Logo
登入
<<<

名稱: 密碼:

加入 | FAQ | 聯絡我們
全部區域 > 神學 > 禮儀與聖事 > KOINONIA 共融感恩祭

頁:  1 | 2 | 3 回 應
作者 內容

morrie


Posted -
2008/1/20 下午 08:25:53

KOINONIA 共融感恩祭

願上主永受讚美!

Augustine


Posted -
2008/1/20 下午 10:55:57

Without the proper matter (the bread) no valid consecration can be effected. That would not be a Mass at all.
I would consider this fortunate lest the real Blessed Sacrament be desecrated in such a profanity. Perhaps Father used the invalid matter deliberately to avoid a desecration?

Let them simulate a mass with a Protestantized service or whatever, that was not a mass since there was NO consecration. No one would blame the young students. Someone would have to account for this before God.

morrie


Posted -
2008/1/21 下午 05:14:55

I don't think the actions by the Roman Catholic Priest is appropriate.

hubert


Posted -
2008/1/24 下午 11:28:31

多謝morrie所提供的短片。縱使短片所見的「彌撒」嚴格來說並不符合「禮規」,不過我認為如果單憑這點而把這短片視為「羅馬公教會的悲哀」,這才真是「羅馬公教會的悲哀」。

我雖然沒有參加這種形式的「彌撒」,但是我會對參加過這種形式的「彌撒」的弟兄姊妹說:「我作為羅馬公教會的一員,我絕對不會因你們的行為而悲哀羞恥,反而十分欣賞你們對天主的這份愛,在這份愛中,我看到羅馬公教會的希望。」

waikit38


Posted -
2008/2/3 下午 11:52:34

以我所知恩神父開呢種彌撒唔係第一次,之前係齊家運動都搞過幾次。

獨立思考


Posted -
2008/2/4 上午 12:27:35

那些詩歌好好聽呀!想問知唔知有無cd買?邊度有得買?

獨立思考


Posted -
2008/2/4 上午 12:29:51

hubet:
想請問點解短片所見的「彌撒」嚴格來說並不符合「禮規」?

Learing to Serve


Posted -
2008/2/11 下午 03:06:35

合一 = 基督教化*Protestant*





共融合一


Posted -
2008/5/7 下午 01:18:30


















共融合一


Posted -
2008/5/7 下午 02:16:54










simon


Posted -
2008/5/7 下午 04:21:45

Augustine,

那個餅是比平常的大了一點,但有甚麼問題?

simon


Posted -
2008/5/7 下午 04:25:16

獨立思考:

按「規定」,感恩祭用的聖杯,好像是要貴重金屬杯,不應用玻璃杯。

但這個規定是否正確,我有所懷疑。
耶穌當年親自建立聖體聖事,是用貴重金屬杯嗎?他是木匠的兒子,他會否其實是用木杯呢?

simon


Posted -
2008/5/7 下午 04:29:41

天主無限。天主會否只准人們用單一的方法去進行感恩祭呢?一個大問號!

短片中,我感受到參加者的誠意和對天主的愛,很好。愛人愛神,他們做到了。
旁觀者要怎樣想,不在我們掌握中。

morrie


Posted -
2008/5/7 下午 05:10:56

Simon兄所言甚是

Augustine


Posted -
2008/5/7 下午 05:38:10

The bread was not made of unleavened wheat. In order words, the proper matter is absent. Without proper matter (unleavened bread composed purely of natural wheat), or the form (the formula of consecration), or an ordained minister (priest) or correct intention (to do what the Church intends to do), there cannot be a proper consecration and hence no mass has properly happened.

Please note that here we are NOT discussing the possible subjective "piety" or "love" (whatever this words mean) on the part of the participants and "celebrants", or whether these acts will be pleasing to God. We are concerned rather, with the validity of the mass itself. That is, is there really a mass, with the Body and Blood and Soul and Divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ actually confected as the immaculate propitiatory oblation, offered in the hands of the priest in the name of the Church, for the remission of sins of the world, re-enacting the bloody Sacrifice on Calvary in an unbloody manner?

If no Eucharist was consecrated, then these activities should not be referred to as "masses" but rather as prayer services. Whether they are legitimate forms of Roman Catholic Public Prayer stipulated by the law of the Church or not being another matter of discussion.

The objective reality of the Real Presence is not an object of feeling. No one can "by feeling" or "by faith"/"good will" or "love of God" effect the miraculous mystery of Transubstantiation. Our Lord exists under the species is a matter of objective fact, not personal belief or effect of subjective sentiments, however noble or sublime these sentiments could be.

Please not that simulating a sacrament (acting the externals of a sacrament without effecting the subtance of it) such as the Holy Sacrifice is considered a grave sin of sacrilege.

Augustine


Posted -
2008/5/7 下午 05:56:10

If it is only reasonable to use antique-Palestinian-wood-made-plus-handcraft cups as chalice, then by extension, in the Church today there should not be any use of air-conditioning, overhead projectors during mass, microphones, or any type of non-antiquarian-archaelogical objects or facilities.

