Liturgical Abuses - So what's the big deal?

[fix]

YinYangMom:

Yeah, but since when are we charged to dissect a priest or bishops faithfulness? You jumped down my neck for presuming things based on how I read your own words. How can you then advocate putting ourselves at risk of doing the same with our Church authority figures?

It is best to use examples for issues like this for simple minded guys like me. A few years ago I belonged to a parish where the priest said from the altar, just before dismissal of mass, that Rome was wrong about ordination of women. This is one minor example of stuff that goes on. Anyway, the priest is in “good standing” and full communion with Rome. Does that imply every word is in full communion? I am no scholar or expert, but I can reason pretty well. I have no obligation to accept his words or ideas on that subject regardless of his status with the Church.

To be perfectly honest, imo, we faithful have our own job to do with regard to the Church. We are to pray, fast, give alms, care for the needy, minister to the needs of our parish. I am so busy focusing on **my **actions being in communion with Rome I don’t have the time to watch every move of my priest, monitor every word he speaks or writes (let alone that of my bishop), attend every Mass to catch him making a mistake, monitor every EMHC, usher, reader, altar server, etc. and fully immerse myself in the sacrifice of the mass. It’s just too much.

I agree.

I was asking if you believed the RS was meant for you to act upon, as if it were written expressly for you. Do you?

Do you think I have some kind of psychological complex? No I do not have any type of illusion the Pope was writing specfically to me.

 

[buffalo]

buffalo:

These are a few observed in my Parish and others nearby.

These are a few observed in my Parish and others nearby.

1.** First Communion** - Children and parents standing around the Altar and sometimes teen Masses -** abuse** - In paragraph 162 of the General Instruction it says, referring to the Extraordinary Ministers of Communion when required by pastoral necessity, “These ministers should not approach the altar before the priest has received Communion…” That point is, of course, well after the Our Father.From the abuses pointed out by these 8 Roman dicasteries, it is clear than a practice which blurs the distinction of priest and people, such as everyone standing around the altar, is contrary to the sacramental nature of the Eucharistic liturgy as a sign of the Christ and the Church. In a document on the Role of Non-Ordained Ministers in 1998, 8 Roman Congregations re-iterated this point by stating that Extraordinary Eucharistic Ministers may not do this. What applies to them applies to all the laity. The new GIRM is clear, as well, that EMEs come up AFTER the priest’s Communion. That certainly prevents all others from being up there during the Eucharistic Prayer.
2. Glass vessels - abuse RS# [117.] Sacred vessels for containing the Body and Blood of the Lord must be made in strict conformity with the norms of tradition and of the liturgical books.[205]The Bishops’ Conferences have the faculty to decide whether it is appropriate, once their decisions have been given the recognitio by the Apostolic See, for sacred vessels to be made of other solid materials as well. It is strictly required, however, that such materials be truly noble in the common estimation within a given region,[206]so that honour will be given to the Lord by their use, and all risk of diminishing the doctrine of the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharistic species in the eyes of the faithful will be avoided. Reprobated, therefore, is any practice of using for the celebration of Mass common vessels, or others lacking in quality, or devoid of all artistic merit or which are mere containers, as also other vessels made from glass, earthenware, clay, or other materials that break easily. This norm is to be applied even as regards metals and other materials that easily rust or deteriorate.[207]
3. EMoHC being called EM’s - they pour the wine into different glass vessels. - abuse - [106.] However, the pouring of the Blood of Christ after the consecration from one vessel to another is completely to be avoided, lest anything should happen that would be to the detriment of so great a mystery. Never to be used for containing the Blood of the Lord are flagons, bowls, or other vessels that are not fully in accord with the established norms.
4. EMoHC co-communicate with the Priest - abuse - All receive Holy Communion in the manner described by the General Instruction to the Roman Missal, whether priest concelebrants (cf. GIRM, nos. 159, 242, 243, 246), deacons (cf. GIRM, nos. 182, 244, 246), or Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion (cf. GIRM, no. 284). Neither deacons nor lay ministers may ever receive Holy Communion in the manner of a concelebrating priest. The practice of Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion waiting to receive Holy Communion until after the distribution of Holy Communion is not in accord with liturgical law. (THLS, 39; GIRM, 160).
5.** Talk by religious - no homily on Sunday - abuse** - GIRM - 66. The Homily should ordinarily be given by the priest celebrant himself. He may entrust it to a concelebrating priest or occasionally, according to circumstances, to the deacon, but never to a lay person.65 In particular cases and for a just cause, the homily may even be given by a Bishop or a priest who is present at the celebration but cannot concelebrate.
There is to be a homily on Sundays and holy days of obligation at all Masses that are celebrated with the participation of a congregation; it may not be omitted without a serious reason. It is recommended on other days, especially on the weekdays of Advent, Lent, and the Easter Season, as well as on other festive days and occasions when the people come to church in greater numbers.

