• Editorial - Op Ed
• Bulletin Board, Announcements, Calendar
• Welcome and Website Protocol
• Article Archive

Print this page

Article Categories

• Book Reviews
• Open Letter
• Editorials
• Notes, Quotes & Comments
• Pastor's Study
• Project Millstones
• Sidebar Comments
• Weekly Message

Links

AMERICA Magazine
A balanced Catholic weekly magazine published by the jesuits of the United States for an intelligent Catholic readership. Go online to subscribe.

Liturgy
This link will keep 'parishioners-at-large' in touch with current creative liturgy sources and resources that respect a variety of 'traditions' within the Church.

Voice of the Faithful
A 'movement' of lay Catholics 'inspired' by the abuse scandal calling for greater accountability of bishops to 'Catholics in the Pew.'

Survivos' Network for those Abused by Priests or Religious
A National Network of self-help support groups for people abused by clergy or religious.

Bishop Accountability
Vital information about the disclosure of sexual abuse and related issues affecting Catholics in the pew and the manner in which Bishops continue to exempt themselves from accountability

National Catholic Reporter
A national Catholic lay newspaper covering events not usually covered or presented with a clerical bias in the local diocesan press or but of concern and interest to Catholics.

COMMONWEAL Magazine
A 'lay' Catholic weekly publication with an accent on an intelligent analysis and commentary on curent issues, trends and concerns of interest to Catholics.

Search

Daily Scripture

+ 5th Week in Ordinary Time

It still has meaning.

1 Kings 8:1-7, 9-13 Psalm 132:6-7, 8-10 Mark 6:53-56

The priests brought the ark of the covenant of the Lord to its place beneath the wings of the cherubim in the sanctuary, the holy of holies of the temple. There was nothing in the ark but the two stone tablets which Moses had put there at Horeb, when the Lord made a covenant with the children of Israel. [1 Kings 8:6, 8]
_
In recent years there has been much discussion in liturgical circles about the proper location of the tabernacle in the worship space. The directives implementing the Constitution on the Liturgy by the Second Vatican Council prescribed that the tabernacle be located in prominent location in the church or chapel, preferably in a chapel dedicated to the reservation of the Blessed Sacrament and appropriate for veneration. In any case, it was not to be located on the altar table used for the celebration of the Eucharist. As a result in many churches renovations, the tabernacle was moved to the ‘side altar’ previously used for the veneration of the Blessed Virgin or St. Joseph and in some churches, it was placed on the old altar previously used for Mass. In situations the old altar was replaced with a permanent pedestal on which the tabernacle was placed.

In liturgical matters, nothing is simple. Those of a more conservative disposition insisted that the location of the Tabernacle on the side altar reduced the status of the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist thereby diminishing its meaning in the devotional life of the faithful. Others of a more liberal persuasion opined that in fact, the location in a separate chapel within the church assigned to the sacrament greater prominence thereby increasing the devotional aspect. Moreover, in as much as an emphasis of the ‘action’ of the Mass as the repetition of the “Lord’s Supper” was promoted by the Council, it seemed to liturgists that the location of the tabernacle in the main sanctuary behind the free standing Eucharist table would compete with the ‘action’ of the Mass as a sacred meal.

The most recent prescriptions in the United States provide that the tabernacle be located in the main sanctuary on suitably ornate pedestal. It is ironic that in the major basilicas including the basilica of St. Peter in Rome, the tabernacle is located on a side altar that is not very prominent.

Whatever the location, it should not be a bone of contention worthy of a liturgical battle. The public and private devotion to the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist is rooted in the long tradition of the Church and should not be disparaged. In the same way in which the tablets of stone on which the Ten Commandments was symbolic of God’s presence in the temple, so too, the reservation of the Eucharist Bread has been one of the longest-standing practices of the devotional life of Catholics. It is intended to extend the meaning and the effects of the Eucharistic celebration into the life of the faithful who continue to spend time in prayerful meditation on the mysteries of the life of Jesus not the least of which is his faithfulness unto death on the cross for the salvation of the world. The two aspects of Eucharist need not be in competition. The ‘Mass’ continues to be considered a “sacrificial” meal. But we need to be clear that its connection with the passion and death of Christ even as the lamb of God is not to suggest that his death was mandated to satisfy and angry God. That in my opinion is not an appropriate application of Old Testament sacrifices. No, Jesus sacrificial death was the completion of his entire sacrificial life of unqualified and indiscriminate love in the same way as the sacrificial love of partners in marriage offer their sacrificial love to one another or in the manner that Mother Teresa offered her live in sacrificial service to victims of poverty in the streets of Calctta. It is in this sense that devotion to the Eucharist in the tabernacle takes its extended meaning.

During the celebration of the Eucharist, we become what we eat. Through our devotion to the Eucharist reserved in the tabernacle, we are reminded that the Eucharistic presence in our mind, heart and soul extends into all the good works of our lives with the hope that we too will always think and act with the same sacrificial love as did Jesus in his earthly life.

Tuesday, Second Week of Easter

Tuesday April 13, 2010

We are an imperfect church in an imperfect world.

Readings: Acts 4:32-37 Psalm 93:1-2, 5 John 3:7-15

Today’s texts seem to demand greater attention and so I offer this expanded commentary to engage us in thought and prayer.

The community of believers was of one heart and mind, and no one claimed that any of his possessions was his own but they had everything in common. There was no needy person among them, for those who owned property or houses would sell them, bring the proceeds of the sale, and put them at the feet of the Apostles, and they were distributed to each according to need. [Acts 4:32, 34-35]

Jesus said to Nicodemus, “You must be born from above. The wind blows wherever it wills and you can hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. That is how it is with all who are born of the Spirit.” [John 3:7-8]

Many years ago, I was privileged to serve as an adjunct member of MDI, an ecumenical consulting group that worked with parishes and religious communities in the development of leadership skills that promote process planning through dialogue and collaboration. They were exciting times for a church so energized by the vision of Vatican II. For a few brief moments in the history of the Church, impetus for renewal was initiated from the top down. The then progressive theologian, Father Joseph Ratzinger was among many young influential theologians calling for greater collaboration of the faithful in there renewal process.

My MDI mentor was Father George Wilson, SJ, a theologian who specialized in ecclesiology and the structure of the Church. When contracted by a parish or religious community to work with them for a period of time, we would engage leaders and members at large in a dialogue. From the very outset of our relationship with them, we attempted to teach the skills by using the skills in all our workshops.

Before going into a parish or religious community, George would remind us that “things are never as good as they may appear but they are never as bad as some may suggest.” During our early listening sessions, participants would say some wonderful things about their parish until they were confident in our leadership. As their confidence grew, they would entrust us with data that let us know that indeed, not everything was rosy pink. At the conclusion of most of these introductory sessions, we were assured that the community had many strengths and many areas for growth.

The greatest learning, however, is that good leaders listen before they speak and they reassure participants that they are listening by feeding back to them what they said – not putting words into their mouths but by accepting their self-perception and history without casting a judgment.
Effective leadership engages its members in a confident dialogue that is based on hard data and soft data, thus allowing members to take ownership of the data harnessing the energy in the group toward the development of a vision, mission, goals and objectives. All of this demands transparency, mutual accountability and much give and take.

The process works – I know it works.

The author of the Acts of the Apostles is presumed to be St. Luke, author of his own gospel. There is no doubt that Luke was putting the early Church in a very favorable light. Did you find yourself responding to the text above with the words, “Year right?” Of course; it wasn’t all that positive. We read later in Chapter 6 of the Acts that, “In those days as the number of disciples grew, the Greek speaking believers made a a complaint against the Hebrews, asserting that their own widows were being neglected in the daily distribution of food. And so the Twelve called together the entire community of disciples and said, ‘It is not right for us to neglect the word of God in order to wait on tables. Therefore, brethren, we direct you to select from among you seven [men] of good reputation filled with the Spirit and with wisdom to whom we may assign this task.”

The emerging leadership of the early church was flexible enough to broaden the ministry of the early church by adopting a protocol that would satisfy the needs of the community. The implications here for the consideration of women to serve as deacons and as presbyters is obvious. In fact, there is some evidence that women did indeed serve as deacons at some point in the early church.

There were more ‘both / ands’ in the early church experience than ‘either / ors.’

The church was formed as an institution over time and after much dialogue. A variety of structures emerged in Jerusalem, Antioch and eventually in Rome. There was unity in diversity and the mix was messy at times.

What’s the point?

The point is that we have become much too linear in our thinking about how the Church should function and far too restricted in our thinking about how the Church should be structured geographically and culturally.

Indeed, “the wind blows where it will and you can hear the sound it makes but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes.” [John 3:7]

And we still experience the tension between dualistic or black and white linear thinking and what we might call multi-layered thinking, i.e., thinking with the Spirit of God in whom there is no east or west, north or south. In order for tradition to grow and expand, it must change. Tradition stagnates when its leaders refuse to acknowledge new truths that emerge over time in the consciousness of all the believers working together collaboratively.
The Church is in crisis because its leadership has refused to acknowledge the voice of the spirit in the minds and hearts of its members. It is the antithesis of the experience of the early Church of Acts. In effect, contemporary church leaders are sinning against the Holy Spirit in their refusal to open the door to open dialogue about the ‘tradition’ and its implications for the belief and practice of all the members.

The sexual abuse scandal is only symptomatic of deeper issues facing the Church at every level and it will not go away until it is unpacked honestly and thoroughly.

But it is also true that as members of the Church, we must not abandon our commitment to the tradition whatever its expression. If we can dialogue with Jews and Moslems, Buddhists and Hindus, and find something in all of them to enrich our own tradition, then surely we must sift through the differences within our walls, as it were, and find something that reflects the authenticity of God’s mystical presence in some form. There will never be uniformity within the Church any more than there were will be uniformity among the worlds great religious but there can be unity within a a pluralism that can only hint at the great mystery that is God continuing to reveal himselfherself throughout the ages and in the ages yet to come.

We are an imperfect church in a very imperfect world still striving to grasp the mystery of life that unfolds one day at a time.

More.. to come…