Had a bad experience at mass yesterday

[MonkeyTape]

Please bear with me.

There is this one priest who helps out at our parish sometimes, and there are a number of things I have been concerned about for quite a while now. I let them go, thinking they were minor and yesterday my fear that not doing anything just would help things get out of hand someday may have been realized.

He often does not rinse or clean any of the vessels used during the celebration of the Eucharist - I am not sure if this is ok, nor do I know what he may do after mass. He wings the Penitential Rite, all of it, never reads just wings it. He also normally wings the Opening Prayer. He also wings the General Intercessions.

During the Eucharistic Prayer he always adds “May the Body and Blood of Christ allow us to more and more embody Him in our time and space.” I am careful to hear what he says during the Consecration, and he actually normally reads it. During this particular mass he did not put water into both chalices, and lifts the chalice and host during the consecration, but not after the consecration, he just keeps them at the same height. My understanding of this is so that we may all know when they are Our Lord and therefore would not be confused and worship normal bread and wine instead of Our Lord.

Lastly, this priest normally changes minor words or the order of words during the Gospel reading. For instance this week the reading was “Go, sell what you have, and give to the poor and you will have treasure in heaven; then come, follow me.”

Instead he said “Go, sell what you have, THEN give to the poor and you will have treasure in heaven; then come, follow me.”

Minor, absolutely, but things like that are constant - every single time. This week he stopped at "Jesus looked around and said to his disciples, “How hard it is for those who have wealth to enter the kingdom of God!”

Not the approved short form, just decided to stop there, where he wanted to stop.

It is bad enough I have to hear the same hymns every week when we have 2,000 years of beautiful musical heritage to choose from. Sometimes I feel that if I hear Gather Us In, or One Bread, One Body one more time I will pass out. But this week, for the first time we had the added feature of an acoustic guitar. Not only that but our organ which we bought a few years back, for tens or thousands of dollars, was also replaced with an electric keyboard. I don’t know why this may have happened, and I can only hope it was a one time event.

Didn’t our last 2 popes and Cardinal Arinze all say that guitars during mass are inappropriate liturgical music? Prayer services and such are just fine, but not the liturgy?

This new choir also went on to change the form of the Great Amen and Holy, Holy so much so that I couldn’t participate - they were harmonized or something. The Agnus Dei was so different I had never heard anything like it, the last “Lamb of God” was replaced with “Jesus Christ”.

I asked myself “is this mass or a concert? Am I here to worship God or be entertained?” Far from helping me focus on God it was an incredible distraction, all of it. I felt like I was there but not part of it, like I was just going through the motions. It was truly the most confusing and distracting mass I ever went to.

When I walked out with my wife and sister-in-law I said I have to check and make sure we hadn’t been excommunicated by just being there.

My questions are what in this confusion are actually problems, that is what things that may be out of the ordinary are also illicit or truly improper? I assume some of these things may be uncommon but perfectly acceptable.

After that should I discuss anything with my pastor? I like him a lot, my wife and I moved but continue to travel almost 30 minutes to this parish. It is close to her family whom we spend Sundays with anyway. I am surprised by what happened because our pastor is normally pretty traditional and a bit of a rules stickler. That being said I would be surprised if that guitar could have made it into the choir loft, or the Great Amen, or Agnus Dei could have been changed, without him knowing about it.

If not my pastor then should I speak with someone at the bishop’s office?

I also can’t imagine he isn’t aware of the visiting priest and the things he does and changes every time he is there. One of our deacons are usually there with him.

I don’t know, I am upset and confused - but should I really be? Am I just more concerned about how I want mass to be and should be more concerned with worshiping God?

Help, please.

 

[FAB]

Please bear with me.

There is this one priest who helps out at our parish sometimes, and there are a number of things I have been concerned about for quite a while now. I let them go, thinking they were minor and yesterday my fear that not doing anything just would help things get out of hand someday may have been realized.

 

[CatholicZ09]

I would definately speak with the Pastor. These practices he does are a bit improper, but if it would make you feel better, I would speak with the Pastor. Also, I understand what you said about hearing “Gather Us In” and “One Bread, One Body” one more time. I like hearing some more traditional music sometimes, but that is up to the musical director. Maybe recommend some songs you’d like to hear sung? I did that with my music director and he’s using them currently.

 

[benedictgal]

He is not allowed to wing parts of the Mass at will. Now, the General Intercessions do allow some leeway, but, the rest of the Mass needs to go by the Roman Missal. Formula B for the Penitential Rite does give the celebrant a plethora of options, but, the ending for the first one has to be Kyrie Eleison (Lord, have mercy), for the second petition, Christe Eleison (Christ, have mercy) and the third, Kyrie Eleison (Lord, have mercy).

Regarding the Eucharistic Prayer, I find some serious issues with what the OP reported. This is what Redemptionis Sacramentum has to say:

[51.] Only those Eucharistic Prayers are to be used which are found in the Roman Missal or are legitimately approved by the Apostolic See, and according to the manner and the terms set forth by it. "It is not to be tolerated that some Priests take upon themselves the right to compose their own Eucharistic Prayers"129 or to change the same texts approved by the Church, or to introduce others composed by private individuals.130

The parts of the Mass also need to be respected. Again, according to Redemptionis Sacramentum:

[59.] The reprobated practice by which Priests, Deacons or the faithful here and there alter or vary at will the texts of the Sacred Liturgy that they are charged to pronounce, must cease. For in doing thus, they render the celebration of the Sacred Liturgy unstable, and not infrequently distort the authentic meaning of the Liturgy.

The Agnus Dei needs to remain intact and not be paraphrased. While “Lamb of God, you take away the sins of the world, have mercy on us” may be repeated as often as necessary for the fraction rite, addtional wording is not to be added. Furthermore, the Agnus Dei should end with “Lamb of God, you take away the sins of the world, grant us peace”.

Regarding the quality of music, Sacramentum Caritatis addresses this particular matter:

Liturgical song

1. In the ars celebrandi, liturgical song has a pre-eminent place. (126) Saint Augustine rightly says in a famous sermon that “the new man sings a new song. Singing is an expression of joy and, if we consider the matter, an expression of love” (127). The People of God assembled for the liturgy sings the praises of God. In the course of her two-thousand-year history, the Church has created, and still creates, music and songs which represent a rich patrimony of faith and love. This heritage must not be lost.** Certainly as far as the liturgy is concerned, we cannot say that one song is as good as another. Generic improvisation or the introduction of musical genres which fail to respect the meaning of the liturgy should be avoided.** As an element of the liturgy, song should be well integrated into the overall celebration (128). Consequently everything – texts, music, execution – ought to correspond to the meaning of the mystery being celebrated, the structure of the rite and the liturgical seasons (129). Finally, while respecting various styles and different and highly praiseworthy traditions, I desire, in accordance with the request advanced by the Synod Fathers, that Gregorian chant be suitably esteemed and employed (130) as the chant proper to the Roman liturgy (131).

Unfortnately, the two big publishing houses, OCP and GIA, tend to ignore this particular document, especially what I bolded in red. Oddly enough, even RS covers this particular aspect:

[57.] It is the right of the community of Christ’s faithful that especially in the Sunday celebration there should customarily be true and suitable sacred music, and that there should always be an altar, vestments and sacred linens that are dignified, proper, and clean, in accordance with the norms.

[58.] All of Christ’s faithful likewise have the right to a celebration of the Eucharist that has been so carefully prepared in all its parts that the Word of God is properly and efficaciously proclaimed and explained in it; that the faculty for selecting the liturgical texts and rites is carried out with care according to the norms; and that their faith is duly safeguarded and nourished by the words that are sung in the celebration of the Liturgy.

I hope this helps.

 

[ljubim]

MonkeyTape;5813646:

No that is not the case

With all due respect, yes it is

Cardinal Arinze “The local church should be conscious that church worship is not really the same as what we sing in a bar, or what we sing in a convention for youth. Therefore it should influence the type of instrument used, the type of music used. I will not now pronounce and say never guitars; that would be rather severe. But much of guitar music may not be suitable at all for the Mass.”
boston-catholic-journal.com/mass-is-not-entertainment-by-francis-cardinal-arinze.htm

Pope Benedict “Pope Benedict XVI has called for an end to electric guitars and modern music being played in church and demanded a return to traditional choirs and Gregorian chants.”
nysun.com/foreign/pope-opposes-guitar-riffs-at-church/35136/

Sadly we still wish to use guitars and do what makes us feel good

 

[4EverHis]

I’d consider changing parishes

 

[FAB]

FAB;5813923:

With all due respect, yes it is

Cardinal Arinze "The local church should be conscious that church worship is not really the same as what we sing in a bar, or what we sing in a convention for youth. Therefore it should influence the type of instrument used, the type of music used. I will not now pronounce and say never guitars; that would be rather severe. But much of guitar music may not be suitable at all for the Mass

."
boston-catholic-journal.com/mass-is-not-entertainment-by-francis-cardinal-arinze.htm

Pope Benedict “Pope Benedict XVI has called for an end to electric guitars and modern music being played in church and demanded a return to traditional choirs and Gregorian chants.”
nysun.com/foreign/pope-opposes-guitar-riffs-at-church/35136/

Sadly we still wish to use guitars and do what makes us feel good

None of this has even been made a displinary action. The church is worldwide, guitars are just one instrument that is used.

But much of guitar music may not be suitable at all for the Mass.

This does prohibit thier use, it states that not all guitar music is suitable.

Peace,
FAB

 

[onwillowbay]

We have an elderly priest at our parish who needs assistance through each mass. And assistance is readily available to him by pointing to what is to be said , etc.
But yesterday I had a bad experience, as well.
My husband died on May 4th. Mass was supposed to be said for him. But he was omitted. They just messed up and this is about the 3rd time of messups for my family.
I felt rather badly and sad but I also feel a pettiness about being “neglected”. My mom and I carried the gifts down yesterday and I guess that is why I am sad.
I overlook mistakes the elderly priest makes (and there are many) but I’m going through a pretty rough time right now and seriously thinking about changing parishes (in fact, this was going to be my last visit at this particular parish)…
Diane

 

[MonkeyTape]

With all due respect, yes it is

Cardinal Arinze “The local church should be conscious that church worship is not really the same as what we sing in a bar, or what we sing in a convention for youth. Therefore it should influence the type of instrument used, the type of music used. I will not now pronounce and say never guitars; that would be rather severe. But much of guitar music may not be suitable at all for the Mass.”
boston-catholic-journal.com/mass-is-not-entertainment-by-francis-cardinal-arinze.htm

This says much guitar music, not guitar music in general. In fact he says he can’t say never use guitars.

Pope Benedict “Pope Benedict XVI has called for an end to electric guitars and modern music being played in church and demanded a return to traditional choirs and Gregorian chants.”
nysun.com/foreign/pope-opposes-guitar-riffs-at-church/35136/

Sadly we still wish to use guitars and do what makes us feel good

While FAB says it was never made a disciplinary action I have to agree and disagree.

I agree with FAB in that guitars are but one instrument, in some cultures of which I may not be familiar they may be viewed as a higher form of art than ours.

I disagree with the spirit of that statement. How many have said they would do or not do something if the Church were to say so? These people often say that because they know the Church does not deal with matters on a individual basis very often. So to say guitars have not been singled out as improper isnot conclusive. For instance I bet harmonicas and kazoos have likewise not been singled out either. We must be mindful of what the intent of these statements are - that guitars, in most cases, lack the dignity of organs and, most importantly, the human voice in the liturgy.

