The Complexities of Eucharistic Sharing in Homes for the Aged: A Study in Pastoral Ecumenism
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The question of eucharistic sharing has been described as of the most vexing pastoral questions facing the churches today. (1) Restrictive policies on sharing can be the cause of a great deal of spiritual pain for those who are present and long to receive but are not permitted to do so. At the same time, open policies on eucharistic sharing can cause similar levels of discomfort. When people are offered communion but recognize that they must refrain from receiving because of the policies of their own denomination, a great deal of unease can arise. A further consideration is that, if core elements of the liturgy are unfamiliar, uncertainty and even anxiety may arise. Given today's varying philosophies on eucharistic sharing and a desire to reduce such feelings of unease as much as possible, what is the best pastoral approach to eucharistic sharing in ecumenical settings? Nursing homes and homes for the aged face unique pastoral challenges with respect to eucharistic sharing. People come together in nursing homes from a variety of denominations at a time in their lives when many turn more fervently to prayer. Some homes are administered by particular faith groups; yet, when a person's health or strength deteriorates, he or she will often be placed in whatever home has a vacancy, regardless of the person's denominational affiliation. Worshiping among those of other denominations is, therefore, much more frequent in such settings than it would be in parish Characteristics commonly associated with aging, such as communication difficulties, limited mobility, and dementia add to the pastoral challenge. This essay examines the practice of eucharistic sharing within the Canadian context, with particular focus on nursing-home settings. The seven most populous Christian denominations in Canada are: Roman Catholic (43.2%), United Church of Canada (9.6%), Anglican Church of Canada (6.9%), Baptist (2.5%), Lutheran (2.1%), and Orthodox (1.6%). (2) The Decree on Ecumenism states: must become familiar with the outlook of the separated churches and communities. (3) Such familiarity is particularly vital in ecumenical communities such as nursing homes; it is possible to have very good intentions and yet to act with insensitivity unless the beliefs and practices of other denominations are taken into account. This essay, therefore, begins with a review of the eucharistic-sharing policies found in the above-named Christian denominations and examines the policies in light of some of the pastoral challenges one might find in a nursing-home environment. It then explores a related issue that is very common in nursing homes: communion to the sick, or the practice of taking communion to residents in their rooms when they are not strong enough to gather with the community. Given that Roman Catholicism is the most populous Christian denomination in Canada, the question of communion to the sick will be examined from a Catholic perspective. That is, we will explore the conditions under which Catholics might be permitted to offer communion to non-Catholic Christians outside of the eucharistic assembly by first examining how each denomination handles the question of communion to the sick for its own members. For some denominations communion to the sick is a very important and expected ministry. For others the practice is unfamiliar or even theologically problematic, and it is vital that pastoral-care workers be sensitive to such concerns. This examination will yield insights about whether to offer communion and, if so, how to offer it in ways that respect the beliefs of the non-Catholic recipient. We will find that, by modifying pastoral practice to meet the needs of non-Catholic denominations, it will be possible to make the rites fuller and richer for Catholics as well. This analysis of eucharistic practice in Canadian nursing homes will draw attention to the complexities that must currently be navigated as a result of our continuing divisions. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,014 | 0,006 |
| Communication savante | 0,005 | 0,005 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,005 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».