Editorial

Jesus is present today:
How we meet him in the Eucharist

Can you imagine what would happen if Jesus Christ decided to return to the earth? If we saw him walking down the street? I can't begin to fathom the media attention! People would follow him, trying to get close to touch his sleeve or hear his voice.

Like the "doubting Thomas" of the Scriptures, people today only seem to believe what they can see or feel. They don't accept anything on faith alone.

Yet, Jesus actually IS present in the world today. He comes in many forms, perhaps the most important in his real presence in the celebration of the Eucharist.

Challenges human understanding. Christ's presence in the Eucharist challenges human understanding, logic, and ultimately reason. His presence cannot be known by the senses, but only through faith - a faith that is continually deepened through that communion which takes place between the Lord and his faithful in the very act of the celebration of the Eucharist.

That message is pointed out in the Norms for the Celebration and Reception of Holy Communion Under Both Kinds published in this week's Catholic Herald [print edition]. Bishop William H. Bullock asked our diocesan paper to publish these norms in their entirety to help people in the Diocese of Madison "celebrate with full hearts, minds, and voices . . . with reverence and devotion."

Not really new. These norms are not really new to the Catholic Church. In fact, they hearken back to the early centuries of Christianity. And they are part of the liturgical reforms called for by the Second Vatican Council some 40 years ago.

After Christ said "do this in memory of me," the early Christians' celebration of the Eucharist consisted of the reception of both species in fulfillment of the Lord's command to "take and eat . . . take and drink." The distribution of Communion under both forms - bread and wine - was the norm for more than a thousand years of Catholic practice. It continued until the late 11th century, when the custom of distributing the Eucharist to the faithful under the form of bread alone began to grow.

In 1963 the Second Vatican Council authorized distribution of Communion under both forms of bread and wine. In fact, the council encouraged Communion to be received this way as a "more complete form," a "fuller sign of the Eucharistic banquet."

Communion under both forms. Bishop Bullock is asking that Communion under the forms of both bread and wine should be offered at every Mass in our diocese. Many parishes already follow that practice, but it will take education and cooperation for these Communion norms to be implemented fully.

I encourage people to take time to read the norms. They give us a wonderfully clear teaching about the meaning of the Eucharist. What a privilege we have to meet Our Lord today - let's take full advantage of this opportunity as often as we can.

Mary C. Uhler, editor

Mailbag

To the editor:

	Mailbag policy We reserve the right to edit or reject letters. Limit letters to 200 words or less. All letters must be signed. Send letters to: Mailbag The Catholic Herald P.O. Box 44985 Madison, WI 53744-4985 Fax: 608-821-3071 E-mail: info@madisoncatholicherald.org

I write to commend you for your excellent coverage of the Knights of Columbus effort to provide a bronze statue of Rachel for Resurrection Cemetery dedicated on Mother's Day 2002. The Knights deserve great praise and thanks. You will recall however that I also singled you out as a major contributor to the life issues struggles of our time.

Your editorials in this year have addressed all life issues from the horrors of abortion to euthanasia. You have addressed cloning, the embryonic stem cell issue, genetic manipulation, to mention but a few. You have done so with clarity and consistency, having properly researched your findings and presented them to our readership in a very convincing, persuasive, and effective manner.

I hail you, your writings, your sticktoitiveness all so necessary in a society where too many believe "if it's medically possible it is morally correct," "if it's a 'choice' morally good or bad, it's a right of the chooser." We need to hear more from you and know that your record in this regard deserves special awards and special prayerful thanks.

Bishop William H. Bullock, Bishop of Madison

Addressing sexual abuse facts

To the editor:

In a letter in the May 9 issue of The Catholic Herald, Robyn Hackett objects to the distinction made by some church leaders between "pedophiles" and abusers of adolescent boys. She argues that no distinction should be made, on the grounds that adolescent boys (up to age 18) still are considered "children." Ms. Hackett confuses the legal and medical definitions of "children." Whereas age 18 often provides a legal definition, pedophilia refers specifically to a psychiatric disorder involving the abuse of pre-pubescent (i.e., sexually immature) children. Abuse of sexually mature adolescents has its own name: ephebophilia.

However, an expert who has done research in this area, Dr. Phillip Jenkins of Penn State University, advises that we not even bother to give it a special name. I agree. In plain English, it is simply engaging in sex with a minor, homosexual if same-sex, heterosexual if not.

The vast majority of the abuse cases reported involve homosexual advances on adolescent boys. According to most studies, "pedophile priests" are rare, no more common than among clergy of other denominations and less common than among the general population.

The current crisis cannot be understood without recognizing these facts and no solution will be obtained unless they are addressed head-on. For example, the argument that the scandal would end if priests were allowed to marry makes no sense, unless one is arguing for same-sex marriages. On the other hand, as noted by some bishops and cardinals after the recent meetings at the Vatican, the number of homosexuals in the priesthood must be addressed at their June meeting in Dallas.

James A. Sorensen, Madison

Address issue of contraception

To the editor:

In 1996 the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), a division of the Center for Disease Control (CDC) of the U.S. government, published a report showing that 75 percent of women in their child-bearing years use some form of artificial contraception, including sterilization. The remaining 25 percent are women who were not using contraception at the time of the study. This includes pregnant women, post-partum women, and women open to pregnancy. The study found that sterilization usage was higher than usage of the pill.

The study did not look for differences between Catholics, Protestants, Jews, and the general population. When the previous study in 1992 looked for such differences, they could not find any.

It looks like the need for spiritual reform in this area is enormous. I wonder if our Catholic Herald may publish some articles on this momentous issue.

Ewa Verhoven, Middleton