 

[FAB]

With all due respect, yes it is

Cardinal Arinze “The local church should be conscious that church worship is not really the same as what we sing in a bar, or what we sing in a convention for youth. Therefore it should influence the type of instrument used, the type of music used. I will not now pronounce and say never guitars; that would be rather severe. But much of guitar music may not be suitable at all for the Mass.”
boston-catholic-journal.com/mass-is-not-entertainment-by-francis-cardinal-arinze.htm

This says much guitar music, not guitar music in general. In fact he says he can’t say never use guitars.

Pope Benedict “Pope Benedict XVI has called for an end to electric guitars and modern music being played in church and demanded a return to traditional choirs and Gregorian chants.”
nysun.com/foreign/pope-opposes-guitar-riffs-at-church/35136/

Sadly we still wish to use guitars and do what makes us feel good

While FAB says it was never made a disciplinary action I have to agree and disagree.

I agree with FAB in that guitars are but one instrument, in some cultures of which I may not be familiar they may be viewed as a higher form of art than ours.

I disagree with the spirit of that statement. How many have said they would do or not do something if the Church were to say so? These people often say that because they know the Church does not deal with matters on a individual basis very often. So to say guitars have not been singled out as improper isnot conclusive. For instance I bet harmonicas and kazoos have likewise not been singled out either. We must be mindful of what the intent of these statements are - that guitars, in most cases, lack the dignity of organs and, most importantly, the human voice in the liturgy.

Please try the entire quote

“the Church is not saying that everything should be Gregorian music. There is room for music which respects that language, that culture, that people. There is room for that too, and the present books say that is a matter for the bishops’ conference, because it generally goes beyond the boundaries of one diocese.”

What should not be the case is "individuals just composing anything and singing it in church. This is not right at all - no matter how talented the individual is. That brings us to the question of the instruments to be used.

"The local church should be conscious that church worship is not really the same as what we sing in a bar, or what we sing in a convention for youth. Therefore it should influence the type of instrument used, the type of music used.** I will not now pronounce and say never guitars that would be rather severe**. But much of guitar music may not be suitable at all for the Mass.

“The judgment would be left to the bishops of the area. It is wiser that way.”

Guitars are not prohibited.
Peace,
FAB

 

[Leticia_Isabel]

I ditto 4everHis…find a new church.

 

[FAB]

He is not allowed to wing parts of the Mass at will. Now, the General Intercessions do allow some leeway, but, the rest of the Mass needs to go by the Roman Missal. Formula B for the Penitential Rite does give the celebrant a plethora of options, but, the ending for the first one has to be Kyrie Eleison (Lord, have mercy), for the second petition, Christe Eleison (Christ, have mercy) and the third, Kyrie Eleison (Lord, have mercy).

Regarding the Eucharistic Prayer, I find some serious issues with what the OP reported. This is what Redemptionis Sacramentum has to say:

The parts of the Mass also need to be respected. Again, according to Redemptionis Sacramentum:

The Agnus Dei needs to remain intact and not be paraphrased. While “Lamb of God, you take away the sins of the world, have mercy on us” may be repeated as often as necessary for the fraction rite, addtional wording is not to be added. Furthermore, the Agnus Dei should end with “Lamb of God, you take away the sins of the world, grant us peace”.

Regarding the quality of music, Sacramentum Caritatis addresses this particular matter:

Unfortnately, the two big publishing houses, OCP and GIA, tend to ignore this particular document, especially what I bolded in red. Oddly enough, even RS covers this particular aspect:

I hope this helps.

I understand the norms of the Redemptionis Sacramentum and it’s reasoning, I believe though that some are to scrupulous in it’s enforcement. A visiting priest that changes a word or two is in violation of the document, but certainly hasn’t re-written it.
I have noticed thing form time to time, we have visiting priest who almost give a second homily before the closing communion prayer. I suppose a complaint would be in order, but to what end. Jesus main critique of the Pharasis was thier unbending enforcement of the law. Somehow, despite the strait forward language of the Redemptionis Sacramentum, do I think that condemation is required when every word is not said just so, was it’s intent.

