Liturgical Abuses - So what's the big deal?

[buffalo]

YinYangMom:

Yeah, but then I see the news about the Church in Spain and other countries who seem to be flailing as well…so I really don’t know what’s going on, except to say that Satan is encroaching powerfully and pervasively way too close for my comfort. I’m getting angry at him more than anything else. If bishops and cardinals and priests err it’s because of Satan plain and simple, imo. I wish we’d all just see the elephant in the room and start attacking it instead of the piles of poop he leaves behind Attack with the rosary, non-stop!

But this has to do with choices people are now making, secular and material choices. It still is up to the Church to stand firm and preach truth.

 

[buffalo]

YinYangMom:

Well then, certainly #2 and #3 in your examples would warrant vigilance on your part and would not be considered ‘hyper’ by any means.

The others, is where because of #2 and #3, as you noted casting a shadow of doubt over the rest, could be construed as ‘hyper’ because while possibly abusive, do not invalidate the Eucharist.

But really, I understand completely the position you’re coming from with regard to your parish.

mom, a priest can do many illicit things and not invalidate the Eucharist. But should he?

 

[YinYangMom]

buffalo:

I would say it starts with the leaders and what they will allow when they become aware.

So a country whose diocesan leaders are orthodox would least likely have complaints of abuse, right? Makes sense.

Then again, that doesn’t mean the diocese would be complaint free since the people residing in the diocese could be heterodox clamoring against the orthodox leaders, right? Themselves, charging abuses (where there would be none, of course)???

 

[Quaere_Verum]

YinYangMom:

I wish we’d all just see the elephant in the room and start attacking it instead of the piles of poop he leaves behind …

Hee! Hee! (Yes, that’s the way I really laugh).

 

[Orionthehunter]

Quaere Verum:

Isn’t this the truth? I saw a post above, I think by Joysong where the document mentioned “adaptations for the U.S.” It makes you wonder. Is our nation really the troubled child? If guided correctly they can either become the worst kind of trouble or the most loyal and strongest defenders of the family. That is if countries are like people.

I think we are getting off now. Abuses are abuses and need to dealt with. Adaptations are approved consideration for inculturization of the Liturgy to local customs. Adaptations are not bad so long as Rome determines they don’t detract from the Liturgy but in fact enhance it in that culture. Considering that the fastest and most vibrant area of the world for Catholicism, I can tell you that the elimination of adaptations for various cultures won’t make the Mass more consistent with Rome’s liturgy but will likely result in a more African “flavor.” Trust me. I’ve been to Masses with a Sudanese “flavor” and a Congo “flavor”. I don’t think the rest of us would recieve this “flavor” favorably.

 

[TableServant]

fix:

Right now a parish is deciding if women should preach at mass and the bishop has said it is licit. Should the laity look the other way and claim the bishop says it is ok so it must be ok?

People want very much to obey Rome. That is not the issue usually.

Hmm… I was just about to use this as an example…

One of these is expressly forbidden, one is not:

1. A lay person (man OR woman) preaching at Mass.
2. Praying the Our Father with hands clasped, holding hands*, or in the orans posture.

Given the status of each of these - only an ordained minister may preach at Mass, and that no particular posture is either forbidden or given - would we then say that (1) is an abuse, and (2) is a point of discussion within the church? I know that some would say that,* in their opinion*, holding hands is an abuse, but taken objectively, is that truly the case?

• I am not talking about people who insist that you hold their hands or “cross the aisle”, but people who hold hands, with those who are willing, within their particular area.

 

[fix]

Joysong:

Silly Cardinal? Some more of your sarcasm, Fix?

It is not the clergy that were referred to, but those who believe they know more than the clergy. Read my post again.

So, there are problems and the laity should not comment on these problems or let their needs be known to the clergy?

