Synod of Bishops
XI
Ordinary General Assembly
The rapport
between
the Sacrament of Penance and
the
Sacrament of the Eucharist
Your Holiness,
Brothers and sisters in Christ,
I speak in the name of the Union of Superiors General. My point of departure
is the discussion of the rapport between Eucharist
and Penance that is found in n. 23 of the
Instrumentum Laboris.
The Instrumentum laboris makes frequent reference to the relationship
between Eucharist and Penance
[1]
and this relationship is
most often presented as a reason for the concerned
attention of this Synod. The document notes
contemporary trends in some areas of the world,
such as a decrease in the celebration of the
sacrament of Penance and an increase in those
receiving the Eucharist; this development
leads to speculation that some of the faithful
are receiving the Eucharist without fulfilling
the canonical requirement of sacramental Penance
for those guilty of mortal sin. The rapport
between Eucharist and Penance poses serious
theological and pastoral challenges. How can
we help people to regain what St. Alphonsus
Liguori calls an “affection” for the sacrament
of Penance
[2]
and appreciate the gift
of the Eucharist as a supreme motivation for
loving God who has given Himself to us?
[3]
The challenge presents itself at various levels. There are canonical rules
that govern the celebration of both sacraments
and practical norms to be followed in pastoral
practice;
[4]
these are at times ignored
or neglected. There is also a widespread ignorance
of the faith in some local Churches that leads
to a superficial understanding of these great
sacraments. There is the dilemma of people
in difficult pastoral situations who do not
know whether they are excluded from the sacraments.
Their pastors often are confused as to how
they should respond. And, although the relationship
between the Eucharist and Penance presents
itself as an excruciatingly painful problem
for particular groups of people, such as those
in second unions, the solution does not start
here.
I will identify four levels to the problem I have indicated. There are important
differences between these levels as well as
implications for the way we eventually ground
pastoral practice in sound doctrine and solid
theology. The levels to which I refer are
the ecclesial, sacramental, moral and juridical
understanding of Eucharist and Penance.
The Church, the community of those who by the power of the Spirit believe
in Jesus as the Saviour through his death
and resurrection, is recognised by its faithfulness
to the Word of God and its constant celebration
of the sacraments.
[5]
If the Eucharist is not
celebrated and frequented, or if people are
wrongly excluded from participating in its
celebration, then there is the ecclesial difficulty
of demonstrating the actual unity of the Church
in Christ as an anticipation of its future
unity in the Kingdom of God. If the sacrament
of Penance is de facto absent in many
local Churches we must wonder whether the
Church can be properly recognised as the Church
willed by Jesus Christ. Our fundamental concern,
therefore, is how the Church is recognised
as a Church that celebrates the sacraments.
Everything else is to be formulated in the
light of this ultimate concern.
In public discussions, participation
in the Eucharist or the sacrament of Penance
is presented sometimes in terms of the rights
of individuals or the duties of pastors. These
categories can and should be discussed, but
not as the primordial question, which is related
to the mystery of the Church itself.
It is obvious that both Penance and Eucharist pose a sacramental question,
although here too there is confusion. The
Eucharist is a sacrament because it is the
sacred meal in which the unity of the Church
in love is symbolized and made efficacious,
the one sacrifice of Christ is recalled and
the future Kingdom is anticipated. No wonder
we say: “Mystery of Faith”! The Eucharist
should never be instrumentalized in an ideological
way, for instance, when the Eucharist is used
to prove some personal or political point
that has nothing to do with the sacrament.
The sacramental aspect of the Eucharist is
often obscured because of an inadequate catechesis
and deficient manner of celebration. We must
be worthy to participate in the Eucharist
[6]
and the Eucharist should
be celebrated in such a way that its full
sacramental power is made obvious. There is
an analogous problem with the sacrament of
Penance. The presentation of the sacrament
is often that of an individual and private
reconciliation, lacking is the sense of how
we are reconciled to God in a sacramental
way through the ministry of the Church, or
simply as a requirement for the reception
of the Eucharist. The latter misunderstanding
is often expressed by the faithful with the
following formula: “I have to go to
confession; I get to receive Holy Communion”,
conveying the perception that one sacrament
is simply an obligation while the other is
a gift. The crisis of Penance may be rooted
in the fact that we are not
successful in showing how the forgiveness
of sin is neither cheap grace nor guilty self-obsession
but rather the free offer of God’s restored
peace in Christ to those who have gravely
sinned and who sincerely repent.
