Category: Benedict XVI

Recently I reported the current word-on-the-ecclesiastical-street regarding B16’s forthcoming first encyclical, which will reportedly be titled Deus Charitatis Est ("God Is Love") and involve a meditation on the obvious theme of the title, which is drawn from 1 John.

When I reported this, I was a little suprised at the disappointment some expressed in the combox, and so I thought (before getting to some new rumors regarding the encyclical) I’d issue a word of encouragement.

Upon learning the title of the encyclical, I wasn’t disappointed at all, for these reasons:

1. There are some interesting questions theologically about what is and isn’t meant by the affirmation that God is love, and we could (maybe) be looking at some doctrinal development depending on what B16 chooses to do.
2. The titles of first encyclicals often aren’t exhaustive of what the documents discuss. For example, JP2’s first encyclical was called Redemptor Hominis ("Redeemer of Man"), but the encylical wasn’t just a meditation on Christ the Redeemer. IT CONTAINED A BLUEPRINT FOR JOHN PAUL II’S ENTIRE PONTIFICATE. That was to be expected–at least somewhat since first encyclicals to at least announce the pope’s program of governance (though it’s really amazing to read Redemptor Hominis and see in it the seeds for basically everything JP2 did in the next 26 years). We should expect the same of B16’s first encyclical. No matter what it’s called, he should be expected to tell us his program of governance.
3. It seems to me that the title reflects this. In fact, I smell a "bank shot" to borrow a term from billiards. He wants to send a positive, open impression that corresponds to his own outlook (he talks about love and joy a lot in his prior interviews) but at the same time stress that the fact that God is love is NOT a license to do or believe anything that you want–that love makes real demands and involves sharing the truth with people. Thus "God is love" is likely to be the avenue of attack he has chosen against the "dictatorship of relativism" that he spoke of after the death of JP2.

So don’t expect this to be just a contentless meditation on God and love of the sort that you’re likely to hear from the pulpit on Sunday morning!

Remember: You heard it hear first.

Now, let’s turn from the speculation and get to the rumors!

Catholic News Agency is reporting:

The Italian daily “La Stampa,” announced today that the Pope Benedict XVI’s first encyclical, that other source already mentioned would be versed in the theme of Charity, could be released in the beginning of January, probably on January 6, day of the Solemnity of the Epiphany.

Again according to La Stampa, the Encyclical will bear the date of December 8, 2005, Solemnity of the Immaculate Conception, an emblematic date not only for its Marian character, but also because it coincides with the 40th anniversary of the closing of the Vatican II Council.

A source in the Vatican, commented to CNA that the date of release announced by La Stampa is only an approximation because  the Holy See usually doesn’t  release important document on holidays, as the Epiphany is at the Vatican or in many European countries. “It is more probable that the Encyclical will be released later in January, although the exact date is given only a few days before,” said the source.

The title of the Encyclical, again according to La Stampa, centered on the theme of Christian  Charity and the Love of God will be “Deus Caritas est,” (God is Love), taken from the fourth chapter of the First Letter of Saint John [SOURCE].

B16 recently gave a speech in Latin encourating people to learn (of all things) Latin.

Maybe he gave it in Latin so that people would have to learn Latin to find out he was encouraging them to learn Latin.

Anyhoo . . . he also encouraged the teaching of Latin through new techniques, which I AM ALL FOR. The pedagogy in many Latin books (like Collins’s AWFUL Primer of Ecclesiastical Latin) is horribly out of date and seems designed to make learning the language hard on students.

I’d love to see a Latin textbook modelled off of Bill Mounce’s (excellent) Basics of Biblical Greek or an audio course for Latin based on the Pimsleur method.

Unfortunately, none of those things exist.

I’ve noodled around with writing a Latin textbook, but thus far it hasn’t come together for me. I’ve been able to simplify a lot of Latin instruction using a largely inductive method of teaching, but the Latin noun endings system is such a bear to try to teach in that fashion (or any fashion) that I’m not satisfied with the results yet.

