A reader writes:
Please help me. I live in a parish where members are pushing for the emphasis on community during the Mass. They are citing an article in St. Anthony’s Messenger by a Fr. Lawrence E. Mick entitled Finding Jesus in the Eucharist: Four Ways He is Present. Even the title does not make sense to me. It seems as though he is only present one way in the Eucharist—and that’s by being in the Eucharist. Hey, maybe I’m too concrete a thinker.
I respect you. You are a lucid thinker and you have the integrity to back up your arguments with primary (vs. secondary) sources. In short, I know that Jesus is present in the the Blessed Sacrament, the Priest, the Word, and the people—but isn’t He most ‘substantially’ present in the Eucharist—and doesn’t that mean something? If it didn’t mean something, why mention it in Sacrosanctum Consilium, ect.
What is the best way to argue against an overemphasis on Jesus’ presence in the community during Mass; what is the best way to argue against the notion that Jesus is equally present all four ways?
Am I wrong in my thinking? Even the head of our Archdiocesan Worship office told me "we need to get the emphasis on the community, make the mystery accessible to the people, ect."
Regarding the nonsensicalness of the title, I think that they’re using the term "Eucharist" as an overall term for the celebration of Mass, at which the Sacrament, the priest, the word, and the people are all present. (Admittedly, it’s a dumb title.)
This kind of effort to flatten the uniqueness of Christ’s presence in the Eucharist has been around since during the Second Vatican Council, when some theologians were going nuts and proposing a number of false ideas such as the idea that Christ is equally present in things besides the Eucharist. As a result, Paul VI rushed out an encyclical during the Council called Mysterium Fidei ("The Mystery of Faith") to set matters straight. It’s worth a rather lengthy quotation from the encyclical to show what authentic Catholic teaching on this matter is. The money quote is at the end. Here goes:
Various Ways in Which Christ is Present
35. All of us realize that there is more than one way in which Christ is present in His Church. We want to go into this very joyful subject, which the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy presented briefly, (30) at somewhat greater length. Christ is present in His Church when she prays, since He is the one who "prays for us and prays in us and to whom we pray: He prays for us as our priest, He prays in us as our head, He is prayed to by us as our God" (31); and He is the one who has promised, "Where two or three are gathered together in my name, I am there in the midst of them." (32) He is present in the Church as she performs her works of mercy, not just because whatever good we do to one of His least brethren we do to Christ Himself, (33)but also because Christ is the one who performs these works through the Church and who continually helps men with His divine love. He is present in the Church as she moves along on her pilgrimage with a longing to reach the portals of eternal life, for He is the one who dwells in our hearts through faith, (34) and who instills charity in them through the Holy Spirit whom He gives to us. (35)
36. In still another very genuine way, He is present in the Church as she preaches, since the Gospel which she proclaims is the word of God, and it is only in the name of Christ, the Incarnate Word of God, and by His authority and with His help that it is preached, so that there might be "one flock resting secure in one shepherd." (36)
37. He is present in His Church as she rules and governs the People of God, since her sacred power comes from Christ and since Christ, the "Shepherd of Shepherds," (37) is present in the bishops who exercise that power, in keeping with the promise He made to the Apostles.
38. Moreover, Christ is present in His Church in a still more sublime manner as she offers the Sacrifice of the Mass in His name; He is present in her as she administers the sacraments. On the matter of Christ’s presence in the offering of the Sacrifice of the Mass, We would like very much to call what St. John Chrysostom, overcome with awe, had to say in such accurate and eloquent words: "I wish to add something that is clearly awe-inspiring, but do not be surprised or upset. What is this? It is the same offering, no matter who offers it, be it Peter or Paul. It is the same one that Christ gave to His disciples and the same one that priests now perform: the latter is in no way inferior to the former, for it is not men who sanctify the latter, but He who sanctified the former. For just as the words which God spoke are the same as those that the priest now pronounces, so too the offering is the same." (38) No one is unaware that the sacraments are the actions of Christ who administers them through men. And so the sacraments are holy in themselves and they pour grace into the soul by the power of Christ, when they touch the body.
The Highest Kind of Presence.
