 |
 |
 |
|
|
|---|
|
Rome sees the priest's representation of the Church as secondary.
“ It is true that the priest represents the Church, which is the
Body of Christ. But if he does so, it is precisely because he first represents
Christ himself, who is the Head and the Shepherd of the Church. The Second
Vatican Council used this phrase to make more precise and to complete the
expression in persona Christi. It is in this quality that the priest
presides over the Christian assembly and celebrates the Eucharistic sacrifice
‘in which the whole Church offers and is herself wholly
offered’.” Inter Insigniores §
33.
What comes first: representing the Church or
representing Christ?
Undoubtedly, the priest ultimately represents Christ, but there are good
theological reasons to say that the priest begins his or her ministry as
someone who receives ordination in a line of apostolic succession. In an
‘ascending theology’ the priest receives his mandate from the church
on earth. However, because of the indissoluble bond that exists between the
head (Christ) and the members of the church, namely the Holy Spirit, the priest
who represents the members represents Christ the head.
“The first (in persona Ecclesiae) begins with what is more
accessible and progresses toward what is ultimately signified; the second
(in persona Christi) analyzes the actual process in which what is
ultimately signified directs the whole process of symbolization.”
E.Kilmartin, ‘Bishop and Presbyter as Representatives of the
Church and Christ’, in Women Priests: a Catholic Commentary of the Vatican
Declaration, eds. A. and L.Swidler, Paulist Press, New York 1977, pp. 295-302;
here p. 296. See also David Coffey, ‘Priestly Representation and
Women’s Ordination’, in Priesthood. The Hard Questions ed.
Gerald P. Gleeson, Columba, Dublin 1993, pp. 79-99; here p. 96.
The question is more relevant when we apply it to the priest as the
celebrant during Mass.
At the Eucharistic Prayer the priest acts more directly
in the name of the believing community, though ultimately in the name of Christ
The reason for saying this is the liturgy itself.
1. Throughout the eucharistic prayer the priest speaks in name of the
community
It is enough to read the prayer itself, as we find it, for instance, in
the First Eucharistic Prayer. The priest always speaks of ‘we’,
‘us’, ‘all of us’, etc. I will just indicate the
beginnings.
- We come to you, Father, with praise and thanksgiving through Jesus
Christ your Son. Through him we ask you to accept and blesss these gifts we
offer you in sacrifice.
- We offer them for your holy catholic Church . . .
- Remember, Lord, those for whom we now pray . . . .
- Remember all of us gathered here before you. You know how firmly we
believe in you and dedicate ourselves to you . . . .
- In union with the whole Church we honour Mary . . .
- Father accept this offering from your whole family. Grant us your
peace in this life and save us from final damnation . . .
- Bless and approve our offering . . .
2. The words of consecration do not stand on their own
Following Thomas Aquinas and other medieval theologians, Rome gives the
impression that the words of consecration stand on their own, that - while the
priest speaks these words - he steps outside his role as leader of the
community and suddenly speaks only in the name of Christ. “The priest, who
alone has the power to perform it, then acts not only through the effective
power conferred on him by Christ, but in persona Christi, taking the
role of Christ, to the point of being his very image, when he pronounces the
words of consecration.” Inter Insigniores §
25.
Let us look at the text itself, as we find it in the First Prayer (the
socalled Roman Canon). I will give a literal translation from the latin text
which is at least ten centuries old.
[invocation prayer]
“Bless and approve our offering;
make it acceptable to you, an offering in spirit and in truth. Let it become
for us the body and blood of Jesus Christ, your only Son, our Lord
[institution narrative]
who on the day before he suffered took bread
in his sacred hands and looking up to heaven, to you, his almighty Father, gave
you thanks and praise.
He broke the bread, gave it to his disciples, and
said: ‘Take this, all of you, and eat it: this is my body which will be
given up for you’.
