CARDINAL SARAH'S POWERFUL LETTER ON THE LITURGY & FATHER A. SCHMEMANN ON THEOLOGY AND THE EUCHARIST

Cardinal Robert Sarah has the reputation of being a "right-winger" by those who wish to reduce everything to politics.   However, he was made prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship by Pope Francis who has, in my view, the mistaken reputation for being a liberal.  One of Pope Francis' favourite themes is that there is great diversity in the Catholic Church, and that the bishops represent that diversity; while it is the function, the service of the pope to represent and to foster unity.  Both diversity and unity are signs of the Holy Spirit's presence in the Church.   In the following exerpts from an interview with Cardinal Sarah, you can see how he shares with Pope Francis a recognition of diversity, even while his own view of liturgy is theologically coherent, following the line of Pope Benedict.  Nevertheless, he will move to reconciliation of the different groupings in the Church.  You can see why Pope Francis chose him.

my source: Aleteia
 "Vatican II never asked us to reject the past and abandon the Mass of St. Pius V, which spawned many saints, nor discard Latin. But at the same time we must promote the liturgical reform sought by the Council itself.
 The liturgy is the special place where we meet God face-to-face, bring Him our whole life, our work, and make an offering of all this to his glory. We cannot celebrate the liturgy while taking up arms: carrying on our shoulders weapons of hate, combat, resentment. Jesus Himself said, "Before presenting your offering, first be reconciled to your brother." In this "face-to-face" with God, our heart must be pure, free of all hatred, all rancor. Each person must remove from his heart anything that might cast a shadow on this meeting. This involves respecting everyone’s sensitivity. 

Yes, this is the meaning of the motu proprio Summorum Pontificum (July 2007, ed.) Benedict XVI put a lot of energy and hope into this work. Alas, he was not totally successful because people "clung" to their specific rite and mutually excluded each other. In the Church, everyone should be able to celebrate according to his or her own sensitivity. It is one of the conditions of reconciliation. Attention should also be paid to the beauty of the liturgy, its sacredness. The Eucharist is not a "dinner with friends", it is a sacred mystery. If it is celebrated with fervor and beauty, an understanding will certainly be reached. However, we must not forget that it is God who reconciles, and this will take time. 

The Pope is our father. We owe him respect, affection and trust (even if criticism does not seem to bother him). Reading certain documents or statements, one might get the impression that he does not respect the doctrine. Personally, I fully trust him and I encourage all Christians to do the same. You have to be serene and calm as he sails the boat. Jesus is with him, He who said to Peter: "I have prayed for you, that your faith may … strengthen your brothers.” A conclave is an action of God, it is God who gives a Pope to the Church. God gave us Francis to lead the Church today."

Cardinal Sarah’s Powerful LetterAvailable

in English! published 12 August 2015 by Corpus Christi Watershed 406 Robert Cardinal SARAH ROBERT CARDINAL SARAH, Prefect of the Congregation for the Divine Worship, published a powerful document on 12 June 2015 in L’Osservatore Romano. The original was in Italian and numerous translations soon appeared, but not all were of a high quality. 1For decades, ADOREMUS BULLETIN has provided access to official documents. Recently, they uploaded an English translation by Christopher Ruff, and the table below allows comparison between his excellent work and the original Italian.Cardinal Sarah’s statements about ad orientem for the Penitential Rite, Gloria, Orations, and Eucharistic Prayer caused a worldwide sensation! 2   It’s the eighth paragraph, which begins “contrary to what has sometimes been maintained…”|

FIFTY YEARS AFTER its promulgation by Pope Paul VI, will the Second Vatican Council’s Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy finally be read? Sacrosanctum Concilium is not in fact a simple catalogue of “recipes” for reform, but a true and proper Magna Carta for all liturgical action. In that Constitution, the Ecumenical Council gives us a masterful lesson in methodology. Far from contenting itself with a disciplinary and external approach to the liturgy, the Council summons us to contemplate the liturgy in its essence. The Church’s practice always flows from what she receives and contemplates from Revelation. Pastoral practice cannot be divorced from doctrine.

.

In the Church, “action is directed to contemplation” (cf. §2). The conciliar Constitution invites us to rediscover the Trinitarian origin of the work of the liturgy. Indeed, the Council affirms continuity between the mission of Christ the Redeemer and the liturgical mission of the Church. “Just as Christ was sent by the Father, so also he sent the apostles,” so that “by means of sacrifice and sacraments, around which the entire liturgical life revolves” they might “accomplish the work of salvation” (§6).

The liturgy in action is thus none other than the work of Christ in action. The liturgy is in its essence actio Christi: “the work of Christ the Lord in redeeming mankind and giving perfect glory to God” (§5). He is the high priest, the true subject, the true protagonist of the liturgy (cf. §7). If this vital principle is not embraced in faith, one risks reducing the liturgy to a human action, to the community’s celebration of itself.

On the contrary, the true work of the Church consists in entering into the action of Christ, participating intimately in the mission he has received from the Father. Thus “the fullness of divine worship was given to us,” because “his humanity, united with the person of the Word, was the instrument of our salvation” (§5). The Church, the Body of Christ, must in turn become an instrument in the hands of the Word.

.

This is the ultimate meaning of the key concept of the conciliar Constitution, participatio actuosa. For the Church, this participation consists in becoming an instrument of Christ the Priest, so as to participate in his Trinitarian mission. The Church participates actively in the liturgical work of Christ insofar as she is his instrument. In this sense, language about the “celebrating community” can carry a degree of ambiguity requiring true caution (cf. the Instruction Redemptoris sacramentum, §42). Participatio actuosa must not be understood, therefore, as the need to do something. On this point the teaching of the Council has often been distorted. It is a question, rather, of allowing Christ to take hold of us and to associate us with his sacrifice.

Liturgical participation must therefore be understood as a grace from Christ who “always associates the Church with himself” (Sacrosanctum Concilium, 7). It is he who takes the initiative, who has primacy. The Church “calls to her Lord, and through Him offers worship to the Eternal Father” (§7).

.

The priest must thus become this instrument that allows Christ to shine through. As our Holy Father Pope Francis recently recalled, the celebrant is not the host of a show, he must not seek the affirmation of the assembly, standing before them as if they were called to enter into dialogue primarily with him. To enter into the spirit of the Council means—on the contrary—to efface oneself, to renounce the spotlight.

.

Contrary to what has sometimes been maintained, it is in full conformity with the conciliar Constitution—indeed, it is entirely fitting—for everyone, priest and congregation, to turn together to the East during the penitential rite, the singing of the Gloria, the orations, and the Eucharistic prayer, in order to express the desire to participate in the work of worship and redemption accomplished by Christ. This practice could well be established in cathedrals, where liturgical life must be exemplary (cf. §41).

.