Peace,
FAB

 

[benedictgal]

I understand the norms of the Redemptionis Sacramentum and it’s reasoning, I believe though that some are to scrupulous in it’s enforcement. A visiting priest that changes a word or two is in violation of the document, but certainly hasn’t re-written it.
I have noticed thing form time to time, we have visiting priest who almost give a second homily before the closing communion prayer. I suppose a complaint would be in order, but to what end. Jesus main critique of the Pharasis was thier unbending enforcement of the law. Somehow, despite the strait forward language of the Redemptionis Sacramentum, do I think that condemation is required when every word is not said just so, was it’s intent.

Peace,
FAB

With all due respect, I believe that you are wrong. Jesus’ criticism of the Pharisees had nothing to do with the cultic worship of Ancient Israel. In fact, Jesus never criticized the sacrificial form of cultic worship of Ancient Israel because His own Father was the one who dictated the norms. When Jesus criticized the Pharisees, He was talking about something entirely different. He talked about the Pharisees trying to impose Levitical law on the faithful such as all of the multiple ritual purifications that were designed for the priests alone, not the rest of Ancient Israel.

If you choose to take a lax view, as I read some of your posts in this and other threads, that is your personal opinion. However, it is not the Church’s.

As Redemptionis Sacramentum notes:

[11.] The Mystery of the Eucharist “is too great for anyone to permit himself to treat it according to his own whim, so that its sacredness and its universal ordering would be obscured”.27 On the contrary, anyone who acts thus by giving free rein to his own inclinations, even if he is a Priest, injures the substantial unity of the Roman Rite, which ought to be vigorously preserved,28 and becomes responsible for actions that are in no way consistent with the hunger and thirst for the living God that is experienced by the people today. Nor do such actions serve authentic pastoral care or proper liturgical renewal; instead, they deprive Christ’s faithful of their patrimony and their heritage. For arbitrary actions are not conducive to true renewal,29 but are detrimental to the right of Christ’s faithful to a liturgical celebration that is an expression of the Church’s life in accordance with her tradition and discipline. In the end, they introduce elements of distortion and disharmony into the very celebration of the Eucharist, which is oriented in its own lofty way and by its very nature to signifying and wondrously bringing about the communion of divine life and the unity of the People of God.30 The result is uncertainty in matters of doctrine, perplexity and scandal on the part of the People of God, and, almost as a necessary consequence, vigorous opposition, all of which greatly confuse and sadden many of Christ’s faithful in this age of ours when Christian life is often particularly difficult on account of the inroads of “secularization” as well.31

[12.] On the contrary, it is the right of all of Christ’s faithful that the Liturgy, and in particular the celebration of Holy Mass, should truly be as the Church wishes, according to her stipulations as prescribed in the liturgical books and in the other laws and norms. Likewise, the Catholic people have the right that the Sacrifice of the Holy Mass should be celebrated for them in an integral manner, according to the entire doctrine of the Church’s Magisterium. Finally, it is the Catholic community’s right that the celebration of the Most Holy Eucharist should be carried out for it in such a manner that it truly stands out as a sacrament of unity, to the exclusion of all blemishes and actions that might engender divisions and factions in the Church.32

The OP and the rest of us, for that matter, have the right to have the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass properly celebrated, free of liturgical abuse. What the OP witnessed was abusive, whether you choose to see that or not.

 

[FAB]

With all due respect, I believe that you are wrong. Jesus’ criticism of the Pharisees had nothing to do with the cultic worship of Ancient Israel. In fact, Jesus never criticized the sacrificial form of cultic worship of Ancient Israel because His own Father was the one who dictated the norms. When Jesus criticized the Pharisees, He was talking about something entirely different. He talked about the Pharisees trying to impose Levitical law on the faithful such as all of the multiple ritual purifications that were designed for the priests alone, not the rest of Ancient Israel.

If you choose to take a lax view, as I read some of your posts in this and other threads, that is your personal opinion. However, it is not the Church’s.

