Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Eucharist vs. the Word (which is more important in the Catholic Church)
ZNA ^ | November 11, 2008 | Father Edward McNamara

Posted on 11/26/2008 4:35:17 PM PST by NYer

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-132 next last
Readers may send questions to liturgy@zenit.org. Please put the word "Liturgy" in the subject field. The text should include your initials, your city and your state, province or country. Father McNamara can only answer a small selection of the great number of questions that arrive
1 posted on 11/26/2008 4:35:21 PM PST by NYer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Salvation; narses; SMEDLEYBUTLER; redhead; Notwithstanding; nickcarraway; Romulus; ...
November 26 - Follow-up: Eucharist vs. the Word

In the wake of our column on the Eucharist and the Word (see Nov. 11), a Singapore reader offered the following comments:

"In this week's topic on 'Eucharist vs. the Word,' I was also thinking about Vatican II's dogmatic constitution on divine Revelation, 'Dei Verbum,' when I read the question posed by N.C. from Cleveland, Ohio.

"In No. 21 of 'Dei Verbum' it states, 'The Church has always venerated the divine Scriptures just as she venerates the body of the Lord, since, especially in the sacred liturgy, she unceasingly receives and offers to the faithful the bread of life from the table both of God's word and of Christ's body.'

"The proclamation of the Scriptures has always been an integral part of the liturgy at Mass. In a sense, [the] relationship between Scriptures and the Eucharist is complementary, as expressed in 'Dei Verbum.' This was also clearly brought out in your reply.

"The 17th General Congregation (12th Synod of Bishops) on Oct. 15, 2008, reported in the third point: 'Eucharist, homily, community' deals with the relationship between Scripture and the Eucharist, with the question, which emerged from the synodal discussion, on how to privilege, among the faithful, a more unitary perception of this relationship; the sacramental dimension of the Word and eschatological dimension; the celebration of the Word; the importance of the homily; art as an analogical form of preaching; finally, the relationship between the Word of God, celebration and community.

"Perhaps this is also the reason why, in the question asked, the reader said he was told that 'Catholics believe that the Word of God is as important as the Eucharist.'"

While "Dei Verbum" is a solemn conciliar text, the text from the Synod represents a work in progress. The latter will become formally magisterial in the degree that the Holy Father might incorporate these suggestions into an apostolic exhortation.

It is quite possible that a misinterpretation of texts such as "Dei Verbum" could have led some Catholics to cast a shadow on the mutually complementary relationship between Eucharist and Word, thus leading to a false opposition between them.

"Dei Verbum" simply recalls that the Church has historically observed a certain parallelism between the liturgical honors offered to sacred Scriptures and that offered to the Eucharist (incense, candles, etc.). The point was not to produce equivalence but rather to emphasize the fact that, contrary to certain accusations, Catholics had always venerated the Word. After all, the same Second Vatican Council had earlier proclaimed the liturgy, and especially the Eucharist, as the summit and source of the Church's life.

The Synod's recommendation of a more unitary perception of the Word in its relationship with the Eucharist should also be seen in continuity with previous doctrine. At the same time, a fuller and deeper vision of the various dimensions of the Word in Catholic life and worship can only lead to a fuller appreciation of the importance of the Eucharist as the fulfillment of Scripture.

2 posted on 11/26/2008 4:37:55 PM PST by NYer ("Run from places of sin as from a plague." - St. John Climacus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Let me say this. Jesus is the Word made flesh. The Eucharist is Jesus in the Flesh. They are inseperable. I was taught to think of Scripture, the Eucharist and Tradition as a 3 legged stool. All three have a unified role in our Faith. In this fashion, none would be able to stand without the others. The 3 legs are also representative in the Trinity. You cannot ask who is most important in the Trinity, all are one, yet 3. Same answer goes for the question you pose. Love how God works in 3’s and 7’s :)


3 posted on 11/26/2008 4:51:31 PM PST by wombtotomb (since its "above his paygrade", why can't we err on the side of caution about when life begins?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Jesus is the Word. The Bible is not the Word. It is an account of the Word.


