Christ
Incarnate in the Priest
“The
Incarnation in the Eucharist”
Spokane, June 2, 2021
I hope not to disappoint anyone with my
talk today. For all my ruminating and cogitating, I could not get past my first
thoughts on hearing the topic proposed to me. I could not help but personalize
the topic and allow free flow to thoughts about me the priest incarnating
Christ. However frivolous those thoughts might have been, and yes to a great
extent they deserve to be classified as distractions, I could not put those
thoughts behind me. I could not put my talk together without leaving in a heavy
dose of my early musings on the topic. Though spontaneous and not all that
professionally researched, I find them worthwhile and hence I want to share them
with you. There is nothing particularly doctrinal or dogmatic about my musings,
nevertheless, I find them helpful in illustrating the priest’s identification with
our Lord and Savior in and coming forth from the Eucharist.
Why this particular methodology? Why the avoidance of a
classic theological approach to the topic? It could be that at the beginning of
the process last January I was frightened off from a more scientific approach
to the topic by the comments I read online, lodged against a January 11, 2021
reprint on 1P5 of an older article from Homiletic and Pastoral Review, written
by Peter Kwasniewski
entitled: “Incarnate Realism and the Catholic Priesthood”. In the article he
discusses something different from our topic, but the methodological question
still pertains. What frightened me in those online comments were the criticisms
of abstruseness leveled against the good professor. It was not so much that
these readers were in principle death on a Thomistic approach. Regardless of
where they stood on the theological and philosophical spectrum, they seemed
troubled by the rigor of Dr. Kwasniewski’s thought. Even though my
specialization is in Canon Law and not in an exclusively theological discipline,
I understood and enjoyed his article at first reading. As I say, though not all
that well read in theology and philosophy and different from some folks, I love
St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Augustine, and all those thinkers whom others today
seem to want to cancel. The point being, that if I were writing a book on our
topic, my methodology would have been closer to that of the professor. In a
long article, treatise, or book, I would be sure and quote the approved authors
of the past, but in a talk like this with its time limitations I hope to err on
the side of accessibility in expressing my thought without too many references
and footnotes.
Very simply then, let it be said that it is clear to me, when
speaking of Christ incarnate in the priest, when speaking of the Incarnation in
the Eucharist, our point of departure is unmistakable. We start with the
priest’s raison d’être, which is to offer sacrifice on behalf of God’s
People. You might say that it is the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass which defines
the priest. We pick up the narrative from within the Holy Sacrifice itself. We
begin with the words of consecration, Hoc Est Enim Corpus Meum. For this
is my body. These words are our principal liturgical font and sufficiently
ground our affirmation of the priest’s identification with our Incarnate Lord.
Musings first, then!
When Dr. Lynne Bissonnette-Pitre first contacted me back in
January I had just moved into my retirement home in Sioux Falls and had begun
to unpack at what I am convinced is my lifetime’s “final destination”. The
packing boxes have reached the end of the road. They are all going to have to
go or are already gone. No need to save them for another move on my part. By
the way, if anyone is interested, I have a pile of suitcases in basement
storage that I would be happy to give away. Think about it the next time you
are passing through South Dakota!
Back in January, Dr. Bissonnette proposed the theme we
eventually agreed upon for me within the general theme of our Sacred Liturgy Conference.
I started thinking about what I was going to say come June and obviously I was doing
so against the background of my new surroundings, with boxes to unpack and
stuff to put in its proper place. One of those places is my chapel, which is
coming together quite nicely. For my chapel at my arrival back in January, the
Diocese had kindly loaned me the basics (altar, crucifix, etc.). The Crucifix
they sent along with the altar was part of a traveling set built for diocesan
functions. It is 4 ft. tall and way too big of a Crucifix for my tiny chapel. For
almost a month, until they could come back for it, that big Cross was standing
there near the altar in my chapel, leaned against the wall.
