The Theo-Centric Character of Catholic Liturgy

The Thomistic Institute Pontifical Faculty of the Immaculate Conception Dominican House of Studies Thomistic Circle “St. Thomas Aquinas and Theo-Centric Ecclesiology” Washington, D.C. 11 May 2011 The Theo-Centric Character of Catholic Liturgy Introduction First of all, I wish to express my heartfelt gratitude to Father Steven Bogluslawski, President of the Pontifical Faculty of the Immaculate Conception, and Father Thomas Joseph White, President of the Thomistic Institute, for the invitation to give a presentation within the context of the Institute’s study of St. Thomas Aquinas and Theo-Centric Ecclesiology, on the theo-centric character of the Sacred Liturgy. Because of the high esteem in which I hold the Pontifical Faculty of the Immaculate Conception and also because of the importance of the subject matter, I was most happy to accept the invitation. I am deeply grateful to all who have made it possible for me give this afternoon’ s presentation on the theo-centric character of Catholic liturgy. To speak about the theo-centric character of ecclesiology, of the Church, and, specifically, of the Sacred Liturgy, as the highest and most perfect expression of the life of the Church, could seem to be a redundancy. Is not the Church, by its very nature, divine, that is, called into being and sustained in being by God, and, therefore, centered in God? A fortiori, are not the Church herself and the Church’s worship, by definition, directed to God? Otherwise, she would end up in some form of idolatry. Why is it necessary to devote attention to the truth that the Sacred Liturgy is centered in God, that it is, in fact, the action of God the Son Incarnate, seated in glory at the right hand of the Father and, at the same time, active in the Church, on our behalf, for the salvation of the world? What has happened, in our time, to make it necessary to address the God-centered character of the Sacred Liturgy? In canonical terms, why is the discussion of the ius divinum, of the divine right of God to be worshipped by us in the manner in which He wishes to be worshipped, so seldom taken up, in our day? Context To speak of the theo-centric character of the Sacred Liturgy or of the ius divinum and the Sacred Liturgy is, in simple terms, to speak of the right relationship between God and His creation, especially man, the only earthly creature created in the image of God Himself. Clearly, such a conversation has to do, first of all, with the Sacred Liturgy as the highest and most perfect expression of the relationship between God and man. There is no other aspect of the life of the Church, in which the truth about God’s relationship with man should be more visible, than the Sacred Liturgy. Such a conversation, however, if I am not mistaken, has been rarely engaged over the last years, so that it causes wonder to speak of the relationship between God and man, and the Sacred Liturgy, the relationship between the ius divinum and Sacred Liturgy. In the time since the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, but certainly not because of the teaching of the Council, there has been an exaggerated attention on the human aspect of the Sacred Liturgy, which has overlooked the essence of the Sacred Liturgy as the encounter of God with us by means of sacramental signs, that is, as the direct action of the glorious Christ in the Church to give to us the grace of the Holy Spirit. I wish to offer today an initial reflection on the theo-centric character of Catholic liturgy which I hope, in the future to be able to develop and expand. In light of my background as a canonist, I focus the discourse on the ius divinum and the Sacred Liturgy. It should be clear, however, that the canonical perspective is necessarily securely grounded in the theological reality of the Church. First, I will take up the subject in the Sacred Scriptures and in the Magisterium, and then its manifestation in canonical discipline. Since the canonical order is at the service of the objective order of our life in Christ in the Church, it is fundamental to understand, at least in its essentials, the objective relationship of the ius divinum and the Sacred Liturgy, in order also to understand the deepest significance of the canonical norms which govern the Sacred Liturgy. The liturgical law of the Church, after all, is at the service of the theo-centric nature of Catholic worship. Sacred Scripture When God offered the covenant to His chosen people, to repair the covenant destroyed by the sin of Adam and Eve, He founded the covenant of faithful and enduring love between Himself and His people on the Decalogue, the Ten Commandments. The first three commandments, in fact, express the essence of the ius divinum, the right of God to be recognized as the Creator of the world and the Lord of history and, therefore, as the exclusive recipient of the worship of man. One recalls that Satan tempted Adam and Eve to sin against the one and only commandment of the Lord, that is, “of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall die,” Gn 