Dear Editor, Aged 14 years, I was given my most memorable insight into the mystery of The Eucharist, based on the following words at The Offertory of the Mass: “By the mingling of this water and wine may we come to share in the divinity of Christ who humbled Himself to share in our humanity.” The wonderful priest who talked about these words, now deceased RIP, spoke about how the water – representing us – and wine – representing Christ – could never be separated. The impression this left on me has been indelible, that, at the Consecration we become so intimately and inseparably part of the divine body and blood of Christ.
Yet, I am frustrated that so many priests – and maybe even bishops – never say these words aloud. Why?
Is there any priest, bishop, pope out there who could enlighten me as to why this is carried out by so many clergy in silence? I am from a generation who are – or may be – aware of the words. They were once said aloud. But, I have children and grandchildren who would not have a clue what this seemingly meaningless ritual, carried out in a meaningless, hurried, silent fashion, actually means.
As for choirs singing over The Offertory, creating a hiatus in the Mass – where the congregation remain uninvolved, only to be suddenly shuddered back to reality with the priest saying: “Let us pray, brothers and sisters that your sacrifice and mine….”. What ‘sacrifice’, when we were denied any sense of sacrifice and the other beautiful words of The Offertory. I am not sure what the liturgical viewpoint on this practice is. But, I cannot understand why we would have words and gestures of The Offertory only to be drowned out by song, leaving the congregation uninvolved.
Yours etc,
Malachy Duffin
Randalstown, Co. Antrim
A reminder to honour our religious sisters
Dear Editor, Pedro Esteva’s article (IC November 6) highlighting the wonderful legacy of the late Sr Stanislaus ‘Stan’ Kennedy was an important reminder for me of the contribution of many religious sisters who have lived out the Gospel values in caring for the vulnerable, the needy and their work in education and health care. Perhaps it is time for us all to speak up for our religious sisters who have been demonised in recent years by some parts of our media and by particular politicians and celebrities.
Yours etc,
Deacon Frank Browne
Rathfarnham, Dublin 14
Religion in schools is synodal
Dear Editor, With the Department of Education’s new survey on religion in schools; some are of the opinion that religion should be taught outside the classroom.
This creates an issue for synodality. Aren’t all religions now supposed to share a common philosophy or elements of a Logos that unite us? How is that going to work if there is no religion of any type in an educational institution where all these diverse believers are supposed to be educated, together?
Yours etc,
Dr John Jennings
Knocknacarra, Co. Galway
The sacred name of Jesus
Dear Editor, I am writing to ask you – The Irish Catholic – on behalf of me, my wife and family and the Catholics of Ireland objecting in the strongest terms to the media etc… using the sacred name of Jesus in a mocking and disrespectful way for the past few weeks. It was started by Ivan Yates and now all the media are at it.
Our ancestors suffered and died so that we would have our faith and it’s about time that we, the Catholics of Ireland, came out of hiding and started to stand up and be counted for our beliefs and our beautiful faith.
The left in society, in politics and the media are coming after our children and grandchildren now in the schools. It’s about time we started to show our children how much our faith means to us, and how much it can mean to them, and it can give them such a great life.
Let’s bring back the sacred name of Jesus and the Holy Family this Christmas into our lives and our homes and do it with pride.
Yours etc,
Tony and Madeline McCarthy
Ennis, Co. Clare,
The Church’s power to ordain
Dear Editor, Fr Gerry O’Hanlon’s reply to Fr Twomey (IC November 6) is rather confusing, indeed blatantly self-contradictory. Fr O’Hanlon begins by asserting firmly that he is “not advocating ordination [of women]” but he ends his letter by saying that he hopes for “an open-minded and open-hearted revisiting of the current teaching on ordination” that “may result in its revision.” In his letter, Fr O’ Hanlon’s understanding of ‘revision’ is that it is radical, going even further than “clearer communication of existing teaching”, or “its reformulation” (as was done by the Council of Nicea, for example, with regard to Christ’s divinity. Fr O’ Hanlon’s ‘revision’ would surely aim at ordaining women, in line with the (current) sense of the faithful as understood by Fr O’Hanlon and in spite of opposition from conservative bishops.
So, how can he claim coherently that he does not advocate ordination? It is unlikely that his hoped-for revision of Church teaching concerns outlawing ordination completely. That would be in line with Protestant belief rejecting the priesthood as a merely human, and gravely mistaken, invention. But Catholics believe in the Church’s power to ordain, a belief based on Scripture, Tradition, and Magisterium taken as working in harmony (see Vatican II’s Dei Verbum 10). This belief relies on firm confidence (faith) in the Church being able to know, over all the centuries since Christ, and currently, what has been divinely revealed. Advocacy of women’s ordination, whether by Fr O’Hanlon or others like him, weakens or even destroys such confidence. Ironically, such advocacy works against the possibility of ordaining anyone.
Yours etc,
Dr John Murray
Dun Laoghaire, Co. Dublin
Anti-Catholicism cannot be accepted ‘as part of the deal’
Dear Editor, Notwithstanding that Mary Kenny is a distinguished journalist, her recent column caused me to ‘raise an eyebrow’.
She rightly describes the Orange Order as anti-Catholic but argues that in the event of a United Ireland that simply has to be accepted as part of the deal.
Let’s just substitute the word ‘anti-Semitic’ for ‘anti-Catholic’. One cannot imagine a scenario where it would be deemed acceptable for such an organisation to be openly anti-Semitic. So why should it be ok for an organisation to be anti-Catholic? Let the Order have its marches, bands and so on, but not their anti-Catholicism. Why can’t they be expected to follow the lead of their King?
Yours etc,
Michael Sanfey
Co. Dublin
Reconciliation and Christ as peacemaker
Dear Editor, Reading the Parable of the Prodigal Son is such an eye-opener when it comes to God’s relationship with us. The two sons represent the good and the bad. And both were treated with such non-judgemental fatherly love. The younger son had taken half the family property and then squandered the proceeds on a life of debauchery. But what he received from his father on his return home was a most loving welcome. And we shouldn’t underestimate the significance of the ring that the father gave his wayward son. He was now back as a full family member. I wonder how the media would have reacted if Prince Andrew (now Andrew Mountbatten Windsor) had received something similar.
Unfortunately, in the liturgy of the Eucharist we see Jesus as the peacemaker between us, the sinners and our Heavenly Father. Even when we use the word “Redemption”, there is a price to pay before we regain our status as God’s children. And when we hear those words in Eucharistic Prayer III, “by whose death you willed to reconcile us to yourself” we see clearly a belief that God will not be united with us in peace until His Son’s death has appeased Him. So, we badly need to renew our theology and our liturgy.
Christ’s aim in life was not to be an expiatory sacrifice, but the way for us – God’s adopted children – to become fully united with God in heaven. Christ was born, a man like us, and so he had to empty himself of that innate selfishness with which we are all born and be totally filled with the Divine Love itself. The critical moment of the process came when he was faced with the option of escaping from his enemies, or making the total sacrifice of his life nailed to a cross. And it was only with his last breath that he could claim that the lifelong process of becoming totally filled with Love had been fulfilled.
Yours etc,
Rev. Pat Seaver
Farranshone, Co. Limerick
Irish Synodal Pathway lacks implementation
Dear Editor, The Kilkenny synodal gathering on October 18 was run “in light of the magisterial guidance” of the Final Document (FD) of the Universal Synod Assembly of 2024. Pope Francis classified the FD as part of his magisterium. It “must be received accordingly.” Faithful Catholics are loath to dismiss such classifications. How necessary is reception here?
In his accompanying note Pope Francis said the FD “is not strictly normative.” There are no clearly stated goal(s) regarding what will eventually be implemented. So, goals may be altered timewise. There is no general call by bishops throughout the world to continue the “synodal process.” The exact nature of what it means for the Church to become more “synodal” remains unexplained. Evaluating choices regarding authentic walking together in a spirit of co-responsibility becomes possible only as implementation proceeds. This is apparent in the responses made by participants to the Pre-Synodal Assembly in Kilkenny as published in The Irish Catholic.
No concrete perception of synodality exists until synodality actually happens. In recent years the magisterium of one Pope has overlooked that of a predecessor. In fact, the burden of reception eases considerably. Catholics still have a duty as members of the Body of Christ to pray that the synodal process operates in accord with God’s will.
Over a number of years, I have observed significant renewal in one French parish. Today I become aware of a similar renewal in England. Both exercises have existed for 15 to 20 years. They are priest-led cum laity apostolates oblivious of “the authoritative proposals” outlined in the FD. They require consistent, concrete, repetitive effort based on Church doctrine. Similar endeavours probably exist elsewhere.
Is it foreign to the culture of the Irish Synodal Pathway, i.e., does the FD permit consideration of these implementations of renewal as paradigms for procedure?
Yours etc,
Neil Bray
Cappamore, Co. Limerick