 

[buffalo]

con’t

6.Priest leaving the Sanctuary at sign of peace (Sunday Mass) - abuse
7. Responsorial Psalm - hymns subsituted on regualr basis - abuse - From the GIRM 61 In the Diocese of the United States of America, the following may also be sung in place of the Psalm assigned in the Lectionary for Mass: either the proper or seasonal antiphon and Psalm from the Lectionary, as found either in the Roman Gradual or Simple Gradual or in another musical setting; or an antiphon and Psalm from another collection of the psalms and antiphons, including psalms arranged in metrical form, providing that they have been approved by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops or the Diocesan Bishop. Songs or hymns may not be used in place of the responsorial Psalm.
8. Gift bearers entering Sanctuary and putting gifts on Altar -** abuse** - From the GIRM 73. At the beginning of the Liturgy of the Eucharist the gifts, which will become Christ’s Body and Blood, are brought to the altar.
First, the altar, the Lord’s table, which is the center of the whole Liturgy of the Eucharist,70 is prepared by placing on it the corporal, purificator, Missal, and chalice (unless the chalice is prepared at the credence table).
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.
9. Saying at the end of Mass - “the Mass never ends” - abuse - According, to the GIRM no one, Priest or layperson is allowed to change the MASS.
10. Priest was breaking Host at Conscecration -abuse - [55.] In some places there has existed an abuse by which the Priest breaks the host at the time of the consecration in the Holy Mass. This abuse is contrary to the tradition of the Church. It is reprobated and is to be corrected with haste.
11.** Liturgical gesturing during Mass (children go into Santuary and gesture to Music) - abuse** - The Bishops have expressly prohibited any and all forms of dancing in the Liturgy.

 NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF CATHOLIC BISHOPS (BISHOPS' COMMITTEE on the LITURGY) NEWSLETTER.  APRIL/MAY 1982.

“FROM THESE DIRECTIVES, from the NATIONAL CONFERENCE of CATHOLIC BISHOPS, all dancing, (ballet, children’s gesture as dancing, the clown liturgy) are not permitted to be ‘introduced into liturgical celebrations of any kind whatever.’”

---

Mom and orion, what do I do now?

 

[buffalo]

YinYangMom:

Perhaps I’m confusing you with Buffalo again…

:crying: :crying:

 

[fix]

:crying: :crying:

I do not think Buffalo is guilty of what you charge either.

 

[Quaere_Verum]

I have read the passionate replies posted here, and I have to assume that heated debates exist at all levels in the Church. It must be a difficult task to understand and then pass on the information to the faithful. I continue to ask why it is so difficult? Didn’t it used to be simpler? Then I read Paul’s letters in the Bible, and I see churches having to be corrected, so I guess since the beginning of the Church there have been abuses.

How does God expect the faithful who sincerely want to follow Church teachings to know what is right and wrong? God will honor our obedience to His priests, but that will not stop the abuses. So I guess we will always need people like those who have posted in this thread to identify what is wrong, present it in a charitable way, and see to it that wrongs are righted.

 

[YinYangMom]

I do not think Buffalo is guilty of what you charge either.

Awww…
well then I must be confusing different posts from different thread topics…I do hop around quite a bit and have on at least two occasions crossed topics before.

Sorry Buffalo!

 

[YinYangMom]

fix:

We agree…:clapping:

Woohoo :dancing:

To be honest, this debate is for a separate thread. If you want to start it I will be there.

Good golly, no. I really don’t like debates, they get me dizzy. I love discussions though.

