Number of theology students: some trends

The Association of Theological Schools, accreditor of graduate theological schools in the U.S. and Canada, publishes stats on its member schools annually. The 2010 report allows us to track trends in the last four years.

Since 2006:

* The head count of graduate students in Catholic grad schools in the U.S. has sunk 8.25%, and the full-time equivalent (FTE) has declined 6%.

*The decline for Catholic grad schools in Canada is 34% (headcount) and 23% (FTE). Anyone know what’s going on in Canada??

* The decline for Protestant grad schools in the U.S. is 5% (headcount) and 6.2% (FTE).

The charts for Catholics and Protestants give the raw numbers.

Why do you suppose the number of theology grad students in the U.S. and Canada is declining, for Protestants and Catholics alike?

I noticed that the Protestant and non-denominational schools have total student numbers markedly higher than Catholic schools’ totals, so I did a bit of calculating. If about 51% of the U.S. population is Protestant and about 22% is Catholic, this means that:

* there are about 4 millions Protestants in the U.S. for each student in a Protestant graduate theology school; but

*there are almost 15 million Catholics in the U.S. for each student in a Catholic graduate theology school.

Why do you suppose that is?

Now of course some of the students in Protestant grad schools are Catholic, and vice versa. But that probably doesn’t account for all the gap. How much of it is explained by lower clergy/member ratios in Protestantism compared to Catholicism?

awr

Anthony Ruff, OSB

Fr. Anthony Ruff, OSB, is a monk of St. John's Abbey. He teaches liturgy, liturgical music, and Gregorian chant at St. John's University School of Theology-Seminary. He is widely published and frequently presents across the country on liturgy and music. He is the author of Sacred Music and Liturgical Reform: Treasures and Transformations, and of Responsorial Psalms for Weekday Mass: Advent, Christmas, Lent, Easter. He does priestly ministry at the neighboring community of Benedictine sisters in St. Joseph.

Please leave a reply.

Comments

89 responses to “Number of theology students: some trends”

  1. Claire Mathieu

    It’s the economy. The number of students in computer science rose rapidly: people need degrees that will land them jobs.

    Reply
  2. Joe O'Leary

    Theology (with the partial exception of Scripture and Patristics) and English Literary Criticism are two fields in which quality is in decline, making them less attractive to graduate students. The steeper decline among Catholics — 5 times steeper! — reflects the fraught nature of Catholic theology at a time when loud-mouthed magisterial fundamentalists rule the roost and when Catholic theologians are regularly denounced or fired for no good reason. Who in their senses would seek a PhD in Catholic theology under such circumstances?

    Reply
    1. Jeff Rexhausen

      Joe, it’s also clear that the demand for these people is changing.

      I was recently asked to assess the responses to a survey of diocesan priests in one Midwestern diocese. When asked about the type of person they would consider for a parish pastoral staff position:

      Among priests ordained before 1970, persons trained through the seminary’s graduate and lay ministry programs are preferred over graduates of a Catholic university, with little difference due to gender or diaconal status. [Note: The graduate program includes master’s degrees in theology, scripture, pastoral ministry, and pastoral counseling.]

      Those ordained in the 1970s exhibit a slight preference for those local master’s graduates, but there are no identity differences. Priests in the 1980s ordination group also manifest a slight preference for local master’s graduates, but a much larger preference for deacons with or without a master’s degree.

      The preference for graduates from one of the seminary’s programs continues in the 1990s ordination classes, but in considering candidates for pastoral staff positions, more of these priests view lay ministry program graduates as unqualified, compared to those with other backgrounds.

      The priests ordained in 2000 or later show a further shift away from all seminary program graduates, with the most favorable rating now given to a graduate of a Catholic university, followed by a slight preference for a deacon rather than a lay person from anywhere else.

      Why do priests ordained in the 70s, 80s, and 90s want more graduate training in their pastoral ministers? Does the size of their parishes affect this? Why do younger priests prefer deacons, even if they have less theology training? Is this affected by their priorities among parish ministries, or by other ways in which these newest priests seem to differ from their older brother priests? These are important questions.

      Reply
  3. Fr. Allan J. McDonald

    Are these people studying for ordained ministry or not? Or do they want to teach theology or work in churches as adjunct staff? Are there greater opportunities within Protestantism for good paying jobs both teaching and/or working in churches? Apart from a university setting, the best paying jobs for those with theology degrees isn’t going to be in a Catholic parish or school. But the other issues of secularism undermining both Protestantism and Catholicism must be taken into account, the changing face of Catholicism too as it becomes more Hispanic in the USA and institutionally more conservative about Catholic identity. And yes lastly, we need to find out how much the sex abuse scandal is affecting lay Catholics and their desire to serve the institutional Church.Is this leading to an ambivalence about the Church in particular and religion in general?

    Reply
    1. Chris Grady

      You can probably also add, for starters, the degree to which people get turned off theology/church/religion by certain clergypersons, Allan.

      Reply
      1. Fr. Allan J. McDonald

        Certainly we can also include certain laity, Chris.

  4. Paul Stokell

    It has become difficult for people (and I can only speak from a Catholic perspective) to get a degree in Theology, then expect to find a job in a related field. In the two dioceses I’ve lived in in recent years, the same issue is present – many in lay ministry are holding on to their jobs for dear life, year after year, declining in effectiveness, leading to a sort of “entrenchment.” Younger folks who could do much have no choice but to find other work to pay off their student loans and/or feed their families and possibly hope to use what they’ve learned as volunteers. The only exception would be in cities with schools and/or large parishes, or dioceses who have placed a premium on developing Lay Ministry.

    If we’re in the “age of the laity,” where the call to Lay Ecclesial Ministry is not only present (and always has) and has been even verified by the bishops, why would this not happen? That’s not to denigrate those that do volunteer; it is a great opportunity to sample the experience of service to the Church, and a welcome balance to the stratification that exists in select Protestant and (much) larger Catholic parishes. But as in other fields, there are those called to study and take on other roles in lay leadership.

    Last October’s issue of Catechist magazine crossed my desk, touting how the “thing to do” was to eliminate professional, degreed Directors of Religious Education and replace them with part-time volunteer Coordinators. No real reasons were given beyond leaders “aging out,” and the economy. My reaction to this was visceral. We can’t go backward, regardless of what the economy might dictate. People deserve better. I canceled my subscription.

    Reply
  5. Eileen Russell

    Paul, your youth is showing. Lay Ecclesial Ministry was strong in the ’70s and 80’s – long before we (and the bishops) put a name to it. We, too, had no choice but to find other work to pay off our student loans and/or feed our families and hope to use what we learned as volunteers to make our livelihood. Somewhere along the way, some found employment with adequate salary and, after years and years of work, we are able to live on our salaries. Sure we are holding on to our jobs for dear life, year after year. I am not old enough to retire, despite over 30 years of active parish ministry. And that is how it is – year to year! I live with the distinct possibility that if a new pastor is assigned, I could be replaced for a younger, less expensive person. It happens all the time.

