Posted on 08/15/2004 11:42:32 AM PDT by ninenot
he Eucharist belongs to the entire church, universal as well as local. The dynamics of its structure are deeply rooted in the theology of God's grace and in the reality of human religious experience. The Eucharist, rooted in Scripture and Jewish prayer, has been shaped by centuries of tradition, and then reshaped as it was handed over from one culture to another.
As if to signal that its elements were not subject to the whim of individual congregations or presiders, the Second Vatican Council's Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy stipulated changes could only be made by those authorized to do so (§ 22). Thus, the liturgy, belonging to the whole church, should not be arbitrarily changed. Preserving its integrity is the duty of the individual presider.
At the same time, the Council decreed the guiding goal of full, conscious and active participation for all the baptized faithful (§14), each in his/her respective role. That means every effort should be made to tailor the celebration to the mentality, culture and needs of any given community. One sign of that obligation is the explicit exhortation regularly found in the rituals themselves that presiders say something "in these or similar words." Thus, in another sense, the church's liturgy belongs in a unique manner to the local gathering of faithful and must be adapted accordingly. This is also the duty of the individual presider.
Historically the official missals and rituals of the church have been published with directions on how the sacraments should be celebrated in small red print, called "rubrics" (from the Latin word, ruber meaning "red"), and the actual words to be said by presider or congregation printed in larger black type. Thus, the word "rubrics" has come to signal attentiveness to the directions in fine print which should be followed in any sacramental celebration.
Rubrics, as I indicated above, are important because they give direction, structure and purpose to the flow of the liturgical celebration. They help prevent serious lapses or deficiencies in the sacramental sign itself. The rubrics can protect the sanctity of the ritual. They serve to keep the individual celebration of each parish's liturgy in communion with the larger church, diocesan and universal.
When I use the word "rubricism," however, I mean such an obsessive and driven preoccupation with the directives in red print as to risk losing sight of the Eucharist's main purpose. The primary goal of sacraments, especially the Eucharist which is the source and summit of the church's life (§ 10), is sharing in the death and resurrection of the Lord and in Christ's praise of the Father which accomplished the new creation of God's people by divine grace and mercy.
While rubrics are important, they can also become obstacles to God's grace if taken out of context or given exclusive attention. For that reason the Council also included a solemn warning: "Pastors of souls must therefore realize that, when the liturgy is celebrated, more is required than the mere observance of the laws governing valid and licit celebration. It is their duty also to ensure that the faithful take part knowingly, actively and fruitfully" (§ 11).
Now to the other part of my title for this column. Heresy is the deliberate and knowing denial of a divinely revealed truth. Like serious sin, formal heresy required full knowledge and a deliberate act of the human will.
There is also the type of heresy called "material," namely a de facto denial of God's truth which is not fully understood nor freely made. Such an act can be a denial of God's truth without the individual realizing it. Good and holy people can have seriously erroneous (namely, heretical) opinions. This latter sense is the notion I'm addressing, and that’s the reason for the title's use of the word in quotation marks.
There are two reasons for suggesting that total and narrowly exclusive preoccupation with the rubrics of the Eucharist might be heretical, that is, embodying a serious denial of a fundamental truth of our Catholic faith.
First of all, excessive and exclusive preoccupation with the directives governing the human actions of our Eucharistic worship could be heretical because it suggests that our salvation depends upon our own actions alone, not God's grace and mercy. The error of acting as if we can achieve our own salvation by our works, howsoever holy and attentive, is a serious one, called "Pelagianism" after its fourth century proponent.
Secondly, excessive and exclusive preoccupation with the rubrics might be heretical because it totters on the brink of indulging in magic. Whenever anyone thinks the blind recitation of certain words or the performance of physical actions themselves causes the effect, that is magic; hardly consistent with our faith or with our Christian recognition of God's sovereign power.
In Catholic tradition there is an historical recognition that an action can have its own immediate effect " ex opere operato " but that is by the promise of God, not the action of any human being as such.
These are things I as a bishop worry about, given today's increasing focus on correct rubrics as if they were the means to salvation, rather than an occasion for God's loving mercy. Keep an eye on the mystery, not merely the pathway to it.
That's not the way I read it.
There is a low percentage, but a percentage nonetheless, of nervous nellies in every parish, who write letters to the pastor and the bishop if there is one deviation from the wording of their St. Joseph Sunday Missal, English Edition. Things like "Pray, my brothers and sisters" send these liturgical zealots into paroxysms and frenzies.
These people will drive you nuts; they, after all, don't want to be only ones occupying that state of mind. Our chancery simply puts their missives in the round file.
When does this cleric taste the fruits of a, ahem, well deserved retirement? Will you throw the party?
We have a long way to go in Milwaukee before "party time," for this character's retirement--OR for the 50+ remaining ordained FutureChurch wannabees.
The TTGC (see my tagline) has a party in mind, of course, but not one with cake and balloons. THAT party could be held as early as this Friday.
C'mon, Sink.
Give us a NUMBER--you know, what PERCENT of the Diocese actually writes these letters?
A decent dinner wager is less than 2.5%. In fact, I'd be willing to go all the way down to 1%, max.
I'll trust you.
In our little diocese, that's 600 people!!
No wonder our bishop doesn't have any hair!!!
The use of a glass chalice goes in the same category with wering the stole on top of (or instead of) a chasuable: it is a sign of disent. It is a sign of disobedience - of the worst of the Novus Ordo revolution in the church.
You are quite correct that the chalice is supposed to be made of a durable substance.
The fact that the priest uses that kind of chalice alone does not invalid the consecration. It is dependant on three things: the valid ordination of the priest, the use of the proper rite (of the mass), and the correct sacramental intention of the priest (to intend to effect transubstantiation).
I would insert this cautionary note: these "signs of dissent" can run much deeper then the surface. There are many priests who no longer believe in transubstantiation.
If you observe from anything the priest does, says, writes, that he does not share the faith of the church in terms of the sacrificial nature of the mass - or in terms of what happen to the bread and wine at the consecration, then you may have a priest who is saying invalid masses.
In such as case, you should not receive communion from the priest, as it may literally be material idolatry of bread & wine - if it is not properly consecrated. The same would be true if the priest made up his own mass (or canon) as he went along. If you become aware of such abuses, seek another mass, priest, parish.
Oh Lordy, agree 100%. The heterodox (I mean the "scholars" who generally write this tripe) always forget neglect the fact that each of us "lowly" laity have rights under canon law too. The right to receive the sacraments per the correct authorized liturgy of the Church is chief among them.
Of course, just like their liberal counterparts in secular society, they are only concerned about pushing their agendae.
The fact that an active Bishop wrote this is very troubling. The fact that he is an auxiliary, and undoubtedly will remain so, eases the shock (a little).
| Liturgy is never anyone's private property, be it of the celebrant or of the community in which the mysteries are celebrated... Priests who faithfully celebrate Mass according to the liturgical norms, and communities which conform to those norms, quietly but eloquently demonstrate their love for the Church. |
Thank you Renatus. I subscribe to Adoremus Bulletin and was pleased to see that the most recent edition published Redemptionis Sacramentum in its entirety. There's something special about reading hardcopy over the web; the many R.S. footnotes lead to great reading and learning as well. FReegards.
Have you received some revelation from God that the rest us us hasn't? On one hand, you want to bypass the authority of the Church which Christ established, and on the other, you are speaking for the Almighty Himself!
If it is merely a matter of a kid receiving some wafer, you might have a point. But if the issue is about receiving Holy Communion, that's another ball of wax altogether.
Our Lord Himself established the reality of the Eucharist and what it is that constitutes the proper matter and form. He chose wheat bread and wine for the matter. The Church has no choice but to guard, protect, and pass on what He has chosen. The Church has no authority to change it.
In the article you referenced, the kid had other valid options for receiving Holy Communion. Rejection of them on the part of others is not the Church's fault.
Incorrectly following the rubrics of the liturgy generally results in illicit actions. The referenced article deals with an invalid Eucharist, i.e. it really is only bread, not the body, blood, soul, and divinity of Christ.
The Church can't change that fact.
Where the sacraments are concerned, it is the other way around. Indeed, it is through the sacraments that Christ Himself chooses to give His Grace to us. So, for example, if a Priest, that is one who has received ordination, celebrates the Mass, it is Christ Himself invisibly acting through him. What if a particular Priest is a wicked man? The sacraments remain valid, and the Priest commits ever more serious sins that, sans penance, will lead to his greater pains in hell.
St. Augustine had occasion to deal with this very topic in his day. The question here isn't whether or not God reads hearts (He does), but rather, do we need to know what the interior life of others, particular Priests, are in order to be assured of receiving valid sacraments? This is practically impossible, but it doesn't matter to the individual recipient since it is the power of Christ Himself Who is active in the sacraments.
For Priests striving towards holiness, Christ uses them as active instruments leading them on (and others through them) to greater glory in heaven. For evil and wicked Priests, Christ uses them as passive instruments, the results of which I have already typed.
Not to mention the brains and abilities to look up the documents and figure out that they are full of it.
Well, I'm a biomedical engineer. If there's any use for one, for me, it could be just the right connection to the Dominicans again.
Well, some of us anyway.
Naturally.
Then again, according to this Bishop, we might be in jeopardy of committing heresy.
Oh, well. I've been accused of worse.
As long as you're wearing a hat, I'll never believe it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.