Liturgical Abuses - So what's the big deal?

[YinYangMom]

netmil(name removed by moderator):

Time and B16! God Willing!

 

[buffalo]

YinYangMom:

Which is why it is up to the faithful to determine for themselves whether or not hand holding and orans position is appropriate for them (not for others, for them). It is not binding on all the faithful because the proper representatives of the church have not yet ruled on the matter. One day, we hope, they will and we can put the matter to rest.

Though I wonder if they rule ‘yes’ if there will be the complaint that they ‘caved in’ to pressure. Personally, I’ll keep praying they rule “no”.

:banghead: No the faithful do not have the right to decide what is appropriate. In this case we should wait patiently for an answer and continue with the existing Tradition and norms. We are never to make our own!

 

[Quaere_Verum]

Yoo Hoo! OP here! You guys seem to be having lots of fun with this thread, and I’m glad. I wanted lots of (name removed by moderator)ut, and sure enough I’m getting it. However, now I’m more confused than before.

Can somebody make this simple. Let’s assume that I am a simple Catholic not an intellect, and my greatest desire is to follow the teachings of the Church. What would/should I do to ensure that I am not participating in abuses?

 

[YinYangMom]

buffalo:

If you can read, and it’s clearly written, absolutely. In fact RS says it is a duty.

I asked if it is the case when the priest, bishop and archbishop have explained to you it is not and shown you why. So, they have writings to support their decision but you reject their supportive evidence…so you believe you have the right to go to Rome, too?

 

[netmilsmom]

:banghead: No the faithful do not have the right to decide what is appropriate. In this case we should wait patiently for an answer and continue with the existing Tradition and norms. We are never to make our own!

Isn’t that what Martin Luther did?
He decided what was appropriate?

 

[netmilsmom]

Quaere Verum:

Can somebody make this simple. Let’s assume that I am a simple Catholic not an intellect, and my greatest desire is to follow the teachings of the Church. What would/should I do to ensure that I am not participating in abuses?

Move to Michigan and come to my parish.

 

[buffalo]

YinYangMom:

I asked if it is the case when the priest, bishop and archbishop have explained to you it is not and shown you why. So, they have writings to support their decision but you reject their supportive evidence…so you believe you have the right to go to Rome, too?

I always have a right to go to Rome. However, if they showed legitimate documents and teachings I would be foolish and I then should be obedient.

Now the question is what if they showed me supporting evidence taken out of context and I knew it?

 

[YinYangMom]

Della:

And finally, I see no reason why people can’t assume good will on the part of other posters. If we can’t do that then there is no good reason to discuss anything on the forum.

Can we extend the same good will to the priests then, who allow for these innovations rather than automatically presumes they are defiantly and deliberately introducing abuses to the liturgy?

 

[Quaere_Verum]

netmil(name removed by moderator):

Move to Michigan and come to my parish.

After reading all the posts of my wise fellow CA members, I think announcing to my husband we’re moving, uprooting my family with no job prospects or home, and moving to a place far from relatives does sound like a simple idea.

 

[netmilsmom]

YinYangMom:

Can we extend the same good will to the priests then, who allow for these innovations rather than automatically presumes they are defiantly and deliberately introducing abuses to the liturgy?

Call me sour but in my experience, liturgical committes and DREs are the one’s who are defiant. The Poor Priests, over worked and over tired are caught in the middle.

 

[YinYangMom]

:banghead: No the faithful do not have the right to decide what is appropriate. In this case we should wait patiently for an answer and continue with the existing Tradition and norms. We are never to make our own!

We were discussing specifically the hand holding and orans thing with the Our Father. The bishops have ruled that it is neither expressly forbidden nor required and they have instructed us to use our discretion here.

Yes, I agree wholeheartedly that the faithful certainly cannot come up with it’s own things to do (like cartwheels in the pew at the Alleluia), I did not mean to suggest that at all.

 

[YinYangMom]

netmil(name removed by moderator):

Call me sour but in my experience, liturgical committes and DREs are the one’s who are defiant. The Poor Priests, over worked and over tired are caught in the middle.

I’m with you on that observation.

 

[YinYangMom]

buffalo:

Now the question is what if they showed me supporting evidence taken out of context and I knew it?

Good one…
This is where it would indeed be your duty to inform them otherwise and perhaps even take it to Rome, of course, providing evidence to substantiate your concern.

You’d have in writing the references they provided supporting their position and you’d offer it to Rome to rule on the matter. In the meantime…and this is where it gets a little scary for me…do you obey? or remain defiant?

Fortitude would suggest you remain defiant since you know better, but obedience would suggest you respect the direct authority of your bishop whom the Church has entrusted with Her care.

 

[YinYangMom]

Quaere Verum:

Yoo Hoo! OP here! You guys seem to be having lots of fun with this thread, and I’m glad. I wanted lots of (name removed by moderator)ut, and sure enough I’m getting it. However, now I’m more confused than before.

Sorry about that. Gotta take a break now anyway. I’ll check back later this evening.

 

[netmilsmom]

Quaere Verum:

After reading all the posts of my wise fellow CA members, I think announcing to my husband we’re moving, uprooting my family with no job prospects or home, and moving to a place far from relatives does sound like a simple idea.

Well, I’ve been known to be simple in my life!

 

[Joysong]

Isn’t that what Martin Luther did?
He decided what was appropriate?

This is not a good example, for Luther took doctrinal matter and changed its meaning in defiance of those in Church authority.
The matter of holding somebody’s hand while praying? Hardly doctrinal, hardly moral, hardly an abuse. If it needs a label, it could be a lack of sameness because each person has freedom to participate or not in the act of holding the hand of someone near to them.

This is not directed to anyone in particular, but I just wanted to remind us that Jesus had infinite knowledge and wisdom, as He was full of the Holy Spirit – yet He obeyed the imperfect, probably finite decisions of St. Joseph. It is something to consider when we believe that our way may be more perfect in vision or wisdom than the imperfect guidance of our priest or bishop.

I agree with YYM that in these incidental matters that are not of moral consequence or truly an abuse toward the Holy Eucharist, we do well to leave it up to the Bishop to guide us. This is so difficult for me to believe that we spend entire afternoons debating these things.

Maybe next, we will speak about whether it is an abuse not to have our knees touch the floor when we genuflect, as if the act of hitting the floor makes it more genuine, and a half genuflect is disrespectful toward the tabernacle. Duh! Or maybe it is an abuse to giggle out loud at a priest’s joke, or sing off-key and disturb the tonal quality of others’ worship, or drop holy water on the floor when we bless ourselves, etc. I overstate, but I think sometimes that is the level of rigidness some display.

Your disciples don’t wash their hands! Why don’t they fast? You heal on the Sabbath! Your works are done through beelzebub! True enough, the law required washing the hands, so was Jesus setting aside the letter of an overly strict element of Jewish law or rather the rigid spirit that castigated he and his disciples?

Carole

 

[netmilsmom]

Joysong:

I just wanted to remind us that Jesus had infinite knowledge and wisdom, as He was full of the Holy Spirit – yet He obeyed the imperfect, probably finite decisions of St. Joseph.

This is not sounding quite right to me.
Jesus was filled with the Holy Spirit?
Doesn’t that make the Holy Spirit just a little above Jesus. Are you saying that Jesus would somehow be less of something without the Holy Spirit?

Aren’t there three people in one God?

 

[Eileen_T]

YinYangMom:

Yes, and who’s responsibility is it to get that information to the laity? THE BISHOP’S! We, the faithful, must cling to our bishops, look to them for guidance and instruction - and we must trust they speak the Truth at all times.

Sometimes they refrain from speaking. I had dinner with a retired bishop and a couple of priests at a Humanae Vitae Conference in 2003. I asked why bishops and priests did not speak out strongly against Catholics communicating while contracepting? The Bp replied with a sigh that they don’t want to be unpopular. The priests nodded in agreement.

 

[YinYangMom]

Eileen T:

Sometimes they refrain from speaking. I had dinner with a retired bishop and a couple of priests at a Humanae Vitae Conference in 2003. I asked why bishops and priests did not speak out strongly against Catholics communicating while contracepting? The Bp replied with a sigh that they don’t want to be unpopular. The priests nodded in agreement.

All the more reason to pray for all our clergy, that they may be renewed with the Spirit to safeguard the Truth and truly protect their flock.

 

[YinYangMom]

Joysong:

Your disciples don’t wash their hands! Why don’t they fast? You heal on the Sabbath! Your works are done through beelzebub! True enough, the law required washing the hands, so was Jesus setting aside the letter of an overly strict element of Jewish law or rather the rigid spirit that castigated he and his disciples?

Carole

Well said :clapping: