The Rite Stuff

While we are still waiting for official English translations, the new General Instruction of the Roman Missal is out and is being implemented. In the Archdiocese of St. Paul/Minneapolis, the Office of Worship offered a workshop, reviewing in detail the new “rules.” We have been asked to catechize our people better than we did in the late ’60s when the first reforms came out and no one bothered to explain why.

Our pastoral experience shows us that our people are becoming less perceptive regarding the celebration of Eucharist. Many young adults possess an extremely poor understanding of our purpose for gathering and complain bitterly that the music is boring, the ritual “always the same” and coming to Mass is “not fun.” This is partly due to neighboring mega-churches whose sole purpose for gathering is achieving a spiritual high. Using upbeat music, state-of-the-art sound systems and preachers that offer more motivational messages than any demands for conversion, they stand in vibrant contrast to a more “traditional” worship experience. An hour-long worship service might be dominated by 40 minutes of music, with 20–30 minutes of motivational preaching. In a consumer world, this is church heaven.

In order to catechize effectively, we need to discuss why we use the same ritual form each week. We need to teach about the liturgical year, the way the lectionary works, the purpose of our music and why Eucharist is celebrated every day — not just once a month. Our people need to hear about the meaning of our many Catholic rituals and symbols and to understand in a fundamental way why they are important and how they originated.

The revised GIRM directs the presider not to leave the sanctuary during the sign of peace. Though there has been some concern about this rule, my experience in many communities is that the sign of peace has become a casual handshake rather than a sign of a desire for reconciliation. In this, the presider need not be separated from the community. There is nothing preventing the communion ministers from coming into the sanctuary at this time and joining the presider in the sign of peace. The sung Lamb of God would begin with the actual fraction rite rather than being a cue for the presider to return to the altar. With the priest truly acting as servant and presider in this sacred meal, the focus on the table and the ritual event is strengthened.

The GIRM reforms address the practice of those who genuflect before receiving communion, as if to announce to everyone that only they truly understand and recognize the real presence. The GIRM indicates that a reverent bow of the head occurs at the time of communion. It is trying to restore the sense of the holy disrupted by “body snatchers” (people who snap the host out of the minister’s hand instead of receiving it with humility) and “dippers” (people who believe they’ll get fewer germs if they dip the host into the wine). The new GIRM rightly insists that we are to share and receive the Body and Blood of Christ rather than taking it like any ordinary piece of food.

A difficult piece of the new GIRM has to do with the communion rite. By insisting that only the priest or deacon may break the bread and pour the wine and handle the vessels on the altar, it disproportionately lengthens the fraction rite and draws inappropriate attention to the communion ministers as the ordained share communion with each minister. The practice of ministers receiving communion after the assembly has been served has been repressed.

I am bothered by the new prohibition of fully initiated Christians from approaching the altar or touching the vessels during the fraction rite. It questions whether the baptismal call to ministry of a layperson is sufficient to assist at the altar. I’m sure the hierarchy would deny this implication, but their actions regarding this ritual clearly point to a desire to ritually elevate the priesthood of the ordained over the priesthood of all the baptized. The laity treat the consecrated elements with dignity and respect. They are not confused about roles. Is an ordained person more worthy to share the Body and Blood of Christ? It would seem so. Isn’t it ironic that such concern over the celebration of Eucharist should occur as the number of presbyters dwindles and weekly Eucharist becomes less and less of a possibility in the near future? Seems a bit like rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic, I say. ML

What do YOU Think?
Send an e-mail to ML Editor or post an entry on the ML Current Issue Discussion Board. (All submissions become the property of RPI and may be edited for length.)