As Redemptionis Sacramentum notes:

The OP and the rest of us, for that matter, have the right to have the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass properly celebrated, free of liturgical abuse. What the OP witnessed was abusive, whether you choose to see that or not.

You don’t answer the basis of by comment. What does it achieve to be so scrupulous? I also do not presume to speak for the Church as you seem to. Perhaps I am just trying to be more forgiving of human faults.

I disagree with you interpetation of the Jesus Critique of the Pharisis. His point was that they were so bound up in the law that they failed to unstand the reason behind the law of the effect it intended on the individual person.

The Redemptionis Sacramentum is to stop abuses in the liturgy and to hold the priest to a stricter standand, but not to make him into a church robot. True abuses can have remedies, but a lot of these things are just nit picking. So once agian, what does that accomplish?

Peace,
FAB

 

[benedictgal]

You don’t answer the basis of by comment. What does it achieve to be so scrupulous? I also do not presume to speak for the Church as you seem to. Perhaps I am just trying to be more forgiving of human faults.

I disagree with you interpetation of the Jesus Critique of the Pharisis. His point was that they were so bound up in the law that they failed to unstand the reason behind the law of the effect it intended on the individual person.

The Redemptionis Sacramentum is to stop abuses in the liturgy and to hold the priest to a stricter standand, but not to make him into a church robot. True abuses can have remedies, but a lot of these things are just nit picking. So once agian, what does that accomplish?

Peace,
FAB

Again, Jesus’ rebuke of the Pharisees had absolutely nothing to do with the cultic worship of Ancient Israel. If you were to read the New Testament carefully and, with all due respect, study why the Pharisees came into being, you would note that they were making an honest, but misguided attempt, at trying to keep Ancient Israel from sinning. The sins of Ancient Israel led to the Babylonian Exile and lots of other bad things. When Ancient Israel was taken captive, there was no Temple for the Chosen People to offer sacrificial worship. This is where the Pharisees came into being. Out of spiritual paranoia, they decided to go to the extreme and make sure that Ancient Israel would not fall into deadly sin again. That is why they surrounded the Law with a whole bunch of other laws, including binding the entire community of Ancient Israel to the mandates and prescriptions reserved solely to the priests. That is what Jesus was addressing. It had nothing, absolutely nothing to do with the Sacrificial cultic worship of Ancient Israel, whose norms were dictated by the God, the Father, Himself.

Redemptionis Sacramentum came into being because things have been going out of hand with the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass to the point that things, such as that described by the OP, were happening. For you to compare this to Pharisaism, as I see it, is to completely miss the point. There is room for legitimate flexibility, but, not in the manner described in the OP. For you to claim that this document would make priests “robots” is to also miss the point.

 

[FAB]

Again, Jesus’ rebuke of the Pharisees had absolutely nothing to do with the cultic worship of Ancient Israel. If you were to read the New Testament carefully and, with all due respect, study why the Pharisees came into being, you would note that they were making an honest, but misguided attempt, at trying to keep Ancient Israel from sinning. The sins of Ancient Israel led to the Babylonian Exile and lots of other bad things. When Ancient Israel was taken captive, there was no Temple for the Chosen People to offer sacrificial worship. This is where the Pharisees came into being. Out of spiritual paranoia, they decided to go to the extreme and make sure that Ancient Israel would not fall into deadly sin again. That is why they surrounded the Law with a whole bunch of other laws, including binding the entire community of Ancient Israel to the mandates and prescriptions reserved solely to the priests. That is what Jesus was addressing. It had nothing, absolutely nothing to do with the Sacrificial cultic worship of Ancient Israel, whose norms were dictated by the God, the Father, Himself.

 

[ljubim]

Didn’t our last 2 popes and Cardinal Arinze all say that guitars during mass are inappropriate liturgical music? Prayer services and such are just fine, but not the liturgy?

