Adlibited 'liturgy'

[laszlo]

Yesterday as social obligation, I went to my territorial parish (what I left alone three years ago for a parish where God is worshiped, not the human success. That church worships God under the New order and also under the Traditional order of the Holy Mass).

Here in my territorial parish broke away from everything what I can imagine.

1./ They announced the event as Mass for All Souls Day. In the Mass the center shall be Jesus Christ, his word and his sacrifice; over there the center was the people (more than 3/4 of the time)

2./ They named the event in the introduction as ‘liturgy’. Liturgy is: ‘a rite or body of rites prescribed for public worship’. This was all innovation.

• The Petitions of the faithful was extended to an over 40 minutes process, everybody was herded to a loudspeaker to say his own petitions and lit a candle for his loved ones. Such thing was never approved as part of the Mass
• the pastor himself adlibited everything beyond recognition of the Ordo of the Mass. Not only added his own words, but changed the prescribed words of the Mass too. He said several times that Jesus Christ is really present, but he exhorted to honor the people, honor the choir, honor the musical directors, honor the organizers of that event.

3./ The essence of All Souls Day should be to obtain indulgences for the dead. This propitiatory aspect of the Mass ( to get God’[s favor for those in then Purgatory) was entirely omitted, it was taken for the shake or the emotions of the people.

I start to understand why St Pius V in 1570 ordered all Catholics to follow the exact same Roman Rite. Give freedom to the people and they will abuse it. Freedom is necessary, bu the obedience also, and the liturgy is the occasion for the obedience.

Such getting together for the sentiments of everybody could be appropriate even in the church, **outside of the Mass , not deceiving the people that this is the Mass.

 

[wisdomseeker]

I agree.

in my parish, there was this supposedly an altar girl, she was walking around the Sanctuary in a mini skirt.

 

[FAB]

Yesterday as social obligation, I went to my territorial parish (what I left alone three years ago for a parish where God is worshiped, not the human success. That church worships God under the New order and also under the Traditional order of the Holy Mass).

Here in my territorial parish broke away from everything what I can imagine.

1./ They announced the event as Mass for All Souls Day. In the Mass the center shall be Jesus Christ, his word and his sacrifice; over there the center was the people (more than 3/4 of the time)

2./ They named the event in the introduction as ‘liturgy’. Liturgy is: ‘a rite or body of rites prescribed for public worship’. This was all innovation.

• The Petitions of the faithful was extended to an over 40 minutes process, everybody was herded to a loudspeaker to say his own petitions and lit a candle for his loved ones. Such thing was never approved as part of the Mass
• the pastor himself adlibited everything beyond recognition of the Ordo of the Mass. Not only added his own words, but changed the prescribed words of the Mass too. He said several times that Jesus Christ is really present, but he exhorted to honor the people, honor the choir, honor the musical directors, honor the organizers of that event.

3./ The essence of All Souls Day should be to obtain indulgences for the dead. This propitiatory aspect of the Mass ( to get God’[s favor for those in then Purgatory) was entirely omitted, it was taken for the shake or the emotions of the people.

I start to understand why St Pius V in 1570 ordered all Catholics to follow the exact same Roman Rite. Give freedom to the people and they will abuse it. Freedom is necessary, bu the obedience also, and the liturgy is the occasion for the obedience.

Such getting together for the sentiments of everybody could be appropriate even in the church, **outside of the Mass

, not deceiving the people that this is the Mass.

Not certain what you complaints are. First you said out of obligation but all souls day in not a Holy day of obligation. It was a mass offered for the souls in purgatory, hince as you call it the even for all souls. this does not dimnish the sacrafic of the mass.
Since this was a mass in rememberance of all souls meaning those who have gone to their reward, it was very pastoral to allow family members to offer petions for their loved ones.
Christ is really present at the mass, in the precious body and blood.
It is also not unusal for the presider to recognize and thank publicly those groups that partipated and helped to plan and make the liturgy happen.
You are looking for abuses were none exist

 

[WetCatechumen]

I was at a Mass on All Saints’ Day where the priest prayed the Roman Canon (for once). This is the (bad) translation we’re supposed to use:

“We offer them … for all who hold and teach the catholic faith that comes to us from the apostles.”

He said: “We offer them … for all who hold and teach the Christian faith.”

Whereas the Latin actually says:

“In first, we offer you them … for all orthodox believers in the Catholic and Apostolic Faith.”

He visibly paused, so he clearly meant to make the change. He also says: “The Lord is with you”, and he always puts a lot of emphasis on his retranslation.

 

[Barbkw]

While I can respect the need to keep the sacrifice of the Mass holy, you are going overboard in your negative comments about this Catholic worship service.

It’s All Souls Day, the majority of people in attendance have experienced the loss of a beloved family member within that year. The Church body is honoring their loss, their sorrow, the Resurrection of Christ, and His promise to raise each of His faithful.