    I’m told that our employment is at the “will” of the pastor. When I started, and was far less effective than I am today, I worked WITH the pastor. I still do. But, today, instead of equating age with wisdom, it is associated with “declining in effectiveness”. What has declined is the appreciation given the position of DRE. If you get the chance to try it, you might find out.

    Along with your Catechist article, this week I was asked to participate in an on-line survey. The last question asked for me to indicate my level of agreement with “commonly heard statements”. The last “statement” was: Parish catechetical leaders should be working to put themselves out of a job. I ask you what I left as a comment: In what other position could this be listed as a commonly heard statement? Particularly since it has been a vital ministry for over 2000 years.

    It does not come as a surprise to me that enrollment in decline. The dignity given a person who works in ministry is in decline.

    Reply
    1. Paul Stokell

      That’s flattering, but I’m not that young! 🙂 In one capacity or another, Eileen, I’ve been a DRE/Parish Catechetical Leader/Theology teacher going on 15 years. I can only resonate with what you’re saying about appreciation by parishioners, some (but by no means all) pastors and diocesan staffs alike. The more things change…!
      I did, in fact, work myself “out of a job,” after having put years of effort to revitalize their RCIA/Children’s Catechumenate, Adult Formation and (during the absence of an associate pastor) Liturgy planning. The charming “country priest” praised my work, then told me my post was eliminated. Of course, it’s hard to go back to pray in a church where you ended up “fired.” (Professional Note: Never, ever, EVER work where you worship!) Those were tough days – I’m glad they are far behind me.

      As for Catechist magazine – it’s published by the “Peter Li Group” out of Dayton. After cancelling the parish’s subscription I quickly replaced it (for our catechists, Parish Library, etc.) with Religion Teacher’s Journal, now known as Creative Catechist, published by Bayard in Connecticut. It’s smart, level-headed, and is written for the adult catechist in mind. (Note: Nick Wagner did not compensate me for this!) I’d also recommend GIA’s “Celebrating the Lectionary,” or any material which supports Liturgical Catechesis, of which I am a raving fan.

      AFF is all over the place. Some folks do want a “formal,” lecture-based approach, but most go for a moderated, discussion-based format, usually either “one-shot deals” or not lasting more than five or six sessions. I’ve done four-part sessions on the new translation (using England & Wales stuff) and had great results. Scripture and Liturgy seem to be what parishioners feel they need. Then there’s that line between a solid parish model and whatever the diocese is offering, which can vary in quality and content.

      Reply
      1. Eileen Russell

        Clearly, age is not the issue. Your painful experience
        mirrors that of many in lay ministry. It is disgraceful.
        It just doesn’t get easier with age. So what may appear
        as declining in effectiveness, on closer look might be
        just another attempt to re-group and re-focus.

        I was speaking with someone regarding retirement
        planning and he said, “Well, working for so many years,
        your employment seems secure.” Before I could catch
        myself, I laughed out loud. He seemed shocked as
        I had to admit that I had no job security.

        And, then, I felt disloyal.

        And they wonder why there are so few workers! In
        moments of discouragement it is important for us to
        remind each other of the valuable contributions to
        the mission we share. I hope you will continue to do
        such good work. You sound like a gem!

        I agree with you about working where you worship but,
        if you work in a parish, it will be viewed by many as a
        negative. Of course, not by those of us who know
        better.

    2. Brigid Rauch

      It’s not only a matter of being replaced with a younger, cheaper person. I’ve seen priests take along their own personal staffs with them as they move from parish to parish, ousting people who’ve served their parishes for years. Of course, the people Father brings along agree with everything Father says or does, regardless of what the people in the parish want!

      It’s another reason we need Parish Councils that are more than window dressing!

      Reply
      1. Bill deHaas

        All three of you cite painful experiences that seem directly linked to Fr. Ruff’s posting. If I may add to your comments.

        In our diocese have experienced a couple of related trends in the past two years:

        – for roughly 18 months the diocese has advertised for a Diocesan Director of Worship…first, requirements were for an ordained priest with liturgy degree; but, then, as the process continued the requirements changed. The diocese has received one specific qualified individual but the auxiliary bishop currently responsible for this hiring process, stated that the diocese does not have the funding to hire this experience. At the same time, the nun who is running the day to day worship department wrote the candidate telling him that he knew music but not liturgy. Another person on the hiring committee said that the diocesan bishop and nun were thinking of hiring a member of this nun’s community who is finishing graduate school this spring. This is not an isolated event as some of you have shared…it reeks of unprofessionalism, cronism, nepotism, and is unethical. We see it every day in dioceses and repeated when pastors move from parish to parish. Good, skilled, and experienced folks get laid off for no good reason. Excuses are finances, want my own team, etc.

        These stories and experiences are shared and probably impact the trend that Fr. Ruff is noting.

        – we also have a catholic university in the diocese with undergraduate theology school and a school of ministry primarily for working folks, teachers, etc. who want to get a Theology or Pastoral Ministry MA and teach in catholic high schools. Given finances in catholic schools, young, inexperienced, and unskilled graduate students are hired replacing older, experienced, and skilled teachers. It meets the financial goal but deprives our kids of good, experienced theology teachers.

        It raises the whole question about workers rights, unions, etc. Texas catholics have seen some high profile cases in the courts in which skilled workers have sued because of loss of jobs for no good reason; unionization has been fought by bishops; as a church we support unions, etc. until it comes to our own employees.

  6. Fr. Jim Blue

    Interesting comment about Catechist magazine. I am not familiar with it at all, but a couple months I saw our second graders doing their “craft project” for First Communion. The project consisted of their making cardboard “tabernacles” decorating them with plastic gems, etc., and making little paper hosts that, unfolded, revealed the name “Jesus.” I asked the DRE – who is usually pretty savvy about susch things – “where did THAT idea come from?” And she replied “Catechist Magazine.”

    Does anyone know who is behind that publication? It seems that the quality is somewhat questionable.

    Fr. Jim Blue

    Reply
    1. Brigid Rauch

      I’m confused; I would think the project appropiate for second graders. I’m certain the kids could be drilled to recite a proper and lengthy definition of transubstantiation, but a simple project like this is a better way to open their hearts to the notion that something special (or Someone special ) is involved.

      Now, I would hope young adults and older adults would be exposed to deeper discussion. A magazine with project ideas is one resource, but catechists also need access to articles leading them forward into deeper understandings. Baby food for babies, richer more challenging food for adults.

      Reply
      1. Donna Eschenauer

        It is my deep conviction that the best catechesis for First Communion is good liturgical catechesis. That means catechesis in and through liturgy, plus catechesis toward liturgy – not art projects.

