simplebooklet thumbnail

of 0
1
2
Missionary Servants of the Most Holy Trinity
Siervos Misioneros de la Santísima Trinidad
April 2017
3
Presentación / Presentation
Br. N.N
4
Real Presence in the Eucharist
Br. Ramon Flores, ST.
8
El Hombre y la mujer creados en un mismo molde
P. Domingo Zambrana, ST.
10
Liturgical and Theological Development in the Celebration
of the Eucharist
Br. N.N
15
Experiencing God in the Interfaith Committee for Detained
Immigrants.
Br. Gustavo Amell Sanes
17
Celebrating the gift of life / Celebrando el don de la vida
18
Book of the Month
Br. N.N
Contenido / Contend
3
Missionary Bulletín
Presentación / Presentation
Br. N.N
4
The Eucharist is “the source and summit of
the Christian life” (CCC 1324). The Catholic
Church firmly believes that Jesus Christ is
truly present under the appearances of bread
and wine. The Church professes that, in the
celebration of the Eucharist, bread and wine
become the Body and Blood of Christ
through the power of the Holy Spirit. Jesus
said: “I am the living bread that came down
from heaven; whoever eats this bread will
live forever, and the bread that I will give is
my flesh for the life of the world… For my
flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink”
(Jn 6:51-56). Jesus Christ is truly present in
the sacrament of the Eucharist; its Body and
Blood continue to nourish the Church until
his eschatological return. But how does the
belief in the real presence in the Eucharist
develop through the history of the church?
This essay intends to trace the development
of the real presence from the beginnings of
Christianity through the sixteenth century.
The Origins of the Eucharist
“While they were eating, Jesus took bread,
said the blessing, broke it, and giving it to his
disciples said, “Take and eat; this is my
body.” Then he took a cup, gave thanks, and
gave it to them saying, Drink from it, all of
you, for this is my blood of the covenant,
which will be shed on behalf on many for the
forgiveness of sins.” (Mt. 26:26-28; cf. Mk
14:22-24, Lk 22: 17-20, 1 Cor 11:23-25).
The synoptic gospels narrate the Last Supper
of Jesus Christ the night before he was
crucified. It is in this context that the Church
believes that Jesus instituted the Eucharist as
a memorial sacrament of his passion and
death. The gospel of John dedicates a whole
chapter where Jesus is presented as the bread
of life, and Jesus says that his flesh is true
food and his blood is true drink (John 6).
However, it is not clear if the first century
Christians recognized or understood real
presence in the celebration of the Eucharist.
Paul F. Bradshaw and Maxwell E. Johnson in
their book, The Eucharist Liturgies, state that
“There are no grounds for distinguishing a
sacramental Eucharist from other sorts of
Christian meals in the earliest period: agape
and Eucharist are synonyms at this time, and
it was only much later that meal and
Eucharist become separated from one
another” (24). The information about the
early Christian meal practices comes from
the Didache (Teaching of the Twelve
Apostles), and this document does not include
the Last Supper narrative or any mention of
his body and blood; only “spiritual food and
drink” (Eucharistic Liturgies, 16). It is not
until the following centuries that we will see
the Christians begin to refer to the Eucharist
as the Body and Blood of the Lord.
The Second and Third Centuries
During these two centuries we begin to see a
rapid development of the understanding of
the Eucharist as real presence of Jesus Christ.
The first extensive description of Christian
Eucharistic practices comes from Justin
Boletín Misionero
5
Martyr, writing in Rome in the middle of the
second century (26). He is probably the first
one to include the narrative of institution in
the Eucharistic prayers. Furthermore, he
begins to refer to the elements of bread and
wine as the flesh and blood of the Lord. Justin
says,
For not as common bread and common drink
do we receive these things; but just as our
Savior Jesus Christ, being incarnate through
[the] word of God, took both flesh and blood
for our salvation, so too we have been taught
that the food over which thanks have been
given through [a] word of prayer which is
from him, from which our body and flesh are
fed by transformation, is both the flesh and
blood of that incarnate Jesus (First Apology
66.2).
Justin not only refers to the bread and wine as
the flesh and blood of the Lord, but he also
explains that these elements become the flesh
and blood of the Lord “through the prayer of
the word which come from him.” Other
theologians say something similar to Justin.
Tertullian believes that it was necessary to
recite the words of Jesus (the institution
narrative of the Last Supper) in the Eucharist
in order to consecrate the bread. At the end
of the second century, Tertullian speaks in
similar realistic terms of the Eucharistic
elements as Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, and
Ignatius of Antioch, declaring that the bread
is the Lord’s body (De oratione 19; De
idolatria 7), and human flesh feeds on the
body and blood of Christ in order that the soul
may be fattened on God (De resurrectione
carnis 8.3) (48).
