Chicago: Where Eucharistic Revival Goes to Die

I can think of no better way to negate a true Eucharistic Revival than to mandate standing for Communion as Stupich has done in Chicago.

From Crisis

By Fr John A. Perricone, PhD

Layer upon layer of Eucharistic practice was constructed over the millennia as protection against the slightest attenuation of Catholic doctrine regarding the Eucharist. For over sixty years, it has been breached.

For all its good intentions, the grand project of Eucharistic Revival is barely limping to its finish line. Applause is in order, for at least it noticed a precipitous loss of faith in the central mystery of Catholicism. But its cure was carefully wrapped in the naïve gauze that created the fatal lapse in the first place. Look at its official website: a swirl of puerile slogans, kindergarten art, and a breathtaking lack of seriousness.  

But such grave breaches of Catholic Faith deserve the thunderbolts the likes of Blessed Pius IX’s Quanta Cura and The Syllabus of Errors, not petite entreaties couched in the porous language that delivered us to these desperate straits.

But that seems to be a bridge too far. The shepherds seem to be strapped into a straitjacket created by the naivete (or malice) of Important Theologians of the past half century. One of their more ambitious projects was retooling the doctrine of the Holy Eucharist. This was then accompanied by a massive dismantling of the whole architectonic devotional ensemble which promoted piety and protected its doctrinal purity.

More serious was the whole mood created by this theological nomenklatura. By their unchallenged fiat, error was declared to be an antediluvian cul de sac. With priggish insouciance, error was now clothed in the gentler philosophical category of difference, which was to stand proudly along truth without prejudice. (Oh, you say, whiffs of Derrida and Foucault. And you would be correct.) Standards were to be considered atavistic, and only reverent “listening” was to stand in its place.  

Those who govern the Church found themselves paralyzed. Who were they to stifle the “blowing of the spirit”? Strangely, they had no qualms in dragging out the old inquisitorial machinery to discipline those standing in the way of the “spirit blowing.”  

But if a carte blanche now reigned, couldn’t it apply to those opposed to the ideology of the “spirit blowing where it will”? Clearly not. “Listening” would only be deigned to those whom the ruling class found worthy of being listening to.

Which brings us to Chicago—and its prince. With Solomonic certitude, he recently mandated new and inflexible rules regarding the reception of Holy Communion.  

No kneeling. No acts of adoration.  

His reasoning rested upon odd new construals. Odd because this kind of theological reasoning has never been seen in the Church before. He writes: “our ritual for receiving Holy Communion has special significance. It reminds us that receiving the Eucharist is not a private action but rather a communal one, as the very word communion implies.”

Are you raising eyebrows? You should be. Could His Eminence be misunderstanding that “communion” is with Our Lord Jesus Christ and the teachings of His Holy Catholic Church? Yes, communion with other Catholics in the Mystical Body of Christ who think with the Church (sentire cum ecclesia). But that is quite secondary to communion with the Kings of Kings. Of course, this might be attributed to poor sentence construction, or an editor’s slip. But thinking Catholics wonder.

Then there is this:

For that reason, the norm established by the Holy See for the universal church and approved by the U. S. Conference of Catholic Bishops is for the faithful to process together as an expression of their coming forward as the body of Christ and to receive Holy Communion standing.

But the universal norm clearly states that it is a universal right of the faithful to receive Holy Communion kneeling.  

Puzzled? You wouldn’t be alone. Look far and wide, it is impossible to find in the Deposit of Faith that we “process together…as an expression of…coming forward as the body of Christ.” Scrutinize as thoroughly as you like, you will be hard put to find this curious reasoning for the reception of Holy Communion. For two thousand years, reception of Holy Communion was the act of homage, humility, and adoration of the Incarnate Son of God present in the Holy Eucharist.

Of course, Redemptionis Sacramentum of 2004 should settle the matter:

In distributing Holy Communion it is to be remembered that “sacred ministers may not deny the sacraments to those who seek them in a reasonable manner, are rightly disposed, and are not prohibited by law from receiving them” [177]. Hence any baptized Catholic who is not prevented by law must be admitted to Holy Communion. Therefore, it is not licit to deny Holy Communion to any of Christ’s faithful solely on the grounds, for example, that the person wishes to receive the Eucharist kneeling or standing. (91)

Against this dogmatic backdrop, the cardinal’s remarks seem hallucinatory. They signal a dramatic cleavage from the tradition, difficult to redress.