        In regard to the initial point – decline in attendance for graduate theology programs. In theory we say we need well educated, professional pastoral staffs for all ministries. However, in practice, especially where catechesis is concerned, it seems to be the trend that many do not have graduate degrees. You may notice in catechetical circles we have moved to referring to the “Director of Religious Education (DRE)” to the “Catechetical Leader.” Historically (1903 Religious Education Movement), the DRE was an educator, not a church minister. (note: the RC church began to use DRE with the catechetical movement of the 1960’s)
        Catechetical Leader is a mixed bag of highly qualified people, and not qualified at all. I could go on, but I won’t.

  7. Joe O'Leary

    As a young priest I visited a school and heard the catechesis of the kids (perhaps 10 year olds). I asked “what about transubstantiation?” (perhaps I just meant the Real Presence) and was politely told that those days were past.

    Looks like the Real Presence is back, and in its crudest form — but then the Vatican II approach — Christ present (in his paschal mystery) in the Community, the proclaimed Word, and the breaking of bread — is now considered as difficult for kids to understand as transubstantation was in the 1970s. Of course it cannot be explained unless it is enacted in vibrant liturgies. Meanwwhile the EF people are firmly taking us back to the reduction of liturgy to adoration of the Real Presence.

    Reply
    1. Jeffrey Herbert

      Joe;

      There are many non-EF Parishes (mine for one) that have Eucharistic Adoration as an important part of the liturgical life of the parish. I’m not sure it an “either-or” situation, as a reinforcement of belief in and greater reverence for the Real Presence is necessary to have those “vibrant liturgies”. Keep in mind that for those who are inclined to attend the EF, the Real Presence isn’t an issue that is in the forefront of discussion… it is an assumption and simply part of what Catholicism IS.

      If we are, in fact, going back to what you refer to as the “crudest form” of belief in the Real Presence, that’s happening in OF parishes, and I find it hard to describe such a move as a “reduction” of the liturgy as it requires a considerably greater depth of understanding by the faithful, both liturgically and theologically.

      Reply
      1. Tom Poelker

        It is a reduction of the liturgy because it limits liturgy to a one way, one lane street: people worship God through the focus on Real Presence.

        What is omitted is focus on
        [1]the nourishment of people through proclamation of the Scriptures.
        [2] the participation of the people in a feast experience beyond reverent reception
        [3] the development of community through active prayer experiences
        [4] the enrichment of the sense of the assembly as themselves priestly, prophetic, and royal
        [5] the clear rather than implied encouragement of mission to the world over personal doctrinal affirmation of a single issue..

        These are just the first few which come to mind. Other commentators are invited to extend the list.

        In short, it is a reduction of the liturgy to limit it to one point rather than provide the multivalent experience of sacrament, sacrifice, banquet, community, et alia.

      2. Joe O'Leary

        I think Eucharistic Adoration is a very valuable practice. But Pius XII shared my worry that it could reinforce a crude idea of the Real Presence divorced from the total eucharistic process. That is why he insisted that Eucharistic Adoration should be conceived as an extension of the Mass (building on the first extension, the Viaticum to the sick). Pius XII was of course a subtle theologian.

      3. Jeffrey Herbert

        “It is a reduction of the liturgy because it limits liturgy to a one way, one lane street: people worship God through the focus on Real Presence.”

        Tom;

        But that’s precisely the “either-or” assumption I’m talking about, and it is simply doesn’t apply in the real world. The idea that if Adoration is emphasized as an important part of our faith then people ignore Scripture and all other aspects of liturgical life is ludicrous. They don’t, and it’s insulting to suggest that they would. Certainly in the Medieval Church this may have been more the case as the faithful so rarely received Communion, and so Adoration became a replacement for the Sacrament. I would suggest that such is not the case now. Most Catholics are, to use a tired cliche, capable of walking AND chewing gum at the same time.

    2. Donna Eschenauer

      The liturgy documents need to be know by those involved with the educational ministry of the church. Regarding real presence, awareness of #7 of the Constitution on the Sacred liturgy is a must.

      Without graduate studies, they may never know……

      Reply
  8. Jack Rakosky

    At the parish level, “adult faith formation” programs tend to avoid the academic teacher-student model, emphasizing personal understanding and sharing rather than content.

    Although the Little Rock Scripture Study program has the solid content of the Collegeville Commentaries and promotes daily personal study, the leaders of the small discussion groups are recruited for their interpersonal skills, and encouraged to act as facilitators not teachers.

    I interviewed participants of the Little Rock program in a local parish. Everyone wanted leaders who knew more about Scripture; except for the facilitators! They were the only people who subscribed to the idea that facilitators didn’t need to know more than the rest of the people.

    Interviewing people from the same parish about adult faith formation, many wanted stronger content. Many were used to faith sharing groups, and often critiqued the content of these programs as being very banal. They did not want to be lectured, but they did want interesting content at a higher intellectual level.

    Despite the call for more solid content in general, and better teachers of the Bible in particular, people with master’s degrees in Scripture would likely face obstacles in parishes. Most priests and pastoral ministers do not seem to know much about Scripture. Would they be willing to learn? Historical approaches to the study of Scripture demand too much of the lecture method; that is going to meet resistance at the parish level. Literary approaches to the study of Scripture are more promising since they can employ discussion while still being solid on content.

    At least for scripture, there could be a middle ground between degreed paid professionals and facilitators with only social skills. Many scripture courses at local universities are available for nuch less money as audits or continuing education. If parish volunteers or paid staff took these courses they could bring more expertise into leading parish bible study programs.

    Reply
    1. Mike Burns

      Unfortunately we still seem to think that AFF is a scripture class or a class where we can teach adults the content of our faith. The USCCB document “Our Hearts Were Burning Within Us” outlines how to do go about putting a solid AFF process in place. The doucment echoes the GDC in the need to address the six tasks of Catechesis when forming and transforming adults in faith. Those six tasks are: Promoting knowledge of the faith, Liturgical education and Catechesis (including mystagogy), Moral formation, Teaching to pray, Educating for mission, and Educating for community life. This would be a great place to start.

      Reply
  9. Jack Rakosky

    A question about the methodology of this study: I wonder how students are counted?

    In the past decade while a summer graduate student at ND, I also did credit and audits at a local university and audits at the local seminary. I wonder if I was got counted at one, two, or three institutions? The local university seemed to definitely treat me like one of their students and kept me on their books for several years even though I took only one credit course for transfer to ND.

    Reply
  10. Chris Grady

    Fr. Allan J. McDonald :
    Certainly we can also include certain laity, Chris.

    Yet again, Allan (just as you did a few weeks back when you volunteered “veri probati” in your rigourous defence of all things Latin) you prove my point.

    Reply
    1. Joe O'Leary

      Chris, would you please stop?

      Reply
      1. Chris Grady

        No problem, Joe. As I said, Allan proves my points better than I ever can!

      2. Jeremy Stevens

        Yes, Chris, would you please stop?

        Only Joe O’Leary is allowed to bloviate endlessly and magisterially on every thread on this blog.

        Funny how those most opposed to definitive and dogmatic pontifications tend themselves to pontificate definitively and dogmatically.

        News flash to Joe O’Leary: no one who talks as much as you do should even think about telling Chris Grady or anyone else to shut up.

  11. Rita Ferrone

    “If we are, in fact, going back to what you refer to as the “crudest form” of belief in the Real Presence, that’s happening in OF parishes, and I find it hard to describe such a move as a “reduction” of the liturgy as it requires a considerably greater depth of understanding by the faithful, both liturgically and theologically.”

    No it doesn’t. All you need is magical thinking and/or the willing suspension of disbelief on the basis of authority, and there you are. All people possess what is needed to achieve this without any sophisticated liturgical or theological understanding whatsoever. I know of someone who believes the host travels around on its own power. She is very devout. I know of eucharistic ministers who believe that hosts are consecrated by being placed in the tabernacle, without any further ado (such as the consecration). They too are very devout. I’m sure they spend umpteen hours in adoration. It requires no depth of thought whatsoever; in fact, it thrives on the absence of understanding.

    Reply
    1. Brigid Rauch

      The priest who attempted to introduce Perpetual Eucharistic Adoration at my parish preached a story about a priest who was losing his faith until the Host began to actually bleed at one Mass – and it was type A+ Blood!

      For me, the reduction of the mystery of the Eucharist to such trivia is far more sacriligeous than any attempt at a Satanic ritual.

      There is now Eucharistic Adoration at my parish, but only one day a week since so few parishioners are involved. The parish itself is much smaller since well over half the members have fled because this “orthodoxy” isn’t their idea of Catholicism.

      Reply
    2. Fr. Allan J. McDonald

      Keep in mind that even an atheist can understand all that the Church teaches about any aspect of God or the Church and still remain an atheist. The simple faith of the uninformed or those whose faith is not informed by knowledge is still faith and thus a gift from God. That’s not to excuse a lack of catechesis to inform faith. From my own experience of those who make adoration a part of their spirituality and prayer life, they have a greater appreciation of the Eucharist when celebrating Mass and seek to study what the Church believes about our Lord’s presence to strengthen their faith.

      Reply
      1. Joe O'Leary

        The celebration of the Eucharist — if vibrant and meaningful — is itself a catechesis and over time an education in theology — as the faithful come to appreciate more and more ALL the dimensions of the Eucharist, which is the summit and source of Christian life and indeed a synthesis of every aspect of the Gospel. That is why distractions like the cult of the EF and the opaque new translations are so tragic. They cut off authentic insight and deliberately revert to a time when the Mass was merely a ceremony that went on up there on the altar while the faithful said their rosaries — a time when the ONLY thought the faithful had about the Eucharist was that Christ was present in the tabernacle to be worshipped and to be received in Holy Communion. There was no need to limit the diet of the laity to “the simple faith of the uninformed” — Vatican II showed that a different way of celebrating Eucharist could transform simple faith and fill it with biblical, ecclesial information. De Lubac’s writings on Eucharist were revolutionary in their time, because he quoted the Fathers, whereas now, thanks to Vatican II, these understandings are accessible to all who have attended meaningful liturgies.

      2. Jack Wayne

        Joe O’Leary – I’ve been to a number of meaningful liturgies, both OF and EF. I find that I must reject most every characterization you make about the EF since it doesn’t jibe with my own experience (just as I reject similar claims I’ve heard about the OF from traditionalists). Do you have any real experience of the EF beyond the Masses you participated in as a child in the 1960’s?

        I’m truly trying to figure out where you are coming from.

      3. Joe O'Leary

        Jack Wayne, today I talked to my Filipino congregation about the threefold eucharistic presence of Christ — in the community, in the word and in the breaking of bread.

        In the 1950s that was reduced to a fetishism of the Real Presence conceived magically (the prisoner of the tabernacle etc.). Pius XII warned that eucharistic adoration was to be seen as an extension of the mass (like viaticum).

        The most obvious way in which the EF rejects Vatican II is in its curtailing of the opening up of Scripture found in teh NO (and which has deeply shaped modern Catholics). The EF is an anti-Emmaus liturgy.

      4. Jordan Zarembo

        #29 by Joe O’Leary on May 7, 2011 – 7:26 pm

        They [the “cult of the EF”] cut off authentic insight and deliberately revert to a time when the Mass was merely a ceremony that went on up there on the altar while the faithful said their rosaries — a time when the ONLY thought the faithful had about the Eucharist was that Christ was present in the tabernacle to be worshipped and to be received in Holy Communion.

        I wrongly believe that I am “educated” because I do not know how to worship simply. Simplicity is often necessary in times of doubt and struggle. The presence of “simple faith” is not necessarily a signal to apply even more abstract catechesis or snatch rosaries out of peoples’ hands.

        I still practice devotions that post-conciliar liturgists abhor, such as a nightly devotion to the Sacred Heart and recitations from prayerbooks before the Blessed Sacrament. Why? The Sacred Heart devotions speaks to the trials of the everyperson. Can an abstract and academic explanation of the paschal-mystery-sacrifice of the Mass strengthen a person in time of sorrow or great difficulty? A total abandonment to the sufferings of Christ-true-man offers reassurance that our trials on earth are not in vain. Rather, these trials are subsumed in a loving God who encompasses all of our fears and desires.

        The reformed liturgical notion that Catholics must live on exegesis and higher theology alone neglects devotions, novenas, and popular prayer. These devotions have sustained the hope of persons beset with everyday troubles. The clarification of life’s tribulations through a simple but reassuring understanding of Christ’s role in their lives often provides more security and comfort than distillations of (post)modern Eucharistic theology.

      5. claire mathieu

        Jordan, surely you don’t practice devotions during the Mass while the priest is doing his own prayers at the altar?

      6. Joe O'Leary

        Jordan, why so defensive? I am also a devotee of the Sacred Heart and even sing To Thee O Heart of Jesus at liturgies for the Sisters of the Sacred Heart. I also think, as said several times, that Eucharist adoration is a valuable practice. The theology of the Eucharist I referred to is not at all postmodern — it is straight Vatican II — which is why it cannot be upended by the EF revivalists, who are in fact past masters of postmodern pastiche…

      7. Jack Wayne

        Joe O’Leary – you always talk about the 1950’s and 60’s and compare it to your experience today. I never lived back then, so the way the Mass was celebrated in your childhood doesn’t have relevance to me – your experiences are not ones I can apply to the EF Masses I attend and simply do not ring true for me. I live and worship in the present, and have no experience of the liturgy as it was celebrated in the 1950’s, 60’s, 70’s, or even most of the 80’s.

      8. Joe O'Leary

        Jack Wayne, if you live in 2011 why do you want a liturgy in aspic, an effort to resuscitate the liturgy of 1962 exactly as it was? Or is there some subtle difference between the EF and the liturgy of 1962? I did attend a Lefebrite Mass once — it was spooky. I must attend an EF just to see what this wonderful modernity you talk of consists in.

      9. Jordan Zarembo

        #35 by Joe O’Leary on May 8, 2011 – 7:20 am

        Jordan, why so defensive?

        I have no need for defensiveness. Still, I don’t understand why devotions, novenas, and the rosary have been downplayed or even disparaged by a number of people in the post-conciliar Church. I only know of one church where public novenas are practiced, and it is a traditional parish in union with Rome. I find that the congregational rosary before daily Mass is not all that common anymore. Yes, the Mass is more important than novenas or the rosary. Still, in my opinion popular Catholic devotional life has been lost after the Council. I find this to be a terrible loss.

        #34 by claire mathieu on May 8, 2011 – 5:13 am

        I try not to pray the rosary or read prayerbooks at Mass. I often used to do these practices at EF Low Mass, but now I either think mental prayer or meditate on the words of the Mass. I also recite the OF congregational prayers in a low voice, but that is due more to my temperament. I’d rather just meditate through the entire Mass and not say anything, but I understand that verbal participation is very important in the OF.

      10. Jack Wayne

        Joe O’Leary – A missal from 1962 celebrated in 2011 is going to be different than how it was celebrated in 1962 unless you are deliberately trying to do a historic reenactment. The EF is the 1962 Missal with all the same words and rubrics, but that doesn’t mean the people are going to act like it’s the early 1960’s any more than people living in restored Victorian houses are going to act just like Victorians. I don’t pretend I’m living in the 1970’s when I attend the OF.

        IMO, the major theme of Vatican II (which, I’m told, is active participation in the Mass itself) does not come from a particular form of Mass, but rather from those participating in it. It can be achieved with either the OF or EF. Latin Masses with everyone praying the rosary or being lost in other devotions are not something I have ever experienced, for example, so bringing it up as an example of what is wrong with the EF doesn’t work.

        Some EF goers do like to pretend they live in some 1950’s time warp bubble – but that’s their problem and not mine. I imagine a lot of “Lefebrite” Masses are like that, but I’ve never been to one of those. I’ve found that the character of EF communities ranges quite a bit. I would recommend attending one at a parish that simply has added one to its Sunday Mass schedule.

    3. Mike Burns

      We have done such a poor job of catechizing about the active and static presences of the Eucharist. I have no problem with the adoration of the bessed sacrament outside of masss. However, we need to be careful that ocular communion does not replace the active celebration of the paschal mystery and the making of Eucharist that makes the Church.

      Reply
    4. Mary Coogan

      @ Rita Ferrone: The real presence must be a real challenge to teach! In psychoanalytic theory, “magical thinking” pertains to a phase of childhood coinciding with first communion years and often lingering well beyond. (I wonder whether reclaiming the prayer to Michael the Archangel as an invocation against demons plays on this “magical thinking.”) In speaking with adult Catholics, I’ve heard as typical answer to the question “What is the consecrated host?” that it is a “symbol,” especially from “tribal” Catholics for whom religion is part loyalty to family/ethnic heritage. Can one have an understanding of the Eucharist either from catechesis (“authority”) or from the ordinary devotions (“veneration”) alone, or is it part of a spiritual apprehension that includes more than the Eucharist? From James Joyce’s “Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man”:

      Stephen, struck by his tone of closure, reopened the discussion at once by saying:
      —I fear many things: dogs, horses, fire-arms, the sea, thunder-storms, machinery, the country roads at night.
      —But why do you fear a bit of bread?
      —I imagine, Stephen said, that there is a malevolent reality behind those things I say I fear.
      —Do you fear then, Cranly asked, that the God of the Roman Catholics would strike you dead and damn you if you made a sacrilegious communion?
      —The God of the Roman Catholics could do that now, Stephen said. I fear more than that the chemical action which would be set up in my soul by a false homage to a symbol behind which are massed twenty centuries of authority and veneration.

      Reply
      1. Rita Ferrone

        Mary, thanks for your comments and for quoting this incredible passage from James Joyce. It says something profound, and too often glossed over, concerning the fearful connection between a theology and the lived identity of the community which presents it.

        In addition, your final question is spot-on:
        “Can one have an understanding of the Eucharist either from catechesis (”authority”) or from the ordinary devotions (”veneration”) alone, or is it part of a spiritual apprehension that includes more than the Eucharist?”

        I would agree with your assessment, expressed in these last two lines.

    5. Jeffrey Herbert

      Rita;

      Nothing you cite as an example here has anything to do with eucharistic Adoration, and the suggestion that “they spend umpteen hours in adoration”, while it may be true, is an intellectual leap of reasoning that I would not expect you of all people to resort to. They might also very possibly be regular attendees of the Charismatic Prayer Group and attend the Sunday Guitar Mass… but I wouldn’t attribute their misinformation to either of those.

      I am however curious about your implication that Eucharistic Adoration is just “magical thinking” and a suspension of disbelief, thriving on an “absence of understanding”. What exactly is it that those who believe in the real presence “don’t understand”? I only ask because I spend an appreciable amount of time in Adoration… as does our Pastor, our Bishop and quite a large number of our parishioners. I think they would want to know what Rita Ferrone thinks they’ve been missing all this time…

      Reply
      1. Joe O'Leary

        James Joyce presents a Catholicism riddled with magical thinking — but this has been healed by the new theology and Vatican II — a Council that was NECESSARY. If the horizons of Vatican II are lost, Catholicism will revert to something worse than what Joyce depicted. The Real Presence in itself is not magic but the synthesis of the Christian faith — the symbols of bread and wine also effect what they signify — we enact the Paschal Mystery by being fed with Christ’s body and blood (a point on which Lutherans and Calvinists agree with Catholics and Anglicans, despite differences about the modalities).

      2. Rita Ferrone

        Jeffrey,

        While I’m flattered to learn that so many people in your orbit will want to know what I think, you are barking up the wrong tree here.

        What I am critiquing is your blithe, and erroneous, assumption that adoration, and belief in the Real Presence (“in its crudest form,” you’ll remember, was the jumping off point of this discussion) requires “a considerably greater depth of understanding” (your own words) of the liturgy (both theologically and liturgically is what you said). This is simply not true, and you should know it.

        There are certainly some people who do possess great depth of understanding who also engage in adoration and believe fervently in the Real Presence. But the latter (adoration and belief) does not necessarily entail the former (understanding) as you claimed. In fact, there are many counter-examples, and I supplied a few from my own experience. They are true, and relevant to debunking your claim that “deep understanding” is somehow a necessary implication of revering the consecrated host.

        The force of my examples is this: Even a correct, much less a deep, understanding may not always accompany such practices or beliefs.

  12. Joe O'Leary

    The whole idea of going back to the 1962 liturgy, which certainly did not project the dynamic participation in the paschal mystery that the NO does, is a confession of failure to catechize the faithful in the spirit of Vatican II. That failure must be laid in part at the feet of 2 Popes who made an art of selectively quoting the Council in a manner designed to emasculate it, and to the present Pope in particular who as Cardinal made many tendentious, snide, pessimistic, depressive negative comments about Vatican II and the NO.

