Month: November 2005

HERE ARE THE NEXT FIVE PROPOSITIONS FROM THE SYNOD ON THE EUCHARIST.

(Just five more to go after these!)

Proposition 41 deals with the reception of Commuion by non-Catholic Christians. It stresses that this generally isn’t possible but is in some cases. The Fathers of the Council stress that the conditions mentioned in the Catechism and the Compendium must be observed, which is odd since neither of these is a legal document. The place where the conditions are set forth in a legally binding way is canon 844 of the Code of Canon LawI suppose they cite the other two works because they are more generally accessible to the laity.

I suspect that there’s a translation error where Zenit represents the proposition as saying that "It must be clarified that the Eucharist does not only signify our
personal communion with Jesus Christ, but above all the full communion
of the Church." That’s not true. It makes it sounds as if communion with the Church is more important than communion with Christ, which is manifestly not the case. I suspect that the original Latin would have a construciton meaning something more like "but also" or "but in addition" or "but in particular" or something like that.

His proposition also rejects ecumenical concelebration of the Eucharist (despite the fact that JP2 himself ecumenically concelebrated with the Patriarch of Constantinople).

Proposition 42 is another proposition linking the Eucharist to a facet of the Christian life. This time the thing  being linked to is evangelization (i.e., the Eucharist brings us into an encounter with Christ, which motivates us to go out and evangelize others). At the same time as thanking missionaries, the synod fathers also stress some themes from Cardinal Ratzinger’s document Dominus Iesus–the fact that Christ is the only Savior and his "unicity" (uniqueness).

It makes the helpful point that stressing Christ’s uniqueness "will prevent the decisive work of human promotion implicit in evangelization being reduced to a mere sociological note." In other words: It’s not enough to just feed people. You have to tell them about Jesus and the fact that he is the only Savior.

Proposition 43 emphasizes Eucharistic spirituality for the sanctification of the world.

Proposition 44 starts out as just another linking the Eucharist to a facet of the Christian life proposition but quickly turns much more direct and practical. This time the topic is sick people and the proposition recommends several things of practical importance to sick people and their access to the Eucharist: (1) greater insistence on the Eucharist as viaticum, (2) greater distribution of the Eucharist to mentally disabled people, (3) equipping churches architecturally so that the disabled can have access to them.

Point 2 is elaborated by noting that the mere fact we can’t tell how much awareness a mentally disabled person has is NO REASON TO BAR THEM FROM THE EUCHARIST.

YEE-HAW! This is not a change in Church law, but it is a message many people need to receive.

No more, "Uncle Bob is never given the Eucharist because he’s retarded" or "We can’t give Gramma the Precious Blood because she’s in a coma" stuff.

Proposition 45 is a pretty standard affirmation of the need for pastoral care for migrants. Something that makes it a little unusual is that it lays stress on the need for one particular group of migrants: those belonging to the Eastern rites. This is no doubt a reflection of the Christian exodus occurring from the Middle East right now, as well as possibly migration of Eastern rite Christians from the former Soviet bloc into the West.

The proposition stresses that they need to be have access to pastors of their own rites as much as possible, and it says that "Oriental Day" needs to be established in seminaries so that Eastern liturgies will become better known to Latin priests.

HERE ARE THE NEXT FOUR PROPOSITIONS FROM THE SYNOD ON THE EUCHARIST.

Proposition 37 seems to have a mistranslation in Zenit’s rendering of its title. The translation Zenit gives is "Great Concelebrations," but I think what the original meant (in Latin) is "Large Concelebrations." The reason is that, after endorsing the practice of concelebration, it goes on to say that "The competent bodies are requested, however, to study better the
practice of concelebration, when the number of celebrants is very high."

That means either coming up with better ways to do large concelebrations or studying and following the existing norms more closely. Apparently some of the bishops have been in large concelebrations and not been happy with how they were done.

Proposition 38 is basically a big thank you to everyone in the Church who helps with Mass. It also expresses appreciation for the faithful who attend Mass daily and it encourages priests to say Mass daily, even when the faithful do not participate (contra the ideas of some who might say "The Mass is a celebration of the community, and since the community ain’t here at the moment, I shouldn’t say Mass").

