First Youth Mass Tonight

[benedictgal]

There is no evidence that holding hands came from the charismatic renewal. There are many, many theories about where it came from but no one has produced any defiinitive evidence of any single source. There is at least one poster that says he was aware of it already in the late 60’s when the Pauline Mass was introduced, which predates the Charismatic Renewal and would seem to preclude that it originated there.

Addtionally it is strictly an opinion that holding hands in any way does “harm”, not to mention totally off topic.

In my area, hand-holding didn’t occur until the Charismatic movement came into town. Furthermore, having read quite a few books on the development of the liturgy, hand-holding wasn’t even an issue in the years before the Second Vatican Council. It’s just one of those anamolies that happened in the “spirit” of Vatican II rather than what the council actually said.

 

[VociMike]

It may be useful to think why the Church has always been accepting of local cultures, and has positively encouraged the use of local musical culture. And then think do the same reasons apply to youth culture, or not?

Are you saying that the music used in youth Masses is the music of the youth culture? That the music used in these Masses is identical in form (if not in lyrics) to the music that young people listen to in non-religous settings, in non-religious moods? I very strongly doubt that.

 

[benedictgal]

I doubt that your “research” has included an analysis of every “youth” mass in the the worldwide church or even within the US. You are using unproven generalities in support of your position that I find offensive.

Please don’t assume that every or even most “youth” masses have a problem with focusing on the Holy Sacrifice because you do not know this for a fact. Perhaps you have experienced this at however many masses you have attended, but this has not been proven to reflect the reality of the entire church. It does not even reflect my experience of these masses and I’m in a large metro area that has many parishes with Lifeteen.

I would actually direct you to the Adoremus website which lists a document called the Linemata, an instrument used by the Synod Fathers as they were preparing for the 2005 Synod on the Eucharist. Japhy quoted significant chunks ot this document either in this thread or in its sister thread started by VociMike.

The bishops indicated that there were shadows and problems in the Youth Masses, espeically in the area of music. These weren’t just American bishops, or prelates from this continent. This was a world-wide issue. Furthermore, in 2004, Cardinal Arinze told LifeTeen that the “rock-music atmosphere” of their liturgies had to stop, along with innovations such has having the youngsters gather around the altar. If these “Youth Masses” were supposed to be done according to the GIRM, why, then, have they needed to undergo repeated correction?

 

[ncjohn]

In my area, hand-holding didn’t occur until the Charismatic movement came into town. Furthermore, having read quite a few books on the development of the liturgy, hand-holding wasn’t even an issue in the years before the Second Vatican Council. It’s just one of those anamolies that happened in the “spirit” of Vatican II rather than what the council actually said.

When it came to your area says nothing to its origins though.

I don’t think anyone has claimed holding hands was “an issue” prior to Vatican II since the people did not pray the prayer as a community prior to the Pauline Mass. But its use does parallel the people praying the prayer.

You can think it an “anomaly” if you wish. Others would consider, given its parallel growth with the communal prayer as initiated with the Pauline Mass, that it was a natural development and call of the Spirit. That is not to imply that all have the same call or that all should be required or imposed upon, but that our different gifts and callings might indeed call some to this expression, just as some but not all are called to speak in tongues.

It is truly sad to me that we have to get into judging each other in how we express our love of God and that assumptions get made that because someone does it differently from us that THEIR attention can’t possibly be directed toward God. As if all youth, in their awe and love of God are focusing on themselves in clapping their hands as they find themselves in the presence of the Ark as found in the tabernacle.

I’ve found very few things in life to fit a “one size fits all” pattern, especially when it comes to how we present ourselves before God. Maybe there are some who think they know the “one right way”, but I have seldom found anything that holds universally in HOW people pray. I personally am just overjoyed to find people who are so enraptured, when the world would tell us that such is foolishness.

But then, that’s just me.

 

[RomanRevert]

Liturgical innovations such as clapping and hand-holding during the Pater Noster put the focus more on the horizontal rather than the vertical. Perhaps you should re-read Roman Revert’s citation of the former Cardinal Ratzinger’s quote on the matter. The Holy Father certainly drives that point home.

The Mass is not something that we cobble up for ourselves, nor is it meant to be some feel-good experience. The Charismatic movement’s innovations have done nothing but take away the solemnity and the divinity of the Mass and replace it with something that reduces it to a rush of feelings.

Amen sister!

 

[benedictgal]

When it came to your area says nothing to its origins though.

I don’t think anyone has claimed holding hands was “an issue” prior to Vatican II since the people did not pray the prayer as a community prior to the Pauline Mass. But its use does parallel the people praying the prayer.

You can think it an “anomaly” if you wish. Others would consider, given its parallel growth with the communal prayer as initiated with the Pauline Mass, that it was a natural development and call of the Spirit. That is not to imply that all have the same call or that all should be required or imposed upon, but that our different gifts and callings might indeed call some to this expression, just as some but not all are called to speak in tongues.

It is truly sad to me that we have to get into judging each other in how we express our love of God and that assumptions get made that because someone does it differently from us that THEIR attention can’t possibly be directed toward God. As if all youth, in their awe and love of God are focusing on themselves in clapping their hands as they find themselves in the presence of the Ark as found in the tabernacle.

I’ve found very few things in life to fit a “one size fits all” pattern, especially when it comes to how we present ourselves before God. Maybe there are some who think they know the “one right way”, but I have seldom found anything that holds universally in HOW people pray. I personally am just overjoyed to find people who are so enraptured, when the world would tell us that such is foolishness.

But then, that’s just me.

First of all, a review through the GIRM (both old and new) shows that hand-holding is not even a rubric.

Furthermore, hand-holding is not an organic development of the liturgy. It arises more from the Protestant tradition than the Catholic. Remember, the Mass is not a free-for-all experiment in creativity. What creativity is allowed stems only from having the priest and those planning the liturgy choose from approved prayers and texts of the readings. That is how the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments defines “creativity.”

Your argument makes my point that we have lost the sense of the sacred and the solemn in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. There is a time and a place for things: clapping during the Mass (other than as the faithful’s affirmation for a candidate for ordination) is one such thing. Furthermore, when David did what he did before the Ark of the Covenant, it was not in the context of Ancient Israel’s liturgy.

 

[snhs]

It is truly sad to me that we have to get into judging each other in how we express our love of God and that assumptions get made that because someone does it differently from us that THEIR attention can’t possibly be directed toward God. As if all youth, in their awe and love of God are focusing on themselves in clapping their hands as they find themselves in the presence of the Ark as found in the tabernacle.

I’ve found very few things in life to fit a “one size fits all” pattern, especially when it comes to how we present ourselves before God. Maybe there are some who think they know the “one right way”, but I have seldom found anything that holds universally in HOW people pray. I personally am just overjoyed to find people who are so enraptured, when the world would tell us that such is foolishness.

Well if they are singing, while focusing on the rhythm of the music and clapping in time how is it possible that their full focus is on the mass and scared mystery occurring on the altar?

As a personal preference I dislike the idea of clapping during hymns, whether at the beginning or end of the mass, and I find that when it is included in hymns it distracts from the focus on the altar. I think generally that the same is true of the ‘music ministers’ etc that seem to be springing up everywhere, no matter how good their playing might be. I don’t question their intent in trying to play a part in the mass but the end result is the same, the congregation rapidly becomes an audience and instead of their concentration being on the altar their mind wanders to the singing or playing their friends are doing. I don’t think its a matter of judging anyone, aren’t we told to hate the sin and love the sinner?

I would also agree with Benedictgal that hand holding etc is more of a protestant liturgical practice as opposed to a development in the Catholic mass. As such I find it hard to see how it can be viewed as an appropriate practice in a Catholic mass when the many of the ideas that brought it about are so at odds with the Catholic faith.

 

[pnewton]

Furthermore, in 2004, Cardinal Arinze told LifeTeen that the “rock-music atmosphere” of their liturgies had to stop, along with innovations such has having the youngsters gather around the altar. If these “Youth Masses” were supposed to be done according to the GIRM, why, then, have they needed to undergo repeated correction?

I remember when he did that. EWTN interviewed him afterwards. These practices were supposed to be stopped. That was a direct order. But as to the OP, I do not think clapping was mentioned.

 

[agapewolf]

Furthermore, in 2004, Cardinal Arinze told LifeTeen that the “rock-music atmosphere” of their liturgies had to stop

Please provide reference for that.

When the new GIRM came out, there were Three (3) things that LT was asked to do. Three

None of them included anything about changing any music style or instruments.

