The important discussions about synodality in recent times have provided clergy, religious and laity with opportunities to reflect upon the concept of synodality in various spheres of Church life. By synodality, I refer in general to the principles and practices of meetings, consultations and reflections between the Church’s ordained and lay ministers. This process is often characterized by a combination of input, shared listening and reflection, room for silence, stillness and being open to the influence of the Holy Spirit, plus discernment and contemplation of existing or renewed attitudes and resolutions where possible in relation to particular issues.
In this context, it seems timely to suggest that further conversations and discernment between bishops, priests, religious and laity are desirable about how the liturgical practice of Eucharistic concelebration on a large scale (e.g. with hundreds of vested concelebrants at Mass) is perceived in a synodal context.
The primary issues, to my way of thinking, seem to be in relation to ritual scale, liturgical and ministerial balance within the rite, and optics (particularly from the point of view of religious and lay women and men). For example, if concelebration is considered appropriate (a practice that perhaps shouldn’t always be presumed), should there be better parameters around the overall number of concelebrants in order to avoid distortions in relation to ritual flow, liturgical ministerial numbers, and possible negative perceptions by members of the assembly?
Recent concelebrated Masses on a large scale (e.g. at the 2024 Eucharistic Congress in Indianapolis, the Synod for a Synodal Church at the Vatican, and the recent re-opening of Notre-Dame Cathedral in Paris) provide examples of large-scale Eucharistic concelebration that may foster further reflection. In each case, one can appreciate the desire of clergy to concelebrate. Each Eucharistic liturgy was a wonderful celebration by the community present and no doubt appreciated by many watching online. However, from the point of view of all participants, what is ideal in terms of processional length, ordained ministerial representation and perceptions by those present or participating online?
The practice of Eucharistic concelebration exists in various degrees within most local parish, cathedral and monastic contexts. Liturgical historians indicate that Eucharistic concelebration has discernable roots in the Church’s early liturgical tradition, although the practices in the Eastern and Western traditions have varied somewhat, and the liturgical practice was basically confined to Ordinations prior to the Second Vatican Council. Following the Council, the practice was re-introduced into the Church’s liturgical life as a way of assisting clergy, primarily, who may wish to celebrate Mass daily, and to avoid the unnecessary duplication of so-called “private Masses.”
One can understand why clergy might wish to concelebrate at important diocesan celebrations such as Ordinations and the Chrism Mass. Concelebration in these contexts is officially described as symbolizing the unity of the Priesthood, of the Sacrifice and also the whole People of God [see GIRM (2011) no. 199]. It should be noted, however, that within some monastic communities of men and women, greater sensitivity is often shown by limiting concelebration at Mass in order to down-play the differences between ordained and non-ordained members within a monastic community.
It is worth considering whether this type of ecclesial sensitivity could be adopted by the Church community more broadly when large-scale local and international Eucharistic celebrations are organised. In a time in the Church’s history when serious consideration is being given to ways to re-engage with Catholics en masse – especially religious and lay women and men – many of whom, sadly, no longer participate at Mass regularly on Sundays (e.g. around 90% of Catholics no longer participate at Mass in some first-world countries), organisers should consider how hundreds of concelebrants vested at Mass, often standing closest to the altar and with the best sight-lines, frequently (although un-intentionally) block even the view of the non-ordained in the assembly.
Are there more appropriate – more thoughtful – options that could arrive at a better and more sensitive balance of ministries and prevent the liturgical processions and visual optics from becoming too distorted in terms of an ordained ministerial focus, with resultant implications for the ritual flow and a sense of noble simplicity? It is interesting to note in the GIRM (2011) no. 199 that concelebration is recommended, “unless the good of the Christian faithful requires or suggests otherwise.” Two questions for consideration are: what does “the good of the Christian faithful” require or suggest from the point of view of synodality, and should Eucharistic concelebration on a large scale still be considered preferable in a synodal context?
Paul Taylor, Ph.D., is currently Assistant Director of the Australian Catholic University Centre for Liturgy and Organist and Director of Music at Sacred Heart Cathedral in Bendigo, Victoria. From 2012 until 2022, he served as Executive Secretary of the ACBC Bishops Commission for Liturgy and of the National Liturgical Council before joining ACU in 2023.