does not endorse any persons or parties, but she certainly can make a stand about issues. Each of these mailings try to convince me of their particular issue or candidate. Some literature has even come across my desk as either "The Catholic Vote" or "The Pro-Life Vote," often failing to do both in a full way. So, what are we to do? I point you to the bishop's document called "Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship" which outlines the ethical and moral principals by which we are to consider when participating in our political process. The bishop's outline four major themes. They are as follows:

1. Human Life: The right to life of every human person from conception to natural death, must be protected.
2. Family Life: Marriage between a man and woman is not just a sacred good but a social good that government needs to recognize, encourage and protect.
3. Social Justice: The Catholic consistent life ethic “extends from the vulnerable inside the womb to the vulnerable outside the womb.”
4. Global Solidarity: Natural resources are God-given and “we are all responsible for protecting them.”

The bishop's go on to warn us about two tendencies:

"The first is a moral equivalence that makes no ethical distinctions between different kinds of issues involving human life and dignity. The direct and intentional destruction of innocent human life from the moment of conception until natural death is always wrong and is not just one issue among many. It must always be opposed.

"The second is the misuse of these necessary moral distinctions as a way of dismissing or ignoring other serious threats to human life and dignity. Racism and other unjust discrimination, the use of the death penalty, resorting to unjust war, the use of torture,4 war crimes, the failure to respond to those who are suffering from hunger or a lack of health care, or an unjust immigration policy are all serious moral issues that challenge our consciences and require us to act. These are not optional concerns which can be dismissed.

I urge you to read this document in its entirety as well as the Archbishop's Oct. 6th reflection on voting. Here are links related to these writings:

http://www.faithfulcitizenship.org http://www.catholicsentinel.org

Blessings,

Fr. William Holtzinger

Pastor