K
kangnamdragon
Guest
No, I know what an abuse is. I have confirmed them with the bishop’s office.
- Status
K
kangnamdragon
Guest
First time I have heard that one. Why don’t they just skip communion? Plenty of people take the Eucharist for granted.
K
kangnamdragon
Guest
Thank you for understanding how I feel.
A
az_4_faith
Guest
No problem.
We’re all in this together, for good and for bad.
There’s far more good than bad . . . Thanks be to God!
We’re all in this together, for good and for bad.
There’s far more good than bad . . . Thanks be to God!
L
LilyM
Guest
A
az_4_faith
Guest
Who says I’m not doing that already?
J
Joysong
Guest
I think the word I asked you was “personally,” meaning physically present at the liturgy, and not on “You-tube.” I’m sorry to sound doubtful, but you have to admit there have been many posts referencing the episode in California, and I believe that is actually the only place anyone physically experienced it. Are you saying it happened in Boston, or perhaps that you were preseent in CA? Or that you “have seen this” because of watching You-tube on the internet?
Is this what you feel is typical of the majority of liturgies in the US? That is what I expressed doubt for, while sympathizing with any who may continue to experience it. It seems to me that so much light has been brought to the forefront on this that few, if any, would dare to repeat it.
J
Joysong
Guest
AZ 4 Faith,
How recent was the liturgical dancing?
It’s not that I doubt you, but not knowing you at all, I don’t want to put you in the camp of those who are complaining about things that have already been disciplined and eliminated. Some saw this several years ago before the guidelines suppressed it, and they still carry bitterness about the liturgy that they have not stepped foot in for years due to migrating to the TLM. I suppose they believe it still goes on, though they are not certain that it does.
OTOH, if you are still witnessing “dance” on a regular basis, what steps are you taking to report it?
Do you believe the Mass is invalid or less sacred due to omissions of the creed or gloria? * While it is certainly against the rubrics, it does not reduce the sacredness of the rite. Has this been reported to proper authority?
How recent was the liturgical dancing?
It’s not that I doubt you, but not knowing you at all, I don’t want to put you in the camp of those who are complaining about things that have already been disciplined and eliminated. Some saw this several years ago before the guidelines suppressed it, and they still carry bitterness about the liturgy that they have not stepped foot in for years due to migrating to the TLM. I suppose they believe it still goes on, though they are not certain that it does.
OTOH, if you are still witnessing “dance” on a regular basis, what steps are you taking to report it?
Do you believe the Mass is invalid or less sacred due to omissions of the creed or gloria? * While it is certainly against the rubrics, it does not reduce the sacredness of the rite. Has this been reported to proper authority?
I don’t know if this was addressed to me or to another, but I did not see anyone “demeaning others” in this thread. Are you misreading or just making assumptions because there is non-agreement.*
A
az_4_faith
Guest
Liturgical dancing went away with the appointment of our new Bishop three years ago. Thanks be to God.
Of course the Mass isn’t invalid without the Creed or the Gloria on Sunday. But as a daily Mass attendee, where the Gloria and Creed are omitted, I look forward to the opportunity to recite or sing the Gloria and the Creed with my brothers and sisters in faith on Sundays and other Solemnities. There is too much history and tradition in both prayers for either to be skipped. Too much blood has been shed to preserve those words of faith.
Each and every part of the Mass is steeped in historical tradition and has a particular meaning and charism. It connects heaven and earth, the past and the present. Nothing in the Mass is by accident. Each prayer, each chant, each ritual was purposely chosen to be a part of the Holy Mass.
So when a priest takes it upon himself to skip, alter, rush, eliminate, add to, substitute his own interpretation, etc. in areas of the liturgy where Holy Mother Church has told him he’s not allowed to, he’s messin’ with more than just the Mass he’s offering at the moment - he’s effecting the Whole Church - past and present - Militant, Triumphant and Suffering.
Of course the Mass isn’t invalid without the Creed or the Gloria on Sunday. But as a daily Mass attendee, where the Gloria and Creed are omitted, I look forward to the opportunity to recite or sing the Gloria and the Creed with my brothers and sisters in faith on Sundays and other Solemnities. There is too much history and tradition in both prayers for either to be skipped. Too much blood has been shed to preserve those words of faith.
Each and every part of the Mass is steeped in historical tradition and has a particular meaning and charism. It connects heaven and earth, the past and the present. Nothing in the Mass is by accident. Each prayer, each chant, each ritual was purposely chosen to be a part of the Holy Mass.
So when a priest takes it upon himself to skip, alter, rush, eliminate, add to, substitute his own interpretation, etc. in areas of the liturgy where Holy Mother Church has told him he’s not allowed to, he’s messin’ with more than just the Mass he’s offering at the moment - he’s effecting the Whole Church - past and present - Militant, Triumphant and Suffering.
A
az_4_faith
Guest
And no, I’m not a TLM’er
C
Crumpy
Guest
Well, this subject always brings out the negativity in me.
Hey, just stop going to that church, or to all the churches.
My entire diocese is corrupt with, as the Code of Canon Law puts it, “errors in doctrine and practice.” The canon says we’re supposed to support our parish in spite of “errors in doctrine and practice.”
All I can say, is that is makes me so upset, that I cannot participate fully in the Mass. And, my presence is not going to express my support for that nonsense.
According to the Catechism, the Mass is supposed to be an outward sign of our unity. But, that is contradicted in these cases by its lack of unity with the rubrics of the Church.
Way up, on the Catholic Answers menu bar, go to This Rock and then select the tab for contributions. Read Karl Keating’s essay and appeal for his efforts to confront the dissidents in the Church.
If it’s not a CATHOLIC Mass, then what are you doing there?
What’s his name? St. Thomas Moore? He was locked in the Tower for almost two years before his death, and, as best as I know, could not attend a valid Mass. Does anyone question God’s mercy towards him when he couldn’t get to Mass?
Why do you doubt God’s mercy if you cannot find a valid Mass?
Hey, just stop going to that church, or to all the churches.
My entire diocese is corrupt with, as the Code of Canon Law puts it, “errors in doctrine and practice.” The canon says we’re supposed to support our parish in spite of “errors in doctrine and practice.”
All I can say, is that is makes me so upset, that I cannot participate fully in the Mass. And, my presence is not going to express my support for that nonsense.
According to the Catechism, the Mass is supposed to be an outward sign of our unity. But, that is contradicted in these cases by its lack of unity with the rubrics of the Church.
Way up, on the Catholic Answers menu bar, go to This Rock and then select the tab for contributions. Read Karl Keating’s essay and appeal for his efforts to confront the dissidents in the Church.
If it’s not a CATHOLIC Mass, then what are you doing there?
What’s his name? St. Thomas Moore? He was locked in the Tower for almost two years before his death, and, as best as I know, could not attend a valid Mass. Does anyone question God’s mercy towards him when he couldn’t get to Mass?
Why do you doubt God’s mercy if you cannot find a valid Mass?
K
kangnamdragon
Guest
Why are you being the devil’s advocate? If there are 99 good masses and 1 mass with abuse, shouldn’t we be concerned about that 1?
J
Joysong
Guest
For a second time, you have avoided answering, and your non-answer tells me you did not physically attend a liturgy where a clown presided and proclaimed the gospel. That being the probability, you are echoing the laments of those who HAVE seen it, and are repeating it. Not a problem, except for implying that [therefore] it is happening everywhere in liturgy, and that is my real concern, for this would be a false characterization that is being promoted in this thread.
Of course, yes…
I agree that all of us should be concerned if this is the true abuse that occurs in our liturgies. As I mentioned to another, what reports have been submitted to authority? And since it was confined to California a number of years or months ago, how is that anyone’s concern here and now? What are you asking us to do as you repeat it once again in a new thread? Abhor the clergy? File new reports for an old event that has been reported X-number of times? Get upset and not attend mass?
As I read once again your words, it seems to me you are just venting your extreme displeasure with a past practice and your belief that this is a regular occurrence today in many of our churches. With that, I disagree. If you stated, for instance, that the gloria and creed are regularly omitted in YOUR parish, I could agree that it is wrong, but also ask if you have taken action, and how it is progressing.
Honestly, I love the liturgy, and like AZ 4 does, I too, attend many times weekly. There is nothing that will separate you or I from Christ, as St. Paul wrote in the scriptures [not even abuses in liturgy]. May I suggest something the saints follow, that we ourselves become ministers of reparation? — that we go to liturgy with our whole heart and mind engaged in as much love as possible to give honor and praise to God, in reparation for those who are not worshipping in that same spirit?