Again, another thread…

Anything to do with labels I steer clear from intentionally. Thanks for the invite though.

Again, a new thread…

Now this one (juridical) would be one I’d visit since it’s an opportunity for me to learn something new.

Finally, we have come to a mutual understanding. Dialogue does work…well, true dialogue anyway.



I hate to argue with you because I often agree with you and have tremendous respect for you.

Same here. But you know, whenever I find you and others I usuallly agree with on the opposite side of my posts it’s a good call for me to reevaluate how I’m presenting my position, 'cause more often than not, I think we are on the same side when it comes to the faith and defense of the Church. Your patience while working out the kinks is most appreciated. It helps me post better.

 

[Joysong]

Dear Quaere Verum,

YingYangMom wisely cautioned awhile ago how necessary it is for us to read the documents for personal instruction, but never to assume that a peripheral reading qualifies one to have full knowledge and thereby to teach others or correct the clergy.

I just discovered with a casual read of RS, that at the end of that document there are no less than 295 notes containing further documents that helped to define the RS as it was being formulated by those in authority. This background is not something the average lay person has access to when they use the internet, and therefore we have to trust that the Magisterium knows a bit more than we do.

It is also important to realize that the RS indicates that there are very grave abuses, and those that need to be corrected, but are not truly grave. These less grave items are what many get upset about, when in fact, they do not warrant an arrest of the priest and a telegram to Rome.

I remember one off the top of my head that someone thought was an abuse, which is using a hymn for the responsorial psalm. Not an abuse at all, and it is permitted if the psalm is within the words of a song. Many times these song responses for the faithful are quite beautiful. I’m thinking now of one that our parish uses, called Shepherd Me O God, which is the 23rd psalm. Each verse is able to be responded to by the faithful.

When a person is uninstructed and communicates these things to others that their parish priest is abusing the liturgy, it can be quite harmful and may sometimes go so far as to constitute a grave matter, called calumny. Not saying that is so in this case, though.

As a final comment, this incident about the psalm does not fall in the category of most serious, grave abuse. That is also where we need to be careful in making determinations.

God’s peace and joy,
Carole

 

[buffalo]

Joysong:

I remember one off the top of my head that someone thought was an abuse, which is using a hymn for the responsorial psalm. Not an abuse at all, and it is permitted if the psalm is within the words of a song. Many times these song responses for the faithful are quite beautiful. I’m thinking now of one that our parish uses, called Shepherd Me O God, which is the 23rd psalm. Each verse is able to be responded to by the faithful.

When a person is uninstructed and communicates these things to others that their parish priest is abusing the liturgy, it can be quite harmful and may sometimes go so far as to constitute a grave matter, called calumny. Not saying that is so in this case, though.

As a final comment, this incident about the psalm does not fall in the category of most serious, grave abuse. That is also where we need to be careful in making determinations.

God’s peace and joy,
Carole

Please provide sources that show substituting a hymn for the Psalm is OK.

 

[Orionthehunter]

buffalo:

con’t

6.Priest leaving the Sanctuary at sign of peace (Sunday Mass) - abuse
7. Responsorial Psalm - hymns subsituted on regualr basis - abuse - From the GIRM 61 In the Diocese of the United States of America, the following may also be sung in place of the Psalm assigned in the Lectionary for Mass: either the proper or seasonal antiphon and Psalm from the Lectionary, as found either in the Roman Gradual or Simple Gradual or in another musical setting; or an antiphon and Psalm from another collection of the psalms and antiphons, including psalms arranged in metrical form, providing that they have been approved by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops or the Diocesan Bishop. Songs or hymns may not be used in place of the responsorial Psalm.
8. Gift bearers entering Sanctuary and putting gifts on Altar -** abuse** - From the GIRM 73. At the beginning of the Liturgy of the Eucharist the gifts, which will become Christ’s Body and Blood, are brought to the altar.
First, the altar, the Lord’s table, which is the center of the whole Liturgy of the Eucharist,70 is prepared by placing on it the corporal, purificator, Missal, and chalice (unless the chalice is prepared at the credence table).
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.
9. Saying at the end of Mass - “the Mass never ends” - abuse - According, to the GIRM no one, Priest or layperson is allowed to change the MASS.
10. Priest was breaking Host at Conscecration -abuse - [55.] In some places there has existed an abuse by which the Priest breaks the host at the time of the consecration in the Holy Mass. This abuse is contrary to the tradition of the Church. It is reprobated and is to be corrected with haste.
11.** Liturgical gesturing during Mass (children go into Santuary and gesture to Music) - abuse** - The Bishops have expressly prohibited any and all forms of dancing in the Liturgy.

 NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF CATHOLIC BISHOPS (BISHOPS' COMMITTEE on the LITURGY) NEWSLETTER.  APRIL/MAY 1982.

“FROM THESE DIRECTIVES, from the NATIONAL CONFERENCE of CATHOLIC BISHOPS, all dancing, (ballet, children’s gesture as dancing, the clown liturgy) are not permitted to be ‘introduced into liturgical celebrations of any kind whatever.’”

---

Mom and orion, what do I do now?

 

[fix]

YinYangMom:

Now this one (juridical) would be one I’d visit since it’s an opportunity for me to learn something new.

It was my clumsy attempt to point out that while we all should assume one is in full communion with Rome we also understand some openly preach things that are counter to Church teaching.

I am trying hard to avoid names, but we all can read about a certain priest in South Bend that often says things that hardly would be considered orthodox. That is just one example.

 

[YinYangMom]

buffalo:

These are a few observed in my Parish and others nearby.

1.** First Communion** - Children and parents standing around the Altar and sometimes teen Masses -** abuse** - In paragraph 162 of the General Instruction

Yes, well, let me check back later this evening when I read up on that book specifically addressing masses with youth and children though. As I said, it is separate from the GIRM so I wouldn’t expect you to find the same instruction in there as in the other. I’ll be able to cite the resource and specifics when I get home. Still, I’m not sure I’ll find anything contrary to what you’ve stated, it’s just possible they change things for children and youth (otherwise why publish a separate instruction book?)

1. Glass vessels - abuse [206]so that honour will be given to the Lord by their use, and all risk of diminishing the doctrine of the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharistic species in the eyes of the faithful will be avoided. Reprobated, therefore, is any practice of using for the celebration of Mass common vessels, or others lacking in quality, or devoid of all artistic merit or which are mere containers, as also other vessels made from glass, earthenware, clay, or other materials that break easily. This norm is to be applied even as regards metals and other materials that easily rust or deteriorate.[207]

Looks like that’s a definite no-no then. Good catch.

1. EMoHC being called EM’s - they pour the wine into different glass vessels. - abuse - [106.] However, the pouring of the Blood of Christ after the consecration from one vessel to another is completely to be avoided, lest anything should happen that would be to the detriment of so great a mystery. Never to be used for containing the Blood of the Lord are flagons, bowls, or other vessels that are not fully in accord with the established norms.

Seems pretty clear to me. What has your priest said about why he does it that way?

1. EMoHC co-communicate with the Priest - abuse - All receive Holy Communion in the manner described by the General Instruction to the Roman Missal, whether priest concelebrants (cf. GIRM, nos. 159, 242, 243, 246), deacons (cf. GIRM, nos. 182, 244, 246), or Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion (cf. GIRM, no. 284). Neither deacons nor lay ministers may ever receive Holy Communion in the manner of a concelebrating priest. The practice of Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion waiting to receive Holy Communion until after the distribution of Holy Communion is not in accord with liturgical law. (THLS, 39; GIRM, 160).

Well, I admit I’m not up to speed on what the red entails. *
What do you mean by ‘co-communicate’? *
What does that look like?
What is the manner by which a concelebrating priest receives?
I don’t think I’ve seen many concelebrated mass, perhaps 10 but I wasn’t really focusing on anyone’s postures, specific roles/actions.
And then, what you’re saying is your EMHCs are presenting themselves for communion as if they were concelebrants? Is that the problem?
**
5. Talk by religious - no homily on Sunday - abuse** - GIRM - 66. The Homily should ordinarily be given by the priest celebrant himself. He may entrust it to a concelebrating priest or occasionally, according to circumstances, to the deacon, but never to a lay person.65 In particular cases and for a just cause, the homily may even be given by a Bishop or a priest who is present at the celebration but cannot concelebrate.
There is to be a homily on Sundays and holy days of obligation at all Masses that are celebrated with the participation of a congregation; it may not be omitted without a serious reason. It is recommended on other days, especially on the weekdays of Advent, Lent, and the Easter Season, as well as on other festive days and occasions when the people come to church in greater numbers.

