First of all, the approved Statues already indicates that the Mass of the Way is different from the regular Mass held in the Parish. According to the Statutes (Chapter III, Article 13, Section 3 and 4):
For the celebration of the Eucharist in the small communities the approved liturgical books of the Roman Rite are followed, with the exception of the explicit concessions from the Holy See. Regarding the distribution of Holy Communion under the two species, the neocatechumens receive it standing, remaining in their place.
"The neocatechumens receive it standing, remaining in their place." From this, it is already an indication that we do not line up in a procession, but remain in our place. There is only one Mass in the GIRM that speaks about remaining in their place to receive Holy Communion, and that is the concelebrate Mass (See GIRM 242-244)
Nevertheless, showing the GIRM did not satisfy the opponents against the Way. The purpose of the Way was to celebrate in small communities as the Early Christians did. At that time, the word "concelebrant" means "All Christians", not just bishops and priests. The fact that the approved statutes allowed us to celebrate in "small communities" should already be an indication that it is not celebrated as in a large Parish Mass, but in small communities similar to the Early Church.
Those against the Way insist that we are not concelebrants and that we should follow the "modern" definition, which consist of Bishops and priest. So, I found a document showing even the lay Catholic can be a concelebrant in the Eucharist.
According to the Eucharisticum Mysterium 47-48: Concelebration:
47. Concelebration of the eucharist aptly expresses the unity of the sacrifice and the priesthood; whenever the faithful take an active part, the unity of the people of God stands out in a special way, [See Sacrosanctum Concillium art. 57. Sacred Congregation of Rites, Decr. generale Eccelesia semper 7 March 1965.] particularly if the bishop presides. [See Sacrosanctum Concilium art. 41; Lumen gentium no. 28: Presbyterorum ordinis no. 7].
http://catholicsensibility.wordpress.com/2007/07/02/eucharisticum-mysterium-47-48-concelebration/
According to the weblink above:
The faculty to concelebrate also applies to the principal Masses in churches and public and semipublic oratories of seminaries, colleges, and ecclesiastical institutions, as well as in those of religious orders and societies of common life without vows. Where there are a great many priests, the authorized superior can allow several concelebrations to take place on the same day, but at different times or in different places of worship.
The Neocatechumenal Way is an ecclesiastical institution. I provided the weblink, so anyone can read the rest. Nevertheless, I'm certain that those against the Way will simply ignore this and still accuse the Way of disobedience.
Hi, I stumbled across your blog today and happened to read the above article. With all due respect, I think you have misunderstood the meaning of 'concelebrate'. A mass can only be concelebrated by ordained members of the clergy - in the same way that a mass is usually 'celebrated' by the 'celebrant' ie the priest. To concelebrate is to have more than one priest (or Bishop) celebrate the Mass. It is certainly not meaning that the lay faithful become celebrants of the Mass. Of course a lay person may attend the Mass whether it is simply celebrated by the priest or concelebrated by more than one priest.
ReplyDeletePlease note, I have no particular interest in the Neocatechumenal Way itself, but I think you must clear up the confusion around this issue. I hope you publish my comment, but at the very least please take further steps to clarify the meaning of concelebrate.
Dear Anonymous,
DeleteAs I explained in my post, one of the purpose of the Neocatechumenal Mass in celebrating in small communities is to imitate the Mass of Early Christianity. In Early Christianity, the word "concelebration" is not the same as it is used today. In ancient Christianity, all Christians concelebrated according to their role or liturgical order of the Church whereas in modern times, it refers only to the bishops and priests (See the weblink below):
http://books.google.com/books?id=vJ78Vd4O9d4C&pg=PA261&lpg=PA261&dq=Concelebration+in+the+Early+Church&source=bl&ots=n1HLNy-C7B&sig=ZRcMFC0kjZraPPIwwqJgX1tVgy4&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Ntv2UqKRDcjQyAGhgIGwAQ&ved=0CEEQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=Concelebration%20in%20the%20Early%20Church&f=false
According to the Catholic Encycopedia, the word "concelebrate" refers to all Christians according to their role or liturgical order of the Church, and this is the definition that the Neocatechumenal goes by because as I said, the purpose of the Way is to celebrate in small communities just as the Early Christians did.