________________________
“Do not therefore, regard the
bread and the wine as mere
elements, for they are (the)
body and blood of Christ
according to the master’s
own declaration”
________________________
The Fourth and Fifth Centuries
The realistic language about the bread and
wine being the body and blood of Christ
continued to develop in these centuries, as
did the anaphoras themselves. In the
Mystagogical Catecheses, we clearly see the
realistic language of the Eucharist’s
elements: “Do not therefore, regard the bread
and the wine as mere elements, for they are
(the) body and blood of Christ according to
the master’s own declaration” (4.6). Also,
Ambrose of Milan testifies that the Eucharist
prayer of his church spoke of the elements as
being “figure [figura] of the body and blood
of our Lord Jesus Christ” (De Sacramentis
4.21). Therefore we can see that the realistic
language of Christ’s body grows during these
centuries. Bradshaw and Johnson state, “The
realistic language of Christ’s body and blood
becomes stronger in this time period with
either the epiclesis (East) or narrative of
institution (West) seen increasingly as
consecratory in function, in order to make the
Missionary Bulletin
6
bread and wine the body and blood of
Christ…”(Eucharistic Liturgies, 136).
The Medieval Ages
Since the beginning of the Patristic era, we
have seen that Christianity believes that
Christ is present in the Eucharist’s elements:
the bread and wine were his body and blood.
But how exactly is he present? The Western
theologians of the ninth century began to
explore this question. The French monk
Paschasius Radbertus attempted to explain
the nature of Christ’s presence in the
Eucharist. Bradshaw explains, “He asserted
that it was the same body which had been
born of Mary, suffered on the cross, and rose
from the tomb that Christians received in the
Eucharist, though veiled from their sight
under the outward forms of bread and wine,
and that through consuming it, their human
nature was joined to Christ’s nature” (223).
Ratramnus, Pashasius’s fellow monk, took a
very different position. He agrees that the
bread and wine were truly the body and blood
of Christ, but this was a spiritual reality
invisible to the senses and perceived only by
faith, and not the same body born of Mary
(223). However, Radbertus’ realistic
understanding came to be generally accepted
in the centuries to follow.
The Medieval schools recovered the
Philosophy of Aristotle. Its terminology of
“substance” and “accidents” were used to
explain Christ’s presence in the Eucharist.
According to Aristotle, the term “substance”
is the essence of a thing or person and
“accidents” are the physical properties that
could be perceived through the five senses.
“The term transubstantiation entered the
theological vocabulary to denote the change
of the bread and wine into the body and blood
of Christ in the first half of the twelfth
century and was incorporated in the official
teaching of the of church in the first canon of
the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215” (225).
The Dominican theologian Thomas Aquinas
says:
“Substance as such cannot be seen by the
bodily eye, nor is it the object of any sense,
nor can it be imagined; it is only open to the
intellect, the object of which is the essence of
things, as Aristotle says. Hence, properly
speaking, the body of Christ, according to the
mode of existence which it has in this
sacrament, can be reached neither by sense
nor by imagination; it is open only to the
intellect which may be called a spiritual
eye.” (Summa Theologiae 3a.76.7)
The term transubstantiation became common
usage to explain how Christ was really
present in the Eucharistic elements. Other
theologians disagree with the term because of
the philosophical problems that such
explanations have. During this time, the
people receive the Eucharistic bread only a
few times a year. They believed that this
bread was truly the body of Christ. Therefore,
they saw it as something to be adored and
contemplated. The Elevation of the Host
during the Mass became the devotional
Boletín Misionero
7
climax of the mass. This devotional practice
became very common among the laity during
the middle ages.
During the sixteenth century, the Protestant
Reformation challenges the devotional
practices of the Church, and Martin Luther
rejects the Aristotelian term
“transubstantiation” but affirms the “real
presence” in the Eucharist. He writes in his
Large Catechism of 1520, “It (the Sacrament
of the Altar) is the true body and blood of the
Lord Christ in and under the bread and wine,
which we Christians are commanded by
Christ’s word to eat and drink.” However, not
all Reformers believed in “real presence” in
the bread and wine (Ulrich Zwingli),
although some (John Calvin, and probably
Thomas Cranmer) affirmed communion with
Christ’s presence in Eucharistic action as a
whole even if Christ was not directly present
in the bread and wine. The Catholic
Reformation condemns the Protestants and
affirms “real presence” (at the Council of
Trent) and uses the term “transubstantiation”
to explain how Christ is present in the
Eucharist.