When supper was ended, he took the cup. Again he
gave you thanks and praise, gave the cup to his disciples, and said: ‘Take
this, all of you, and drink from it: this is the cup of my blood, the blood of
the new and everlasting covenant. It will be shed for you and for all so that
sins may be forgiven. Do this in memory of me’. ”
It is clear that the words of consecration are part of the whole
eucharistic prayer:
- Textually the institution narrative is wholly dependent upon the
invocation which precedes it, and the narrative is unintelligible except as a
continuation of the invocation. The narrative does not stand alone or in
disjuncture from the rest of the eucharistic prayer.
- The institution narrative, which quotes the verba Christi, is
spoken in the third person: it is a quotation within a narrative recital
addressed as part of a prayer to God the Father, and it is encompassed within a
prayer spoken in the name of the whole church.
- An examination of the eucharistic prayers shows that even at the
moment of consecration the priest does not really step into the character of
Christ or play his part, even though he uses certain words and gestures of
Christ. The form of this part of the mass is not drama; it is narrative, in
which the priest speaks throughout of Christ in the third person, clearly as
someone other than himself, even in the pronunciation of the words of
consecration. He unmistakably maintains his direct representation of the church
and his identity as its minister right through the sacred action.
- Christian antiquity, at least until the fourth century, universally
viewed the entire prayer as consecratory. Western theological reflection, for a
variety of reasons had by the high Middle Ages singled out the institution
narrative as “words of consecration.” More recent theological
reflection, attentive to the nature and structure of the eucharistic prayer,
has returned to the older view.
- Isolating the ‘words of consecration’ ignores the structure
of the eucharistic prayers, which are composed of a number of elements, of
which the institution narrative is one certainly, but, very importantly, the
epiclesis [=calling down of the Spirit] is another.
The well known liturgist, Ralph A. Keifer comes to this conclusion:
“ In the Roman liturgy the institution narrative
does not stand in any sort of disjuncture from the rest of the eucharistic
prayer. And at no point in the prayer does the priest speak directly in the
name of Christ. He continually speaks in the name of the church. Even the
institution narrative, which quotes the verba Christi, is spoken in the
third person: it is a quotation within a narrative recital addressed as part of
a prayer to God the Father, and it is encompassed within a prayer spoken in the
name of the whole church. The Declaration contends that the priest
represents the church because he first represents Christ himself as head and
shepherd of the church. It is not the purpose of this paper to discuss the
theological truth of this assertion. But on the level of sign, in what
is said and done at the act of eucharist, the exact opposite is the case. It is
only by praying in the name of the church that the priest enacts his role as
consecratory representative of Christ.”
“Thus in the articulation of the eucharistic prayer in the Roman rite no
clearcut distinction is made between the priest’s representing the praying
church and his representing Christ the head and shepherd of the church. The two
roles are enacted simultaneously. Even on a view which insists on pinpointing a
temporal moment of consecration with the recitation of the verba Christi,
there is still no disjunctive representation of Christ as the head and
shepherd of the church apart from the priest’s representation of the
church as the body and bride of Christ. In reciting the institution narrative,
the priest continues to speak on behalf of the praying church. And since, on
the level of sign, the representation of Christ is grounded in representation
of the Church, it would seem that a woman could perform the priestly role of
representing Christ as well as a man.”
Ralph A. Keifer, ‘The Priest as "Another Christ" in Liturgical
Prayer’, in Women and Priesthood. Future Directions, Liturgical
Press, Collegeville 1978, pp. 103-110; here pp. 109-110. Keifer is Associate
Professor of Liturgy at Catholic Theological Union, has lectured in many
universities and written many books. From 1971-1973 he was General Editor for
the International Committee for English in the Liturgy.
Read: Can Men be
Ordained?, by Rosemary Radford Ruether
John Wijngaards
Follow @JohnWijngaards
Join our Women Priests' Mailing List
for occasional newsletters:
An email will be immediately sent to you
requesting your confirmation.
Please, credit this document
as published by www.womenpriests.org!