Obrázky na stránke
PDF
ePub

ing of the conditions for mortal sin. Conceptual cognition of the malice of grave sin is an effective means of helping the child to avoid grave transgressions, even if at present they would not be for him subjectively mortal. And if he does lapse into formal mortal sin at an early age-and, as was said above, the Church seems to consider this as possible-he should have enough knowledge of the nature and effects of mortal sin to be able to recover the state of grace. To say that a child should not be taught about mortal sin until he is capable of mortal sin is like saying that a person should not be taught about the duties of marriage until he is married.

It is to be hoped that this new catechetical nction is not inspired by the desire to adapt Catholic teaching as nearly as possible to Protestant doctrine-a tendency which has appeared in some quarters in connection with ecumenism. For it was one of the errors of the Reformers, condemned at the Council of Trent, that no distinction should be made between mortal and venial sin (DB, 804).

THE DIVINE OFFICE IN THE VERNACULAR

Question: A brother priest has expressed to me the opinion that in fulfilment of his obligation to recite the Divine Office he may use the vernacular. His argument is that he does not understand Latin very well and feels that by a reasonable use of epicheia he is permitted to recite the breviary in a language in which he can pray intelligently. What is to be said about this opinion?

Answer: The Church prescribes that the Divine Office for clerics of the Latin rite must be recited in the Latin language. Otherwise they will not satisfy the obligation (Cf. S.R.C., June 3, 1904; Noldin-Schmitt, Summa theologiae moralis, II, n. 762; Iorio, Theologia moralis, II, n. 997). Hence, it is difficult to understand how a priest can argue that he fulfills this obligation by reciting the canonical hours in the vernacular. The defense of this practice, mentioned by our correspondent, that it can be permitted by a reasonable use of epicheia, is very weak. Epicheia can be used to interpret a law in a manner contrary to the literal sense, only when there is some indication that the lawmaker did not make provision for a certain case when he drew up his law. Now, the Church is fully aware that some of those bound to the Divine Office

are not familiar with Latin; yet the Church commands that they use this language. Hence, it cannot be said that the Church did not foresee such cases and make provision for them. For example, the Holy See certainly knows that many nuns with solemn vows, strictly bound to the Divine Office, have little or no understanding of the Latin words they are reciting; yet they are included in the obligation of reciting the breviary in Latin. Of course, the Church itself can make exceptions; and any priest who may obtain from the Holy See the right to recite his Office in the vernacular may use it without hesitation. The one general exception that I know of is found in the rubrics for the Feast of St. Mark, April 25, where it is stated that those who do not take part in the procession of the major litanies are bound to recite them in Latin. But if they take part in the procession and the vernacular is used for the chanting or recitation of the litanies by the faithful, those bound to the Office need not recite the litanies again in Latin. Now, if the law is so definite in requiring Latin in the private recitation of the litanies an adjunct to the Office-it certainly demands Latin for the Office itself.

The next session of the Council may, indeed, allow the canonical hours in the vernacular; but until such a change is officially promulgated, priests must continue to use the Latin breviary. I suggest that the questioner inform his brother priest that a prayer can be effective and pleasing to God even though the one reciting it does not understand it. St. Thomas teaches that, in addition to the sense of the words, attention can be directed to the proper pronunciation of the words or to God; and he adds that this third species of attention can be very excellent (Summa, II-II, Q. 83, art. 13). I am sure that St. Thérèse of the Child Jesus did not understand much of the Latin Office which she recited daily, but I am also sure that she gained many spiritual blessings from it. Of course, if a priest wishes to say the Office in the vernacular, he may do so, but he must also recite it in Latin.

FRANCIS J. CONNELL, C.SS.R.

COMMEMORATION ON TRINITY SUNDAY

Question: Is the First Sunday after Pentecost still to be commemorated on Trinity Sunday?

Answer: There is no longer a commemoration of the First Sunday after Pentecost in the Mass of Trinity Sunday. The feast of the Most Holy Trinity is one of those which are the exception to the rule in the new rubrics (#17) that "Sunday excludes the permanent assignment of a feast. . . . These feasts take the place of the occurring Sunday with all its rights and privileges; hence there is no commemoration of the Sunday.”

ST. JOHN NEPOMUCENE

Question: The Office of St. John Nepomucene, like that of other saints whose Masses are listed in the MPAL section of the missal, has not been extended to dioceses in the United States. May the Mass be used on the patronal feast day in parishes titled after these saints? Would the Vatican Council consider allowing these MPAL Masses to be used in parishes even though the feasts do not appear in the Ordo?

Answer: "The Mass of a Saint given among the Masses for Certain Places may not be used as a votive Mass, except where the feast is celebrated by apostolic indult" (Matters Liturgical, n. 254, f). Since the Mass which you would offer on the patronal feast would be a votive Mass in so far as it would depart from the diocesan calendar, you could not use, for example, the Mass in honor of St. John Nepomucene found in MPAL for May 16. As regards the possible action of the Second Vatican Council, the present schema on the Liturgy, not yet approved in its entirety by the Council, tends to subordinate the feasts of saints, i.e. the sanctoral cycle, to the observance of feasts which celebrate the mystery of salvation. At the same time, it would confine the observance of saints' days to localities where they have special significance, such as parish, diocese, or country. This tendency, together with the recommended establishment of national Episcopal Conferences to control the liturgy with the approval of the Holy See, might facilitate the observance of parochial patronal feasts with an accompanying permission to use the MPAL formularies where they exist.

VOTIVE OFFICE

Question: When a votive Office is used for Vespers in a seminary, as for example when the Vespers of the Blessed Sacrament

are sung during the Forty Hours' Devotion, do the deacons fulfill their obligation by joining in the singing of that Office or must they also recite the Vespers prescribed in the Ordo?

Answer: The new code of rubrics (#157) gives us a clear answer to this question: "Any diocesan cleric, however, or any religious of either sex, obliged under any title to recite the Divine Office, who participates in the Office in choir or in common according to another calendar or rite than his own, is thereby satisfying his obligation as far as this part of the Office is concerned. Likewise, when anyone participates in votive Vespers of any external solemnity, he is satisfying his obligation as to this part of the Office, as long as the aforesaid Vespers have been celebrated in their entirety and according to the rubrics."

RECITATION OF THE GRADUAL IN SOLEMN MASS

Question: In a solemn Mass, is the celebrant to read the Gradual immediately upon returning to the altar from the bench, or must he first receive and bless the subdeacon?

Answer: The new Ritus servandus in celebratione Missae (VI, 4) reads: "When the Epistle has been sung, the celebrant returns to the book, and the subdeacon genuflects again in the center and goes to the celebrant, and kneeling kisses his hand, and is blessed by him, except in Masses of the dead. Then (emphasis added) the celebrant reads, in lowered voice, the gradual, etc., up to the Munda cor meum exclusively."

CIRCULAR INCENSING OF THE ALTAR

Question: I have heard that the new Ritus makes provision for a continuous incensing of the altar, front, sides, and back, where it can be conveniently done. What is the procedure?

Answer: New missals carry a second diagram for the incensation of an altar "quod commode circuiri potest." After the incensation of the cross (and relics, if present) and genuflection (or bow), the celebrant makes the customary three swings above the mensa as he moves to the Epistle side, and follows them with two consecutive swings to the side below the mensa as he moves to the

rear of the altar; he then moves along the rear of the altar, making three evenly distributed swings toward the altar and below the mensa on each side of the tabernacle or crucifix; coming along the Gospel side he incenses twice in the same manner as at the Epistle side, below the mensa; the next three swings are made above the mensa as the celebrant stands in front of the altar and toward the Gospel side; he then makes three swings below the mensa as he advances toward the center and, after genuflecting (or bowing), concludes with three swings below the mensa as he moves to the Lavabo position. Not counting the incensation of the cross, we have a total of twenty-two swings in this procedure. One liturgical commentator sees in this return to an incensation "in circuitu" an appeal for a return to a simple altar, an altar which will not be just a base for a big monument covered with baroque ornamentation.

JOHN P. MCCORMICK, S.S.

« PredošláPokračovať »