HERE ARE THE NEXT FIVE PROPOSITIONS FROM THE SYNOD ON THE EUCHARIST.
At this point we’re out of the theological reflection stage and are into the practical stuff, so that’s more to my liking. Some of the proposals here are quite striking.
Proposition 21 states: "The Eucharistic Prayers could be enriched with acclamations, not only after the consecration but in other moments, as provided in the Eucharistic Prayers for celebrations with children and as is done in several countries." I’ll have to look up what they have in mind here.
This is a very striking proposal because we’re still in the process of getting translated the third edition of the Roman Missal (released 2000) and now they’re talking about adding elements to the Eucharistic prayer, which would necessitate a fourth edition (presumably identical to the third except for the minor adjustments they indicate).
Proposition 22 states: "The Synod hopes that the link between the epiclesis and the account of the institution will be shown with greater clarity. In this way, it would be more evident that the whole life of the faithful is, in the Holy Spirit and in the sacrifice of Christ, a spiritual offering pleasing to the Father.
"
I’m not sure (on the heels of the previous proposal) whether they’re talking again about changing the text of the Eucharistic prayers to bring out the connection between the Epiclesis (invocation of the Holy Spirit upon the gifts) and the Words of Institution (regarded as the moment of consecration in Latin theology) or if they’re just suggesting that B16 dwell on this in his apostolic exhortation. Could be either.
Proposition 23 says that the sign of peace sometimes "assumes a dimension that could be problematic, when it is too prolonged
or even when it causes confusion, just before receiving Communion. Perhaps it would be useful to assess if the sign of peace should
take place at another moment of the celebration, taking into account
ancient and venerable customs."
The ancient and venerable customs they’re referring to may be the way the sign of peace is exchanged in some of the Eastern rites, where it is not a handshake or hug but a more solemn exchange of peace that we really don’t have the vocabulary to describe succinctly in English. Basically: The priest puts his hands together palm to palm and then the ministers brush the outsides of his hands with their palms so as to receive the peace from him. Then they put their palms together and let someone else receive the peace from them, passing down the aisles to allow the peace to be passed in this fashion from person to person in the pews.
I don’t know if that’s going to be the way we do it in the Latin rite in the future, but they may well move the sign of peace so that it isn’t just before Communion.
Proposition 24 also deals with a change that would necessitate an alteration in the Roman Missal: "To make more explicit the relationship between Eucharist and mission,
which belongs to the heart of this Synod, it is suggested that new
dismissal formulas be prepared (solemn blessings, prayers over the
people or others), which underline the mission in the world of the
faithful who have participated in the Eucharist."
Proposition 25 is devoted to correcting liturgical abuses. Among other things, it states: "The value, importance and necessity of the observance of the liturgical
norms must be underlined. The Eucharistic celebration must respect the
sobriety and fidelity of the rite desired by the Church, with a sense
of the sacred that helps to live the encounter with God and also with
sensible forms that favor it."
Unfortunately, there is nothing more here than a general exhortation to greater fidelity. No specific program is suggested to promote greater fidelity.
This may be because they’ve already done the major obvious things they can on this one (e.g., releasing a new GIRM, a new Missal, a new and improved set of translations that are in the works, and the document on liturgical abuses that came out recently–i.e., Redemptionis sacramentum). Shy of esatablishing a liturgical secret police, there’s not many more obvious ways to crack down on liturgical abuses at the moment. They may want to let the effect of the recent efforts continue to work their way through the Church before undertaking a major new anti-abuse initiative.
I can only imagine how people would freak out if we were instructed to do a real kiss of peace.
I would love it if they were to move the kiss of peace, or get rid of it all together. I personally find it distracting and have taken to just shutting my eyes and reminding myself of the true presence of the Lord in the eucharist.
“To make more explicit the relationship between Eucharist and mission, which belongs to the heart of this Synod, it is suggested that new dismissal formulas be prepared (solemn blessings, prayers over the people or others), which underline the mission in the world of the faithful who have participated in the Eucharist.”
Ideas, anyone?
“The Mass is ended, now get your rears in gear.”
“Let us go forth to love and serve the Lord”?
Brad, don’t ask for ideas. That’s how we get. “The Mass Never Ends, It Must be Lived”.
Please move the sign of peace. Often it is total bedlam just before communion. At one wedding, everyone in the church decided they had to come up and talk with the bride and groom during the sign of peace. The priest had to many times say “back to you seats so we can continue.” I thought it might be helpful if he had a gavel that he could use to pound on the altar to get the assembly back in order. At masses with the whole grade school, it is difficult to get anyone back into a serious, reverent attitude after they run up and down the aisles to find their friends. It is also a major problem when there a large number of non-catholic visitors. When choir starts the “Lamb of God”, our presiders take that as a sign that they should start heading back to the altar. I think the proximity of the sign of peace and the communion rite is one of the reasons we seem to have noticeably less respect for the presence of Christ in the bread and wine.
“Shy of esatablishing a liturgical secret police,”
What a chilling thought.
The proposals highlight how the Roman Missal is often changed:
Dennis Smolarski in The General Instruction of the Roman Missal 1969-2002 has a chapter “Evolution of the GIRM” with the headings:
The 1970 GIRM and Roman Missal
The Revision of Minor Orders and the 1973 GIRM
The Second Edition of the Roman Missal and the 1975 GIRM
The Promulgation of the Revised Code of Canon Law and the 1983 GIRM.
In proposition 33 they refer to “(cf. General Instruction of the Roman Missal, published on January 25, 2004, numbers 103-107).” It is not called the 2002 GIRM, when the 2002 Roman Missal was published. My guess is that they mean an Italian version of the GIRM (just as there is a U.S.A. 2003 GIRM and an England and Wales 2005 GIRM).
So just as I might buy Adobe Photoshop CS2, expecting a CS3 to be available in two years, the bishops expect a 4th edition of the Roman Missal.
Thanks, Jimmy, for some extremely helpful and practical commentary!
A general question: Do the Eastern Rites have the problems we do in the Roman Rite? I haven’t heard of a vocations crisis in the East, or wacky Clown Divine Liturgies of St. John Chrysostom, or Maronite liturgical dancing, or anything like that.
Do the Eastern Rites have the problems we do in the Roman Rite?
No. But in my experience, the wacky abuses of the Latin Church are also greatly exaggerated.
Pha: “The wacky abuses of the Latin Church are greatly exaggerated.” Clearly, you don’t live in Quebec. Redemptionis Sacramentum doesn’t cover half of the absurdities that are seen in many of our churches.