2:17; cf. Gn 3:3. with the words: “You will not die. For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” Gn 3:4-5. Our first parents were tricked, not recognizing God as the source of their being and of their every good, but taking on the pretense of being equal to God. The first three commandments of the Decalogue reestablish the just relationship between God and man, based on divine right. The Decalogue begins with the identification of the Lord, as the only God, Creator and Savior: “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.” Ex 20:2. Then, follows immediately the prohibition of every idolatry, “You shall have no other gods before me” Ex 20:3.; the commandment to honor always the holy name of the Lord, “You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain” Ex 20:7.; and the precept of the observance of the day of the Lord: “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.” Ex 20:8. The other seven commandments derive from these first commandments which establish and safeguard the divine right. In other words, the worship of God, “in spirit and truth,” Jn 4:24. is, at once, the sanctification of the people. In the Code of the Covenant, which follows the declaration of the Decalogue, the first attention is dedicated to divine worship and specifically to the altar. God, drawing the attention of the people to the fact that He has come from heaven to speak to them, commands: “An altar of earth you shall make for me and sacrifice on it your burnt offerings and your peace offerings, your sheep and your oxen; in every place where I cause my name to be remembered I will come to you and bless you.” Ex 20:24. Subsequent to the ratification of the covenant, detailed norms for divine worship are listed. Cf. Gn 25:1-31:18. After the account of the offering and of the ratification of the covenant in the Book of Exodus, the Book of Leviticus contains the detailed norms for the priests and Levites, in order that they might fulfill their responsibility for divine worship and, therefore, for the sanctification of the people. From this brief look at the content of the covenant between God and man, one sees as the fundamental principle, the ius divinum, the right of God to receive the worship of man in the manner that God commands. It is clear that divine worship and the sanctification of the people, which is its fruit, is ordained by God Himself. It is not the invention of man, but the gift of God to man, by which God makes it possible for man to offer “the sacrifice of communion” with Him. In the Sermon on the Mount, in which Our Lord Jesus communicates the law of the new covenant, the first Beatitude is the poverty of spirit, which recognizes the Lord as the source of being itself and of every good: “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.” Mt 5:3. All of the other Beatitudes depend upon the recognition of our relationship with God and and the efficacious expression of the same. After having announced the Beatitudes as the law of the new covenant and after having exhorted the disciples to be “the salt of the earth” and “the light of the world,” so that others, seeing the holiness of the people, may give “glory to your Father who is in heaven,” Mt 5:16. the Lord declares His mission in what pertains to the Law: Think not that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets; I have come not to abolish them but to fulfil them. For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. Mt 5:17-19. The words of the Lord confirm the fundamental service of the law, which is to honor and to safeguard the ius divinum, the divine right, and, thereby, to honor and safeguard the order written by God in His creation. All of the norms of the law are directed to the just relationship between God and His people, upon which depends the salvation of the world, and thus the norms must be respected as the commandment of God and not the invention of man. Otherwise, the Law of God is corrupted for human purposes. After having declared the holiness of the Law, the Lord exhorted the disciples with these words: “For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.” Mt 5:20. Only by observing and honoring the divine right that God be known, adored and served, as He commands, does man find his happiness in this life and in the life to come. When Our Lord encountered the Samaritan Woman at the well of Jacob, He revealed Himself as the Messiah with these words, “I who speak to you am he.” Jn 4:26. In the conversation with the Samaritan Woman which precedes the revelation, Our Lord instructs her on the true worship of God, the adoration of God “in spirit and truth.” Jn 4:23-24. It is clear from His teaching that faith in Him as Messiah, as God the Son made man, is expressed, first of all, in the worship owed to God. At the Last Supper, when Our Lord instituted the Eucharistic Sacrifice, He gave directly the command: “Do this in remembrance of me.... Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.” 