I didn't think that anyone was allowed to add a posture or gesture to the liturgy, because that in itself is abuse. It's OK to yawn or stretch or cry, but to deliberately add a posture or gesture--I don't think that's allowed. Am I correct or not? Thank you for letting me know one way or the other.
I agree with several other posters, especially shin (hey, isn't that a miracle?!) Excellent comment, shin, one that I will remember and try to practice.
A public protest of abuse will not correct abuse. You have to do things the old-fashioned, slow-but-steady, BIBLICAL way--go to the priest privately and speak to him first, and if that doesn't work, try to find a few other people who are in agreement with you and go to the priest again, and then bring it to the attention of the Church (the bishop) probably through a letter and possibly through a personal appointment, and if this doesn't bring about the change, then leave and do not return.
If you are just travelling and visiting a church, it will be difficult to seek out a group of like-minded people who feel the same way you do. It might be best to just drop it, especially if you will never be back in that church again. As shin said, pray for that parish, that others will do their duty and step forward and work with the priest to correct any liturgical abuses.
I also agree with Mintaka who said to do some research and find the specific places in the GIRM that spell out the abuse. E.g., I don't think ??? that condemning a parishioner in a homily is technically a liturgical abuse. I think ??? it might be considered libel or slander, but I'm not sure if that's abuse. It's low class and mean-spirited, perhaps, but OTOH, if the parishioner is causing scandal, doing harm, teaching heresy, practicing blatant sin, and is dangerous to the bodies and souls of the parishioners, a wise shepherd WILL warn his sheep, right? (I think it would be best if he didn't mention names.)
Another example is "speaking in favor of the ordination of women." This isn't really a liturgical abuse, is it? It's incorrect teaching, but that's not a liturgical abuse, right? (?? I'm honestly not sure here.) It's a theological abuse, but that's different than a liturgical abuse, right? (Talk to me, everyone--tell me if I'm on the right track here!) I realize that I'm being picky over the semantics, but the fact is, if a person is willing to organize/start up an international gesture or protest consisting of kneeling and burying their head in their hands and make a public spectacle of themselves in the Holy Mass and take the attention away from Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament over "liturgical abuse," they had better be darn sure that what they are protesting is truly a liturgical abuse!
And make darn sure that the priest was truly talking about ordination of women to the priesthood, not just involvement of women in parish life and ministries. Sometimes we hear things wrong. Check with others who heard the same homily. Or again, make an appointment and speak with the priest. Maybe he just phrased his homily very badly or got his words mixed up, and it came out confusing. Plenty of times, I've heard priests, pastors, and laypeople stumble over words and if we took them literally, they would be preaching devilish stuff; e.g., "Thou shalt commit adultery." (They forgot the "not"--just clumsy reading.)