There was an interesting policy change in our diocese this summer, promulgated, I believe, on Corpus Christi. I heard about it, but couldn't find it in writing anywhere at the time, so I forgot until recently, when our pastor announced he was going on a trip (to Medjugorje) for ten days, and what accomodations would be made in his absence. (He is the only priest in the parish, 3 weekend Masses, 2 daily Masses every day).
While various area priests would cover various Masses, the related point of the announcement was that there would be no more Communion services to replace a Mass when he was gone. (This wouldn't happen on a Sunday, but on a weekday). The new policy is that in areas in which people have access to other daily Masses, there should be no Communion services.
Good move.
Back in the day - the "day" being the 70's and up through much of the 80's - lots of us thought Communion services were not only okay but sort of great. Especially those of us, like me, who had the opportunity to lead them in various settings. It was a very weird time, to be honest. In retrospect, of course, it was very odd that during this same period we were being told over and over again that there was so much more to the Presence of Christ than that Eucharist business, and that the main point of gathering was the the Presence of Christ in You n' Me, and that a focus on Christ in the Eucharist outside of Mass was (sniff) problematic and rather medieval...the question would nag...then why do a Communion service? Doesn't that reinforce the irreplacable, unique Preasence in the Eucharist? Doesn't it even reinforce that dreaded "mechanistic" "vending machine" notion of sacraments?
And wait...another trope we heard repeated was "Why does everything have to have Mass?" (and this is a point I agree with, incidentally) - I mean...how about the Liturgy of the Hours? If you can't have Mass, do what Catholics and other Christians have done for centuries in their churches - gather for Morning or Evening Prayer?
(Of course, gathering to pray the Liturgy of the Hours was usually not the intention of those who sang that song. It was more..gather to pray the para-liturgical service I wrote...and be sure to pick up your symbolic little stone on the way into the chapel, by the way)
Well, of course, any thinking person would realize how none of that was consistent - to degrade the Presence of Christ in the Eucharist outside of Mass, and at the same time insist on presiding at Communion services in a priest's absence. But you see, that was a small price to pay, since the bigger point, in the proliferation of Communion services, when there really was no need, was to de-emphasize the role of the male priest in Eucharist, period, to acclimate us to seeing someone else besides a male ordained person presiding.
So, it's interesting that Bishop D'Arcy has instituted this new policy. I've no idea what was going on behind the scenes, if problems and confusions were arising in various places. But it's a intriguing step.
Now...can we get the Liturgy of the Hours, or at least some of it - publicly prayed in every cathedral in every diocese of the country, to give us an even fuller sense of what it means for the Church to pray?
Comments