Of course, yes…
I agree that all of us should be concerned if this is the true abuse that occurs in our liturgies. As I mentioned to another, what reports have been submitted to authority? And since it was confined to California a number of years or months ago, how is that anyone’s concern here and now? What are you asking us to do as you repeat it once again in a new thread? Abhor the clergy? File new reports for an old event that has been reported X-number of times? Get upset and not attend mass?
As I read once again your words, it seems to me you are just venting your extreme displeasure with a past practice and your belief that this is a regular occurrence today in many of our churches. With that, I disagree. If you stated, for instance, that the gloria and creed are regularly omitted in YOUR parish, I could agree that it is wrong, but also ask if you have taken action, and how it is progressing.
Honestly, I love the liturgy, and like AZ 4 does, I too, attend many times weekly. There is nothing that will separate you or I from Christ, as St. Paul wrote in the scriptures [not even abuses in liturgy]. May I suggest something the saints follow, that we ourselves become ministers of reparation? — that we go to liturgy with our whole heart and mind engaged in as much love as possible to give honor and praise to God, in reparation for those who are not worshipping in that same spirit?
O
otjm
Guest
It might help to have some perspective on things.
Currently the part of the Catholic Church that is showing the most growth is in Africa. To assume they have no problems would be at best unwise (in some areas there are serious problems concerning plural wives, for one; and heterosexual transmission of AIDS seems to be more prevalent there than elsewhere, for a second problem); but they are experiencing great growth right now.
Some of the most intense Catholicism seems to be where it is persecuted greatly; look to Asia, Viet Nam, and up until 10 years ago or so, the Eastern Block countries. However, there are reported problems even in some of the Eastern Block countries that have come out from under Soviet domination; there seems to be some falling off of Mass attendance.
Europe is down in Mass attendance on a weekly basis of somewhere into the teens to below 10% of those baptized. It makes America look like a beacon of hope.
As to the abuses in the Mass, there is seemingly an inability to distinguish between something that invaildates the Mass, and something that is done deliberately as an experimental tinkering, what is done not out of deliberate disobdience but as simply sloppy rubrics; what is done by mistake, and what is done out of prior training.
For example, there is a tad bit of difference between a priest changing the words of Consecration (I have never seen this nor spoken to anyone who actually has, but rumors abound) and holding hands during the Our Father (the latter being poor liturguical action but clearly not being addressed by Rome who has had multiple chances).
One needs to understand that a goodly number of the older clergy was trained at a time that liturguical experimentation was going on much more than it is now; it was a “given” (from their training - or lack thereof) that liturgical experimentation was fine. There is also an attitude among some that Rome is so far out of touch with the local parish as to be irrelevant; again, an issue of training, either explicitly or implicitly. And as to the bishops, they came from that same pool of priests and were taught along side of them.
The last pope was not well known as a disciplinarian, and this one has shown little or no inclination to wade in deeply and kick rears and take names. Coupled with that is the belief that they used to do so. Neither the Pope not the Curia have micro-managed parishes in recent history - and you can take that back several hundred years. Discipline was, and still is an issue primarily at the dioccese level, and we can all agree that it has been lax since about when Humanae Vitae exploded on the scene and dissent broke loose. However, it might be noted that the bishops “on duty” when Humanae Vitae broke were trained as priests long before Vatican 2, and they were not particularly good disciplinarians. That fact alone should cause one to pause and consider that discipline prior to Vatican 2 was much less due to it being imposed and enforced than it was due to the fact that pretty much everyone was self-disciplined.
O
otjm
Guest
Some further thoughts: I in no way condone liturgical experimentation. I agree with John Paul that the Mass is not the possession of the individual pastor or parish; it is the action of the universal Church and needs to be in accord with the universal Church’s rubrics, local exceptions provided by Rome excepted.
However, something that seems to linger in the background of all the complaints about liturgical abuses is what Cahtolicism is all about. Catholicisim is not all about Mass on Sunday. That the Eucharist is the sum and summit of the Church I have no question. But Mass is to feed us - with the Old and New Testament readings, and the Eucharist - so we can go into the world and do what Christ commanded us.
I see nowhwere in the Gospels that Christ told us to attend Mass on Sunday (He went to the synagogue on Saturday) as His central command; He certainly said we were to offer the Eucharist (see the Last Supper readings). But what He told us to do was to preach the Good News. That was not something left to the Apostles, and subsequently to the bishops and their delegates the priests; ti was to all of us.
We are upset by that which we choose to let upset us. I do not suggest that a priest who does not faithfully follow all of the rubrics is doing right; but I do compare that issue with, say, the 1,000,000+ abortions a year. And with the sexual license that is so prevalent in society today. and with trying to bring justice to the poor.
So what I am saying is that for the majority of complaints about variations in the Mass that are gratis, I put them in perspective with some issues that seem to have a bit more pressing need for correction. Would that they were all corrected; but then, that would be utopia… and I don’t expect to find utopia soon.
However, something that seems to linger in the background of all the complaints about liturgical abuses is what Cahtolicism is all about. Catholicisim is not all about Mass on Sunday. That the Eucharist is the sum and summit of the Church I have no question. But Mass is to feed us - with the Old and New Testament readings, and the Eucharist - so we can go into the world and do what Christ commanded us.
I see nowhwere in the Gospels that Christ told us to attend Mass on Sunday (He went to the synagogue on Saturday) as His central command; He certainly said we were to offer the Eucharist (see the Last Supper readings). But what He told us to do was to preach the Good News. That was not something left to the Apostles, and subsequently to the bishops and their delegates the priests; ti was to all of us.
We are upset by that which we choose to let upset us. I do not suggest that a priest who does not faithfully follow all of the rubrics is doing right; but I do compare that issue with, say, the 1,000,000+ abortions a year. And with the sexual license that is so prevalent in society today. and with trying to bring justice to the poor.
So what I am saying is that for the majority of complaints about variations in the Mass that are gratis, I put them in perspective with some issues that seem to have a bit more pressing need for correction. Would that they were all corrected; but then, that would be utopia… and I don’t expect to find utopia soon.
B
blessedtoo
Guest
I must take issue with this statement. Catholics have a right to a proper celebration of the Mass. The majority of Catholics only attend Mass once a week. The majority of Catholics only give thought to being Catholic once a week. This is their only exposure to what it means to be a part of our Church. Most will never crack open a Cathechism, or read a Bishop’s statement (or even know who their Bishop is), or hear of an encyclical. It is all the more important for this very reason that the one Mass they attend be celebrated without the personal innovations of the priest. And I would suggest there may be a correlation between the number of abortions, the sexual license and the poverty problem and the fact that it’s highly unlikely any Catholic who attends Mass once a week will even hear these things mentioned in a homily. Too many Parishes are more interested in “entertainment” liturgy. Don’t want to bum the people out, right? Don’t want to ruffle too many feathers.
Also, simply because abortion, promiscuity, and poverty still exist does not diminish or negate the problem that absolutely exists in our Catholic Churches.
K
kangnamdragon
Guest
I am offended that you make light of the situation and do not take the problem seriously.
J
Joysong
Guest
What situation, K? The very old postings concerning the gospel being read by the “clown?” Yes, that situation was wrong, and I don’t think you read anywhere that I agreed with it or made light of it. But it is now ancient history, friend, and is not now being done anywhere that I know of. Why the rehashing of this?
I will repeat again, if anyone has a problem with irregularities or abuses in liturgy, is anything being done with regard to notifying the proper authorities?
And again, I allude to some previous comments regarding sorrow for these infractions, rather than indignation and anger, coupled with prayer, followed by peaceful action that hopefully resolves it.
If that doesn’t work, then the only recourse is “acceptance” as prayed in the Serenity Prayer and turn it over to God. It is not my cup of tea to hear complaining in these threads over and again. I look for peaceful resolutions that are tempered with God’s own mercy. This morning’s first reading at mass spoke about God’s anger with His people in the desert who complained so frequently that He sent seraph serpents to punish them. It can become very disillusioning when one is on the listening end, no?
I will repeat again, if anyone has a problem with irregularities or abuses in liturgy, is anything being done with regard to notifying the proper authorities?
And again, I allude to some previous comments regarding sorrow for these infractions, rather than indignation and anger, coupled with prayer, followed by peaceful action that hopefully resolves it.
If that doesn’t work, then the only recourse is “acceptance” as prayed in the Serenity Prayer and turn it over to God. It is not my cup of tea to hear complaining in these threads over and again. I look for peaceful resolutions that are tempered with God’s own mercy. This morning’s first reading at mass spoke about God’s anger with His people in the desert who complained so frequently that He sent seraph serpents to punish them. It can become very disillusioning when one is on the listening end, no?
B
blessedtoo
Guest
I’ll respond to your question. Here in my city, there are quite a few of us who have taken the issue of liturgical irregularities to the Archbishop. Some of us have done it so frequently, that we are on a first name basis with our Shephard! For myself, I have left Churches both in tears, and enraged. It has taken years of persistence on the part of some faithful Catholics to make any impact at all. Perhaps you haven’t experienced first hand what it is like to live in a diocese littered with abuses. Perhaps you haven’t had to hunt for one Church out of hundreds that celebrates the Mass in accordance with the rubrics. I assure you that I am not a member of the liturgy police and I enter every Church expecting to experience a Catholic Mass. When what I see bears no resemblence to what I should, by rights, expect to witness, you bet there will be anger, outrage, and even sadness.
J
Joysong
Guest
Blessedtoo, I really do appreciate your feedback, and you have my support for pursuing your cause in a right spirit. While I don’t know the particulars of your reporting to the Bishop, I realize from seeing other threads that it is a very slow process that can try one’s patience.
There is hope, though, for a lot of the former grave abuses that came to light are now being addressed, and many pastors have abided by the new guidelines, though maybe not all.
You’ll note I used the word “grave” and with good reason. There are some who find fault with minor deviations that are more or less irritable to one’s preference than are an actual abuse. We can spend a few posts itemizing them, but I can ally with the Bishops in this regard, for while they are not ideal, they are not something that are outright grave for which the priest is often put on a chopping block.
I wish I could reference it for you and others, but I forget the title. EWTN had a good article by Rev. Most. He explained the difficulty of trying to find a middle ground that embraces the likes and dislikes of every Catholic who worships at Mass. It will be as dilfferent as night and day to people who have varied temperments and personalities, and these are some of the gripes that Bishops are having to juggle as they hope to satisfy everyone.
In charity, it might be good for all of us to develop a tolerance for many of the variances that occur in Mass, and not be quick to judge the pastor. Keep in mind that I am not addressing serious abuses here. As I reflect on this post, I can think of at least a dozen lawful but intensely disliked things that some consider an abuse, but could we really accuse the celebrant of serious sin if he permits them?
Today’s first reading is something to meditate upon. Moses did not do anything unlawful, but the culture these people were USED TO did not fit their present circumstance, and they developed a rebellious spirit that spread one to the other. This is what I find especially disturbing about some threads where negativity abounds. Like Moses, these pastors are God’s ministers …
chosen and beloved by Him.
There is hope, though, for a lot of the former grave abuses that came to light are now being addressed, and many pastors have abided by the new guidelines, though maybe not all.
You’ll note I used the word “grave” and with good reason. There are some who find fault with minor deviations that are more or less irritable to one’s preference than are an actual abuse. We can spend a few posts itemizing them, but I can ally with the Bishops in this regard, for while they are not ideal, they are not something that are outright grave for which the priest is often put on a chopping block.
I wish I could reference it for you and others, but I forget the title. EWTN had a good article by Rev. Most. He explained the difficulty of trying to find a middle ground that embraces the likes and dislikes of every Catholic who worships at Mass. It will be as dilfferent as night and day to people who have varied temperments and personalities, and these are some of the gripes that Bishops are having to juggle as they hope to satisfy everyone.
In charity, it might be good for all of us to develop a tolerance for many of the variances that occur in Mass, and not be quick to judge the pastor. Keep in mind that I am not addressing serious abuses here. As I reflect on this post, I can think of at least a dozen lawful but intensely disliked things that some consider an abuse, but could we really accuse the celebrant of serious sin if he permits them?
Today’s first reading is something to meditate upon. Moses did not do anything unlawful, but the culture these people were USED TO did not fit their present circumstance, and they developed a rebellious spirit that spread one to the other. This is what I find especially disturbing about some threads where negativity abounds. Like Moses, these pastors are God’s ministers …
chosen and beloved by Him.
- Status