Proposition 39 seeks to relate the Eucharist to the spirituality of daily life. It does so in rather general terms of urging people to "draw life" from the Eucharist and to find in the Eucharist strength for a radical following of Christ.

This is all fine, but I hope that the pope elaborates this in a more practical way in his apostolic exhortation. My concern is that, as this passage is phrased, it speaks a poetic language that doesn’t connect with the average person that successfully.

What I’d like to see the pope do is to get practical instead of poetic with Eucharistic spirituality. I’d like him to say things like: "Look, the Eucharist is Jesus. Your relationship with the Eucharist therefore represents your relationship with Jesus. If you want to be a worthy follower of Christ then you need to avoid mortal sin like the plague and seek to grow in holiness and love for God. One of the best ways to do the latter is to go our and start telling people about Jesus and how they need him to be saved. You should also think about Jesus a lot. You should read the gospels and read books about the faith he gave the Church. As you do these things you should constantly pray to Jesus in the Eucharist and tell him how much you love him and how you need his help. When you encounter difficulties–as you will–turn to him and ask for his help and trust that he will give you what you need to get through the difficulty, even if things don’t go your way."

This kind of practical language, I find, helps me a lot more than poetic language about contemplation and "drawing life" does.

You’ll notice that I’ve just said the same stuff (instead of "contemplation" I’ve spoken in terms of thinking aobut Jesus and learning about him and the faith and instead of "drawing life" I’ve spoken of asking Jesus for help and trusting him to give it), but I’ve said it more practically and less poetically.

I think a great many people in the world live in a more practical mode than a poetic mode, and a lot of the quiet, contemplative way that Church documents express themselves just doesn’t reach ordinary people and motivate them to do things differently in their lives.

Indeed, churchmen these days generally acknowledge that the message isn’t getting through to the people, and I think this is part of why. A specialized, poetic vocabulary has been built up around the practice of the faith that most people do not know. It’s the same problem as an Evangelical asking a non-Christian if he’s been "washed in the blood of the Lamb." The non-Catholic doesn’t know what that means.

In the same way, ordinary people in the pews often have an idea that a pious sentiment has just been expressed when they hear the language of Catholic poetical theology, but they don’t know what it means they are to do practically in their lives.

IT’S A PROBLEM I’VE WRITTEN ABOUT BEFORE.

Proposition 40 deals with the problem of Catholics who have divorced and remarried without getting an annulment. These folks are not validly married and for that reason cannot receive the Eucharist if they are having conjugal relations with each other since these relations are objectively gravely sinful.

Many bishops would like to find a way to allow them to receive Communion, and the document refers to this by noting "the painful concern expressed by many Fathers" of the Synod. B16 himself is one who has said that years ago he wanted to find a way to help at least some of these people receive Communion and that more study of this question is needed.

He has also said that, despite his initial views on the subject, his own further study of the question has convinced him that it is a very complicated topic and that the general principles already laid down must be accepted and respected.

This is a topic that we will be hearing more about in times to come, but as far as the Synod’s propositions go, they basically reinforces the current handling of such situations. Without putting it together as concisely as I’m about to, the Synod acknowledge that people in such situations need to either (a) get an annulment and get married for real, (b) stop living together, or (c) stop having sexual relations.

It also stresses that such people are still part of the Church, which cares for them, and that they need to cultivate the Christian life.

It also encourages tribunals handling annulment cases to do so expeditiously and pastorally while following the Church’s law regarding the handling of annulment cases and recognizing how messed up some people are with regard to marriage due to the way their understanding of it has been poisoned by our culture.

This part of the document reflects a delicate balancing of exhortations to tribunals. In some countries the tribunals are barely functional and you simply can’t get them to process annulment cases. This doesn’t mean that they rule against nullity too frequently. It means that they just sit on cases or process them with excruciating slowness that contravenes the pastoral good of the faithful–as well as the law regarding how cases must be heard in a timely manner.

There is also a concern that in other countries the rules aren’t being followed in a different way and that some tribunals hand out annulments too frequently.

But there is also a concern that culture really is poisoning people’s understanding of marriage and, as a result, they’re not exhanging valid matrimonial consent when they attempt marriage.

The Synod tries to balance these concerns in its exhortation to tribunals, though neither this nor B16’s forthcoming apostolic exhortation is really the place to discuss this matter in detail. Instead, his forthcoming address to the Roman Rota (typically held in January or February) is a more likely venue to get a sketch of what B16 thinks tribunals need to do.

