|
作者
|
內容
|
|
靚仔
|
Posted -
2006/5/9 下午 03:48:13
|
|
|
據記憶他們是一群重回天主教會懷抱的聖庇護十世會的神父開始的組織.
這幾天在看一本今年四旬期時買的書,說新不太新,但也不可說舊,如想對特倫多之後的禮儀發展有所了解,這是一本不錯的書.By James F. White, Roman Catholic Worship--Trent to today, Collegeville, MN: Pueblo, 2003.
|
|
Ignatius
|
Posted -
2006/5/9 下午 05:19:47
|
|
|
難怪兩個團體的名稱那麼相似.
|
|
THOMA
|
Posted -
2006/5/9 下午 10:44:54
|
|
|
Fanny:
Sorry to answer your question so late because I am very busy recently, the answer of your question is: Yes, It is certainly true, I remember that as St. Thomas Aquinas explains, that Faith is not required of necessity in the minister for the sacraments he administers to be valid (Summa theologiae IIIa, Q.64, a.9). In just the same way that a heretic can validly administer the sacrament of baptism (e.g. a protestant), and even the fact that he does not believe in original sin does not invalidate this sacrament, so also can a heretic celebrate a valid Mass. He does not have to intend what the Church intends, but only what the Church does, which latter is possible even when he has a gross misunderstanding of what the Church really does.
However, this being the case, the existence of heresy can certainly place a shadow of doubt over the intention of the minister giving a sacrament. Before Vatican II it was always the practice to baptize under condition any adult converts from Protestantism.
There were several reasons to doubt to some degree Protestant baptisms, one of which is a defective intention of the minister. If the minister had an explicitly contrary intention, namely if he had explicitly formulated the intention of not doing what the Catholic Church has always done, then the sacrament would be invalid. It is not the fact that he does not believe in original sin that could makes the sacrament of baptism invalid, but the fact that his explicit intention is just to give an outward sign, and not to administer a sacrament that removes original sin and infuses sanctifying grace.
Somebody will say that it can be the same case with the New Mass, and this even if the priest still believes in the Real Presence. He could have a contrary intention to that of the Church. This would be the case if his intention explicitly refuses offering a true sacrifice, the unbloody renewal of Calvary, and explicitly considers that it is to be only a meal and a commemoration of the Last Supper. Such an intention would be directly contrary to the intention of doing what the Church does. We do not know how often this happens, but it is very reasonable to believe that it is a common occurrence. Consequently, there are probably many celebrations of the New Mass, by priests who are convinced of modernist theories, which are invalid.
I think this is one of the reason that somebody claim that we cannot have anything to do with the New Mass. However, the more universal reason is that it is insulting and injurious to Almighty God and to Our Lord Jesus Christ, even if it happens to be valid.
But how did we know how often this happens. How can we judge the intention of the priest, I think nobody will tell us the answer, except God, So We only believe that the new mass should be valid through our faith.
|
|
THOMA
|
Posted -
2006/5/9 下午 10:56:45
|
|
|
已故教宗及當今教宗都曾幫過聖伯多祿兄弟會開彌撒,當然仲有Cardinal Hoyos, Archbishop Burke, Bishop Rifan....
我最近開始睇 Dom Prosper Gueranger 寫的The Liturgical Year, 他可說是禮儀改革的先祖,雖然頗為長,但當故事書睇都不失其樂趣也, 非常好睇, 講出左禮儀改革的精髓所在
|
|
Augustine
|
Posted -
2006/5/9 下午 11:35:30
|
|
|
天亞社的報導:
"...反對梵二禮儀改革提出以本地語文舉行彌撒..."
"...the Mass being said in vernacular languages, which Vatican Council II made the norm..."
According to the actual Sacrosanctum Concilium ("SC") Vatican 2's constitution on the sacred liturgy:
"in Masses which are celebrated with the people, a suitable place may be allotted to their mother tongue", "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," (SC #54)
and "the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites" (ibid. #36).
I would like to ask UAN: How did Vatican 2 "made vernacular the norm for sacred rites including the Holy Mass"?
|
|
Augustine
|
Posted -
2006/5/10 上午 12:57:43
|
|
|
Thoma:
In your article you mentioned: "...(the ministers) does not have to intend what the Church intends, but only what the Church does,"
-This seems to imply what the Church intends and does could be different.
The Church always does what it intends. The intention of a minister to follow Church's intention is ALWAYS required:"Ad validitatem sacramentorum requiritur intentio vere interna faciendi quod facit Ecclesia"......(Trid. sess VII can.11)
The point in the article is: the minister may not have the proper understanding of, or have faith in what pertains to be the "intention of the Church".
In such case, it is enough to intend the rites to accomplish what Christ has instituted to be accomplished, or what Christians have been accomplishing in carrying out this rite.
"Ad hanc intentinonem habendum necesse non est ut minister ipse pro sacro et gratiae productivo habeat ritum quem perficit, sed sufficit ut indendat illum ritum perficere quem Christus instituit, aut facere quod Christiani agunt dum hunc ritum perficiunt. Unde haec intentionem haberi potest ab haeretico vel infideli, dummodo intendat id quod intendunt qui hunc ritum recte ministrant"...(Tanquerey III 422)
In other words, a heretic validly administers a sacrament intending to accomplish (perficere) WHATEVER (he may not know what it is nor have faith in it) is accomplished whenever the rite is correctly(recte) done by others. But he still has to intend what the Church intends AND does.
|
|
靚仔
|
Posted -
2006/5/10 上午 10:01:13
|
|
|
thoma,
"We do not know how often this happens, but it is very reasonable to believe that it is a common occurrence. Consequently, there are probably many celebrations of the New Mass, by priests who are convinced of modernist theories, which are invalid."
你憑甚麼來懷疑舉行保祿六世彌撒的司鐸的意向呢?
這可算是一種惡毒的誹謗.
我反而可以看到你有蓄意的意向詆譭保祿六世彌撒.
|
|
靚仔
|
Posted -
2006/5/10 上午 10:29:16
|
|
|
就意向的問題,司鐸的意向是否只是要做耶穌建立這件聖事的目的就已足夠?
|
|
THOMA
|
Posted -
2006/5/10 下午 07:06:49
|
|
|
靚仔,我只是說出有人的擔心,並非一個必然的事實,無錯,我們不能肯定神父意向的足夠與否.故本人仍然有參與保祿六世的彌撒.當然本人亦無懷疑在特倫多拉丁彌撒一樣會有機會出現這樣的事,我根本並沒有詆毀新彌撒!何況在Cardinal Bacci及Cardinal Ottavianni的信件裡的確有類似的擔憂,莫非有這樣的擔憂都是詆毀教宗保祿六世??如果照你的說話,那麼教宗保祿六世將整個彌撒撤底改革,是不是在詆毀歷代教宗呢??
|
|
靚仔
|
Posted -
2006/5/11 上午 10:37:35
|
|
|
thoma,
你的句子不是引述,而是描述.用的是"we"
而且你說的不是擔憂,而是"reasonable"地相信這已是"common"地發生.
你對無事實根據的事,作出這樣的評估,是否"詆毀"我就讓各人的良心來作論斷好了.
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2006/5/14 下午 02:50:33
|
|
|
多默兄：
一、意向是以「行動」作為其闡釋基礎的。例如：有某邪惡少年，懷著「誘姦」的動機，施捨金錢給一位貧苦少女。他的意向包括「施捨」，而更遠的意向包括「誘姦」。我們沒有理由否定他「給予金錢」的行為，在實質上是一種「施捨」行為。
二、同理，一位已經完全失去了信仰（＝背教）、甚至不再相信天主存在（亦即不能有意義地相信任何「祭獻」的存在）的司鐸，抱著「做一日和尚敲一日鐘」的心態，去舉行一台彌撒，則只要他仍說得出「這是我的身體」和「這一杯就是我的血」，而祭台上又的確放著麥麵餅和葡萄酒，那就是一台有效的彌撒。
三、小弟愚見：可供「懷疑有效性」的地方，只可以是該位司鐸在誦念祝聖經文時，沒有跟足禮規（例如：將「這就是我的身體」唸成「這也許就是我的身體」），而不是在於保祿六世所訂的禮書本身。
四、但是對著如此的一位司鐸，舊禮彌撒就沒有問題嗎？例如，馬丁路德不相信「體變論」（Transubstantiatio）。設若他認為祝聖聖體的經文中「HIC EST ENIM CORPUS MEUM」的「hic」不是短音的「nominative」（語意：「這」是我的身體），而應是長音的「ablative」（即：「在這〔餅〕之中」有我的身體），那麼，一個長短音的分別，是否使一台彌撒（不論新禮或舊禮）變成無效呢？
五、懷疑新禮本身的有效性，不只十分惡毒，且與懷疑「某被列為聖人者是否真的已在天堂」般，是近乎異端的錯誤。
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2006/5/14 下午 03:00:39
|
|
|
此外，請讓小弟重申，亦請各位弟兄留意：有關Cardinal Ottaviani的「intervention」，其實只是極端傳統派的炒作。
該位樞機的信件只發表於新禮的籌備階段，教宗保祿六世在該過程中，亦親自作了不少「干預」。事實勝於雄辯，在新禮獲最終定型後，Ottaviani對它讚賞有加。
|
|
秀永明子
|
Posted -
2006/5/15 上午 09:10:03
|
|
|
http://www.latinmassireland.org/newshappenings/zen_mass_hk.html
|
|
Augustine
|
Posted -
2006/5/15 下午 02:29:17
|
|
|
The 22 April Hong Kong Latin Mass as reported overseas
|
|
Ignatius
|
Posted -
2006/10/17 下午 04:27:52
|
|
|
主教特准特倫多拉丁文大禮彌撒
日期: 2006年11月12日 (主日)
時間: 下午三時至五時
地點: 九龍尖沙咀玫瑰堂, 125 Chatham Road South
（歡迎捐獻支付經費）
承蒙臺灣「南瀛混聲合唱團」獻唱
查爾斯●古諾 (Charles GOUNOD) 之
「 聖則濟利亞莊嚴彌撒曲」 (Messe Solennelle de Sainte Cécile )
（琴鍵伴奏）
合唱團簡介:
南瀛混聲合唱團由台南縣愛好音樂之教師及社會人士組成 ，希望藉著歌聲跨越人際及國界的鴻溝，對音樂向下紮根及向外推廣的工作能有所奉獻。
查詢： 9811-4075（劉先生）
http://tridentine.catholic.org.hk
|
|
FANNY
|
Posted -
2006/11/9 下午 11:28:47
|
|
|
拉丁彌撒終於可走出長沙灣，真係可喜可賀，我剛從英國返港得知真係好開心呀！但今次為何沒有管弦樂伴奏，確係可惜！因為本人在英國時，曾參與過一台主教彌撒，他們是以管弦樂伴奏，非常好聽！！
本人想問教會有否禁止過以管弦樂等作為聖樂呢？？
|
|
fabi
|
Posted -
2006/11/14 下午 03:27:56
|
|
|
我地都好鍾意 o的Solemn High-mass, 尤其有Fr. Lido Mencarini & the chants always lead us very close to the Latin Mass! 今次 更多謝從臺灣老遠來的「南瀛混聲合唱團」 真係唱得好好聽, 尤其係o的 "soprano-solo" 呀!
|
|
秀永明子
|
Posted -
2006/11/14 下午 08:18:17
|
|
|
臺灣同胞訪港時間有限, 來不及跟本地管弦樂團合作. 本來醫學會的管弦樂團是有意協奏的.
|
|
fabi
|
Posted -
2007/3/9 下午 10:50:04
|
|
|
Make yourself enjoy much more about the valuable Traditional Latin Mass, here below are the websites. Sacred consecration of the bread & wine to become the real body & blood of our Lord Jesus Christ in the eucharist, beautiful liturgy and the choral - keep us closer to the Holy Mass!
Traditional Latin Low Mass Introduction
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jtJb_zWDw0U&mode=related&search=
A Tridentine Mass:-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=thOUFBpHqhI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QKJ-gYky3e0&mode=related&search=
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfm5Y5MwZqQ
|
|
FANNY
|
Posted -
2007/3/9 下午 11:56:36
|
|
|
Fabi,
Thank you for your sharing, are you the member of SSPX?? if no, why are you share many of their movies? I’ve seen some of the movie before, but I would like to ask where does the SSPX holding mass in Hong Kong?
|
|
fabi
|
Posted -
2007/3/10 上午 01:02:55
|
|
|
You are very welcome! I love to share! The Latin mass is very beautiful, very pious. Let's pray for them too for unity...
I go to the INDULT Latin Mass only at Cheung Sha Wan Secondary School.
http://tridentine.catholic.org.hk
|
|
靚仔
|
Posted -
2007/5/11 上午 10:18:29
|
|
|
我想問問,按舊禮規,非六品的人員是否可以在彌撒中穿起六品服擔任六品的職務?我記憶中,司鐸是可以"降格"在彌撒中擔任六品,但卻不肯定未領六品的人可以這樣做.有無人可以話我知?
|
|
Mitrophanes
|
Posted -
2007/5/12 上午 04:17:30
|
|
|
//我想問問,按舊禮規,非六品的人員是否可以在彌撒中穿起六品服擔任六品的職務?我記憶中,司鐸是可以"降格"在彌撒中擔任六品,但卻不肯定未領六品的人可以這樣做.有無人可以話我知? //
似乎，按照改革前的罗马礼仪，只有小品可以“升格”“权代”五品，但是不戴手带，而且在具体的职务中有一些限制（细节有些恍惚了）。
六品以下者“升格”做六品，似乎是不可以的。但是恍惚曾经读到一本书里说：五伤方济，从没领过大品，但是却曾经穿了六品服“权带”六品。
当然，若依照律藏的标准来说，不仅小品“升格冒充大品”是不如法，高品“降格”冒充低品也是不如法。第一次神圣普世大公会议的法典就关于至圣所内的品级次序，尤其是领圣体血时候的次序做了规定。而且在大圣瓦西里的圣祭文中，也祈求“不要让我们的职分紊乱”。
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2007/5/12 上午 08:57:08
|
|
|
亞西西的聖方濟，是的確曾領受過執事聖職的。
|
|
秀永明子
|
Posted -
2007/5/12 下午 05:05:33
|
|
|
靚仔的提問讓回想到另一件事: 按"舊禮", 未領"五品"的修士是不能擔當大禮彌撒中的"副執事"禮職; 但大公會議後取消了"五品"的今天:
"A question was raised about who might subsititute for a subdeacon at a High Mass. There was a practice of dressing in a tunic a fellow as a subdeacon, sort of a "straw" subdeacon, as they were nicknamed.
I would like to supply some important information, which won’t be well known. In 1992 (?) on behalf of the Australian Ecclesia Dei Society I sent a dubium to the Ecclesia Dei Commission asking them to clarify the situation about who may act as a substitute for a subdeacon at a Solemn Mass, in the absence of cleric.
Whatever about what might have applied or was practised before the Council, this is the ruling now, as given by the Ecclesia Dei Commission:
A layman who has been instituted with the office of Acolyte may perform the duties of a subdeacon at a Solemn Mass. He performs all the duties pertaining to this office during the Mass but does not wear the maniple.
Obviously, this ruling excludes women and any also layman who is not an instituted acolyte."
錄自: http://wdtprs.com/blog/2006/10/straw-subdeacons-tridentine-high-mass/
|
|
