Concerned about liturgical abuses

[benedictgal]

That’s not what I said at all. Please re-read my post. I didn’t advocate turning a blind eye at all. With all do respect to you, please re-read my post.

I did read your post. That was the tenor I got. You and I do not agree on many things, but, respect comes from this direction, as well.

However, what the OP described wasn’t something minor. The proclamation of the Gospel, in the correct manor, is nothing something that should be played with by anyone. In fact, it is very troubling.

The problem is that so many people have been infected with the alleged Spirit of Vatican II, reading into things, instead of actually reading what the Council documents actually say.

 

[John_Lilburne]

…*Fr. left the sanctuary and walked down the middle isle of the church during the homily.
The priest may not leave the sanctuary during the homily (GIRM 97).

catholic.com/thisrock/1999/9901fea1.asp…

I disagree on this point, or at least things are not as clear as they used to be. The 1975 General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM) had:
“97. The homily is given at the chair or at the lectern.”

But from the 2002 GIRM approved for the USA, which can be accessed from romanrite.com/girm.html :
“136. The priest, standing at the chair or at the ambo itself or, when appropriate, in another suitable place, gives the homily.”

Regarding what to do. There are lots of options. You are in a better position to assess what resources you have. Brainstorming some ideas:

• Letter of complaint to the priest.
• Letter of complaint to the parish priest, bishop, superior of the order giving the mission, Vatican congregation.
• Plan what to do if it happens again. eg stand for the Gospel, walk out.
• Tell people about the liturgical abuses. Educate them, encourage them to do what they can to fix it.
• Bring a tribunal case against the priest for breaching canon 846 of the Code of Canon Law (see vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/_INDEX.HTM ).
• Think of ways to support those following the liturgical books.
• Collect evidence of the liturgical abuses.

 

[joeysmom]

What if this is a visiting priest who visits annually. It seems that these liturgical abuses are apparent to only a few or at least only a few will speak out. I really hate criticizing any priest especially when we don’t know his heart but some things we just can’t overlook.

So, what do we do?

 

[Katholikos33]

there has always be diversity in the liturgy, and in rites. I am a Byzantine Rite Catholic. However all rites must be rooted in sound Apostolic Tradition. Many priests think they can do as they please and thats wrong. The Mass must be protected from errors. A good book to read is Cardinal Ratzinger’s “spirit of the liturgy.” Also here is a link of the rites of the Catholic Church, the Latin Rite is only 1.

ewtn.com/expert/answers/catholic_rites_and_churches.htm

 

[Katholikos33]

i don’t like when priests leave the sanctuary in the homily and walk out in the nave and start asking everybody questions. it’s kind of protestant. The priest is supposed to speak from the pulpit with respect for the word of God and the gospel. the main point is that the priest is supposed to die to self and be another Christ, not be a show seeker. going to Mass shouldnt be a show.

 

[Karl_M]

I know I am worshipping Christ in the Eucharist so it doesn’t matter to me how the prayers are said.

If it doesn’t matter how the prayers are said, then why can’t they be said the way they’re supposed to be?

 

[LilyM]

I don’t spend my time worrying about liturgical form. Worship is worship. As long as I am worshipping Our Lord in the Eucharist the rest is human tradition and is inconsequential according to what He said Himself.

Really? I thought He said ‘do THIS in memory of me’ and not ‘do whatever the heck you feel like in memory of me’. The ‘THIS’ that we are supposed to do - in other words the form of the Mass - is spelled out clearly and must adhered to.

For that matter, if you are correct, why bother going to Mass at all? You can go sit in front of the Tabernacle or the Monstrance without a formal prayer uttered, and be just as much worshipping Our Lord in the Eucharist. There’s more to it.

 

[goofyjim]

Oh thank you all for tearing my views apart. I go to Mass to receive the body and blood of Christ. The words said are not important to me. Where the priest is when he gives the homily is not important to me. It seems we are more caught up in the letter of the law instead of the spirit of the law.

 

[goofyjim]

Really? I thought He said ‘do THIS in memory of me’ and not ‘do whatever the heck you feel like in memory of me’. The ‘THIS’ that we are supposed to do - in other words the form of the Mass - is spelled out clearly and must adhered to.

For that matter, if you are correct, why bother going to Mass at all? You can go sit in front of the Tabernacle or the Monstrance without a formal prayer uttered, and be just as much worshipping Our Lord in the Eucharist. There’s more to it.

The THIS He refers to is receiving Him in the Eucharist not the specific liturgical form. Otherwise we wouldn’t have such diversity as in the Byzantine rite, the Latin rite (both Novus Ordo and Tridentine) etc.

 

[benedictgal]

The THIS He refers to is receiving Him in the Eucharist not the specific liturgical form. Otherwise we wouldn’t have such diversity as in the Byzantine rite, the Latin rite (both Novus Ordo and Tridentine) etc.

First of all, you are reading the text wrong. The THIS to which Jesus refers is, in fact, the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. It is also a misconception that there is diversity in the Latin Rite. We only have two forms: the Ordinary Form (Novus Ordo) and the Extraordinary Form (Traditional Latin Mass). And, the only diversity that is allowed is in the flexibility to choose the readings and the propers from the approved texts, as well as correct and proper liturgical music.

What you have written in your previous posts is very serious and, unfortunately, not correct. Words, rubrics and form are extremely important. When the Eucharistic Prayer is improperly recited (when the proper form and words are not used) and when the matter is not used (proper eucharistic bread and wine), that renders the Eucharist invalid. Then, what you are receiving is not the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ. You are merely consuming bread and wine.

The form and prayers for the rest of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass are just as important. As Jesus told the woman of Samaria, “we worship what we understand.” That certainly holds true for the Church. If form, matter, words and rubrics are not important, why would the Lord have spent significant chunks of the Pentatuch telling and spelling out to Moses just how He wanted things done. Jesus didn’t come to abolish this form of worship. He came to fulfill it and bring it to its full plentitude, and this is done within the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

So, we do need to have some understanding of our worship as Catholics.

In the spirit of fraternal and charitable correction, I urge you to read Pope Benedict’s book, The Spirit of the Liturgy. It would certainly help deepen your appreciation of the sacred treasure that Jesus left His bride, the Church. She is the keeper of this Sacred Mystery.

 

[NetNuncio]

The THIS He refers to is receiving Him in the Eucharist not the specific liturgical form. Otherwise we wouldn’t have such diversity as in the Byzantine rite, the Latin rite (both Novus Ordo and Tridentine) etc.

I will agree that we have a diversity of rites. That is great and the fact that you find fulfillment in all of these rites is wonderful. What is important is that these rites are performed CORRECTLY. For you see, if rites are performed incorrectly, the entire point of the rite is lost. Yes, just worshipping is wonderful, but we do what we do in unison with the whole Church Universal. If we just pick and choose what parts of the rites we want to do correctly and what we want to make up, uniformity of worship suffers, which often means uniformity of belief suffers…as it is said, lex orandi, lex credendi.