1 Cor 11:24-25. It is clear that the Holy Eucharist, the worship offered to God “in spirit and truth,” is not an invention of man, but a gift of God to man. In a similar manner, when Christ was about to ascend to the right hand of the Father in heaven, He gave the command to the disciples: All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. Mt 28:18-20. It is evident that true worship, for example, the conferral of the Holy Spirit with the Sacrament of Baptism, is an act of respect for the right of God, carried out in accord with the indications given by Our Lord. The Catechism Before considering some texts of the Magisterium, it is necessary to consider the Catechism, the instrument for the understanding and application of the Sacred Scriptures and the Magisterium in daily living. Regarding the First Commandment, we read in the Roman Catechism, edited after the Council of Trent: It should also be noted here that this is indeed the First Commandment, not just because it is first in order, but because it is first in rank by its very nature and excellence. God is entitled to a love and an obedience infinitely greater than what is owed to any other king or superior. He created us, he governs us. He nurtured us even in the womb of our mother and brought us into the world and still provides for us in all that we need for life “[H]oc praeceptum esse omnium primum et maximum: non ordine tantum ipso, sed ratione, dignitate, praestantia. Debet enim Deus obtinere apud nos infinitis partibus majorem quam domini, quam regis charitatem et auctoritatem. Ipse nos creavit, idem gubernat; ab eo in utero matris nutriti, atque inde hanc in lucem ducti sumus: ipse nobis ad vitam victumque res spedita necessarias. Catechismus Romanus ad Parochos, Coloniae Agrippinae: Apud Franciscum Balth. Neuwirth, 1765. Pars III, Caput II, Quaestio II, n. IV, p. 479; English translation: The Roman Catechism, tr. Robert I. Bradley, S.J. and Eugene Kevane, Boston: St. Paul Editions, 1985, p. 359, n. 6. The language of the Catechism underlines the truth that worship is owed to God, that is, worship is part of the divine right. In presenting the obligation to observe the Decalogue, the Catechism of Saint Pius X declares: “We are obliged to observe the commandments of God, because they are imposed by Him, our supreme Master, and dictated by nature and sound reason.” “Siamo obbligati a osservare i comandamenti di Dio, perché sono imposti da Lui, nostro Padrone supremo, e dettati dalla natura e dalla sana ragione.” C. T. Dragone, S.S.P., Spiegazione del Catechismo di San Pio X per catechisti, 4ª ed., Verrua Savoia (Torino): Centro Libraria Sodalitium, 1964, p. 258. English translation by author. Father C. T. Dragone, in his classical presentation of the same Catechism for catechists, comments on the First Commandment with these words: Religion is a duty and a fundamental need of every intelligent being. By the fact itself that we are creatures, we must recognize and honor fittingly our Creator and Lord, offer adoration, praise, thanksgiving and reparation to Him, and implore from him what we need. “La religione è un dovere e un bisogno fondamentale per ogni essere intelligente. Dal fatto stesso che siamo creature, dobbiamo riconoscere e onorare convenientemente il nostro Creatore e Signore, offrire a Lui adorazione, lode, ringraziamento, riparazione e implorare quanto ci occorre. La religione è la virtù che ci fa riconoscere Dio come nostro sovrano assoluto, la nostra totale dipendenza da Lui e inclina a rendergli il culto e l’onore che gli è dovuto.” Ibid., p. 262; English translation by author. Divine worship therefore is the first and most perfect way to observe the divine right. The Catechism of the Catholic Church puts the duty of divine worship among the rights and duties “inherent in the nature of the human person.” Catechism of the Catholic Church, no. 2070. Divine worship constitutes the fundamental duty of man toward God; the First Commandment, like the others, is “engraved by God in the human heart.” Catechism of the Catholic Church, no. 2072. In the words of the Catechism, “God’s first call and just demand is that man accept him and worship him.” Catechism of the Catholic Church, no. 2084. Saint Thomas Aquinas Saint Thomas Aquinas, in the Summa Theologica and in the Summa Contra Gentiles, presents divine worship as an act of religion, Cf. Summa Theologica, II-II, q. 81, art. 1. the virtue by which we render the honor owed to God. Cf. Summa Theologica, II-II, q. 81, art. 2. He responds to the question whether religion is a theological virtue, with these words: I answer that, As stated above (A. 4) religion pays due worship to God. Hence two things are to be considered in religion: first that which it offers to God, viz. worship, and this is by way of matter and object in religion; secondly, that to which something is offered, viz. God, to Whom worship is paid. And yet the acts whereby God is worshiped do not reach out to God himself, as when we believe God we reach out to Him by believing; for which reason it was stated (Q. a, AA. 1, 2, 4) that God is the object of faith, not only because we believe in a God, but because we believe God. Now due worship is paid to