How can the Collapse of the Liturgy be reversed?

[Rickwood]

I’m sorry, what is the purpose of a “liturgist”?

I’ve never met one, heard of one, or belonged to a parish that has one.

The pastor is in charge of the liturgy. To delegate this seems odd. For a lay person to have control of the liturgy seems absurd.

Why, anyway, would a priest need help from a “liturgist”? It’s all in the Missal.

One more big plus for the EF. No options, no need for “liturgists”.

God Bless

I know your question is rhetorical, but I’ll answer it.

In many parishes, particularly large ones there is a “liturgist.” If you go to a very large venue like the National Shrine, there is a priest designated as the Director of Liturgy – and it’s not the Rector. In my parish we don’t have a separate director of the liturgy, but my pastor is aided by a priest who is our diocesan liturgical director.

Such positions exist because the pastor/rector is often not able to do it all on his own, depending on the demands on his time and his own expertise. For large liturgies or those that only happen once in a great while (the cardinal visits for an ordination Mass), my pastor while a bright and wise man, would not be able to do as good a job as our diocesan liturgist.

One huge problem I see is the role of “liturgist” is often given to unqualified people in situations were no liturgist other than the pastor is necessary. That can cause a great number of problems.

As for the OF/EF quip, there are plenty of options with the EF as well – which model of the EF to celebrate, music, etc. The Pope has a liturgist (actually a whole team of them) even when he celebrates the EF.

 

[Rickwood]

Maybe so. That would certainly be troublesome.

Forcing the EF in this sort of situation though, might bring the priest in question closer to an official state of schism, which is most likely the reality anyway, if his Masses are filled will abuses.

It’s unfortunate, but if this is the situation, if he wouldn’t even obey the strict rubrics for the TLM, then he’s never going to have good liturgy, because he’ll blatantly ignore the official instructions.

And for some reason, liturgical abuses seem to go hand in hand with a heterodox perspective on faith and morals.

I might be foolish, but I feel like things need to move closer to a head. Eventually, there’s going to be a Reformed American Catholic Church (if there’s not already one brewing somewhere). Might as well get it over with sooner, in my opinion.

Sounds like yet another Protestant sect.

If you think the Holy See is going to allow “two Churches”, then you need to study the history of the Church. There is now way the Holy See would even allow a separate Tridentine rite. Far too divisive.

 

[PrayforMallory]

It may be that pastoral attention to their liturgical needs could address the anger issue, too, though, don’t you think? Right or wrong, being habitually ignored does tempt toward a habit of bitterness and anger.

There are many places where the pastors and their priestly help are already stretched so thin that I would hesitate to make the TLM a requirement, particularly in metropolitan areas where more limited offerings would actually lead to larger stable TLM groups. Nevertheless, I think it is pretty clear that the EF fills a real spiritual need. There are times when not every need can be met, but needs should be addressed whenever possible, and should come before wants. More important than what I think, the Holy See would seem to have the same opinion.

If it’s advertised enough, it will catch on. I’m sure a lot of people didn’t like the OF when it was first promulgated, but people got used to it.

I just feel like the day people choose which Mass they go to based on the time of day they are offered, instead of which form they are going to,will be the day that both forms reach their full potential. It’d be nice if one day the forms weren’t so drastically different, so that people could actually choose Masses more convenient to their driving schedule, etc.

That would be a long way off, I fear.

Eventually a good chunk of the American Church is going to schism of women priests and gay marriage, so maybe then the only parishes in communion with Rome will be orthodox.

 

[PrayforMallory]

Sounds like yet another Protestant sect.

If you think the Holy See is going to allow “two Churches”, then you need to study the history of the Church. There is now way the Holy See would even allow a separate Tridentine rite. Far too divisive.

Oh don’t get me wrong. I wasn’t suggesting that EF people were going to form a new Church. I was suggesting that NCR-type dissenters will end up starting a new Church, totally breaking from Rome, in which their excommunications mean nothing to their flocks.

I keep feeling like we are facing a stark choice- either bend on our morals or face schism.

 

[Rickwood]

If it’s advertised enough, it will catch on. I’m sure a lot of people didn’t like the OF when it was first promulgated, but people got used to it.

I just feel like the day people choose which Mass they go to based on the time of day they are offered, instead of which form they are going to,will be the day that both forms reach their full potential. It’d be nice if one day the forms weren’t so drastically different, so that people could actually choose Masses more convenient to their driving schedule, etc.

That would be a long way off, I fear.

Eventually a good chunk of the American Church is going to schism of women priests and gay marriage, so maybe then the only parishes in communion with Rome will be orthodox.

What would make you post such a comment? You don’t even qualify it by “In my opinion…”

Do you think most devout Catholics even think in such terms, let alone post them?

The Catholic Church is not the Anglican Communion. God made a promise to us:

**Mat 16:18 ** And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it.

 

[Rickwood]

Oh don’t get me wrong. I wasn’t suggesting that EF people were going to form a new Church. I was suggesting that NCR-type dissenters will end up starting a new Church, totally breaking from Rome, in which their excommunications mean nothing to their flocks.

I keep feeling like we are facing a stark choice- either bend on our morals or face schism.

Where have you been? It’s called Orthodoxy, Protestantism and paganism. It’s been going on for nearly a thousand years.

You’re wrong about “breaking away from Rome.” Those that have that mindset are long gone or they were never Catholic to begin with. The problem are those that remain who want to “change the Church.” Being in communion with the Holy See is just as important to them as their own egos. They want to be Catholic – just on their own terms. Leaving the Church is not something they embrace.

(N.B. Slurs like “NCR-type dissenters” are not only ignorant, they are unnecessary here. I’m not sure what National Cash Register has to do with anything, but “NPR-type dissenters” would be just as ignorant and unneeded.)

 

[japhy]

What would make you post such a comment? You don’t even qualify it by “In my opinion…”

There are already a fair number of American Catholics who support women’s ordination. There are a few dozen people who have excommunicated themselves over it in the past couple of months.

There’s an undercurrent of dissent in the Church in America; not everywhere, but in many places. I could name a few, but then this thread would be shut down, and we know I don’t want that to happen. Safe to say, there are priests who preach heresy at the Mass, and parishioners who eat it up.

Please do me a favor: don’t get this or any other Liturgy & Sacraments thread locked or deleted!

 

[EasterJoy]

Maybe so. That would certainly be troublesome.

Forcing the EF in this sort of situation though, might bring the priest in question closer to an official state of schism, which is most likely the reality anyway, if his Masses are filled will abuses.

It’s unfortunate, but if this is the situation, if he wouldn’t even obey the strict rubrics for the TLM, then he’s never going to have good liturgy, because he’ll blatantly ignore the official instructions.

And for some reason, liturgical abuses seem to go hand in hand with a heterodox perspective on faith and morals.

I might be foolish, but I feel like things need to move closer to a head. Eventually, there’s going to be a Reformed American Catholic Church (if there’s not already one brewing somewhere). Might as well get it over with sooner, in my opinion.

“Over with” might be a bit much to ask for. IMHO, there is already schismatics openly attempting to work as if it they can legitimately operate as an underground arm of the Roman Catholic Church. They call themselves Roman Catholic Womenpriests. They are excommunicated automatically for having attempted the ordination of women, but they “reject their excommunication” and act as if they are not. So don’t expect everyone who is in schism to be so courteous as to vacate the buildings or hand in the stationery. They might, and then again, they might not.

I don’t think there are any priests out there who change the Mass around because they hate the Church, hate the Lord, or any of that. There are a few that may have, in reality, lost or abandoned the faith–meaning they reject things so basic as a literal Resurrection and the True Presence–but I really believe that the vast majority are doing what they think best. The vast majority intend to be faithful to God, even as they rationalize that this might involve being disobedient to their bishop.

When bringing these priests back around to playing according to Hoyle, or if their seminary preparation was poor, bringing them around to playing cricket in the first place, a wise bishop will recognize that there are those whose return is possible, if the bishop leads firmly but in charity. He is dealing with brother priests, bright guys who have given up everything to hand their lives over to the Church, to tend to the well-being of their brothers and sisters in the faith. I think the most successful bishops always treat their priests with that in mind.

The same thing goes for liberal parishes. You won’t get anywhere by coming in and telling them they have abandoned the faith. You have to convince them that while you believe they want to be faithful to the Gospel, some of what they want and need lies in a different direction than where they’ve been headed. The ones whose rehabilitation is possible will still need that much.

Think about what SSPX needs to come back. That is what I mean. You have to at least recognize where the intention was to be faithful.

 

[benedictgal]

Here is the explanation given by the Holy Father’s MC, Msgr. Guido Marin, regarding the location of the crucifix during the Papal Masses:

On the placement of the cross at the center of the altar, Marini says:

«This indicates the centrality of the Crucified One in the Eucharistic celebration, and the exact orientation that the entire assembly is called to have during the Eucharistic liturgy: we do not look at ourselves, but we look at Him who was born, died, and rose for us, the Savior. Salvation comes from Lord, He is the East, the rising Sun to whom we must all turn our eyes, from whom we must receive the gift of grace. The question of liturgical orientation in the Eucharistic celebration, and the manner – including practical – in which this takes form, is of great importance, because with it is communicated a fundamental reality that is at the same time theological and anthropological, ecclesiological and inherent to personal spirituality.»

Regarding the Motu Propio, Msgr.Marini offers this explanation:

«As for the motu proprio cited, considering this with serene attention and without ideological views, together with the letter presenting it addressed by the pope to the bishops of the whole world, a precise, twofold intention emerges. First of all, there is the intention of making it easier to reach “a reconciliation in the bosom of the Church”; and in this sense, as has been said, the motu proprio is a beautiful act of love for the unity of the Church. In the second place – and this fact must not be forgotten – its aim is that of fostering a mutual enrichment between the two forms of the Roman rite: in such a way, for example, that in the celebration according to the missal of Paul VI (the ordinary form of the Roman rite) "will be able to demonstrate, more powerfully than has been the case hitherto, the sacrality which attracts many people to the former usage.»

And finally, the comment that centers around the issue raised by the Holy Father, as quoted in the OP certainly jibes with what Msgr. Marini has to say:

As for terms like “preconciliar” and “postconciliar” that are used by some, it seems to me that these belong to an outdated language, and if they are used with the intention of indicating a discontinuity in the Church’s journey, I maintain that they are mistaken and typical of highly reductive ideological views. There are “old things and new things” that belong to the treasury of the Church of all time, and must be considered as such. The wise man is able to find both of these in his treasury, without appealing to other criteria apart from those of the Gospel and the Church. Not all that is new is true, nor is all that is old. The truth spans old and new, and it is for this that we must strive, without prejudice. The Church lives according to the law of continuity in virtue of which it recognizes development rooted in tradition. What is most important is that everything work together so that the liturgical celebration truly is the celebration of the sacred mystery, of the crucified and risen Lord who becomes present in his Church, reenacting the mystery of salvation and calling us, in the logic of an authentic and active participation, to share to the full in his own life, which is a life given in love to the Father and to his brothers, a life of holiness.»

The Holy Father is rebuilding the liturgy and stengthening it by, first and foremost, leading by example. He is Peter. He knows what he needs to do and is wasting no time getting the job done.

 

[japhy]

Where have you been? It’s called Orthodoxy, Protestantism and paganism. It’s been going on for nearly a thousand years.

You’re wrong about “breaking away from Rome.” Those that have that mindset are long gone or they were never Catholic to begin with. The problem are those that remain who want to “change the Church.” Being in communion with the Holy See is just as important to them as their own egos. They want to be Catholic – just on their own terms. Leaving the Church is not something they embrace.

So now we’re getting into semantics. Fine. There are plenty of men and women who want women to be ordained; many have gone ahead and “done” it (not like it’s real). These people still think they’re Catholic; they pay no need to the excommunication they’ve brought upon themselves. These people are causing damage to our parishes. There’s a Canadian priest who, just this week, said in his homily (railing against the Extraordinary Form and those who request it) that the Pope is not the universal bishop, he’s just Rome’s bishop. That’s blatant heresy. Sure, he’s not truly Catholic now, but do his parishioners know that?

