Is My Parish Committing Liturgical Abuses?

[Boomer_Sooner]

Hello Everyone!

I need some help/advice here! As many of you know from my previous posts, I am a ‘fairly recent’ convert to the Faith. I consider myself to be a rather “knowledgable” Catholic as I am constantly reading more and more books on Catholicism, listening to Catholic Answers, watching EWTN, etc. Thus in the process, I’m coming to the conclusion (especially after reading Jimmy Akin’s “Mass Confusion”) that my parish might be committing some “liturgical violations” during the Mass.

More importantly, I think they might have an agenda that is meant to chisel away at the priesthood.

As I said, I’m a convert, so I’d like to hear some thoughts/opinions from some more knowledgable Catholics out there… but here is what I have noticed:

Possible Liturgical Abuse # 1:
The priest and the deacon both wear a chasuble and look identical.

I was always under the impression that deacons and priests were to wear different vestments:

The dalmatic, worn over the alb and stole, is the vestment proper to the deacon. …] The deacon wears the stole over his left shoulder and drawn across the chest to the right side, where it is fastened.

Ceremonial of Bishops, 67

Possible Liturgical Abuse # 2:
During the “Presentation of the Gifts”, normally, the deacon/priest would wait at the top of the aisle in front of the altar, then a family would bring the gifts up to them, bow, etc.

But as for the last couple of weeks, they’ve started a new trend of the Extraordinary (Eucharistic) Ministers [15-20 people, which is, in my opinion way too many to begin with anyway] will bypass the priest/deacon, circle around the altar, and place the gifts (bread/wine) on the altar by themselves.

When I looked it up, the General Instruction of the Roman Missal states:

The offerings are then brought forward. It is praiseworthy for the bread and wine to be presented by the faithful. They are then accepted at an appropriate place by the priest or the deacon and carried to the altar.

GIRM, 73 - The Preparation of the Gifts

Then during the Concecration, the priest skipped the entire part dealing with the washing of his hands, and concecrating the wine, as I suppose the wine brought to the altar by the Extraordinary Ministers was already concecrated?

Possible Liturgical Abuse # 3:
I think the priest “adds” stuff to the prayers in the liturgy. It’s not as if what he’s saying is BAD, per se, but I just don’t think it “belongs” there.

For example, I noticed that during the “Preparation of the Elements”, when the priest says, “Blessed are you, Lord, God of all creation…” our priest has started to ramble on and on with all this extra stuff, something to the extent of: “Blessed are you, Lord, God of all creation… How fortunate! How marvelous! How lucky are we! How blessed! … that through your goodness we have this bread to offer…”. Is this allowed?

Possible Liturgical Abuse # 4:
During the “Sign of Peace”… the priest will leave the Sanctuary, go down into the congregation, and shake hands, hug, and kiss the faithful.

But according to Jimmy Akin:

If the priest does call for the individual exchange of a sign of peace, he has the option of himself remaining still or of personally exchanging a sign of peace with the ministers. He is not authorized to leave the sanctuary and shake hands or hug people in the congregation, as this would unduly prolong the sigh of peace and disturb the orderly flow of the liturgy.

James (Jimmy) Akin, Mass Confusion: The Do’s and Don’s of Catholic Worship, Page 163

Other Random Stuff:
I guess that pretty much wraps it up. There’s been some other odd things that have caused me to raise my eyebrows… the priest has asked us that during the “Our Father”, we are to raise our hands in the ‘Orans Posture’ as he does… I’m still confused on what to do regarding this.

…the last time I went to receive the Blood of Our Lord during Communion, the Extraordinary Minister didn’t say “The Blood of Christ”, so I just stood there forever staring at her, waiting for her to say it – she never did – so I just said ‘Amen’ and took it anyway…

…then the last kicker is that when (our wonderful) Pope Benedict was elected as Pope (by the grace of the Holy Spirit), our priest expressed his great “dissatisfaction” with the election – whatever that means.

Conclusion:
Anyway, I have a sinking feeling I’m going to drive up to Mass one day and see a sign out front that reads “St. _______ , A Parish Community”. Haha.

On a serious note, are these above mentioned actions “violations” that need to be brought to someone’s attention, or am I a novice Catholic who still has much more to learn? I honestly don’t know and any advice/help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

 

[Andreas_Hofer]

Boomer Sooner:

Possible Liturgical Abuse # 1:
The priest and the deacon both wear a chasuble.

Possible Liturgical Abuse # 2:
During the “Presentation of the Gifts”, normally, the deacon/priest would wait at the top of the aisle in front of the altar, then a family would bring the gifts up to them, bow, etc.

But as for the last couple of weeks, they’ve started a new trend of the Extraordinary (Eucharistic) Ministers [15-20 people, which is, in my opinion way too many to begin with anyway] will bypass the priest/deacon, circle around the altar, and place the gifts (bread/wine) on the altar by themselves.

When I looked it up, the General Instruction of the Roman Missal states:

Then during the Concecration, the priest skipped the entire part dealing with the washing of his hands, and concecrating the wine, as I suppose the wine brought to the altar by the Extraordinary Ministers was already concecrated?

Possible Liturgical Abuse # 3:
I think the priest “adds” stuff to the prayers in the liturgy. It’s not as if what he’s saying is BAD, per se, but I just don’t think it “belongs” there.

For example, I noticed that during the “Preparation of the Elements”, when the priest says, “Blessed are you, Lord, God of all creation…” our priest has started to ramble on and on with all this extra stuff, something to the extent of: “Blessed are you, Lord, God of all creation… How fortunate! How marvelous! How lucky are we! How blessed! … that through your goodness we have this bread to offer…”. Is this allowed?

Possible Liturgical Abuse # 4:
During the “Sign of Peace”… the priest will leave the Sanctuary, go down into the congregation, and shake hands, hug, and kiss the faithful.

#1 - No, the deacon may not vest in a chasuble, but are you sure he is? I’ve heard some people not realize the difference in the past. The dalmatic has sleeves, whereas the chasuble does not, and instead of the chasuble’s cross a dalmatic should have two vertical lines like a column with a bar across them.

#2 - You’re correct, the priest and/or deacon should be receiving the gifts from the people.

What do you mean, though, about not consecrating the wine? Do you mean he’s eliminating that part of the institution narrative including “This is the cup of my blood…”? That would be very serious and scandalous.

#3 - Vatican II’s *Sacrosanctum Concilium *stated that a priest is not to add or remove anything, and that directive stands. There are parts in the Mass where the priest has options, so one shouldn’t automatically assume wrongdoing, but the section you cited is not one of those.

#4 - on certain special occasions the priest IS allowed to leave the sanctuary to extend the sign of peace; but if this is done every week you can probably bet it shouldn’t be.

 

[Boomer_Sooner]

#2 - I’m sorry, let my clarify myself. He did say the institution narrative including “This is the cup of my blood…”. (I know so, because when elevating the cup, he does a full 360 showing everyone) so I reckon it was concecrated.

What he did not do is I guess “prepare” it: wash his hands, pour the water into the wine, etc. All of this was skipped, thus I suppose this was done elsewhere before Mass (although I have no idea).

I read somewhere that this technically “could” be done, but only generally when there’s a “large congregation”, etc (read this on the internet, so not 100% sure on this)… but I’ve been to an incrediably large Mass at the Vatican and this process was still done, so I don’ t know why our priest would feel our parish would be “too large” for this.

 

[netmilsmom]

Other Random Stuff:
I guess that pretty much wraps it up. There’s been some other odd things that have caused me to raise my eyebrows… the priest has asked us that during the “Our Father”, we are to raise our hands in the ‘Orans Posture’ as he does… I’m still confused on what to do regarding this.

Check with your Diocese. Some are actually encouraging the Orans for the Laity to overcome handholding.

 

[buffalo]

No one is to raise their hands as the Priest or Deacon does. The Orans position is not the same as what the Priest and Deacon do.

 

[Unfinished]

netmil(name removed by moderator):

Check with your Diocese. Some are actually encouraging the Orans for the Laity to overcome handholding.

While we are on this topic, why do we hold hands anyway? And at the end of the prayer when we start “For the kingdom, the power…” everyone raises thier hands up about head level so you can see this big hand holding chain across the church.

When did this start? When I was a child, we never held hands or did any of that. (I was born after Vatican II). Is it a parish thing or what? Frankly, it gets on my nerves.

 

[netmilsmom]

Unfinished:

While we are on this topic, why do we hold hands anyway? And at the end of the prayer when we start “For the kingdom, the power…” everyone raises thier hands up about head level so you can see this big hand holding chain across the church.

When did this start? When I was a child, we never held hands or did any of that. (I was born after Vatican II). Is it a parish thing or what? Frankly, it gets on my nerves.

Look up some of the threads on Handholding for the Our Father. Some people like it, some don’t. It is being discouraged in many areas.
The typical response from those who like it is, if you don’t like it, don’t do it but this leads to a very uncomfortable situation with your neighbors. One looks cold and uncaring when it doesn’t belong in the liturgy anyway. I like this quote from the St. Louis Diocese…
"Is holding hands during the Lord’s Prayer allowed or encouraged?

BCL Newsletter, October-November 1989

No. The community’s corporate act of receiving communion is the primary symbol of unity with Christ and the Church. The Sign of Peace immediately preceding the reception of Communion is a liturgical rite that should not be minimized or duplicated in any way. A separate but related issue is the situation of individuals who for personal reasons feel uncomfortable with the practice of holding hands. In this case those individuals feel increasingly excluded from the worshipping community. Sensitivity is needed to include all and draw all to the true symbol of unity."

 

[mosher]

yeah … everything that was described by the OP is a liturgical abuse. There is no permission given to do any of the things that you describe nor are there optional provisions in the GIRM to account for them.

 

[TobyLue]

Boomer Sooner

Then during the Concecration, the priest skipped the entire part dealing with the washing of his hands, and concecrating the wine, as I suppose the wine brought to the altar by the Extraordinary Ministers was already concecrated?

Heavens No!!!, the wine cannot be consecrated before mass. If I’m not mistaken if the priest changes or omits the word of consecrations for either species during the mass, no consecrations takes place and that makes the mass invalid. This is a gross abuse. If no consecrations takes place, then the congregation is committing idolatry, albiet unknowinling and not their fault,by worshiping a piece of bread. The Bishop should know about this like yesterday!!! You may want to submit this quesiton to the Q&A to get a complete answer.

 

[John_Lilburne]

#1. If the deacon is wearing a chasuble instead of a dalmatic that is an abuse. But it would be a surprising thing for a deacon to do. The two garments look similar.

#2 I agree, an abuse. There does not have to be an offertory procession. The gifts could be already in the sanctuary and brought towards the altar by altar servers. The 2002 GIRM 75 has “The bread and wine are placed on the altar by the priest to the accompaniment of the prescribed formulas.” The deacon is not described as putting things on the altar, but of handing them to the priest, in 2002 GIRM 178. With large numbers of vessels, if ministers are going to place things on the altar they should at least do so after the priest.

You did not see the priest add the water to the wine. With a deacon there he should do this, not the priest. He may do this at the credence table. See 2002 GIRM 178, which can be accessed from romanrite.com/girm.html .

The priest should have washed his hands.

#3 An abuse, adding words in that prayer. When a priest can use his own words are described in 2002 GIRM n. 31.

#4 The 2002 GIRM n. 154, as approved for the USA has: “The priest may give the sign of peace to the ministers but always remains within the sanctuary, so as not to disturb the celebration. In the dioceses of the United States of America, for a good reason, on special occasions (for example, in the case of a funeral, a wedding, or when civic leaders are present) the priest may offer the sign of peace to a few of the faithful near the sanctuary.”. So in the USA it depends on whether the priest has a special occasion to justify leaving the sanctuary.

 

[Brendan]

#1. If the deacon is wearing a chasuble instead of a dalmatic that is an abuse. But it would be a surprising thing for a deacon to do. The two garments look similar.

I would agree, unless you look closely, the two ARE very similar

for example, here a pic of a dalmatic

http://www.hlstudio.com/Liturgical/Dalmatics/GreenRavennaDalmatic.jpg

Not my favorite style, but still an acceptable dalmatic.

The primary difference is that the dalmatic has sleeves while a chasable does not.

 

[GoLatin]

I believe that in the Traditional Latin Mass, the Dalmatic is usually shorter, so the difference between it and the Chasuble can be seen more easily.

 

[Brendan]

#2 - I’m sorry, let my clarify myself. He did say the institution narrative including “This is the cup of my blood…”. (I know so, because when elevating the cup, he does a full 360 showing everyone) so I reckon it was concecrated.

What he did not do is I guess “prepare” it: wash his hands, pour the water into the wine, etc. All of this was skipped, thus I suppose this was done elsewhere before Mass (although I have no idea)…

If a small amount of water was NOT added, the practice is illicit (an abuse) but the Consecration would still be Valid (it truely is Christ)

But it should be added during the preparation of the gifts at the altar.

 

[Fast_ed75]

*…the last time I went to receive the Blood of Our Lord during Communion, the Extraordinary Minister didn’t say “The Blood of Christ”, so I just stood there forever staring at her, waiting for her to say it – she never did – so I just said ‘Amen’ and took it anyway… *

Well, from what you mentioned, maybe she does does not want to mislead you. If the priest is not performing the proper consecration, then you are sipping cheap cabernet… not the True Body and Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ.

The root of the matter appears to be simple: Father has no faith. Or if he ever had a tiny bit of it, he lost it a long time ago. Otherwise, he would not act in such a disrespectful manner.

It is the virtue and Spiritual Work of Mercy to pray for the soul of such a “priest”. But there is nothing compelling you to put money in his pocket. Sounds like you may need to hurry thee to the another parish.

 

[Fast_ed75]

*There’s been some other odd things that have caused me to raise my eyebrows… the priest has asked us that during the “Our Father”, we are to raise our hands in the ‘Orans Posture’ as he does… *

My immediate reaction would be that some nun in a pants suit came up with the idea to make the Mass more touchy/feely and was a little jealous of priestly “power”, That is very unfair of me, I know, but that has just been my experience in various parishes.

 

[Fast_ed75]

While we are on this topic, why do we hold hands anyway? And at the end of the prayer when we start “For the kingdom, the power…” everyone raises thier hands up about head level so you can see this big hand holding chain across the church.

For me, hand-holding represents everything that has gone wrong with the post-Vatican II church - ‘community’ above all else, and the downplaying of the sacred and the real presence of Christ. It’s a statement. It’s a statement that “We are [the] Church”, that the sacraments are nice, but symbolic only, that good people of all religions go to Heaven, that you could decide for yourself which doctrines to accept or reject, that the mythical ‘early church’ didn’t do things this way, etc., etc. … Nothing screams Benny Hinn/Charismatic/Old-Tent Revival Protestant more than this.

I wish that the Pope would speak against this practice and that it would end.

 

[Maureen_Fiore]

Boomer Sooner:

Hello Everyone!

As I said, I’m a convert, so I’d like to hear some thoughts/opinions from some more knowledgable Catholics out there… but here is what I have noticed:

Other Random Stuff:
I guess that pretty much wraps it up. There’s been some other odd things that have caused me to raise my eyebrows… the priest has asked us that during the “Our Father”, we are to raise our hands in the ‘Orans Posture’ as he does… I’m still confused on what to do regarding this.
Do nothing ignore the people who insist you raise your hands and hold theirs as well. This is definitely a sign that this parish is not in accordance with the Church of Rome.

Pope Benedict was elected as Pope (by the grace of the Holy Spirit), our priest expressed his great “dissatisfaction” with the election – whatever that means.
Because your priest is probably does not have the same conservative views as our Holy Father.

All of what you mention should be reported to the Bishop. Everything sounds like violations to me.

Good Luck

 

[MrS]

*While we are on this topic, why do we hold hands anyway? And at the end of the prayer when we start “For the kingdom, the power…” everyone raises thier hands up about head level so you can see this big hand holding chain across the church.
*

For me, hand-holding represents everything that has gone wrong with the post-Vatican II church - ‘community’ above all else, and the downplaying of the sacred and the real presence of Christ. Hand-holding is more than ‘inappropriate touching’. It’s a statement. It’s a statement that “We are [the] Church”, that the sacraments are nice, but symbolic only, that good people of all religions go to Heaven, that you could decide for yourself which doctrines to accept or reject, that the mythical ‘early church’ didn’t do things this way, etc., etc. … Nothing screamed Benny Hinn/Charismatic/Old-Tent Revival Protestant more than this.

I wish that the Pope would speak against this practice and that it would end.

Another voice of reason heard from

 

[grotto]

I wish I could grant you your wish!

 

[Brendan]

GoLatin:

I believe that in the Traditional Latin Mass, the Dalmatic is usually shorter, so the difference between it and the Chasuble can be seen more easily.

The Dalmatic is supposed to be a knee length garment, but I have noticed that it varies by who is wearing it.

The short ‘transitional’ deacon that was assigned to our parish, and the ex-Marine, Football coach ‘permanent’ Deacon both wore the same parish owned dalmatics.

Needless to say, what was ‘kneelength’ on one was floor lenght on the other