Liturgical Abuses
Does Liturgical Abuses Matter?
…experimentation with the rubrics (i.e. rules) of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass have resulted in many abuses. In addition to priestly experimentation, even some Archbishops and Cardinals promulgate pastoral letters directing parish priests to implement liturgical changes at odds with the official Church rubrics. Some of these abuses are so serious that they actually invalidate the Mass, which then greatly deprives the soul of Grace and the sacrificial benefit of Eucharistic Jesus. Such loss of Grace for both the faithful laity and priest may result in loss of the Catholic Faith and further descent of this world into pagan darkness.
- http://www.ourladyswarriors.org/articles/badliturgy.htm
1. Disregarding the prescribed text of the Order of Mass.
This particular abuse is perhaps the most widespread. You might think that the mere existence of a prescribed, official Order of Mass would be enough to show priests that they’re not to change or improvise, but it isn’t. It’s not uncommon to find lectors eliminating male references to God in the Scripture readings or using the New Revised Standard Version of the Bible (or other inaccurate and unapproved ones) for the readings. You sometimes hear priests changing the words of the Nicene Creed—omitting the word “men” in “for us men and for our salvation” is the most common violation—or omitting the Creed altogether; saying aloud the prayers to be said quietly; or generalizing them, saying, for instance, “Lord, wash away our iniquities and cleanse us of our sins” (instead of “my” and “me”). You hear priests changing the tense and thereby the sense of phrases like “pray that our sacrifice is acceptable” instead of “may be acceptable” or “the Lord is with you” instead of “the Lord be with you.” You hear them inviting the congregation to join in prayers specified as the priest’s alone. On occasion you even find priests winging it during the Eucharistic Prayer. And beyond the improvised words you’ll find a lot of flippant practices like using blue vestments for Marian feasts or gingerbread for the Eucharist at children’s Masses. All of this is unlawful: “Regulation of the sacred liturgy depends solely on the authority of the Church, that is, on the Apostolic See and, as laws may determine, on the bishop. Therefore no other person, even if he be a priest, may add, remove, or change anything in the liturgy on his own authority” (Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, 22, repeated in documents like Sacram Liturgiam; Tres Abhinc Annos; CIC 841, 846; and many other laws and regulations). Deviations from the Order are illicit, and when done intentionally they’re a grave offense both against the Church and the faithful who have a right to an authentic liturgy (Inaestimabile Donum, CSDW, April 3, 1980).
2. Interrupting the Mass.
The priest has no more right to interrupt the Mass from the sanctuary than you have to interrupt it from the pews. At the conclusion of Mass the lector or priest may make general announcements for the information of the parish; that’s specified in the Order. But no one may stop the Mass to make announcements, give financial reports, or make pleas for funds (Inter Oecumenici; Inaestimabile Donum). No one may stop the Mass for extra homilies (CSDW, Liturgicae Instaurationes 2(a)) and certainly not for other activities that are themselves unlawful, like skits or “liturgical dance.”
3. Omitting the penitential rite.
This one is often misunderstood. A priest may choose to use the rite of blessing and sprinkling as given in the Order, in which case he must omit the “Lord have mercy.” But a priest can never omit the penitential rite altogether, and he cannot give a general absolution during the penitential rite of the Mass as a substitute for individual Reconciliation (nor can he do so during a communal penance service [CIC 961]). There are other options available to the celebrant elsewhere in the Order. The sign of peace, for instance, is optional (GIRM 112). If he includes it, though, the priest is not allowed to leave the sanctuary to exchange it with the congregation (GIRM 136).
4. Replacing or omitting the homily.
A priest may omit the homily only on weekdays that are not holy days. On Sundays and holy days he must give a homily (Sacrosanctum Concilium; CIC 767); it should relate the readings to one another and indicate how their message can be applied to the lives of his parishioners (Paul VI, Evangelii Nuntianidi; Inter Oecumenici). No priest can substitute announcements, financial reports, or pleas in place of the homily, nor add such things to it. Of course the Holy See isn’t going to make a fuss if he takes a couple of sentences at the end of the homily to make an announcement, tell how much is in the building fund, or mention a second collection. Nobody who is not a priest, deacon, or bishop can give the homily at Mass; nobody who is not ordained can give a “talk” or “reflection” in place of the homily (CIC 766–768). Although some few groups like the Society for the Propagation of the Faith have a dispensation to speak on behalf of an order or mission at the time appointed for the homily, it is never permitted without that dispensation—not even if he (or, worse, she) gives a short homily before launching into the appeal. An ordained minister gives a homily structured on certain guidelines; that’s it. Incidentally, he may not leave the sanctuary during the homily (GIRM 97).