Real Presence?
We have seen that at least since the beginning
of the second century, Christianity has
believed that Christ is present in the
Eucharist. Justin Martyr begins in this
century to refer to the Eucharistic bread and
wine as the flesh and body of Christ. In the
patristic era the New Testament narratives
are at last beginning to shape Eucharistic
theology more directly (49). In the following
centuries the realistic language of the
Eucharist increases, and by this time it is
absolutely clear that the people truly believed
that the bread and wine were truly the flesh
and blood of Christ. During the middle ages,
different theologians begin to explain how
Christ is present in the Eucharist. Thomas
Aquinas’ term “transubstantiation” came to
be the most commonly held explanation for
Christ’s presence in the Eucharist by the end
of the Middle Ages. Although, Luther rejects
the Aristotelian term “transubstantiation,” he
affirms real presence in the celebration of the
Eucharist, while others reject or question it.
________________________
“The term transubstantiation
entered the theological
vocabulary to denote the
change of the bread and wine
into the body and blood of
Christ in the first half of the
twelfth century and was
incorporated in the official
teaching of the of church in
the first canon of the Fourth
Lateran Council in 1215”
________________________
Missionary Bulletin
8
La mujer se mira en el espejo y usualmente
no está satisfecha con lo que ve. Se cambia
los aretes, se arregla un poco el peinado, se
jala la falda o se aprieta más la cintura, o algo
así por el estilo. En contraste, el hombre se
mira en el espejo una y otra vez y le fascina
lo que ve. Se vira de un lado y luego del otro
y se va contentísimo. “Son pocos los guapos
como yo”, parece pensar. Y así en muchos
aspectos de lo que es cada cual de acuerdo a
su psicología y temperamento. Dios el
creador los hizo a imagen y semejanza suya,
o sea en un mismo molde. A ambos les
concedió inteligencia y libre voluntad. Son
marcadas sin embargo, las muchas otras
diferencias que se notan entre el hombre y la
mujer. Grandeza de la sabiduría del Creador
que hizo que esas diferencias fuesen las que
desde el amor, se complementasen el uno al
otro. Son esas diferencias también que desde
la falta de crecimiento personal, desde la
inmadurez psicológica y emocional,
constituyen motivo de tensión, no aceptación
y hasta de rechazo en una pareja.
Las diferencias entre los géneros masculino y
femenino no solo se fundamentan en la
realidad física y biológica que identifica a
cada cual. Impactante son también todas las
experiencias circunstanciales de la crianza,
comenzando desde el mismo vientre. El
conocido psicólogo Carl Jung (1875-1961)
alude una teoría muy interesante respecto a
los géneros. Ambos géneros tienen rasgos
masculinos y femeninos a la misma vez,
argumenta él. El “animus” representa los
rasgos masculinos y el “anima”, los rasgos
femeninos. En el proceso de desarrollo y de
socialización, la mujer acentúa lo propio de
su feminidad (“el anima”), según la cultura y
el medioambiente. De igual manera el
hombre desarrolla “el animus”, con todos los
rasgos propios de su género. Lo dramático en
el contexto de la cultura machista es que el
hombre siente en su psique el amarre de su
“anima”, o sea las tendencias femeninas (e.g.
ternura, romanticismo, sensitividad, afecto),
pero desde su inseguridad, se siente
amenazado y con pánico de demostrar rasgos
afeminados. Como resultado, rechaza tales
propensiones.
¡Que riqueza y que belleza cuando los
géneros viven con tranquilidad los rasgos que
llevan a la complementariedad y sostienen el
proyecto común de la vida conyugal! Desde
la ignorancia, o aun desde la no aceptación de
su “animus y anima” juntos como parte
normal del ser humano, tanto el hombre
como la mujer viven momentos de gran
incertidumbre. La problemática se agrava
cuando en la cultura machista, se crean
expectativas injustas respecto a lo que debe
de ser el comportamiento de una mujer y de
un hombre. Esto es lo que en la conciencia
colectiva de un pueblo se llaman estereotipos.
Una mujer no debe de ser policía, ni militar,
ni bombero, ni carpintero, por mencionar
algunos ejemplos concretos. De igual
manera, un hombre no debe ser niñero, ni
amo de casa, ni enfermero, ni bailarín de
ballet. En una sociedad prejuiciada y
pobremente desarrollada, una que carece de
apertura emocional y psicológica para
conceder autenticidad a quien desee actuar
como le plazca, tendrá dificultad en aceptar
roles y comportamientos que son contra
culturales.