God, in so far as certain acts whereby God is worshiped, such as the offering of sacrifices and so forth, are done out of reverence for God. Hence it is evident that God is related to religion not as matter or object, but as end; and consequently religion is not a theological virtue whose object is the last end, but a moral virtue which is properly about things referred to the end. “Respondeo dicendum quod, sicut dictum est, religio est quae Deo debitum cultum affert. Duo igitur in religione considerantur. Unum quidem quod religio Deo affert, cultus scilicet; et hoc se habet per modum materiae et obiecti ad religionem. Aliud autem est id cui affertur, scilicet Deus. Cui cultus exhibetur non quasi actus quibus Deus colitur ipsum Deum attingunt, sicut cum credimus Deo, credendo Deum attingimus (propter quod supra dictum est quod Deus est fidei objectum non solum inquantum credimus Deo): affertur autem Deo debitus cultus inquantum actus quidam, quibus Deus colitur, in Dei reverentiam fiunt, puta sacrificiorum oblationes et alia huiusmodi. Unde manifestum est quod Deus non comparatur ad virtutem religionis sicut materia vel obiectum, sed sicut finis. Et ideo religio non est virtus theologica, cuius obiectum est ultimus finis: sed est virtus moralis, cuius est esse circa ea quae sunt ad finem.” Summa Theologica, II-II, q. 81, art. 5.. The text of the Angelic Doctor shows how divine worship is the expression of the virtue of religion, by which man offers to God acts of reverence, in accord with the objective relationship between God and himself. In the Summa contra Gentiles, Saint Thomas explains that the objective relationship between God and man, the relationship between Creator and the creature capable of knowing and loving Him, capable of offering to the Creator due reverence, not only interiorly but with the body, with words and gestures, postulates three norms, as they are enunciated in Chapter 20 of the Book of Exodus. Above all, the worship of other gods or idolatry is prohibited. In the second place, the divine name may not be pronounced without due reverence. And, finally, the rest of the Day of the Lord is prescribed, in order that man may dedicate his soul to contemplation. Summa contra Gentiles, cap. 120, no. 25. The Magisterium Time does not permit the review of all of the texts of the Magisterium which indicate the irreplaceable relationship between divine right and liturgical law. I limit myself to some texts. The Council of Trent, in treating the question of doctrine on Holy Communion “sub utraque specie et parvulorum,” declared that the Church from the beginning has had the authority to order the administration of the Sacraments, but that it has no authority to touch in any manner the substance of the Sacraments. Here is the text from Session 19 of the Council: [The Holy Council] furthermore declares that in the dispensation of the sacraments, provided their substance is preserved, the Church has always had the power to determine or change, according to circumstances, times and places, what she judges more expedient for the benefit of those receiving them or for the veneration of the sacrament. “Praeterea declarat, hanc potestatem perpetuo in Ecclesia fuisse, ut in sacramentorum dispensatione, salva illorum substantia, ea statueret vel mutaret, quae suscipientium utilitati seu ipsorum sacramentorum venerationi, pro rerum, temporum et locorum varietate, magis expedire iudicaret.” Henricus Denzinger et Adolfus Schönmetzer, Enchiridion Symbolorum, Romae: Herder, 1967, no. 1728. English translation, no. 1324. The substance of the Sacraments cannot be touched because they are instituted by Christ and entrusted to the Church, as the worship of God the Father “in spirit and truth.” Jn 4:24. The Second Vatican Ecumenical Council has repeated the constant teaching on the exclusive authority of the Church for the right discipline of the Sacred Liturgy, distinguishing two parts of the liturgy, “unchangeable elements divinely instituted” and “elements subject to change,” which “not only may be changed but ought to be changed with the passage of time, if they have suffered from the intrusion of anything out of harmony with the inner nature of the liturgy or have become less suitable.” “parte immutabili, utpote divinitus instituta,... partibus mutationi obnoxiis, … decursu temporum variare possunt vel etiam debent, si in eas forte irrepserint quae minus bene ipsius Liturgiae intimae naturae respondeant, vel minus aptae factae sint.” Sacrosanctum Concilium Oecumenicum Vaticanum II, Constitutio Sacrosanctum Concilium, “de Sacra Liturgia,” 4 decembris 1963, Acta Apostolicae Sedis 56 (1964), pp. 105-106, no. 21. English version: Vatican Council II: The Conciliar and Post Conciliar Documents, ed. Austin Flannery, O.P., Collegeville, Minnesota: Liturgical Press, 1975, p. 9. Regarding the elements susceptible to change, the Council enunciated clear rules, namely: 22. § 1. Regulation of the sacred liturgy depends solely on the authority of the Church, that is, on the Apostolic See, and, as laws may determine, on the bishop. § 2. In virtue