Going back, yes, in excess they are inappropriate. And case by case it still depends. Let’s not wage a semantics war. I mean at the very least guitars are a less fitting, but still ok form of music, right? Or am I missing the point of our highest Church authorities here?

 

[benedictgal]

It was the temple system that Jesus was specifically condeming. The money changers in the temple for example, the example of the widow’s contribution was condeming the idea that before any one could worship in the temple, they had to give to the temple, not matter how little they had. The temple should have been helping the widow.

You continue to miss my point. If we become overly scruplious, such as this thread wants to do with this priest, if we put the action above the spiritual and supernatural aspect of the Eucharist, we become as the Pharisis, putting the law above human need.

Peace,
FAB

Fab, you are the one missing the point. Jesus was not condeming the Sacrificial worship of Ancient Israel, especially since this was the prefigurement of His authentic True sacrifice.

You are also getting your scriptural passages confused. The indicent with the money changers had nothing to do with the widow’s mite. It also has nothing to do with this thread. Neither of them do. He also never said anything about them helping the widow. He noted that she gave from her want, not from her excess and he extolled her for that. What you are talking about is social justice. This is not the subject of the thread.

In fact, the moneychanger incident actually only serves to solidify the point that I am making regarding liturgical abuse, since what the moneychangers were doing was profaning the Temple.

With all due respect, I would suggest that you read the scriptures in the context of what is happening.

Unfortunately, liturgical abuse has been around since the time of Moses. Recall that Aaron’s sons committed the first act of liturgical abuse by violating the norms dictated by God, Himself. Later on, Dathan and another priest violated the norms. All of them were fatally punished.

Jesus condemned violations against the sacrificial Temple worship when he threw the moneychangers out. St. Paul also condemned liturgical abuse when he lashed out at the Corinthians.

 

[DOShea]

It was the temple system that Jesus was specifically condeming. The money changers in the temple for example,

There was nothing wrong with money changers being IN the temple. They were set up in the outer court before the entrance to the main worship-conducting part of the temple to allow Jews to fulfill their obligation given in the book of Exodus to be able to pay their 1/2 shekel annual temple tax. It was necessary because their laws prohibited use of any coin with a graven image… and under Roman rule, all coins had an image of Caesar on them. The purpose of the money changer was to allow these coins to be converted to shekels, a coin made just for this purpose, that contained an image of a palm on it (not a person).

What Jesus was responding to was the fact that they were charging 8:1 exchange rate, so it cost a person 4 shekels in reality to pay the 1/2 shekel required. Without that tax being paid, they were prevented from further worship (offering their sacrifice).

The sin was barring access to God by price-gouging in the required temple tax money conversion, not simply being there.

 

[MonkeyTape]

You don’t answer the basis of by comment. What does it achieve to be so scrupulous? I also do not presume to speak for the Church as you seem to. Perhaps I am just trying to be more forgiving of human faults.

I disagree with you interpetation of the Jesus Critique of the Pharisis. His point was that they were so bound up in the law that they failed to unstand the reason behind the law of the effect it intended on the individual person.

The Redemptionis Sacramentum is to stop abuses in the liturgy and to hold the priest to a stricter standand, but not to make him into a church robot. True abuses can have remedies, but a lot of these things are just nit picking. So once agian, what does that accomplish?

Peace,
FAB

Perhaps a lot of those things were nit picking, and I freely admitted that possibility as i was writing as well at the end of my post. However, by your own admissions some of those things are a bit more severe if only “a lot” were nit picking. Also, when many small things occur at one time it can, and usually does, pile up and make a bigger deal.

Many of these things had been happening and I just grumbled to wife a bit afterwards. It was this last Sunday that much more happened. In effect because I, and apparently everyone else, just sat there and let small things go by we were hit with more later.

As Benedictgal said we have the right to a mass free of liturgical abuses. If you think not having abuses makes the priest a robot then I do not know what to answer to you.

His freedom comes in using chant or not or during the homily - which really was one of his better this last Sunday. It doesn’t come when the Church prescribes otherwise.