El hombre y la mujer creados en un mismo molde
P. Domingo Rodriguez, ST.
Boletín Misionero
9
Fue un gran amigo mío, psicólogo social de
la Universidad de Puerto Rico, José A. Torres
Zayas, quien en la década de los 70, publicó
el libro “Holocausto Familiar”, una
compilación de artículos escritos en el ya no
existente periódico El Mundo. A modo
popular, explicaba el autor la tragedia (de ahí
el titulo “Holocausto”) que le tocaba vivir a
la sociedad puertorriqueña en la transición de
un estilo de vida agrario a uno industrial. No
hubo tiempo de ajuste psicológico ni
emocional. Los patrones de la vida cotidiana
se alteraron de tal manera, que prácticamente
desapareció la cohesión y unión familiar. Los
roles fijos y definidos de una sociedad
agrícola (e.g. la mujer en el hogar, el hombre
en el campo), fueron sustituidos por las
exigencias de la estructura industrial. En ésta,
los roles intercambiables y en continuo
ajuste, de acuerdo a la tecnología, empujaron
tanto a la mujer como al hombre a una
experiencia de trabajo asalariado fuera del
hogar. ¡Progreso material, mejoría
económica, pero desastre familiar!
En esta experiencia de transición, el hombre
siguió con la mentalidad de que la mujer,
además de su trabajo asalariado, tenía que
seguir cumpliendo con las tareas y faenas de
madre, esposa, niñera, cocinera, lavandera,
sirvienta de la limpieza, etc. El hombre,
exhausto por supuesto, no colaboraba en
nada. ¡Su televisor y cerveza! Mucho de esto
por supuesto, es lo que sigue viviendo el
pueblo hispano que emigra a los Estados
Unidos, donde las exigencias de los estilos de
vida chocan con lo tradicional y
acostumbrado desde el país de origen.
El hombre y la mujer fueron creados en un
mismo molde, con igual dignidad, con igual
apacidad de razonar y decidir. El “anima” del
varón debería de ayudarlo a mayor
sensibilidad y ternura, a mayor comprensión
y tolerancia, especialmente en las situaciones
cambiantes de su rol como esposo, papá y
cabeza del hogar. El “animus” de la varona
de hecho, es la que la hace der de su familia,
la emprendedora, la atrevida, la que se
arriesga, la que corrige y disciplina a la prole,
la que da la cara en tiempos difíciles,…la que
perdona y da la vida por los que ama.
“Y vio Dios todo lo que había hecho, y he
aquí que era bueno en gran manera…”
(Génesis 1, 31).
_____________________
¡Qué riqueza y que belleza
cuando los géneros viven con
tranquilidad los rasgos que
llevan a la complementariedad y
sostienen el proyecto común de
la vida conyugal!
_____________________
Missionary Bulletin
10
Introduction
Our Christian Tradition always has seen the
roots of the Christian Eucharist in the
synoptic gospels and the letters of Saint Paul
(1 Cor). This institution is claimed to be by
Jesus himself who celebrated the Last Supper
with his disciples and commanded to
continue celebrating it as a “memorial” in his
name. However, the recent development of
Eucharistic Theology and the Last Supper
leads us to think that there were other
important cultural aspects included in the
context where Jesus celebrated his last meal
with his disciples. Furthermore, every
tradition or celebration is always situated in a
cultural context, which is an important aspect
that helps us to recognize that in order to do
a proper study of the Christian Eucharist we
have to go back to the customs in the Jewish
and Greco-Roman meal practices and how
those practices were developed in a Christian
context throughout the first centuries. In this
essay I propose to analyze the significant
liturgical changes that occurred between the
New Testament period and the Golden Age
of the fourth and fifth centuries.
Greco-Roman and Jewish Practices Meals
In the Greco-Roman world, to gather and to
eat was such as an important aspect in the
social life. The meal helped to enforce
community bounds among communities,
even though there was an evident separation
in the gathering between those who were
higher of status than the lower ones. On the
contrary, poor communities or families did
not have the opportunity to share splendid
banquet as the wealthy, but a very simple
meal to share with the closest ones. However,
among the Jews circles the meal had another
connotation. According to some sources, we
know that some Jewish sectarian
communities “at their shared meals
participants were arranged according to their
status within the community” (Ibid., 4). The
common characteristic was to have
everything in common: eating, praying and
deliverance. In this sense, the meal among
Jewish has a religious significance,
especially after fasting on the Sabbath. There
were also some sort of blessings very well
known by the Jewish people before and after
the meal, such as berakah and Birkat-ha-
mazon. Meal customs like this shaped the
Last Supper as an early Christian Eucharistic
practice.
