How can I report liturgical abuse when the priests keep changing?

[Joannm]

Again I ask why do you accept the OP at face value against the priests?
What happened to innocent until proven guilty?? My pity and mercy at this stage goes out to the priests who are being accused of abuses without any evidence being presented.
Shame on anyone who backs an accuser in such a scenario.

I no doubt believe that the OP honestly has experienced some “abuses”, we all do. However, he mentioned being new to the faith. Is he aware that there are times when the penitential rites are not used? Does he know there are 13 Eucharistic prayers and that usually only 4 are printed in missalettes? There are times when the creed is not prayed on Sundays. Also, we have a lot of visiting priests from other countries and while they are to hold to the same GIRM, I find that they often do some strange things. We just had one from India who basically made up his own mass. He is well over 80 years old and wasn’t about to change what he did. We are in such a need of summer help that no one bothers to confront them…and when you do they get angry and don’t want to hear it from a lay person (no less a woman). So we put up with it for a few weeks. The bishop isn’t go to do anything and what is the use to write the Vatican when by the time we get a response the priest will be back in India or Ghana or Kenya or the Philippines.

With all my liturgical background I could go crazy at almost any mass I go to noticing mistakes or irregular activities (I don’t call them abuses, I save that for really serious things that I hardly ever experience). I have learned to focus on Jesus when I begin to get distracted by what the priest is doing wrong. I pray for the priest also.

 

[Student09]

I no doubt believe that the OP honestly has experienced some “abuses”, we all do. However, he mentioned being new to the faith. Is he aware that there are times when the penitential rites are not used? Does he know there are 13 Eucharistic prayers and that usually only 4 are printed in missalettes?

Are there also times when Mass is not supposed to begin with the sign of the cross or there is no “This is the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of world”? Are those also optional? And I suppose it is totally fine for a priest to say that “the Catechism of the Catholic Church is very restrictive” and “We have this idea that we need to go to Confession when we sin; Catholics really have a problem with guilt.”

Sigh. If y’all don’t want to believe me, oh well. I guess that isn’t really my problem.

 

[Veronica7978]

Again I ask why do you accept the OP at face value against the priests?
What happened to innocent until proven guilty?? My pity and mercy at this stage goes out to the priests who are being accused of abuses without any evidence being presented.
Shame on anyone who backs an accuser in such a scenario.

Whatever. The priests don’t even know. This kid has issues that you refuse to see because you are blinded by the fact that you have selected a side and must now stay on it. Jump over to the good side. It’s nice over here!

 

[Veronica7978]

Are there also times when Mass is not supposed to begin with the sign of the cross or there is no “This is the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of world”? Are those also optional? And I suppose it is totally fine for a priest to say that “the Catechism of the Catholic Church is very restrictive” and “We have this idea that we need to go to Confession when we sin; Catholics really have a problem with guilt.”

Sigh. If y’all don’t want to believe me, oh well. I guess that isn’t really my problem.

Most of us believe you; however, we are stating, for your own good, move on with your life. Report it, get some help.

 

[thistle]

Whatever. The priests don’t even know. This kid has issues that you refuse to see because you are blinded by the fact that you have selected a side and must now stay on it. Jump over to the good side. It’s nice over here!

Without any evidence the right side is ALWAYS to support the priests.

 

[Veronica7978]

Without any evidence the right side is ALWAYS to support the priests.

Like I said, “Whatever.”

 

[Student09]

Without any evidence the right side is ALWAYS to support the priests.

How would I be able to give evidence over the internet?

Do you respond the same way to everyone who posts about experiencing liturgical abuses, or are you treating me this way because I mentioned that I was scrupulous and you assume that everyone who has any kind of emotional problem must be a pathological liar?

Besides, what do you think is going to happen to these priests if the members of CAF foolishly believe my over-the-internet testimony? I mean, nothing will happen to them. I have not mentioned the name of the parish or any of the priests. No offense, but you are simply not making any sense at all.

 

[Student09]

Most of us believe you; however, we are stating, for your own good, move on with your life. Report it, get some help.

Thank you … I am moving on.

 

[CB_Catholic]

As I said, I don’t remember the exact date of every Mass I have attended there.

Would you consider leaving out parts of the Mass, such as the pentitential rite, the Agnus Dei, the “This is the Lamb of God,” and the final blessing, and using a “memorial accalamation” that is not one of the options, and changing the words of the Eucharistic prayer, to be “actual abuses and serious enough to be reported”?

You know what, forget it … you people are not helping and I have enough to deal with. This is all just so unfair.

Calm down. I am not arguing with you or assuming anything. I am just trying to be helpful. There are some things that posters have called abuses that actually were not when further investigated. For instance, the penetential rite. That may be omitted under certain circumstances, so be sure that if it is omitted, it is not under one of those circumstances. I am only saying that you need to do your homework, be sure that what was done or not done is an abuse, not an allowed variation, etc. I’m telling you to keep it factual, keep your personal oinions and emotions out of it, and be able to back it up. Otherwise, you are not going to get anywhere with the higher ups. And really, this is only common sense and what you would do in a secular circumstance, like filing a complaint at work, or anything else.

Furthermore, what people have written here seems to be mostly fairly helpful. The problem is that what you have presented sounds like real abuse, but you don’t know the names of the priests, when it was, etc. How can anyone help you with that? We weren’t there. And when you write your letter the people who read it are going to want these facts. So we are helpful, we’re telling you what you need to do to get your case heard and action taken.

 

[malphono]

And when you write your letter the people who read it are going to want these facts. So we are helpful, we’re telling you what you need to do to get your case heard and action taken.

With due respect, even in the absence of names, I think the OP can still present the case to the bishop. It seems to me that what the OP should do is present as much detail as available and simply ask the bishop to explain if what was done was correct or not. For example, something like this:

Your Excellency,

My name is Mx XYZ and I’m a parishioner at St. X in Anytown. I frequently attend daily Mass at St Y Cathedral, and am writing to ask for your help.

It often happens that the priest celebrant seems not to be following the prayers of the Order of Mass printed in the Missal, and this is of concern to me. For example, at the 0 am Mass on 0/0/10 xxxxx and yyyy were omitted, and the words of zzzz were changed. Is is correct to do that? …

Doing it that way, the OP is asking for the bishop’s help in understanding what was done, and why it was done. If it happens that it was one of the ubiquitous “options” in the OF, the bishop would (hopefully) explain that. If it happens that it was a “novelty” or, worse, a true abuse, the bishop would (again, hopefully) explain that too.

I would suggest that the key is the tone of the letter. If the tone is huffy and accusatory, the letter will probably get tossed into the circular file. OTOH, if it’s simple and humble, it should get a response. It shows a parishioner who is interested in the Mass and who is simply asking what should and should not be done. Now, if the latter does not get a response, one would have to surmise that the bishop is already aware of what’s going on and either approves of it or doesn’t care.

Another :twocents: from me.

 

[Veronica7978]

With due respect, even in the absence of names, I think the OP can still present the case to the bishop. It seems to me that what the OP should do is present as much detail as available and simply ask the bishop to explain if what was done was correct or not. For example, something like this:

Your Excellency,

My name is Mx XYZ and I’m a parishioner at St. X in Anytown. I frequently attend daily Mass at St Y Cathedral, and am writing to ask for your help.

It often happens that the priest celebrant seems not to be following the prayers of the Order of Mass printed in the Missal, and this is of concern to me. For example, at the 0 am Mass on 0/0/10 xxxxx and yyyy were omitted, and the words of zzzz were changed. Is is correct to do that? …

Doing it that way, the OP is asking for the bishop’s help in understanding what was done, and why it was done. If it happens that it was one of the ubiquitous “options” in the OF, the bishop would (hopefully) explain that. If it happens that it was a “novelty” or, worse, a true abuse, the bishop would (again, hopefully) explain that too.