Hopefully the pope’s impetus for better Latin pedagogical methods will serve as the impetus for better Latin pedagogical methods.

To go along with new teching methods there are also a lot of new Latin words to be taught. One of the things that

THIS ARTICLE ON THE POPE’S SPEECH

notes is that the group he was talking to

has also published a dictionary, the Lexicon Recentis Latinitatis, containing more than 15,000 neologisms translated into Latin.

For those who ever wondered about the Latin equivalent for "computer," "terrorist" or "cowboy," there are now answers.

"Instrumentum computatorium" is the way the Latinitas Foundation refers to computers.

Those who sow violence and terror are called "tromocrates (-ae)"; while characters in Westerns are called "armentarius."

Some of the words of the Lexicon Recentis Latinitatis can be consulted on the foundation’s Web page.

CHECK OUT THE LIST
(Thanks to the reader who e-mailed.)

John Allen has a nice piece on a couple of related changes that B16 has made in recent days.

The first is that he released a motu proprio stripping the Assisi Franciscan shrine of the autonomy it has enjoyed (and some would say, abused) for the last few decades. Now it will have to coordinate its initiatives "with pastoral aspects" with the local bishop and others.

Why’s this?

Some argued that it’s a way of muzzling the normally left-leaning Franciscans ahead of expected Italian national elections in 2006. Others, such as Italian Catholic writer Vittorio Messori, suggested that the roots of the motu proprio reached back to 1986, and a summit of religious leaders John Paul II hosted in Assisi. Horror stories have long circulated about what happened — including Buddhists putting smoking prayer-sticks in front of the Tabernacle in one church, and African animists slaughtering chickens in another.

An official of the Congregation for Bishops told NCR Nov. 23, however, that such interpretations are off-base.

“We had been studying the canonical situation in Assisi for years, and this document was prepared under John Paul II. The new pope had almost nothing to do with it, except for signing it. The idea that this is a ‘restoration’ by Ratzinger is absurd,” this official said.

I’ve kept checking the Vatican web site the last few days to read the text of the motu proprio to see what tea leaves might be read from it, but they haven’t put it up yet. (Typical. Absolutely typical.)

The outgoing bishop of Assisi is a big fan of the change. After the change was made he publicly expressed frustration with finding out from the press what the Franciscans were doing.

As diplomatically as the motu proprio is likely phrased, it’s clear that this was a smackdown on a group perceived to be acting in a rogue manner.

Fortunately, the Franciscans have pledged to comply with the change.

Allen brings up something else of interest in connection with this: Who the new bishop of Assisi is.

Sorrentino had been the secretary at the Congregation for Divine Worship since August 2003, meaning just 27 months. The previous occupant of the job, Archbishop Francesco Pio Tamburrino, served for four years, from April 1999 to August 2003. Both put in less than the normal five-year term.

Some have construed Sorrentino’s departure as the first wave of the curial “tsunami” expected under Benedict XVI.

Whether that tsunami emerges remains to be seen. What seems clear, however, is that Sorrentino’s transfer is more than a routine reassignment. Both Sorrentino and Tamburrino were nominations from the Secretariat of State, and both embodied a “softer,” more flexible stance on liturgical questions than the prefects they served: Cardinal Jorge Medina Estévez in the case of Tamburrino, Cardinal Francis Arinze in the case of Sorrentino.

“What the Secretariat of State was probably after was balance,” a Vatican source said Nov. 21.

It’s not clear whether that kind of “balance,” however, is what Pope Benedict XVI wants, since over the years he has been supportive of efforts to restore greater reverence, sobriety, and traditional forms of expression in worship. In November, the pope sent a letter to the Vox Clara Commission, created to advise the congregation on liturgical translation in English, in which he affirmed Liturgiam Authenticam, the congregation’s 2001 document that demanded greater fidelity to Latin originals.