Important Aspect in Early Christian
Meals
Among early Christians, the tradition was to
gather and to share a meal in the house of a
rich church member, where everybody could
participate iregardless of their social status.
“The tradition of participants all bringing
bread and wine (and sometimes other
foodstuffs) to the celebration was continues
in later Eucharistic practices for several
century” (Ibid., 10). For some theologian, the
Eucharist took place among a meal, even
more, the Eucharist was the meal, “the
practical expression of love and care for all,
Liturgical and Theological Development in the Celebration of the Eucharist.
Br. Gustavo Amell Sanes, ST.
Boletín Misionero
11
and especially the poor that was meant to be
a vital dimension of Christian eating
together.” (Ibid.,10). Some communities
even referred the Eucharistic meal as agape,
a Greek term which means “love”.
Nevertheless, we can notice that at this time
there was not a clear differentiation between
Christian meals and sacramental Eucharist.
However, there were some difficulties or
problems arising among the early
community. On one hand, there were
tendencies of stigmatize Christian
participants because of their social status. On
the other hand, the idea whether Gentiles
Christian should share the meal with Jewish
Christians, or in Jewish language, between
the pure and impure. This concern would be
only the beginning of another bigger concern,
the participation in the Eucharist between the
baptized and the unbaptized.
Theological and Liturgical Changes of the
Eucharist
Until this time, we do not have any evidence
of a specific singular rite, or any idea of
sacrifice or worship, and not yet much
evidence that the bread and wine were seen
as the body and blood of Jesus. One of the
most important documents that gives us
information about the early Christian
eucharistic practices is the Didache or
Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, which has
some connections with the Jewish Birkat ha-
mazon. In the Didaché, “The principal focus
of the meal is on remembrance of and
thanksgiving for the revelation brought by
Jesus and petition for the final gathering of
the church into the God’s kingdom” (Ibid.,
17).
The “transition” of the Eucharist from a meal
to a rite seems to start gradually in the second
and third century. It was not a gathering of a
meal anymore, but a celebration of a more
complex rite. Justin Martyr was the first
Christian to give us a description of Christian
Eucharist in the middle of the second century.
He describes such practice in his First
Apology, where he mentioned the Christian
Eucharist in the context of a celebration of
new baptized and for a weekly celebration.
These two celebration shared some of
aspects, such as, common prayers, bread and
cup, kiss of peace, “president” gives thanks,
etc. Also, he identifies the bread and cup with
the flesh and blood of Christ, and gives an
explanation of the transformation through “a
word of prayer”. Other important description
of the early Christian Eucharistic practices
comes from Tertullian and Cyprian at the end
of the second century. Tertullian “uses the
word “Eucharist” to refer to the consecrated
bread itself rather than the rite.” (Ibid., 31).
Cyprian goes further and he associates the
Eucharist with a “sacrifice” performed by the
main celebrant on behalf of the people. Even
though, the communion-sacrifice was already
introduced by Paul, there was a constant
tendency to associate Eucharist with
“sacrificial praise”. Irenaeus describes the
bread and cup as a thank-offering, a new
covenant which is offered to God. This idea
of the Eucharist as a sacrifice had some
consequences, such as, the emphasis on
martyrdom, to see the Eucharist as benefit for
Missionary Bulletin
12
the congregation and as intercession for those
who have died. Also, the time in which the
Eucharist was celebrated changed. There are
some letters written by Tertullian that suggest
certain practices of a Eucharistic celebration
in the morning. However, “it appears that by
the middle of the third century a complete
Eucharistic rite was certainly being
celebrated in the morning” (Ibid, 33); the
evidence is found in a letter that Cyprian
wrote to Caecilius, bishop of Biltha.
Now, at this point we find two important
aspects. On the one hand, there has been a
gradual development in the Eucharist as a
“rite” (or multiples rites) among the early
Christian communities. On the other hand,
there have been some theological
development in the idea that the Eucharist is
a thanksgiving and a sacrifice. Also, the
concept that the bread and wine after being
“eucharistized” become the flesh and blood
of Jesus.
______________________________
In this time the idea of the
“exaltation of the divine in the
rites was developed, but in
contrast, this attitude describes
the worshipers as “sinners and
unworthy”. Among the
preachers were the tendency of
warning the congregation of
participate in the communion
having a sinful life.