4 posted on 11/26/2008 5:04:34 PM PST by ex-snook ("But above all things, truth beareth away the victory.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

It’s not “either or”, but “both and”.


5 posted on 11/26/2008 5:07:27 PM PST by Unam Sanctam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ex-snook
Jesus is the Word.

We have a winner. You can stop there.

6 posted on 11/26/2008 5:13:34 PM PST by RGPII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

itz amazing that folks dont get this simple truth of the word and the mass....


7 posted on 11/26/2008 5:20:14 PM PST by raygunfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: NYer; All

I wonder why the wine part (blood) is not adored as well? Maybe it is that it can not be put in a Monstrance and that also has a long history with Adoration and Processions.


8 posted on 11/26/2008 5:34:10 PM PST by RGPII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

The Latin Mass was a tissue of Scripture reading, from beginning to end, with its dramatic climax in Communion. It was divided into two parts: the Mass of Catacumens and the Mass of the Faithful, the old OCC. The first part was an instruction in the holy mysteries’ the second participation. The new form has had the unfortunately effect of deemphasizing the mystery simply because formally the separation between the two is so apparent. The integrity of the two parts of the Old mass was especially obvious when said without a homily.
The new mass, unfortunately, seems chopped up into many parts. This is not helped by the usual music which seems to have no relationship to the actions
of the priest and just fills in the gaps when nothing is being said.


9 posted on 11/26/2008 6:05:58 PM PST by RobbyS (ECCE homo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS; NYer

“The Latin Mass was a tissue of Scripture reading, from beginning to end, with its dramatic climax in Communion. It was divided into two parts: the Mass of Catacumens and the Mass of the Faithful, the old OCC. The first part was an instruction in the holy mysteries’ the second participation.”

As the Divine Liturgies of Orthodoxy and Oriental Orthodoxy are to this day. The distinctions made in this article ring hollow to Orthodox ears; the question wouldn’t come up in Orthodoxy. Sometimes I think the West, in the past 40 years or so, set aside our shared Ignatian Eucharistic theology and forgot that we are, very findamentally, a liturgical people, gathered together with our bishops at the Liturgy and focused on Christ in the Eucharist.


10 posted on 11/26/2008 6:32:19 PM PST by Kolokotronis (Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Kolokotronis

The mass today, at least as it is sometimes celebrated, reminds me that in Geneva, John Calvin developed a service in two parts, that one devoted to the reading of the Word, to the singing of Psalms and preaching. The second was a service of the Lord’s Supper. He would have preeffred that both be done each Sunday, but his colleagues disagreed, and the first became the normal Sunday service. Luther retained something like the mass, and it seems that the liturgical reformers had something like his service in mind when they composed the New Mass.


11 posted on 11/26/2008 6:43:14 PM PST by RobbyS (ECCE homo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS

“The mass today, at least as it is sometimes celebrated, reminds me that in Geneva, John Calvin developed a service in two parts, that one devoted to the reading of the Word, to the singing of Psalms and preaching. The second was a service of the Lord’s Supper. He would have preeffred that both be done each Sunday, but his colleagues disagreed, and the first became the normal Sunday service.”

Now there’s a piece of liturgical history I never knew. Thanks!


12 posted on 11/26/2008 6:45:50 PM PST by Kolokotronis (Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Equal parts of the Mass.


13 posted on 11/26/2008 8:42:20 PM PST by Salvation ( †With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ex-snook
Jesus is the Word. The Bible is not the Word. It is an account of the Word.

That's what your church teaches you anyway...They have to elevate their man-made traditions to the level of authority as the spoken words of God...

The word of God is NOT just an account of God...There is POWER in the words of God which are the scriptures...Power that your church doesn't have when it goes outside the scriptures...

