Pope: Apostolic Exhortation on Eucharist is "imminent"

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rolltide
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

Rolltide

Guest
From Catholic World News 2/22/07:

cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=49430

Feb. 22, 2007 (CWNews.com) - Pope Benedict XVI (bio - news) has announced that he will soon release the apostolic exhortation summarizing the work of the Synod on the Eucharist, which concluded its deliberations 16 months ago.

The appearance of the apostolic exhortation is “imminent,” the Holy Father told priests of the Rome diocese, during a traditional early-Lenten meeting in the Hall of Benedictions at the Vatican on Thursday morning.

In June 2006, the bishops who make up the ordinary council of the Synod completed a final text on the previous year’s Synod on the Eucharist, to be submitted to the Pope as the basis for his apostolic exhortation.

The Synod of Bishops met in October 2005 to discuss the theme, “The Eucharist: Living Bread for Peace in the World,” with 256 bishops from 118 countries participating in the discussions. In a break from the usual practice, the Synod fathers made public an “unofficial” list of the 50 propositions approved at the conclusion of their deliberations. Ordinarily the propositions remain confidential to be used by the Pope in preparing an apostolic exhortation on the topic of the Synod’s deliberations. But Pope Benedict approved the public release of the conclusions.

During his February 22 meeting with priests of Rome, the Pope said that his apostolic exhortation would offer a series of meditations on some of the key points made during the Synod.

Pope Benedict did not mention the motu proprio that he is also expected to release in the near future, allowing broader use of the pre-conciliar Latin liturgy. Several Vatican journalists have suggested that the motu proprio is likely to appear in conjunction with the apostolic exhortation on the Eucharist, although the Holy See has not confirmed that speculation.
 
It will be very interesting to see which of the propositions Benedict chooses to include, and which he chooses to ignore in his Exhortation. There is a real smorgasbord of different options, of which these are merely what caught my eye during a quick scan: “unexplored riches” of the Vatican II reform, Catholic-Orthodox unity, dialog with Protestants, adoration, expansion of the penitential rite, polygamy, promotion of vocations, lowering the age of Confirmation, publishing a Eucharistic Compendium, assigning themes for homilies so that e.g. the Creed, 10 Commandments, etc are covered during the liturgical year, adding acclamations to the Eucharistic Prayer such as those currently provided for in children’s masses, changing sign of peace to a different part of mass, new dismissal formulas, increasing inculturation, art & architecture, tabernacle location, keeping Sunday holy, small group Eucharistic celebrations, clarification of roles of lay ministers, kneeling and genuflection, those unworthy refraining from communion, limiting concelebration, discussion of the limitations on divorced and non-Catholics receiving communion, communion for mentally disabled, handicapped-accessible church architecture, ecology.
 
Wasn’t there supposed to be something in here about the greater use of Gregorian Chant and Sacred Polyphony, or was that another document or group? Or… did it simply not make the cut?
 
Can someone please translate Proposition 9 into plain language for me?

I believe its subject applies to my situation, but I don’t know what it means.
 
Wasn’t there supposed to be something in here about the greater use of Gregorian Chant and Sacred Polyphony, or was that another document or group? Or… did it simply not make the cut?
Pax tecum!

That mandate was in Vatican II itself. It has been, for the most part, completely ignored by almost every parish in the world, though.

In Christ,
Rand
 
Can someone please translate Proposition 9 into plain language for me? I believe its subject applies to my situation, but I don’t know what it means.
Proposition 9:
The nature of marriage exacts that man be definitively united to only one woman and vice versa. In this perspective, the polygamous must be helped to open to the Christian faith to integrate their human plan in the novelty and radical nature of Christ’s message. In regard to catechumens, Christ reaches them in their concrete situation and calls them to the renunciations and ruptures exacted by communion, which one day they will be able to celebrate through the sacraments, above all, the Eucharist.
Meanwhile, the Church supports them with pastoral care full of gentleness and firmness.
Plain language: “You’re only allowed to be married to one person. If you’re married to more than one, we need to help you to draw closer to the Faith, renounce your multiple marriages if possible, so that you can be in communion and thus receive communion at mass. Until then, we’re rooting for you (but no, you can’t have communion yet).”
 
Wasn’t there supposed to be something in here about the greater use of Gregorian Chant and Sacred Polyphony, or was that another document or group? Or… did it simply not make the cut?
I think it’s in proposal 36.
 
Pacifists, Ecologists and Ecumenists: Antichrist at Work

The retired Archbishop of Bologna, Cardinal Giacomo Biffi, says the Antichrist presents himself as a “pacifist, ecologist, and ecumenist.” He said this in the Lenten Retreat he finished preaching on March 3rd to Benedict XVI and the leaders of the Roman Curia. After the final session, the Pope praised the Cardinal, saying he had delivered a “very accurate and precise diagnosis of our situation today.” What can this mean?

beta1.catholicculture.org/commentary/articles.cfm?id=177
 
It means this…
Among many possibilities, the three modern enthusiasms Cardinal Biffi selected to make his point were, again, pacifism, environmentalism (ecologism) and ecumenism. There is, of course, nothing wrong with working for unity among Christians, or with improving our stewardship over the environment, or with choosing (in the face of threats to oneself) never to shed blood. On the contrary, all of these are good. But it is precisely when each is elevated to an “ism” that the trouble begins. The more popular the “ism”, the greater the harm it causes.

For example: Pacifism applied as a universal idea seriously undermines not only the ability to defend what is worth defending (home and family, country and faith) but even the ability to discern that some things are, after all, important enough to defend even by blood. Or, again, environmentalism writ large so emphasizes the environment that it forgets the primary importance of the human person, which it begins to redefine as one thing among many (and probably the least amiable). Or, finally, ecumenism proposed as a sovereign good elevates unity over truth, thereby abandoning the only possible unifying principle capable of bearing fruit.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top