(thanks to Terence Weldon at Queering the Church for the link to this article at dot.commonweal. Very interesting comments follow the article at the site. )
Models of the Future Church
May 9, 2010, 11:16 pm                
Posted by Lisa Fullam                    
Back in 2004, the archdiocese of Boston announced  the closure in one fell swoop of more than 18% of its parishes . In the  midst of all the shock, sadness, anger and dismay, some parishes decided  to refuse the order to close, and began to maintain round-the-clock  vigils in the churches to keep them open. Saturday’s Boston  Globe included a piece from a member of one such church. Money  quote:
While the universal Catholic Church seems on the verge of  imploding under the weight of its own moral crisis, the weekly gathering  of this close-knit congregation generates a palpable spirituality that  is rare and unique.
The St. James phenomenon (replicated across sister parishes in Massachusetts that also chose vigil over closure) is changing church culture by pioneering a post-institutional brand of grass-roots Catholicism.
I’m intrigued by this. We all know of situations of priestless  parishes still under the auspices of various  dioceses: a priest may  zoom through to dispense the sacraments, but day-to-day pastoral care is  carried out by non-ordained people. One troublesome point in these  parishes is the separation of the practice of ministry from the  celebration of the sacraments, in which the latter are rare special  events run by strangers, not a regular part of the worship life of the  community. A second concern is the lack of uniform standards for people  running such churches–one parish might be run by a gifted lay minister  with an M.Div., but the next might be run by a person without a shred of  theological or pastoral training. 
But these “Heavens, no, we won’t go” parishes are a different kettle  of fish. Instead of divorcing ministry from sacraments, these  communities have formed a new model of church with generally egalitarian  leadership, continuing to celebrate Eucharist as the “source and summit  of the Christian life,” and developing a vibrant sense of community.  The divorce here is of the community from the hierarchy of the Church.  (I still worry about the theological training of the leadership. But  there are lots of qualified people thereabouts–if theologically-literate  leadership is important to the community, they can find people with  both vocation and education to lead and/or teach.) 
We’re at a time of increasingly diverse “versions” of Catholic parish  life, including the two I mention here. With or without the cooperation  of Church leaders, the Church is changing. 
To which I'd like to add this quoted discussion from NCR which I posted last September:
It was Schillebeeckx who  contended in his 1980 book Ministry: Leadership in the Community of  Jesus Christ that the church had gone awry by connecting the faithful’s  right to Eucharist to some “magical power” of the hierarchy to ordain,  thereby disconnecting it from the community of Christians. He noted that  the Council of Chalcedon in the fifth century had declared any  ordination of a priest or deacon illegal, as well as null and void,  unless the person being ordained had been chosen by a particular  community to be its leader.
Because the church has basically ignored that  clear directive of the early church throughout the second millennium,  Schillebeeckx recommended “new possibilities” for reconnecting the  Eucharist to its community roots, even if such actions contradict  current church law. In “Church and Ministry,” the newly released  document, the Dominicans put forward such “new possibilities” as this:  “Men and women can be chosen to preside at the Eucharist by the church  community; that is, ‘from below,’ and can then ask a local bishop to  ordain these people ‘from above.’ ”
If, however, “a bishop  should refuse a confirmation or ordination” of such persons “on the  basis of arguments not involving the essence of the Eucharist, such as a  requirement that deacons or priests be celibate, parishes may move  forward without the bishops’ participation, remaining confident “that  they are able to celebrate a real and genuine Eucharist when they are  together in prayer and share bread and wine." 
taken from  National Catholic Reporter interview, December 14, 2007
This quote has  always had a powerful effect on me, as a daring solution to so many ills  besetting the Catholic community in this time, the sexual scandals  being at the top of the list. It would require extraordinary daring to  implement, however, and culturally would be next to impossible to  receive widespread acceptance (to judge by the comments and reactions at dot.commonweal. to the above article.) However, in those communities deprived of  the services of a priest for as long as a year (1 yearly visit for  confession and baptisms in some remote mountain villages in South  America), the 'lay catechist' should surely be entitled to lead the  community in the celebration of the Eucharist. But I've also proposed  elsewhere that communities of disaffected gay Catholics, who feel bound  in conscience to remain outside the formal worship of the Church, should  then gather together and celebrate the Supper of the Lord. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

0 comments:
Post a Comment