14 posted on 11/26/2008 9:15:32 PM PST by Iscool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Iscool

I don’t think you have the Traditions to say such!


15 posted on 11/26/2008 9:27:46 PM PST by RGPII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: RGPII; Iscool

“I don’t think you have the Traditions to say such!”

Consider the following...

“...Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down...”

Jesus, Mark 7:13


16 posted on 11/26/2008 10:13:12 PM PST by AngieGal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: NYer

A priest told me I could not receive communion at any Mass where I did not hear the readings. This seems to substantiate the importance of the scripture.


17 posted on 11/26/2008 10:25:27 PM PST by malkee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
From this perspective the Eucharist is thus "more important" than Scripture because Scripture's ultimate goal is to lead us to union with Christ through full participation in the Mass.

Ping for reference

Related thread: Synod: Christianity not a 'Religion of the Book'

“In our language, we shouldn’t fall into the ambivalent expression ‘the three religions of the Book,’” Fisichella said, referring to Christianity, Judaism and Islam. Instead, he insisted, Christianity is properly understood as a “religion of the Word.”

18 posted on 11/26/2008 10:50:59 PM PST by Alex Murphy ( "Every country has the government it deserves" - Joseph Marie de Maistre)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AngieGal
Bible Plus Tradition or Bible alone?

1 Cor 11:2 - hold fast to traditions I handed on to you

2 Thess 2:15 - hold fast to traditions, whether oral or by letter

2 Thess 3:6 - shun those acting not according to tradition

Jn 21:25 - And there are also many other things which Jesus did, which if they were written in detail, I suppose that even the world itself would not contain the books that would be written.

Mk 13:31 - heaven & earth shall pass away, but my word won't

Acts 20;35 - Paul records a saying of Jesus not found in gospels

2Tim 1:13 - follow my sound words; guard the truth

2Tim2:2 - what you heard entrust to faithful men

2Pet 1:20 - no prophecy is a matter of private interpretation

2Pet 3:15-16 - Paul's letters can be difficult to grasp & interpret

1Pet 1:25 - God's eternal word = word preached to you

Rom 10:17 - faith come from what is heard

1Cor 15:1-2 - being saved if you hold fast to the word I preached

Mk 16:15 - go to the whole world, proclaim gospel to every creature

Mt 23:2-3 - chair of Moses; observe whatever they tell you

“...Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down...”

Jesus, Mark 7:13

19 posted on 11/27/2008 3:43:49 AM PST by RGPII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: AngieGal; RGPII; Iscool; Alex Murphy
“...Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down...”

By virtue of its divinely-appointed authority (Matt. 16:19; 18:18), the Catholic Church determined the canon of Scripture (what books belong in the Bible) at the end of the fourth century. We therefore believe in the Scriptures on the authority of the Catholic Church. After all, nothing in Scripture tells us what Scriptures are inspired, what books belong in the Bible, or that Scripture is the final authority on questions concerning the Christian faith. Instead, the Bible says that the Church, not the Scriptures, is the pinnacle and foundation of the truth (1 Tim. 3:15) and the final arbiter on questions of the Christian faith (Matt. 18:17). It is through the teaching authority and Apostolic Tradition (2 Thess. 2:15; 3:6; 1 Cor. 11:2) of this Church, who is guided by the Holy Spirit (John 14:16,26; 16:13), that we know of the divine inspiration of the Scriptures, and the manifold wisdom of God. (cf. Ephesians 3:10).

Non-Catholic christian churches also follow tradition. During the Reformation, the Protestants accepted the New Testament as defined by the Catholic Church in the late 4th century but excluded 7 OT books. What is that if not a man made tradition? According to the quote from the Book of Mark, you are suggesting that Protestants nullified the word of God. This is a good example of why private interpretation of the Bible is not condoned in the Bible Itself (2 Peter 1:20).

20 posted on 11/27/2008 6:07:38 AM PST by NYer ("Run from places of sin as from a plague." - St. John Climacus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-132 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson