I need your advice on this letter to my priest re: Liturgical Abuses

  • Thread starter Thread starter CyberSaint
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

CyberSaint

Guest
I value your (name removed by moderator)ut. Please let me know if my position is off-base, if the letter sounds rude, if I am incorrect somehow, etc.

Father, I like the spirituality and depth you bring to the Mass, Father. I enjoy your sermons, and the heartfelt way you communicate with us. You seem to be someone who has a heart for the Lord, and who is deeply interested in our spiritual wellbeing. I am encouraged by what you have to say, and exhorted to deeper levels of life with Christ. Thank you so much for this!

I have had to study a great deal to learn as much as I have about the Church’s teachings and practices, her traditions and history. And this always opens up still further questions. I have had to defend her doctrines and explain her teachings, and have always been happy to do it. I love her, and I love her guidance and discipline as one would love his own mother. For me, it is important to help ensure people understand Catholicism, and to grow in holiness and love in a relationship with her Lord. This is all a big deal to me, and so I feel passionate about this.

I have some concerns that continue to nag at me. To put things into context, please know that I have the highest respect for you, Father, as the Emissary of the Lord, as my Shepherd. By the same token, I have a great love for the Lord’s doctrines and also His Liturgy, and it is my ever-present desire to see them respected by celebrants and parishioners one and all. This entails worshiping, as you stated, with full, active, and conscious participation. It also entails, I believe, executing the Liturgy with reverence and precision.

I have been thinking about what you said about the changes you have made to the Liturgy. To be honest, I am uncomfortable with the modified lead-ins to the prescribed texts, with your recitation with us of “May the Lord accept this sacrifice at your hands,” and with the interruption of the Mass with announcements.

These changes make the Mass feel alien to me, they confuse me, making me forget the place we are at in the Liturgy, and they cause me to be distracted by the changes so that I no longer think of what we are doing at the present but instead am reflecting on what was done just before.

In doing some research on this, I can find no authorization that allows for these; in fact, the descriptions I could find on these are listed as abuses.

I remember you said to me: 1) bishops themselves differ on how the Liturgy is to be conducted, and 2) priests need to have good reasons for deviating from the Liturgy. Although the first may be correct, this does not, however, condone deviations from he Liturgy. It merely explains the context in which they occur. The bishops themselves are bound to celebrate the Liturgy correctly, are they not? As to the second, again, this does not give justification for the deviations.

The Liturgy does not belong to the clergy, but to the Lord, correct? If this is true, then it follow that it is not proper for a priest or a bishop to change the Liturgy, since neither one has the authority to do this, no matter what the reasons may be.

I remain open to your guidance on this, Father, and I bring this all to you with humility and also affection. I hope you are not put-off by my directness. I prefer to speak/write plainly, to the point. It is not out of arrogance or self-righteousness that I write to you, but out of genuine concern, felt deeply.

I hope either that you can help me to see how my expectations are unreasonable, or that, if my perspective is correct, you would begin to conduct the Liturgy more in alignment with the Rubrics.

This probably warrants a face-to-face discussion, and I would be happy to meet with you before Liturgy Committee on Monday, if you so desire. Please let me know how you would like to proceed.

Please let me know your thoughts on this within a few days.
 
I don’t know… it seems a bit too formal and “sucks up” a little more than I’d prefer.

Your position is definitely not off base though. I’d recommend toning it down just a little and sending it. Unless it is easier to just meet with the priest in person.
 
The things you are concerned about, in the grand scheme of things, are very minor. If you make a big deal out of this, you may be labeled as a troublemaker, despite the “sucking up” described by the previous poster. Then, when something serious comes along, you will have spent all your credibility on these small things, and whatever important thing you have to say could be totally discounted.

Read it over one more time, enjoy it, then tear it up. I’ve done that myself, and have been very glad of it.

Betsy
 
I’m afraid that I don’t have enough info to guide you. Praying the people’s response to the Orate Fratres seems minor. Unless your priest has the “Voice of God Omnipresent Booming” mic, I can’t see how it distracts. If he does, you have a bigger problem.

The rest of your concerns aren’t really clearly indicated here. Without being in your parish, I don’t really know how bad his improv’ed lead-ins are. You also best make absolutely certain that these are genuinely improv’ed and not an option allowed in the rubrics too.

