Unnatural symbols lack power

I have written that imagination and metaphor play an essential role in religious language.

I now turn to symbols, the building blocks of metaphor that link the well-known to the less well-known. The Greek origin of the word "symbol" is delightful: two words meaning throwing things together, an exercise in serious play conveying the attitude of "Let's see if it works."

Authentic symbols spring naturally from the subconscious, from the drama of human experience, and give meaning to the conscious, enriched by emotions They have the power to move the will and inspire dedication and commitment to high ideals. Think, for example, of the powerful symbol of the cross of Christ, of the national flag and anthem, of the Churchillian "V" for victory sign.

But symbols are life-giving only as long as they continue to evoke the depths of the human collective. Sadly, symbols can be perverted to diabolical ends such as the traditional Hindu swastika, which meant well-being, distorted and debased by the Nazis to sanctify mass murder. Ideally, symbols construct a form that can be experienced by the senses and through which a higher reality appears as present and life-ennobling.

In line with the Jewish tradition, Jesus elevated bread and wine to become the central eucharistic symbols of his ongoing presence among us. His words, "I am the bread of life" and "This is the cup of my blood," develop symbol into metaphor. These were natural choices because these were the foundational staples of his culture.

Today, in the church even with its efforts at enculturation, there seems to be a disconnect in insisting on the sacramental use of bread and wine in cultures where they are unnatural and therefore lack the force of symbolic relevance. For these peoples, bread and wine are not their "work of human hands" but imports from an alien culture that degrade the indigenous prime staples they have known and loved from time immemorial. Why, then, could they not be free to imitate the creativity Jesus showed by praying for "our daily rice," "our daily manioc" or among the Inuit, the sacramental use of seal liver?

As well, this change would remove the imposed use of alcohol from these peoples for whom it is not only toxic, but a major cause of the destruction of their culture.

We must understand that the imposition of unnatural symbols is a form of religious colonialism allied with the social, political and economic imperialism fostered by conquering foreigners.

If this proposal seems wild and unthinkable, we must remember that in 1995, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger allowed alcoholic priests to use grape juice instead of wine at Mass. No sacramental fundamentalism here, but a hopeful sign of healthy change.

Surely, such creative innovative adjustments should apply also to those afflicted with celiac disease. Gluten-free bread or rice cakes can be used for Holy Communion. Arguments to the contrary recently expressed by Trenton, New Jersey Bishop John Smith, refusing this accommodation to eight-year-old Haley Waldman at her First Holy Communion. That appears as mind-boggling bafflegab, the cruel consequence of a crippling biblical literalism.

How contrary to the Second Vatican Council's Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy (1963), which proclaimed that "Even in the liturgy the church has no wish to impose a rigid uniformity in matters that do not affect the faith" (No.38). Or the 1994 Instruction of the Roman Congregation of Divine Worship that favoured the "incarnation of the Gospel in autonomous cultures and at the same time the introduction of these culture into the life of the church." We are now at the stage where the rubber hits the road.

There is risk involved in changing customs that stem from the earliest days of the church, but to negate the possibility of liturgical changes is to betray the history of such change, which has marked our church from its very inception until today. With our growing understanding of the fuller meaning of the Catholic or universal church, we need more than ever to be respectful of the pluriformity of symbols and practices that enrich our one world and be willing to banish the lock step uniformity, which has done so much harm.

As Filipino liturgist Anscar Chupungco said regarding eucharistic elements: "The supreme authority of the church, the theological climate that obtains in local churches and the socio-religious response of the people all have a decisive role in the matter."

Fr. Jim Roberts writes from Burnaby, B.C.

COPYRIGHT 2004 Catholic New Times, Inc.
COPYRIGHT 2004 Gale Group