______________________________
As it is very well indicated by Bradshaw and
Johnson, the imperial acceptance of Christian
religion in the fourth century was a crucial
moment that brought important changes in
the way people conceived the celebration of
the Eucharist. “The new religion needed, as
other contemporary religion, temples, altars,
a visible priesthood, and so on, and its
worship therefore took on more of the
features of the worship of other religions.”
(Ibid., 61). Because of the great number of
people attending these ceremonies in this
period, there was a necessary use of big
spaces for the liturgy. Thus, it was necessary
to construct and build new churches and
shrines that would fit the large quantity of
people and have their ceremonies. Along
with all of these changes, there were also
some important aspects in the way that
people conceive the Eucharist. There was an
emphasis in the behavior of the participant at
worship that was taught through the
catechesis. The idea was to communicate was
happening in the Eucharist and other
liturgical rites. There was also an emphasis in
the rules and regulations at the moment of
receiving communion, as we can see in the
Mystagogical Catechesis (Ibid., 65). Also, in
this time the idea of the “exaltation of the
divine in the rites was developed, but in
contrast, this attitude describes the
worshipers as “sinners and unworthy”.
Among the preachers were the tendency of
warning the congregation of participate in the
communion having a sinful life. One example
of these tendency is John Chrysostom who
Boletín Misionero
13
promotes the idea of purity of soul to receive
the Eucharist and “advising those who were
guilty of sin to leave the service before the
Eucharistic action itself began (Ibid., 66).
This idea of unworthiness that was
emphasize led to the practice of non-
communicating attendance during a
significant time. Another tendency that was
practiced during that time was the idea of
receiving communion “only infrequently
during the year and for the rest of the time
attended without communicating, the
Eucharist had not only ceased to be a
communal action but was no longer even
viewed as food to be eaten.” (Ibid, 67).
Instead, there was a great emphasis in the
aspect of not eating, but devotion.
However, the Eucharist became something
very different than what it meant in the
beginning, this was a period of time where we
developed of the rites, and Eucharistic
Theology. In the aspect of rites, “the
liturgical outline provided by Justin Martyr’s
First Apology 65-66 became the predominant
skeleton or pattern for the Eucharistic liturgy
across a wide range of diverse tradition in ast
and West” (Ibid., 70. To see the pattern
propose for Justin see p.26-27). Also there
are other earlier Eucharistic liturgies, such as,
the Apostolic Tradition, The anaphora of
Addai and Mari, St. Basil, St. James, among
others, that bring us an idea of the
development concerning to the Eucharistic
Theology and the rites. For example, in the
Apostolic Tradition there are certain elements
that helps us to understand the development
of the Eucharistic rites and theology during
this early period. The Apostolic Tradition has
the following schema:
1. Opening Dialogue
2. Thanksgiving
3. Institution Narrative,
4. Anamnesis,
5. Epiclesis,
6. Intercession,
7. Doxology
The Eucharistic rites became important
elements among the culture, catechesis, and
traditions, associated with the patriarchal see.
The Eucharistic prayers developing during
this time was the idea of Eucharist as a
“sacrifice”. It was seen from different
perspectives: sacrifice of prayer, gift-
sacrifice of bread and wine, memorial
sacrifice, and propitiatory sacrifice.
Furthermore, in the fourth and fifth century
“the realistic language of Christ of Christ
body and blood became stronger in this time
period with the epiclesis (East) or narrative
institution (West) seen increasingly as
“consecratory” in function, in order to
“make” the bread and wine the body and
blood of Christ, though the language remains
at the level of “figure, sign, symbol, type,
antitype, or homoioma, which is a Greek term
that means “likeness” (Ibid., 136). These
elements began to be regular features of the
Eucharist prayers.
Missionary Bulletin
14
Conclusion
In the first few centuries of Christianity, there
were a great development between the New
Testament period and the Golden Age of the
fourth and fifth century. In the early Church,
the faithful did not have a clear
differentiation between Christian meals and
sacramental Eucharist. The Eucharistic
Theology and Eucharistic rites were taking
shape gradually among the following
centuries thanks to the reflection of some
theologians who helped to develop a
Eucharistic Theology and Eucharistic rites
that were the essential aspects of the
Christian religion. The richness of this period
is found in many aspect of our contemporary
liturgy and the Eucharistic Theology that we
have today.
____________________________________
On the one hand, there has
been a gradual development
in the Eucharist as a “rite”
(or multiples rites) among the
early Christian communities.
