How to clear up liturgical abuses?

[brycelaliberte]

I came here to ask on behalf of my friend what she ought to do.

This is what she wrote to me;

It’s really, bad as far as I can tell. It’s pretty much forced me to look for a different Mass to attened. As I’m sure you remember, I attended the teen Mass at my church, and over the last few weeks, they’ve been taking the Mass and turning it into a zoo. Almost every week they seem to have a skit durring the homily, which I don’t understand the point of. Why have a skit? Why not just have the preist say what he means, but even worse than the fact that some of these skits are bad and not thought through well, is that the people putting them on seem to have no respect for the alter or the traditions that surround the Liturgy of the Word. We’ve had teens reading part of the gospel, doing skits right up around the alter, and other such craziness.

What really got to me though, and what sent me to tears for the whole of the Mass, is that a few weeks ago, they decided it was nessicary to have an alter call before Mass… Can you believe that? I mean, I do not understand the point of the alter call. Everything we do there is done durring Mass itself, and the explination I was given about it taked of general absolution, which we never do except in the most dire of circumstances.

There are more problems, but these are the biggest things I can think of in the amount of time that I have to type this out, and I know it’s my pastor’s ideas because I’ve seen the meetings myself and he kind of runs them. I honestly am at a loss of what to do if it’s my pastor himself causing these inconsistancies and issues…

What should my friend do? I suggested talking to another priest, or, if that doesn’t clear up the problem, contacting her bishop somehow. Does someone here with experience on this sort of issue have any help for my friend?

 

[John_Lilburne]

Some approachs:
Complain to priest and/or bishop and/or Vatican.
Discuss with others in the parish.
Support others in parish who are doing something to correct situation.
Go to another Roman Catholic church or cathedral.
Learn what should happen, maybe read the 2004 Instruction Redemptionis Sacramentum and General Instruction of the Roman Missal.

 

[passus]

What really got to me though, and what sent me to tears for the whole of the Mass, is that a few weeks ago, they decided it was nessicary to have an alter call before Mass… Can you believe that? I mean, I do not understand the point of the alter call. Everything we do there is done durring Mass itself, and the explination I was given about it taked of general absolution, which we never do except in the most dire of circumstances.

I’ve never witnessed a proper “altar call” in person or, aside from some similar-sounding charismatic Catholic practices, heard of one being done in a Catholic Church. So long as nothing anti-Catholic was going on, there would be no grounds to call this an abuse.

Not everything Catholic takes place within the context of the Mass, itself, and as far as that goes, the Church does not set rubrics or legislate regarding every particular devotion or practice there is.

Without having been there, myself, I would have to say that it’s very possible that what happened was entirely legitimate.

What should my friend do? I suggested talking to another priest, or, if that doesn’t clear up the problem, contacting her bishop somehow. Does someone here with experience on this sort of issue have any help for my friend?

The problem should be addressed at the parish level firstly. Have your friend show the parish pastor where in the Church’s documents the various practices are dis-allowed. It may be that he is simply not a very good liturgist and if he is shown where he is perpetrating formal abuses, he could be encouraged to stop.

If there is no progress with him, then your friend should address to the Office of the Bishop a hard copy letter–certified and return receipt requested. In the letter should be: the relevant details of any communication with the parish pastor regarding the abuses (include copies of email and written correspondence, if there are any) as well as the specifics of how each of the abuses took place and how often they occur. The Church’s documents should be cited in the letter, too. All correspondence should be saved.

Hopefully, the Bishop’s office will reply and do what needs to be done in this particular parish to ensure that the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is being celebrated with the right of the congregation to see liturgy conducted according to the Church’s set practices–rather than creativity–in mind.

I hope that helps.

 

[Cavaille-Coll]

With regard to altar calls, if this refers to the Evangelical practice of having people come forward to give their lives to Christ or to receive prayer, the Catholic Mass does not allow for this. Such things may be done outside the Mass at prayer services, but the way we begin our Christian walk starts at the baptismal font.

Unfortunately, some Catholic charismatic groups have come too heavily under the influence of Protestant/Evangelical organizations or models and begin to rebel against Catholic liturgical structures. When this happens, one can be fairly certain that the Holy Spirit is not behind it.

 

[adowcday]

I agree that what is described does not sound like liturgical abuse, although the style of the approach to the Liturgy of the Word is unusual in Catholic churches, including the use of drama. An altar call is complete unobjectionable, while also unusual in Catholic churches. An altar call does not provide sacramental absolution nor does it do away with baptism – it simply encourages those who come forward to make a commitment to Christ and tells them that Jesus forgives sin. The sad truth is that many Catholics have never made a full, adult commitment to follow Christ. In my view, better that they be challenged to do so in the context of a Catholic mass than a Billy Graham Crusade. In many fast-growing evangelical churches, 30-40 percent or more of new converts are former Catholics. Many will say publicly that they never heard the gospel message as Catholics. I’ve attended lots of evangelical church services, and I’ve heard it myself over and over again. It’s not the Catholic style to evangelize in the context of a mass (or anywhere else, for that matter), but it should be, in my opinion.

 

[benedictgal]

First of all, the homily needs to be a homily, not a skit, not a play, not a dramatization. Redemptionis Sacramentum states very clearly that:

[64.] The homily, which is given in the course of the celebration of Holy Mass and is a part of the Liturgy itself,142 “should ordinarily be given by the Priest celebrant himself. He may entrust it to a concelebrating Priest or occasionally, according to circumstances, to a Deacon, but never to a layperson.143 In particular cases and for a just cause, the homily may even be given by a Bishop or a Priest who is present at the celebration but cannot concelebrate”.144

[65.] It should be borne in mind that any previous norm that may have admitted non-ordained faithful to give the homily during the Eucharistic celebration is to be considered abrogated by the norm of canon 767 §1.145 This practice is reprobated, so that it cannot be permitted to attain the force of custom.

[66.] The prohibition of the admission of laypersons to preach within the Mass applies also to seminarians, students of theological disciplines, and those who have assumed the function of those known as “pastoral assistants”; nor is there to be any exception for any other kind of layperson, or group, or community, or association.146

[67.] Particular care is to be taken so that the homily is firmly based upon the mysteries of salvation, expounding the mysteries of the Faith and the norms of Christian life from the biblical readings and liturgical texts throughout the course of the liturgical year and providing commentary on the texts of the Ordinary or the Proper of the Mass, or of some other rite of the Church.147 It is clear that all interpretations of Sacred Scripture are to be referred back to Christ Himself as the one upon whom the entire economy of salvation hinges, though this should be done in light of the specific context of the liturgical celebration. In the homily to be given, care is to be taken so that the light of Christ may shine upon life’s events. Even so, this is to be done so as not to obscure the true and unadulterated word of God: for instance, treating only of politics or profane subjects, or drawing upon notions derived from contemporary pseudo-religious currents as a source.148

While RS addresses the issue of who cannot give the homily, common sense would dictate that even what the kids are doing falls under that prohibition.

Regarding the altar call, this is something that should not be allowed. Inasmuch as this occured before the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, the priest (or whoever allowed this to happen) is already causing confusion as to what the Mass is. This is a case of creativity and liberty gone awry. Again, as Redemptionis Sacramentum notes:

6.] For abuses “contribute to the obscuring of the Catholic faith and doctrine concerning this wonderful sacrament”.14 Thus, they also hinder the faithful from “re-living in a certain way the experience of the two disciples of Emmaus: ‘and their eyes were opened, and they recognized Him’”.15 For in the presence of God’s power and divinity16 and the splendor of His goodness, made manifest especially in the Sacrament of the Eucharist, it is fitting that all the faithful should have and put into practice that power of acknowledging God’s majesty that they have received through the saving Passion of the Only-Begotten Son.17

[7.] Not infrequently, abuses are rooted in a false understanding of liberty. Yet God has not granted us in Christ an illusory liberty by which we may do what we wish, but a liberty by which we may do that which is fitting and right.18 This is true not only of precepts coming directly from God, but also of laws promulgated by the Church, with appropriate regard for the nature of each norm. For this reason, all should conform to the ordinances set forth by legitimate ecclesiastical authority.

[8.] It is therefore to be noted with great sadness that “ecumenical initiatives which are well-intentioned, nevertheless indulge at times in Eucharistic practices contrary to the discipline by which the Church expresses her faith”. Yet the Eucharist “is too great a gift to tolerate ambiguity or depreciation”. It is therefore necessary that some things be corrected or more clearly delineated so that in this respect as well “the Eucharist will continue to shine forth in all its radiant mystery”.19

[9.] Finally, abuses are often based on ignorance, in that they involve a rejection of those elements whose deeper meaning is not understood and whose antiquity is not recognized.

Here is a link to Redemptionis Sacramentum, the document that John referred to in his post.

adoremus.org/RedemptionisSacramentum.html#anchor1186479

What was described in the OP is indeed serious enough to warrant intervention by the Bishop.

The sad truth is that the kids are not learning what the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass truly is. It is more than evangelization. It is the fact that God lifts the veil between heaven and earth and time and space and we are present at the Sacrifice of Calvary. We are just as much there as were the Blessed Mother and Sts. John and Mary Magdalene. If this is not enough to move our hearts and draw us closer to the Lord, more than a mere verbal acknowledgment of accepting Jesus as our savior, then we have missed the boat.

The homily should be used to explain these sacred mysteries and guide the faithful deeper into them. The previous poster alluded to Catholics leaving the Church for these evangelical ecclesial communities. If they only knew what the Church taught and that the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is a direct encounter with the Word made Flesh, they would not be so quick to abandon Him or His Church.

 

[bkovacs]

The sad truth is that most Roman Catholics are not learning what the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass truly is!. The Roman Rite as a whole is turning into a fiasco. Thank God for Eastern Churches !.

 

[rkrispies]

I was at Mass a couple of weeks ago (2nd Sunday of Lent?) and an apparent lay man gave a “homily” much to my dismay. Then he proceeded to close it with the Aaronic benediction, which caused a bit more discomfort for me. I decided to write to the pastor, and ask him about it. I received a letter informing me that this particular man is in training to be a permanent deacon, and gave a “reflection on the Scripture”, which is required for his training. And because he did not use the sign of the Cross, no blessing occurred. In other words, despite all outward appearances of a homily and a blessing, neither occurred.

So I’m left wondering why a non-ordained man would be required to give a “homily” at Mass even though it’s not permitted? Or am I just confused for no good reason?

Chris

 

[kristie_m]

In my diocese, the seminarians are granted similar opportunity to “practice” by offering a reflection during the Mass. It is sometimes, but not always followed by a short homily from the presiding priest. There are some technical differences between a reflection and a homily…though I’m hard pressed at the moment to tell you what they are!

 

[zab]

I was at Mass a couple of weeks ago (2nd Sunday of Lent?) and an apparent lay man gave a “homily” much to my dismay. Then he proceeded to close it with the Aaronic benediction, which caused a bit more discomfort for me. I decided to write to the pastor, and ask him about it. I received a letter informing me that this particular man is in training to be a permanent deacon, and gave a “reflection on the Scripture”, which is required for his training. And because he did not use the sign of the Cross, no blessing occurred. In other words, despite all outward appearances of a homily and a blessing, neither occurred.

So I’m left wondering why a non-ordained man would be required to give a “homily” at Mass even though it’s not permitted? Or am I just confused for no good reason?

Chris

Your pastor was correct.

 

[Cluny]

Someone in training for the permanent diaconate is in, effect, a seminarian, even though not living in an academic community.

Authority to speak in Church is vested in the Bishop. A priest or deacon preaches only by delegation.

Should the Bishop occasionally give an extraordinary blessing to preach to someone else, I don’t see what the problem is.

 

[PhilotheaZ]

Should the Bishop occasionally give an extraordinary blessing to preach to someone else, I don’t see what the problem is.

The problem is that the Church specifically prohibits it. From Redemptionis Sacramentum (bold emphasis added):

[64.] The homily, which is given in the course of the celebration of Holy Mass and is a part of the Liturgy itself,[142] “should ordinarily be given by the Priest celebrant himself. He may entrust it to a concelebrating Priest or occasionally, according to circumstances, to a Deacon, but never to a layperson.[143] In particular cases and for a just cause, the homily may even be given by a Bishop or a Priest who is present at the celebration but cannot concelebrate”.[144]

[65.] It should be borne in mind that any previous norm that may have admitted non-ordained faithful to give the homily during the eucharistic celebration is to be considered abrogated by the norm of canon 767 §1.[145] This practice is reprobated, so that it cannot be permitted to attain the force of custom.

[66.] The prohibition of the admission of laypersons to preach within the Mass applies also to seminarians, students of theological disciplines, and those who have assumed the function of those known as “pastoral assistants”; nor is there to be any exception for any other kind of layperson, or group, or community, or association.[146]

If someone other than a priest or deacon must for some reason speak at Mass, it needs to be done at the end of Mass just before the final blessing, to remove any confusion with a homily.

Seminarians can get their practice outside Mass, for example, at a parish mission outside Mass, at Bible study meetings, adult education meetings, in high school classrooms, etc.

 

[rkrispies]

[66.] The prohibition of the admission of laypersons to preach within the Mass applies also to seminarians, students of theological disciplines, and those who have assumed the function of those known as “pastoral assistants”; nor is there to be any exception for any other kind of layperson, or group, or community, or association.[146]

That’s basically what I was thinking, but I am assuming that because this person is permitted by the pastor, he is permitted by the bishop as well. So we end up with the Vatican saying no, but the bishop requiring it for formation and training.

Chris

 

[FrDavid96]

[66.] The prohibition of the admission of laypersons to preach within the Mass applies also to seminarians, students of theological disciplines, and those who have assumed the function of those known as “pastoral assistants”; nor is there to be any exception for any other kind of layperson, or group, or community, or association.[146]

That’s basically what I was thinking, but I am assuming that because this person is permitted by the pastor, he is permitted by the bishop as well. So we end up with the Vatican saying no, but the bishop requiring it for formation and training.

Chris

The pastor can’t give that permission. Even the bishop can’t give that permission.

I once had a friend, years ago, who was a “bad driver” he would do things like run stop-signs when there was no one around (situations where it was “safe” to do so, never when there was even the slightest danger). He would give a little laugh and say “it’s okay, my brother-in-law said I can do it.” Just because someone says it’s permitted does not mean that it’s permitted. The person giving the permission must have the authority to give that permission in the first place. That’s a point that so many Catholics today (including clerics) just “don’t get.”

 

[kristie_m]

I had a similar discussion with my pastor recently, trying to understand church heirarchy. Basically each Bishop is responsible for the goings on in his diocese. He gets the final say in what happens. Now, if there was something going on that was happening that was in major conflict with church teachings (such as the Bishop who was ordaining women) then the you might see some intervention from Rome, but I seriously doubt that anyone from the vatican is going to come down on an individual Bishop for allowing a lay person to give a reflection during a Mass…even if it is “against the rules”.

 

[benedictgal]

I had a similar discussion with my pastor recently, trying to understand church heirarchy. Basically each Bishop is responsible for the goings on in his diocese. He gets the final say in what happens. Now, if there was something going on that was happening that was in major conflict with church teachings (such as the Bishop who was ordaining women) then the you might see some intervention from Rome, but I seriously doubt that anyone from the vatican is going to come down on an individual Bishop for allowing a lay person to give a reflection during a Mass…even if it is “against the rules”.

No. This is a serious matter. Please bear in mind that the bishop does not have absolute authority in this regard. Redepemptionis Sacramentum was promulgated to address some very serious issues that have been happening with the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. In fact, back in 1997, the document Ecclesia de Mysterio was promulgated that began pointing out what should and should not be done. Here is what this document had to say about the issue of the homily:

The homily, therefore, during the celebration of the Holy Eucharist, must be reserved to the sacred minister, Priest or Deacon(69) to the exclusion of the non-ordained faithful, even if these should have responsibilities as “pastoral assistants” or catechists in whatever type of community or group. This exclusion is not based on the preaching ability of sacred ministers nor their theological preparation, but on that function which is reserved to them in virtue of having received the Sacrament of Holy Orders. For the same reason the diocesan Bishop cannot validly dispense from the canonical norm(70) since this is not merely a disciplinary law but one which touches upon the closely connected functions of teaching and sanctifying.

For the same reason, the practice, on some occasions, of entrusting the preaching of the homily to seminarians or theology students who are not clerics(71) is not permitted. Indeed, the homily should not be regarded as a training for some future ministry.

All previous norms which may have admitted the non-ordained faithful to preaching the homily during the Holy Eucharist are to be considered abrogated by canon 767, 1.(72)

Thus, the bishops authority is very limited in this regard, as this document shows. In fact, Ecclesia de Mysterio still remains in force. Furthermore, although it was released under the auspices of the Congregation for Clergy, several other congregations, including the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, headed at the time by the former Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, signed off on it. He also signed off on the document Redemptionis Sacramentum.

 

[zab]

No. This is a serious matter. Please bear in mind that the bishop does not have absolute authority in this regard. Redepemptionis Sacramentum was promulgated to address some very serious issues that have been happening with the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. In fact, back in 1997, the document Ecclesia de Mysterio was promulgated that began pointing out what should and should not be done. Here is what this document had to say about the issue of the homily:

Thus, the bishops authority is very limited in this regard, as this document shows. In fact, Ecclesia de Mysterio still remains in force. Furthermore, although it was released under the auspices of the Congregation for Clergy, several other congregations, including the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, headed at the time by the former Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, signed off on it. He also signed off on the document Redemptionis Sacramentum.

This must be why our most recent permanent deacon did not give reflections at Mass until after he was ordained. Although I seem to recall that he gave reflections during the Morning Prayer while he was still studing for Permanent Diaconate.

 

[centurionguard]

No. This is a serious matter. Please bear in mind that the bishop does not have absolute authority in this regard. Redepemptionis Sacramentum was promulgated to address some very serious issues that have been happening with the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. In fact, back in 1997, the document Ecclesia de Mysterio was promulgated that began pointing out what should and should not be done. Here is what this document had to say about the issue of the homily:

Thus, the bishops authority is very limited in this regard, as this document shows. In fact, Ecclesia de Mysterio still remains in force. Furthermore, although it was released under the auspices of the Congregation for Clergy, several other congregations, including the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, headed at the time by the former Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, signed off on it. He also signed off on the document Redemptionis Sacramentum.

I’m not really sure (“how many”) lay Catholics would take particular notice if a lay catholic, was the person giving the homily, or would they be just passive about it. Although this kind of abuse doesn’t thankfully happen in my own parish, I do know of two parishes in the diocesan sector of the English Deanery that do have lay preachers. Oh by the way this happens while the priest is sitting in the Presidential chair. The biggest part of this fiasco is that the Archbishop has received a number of complaints from concerned parishioners not only from the two parishes in question but from several other parishioners within the diocese. This has been going on for over six months. Is it beyond me to question my Ecclesiastical Shepard ? If I had the health I would be actively challenging this kind of liturgical practice. All I can do is pray something better happens.

 

[FrDavid96]

I had a similar discussion with my pastor recently, trying to understand church heirarchy. Basically each Bishop is responsible for the goings on in his diocese. He gets the final say in what happens. Now, if there was something going on that was happening that was in major conflict with church teachings (such as the Bishop who was ordaining women) then the you might see some intervention from Rome, but I seriously doubt that anyone from the vatican is going to come down on an individual Bishop for allowing a lay person to give a reflection during a Mass…even if it is “against the rules”.

Kristie,
Please understand that the bishop does not have the final say in what happens in his diocese. He is bound by canon law (as well as Tradition, the teachings of the Church etc. etc.) just as much as anyone else. The law gives him considerable authority, including the authority to dispense from some of the law (but this is not one of those times). Lay “preaching” at Mass is indeed “something…in major conflict with Church teachings.” The Vatican does not monitor what happens in individual parishes or diocese (not in the sense that we’re discussing here) but if something like this were to be brought to the attention of the appropriate persons at the Holy See they would take notice. This is no small matter.

 

[benedictgal]

I’m not really sure (“how many”) lay Catholics would take particular notice if a lay catholic, was the person giving the homily, or would they be just passive about it. Although this kind of abuse doesn’t thankfully happen in my own parish, I do know of two parishes in the diocesan sector of the English Deanery that do have lay preachers. Oh by the way this happens while the priest is sitting in the Presidential chair. The biggest part of this fiasco is that the Archbishop has received a number of complaints from concerned parishioners not only from the two parishes in question but from several other parishioners within the diocese. This has been going on for over six months. Is it beyond me to question my Ecclesiastical Shepard ? If I had the health I would be actively challenging this kind of liturgical practice. All I can do is pray something better happens.

If the Metropolitan has done nothing about the issue, then the concerned parishioners need to take the complaint to the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacrament. This is certainly within their right, as RS notes that:

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

Here is the real clincher in all of this, as it refers to the Bishop and/or Archbishop:

[177.] “Since he must safeguard the unity of the universal Church, the Bishop is bound to promote the discipline common to the entire Church and therefore to insist upon the observance of all ecclesiastical laws. He is to be watchful lest abuses encroach upon ecclesiastical discipline, especially as regards the ministry of the Word, the celebration of the Sacraments and sacramentals, the worship of God and the veneration of the Saints”.287

[178.] Hence whenever a local Ordinary or the Ordinary of a religious Institute or of a Society of apostolic life receives at least a plausible notice of a delict or abuse concerning the Most Holy Eucharist, let him carefully investigate, either personally or by means of another worthy cleric, concerning the facts and the circumstances as well as the imputability.

Now, here is where the faithful have the right to appeal to the Holy See:

1. The Apostolic See
   [181.] Whenever the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments receives at least a plausible notice of a delict or an abuse concerning the Most Holy Eucharist, it informs the Ordinary so that he may investigate the matter. When the matter turns out to be serious, the Ordinary should send to the same Dicastery as quickly as possible a copy of the acts of the inquiry that has been undertaken, and where necessary, the penalty imposed.

[182.] In more difficult cases the Ordinary, for the sake of the good of the universal Church in the care for which he too has a part by virtue of his sacred Ordination, should not fail to handle the matter, having previously taken advice from the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments. For its part, this Congregation, on the strength of the faculties given to it by the Roman Pontiff, according to the nature of the case, will assist the Ordinary, granting him the necessary dispensations289 or giving him instructions or prescriptions, which he is to follow diligently.

1. Complaints Regarding Abuses in Liturgical Matters
   [183.] In an altogether particular manner, let everyone do all that is in their power to ensure that the Most Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist will be protected from any and every irreverence or distortion and that all abuses be thoroughly corrected. This is a most serious duty incumbent upon each and every one, and all are bound to carry it out without any favoritism.

[184.] Any Catholic, whether Priest or Deacon or lay member of Christ’s faithful, has the right to lodge a complaint regarding a liturgical abuse to the diocesan Bishop or the competent Ordinary equivalent to him in law, or to the Apostolic See on account of the primacy of the Roman Pontiff.290 It is fitting, however, insofar as possible, that the report or complaint be submitted first to the diocesan Bishop. This is naturally to be done in truth and charity.

So, Rome does care. If she did not, she would not have had two documents specifically aimed at curbing liturgical abuses, nor would she have offered the necessary remedy to correct them.