How many of these are liturgical abuses?

[00tan30hh]

Was on the road today and stopped by a different church for mass. I thought I wandered into a protestant church by mistake!

• Procession included random parishoners carrying hymnals
• padded “pews” centered around altar that was on the side wall of the church
• no kneelers
  (I kneeled anyway on the floor during the parts of mass that you are supposed to kneel while everyone else just sat)
• lectern placed between altar and tabernacle
• priest gave summaries of the readings before each lay person read them
• Hallelujah sung before AND after the gospel

-priest joked around during the mass

• communion served out of a dinner plate
• priest LEFT THE CHURCH after communion was distributed and went outside for a few minutes for no apparent reason then came back in

-probably the least reverent atmosphere of any Catholic church I have attended. It was really sad. Then priest has the nerve to ask for money after communion (when he returned after his “break”

So how many of these are actual liturgical abuses?

 

[puzzleannie]

none, because you described nothing that actually goes against any of the rubrics, and not enough detail on the questionable aspects. We are required to kneel at the prescribed time, whether or not kneelers are present. The fact that parishioners did not kneel indicates they have been poorly instructed but is not per se an abuse, which term should be reserved to actual violations of the published norms by the celebrant. Is it possible the priest returned the unused hosts to a tabernacle in a side chapel when he “left”? or is it possible he had another valid reason that is not necessarily any one else’s business? Just because something is weird, unfamiliar or plain goofy does not necessarily make it a liturgical abuse, but it sure does not help to catechize the parishioners on the meaning of the Mass and Eucharist, nor as you wisely note does it make for a reverent atmosphere. Was the dinner plate an actual ceramic plate from Target, or just a big paten? We will be travelling next month, and I totally agree we will have to brace ourselves to put or or shut up, and frequently check the signs and bulletins to make sure we end up in the right place.

 

[Corki]

Was on the road today and stopped by a different church for mass. I thought I wandered into a protestant church by mistake!

• Procession included random parishoners carrying hymnals

The procession isn’t technically part of the liturgy so it can’t be abuse but it doesn’t sound very reverent.

padded “pews” centered around altar that was on the side wall of the church

I don’t see anything wrong with padded pews. I can’t really mentally picture the layout you are describing.

no kneelers
(I kneeled anyway on the floor during the parts of mass that you are supposed to kneel while everyone else just sat)

kneelers aren’t required but kneeling is (as long as one is able)

• lectern placed between altar and tabernacle

Not a liturgical abuse but miight go against diocisan rules for Churuch layout depending on where the tabernacle was.

priest gave summaries of the readings before each lay person read them

as long as it was brief, it is fine.

• Hallelujah sung before AND after the gospel

not sure about that one

-priest joked around during the mass

not an abuse if in the homily or announcements but not permitted elsewhere

• communion served out of a dinner plate

This is a big abuse. Any abuse that involves the Eucharist is considered major according to Redemptionis Sacramentum. All Communion vessals are supposed to be of noble material and not resemble common table ware.

priest LEFT THE CHURCH after communion was distributed and went outside for a few minutes for no apparent reason then came back in

Perhaps he was ill? Otherwise, he should not have left the altar until the Eucharist was reserved in the tabernacle.

-probably the least reverent atmosphere of any Catholic church I have attended. It was really sad. Then priest has the nerve to ask for money after communion (when he returned after his “break”

Most of what you describe was irreverent and/or in bad taste but not technically abuse. Sad overall. Sorry you had to experience that.

So how many of these are actual liturgical abuses

 

[00tan30hh]

none, because you described nothing that actually goes against any of the rubrics, and not enough detail on the questionable aspects. We are required to kneel at the prescribed time, whether or not kneelers are present. The fact that parishioners did not kneel indicates they have been poorly instructed but is not per se an abuse, which term should be reserved to actual violations of the published norms by the celebrant. Is it possible the priest returned the unused hosts to a tabernacle in a side chapel when he “left”? or is it possible he had another valid reason that is not necessarily any one else’s business? Just because something is weird, unfamiliar or plain goofy does not necessarily make it a liturgical abuse, but it sure does not help to catechize the parishioners on the meaning of the Mass and Eucharist, nor as you wisely note does it make for a reverent atmosphere. Was the dinner plate an actual ceramic plate from Target, or just a big paten? We will be travelling next month, and I totally agree we will have to brace ourselves to put or or shut up, and frequently check the signs and bulletins to make sure we end up in the right place.

Ok so it looked like someone took an old, normal church and turned everything about 90 degrees counter-clockwise and moved the front door to the side and put the pews in a U-shape around the altar which is now on the side wall of the church. Not that I haven’t seen this layout before, but coupled with the no-kneelers and padded pews this was extra wierd. Also, the priest went out the side door next to the altar area that lead directly to the parking lot. Also, there were no misslettes (sp?) in the pews, only hymnals. So no one could follow along with the readings.

 

[Phemie]

Ok so it looked like someone took an old, normal church and turned everything about 90 degrees counter-clockwise and moved the front door to the side and put the pews in a U-shape around the altar which is now on the side wall of the church. Not that I haven’t seen this layout before, but coupled with the no-kneelers and padded pews this was extra wierd. Also, the priest went out the side door next to the altar area that lead directly to the parking lot. Also, there were no misslettes (sp?) in the pews, only hymnals. So no one could follow along with the readings.

I’ve attended at least one church without kneelers and where they use padded chairs instead of pews (I’ve also attended a traditionally arranged church with padded pews with kneelers – comfort does not an abuse make).

As for missalettes, well, we’re supposed to listen to the readings so I don’t see a problem with that; we don’t provide them for Sundays and will probably discontinue the daily ones when this subscription runs out. We bring in the annual Sunday Missals and if people want them they can buy them. It’s quite an expense to a parish to provide them in the pews.

 

[puzzleannie]

no missalettes is not an abuse, because they are actually modern innovations.

perhaps the church is attached a monastic foundation and the pew arrangement is choir style to accommodate LOTH etc., an approved option. those of us trying to suggest possible legit explanations are trying to be charitable to that priest and parish, I guess

 

[jmjconder]

When Masses are valid and we faithful get caught up in being the liturgical police I believe it takes away from the fact that Jesus Christ is still present in the Holy Eucharist. The ONLY time He is NOT is when the matter and form are not observed.

Please do not get me wrong…I myself often get caught up in liturgical abuses…however on this Solemnity of the Body and Blood of Christ…and listening to an absolutely powerful homily in my parish today…it brings home that fact that no matter what as long as the Mass is valid …“I am the Living Bread come down from Heaven”…what else matters? As Father said this morning…nothing.

Let us focus on that reality…as long as the Mass is rendered valid…let us take the “liturgical abuses” with a softer hand.

 

[Cat]

“The faithful kneel after the Agnus Dei unless the Diocesan Bishop determines otherwise.”

I am NOT an expert by any means on GIRM and rubrics. But the question about kneeling has come up many times on CAF and because our parish offers a Family Mass in the gymnasium of the parish school with NO KNEELING, I did some research on this question a few years back.

The phrase above is a quote straight out of the GIRM indicating that the bishop may determine that another posture can be used.

Our parish (around 7000 people) is NOT an abusive, modernist, neo-pagan parish, and our very conservative bishop is a stickler for a non-abusive Mass, both OF and EF.

But in our Family Mass, there is no kneeling. “The bishop has determined otherwise” when it comes to our Family Mass.

Kneeling in this Mass would mean kneeling on a hard gymnasium floor, and many of the families in attendance have multiple babies, and toddlers who can run faster than many parents, especially those with babes in arms, can get up and give chase!

Also, many of the attendees sit in the bleachers, and it’s simply not possible to kneel in a bleacher, especially, again, when you are taking care of tiny children.

There are plenty of other Masses in the parish that parents with small children can attend and KNEEL. The Family Mass is usually quite packed, but so are the other Masses (with plenty of young families.) Families with little ones are not forced to attend the Family Mass.

I’m not saying that this is the situation in the church that the OP visited. It sounds to me like nothing would prevent the faithful from kneeling. But since I’m not there, I would not want to make a judgement. Perhaps the bishop is the one who “determined otherwise” for this parish for some reason that would make sense to us if we were there.

 

[bpbasilphx]

While some of these things you mentioned might be bad liturgical praxis or even bad taste, none of them are abuses.

Liturgical abuses should not be a term that’s flung around lightly, especially for permitted things that are simply different from what you have seen at home.

Read this thread:

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

 

[Nick_in_MB]

• padded “pews” centered around altar that was on the side wall of the church

We have padded pews. Just basically a pew with a cushioned seat.

We are required to kneel at the prescribed time, whether or not kneelers are present.

I was just at the Atlanta Eucharistic Congress, and their mass just had folding chairs. I was surprised (and glad) when everybody I could see knelt. And it was an uncomfortable concrete floor.

 

[FastLearner]

I was just at the Atlanta Eucharistic Congress, and their mass just had folding chairs. I was surprised (and glad) when everybody I could see knelt. And it was an uncomfortable concrete floor.

Do you know the Archdiocese’s position on this? I’ve been to Mass in Atlanta where everyone stood, I’ve been to Mass in Atlanta where everyone kneeled, and I’ve been to Mass in Atlanta where some people kneeled and some stood.

 

[Brendan]

Do you know the Archdiocese’s position on this? I’ve been to Mass in Atlanta where everyone stood, I’ve been to Mass in Atlanta where everyone kneeled, and I’ve been to Mass in Atlanta where some people kneeled and some stood.

The position (no pun ) of this Archdiocese would be the same as all other diocese in the US. If there is sufficent room and one is physically capable, you kneel.

 

[FastLearner]

The position (no pun ) of this Archdiocese would be the same as all other diocese in the US. If there is sufficent room and one is physically capable, you kneel.

Is Cat’s assessment above that individual bishops make a determination incorrect? Or is it correct, and you know that all bishops in the US (maybe via the USCCB) have the same position (pun was actually intended )?

edit: Hmm… this seems to indicate that Cat is wrong: youtube.com/watch?v=Cc0g3UMRtMM

Why would priests allow people to stand? It’s not like it was one or two people, but everyone (including many well-abled individuals). The “everyone stands” happened to me once in Atlanta and once in Maryland. The “some stand, some kneel” happened more than once in Atlanta (all in the same church, though).

 

[Brendan]

Is Cat’s assessment above that individual bishops make a determination incorrect? Or is it correct, and you know that all bishops in the US (maybe via the USCCB) have the same position (pun was actually intended )?

edit: Hmm… this seems to indicate that Cat is wrong: youtube.com/watch?v=Cc0g3UMRtMM

Why would priests allow people to stand? It’s not like it was one or two people, but everyone (including many well-abled individuals). The “everyone stands” happened to me once in Atlanta and once in Maryland. The “some stand, some kneel” happened more than once in Atlanta (all in the same church, though).

Here is the GIRM on the subject, which applies (as it states) to all the diocese in the US.

“In the dioceses of the United States of America, [the faithful] should kneel beginning after the singing or recitation of the Sanctus until after the Amen of the Eucharistic Prayer, except when prevented on occasion by reasons of health, lack of space, the large number of people present, or some other good reason. Those who do not kneel ought to make a profound bow when the priest genuflects after the consecration. The faithful kneel after the Agnus Dei unless the diocesan bishop determines otherwise” (43).

 

[Phemie]

“Some other good reason” has been interpreted very widely by many priests I know. The ones who don’t genuflect at the consecration aren’t likely to ask their congregation to kneel at that moment either.

 

[Corki]

Is Cat’s assessment above that individual bishops make a determination incorrect? Or is it correct, and you know that all bishops in the US (maybe via the USCCB) have the same position (pun was actually intended )?

edit: Hmm… this seems to indicate that Cat is wrong: youtube.com/watch?v=Cc0g3UMRtMM

Cat is partially right. The USCCB requested and was granted permission to establish the norm of kneeling from the end of the Sanctus until after the Great Amen. An individual Bishop couldn’t make an alternate determination for that part. On the other hand, kneeling after the Agnus Dei was left for the Bishop to decide but was to be for a whole diocese. So a Bishop couldn’t say that some parishes kneel while others can stand after the AD.

BUT kneeling in general for Mass is unless one is unable to kneel or prevented by lack of space or other serious reason. That leaves the Bishops (and priests, for that matter) with some wiggle room. Some have said that no kneelers is sufficient reason to ivoke that clause. We have no kneelers in my parish and we kneel for both parts since that’s the norm in our diocese. Those who can’t, or who would have much difficulty, simply don’t. No big deal.

 

[Brendan]

We have no kneelers in my parish and we kneel for both parts since that’s the norm in our diocese. Those who can’t, or who would have much difficulty, simply don’t. No big deal.

When our parish was being expanded, we had Mass on folding chairs in the parish hall. The large majority knelt.

 

[brittrossiter]

*** snip ***

• priest LEFT THE CHURCH after communion was distributed and went outside for a few minutes for no apparent reason then came back in

*** snip ***

So how many of these are actual liturgical abuses?

If the priest left the Church immediately after distributing Communion, and left the remaining Blessed Sacrament alone on the altar, then I suspect that this would be a serious abuse. But it’s unclear from your description whether this was what happened.

 

[paperwight]

If the priest left the Church immediately after distributing Communion, and left the remaining Blessed Sacrament alone on the altar, then I suspect that this would be a serious abuse. But it’s unclear from your description whether this was what happened.

Well, quite.

I’ve knowm two priests who’ve had to dash off, admittedly not at Mass, but in the middle of a conversation, because of ulcerative colitis in one case, and prostate trouble in the other.

My first reaction, had I been at the Mass the OP describes, would have been to assume a health reason and to think ‘Oh poor Father, how embarassing’.

Why look for abuses when there’s a commonsense possible explanation?

 

[LRThunder]

Regarding the priest leaving immediately after communion and returning shortly afterward, it’s possible he was taking the remaining hosts to the tabernacle if the tabernacle wasn’t in the church itself, but in a chapel. There’s one parish in my city where that’s the case.