Fighting over liturgy distorts purpose of Mass, papal liturgist says

[Jon_Mallory]

This comment surprises me from one who is Orthodox in light of the chain of comments to which I was responding, which you see in the previous comment. It concerned someone who had made a reference to the Bishop of Rome and made the response that it was “his opinion.”

As an Orthodox, do you consider the liturgical decisions of the heads of the autocephalous Churches as simply opinions equal to your own? I have never before met an Orthodox who did.

I don’t think any individual bishop has the authority to do a complete overhaul of the liturgy. Certainly, there is a prerogative for bishops to guard their flock by censuring or approving translations for the well being of the flock. The only real top down is the descent and agreement with the Holy spirit in Council. The Church is both bottom up with the laity supporting the laity as well as top down with the hierarchy. We need each other to make the wholeness of the Church.

Did the Holy Spirit really initiate the liturgical reform of the RCC rr did the RCC just analyze a random sample of RCC parishes to make a statistical inference on how many RC’s were satisfied with the old mass? I’m pretty sure the RCC just used statistics to determine satisfaction/dissatisfaction with the liturgy and acted according to the results. Science was probably involved–not the supernatural. Statistics is a powerful tool.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

I don’t think any individual bishop has the authority to do a complete overhaul of the liturgy. Certainly, there is a prerogative for bishops to guard their flock by censuring or approving translations for the well being of the flock. The only real top down is the descent and agreement with the Holy spirit in Council. The Church is both bottom up with the laity supporting the laity as well as top down with the hierarchy. We need each other to make the wholeness of the Church.

Did the Holy Spirit really initiate the liturgical reform of the RCC rr did the RCC just analyze a random sample of RCC parishes to make a statistical inference on how many RC’s were satisfied with the old mass? I’m pretty sure the RCC just used statistics to determine satisfaction/dissatisfaction with the liturgy and acted according to the results. Science was probably involved–not the supernatural. Statistics is a powerful tool.

So Vatican II was not inspired by the Holy Spirit ?

Jim

 

[Don_Ruggero]

I don’t think any individual bishop has the authority to do a complete overhaul of the liturgy. Certainly, there is a prerogative for bishops to guard their flock by censuring or approving translations for the well being of the flock. The only real top down is the descent and agreement with the Holy spirit in Council. The Church is both bottom up with the laity supporting the laity as well as top down with the hierarchy. We need each other to make the wholeness of the Church.

Did the Holy Spirit really initiate the liturgical reform of the RCC rr did the RCC just analyze a random sample of RCC parishes to make a statistical inference on how many RC’s were satisfied with the old mass? I’m pretty sure the RCC just used statistics to determine satisfaction/dissatisfaction with the liturgy and acted according to the results. Science was probably involved–not the supernatural. Statistics is a powerful tool.

That is not the comment I was responding to or that you responded to.

The question is actually very simple: based on the earlier statement in this thread that the Bishop of Rome is entitled to his “opinion”.

My question was: do you, as Orthodox, in comparing what you think about the liturgy with that of your Metropolitan, who has jurisdiction over you…do you contend that his is a mere opinion? That it is equal to your own in terms of its weight and in terms of the knowledge that stands behind it? Or must you, in fact, show deference to his decision of your hierarch and comply with his decision?

Because if you answer that what he has is an opinion and that there is no difference between a Metropolitans thoughts and decision about the liturgy from an unordained person who is not theologically formed to the level of one in your hierarch’s position, you will be the first Orthodox to ever say that to me.

 

[Jon_Mallory]

So Vatican II was not inspired by the Holy Spirit ?

Jim

An Orthodox can’t really say. You can’t test the “Holy Spirit”. It’s a legitimate question from a non-Catholic perspective.

 

[Jon_Mallory]

That is not the comment I was responding to or that you responded to.

The question is actually very simple: based on the earlier statement in this thread that the Bishop of Rome is entitled to his “opinion”.

My question was: do you, as Orthodox, in comparing what you think about the liturgy with that of your Metropolitan, who has jurisdiction over you…do you contend that his is a mere opinion? That it is equal to your own in terms of its weight and in terms of the knowledge that stands behind it? Or must you, in fact, show deference to his decision of your hierarch and comply with his decision?

Because if you answer that what he has is an opinion that is no different than an unordained person who is not theologically formed to the level of one in your hierarch’s position, you will be the first Orthodox to ever say that to me.

No, we are not equal.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

No, we are not equal.

Thank you.

 

[Expatreprocedit]

I sure have, even now my church will do a song at the end of mass were folks start clapping.

Aren’t there OT verses exhorting the people to “clap for joy” in praise? The end of the liturgy seems an appropriate time to do that.

 

[ProVobis]

The EF also has to be celebrated in Latin, which is an antiquated rule.

If you consider 1984 as antiquated.

 

[ProVobis]

The term “Kumbaya” is a distortion of the phrase “Come Be Here”, so you can sing “Come Be Here, Lord” if you prefer. Of course, if the Lord is truly present in Eucharistic form, this would be inappropriate and you might be better served by “Tantum Ergo Sacramentum.”

I for one agree with you. The Lord IS always with us. No "be"s or "but"s.

However, I feel we’re in a tiny minority.

 

[zz912]

And indeed we are not speaking of equal opinion when it comes to contrasting His Holiness with anyone else. The mind of the Pope on the liturgy is supreme…and ALL Catholics are to yield to it completely.

The thoughts of a lay person are as valuable to me as they are steeped in knowledge or wisdom and as valueless as they lack either or both.

I remember when the decision was made to allow girls and women to licitly be altar servers in 1994 and various laity came to me to express their displeasure. My response was very direct: “I don’t care. The pope has spoken, the issue is now resolved, and that is what is going to happen. It will be implemented as swiftly as possible, according to the bishop’s will, and if you would like help to adjust, I will gladly give it but make no mistake: there will be girls and women serving Mass from here forward and that decision is to be assented to.”

Similarly when Pope Francis, finally, changed the law about the foot washing rite for Holy Thursday. “It will be done and that is not open for any discussion.” All opinions are not equal in a hierarchical institution.

I’m confused. Did you tell these laity that the Pope mandated for girl altar servers? And did you tell them that the changes in the rite mandated changes to who is selected for feet washing?

Because as I understand it, the decision on both is up to the bishop and the pastor, and that the Pope only allowed them to be done, but did not mandate them.

The fact that you find them “little more than emotional pablum that reeks of protestant infection” has no significance to me who was a Presider at Life Teen Masses. My suggestion to such statements would be very short and very simple: “then you should find another Mass to attend because this one is not changing.”

Oh don’t worry, I do. I only attend when my schedule forces me to attend it. But instead of being so dismissive and rude to myself and other laity, perhaps you would look at and investigate how well your teens are retaining the faith into their 20’s? Do they stay in the Church and remain devout Catholics? If so, then more power to you. But if not (which is the case in MOST dioceses), then perhaps it would be wise to consider what others might offer as something for consideration instead of outright resentment and dismissal?

 

[Don_Ruggero]

I’m confused. Did you tell these laity that the Pope mandated for girl altar servers? And did you tell them that the changes in the rite mandated changes to who is selected for feet washing?

Because as I understand it, the decision on both is up to the bishop and the pastor, and that the Pope only allowed them to be done, but did not mandate them.

I informed them of what was going to happen: the bishop decided that the implementation of the pope’s decision – in both instances – was to be faithfully executed by each parish.

Oh don’t worry, I do. I only attend when my schedule forces me to attend it. But instead of being so dismissive and rude to myself and other laity, perhaps you would look at and investigate how well your teens are retaining the faith into their 20’s? Do they stay in the Church and remain devout Catholics? If so, then more power to you. But if not (which is the case in MOST dioceses), then perhaps it would be wise to consider what others might offer as something for consideration instead of outright resentment and dismissal?

We are not only happy with the numbers of young people who are engaged and remain engaged across the years – and especially to see the young people of years past be the young adults who are active as our next generation of laity engaged in the lay ministries in our parishes – we are most happy, too, with our vocation numbers for the diocesan presbyterate as well as for consecrated life.

 

[deaconjohnO]

Far from infuriating, I found the Life Teen Masses to be among the ones I was most pleased to preside at during my time in the United States.

Life teen is quite passe in my neck of the woods. I for one am delighted that it is completely gone as it was extremely divisive to many parishes in our deanery. The existence of life teen was so divisive that it seemed like two parishes. My best opinion of life teen was that it became cultish. Life teen’s liturgical goal was to bring the mass to teens. The only problem is they were completely out of touch with the reality of liturgical worship when they “aged out”. The worship experience was so dramatically different that they either butted heads with others on the liturgy when they got older or the more common result was to leave and go to evangelical churches with rock bands. That is my experience and I was there.

 

[twf]

I informed them of what was going to happen: the bishop decided that the implementation of the pope’s decision – in both instances – was to be faithfully executed by each parish.

We are not only happy with the numbers of young people who are engaged and remain engaged across the years – and especially to see the young people of years past be the young adults who are active as our next generation of laity engaged in the lay ministries in our parishes – we are most happy, too, with our vocation numbers for the diocesan presbyterate as well as for consecrated life.

As I understand it, Father, Pope St. John Paul II decided to allow female altar servers at the discretion of each local bishop. So really you were more implementing your bishop’s decision rather than the Pope’s? In my archdiocese this decision is left to the parish pastor. While I would say the majority of parishes employ altar girls, some do not. The argument of fostering vocations to the priesthood among young men is sometimes cited.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

As I understand it, Father, Pope St. John Paul II decided to allow female altar servers at the discretion of each local bishop. So really you were more implementing your bishop’s decision rather than the Pope’s? In my archdiocese this decision is left to the parish pastor. While I would say the majority of parishes employ altar girls, some do not. The argument of fostering vocations to the priesthood among young men is sometimes cited.

Pope Saint John Paul II determined that the authentic interpretation of Canon 230 was that girls and women should not have been precluded from serving Mass.

This, the authentic interpretation of the law, was to be implemented in my diocese immediately, with no resistance, but rather with complete acceptance that this was what was to be done because of the pope’s authoritative interpretation.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

Life teen is quite passe in my neck of the woods. I for one am delighted that it is completely gone as it was extremely divisive to many parishes in our deanery. The existence of life teen was so divisive that it seemed like two parishes. My best opinion of life teen was that it became cultish. Life teen’s liturgical goal was to bring the mass to teens. The only problem is they were completely out of touch with the reality of liturgical worship when they “aged out”. The worship experience was so dramatically different that they either butted heads with others on the liturgy when they got older or the more common result was to leave and go to evangelical churches with rock bands. That is my experience and I was there.

My experiences were all completely positive.

 

[pnewton]

The term “Kumbaya” is a distortion of the phrase “Come Be Here”, so you can sing “Come Be Here, Lord” if you prefer. Of course, if the Lord is truly present in Eucharistic form, this would be inappropriate and you might be better served by “Tantum Ergo Sacramentum.”

Ah, but we do sing Veni Sacnte Spiritus, do we not, even though the Lord is present. One song is in Latin and the other not. The intent and solemnity is the same.

I do not ever sing “Kumbaya”, but there is liturgically not one thing wrong with it.

If one opposes what the Msgr. said in the article, one is also opposing the very foundation of Catholic authority. The priest, acting in the name of the bishop, has authority over the implementation of the liturgy. This topic is again being argued because someone asked Msgr. Marini a loaded question and he dared answer it directly. You can disagree with him, as anyone can dissent from other matters of canon law, but recognize dissension for what it is. Instead of fighting the Church on this, maybe it is better to examine oneself as to what one can learn from this, even if the priest is making a stupid decision, in your opinion. Obedience is worthless trash and will avail you nothing before God if you only obey that which you agree with. True obedience, the most laudable obedience is found when you disagree the most with the decisions of one who exercised divine authority.

Going to the great gallery of faith found in Hebrews, we see that God has asked people to obey him in things which seem counter to all logic. Yet it is only in there, when asked to do that which seemed wrong, where the deepest faith is found.

 

[pnewton]

My experiences were all completely positive.

My experience with them has been that they are very “teen”. I am too old and set to enjoy them, at least with what little exposure I have had. It is not my type of music. Yet the reverence was clear in the eyes of those young people (after the electric guitars and drums were done). They worshiped in the presence of the Lord.

So, when I have to go to such a Mass, I will go. I darn sure would never presume that the priest in that town did not know what was best for his parish, and his youth, much less that my opinion of the matter was of any value.

 

[Contra_Mundum_1]

What an encouraging thought! I have seen a priest lose his parishes because he offered the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass ad orientem.

 

[pnewton]

I frankly am soooo tired of people bashing the music ministry, when few are willing to step up to the bat, few are willing to learn chant, few are willing to sing more modern pieces that clearly the priests approve of, and most parishes pay their musicians or Directors pennies.(

When I joined the Catholic Church, the priest told me that whenever he was approached to start a new thing, he always asks the one asking for some new program how he will pay for it, and if he will take charge. It cuts out most off the cuff ideas.

So, when I am approached with something outside my wheelhouse, I offer to integrate the one asking into providing the service. I never have takers. If we had more musicians at my parish, I would welcome it with open arms, or if we had a someone just offering to fund a new organ, or organist, or a trained Gregorian choir. My parish, like yours, just does the best they can with what resources they have, as do most priests.

 

[Phemie]

When I joined the Catholic Church, the priest told me that whenever he was approached to start a new thing, he always asks the one asking for some new program how he will pay for it, and if he will take charge. It cuts out most off the cuff ideas.

So, when I am approached with something outside my wheelhouse, I offer to integrate the one asking into providing the service. I never have takers. ** If we had more musicians at my parish, I would welcome it with open arms, or if we had a someone just offering to fund a new organ, or organist, or a trained Gregorian choir. My parish, like yours, just does the best they can with what resources they have, as do most priests.**

That is very true. The only parish I’ve ever been in that paid its organist/musicians was a military parish which didn’t have to pay for anything else. Everything from office supplies to altar bread and sacramental wine was paid for by the military, leaving us with all the donations to go for music or workshops or charitable donations.