5. Dictating posture.
There are parishes where the ushers will ask you to stand when you’re kneeling. Many churches are being built now without kneelers to discourage you from kneeling at all. This violates the law and does no honor to Christ nor to the martyrs who died rather than compromise the outward signs of their faith. But if the celebrant and his ushers can’t mandate your posture, the law can, and it does. Everybody at Mass is supposed to be uniform in standing, sitting, and kneeling (GIRM 20), and there are universal rules about it. In this country you are still required to kneel during the Consecration, from after the end of the Sanctus until the Great Amen, even if there aren’t any kneelers (GIRM 21; Appendix to the General Instruction 21). You are required to bow or kneel at the words “by the power of the Holy Spirit” in the Creed (GIRM 98). You are required to genuflect whenever you pass the Eucharist, whether it’s in the tabernacle or publicly exposed except when in procession (GIRM 233; CB 71). And contrary to what you might see these days, the Eucharist’s tabernacle can’t be tucked out of the way. It should be “placed in a part of the church that is prominent, conspicuous, beautifully decorated, and suitable for prayer” (CIC 938). After Communion, though, you’re free to stand, sit, or kneel as you choose.
6. Dictating the manner of reception of the Eucharist.
Vatican II never mentioned receiving the host in hand. But when some countries introduced the practice illicitly Pope Paul VI surveyed the world’s bishops to see if it should be allowed where it already existed. Rather than suddenly suppressing reception in the hand, the pope granted an indult intended to let the practice continue for a time in those areas where it already existed. Oddly enough, the bishops of the United States—where the practice did not exist—asked permission of the Holy See to introduce it here. Even more amazingly, they got it. Still, universal Church law does not permit reception of the Sacrament in the hand, and John Paul II disapproves of the practice. The indult that allowed it specified that reception in the hand “must not be imposed” (CSDW, En réponse, 1969). Absolutely no priest or extraordinary minister of Holy Communion may refuse to administer the Eucharist on the tongue. Your right to determine which lawful manner you use is stated in the GIRM (Appendix for the United States, 240b). The chalice cannot be left on the altar for people to pick up and drink from, not even during lightly attended Masses. The celebrant must distribute the Sacrament (United States Bishops’ Directory on Communion Under Both Species, 47). In fact, you’re not allowed to dip your host into the chalice; you have to take the cup and drink from it (DCUBS 45). By the way, as to Eucharistic ministers, it’s important to note that they’re not supposed to help distribute the Sacrament routinely; only if there’s an unusually large number of people at Mass or if they’re sent to distribute extraordinarily outside of Mass, as to the sick. They are not supposed to assist at all when a priest is in attendance. Their office has nothing whatever to do with increased participation by the laity.
7. Ignoring rules for reception of the Eucharist.
The official statement of the rules for reception has recently been rewritten by the National Conference of Catholic Bishops, and unfortunately it’s pretty vague. But it still says clearly that “in order to be properly disposed to receive communion, participants . . . normally should have fasted for one hour,” abstaining from food and drink except water or medicine. The rewrite also goes to great lengths to say that non-Christians and Christians not in communion with the Church are welcome to come to Mass, but it’s not nearly so clear as it used to be on the fact that they may not receive the Eucharist. The new phrase “ordinarily not admitted to holy communion” makes some Catholics—and too many priests—figure that it’s all right for non-Catholics to take communion on special occasions like weddings or funerals, or if the non-Catholic is a prominent person like a government official or head of state. Exceptions are so few and given in circumstances so rare that it might have been more helpful to write simply “not admitted to holy communion”; but that’s for the bishops to say. Naturally, you’re also required to be free from “grave” sin—what we all used to call “mortal” sin—which means Reconciliation before reception if you have committed a grave offense. And, no, the theology about what constitutes a grave sin has not changed, even if the terminology has.
8. Holding hands during the Our Father.
This is oddly widespread in the United States but it’s an illicit addition to the liturgy. The official publication of the Sacred Congregation for the Sacrament sand Divine Worship, Notitiae (11 [1975] 226), states the practice “must be repudiated . . . it is a liturgical gesture introduced spontaneously but on a personal initiative; it is not in the rubrics.” And anything not in the rubrics is unlawful, again because “no other person . . . may add . . . anything [to] the liturgy on his own authority” (ibid). Notitiae (17 [1981] 186)) also reaffirms that the priest may never invite the congregation to stand around the altar and hold hands during the Consecration. He stays in the sanctuary and we stay outside of it.
9. Performing liturgical dance.
Introducing dance into the liturgy in the United States would be to add “one of the most desacralized and desacralizing elements” leading to “an atmosphere of profanity, which would easily suggest to those present worldly places and profane situations. Nor is it acceptable to introduce into the liturgy the so-called artistic ballet because it would reduce the liturgy to mere entertainment” (Notitiae 11 [1975] 202–205).