A little confession! I am sort of a quirky type, and so almost
naturally at least for an old man like me, in passing while lighting candles or
whatever, I would place my hand on the Head of the Suffering or Dead Christ. I
suppose lots of different thoughts would cross my mind, but in thinking of the
Conference theme, it was more a question: “This is He, Whom I am supposed to
incarnate?” Apart from my intention to embrace all He suffered in obedience to
the Will of the Heavenly Father and to make that truth present in my life, what
gave me pause, looking at that Crucifix, was the idea of the age discrepancy between
us in that moment when the Lord Jesus was lifted up on the Cross, drawing all
to Himself. There upon the Cross is this young man, presumably about age 33,
and here I am at plus 70 years of age, standing beside Him with my hand placed
upon His Head all bloody and crowned with thorns. Humanly speaking, I guess, I
could almost be His grandfather! How is Christ incarnate in me the priest, the
older priest, the retired archbishop? Musings? The question needs to be faced squarely,
when not with a certain rigor. What am I saying, when I declare that in the
Eucharist Christ is incarnate in the priest? The prerequisites in the priest
himself cannot flow forth from anything other than his priestly ordination. Not
country of origin or ethnicity, not age, not height, not hair color or beard
quality! The Church, the Mystical Body of Christ, through the office of the
Bishop lays hands unto priesthood on a man for Holy Orders. This is one of the seven
sacraments instituted by Christ, and thus by the Lord’s sovereign will conforms
this chosen man to Himself, to Christ the Priest. The priest’s sacrifice in the
Mass is unbloody, but nevertheless, it is the renewal for the sake of the life
of the world of Christ’s self-offering once and for all upon the Cross.
That is one thought line I would like to
address but suffer me one more such musing also tied to my chapel at home in
Sioux Falls! This one has a longer story line and is tied to my ongoing
spiritual journey as a priest over what on 27 June will be 45 years.
Whether for better or for worse, particularly since my
episcopal consecration in November of 2004, I have kept up an ongoing
reflection on my priestly ministry by thematizing each new assignment I have
had as an Apostolic Nuncio. This has
been accomplished in part by opening a new blog with an apt title as I moved
from one country to another. In late 2004, in the Caribbean I called my blog “Island
Envoy”, in 2011, in Ukraine I really kind of stepped out with “Deo
Volente ex Animo”, which I translate “God Willing from the Heart”. Moving
on in 2015 after that very intense experience in the heart of Eastern Europe,
for Switzerland and Liechtenstein I went with “ad montem myrrhae”
subtitled with a scripture quote: "Until the day breathes and the shadows
flee, I will hasten to the mountain of myrrh and the hill of
frankincense." [Song of Solomon 4:6]. In my five years in Bern,
Switzerland, even without the Spokane Conference on my horizon, there matured
within me an ongoing meditation on the Incarnation and the Eucharist.
Seriously, I am not making this up! It began to mature in me not so much in the
sense of the first thought to which I alluded with reference to the Crucifix. In
this case, it was less about me the priest somehow incarnating the Son of God
come among us as the Son of Man. Rather, images and words came to me in those
years especially in terms of Christmas and the Lord’s Incarnation, hence in
that sense: “et Verbum Caro Factum Est”. You can blame it, if you will, on
my previous experience of the boundless Ukrainian enthusiasm for the great
feast of Christmas and all their great Christmas carols and customs, but it is
much more than Ukrainian folk customs that distracted me. If you have any hesitations
about the centrality of the Nativity and hence of the Incarnation to how we
live the Eucharist, then visit, even virtually, St. Mary Major in Rome and
ponder its confessio enshrining the remnants of the Crib, the wooden Manger
from Bethlehem. Eucharist celebrated at the high altar in that Marian Basilica,
the first and greatest of the Catholic world, at the papal altar placed over
the top of the Crib is very much about the Incarnation in the sense of the
Nativity.
As retirement neared and my reflection on Eucharist and
Nativity proceeded, I happened to see on sale online, from a woodcarving
operation in northern Italy, an antiqued copy of a Romanesque bas-relief of the
Nativity. I could not tell you where the original might be found, but this
image spoke to me. The eyes, the big eyes of everyone in the composition, of
Mary, of Joseph, of Baby Jesus, of the ox and ass as well, are all looking at
you and engaging you. There is also a great star of Bethlehem in the picture. I
was captivated. Without even having a house yet, I bought it and had it shipped
to Sioux Falls with plans to mount it on the wall of my chapel in the house I
still had not even begun to shop for. “Et Verbum Caro Factum Est” ! Eucharist
and Nativity!
