How do you explain that liturgical abuse is bad?

[fish90]

Hello,

After reading a lot of threads about liturgical abuse, I have realized that it is very bad. How do you explain the wrong with liturgical abuse? Many people do not care that the “Our Father” thingy is wrong or that Extraordinary Ministers of Communion are blessing those in the line.

God Bless

 

[Mel_Stones]

I think you demonstrated the reason: lack of knowledge.

Many people do not care that the “Our Father” thingy is wrong or that Extraordinary Ministers of Communion are blessing those in the line.

(Bold added).

I don’t know what you are referring to here but the “Our Father” is a prayer and IMO this would be better stated as 'Many people do not care that the “Our Father” is prayed (in this manner, with this done improperly)".

Many, many people do not realize all the meaning within Mass. Every word, every action has a purpose and a meaning, often a very deep meaning. There are places in the Mass for leeway and that is not a problem. But there are also places in the Mass where meaning is lost because leeway is illicitly taken.

Christ’s peace.

 

[Newbie2]

I don’t think it’s an easy thing:

1. Liturgical “abuses” can be real abuses or perceived abuses (irregularities).
2. Liturgical abuses can be serious or minor.
3. You’re absolutely right, some people don’t care; bishops down to parishioners.

If legitimate liturgical abuse remains unchecked, it begs the question why have rubrics for mass at all? Throw out the GIRM. Let’s become Protestant.

The minor irregularities or less serious abuses……I don’t think they’ll ever go away. When it really comes down to it, if a priest, say, encourages handholding or blessings or whatever, what is the bishop going to do if said priest doesn’t cease the practice? I’ve heard that coming from several priests in our diocese…“what are they going to do, fire me?”

Half-joking, perhaps, but the shortage of replacement priests means if a priest digs in his heels, the bishop may have to either accept whatever practice is going on or have yet another parish without a pastor.

Don’t take that as an acceptance of what’s going on, but an observation of reality.

 

[benedictgal]

A lot of it has to with liturgical apathy, I’m afraid. Like my parochial vicar said in his homily yesterday, a lot of us show up for Mass because we have an obligation to do so. He chided us for chatting before Mass and somehow ignoring the fact that we are in the very presence of God.

For his part, he has been trying to curb this apathy by explaining the Mass at the tail end of his homilies. He tries to also curb any abuses that occur while he is celebrating Mass. He tells us that we have no right and authority to “add” things to the Mass to “improve” them. Slowly, the faithful are starting to get the message.

 

[fish90]

I think you demonstrated the reason: lack of knowledge.

(Bold added).

I don’t know what you are referring to here but the “Our Father” is a prayer and IMO this would be better stated as 'Many people do not care that the “Our Father” is prayed (in this manner, with this done improperly)".

Many, many people do not realize all the meaning within Mass. Every word, every action has a purpose and a meaning, often a very deep meaning. There are places in the Mass for leeway and that is not a problem. But there are also places in the Mass where meaning is lost because leeway is illicitly taken.

Christ’s peace.

What I meant with the “Our Father thingy” is when the laity hold hands during the Lord’s prayer.

Anyway you are correct in that I do not know every meaningful piece of the mass.

God Bless

 

[Tantum_ergo]

I like Benedictgal’s priest!

Ours here do the same, I believe, and I’m seeing it in more and more places. Believe me, if someone had told me 10 years ago that it would be happening, I would have been skeptical. After (at that time) 30 years of ‘innovation nation’ I thought things would only keep getting worse.

IF I ever had the chance though to try to explain why liturgical abuse is bad, though, I’d bake up a whole bunch of cookies and cakes and let the people eat them.

When they started to pucker up or choke slightly, I’d say,

Well hey, you know, the sugar cookie recipe didn’t look exciting enough so I added some cayenne pepper for spice.

And well, the molasses cookie called for some coffee, but I didn’t have coffee and so I put in Kool-Aid instead.

Chocolate chips are so ordinary. So I put in nacho chips instead.

Why are you complaining? It’s just a little pepper. It’s just a substitution. It’s just trying to make things less ordinary and more special. . .

Oh, you mean you can’t just throw in a little spice? You mean that some things just ‘go with’ some other things? You mean that you can’t just change around things arbitrarily because the food could wind up not tasting so great. . .in fact, could be inedible?

Ah. I see you now understand why the same attitude toward liturgy is bad. That you can’t just throw things together just because you might like something, because it doesn’t necessarily work with what you’re putting it into. That just arbitrarily changing to make something ‘less ordinary’ can make it totally unpalatable. . .

 

[Cluny]

What I meant with the “Our Father thingy” is when the laity hold hands during the Lord’s prayer.

Then why didn’t you just say “holding hands during the Our Father” to start with?

This might be bad manners or bad style, I don’t think it’s a liturgical abuse necessarily.

In fact, I started a thread dealing with the issue of “liturgical abuse” and how olften the term is misused to mean no more than “I dont like this.”

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=342512

 

[fish90]

I like Benedictgal’s priest!

Ours here do the same, I believe, and I’m seeing it in more and more places. Believe me, if someone had told me 10 years ago that it would be happening, I would have been skeptical. After (at that time) 30 years of ‘innovation nation’ I thought things would only keep getting worse.

IF I ever had the chance though to try to explain why liturgical abuse is bad, though, I’d bake up a whole bunch of cookies and cakes and let the people eat them.

When they started to pucker up or choke slightly, I’d say,

Well hey, you know, the sugar cookie recipe didn’t look exciting enough so I added some cayenne pepper for spice.

And well, the molasses cookie called for some coffee, but I didn’t have coffee and so I put in Kool-Aid instead.

Chocolate chips are so ordinary. So I put in nacho chips instead.

Why are you complaining? It’s just a little pepper. It’s just a substitution. It’s just trying to make things less ordinary and more special. . .

Oh, you mean you can’t just throw in a little spice? You mean that some things just ‘go with’ some other things? You mean that you can’t just change around things arbitrarily because the food could wind up not tasting so great. . .in fact, could be inedible?

Ah. I see you now understand why the same attitude toward liturgy is bad. That you can’t just throw things together just because you might like something, because it doesn’t necessarily work with what you’re putting it into. That just arbitrarily changing to make something ‘less ordinary’ can make it totally unpalatable. . .

Great explanation, but what about the sillies who would enjoy nacho chips.

In serious terms, what if the laity actually enjoy applauding, holding hands during the “Our Father” and children going up to the altar to see the consecration? Would this happen and are these abuses the realm of the bishop to handle?

God Bless

God Bless

 

[fish90]

Then why didn’t you just say “holding hands during the Our Father” to start with?

This might be bad manners or bad style, I don’t think it’s a liturgical abuse necessarily.

In fact, I started a thread dealing with the issue of “liturgical abuse” and how olften the term is misused to mean no more than “I dont like this.”

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=342512

The holding of hands during the “Our Father” is a liturgical abuse. The reference for this from Catholic Forums is catholic.com/thisrock/1999/9901fea1.asp.

This reference reads:

1. Holding hands during the Our Father.

This is oddly widespread in the United States but it’s an illicit addition to the liturgy. The official publication of the Sacred Congregation for the Sacrament sand Divine Worship, Notitiae (11 [1975] 226), states the practice “must be repudiated . . . it is a liturgical gesture introduced spontaneously but on a personal initiative; it is not in the rubrics.” And anything not in the rubrics is unlawful, again because “no other person . . . may add . . . anything [to] the liturgy on his own authority” (ibid).

Notitiae (17 [1981] 186)) also reaffirms that the priest may never invite the congregation to stand around the altar and hold hands during the Consecration. He stays in the sanctuary and we stay outside of it.

God Bless

 

[benedictgal]

I like Benedictgal’s priest!

Ours here do the same, I believe, and I’m seeing it in more and more places. Believe me, if someone had told me 10 years ago that it would be happening, I would have been skeptical. After (at that time) 30 years of ‘innovation nation’ I thought things would only keep getting worse.

IF I ever had the chance though to try to explain why liturgical abuse is bad, though, I’d bake up a whole bunch of cookies and cakes and let the people eat them.

When they started to pucker up or choke slightly, I’d say,

Well hey, you know, the sugar cookie recipe didn’t look exciting enough so I added some cayenne pepper for spice.

Oh, you mean you can’t just throw in a little spice? You mean that some things just ‘go with’ some other things? You mean that you can’t just change around things arbitrarily because the food could wind up not tasting so great. . .in fact, could be inedible?

Ah. I see you now understand why the same attitude toward liturgy is bad. That you can’t just throw things together just because you might like something, because it doesn’t necessarily work with what you’re putting it into. That just arbitrarily changing to make something ‘less ordinary’ can make it totally unpalatable. . .

Well, my parochial vicar has been preaching this for years, even when he was rector at our Cathedral. I learned a lot from him (I still do). He has a genuine love of the liturgy and it shows every time he celebrates the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. He tells us that we are not called to be creative. We are called to receive the Holy Sacrifice with love and obedience.

Liturgical abuse unnerves him and it disrupts him. I witnessed this first hand when he was visiting at another parish and things had gone downhill. He had to signal the EMHCs to not come forward until after he communicated. He also motioned them to not approach the Tabernacle.

He has a genuine sense of the sacred and bemoans the fact that the quality of music used for the Mass has gone down hill of late. And, no, he is not old. He grew up during the late 1960s early 1970s, so he experienced the bad.

 

[Bull]

Hello,

After reading a lot of threads about liturgical abuse, I have realized that it is very bad. How do you explain the wrong with liturgical abuse? Many people do not care that the “Our Father” thingy is wrong or that Extraordinary Ministers of Communion are blessing those in the line.

God Bless

Explain to whom? And what precisely what do you mean by a “liturgical abuse?” That phrase (a mantra to some!) has been so wrongly used so many times that I think it often falls on deaf ears when something truly problematic pops-up.

Have you ever considered what’s wrong with being fixated/obsessed with so-called “liturgical abuses?” Unless the Blessed Sacrament is being profaned (in which case truly hardcore corrective action needs to take place and typically DOES take place), report the “liturgical abuse” to whomever is in responsible and then pray – not only that the abuse be terminated but that you be given the grace not to be fixated or obsessed with the matter.

It’s not meritorious to be consumed with what one feels are “liturgical abuses.”

 

[Bull]

The holding of hands during the “Our Father” is a liturgical abuse. The reference for this from Catholic Forums is catholic.com/thisrock/1999/9901fea1.asp.

This reference reads:

1. Holding hands during the Our Father.

This is oddly widespread in the United States but it’s an illicit addition to the liturgy. The official publication of the Sacred Congregation for the Sacrament sand Divine Worship, Notitiae (11 [1975] 226), states the practice “must be repudiated . . . it is a liturgical gesture introduced spontaneously but on a personal initiative; it is not in the rubrics.” And anything not in the rubrics is unlawful, again because “no other person . . . may add . . . anything [to] the liturgy on his own authority” (ibid).

Notitiae (17 [1981] 186)) also reaffirms that the priest may never invite the congregation to stand around the altar and hold hands during the Consecration. He stays in the sanctuary and we stay outside of it.

God Bless

It’s sad to suggest something like this is an “abuse.” As the saying goes “get over it already.” If someone is worried about people holding hands in church they need to look within themselves for the genesis of their misplaced feeling and not in some misinterpreted document.

It’s rather stunning to see how many people consider themselves to be experts on the Church. Good grief.

 

[benedictgal]

Explain to whom? And what precisely what do you mean by a “liturgical abuse?” That phrase (a mantra to some!) has been so wrongly used so many times that I think it often falls on deaf ears when something truly problematic pops-up.

Have you ever considered what’s wrong with being fixated/obsessed with so-called “liturgical abuses?” Unless the Blessed Sacrament is being profaned (in which case truly hardcore corrective action needs to take place and typically DOES take place), report the “liturgical abuse” to whomever is in responsible and then pray – not only that the abuse be terminated but that you be given the grace not to be fixated or obsessed with the matter.

It’s not meritorious to be consumed with what one feels are “liturgical abuses.”

Bull, maybe you might want to avail yourself of a copy of Redemptionis Sacramentum. It might prove to be a real eyeopener to you:

adoremus.org/RedemptionisSacramentum.html#anchor1242988

Evidently, liturgical abuse means a great deal to the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments (and the former Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, since he had a hand in drawing up this document). RS notes that:

[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

Thus, Rome cares a great deal about maintaining the integrity of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass to the point that she even states that the faithful have the right to a properly celebrated liturgy.

You remind me of another poster who also seemed to heavily downplay liturgical abuse. With all due respect, I am wondering if you are one in the same. The similarities between the both of you are great.

One thing to note to the OP: please note that there does exist a moratorium on this thread regarding discussion of the posture a person takes during the recitation of the Pater Noster (Our Father) during Mass.

 

[DOShea]

Sneezing isn’t in the rubrics either. What should we do with sneezers? It’s certainly spontaneous. Certainly individual.

Somehow these discussions always remind me of discussions about Reconciliation. That Sacrament has forms too, and every single day some Priest, somewhere, does something that at least casts suspicion in the eyes of the confessee on whether or not it made the whole thing invalid or illicit. This forum gets questions about it frequently. And we want the same people who do that to stand up and cite rules of how to stand and hold your hands? I don’t see it happening, right or wrong.

It strikes me as overkill to toss the whole joy of a Mass out the window because someone holds hands during a prayer and that’s all they do. Yes, it isn’t in the rubrics, but it isn’t taking away from the liturgy or the Sacrament of the Eucharist either.

And what is the proposal to “fix” it? Pester the Bishop, like he doesn’t have any more pressing business than to deal with the parishioners in the 3rd pew at St. Rubric’s? There are 4,000 babies being ripped apart every single day and we can’t get them to unify in what to do about it other than give statements, and we’re supposed to forget that and pivot the purity and piousness of the faith on how well some guy avoids an orans posture? Give me a break!

 

[Bull]

Sneezing isn’t in the rubrics either. What should we do with sneezers? It’s certainly spontaneous. Certainly individual.

Somehow these discussions always remind me of discussions about Reconciliation. That Sacrament has forms too, and every single day some Priest, somewhere, does something that at least casts suspicion in the eyes of the confessee on whether or not it made the whole thing invalid or illicit. This forum gets questions about it frequently. And we want the same people who do that to stand up and cite rules of how to stand and hold your hands? I don’t see it happening, right or wrong.

It strikes me as overkill to toss the whole joy of a Mass out the window because someone holds hands during a prayer and that’s all they do. Yes, it isn’t in the rubrics, but it isn’t taking away from the liturgy or the Sacrament of the Eucharist either.

And what is the proposal to “fix” it? Pester the Bishop, like he doesn’t have any more pressing business than to deal with the parishioners in the 3rd pew at St. Rubric’s? There are 4,000 babies being ripped apart every single day and we can’t get them to unify in what to do about it other than give statements, and we’re supposed to forget that and pivot the purity and piousness of the faith on how well some guy avoids an orans posture? Give me a break!

You make some good points.

People DO miss out on a lot of God’s grace because they are so fixated on something they consider to be an abuse and that’s tragic. Their voices are also silenced through overuse. When a real abuse rears its ugly head their voices are still often not listened to because they have been jawing about the “abuse” of being able to see Fr’s Roman Collar during the Mass.

They also can’t seem to offer their discomfort (pain, anger, etc.) up to God once they have taken action (contacted their pastor, bishop, etc.) They seem to derive pleasure in ruminating over the “abuses” and that’s simply wrong. It’s not healthy.

 

[Bull]

Bull, maybe you might want to avail yourself of a copy of Redemptionis Sacramentum. It might prove to be a real eyeopener to you:

adoremus.org/RedemptionisSacramentum.html#anchor1242988

Evidently, liturgical abuse means a great deal to the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments (and the former Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, since he had a hand in drawing up this document). RS notes that:

Thus, Rome cares a great deal about maintaining the integrity of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass to the point that she even states that the faithful have the right to a properly celebrated liturgy.

You remind me of another poster who also seemed to heavily downplay liturgical abuse. With all due respect, I am wondering if you are one in the same. The similarities between the both of you are great.

One thing to note to the OP: please note that there does exist a moratorium on this thread regarding discussion of the posture a person takes during the recitation of the Pater Noster (Our Father) during Mass.

I’m not “downplaying” liturgical abuses.

I’m simply pointing out that not all irregularities are “liturgical abuses.”

I’m also pointing out that some people simply cannot let go by placing things in God’s hands. They obsess over “abuses” and it’s not healthy, nor is it what God intended.

I’ll also add that I truly wonder if there is any joy in those peoples’ lives who obsess about abuses? I see them at my parish. The grim mouths, the red faces, the clenched jaws and I feel sorry for them. Not because my pastor licitly employs EMsHC but because they lack the grace to leave it in their pastor’s hands and the background to accurately interpret Church documents on the matter.

Most of these people have skimmed a handful of Church documents, surfed forums like this and commiserated in person with people who feel as they do. They chuck any confidence they had in their pastors and bishops for this and I find it terribly sad.

 

[Bull]

Sneezing isn’t in the rubrics either. What should we do with sneezers? It’s certainly spontaneous. Certainly individual…

I remember reading on a forum either here or elsewhere of a priest that would kneel behind the altar for the entire EP.

Those that typically bemoaned “abuses” almost to a person commented on how wonderful that sounded. That they were going to talk to their pastors in the hopes they would adopt the practice.

Talk about abuses! Yet THIS one seemed OK to them because it was somehow better than what the actual rubrics directed. Somehow more “traditional.” Cafeteria Catholicism at its best or rather, worst.

 

[DOShea]

Well the point I was trying to make was not that it’s a question of right or wrong; that’s already settled by the rubrics - it’s wrong. But I think an honest evaluation would have to involve some sort of sense of scale. Tearing that little tag off your mattress is illegal, but if someone does it, what are we to do - call the FBI?

When I read these words:

“injures the substantial unity of the Roman Rite, which ought to be vigorously preserved,”

I am not getting the sense that Mary Jane Rosarybead is screwing up the “substantial unity of the Roman Rite” when she joins hands with her husband and her daughter for one prayer. Now if they were wanting to shoot off fireworks in a sense of joy, I’d say that might interfere with substantial unity. If they wanted to alter the order of the Liturgy, introduce hip-hop hymns, or have their own procession into Mass, yeah… now we’re talking substantial unity disruption. But I just do not get that same sense of importance or scale out of a few people holding hands in a pew.

In 1988 or 89, while the Msgr. was saying the Mass one Sunday, the parochial vicar standing in the back of the church spotted two teenage boys that he thought were jabbing each other in the arm… horseplay in other words. As he stealthily approached, to his horror he discovered they were actually playing cribbage! Msgr told a few of us (I was ushering then) later in the week that he was amazed these kids told him they had been playing cribbage every week for a couple of months and no one noticed them. So it makes me wonder how truly distracting can joining hands for a single prayer be?

It’s interesting that for decades I held my wife’s hand during the entire Mass except for the Gospel reading and while going to communion, never did anyone say a thing about it. But once the “I got a new Mass format” stuff started happening, holding hands for anything suddenly leapt to importance.

 

[Newbie2]

Sneezing isn’t in the rubrics either. What should we do with sneezers? It’s certainly spontaneous. Certainly individual.

Coughers too. The bishops really ought to look into this.

I’m not “downplaying” liturgical abuses.

I’m simply pointing out that not all irregularities are “liturgical abuses.”

I’m also pointing out that some people simply cannot let go by placing things in God’s hands. They obsess over “abuses” and it’s not healthy, nor is it what God intended.

I’ll also add that I truly wonder if there is any joy in those peoples’ lives who obsess about abuses? I see them at my parish. The grim mouths, the red faces, the clenched jaws and I feel sorry for them. Not because my pastor licitly employs EMsHC but because they lack the grace to leave it in their pastor’s hands and the background to accurately interpret Church documents on the matter.

Most of these people have skimmed a handful of Church documents, surfed forums like this and commiserated in person with people who feel as they do. They chuck any confidence they had in their pastors and bishops for this and I find it terribly sad.

Well put. There is a place for concern, but when it goes beyond that into obsession…

 

[fish90]

One thing to note to the OP: please note that there does exist a moratorium on this thread regarding discussion of the posture a person takes during the recitation of the Pater Noster (Our Father) during Mass.

My apologies, I was not aware of that.

So is the general consensus is that the only liturgical abuse the laity can care about is those that disrespect the Eucharist such as clown masses?

God Bless