According to the Eucharisticum Mysterium 47-48: concelebration not only refers to the Bishops and priest but also to the entire people of God. According to the website that I posted (Capitalization is my emphasis):
Concelebration can be something of a mystery to many lay Catholics. In the parish, we most often see it when the bishop is on the scene, or when a special priest’s event, like an anniversary, retirement, or special visit takes place. Not too often is concelebration observed for a liturgical reason–at least not in parishes.
47. Concelebration of the eucharist aptly expresses the unity of the sacrifice and the priesthood; WHENEVER THE FAITHFUL TAKE AN ACTIVE PART, THE UNITY OF THE PEOPLE OF GOD STANDS OUT IN A SPECIAL WAY. [See Sacrosanctum Concilium art. 57. Sacred Congregation of Rites, Decr. generale Ecclesiae semper, 7 March 1965.] particularly if the bishop presides. [See Sacrosanctum Concilium art. 41; Lumen gentium no. 28; Presbyterorum ordinis no. 7.]
Concelebration ALSO symbolizes and strengthens the fraternal bond between priests, because “by virtue of the ordination to the priesthood that they share all are linked together in a close bond of brotherhood.” [Lumen gentium no. 28; Acta Apostolicae Sedis 57 (1965) 35; ConstDecrDecl 148; see also Presbyterorum ordinis no. 8.]
http://catholicsensibility.wordpress.com/2007/07/02/eucharisticum-mysterium-47-48-concelebration/
Dear Anonymous, there is no confusion here. In communities, the celebration of the Eucharist is a celebration for all community members. Therefore it is a community act, a con-celebration. I hope this helped you out of your confusion. ;)
ReplyDeleteDear Zoltan,
DeleteI agree. This also explains why the brothers and sisters in the Way can call a priest a "brother." When I first joined the community, I thought that this was wrong. After much research, I stumbled upon this blogsite which gives a Catholic explanation. It was the Capuchian priests who promoted this. According to the blogsite (weblink is provided below so you can read the rest):
After all, we're all used to addressing a priest as 'Father', and when we meet religious orders we learn that the 'Brothers' are those who are not priests. But then along comes an awkward exception - a priest who goes by the title of 'Brother'. What's going on?
"It's the Capuchin custom", I usually tell people, without going on to quote the relevant passage from the Constitutions of the Order: "in accordance with the Rule [of St. Francis], the Testament [of St. Francis] and the earliest custom of the Capuchins, all of us should be called brothers without distinction." Now, however, I have leisure to explain at greater length the why and wherefore.
It all goes back to St. Francis and his followers, all of whom were called 'Brother'. In fact, the word 'friar' is an English corruption of 'frater' - the Latin for 'brother'. An appreciation of universal brotherhood (and sisterhood) under the universal Fatherhood of God is a key aspect of St. Francis' special charism. His tendency to address animals, birds, sun and moon, and even the elements as 'Brother' and 'Sister' is well known. But of course his brotherly feeling towards his fellow humans was even stronger, and he consistently referred to himself as 'Brother Francis'. Importantly, he linked the idea of brotherhood to that of 'minority' or humility. The title was intended to convey not mere equality, but lowliness.
http://acertainhope.blogspot.com/2011/05/brother-and-priest.html
Ok, please point out if the following summary of your position is incorrect:
Delete1. The term "concelebrate" is important because the General Instruction to the Roman Missal has specific provisions for the celebration of the Eucharist where Mass is concelebrated.
2. The Neocatechumenal Way Eucharist is asserted to be a "concelebration" of all faithful, clergy and laity alike, as this is the meaning of the word in the Church of antiquity.
3. Therefore the Neocatechumenal Way is permitted to vary the rubrics of the Mass in accordance with the GIRM instructions on "concelebrated" Masses.
The problem with this approach is that the Holy See, the 'author' of the GIRM, uses the modern meaning of "concelebrate" - ie The GIRM provisions for concelebrated Masses are specifically referring to the clergy only, and not members of the laity - which is why of course the GIRM refers to the concelebrants as being in the sanctuary, wearing the liturgical garb, and reciting the appropriate words of consecration.
The "authors" of the GIRM clearly do not intend for those clauses to apply generally to laity attending Mass.
In fact the Catholic Encyclopaedia says this about concelebration:
"Concelebration is the rite by which several priests say Mass together, all consecrating the same bread and wine" http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04190a.htm
Do the lay community members actually recite, with the priest(s), the words of the consecration? If not, then the lay members cannot be concelebrating the Mass as per the meaning of the GIRM. If lay members do recite the words of the consecration, this would amount to a grave violation of the same instructions.
Dear Anonymous,
DeleteFirst of all, I was referring to this Catholic Encyclopedia (See the weblink below):
http://books.google.com/books?id=vJ78Vd4O9d4C&pg=PA261&lpg=PA261&dq=Concelebration+in+the+Early+Church&source=bl&ots=n1HLNy-C7B&sig=ZRcMFC0kjZraPPIwwqJgX1tVgy4&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Ntv2UqKRDcjQyAGhgIGwAQ&ved=0CEEQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=Concelebration%20in%20the%20Early%20Church&f=false
If you copied and pasted that weblink, it stated:
The verb to "concelebrate in the Early Church had a somewhat different meaning from the present, more technical understanding. In Christian antiquity, all Christians "concelebrated according to their role or liturgical order in the Church..........In the Middle Ages, this term came to mean exclusively the celebration by bishops and priests together."
In the Neocatechumenal Way, the principal concelebrant is always the priest. When the Apostle Peter said that we are a holy priesthood, this does not mean that everyone in the laity is capable of consecrating the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ. Only an ordain priest can do that.
As I said, the Neocatechumenal Way celebrates in small communities to imitate the celebration of the Early Christians. According to New Advent, the Catholic Encyclopedia:
50. The sacred liturgy does, in fact, include divine as well as human elements. The former, instituted as they have been by God, cannot be changed in any way by men. But the human components admit of various modifications, as the needs of the age, circumstance and the good of souls may require, and as the ecclesiastical hierarchy, under guidance of the Holy Spirit, may have authorized. This will explain the marvelous variety of Eastern and Western rites. Here is the reason for the gradual addition, through successive development, of particular religious customs and practices of piety only faintly discernible in earlier times. Hence likewise it happens from time to time that certain devotions long since forgotten are revived and practiced anew. All these developments attest the abiding life of the immaculate Spouse of Jesus Christ through these many centuries. They are the sacred language she uses, as the ages run their course, to profess to her divine Spouse her own faith along with that of the nations committed to her charge, and her own unfailing love. They furnish proof, besides, of the wisdom of the teaching method she employs to arouse and nourish constantly the "Christian instinct."
61. The same reasoning holds in the case of some persons who are bent on the restoration of all the ancient rites and ceremonies indiscriminately. The liturgy of the early ages is most certainly worthy of all veneration. But ancient usage must not be esteemed more suitable and proper, either in its own right or in its significance for later times and new situations, on the simple ground that it carries the savor and aroma of antiquity. The more recent liturgical rites likewise deserve reverence and respect. They, too, owe their inspiration to the Holy Spirit, who assists the Church in every age even to the consummation of the world.[52] They are equally the resources used by the majestic Spouse of Jesus Christ to promote and procure the sanctity of man.
http://www.newadvent.org/library/docs_pi12md.htm
In addition, I would like to add on #61 where it says that the ancient rites and ceremonies are to be respected.. The modern rites and usage are also respected and are not meant to replace it with something that was ancient. Both are equally good. Pope Francis commended the lay movements who wanted to live simple lives and celebrate as the Early Christians.
ReplyDelete