Florida Bishop Holds Blessed Sacrament Hostage
When the two women arrived at Our Lady of the Angels chapel
on Friday morning to keep their vigil with Jesus exposed for adoration,
He wasn't there. Where the monstrance once had stood, there was a bare
altar. "What has happened?" said one of the women, obviously puzzled.
"I have been coming here to pray every Friday for years"
Exposition of the Most Blessed Sacrament had been held
daily at the small Franciscan chapel of St. Patrick's parish in Tampa,
Florida, for over a decade. However, new liturgical guidelines promulgated
by Bishop Robert N. Lynch, Ordinary of the Diocese of St. Petersburg,
Florida, on the first Friday of September 2000, had significantly changed
Our Lady of the Angels' devotional routine.
Although the guidelines were issued by Bishop Lynch in
a letter to his priests on June 12, the target date for parishes to bring
their current Eucharistic devotional practices in line with the new orders
was September 1, the date the Eucharistic Lord was removed from Our Lady
of the Angels. When the people heard the news, they were stunned.
The immediate reaction to the restrictive nature of the
guidelines is one of surprise because it goes against an ever growing,
world wide movement that sees perpetual Eucharistic adoration on the rise.
Pope John Paul II, who began daily Eucharistic exposition in St. Peter's
in Rome, has repeatedly called for the practice to be instituted in parishes
wherever possible. So persistent is he that he's known as the "defender
and apostle of Eucharistic adoration." He refers to the devotion as a
precious element of Catholic heritage, "in full accord with the teaching
of the Second Vatican Council." Therefore it's no wonder both priests
and people were shocked by the guidelines and remain in a state of confusion
over them.
The Guidelines.
The guidelines themselves are self-serving and intellectually
dishonest. Selective quotations from Church documents are arranged to
create a tone that implies Exposition/Adoration is misunderstood, is harmful
to the communitarian worship of the Church, does not conform to the "new"
theology and should be strictly limited. The message that emerges is Eucharistic
exposition is not "the mind of the Church." One area of the document that
is particularly onerous is the attempt to render the Real Presence of
Christ less distinctive. The guidelines twice speak of the Second Vatican
Council as recovering the "early Church's understanding of the multiple
presence's of Christ in the liturgy."
The overall thrust of the "theology for the third millennium"
is designed to convince people that Christ's presence in the Consecrated
host is no different from His fourfold presence in His word, prayer, i.e.,
"where two or three are gathered in my name," the sacraments, i.e., Mass,
and the priest.
This dilution of the sacrament directly contradicts constant
Church teaching. After affirming the fourfold presence, the Catechism
of the Catholic Church states "...But 'He is present...most especially
in the Eucharistic species." (# 1373) Eucharistiae Sacramentum,, promulgated
by the Holy See 21 June, 1973, declares Christ is present in the Eucharistic
species "in a manner altogether unique, God and man, whole and entire,
substantially and continuously."
If there is no difference between Christ's presence in
people gathered for prayer (which the modernist refer to as the gathered
assembly), at Sunday Mass and the Consecrated host, Exposition becomes
idolatry. In order to teach a concept of equality among equals, Christ's
Real Presence exposed in the monstrance for adoration would need to be
severely curtailed.
Acknowledging that exposition "allows a parish community
the opportunity to meditate more deeply on the mystery of the Eucharist,"
Bishop Lynch recommends an "annual" event maybe celebrated on a parish's
anniversary.
The intimidation factor...
Holy Communion and Worship of the Eucharist Outside Mass
(hereafter abbreviated as HCWEOM) is a frequently quoted document referenced
in the guidelines, the full reading of which does not in any way reflect
the restrictive nature of the bishops' mandate. His guidelines claim "the
clear intention of these documents is that exposition...is not perpetual."
HCWEOM does not say that.
Similarly the guidelines state "the directives for exposition
are explicit," and names a number of requirements such as music, scripture,
preaching, prayer and "liturgical ministers (at least a musician and a
leader)." While the rules governing exposition are explicit, they contain
nothing that is not already done or that is not easily accomplished. Furthermore,
there is no mention of needing "liturgical ministers and leaders." In
fact HCWEOM makes it clear the devotion is easily handled by priest and
people, even going so far as to include a Model Service in the appendix
of the 1976 referenced book.
Instead, HCWEOM states "lay men and women such as those
in an association devoted to Eucharistic adoration upon appointment by
the local Ordinary, "may publicly expose and later repose the Holy Eucharist
for the adoration of the faithful." Were the faithful even aware that
they could form such associations? Do they know the Pontifical Council
for the Laity has granted persons the right to establish such groups specifically
for the purpose of perpetual Eucharistic exposition/adoration in accord
with the teaching of the Second Vatican Council and Canon Law #304, 1-2.
In regard to the perpetuity of exposition, the International Association
for Perpetual Exposition says the practice of such associations to continuos,
perpetual exposition (365 days a year), is not limited to such but states
"a small parish may be only able to maintain (exposition) two or three
days a week. This is to be considered preferable to any other arrangement."
Bishop Lynch acknowledges that people are advocating perpetual exposition.
However, not only does he fail to inform his people of their rights of
association, but he dishonestly claims "the general understanding of the
Church is that this type of exposition is not to be the normal and continuous
pattern in the parish."
If there appears to be one saving grace in the entire
document it is that Bishop Lynch has said parishes may seek to have the
guidelines rescinded, but only under certain conditions, conditions remarkable
for their peculiar inattention to Church teaching.
Looking for answers.
The laity in St. Petersburg, in Tampa and the surrounding
environs are looking for answers to explain this extraordinary action
on the part of their bishop. No one can ever remember a bishop disallowing
regular worship of Christ's Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity in the exposed
host.