of power conceded by law, the regulation of the liturgy within certain defined limits belongs also to various kinds of bishops’ conferences, legitimately established, with competence in given territories. § 3. Therefore no other person, not even a priest, may add, remove, or change anything in the liturgy on his own authority. “22. § 1. Sacrae Liturgiae moderatio ab Ecclesiae auctoritate unice pendet: quae quidem est apud Apostolicam Sedem et, ad normam iuris, apud Episcopum. § 2. Ex potestate a iure concessa, rei liturgicae moderatio inter limites statutos pertinet quoque ad competentes varii generis territoriales Episcoporum coetus legitime constitutos. § 3. Quapropter nemo omnino alius, etiamsi sit sacerdos, quidquam proprio marte in Liturgia addat, demat, aut mutet.” Ibid., p. 106, no. 22. English version: Ibid., pp. 9-10. The Sacred Liturgy is the worship owed to God, as He Himself has instituted it. It cannot, as the Church has always taught, be reduced to the activity of any individual, not even a priest, but must be governed, in respect for the divine right, by the law of the Church, by the supreme authority, that is, by the Roman Pontiff and by the Bishops in communion with him, always in accord with the norms of the Church’s law. Blessed Pope John Paul II underlined the divine right in what pertains to the Sacrament of Penance in his first Encyclical Letter Redemptor Hominis. Confronting a certain tendency to substitute communal forms of penance and conversion for individual confession, he called to mind that the act of conversion has always to be personal. These are his words: Although the participation by the fraternal community of the faithful in the penitential celebration is a great help for the act of personal conversion, nevertheless, in the final analysis, it is necessary that in this act there should be a pronouncement by the individual himself with the whole depth of his conscience and with the whole of his sense of guilt and of trust in God, placing himself like the Psalmist before God to confess: “Against you… have I sinned.” In faithfully observing the centuries-old practice of the Sacrament of Penance – the practice of individual confession with a personal act of sorrow and the intention to amend and make satisfaction – the Church is therefore defending the human soul’s individual right: man’s right to a more personal encounter with the crucified forgiving Christ, with Christ saying, through the minister of the sacrament of Reconciliation: “Your sins are forgiven;” “Go, and do not sin again.” “Etsi fraterna communitas fidelium celebrationem paenitentialem simul peragentium insigniter provehit actum conversionis singulorum, nihilo minus oportet denique in hoc eodem actu se exprimat quisque homo ex intimis penetralibus conscientiae suae, immo cum toto sensu culpae suae fiduciaeque Dei, coram quo sistat psalmistae similis, ut confiteatur: «Tibi, tibi soli peccavi». Propterea Ecclesia, dum fideliter asservat productum plura per saecula usum Sacramenti Paentitentiae – hoc est usum confessionis singularis, copulatae cum actu doloris propositoque emendationis et satisfactionis – ius particulare animae humanae tuetur; quod scilicet ius refertur ad congressionem, uniuscuiusque hominis magis propriam, cum Christo Cruci affixo, qui ignoscit, cum Christo, qui per Sacramenti Reconciliationis ministrum declarat: «dimittuntur peccata tua»; «vade, et amplius iam noli peccare». Ioannes Paulus PP. II, Litterae Encyclicae Redemptor Hominis, “pontificali eius ministerio ineunte,” 4 martii 1979, Acta Apostolicae Sedis , n. 20. English version: Pope John Paul II, Encyclicals, Trivandrum, Kerala, India: Carmel International Publishing House, 2005, p. 1115. Having noted the right of the individual penitent “to a more personal encounter” with Christ in the Sacrament of Penance, the Holy Father quickly adds that is is a also a question of “a right on Christ’s part with regard to every human being redeemed by him.” “ius Christi est, quod is habet erga quemque hominem a se redemptum.”Ibid. English version: Ibid., p. 1115. He continues, explaining the right and also the duty of the Church to insist on the observance of the divine right, His right to meet each one of us in that key moment in the soul’s life constituted by the moment of conversion and forgiveness. By guarding the sacrament of Penance, the Church expressly affirms her faith in the mystery of the Redemption as a living and life-giving reality that fits in with man’s inward truth, with human guilt and also with the desire of the human conscience. “Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be satisfied.” The sacrament of Penance is the means to satisfy man with the righteousness that comes from the Redeemer himself. “Est nempe ius conveniendi unumquemque nostrum in illo decretorio tempore vitae animae, quod est momentum conversionis et condonationis. Ecclesia Sacramento Paenitentiae custodiendo profitetur aperte fidem suam in Redemptionis mysterium, ut in rem veram et vivificantem, quae etiam cum interiore veritate hominis congruit, cum humano culpae sensu et