|
作者
|
內容
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2004/4/24 下午 04:47:49
|
|
|
教宗於去年的通諭《Ecclesia de Eucharistia》中，曾表示將就現時各地彌撒禮儀的某些流弊，制訂出一套法規性的訓令。而教廷聖禮部，聯同信理部及聖教法典解釋委員會，昨天發佈了該份文獻。很值得大家注意。
該份文件可在這個網站下載。
不知大家對此有何意見？
|
|
Ignatius
|
Posted -
2004/4/24 下午 10:17:21
|
|
|
聖座公佈"救贖聖事"訓令，重申舉行彌撒聖祭應守的規矩
[梵蒂岡電臺訊] 聖座禮儀聖事部部長弗蘭西斯·阿林澤樞機主教四月二十三日在梵蒂岡新聞室主持一項重要的記者招待會，介紹教宗批准的有關舉行彌撒聖祭的規矩的訓令。參與主持這項記者招待會的還有禮儀聖事部秘書長多梅尼科·索蓮蒂諾總主教，聖座教義部秘書長安傑洛·阿馬托總主教，聖座法典條文委員會主席胡利安·艾蘭斯樞機主教。訓令的內容在強調舉行彌撒聖祭時應該遵守的規則和應該避免的事。
一年前教宗頒佈他的聖體聖事通諭時，就指出教會內出現妄用彌撒聖祭的現象。當時他希望教會當局儘早公佈有關訓令，校正違規的現象。教宗說："聖體聖事是教會在歷史中生活所能擁有的最珍貴聖事。這個奧跡是如此的偉大，以至沒有任何人可以任意對待它或低估它。事實上，總不能忘記在聖體聖事內真正存在著我們的主耶穌基督的聖體和聖血，以及他的靈魂和神性，因此，那是整個的基督"。為此，昨天二十三日公佈的訓令，乃在提醒人不可小看或降低聖體聖事的偉大，也不可以混亂教友的信仰。
訓令承認梵蒂岡第二屆大公會議禮儀改革所帶來的種種巨大好處，因為那些改革使教友更有意識地、也更積極地參與祭台的祭獻。然而，對妄用、甚至極嚴重地妄用聖體聖事的現象卻不能視若無睹，這樣的事不能容許，必須終止。
這道由聖座禮儀聖事部所發出的訓令，強調教會當局以及與教宗共融的主教們節制與聖體聖事有關的規矩的權威；它重申必須由司鐸來舉行彌撒聖祭；它指出彌撒聖祭的本質不但是共用宴席，更是一個祭獻，因此決不能把彌撒視同普通的晚餐；舉行彌撒聖祭時絕對必需使用彌撒經本裏面的聖祭禱詞，並頌念教宗和教區主教的名字；禁止教友在彌撒中講道，而司鐸在講道中不能只談政治或世俗的事物，掏空了天主聖言純真的內容意義；身負重罪的教友必須先辦告解才能領聖體。
訓令重申舉行彌撒聖祭時，為了適應世界不同地方人民的感性，可以合法地采行具有創造性和適應性的措施；訓令無意禁止深入瞭解彌撒禮儀和提出相關的新建議的可能性；必須絕對禁止的是把彌撒禮儀作為試驗和個人任意行事的場所；就因為如此，訓令才強調舉行彌撒聖祭時，必須使用新鮮的無酵餅和純葡萄釀制、不參雜其他物質的酒，其他任何食品和飲料都不能成為舉行彌撒聖祭的有效材料；此外，也必須避免某種大公合一性質的做法，那些做法即使懷著善意，卻相反舉行彌撒聖祭的規則；不能在非基督信仰的宗教神聖場所舉行彌撒聖祭，也不能把其他宗教的元素引入彌撒聖祭中；必須尊重司祭與在俗教友的區別，避免把在俗教友神職化；女兒童或婦女可以輔祭；尊重羅馬禮節的習慣，應在領聖體之前行互祝平安禮；領聖體時的姿態或跪下或站立，必須在司祭面前立刻咽食聖體，也容許同一天二次領聖體。誰丟棄聖體，或帶走聖體，或為了褻瀆而保存聖體，即刻受自科絕罰的處分。
最後，訓令鼓勵教友朝拜聖體，但是在沒有妥當看守的情況下，聖體不能片刻明供。任何天主教徒發現任何妄用禮儀的情況時，必須通知教會當局。
|
|
Cecil
|
Posted -
2004/4/26 上午 09:35:27
|
|
|
'這裡是跑馬地,於是,為了我們堂區的牧民需要,禮規不用理會'.
此話昨日出於某前牧民會長,'教訓'鄙人提出彌撒經書總論的觀點.按照其說法,如果'她'認為是牧民需要,可以用讀經台來教人填表格,絕對可以領完聖體即作十段八段她以為'必要'作的堂區報告(但英文彌撒信友則不用報知),然後才唸領聖體後經,更可以在大半堂信友已經領完了聖體才'開始'唱第一首'領主詠' - 全是'牧民需要'.
