|
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
Prayers for all Occasions, Needs, and Intentions LITURGICAL LAW The Regulation of the Liturgy and the Sacred Minister or Celebrant One of the more
difficult areas of law is that involving the regulation of the liturgy and
the sacred minister or celebrant. This is because the law which, regulates
all aspects of liturgical celebration, cannot be found in one source as,
for instance, in the Code of Canon Law. To discover the norm for proper
liturgical celebration one must turn to the introductory norms as
contained in the liturgical books (e.g., the General Instructions of the
Roman Missal) or the various instructional and Roman documents touching
upon liturgy with a view to legislation. Because of this situation,
liturgical law tends to become an amorphous mass of norms, many of which
escape the minister’s attention and at times prove pastorally harmful to
the worshiping community. This condition is especially distressing when
one considers that liturgical law is the most fundamental and proximate
experience of law a priest or sacred minister confronts in his day-to-day
ministry. The 1917 Code of Canon
Law does not deal explicitly with liturgical norm. In its section on
general norms, under Canon II, it states: “The Code as a rule does not
legislate regarding the rites and ceremonies which the liturgical books
approved by the Latin Church prescribe for the celebration of the most
holy sacrifice of the Mass, the administration of the sacraments and
sacramentals, and other sacred functions.” One can readily observe that,
as far as liturgical law is concerned, the Code adopts a hands-off policy. What is one to
understand by this and what, per se, are the reasons for such a legal
disclaimer, as viewed in Canon II? There are two reasons: (1) The peculiar
character of liturgical law (that is, the nature of the law itself) works
against its being included in codified legislation. The norms for divine
worship are by their nature meticulous and ritualistic, thereby preventing
their being included in a book of law. (2) The norms for celebration and
otherwise pervasive liturgical regulations are so numerous that their
inclusion in the Code of Canon Law would have rendered the Code too
unwieldy. Hence, one finds the rules, norms and prescriptions not in a
book of law but in general instructions on celebration and in each and
every liturgical book itself. For example, the law governing the
celebration of Mass can be found in the General Instructions of the Roman
Missal; many other things relative to law can likewise be found in the
Roman Missal. The laws governing the separate rites of baptism, anointing,
confirmation, etc., can be found in the introductory section of each
ritual book. Therefore, generally, the law regulating each sacrament is
spelled out in the liturgical book or “ceremonial” of each individual
sacrament. Incidentally, here and
there, the Code of Canon Law does legislate matters regarding rites and
ceremonies; for example, in areas where doubts are to be resolved, defects
supplied, certain changes specified. Illustration of these can be found in
the Code under the section dealing with sacraments, sacred times and
places, divine worship and sacramentals. These deal basically with
diversity of rite, holy Mass and administration of sacraments. But the
view is always to the canonical ordering of liturgy in a general way and
not with a view to the legislating for specific sacramental celebration or
regarding pre-Scripture rubrics. The Code would treat of liturgical matter
strictly, not with liturgical matters which only touch upon discipline or
celebration. Ergo, the liturgical law of the Church, properly so called,
can be found in the official liturgical books which are approved by the
Holy See or by the episcopal conferences insofar as the Vatican delegates
this power to episcopal conferences in particular matters, e.g.,
Thanksgiving Day liturgy. The usefulness of
liturgical books is readily evident; not only do they provide the Church
with proper format of sacramental celebration and the ordering of
sacramental matter and form, but they provide the norms for proper
regulation of worship with a view to sound ecclesial celebration. Without
these norms the liturgy would become chaotic and unwieldy. Moreover, the
norms for worship insure that the unity of worship in a particular rite is
maintained and safeguarded against unwarranted abuse. Since liturgy is a
source, indeed, the font of unity, then the proper presentation of good
sacramental order is essential to the Church’s future and tradition.
This in no way implies a uniformity (e.g., Latin was viewed in this light
by many) but, on the contrary, fosters a unity of sacramental celebration
which in turn builds up a unified faith community. The norms of liturgy
are not meant to be a means to insure monotonous worship but to assure the
believing community of the Church that the essential aspects of their
worship will be preserved as Christ had intended. The diversity of worship
has long been recognized by the Church: to wit, the Eastern Rites. But
this diversity is careful to maintain the unity in essentials which is
needed for authentic gospel liturgy. Certain norms must be followed so as
to protect the most sacred aspect of one’s faith life from distortion at
the hands of enthusiastic amateurs and reputable theologians alike. Variety in liturgical
celebration is greatly needed. No one doubts nor would argue this point.
But the question of authentic and genuine liturgical adaptation must not
descend into an awkward or unwieldy pastoral practice. One must
continually guard against the temptation to usurp the venerable heritage
of the Church in favor of some homespun variety of dubious value.
Admittedly, occasions will arise when pastoral necessity will dictate
one’s deviating from the general liturgical norms of the Catholic
Church; but this ought always to be the exception and not the rule. The question of
flexibility within the limits of law continues to be a pointed one,
especially in modern times. The post-Vatican II experience has left the
clergy with a great need to adapt to the unexpected situation as well as
to the unforeseen demands emanating from the Church’s program of
renewal. These situations become somewhat critical when Church law and
demands for good order conflict with particular circumstances and pastoral
necessity. There is no easy avenue for relief. The resolution is mostly
left to the priest’s own good judgment. In liturgical matters
no sacred minister need fear gross reprisal from high churchmen for
deviation in liturgical celebration so long as there exists a genuine need
and a just cause. A priest or deacon should feel free to adapt the liturgy
to the needs of the people whenever the situation calls for such action,
but only when the need is legitimate. For example, it is one thing to use
a special Eucharistic proper designed for children at a specifically
children’s liturgy (the Holy See has approved the use of three
Eucharistic prayers called for by the National Conference of Catholic
Bishops, or NCCB). and quite another thing altogether to employ
unauthorized Eucharistic prayers at general parish Masses on Sunday
morning, or on the occasion of some high Church feast. To engage in
enlightened adaptation, the sacred ministers must be apprised of what good
liturgy is and how a variation can promote the good of souls under certain
conditions. For a priest or deacon to alter seriously the character of
liturgy as set by Rome and the NCCB, there should be present a real
pastoral need, a just cause (e.g., epikeja, excusing causes, exempting
causes, moral impossibility), and it ought to be directed toward a
particular group or category of persons within the Church. The liturgy is the
efficacious point of contact between people and their God. It further
represents the most profound area wherein people and law or authority
converge. Apart from marriage law, people have their most intimate
experience with Church law relative to liturgical celebration. Owing to
this contact between law, people and liturgy, the Church rightly considers
liturgical law to be most significant in the configuration of faith and
order. Because of the impact of liturgical law on the Church, it forever
remains a highly guarded area. In a final note the
priest should take particular interest in the distinction drawn between
essential and accidental rubrics. An essential rubric is a norm of action
which regulates, directs or otherwise orders a particularly significant
aspect of sacramental liturgy with a view to insuring valid celebrations.
The essential rubric touches upon the most profound element of liturgical
activity. One should not casually approach an essential rubric or norm.
(It should be understood that while the word “rubric” carries poor
connotation today, it is really only a euphemism for a norm.) An
accidental rubric is one which concerns aspects of liturgical celebration
which are of lesser import and usually exist in order to promote fluid,
artful and stately worship. These selections touch upon the validity of a
sacrament. Those rubrics or norms which usually appear in the front of the
liturgical books (e.g., Roman Missal, Sacramentary, etc.) are generally of
a more essential nature; those that appear throughout the text are
generally accidental in nature. This rule of thumb
should be used when attempting to judge whether a norm or rubric is
essential or accidental: Does this particular norm touch upon the essence
of the sacrament? If the answer is yes, the norm is essential; otherwise
it is accidental. To wit: The rubric which states that the water used in baptism is to be poured in a flowing manner over the head of the one to be baptized, not sprinkled, is certainly more important than whether the mother or godmother holds the child.
|
|||||||||
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
|