On the other hand, there
have been some theological
development in the idea that
the Eucharist is a
thanksgiving and a sacrifice.
Also, the concept that the
bread and wine after being
“eucharistized” become the
flesh and blood of Jesus.
____________________________________
Boletín Misionero
15
Through Catholic Theological Union I knew
about the Interfaith Committee for Detained
Immigrants (ICDI), and immediately I was
interested to volunteer in its ministries. While
I was in California in a missionary
experience, I heard so many shocking stories
about the difficult situations that
undocumented immigrants have to go
through coming to this country. Because of
those stories I became more aware of the
reality of immigration in this country, so
when I knew about ICDI I thought that it was
the best opportunity to contribute in any way
to help those people who are facing the
difficult moment of being deported and their
families.
Since last summer I have been assisting to
Broadview Detention Center and the House
of Hospitality in Cicero. Every Friday, I used
to go to Broadview now Kankakee jail-
where, with other volunteers, we gave
information and support to the families that
go to say good bye to their relatives, and
those who are deported. To be exposed to that
reality of suffering and separation of families
changed my perception of ministry and help
me to realize that, perhaps, I will not be able
to do many things in behalf of these people,
but at least, I can accompany them, and give
a voice of hope in those difficult moments.
There are many experiences at the detention
center that have kept stuck in my heart, and
challenge me to continue doing something
for those who are suffering because of the
broken immigration system of this country.
One beautiful aspect among the environment
of sadness that there is in the detention center,
is the sense of community of the people who
go to pray. To see people in the interfaith
vigil encourage me to continue my apostolate
with our immigrant brothers and sisters
knowing that it is a ministry that unites
people from all creeds, and makes us truly
brothers and sisters through helping those in
need. We, who profess faith that called God
father, can never get accustomed to see or be
indifferent to the pain of our brothers and
sisters.
Missionary Bulletin
Experiencing God in the Interfaith Committee for Detained Inmigrants.
Br. Gustavo Amell Sanes
16
However, volunteering with ICDI, I also
have the opportunity of seeing the other side
of the coin. While in the detention center
things seem to be hopeless in Cicero House
there is a lot of hope. The participants have
the opportunity to achieve their dreams, to
look for a better lifestyle, and the opportunity
to start again. In many occasions, I have
found myself in situation where I feel
evangelized by these guys. The beauty of
sharing meals, sharing stories, helping them
with little things, do not seem to be a big
detail, but it is through helping them that help
us to become more compassionate. In Cicero
House I have learned what it means “ministry
of presence”. Sometimes, we may have the
idea that the minister is one who does many
things. But, one thing that my time in Cicero
House has taught me, is to realize minister is
also the one “who is there”, “who is present.”
It is so important that these men know that
somebody is there if they need something.
Working with ICDI has been a blessing
where I have met people who are passionate,
self-giving, and compromise with the cause
of defending the dignity of the human person,
especially those who are more vulnerable
because of their immigration status. Being
part of ICDI has taught me a great lesson of
being better human, a lessons that is not
learned in a classroom or in a book, but in the
experience of being exposed to the suffering
of our brothers and sisters, and in the contact
with the merciful response of people from
ICDI.
________________________
To see people in the interfaith
vigil encourage me to
continue my apostolate with
our immigrant brothers and
sisters knowing that it is a
ministry that unites people
from all creeds, and makes us
truly brothers and sisters
through helping those in need.
We, who profess faith that
called God father, can never
get accustomed to see or be
indifferent to the pain of our
brothers and sisters.
________________________
Boletín Misionero
17
Please, keep in your prayers our brothers
who are celebrating the gift of life this
month.
Por favor, mantén en tus oraciones a
nuestros hermanos que están celebrando el
don de la vida este mes.
May
14
Fr. John Edmunds, ST.
May
15
Fr. Peter Krebs, ST.
May
23
Fr. Arturo Quezada, ST.
May
24
Fr. Dennis Berry, ST.
Martín Gerardo Oliva, ST.
May
27
Fr. Michael Barth, ST.
May
29
Fr. Alexander Díaz, ST.
May
30
Rigoberto Chávez, ST.
Celebrating the gift of life / Celebrando el don de la vida.
April
Missionary Bulletin
18
It happens in all corners of human life. A
practice or endeavor starts up, gains
momentum and evolves into an unquestioned
feature of the social landscape. This familiar
process of routinization displays certain
advantages. It allows society to turn its
attention to more pressing business, under the
assumption that if settled institutions are not
broken, they require no fixing. The problem
is that self-regulation is rarely sustainable.