On the other hand, some sources say the problem with Sorrentino was not always content, but style.

Those sources say that Sorrentino was a highly scrupulous secretary, wanting to be well informed and to hear multiple points of view before making decisions. Some believe that occasionally translated into gridlock. This was a particular liability, sources say, since the congregation’s prefect, Arinze, is one of the most-traveled Vatican officials, giving lectures and conferences in various parts of the world. Given that, sources say, it’s especially important to have a secretary who can make the trains run on time.

In general, observers believe that under Benedict XVI, the Secretariat of State is likely to play a less prominent role in filling positions such as that vacated by Sorrentino. Such decisions are more likely to come from the papal household, or at least to be subjected to a greater degree of review by the pope.

Personally, I’m heartened by the idea that the Secretariat of State will be playing a lesser role. For too long the Secretariat of State has served as the most important dicastery at the Holy See–more important even than the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith–which makes no sense. Christ sent the Church to preach the faith, not to be a state. Adding to this the political overlay that is bound to come from a dicastery devoted to matters of state, it’s heartening to hear that a different dynamic is expected to be at work.

GET THE STORY.

Earlier I linked a Catholic News Service story regarding B16’s forthcoming encyclical. That was only one small point in the article, though.

The piece as a whole dealt with things that are happening at the Vatican these days. Among them:

— The Vatican’s chief ecumenist, Cardinal Walter Kasper, traveled to Jerusalem, Turkey and Geneva in November for meetings to commemorate the Second Vatican Council’s major documents on ecumenical and interfaith dialogue.

— A flurry of beatification Masses were held at the Vatican and elsewhere, all for sainthood causes that were advanced under Pope John Paul. Unlike his predecessor, Pope Benedict has opted not to preside over these liturgies.

— The Congregation for Catholic Education prepared to release a document on homosexuals and seminary admission, under preparation since 2001.

— At the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments, a commission held another in a series of meetings on reworking liturgical translations in English.

— The Vatican’s major pontifical academies sponsored a series of international conferences in November on a wide range of topics: the science and ethics of water distribution, globalization and education, and the concept of the human person.

— This year even saw "dueling conferences," when a bioethics congress sponsored by the Vatican’s Pontifical Academy for Life coincided with an international conference on the human genome, sponsored by the Pontifical Council for Health Care Workers.

The article also focused singificantly on B16’s management style, which made for fascinating reading.

GET THE STORY.

B16’s first encyclical has been hotly anticipated ever since he was elected as the successor of Peter.

I’ve been coming across rumors on what it’ll be about. One that I saw in print was from the Catholic News Service and said:

The sources told Catholic News Service Oct. 20 that the encyclical was a 46-page spiritual meditation focusing in large part on "eros" (love) and "logos" (the word) and their relationship to the person of Christ [SOURCE].

When I saw this, I looked at it cockeyed since it is exceedingly unlikely that Pope Benedict would write an encyclical on the relationship of eros and logos.

While eros is one of the Greek words for love, it has all the wrong conotations (it’s where we get the word "erotic" and was the name of the god of romantic love), it has not played a significant role in the history of Christian theology, and it never appears in the Bible.

So I didn’t know what to make of that–whether it was bad reporting or bad sourcing.

But now CNS has published a much more plausible report on the forthcoming encyclical:

The only certain big thing on the horizon is the pope’s first encyclical, a 46-page meditation titled "Deus Caritas Est" ("God Is Love"), which takes its inspiration from the first letter of St. John. It will be published in early December [SOURCE].

We should know in the next couple of weeks if the report is true.