So much for my musings! In two points, these thoughts (Call
them promptings of the Spirit if you dare!) have suggested to me an outline for
my talk on the assigned topic. In our Conference dedicated to reflecting on the
various aspects of “The Incarnation in the Eucharist”, let me share some
thoughts about “Christ Incarnate in the Priest”! One line of my thought
development is looking inward by way of the Cross and one maybe more outward looking,
passing by way of the Crib. Per force and at a conference on the Sacred Liturgy,
these two lines of reflection call forth consequences inwardly for the life of
the priest if he is to body forth our Eucharistic Lord in the Holy Sacrifice. Outwardly
as well, let me talk about the priest and the obligations or duties that should
mark him off from the rest of men. There is no denying that the priest has
duties toward the Eucharist he celebrates and to the priestly lifestyle which
should set him apart from his fellows, as one who embodies Christ.
Before I dive into the topic as so outlined, however, one important
DISCLAIMER: I am not talking about Christ Incarnate in the Priest first
and foremost at the expense of other baptized people, whether of people in the
vowed life, of permanent deacons, or of the lay faithful. By reason of Baptism
the Christian, every Christian, bodies forth Christ in the world. By reason of
my Baptism and holiness of life, I am a child of God bound up in Christ’s
Sonship. By reason of sanctifying grace, I body forth Divine Sonship; Christ
lives in me for the sake of the life of the world. That is something we all share.
That is what is at the very core of the mystery of the Incarnation. How Christ
is incarnate in the priest, however, is something quite different.
When in our title we speak of the priest incarnating Christ,
we intend something more, which is totally wrapped up in Eucharist. I suppose
it cannot be denied that speaking today of the priest as incarnating Christ is
a bit unusual. Since the II Vatican Council it is usual to speak of ministerial
priesthood, as somehow different from the priesthood of all the baptized.
Regardless of how legitimate that distinction, which we also find used in the
Catechism of the Catholic Church, on its own it is inadequate for describing
this mystery. Qualifying priesthood with the adjective “ministerial” has always
struck me as less than rigorous thought. This solution falls short or flat; it
fails to inspire. As a stand-alone or primary image, I think it impoverishes
our notion of the Eucharist, source and summit of Christian existence. I would be
most grateful for anyone who can enlighten me as to why I should not see the present-day
popularized notion of the priesthood of the laity vis-à-vis ministerial
priesthood as a clear and unfortunate departure from constant Church teaching
(cf. Mediator Dei, par. 82-84)
To say that the priest is caught up in the only begotten Son, incarnate, the priest
bodying forth Christ and offering the Perfect Sacrifice to the Father in the
Redeemer’s stead and on behalf of the faithful, is to say more than the
adjective ministerial can render. And yes, your suspicions are correct: by this
line of discourse, I very much intend to put the priest on a pedestal.
That is as it should be. It is and why should it not be just
fine? We need not apologize for holding the priest up, because in fact he is
being lifted up with Christ upon the Cross. Golden crowns and thrones have
nothing to do with the type of incarnation we want for the priest and to which
he is called by Christ in His Church. O Sacred Head surrounded by Crown of
piercing thorn!
NOTA BENE: It follows, when the priest’s whole identity carries him to
and from the Eucharist that we are far from somehow espousing an elitist
position, setting off one category of people amid a gifted people. Undeniably some
of them may be more gifted intellectually or in personality than many an
ordained minister. Nonetheless, our approach to the topic is in no way tainted
by clericalism. We are not and cannot be talking about personal advantage,
aspiration, or ambition. This is vocation and it comes from God. Granted, in
practice, in the unfolding of the mystery in the liturgy, I think it is more
than fair to say that the Mass of Pope St. Paul VI leaves itself wide open, in
the way it is celebrated, to being labeled an instrument of priestly
protagonism. What we experience as the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite too
often constrains the priest to perform, to seek to engage the folks in church,
to do something which is contrary to his priestly calling. What can easily
degenerate into showmanship comes about in the Novus Ordo in a way it never did
in the Traditional Latin Mass, never did nor can.
On with my two-point outline then!
A.
Looking inward, the priest finds in himself at Eucharist the
martyred Body and the sacred Head of the Crucified One.