etiam cum humanae conscientiae desideriis. «Beati, qui esuriunt et sitiunt iustitiam, quoniam ipsi saturabuntur». Paenitentiae Sacramentum est instrumentum, quo homo illa iustitia satietur, quae ex eodem Redemptore emanat.” Ibid. English version: Ibid., p. 1115. The solicitude of the Church for the correct celebration of the Sacrament of Penance corresponds to the divine right, to the right of Christ, Who, at the moment of His death on the Cross, expressed the reality of His Redemptive Incarnation with one only word: “Sitio,” “I thirst.” Jn 19:28. The discipline of the Sacrament of Penance ought always to correspond to the objective relationship between God and man, which is constituted by the unceasing love of God for all men, without boundary, expressed so eloquently and profoundly with the word, “Sitio. The Canonical Discipline In the canonical tradition, the discipline of the worship owed to God has been regulated by the highest authority, that is, the Apostolic See. Can. 1247 of the Pio-Benedictine Code enunciated the perennial discipline of the Church, that is, that it pertains solely to the Apostolic See to order the Sacred Liturgy and to approve liturgical books: “It belongs only to the Apostolic See to order sacred liturgy and to approve liturgical books.” “Unius Apostolicae Sedis est tum sacram ordinare liturgiam, tum liturgicos approbare libros.” Codex Iuris Canonici Pii X Pontificis Maximi iussu digestus Benedicti Papae XV auctoritate promulgatu, can. 1257. English version: The 1917 or Pio-Benedictine Code of Canon Law in English Translation, ed. Edward N. Peters, San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2001, p. 426 [Hereafter, CIC-1917]. The Code also enunciated the responsibility of the Bishops to exercise vigilance over the correct observance of the norms regarding divine worship Cf. CIC-1917, can. 1261, § 1. and over the introduction of abuses into ecclesiastical discipline, especially in what pertain to divine worship and the Sacred Liturgy. Cf. CIC-1917, can. 336, § 2. The present Code, promulgated by the Blessed John Paul II on January 25, 1983, enunciates in can. 838 the discipline formulated in the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council. In the second paragraph of the canon, we read: It is for the Apostolic See to order the sacred liturgy of the universal Church, publish liturgical books and review their translations in vernacular languages, and exercise vigilance that liturgical regulations are observed faithfully everwhere. “Apostolicae Sedis est sacram liturgiam Ecclesiae universae ordinare, libros liturgicos edere eorumque versiones in linguas vernaculas recognoscere, necnon advigilare ut ordinationes liturgicae ubique fideliter observentur.” Codex Iuris Canonici auctoritate Ioannis Pauli PP. II promulgatus, 25 ianuarii 1983, Acta Apostolicae Sedis 75, Pars II (1983), p. 153, can. 838, § 2. English version: Code of Canon Law: Latin-English Edition, New English Translation, ed. Canon Law Society of America, Washington, D.C.: Canon Law Society of America, 1998, p. 276. In the second paragraph of can. 392 of the 1983 Code, the responsibility of the Bishop to “promote the common discipline of the whole Church and therefore to urge the observance of all ecclesiastical laws” “disciplinam cunctae Ecclesiae communem promovere et ideo observantiam omnium legum eccleiasticarum urgere tueatur.” Ibid., p. 71, can. 392, § 1. English version: Ibid., p. 128. is treated. It reads: He is to exercise vigilance so that abuses do not creep into ecclesiastical discipline, especially regarding the ministry of the word, the celebration of the sacraments and sacramentals, the worship of God and the veneration of the saints, and the administration of goods. “Advigilet ne abusus in ecclesiasticam disciplinam irrepant, praesertim circa ministerium verbi, celebrationem sacramentorum et sacramentalium, cultum Dei et Sanctorum, necnon bonorum administrationem.” Ibid., p. 71, can. 392, § 2. English version: Ibid., p. 128. The present Code puts together the various objects of the vigilance of the Bishop over ecclesiastical discipline and has lost a bit the particular emphasis on the vigilance over the discipline of the Sacred Liturgy, which is found in the Pio-Benedictine Code. In fact, after the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, but certainly not because of the teaching of the Council, many abuses in the celebration of the Sacred Liturgy took place. Pope Benedict XVI makes explicit reference to the situation in his Letter to the Bishops of the world, at the time of the promulgation of the Apostolic Letter, given motu proprio, Summorum Pontificum. Writing about the desire of some of the faithful for the form of the Sacred Liturgy existing before the post-Conciliar reforms, he affirms: Many people who clearly accepted the binding character of the Second Vatican Council, and were faithful to the Pope and the Bishops, nonetheless also desired to recover the form of the sacred liturgy that was dear to them. This occurred above all because in many places celebrations were not faithful