http://www.latinmassmagazine.com/articles/articles_emasculation.html
A constitutive part of masculinity is the desire for unique intimacy. Much has been written in the past three decades about appropriate intimacy for the priest... The need for a unique physical intimacy with another is constitutive of permanent monogamous relationships ordained by the Creator, Yet it is precisely that type of intimacy with another human being that the celibate sacrifices. The celibate priest, however, was offered through his office an incomparable and unparalleled intimacy: he alone could touch God.
The liturgical legislation of the post-Conciliar era has eliminated the Eucharistic exclusivity that marked the office of the priest. The celibate priest no longer possesses the unique corporeal relationship with God. He is not denied the relationship, but others have access to it. Consider a parallel situation: i.e., within the Sacrament of Matrimony. The possession of an exclusive bodily prerogative with one's spouse is primary; in fact there exists no greater convergence between the Divine Law and the instincts of even fallen human nature than on this point. Violate this pact, and one risks murderous rage. If a celibate priest, however, reacts with even the slightest resentment towards the loss of what was his corporeal exclusivity within his Sacrament of Holy Orders, he is considered a candidate for psychological evaluation."
......
The loss of the priest's unique intimacy with the sacred has subtly, but mightily, contributed to this development. While insisting that nothing has essentially been changed for the priest because he is still the one who consecrates, the liturgical engineers have made his presence optional at the most intimate moment of holy communion between the flock under his care and Our Lord. The majority of Catholics receive the Eucharist from the hands of a lay person. The act of shared intimacy that is at the heart of shepherding ("Feed my lambs, feed my sheep") is absent. The Church, echoing an increasingly feminized society, is telling priests: "Once you have consecrated, you are no longer needed." The act of the priest "feeding" the faithful with the Bread of Life incarnates his role as Its sole provider and, far more than the eye can see, forms his and his people's perception of his spiritual fatherhood. The priest's role was never confined to the sanctuary, but what made him unique to his people was his unique relationship to the Eucharist which he brought forth from within the sanctuary. The commitment to celibacy in the Latin Rite was the tangible sign of the Eucharistic "Christ-man."
The vocations crisis, created by the anti-masculine policies of the ecclesiological revolution, is now blamed by the bishops on celibacy. Celibacy is a problem, but only because the present structural environment of the Church has removed those elements which traditionally have supported its compatibility with a healthy masculine nature.
I came across the point in Dom Prosper Gueranger's book "The Holy Mass" about why, in the Traditional Rite, a priest holds his finger and thumb together after consecration. I have heard previously that this was a merely practical measure to prevent tiny fragments of the Blessed Sacrament from falling and becoming profaned. Perhaps this is also true. But Gueranger says that it is because the Priest's fingers are sacred, or consecrated, and alone have the privilege of touching our Lord (rather than anything else around him). This consecration happens at a Priest's ordination, when the bishop wraps a special material around the fingers, consecrating them with oil. To stress his point, Gueranger adds that if a Priest were to lose one of these forefingers through injury, he would have to seek special permission to use another finger for the Sacred Mysteries. All this may seem silly and ritualistic. But take something so ingrained in Tradition away from the priesthood, and perhaps it is difficult to predict the consequences. The above article, I suppose, seeks to get to the psychological bottom of it! Take it or leave it, but I agree with its conclusion.Image: FSSP Ordinations June 2007 http://www.schola-sainte-cecile.com/
Why does the writer you quote use 'feminized' as an insult? Why would a woman want anything to do with a church that holds females in such obvious contempt?
ReplyDeleteKitty, I can understand your concern, but the writer is simply referring to the position of Priest, which is a Masculine ministry. For a priest to be feminised, is certainly an insult in that regard. The Church teaches a unique fulfilling of our role as human beings, whether that be masculine or feminine. You will find that this runs contrary to society at large, where there are all sorts of blurring of boundaries, to the extent that men have problems understanding what it truly is to be masculine. Likewise, I daresay this is true for women. The Church's teaching on these issues is surely a beautiful thing if we only sought to understand it better.
ReplyDeleteWhere on earth did she get that hat??? That is certainly OTT and not a bit necessary,,,,it's not her that's important.
ReplyDeleteWhile I entirely agree with all you have written may I make a point about Abbot Guerenger? He was a great c19 French liturgiologist, that cannot be denied, but, being French, he was full of c19 Gallicanism which tended to over spiritualize perfectly reasonable rubrics and invest them with 'spiritual' interpretations that cloud their prime purpose.
ReplyDeleteYou are right: finger tips were held together to protect any consecrated matter until the ablutions. But they had to be separated in order to distribute Holy Communion. This, however, was done rarely before Pope Pius X's drive for frequent Communion and the forefingers and thumbs would have been closed until the ablutions. That is all that actually suffices: the protection of the Host.
Abbot Guerenger goes beyond the prime purpose of the action and, in consequence, over-spiritualizes a primarily functional act. That is typical of French c19 pietism, tinged with Jansenism, I fear. Rome is more down to earth and always has been.
Catty:
ReplyDeleteI really like the practice of spiritualising things to deepen our own outlook of Faith in Christ. I don't think it is a far throw from the ancient tradition of the Church Fathers, who would see things in the Old Testament as types of Christ and His Church. It is easy to apply the principle of hermeneutics to everything, from Scripture to Liturgy, and gain a purely historical and practical understanding of things. But I find it far more spiritually lucrative to see and pray beyond these points.
With regards to the priest's thumb and index finger unjoining during communion, this is only ever to handle the Blessed Sacrament, which is done several times during the Mass between the Consecration and Ablutions anyway. Everything else the Priest handles, from the Chalice to the Ciborium to the Communion Plate, are all done with his other fingers.
So your point about preserving fragments of the consecrated host do not entirely add up; these supposed fragments would potentially fall every time the Priest handles the Host itself(eg at the Domine Non Sum Dignus, Agnus Dei, Breaking of the Host, etc.)
Therefore, I can't help but think the over-pietised Guerenger's explanation actually fits better!
We could quibble for hours about the position of the priest's fingers at Mass and all of your points are well known. The piety of the Fathers expressed in typology was far earthier than c19 French pietism which, if followed to its logical conclusion, rots the soul. They were making theological rather than spiritual points. But it's always better to be a true blue Roman than a Gallican pietist, especially where liturgy is concerned. After all, that's what you get at the Birmingham Oratory. And the London Oratory is, and has always been, Italianate. On the other hand, you do have Fr Fenlon Cong Orat in Birmingham???
ReplyDeleteThe ordained priest alone can consecrate the bread and wine into the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ and it is through the priest's ministry that lay persons give the Holy Eucharist to others. Without the priest there is no Holy Eucharist, no sacraments, no church. The lay priesthood function through the ordained priesthood. The priest offers all the peoples' offerings to God and brings down God's blessing on the whole church. One of the blessings the priest brings down through his ministry in the Catholic Church is the lay ministers' function in giving the Sacred Species.
ReplyDeleteAll persons touch the Sacred Species by receiving Holy Communion,but only the ordained priest may transubstantiate, confect the Sacred Species. The act of shared intimacy that is at the heart of shepherding is NOT lost because of WHO Jesus Christ is.
When the priest receives Our Lord, the priest receives for all mankind, and because of the priest's Holy Orders, the priesthood of the laity comes into being.