1. the altar thing (AFTER LT was offered an indult for the practice and LT didn’t take it)

2)a moment of quiet before Mass begins

1. words at the end of Mass need to follow the R.M.

This was it. Nothing about “rock style bad” or anything else.

 

[ncjohn]

First of all, a review through the GIRM (both old and new) shows that hand-holding is not even a rubric.

And neither is folding your hands, clasping your hands, putting them on the back of the pew, putting them in your pockets, or holding your baby. I too have reveiwed the GIRM on numerous occasions. The rubrics are silent on the topic as the USCCB noted when asked the question.

It arises more from the Protestant tradition than the Catholic.

So now it’s a “Protestant tradition” rather than the Charismatic Renewal that’s responsible? Again, unless you can show some documentation, please cease and desist with the claims of where it originated. Every protestant and former protestant I have seen address this on this forum has denied this particular claim to be true.

Remember, the Mass is not a free-for-all experiment in creativity. What creativity is allowed stems only from having the priest and those planning the liturgy choose from approved prayers and texts of the readings. That is how the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments defines “creativity.”

And yet there are also provisions for “movements” to grow organically from the people. Canon law (I’m thinking it’s 23 but I’d have to go back and check my sources) specifically allows for a custom to spring from the people, which becomes a legitimate custom after 30 years of continuous unabated use. I agree it’s not a “free-for-all” but the Spirit does also speak through the people and the Church recognizes that.

Your argument makes my point that we have lost the sense of the sacred and the solemn in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

Thank you for yet another personal attack with the implication that I don’t recognize or practice the sacred because I happen to look at something different from your particular opinion.

Again I would express my great sadness that some feel so called to judgment of other’s devotion and piety based on different ways of expressing our love of God and seem to have such a need to have everything “my way”.

 

[ncjohn]

And neither is folding your hands, clasping your hands, putting them on the back of the pew, putting them in your pockets, or holding your baby. I too have reveiwed the GIRM on numerous occasions. The rubrics are silent on the topic as the USCCB noted when asked the question.

So now it’s a “Protestant tradition” rather than the Charismatic Renewal that’s responsible? Again, unless you can show some documentation, please cease and desist with the claims of where it originated. Every protestant and former protestant I have seen address this on this forum has denied this particular claim to be true.
And yet there are also provisions for “movements” to grow organically from the people. Canon law (I’m thinking it’s 23 but I’d have to go back and check my sources) specifically allows for a custom to spring from the people, which becomes a legitimate custom after 30 years of continuous unabated use. I agree it’s not a “free-for-all” but the Spirit does also speak through the people and the Church recognizes that.

Thank you for yet another personal attack with the implication that I don’t recognize or practice the sacred because I happen to look at something different from your particular opinion.

Again I would express my great sadness that some feel so called to judgment of other’s devotion and piety based on different ways of expressing our love of God and seem to have such a need to have everything “my way”.

 

[benedictgal]

And neither is folding your hands, clasping your hands, putting them on the back of the pew, putting them in your pockets, or holding your baby. I too have reveiwed the GIRM on numerous occasions. The rubrics are silent on the topic as the USCCB noted when asked the question.

So now it’s a “Protestant tradition” rather than the Charismatic Renewal that’s responsible? Again, unless you can show some documentation, please cease and desist with the claims of where it originated. Every protestant and former protestant I have seen address this on this forum has denied this particular claim to be true.
And yet there are also provisions for “movements” to grow organically from the people. Canon law (I’m thinking it’s 23 but I’d have to go back and check my sources) specifically allows for a custom to spring from the people, which becomes a legitimate custom after 30 years of continuous unabated use. I agree it’s not a “free-for-all” but the Spirit does also speak through the people and the Church recognizes that.

Thank you for yet another personal attack with the implication that I don’t recognize or practice the sacred because I happen to look at something different from your particular opinion.

Again I would express my great sadness that some feel so called to judgment of other’s devotion and piety based on different ways of expressing our love of God and seem to have such a need to have everything “my way”.

First of all, this was not a personal attack. Perhaps you need to stand back and objectively review the situation at hand.