Finally, announcements are allowed at Mass. I believe they can occurr either right after Communion or between the post-Communion prayer and the dismissal. Best check on this too.

I’m afraid that, like baltobetsy said, you’re making too much out of minor (or possibly non) abuses. Best to save your credibility up to fight a bigger issue (like perhaps the use of the “Voice of God Omnipresent Booming” mic).
 
I agree with Jabronie that the letter is a bit too formal and “sucks up” to the priest. Even more I agree with Baltobetsy that you should ultimately tear up the letter, because it is an overreaction to minor, minor things. I fail to see how the examples you mentioned could “…make the Mass feel alien to me, they confuse me, making me forget the place we are at in the Liturgy, and they cause me to be distracted by the changes…”

I think you are being scrupulous.
 
If you think he is deviating the proper rubrics of the 1970 Ordo Missae then send the letter to him or make an appointment for a meeting with him. You have the right to comment or tell him about the problem especially about the Church, I don’t see any reason not to tell him even if it is minor. The Church has laws and rulings that we should follow and adhere to, and nobody even a priest can change it without the approval of the Council of Bishops and the magisterium.
but it’s still up to you whether you want to send the letter or not.

Pax
Laudater Jesus Christo
Instaurare omnia in Christo
 
If the violations are very minor, then I agree with the previous posters that sending a letter now would be construed as quibbling. Probably best to let it slide.

However, if it’s major, such as messing with the Words of Institution, then the “humility” and “suck-up” portions only get in the way.

I once wrote a letter to my bishop and cc’d the superior of a priest who clearly and intentionally used an unapproved “eucharistic prayer” with botched words of institution. It was a sharp but respectful letter that went straight to the point, basically expressing my sorrow, reiterating my right to an authentic liturgy, a description of what happened, and the proper citations of Redemptionis Sacramentum. No “Father is an anointed of God” stuff. Straight: “Father may have deprived the faithful of their Eucharistic Lord.”
 
I appear to be the only one who disagrees about the “sucking up” part (I hate that expression, by the way); I think that you are trying to make it clear that you are neither attacking him nor presenting yourself as a self-styled liturgical expert who is trying to police his every move on the altar. I hope that’s the intent anyway.

BUT …

I do agree with the other posters that the deviations you mention here (I wouldn’t go so far as to call them “abuses”) really do seem rather minor, and I suspect that your pastor doesn’t have any genuine bad intent in doing them. You ought to consider the possible negative effects that sending him a letter for such a minor problem may cause.

Remember that things which are written down tend to be “eternal” in a way that things which you say really aren’t. I mean to say that because it’s there in black and white and can be re-read again and again, a written complaint tends to live on and its power can in fact increase over time. You don’t want to make a mountain out of an anthill.

I really would urge you to consider whether the things you mention are indeed serious enough to warrant either a letter or a chat with your pastor. Give him the benefit of the doubt, perhaps?
 
since the letter specifies no liturgical abuse, I don’t think it will have your desired effect.
 
lose one of the ‘fathers’ in the first line. the letter has a rambling feel to it. you seem to suck up, then be critical, then apologize and explain, then ask for guidance… then suggest a meeting.

it’s sort of all over the place.

like a previous poster said… why don’t you just call him?
 
You all express excellent points. Thank you very much.

The announcements are being read “pastorally,” with pastoral commentary, before the final Communion prayer. FYI.

I shall not send the letter. I do not want to create a huge hullabaloo about minor offenses.

Thanks again- I truly value your (name removed by moderator)ut.
 
CyberSaint said:
The announcements are being read “pastorally,” with pastoral commentary, before the final Communion prayer. FYI.

I shall not send the letter. I do not want to create a huge hullabaloo about minor offenses.
Click to expand...
I cannot recall if the announcements can go there or if they must go after. In any case, if they’re in an acceptable place, it’s not a minor offense. It’s not an offense at all. If they’re not in the right place, I doubt it would take a whole lot of effort on your part to talk Father into moving them into the right place. Perhaps you want to do some legwork and look this up.
 
Hello CyberSaint,

To save you from wearing egg on your face, you may want to learn what the Church permits. I believe your priest is giving announcements correctly:

cuf.org/FileDownloads/announce.pdf

Has someone rigorously promoted their own agenda that caused you to believe this was an abuse?

Carole
 
It could be an accidental error on the part of your pastor. Why don’t you casually ask him why they do announcements where they do, and suggest that they move them to after the Prayer.
 
cuf.org/FileDownloads/announce.pdf

This document states that the announcements should be made after communion before the communion prayer.

For the sake of smooth liturgy, my pastor chose to do this while everyone was sitting quietly after communion (we sit in our diocese after the tabernacle is closed). He allows plenty of time for silent reflection first, then the announcements. His thinking was that to have everyone stand for the brief communion prayer, and then sit back down to listen to announcements, then stand again for the final blessing, would make us out to be jack-in-the-boxes.

Is there anything in the rubrics that call for a smooth flow in liturgy that is interrupted in this manner, just for the sake of following rubrics? Common sense is out the window?

In my book, it is a very picayune thing that I would never bring up to my pastor. God is not offended thereby.

Carole
 
CyberSaint said:
…To be honest, I am uncomfortable with the modified lead-ins to the prescribed texts, with your recitation with us of “May the Lord accept this sacrifice at your hands,” and with the interruption of the Mass with announcements. …
Click to expand...
Regarding “modified lead-ins”, from the 2002 General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM) approved for the USA, which can be accessed from romanrite.com/girm.html :
“31. It is also up to the priest, in the exercise of his office of presiding over the gathered assembly, to offer certain explanations that are foreseen in the rite itself. Where it is indicated in the rubrics, the celebrant is permitted to adapt them somewhat in order that they respond to the understanding of those participating. However, he should always take care to keep to the sense of the text given in the Missal and to express them succinctly. The presiding priest is also to direct the word of God and to impart the final blessing. In addition, he may give the faithful a very brief introduction to the Mass of the day (after the initial Greeting and before the Act of Penitence), to the Liturgy of the Word (before the readings), and to the Eucharistic Prayer (before the Preface), though never during the Eucharistic Prayer itself; he may also make concluding comments to the entire sacred action before the dismissal.”

Regarding the priest recitation with the people “May the Lord accept this sacrifice at your hands,”. The correct words are “May the Lord accept the sacrifice at your hands …”. The rubrics in the Roman Missal have before them: “The people respond:”. The GIRM also makes this clear:
“146. Upon returning to the middle of the altar, the priest, facing the people and extending and then joining his hands, invites the people to pray, saying, Orate, fraters (Pray, brethren). The people rise and make their response: Suscipiat Dominus (May the Lord accept). Then the priest, with hands extended, says the prayer over the offerings. At the end the people make the acclamation, Amen.”
So the priest is not following the Roman Missal on this. Therefore he is committing a liturgical abuse.

Regarding announcements, they can be made in Mass. The priest or deacon can provide comments, and so can the commentator. From the GIRM:
“105 … b. The commentator, who provides the faithful, when appropriate, with brief explanations and commentaries with the purpose of introducing them to the celebration and preparing them to understand it better. The commentator’s remarks must be meticulously prepared and clear though brief. In performing this function the commentator stands in an appropriate place facing the faithful, but not at the ambo.”

Another discussion of announcements is from the 2004 Instruction Redemptionis Sacramentum:
“[74.] If the need arises for the gathered faithful to be given instruction or testimony by a layperson in a Church concerning the Christian life, it is altogether preferable that this be done outside Mass. Nevertheless, for serious reasons it is permissible that this type of instruction or testimony be given after the Priest has proclaimed the Prayer after Communion. This should not become a regular practice, however. Furthermore, these instructions and testimony should not be of such a nature that they could be confused with the homily,
[footnote 156: Cf. Congregation For the Clergy et al., Instruction, Ecclesiae de mysterio, Practical Provisions, art. 3 §2: AAS 89 (1997) p. 865.]
nor is it permissible to dispense with the homily on their account.”
 
Thanks again, everyone. It seems I have some more homework to do…
 
If this is the only abuse at your Mass, I would count myself as very fortunate and blest. Others deal with much more. I would suggest if you are going to study up, forget about policing the liturgy and read a good devotional book. It will do more for you than tracking error. 🙂

ps; I agree with some of the others who used the term “sucking up”. I think your decision not to send your letter was a wise one. Some times going so far and trying so hard to express respect has the opposite impact on the recipient.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top