Benedict XVI recently read the Austrian bishops the riot act, telling them:

You, dear brothers in the episcopacy, know this well: there are some
topics relating to the truth of the faith, and above all to moral
doctrine, which are not present in the catechesis and preaching of your
dioceses to a sufficient extent, and which sometimes, for example in
pastoral outreach to youth in the parishes or groups, are either not
confronted at all or are not addressed in the clear sense understood by
the Church. Thanks be to God, it is not like this everywhere. Perhaps
those who are responsible for the proclamation [of the Gospel] are
afraid that people may draw back if they speak too clearly. However,
experience in general demonstrates that it is precisely the opposite
that happens. Don’t deceive yourselves! Catholic teaching offered in an
incomplete manner is a contradiction of itself and cannot be fruitful
in the long term.

Ouch!

He then surprised the bishops of Latin America by deciding, on the spot, that a conference they were planning to hold in Rome so he could participate would instead be held in Brazil and that he would go there.

Benedict XVI said to them all of a sudden: “It will be held in Brazil,”
and immediately asked what the country’s most venerated Marian shrine
is. “The Aparecida,” they replied. And the pope: “In Brazil, at the
Aparecida, in May. I’ll be there.”

The four cardinals were taken completely by surprise. And so were
the leaders of the Roman curia – the pope hadn’t discussed the matter
with any of them. What induced Benedict XVI to choose Brazil may have
been what Cardinal Hummes said at the synod a few days earlier:

“The number of Brazilians who declare themselves Catholics has
diminished rapidly, on an average of 1% a year. In 1991 Catholic
Brazilians were nearly 83%, today and according to new studies, they
are barely 67%. We wonder with anxiety: how long will Brazil remain a
Catholic country? In conformity with this situation, it has been found
that in Brazil there are two Protestant pastors for each Catholic
priest, and the majority from the Pentecostal Churches. Many
indications show that the same is true for almost all of Latin America
and here too we wonder: how long will Latin America remain a Catholic
continent?”

But the choice of the Aparecida also left the four cardinals
speechless. That is indeed the most frequently visited shrine in
Brazil, but it is located in an isolated part of the state of San
Paolo, and it lacks the structures capable of hosting a large-scale
continental congress.

But none of the four cardinals dared to object. The pope had
decided, and his reasons were all too clear. He has at heart a vigorous
renewal of the Catholic faith on the Latin American continent, and
symbols are very valuable in this regard.

There’s time to build a convention center on the plain of the Aparecida, until May of 2007.

GET THE STORY.
(Thanks to the reader who e-mailed.)

British journalist and author John Cornwell — whose book Hitler’s Pope could be said to be the felix culpa that launched such fine defenses of Pope Pius XII as Hitler, the War, and the Pope by Ronald J. Rychlak and The Myth of Hitler’s Pope by Rabbi David G. Dalin, and who blasted John Paul II in his last days with the book The Pontiff in Winter — has now turned his spotlights on Pope Benedict XVI.

Although he cannot resist a mean swipe by speculating unfairly on the possible hidden portents of a child frightened at the prospect of meeting the Holy Father, Cornwell seems astonished that Pope Benedict is not the metal-ball-rolling, hard-eyed Grim Rottweiler that Everyone Who Knew Anything about Pre-16 predicted him to be.

"First indications were ominous. Within a week of the papal election, Tom Reece [sic, Reese], editor of America, the leading US national Catholic journal, was sacked (for alleged unorthodoxy); Sister Lavinia Byrne, a former Catholic nun known for her espousal of women priests, was disinvited from a Catholic speaking engagement in Australia; and a senior Jesuit professor withdrew a theological work from his publisher fearing it was too critical for the new regime.

"As it happened, these were precipitate acts of self-policing rather than sweeps of a hard new papal broom. Seven months on there is still no sign of the purge. In the view of William Rees-Mogg, writing in The Times last week, Benedict is even happy to endorse the validity of Darwinian evolution (provided, of course, God is seen as its ultimate architect), thus distancing himself from the rabid creationist Christian right. As Pope, Benedict XVI is indeed looking complex if not exactly progressive."

GET THE STORY.

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.