 

[Quaere_Verum]

Orionthehunter:

I think we are getting off now. Abuses are abuses and need to dealt with. Adaptations are approved consideration for inculturization of the Liturgy to local customs. Adaptations are not bad so long as Rome determines they don’t detract from the Liturgy but in fact enhance it in that culture. Considering that the fastest and most vibrant area of the world for Catholicism, I can tell you that the elimination of adaptations for various cultures won’t make the Mass more consistent with Rome’s liturgy but will likely result in a more African “flavor.” Trust me. I’ve been to Masses with a Sudanese “flavor” and a Congo “flavor”. I don’t think the rest of us would recieve this “flavor” favorably.

Thanks for helping out - just trying to understand.

 

[buffalo]

YinYangMom:

So a country whose diocesan leaders are orthodox would least likely have complaints of abuse, right? Makes sense.

Then again, that doesn’t mean the diocese would be complaint free since the people residing in the diocese could be heterodox clamoring against the orthodox leaders, right? Themselves, charging abuses (where there would be none, of course)???

Right, their complaints would take the form of expanding the liturgical experience, (ie more satisfying entertainment).

 

[YinYangMom]

buffalo:

mom, a priest can do many illicit things and not invalidate the Eucharist. But should he?

Of course he shouldn’t, but should we, the faithful, be hyperviligant of everything the priest does?

Where I get miffed is I can’t do two things at once…in order to fully participate in the Eucharist I expend a lot of energy keeping my mind, heart and soul focused on Jesus before me. It’s hard enough blocking out my children beside me and the others in the church who are talking, cooing, crying and tantruming (poor things). I’m always watching every step of that part of the mass, and I’ve seen the host drop on an occasion or two - I remember praying quickly that I not allow that to distract me from what’s really important. Thus, I would be dismayed to learn I have an obligation, as a faithful Catholic, to monitor everything about a mass I’m attending and report abuses right away. I can’t do both, and I’d be afraid not doing so would be held against me in the end.

I remember several posts in different threads where people complain about trying to pray before the mass while others are chatting, or trying to focus on the mass when children are crying and how those children should stay home or go to a separate room…

well, watching every part of the mass to look for possible abuses is one heck of a distraction, isn’t it? How can anyone fully participate in a mass if they aren’t able to block out the ‘variations’ going on at any given time, trying to determine whether or not the adaptation is valid or an abuse?

How do you do it, really? If it’s something you focus on after the mass, while in your car, still, you’d have to be taking mental notes throughout the mass to reflect upon later, wouldn’t you?

Is hyper-vigilance defined as vigilence to the point of distraction, perhaps, such that it minimizes the grace we receive from the mass because of our own lack of full cooperation?

 

[Orionthehunter]

fix:

So, there are problems and the laity should not comment on these problems or let their needs be known to the clergy?

I don’t recall anyone who has ever suggested that one shouldn’t inform a higher authority on a known abuse or ask for an explanation on a suspected abuse. I think everyone has universally said that this is appropriate and fully within a lay Catholics right and perogative. I think the issues is to try to give information on whether something is really an abuse or legitimate adaptation (Go back to Buffalo’s list where I think it became the consensus that most were abuses and a few were not). Also, there has been discussion on whether or not some abuses are so significant as to justify extreme measures (defiance) or just quiet submission accompanied by prayer or taking on an effort to properly catechize to effect change.

P.S. I’ve reflected a little on Buffalo’s example of the Priest proclaiming at the end of Mass “the Mass never ends.” I still like more explanation of the exact way and context he says it. Assuming it is proper, when one reflects on the theological teaching associated with it, I find great beauty and majesty in the entire concept.

 

[YinYangMom]

buffalo:

Right, their complaints would take the form of expanding the liturgical experience, (ie more satisfying entertainment).

I get the impression that’s what’s happening in Spain…does anyone know?

 

[buffalo]

YinYangMom:

Of course he shouldn’t, but should we, the faithful, be hyperviligant of everything the priest does?

Where I get miffed is I can’t do two things at once…in order to fully participate in the Eucharist I expend a lot of energy keeping my mind, heart and soul focused on Jesus before me. It’s hard enough blocking out my children beside me and the others in the church who are talking, cooing, crying and tantruming (poor things). I’m always watching every step of that part of the mass, and I’ve seen the host drop on an occasion or two - I remember praying quickly that I not allow that to distract me from what’s really important.