看來如果她太太閣下歡喜,也可以在讀經台進行議會大選程序,因為這'必然'是牧民需要來的了!
'梵諦岡是梵諦岡,這裡是跑馬地' - 她也真夠沙膽也矣 -
"必須絕對禁止的是把彌撒禮儀作為試驗和個人任意行事的場所；就因為如此，訓令才強調舉行彌撒聖祭時，必須使用新鮮的無酵餅和純葡萄釀制、不參雜其他物質的酒，其他任何食品和飲料都不能成為舉行彌撒聖祭的有效材料；此外，也必須避免某種大公合一性質的做法，那些做法即使懷著善意，卻相反舉行彌撒聖祭的規則；不能在非基督信仰的宗教神聖場所舉行彌撒聖祭，也不能把其他宗教的元素引入彌撒聖祭中；必須尊重司祭與在俗教友的區別，避免把在俗教友神職化；女兒童或婦女可以輔祭；尊重羅馬禮節的習慣，應在領聖體之前行互祝平安禮；領聖體時的姿態或跪下或站立，必須在司祭面前立刻咽食聖體，也容許同一天二次領聖體。誰丟棄聖體，或帶走聖體，或為了褻瀆而保存聖體，即刻受自科絕罰的處分。
最後，訓令鼓勵教友朝拜聖體，但是在沒有妥當看守的情況下，聖體不能片刻明供。任何天主教徒發現任何妄用禮儀的情況時，必須通知教會當局。 "
跑馬地堂區可以不理以上的訓令,如果會長認為不合她認為的牧民需要.
|
|
靚仔
|
Posted -
2004/4/26 上午 11:51:10
|
|
|
美國主教團的網頁有pdf格式版本可以下載,比較容易列印.
另外有主教團禮儀委員會通訊最新一期對文件的簡介及30條Q&A.
網址:www.usccb.org
|
|
Augustine
|
Posted -
2004/4/26 下午 04:01:24
|
|
|
RS 103: Communion under both kinds can either by drinking directly from the chalice or in the form of instinction (or by a spoon).
For instinction the sacred species must be received on the tongue.
RS 92: "each of the faithful always has the right to receive Holy Communion on the tongue, at his choice"
RS 103: Communion by instinction must be administered by ordained priests. Lay members should not instinct themselves (RS 104)
|
|
Augustine
|
Posted -
2004/4/26 下午 06:40:27
|
|
|
"領聖體時的姿態或跪下或站立": this is always the norm, but what is explicitly stated here is that
(RS 91) it is not licit to deny the Blessed Sacrament to any communicant kneeling, or sticking out his tongue for communion on the tongue.
女兒童或婦女可以"輔祭" should be "祭台服務員"?
"應在領聖體之前行互祝平安禮"
RS 72: "It is appropriate “that each one give the sign of peace only to those who are nearest and in a sober manner”.
So, by negation, "It is inappropriate “that any one give the sign of peace also to those who are not nearest or not in a sober manner”.
|
|
Cecil
|
Posted -
2004/4/27 上午 09:22:50
|
|
|
What if a group comes up advocating that "for (unspecified) pastoral reasons (of that group alone) we 'should' not follow these rules'?
|
|
靚仔
|
Posted -
2004/4/27 下午 02:26:49
|
|
|
Edward哥,
兄可能眼大睇過龍,該文件是"Redemptionis Sacramentum",不是Redemptoris,所以兄的翻譯也錯啦.不是"贖世主的聖事",而應是"救贖的聖事"
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2004/4/27 下午 04:25:06
|
|
|
靚仔兄所言甚是。應稱為「救贖的聖事」才對。
不過那個標題則「竄改」不了。
|
|
靚仔
|
Posted -
2004/4/28 上午 10:14:33
|
|
|
施施姐,可以開展教會法的法律程序,這個幫唔幫到您?
Correct Liturgical Abuses
Redemptionis Sacramentum provides processes for handing liturgical abuse cases.
Diocese or Religious Order
The local Ordinary or the Religious Superior is obligated to act on "a plausible notice of delict or abuse," to investigate it himself or appoint a "worthy cleric" to do so, to correct and imposing sanctions when necessary and to refer to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith "without delay" all graviora delicta and crimes against the Faith (heresy). In addition the must inform the Congregation of the more serious other cases. I understand this to mean the ones which he himself has resolved.
[178.] Hence whenever a local Ordinary or the Ordinary of a religious Institute or of a Society of apostolic life receives at least a plausible notice of a delict or abuse concerning the Most Holy Eucharist, let him carefully investigate, either personally or by means of another worthy cleric, concerning the facts and the circumstances as well as the imputability.
[179.] Delicts against the faith as well as graviora delicta committed in the celebration of the Eucharist and the other Sacraments are to be referred without delay to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which “examines [them] and, if necessary, proceeds to the declaration or imposition of canonical sanctions according to the norm of common or proper law”.
[180.] Otherwise the Ordinary should proceed according the norms of the sacred canons, imposing canonical penalties if necessary, and bearing in mind in particular that which is laid down by canon 1326. If the matter is serious, let him inform the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments.
