Liturgical abuses at Mass today

[CARose]

Don’t get me wrong, I love a properly done Mass, no abuses please! I even love it when there’s incense and great old hymns with the organ going, candles and bells. I like it the way it’s supposed to be. But I also believe that part of that is the faithful sticking around to help the priests who don’t do it right. We show them our Charity and there is a better chance they’ll begin to open to the Truth. Ultimately, we need to pray even the most frustrating Priests into heaven.

CARose

 

[severinus]

jay29:

This is a good thread. I guess what I really wanted/needed to say is that mass is a very solem occasion and needs to be treated as such. Liturgical dancers? We do not need them. I do not need to see some kind of artsy band playing kumbya, all wearing long beards and long hair in a circle. I do not need to have priests putting there own spin on the mass and changing things at there own discretion. Admitting and omitting anything they want. I just want a straight up mass.

A little history about me. I am a convert from Eastern Orthodox. If anyone knows anything about Eastern Orthodoxy, the liturgy is heaven on earth. Solem chanting, clouds of incense, and wonderful icons! What a Holy Liturgy! You won’t find any new age bands or dancers there. However, I believe the Catholic Church is the true church founded by Jesus himself and that is the only reason I converted. I am just a little disgruntled with the mass.

The Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom is one of the greatest contributions of the Greeks to the world. It is magnificent and awe-inspiring in a way that is different from the comparatively straight-forward solemnity and beauty of the TLM.

I agree that the Mass should be celebrated as reverently as possible, and without any abuses. No Catholic deserves less. There are very nicely done Novus Ordo Masses; unfortunately, the wild and wacky get all the attention.

 

[bear06]

jay29:

This is a good thread. I guess what I really wanted/needed to say is that mass is a very solem occasion and needs to be treated as such. Liturgical dancers? We do not need them. I do not need to see some kind of artsy band playing kumbya, all wearing long beards and long hair in a circle. I do not need to have priests putting there own spin on the mass and changing things at there own discretion. Admitting and omitting anything they want. I just want a straight up mass.

A little history about me. I am a convert from Eastern Orthodox. If anyone knows anything about Eastern Orthodoxy, the liturgy is heaven on earth. Solem chanting, clouds of incense, and wonderful icons! What a Holy Liturgy! You won’t find any new age bands or dancers there. However, I believe the Catholic Church is the true church founded by Jesus himself and that is the only reason I converted. I am just a little disgruntled with the mass.

I hear ya. I guess now you know you can go across town and get a decent Mass. I have to travel 29 miles away to do this! Actually, it’s getting much better in my neck of the woods since our new bishop has arrived.

 

[stanley123]

Post hoc ergo propter hoc rides again. I prefer the TLM, but blaming the *Novus Ordo Missae *for societal changes when so many other factors need to be considered is not fair.

What about the effects of the media? The advance of relativism? Easy, inexpensive, no-fault divorce? Less stability in employment? The growth of materialism, especially when compared to the time of the Great Depression? Greater mobility?

It seems to me that these have more to do with divorce rates than the rite used for the Mass.

These are questions, which I think are very easily answered. Here’s why I don’t buy your argument. These influences that you have mentioned (the effects of the media? The advance of relativism? Easy, inexpensive, no-fault divorce? Less stability in employment? The growth of materialism, especially when compared to the time of the Great Depression? Greater mobility? )
These things have hit everyone in the USA, not just Catholics - right?
However, let’s look at the divorce rate in the USA and how it compares with the annulment rate in the RCC in the USA and see if there is any difference at all:
Divorces in the USA
1930: 195, 961
1979: 1,179,000
1998: 1,135,000
Annulments given out by the Catholic Church:
1930: 9
1989: 61, 416.
The divorces have increased by a factor of about 6
The annulments in the RCC have increased over the same period by a factor of 6824, or more than one thousand times as much as the divorces in the USA at large.
Now did you say that the increase in annulments is due to the surrounding culture??
If so, then why has the number of annulments in
the RCC gone up by more than one thousand times more than the number of
divorces in the surrounding culture?
Remember in 1930, you had the TLM exclusively in the Latin rite RCC.

 

[puzzleannie]

jay29:

Why is it so hard for me to find a catholic church that adheres to the missal/rubrics in my area? I live in the Binghamton, NY area.
Went to mass at a local church. First off, the procession was lead by a candle instead of a processinal cross/crucifix. I found that odd, even though a candle does represent Christ in the Easter/Paschal candle. Second, there was no sign of the Cross at the begining of mass, that is inexcusable. Third, the priest added his own words to the Eucharistic Prayer (3)! Just added as he pleased! If that wasn’t bad enough, he did/practiced intinction when he gave himself the Precious Body and Blood of Jesus! Dipped the particle from the large host into the chalice, consumed it, then distributed the Eucharist. I do not mean to sound picky, but the rules are the rules! The rules/order of the mass needs to be followed precisley. I would like to find a parish that treats the mass as it should be treated, solemly, as the most powerful prayer as well as the crux of our entire faith. Jay

we need to be extremely careful about alleging true liturgical abuse, and we should not even attempt to comment or criticize unless we ourselves are thoroughly familiar with the missal, rubrics, sacramentary and GIRM, which is quite rare for a layperson who is not directly involved in liturgical ministry and who has not had formal training for it.

Since I don’t have all the Eucharistic prayers memorized I would be unable to say definitely that the priest has changed the words even if I here something unfamiliar.

Intinction is allowed, but only the priest can do it (not lay EMHCs) and self-intinction is forbidden.

Was there a crucifix clearly visible in the sanctuary? If so, no problem there.

there are also several instances where the beginning of Mass and penitential rite, can change, for instance when baptisms are being done during Mass; when preceded by Liturgy of the Hours, on feast where Mass and procession begin outside (such as Palm Sunday and Easter Vigil), so without knowing all the circumstances I would not presume to accuse the priest of playing fast and loose with the rubrics.

 

[tee_eff_em]

puzzleannie:

we need to be extremely careful about alleging true liturgical abuse, and we should not even attempt to comment or criticize unless we ourselves are thoroughly familiar with the missal, rubrics, sacramentary and GIRM, which is quite rare for a layperson who is not directly involved in liturgical ministry and who has not had formal training for it.

Indeed. For instance, at least three people* posting on this thread do not fully understand the rules governing the practice of intinction.

puzzleannie:

Intinction is allowed, but only the priest can do it (not lay EMHCs) and self-intinction is forbidden.

Why do you say that EMsHC may not distribute via intinction?

(* and I may be among them)

tee

 

[amarischuk]

stanley123:

These are questions, which I think are very easily answered. Here’s why I don’t buy your argument. These influences that you have mentioned (the effects of the media? The advance of relativism? Easy, inexpensive, no-fault divorce? Less stability in employment? The growth of materialism, especially when compared to the time of the Great Depression? Greater mobility? )
These things have hit everyone in the USA, not just Catholics - right?
However, let’s look at the divorce rate in the USA and how it compares with the annulment rate in the RCC in the USA and see if there is any difference at all:
Divorces in the USA
1930: 195, 961
1979: 1,179,000
1998: 1,135,000
Annulments given out by the Catholic Church:
1930: 9
1989: 61, 416.
The divorces have increased by a factor of about 6
The annulments in the RCC have increased over the same period by a factor of 6824, or more than one thousand times as much as the divorces in the USA at large.
Now did you say that the increase in annulments is due to the surrounding culture??
If so, then why has the number of annulments in
the RCC gone up by more than one thousand times more than the number of
divorces in the surrounding culture?
Remember in 1930, you had the TLM exclusively in the Latin rite RCC.

LOL, their are lies, d*mn lies and statistics.

Firstly, you are comparing two different time frames: 1930-1998 and 1930-1989. Furthermore, the survey does not give the surrounding data…perhaps there were 20 or 30 annulments in 1929 or 1931. And perhaps the 1989 figures are also annomalies.

Secondly, the survey neglects the actual populations at the time which greatly influence the numbers. Given that the Catholic population has so rapidly expanded in the USA since the immigration from Latin America and Eastern Europe has increased.

But thirdly, perhaps their simple should have been more annulments in the Church in the 30s. My own great grandmother, having immigrated to Canada in the 1920s was denied an annulment from her arranged marriage (back in Poland) after she was beaten and spend a couple weeks in a hospital. She eventually returned and beat the bum up with a chair to the point of him leaving her (abandoning her with 4 children) in the thirties and never seeing him again. She eventually remarried, or properly married again because she wasn’t given an annulment thought my great grandfather had dissapeared (20 years after her death my grandfather discovered that he fled to the USA) and was excommunicated for the act.

But the closing line is the funniest: in the 30s their was no Novus Ordo…but their was also no TV, higher education for women, air travel, vaccinations, social security, welfare, sanitized drinking water, indoor plumbing for many, computers, etc.

I suppose you want a return to that too.

Adam

 

[severinus]

stanley123:

These are questions, which I think are very easily answered. Here’s why I don’t buy your argument. These influences that you have mentioned (the effects of the media? The advance of relativism? Easy, inexpensive, no-fault divorce? Less stability in employment? The growth of materialism, especially when compared to the time of the Great Depression? Greater mobility? )
These things have hit everyone in the USA, not just Catholics - right?
However, let’s look at the divorce rate in the USA and how it compares with the annulment rate in the RCC in the USA and see if there is any difference at all:
Divorces in the USA
1930: 195, 961
1979: 1,179,000
1998: 1,135,000
Annulments given out by the Catholic Church:
1930: 9
1989: 61, 416.
The divorces have increased by a factor of about 6
The annulments in the RCC have increased over the same period by a factor of 6824, or more than one thousand times as much as the divorces in the USA at large.
Now did you say that the increase in annulments is due to the surrounding culture??
If so, then why has the number of annulments in
the RCC gone up by more than one thousand times more than the number of
divorces in the surrounding culture?
Remember in 1930, you had the TLM exclusively in the Latin rite RCC.

What you have shown is that annulments are more easily granted today than in 1930, not that the Novus Ordo Missae contributes to the break-up of marriages.

 

[mosher]

tee_eff_em:

Why do you say that EMsHC may not distribute via intinction?

It is only give to the Priest, Deacon or Bishop to distribute communion by intinction. The rubrics are very clear on this and I believe RS addresses the issue as well.

 

[mosher]

YinYangMom:

I also have a problem with a little knowledge placing one in the position to knock down one’s superior. While it’s wonderful that we faithful now have access to church documents and guidelines, I think we need to be a bit more humble about how we use the information. The priests did go through many years of school and training before being ordained. Look into the heart and spirit of the priest and at his works before condemning him for minor variances.

I know what you are saying in your post but this paragraph gave me pause. In particular mentioning that the priest went to the seminary may not be what you think it is. I was at two different seminaries in three years and I can tell you that some of the guys ahead of me at one of the seminaries did know anything about much. When you have guys about ready to be ordained a Deacon who believe that a person can be saved apart from Christ then you have a problem. Going to the seminary does not equate to knowing anything about the faith.

 

[tadly]

amarischuk:

She eventually returned and beat the bum up with a chair to the point of him leaving her (abandoning her with 4 children) in the thirties and never seeing him again.

Polish women can be that way.
I wouldn’t seriously cross mine.

 

[tee_eff_em]

mosher:

It is only give to the Priest, Deacon or Bishop to distribute communion by intinction. The rubrics are very clear on this and I believe RS addresses the issue as well.

(* and I may be among them)

Told ya so!

tee

 

[YinYangMom]

mosher:

I know what you are saying in your post but this paragraph gave me pause. In particular mentioning that the priest went to the seminary may not be what you think it is. I was at two different seminaries in three years and I can tell you that some of the guys ahead of me at one of the seminaries did know anything about much. When you have guys about ready to be ordained a Deacon who believe that a person can be saved apart from Christ then you have a problem. Going to the seminary does not equate to knowing anything about the faith.

Oh, but where is the trust in the Catholic Church???

Especially in the U.S. we can find exceptions to every thing. But on the whole, it takes a number of years to go through the seminary successfully and advance toward the priesthood. There are spiritual advisors provided along the way, aren’t there?

What I’m saying is just because we’ve been Catholic all our lives and now have access to certain documents and read them on our own does not make us fully knowledgeable in all matters of what a priest may and may not do in particular circumstances.

It seems to open that ‘interpretation’ caveat we apply against sola scriptura. We have to trust that on the basic level the interpretation of church documents used in training our priests is being properly disseminated. Yes, there are some areas where it will not, but overall, the Church is protected by the Holy Spirit and these abuses will not prevail whether or not we take the time to nit-pick every move every priest makes in every parish.

Now, in matters where it’s out of control - with the obvious abuses supported not only by the priest but by the lay people on the various commissions/committees basically running parish operations - then I almost feel we should descend upon the parish as a group and pray the rosary outside it for a month or two - something that dramatic…and then leave it up to Mary, the Saints and Christ Himself to turn that parish around. It needs healing, definitely, and the way to heal it is to pray over it, not just abandon it.

As for the annulment statistics provided by another poster…it could also be that more people applied for annulments overall, not just a matter of more were granted. The underlying numbers need to be present to determine the true relationship here. Statistics are devious little things…

 

[Joan_M]

YinYangMom:

First of all, I’m disturbed by this ‘holier-than-thou’ attitude these posts seem to reflect…I know this isn’t the intention, I really, do, but it’s how it comes across nonetheless. …

I believe we are called to be patient and prayerful during these times. When you attend a mass by a priest who exercises abuses, pray especially hard for him that mass, especially at communion.

I just figure I’d be the last person to rag on a priest for his mistakes (when they are mistakes and not the willful misleading of his parishioners, there is a difference, I know). I’d have to go to every one of a particular priest’s services to get a feel for whether or not the error I witnessed was a one-time deal or an underlying belief…and honestly, I don’t have the time to watch over his shoulder like that when I’m not doing such a hot job looking over my own.

:twocents:

First of all, I do not think there is any “Holier than thou” attitude in any of these posts venting about liturgical abuses. We, the faithful laity are totally fed up with bad example from some of our priests. We have a right to the liturgy as the Church has deetermined it should be.

I surely agree with you that we should pray for priests who commits abuses in the Mass. It can try our patience, though.

When you attend Masses in a parish regularly (as I do) it becomes very easy to distingush between mistakes and abuses. Mistakes happen infrequently. They are not habitual practices. Some of the abuses may have started as mistakes that were not corrected. I have tried to tactfully, respectfully, address some abuses with the priest(s) who committed them. The results have been mixed. In the main, no matter how gently, diplomatically, you approach the priest, he takes offence. Why? Because they just don’t want to know. Why would you - a mere lay person - know better than a priest.

I told a priest once ( one I really like and respect) that there have been times that I was so upset with abuses that the only reason I did not hit the priest is because it would be a sacrilege! His reply - “perhaps it would be a virtue!” I’m sure that faithful priests are also upset with those that impose their own version of the liturgy on us.

Each day at Mass, during the Intercessions, I mentally pray for what that same priest I mentioned above asked for once - I pray for all priests to be faithful to the Magisterium of the Church. If they were, we would have no abuses at all.

Regardless - I will suffer through abuses so long as there is a valid Mass and I can receive Jesus. I just wish that Jesus wasn’t insulted so often by prideful priests insisting on doing their own thing.

 

[YinYangMom]

Joan M:

I just wish that Jesus wasn’t insulted so often by prideful priests insisting on doing their own thing.

Me too.
I’m particularly sorrowed by the bishops who allow these priests to continue down the wrong path.
Somebody needs to reign these priests in and I was under the impression that responsibility lies with the bishop.
I don’t accept that they’re busy with other administrative tasks - their primary responsibility is to ensure the faithful are being guided truthfully in the faith.
I, too, am frustrated.

 

[stanley123]

amarischuk:

But the closing line is the funniest: in the 30s their was no Novus Ordo…but their was also no TV, higher education for women, air travel, vaccinations, social security, welfare, sanitized drinking water, indoor plumbing for many, computers, etc.
.

OK. These things affect only RC’s. Everyone else is lillte affected by these.

 

[stanley123]

severinus:

What you have shown is that annulments are more easily granted today than in 1930,…

What I think that the figures show is this:
There may have been changes in the general ambience or atmosphere of the USA culture since 1930. But these changes have impacted both the nonRC and the RC population about equally.
However, we have noted a much larger number of family breakups in the RCC for the period from 1930 -1989, than in the USA at large. In fact, it is of the order of an increase of one thousand times more annulments than the increase in divorces in the USA during this period of time.
Note: in 1930, you had the TLM.
The argument rests on the correlation between the replacement of the TLM by a liturgy which in some cases lessens the sense of the Sacred by introducing an informal and casual approach to worship and the deterioration in catechesis, and the increase in the number of annulments, scandals, and the numerical decrease in seminarians. This correlation under different conditions and settings marshalls support for causality. although I do not claim that it proves it axiomatically. We have to admit that there may be underlying third variables which may be related to the ones under consdieration, but nevertheless, just as in the cse of lung cancer and cigaret smoking, the high correlation lends support to our underlying belief that cigaret smoking “causes” lung cancer. Although it is not proven axiomatically, still the correlation between cigaret smoking and lung cancer strengthens and reinforces our belief that cigaret smoking is a danger to our health and is something to avoid.

 

[stanley123]

amarischuk:

LOL, their are lies, d*mn lies and statistics.

No they are not. But I do admit that the figures are startling. The figures are accurate and they reflect how the cultural changes have impacted the USA population as contrasted the the RC population. The major difference between the USA population and the RC population during that period is that the RC population has experienced a changeover from the TLM and an easing up on the requirements to obtain an annulment.
You say LOL. But my
personal opinion is that this is not a situation which calls for laughing out loud. I say that because families are being destroyed. More than one million RC families confirmed to be broken broken by the annulment process in the USA alone in the last 20 or 25 years. And this is not the way it was in 1930, when there were only 9 annulments declared, and when you had the TLM.

To see tha harm being done by divorce (or annulment) you might want to read the book by Judith Wallerstein, “The Unexpected legacy of divorce.” Wallerstein’s work involved listening to children from broken families and she has reflected on the stories of more than one hundred children from broken families. And just about all of these stories are tragic. The children from these broken families are not laughing.

 

[Michael_Welter]

YinYangMom:

What I’m saying is just because we’ve been Catholic all our lives and now have access to certain documents and read them on our own does not make us fully knowledgeable in all matters of what a priest may and may not do in particular circumstances.

In addition to your excellent point, while we may have access to Church documents, we may not have easy access to exceptions granted by local Bishops. For example, I wrote to my Bishop to complain about the Prescious Blood being poored from one vessel to several smaller vessels. This practice is forbidden by RS. The Bishop, or his assistant, wrote to me and informed me that for practical reason, the Bishop had granted an exemption to that requirement in this diocese.

As for the correlation between the number of annulments and the decline of the TLM, that is pure speculation, and should be presented as such.

 

[Fergal]

You know what I do?

When I get upset about (mostly minor) abuses, I do get angry, but almost immediately use the occassion to remind me of my own sinfulness and ask God for forgivness for the two of us.

If I feel very agitated about them after Holy Mass, I sit down and write out a letter on the computer, which never goes any further. It works wonders for my anger!! The mind feels it has dealt with it and the agitation leaves.

When the abuses are serious (very few and far between here) I will write to the Priest concerned.