to the prescriptions of the new Missal, but the latter actually was understood as authorizing or even requiring creativity, which frequently led to deformations of the liturgy which were hard to bear. I am speaking from experience, since I too lived through that period with all its hopes and its confusion. And I have seen how arbitrary deformations of the liturgy caused deep pain to individuals totally rooted in the faith of the Church. “Molte persone, che accettavano chiaramente il carattere vincolante del Concilio Vaticano II e che erano fedeli al Papa e ai Vescovi, desideravano tuttavia anche ritrovare la forma, a loro cara, della sacra Liturgia; questo avvenne anzitutto perché in molti luoghi non si celebrava in modo fedele alle prescrizioni del nuovo Messale, ma esso veniva addirittura inteso come un’autorizzazione o perfino come un obbligo alla creatività, la quale portò spesso a deformazioni della Liturgia al limite del sopportabile. Parlo per esperienza, perché ho vissuto anch’io quel periodo con tutte le sue attese e confusioni. E ho visto quanto profondamente siano state ferite, dalle deformazioni arbitrarie della Liturgia, persone che erano totalmente radicate nella fede della Chiesa.” Benedictus PP. XVI, Epistula “Ad Episcopos Catholicae Ecclesiae Ritus Romani,” Acta Apostolicae Sedis 99 (2007), p. 796. There is no doubt that, in many places, at the time of the post-Conciliar reform of the Sacred Liturgy, a lack of discipline was found and many abuses were introduced. Blessed Pope John Paul II, as has been noted before, confronted the abuses regarding the celebration of the Sacrament of Penance in his first Encyclical Letter Redemptor Hominis. Also, in his last Encyclical Letter Ecclesia de Eucharistia, published on Holy Thursday of 2003, he once again confronted liturgical abuses. Commenting on the benefits of the post-Conciliar liturgical reform, he also noted the deficiencies which have followed it, with these words: Unfortunately, alongside these lights, there are also shadows. In some places the practice of Eucharistic adoration has been almost completely abandoned. In various parts of the Church abuses have occurred, leading to confusion with regard to sound faith and Catholic doctrine concerning this wonderful sacrament. At times one encounters an extremely reductive understanding of the Eucharistic mystery. Stripped of its sacrificial meaning, it is celebrated as if it were simply a fraternal banquet. Furthermore, the necessity of the ministerial priesthood, grounded in apostolic succession, is at times obscured and the sacramental nature of the Eucharist is reduced to its mere effectiveness as a form of proclamation. “Dolendum tamen est quod iuxta lucida haec umbrae non desunt. Etenim est ubi fere tota neglegentia cultus adorationis eucharisticae deprehendatur. Accedunt in hoc vel illo ecclsiali ambitu abusus qui ad rectam obscurandam fidem doctrinamque catholicam super hoc mirabili Sacramento aliquid conferunt. Nonnumquam reperitur intellectus valde circumscriptus Mysterii eucharistici. Sua enim significatione et vi sacrificii destitutum, mysterium retinetur tamquam si sensum ac momentum alicuius fraterni convivii non excedat. Praeterea sacerdotii ministerialis necessitas, quae successioni apostolicae innititur, nonnumquam absconditur atque eucharistiae sacramentalitas ad solam nuntiationis efficacitatem redigitur.” Ioannes Paulus PP. II, Litterae Encyclicae Ecclesia de Eucharistia, “de Eucharistia eiusque necessitudine cum Ecclesia,” 17 aprilis 2003, p. 439, no. 10. English version: Pope John Paul II, Encyclicals, Trivandrum, Kerala, India: Carmel International Publishing House, 2005, pp. 9-10. The pressing concern of the Supreme Pontiff is most evident. In fact, at the end of the introductory part of the Encyclical Letter Ecclesia de Eucharistia he declared: It is my hope that the present Encyclical Letter will effectively help to banish the dark clouds of unacceptable doctrine and practice, so that the Eucharist will continue to shine forth in all its radiant mystery. “Litteras has Encyclicas Nostras conducere efficaciter posse confidimus ut doctrinarum umbrae dissipentur et usus reprobati submoveantur, unde omni in sui mysterii fulgore Eucharistia resplendere pergat.” Ibid ., p. 439, no. 10. English version: Ibid., p. 10. Toward the end of the Encyclical Letter, Blessed Pope John Paul II writes again about the abuses introduced with the post-Conciliar reform, in the perspective of the responsibility of priests for the correct celebration of the Sacred Liturgy. He makes an urgent appeal “that the liturgical norms for the celebration of the Eucharist be observed with great fidelity.” “ut in eucharistica Celebratione magna quidem fidelitate liturgicae observentur regulae.” Ibid., p. 468, no. 52. English version: Ibid., p. 39. In this context, he requested the competent Dicasteries of the Roman Curia “to prepare a more specific document, including prescriptions of a juridical nature,” “ut proprium appararent documentum cum monitionibus etiam generis iuridici.” Ibid., p. 468, no. 52. on the liturgical