Nonetheless, he continues confidently: “nothing should be done to impede any of these processions, particularly the one that takes place during the sacred Communion ritual.” Notice the hand of the nomenklatura here: cleverly juxtaposing this novelty with the words “sacred Communion ritual.” The conjunction creates sufficient confusion, leading many Catholics to conflate the sacred with “the processions” rather than the reverent reception of Christ in Holy Communion. The typical Catholic’s head is now spinning. Solid doctrinal practice is replaced with vertiginous confusion.

The good cardinal is not finished: “no one should engage in a gesture that calls attention to oneself or disrupts the flow of the procession.” For over a thousand years, Catholics—saints and sinners—have knelt before their God to receive Holy Communion. Now we are told they did this merely “to draw attention to themselves” and (God forbid) disrupt the “flow of the procession.” Isn’t this elevating banality to the level of virtue?

Layer upon layer of Eucharistic practice was constructed over the millennia as protection against the slightest attenuation of Catholic doctrine regarding the Eucharist. For over sixty years, it has been breached. Look at the result. 

Clearly, the evidence has taught nothing. Chicago Catholics are to embrace theological thinking that undermines sound logic, simple common sense, and traditional Catholic piety for over one thousand years. The good cardinal must be quite well-intentioned, but this mandate cannot possibly be of any assistance to Eucharistic Revival. It seems to be its death.

Yet, hope springs eternal. Recently, a bright group of Catholics designed a scientific survey entitled Real Presence Survey. It was the single largest survey of lay Catholics ever completed in the United States. It was sent in an Open Letter to all the bishops of the United States. Its findings would not surprise the ordinary Catholic. Its credibility is supported by the fact that 79 percent of survey respondents primarily attend the Novus Ordo Mass, deflating claims that the survey results were skewed by radical traditionalists. Ninety-six percent of respondents attend Mass on at least a weekly basis. And 97 percent of the respondents stated that they believed in the Real Presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist.

Some other findings may interest you. The top ten issues identified by respondents to the Real Presence Survey were:

• Receiving the Holy Eucharist in the hand while standing
• Scandal created by offering Holy Communion to public sinners who obstinately reject Catholic teaching
• Lack of humility and reverence in the presence of the Eucharist
• Clergy’s casual attitude toward the Eucharist
• Failure to instruct the faithful on Transubstantiation
• Failure to regularly remind the faithful they must be in a state of grace to receive the Eucharist
• Removal of the Tabernacle from the center of the sanctuary 
• Loss of emphasis of the Mass as a sacrifice
• Failure to remind the faithful that the Eucharist is necessary for their salvation 
• Loss of the sense of supernatural transcendence

The survey concludes with some recommendations:

• Encourage the practice of receiving the Eucharist on the tongue while kneeling
• Catechize the faithful (e.g., Transubstantiation, worthy reception, etc.)
• Encourage greater reverence for the Eucharist (e.g., genuflecting, kneeling, prayer, thanksgiving after Mass, etc.)
• Eliminate extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion
• Withhold the Holy Eucharist from public officials who obstinately reject half the teaching [Canon 915]
• Increase Eucharistic events (e.g., adoration, processions, benediction, etc.)

These recommendations have been cited by many theologians over the decades. Regretfully, each represents a third rail in the governance of the Church. The fear and trembling at implementing them is palpable. You see, old paradigms hang like a ball and chain from the necks of many bishops.

Truth be told, the sincere, albeit thin, attempts at Eucharist Revival have been embraced, or were already embraced, by a notable number of parishes. But they are notable primarily in their scarcity. Unless firmer actions are taken, the noble intentions of Eucharist Revival will be stillborn.  

One can talk and talk of proper devotion, but if everything a Catholic does in his parish contradicts what is spoken, the result is nihil.

The collapsing West today needs the Church now as surely as the decaying Roman Empire did two thousand years ago.

But the Church is only as mighty as the traditional doctrines she preaches—especially the Holy Eucharist.

The time is short. The parlor games of the Old Catholic Groupthink have been shown for their hollowness. Let us boldly set forth a New Thinking, which for authentic Catholics is the Ancient Teaching.

Who knows? Perhaps the typical Secularized Catholic will find it fascinating.

It’s at least worth a try, isn’t it?

Pictured: Blase, Cardinal Cupich, Cardinal-Archbishop of Chicago