    Reply
    1. Jeffrey Herbert

      Joe;

      We just celebrated the Second Anniversary of our EF Parish here in Sarasota Florida yesterday morning. In two years, the parish has gone from having one priest to now having three plus a resident seminarian, expanded the Mass schedule from two Sunday Masses to three (there can’t be Saturday Masses, so time limits the schedule), as well as Masses at 4 different remote locations in the Diocese on Sunday afternoons. There is a thriving Choir and Children’s choir (all in Latin) and an attendance growing fast enough to already warrant building expansion plans after two years. The growth in parishioners is almost exclusively YOUNG families (under 30) with multiple children. The Masses are webcast and have between 30 and 45 thousand viewers daily. I say all of this because I have a hard time seeing this as an example of people being nostalgic for the Mass of their childhood…. many of these parishioners were children in the ’80’s and ’90’s.

      Also surprising to me, although I don’t know why since I’m such a person, is the number of people who attend an OF Parish sometimes (the one at which I work), but also attend Mass at Christ the King (EF). I don’t know whether it’s a sign of the success of Vatican II, or the failure, but most such individuals see little difference between the two forms, except that the choir sings in Latin rather than English, and they tend to use incense more often (these were two of the things mentioned to me by parishioners I ran into from my OF parish). Most attendees don’t focus on liturgical-theological distinctions between the two.

      I will say however, that they emphasize an aggressive evangelization effort to their parishioners… obviously successful.

      Reply
      1. Joe O'Leary

        The EF has the charm of novelty — but surely the difference must be huge if it really is the Mass of 1962? Is not the Canon prayed silently and ad orientem? Or if there is no substantive difference, why the fuss at all? Why not just do the NO in Latin with chants, incense etc.?

      2. Jeffrey Herbert

        I’m not sure I’d call it the “charm of novelty”, but it very definitely offers some aspects that are absent in the OF. And yes, it is most definitely the 1962 Missal. The point I was making, perhaps poorly, is that to the YOUNGER attendees of the EF, such distinctions have little meaning. As they were brought up with a liturgical form that offers so many options, such things as the silent canon and ad orientem are just other options.

        As for why not just do the NO with chant, incense, etc…. I think you have stumbled onto my own personal view as to the reason for SP.

        I’m really not trying to be a thorn in anyone’s side here, but I’m just trying to get to the bottom of this apparently widely held belief that those who engage in Adoration or other devotions, or are advocates of the EF are somehow “not understanding” something, are simplistic (they’re not), being deceived (not that either), or are somehow secretly longing for a return to the pre-Vatican II Church. It’s a bit like the joka about the doctor that tells the man “I can’t make you get any younger”, to which the man replies…”Doc, I don’t want to get younger…I just want to keep getting older!”. For those who were not already practicing Catholics pre-1962, all of these things (devotions, adoration, EF) are all FORWARD MOVING. To not see that is to miss a major movement in our faith today.

      3. Jack Wayne

        I think Jeffrey hits the nail right on the head. I’ve always seen the EF as just another option – one can attend two OF Masses and experience two almost completely different liturgies, so it has always puzzled me why having the EF too is really so strange to some people. Protestants seem to be able to manage having “traditional” rites vs “contemporary” ones.

      4. Tom Poelker

        I would like to know more about the demographics.

        Do these congregations include many Spanish speakers who find Latin almost as comprehensible as English?

        What is the proportion of over 60s in the congregation? in those who are “aggressively” promoting the EF?

  13. Fr. Allan J. McDonald

    Apart from reactionary groups in the Church such as the schismatic St. Pius X Society, I don’t think that those parish communities which have started to celebrate the EF Mass in the last four years are doing so from a 1950’s perspective. The principles of post Vatican II participation are being brought to the EF and the number of people receiving Holy Communion at the EF is the same as at the OF, almost all. Yes, the lectionary is only a one year cycle, but there is definitely a Liturgy of the Word in the EF coupled with the sung or spoken introit, Offertory and Communion verses. But with that said, there is no reason why the newer lectionary couldn’t be incorporated into the EF, in fact as I’ve written before, I see no reason why the OF Missal, with all its prayers, prefaces, calendar and lectionary could not be celebrated using the EF Order of the Mass and rubrics either in the Vernacular or Latin or a combination of both and with full, conscious and active participation. As far as the real presence of Christ, He is always active even if there is no sacrament involved and no Blessed Sacrament–no such thing as a Static Christ. Those people I know who make Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament a strong personal devotion and that is what it is a devotion, are often the very same people who are daily communicants and the most active in the parish and in caring for their families and the poor.

    Reply
    1. Joe O'Leary

      Of course there is no such thing as a static Christ, but our communal consciousness of Christ always falls far short of his reality. The EF that takes aboard the entire OF missal — I am not sure what this would look like — would there still be only one eucharistic prayer read silently, for example? And would EF worshipers be happy to see the EF begin to look like the abhorred OF?

      Reply
      1. Fr. Allan J. McDonald

        I’m personally of the mind that if the OF Mass was to be celebrated in Latin and ad orientem, it would be difficult for the people who until only recently have experienced the EF Mass to tell the difference. The proposal I suggest would be keeping the OF as it is and offering as an option the OF Roman Missal with the EF Order of Mass and Rubrics. Perhaps with that option only the Roman Canon would be used. However, the 1962 Missal would also be allowed. I have absolutely no problem with either the OF or the EF form of the Mass and I personally prefer the vernacular. However, I think there is room in the Church for a rich variety of celebrations of the Mass in both language and order and yes I prefer the OF Lectionary for Sunday and daily Mass, although perhaps it would be beneficial to add a D cycle for Sunday that would include the EF lectionary. Just my musings, nothing dogmatic.

    2. Mike Burns

      Since you see no difference in the active and static presence of the Eucharist, do you distribute communion from the tabernacle at Mass? In your line of thinking there would be no viable reason not to distribute the reserved Sacraement.

      Reply
      1. Fr. Allan J. McDonald

        Christ is Christ whether sacramental or not–Is He or is He not active in Protestant communions that are non-sacramental or when one goes to his/her room, shuts the door and prays?
        I hold that the ideal based upon the GIRM that Holy Communion consecrated at the Mass one is attending is to be distributed to the Faithful, only resorting to the tabernacle when the supply happens to run low or in other extraordinary circumstances in the pastoral life of a large parish too many have accumulated in the tabernacle and there is a need to reduce the number. But either way, the communicant is receiving our Lord, Risen and Active, Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity.

      2. Joe O'Leary

        Of course one cannot ensure that there are just enough hosts and no more for a big congregation, so distribution from the tabernacle is usually necessary — and why should that be an issue? It’s just a dill and cummin concern.