Furthermore, the organic growth of movements has nothing to do with the organic growth of the liturgy. These are two very different things. Incidentally, the NeoCatechumenal movement, an approved group, introduced innovations and anamolies to the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. These were stopped by Pope Benedict XVI because, as he rightly points out (and as Cardinal Arinze affirms) no one has the right to add or subtract to the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

Furthermore, it is not “my way”, it is the Church’s way. Please re-read the quotes from Cardnal Arinze regarding innovations to the Mass. They may prove helpful.

 

[benedictgal]

Please provide reference for that.

When the new GIRM came out, there were Three (3) things that LT was asked to do. Three

None of them included anything about changing any music style or instruments.

1. the altar thing (AFTER LT was offered an indult for the practice and LT didn’t take it)

2)a moment of quiet before Mass begins

1. words at the end of Mass need to follow the R.M.

This was it. Nothing about “rock style bad” or anything else.

Agapewolf, as many have told you in previous threads, it might help if you look at things objectively. This is what Cardinal Arinze said:

Life Teen’s Liturgical Reform
Life Teen, the Phoenix-based Catholic youth organization, announced in July that it will cease its idiosyncratic liturgical practices. Monsignor Dale Fushek, Life Teen’s founder and former Vicar General under Bishop Thomas O’Brien, sent a letter July 2, saying that he confirms “our adherence to the new GIRM, and as always, our obedience to our own local Bishops”.

The letter asked that “all parishes that implement the LIFE TEEN model” make these changes. The teens will no longer surround the altar during the Eucharistic prayer; they will cease saying, “The Mass never ends, it must be lived”, at the end of Mass; the rock-party atmosphere before Mass will be toned down to “make sure there is a period of silence to begin the liturgical celebration”; and they will “make sure the music does not in any way detract from the action at the altar, ambo or chair”.

“I am sure these issues will be hard on some parishes and teens”, Monsignor Fushek wrote. His letter said that Phoenix Bishop Thomas Olmsted met in Rome with Cardinal Francis Arinze, of the Congregation for Divine Worship, about Life Teen.

Furthermore, if there weren’t problems with the music at Youth Masses (of which LifeTeen is part), then why would the Fathers of the 2005 Synod on the Eucharist raise the concern?

some lamented the poor quality of translations of liturgical texts and many musical texts in current languages, maintaining that they lacked beauty and were sometimes theologically unclear, thereby contributing to a weakening of Church teaching and to a misunderstanding of prayer. ***A few responses made particular mention of music and singing at Youth Masses. In this regard, it is important to avoid musical forms which, because of their profane use, are not conducive to prayer. ***Some responses note a certain eagerness in composing new songs, to the point of almost yielding to a consumer mentality, showing little concern for the quality of the music and text, and easily overlooking the artistic patrimony which has been theologically and musically effective in the Church’s liturgy.

The directive Cardinal Arinze issued was in 2004. The Lineamata came out in 2005. Clearly, the problem remains. And, respectfully contrary to a preivous post, the problem is also world-wide in nature.

 

[ncjohn]

First of all, this was not a personal attack. Perhaps you need to stand back and objectively review the situation at hand.

Well, being told that my arguments prove that we/ve lost a sense of the sacred is pretty personal, and it’s certainly not a compliment. I’ll take your word though that it wasn’t meant as an attack even though it certainly objectively read as one.

Furthermore, the organic growth of movements has nothing to do with the organic growth of the liturgy. These are two very different things.

Yet Canon law allows for it.

Incidentally, the NeoCatechumenal movement, an approved group, introduced innovations and anamolies to the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. These were stopped by Pope Benedict XVI because, as he rightly points out (and as Cardinal Arinze affirms) no one has the right to add or subtract to the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

Totally irrelevant to the subject but very interesting nonetheless. The Pope stopped those “anomalies”, as affirmed by Cardinal Arinze, yet nobody from the Vatican has tried to officially stop the holding hands over its nearly 40 year history. Pretty much makes clear that they don’t see it as any kind of unacceptable anomaly, or at least not one that is worth addressing. And when you start making judgments about it that the Church does not make, it does become a “my way”.

Holding hands does not “add or subtract” from the liturgy. It is a personal expression of prayer. It was not “introduced” but sprang up spontaneously and was adopted by other people that felt called to that expression. Where it is “led” or instructed that is improper as it would indeed be introducing something, but individual expressions are not regulated by the rubrics.

I’m going to drop out of this at this point since, while tangentially related to the OP, it is going farther off topic.