The Instrumentum laboris treats the moral aspect of the Eucharist
in a most useful way by showing how it is
the font of Christian morality
[7]
. This emphasis recalls
the importance of a proper understanding of
the ecclesial and sacramental dimensions of
the Eucharist: if people do not comprehend
the gift of the Eucharist to the Church in
the sacramental presence of Christ in a way
that entices them to full participation, then
how can we say that the Eucharist is the font
of Christian morality? There are many people
who are not participating in the Eucharist
because they cannot, will not, or feel excluded.
How, logically, can they be faithful to Christian
morality if they are not nourished by its
font? We must be more determined to find solutions
to the practical problems of exclusion from
the Eucharist precisely for this moral reason:
we all need the nourishment of the font and
none should be excluded on grounds that are
not demonstrably adequate.
The moral aspect of the sacrament of Penance is self-evident. In relation
to the Eucharist, however, there is a point
that needs to be underscored. It is not our
human effort that reforms us; such change
is entirely the work of Christ in us. A better
celebration of the penitential rite at the
Eucharist will not diminish the sacrament
of Penance. Rather, by placing the confessing
of our sins as an integral part of the Liturgy
of the Eucharist where we confess the greatness
of God, we will be reminded of the need to
continue along the road of conversion by celebrating
the sacrament of Penance too.
The Church has always been concerned for the respect due to Eucharist and
Penance.
[8]
The disciplinary aspect
is clearly important for the correct celebration
of the sacraments, but it receives its deeper
significance because it is a practical application
of the truths expounded at the previous levels.
We face very grave problems with regard to the tension between the celebration
of the sacraments of Penance and the Eucharist.
These will not be easily or quickly solved.
The pain of those who feel excluded is real
and actual; the concern of the Church that
the two sacraments be celebrated worthily
is also real and actual. It is worth considering,
in the light of the Instrumentum laboris,
how we proceed on this question. We should
begin with the ecclesial dimension of both
sacraments, and then continue to the proper
sacramental presentation of both. In the light
of these two foundational aspects we may proceed
to the moral questions and the juridical problems
involved. This is a better way and more faithful
to Scripture and Tradition than the tendency
to begin with moral and disciplinary aspects,
which may needlessly provoke division in the
Church. The way I propose has the potential
for identifying the unifying aspects of both
sacraments. The human realities of both sacraments
are important, but not as essential as the
fact that the sacraments receive their deepest
significance from the Paschal Mystery of Christ,
which is the key to understanding the Real
Presence of Christ in the Eucharist and the
freeing from the bonds of grave sins in the
Sacrament of Penance.
Joseph W. Tobin, C.Ss.R.
Superior General
[1]
For instance: numbers 22, 23, and 45.
[2]
A recurring theme in the Pratica del
Confessore (San Alfonso Maria de’ Liguori,
1755) is that the priest take care that
the penitent remains affezionato dal
sacramento.
[3]
Confer “L’amore che merita Gesù
Cristo per il dono dell’Eucaristia”
in Pratica di amar Gesù Cristo (Sant’Alfonso
Maria de’ Liguori, 1768, Chapter 2).
[4]
Confer Codex Iuris Canonici, Canons
897-958 and 959-997.
[5]
Confer Lumen gentium, (Vatican Council
II, 1964) 1-8 and 48-51.
[6]
From
the earliest days of the Church this worthiness
is a matter of concern: this is clear in
St.
Paul, for instance
1 Corinthians 10.
[8]
Recent examples are the Vademecum
per i confessori
su alcuni temi di morale attinenti
alla vita coniugale (Pontificio Consiglio
per la Famiglia, 1997) with regard to the
Sacrament of Penance, and Redemptionis
Sacramentum: su alcune cose che si devono
osservare ed evitare circa la Santissima
Eucaristia (Congregazione per il Culto
Divino e la disciplina dei Sacramenti 2004)
with regard to the Eucharist.