  14. Chris Grady

    Fr. Allan J. McDonald :
    I see no reason why the OF Missal, with all its prayers, prefaces, calendar and lectionary could not be celebrated using the EF Order of the Mass and rubrics either in the Vernacular or Latin or a combination of both and with full, conscious and active participation.

    Oh dear me, Allan, it looks like you’re proposing something different from what the current rules allow.

    Careful!

    Bishop Bill Morris got pilloried in comments on this very blog by you and others for pretty much the same thing.

    Reply
    1. Joe O'Leary

      I admit to total confusion as to what the EF is. Apparently it is not just a revival of the 1962 missal, but something mysteriously modern, at least in the intention of its celebrants. In the notorious letter to Lothar Barth, Cardinal Ratzinger foresaw a fusion of old and new, so perhaps the EF will be encouraged to evolve toward the OF and vice versa, so that in the end a liturgy will emerge satisfying to all. In my opinion neither the OF nor the EF is the answer — we need creative new forms.

      Reply
    2. Joe O'Leary

      Actually it turns out that Summ. Pont. does give the leeway Fr Allan refers to: It is changed in Summorum Pontificum to the following: “The vernacular edition of the Lectionary
      for Mass may be used in the extraordinary form, while the 1962 calendar is to be followed. The Ecclesia Dei Commission will study the eventual integration of new saints and some prefaces from the ordinary form into the extraordinary Missal.” This is in the furthest column to the right.” (USCCB clarifications)

      Reply
      1. Fr. Allan J. McDonald

        I did not intend to say that we have the leeway, but the leeway should be given one day; it’s hopeful thinking on my part.

  15. Liz lopez

    Chris, grow up!

    Reply
  16. Joe O'Leary

    “it is changed” — “It” refers to the previous ban on admixtures between 1962 and NO.

    Reply
  17. Paul Inwood

    I hesitate to jump in on this thread, which started life as a discussion of the declining numbers of theology graduate students and really ought to return to it, but Allan said

    Those people I know who make Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament a strong personal devotion and that is what it is a devotion, are often the very same people who are daily communicants and the most active in the parish and in caring for their families and the poor.

    Let’s be perfectly clear about this: Worship of the Eucharist outside Mass is not a personal devotion. It is, or should be, a communal act, a liturgical act. I think this is what some previous commenters in this thread have been driving at when they express their unease at adoration and similar practices. The problem is not adoration or exposition per se but the way in which people conduct themselves during these activities.

    May I suggest that we re-read the Vatican document (1973) Worship of the Eucharist outside Mass (UK English translation appeared in 1978 — don’t know the details for the US), a ritual book which gives a very different theological thrust to this activity from the silent, devotional gazing at a tabernacle or monstrance which is widespread. But an activity, a ritual activity, it certainly is — or should be — with active and communal ritual events happening during it. And what was said in the 1973 document was not new. It has extensive quotes from Eucharisticum Mysterium (1967).

    The thing is, we haven’t taken much notice of it so far, preferring to continue with the previous custom of silent and prayerful gazing to the exclusion of all else.

    Reply
    1. Fr. Allan J. McDonald

      Certainly there is a communal aspect to Benediction and quite of bit of flexibility as to the format. Even with perpetual adoration in many places it is required that at least 2 people be present although there would be no sort of liturgy or communal devotional act apart from the silence. But we shouldn’t denigrate private devotions or allowing people to pray before the tabernacle during the day or in adoration if there is solemn exposition. As with so much in our Catholic tradition, it isn’t either/or, but both/and.

      Reply
      1. Paul Inwood

        although there would be no sort of liturgy or communal devotional act apart from the silence.

        This is not what the documents stipulate. We are talking about a liturgical act — that is the whole point. I’m not denigrating provate devotions at all, but there is a time and place for them and Worship of the Eucharist outside Mass, if you follow the documents, is not that place. It may have been once, but it is not now.

      2. Fr. Allan J. McDonald

        In the case of perpetual adoration in monasteries and in parishes I do not believe it is required to have some type of liturgical expression during adoration apart from adoration that is perpetual. Now if it is for a short time say over the course of an hour or a few hours, then there should be at exposition an opening hymn, silence, and then toward benediction or resposition, readings, hymns, etc., but when there is perpetual exposition adoration which is now allowed in parishes by bishops communal liturgical acts do not occur except for adoration by at least two people.

      3. Joe O'Leary

        The silence is all-important – without it the entire point of eucharistic adoration disappears.

        It seems that there is a sort of running battle going on for decades between Vatican liturgical orthodoxy and private devotion — as in Pius XII’s stress that eucharistic adoration be seen as an extension of the Mass. As in the case of Marian devotion, the Vatican has to both encourage and regulate.

      4. Tom Poelker

        Two people being present at all times for any form of public exposition is a canonical requirement.

        I have been assuming that it is exposition and adoration that many have been promoting here. Is it something else, such as regular and personal meditation time in the same room with the Eucharist in a tabernacle? I think that is a very different thing from organized adoration schedules and exposition. Exposition has many specific rules as in WEOM, mentioned above.

  18. Bill deHaas

    Like the EF and the “wish” for a blended, reformed 1962 missal, the catholic alternative universe is alive and well. It strikes me repeatedly that SP originally was only permission for a small group because of age, etc. But, now we see whole parishes with young people fixated on the unreformed liturgy…..and we have the nerve to criticize Bishop Morris who only wanted to raise the most significant issue that many diocese face – access to the eucharist.

    The contradictions; rationalizations; re-interpretations; and outright resistance (sorry, can’t say dissent) is truly amazing.

    Reply
  19. Mary Hess

    One striking difference between the students in Protestant schools and those in Catholic schools — and I’m surprised no one in this thread noted it? — is that the student body in most Protestant schools at the MDiv level is nearing 50% women. Clearly that is not the case in the Catholic context. When you narrow the applicant pool of course you’re going to narrow the student body.

    Reply
  20. Tom Poelker

    “The idea that if Adoration is emphasized as an important part of our faith then people ignore Scripture and all other aspects of liturgical life is ludicrous. They don’t, and it’s insulting to suggest that they would. Certainly in the Medieval Church this may have been more the case as the faithful so rarely received Communion, and so Adoration became a replacement for the Sacrament.”

    You have attempted to shift the terms of the discussion.
    The message to which I responded was about focusing on adoration in the liturgy, now you speak of the whole life of the parish.

    Eucharistic adoration as a separate practice is a public devotion and not part of the liturgy. It is not communal worship requiring FCAP. It can be a positive addition to parish life, but it is an error to make the adoration of the Eucharistic elements the focus of the liturgical celebration of the Eucharist.

    We all need to be very careful of what we discuss and what is implied by the terms we use. I try to use “liturgy” specifically for the Mass and the Sacraments and the Hours.

    Not all public prayer is liturgical prayer. Different principles apply to public devotions and common recitation of private prayers. Not all worship is liturgical and liturgy is not limited to worship in the narrow sense of honor offered to God from people.