I would suggest that the key is the tone of the letter. If the tone is huffy and accusatory, the letter will probably get tossed into the circular file. OTOH, if it’s simple and humble, it should get a response. It shows a parishioner who is interested in the Mass and who is simply asking what should and should not be done. Now, if the latter does not get a response, one would have to surmise that the bishop is already aware of what’s going on and either approves of it or doesn’t care.

Another :twocents: from me.

Good advice.

 

[jay29]

The assistant priest in my parish doesn’t do the fraction rite until AFTER “The Lamb of God” recitations and today I didn’t notice him put a piece of the Consecrated Host back into the Consecrated Wine either.

 

[thistle]

How would I be able to give evidence over the internet?

Do you respond the same way to everyone who posts about experiencing liturgical abuses, or are you treating me this way because I mentioned that I was scrupulous and you assume that everyone who has any kind of emotional problem must be a pathological liar?

Besides, what do you think is going to happen to these priests if the members of CAF foolishly believe my over-the-internet testimony? I mean, nothing will happen to them. I have not mentioned the name of the parish or any of the priests. No offense, but you are simply not making any sense at all.

In the first place you shouldn’t come here complaining to us.
Your very first action would be to meet the priest immediately after Mass and POLITELY (not confront) ask him about the things that concerned you. After all you may not know if an abuse has actually taken place. Also you may have misheard what the priest said or didn’t hear something he said assuming then that he missed out some words.
It seems to me you simply attend Mass at this particular Church to look and listen for “abuses” instead of focussing on Christ.

By the way even if you have not named the priests in this thread you are nevertheless scandalising them here.

In case you wonder what evidence is it would be video, audio of the abuse or lots of other people at the same Mass who can support your claims.

 

[Veronica7978]

In the first place you shouldn’t come here complaining to us.
Your very first action would be to meet the priest immediately after Mass and POLITELY (not confront) ask him about the things that concerned you. After all you may not know if an abuse has actually taken place. Also you may have misheard what the priest said or didn’t hear something he said assuming then that he missed out some words.
It seems to me you simply attend Mass at this particular Church to look and listen for “abuses” instead of focussing on Christ.

By the way even if you have not named the priests in this thread you are nevertheless scandalising them here.

In case you wonder what evidence is it would be video, audio of the abuse or lots of other people at the same Mass who can support your claims.

Student, Don’t listen to this nonsense. This person is obviously a little self-important. Shouldn’t worry you any.

Get on with your life, and don’t worry about this anymore. You’ve done nothing wrong.

 

[thistle]

Student, Don’t listen to this nonsense. This person is obviously a little self-important. Shouldn’t worry you any.

Get on with your life, and don’t worry about this anymore. You’ve done nothing wrong.

He’s making unfounded accusations against priests. Its really amazing you are taking his side against the priests who deserve your support.
You say he has done nothing wrong. Okay. What evidence (bear in mind making a claim is not evidence) has he presented here to make you believe that the priests committed these abuses? If none, then the priests deserve your support.

 

[Cat]

It seems to me that the OP should, for the time being, forget about reporting liturgical abuses and instead, invest some serious time and effort into getting treatment for scrupulosity.

From what I have read, scrupulosity is a form of mental illness, a variation of obsessive-compulsive disorder. This, IMO, creates a serious “credibity gap.” I’m guessing that people in authority will have reasonable doubts about the OPs ability to correctly evaluate a Mass, since scruples may interfere with the ability to see reality.

What I’m saying is that the “abuses” may exist mainly in the OP’s scrupulous mind.

Even if the abuses are really happening, those in authority may be hesitant to act based solely on the testimony of someone who suffers from scrupulosity. Of course, they can come and see for themselves. But authorities are busy. If only one person is complaining, and that person has a mental illness, I can understand why the authorities may choose not to make an issue of it.

Once the OP has worked with a priest and/or counselor to overcome scrupulosity, THEN he/she can more accurately assess the Mass and determine whether the abuses truly exist and how to best get them corrected. And THEN the authorities will hopefully be more willing to pay attention to the OP.

It’s a question of priorities. The OP should take care of their own soul and mind FIRST, and THEN work on helping others. This is not the right time of life for the OP to be working on the problems of others.

 

[zab]

It’s a question of priorities. The OP should take care of their own soul and mind FIRST, and THEN work on helping others. This is not the right time of life for the OP to be working on the problems of others.

I agree. But I also want to add that I believe part of the OP’s problem is in regards to previous threads where some posters were stressing that one had a duty to report abuses and I believe this only added to the scrupulocity thus the questioning “Am I going to hell if I don’t report it”.

 

[Student09]

I agree. But I also want to add that I believe part of the OP’s problem is in regards to previous threads where some posters were stressing that one had a duty to report abuses and I believe this only added to the scrupulocity thus the questioning “Am I going to hell if I don’t report it”.

Thank you for actually reading what I wrote. I really appreciate that. Yes, I was not planning to report any of this until the responses I got on that thread - and even then I wasn’t planning to until I had a bad day and had a “scruple attack” triggered by the general stress. For what it’s worth, the responses of those on that thread to my statement of what had happened indicates that people other than me think that what I witnessed were real abuses.

That said, I am taking the advice of those on the thread who have told me to take care of myself rather than worrying about reporting. Thank you.

 

[Student09]

From what I have read, scrupulosity is a form of mental illness, a variation of obsessive-compulsive disorder. This, IMO, creates a serious “credibity gap.” I’m guessing that people in authority will have reasonable doubts about the OPs ability to correctly evaluate a Mass, since scruples may interfere with the ability to see reality.

It can be, and often is, associated with OCD, but it doesn’t have to be. In my case, I do not have OCD, just generalized anxiety, which I think is probably the reason why my scruples are not as severe as many people’s that I have read about or encountered on these forums. I am able to assess reality in most situations, just not in regards to judging when I personally have and have not sinned or what the severity of the sin is. Basically, I am so terrified that I will commit a sin or that I have already committed a sin and separated myself from God, that the fear gets in the way of judging; I may even be able to make a reasonable judgment, but then there will be this terrible anxiety - “What if I’m wrong? What if I’m really just deceiving myself to make things easier for myself?” and so on. When looking at another person’s situation I can usually make a normal judgment because the fear is not involved in that situation. I hope this helps you and others to have a better understanding of scrupulosity.

While scrupulous people may overreact to some things that happen in the Mass and have difficulty keeping perspective, I think that when a third of the order of Mass is missing, being perturbed is not an overreaction. I heard some older parishioners talking outside after this particular Mass, and they were clearly upset and questioning the priest’s actions. For all I know, some of them may already have written a complaint and you are right that they would probably be taken more seriously than me, especially since they are older and have been Catholic for a longer time.

 

[Student09]

It can be, and often is, associated with OCD, but it doesn’t have to be. In my case, I do not have OCD, just generalized anxiety, which I think is probably the reason why my scruples are not as severe as many people’s that I have read about or encountered on these forums. I am able to assess reality in most situations, just not in regards to judging when I personally have and have not sinned or what the severity of the sin is. Basically, I am so terrified that I will commit a sin or that I have already committed a sin and separated myself from God, that the fear gets in the way of judging; I may even be able to make a reasonable judgment, but then there will be this terrible anxiety - “What if I’m wrong? What if I’m really just deceiving myself to make things easier for myself?” and so on. When looking at another person’s situation I can usually make a normal judgment because the fear is not involved in that situation. I hope this helps you and others to have a better understanding of scrupulosity.

While scrupulous people may overreact to some things that happen in the Mass and have difficulty keeping perspective, I think that when a third of the order of Mass is missing, being perturbed is not an overreaction. I heard some older parishioners talking outside after this particular Mass, and they were clearly upset and questioning the priest’s actions. For all I know, some of them may already have written a complaint and you are right that they would probably be taken more seriously than me, especially since they are older and have been Catholic for a longer time.