10. Closing the holy water fonts at some seasons.
This is another innovation introduced spontaneously, and while holy water fonts are not integral parts of the Mass, emptying them during Lent or Advent is wrong no matter how you look at it. It’s not found anywhere in liturgical law, which is reason enough to suppose it to be forbidden. And it makes absolutely no sense. Holy water is a sacramental, so its right use carries with it a certain degree of forgiveness of sin and remission of punishment (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1668; CB 110–114). There is no positive spiritual benefit in depriving the faithful of this legitimate aid at any time. In fact, removing it during penitential seasons is bizarre—that’s when we need it most. By the way, because the penitential rite of the Mass and reception of the Eucharist remit venial sins, there’s no need to use holy water on the way out of Mass. Unless you’ve been up to some mischief in those few minutes.
As a postscript, I mention something that might be categorized as an abuse by the laity: parish-hopping. The Code of Canon Law provides that “The precept of participating in the Mass is satisfied by assistance at a Mass which is celebrated anywhere in a Catholic rite either on the holy day or on the evening of the preceding day” (1248, para. 1). Consequently, you can fulfill your Sunday obligation by going to a Mass anywhere. While your legal membership still remains in your local parish, the only times you are required to check in there are when you want to receive a special sacrament (e.g., marriage, confirmation) for which the priest needs the jurisdiction to administer. Nevertheless, if you flee your home parish when things get ugly, you are in a sense not living up to your responsibility as a lay person. It is your duty to point out that liturgy is not entertainment. The liturgy is reality, the primary reality of this world. Christ is God, the reality on whom the secondary reality of creation depends (“through him all things were made,” remember?). And the liturgy is the sacrament by which he comes personally and physically among us. The Mass is indisputably the single most important thing that human beings can do. You have your part to fill in this great work. In fact, that’s what the liturgy is: the word is from the Greek meaning “the laity’s job.” We are the Church itself, we are not the Church’s customers. Still less are we the Church’s audience. And we have a right to authentic liturgy (Inaestimabile Donum), liturgy exactly in line with all applicable rules and celebrated with a suitable sense of reverence (CIC 528). So if your priest offers sloppy, illicit, or even inappropriate liturgies, guess whose job it should be to pitch in and fix the problem?
The Use of Latin in the Roman Catholic Church
Whether or not you’re an advocate of the use of Latin in the Catholic Church, do read the following excerpts from the different documents of the Catholic Church.
On the Importance of Singing (Take note of Section 41 of the GIRM)
In the General Instructions of the Roman Missal (GIRM), Section 39 to 41 states this:
39. The Christian faithful who gather together as one to await the Lord’s coming are instructed by the Apostle Paul to sing together psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs (cf. Col 3:16). Singing is the sign of the heart’s joy (cf. Acts 2:46). Thus Saint Augustine says rightly, “Singing is for one who loves.”48 There is also the ancient proverb: “One who sings well prays twice.”
40. Great importance should therefore be attached to the use of singing in the celebration of the Mass, with due consideration for the culture of the people and abilities of each liturgical assembly. Although it is not always necessary (e.g., in weekday Masses) to sing all the texts that are of themselves meant to be sung, every care should be taken that singing by the ministers and the people is not absent in celebrations that occur on Sundays and on holy days of obligation.
In the choosing of the parts actually to be sung, however, preference should be given to those that are of greater importance and especially to those to be sung by the priest or the deacon or the lector, with the people responding, or by the priest and people together.49
41. All other things being equal, Gregorian chant holds pride of place because it is proper to the Roman Liturgy. Other types of sacred music, in particular polyphony, are in no way excluded, provided that they correspond to the spirit of the liturgical action and that they foster the participation of all the faithful.50
Since faithful from different countries come together ever more frequently, it is fitting that they know how to sing together at least some parts of the Ordinary of the Mass in Latin, especially the Creed and the Lord’s Prayer, set to the simpler melodies.51
Source: http://www.usccb.org/liturgy/current/revmissalisromanien.shtml
—————————————————————————————-
On the Nature of Latin and the Preservation of Latin by the Holy See
In the Apostolic Constitution of Pope John XXIII, Veterum Sepentia, on the Promotion of the study of Latin, it states:
The nature of Latin
Of its very nature Latin is most suitable for promoting every form of culture among peoples. It gives rise to no jealousies. It does not favor any one nation, but presents itself with equal impartiality to all and is equally acceptable to all.
Nor must we overlook the characteristic nobility of Latin for mal structure. Its “concise, varied and harmonious style, full of majesty and dignity”4 makes for singular clarity and impressiveness of expression.
Preservation of Latin by the Holy See
For these reasons the Apostolic See has always been at pains to preserve Latin, deeming it worthy of being used in the exercise of her teaching authority “as the splendid vesture of her heavenly doctrine and sacred laws.”5 She further requires her sacred ministers to use it, for by so doing they are the better able, wherever they may be, to acquaint themselves with the mind of the Holy See on any matter, and communicate the more easily with Rome and with one another.
Thus the “knowledge and use of this language,” so intimately bound up with the Church’s life, “is important not so much on cultural or literary grounds, as for religious reasons.” These are the words of Our Predecessor Pius XI, who conducted a scientific inquiry into this whole subject, and indicated three qualities of the Latin language which harmonize to a remarkable degree with the Church’s nature. “For the Church, precisely because it embraces all nations and is destined to endure to the end of time … of its very nature requires a language which is universal, immutable, and non-vernacular.”