Well that’s clear cut. And certainly those serious reasons should be way few and far between so having it happen even twice in a year would be cause for alarm, imo.

 

[buffalo]

YinYangMom:
The Priest distributes Holy Communion to the EMoHC and then goes back to the Altar and we say “Lord I am not worthy…”. At the completion of the prayer he and the EMoHC at the same time consume the Host.

 

[YinYangMom]

buffalo:

con’t

6.Priest leaving the Sanctuary at sign of peace (Sunday Mass) - abuse

I’ve seen this done occasionally…not usually, but occasionally and I don’t recall the specifics, even whether it was a matter of a visiting priest or a special mass/occasion. I know I’ve seen it at weddings and baptisms, not all, but some… I suppose those have their own instructions beyond the GIRM (like for children and youth masses).

1. Responsorial Psalm - Songs or hymns may not be used in place of the responsorial Psalm.

*Sounds like your director of music has not been properly trained. I know there are diocesan conferences and seminars directors are supposed to go to…maybe yours skipped hers. *

1. Gift bearers entering Sanctuary and putting gifts on Altar -** abuse** - From the GIRM 73. They are then accepted at an appropriate place by the priest or the deacon and carried to the altar.

Certainly seems clear it is the priest or deacon who should carry the gifts to the altar.
**
9. Saying at the end of Mass - “the Mass never ends” - abuse - According, to the GIRM no one, Priest or layperson is allowed to change the MASS.

Definitely! What has your priest said about this?

1. Priest was breaking Host at Conscecration -abuse - [55.] In some places there has existed an abuse by which the Priest breaks the host at the time of the consecration in the Holy Mass. This abuse is contrary to the tradition of the Church. It is reprobated and is to be corrected with haste.

Geez, what a mess. If this is the same priest who does the other things he really needs praying over!

11.** Liturgical gesturing during Mass (children go into Santuary and gesture to Music) - abuse** - The Bishops have expressly prohibited any and all forms of dancing in the Liturgy.

NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF CATHOLIC BISHOPS (BISHOPS’ COMMITTEE on the LITURGY) NEWSLETTER. APRIL/MAY 1982.

“FROM THESE DIRECTIVES, from the NATIONAL CONFERENCE of CATHOLIC BISHOPS, all dancing, (ballet, children’s gesture as dancing, the clown liturgy) are not permitted to be ‘introduced into liturgical celebrations of any kind whatever.’”

My, my. The closest I can come to conjuring up even remotely an instance would be if at a children’s mass on or two children stood next to the cantor, off to the side of the sanctuary, to sign (for the hearing impaired) the words the Cantor sings. To have children in the sanctuary during the mass to sign interpretive gestures to music is beyond comprehending…

---

Mom and orion, what do I do now?

You’ve already spoken to your priest, if I recall. I don’t recall what his responses were to you. I take it they weren’t favorable though since the abuses are continuing.

I don’t recall if you provided all this evidence to your bishop yet. Have you?

The one good thing is this priest is not calling on you to do any of these things. The fact that they are going on certainly is a distraction to those of you who know better, but it doesn’t invalidate the Sacrifice, so that’s a good thing.

While the matter is being reviewed by the bishop, if/when you present it to him, then your cross becomes one which will help you exercise charity, patience and forgiveness. (I think of St. Terese being annoyed/distracted by that nun who sat before her during prayers)

I imagine if I were in your shoes I would arrive to Mass early to pray a little prayer for the priest, that the Spirit protect the validity of this Mass, that the Spirit strengthen the faithful against the effects of witnessing these abuses over time, that the Bishop is moved to review and respond to the submitted concerns in a timely fashion, that the Spirit protect me against anger, resentment, disgust and frustration during this mass when the abuses occur…I guess I’d ask Him to help shield me specifically from the harm the distraction does to me personally.

After mass I’d offer a prayer or rosary for the priest and the parish to guard both from Satan’s encroachment.

That’s the best I’d figure I could do.

 

[Joysong]

Dear Buffalo,

Please provide sources that show substituting a hymn for the Psalm is OK.

From your post on the GIRM: “… or an antiphon and Psalm from another collection of the psalms and antiphons, including psalms arranged in metrical form, providing that they have been approved by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops or the Diocesan Bishop.”

The song I mentioned is arranged in antiphonal and metric form, and is approved by my diocesan Bishop. It is used quite often. If you are not a music minister understanding antiphony and such, you would not realize it is proper. Not having full understanding is the very thing that I tried to point out:

I just discovered with a casual read of RS, that at the end of that document there are no less than 295 notes containing further documents that helped to define the RS as it was being formulated by those in authority. This background is not something the average lay person has access to when they use the internet, and therefore we have to trust that the Magisterium knows a bit more than we do.

So if one happens to read a few instructions in the GIRM , it is assumed many things are an abuse, and in this case is none at all, and if it were, it is not among those that are very grave matter. What the casual reader does not know is that the Bishop/priest knows what is lawful, what is permitted, what constitutes abuse. We do not have all the background, and we are not appointed by God to be liturgical police, as was discussed a few pages ago. It is our place to obey, until and unless we are positive it is a grave matter.

It is always best to ask questions first, and I would have to ask you whether you tried to inform yourself about this with either the pastor or the organist?

Carole

 

[YinYangMom]

Quaere Verum:

I continue to ask why it is so difficult? Didn’t it used to be simpler? Then I read Paul’s letters in the Bible, and I see churches having to be corrected, so I guess since the beginning of the Church there have been abuses.

Why? Because Satan is attacking the Church from every possible avenue, and yes, as it was in the beginning of the Church this battle will continue until the end of time. It helps to keep our perspective on the long term rather than get caught up in the short term.

How does God expect the faithful who sincerely want to follow Church teachings to know what is right and wrong?

Well, simply put, this is why He gave us the Church and the Pope.

At the most basic level each Catholic must adhere to the Precepts of the Church (from the Catechism):

2042 The first precept (“You shall attend Mass on Sundays and holy days of obligation.”) requires the faithful to participate in the Eucharistic celebration when the Christian community gathers together on the day commemorating the Resurrection of the Lord.

The second precept (“You shall confess your sins at least once a year.”) ensures preparation for the Eucharist by the reception of the sacrament of reconciliation, which continues Baptism’s work of conversion and forgiveness.

The third precept (“You shall humbly receive your Creator in Holy Communion at least during the Easter season.”) guarantees as a minimum the reception of the Lord’s Body and Blood in connection with the Paschal feasts, the origin and center of the Christian liturgy.

2043 The fourth precept (“You shall keep holy the holy days of obligation.”) completes the Sunday observance by participation in the principal liturgical feasts which honor the mysteries of the Lord, the Virgin Mary, and the saints.

The fifth precept (“You shall observe the prescribed days of fasting and abstinence.”) ensures the times of ascesis and penance which prepare us for the liturgical feasts; they help us acquire mastery over our instincts and freedom of heart.

God will honor our obedience to His priests, but that will not stop the abuses. So I guess we will always need people like those who have posted in this thread to identify what is wrong, present it in a charitable way, and see to it that wrongs are righted.

Yes, as I noted before, I sincerely believe there are a select group of faithful servants of the Church who have been blessed by the Holy Spirit to discern the various Church documents on a ‘laity’ level in order to help protect their parishes from abuses. The Spirit will work through them to effect change.

In the meantimes the rest of us need to pray and do what we can to help those who have been moved to protect the parish. They deserve our respect and support.

 

[YinYangMom]

buffalo:

Please provide sources that show substituting a hymn for the Psalm is OK.

At the same time, Buffalo, it might help if you can reflect back to the times hymns were used to see whether or not those hymns did indeed contain psalm passages within them.

When I get home I will look at the instruction book the directors get with regard to music in the liturgy to see if I can find anything specifically about this.

 

[YinYangMom]

fix:

It was my clumsy attempt to point out that while we all should assume one is in full communion with Rome we also understand some openly preach things that are counter to Church teaching.

I guess I’m trying to protect all the ‘simple’ Catholics from having to learn that lesson though, if they haven’t already been exposed to it. Do you understand where I’m coming from?

The starting point for all Catholics is to assume our clergy are in full communion with Rome. I don’t think it’s wise to add to that, “unless of course, it becomes obvious they are not” Even making that broad exception plants in the faithful’s mind a grain of doubt that can fester and be used by Satan to pull them away from the Church.

To that end, I believe, those of you who are blessed with the gifts of the Spirit to recognize abuses and act accordingly to protect your parishes from them should also exercise confidentiality in an attempt to shield those you seek to protect. Better to handle the matter swiftly and silently, imo, than to alarm those who have not been blessed by the Spirit to properly digest this news. But that’s just my thinking.

 

[Orionthehunter]

This response is to Buffalo’s answer to his own questions. Please refer to his post below as the size of post doesn’t allow me to include his original post.

1. I still don’t have any accurate picture of what he describes here. Thus I am unable to respond on whether I agree his interpretation of it being an abuse is correct. Also, I don’t know what the reference to “teen Masses” mean. Is he saying that teen Masses are an abuse? What makes a teen Mass an abuse?
   2-5) Based on the description Buffalo provided, the backup he provided or my own understanding, I concur that these are abuses.
2. I concur at minimum that this is discouraged. I don’t know if there are special circumstances that would allow it. However, considering that the Real Presence has been consecrated, I doubt it.
3. This is allowed according to Buffalos post: “psalms arranged in metrical form”. Does anyone know what arranged in metrical form is? Is this what would appear to be a song/hymn? If so, what I described in my post may not be an abuse and Buffalo’s characterization of it being an abuse may be misleading. If not, he may be correct.
4. We concur
5. I’m not sure that this would be characterized as changing the Mass. There are specific directions that certain prayers/processes are to be followed exactly (ie the Eucharistic Prayer) because of the importance of the words are critical to the “form and substance” while in other places the words are not quite so critical (i.e. the invitation/preamble to praying the the Confiteor). However, I think that adding the words “The Mass never ends” (which is a Teaching of the Church as per my earlier post) at the end of the dismissal may not be an abuse. I’d have to see something to the effect that the exact words are specifically spelled out.
6. We concur
7. I don’t know for sure what Buffalo observed so I don’t know if his application of the USCCB instruction is appropriate. In our Church, the choir is to the side of the sanctuary. Our parish is responsible for ministering to the deaf community in our city. The different choirs in our parish try to at least sign the refrain of most songs and have now learned to sign the Gloria and Holy Holy in an effort to communicate welcome to this special community. Is this a prohibited liturgical gesturing? Or how about when a deaf member signs the epistle readings with the interpreter providing vocal?

I do find Joysong’s post stating that the RS has over 295 footnotes such that for ANYBODY to feel sufficiently confident they are making an accurate interpretation to have at least read through these references. And even if they did, I’m still not sure that a lay person can fully grasp the full intention of the GIRM due to a lack of training and knowledge in the genesis and intracacies of the Mass.

Additionally, I do find the USCCB’s Committee on the Liturgy GIRM’s Chapter IX- Adaptations Within the Competence of Bishops and Bishops’ Conferences an interesting read on this matter and specifically paragraphs 395-399. usccb.org/liturgy/current/chapter9.shtml

I specifically refer to the following:

“Once these proposals have been duly approved by the Apostolic See, experiments should be carried out for specified periods and at specified places. If need be, once the period of experimentation is concluded, the Bishops’ Conference shall decide upon pursuing the adaptations and shall propose a mature formulation of the matter to the Apostolic See for its decision.”

In other words, what we think we see as an abuse might actually be an approved experiment.

Finally, if you read Chapter 9, it talks about how Bishops are allowed to introduce adaptations for the benefit of the faithful under a defined approval and vetting process. Throughout the document there are clear indication that it is the Bishop charged w/ determining what is for the benefit of the faithful in that culture.

Now I have a question: If a Bishop properly follows the defined vetting and approval process for an adaptation and recieves approval from the Vatican for the adaptation, will the change be footnoted in the USCCB’s GIRM or will we have to find it in another place? This is a critical point. If we don’t know if there might be an approved adaptation, how can we judge if what we see is for sure an abuse or not?