The individual candles are representative of those souls and their connection to the body of Christ and to the Church and to all of us. Family members light the candles in remembrance. Most came back from the alter either crying or with tears. Elderly men cried.

Honestly, how can you participate in the Mass when you are nick picking throughout all of it, tallying up how it wasn’t good enough for you?

My only concern at Mass is that a properly ordained priest said the words of consecration.

 

[paddy22]

FAB and Barbkw - really? You both write so non-chalantly about unauthorized changes and additions to Holy Mass. Do you really see nothing wrong with what the OP described?

 

[pnewton]

There is no time limit on the intentions for the Mass. I do not see what the beef is all about, but then I found the initial posting difficult to follow.

 

[Timothysis]

I agree.

in my parish, there was this supposedly an altar girl, she was walking around the Sanctuary in a mini skirt.

“Supposedly?” So, instead of relating something that you witnessed you’re going to relate what so-and-so told so-and-so?

 

[FAB]

FAB and Barbkw - really? You both write so non-chalantly about unauthorized changes and additions to Holy Mass. Do you really see nothing wrong with what the OP described?

The poster only gives a partial description of the events at the mass. So from what he described, I can’t see that there were any abusses. Only ones that the poster percieved.

 

[paddy22]

The poster only gives a partial description of the events at the mass. So from what he described, I can’t see that there were any abusses. Only ones that the poster percieved.

What about changing the words of the Mass? He clearly described that.

 

[FAB]

What about changing the words of the Mass? He clearly described that.

He didn’t say what words he changes, and since there are a different versions that can be choosen, and by his own admission he doesn’t regular attend the OF , how does he know?
Unless he was sitting with a copy of the Roman Missal reviewing the lines word for word, he wouldn’t know

 

[paddy22]

He didn’t say what words he changes, and since there are a different versions that can be choosen, and by his own admission he doesn’t regular attend the OF , how does he know?
Unless he was sitting with a copy of the Roman Missal reviewing the lines word for word, he wouldn’t know

Alright, I can understand what you’re saying. But I do regularly attend the OF, and though I don’t sit there with a copy of the Roman Missal, and don’t have the different prayers memorized, I can tell when a priest is adding his own words in there - maybe it is the same with the OP? I don’t know any prayer in the OF that honors the choir, the musical directors, or the organizers. I also don’t think it is proscribed that on All Souls Day for everybody to offer their own petitions and light a candle. This seems like an addition inside of the context of Mass. Can you at least agree that something sounds a little off here? It is adding unnecessary, and unproscribed, almost theatricality to the Mass. While it may have been an emotional, moving experience for those in attendance, it strikes me as inappropriate. The Mass is a sacrifice, not a feel good get together.

 

[pnewton]

I also don’t think it is proscribed that on All Souls Day for everybody to offer their own petitions and light a candle. This seems like an addition inside of the context of Mass.

Let’s look at this, shall we:

The Prayer of the Faithful

…70. As a rule, the series of intentions is to be

1. 
   *]For the needs of the Church;
   *]For public authorities and the salvation of the whole world;
   *]For those burdened by any kind of difficulty;
   *]For the local community.

1. 
   Nevertheless, in a particular celebration, such as Confirmation, Marriage, or a Funeral, the series of intentions may reflect more closely the particular occasion.
   

   …The intentions are announced from the ambo or from another suitable place, by the deacon or by a cantor, a lector, or one of the lay faithful.68

   Here is the link to the full version, for those here that do not have the GIRM memorized:
   nccbuscc.org/liturgy/current/chapter2.shtml#sect3b
   
   Since All Soul’s Day is not a Holy Day, I can see having a special commemoration of those departed in which the community offers up each of the names of their departed faithful loved ones. It may not be my choice, but it hardly is contrary to anything written in the GIRM.
   
   I have to say that it does my heart good to see the alleged abuses that people here rail about become less and less significant. Perhaps this is a good sign.

 

[FAB]

Alright, I can understand what you’re saying. But I do regularly attend the OF, and though I don’t sit there with a copy of the Roman Missal, and don’t have the different prayers memorized, I can tell when a priest is adding his own words in there - maybe it is the same with the OP? I don’t know any prayer in the OF that honors the choir, the musical directors, or the organizers. I also don’t think it is proscribed that on All Souls Day for everybody to offer their own petitions and light a candle. This seems like an addition inside of the context of Mass. Can you at least agree that something sounds a little off here? It is adding unnecessary, and unproscribed, almost theatricality to the Mass. While it may have been an emotional, moving experience for those in attendance, it strikes me as inappropriate. The Mass is a sacrifice, not a feel good get together.

In the Roman Missal there is a specific mass for all souls day. The poster didn’t indicate when the choir and others were recongized for their work. If after the final communion prayer, there is no problem. There is nothing in the rubics as far as the number of petitions that can be offered, and petitions from the congregation are acceptible. The rite does not prohibit what was done.
There are masses perscribed for paricular purposed, weddings , funerals, as example.
We come together as a cummunity to celbrate the sacrafice, what is wrong with feeling good about the experiance. We should leave with our wounds healed anad our spirits lifted.