Source: http://www.adoremus.org/VeterumSapientia.html
————————————————————————————
On the Rites and Ceremonies of the Eucharistic Celebration. (Notice the Primary Language Emphasized)
The 1987 Code of Canon Law, Canon 928 states:
Can. 928 The eucharistic celebration is to be carried out in the Latin language or in another language provided that the liturgical texts have been legitimately approved.
Source: http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P3A.HTM
—————————————————————————————
On the Preservation of Latin
In the Constitution of the Sacred Liturgy promulgated by Pope Paul VI, Sacrosanctum Concilium, Paragraph 36 and 54 states:
36. 1. Particular law remaining in force, the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites.
54. In Masses which are celebrated with the people, a suitable place may be allotted to their mother tongue. This is to apply in the first place to the readings and “the common prayer,” but also, as local conditions may warrant, to those parts which pertain to the people, according to tho norm laid down in Art. 36 of this Constitution.
Nevertheless steps should be taken so that the faithful may also be able to say or to sing together in Latin those parts of the Ordinary of the Mass which pertain to them.
And wherever a more extended use of the mother tongue within the Mass appears desirable, the regulation laid down in Art. 40 of this Constitution is to be observed.
Source: http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19631204_sacrosanctum-concilium_en.html
————————————————————————————-
On the Latin Language in Servant of God John Paul II’s own words
In the Letter, Dominicae Coenae, of the Supreme Pontiff John Paul II on the Mystery and Worship of the Eucharist, Article 10 states:
Article 10: [Latin] which in all the world was an expression of the unity of the Church and through its dignified character elicited a profound sense of the Eucharistic Mystery.
Article 10: The Roman Church has special obligations towards Latin, the splendid language of ancient Rome, and she must manifest them whenever the occasion presents itself.
Source: http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_let_24021980_dominicae-cenae_en.html
—————————————————————————————
Sanctus Pius Decimus
Sancte Pie Decime, Gloriose Patrone, Ora! Ora Pro Nobis!
Yes i know it’s recorded in a SSPX’s Seminary. But who says we can’t read their stuff or access their stuff! They have good treasures man. 
I think this hymn is the SSPX anthem or something. But since i’ve adopted him as my Patron Saint, i guess there is nothing wrong in saying: O Saint Pius X! Glorious Patron! Pray for us!
Pax Vobiscum.
Vexilla Regis
I thought the Vexilla Regis hymn and the accompanying Missa Cantata scene was a good combination. Enjoy this beautiful Hymn !!
ABROAD the Regal Banners fly,
Now shines the Cross’s mystery;
Upon it Life did death endure,
And yet by death did life procure.
Who, wounded with a direful spear,
Did, purposely to wash us clear
From stain of sin, pour out a flood
Of precious Water mixed with Blood.
That which the Prophet-King of old
Hath in mysterious verse foretold,
Is now accomplished, whilst we see
God ruling nations from a Tree.
O lovely and refulgent Tree,
Adorned with purpled majesty;
Culled from a worthy stock, to bear
Those Limbs which sanctified were.
Blest Tree, whose happy branches bore
The wealth that did the world restore;
The beam that did that Body weigh
Which raised up hell’s expected prey.
Hail, Cross, of hopes the most sublime!
Now in this mournful Passion time,
Improve religious souls in grace,
The sins of criminals efface.
Blest Trinity, salvation’s spring,
May every soul Thy praises sing;
To those Thou grantest conquest by
The holy Cross, rewards apply. Amen.
Solemnity of Corpus Christi – Papa Benedictus XVI
HOLY MASS AND EUCHARISTIC PROCESSION
TO THE BASILICA OF SAINT MARY MAJOR
ON THE SOLEMNITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI
HOMILY OF HIS HOLINESS BENEDICT XVI
Square outside the Basilica of Saint John Lateran
Thursday, 11 May 2009
“This is my Body…. This is my Blood”.
Dear Brothers and Sisters,
These words that Jesus spoke at the Last Supper are repeated every time that the Eucharistic Sacrifice is renewed. We have just heard them in Mark’s Gospel and they resonate with special power today on the Solemnity of Corpus Christi. They lead us in spirit to the Upper Room, they make us relive the spiritual atmosphere of that night when, celebrating Easter with his followers, the Lord mystically anticipated the sacrifice that was to be consummated the following day on the Cross. The Institution of the Eucharist thus appears to us as an anticipation and acceptance, on Jesus’ part, of his death. St Ephrem the Syrian writes on this topic: during the Supper Jesus sacrificed himself; on the Cross he was sacrificed by others (cf. Hymn on the Crucifixion, 3, 1).