CAVEAT! How can the priest be one with the Crucified Christ? The priest can only live
this identification or empowerment by humbly distancing himself from his
incarnate Lord as did St. Peter in the Acts of the Apostles. Time and again, Peter
distinguished himself from the God-Man whose vicar he had become by Christ’s
will. There are multiple examples of this distancing or clarifying but let Acts
10:25-26 stand for them all!
“When Peter entered, Cornelius met him and, falling at his
feet, paid him homage. Peter, however, raised him up, saying, ‘Get up. I myself
am also a human being.”
As a Gentile, Cornelius had never seen Peter before that moment.
Gentiles and Jews did not travel in the same circles. Evidently the man had
been taught by God and he showed proper reverence as only he knew how. Nevertheless,
and rightly so, Peter distanced himself from Cornelius’ confession of the
identification between Peter and His Lord. The Roman was going by what had been inwardly
revealed to him in prayer; he had not seen a miraculous healing such as the one
performed by Paul and Barnabas before the eyes of the Lycaeonians of Lystra and
Derbe (Acts 14:8-15). The reaction of Paul and Barnabas to the Lycaeonians’
attempt to offer them sacrifice at the gates of the city was much more dramatic.
I suppose it had to be, because the Lycaeonians were farther off the beam than
Cornelius’ understanding of who had come into his house. Still, the reaction of
Paul and Barnabas was no different than Peter’s gentle but firm protest in reaction
to Cornelius’s prostration before him. Paul and Barnabas also protested their
mortality and gave the glory to God alone.
The point being, that Christ’s Incarnation, Et Verbum Caro
Factum Est, rightly brings us to our knees before the Blessed Sacrament and
before the priest. The two “incarnations” are not identical, however. Understanding
the significance of the expression Christ incarnate in the priest
requires additional sorting out. How and when does the Lord Jesus take on flesh
in me the priest? Am I not really talking here about the Church’s constant
teaching on the priest offering the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass in persona Christi? The traditional
doctrine about the priest at Mass acting in the very person of Christ would be a
restrictive or narrow application just for Eucharist of the Church’s teaching
on the priest as being another Christ, an alter Christus.
At some point in my academic carrier, I think I must have
been proofreading somebody’s doctoral dissertation or license paper, which made
a very expansive or extensive application of this title in
persona Christi to the priest going far beyond the celebration of the
Eucharist. Somebody back then criticized the author’s work as sloppy because the
concept in persona Christi seems rather in Catholic teaching to have always
been limited to the sacrificial dimension of the Mass itself. It is a
legitimate point. How else do you explain in the TLM the priest taking off the
maniple to preach when he remains in the sanctuary, and taking off his chasuble
as well, if he climbs a pulpit somewhere out in the nave of the church? Lex
orandi, Lex credendi? In the same
way, one could ask why the bishop only dons the maniple in the prayers at the
foot of the altar, after his Confiteor and after pronouncing the absolution. One
school of thought would have the priest (and here specifically the bishop)
acting in persona Christi when he is offering, when he has ascended the
altar of sacrifice, but not when exercising the ministry of the word through
preaching, which is somehow divorced from the rest of the sacred action, that
is, from the altar of sacrifice. (To fend off questions about my “last
chapter”, retirement title for my blog, it is: ut ad Sancta sanctorum puris mereamur
mentibus. It is
drawn from the priest’s prayer as he ascends the altar: “Aufer a nobis, quǽsumus, Dómine,
iniquitátes nostras: ut ad Sancta sanctórum puris mereámur méntibus introíre.
Per Christum, Dóminum nostrum. Amen”.)
I think this discussion is important, because talking about a
vocation sealed by a sacrament empowering or enabling a man to act for Christ
on behalf of others, while not being synonymous with the title of my talk
“Christ incarnate in the priest” may nevertheless be helpful.
Golden crowns and thrones (as opposed to cross and thorns) have
nothing to do with the type of incarnation we want for the priest and to which
he is called by Christ in His Church. For our priests, truth to be told, we
want nothing less than the Cross of Christ. Anything else would be a charade. Hence
the clear witness of St. Pietro of Pietralcina, Padre Pio! In his own body he
bore the marks of the Lord’s Passion and suffered Christ’s pain upon the Cross.
There is a famous passage from the life of Padre Pio recounting his impatience
for night to pass so that once again he could ascend the altar of God and
celebrate the Holy Sacrifice.