Taking anything for granted for too long
invites corruption and corrosion. When the
inevitable crisis arises, it is time for hard
thinking and quick action.
Christian ministry provides a particularly
poignant case study in this life cycle of social
institutions. Even in contexts where ministers
appear to deserve unquestioned trust, scandal
is just one betrayal away. When abuses
involving sex, money and power grow to
systemic proportions, thoroughgoing reforms
emerge as the only remedy to set things right.
The latest book by Richard Gula, S.S.,
proposes just the type of reforms we need in
the wake of the clergy sex abuse scandals.
Drawing upon decades of experience
teaching ethics at the Franciscan School of
Theology of the Graduate Theological Union
in Berkeley, Calif., Gula addresses sensitive
issues of equal relevance for both ordained
and lay ecclesial ministry.
The advice offered is anything but a generic
call for better behavior and more consistent
attention to moral responsibilities in ministry.
Gula makes a strong case for a specific
program of improvement, one revolving
around the adoption of expanded
standardized and explicit codes of ethics for
ministers, both clerics and laity.
The key term in this regard is the
professionalization of ministry. Any proposal
to accomplish this goal meets with
predictable opposition on the grounds that
qualitative differences exist between ministry
and the usual endeavors identified as
professions, such as law and medicine. Gula
readily acknowledges the distinctive nature
of ministry as rooted in a holistic, vocational
response to God’s initiative and displaying
spiritual, indeed transcendent dimensions. He
argues that despite such inevitable tensions,
resisting such features of professional life as
institutionalized codes of conduct will only
retard the trust upon which responsible
ministry depends.
If ministers are to assume a fully professional
identity, changes will have to unfold on two
levels. The more obvious is the package of
external reforms, including structures to
ensure ministerial accountability and uniform
standards to protect values such as
Book of the Month
Just Ministry Richard Gula
Boletín Misionero
19
confidentiality in ministerial relationships.
Gula suggests a range of practices, such as
peer review and uniform disciplinary
procedures and sanctions for controlling
deviant behavior. It should be possible to
build on existing platforms like the
competency-based model of the “National
Certification Standards for Lay Ecclesial
Ministry.” Dioceses will have to cede some
of the autonomy they enjoy (even under the
Dallas charter) in order to implement national
standards and codes of behavior, especially
governing priests and deacons. But whatever
price is paid will pale in comparison to what
is accomplished in strengthening justice in
ministry and restoring trust in the church.
The second set of changes involves the
attitude of ministers across the entire range of
church-based services and activities. Gula’s
book proceeds explicitly from the framework
of virtue ethics, emphasizing the role of
pivotal personal qualities (humility,
generosity, compassion and gratitude, among
others) as key to ministry. The character,
emotional maturity, pastoral imagination and
motivation of the minister are indispensible
elements in any consideration of ministerial
ethics. Maintaining a sharp Christocentric
focus that holds up Jesus as a model of
inclusive love and liberating power, Gula
supplies rich analysis of relevant sources in
Scripture and theology that both support and
challenge all who minister. In an era of
slumping morale in lay and ordained ministry
alike, the encouragement offered in these
pages will be much appreciated.
The final chapters of this volume cover topics
that are probably on the minds of even a
casual observer of ministry today: the
dynamics of power in parish ministry,
violations of fiduciary boundaries in ministry
and clericalism in the organizational culture
of the Roman Catholic Church. Gula deals
frankly with the dangers of sexual abuse,
exploitation and harassment and offers
practical guidelines on such topics as the seal
of confession, the significance of cybersex
and the appropriateness of touch in public
and private ministerial settings.
Some readers will quibble with the fine
points of Gula’s analysis or his specific
recommendations on pastoral practice, but
no one would deny that this is a most
readable and appealing book. Its clarity and
depth make it eminently suitable for a wide
range of courses in theological education
and ministerial formation. Especially
helpful is Gula’s technique of opening each
chapter with a vividly drawn vignette of a
conflict in ministerial practice, and shaping
that chapter so that the text sheds light on
resources and approaches that resolve that
case study.
In these sketches and indeed throughout this
splendid book, Gula displays a most
judicious balance between sober realism
and positive hopefulness. While there are no
quick and easy solutions to the present crisis
in ministry, progress is possible and indeed
quite likely, provided that Christian
communities marshal the good will, moral
character and hard work necessary to ensure
a just ministry for the future.
Boletín Misionero
20
Missionary Servants of the Most Holy Trinity
Siervos Misioneros de la Santísima Trinidad