Thursday, February 9, 2017

REDEMPTIONIS SACRAMENTUM

Posted by Tim

In light of the renewed discussion about the liturgical aberrations of the Neocatechumenal Way, we are moving this post back to the top and recommending a re-read of this post: THE NCW EUCHARIST IS ILLICIT, AND HERE'S WHY...AGAIN.

[4]..."It is not possible to be silent about the abuses, even quite grave ones, against the nature of the Liturgy and the Sacraments as well as the tradition and the authority of the Church, which in our day not infrequently plague liturgical celebrations in one ecclesial environment or another. In some places the perpetration of liturgical abuses has become almost habitual, a fact which obviously cannot be allowed and must cease."
So begins the Instruction Redemptionis Sacramentum, an instruction issued by the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments on 25 March 2004. The document's subtitle makes its purpose crystal clear: "Instruction on Certain Matters to Be Observed or to Be Avoided Regarding the Most Holy Eucharist."


The Congregation further declared: 
[11.] "The Mystery of the Eucharist 'is too great for anyone to permit himself to treat it according to his own whim, so that its sacredness and its universal ordering would be obscured'. On the contrary, anyone who acts thus by giving free rein to his own inclinations, even if he is a Priest, injures the substantial unity of the Roman Rite, which ought to be vigorously preserved, and becomes responsible for actions that are in no way consistent with the hunger and thirst for the living God that is experienced by the people today." 
And:
"Nor do such actions serve authentic pastoral care or proper liturgical renewal; instead, they deprive Christ's faithful of their patrimony and their heritage. For arbitrary actions are not conducive to true renewal, but are detrimental to the right of Christ's faithful to a liturgical celebration that is an expression of the Church’s life in accordance with her tradition and discipline. In the end, they introduce elements of distortion and disharmony into the very celebration of the Eucharist, which is oriented in its own lofty way and by its very nature to signifying and wondrously bringing about the communion of divine life and the unity of the People of God."
In other words: NO ONE! No priest, no bishop, no Kiko, may alter the liturgy by one word, by one rubric, by one iota. When it comes to the Sacred Liturgy, there is only ONE authority:
 [16.] “It pertains to the Apostolic See to regulate the Sacred Liturgy of the universal Church, to publish the liturgical books and to grant the recognitio for their translation into vernacular languages, as well as to ensure that the liturgical regulations, especially those governing the celebration of the most exalted celebration of the Sacrifice of the Mass, are everywhere faithfully observed.”
So now to the subject at hand.

The Kikos' main recruitment tool is their "Invitation to Joy," which is usually composed of a testimonial and an invitation to a catechesis INSERTED into the Sacred Liturgy. Regardless of the content - which is usually stuff not fit to share at the dinner table let alone the Lord's Table - the "Invitation," inserted as it is into the Mass, is a direct violation of the Liturgy if not a pure prostitution of it. 

These "Invitations" normally occur at the time reserved for the homily, or before the Dismissal. Let's look at both.

The Kikos - masters at twisting truth as they are - try to get around violating the time reserved for the homily by saying that they are not giving a homily but only a testimony. Let's look at what Redemptionis Sacramentum says about the homily:
[64.] The homily, which is given in the course of the celebration of Holy Mass and is a part of the Liturgy itself, “should ordinarily be given by the Priest celebrant himself. He may entrust it to a concelebrating Priest or occasionally, according to circumstances, to a Deacon, but never to a layperson. In particular cases and for a just cause, the homily may even be given by a Bishop or a Priest who is present at the celebration but cannot concelebrate”.
The homily is A PART OF THE LITURGY ITSELF. And whatever occurs at the time reserved for the homily is a "Mass part." Permitting a lay person on the pulpit at this point - regardless of what he or she might say - is a direct violation of the instruction: "never to a layperson." 

So what about at "the end" of Mass?
[74.] If the need arises for the gathered faithful to be given instruction or testimony by a layperson in a Church concerning the Christian life, it is altogether preferable that this be done outside Mass. Nevertheless, for serious reasons it is permissible that this type of instruction or testimony be given after the Priest has proclaimed the Prayer after Communion. This should not become a regular practice, however. Furthermore, these instructions and testimony should not be of such a nature that they could be confused with the homily,[156] nor is it permissible to dispense with the homily on their account.
This is where the Kiko's really stretch it. "For serious reasons" pertains to something on the level of an emergency. In any event, such "instruction or testimony...should not become a regular practice," and this IS the regular practice of the NCW. 

Now whose responsibility is it to enforce this? Unless the bishop has given clear instruction to do otherwise (in which case he is liable for any abuse), the priest presiding at the Mass is the primary guardian of the Sacred Liturgy.

Finally:
[169.] Whenever an abuse is committed in the celebration of the sacred Liturgy, it is to be seen as a real falsification of Catholic Liturgy. St Thomas wrote, “the vice of falsehood is perpetrated by anyone who offers worship to God on behalf of the Church in a manner contrary to that which is established by the Church with divine authority, and to which the Church is accustomed”.
And so what to do when you witness abuse?
[184.] Any Catholic, whether Priest or Deacon or lay member of Christ’s faithful, has the right to lodge a complaint regarding a liturgical abuse to the diocesan Bishop or the competent Ordinary equivalent to him in law, or to the Apostolic See on account of the primacy of the Roman Pontiff. It is fitting, however, insofar as possible, that the report or complaint be submitted first to the diocesan Bishop. This is naturally to be done in truth and charity.
Print out the full document, study it, and keep it for reference. The Church in Her care for her children, has seen to it that we have the tools and information necessary to join those good bishops and priests who will defend the Sacred Liturgy from the abusers.

Here is an example of Archbishop Anthony S. Apuron violating Redemptionis Sacramentum:


Other references


Recommendations by JungleWatch