    Reply
    1. Joe O'Leary

      Yes, it is an error to make adoration of the real presence the center of the Eucharist, which is why I dislike the acclamation allowed in Ireland (but in fact rarely if ever used as far as I know): “My Lord and my God”. However, the eucharistic adoration should not be separated from the Eucharist as if it were another planet. Like Viaticum it is an extension of the Mass.

      Reply
  21. Tom Poelker

    “Latin Masses with everyone praying the rosary or being lost in other devotions are not something I have ever experienced, for example, so bringing it up as an example of what is wrong with the EF doesn’t work.”

    Within the last 15 years, the second and last time I checked, this was exactly what was going on at the indult EF in St. Louis. The music was provided by the poorly trained voice of the organist/soloist, and was very similar to the normally bad High Masses I experienced in those days, not even as good as the eighth grade girls’s choirs could be then.

    I guess I need to force myself to attend one of the priests’ of Christ the King Masses now available to see their quality, but I am not hopeful.

    I also do not understand why EF fans could not use OF Latin ad orientum for the Liturgy of the Eucharist and meet most of their personal needs while sharing the same calendar with the rest of the RCC [and the RCL using churches] and the benefits of a broader selection of Scriptures. If somebody wants to do that in St. Louis or Jefferson City or eastern Springfield dioceses, I will volunteer my professional services to train adult ministers and be Master of Ceremonies.

    Reply
    1. Joe O'Leary

      orientem not um

      Reply
  22. Tom Poelker

    per JH
    “… most such individuals see little difference between the two forms, except that the choir sings in Latin rather than English, and they tend to use incense more often”

    If they can see little difference, then, I suggest, that the OF Mass does not involve the FCAP which SC envisioned. The OF presiders may be among the many who only read their parts and do not actually lead the assembly. There should be many experienced differences between the two forms. The obvious one from your example is that the role of the choir should be noticeably different.

    “I will say however, that they emphasize an aggressive evangelization effort to their parishioners… obviously successful.”

    Is this aggressive evangelization or is it aggressive marketing? Please offer examples which would demonstrate how it is the first and not the second.

    Reply
  23. Tom Poelker

    per JH
    “For those who were not already practicing Catholics pre-1962, all of these things (devotions, adoration, EF) are all FORWARD MOVING. To not see that is to miss a major movement in our faith today.”

    So who is and why are they promoting this going backwards as if it were going forward? Why not promote the OF with the current calendar and lectionary and the EP One in the 1950s style? If these younger people think they are getting a variant on the contemporary but they are actually getting something old, what subversive intent is behind that? Who is deceiving them and why?

    Reply
  24. Tom Poelker

    per AJM
    “in the pastoral life of a large parish too many have accumulated in the tabernacle and there is a need to reduce the number.”

    If the presiders do their job at all conscientiously, this need never happen. With about five weeks on attention, priests or sacristans can get within about ten hosts or to the right number of loaves for even the largest Sunday congregations. A quick glance will tell if there is a notably larger or smaller than usual crowd and adjustments can be made to what is brought to the table. Remaining excess can be reverently consumed or shortages supplied by further breaking of portions.

    There is no need to ever have in the tabernacle more hosts than are expected to be needed for viaticum for the next 48 hours.

    Reply
    1. Jack Feehily

      I believe one of the problems related to the tabernacle holding so much consecrated Bread that it must be resorted to regularly is the use of wafer thin and tiny altar breads. They are harder to count so why bother seems to be the attitude. It’s all the body & blood, soul& divinity, so what difference does it make? I regard this as sheer carelessness, not to mention utter disdain for a well thought out rubric.

      On the issue of eucharistic adoration outside Mass, my parish has a tabernacle that allows for perpetual exposition. The large Host is removed during mass, of course and returned to it’s place following communion. The use of an impenetrable acrylic lens meets the requirement for safeguarding the Holy Sacrament. It is located in it’s own chapel with 24/7 access through a coded door. This chapel is fully viewable through the glass wall that separates it from the church proper. When you enter the church your eyes are drawn to it as well as to the altar and the cross. We encourage people to come and pray in the Presence of Christ and they come thru the day and night.

      Reply
    2. Samuel J. Howard

      With about five weeks on attention, priests or sacristans can get within about ten hosts or to the right number of loaves for even the largest Sunday congregations.

      I’ve been counting our Sunday congregations for about two years. The number fluctuates by as much as 60 people from week to week and it’s not possible from a glance to tell how many people are there each week (or how many will come to communion, since they don’t all receive.)

      Reply
      1. Joe O'Leary

        Even in a small community, where people individually put a host in the ciborium, one cannot calculate infallibly. This is a ridiculously petty issue.

  25. Tom Poelker

    I think the narrow understanding of Eucharist by many was illustrated by those who could not tolerate having Mass in churches without having the tabernacle front and center. This may not be a static view of the presence of Jesus, but it shows a narrow view of why one comes for Sunday Eucharist, for the purpose of going to the church building at all. It showed a failure to understand the higher importance of the Eucharist as celebrated rather than the Eucharist retained adored. I can never understand why anyone would want to have the tabernacle in any place where anyone would turn their back to it. It is this kind of misunderstanding which concerns me with people who focus on adoration of the elements and their personal reception, the possibility that they are excluding understanding of the Eucharist as banquet, as communal experience, and the Liturgy of the Word as anything but a sacred setting for a miracle.

    These are not accusations that these things are so, but expressions of concerns raised by advocates of certain practices.

    Reply
  26. Tom Poelker

    Sorry to have filled the recent comments column on everybody.

    On the other hand, this has been one of the least rhetorical discussions we have had recently on PT and I have found it very stimulating. Thank you all.

    Reply
  27. Earle Luscombe

    Since we both live in St. Louis, I assume we are talking about De Sales. In the last couple of years the choir has improved dramitically. FACP, however, really is very much in passive mode. As to the OF in atin, ad orientem, incense, there is a Mass at Victory, at 9 a.m. However, unless things have changed in the last few years, no one much attends.

    Reply
    1. Tom Poelker

      Yes, it is DeSales where I need to go. I have not been there since it took over from St. Agatha where I took my PSR class. I did not know about OL Victory? Where is that. downtown?

      Want to set a date to go to DeSales and discuss it at breakfast later?

      Reply
  28. Mike Burns

    #59 Joe O’Leary
    Using reserved Eucharist should not be the norm. My parish never uses eucharist from the tabernalce at the active celebration of the Eucharist. There are always those rare cases where the GIRM would apply.

    Reply
  29. Earle Luscombe

    #84 Tom,

    Sure, send me an e mail, earle.luscombe@att.net

    St. Mary of Victories, is at 744 South 3rd. St., and the Mass in question was/is at 9 a.m.

    Reply

Posted

in

by

Anthony Ruff, OSB

Tags:

, , ,

Discover more from Home

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading