Liturgical Abuse

  • Thread starter Thread starter torch621
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
paperwight said:
I find it difficult to believe that any priest would perpetrate an ‘abuse’ though ingnorance: good heavens, they’ve been to a seminary, haven’t they?
Click to expand...
Some seminaries teach incorrectly and so priests become ordained thinking incorrect things are correct.
And I really don’t see the average bishop following up a complaint from a parishioner and taking one of his rare-as-hen’s-teeth priests to task over something that doesn’t matter in the long-term. Wording, gestures can all be changed by the Church tomorrow., after all.
Click to expand...
Well, someone in the bishop’s office might "fire off a letter"gently letting the priest know that someone called complaining the gloria was omitted and that it should not be. But you are correct that many people seem to have the impression that the bishop is going to call priests into his office and read them the riot act over smaller matters.

And, of course, that’s assuming the bishop is even told what’s going on. Other people in the bishop’s office answer the phones and read mail. And if whoever opens the complaint letter is friendly with that priest…
 
diggerdomer said:
Can you give us an example of such seminaries or instructions? Thanks.
Click to expand...
Fr. John Zuhlsdorf often refers to liturgically and theologically vapid experiences from his time in seminary. I don’t know if he names names (and if that’s prudent or not).

I suppose it’s either a problem with some seminaries (or some seminary professors)… or just a widespread misunderstanding among many priests that the liturgy is not their private playground for innovation and distortion. Or maybe there are liturgical “memes” that get picked up easily, like filling holy water fonts with sand during Lent, or changing words of the Mass to avoid saying “Father” or “He/Him/His”, etc.
 
japhy said:
Fr. John Zuhlsdorf often refers to liturgically and theologically vapid experiences from his time in seminary. I don’t know if he names names (and if that’s prudent or not).

I suppose it’s either a problem with some seminaries (or some seminary professors)… or just a widespread misunderstanding among many priests that the liturgy is not their private playground for innovation and distortion. Or maybe there are liturgical “memes” that get picked up easily, like filling holy water fonts with sand during Lent, or changing words of the Mass to avoid saying “Father” or “He/Him/His”, etc.
Click to expand...
It should be pointed out that abuses and innovations are not limited to the so called liberal or progressives. I have been to many Masses celebrated by very conservative priests who have inserted their own pietistic practices into the Mass or have combined aspects of an older form of the rite (even older than the 62 Missal) into it that are not in the rubrics. This is just as wrong as any other change a more liberal priest might make. It confuses the laity just as much.

With regard to seminaries. It may not be that they are being taught the wrong thing. I work with priests, all kinds of priests, and know that some of them go through the seminary and do very well in their classes, follow all the rules and seem like model students, and when they get out they do their own thing. They are just went through the motions in the seminary to get ordained. Unfortunatly, some of these priests find that they are at odds with the pastor and sometimes the bishop and often get moved around a lot.
 
The priests they meet along the way has a big influence on young priests. In the past couple of years we’ve had a few young priests from Poland come to our parish. When they arrived their celebrations were shining examples of following rubrics. But, after a month with our non-genuflecting priests these young 'uns stopped genuflecting at Consecration and before Communion and gradually adopted the sloppy habits of their elders.
 
diggerdomer said:
Can you give us an example of such seminaries or instructions? Thanks.
Click to expand...
Well, I’m not going to “name names” so to speak. There are a couple of issues that confront seminarians when it comes to liturgy. One is that occasionally the instructions in liturgy are done by individuals with axes to grind with one aspect of liturgy or another. Another is that sometimes they’re using outdated nccb documents or outdated liturgical ideas that have been disapproved. And then there’s always some strange interpretations of documents.
And that’s what’s wrong with what is directly taught. Indirectly seminary masses themselves teach seminarians that Mass is an extension of the presider. Seminary masses depend heavily on who the presider is. Indirectly, through example, seminarians are taught to just do whatever the heck they want.
japhy said:
Or maybe there are liturgical “memes” that get picked up easily, like filling holy water fonts with sand during Lent…
Click to expand...
Yes, those little innovations that aren’t directly related to the Mass but yet are strange and uncalled for. Those things are passed along through seminary.
Phemie said:
The priests they meet along the way has a big influence on young priests. In the past couple of years we’ve had a few young priests from Poland come to our parish. When they arrived their celebrations were shining examples of following rubrics. But, after a month with our non-genuflecting priests these young 'uns stopped genuflecting at Consecration and before Communion and gradually adopted the sloppy habits of their elders.
Click to expand...
When they end up as pastors or as assistants in another parish they might go back to following the rubrics. Sometimes people go along to get along.
 
Phemie said:
these young 'uns stopped genuflecting at Consecration and before Communion and gradually adopted the sloppy habits of their elders.
Click to expand...
It’s interesting to notice that priests leaving the seminary are usually eager to adhere to the rubics. Also, the ‘traditional’ seminaries like the FSSP have waiting lists while ‘progressive’ don’t. Certainly there is a generation of ‘spirit of Vatican II’ priests now elders who’s eventual absence will be less of a liturgical liberal influence on the Church on whole.
 
Justin
Click to expand...
I hear your concern and appreciate your email. We are in the “in between time” with our usual experience of liturgy and anticipating the changes wrought be the English translation governing the Eucharist. We have been waiting for at least five years and the changes appear to be imminent. Let’s stay tuned.
Click to expand...
Msgr. Barton
Click to expand...
Father’s response.
 
Wait, torch621. Let me make sure I got this right…

You wrote to your priest, saying something like:
Dear Msgr. X, I have noticed lately that the Gloria isn’t being sung or said at Mass on Sundays. I really like that prayer, and I was wondering why it’s currently being omitted.
And he responded:
I hear your concern and appreciate your email. We are in the “in between time” with our usual experience of liturgy and anticipating the changes wrought be the English translation governing the Eucharist. We have been waiting for at least five years and the changes appear to be imminent. Let’s stay tuned.
I don’t see how his answer pertains to your question (if I have phrased it like you did).

We are, indeed, anticipating changes which will come when the new English translation is finally approved for use in the liturgy. Changes are coming in the next few years. But there is no sign that we are in an “in between time”, since nothing is supposed to be changed now. What does the coming translation have to do with illicitly changing the liturgy now?

I don’t understand your priest’s response. You want to know why the Gloria is being omitted, and he hasn’t told you why. It’s not like the Gloria is going to be omitted from the Mass when the new translation is employed.
 
japhy said:
Wait, torch621
I don’t understand your priest’s response. You want to know why the Gloria is being omitted, and he hasn’t told you why. It’s not like the Gloria is going to be omitted from the Mass when the new translation is employed.
Click to expand...
Its called: “giving someone the run around”
 
"Yes, there is currently very great secularization and secularism, the sense of mystery and the sacred has been lost, one does not live with the spirit truly to worship God and to let God be God. This is why it is believed to be necessary constantly to be changing things in the liturgy, to innovate and that everything has to be very creative. This is not what is needed in the liturgy, but that it really be worship, i.e. recognition of the One who transcends us and who offers us salvation. The mystery of God, which is the unfathomable mystery of his love, is not something nebulous, but is Someone who comes to meet us. We must recover the man who adores. We must recover the sense of the mystery. We must recover what we never ought to have lost. The greatest evil that is being done to man is trying to eliminate from his life transcendence and the dimension of the mystery. The consequences we are experiencing today in all spheres of life. They are the tendency to replace the truth with opinion, confidence with unease, the end with the means … Therefore it is so important to defend man against all the ideologies which weaken him in his triple relationship to the world, to others and to God. Never before has there been so much talk of freedom, and never before have there been more enslavements. "

Cardinal Antonio Cañizares Llovera, Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship

networkedblogs.com/p15915103
 
More specifically when you follow up, respectfully and with charity point out the Church documents and teachings listed here. Your priest should realize that if he refuses to follow Church guidelines then your next step is to contact the bishop.
 
I’m learning that there are a lot of abuses in our local churches. Our pastor never wears the chasuble at the weekday Masses (well, I’ve seen it happen twice), and today, the feast of Sts Simon and Jude, he omitted the Gloria. Yesterday I went to a church where I was formerly a member. That priest never laid his hands over the bread & wine at the Consecration, instead, leaving them at his side, and then when he should have elevated the Consecrated Host, his hands were again at his side.
Our pastor allowed a seminarian, in residence, to give the homily at weekday Masses. He called it practice, and actually was much better than he did/does.
A former pastor omitted the washing of hands during the week.
And the list goes on.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top