Summing up the fruits of my ongoing reflection on my first
musing: Yes, in Eucharist Christ is incarnate in the priest who is offering in
His stead that one unique Sacrifice for the life of the world. That is why when
consecrating the priest says, this is my Body, this is my Blood. The Crucified
One is speaking. Like Mary, like the Evangelist or the Magdalen, we all assist
at this unbloody renewal while standing at the foot of the Cross. Christ alone
on Calvary offered up Himself, He the Priest, He the Altar, He the Lamb of
Sacrifice. The priest offers in just that same way and the faithful actively
participate through their prayer, uniting themselves to him and thereby to
Christ presenting and acting.
B.
“Et Verbum Caro Factum Est” ! Looking outward from myself as
priest toward the Infant Jesus born at Bethlehem and placing myself there alongside
Him in the light of that star, shoulder to shoulder with St. Joseph, with the
shepherds summoned by the angels and, of course, being there with the magi
summoned by that very star.
In terms of the mystery of the Incarnation, the Nativity
scene is as much to be found there in Eucharist as is Calvary. In the
literature of the approved authors, of the fathers and doctors of the Church,
there is no lack of parallels between Jesus nailed to the wood of the Cross as
an adult man, and Baby Jesus bound up in swaddling clothes, fixed to the rough
wood of that feed trough, that manger we call the Crib. When talking Nativity,
we are deprived of the temptation to see the priest as more central to the
action than Jesus Himself. This obviously is partly because it is more of a
stretch to identify the priest at Mass with the Infant Jesus than it is with
the Crucified One. The mystical witness of Padre Pio in that sense is only a
partial report. The saint does not totally exhaust in himself as priest what we
mean by Incarnation. That newborn Baby stands or lies on a vastly different
plain than does the adult priest no matter what his age. You might say that the
priest is privileged or constrained not to identify with Baby Jesus but to
minister to the tiny Lord of Life, just as are all the other folks summoned to
the manger and huddling around in wonder and awe to contemplate the scene. If we
contemplate the Eucharist as Nativity/Incarnation, you might say that the
priest plays the part of old Simeon in the Temple meeting the young couple,
Mary carrying the Baby and Joseph with the cage with the two turtle doves brought
for the sacrifice. Simeon takes the Baby in his arms and in ecstasy sings his Nunc
dimittis, “Now, O Lord, you may dismiss your servant!”
In that case, thinking of Padre Pio, the
witness of the stigmatic is not and cannot be exhaustive of what we intend in
the idea of Christ being incarnate in the priest at the altar. The disciples recognized
the Risen Lord because He bore in His glorified Body the marks of the Cross. We
could make this distinction between Christ and the priest in the context of
Calvary alone. Overlaying or including the profound notion of Incarnation as
Nativity, participation in the mystery is still assured while declaring that
measure of distance which does not detract in the least from the first-person
force or impact of the words of consecration, “Hoc est enim Corpus Meum.”
Yes, then, in using the language of my
musings and holding as much to the Infancy Narrative as we do to the account of
Christ’s Passion, I hope you will not be disappointed and accuse me of oversimplification
if I say very simply that Christ is incarnate in the priest at Eucharist. He is
so at once by identification with Christ’s Sacrifice and also as privileged witness:
Ecce Agnus Dei qui tollit peccata mundi! Behold the Lamb!
Ad Orientem! The
classic priestly stance at the altar, facing Christ with the assembly, is as
good a hedge against priestly protagonism in liturgy as you are going to find.
Sadly, in the Mass of Pope St. Paul VI, we have lost the punctuation of the
rite with the regular and repeated turns of the celebrant to the people for the
Dominus vobiscum, intended not only to mark each part of the Mass but also
to bind the people into the priest’s offering in Christ’s stead.
The Altar of Sacrifice! In the TLM, with all the extra kissing by the priest,
the symbolism of the altar is underscored. The words of consecration in the TLM
are always pronounced sotto voce by the priest with his elbows or
forearms supported by the altar (symbolizing Christ). As I say, Christ
predominates both in word and in gesture over the priest. There is no danger
here of protagonism!
