I must add a disclaimer or clarification here. I’m not sure what would be the right word. When we speak about the Franciscans and other religious orders having had communion in the hand for centuries, we must understand their situation. There are a number of very important points that must be remembered.
This was done in many provinces, but it became less necessary in the American provinces. The reason that it was done is important. Franciscans and other ancient religious orders were founded as brotherhoods. This meant that the religious were and are brothers in the truest sense of the word. They never cease being brothers, even if they are ordained. The sole purpose for which they join these particular orders is because they want to be religious brothers, not because they want to be priests. These orders do not engage in priestly ministry. They allow those members who are priests to do priestly ministry; but it’s not a corporate commitment, as is the case with the Dominicans or the Jesuits. For most Benedictines and Franciscans, being a priest is accidental, not essential to them. If God calls them to serve their brothers and sisters as ordained men, they do so. However, they do not relinquish their status as brothers or lose their canonical status as such. In fact, even for those who are ordained, the proper title remains, Brother, not Father, except for the Franciscans of the Eternal Word. They’re different. Mother Angelica founded them with a different purpose in mind. For their ministry, the priesthood is essential. Nevertheless, for the rest of the Franciscan family, its primary vocation is to be brothers.
This plays itself out in our daily lives. We have houses where five friars are ordained and one friar is a lay brother. But guess what? The lay brother is the superior of the hosue. You don’t tell your superior that he is not your equal, not even at mass. It is understood that there are things that you, as an ordained friar can do that the superior cannot do, such as consecrate or absolve. Nevertheless, receiving the host in your hand is not one of those things. The assumption that the man who is responsible for the souls of his brothers and who is the canonical successor to St. Francis or St. Benedict cannot receive a host with reverence is mind-boggling to us. We would never deny that to St. Francis. In fact, we never did. He was not a priest. However, you would not know it. He preached and was called Father Francis while everyone else was Brother. It was not until 1223 that he was ordained a deacon so that he could grant faculties, rather than bother the local bishop. But he had been the Superior General since 1209. For 14-years this community was governed by a lay brother, while many ordained brothers served under his authority. It was he who decided who would be ordained and who would not be. To this day, this remains the rule. The man elected to succeed Francis need not be a priest, but he is his canonical successor and it is he who decides whether you are ordained or not. If you entrust someone with the souls of a large religious family and with their vocation, then it seemed contrary to deny them the privilege of Communion in the hand. This is one of the major differences between their situation and that of the man in the pew. This was not only among Franciscans. Many Benedictine houses also had Abbots who were not priests. They too de-clericalized the community.
The other difference has to do with education and formation. Many of these friars or monks who were not priests or are not priests today, are theologians, philosophers, scientists, etc, while many of their brothers who are priests have a basic theological education that equates to a Master’s Degree in Ministry, not a degree in theology. The Church does not require a degree in theology to be a priest. A degree in ministry suffices. Along with the academic education, everyone goes through the same 10 years of religious formation. The friar or monk who is an engineer, has a very strong formation in spirituality. By the time he makes solemn vows, he is molded in the life of prayer and worship, more than the average person in the pew. The average person in the pew must do this independently. No one requires him to have such an in-depth spiritual formation. Many do, but it’s their doing. The Church does not demand it. The Church does not impose spiritual authority on the person in the pew, as it does on the Guardian of a friary or the Abbot of a monastery.
However, it is correct to say that the Church would not have allowed these men to have such privileges as Communion in the hand, no communion rails, no kneelers, very austere chapels or churches, if she believed that these were bad and that they were obstacles to holiness. The Church believes that this is good and that it can lead to holiness. At the same time, the Church has been very realistic in her assessment of the person in the pew. She recognizes that the secular layperson in the pew has many other duties: husband, father, employee, citizen and so forth. Therefore, she does not expect him to have the formation of a friar or a monk, nor does she demand that he have the discipline of a friar or a monk. She would very much like him to learn from friars and monks as much as possible and to borrow whatever he can use for his sanctification and that of the secular world. Therefore, it is a good thing to teach the man in the pew to worship and show reverence for the Eucharist in the same manner as friars and monks do. Friars and monks exist for their personal sanctification, the sanctification of their religious community and the edification of the faithful. . I believe that the more we edify the closer we get to being saints. Edification is not the same as browbeating.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