I remember several posts in different threads where people complain about trying to pray before the mass while others are chatting, or trying to focus on the mass when children are crying and how those children should stay home or go to a separate room…

well, watching every part of the mass to look for possible abuses is one heck of a distraction, isn’t it? How can anyone fully participate in a mass if they aren’t able to block out the ‘variations’ going on at any given time, trying to determine whether or not the adaptation is valid or an abuse?

How do you do it, really? If it’s something you focus on after the mass, while in your car, still, you’d have to be taking mental notes throughout the mass to reflect upon later, wouldn’t you?

Is hyper-vigilance defined as vigilence to the point of distraction, perhaps, such that it minimizes the grace we receive from the mass because of our own lack of full cooperation?

You really don’t have to go searching for this stuff. Even in prayer it jumps out at you. I might add especially in prayer it jumps out. It can and does have an effect on the worhip of many. It’s really not an effort.

 

[fix]

Joysong:

And Buffalo, of course I do not think that your listing abuses is a result of “immature faith formation.” Nor was I referring to anyone in particular, but what I have observed, in general, on the forum from time to time. What I believe Quaere and I were discussing is the spirit of rebellion when the teenager is confronted by law. As a well-known author said Sunday on EWTN, “assent” to law is viewed as “how little need I obey?” … also, “dissent” is frequently personal license to lobby and rally the faithful against the magisterium.

I agree the adolescent rebellion is exhibited by those who reject the norms, or introduce novelty. That is what many of the posts in these fora reference.

Isn’t that what teens do? Get on the phone and complain bitterly that the curfew is 10 PM rather than 11:00? Why must they go home earlier, when all their friends are permitted a later time? They moan and groan to all who will listen, disrespecting parental authority. It is not a mature response.

But, this is getting simple minded and detracts from the important points many are concerned over. It is not for you, or I, to tell another their concern is unwarranted. Each case is different.

Adults who observe problems with law go about it in a worthier manner. They do not carry suspicions of wrong-doing about every action that “instinct” presents to their thinking.

Patterns can be discerned. Adults, inteligent adults, discern a pattern. They may discuss it in varying degrees. When folks like you paint with a broad brush you seem as guilty as those you accuse of constant suspicion. Can you see this?

As for true abuse in parental law, YYM gave an excellent post about this several pages ago. We need to confront these situations as adults with true understanding and charity, believing the parent may have good motives.

Certainly, we all agree. However, many face an ongoing, systemic problem. This I believe is where Buffalo is coming from.

If the matter is blatantly, gravely evil, then authorities must be contacted. But an hour difference in a curfew is not a grave abuse. It seems some have a problem discerning what is grave and what is a once-in-awhile occurrence that is not motivated by deliberate intent to take the faithful down a slippery slope.

Pardon me, but it seems you want to be the authority and at the same time accuse others of not having authority.

 

[buffalo]

Orionthehunter:

P.S. I’ve reflected a little on Buffalo’s example of the Priest proclaiming at the end of Mass “the Mass never ends.” I still like more explanation of the exact way and context he says it. Assuming it is proper, when one reflects on the theological teaching associated with it, I find great beauty and majesty in the entire concept.

I believe it originated as a lifeteen innovation, and it was probably with good intent and good will. But a local innovation done in a reactionary form may not serve the long term theology of the Church. That is why the Church must move deliberately.

 

[buffalo]

fix:

Certainly, we all agree. However, many face an ongoing, systemic problem. This I believe is where Buffalo is coming from.

fix, how many posts I made for what you said so succintly. :bowdown:

 

[Joysong]

Dear Fix,

You may have missed my post to Quaere saying:

What I know to be true, though, is that the words of adults seldom get through to a teen, for they KNOW better. I guess it doesn’t prevent us from trying, though.

In your case, I quit trying … (sigh)

Carole

 

[YinYangMom]

buffalo:

You really don’t have to go searching for this stuff. Even in prayer it jumps out at you. I might add especially in prayer it jumps out. It can and does have an effect on the worhip of many. It’s really not an effort.