In closing, if I could make you a recommendation:
In reading around my topic, a “must read” document which came
to my attention and would not let me go was: MEDIATOR DEI, an Encyclical of
POPE PIUS XII on the Sacred Liturgy. It was promulgated at Castel Gandolfo,
near Rome, on the 20th day of November in the year 1947, the 9th of his
Pontificate (so before I was born, that is nearly 74 years ago). Why is it a
“must read”? Because it is just plain great in every way and as good a place as
any to find the ammunition needed to send older folks into shock by challenging
them to address their unfortunate preconception that things newer are somehow
better. Be assured, friends, that Summorum Pontificum was not just a
fluke, but rather an overly cautious first step on the part of Pope Benedict
XVI to attempt to redress an historical injustice and move us on the path to
new life through the one reset which I favor without reservation, namely a
liturgical reset.
The Encyclical “Mediator Dei” is readily accessible in
various languages on the Vatican website, to be found under the documents of
the venerable servant of God, Pope Pius XII. The English translation offered
there is a bit stilted, but if you can look past its stiffness, I hope that in
reading it, if you are not familiar with this masterpiece, that you will find
it as refreshing and clear-sighted as I do.
Apologia pro vita sua! I find the approach I have taken in my talk today more
than sustained by the teaching of Papa Pacelli on the liturgy. Let me quote
just one paragraph to illustrate!
17. No sooner, in fact, "is the Word made flesh"
than he shows Himself to the world vested with a priestly office, making to the
Eternal Father an act of submission which will continue uninterruptedly as long
as He lives: "When He cometh into the world he saith. . . 'behold I come .
. . to do Thy Will." This act He
was to consummate admirably in the bloody Sacrifice of the Cross: "It is
in this will we are sanctified by the oblation of the Body of Jesus Christ
once." He plans His active life among men with no other purpose in view.
As a child He is presented to the Lord in the Temple. To the Temple He returns
as a grown boy, and often afterwards to instruct the people and to pray. He
fasts for forty days before beginning His public ministry. His counsel and
example summon all to prayer, daily and at night as well. As Teacher of the
truth He "enlighteneth every man" to the end that mortals may duly
acknowledge the immortal God, "not withdrawing unto perdition, but
faithful to the saving of the soul." As Shepherd He watches over His flock,
leads it to life-giving pasture, lays down a law that none shall wander from
His side, off the straight path He has pointed out, and that all shall lead
holy lives imbued with His spirit and moved by His active aid. At the Last
Supper He celebrates a new Pasch with solemn rite and ceremonial, and provides
for its continuance through the divine institution of the Eucharist. On the
morrow, lifted up between heaven and earth, He offers the saving sacrifice of
His life, and pours forth, as it were, from His pierced Heart the sacraments
destined to impart the treasures of redemption to the souls of men. All this He
does with but a single aim: the glory of His Father and man's ever greater
sanctification.
Dear priests! If the imitation of Christ is a proper
spirituality for one called to incarnate the God-Man, then here in one
paragraph is a nice blueprint for your acting at the altar, in your personal
and private life, as well as in the public square!
It is not my task to do a review of the encyclical, but I
would ask you to take note and go and read paragraph 62
and then ask yourself about the legitimacy of much which has gone on over the
course of the years since Vatican II. Let me pronounce the word and then let it
go: iconoclasm! The post-conciliar “wreckovation” which stripped many of our
churches of images and decoration, which burned books and vestments, was
nothing short of recourse to tactics attributable to the ancient error of
iconoclasm.
Thinking about the Eucharist and Christ incarnate in the
priest, I have intentionally limited myself to focusing on the priest at Mass
renewing Christ’s Sacrifice on the Cross in an unbloody fashion.
I think that is what this Conference expected of me. Despite the pitfalls of
extending beyond offering sacrifice what we mean by the priest acting in
persona Christi, bodying forth Christ cannot be so punctual or
circumscribed as to not include the notion of the priest as alter Christus,
as another Christ. Venerable custom has us kissing the palms of the hands of a
new priest, in gratitude for his first blessing, long after the holy oils have
been washed away or evaporated. As there is no comparable rite of kissing a new
bishop’s head, we can conclude that the hand kissing focuses on Christ
incarnate in the priest, ordained to act in Jesus’ stead at the altar in the
Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.
Nos cum Prole Pia
Benedicat Virgo Maria!