Canon 1326
1. A judge can punish more severely than a law or a precept has stated:
(1) a person who after condemnation or after a declaration of a penalty still commits an offense so as to be prudently presumed to be in continuing bad will in light of the circumstances;
(2) a person who has been given some dignified position or who has abused authority or office in order to commit the offense;
(3) an accused who although a penalty has been established against a culpable offense, foresaw what was to happen yet nonetheless did not take the precautions which any diligent person would have employed to avoid it.
2. If the penalty established is an automatic one (latae sententiae), another penalty or a penance can be added in those cases mentioned in part 1.
|
|
Cecil
|
Posted -
2004/4/28 上午 11:09:53
|
|
|
Wowwwww...am afraid my head would be chopped off at once before the issue reaches the 'Sacred Council'.(It is half off already).
|
|
靚仔
|
Posted -
2004/4/28 上午 11:45:54
|
|
|
雖千萬人吾往矣嘛．
不過話說回來，您如向禮委說要改正點聖血的方式，他們可能也說牧民理由行不得呢！不信？你問問試試．
|
|
Cecil
|
Posted -
2004/4/28 下午 03:14:50
|
|
|
其實如果真正為牧民理由,許多時可以從裡規的容許空間中著手,犯不著下下改變裡規來就,其一也.
其二,不可以用一個以偏蓋全的一刀切方法來處理.
其三,如此聲大大的否定教廷在聖禮儀上的權威,會構成SACRILEGE - 褻瀆之罪。
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2004/4/28 下午 06:42:22
|
|
|
是基於何種「牧民理由」呢？
|
|
靚仔
|
Posted -
2004/4/29 上午 10:07:56
|
|
|
有時我也不禁會問，究竟是「牧者理由」，還是「牧民理由」．
十來年前，不是大部份人都是張開口來領聖體的嗎？當時為何無「衛生問題」？現在反對由送聖體者點完聖血放在領聖體者口中的理由，有人說這做法「不衛生」．這是理由嗎？
我是贊成由送聖體者點聖血的方式的，因為起碼應可大量減少濺出聖血的危險．我真的不想見到聖血時常遭人濺踏．唉．
|
|
靚仔
|
Posted -
2004/4/29 上午 10:11:34
|
|
|
施施姐，反對教廷權威會構成褻瀆罪？出於教律何章？向您請教．
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2004/4/29 下午 01:34:33
|
|
|
"Pastoral reasons" are many a times "social excuses" rather than "scientific".
Share with you an article:
Holy Communion and Infection Risks: an age-old concern
|
|
Cecil
|
Posted -
2004/4/29 下午 03:14:54
|
|
|
十誡中的妄證 - 因為此為虛假的設定,又宣諸口,構成誤導(大話).
|
|
Cecil
|
Posted -
2004/4/29 下午 03:20:50
|
|
|
RS 103: Communion by instinction must be administered by ordained priests. Lay members should not instinct themselves (RS 104)
神父說會和秘書長向羅馬提出反建議.他沒有用籠統的'牧民理由',而是以'行動'和禮儀含義為理由.
你昨晚沒來就真是'洒左'咯.
|
|
CECIL
|
Posted -
2004/4/29 下午 03:24:35
|
|
|
EDWARD - My example - if any thing can be done in the liturgy under the blanket of 'pastoral reasons', then N OTHING would NOT fall within, since -
(1) why are you at Church? If you are there for worship, everything done is "pastoral" in a sense;
(2) however, can one, say, use the ambo for conducting electoral procedure of the pastoral council? The PC is to be elected for pastoral work, so it MUST be for a pastoral reason...
|
|
Josemaria
|
Posted -
2004/4/29 下午 05:05:36
|
|
|
Quite so, and by the same token, nearly every abuse of our liturgy can be seen as some thing done for such a 'pastoral' reason.
Really have to be very careful in such greyer than grey area!
|
|
靚仔
|
Posted -
2004/4/29 下午 05:21:28
|
|
|
施施姐:
妄證和褻瀆有點分別吧,當然我不是說他們做得對,但也未至於褻瀆吧.
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2004/4/29 下午 10:32:01
|
|
|
說到這個「妄證」和「褻瀆」的問題，倒令我想起了近來美國教會內，有關美國民主黨總統候送人約翰．克里，應否領聖體的問題。
有人指出，這位作為教友的公眾人物，離婚後重婚、投票支持墮胎、且在其他宗派中領聖餐。若你是教會領袖，而他又上前要由你手中領聖體的話，你會怎辦？
|
|
steve
管理人員
|
Posted -
2004/4/30 上午 01:08:19
|
|
|
come on Edward, they re Americans!
|
|
Cecil
|
Posted -
2004/4/30 上午 09:34:59
|
|
|
Edward從前的十誡連結可否再做一次給我?
靚仔兄弟的看法也不無道理.可能再研究的,是在聖禮儀上如果公開反對教廷的指示而又出示不到神學理由,可能是裂教的事件的開端也說不定了.
|