Oh, I don’t know if it jumps…

glass vessels does not ‘jump’ to the average faithful.
nor does where a EMHC stands…
nor would children signing to music or several of the other things you’ve picked up on.

To you, they jump, to most, it’s not even a blip on the radar…and I guess that’s where it gets confusing for people like me to determine whether or not its our responsibility to know the same things priests and bishops know (reading documents expressly for them to supplement their previous training which prepared them for the priesthood to begin with) in order to watch each one to catch them doing something wrong.

And yet, it’s tough, because most of your items are abuses, plain and simple, so yeah, they need to be reported (which they have been, you assured us)…but when, then, are you allowed to let those things go? Perhaps it’s within God’s will to have this priest continue in this manner for some time to come (could be he’s waiting to use him to communicate to someone in your parish other than you and that person hasn’t seen the light yet)…so in the meantime, since you’ve already done your part, can’t you be let off the hook now (pass the baton, so to speak) so you can get back to focusing on the mass itself?

 

[buffalo]

YinYangMom:

Oh, I don’t know if it jumps…

glass vessels does not ‘jump’ to the average faithful.
nor does where a EMHC stands…
nor would children signing to music or several of the other things you’ve picked up on.

To you, they jump, to most, it’s not even a blip on the radar…and I guess that’s where it gets confusing for people like me to determine whether or not its our responsibility to know the same things priests and bishops know (reading documents expressly for them to supplement their previous training which prepared them for the priesthood to begin with) in order to watch each one to catch them doing something wrong.

And yet, it’s tough, because most of your items are abuses, plain and simple, so yeah, they need to be reported (which they have been, you assured us)…but when, then, are you allowed to let those things go? Perhaps it’s within God’s will to have this priest continue in this manner for some time to come (could be he’s waiting to use him to communicate to someone in your parish other than you and that person hasn’t seen the light yet)…so in the meantime, since you’ve already done your part, can’t you be let off the hook now (pass the baton, so to speak) so you can get back to focusing on the mass itself?

All one has to do is go to Mass in another parish.

“Hey Dad, I went to Mass at St. soandso. Their Mass is nothing like ours. They don’t do this and this and this. They do this…”

Dad to Kid - “Don’t worry about just focus on the Mass.”

 

[YinYangMom]

buffalo:

All one has to do is go to Mass in another parish.

“Hey Dad, I went to Mass at St. soandso. Their Mass is nothing like ours. They don’t do this and this and this. They do this…”

Dad to Kid - “Don’t worry about just focus on the Mass.”

That’s exactly what my dad would have said to me.

Different does not automatically make a mass invalid, plus most people would not have a clue which ‘differences’ were adaptations authorized by the bishop and which were actual abuses. The point is they should be focusing on the mass itself, making sure their participation is according to the guidelines instead of focusing on what everyone else in the church is doing, including the priests, lectors, choir and so on.

After the mass, my father probably would have commented about what a different experience this mass was for him as he left the church shaking the priests’ hand , but he certainly would not have presumed the priest was deliberately abusing the liturgy against the teachings of Rome. He’d be trusting this priest is doing what his bishop told him to and leave it at that. He’d probably make a note not to go back to that church, too, if he didn’t like the experience. If he liked it he might even make an extra effort to return.

We have two Catholic churches here. One day we attended the ‘other’ church for some reason, can’t recall…anyway, it was certainly different all the way down to the host…the host was not unleavened but puffy and moist, it almost had a tinge of honey flavoring to it too! My husband walked away having enjoyed the service very much (reminded him of his 70’s Santa Barbara days) Kids and I didn’t appreciate it much. The kids were little, too, so it was cool (to me) that they prefered our mass.

There’s a different priest there now and the whole interior was reconfigured. Went to mass recently and it was much better, more conformed. Now that I’ve read up on these other documents the only thing I definitely would have flagged as abuse was that host…I cannot believe that was acceptable…but I don’t know that it wasn’t either.