Finally, this proposition encourages bishops and pastors to be more vigilant in weeding out people through the marriage preparation process who aren’t ready to get married (or married to each other) and thus decrease the number of divorces and irregular marital situations that way.

HERE ARE THE NEXT SIX PROPOSITIONS FROM THE SYNOD ON THE EUCHARIST.

Proposition 31 stresses the importance of celebrations of the Word of God and particularly recommends the Liturgy of the Hours.

It also says something rather odd in stating that "Forms of access to the Word of God may also be used which have been
demonstrated to be valid in the catechetical and pastoral endeavor,
such as dialogue, silence or other creative elements like gestures and
music."

Hopefully this will not be taken as license for free-wheeling liturgies of the word.

Proposition 32 deals with celebrations of the Eucharist in "small groups" (i.e., parish cell groups). These groups have been introduced in many places as a way of trying to build involvement in the parish, but there have been numerous problems accompanying them, including the fact that their leaders are often heterodox or emphatic about a particular form of Catholic spirituality that they expect everyone in the group to conform to. There also have been problems with families being separated into different small groups and there have been problems with factionalism in parishes based on the small groups.

Thus the proposition states:

Holy Masses celebrated in small groups must foster a more conscious,
active and fruitful participation in the Eucharist. The following
criteria have been suggested:

— small groups must serve to unite the parish community, not to fragment it;

— they must respect the needs of the different types of faithful,
so that they foster the fruitful participation of the whole assembly;

— they must be guided by clear and precise directives;

— they must keep in mind that, in the measure possible, the unity of the family must be preserved.

Proposition 33 addresses the problem of lay ministries in Mass infringing on the role of the clergy and states that "The tasks of the priest and of other liturgical ministries must be better clarified." Among the clarifications it recommends are:

These ministries must be introduced according to their specific mandate
and according to the real needs of the community that celebrates.

The persons in charge of these lay liturgical services must be
carefully chosen, well prepared and supported by permanent formation.
Their appointment must be temporary. These persons must be known by the
community and must receive grateful acknowledgment from the same. The
liturgical norms and regulations serve to give a clear orientation on
the economy of salvation, "communio" and the unity of the Church.

These recommendations are designed to limit the unauthorized and unnecessary multiplication of lay roles at Mass and of these positions being permanently commandeered by people who are heterodox, unaccountable, and unresponsive to the parshioners they ostensibly serve.

Proposition 34 deals with reverence for the Eucharist and is short and to the point:

To be observed before the consecrated Host is the practice of
genuflection or other gestures of worship, according to different
cultures. The importance of kneeling is recommended during significant
moments of the Eucharistic prayer, with a sense of worship and praise
of the Lord present in the Eucharist. Moreover, thanksgiving after
Communion should be promoted, including with a time of silence.

Proposition 35 deals with the reception of Communion or–more precisely–the non-reception of Communion. It stresses that those who are not allowed to receive Communion (e.g., because they are not Catholics or because they haven’t been to confession) need to have this point explained to them firmly and charitably, with it being pointed out that this is not a personal diss on them.

The proposition also states that "In some situations, a celebration of the Word of God is recommended instead of the Holy Mass." This seems to be a reference to situations in which the best way to prevent people from receiving the Eucharist illicitly would be to not offer Mass but have a liturgy of the word instead. It also says that "Pastors of souls must be concerned to lead the greatest possible number
of men to Christ, who calls all to himself — and not only in Holy
Communion — so that they will have eternal life."

Proposition 36 recommends greater use of Latin in the current rite of Mass, at least in Masses with people from different countries:

To express better the unity and universality of the Church in the
celebration of the Eucharist during international meetings, ever more
frequent today, it is proposed:

— to suggest that the concelebration of the Mass be in Latin
(except Readings, the homily and the Prayer of the Faithful). So also
should be the prayers of the tradition of the Church, and musical
compositions of Gregorian chant should eventually be sung;

— to recommend that priests be prepared in the seminary to
understand and celebrate the Mass in Latin, as well as to use Latin
prayers and know how to value Gregorian chant;

— to not neglect the possibility that the faithful themselves be educated in this respect.