(Slurs like “NCR-type dissenters” are not only ignorant, they are unnecessary here.)

Given the average content of the NCR periodical and its online comments, I think it’s a rather adequate term. The typical “issue” of NCR advocates lay preachers, women priests, gay marriage.

Please do me a favor: don’t get this or any other Liturgy & Sacraments thread locked or deleted!

 

[Rickwood]

There are already a fair number of American Catholics who support women’s ordination. There are a few dozen people who have excommunicated themselves over it in the past couple of months.

There’s an undercurrent of dissent in the Church in America; not everywhere, but in many places. I could name a few, but then this thread would be shut down, and we know I don’t want that to happen. Safe to say, there are priests who preach heresy at the Mass, and parishioners who eat it up.

Please do me a favor: don’t get this or any other Liturgy & Sacraments thread locked or deleted!

I actually think it’s headed the other way. Those sad people who feel they have been ordained, along with the demise of the Anglican Communion are fairly sobering pictures of what happens when people put their ego first. That, along with the leadership of our current Pope seems to be turning the tide.

The Church will not and cannot budge on female ordination. I think more than ever that is becoming clear to the world.

 

[James0235]

Oh, please…



Maybe your liturgy collapsed but a whole lot of us have found incredible grace in ours.

Tell that to the Holy Father. Pope Benedict is of the opinion that the Liturgy has collapsed since Vatican II.

“I am convinced that the ecclesial crisis in which we find ourselves today depends in great part upon the collapse of the liturgy, which at times is actually being conceived etsi Deus non daretur: as though in the liturgy it did not matter anymore whether God exists and whether He speaks to us and listens to us.”
Joseph Ratzinger

If we’re going to have another OF bashing fest, can it at least be taken to the Traditional forum? One is certainly entitled to an opinion that the “liturgy has collapsed”, but let’s please not make that some kind of infallible foundational premise.

The point of this thread is to discuss ways the Liturgy can be restored. Effectively this means ways to restore a sense of the sacred - something that is sadly missing from the Mass in many places.

It is in no way an “OF bashing fest”. I don’t think there has been a single post in this thread bashing the OF. So, to claim that that is the purpose of this thread is, at best, dishonest on your part.

I’m afraid I have to call you out on this. Please point out all the “OF bashing” on this thread. Basically put up or shut up.

Japhy’s plea bears repeating here:
**Please do me a favor: don’t get this or any other Liturgy & Sacraments thread locked or deleted!

**ncjohn, it is uncalled for and untrue cries of “bashing, bashing!” from people like you that leads to great, positive threads like this being locked or deleted.

James

 

[japhy]

The Church will not and cannot budge on female ordination. I think more than ever that is becoming clear to the world.

Oh, I agree with you 100%. But there are some Catholics who think it’s a matter of “the Church in Rome won’t budge on female ordination, but the Church in America will gladly accept it”. They see it as one big Catholic Church, when they’re really slipping into heresy and schism.

Please do me a favor: don’t get this or any other Liturgy & Sacraments thread locked or deleted!

 

[Brendan]

This is a prime example of a liturgical abuse/irregularity that is often tolerated, even celebrated by those who go nutty at just about every other liturgical abuse/irregularity they believe they see. That’s exceedingly bad form and it’s a real problem.

Actually, that is what the Pope himself used at both the Wash DC Mass, and at World Youth Day.

What the GIRM actually instructs is that their be a crucifix within the Sanctuary, that does not necessarily include one being suspended ABOVE the Sanctuary, or behind it.

Rather, the processional cross and altar cross should not be used simultaneously.

 

[bilop]

Why would you post such a thing? I know it is meant as a shot, but it sounds like that cleric is his own liturgist – the overwhelming preference.

My point is, that a priest can offer a wide array of liturgies w/o recourse to a professional liturgist.

From you other post, I can see where the Pope or a Cardinal would need someone to arrange his litugies, but that is really more like an MC. And, to my knowledge, the Holy Father has not yet celebrated the EF; at least not in public.

To me, the idea of a liurgist, other than the priest himself, smacks of modern, illicit, innovations to the Mass. The liturgist will want to “show off his talents” and this will inevitably lead to abuses.

God Bless

 

[Rickwood]

“Over with” might be a bit much to ask for. IMHO, there is already schismatics openly attempting to work as if it they can legitimately operate as an underground arm of the Roman Catholic Church. They call themselves Roman Catholic Womenpriests. They are excommunicated automatically for having attempted the ordination of women, but they “reject their excommunication” and act as if they are not. So don’t expect everyone who is in schism to be so courteous as to vacate the buildings or hand in the stationery. They might, and then again, they might not.

Said people are heretics, not schismatics. They are painting a horrific picture of what happens when ignoring God for one’s own ego.

I don’t think there are any priests out there who change the Mass around because they hate the Church, hate the Lord, or any of that. There are a few that may have, in reality, lost or abandoned the faith–meaning they reject things so basic as a literal Resurrection and the True Presence–but I really believe that the vast majority are doing what they think best. The vast majority intend to be faithful to God, even as they rationalize that this might involve being disobedient to their bishop.

Yup. I think many priests are simply burned-out.

When bringing these priests back around to playing according to Hoyle, or if their seminary preparation was poor, bringing them around to playing cricket in the first place, a wise bishop will recognize that there are those whose return is possible, if the bishop leads firmly but in charity. He is dealing with brother priests, bright guys who have given up everything to hand their lives over to the Church, to tend to the well-being of their brothers and sisters in the faith. I think the most successful bishops always treat their priests with that in mind.

Yes – but not as brothers, but sons.

The same thing goes for liberal parishes. You won’t get anywhere by coming in and telling them they have abandoned the faith. You have to convince them that while you believe they want to be faithful to the Gospel, some of what they want and need lies in a different direction than where they’ve been headed. The ones whose rehabilitation is possible will still need that much.

Replace “liberal” with “dissenting” and I would agree.

 

[VociMike]

Replace “liberal” with “dissenting” and I would agree.

Yep, that’s an important distinction to keep in mind.

 

[benedictgal]

Actually, that is what the Pope himself used at both the Wash DC Mass, and at World Youth Day.

What the GIRM actually instructs is that their be a crucifix within the Sanctuary, that does not necessarily include one being suspended ABOVE the Sanctuary, or behind it.

Rather, the processional cross and altar cross should not be used simultaneously.

He’s also used this at St. Peter’s (Bssilica and Square), at St. John Lateran and at Genoa. Believe me, I make it a point to see as many Papal Mass broadcasts as I can. In fact, Cardinal Pell used the same set-up for the opening WYD Mass.

As I said before, Pope Benedict is leading by example. Everyone else needs to hop on the Benedict express before they get left behind at the station.

 

[James0235]

As I said before, Pope Benedict is leading by example. Everyone else needs to hop on the Benedict express before they get left behind at the station.

I love that line.

James

 

[Rickwood]

My point is, that a priest can offer a wide array of liturgies w/o recourse to a professional liturgist.

Absolutely no question and as I have stated, I would always prefer a liturgist who is a cleric.

From you other post, I can see where the Pope or a Cardinal would need someone to arrange his litugies, but that is really more like an MC. And, to my knowledge, the Holy Father has not yet celebrated the EF; at least not in public.

Call him what you like, Msgr. Marini and his team spend their days planning the Pope’s Masses, including who will be the MC – Msgr. Marini. The same level of preparation would go on if it were an EF Mass.

To me, the idea of a liurgist, other than the priest himself, smacks of modern, illicit, innovations to the Mass. The liturgist will want to “show off his talents” and this will inevitably lead to abuses.

Not at all. To be candid there are priests who act as you describe and lay liturgists with just the opposite qualities. One cannot generalize.

My beef are those laypersons who claim to be liturgists, they might even hold the title, yet they lack the formal education and training to do the job without often dire consequence.