{"id":24116,"date":"2014-02-12T20:19:20","date_gmt":"2014-02-13T02:19:20","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/?p=24116"},"modified":"2014-02-13T10:50:12","modified_gmt":"2014-02-13T16:50:12","slug":"the-january-issue-of-worship","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/praytellblog.com\/index.php\/2014\/02\/12\/the-january-issue-of-worship\/","title":{"rendered":"The January Issue of Worship<\/i>"},"content":{"rendered":"

I hope that the January issue of Worship<\/em><\/a> <\/em>is in your hands by now. I know that some of our overseas readers might not yet have received it. This issue is the liturgist\u2019s version of an action-packed Hollywood movie.<\/p>\n

The issue starts out with a bang. Robert Taft, S.J. in <\/strong> \u201c\u2018Communion\u2019 from the Tabernacle \u2013 A Liturgico-Theological Oxymoron\u201d<\/strong> writes a scathing critique of the practice of distributing communion from the tabernacle. Taft\u2019s wit is on full display as he begins his article saying:<\/p>\n

In an unjustifiably sanguine bout of optimism I had initially subtitled this study \u2018The Last <\/em>Liturgico-Theological Oxymoron?\u2019 But the ongoing exaggerations in eucharistic devotion that the neocon restorationists of the newly contentious and divisive Roman Catholic West continue to invent or rediscover and reprise convinced me that such optimism was currently misplaced. Still, the liturgical practice of Bishop of Rome Francesco is encouraging, so maybe it is till too early to repeat the old saw: \u2018East is East and West is West and ne\u2019er the twain shall meet.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Taft\u2019s critique, or more properly condemnation, of communion from the tabernacle revolves around 4 key points: \u201c1. It reflects a patent ignorance of Eucharistic theology. 2. Its origins and history are questionable. 3. It ignores the authentic tradition still observed by the Orthodox East. 4. It is a practice condemned and proscribed by the supreme authority of the Catholic Church in which it is being practiced despite these strictures.\u201d Taft\u2019s article then sets out to unpack each of these accusations. He does so with an eye to general differences in Eastern and Western Eucharistic piety. Taft\u2019s article is a fun read thanks in part to his classic wit and genius.<\/p>\n

Bruce Morrill, S.J. in \u201cLay Liturgical Leadership in the US Catholic Church: Popular Advances, Official Retreat,\u201d <\/strong>focuses on the tension between the faithful’s desire for community and the Vatican’s concerns about the centrality of the priest and the Eucharist celebrated in its fullness. Morrill\u2019s article begins with a plethora of interesting, and at times depressing, statistics about the frequency and practical effects of parish closures. These statistics are intermingled with personal anecdotes from Morrill\u2019s own ministry. Morrill\u2019s article then provides an interesting look at lay-led liturgies, such as Sunday Celebration in the Absence of a Priest. He highlights the tension between the need for more lay involvement and the official viewpoint, which often sees lay leadership as a threat to holy orders.<\/p>\n

In looking at Sunday Celebration in the Absence of a Priest, Morrill notes the hierarchy\u2019s \u201cdelicate\u201d approach to this ritual. (From my perspective such delicacy is understandable, however, I often wonder what drives this delicate approach, a concern about lay ministry or a concern about the declining importance of the Eucharistic prayer?) The reception of communion, as it is described in Morrill’s article, appears to be more important for the faithful than the Eucharist celebrated in its fullness. In this way, Morrill\u2019s article seems to be a logical extension of Taft\u2019s. Morrill even writes that:<\/p>\n

Put bluntly, the people do not miss the Eucharistic prayer. They have so little affective or intellectual appropriation of it as not to be disturbed by its absence or, therefore, to be persuaded by the hierarchy\u2019s exhortations about the value of the \u2018full Eucharist\u2019 (their neologism for the Mass, as distinct from a communion service).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

As the number of priests declines, parishes close, bishops continue to restrict the usage of Sunday Celebration in the Absence of a Priest, and the faithful further disassociate themselves from the Eucharistic prayer as a whole, the Church is left broken and with very few avenues for healing that are theologically acceptable and practically realistic, let alone find support amongst both the faithful and her clergy. I am left wondering: “What can be done?”<\/p>\n

William Smith in\u00a0 \u201cWho Sang What?\u201d<\/strong> provides a bit of a change in pace. Smith\u2019s article is a look at psalmody from ancient Judaism to the early Church. Smith\u2019s article requires a rethink of the way we approach psalmody. It begins with a series of questions:<\/p>\n