Belleville bishop removes pastor for improvising prayers

  • Thread starter Thread starter Elizium23
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
manygift1spirit said:
Hmm, if the priest in these videos is the same Fr. Bill Rowe, then there are larger problems at this parish than an ad libbing priest.

Fr. Bill Rowe Mass Pt. 1

Fr. Bill Rowe Mass Pt. 2

Fr. Bill Rowe Mass Pt. 3

That was more a Jerry Lewis telethon than a Mass. And who was that reading the Gospel???
Click to expand...
What was that? :confused:

There was no consecration from what I saw skimming through the videos, so it was definitely not a Mass.

It seems that it was some bizarre faux-liturgical gathering. Whatever they were trying to do, it was not proper.
 
curlycool89 said:
What was that? :confused:

There was no consecration from what I saw skimming through the videos, so it was definitely not a Mass.

It seems that it was some bizarre faux-liturgical gathering. Whatever they were trying to do, it was not proper.
Click to expand...
The consecration was edited out. It would fall between parts 2 and 3. At the end of part 2, there was an “offertory” and bread and wine were brought up.

According to reports, the priest had been in the habit of changing everything except the essential words, “This is my Body, This is … my Blood.”

This so-called liturgy had more abuses than I could possibly count. It really made my head spin. It was as if people sat down and asked themselves “how many abuses can we squeeze into one space?”

The highlights included, but are not limited to: priest not vested in chasuble, sitting in pew for entire “liturgy of the word”. Laywoman reciting gospel, improvised prayers, and “blessing”, congregation responds to laywoman with “And with your spirit”. General intercessions centered around thanking the priest with the confusing response “We thank you, Father.” Nothing but glass vessels for the Precious Blood.

I did not want to put an uncharitable comment in that community’s videos, but I did “dislike” them all, and I was led to a video interview with the priest, where I expressed my support for the bishop, who really had to make a hard decision, because this is a well-loved man.
 
curlycool89 said:
What was that? :confused:

There was no consecration from what I saw skimming through the videos, so it was definitely not a Mass.

It seems that it was some bizarre faux-liturgical gathering. Whatever they were trying to do, it was not proper.
Click to expand...
They omitted the EP and the Communion Rite from the videos and I think with good reason. Did you see a Roman Missal on that altar? No, me neither. So he, what, wings the EP? So at this school Mass the children were victims of how many liturgical abuses?
  1. The Greeting by a layperson
  2. The Psalm replaced by a song
  3. A lay person reading the Gospel
  4. A lay person giving the ‘homily’
  5. The priest improperly vested
  6. The priest not sitting in the priest’s chair
  7. No Roman Missal
    etc., etc.
 
Elizium23 said:
I did not want to put an uncharitable comment in that community’s videos, but I did “dislike” them all, and I was led to a video interview with the priest, where I expressed my support for the bishop, who really had to make a hard decision, because this is a well-loved man.
Click to expand...
Well, you were more charitable than I was because I did comment on the abuses.
 
Elizium23 said:
The highlights included, but are not limited to:…
Click to expand...
LOL Your response reminds me of the story that NASA uses the 1998 movie Armageddon in its management training program - not as an example to imitate, but as an example of over 168 scientific inaccuracies or impossibilities.
 
Elizium23 said:
The consecration was edited out. It would fall between parts 2 and 3. At the end of part 2, there was an “offertory” and bread and wine were brought up.
Click to expand...
I was hoping that that wasn’t true. Otherwise…
Elizium23 said:
This so-called liturgy had more abuses than I could possibly count. It really made my head spin. It was as if people sat down and asked themselves “how many abuses can we squeeze into one space?”

The highlights included, but are not limited to: priest not vested in chasuble, sitting in pew for entire “liturgy of the word”. Laywoman reciting gospel, improvised prayers, and “blessing”, congregation responds to laywoman with “And with your spirit”. General intercessions centered around thanking the priest with the confusing response “We thank you, Father.” Nothing but glass vessels for the Precious Blood.
Click to expand...
Bloody hell, where do we even start?

Here’s my theory: I want to put forth then that the priest violated canon 927
Can. 927 It is absolutely wrong, even in urgent and extreme necessity, to consecrate one element without the other, or even to consecrate both outside the eucharistic celebration.
Click to expand...
I charge that this “Mass” was non-existent ab initio. The priest did not process into the Sanctuary to start the Mass nor give the beginning dialogue, so I charge that the Mass never began, and so there was no Mass.

The introduction, penitential Rite, and Kyrie were all omitted, and a “sign of peace” was added at the beginning. At minimum, for something to be counted as a Mass, it has to at least resemble a Mass in structure.
The priest did not read the gospel nor give the homily. At this point, at most what this is is a lay-led liturgy (a Communion Service). A Communion Service and Mass are mutually exclusive rites, and one cannot be “grafted” onto another, therefore I charge again that this was not a Mass.

The priest also gives some sort of impromptu-speak after what appears to be an offertory (and again at the end of part 3). Again, this is does not resemble a Mass.

Finally, there was no dismissal or concluding rite (I’m assuming that the beginning of part 3 is after what would ordinarily be called a “communion procession” if it was a Mass). Again, it seems to me that there was no Mass at all.
 
Update

It seems that the videos on Youtube have now been removed by the user.
 
Phemie said:
Guess they realized that posting those just proved to the world that the Bishop was correct.
Click to expand...
That’s what I first thought when I noticed the canon of the mass was omitted between parts 2 & 3.
 
I feel sorry for those kids…can you imagine what their faith formation has been?
 
Tigg said:
I feel sorry for those kids…can you imagine what their faith formation has been?
Click to expand...
We can only assume the parents either support this situation or don’t care. I’m sure they have already organized statement-making gatherings such as candlelight vigils.
 
Rainaldo said:
Did you notice, before the videos were taken down, that the altar in the chapel was shifted to the left of the “stage”, instead of placed front-and-center? Subtle, but speaks volumes.
Click to expand...
I had noticed the altar too, and it’s size suggests a diminished understanding of the Eucharist not as a sacrifice or even as a memorial meal. Its more like coffee to go
 
applesofgold said:
I had noticed the altar too, and it’s size suggests a diminished understanding of the Eucharist not as a sacrifice or even as a memorial meal. Its more like coffee to go
Click to expand...
Over the years I’ve run into ‘liturgists’ who promoted both the off center altar/ambo arrangement and the similarly sized ambo & altar combo since ‘both Tables are equal’.
 
Phemie said:
Over the years I’ve run into ‘liturgists’ who promoted both the off center altar/ambo arrangement and the similarly sized ambo & altar combo since ‘both Tables are equal’.
Click to expand...
Yes, equal, with plenty of room front and center for the homilist.
 
manualman said:
I hope Father has enough quiet time that he is able to zoom out from the issue a bit and realize the message he sends to his congregation and to God when he does this.

In effect, it says “I am better qualified than anyone else to set the language of prayer in liturgy.”

Once one puts down the mirror of Narcissus, it’s not hard to see the role ego plays in such a decision.
Click to expand...
How sad to imply with innuendo that the pastor may be adjusting language of the liturgy for narcissistic or egotistical reasons, and not for clarification. It grieves me to see so much of that kind of accusing in Catholic Answers Forums. Instead, let’s favor best intentions whenever there seems to be some doubt.

I dare say that no one but God could ever know a person’s true intentions. Therefore, Jesus said: “Stop judging, that you may not be judged. For as you judge, so will you be judged…” (Source: Matt. 7:1-5, it’s a good read.)

Let’s think the best of our fellow Christian brothers’ and sisters’ intentions in these CAF Threads, and not the worst. This would help to bring out the best in each of us, which should bring us all closer to Christ Jesus. I would think that improvement of our relationship with Jesus the Christ, is the ultimate purpose of the CAF Threads.

I do believe that when we defend the Institutional Catholic Church’s teachings and practices, we are defending the MEANS to an end, and not the end in itself; the end surely must be to bring about a closer, personal relationship with Christ Jesus our Savior.

Let’s not accuse; let’s encourage. May we all avoid accusing, as much as possible.

I understand that further changes in the official language is still possible, and I have problems with “consubstantial.” I had to look it up. I’m sure all Catholic children and adults will know what it means, when they profess their faith. 🙂

I’ll never forget when one of my 9 children, a little guy at the time, prayed: “Our Father who are in heav’n. Harold be my name…”

Peace
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top