And Christian should revert to the whole bunch of ancient Jewish customs effective in the first decades of AD.

simon


Posted -
2008/5/7 下午 10:37:00

Augustine,

恕我直問:你是羅馬天主教徒嗎?如果是,你可能是比較年長的羅馬天主教徒。

以我所知,現在羅馬天主教會並不要求必須用「無酵麥餅」(unleavened bread) ,只要是麥餅(即使發過酵),就可以用作成聖體。

時代改變,習慣也變,一切外在的東西都會轉變,最重要是愛主愛人的心不變。

主佑。



Augustine


Posted -
2008/5/8 上午 10:19:09

The 1983 Code of Canon Law provides:

Canon 924 §2.

"The bread must be only wheat and recently made so that there is no danger of spoiling."

The instruction Redemptionis Sacramentum further specifies:

[48.] "The bread used in the celebration of the Most Holy Eucharistic Sacrifice must be unleavened, purely of wheat, and recently made so that there is no danger of decomposition. It follows therefore that bread made from another substance, even if it is grain, or if it is mixed with another substance different from wheat to such an extent that it would not commonly be considered wheat bread, does not constitute valid matter for confecting the Sacrifice and the Eucharistic Sacrament. It is a grave abuse to introduce other substances, such as fruit or sugar or honey, into the bread for confecting the Eucharist. Hosts should obviously be made by those who are not only distinguished by their integrity, but also skilled in making them and furnished with suitable tools."

I think this is so clear that not only an elderly Roman Catholic with many years of catechism could understand. I wouldn't call the 1983 Code or the instruction R.R. issued a few years ago "outdated".

Augustine


Posted -
2008/5/8 上午 10:26:24

Time changes, customs change, every externality changes, but the love of God and neighbors remains unchanged. (I would like to add: without the proper matter, the bread remains unchanged as well)

simon


Posted -
2008/5/8 下午 04:35:05

Augustine,

若我沒有理解錯誤,有酵麥餅也及格,可用作聖體聖事。對嗎?

你單看短片,怎能確定那個大餅是用甚麼造?

morrie


Posted -
2008/5/8 下午 06:52:48

GIRM 282:

According to the tradition of the entire Church, the bread must
be made from wheat; according to the tradition of the Latin Church,
it must be unleavened.

simon


Posted -
2008/5/9 上午 12:33:19

真的不應道聽途說。

我上慕道班時,印象中導師曾說聖體必須由無酵餅開始。

在這個網站中,一位曾念畢神學的網友(Exactly 哪一位我忘了),鄭重地告訴我,成聖體用的餅,只要是麥餅便可,有酵和無酵都可以。我就當真了。

現在讀讀GIRM,確是要求用無酵餅。
Augustine,你說必須用無酵餅,是正確的(站在羅馬天主教會的立場)。

x x x

不過我對麥餅的要求,仍是有懷疑的。

耶穌當年是用無酵麥餅,但耶穌沒有清楚地說,你們必須用無酵麥餅成聖體。

無酵麥餅作為「必須條件」,只是後人的推測。

正如耶穌當年是用以色列葡萄酒成聖血,我們又為甚麼不要求神父必須用以色列葡萄酒呢?

michaelcychan


Posted -
2008/5/9 下午 12:01:30

小弟初來報到,跟各位先打個招呼

Simon:
跟據二零零四年禮儀聖事部所出的救贖聖事訓令,教會再一次重申「為舉行感恩祭所用的餅應為無酵餅,由純粹的小麥新近製成且沒有任何腐壞的危險。為此,若以其他材料,即使是穀物製成的餅,或混以過多非小麥的材料,而不再被認為是麥麵餅,皆不能作為舉行祭獻及聖體聖事用的有效物質。……﹝第48條﹞

耶穌當時用的餅應是無酵餅。因為建立聖體聖事是,耶穌是在和宗徒舉行猶太人的逾越節晚餐,按規定是無酵餅。

我有朋友出席了該次影片的聚會。當時朋友沒有表示懷疑該聖事的有效性,但明顯地這不像一台彌撒。始終彌撒是整個教會的祈禱,也是要展示信仰中不可言喻的部分。我真的很懷疑這些彌撒﹝包括現在很流行的「青年彌撒」﹞究竟能否達到這些功用。

我不懷疑那些主辦人、青年的意途,我想他們的用心都是正直的,但祈禱會、演唱會可能是比較好的途徑去表現他們的創作。個人意見是,現在彌撒中很多時都是不夠隆重了,實在不宜將彌撒再變為表演埸地。

Pooh-Pooh


Posted -
2008/5/9 下午 02:02:18

我完全信服於教會對聖事的規定,教會的規定,是否推測?
對我來說不重要,因為我相信耶穌將這權柄交給了教會!

Pooh-Pooh


Posted -
2008/5/9 下午 02:09:14

我同意彌撒中的表達可以有不同的方式;
對於片中的模式及所謂的”青年彌撒”,我覺得,不是”公開”(即聖堂的常時彌撒),也可接受!
當然,要符合教會的規定!

還有,我認為安排甚麼,”青年彌撒”,”兒童彌撒”,”老人彌撒”...等等,要非常小心;否則,就會給人一種”正常”彌撒,是不合時宜,為小數人服務.....等等的負面訊息;最重要的,是小心不要讓教會又一次分裂了!

頁:  1 | 2 | 3 回 應