“This is my Blood”. Here the reference to the sacrificial language of Israel is clear. Jesus presents himself as the true and definitive sacrifice, in which was fulfilled the expiation of sins which, in the Old Testament rites, was never fully completed. This is followed by two other very important remarks. First of all, Jesus Christ says that his Blood “is poured out for many” with a comprehensible reference to the songs of the Servant of God that are found in the Book of Isaiah (cf. ch. 53). With the addition “blood of the Covenant” Jesus also makes clear that through his death the prophesy of the new Covenant is fulfilled, based on the fidelity and infinite love of the Son made man. An alliance that, therefore, is stronger than all humanity’s sins. The old Covenant had been sealed on Sinai with a sacrificial rite of animals, as we heard in the First Reading, and the Chosen People, set free from slavery in Egypt, had promised to obey all the commandments given to them by the Lord (cf. Ex 24: 3).
In truth, Israel showed immediately by making the golden calf that it was incapable of staying faithful to this promise and thus to the divine Covenant, which indeed it subsequently violated all too often, adapting to its heart of stone the Law that should have taught it the way of life. However, the Lord did not fail to keep his promise and, through the prophets, sought to recall the inner dimension of the Covenant and announced that he would write a new law upon the hearts of his faithful (cf. Jer 31: 33), transforming them with the gift of the Spirit (cf. Ez 36: 25-27). And it was during the Last Supper that he made this new Covenant with his disciples and humanity, confirming it not with animal sacrifices as had happened in the past, but indeed with his own Blood, which became the “Blood of the New Covenant”. Thus he based it on his own obedience, stronger, as I said, than all our sins.
This is clearly highlighted in the Second Reading, taken from the Letter to the Hebrews, in which the sacred author declares that Jesus is the “mediator of a new covenant” (9: 15). He became so through his blood, or, more exactly, through the gift of himself, which gives full value to the outpouring of his blood. On the Cross, Jesus is at the same time victim and priest: a victim worthy of God because he was unblemished, and a High Priest who offers himself, by the power of the Holy Spirit, and intercedes for the whole of humanity. The Cross is therefore a mystery of love and of salvation which cleanses us as the Letter to the Hebrews states from “dead works”, that is, from sins, and sanctifies us by engraving the New Covenant upon our hearts. The Eucharist, making present the sacrifice of the Cross, renders us capable of living communion with God faithfully.
Dear brothers and sisters whom I greet with affection, starting with the Cardinal Vicar and the other Cardinals and Bishops present like the Chosen People gathered on Sinai, this evening let us too reaffirm our fidelity to the Lord. A few days ago, in opening the annual Diocesan Convention [of Rome] I recalled the importance of remaining, as Church, attentive to the word of God in prayer and in exploring the Scriptures, especially through the practice of lectio divina, that is, through reading the Bible in meditation and veneration. I know that in this respect many initiatives which enrich our diocesan community have been promoted in parishes, seminaries and religious communities, in confraternities and in apostolic associations and movements. I address my fraternal greeting to the members of this multiplicity of Church bodies. Your numerous presence at this celebration, dear friends, highlights the fact that God moulds our community, characterized by a plurality of cultures and by different experiences. God moulds it as “his” People, as the one Body of Christ, thanks to our heartfelt participation in the twofold banquet of the Word and of the Eucharist. Nourished by Christ, we, his disciples, receive the mission to be “the soul” of this City of ours (cf. Letter to Diognetus, 6: ed. Funk, I, p. 400; see also Lumen Gentium n. 38), a leaven of renewal, bread “broken” for all, especially for those in situations of hardship, poverty or physical and spiritual suffering. Let us become witnesses of his love.
I address you in particular, dear priests, whom Christ has chosen so that with him you may be able to live your life as a sacrifice of praise for the salvation of the world. Only from union with Jesus can you draw that spiritual fruitfulness which generates hope in your pastoral ministry. St Leo the Great recalls that “our participation in the Body and Blood of Christ aspires to nothing other than to become what we receive” (Sermo 12, De Passione 3, 7, PL 54). If this is true for every Christian it is especially true for us priests. To become the Eucharist! May precisely this be our constant desire and commitment, so that the offering of the Body and Blood of the Lord which we make on the altar may be accompanied by the sacrifice of our existence. Every day, we draw from the Body and Blood of the Lord that free, pure love which makes us worthy ministers of Christ and witnesses to his joy. This is what the faithful expect of the priest: that is, the example of an authentic devotion to the Eucharist; they like to see him spend long periods of silence and adoration before Jesus as was the practice of the Holy Curé d’Ars, whom we shall remember in a special way during the upcoming Year for Priests.
St John Mary Vianney liked to tell his parishioners: “Come to communion…. It is true that you are not worthy of it, but you need it” (Bernard Nodet, Le curé d’Ars. Sa pensée – Son coeur, éd. Xavier Mappus, Paris 1995, p. 119). With the knowledge of being inadequate because of sin, but needful of nourishing ourselves with the love that the Lord offers us in the Eucharistic sacrament, let us renew this evening our faith in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. We must not take this faith for granted! Today we run the risk of secularization creeping into the Church too. It can be translated into formal and empty Eucharistic worship, into celebrations lacking that heartfelt participation that is expressed in veneration and in respect for the liturgy. The temptation to reduce prayer to superficial, hasty moments, letting ourselves be overpowered by earthly activities and concerns, is always strong. When, in a little while, we recite the Our Father, the prayer par excellence, we will say: “Give us this day our daily bread”, thinking of course of the bread of each day for us and for all peoples. But this request contains something deeper. The Greek word epioúsios, that we translate as “daily”, could also allude to the “super-stantial” bread, the bread “of the world to come”. Some Fathers of the Church saw this as a reference to the Eucharist, the bread of eternal life, the new world, that is already given to us in Holy Mass, so that from this moment the future world may begin within us. With the Eucharist, therefore, Heaven comes down to earth, the future of God enters the present and it is as though time were embraced by divine eternity.
Dear brothers and sisters, as happens every year, at the end of Holy Mass the traditional Eucharistic procession will set out and with prayer and hymns we shall raise a unanimous entreaty to the Lord present in the consecrated host. We shall say, on behalf of the entire City: “Stay with us Jesus, make a gift of yourself and give us the bread that nourishes us for eternal life! Free this world from the poison of evil, violence and hatred that pollute consciences, purify it with the power of your merciful love”. “And you, Mary, who were the woman “of the Eucharist’ throughout your life, help us to walk united towards the heavenly goal, nourished by the Body and Blood of Christ, the eternal Bread of life and medicine of divine immortality”. Amen!
© Copyright 2009 – Libreria Editrice Vaticana
Malcolm Cardinal Ranjith ?
The Peacemaker
Pope Benedict XVI has decided to send one of the staunchest supporters of his liturgical reform in the Roman Curia away from the Eternal City. Why?
By Robert Moynihan
VATICAN CITY, June 12, 2009 — The Pope has decided that Archbishop Malcolm Ranjith (photo), the Secretary of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments and one of the strongest supporters of Benedict’s liturgical reform, will be transferred this summer to Colombo, the capital of Sri Lanka (his native country), where he will become archbishop, reliable Vatican sources confirmed today. The decision will be announced publicly in the next few days, the sources said.
According to veteran Vaticanista Andrea Tornielli (but this has not been confirmed), Ranjith will be replaced by the American Dominican J. Augustine Di Noia (photo), who has been Undersecretary of the Congregation of the Doctrine for the Faith (CDF) since 2002, where he was in daily working contact with then-Cardinal Ratzinger, the Prefect of the CDF before he became Pope. “After having been the number three of Ratzinger, he (Di Noia) will now become the number two of the ‘little Ratzinger,’ a nickname given to Spanish Cardinal Cañizares Llovera, who leads the Congregation of Worship,” Tornielli wrote in Il Giornale recently. “The liturgical dicastery is the Vatican office that has most often changed its Secretary in recent years: Di Noia will be the fourth in just seven years.”
Many Vatican observers believe that the decision to send Ranjith away from Rome is a “victory” for liturgical progressives, and a “defeat” for liturgical traditionalists, since Ranjith has been a prominent champion of more solemnity and decorum in the celebration of the Mass in the new rite, and a supporter of wider use of the old rite, and this interpretation can be found in numerous articles and blogs on the internet.
However, it is not certain that this is the true interpretation. And there are reasons to interpret the appointment in a different way.
Colombo is not presently a cardinalatial see, but there has been a cardinal in Colombo in the past, so it is certainly a possibility that Ranjith could receive the red hat in an upcoming consistory — something he could not have received if he had remained as a secretary of the Congregation.
Ranjith was a bishop in Sri Lanka in the 1990s, but in 2001 Pope John Paul II called him to Rome, appointing him secretary under Cardinal Crescenzio Sepe at the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples (Propaganda Fide). Due to tensions between the two, in April 2004, Ranjith — who was not a Vatican diplomat — was named the nuncio in Indonesia and East Timor. Then, after Pope Benedict was elected, in April 2005, he called Ranjith back to Rome, making him secretary of the Divine Worship Congregation in December, 2005.
Some thought that Ranjith would succeed Cardinal Francis Arinze as head of the Congregation upon Arinze’s retirement for reason of age, but, Tornielli writes, Ranjith was “considered by his adversaries too close to the traditionalists and Lefebvrists.”
Tornielli sums up the consensus view: “Ranjith’s presence on the front lines in Asia will be important, because there the Church faces a decisive challenge. But it is difficult not to view his appointment as a ‘promoveatur ut amoveatur’ (‘let him be promoted that he may be removed’).”
Still, there is a Sri Lankan proverb: “The tiger who is outside of his cage is more dangerous than the tiger who is inside of his cage.”
Ranjith, once in his own archdiocese, will have a chance to help bring true peace to his war-torn country, and to fight for social and economic justice in his homeland, something he has written and spoken about often in the past.
It is known that the president of Sri Lanka twice visited Rome in recent years, and twice told Pope Benedict that he would appreciate Ranjith’s contribution to the peace process in his country, as Ranjith is respected by all sides.
In this perspective, one could perhaps imagine that Benedict has actually followed the opposite logic from that which most Vatican watchers see here: “amoveatur ut promoveatur” (“let him be removed that he may be promoted”).
Only time will tell whether Ranjith will rise to the challenge his new post poses, and become a true peacemaker, binding up the wounds caused by a long civil war, as well as continuing to be a supporter of reverence and decorum in the Church’s liturgy, as desired by Pope Benedict.
Corpus Christi and St. Thomas
http://www.cts.org.au/1998/corpuschristi.htm
by James Chegwidden
The feast of Corpus Christi is cause for major celebration in the Church on the Thursday following Trinity Sunday. For Thomists it should be highly regarded, for the author of the Mass and Office of Corpus Christi was St Thomas Aquinas himself.
Corpus Christi is a late feast, being only introduced in the 13th century, by which time most of the other feasts in the classical Roman Missal had been established for almost a millennium. In 1264, Pope Urban IV issued a papal bull, Transiturus, promulgating Corpus Christi as a feast for the Universal Church. He was acting after years of petitions from several sources, most notably from St Juliana de Cornillon, who had received visions from the Saviour requesting such a feast. Urban cast his eyes around the known world for candidates to compose a Mass and Office for the Feast. His search ended with Thomas Aquinas, the friar whose fame was fast spreading through out Europe.
What a glorious choice! The commission came from the Pope, but the call was from Christ “Write, Sing of This, for This is My Body that was delivered for you, and My Blood that was shed for you”. And sitting in his quiet cell, Thomas began to write, and to sing. His song would soon resound on every hill and echo in every valley of Christendom.
The Mass and Office he wrote can still be seen and heard in the classical rite of the Roman Church. It is work of genius, which the famous Abbot Cabrol described as “one of the most beautiful canticles in the Catholic liturgy”, and Pius Parsch as “unquestionably a classic piece of liturgical work”. The poet Santolius avowed that he would have given his whole life’s work to become the author of just one verse of the Hymn for Lauds, Verbum Supernum.
Testimony to the greatness of work comes also from other great saints, such as St Bonaventure. Having also been commissioned by the Holy See to write an office for Corpus Christi, upon reading just one page of Thomas’ efforts, he immediately took his work almost certainly a great masterpiece as well and burned it in front of St Thomas. When the shocked St Thomas asked “But why?” he replied, “Because I would not have it on my conscience, Thomas, that I had attempted to stand between the world and this.”
Thomas had begun with words that have been compared to the clash of cymbals “Pange Lingua”:
Pange lingua, gloriosi,
Corporis mysterium,
Sanguinisque pretiosi,
Quem in mundi pretium,
Fructus ventris generosi
Rex effudit gentium.
Sing, my tongue, the Saviours glory,
of his flesh the mystery sing:
of the blood all price exceeding
shed by our immortal King,
destined for the world’s redemption
from a noble womb to spring.
For St. Thomas the mystery of Christ’s Body and Blood is the mystery of the Incarnate God, the Word made Flesh, and his work does not merely cover the main themes of the doctrine of the Blessed Sacrament. The Mass text is richly theological in content, as is the Office, combining in exquisite poetry the precise teaching of the Church on the Real Presence, the nature of Christ’s sacrificial offering in the Mass, and Holy Communion. The Lauda Sion, the sequence of the Mass, reveals much of this fine teaching:
What He did at supper seated,
Christ ordained to be repeated,
In his memory divine;
Wherefore we, with adoration,
Thus the Host of our salvation
Consecrate from bread and wine.
Taught by Christ the Church maintaineth,
That the bread its substance changeth,
Into Flesh, the wine to Blood.
Doth it pass thy comprehending?
Faith, the law of sight transcending,
Leaps to things not understood.
Here, beneath these signs are hidden
Priceless things, to sense forbidden;
Signs, not things are all we see
Flesh from Bread, and Blood from wine,
Yet is Christ in either sign,
All entire confess’d to be.
They, too, who of Him partake,
sever not, nor rend nor break,
But entire their Lord receive.
Whether one or thousands eat,
All receive the self-same meat,
Nor the less for others leave.
Lo the wicked with the good
Eat of this celestial food:
Yet with ends how opposite!
Life to these, ‘tis death to those:
See how from life taking flows
Diff’rence truly infinite!
Nor do thou doubts entertain,
When the Host is broke in twain;
But be sure, each part contains
What was in the whole before.
‘Tis the simple sign alone.