norms and their profound meaning, which we may define, in a summary manner, respect for the divine right. Thus, Blessed Pope John Paul II concluded the discussion of the norms of the discipline of the Sacred Liturgy with these words: No one is permitted to undervalue the mystery entrusted to our hands: it is too great for anyone to feel free to treat it lightly and with disregard for its sacredness and its universality. “Nulli quidem parvi pendere licet Mysterium nostris manibus concreditum: maius quidem illud est quam ut quisquam sibi permittat proprio id arbitratu tractare, unde nec sacra eius natura observetur nec universalis ratio.”Ibid., p. 468, no. 52. English version: Ibid., p. 40. As he had done in his first Encyclical Letter, so in his last, he teaches us the divine right, the ius divinum of our worship, in accord with the objective reality of our relationship with God. On March 25, 2004, the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, published the document requested by Blessed Pope John Paul II, the Instruction Redemptionis Sacramentum “On certain matters to be observed or to be avoided regarding the Most Holy Eucharist.” Congregatio de Cultu Divino et Disciplina Sacramentorum, Instructio Redemptionis Sacramentum, “de quibusdam observandis et vitandis circa sanctissimam Eucharistiam,” 25 martii 2004, Acta Apostolicae Sedis 96 (2004), pp. 549-601. English version: Vatican Polyglot Press. The eighth and last chapter of the Instruction treats remedies of the delicts and abuses in the celebration of the Sacred Liturgy. After having listed the most serious delicts and the relative sanctions, Cf. Ibid., pp. 597-598, nos. 172-173. the Instruction treats other abuses, indicating that are not to be considered “of little account,” but “are to be numbered among the other abuses to be carefully avoided and corrected.” “leviter ... inter eos abusus sedulo vitandos et corrigendos adnumerentur.”Ibid., p. 598, n. 174. The Instruction then indicates that all liturgical norms are to be observed and the necessity of the correction of errors: The things set forth in this Instruction obviously do not encompass all the violations against the Church and its discipline that are defined in the canons, in the liturgical laws and in other norms of the Church for the sake of the teaching of the Magisterium or sound tradition. Where something wrong has been committed, it is to be corrected according to the norm of law. “Quae in hac Instructione exponuntur, ut patet, haud omnes contra Ecclesiam eiusque disciplinam referunt violationes, quae in canonibus, in legibus liturgicis atque in aliis normis Ecclesiae ob doctrinam Magisterii sanamve traditionem definiuntur. Ubi quid mali patratum est, corrigendum erit ad normam iuris.” Ibid., p. 598, no. 175. The right attention to liturgical norms does not constitute a sort of legalism or rubricism, but an act of profound respect and love for our Lord who has given us the gift of divine worship, an act of profound love which has as its irreplaceable foundation the respect for the divine right. Conclusion I hope that this brief reflection on the ius divinum and the Sacred Liturgy has indicated the necessity of beginning every consideration of the Sacred Liturgy in the context of the objective relationship of God with man, a relationship which demands the worship of God, on the part of man, as God Himself has taught in the Sacred Scriptures and in the Tradition. In other words, every consideration regarding Sacred Worship must be essentially theo-centric. In this sense, I also hope that the reflection has underlined the fundamental disposition of man in the act worship of God, that is, care to offer worship to God in the manner that God himself asks. Father Nicola Bux has observed: What more is there to say? The Church has established the matters that are to be observed in the liturgy and those that are not to be done, but the crisis and the uncertainty of the authority, and of Church and liturgical discipline, connected to the conviction that to manipulate Sacred Liturgy is not a serious sin, renders the norms a dead letter. This follows precisely from having trampled upon the divine right and the juridical dimension of the liturgy. “Che dire di più? La Chiesa ha stabilito le cose che si devono osservare nella liturgia e quelle che non si devono fare, ma la crisi e l’incertezza dell’autorità e della disciplina ecclesiale e liturgica, unite alla convinzione che manipolare il culto non sia peccato grave, rendono le norme lettera morta. Questo dipende proprio dall’aver conculcato il diritto divino e la dimensione giuridica della liturgia.” Nicola Bux, Come andare a Messa e non perdere la Fede, p. 43. It is in the liturgical act, above all, that man must put into the practice the way of the Beatitude, the poverty of spirit which recognizes the Lord as Creator of the world and Lord of history, and with humility and total fidelity offers to him due worship. Raymond Leo Card. Burke Prefect of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT 18 PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT 19