Of course it is understood that there are other parts of the Mass in which the priest, acting in persona Christi Capitis, enters into nuptial dialogue with the assembly. But this face-to-face has no other purpose than to lead to a tete-à-tete with God, which, through the grace of the Holy Spirit, will become a heart-to-heart. The Council thus proposes additional means to favor participation: “acclamations, responses, psalmody, antiphons and songs, as well as…actions, gestures, and bodily attitudes” (§30).

A hasty and all-too-human reading of the Constitution has led to the conclusion that the faithful must be kept constantly busy. The contemporary Western way of thinking, shaped by technology and dazzled by the media, has wished to turn the liturgy into a lucrative production. In this spirit, many have tried to make the celebrations festive. Prompted by pastoral motives, liturgical ministers sometimes stage celebrations into which elements of worldly entertainment are introduced. Have we not witnessed a proliferation of testimonials, acts, and applause? It is imagined that this will foster the participation of the faithful, when in fact it reduces the liturgy to a human plaything. 

.

.

“Silence is not a virtue, noise is not a sin, it is true,” says Thomas Merton, “but the turmoil and confusion and constant noise of modern society [or of some African Eucharistic liturgies] are the expression of the ambiance of its greatest sins—its godlessness, its despair. A world of propaganda, of endless argument, vituperation, criticism, or simply of chatter, is a world without anything to live for…. Mass becomes racket and confusion; prayers—an exterior or interior noise” (Thomas Merton, The Sign of Jonas [San Diego: Harcourt, Inc., 1953, 1981], passim). 

.

We run the real risk of leaving no room for God in our celebrations, falling into the temptation of the Israelites in the desert. They sought to create a cult of worship limited to their own measure and reach, and let us not forget that they ended up prostrate before the idol of the golden calf.

The hour has come to listen to the Council. The liturgy is “above all things the worship of the divine majesty” (§33). It can form and teach us only insofar as it is completely ordered to divine worship and the glorification of God. The liturgy truly places us in the presence of divine transcendence. True participation means the renewal in us of that “amazement” that St. John Paul II held in such high regard (cf. Ecclesia de Eucharistia, §6). This sacred amazement, this joyous reverence, requires our silence before the divine majesty. We often forget that sacred silence is one of the means indicated by the Council to foster participation.

If the liturgy is the work of Christ, is it necessary for the celebrant to interject his own comments? We must remember that when the Missal authorizes commentary, this must not become a worldly, human discourse, a more or less subtle pronouncement on current events, or a banal greeting to those present, but rather a very brief exhortation to enter into the mystery (cf. General Introduction of the Roman Missal, §50).

As for the homily, it too is a liturgical act which has its own rules. The participatio actuosa in the work of Christ presupposes that one leaves behind the profane world in order to enter into “sacred action surpassing all others” (Sacrosanctum Concilium, §7). In fact, “we claim somewhat arrogantly to remain in the human sphere so as to enter into the divine” (Robert Sarah, God or Nothing, Ignatius Press, Chapter IV).

In this sense it is deplorable that the sanctuary in our churches is not strictly reserved for divine worship, that people enter it in worldly garb, that the sacred space is not clearly delineated by the architecture. And since, as the Council teaches, Christ is present in his word when it is proclaimed, it is equally harmful when readers are not dressed in a way that shows they are pronouncing not human words, but the Word of God. 

.

The liturgy is a fundamentally mystical and contemplative reality, and thus beyond the reach of our human action; even participatio is a grace from God. It presupposes on our part openness to the mystery being celebrated. For this reason the Constitution encourages full understanding of the rites (cf. §34) and at the same time prescribes that “the faithful…be able to say or to sing together in Latin those parts of the Ordinary of the Mass which pertain to them” (§54). 

.

.

In reality, an understanding of the rites is not achieved by human reason left to itself, as if it could grasp everything, understand everything, master everything. An understanding of the sacred rites is the fruit of the sensus fidei, which exercises living faith through symbol and understands more by affinity than by concept. Such understanding presupposes that one draws near to the mystery with humility.

. 

.

But will we have the courage to follow the Council all the way to this point? Yet it is only such a reading, illumined by faith, which constitutes the foundation for evangelization. Indeed, “the liturgy… shows forth the Church to those who are outside as a sign lifted up among the nations, under which the scattered children of God may be gathered together” (§2).

It must cease to be a place of disobedience to the prescriptions of the Church. More specifically, the liturgy cannot be an occasion for divisions among Christians. Dialectical readings of Sacrosanctum Concilium, or the hermeneutics of rupture in one sense or another, are not the fruit of a spirit of faith.

The Council did not intend to break from the liturgical forms inherited from tradition – indeed, it desired to deepen them. The Constitution establishes that “any new forms adopted should in some way grow organically from forms already existing” (§23). In this sense, it is necessary that those who celebrate according to the usus antiquior do so without a spirit of opposition, and thus in the spirit of Sacrosanctum Concilium.

By the same token, it would be a mistake to consider the extraordinary form of the Roman Rite as deriving from a different theology than that of the reformed liturgy. And one could hope that a future edition of the Missal might include the penitential rite and the offertory of the usus antiquior, so as to underscore the fact that the two liturgical forms shed light one upon the other, in continuity and without opposition.

. 

+ ROBERT CARDINAL SARAH 

12 June 2015

If we live in this spirit, the liturgy will cease to be the locus of rivalries and criticisms, and we will be brought at last to participate actively in that liturgy “which is celebrated in the holy city of Jerusalem toward which we journey as pilgrims, where Christ is sitting at the right hand of God, a minister of the holies and of the true tabernacle” (§8). 

+ ROBERT CARDINAL SARAH 

12 June 2015

This English translation was created by Christopher Ruff, courtesy of the ADOREMUS BULLETIN website. Priests considering ad orientem may wish to obtain the Jogues Missal for their pews, since it contains color images of a priest celebrating the way Cardinal Sarah recommends. This can help congregations “adjust” to ad orientem.

UPDATE : The Catholic World Report has posted a translation by Michael J. Miller.

NOTES FROM THIS ARTICLE:

1   Several appeared to have been created by means of Google Translate. Others were only excerpts. 

2   Readers will also want to bookmark Cardinal Sarah’s Top Six Liturgy Quotes.

Ad Orientem, Robert Cardinal Sarah, Silenziosa azione del cuore, The Silent Action of the Heart

Cardeal Sarah: Um discernimento teológico nos permite ver em nosso tempo duas ameaças inesperadas(quase como duas “bestas do apocalipse”) localizadas em lados opostos: por um lado, a idolatria da liberdade ocidental; do outro, o fundamentalismo islâmico: secularismo ateísta versus fanatismo religioso.

A voz da África clama no deserto – o discurso do Cardeal Sarah no Sínodo.

Temos a honra de divulgar a íntegra da intervenção do eminentíssimo Cardeal Robert Sarah, prefeito da Congregação para o Culto Divino e a Disciplina dos Sacramentos — tradução de nossa colaboradora Teresa Maria Freixinho — na aula do Sínodo sobre a Família atualmente em curso em Roma (destaques do original).

