By Alex P. Vidal
“I have spoken about deficits, and I think deficits are important because they address broad economic and financial stability. We need to talk about that.”—Ben Bernanke
THERE is more than meets the eye in the recent letter released by a high-ranking Vatican cardinal to the Presidents of Bishops’ Conferences (PBC) which was immediately approved by Pope Francis.
The pandemic’s social distancing has certainly resulted in the church’s “financial distancing” and it may have virtually dented the Roman Catholic church’s vast financial empire.
When the in-person Mass was prohibited as part of the protocols to prevent the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in crowded places, churches, chapels, and all other houses of worships maintained by other religious denominations and which relied on contributions from the faithful for their maintenance and other expenses, also absorbed the deficit and economic blow in the chin.
In a recent article in the Vatican News, Cardinal Robert Sarah was quoted as writing the PBC that “there is an urgent need to return to a normal experience of Christian life through the physical presence of the faithful at Mass, where circumstances permit.”
Cardinal Sarah, the Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, insists that “virtual” services cannot compare to, and cannot replace, personal participation in the liturgy. Bearing the title, “Let us return to the Eucharist with joy!” the Letter was published with the approval of Pope Francis, which he reportedly granted on September 3.
Communitarian dimension of the Christian life. Cardinal Sarah wrote: “The pandemic caused by the new coronavirus has produced upheavals,” not only in social and familial relationships, “but also in the life of the Christian community, including the liturgical dimension.”
He noted, “This community dimension has a theological meaning: God is a relationship of Persons in the Most Holy Trinity”; and God “puts Himself in relationship with man and woman and calls them in turn to relationship with Him.”
So, while pagans built temples to the various deities, to which the people had no access, “Christians, as soon as they enjoyed freedom of worship, immediately built places that were the domus Dei et domus ecclesiae, where the faithful could recognize themselves as the community of God…” For this reason, the Letter continues, “the house of the Lord presupposes the presence of the family of the children of God.”
Cooperation with civil authorities. Cardinal Sarah explained: “The Christian community has never sought isolation and has never made the Church a city with closed doors,” the Letter reads. “Formed in the value of community life and in the search of the common good, Christians have always sought insertion into society.”
Even in the midst of the pandemic, wrote Cardinal Sarah, “a great sense of responsibility has emerged. In listening to and collaborating with civil authorities and experts,” he notes that the Bishops of the Church “were prompt to make difficult and painful decisions, even to the point of suspending the participation of the faithful in the celebration of the Eucharist for a long period.”
The urgency of a return to the normal state of Christian life. Keeping that in mind, Cardinal Sarah wrote that nonetheless, “as soon as circumstances permit… it is necessary and urgent to return to the normality of Christian life, which has the church building as its home and the celebration of the liturgy, especially the Eucharist, as ‘the summit toward which the activity of the Church is directed; and at the same time it is the font from which all her power flows’ (Sacrosanctum Concilium, 10).”
The Letter continued, “Aware that God never abandons the humanity He has created, and that even the hardest trials can bear fruits of grace, we have accepted our distance from the Lord’s altar as a time of Eucharistic fasting, useful for us to rediscover its vital importance, beauty and immeasurable preciousness.”
So, “as soon as is possible,” wrote Cardinal Sarah, “we must return to the Eucharist … with an increased desire to meet the Lord, to be with Him, to receive Him and to bring Him to our brothers and sisters with the witness of a life full of faith, love and hope.”
The necessity of personal participation at Mass. The Cardinal emphasized that “as much as the means of communication perform a valued service to the sick and those who are unable to go to church, and have performed a great service in the broadcast of Holy Mass at a time when there was no possibility of community celebrations, no broadcast is comparable to personal participation or can replace it.”
On the contrary, he said, liturgies in which the faithful participate only virtually “risk distancing us from a personal and intimate encounter with the incarnate God” whose presence among His people was not virtual but Real, as He said: ”He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood remains in Me and I in him” (John 6:56).
Cardinal Sarah insisted, “This physical contact with the Lord is vital, indispensable, irreplaceable.” Therefore, he continues, “once the concrete measures that can be taken to reduce the spread of the virus to a minimum have been identified and adopted, it is necessary that all resume their place in the assembly of brothers and sisters” and to “invite and encourage again those brothers and sisters who have been discouraged, frightened, absent or uninvolved for too long.”
Suggestions for a return to the celebration of the Eucharist
The Letter suggested several “courses of action to promote a rapid and safe return to the celebration of the Eucharist.”
However, “due attention to hygiene and safety regulations cannot lead to the sterilization of gestures and rites, to the instilling, even unconsciously, of fear and insecurity in the faithful.”
Instead, “it is up to the prudent but firm action of the Bishops to ensure that the participation of the faithful in the celebration of the Eucharist is not reduced by public authorities to a ‘gathering’, and is not considered comparable or even subordinate to forms of recreational activities.”
Once again citing Sacrosanctum Concilium, Cardinal Sarah made clear that civil authorities cannot legislate on liturgical norms. On the contrary, “only the competent ecclesiastical authorities” can legislate in this area.
(The author, who is now based in New York City, used to be the editor of two dailies in Iloilo)