These various ways in which Christ is present fill the mind with astonishment and offer the Church a mystery for her contemplation. But there is another way in which Christ is present in His Church, a way that surpasses all the others. It is His presence in the Sacrament of the Eucharist, which is, for this reason, "a more consoling source of devotion, a lovelier object of contemplation and holier in what it contains" (39) than all the other sacraments; for it contains Christ Himself and it is "a kind of consummation of the spiritual life, and in a sense the goal of all the sacraments." (40)
39. This presence is called "real" not to exclude the idea that the others are "real" too, but rather to indicate presence par excellence, because it is substantial and through it Christ becomes present whole and entire, God and man. (41) And so it would be wrong for anyone to try to explain this manner of presence by dreaming up a so-called "pneumatic" nature of the glorious body of Christ that would be present everywhere; or for anyone to limit it to symbolism, as if this most sacred Sacrament were to consist in nothing more than an efficacious sign "of the spiritual presence of Christ and of His intimate union with the faithful, the members of His Mystical Body." (42) [SOURCE.]
Thus, the Catechism of the Catholic Church also notes:
1373 "Christ Jesus, who died, yes, who was raised from the dead, who is at the right hand of God, who indeed intercedes for us," is present in many ways to his Church:195 in his word, in his Church’s prayer, "where two or three are gathered in my name,"196 in the poor, the sick, and the imprisoned,197 in the sacraments of which he is the author, in the sacrifice of the Mass, and in the person of the minister. But "he is present . . . most especially in the Eucharistic species."198
1374 The mode of Christ’s presence under the Eucharistic species is unique. It raises the Eucharist above all the sacraments as "the perfection of the spiritual life and the end to which all the sacraments tend."199 In the most blessed sacrament of the Eucharist "the body and blood, together with the soul and divinity, of our Lord Jesus Christ and, therefore, the whole Christ is truly, really, and substantially contained."200 "This presence is called ‘real’ – by which is not intended to exclude the other types of presence as if they could not be ‘real’ too, but because it is presence in the fullest sense: that is to say, it is a substantial presence by which Christ, God and man, makes himself wholly and entirely present."201 [SOURCE.]
Hope this helps!
Isn’t the community supposed to offer itself up with Christ in the Eucharist? Here’s a great passage from an old missal’s pre-consecration prayer:
“With Him, therefore, and though Him, we venture to offer Thee this Sacrifice: to His most sacred intentions we desire to unite ours: and with this offering which He makes of Himself we wish to make an offering of our whole being unto Thee.”
“Community” is too often just a form of collective egoism, to which the Holy Sacrifice is the cure. I think emphasizing this aspect would preserve the truth in certain modernizers’ overemphasis on the community while at the same time further strengthening our communion with God and each other.
Very well said, Kevin. Folks are so ignorant these days concerning the basics of “living the Mass.”
Jimmy,
Read Fr Jonathan Robinson’s new book from Ignatius Press called the Mass and Modernity where he nails the origin o f this community flattening to the influence of Hegel.
Community is the new counterfeit of Communio. Time for a philosophical exorcism.
Kirk out.
I like summaries of current “theo” thinking since many theologians write their books with a “paid by the word” attitude. Any thoughts on the summary of the Last Supper theology as presented at http://www.rexaehuntprogressive.com/articles/meals ???
Realist-
I read the post you mentioned. I especially appreciated the “sample liturgy” at the end, titled:
CELEBRATING COMMUNITY: THE SACRAMENT OF HOLY COMMUNION
I laughed ’til I cried!!
I continue to pray for your conversion to the Christian faith.
Tim J,
Conversion to any Christian faith? 🙂 Hopefully the crying stopped. And the sample liturgy was only a minor part of the review.
Realist,
I also read the link you provided. Again, you suggest we read someone who ignores the constant Teaching and Authority of the Church (2 Peter 1:20). Someone who admits he has been wrestling with the complex issue for only 35 years and that the “new knowledge” has come about in his lifetime. Then he goes on to twist the Scriptures to his own destruction (2 Peter 2:16).
Now I invite you to read the writings of St. Justin Martyr (155 A.D.).
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0126.htm
Especially paragraphs 65 and 66 which describe Mass after a Baptism.
At least read the writings of the Church fathers for yourself.
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/
If you read the writings of those who were taught the faith by the Apostles and their disciples you be exposed to the Truth. A Truth so beautiful and powerful that many of the them were willingly and joyfully martyred for proclaiming the Gospel as they had received it.
Modern theologians proclaim a faith without sacrifice and suffering. It may sound nice but it is NOT what Our Blessed Lord taught. We are warned not to be lukewarm about our faith (Rev 3:15-17).
Take care and God bless!
J+M+J
Inocencio,
I assume we are questioning “infallibility” of the Pope?
John 14: 26 not historic ( 62-. Spirit under Trial: (1) 1Q: Luke 12:11-12 = Matt
10:19-20; (2) Mark 13:11 = Matt 10: 19-20 = Luke 21:14-15; (3) John 14:26.)
Matt 16: 18-19 not historic (73- Who Is Jesus?: (1) Gos. Thom. 13; (2a) Mark
8:27-30 = Matt 16:13-20 = Luke 9:18-21; (2b) Gos. Naz. 14; (2c) John 6:67-69.)
1 Timothy- not written by St. Paul (See Crossan’s “In Search of Paul”, Harper, San
Francisco, 2004, p.105)
2 Peter 1:20 i.e. ~ 130 CE/AD, author unknown. Tis a bit dated for use in claiming infallibility plus the verse is not from Jesus or Peter but some possible remembrance of a scribe.
Also, since Schillebeeckx basically ruled out prophecies by concluding God does not know
the future, one can rule out the infallible nature of this verse.
Schillebeeckx has been evaluating God and future a lot longer than you and I have, so I would have to side with his analysis.
Revelations was written by a late century Stephen King who read too much Greek mythology, so I fret not.
Now there’s intellectual integrity! “Anything I don’t like is not historical.” Realist, you have a rich fantasy life! We’re right back to a previous post of mine that you ignored (understandably, as it cannot be logically refuted). The Apostles and other early Christians made up a bunch of stories that cost them their livelihoods, caused them to suffer exile, imprisonment, torture, and death. Peter, Andrew, and Philip were crucifed; Bartholomew was skinned; Jude, Matthew, and James the Less were beaten to death; Thomas was stabbed; James the Greater and Paul were beheaded; Mark was dragged to his death. All for a lie of their own making! And they could have gotten out of these sufferings by admitting their lies and not repeating them! Too bad they weren’t as smart as you are, speaking Ex Cathedra from your belly button! In all seriousness, Realist, if you can truly believe all the Garbage Out that you spew, have I got a deal for you on some swamp land in the Mojave Desert that I’m forced to sell at well below market value due to a cash flow problem.
Realist,
The Church has been preaching and teaching the Word of God for nearly 2000 years. But if you want to follow some modern newcomer do so understanding the risk.
Did you at least read the St. Justin Martyr sections 65 and 66? Or is the Truth too bright for you eyes so long in the shadows?
You are questioning the Word of God which comes to us both by Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture.
Only the Church has the authority to declare and define the canon of Scripture. You and your lunatic fringe do not.
So you should fret because you ignore the clear teaching of the Church as has been pointed out many times.
At least admit you are not following Christianity but Cros(in)sanity.
I pray that God will have mercy on both of our souls. May you and your family have a Blessed Advent and Mary Christ Mass.
Take care and God bless.
J+M+J
G.I.G.O.: Garbage In/Garbage Out. Garbage In=Crossan(again). Garbage Out=Realist’s verbiage. He keeps on going back to Crossan(“Christ’s Body was probably eaten by wild dogs”) and expecting a different result(that we will take him and Crossan seriously). Doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result is the definition of insanity. Prediction: he will do it again. He can’t help it.
Good post, Jimmy. I once was discussing this issue with some brother priests who were concerned about neglecting Christ’s presence in the community. I asked them, “Would your worship the Eucharist?” They replied, “Yes.” I then asked, “Would you worship me?” They quite sensibly answered, “No.” It took us some time to sort out the difference, but in the end we agreed there is something fundamentally different about Christ’ presence in the Eucharist and in other people. What do you think it is?
“Schillebeeckx basically ruled out prophecies by concluding God does not know”
1) When did Schillebeeckx get declared infallible?
2) How much crack does he smoke? The Almighty God doesn’t know the future, which is an aspect of space-time, which He created, and which He is outside of? Riiiiiiiiight….
Based on an extrapolated analysis of a piece of fairy cake, I have ruled out the existence of Schillebeeckx.
I believe that he is a composite character. His books are actually cleverly disguised social satire, and were never meant to be taken seriously.