 

[benedictgal]

Well, being told that my arguments prove that we/ve lost a sense of the sacred is pretty personal, and it’s certainly not a compliment. I’ll take your word though that it wasn’t meant as an attack even though it certainly objectively read as one.
Yet Canon law allows for it.
Totally irrelevant to the subject but very interesting nonetheless. The Pope stopped those “anomalies”, as affirmed by Cardinal Arinze, yet nobody from the Vatican has tried to officially stop the holding hands over its nearly 40 year history. Pretty much makes clear that they don’t see it as any kind of unacceptable anomaly, or at least not one that is worth addressing. And when you start making judgments about it that the Church does not make, it does become a “my way”.

Holding hands does not “add or subtract” from the liturgy. It is a personal expression of prayer. It was not “introduced” but sprang up spontaneously and was adopted by other people that felt called to that expression. Where it is “led” or instructed that is improper as it would indeed be introducing something, but individual expressions are not regulated by the rubrics.

I’m going to drop out of this at this point since, while tangentially related to the OP, it is going farther off topic.

Pleas state where canon law allows for this to happen. I respectfully believe that you are confusing the two issues. Furthermore, if that were indeed the case, why, then, would a document such as Redemptionis Sacramentum exisit? If what you say is allowed to happen under Canon Law, then, how can the same authority (JP II) produce a document that would run contrary to the new code that he personally promulgated?

Remember, too, that the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is not some personal prayer. It is the supreme prayer of the Church and it belongs to the Church. Only she can administer it as she sees fit. Furthermore, as Cardinal Arinze rightly states,

The Second Vatican Council is not ambiguous: “Regulation of the sacred liturgy depends solely on the authority of the Church, that is, on the Apostolic See and, as laws may determine, on the bishop. In virtue of power conceded by the law, the regulation of the liturgy within certain defined limits belongs also to various kinds of competent territorial bodies of bishops legitimately established”. Then the Council adds the warning: "Therefore, absolutely no other person, not even a priest, may add, remove or change anything in the liturgy on his own authority". (SC 22)

These rulings are not a sign of lack of respect for anyone. They follow from the fact that the liturgy is a celebration of the universal Church. “The prayers addressed to God by the priest who presides over the assembly in the person of Christ are said in the name of the entire holy people as well as of all present. And the visible signs used by the liturgy to signify invisible divine things have been chosen by Christ or the Church”. (SC 33)

From these considerations it follows that a do-it-yourself attitude is not acceptable in the public worship of the Church. It does damage to the Church’s worship and to the faith of the people. The people of God have the right that the liturgy be celebrated as the Church wants it. (cf RS 12) The mysteries of Christ should not be celebrated as personal taste or whim may indicate. “The ‘treasure’ is too important and precious to risk impoverishment or compromise through forms of experimentation or practices introduced without a careful review on the part of ecclesiastical authorities”. (EE 51)

Therefore, this means that introducing things into the liturgy on one’s own accord is wrong. It is definitely not an organic growth; rather, it is based on someone’s personal tastes and idiosyncracies.

 

[pnewton]

Please provide reference for that.

In the Old Testament, two witnesses were considered adequate. I am of the opposite stripe (or at least a sideways version) of benedictgal. She is telling the truth. Cardinal Arinze said the same thing on EWTN. Heck, I have even thought about using an electric guitar myself, but only for medicinal purposes.

 

[ncjohn]

Pleas state where canon law allows for this to happen. I respectfully believe that you are confusing the two issues.

No, I’m not confusing any issues.

Can. 26 Unless the competent legislator has specifically approved it, a custom contrary to the canon law now in force or one beyond a canonical law (praeter legem canonicam) obtains the force of law only if it has been legitimately observed for thirty continuous and complete years.

Since this is a custom outside of canon law that has been legitimately observed for over thirty continuous years, it would certainly seem to meet the requirements.

Therefore, this means that introducing things into the liturgy on one’s own accord is wrong. It is definitely not an organic growth; rather, it is based on someone’s personal tastes and idiosyncracies.

And again, one final time, how an individual holds their hands is NOT introducing anything into the liturgy unless some outside party is directing it. If it is, then so is any other position you put your hands in as there is no position prescribed.

I have no problem with you or anyone else choosing to not hold hands. I have no problem with you possibly thinking that it might cause the world to crumble around us. I do have a problem though with people making up rules that don’t exist and trying to then convince others that people are doing something wrong when the Church says no such thing. And I have an even bigger problem with people making judgments about other’s piety based on such things, whichever preference or opinion they hold to.