Some of the faithful are attributing this turn of events
to their recent diocesan Liturgical workshop, Gather On Sunday, Liturgical
Life for the New Millennium. (1/20/00). The keynote speaker was Los Angeles'
Cardinal Roger Mahony, who presented his vision of liturgy for the coming
millennium. Those Catholics who have studied Cardianl Mahony's 1997 pastoral
letter, Gather Faithfully Together, find in it a remarkable resemblance
to Bishop Lynch's document. The conditions that must be fulfilled before
regular Eucharistic exposition is returned to St. Petersburg's parishes
are nearly identical to those mandated for Sunday worship in Cardinal
Mahony's diocese.
Mahony: "...such was the need to assemble the Church
and make the Eucharist." GFT, p., 20.
Lynch: "...a parish's first priority is well-planned and
well-celebrated Masses."
Mahony: "...in fact they (the people) are turning toward
each other, becoming conscious of each other's presence." GFT, P. 40.
Lynch: "...are they (the people) as respectful and reverent
towards Christ's presence in the gathered Body...as...to...Christ in the
Sacrament?"
Mahony: "...parishes are strongly urged to use bread for
the Eucharist that more closely resembles bread. Recipes ...are available."
GFT. P. 196.
Lynch: "Does the eucharistic bread look like bread?"
Mahony: "Our more careful planning helps us avoid taking
from the tabernacle hosts consecrated at a previous Mass because we have
given thanks over this bread and wine on this altar." GFT, p. 139. Lynch:
"Does the parish carefully prepare enough communion for the gathered assembly
instead of routinely going to the tabernacle?"
Careful observance should be given to the last two entries.
Students of GFT will note the heavy emphasis in Cardinal Mahony's pastoral
on the community giving thanks, almost exclusive of offering sacrifice,
and his references to consecrated hosts as this "bread," and "wine" on
this altar, which Bishop Lynch's guidelines parrot.
With all the cathedrals and churches which have been
robbed of tabernacle, crucifix and Catholic character, the laity have
every reason to be jittery. If there is nothing to reserve and no exposition
of the Eucharistic Christ, what need is there for tabernacles? The rubrics
demand a tabernacle in all churches, but rubrics are being routinely discarded
in both Cardinal Mahony's and Bishop Lynch's documents.
In addition to the Mahony/Lynch look-a-likes, Bishop
Lynch also demands, in return for the Lord, the people "reflect on their
practices during the communion rite and their commitment of time and money
to social services." Basically, what is happening is Bishop Lynch is holding
the Blessed Sacrament hostage. He is rendering Christ exposed inaccessible
to the people's worship until they practice a form of the Mass that is
theologically unsound and dangerously flawed. He has no authority to make
such demands upon the faithful.
A bishop who attempts to withhold the Eucharist from
the people until they conform to his ideas about the Church, has abdicated
his apostolic role as Father, shepherd and teacher, and gives scandal
to the Church. "For all the bishops have the obligation of fostering and
safeguarding the unity of the faith and of upholding the discipline which
is common to the whole Church." Lumen Gentium, no. 23. Long ago, the late
Bishop Fulton Sheen prophetically warned, "the laity will have to save
the Church." That day has come for the St. Petersburg Diocese. Roman Catholics
throughout America should join in prayers for a propitious outcome
of this crisis.
[Oct/Nov
2000 edition of The Catholic Advocate P.M.B. 346, 9378 Arlington Expw.,
Jacksonville, Fl 32225.]
More Troubles for St. Petersburg
In addition to the new guidelines, the St. Petersburg diocese
may be in for even rougher days ahead. Fr. Richard Vosko, a Liturgical
Design consultant, has been a recent visitor in the diocese. Fr. Vosko,
a priest from the Albany diocese, is known as the "wreckovator" for having
removed all traces of Catholicity from any number of cathedrals and parish
churches in the nation. Not only is he a consultant on Cardinal Mahony's
multi-million dollar plus, new Cathedral, dubbed the "Rog Mahal," but
he has been hired by the Archdiocese of Milwaukee for the remodeling of
their historic cathedral.
Accompanying Bishop Lynch's guidelines are orders "for
building or remodeling worship spaces," titled Building a House for Every
Age. The order will employ the use of Environment and Art in Catholic
Worship. EACW, the US. Bishop's 1978 Committee paper, which lacks official
Vatican approval, has been wielded as a weapon against the Faith for over
two decades.
EACW has turned sanctuaries into buildings resembling
airplane hangars or barns in an effort to direct the people's attention
to the community rather than the majestic and awe inspiring worship of
God. Bishop Lynch's architectural guidelines go "into effect immediately."
Why the big rush? Could it be because the NCCB is preparing
to vote on a replacement document to EACW, Domus Dei (House of God), at
their November meeting? One final item: Archbishop Rembert Weakland, OSB,
of Milwaukee, WI, will be the keynote speaker at the diocesan 2001 Liturgy
conference, March 7th. His topic? Liturgy as Art: The Art of Celebration
for the Third Millennium.
One diocesan priest is already prepared. Fr. Thomas L.
Madden, pastor at Our Lady of Lourdes, Dunedin, FL, in his August 27th
bulletin writes "in the place of the tabernacle (in the Oratory), I will
be placing a piece of liturgical art that will be conductive to prayer
and reflection." It appears the people of the St. Petersburg diocese will
have much to reflect upon in the coming days.
[Oct/Nov
2000 edition of The Catholic Advocate P.M.B. 346, 9378 Arlington Expw.,
Jacksonville, Fl 32225.]
|