Sua Santidade, Eminências, Excelências, participantes do Sínodo, proponho essas três reflexões:

1) Mais transparência e respeito entre nós

Sinto uma forte necessidade de invocar o Espírito da Verdade e do Amor, a fonte de parresia ao falar e humildade ao ouvir, o Único capaz de criar a verdadeira harmonia na pluralidade.

Digo francamente que no Sínodo anterior, sentia-se, em diversos temas, a tentação de ceder à mentalidade do mundo secularizado e do Ocidente individualista. Reconhecer as supostas “realidades da vida” como um locus theologicus [lugar teológico] significa desistir da esperança no poder transformador da fé e do Evangelho.

O Evangelho que outrora transformava culturas agora está em perigo de ser transformado por elas. Além disso, alguns dos procedimentos utilizados não pareciam visar o enriquecimento da discussão e comunhão tanto quanto o fizeram para promover uma maneira de ver típica de certos grupos marginais das igrejas abastadas. Essa mentalidade é contrária a uma Igreja pobre e a um sinal alegremente evangélico e profético de contradição ao espírito do mundo. Não se pode compreender que algumas declarações que não encontram o consenso da maioria qualificada do último Sínodo ainda tenham entrado na Relatio e, em seguida, na Lineamenta e no Instrumentum laboris, enquanto outras questões candentes e muito atuais (como, por exemplo, a ideologia de gênero) foram ignoradas.

Portanto, a primeira esperança é que, em nosso trabalho, haja mais liberdade, transparência e objetividade. Por isso, seria proveitoso publicar os resumos das intervenções, para facilitar a discussão e evitar qualquer preconceito ou discriminação na aceitação dos pronunciamentos dos Padres Sinodais.

2) Discernimento da história e dos espíritos

Uma segunda esperança: Que o Sínodo honre a sua missão histórica e não se limite a falar somente sobre determinadas questões pastorais (como, por exemplo, a eventual comunhão aos divorciados e recasados), mas auxilie o Santo Padre a enunciar claramente determinadas verdades e dar orientação útil em nível global. Isso porque há novos desafios em relação ao sínodo celebrado em 1980. Um discernimento teológico nos permite ver em nosso tempo duas ameaças inesperadas(quase como duas “bestas do apocalipse”) localizadas em lados opostos: por um lado, a idolatria da liberdade ocidental; do outro, o fundamentalismo islâmico: secularismo ateísta versus fanatismo religioso. Para usar um slogan, encontramo-nos entre “a ideologia de gênero e o ISIS”. Massacres islâmicos e exigências libertárias normalmente disputam a primeira página dos jornais. (Lembremo-nos do que aconteceu no último dia 26 de junho!). Desses dois radicalismos surgem duas ameaças maiores para a família: sua desintegração subjetivista no Ocidente secularizado através do divórcio rápido e fácil, o aborto, as uniões homossexuais, a eutanásia, etc. (cf. Teoria de gênero, o ‘Femen’, o lobby LGBT, a IPPF…). Por outro lado, a pseudo-família do Islã ideologizado, que legitima a poligamia, a subserviência feminina, a escravidão sexual, o casamento infantil etc. (cf. Al Qaeda, Isis, Boko Haram ...)

Várias pistas nos possibilitam intuir a mesma origem demoníaca desses dois movimentos. Diversamente do Espírito da Verdade, que promove a comunhão na diversidade (perichoresis), esses movimentos estimulam a confusão (homo-gamy) ou subordinação (poly-gamy). Além disso, eles exigem uma regra universal e totalitária, são violentamente intolerantes, destruidores de famílias, da sociedade e da Igreja e são abertamente cristofóbicos.

“Não estamos lutando contra a carne e o sangue…” Precisamos ser inclusivos e acolhedores a tudo o que é humano; mas o que vem do Inimigo não pode e não deve ser assimilado. Não se pode unir Cristo e Belial! As ideologias homossexuais e abortistas ocidentais e o fanatismo islâmico são hoje em dia o que o Nazi-fascismo e o Comunismo foram no século XX.

3) Proclamar e servir à beleza da Monogamia e da Família

Deparados com esses dois desafios mortais e sem precedentes (“homo-gamia” e “poli-gamia”) a Igreja precisa promover uma verdadeira “epifania da Família.” O Papa (como porta-voz da Igreja) pode contribuir para ambos, e os bispos e pastores do rebanho cristão podem fazê-lo individualmente: Ou seja, “a Igreja de Deus, que ele obteve com o seu próprio sangue” (Atos: 20:28).

Precisamos proclamar a verdade sem medo, ou seja, o Plano de Deus, que é a monogamia no amor conjugal aberto à vida. Tendo em mente a situação histórica que acabamos de recordar, é imperativo que a Igreja, em seu cume, declare de maneira definitiva a vontade do Criador a respeito do matrimônio. Quantas pessoas de boa vontade e senso comum se uniriam nesse ato luminoso de coragem conduzido pela Igreja!

Juntamente com uma Palavra forte e clara do Supremo Magistério, os Pastores têm a missão de auxiliar os nossos contemporâneos a descobrir a beleza da família cristã. Para lograr esse objetivo, é preciso promover tudo o que representa uma verdadeira Iniciação Cristã de adultos, uma vez que a crise no matrimônio é essencialmente uma crise de Deus, mas também uma crise de fé, e isso é uma iniciação cristã infantil. Em seguida, precisamos discernir aquelas realidades que o Espírito Santo já está suscitando para revelar a Verdade da Família como uma comunhão íntima na diversidade (homem e mulher), que é generosa no dom da vida. Nós, bispos, temos o dever urgente de reconhecer e promover os carismas, movimentos e realidades eclesiais em que a Família é verdadeiramente revelada, este prodígio de harmonia, amor de vida e esperança na Eternidade, esse berço de fé e escola de caridade. E há tantas outras realidades oferecidas pela Providência, juntamente com o Concílio Vaticano II, em que este milagre é oferecido.

 fonte

L’intervention du cardinal Sarah au synode romain sur la famille

 

Merci à Yves Daoudal qui a donné une traduction de l’intervention du cardinal Sarah dont il était baucoup question ces derniers temps. Yves Daoudal indique que cette traduction n’est pas parfaite et s’en excuse d’avance. Nous la reproduisons dans son intégralité:

Votre Sainteté, Éminences, participants du Synode,

Je propose ces trois pensées :

1. Plus de transparence et de respect entre nous.

Je ressens un profond besoin d’invoquer l’Esprit de Vérité et d’Amour, la source de la parrhésia dans la parole et de l’humilité dans l’écoute, qui seul est capable de créer une véritable harmonie dans la pluralité.

Je dirai franchement que dans le précédent Synode, sur diverses questions, on a ressenti la tentation de céder à la mentalité du monde sécularisé et individualiste de l’Occident. Reconnaître ce qu’on appelle les « réalités de la vie »comme un locus theologicus signifie abandonner tout espoir dans le pouvoir transformant de la foi et de l’Evangile. L’Évangile qui a autrefois transformé les cultures est maintenant en danger d’être transformé par elles.

En outre, certaines des procédures utilisées ne paraissaient pas destinées à enrichir la discussion et la communion autant qu’elles faisaient la promotion d’une façon de voir typique d’une certaine frange des Eglises les plus riches. Ceci est contraire à une Église pauvre, un signe de contradiction joyeusement évangélique et prophétique pour la mondanité. On ne comprend pas non plus pourquoi certaines déclarations qui ne sont pas partagées par la majorité qualifiée du dernier Synode se sont retrouvées dans la Relatio puis dans les Lineamenta et l’Instrumentum laborisalors que d’autres questions pressantes et très actuelles (comme l’idéologie du genre) sont ignorées.

Mon premier espoir est donc que, dans notre travail, il y ait davantage de liberté, de transparence et d’objectivité. Pour cela, il serait bénéfique de publier les résumés des interventions, afin de faciliter la discussion et éviter tout préjudice ou discrimination dans la réception des déclarations des pères du synode. (1)

2. Le discernement de l’histoire et des esprits

Un deuxième espoir : que le Synode honore sa mission historique et ne se limite pas lui-même à parler de certaines questions pastorales (comme la possible communion pour les divorcés et remariés) mais aide le Saint-Père à énoncer clairement des vérités et une réelle direction au niveau mondial. Car il y a de nouveaux défis par rapport au synode de 1980. Un discernement théologique nous permet de voir à notre époque deux menaces inattendues (presque comme deux « bêtes de l’apocalypse ») situées sur des pôles opposés : d’une part, l’idolâtrie de la liberté occidentale ; de l’autre, le fondamentalisme islamique : laïcisme athée contre fanatisme religieux. Pour utiliser un slogan, nous nous trouvons entre « l’idéologie du genre et l’Etat islamique ». Les massacres islamiques et les exigences libertaires se disputent régulièrement la première page des journaux. (Souvenons-nous de ce qui s’est passé le 26 juin ! (2)) De ces deux radicalisations se lèvent les deux grandes menaces contre la famille : sa désintégration subjectiviste dans l’Occident sécularisé, par le divorce rapide et facile, l’avortement, les unions homosexuelles, l’euthanasie, etc. (cf. la gender theory, les Femen, le lobby LGBT, le Planning familial…). D’autre part, la pseudo-famille de l’islam idéologisé qui légitime la polygamie, l’asservissement des femmes, l’esclavage sexuel, le mariage des enfants, etc. (cf. al-Qaida, État islamique, Boko Haram…).

Plusieurs indices nous permettent de percevoir la même origine démoniaque de ces deux mouvements. Contrairement à l’Esprit de Vérité qui favorise la communion dans la distinction (périchorèse), ils encouragent la confusion (homo-gamie) ou la subordination (poly-gamie). En outre, ils postulent une loi universelle et totalitaire, sont violemment intolérants, destructeurs des familles, de la société et de l’Eglise, et sont ouvertement christianophobes.

« Nous ne nous battons pas contre des créatures de chair et de sang… » Nous devons être inclusifs et accueillants à tout ce qui est humain ; mais ce qui vient de l’Ennemi ne peut pas et ne doit pas être assimilé. On ne peut pas unir le Christ et Belial ! Ce que le nazisme et le communisme étaient au XXe siècle, l’homosexualité occidentale et les idéologies abortives et le fanatisme islamique le sont aujourd’hui.

3. Proclamer et servir la beauté de la monogamie et de la famille

Face à ces deux défis mortels et sans précédent (homo-gamie et poly-gamie), l’Eglise doit promouvoir une véritable« épiphanie de la famille » (3). Aux deux le Pape (comme porte-parole de l’Eglise) peut contribuer, ainsi que chacun des évêques et pasteurs du troupeau chrétien : c’est-à-dire « l’Eglise de Dieu, qu’il a acquise par son sang » (Actes 20, 28).

Nous devons proclamer la vérité sans peur, c’est-à-dire le Plan de Dieu, qui est la monogamie dans l’amour conjugal ouvert à la vie. Gardant à l’esprit la situation historique que je viens de rappeler, il est urgent que l’Eglise, à son sommet, déclare de façon définitive la volonté du Créateur en ce qui concerne le mariage. Combien de gens de bonne volonté et de bon sens se joindraient à cet acte lumineux de courage effectué par l’Eglise !

Avec une Parole forte et claire du Magistère Suprême, les pasteurs ont la mission d’aider nos contemporains à découvrir la beauté de la famille chrétienne. Pour cela, il faut d’abord promouvoir tout ce que représente une véritable initiation des adultes, car la crise du mariage est essentiellement une crise de Dieu, mais aussi une crise de la foi, et là c’est l’initiation des enfants. Alors nous devons discerner ces réalités que le Saint-Esprit est déjà en train de faire monter pour révéler la vérité de la famille comme une intime communion dans la diversité (homme et femme), et qui est généreuse dans le don de la vie. Nous, évêques, avons le devoir urgent de reconnaître et promouvoir les charismes, les mouvements, et les réalités ecclésiales dans lesquels la famille se révèle vraiment, ce prodige d’harmonie, d’amour de la vie et d’espérance en l’Eternité, ce berceau de la foi et cette école de charité. Et il y a tant de réalités offertes par la Providence, avec le concile Vatican II, dans lesquelles ce miracle est offert.

(1) Le pape l’a interdit (note YD).

(2) Attentat de Sousse en Tunisie, 39 morts. Arrêt de la Cour suprême américaine légalisant le soi-disant mariage homosexuel sur tout le territoire des Etats-Unis (note YD).

(3) Benoît XVI, le 6 juin 2012 (note YD).

source 

¿QUÉ TIPO DE MISERICORDIA PASTORAL? por el cardenal Robert Sarah, prefecto de la Congregación para el Culto Divino.

¿QUÉ TIPO DE MISERICORDIA PASTORAL?

por el cardenal Robert Sarah, prefecto de la Congregación para el Culto Divino.
Del primer capítulo de la obra: “África, nueva patria de Cristo. Contribuciones de pastores africanos al sínodo sobre la familia”*. 

Los “Lineamenta”* (N. de la R: es decir, el documento oficial que surgió tras la primera sesión del sínodo y que es la base para una ulterior discusión) indican que en el contexto eclesial mucho más amplio descrito por la “Evangelii gaudium” el nuevo recorrido marcado por el sínodo extraordinario tiene como punto de partida las “periferias existenciales”, las cuales requieren un enfoque pastoral caracterizado por una “cultura del encuentro capaz de reconocer la obra libre del Señor también fuera de nuestros esquemas habituales y asumir, sin reparos, esa condición de ‘hospital de campaña’ que tanto ayuda al anuncio de la misericordia de Dios” (introducción a las preguntas después de la “Relatio synodi”, primera parte).