 

[laszlo]

Not certain what you complaints are. First you said out of obligation but all souls day in not a Holy day of obligation.
\quote]

I said ‘out of social obligation’. Attending Mass is not social obligation (for the sake of people), it is the law of the Church.

My main problem was that the LIturgy of the Universal Church, the Holy Mass, what shall be Holy = Set aside for God, was downgraded to a social gathering. Before the mass people walked around laughing, talking to each other; during the mass a piano player boosted how well he can improvise (even while the priest talked or prayed), he wanted to be the center, either the Liturgy of the Word and the Liturgy of the Eucharist was rewritten by adlibiting, and became unimportant related to the unrelated songs and actions.

It was not something made for God, set aside to God, administered by God’s apppointed and anointed minister the priest; it was something for the people, by the people, through the people.

 

[laszlo]

Let’s look at this, shall we:
Here is the link to the full version, for those here that do not have the GIRM memorized:
nccbuscc.org/liturgy/current/chapter2.shtml#sect3b

Since All Soul’s Day is not a Holy Day, I can see having a special commemoration of those departed in which the community offers up each of the names of their departed faithful loved ones. It may not be my choice, but it hardly is contrary to anything written in the GIRM.

I have to say that it does my heart good to see the alleged abuses that people here rail about become less and less significant. Perhaps this is a good sign.

The GIRM starts with there words:
2. The sacrificial nature of the Mass, solemnly asserted by the Council of Trent in accordance with the Church’s universal tradition,1 was reaffirmed by the Second Vatican Council, which offered these significant words about the Mass: "At the Last Supper our Savior instituted the Eucharistic Sacrifice of his Body and Blood, by which he would perpetuate the Sacrifice of the Cross throughout the centuries until he should come again, thus entrusting to the Church, his beloved Bride, the memorial of his death and resurrection."2

To take 40+ minutes telling the petitions of about 250 of 300 people present and grinding down the offertory to the Our father to less that 10 minutes is definitely against this principle.

The remembrance in itself was appealing, and I would praise it, if that would be made after the Mass.

The GIRM had to be interpreted that everything is forbidden what is not explicitly allowed as for event and as for emphasis. Anything what makes the mass to be seen that this or that is more important than the Sacrifice of Jesus Christ is abuse.

 

[Layman]

Are lay people allowed to interrupt Mass for* 40 minutes* with their petitions? Sounds mawkish to me. I don’t think I could have taken it as a member of the congregation.

Surely a Mass said for all the names in a special book of remembrance would be better? A requiem TLM, said by a priest vested in black, would be better for the Holy Souls. Keep the emotionalism out of it. Just read the names out before Mass.

 

[paddy22]

Let’s look at this, shall we:
Here is the link to the full version, for those here that do not have the GIRM memorized:
nccbuscc.org/liturgy/current/chapter2.shtml#sect3b

Since All Soul’s Day is not a Holy Day, I can see having a special commemoration of those departed in which the community offers up each of the names of their departed faithful loved ones. It may not be my choice, but it hardly is contrary to anything written in the GIRM.

I have to say that it does my heart good to see the alleged abuses that people here rail about become less and less significant. Perhaps this is a good sign.

‘The intentions are announced from the ambo or from another suitable place, by the deacon or by a cantor, a lector, or one of the lay faithful.68’

I am not saying anything against the reading of intentions. It is the parade of people walking up to the ambo. Even in what you cited, nowhere does it say that everybody should, or can, come up - in fact, it says by THE deacon, A cantor, A lector, or ONE of the lay faithful. Emphasis on those is mine. It seems some are grasping at straws to defend this, when clearly something went on that probably shouldn’t have. Why does this have to take place during Mass - I agree with other posters, maybe it should have been done outside of Mass. Just because something is not explicitly forbidden doesn’t mean it’s permissible (I believe another poster just said something to this effect).

 

[pnewton]

…- in fact, it says by THE deacon, A cantor, A lector, or ONE of the lay faithful. Emphasis on those is mine. It seems some are grasping at straws to defend this, when clearly something went on that probably shouldn’t have. .

Clearly? I agree some are grasping at straws and the emphasis *is *yours, not the Church’s. I would have placed the emphasis on “faithful”. I have frequently heard the priest add an intention after the reading by a cantor or layman. I have never considered this to be a violation of the GIRM either because more than one person spoke. I guess I will just have to disagree and be happy that it is such piddling points of “abuse” (my quotations) that so fixate folks here.

Surely a Mass said for all the names in a special book of remembrance would be better?

This seems to be a lot simpler and easier solution. Of course, having this book during Mass is also not mentioned in the GIRM.

 

[paddy22]

I’m not tracking - why would you have placed the emphasis on ‘faithful’?