“In necessary things, unity; in doubtful things, liberty; in all things, charity.”

 

[anamchara]

I have no problem with you or anyone else choosing to not hold hands. I have no problem with you possibly thinking that it might cause the world to crumble around us. I do have a problem though with people making up rules that don’t exist and trying to then convince others that people are doing something wrong when the Church says no such thing. And I have an even bigger problem with people making judgments about other’s piety based on such things, whichever preference or opinion they hold to.

“In necessary things, unity; in doubtful things, liberty; in all things, charity.”

Thank you.

 

[benedictgal]

No, I’m not confusing any issues.

Can. 26 Unless the competent legislator has specifically approved it, a custom contrary to the canon law now in force or one beyond a canonical law (praeter legem canonicam) obtains the force of law only if it has been legitimately observed for thirty continuous and complete years.

Since this is a custom outside of canon law that has been legitimately observed for over thirty continuous years, it would certainly seem to meet the requirements.
And again, one final time, how an individual holds their hands is NOT introducing anything into the liturgy unless some outside party is directing it. If it is, then so is any other position you put your hands in as there is no position prescribed.

I have no problem with you or anyone else choosing to not hold hands. I have no problem with you possibly thinking that it might cause the world to crumble around us. I do have a problem though with people making up rules that don’t exist and trying to then convince others that people are doing something wrong when the Church says no such thing. And I have an even bigger problem with people making judgments about other’s piety based on such things, whichever preference or opinion they hold to.

“In necessary things, unity; in doubtful things, liberty; in all things, charity.”

However, that does not apply to the liturgy. Let’s be very clear on that. It’s a bad liturgical practice that crept into the Mass. Furthermore, your argument would then make many other “innovations” that have made their way into the Mass okay simply because they’ve been done that way for the past 30 years.

As Redemptionis Sacramentum correctly affirms: No one has the right to change any part of the Mass of his own volition. Since RS holds that premise, are you then saying that it violates Canon Law? Does the Holy Father’s pre-papal observations regarding the 'innovations" introduced into the Mass over the course of 40 years violate the passage of Canon Law that you cited? I think not.

 

[ncjohn]

However, that does not apply to the liturgy. Let’s be very clear on that. It’s a bad liturgical practice that crept into the Mass. Furthermore, your argument would then make many other “innovations” that have made their way into the Mass okay simply because they’ve been done that way for the past 30 years.

As Redemptionis Sacramentum correctly affirms: No one has the right to change any part of the Mass of his own volition. Since RS holds that premise, are you then saying that it violates Canon Law? Does the Holy Father’s pre-papal observations regarding the 'innovations" introduced into the Mass over the course of 40 years violate the passage of Canon Law that you cited? I think not.

I give up.

The canon is pretty clear. It doesn’t distinguish as to where the custom is found. You are certainly welcome to express your legal opinion to the contrary, though the canon lawyer I consulted agreed with my interpretation and I’ll take his over yours. I doubt that there’s lots of practices that have survived that time period without the Church stepping in if they truly felt they were abuses. RS certainly addressed anything they seemed to have concerns about.

And even more you seem to be stuck on the idea that how someone holds their hands somehow changes part of the Mass. If you can show me one shred of evidence from an authoritative source at the Vatican that supports that I’ll be glad to rethink it. I’m curious though what you find to be the “correct” position for the hands, and on what basis. And then whether you similarly harass everybody else who does not do what you think is the correct thing. Do you complain about people who put their hands on the back of the pew? Or those who might be holding a missalette? Or those holding babies?

Where does RS address this issue? One would think, given your example of the Pope and the Cardinal stopping “anomalies” with the Neocatechumenate that there would certainly be something from them telling us to cease and desist with this dastardly practice that has been plaguing churches for almost 40 years. Yet RS, written specifically to address all manner of abuses, says not a word.

I’m sorry, but your arguments on this just fall flat. Whatever need you seem to have to control this has no support from the Church. You are obviously well versed in many aspects of liturgy, but quite frankly your credibility with me has fallen completely into the tank with your continued insistence on trying to enforce a rule the Church doesn’t have.

I wish you the best, though I’ll just have to disagree with you on this topic.

Peace,