Wednesday Liturgy: Follow-up: Scriptural Basis of the Mass as Sacrifice

ROME, OCT. 10, 2006 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.

Following our brief treatment of the Mass as sacrifice (Sept. 26) and an earlier comment regarding the priest's obligation to communicate both species before distributing Communion (June 13 and 27, 2006), it appeared necessary to clarify one point.

One priest explained why he first distributed the hosts to a very small assembly before all take Communion together: "My reason for the priest not communicating before the others is that we are sharing a meal and it is impolite for a host to eat […] before offering food to his guests. At the Last Supper it does not seem that the Lord after breaking the bread ate […] before giving it to the disciples."

Although I do not doubt the sincerity and good faith of this priest's argument, especially in the light of other points he mentions, I still cannot agree with him.

While recognizing that the subject merits a more detailed reply than I am able to give in this venue, I wish to highlight the following points.

It is not quite correct to say that the priest is the host at Mass. The host is Christ who is also the sacrificial meal that is being offered. While the priest acts in Christ's person he does so as a minister.

I believe that a closer, albeit still imperfect, analogy of the celebrant's role is that the priest is at once a guest of honor and headwaiter. He also is invited to the Lamb's supper even though his position and role in this are unique and essential.

At the same time, he is charged with serving up the sacrificial meal exactly as the divine Host has ordained it through the medium of his Church and not according to the personal tastes and ideas of the minister.

Also, while it is true that the Eucharist is certainly a fraternal meal, it is so only insofar as it is a ritual sharing in a sacrificial meal. The convivial or fraternal aspect is one of the fruits of authentic participation in the sacrifice.

In the same vein, although the Last Supper was certainly a meal it was primarily a ritual sacrificial meal. From the point of view of the Jewish Passover ritual, participation in the sacrifice, and not the fraternal or family meal as such, was the center of attention.

It was in this ritual context that Christ inserted a new ritual by substituting himself for the paschal lamb thus establishing the new and eternal covenant.

From the basic rite established by Our Lord the Church quickly developed a new sacrificial ritual quite different from that of the Jewish paschal supper and responding to Christian theology of sacrifice, communion and ministry.

Finally, I fail to see how, after almost 2,000 years of constant and universal practice in all rites of the Church, it has suddenly become "impolite" for the minister to take Communion before distributing it to the faithful.

In cases like this, when we might have doubts about a certain practice, I believe we should humbly allow ourselves to be guided by tradition or to use Chesterton's term the "democracy of the dead," both those holy saints and martyrs who developed our rites, as well as myriad Christians who for centuries have participated in them.