La pregunta que hay que plantearse, entonces, es la siguiente: ¿cuáles son estas periferias de la vida en el nuevo contexto socio-cultural que tenemos hoy ante nosotros?

El impacto de la globalización en las culturas humanas ha sido tan destructivo que no sólo las instituciones sociales tradicionales, sino también los valores que las sostienen han sido sacudidos desde sus cimientos. A través del poder político y legislativo (con, por ejemplo, las nuevas leyes que deconstruyen la familia y el matrimonio y especulan sobre la vida humana), del poder financiero (con fondos para el desarrollo condicionados a la adopción de documentos “anti-familia” y “anti-vida”) y especialmente del poder de los medios de comunicación, una ideología relativista se está difundiendo en todas nuestras sociedades contemporáneas.

Libro escrito contra las tesis de Kasper
por once autores, todos ellos obispos
 y arzobispos africanos; entre ellos,
 siete cardenales encabezados por Sarah.

Si nos fiamos del presidente del consejo de las conferencias episcopales europeas, en los países del hemisferio septentrional “la convivencia de hecho es ya la norma”, dato confirmado por los estudios sociológicos. Vivir en una familia cristiana, según los valores del Evangelio, se ha convertido en una situación marginal respecto a la mayoría. Las familias cristianas, en este contexto, son ahora una minoría no sólo numéricamente, sino también sociológicamente. Sufren discriminaciones silenciosas, pero oprimentes e implacables. Todo está contra ellas: los valores dominantes, la presión mediática y cultural, los vínculos financieros, la legislación vigente, etc . Y la propia Iglesia, a través de documentos como los “Lineamenta”, parece que también las estén llevando hacía esa situación.

Si los “Lineamenta” están expresados en el lenguaje que vemos, ¿qué tipo de Iglesia se ocupará de este “pequeño resto”? ¿Quién hará oír la voz misericordiosa del Buen Pastor diciendo repetidamente: “No temas, pequeño grey” (Lc 12, 32)?

¿No hemos encontrado aquí tal vez la verdadera “periferia” de nuestra aldea mundial postmoderna?Esperemos que el próximo sínodo no expulse de la “gruta de Belén” (la Iglesia) a la pequeña familia cristianaque ha encontrado espacio en las fondas de la “Ciudad del rey David” (nuestro mundo globalizado). Las hermosas familias cristianas que están viviendo heroicamente los exigentes valores del Evangelio son hoy las verdaderas periferias de nuestro mundo y de nuestras sociedades, que transcurren la vida como si Dios no existiera.

Además de este “pequeño resto”, hay una segunda categoría que pide en voz alta más atención pastoral. Son las víctimas del sistema postmoderno, que no se dan por vencidas. No se sienten en casa en este mundo sin Dios. Llevan consigo la nostalgia por el calor de la “familia cristiana”, pero sienten que no tienen la fuerza necesaria para volver a ese modo de vida radicalmente evangélico.

Cardenal Sarah

A estas personas les parece que nosotros presentamos hoy una Iglesia rígida, una madre que ya no les entiende y les cierra la puerta en las narices, mientras que otros intentan convencerles de que son juzgados y condenados precisamente por las mismas personas que deberían acogerles y preocuparse por ellos. En lugar de ayudarles a descubrir el horror del pecado y a que pidan ser liberados de él, les ofrecen, sin tener ningún derecho a hacerlo, un tipo de “misericordia” que no tiene otro efecto que dejar que se hundan aún más profundamente en el mal.

Pero estos hermanos y hermanas que han sido realmente heridos por la vida no se dejan engañar. Tienen sed de verdad en sus vidas, no de conmiseración o palabras melifluas. Saben muy bien que son víctimas del sistema globalizado cuyo fin es debilitar y destruir a la Iglesia. No están entre quienes dan voz a las ideologías relativistas que deterioran los cimientos de la doctrina cristiana y anulan la Cruz de Cristo. Se ven a sí mismos como el pecador del que habla San Agustín que, aunque no se asemeja a Dios por haber perdido la impecabilidad, desea por lo menos parecerse a Él en el horror que siente por el pecado. Este, de hecho, es el motivo por el cual no quieren que nadie les impida gritar al cielo: “¿Quién nos dará la salvación?”, “Jesús, hijo de David, ¡ten piedad de mí!”, prometiéndoles en cambio algo que Cristo no ha prometido nunca que daría.

Dios nunca ha cerrado su corazón a estos hermanos y hermanas y tampoco la Iglesia, su sierva, puede hacerlo. Pero, ¿cómo puede asumir la Iglesia un enfoque pastoral de misericordia hacia ellos? Evitando vendar con la comunión sacramental una herida que no ha sido tratada por el sacramento de la reconciliación debidamente recibido.

Si su enfoque pastoral no debe ser la condena, que maltrata a la persona dañada por un herida sangrante, sino más bien la presencia compasiva, entonces la Iglesia no puede hacer creer que ignora la existencia real de las devastaciones causadas por la herida; debe, en cambio, aplicar el bálsamo de su corazón, para que así esta herida pueda ser tratada y vendada en vista de la verdadera sanación.

Esta especie de presencia respetuosa, con el renovado modo de ver las cosas que viene de Dios, nunca llamará “bueno” a algo que es malo o “malo” a algo que es bueno, como recuerda el ritual para la ordenación de los obispos. Se trata de una pastoral de esperanza y de espera, como el padre misericordioso espera al hijo prodigo. Como el Buen Pastor, la Iglesia deberá buscar a los hijos que están lejos, deberá cargarlos sobre sus espaldas, abrazarlos y no volver a lanzarlos sobre las espinas que laceraron sus vidas. Este es el significado de la misericordia pastoral.

__________

El documento surgido tras la primera sesión del sínodo sobre la familia:

> *Lineamenta

Y las líneas de trabajo para la segunda sesión:

> Instrumentum laboris

__________

*Tomado del libro: “África, nueva patria de Cristo. Contribuciones de pastores africanos al sínodo sobre la familia”. Escrito por once autores, todos ellos obispos y arzobispos africanos; entre ellos, siete cardenales, uno de los cuales es de nuevo Sarah, que firma el primero de los ensayos que es el que arriba reproducimos parcialmente. El prólogo del libro ha sido escrito por el cardenal nigeriano Francis Arinze, predecesor de Sarah a la cabeza de la Congregación para el Culto Divino. Traducción en español de Helena Faccia Serrano. Fuente:Infovaticana.com. "Eran cinco; ahora son diecisiete los cardenales anti-Kasper" por Sandro Magister.

http://www.catolicidad.com/

Cardinal Roberto Sarah: Per leggere e applicare la costituzione del Vaticano II sulla sacra liturgia. Cardinal Sarah’s Powerful Letter Available In English!

Cardinal Sarah’s Powerful Letter Available In English!

published 12 August 2015 by Corpus Christi Watershed

OBERT CARDINAL SARAH,Prefect of the Congregation for the Divine Worship, published a powerful document on 12 June 2015 in L’Osservatore Romano. The originalwas in Italian and numerous translations soon appeared, but not all were of a high quality. 1

For decades, ADOREMUS BULLETIN has provided access to official documents. Recently, they uploaded an English translation by Christopher Ruff, and the table below allows comparison between his excellent work and the original Italian.

Cardinal Sarah’s statements about ad orientem for the Penitential Rite, Gloria, Orations, and Eucharistic Prayer caused a worldwide sensation! 2   It’s the eighth paragraph, which begins “contrary to what has sometimes been maintained…”|

INQUANT’ANNI DOPO la sua promulgazione da parte di Papa Paolo VI, si leggerà, infine, la costituzione del concilio Vaticano II sulla sacra liturgia? LaSacrosanctum concilium non è di fatto un semplice catalogo di “ricette” di riforme, ma una vera e propria magna charta di ogni azione liturgica. Il concilio ecumenico ci dà in essa una magistrale lezione di metodo. In effetti, lungi dall’accontentarsi di un approccio disciplinare ed esteriore alla liturgia, il concilio vuole farci contemplare ciò che è nella sua essenza. La pratica della Chiesa deriva sempre da quello che riceve e contempla nella rivelazione. La pastorale non si può disconnettere dalla dottrina.

IFTY YEARS AFTER its promulgation by Pope Paul VI, will the Second Vatican Council’s Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy finally be read? Sacrosanctum Concilium is not in fact a simple catalogue of “recipes” for reform, but a true and properMagna Carta for all liturgical action. In that Constitution, the Ecumenical Council gives us a masterful lesson in methodology. Far from contenting itself with a disciplinary and external approach to the liturgy, the Council summons us to contemplate the liturgy in its essence. The Church’s practice always flows from what she receives and contemplates from Revelation. Pastoral practice cannot be divorced from doctrine.

Nella Chiesa «ciò che proviene dall’azione è ordinato alla contemplazione» (cfr. n. 2). La costituzione conciliare ci invita a riscoprire l’origine trinitaria dell’opera liturgica. In effetti, il concilio stabilisce una continuità tra la missione di Cristo Redentore e la missione liturgica della Chiesa. «Come il Cristo fu inviato dal Padre, così anch’egli ha inviato gli apostoli» affinché «mediante il sacrificio e i sacramenti attorno ai quali gravita tutta la vita liturgica» attuino «l’opera di salvezza» (n. 6). .

In the Church, “action is directed to contemplation” (cf. §2). The conciliar Constitution invites us to rediscover the Trinitarian origin of the work of the liturgy. Indeed, the Council affirms continuity between the mission of Christ the Redeemer and the liturgical mission of the Church. “Just as Christ was sent by the Father, so also he sent the apostles,” so that “by means of sacrifice and sacraments, around which the entire liturgical life revolves” they might “accomplish the work of salvation” (§6).

Attuare la liturgia non è dunque altro che attuare l’opera di Cristo. La liturgia è nella sua essenza actio Christi: l’«opera della redenzione umana e della perfetta glorificazione di Dio» (n. 5). È Lui il grande sacerdote, il vero soggetto, il vero attore della liturgia (cfr. n. 7). Se questo principio vitale non viene accolto nella fede, si rischia di fare della liturgia un’opera umana, un’autocelebrazione della comunità.

The liturgy in action is thus none other than the work of Christ in action. The liturgy is in its essence actio Christi: “the work of Christ the Lord in redeeming mankind and giving perfect glory to God” (§5). He is the high priest, the true subject, the true protagonist of the liturgy (cf. §7). If this vital principle is not embraced in faith, one risks reducing the liturgy to a human action, to the community’s celebration of itself.

Al contrario, l’opera propria della Chiesa consiste nell’entrare nell’azione di Cristo, nell’iscriversi in quell’opera di cui egli ha ricevuto dal Padre la missione. Dunque «ci fu data la pienezza del culto divino», perché «la sua umanità, nell’unità della persona del Verbo, fu strumento della nostra salvezza» (n. 5). La Chiesa, corpo di Cristo, deve quindi divenire a sua volta uno strumento nelle mani del Verbo.

On the contrary, the true work of the Church consists in entering into the action of Christ, participating intimately in the mission he has received from the Father. Thus “the fullness of divine worship was given to us,” because “his humanity, united with the person of the Word, was the instrument of our salvation” (§5). The Church, the Body of Christ, must in turn become an instrument in the hands of the Word.

Questo è il significato ultimo del concetto-chiave della costituzione conciliare: laparticipatio actuosa. Tale partecipazione consiste per la Chiesa nel diventare strumento di Cristo-sacerdote, al fine di partecipare alla sua missione trinitaria. La Chiesa partecipa attivamente all’opera liturgica di Cristo nella misura in cui ne è lo strumento. In tal senso, parlare di “comunità celebrante” non è privo di ambiguità e richiede vera cautela (cfr. Istruzione Redemptoris sacramentum, n. 42). La participatio actuosa non dovrebbe dunque essere intesa come la necessità di fare qualcosa. Su questo punto l’insegnamento del concilio è stato spesso deformato. Si tratta invece di lasciare che Cristo ci prenda e ci associ al suo sacrificio. .

This is the ultimate meaning of the key concept of the conciliar Constitution,participatio actuosa. For the Church, this participation consists in becoming an instrument of Christ the Priest, so as to participate in his Trinitarian mission. The Church participates actively in the liturgical work of Christ insofar as she is his instrument. In this sense, language about the “celebrating community” can carry a degree of ambiguity requiring true caution (cf. the InstructionRedemptoris sacramentum, §42). Participatio actuosa must not be understood, therefore, as the need to do something. On this point the teaching of the Council has often been distorted. It is a question, rather, of allowing Christ to take hold of us and to associate us with his sacrifice.

La participatio liturgica deve perciò essere intesa come una grazia di Cristo che «associa sempre a sé la Chiesa» (Sacrosanctum concilium, n. 7). È Lui ad avere l’iniziativa e il primato. La Chiesa «l’invoca come suo Signore e per mezzo di lui rende il culto all’eterno Padre» (n. 7).	Liturgical participatio must therefore be understood as a grace from Christ who “always associates the Church with himself” (Sacrosanctum Concilium, 7). It is he who takes the initiative, who has primacy. The Church “calls to her Lord, and through Him offers worship to the Eternal Father” (§7).

Il sacerdote deve dunque diventare questo strumento che lascia trasparire Cristo. Come ha da poco ricordato il nostro Papa Francesco, il celebrante non è il presentatore di uno spettacolo, non deve ricercare la simpatia dell’assemblea ponendosi di fronte a essa come il suo interlocutore principale. Entrare nello spirito del concilio significa al contrario cancellarsi, rinunciare a essere il punto focale. .

The priest must thus become this instrument that allows Christ to shine through. As our Holy Father Pope Francis recently recalled, the celebrant is not the host of a show, he must not seek the affirmation of the assembly, standing before them as if they were called to enter into dialogue primarily with him. To enter into the spirit of the Council means—on the contrary—to efface oneself, to renounce the spotlight.

Contrariamente a quanto è stato a volte sostenuto, è del tutto conforme alla costituzione conciliare, è addirittura opportuno che, durante il rito della penitenza, il canto del Gloria, le orazioni e la preghiera eucaristica, tutti, sacerdote e fedeli, si voltino insieme verso Oriente, per esprimere la loro volontà di partecipare all’opera di culto e di redenzione compiuta da Cristo. Questo modo di fare potrebbe opportunamente essere messo in atto nelle cattedrali dove la vita liturgica deve essere esemplare (cfr. n. 41). .

Contrary to what has sometimes been maintained, it is in full conformity with the conciliar Constitution—indeed, it is entirely fitting—for everyone, priest and congregation, to turn together to the East during the penitential rite, the singing of the Gloria, the orations, and the Eucharistic prayer, in order to express the desire to participate in the work of worship and redemption accomplished by Christ. This practice could well be established in cathedrals, where liturgical life must be exemplary (cf. §41).

Ben inteso, ci sono altre parti della messa in cui il sacerdote, agendo in persona Christi Capitis, entra in dialogo nuziale con l’assemblea. Ma questo faccia a faccia non ha altro fine che condurre a un tête-à-tête con Dio che, per mezzo della grazia dello Spirito Santo, diverrà un cuore a cuore. Il concilio propone così altri mezzi per favorire la partecipazione: «le acclamazioni dei fedeli, le risposte, il canto dei salmi, le antifone, i canti, nonché le azioni e i gesti e l’atteggiamento del corpo» (n. 30). .

Of course it is understood that there are other parts of the Mass in which the priest, acting in persona Christi Capitis, enters into nuptial dialogue with the assembly. But this face-to-face has no other purpose than to lead to a tete-à-tete with God, which, through the grace of the Holy Spirit, will become a heart-to-heart. The Council thus proposes additional means to favor participation: “acclamations, responses, psalmody, antiphons and songs, as well as…actions, gestures, and bodily attitudes” (§30).

Una lettura troppo rapida, e soprattutto troppo umana, ha portato a concludere che bisognava far sì che i fedeli fossero costantemente occupati. La mentalità occidentale contemporanea, modellata dalla tecnica e affascinata dai media, ha voluto fare della liturgia un’op era di pedagogia efficace e redditizia. In questo spirito, si è cercato di rendere le celebrazioni conviviali. Gli attori liturgici, animati da motivazioni pastorali, cercano a volte di fare opera didattica introducendo nelle celebrazioni elementi profani e spettacolari. Non si vedono forse fiorire testimonianze, messe in scena e applausi? Si crede così di favorire la partecipazione dei fedeli mentre di fatto si riduce la liturgia a un gioco umano.

A hasty and all-too-human reading of the Constitution has led to the conclusion that the faithful must be kept constantly busy. The contemporary Western way of thinking, shaped by technology and dazzled by the media, has wished to turn the liturgy into a lucrative production. In this spirit, many have tried to make the celebrations festive. Prompted by pastoral motives, liturgical ministers sometimes stage celebrations into which elements of worldly entertainment are introduced. Have we not witnessed a proliferation of testimonials, acts, and applause? It is imagined that this will foster the participation of the faithful, when in fact it reduces the liturgy to a human plaything. .

«Il silenzio non è una virtù, né il rumore un peccato, è vero», dice Thomas Merton, «ma il tumulto, la confusione e il rumore continui nella società moderna o in certe liturgie eucaristiche africane sono l’espressione dell’atmosfera dei suoi peccati più gravi, della sua empietà, della sua disperazione. Un mondo di propaganda, di argomentazioni infinite, di invettive, di critiche, o semplicemente di chiacchiere, è un mondo nel quale la vita non vale la pena di essere vissuta. La messa diviene un baccano confuso; le preghiere un rumore esteriore o interiore» (Thomas Merton, Le signe de Jonas, Ed. Albin Michel, Paris, 1955, p. 322).

“Silence is not a virtue, noise is not a sin, it is true,” says Thomas Merton, “but the turmoil and confusion and constant noise of modern society [or of some African Eucharistic liturgies] are the expression of the ambiance of its greatest sins—its godlessness, its despair. A world of propaganda, of endless argument, vituperation, criticism, or simply of chatter, is a world without anything to live for…. Mass becomes racket and confusion; prayers—an exterior or interior noise” (Thomas Merton, The Sign of Jonas [San Diego: Harcourt, Inc., 1953, 1981], passim). .

Si corre il rischio reale di non lasciare alcun posto a Dio nelle nostre celebrazioni. Incorriamo nella tentazione degli ebrei nel deserto. Essi cercarono di crearsi un culto alla loro misura e alla loro altezza, e non dimentichiamo che finirono prostrati davanti all’idolo del vitello d’oro.	We run the real risk of leaving no room for God in our celebrations, falling into the temptation of the Israelites in the desert. They sought to create a cult of worship limited to their own measure and reach, and let us not forget that they ended up prostrate before the idol of the golden calf.

È tempo di metterci all’ascolto del concilio. La liturgia è «principalmente culto della maestà divina» (n. 33). Ha valore pedagogico nella misura in cui è completamente ordinata alla glorificazione di Dio e al culto divino. La liturgia ci pone realmente alla presenza della trascendenza divina. Partecipazione vera significa rinnovare in noi quello “stupore” che san Giovanni Paolo II teneva in grande considerazione (cfr. Ecclesia de Eucharistia, n. 6). Questo stupore sacro, questo timore gioioso, richiede il nostro silenzio di fronte alla maestà divina. Si dimentica spesso che il silenzio sacro è uno dei mezzi indicati dal concilio per favorire la partecipazione.

The hour has come to listen to the Council. The liturgy is “above all things the worship of the divine majesty” (§33). It can form and teach us only insofar as it is completely ordered to divine worship and the glorification of God. The liturgy truly places us in the presence of divine transcendence. True participation means the renewal in us of that “amazement” that St. John Paul II held in such high regard (cf. Ecclesia de Eucharistia, §6). This sacred amazement, this joyous reverence, requires our silence before the divine majesty. We often forget that sacred silence is one of the means indicated by the Council to foster participation.

Se la liturgia è opera di Cristo, è necessario che il celebrante vi introduca i propri commenti? Ci si deve ricordare che, quando il messale autorizza un intervento, questo non deve diventare un discorso profano e umano, un commento più o meno sottile sull’attualità, o un saluto mondano alle persone presenti, ma una brevissima esortazione a entrare nel mistero (cfr. Presentazione generale del messale romano, n. 50).

