[quote="Oneofthewomen, post:7, topic:310189"]
"Unintentional abuse"? :shrug:
What exactly is that?
To be an "abuse", there must be intent, if there is no intent, there is no "abuse".
When did it happen that I can label every little thing I don't particulally like as an "abuse"?:shrug::rolleyes:
Sorry, but I did not receive that memo!
I don't know about a memo, but if someone involved in the liturgy (e.g. a priest or EMHC) does something that is contrary to the rubrics for the Mass, it is a liturgical abuse whether they did it knowingly or not. The liturgy has not been celebrated according to the rubrics, so liturgical abuse has occurred.
Doing it unintentionally doesn't affect the fact of the abuse, only the culpability for it. A trivial analogy would be if I deliberately misspelled a word (for example to cause offense, like calling someone a "womyn" to make fun of her feminism) I would be culpable for that. If I accidentally misspelled a word, there would be no culpability. In either case, however, the word would be misspelled.
The OP's question here, and it is a legitimate question, is whether the practice being observed is contrary to the rubrics. Unfortunately, I don't know the answer to that.