Click here to advertise on CatholicCulture.org

(demonstration model only: actual liturgy may vary)

By Diogenes (articles ) | Apr 23, 2004

Some comments of Cardinal Arinze at the press conference introducing the new disciplinary document on the Eucharist:

Connected with the preceding point [the need to develop an interior spirit of worship, not just external conformity to norms] is a temptation that must be resisted, i.e., to imagine that it's a waste of time to pay attention to liturgical abuses. It is sometimes argued that, since abuses have always existed and will always exist in the future, we should concern ourselves instead with formation and with improved liturgical celebration.

Though partly true, this objection can lead us astray. Not all abuses respecting the Holy Eucharist have the same weight. Some risk rendering the sacrament invalid. Others indicate a lack of Eucharistic faith. Yet others help sow further confusion among the people of God and tend to profane the celebration of the Eucharist. Abuses are not to be taken lightly.

And the penalty for non-compliance is ...?

An appeal from our founder, Dr. Jeffrey Mirus:

Dear reader: If you found the information on this page helpful in your pursuit of a better Catholic life, please support our work with a donation. Your donation will help us reach seven million Truth-seeking readers worldwide this year. Thank you!

Progress toward our September expenses ($33,239 to go):
$35,000.00 $1,761.25
95% 5%
Sound Off! CatholicCulture.org supporters weigh in.

All comments are moderated. To lighten our editing burden, only current donors are allowed to Sound Off. If you are a donor, log in to see the comment form; otherwise please support our work, and Sound Off!

Show 3 Comments? (Hidden)Hide Comments
  • Posted by: - Apr. 23, 2004 12:32 PM ET USA

    It looks like a hybrid of Sacrosanctum Concilium and the GIRM. Many ordained ignored those documents; will they also ignore this? Diogenes is right; there's no compliance language here. Unless the translation is wrong, the word "should" is used almost exclusively, and "should" is not a mandate. Let's not rush to judgment, though. Let's see if, within the Easter season, our ordinaries issue public instructions mandating compliance with this document. (Don't hold your breath!)

  • Posted by: Laertides - Apr. 23, 2004 12:29 PM ET USA

    Cute. There are no consequences on earth, and there sure aren't any in the afterlife (your local clergyperson: "what afterlife?"). Why do these folks even bother putting on clericals... or keeping their vows (whoops, I forgot! That would imply that they took this nonsense seriously!) Just easier to engineer social change from the pulpit, propagandizing us dupes in the pews. And,as the latest sex scandals (inter alia) show, they really CAN have it all!

  • Posted by: Fr. Zuhlsdorf o{]:¬) - Apr. 23, 2004 12:04 PM ET USA

    "And the penalty for non-compliance is ...? " This is the point, isn't it? There is indeed an adequate arsenal of sanctions available covering everything in the document, but most of them rely on the local ordinary. At the same time, go ahead (as a priest) and say Mass in Latin (perfectly legit, btw) in your parish and they will find a thousand creative ways to fix your little red Roman chasuble, the Code of Canon Law notwithstanding.

Subscribe for free
Click here to advertise on CatholicCulture.org

Recent Catholic Commentary

Liberal visions of Catholicism: Kickstarter and the world's largest NGO 22 hours ago
The Blessed Book of Beasts August 30
Weekend reading August 29
Frustrating the Moral Law August 29
Weep for slaughtered Christians, not for dialogue with Islam August 29

Top Catholic News

Most Important Stories of the Last 30 Days
‘A real via crucis’: Pope Francis, patriarch plead on behalf of Iraq’s Christians CWN - August 8
Hundreds of thousands of Iraqi Christians in flight as Islamic State advances CWN - August 8