If the liturgy is the work of Christ, is it necessary for the celebrant to interject his own comments? We must remember that when the Missal authorizes commentary, this must not become a worldly, human discourse, a more or less subtle pronouncement on current events, or a banal greeting to those present, but rather a very brief exhortation to enter into the mystery (cf. General Introduction of the Roman Missal, §50).

Quanto all’omelia, è essa stessa un atto liturgico che ha le sue proprie regole. Laparticipatio actuosa all’opera di Cristo presuppone che si lasci il mondo profano per entrare nell’«azione sacra per eccellenza» (Sacrosanctum concilium, n. 7). Di fatto, «noi pretendiamo, con una certa arroganza, di restare nell’umano per entrare nel divino» (Robert Sarah, Dieu ou rien, p. 178).

As for the homily, it too is a liturgical act which has its own rules. The participatio actuosa in the work of Christ presupposes that one leaves behind the profane world in order to enter into “sacred action surpassing all others” (Sacrosanctum Concilium, §7). In fact, “we claim somewhat arrogantly to remain in the human sphere so as to enter into the divine” (Robert Sarah, God or Nothing, Ignatius Press, Chapter IV).

In tal senso, è deplorevole che il sacrario delle nostre chiese non sia un luogo strettamente riservato al culto divino, che vi si penetri in abiti profani, che lo spazio sacro non sia chiaramente delimitato dall’architettura. Poiché, come insegna il concilio, Cristo è presente nella sua parola quando questa viene proclamata, è ugualmente deleterio che i lettori non abbiano un abbigliamento appropriato che mostri che non pronunciano parole umane ma una parola divina.

In this sense it is deplorable that the sanctuary in our churches is not strictly reserved for divine worship, that people enter it in worldly garb, that the sacred space is not clearly delineated by the architecture. And since, as the Council teaches, Christ is present in his word when it is proclaimed, it is equally harmful when readers are not dressed in a way that shows they are pronouncing not human words, but the Word of God. .

La liturgia è una realtà fondamentalmente mistica e contemplativa, e di conseguenza fuori dalla portata della nostra azione umana; anche la participatio è una grazia di Dio. Pertanto, presuppone da parte nostra un’apertura al mistero celebrato. Così, la costituzione raccomanda la comprensione piena dei riti (cfr. n. 34) e al tempo stesso prescrive «che i fedeli sappiano recitare e cantare insieme, anche in lingua latina, le parti dell’ordinario della messa che spettano ad essi» (n. 54).

The liturgy is a fundamentally mystical and contemplative reality, and thus beyond the reach of our human action; even participatio is a grace from God. It presupposes on our part openness to the mystery being celebrated. For this reason the Constitution encourages full understanding of the rites (cf. §34) and at the same time prescribes that “the faithful…be able to say or to sing together in Latin those parts of the Ordinary of the Mass which pertain to them” (§54). .

In effetti, la comprensione dei riti non è opera della ragione umana lasciata a se stessa, che dovrebbe cogliere tutto, capire tutto, padroneggiare tutto. La comprensione dei riti sacri è quella del sensus fidei, che esercita la fede vivente attraverso il simbolo e che conosce per sintonia più che per concetto. Questa comprensione presuppone che ci si avvicini al mistero con umiltà. .

In reality, an understanding of the rites is not achieved by human reason left to itself, as if it could grasp everything, understand everything, master everything. An understanding of the sacred rites is the fruit of the sensus fidei, which exercises living faith through symbol and understands more by affinity than by concept. Such understanding presupposes that one draws near to the mystery with humility.

Ma si avrà il coraggio di seguire il concilio fino a questo punto? Una simile lettura, illuminata dalla fede, è però fondamentale per l’evangelizzazione. In effetti, «a coloro che sono fuori essa mostra la Chiesa, come vessillo innalzato di fronte alle nazioni, sotto il quale i figli di Dio dispersi possano raccogliersi» (n. 2). .	But will we have the courage to follow the Council all the way to this point? Yet it is only such a reading, illumined by faith, which constitutes the foundation for evangelization. Indeed, “the liturgy… shows forth the Church to those who are outside as a sign lifted up among the nations, under which the scattered children of God may be gathered together” (§2).

Essa deve smettere di essere un luogo di disobbedienza alle prescrizioni della Chiesa. Più specificatamente, non può essere un’o ccasione di lacerazioni tra cristiani. Le letture dialettiche della Sacrosanctum concilium, le ermeneutiche di rottura in un senso o nell’altro, non sono il frutto di uno spirito di fede.	It must cease to be a place of disobedience to the prescriptions of the Church. More specifically, the liturgy cannot be an occasion for divisions among Christians. Dialectical readings of Sacrosanctum Concilium, or the hermeneutics of rupture in one sense or another, are not the fruit of a spirit of faith.

Il concilio non ha voluto rompere con le forme liturgiche ereditate dalla tradizione, anzi ha voluto approfondirle. La costituzione stabilisce che «le nuove forme scaturiscano organicamente, in qualche maniera, da quelle già esistenti» (n. 23). In tal senso, è necessario che quanti celebrano secondo l’usus antiquiorlo facciano senza spirito di opposizione, e dunque nello spirito della Sacrosanctum concilium.

The Council did not intend to break from the liturgical forms inherited from tradition – indeed, it desired to deepen them. The Constitution establishes that “any new forms adopted should in some way grow organically from forms already existing” (§23). In this sense, it is necessary that those who celebrate according to the usus antiquior do so without a spirit of opposition, and thus in the spirit ofSacrosanctum Concilium.

Allo stesso modo, sarebbe sbagliato considerare la forma straordinaria del rito romano come derivante da un’altra teologia che non sia la liturgia riformata. Sarebbe anche auspicabile che s’inserisse come allegato di una prossima edizione del messale il rito della penitenza e l’offertorio dell’usus antiquior al fine di sottolineare che le due forme liturgiche s’illuminano a vicenda, in continuità e senza opposizione.

By the same token, it would be a mistake to consider the extraordinary form of the Roman Rite as deriving from a different theology than that of the reformed liturgy. And one could hope that a future edition of the Missal might include the penitential rite and the offertory of the usus antiquior, so as to underscore the fact that the two liturgical forms shed light one upon the other, in continuity and without opposition.

Se vivremo in questo spirito, allora la liturgia smetterà di essere il luogo delle rivalità e delle critiche, per farci infine partecipare attivamente a quella liturgia «che viene celebrata nella santa città di Gerusalemme, verso la quale tendiamo come pellegrini, dove il Cristo siede […] quale ministro del santuario» (n. 8). . + ROBERT CARDINAL SARAH 12 June 2015	If we live in this spirit, the liturgy will cease to be the locus of rivalries and criticisms, and we will be brought at last to participate actively in that liturgy “which is celebrated in the holy city of Jerusalem toward which we journey as pilgrims, where Christ is sitting at the right hand of God, a minister of the holies and of the true tabernacle” (§8). + ROBERT CARDINAL SARAH 12 June 2015