Which hath changed its sign and form,
While the signified is one
And the same for evermore
What joy for Thomists to read the doctrine expressed by Christ rendered into pristine exactitude by St Thomas, and sung in the liturgy annually! Take the antiphon for Vespers:
O Sacrum convivium,
in quo Christus sumitur,
memoria recolitur Passionis
Ejus, mens impletur gratia
Et futurae gloriae pignus
nobis datur.
Oh blessed banquet,
Wherein Christ is received.
His Passion is again with us,
the soul o’erflows with grace:
a pledge of future glory is given to us.
This great summary of the effects of Holy Communion was so appreciated that it became part of the rubrics for every distribution of Holy Communion outside Mass.
St Thomas was a master in choosing psalms and other biblical texts for the feast, particularly for his skill in isolating many texts of the Old Testament prefiguring the Eucharist. His Office is far more biblical than most of the compositions of the time. We see Christ, the priest forever according to the order of Melchisedech offering bread and wine (Ps 109); we see Christ, the divine Moses, on the desert journey of life, giving food to them that fear Him (110). We remember the Church’s hymn of thanks in Psalm 115: What shall I render unto the Lord for all He has granted me? I will take the chalice of salvation. Psalm 127 shows the Church as a mother, a fruitful vine, Christ the Father of His family, winning His Bread by great toil. Ps 147 shows Jerusalem at peace, where her Lord nourishes her guests with the fat of wheat. The Magnificat recalls of course that He fills the hungry with good things, and sends the haughty rich empty away.
The second nocturn of Matins contains St Thomas’s own writings, the very ones for which Christ spoke to him from a crucifix and said Thou hast written well of me, Thomas. They are sermons written by the saint, from which I take here a brief extract:
O banquet most precious! … Can anything be more excellent than this repast, in which not the flesh of goats and heifers, as of old, but Christ the true God is given us for nourishment? What more wondrous than this Holy Sacrament! In it bread and wine are changed substantially, and under the appearance of a little bread and wine is had Christ Jesus, God and perfect man. In this sacrament sins are purged away, virtues are increased, the soul is saturated with an abundance of spiritual gifts. No other sacrament is so beneficial. Since it was instituted unto the salvation of all, it is offered by the Church for the living and the dead, that all may share in its treasures.
When St Thomas first heard his brethren singing the Office he had composed and arranged, he started to cry, weeping tears of love and gratitude to the Eucharistic Lord who had inspired such a thing of splendour. Did God, I wonder, give Thomas a glimpse, perhaps, of the mighty future his Feast was to have? Did He show him the panorama of millions of processions, winding through street, town, hill, valley, countryside and cloister, involving billions of Christian faithful in the one great cry Pange lingua gloriosi Corporis Mysterium!
Did he see the flowers strewn on the streets of Spain for the enthroned Body of Christ to see or the hushed English recusants adoring the Real Presence in a small cellar or the vast square of St Peter’s Rome with hundreds of thousands of the faithful being blessed with the Host in the monstrance by the Vicar of Christ himself, after singing that canticle Pange Lingua?
Whether he knew it or not, St Thomas had written the hymn by which Christ’s bride the Church would forevermore praise her divine Spouse.
May we always sing with St Thomas the closing words of the Lauda Sion:
Jesu, Shepherd, Bread indeed,
Thou take pity on our need!
Thou Thy flock in safety feed,
Thou protect us, Thou us lead,
To the Lord of Heavenly Life.
Amen.
Solemnity of the Body and Blood of Christ
It’s the Feast of Corpus Christi !
This day traditionally should fall on Thursday the 11th day of June, the thursday after the Feast of the Holy Trinity but it is a movable feast and can be shifted to the Sunday after Feast of the Holy Trinity. The Archdiocese of Singapore is one of the many diocese that will hold it on the 14th day of June 2009.
The feast of Corpus Christi traditionally falls on a thursday because the one Church commemorates the Institution of the Holy Eucharist on Maundy Thursday. We dedicate this day to celebrate the Holy Eucharist. Yes, the Holy Mass is celebrated every day, every hour, every corner of the World but on this day, it is even more especially for the Eucharist. Wonder why the Church have so many feastdays just for the Eucharist ? The Church wants to emphasize how important the Eucharist is.
Nope, the Eucharist is not something that represents Jesus Christ. It does not represents Jesus. It is Jesus Christ.
(John 6: 48-63)
I am the bread of life. Your ancestors ate the manna in the desert, but they died; this is the bread that comes down from heaven so that one may eat it and not die. 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.
The Jews quarreled among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us (his) flesh to eat?” Jesus said to them, “Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day. For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him. Just as the living Father sent me and I have life because of the Father, so also the one who feeds on me will have life because of me. This is the bread that came down from heaven. Unlike your ancestors who ate and still died, whoever eats this bread will live forever.” These things he said while teaching in the synagogue in Capernaum.
Have you wondered why Jesus said “Amen Amen i say to you…” after the Jews had a commotion on how can he give us his flesh to eat, instead of Jesus saying, “No of course i don’t mean it literally”.
