Most common abuse at mass today.

[fix]

Bill_A:

My understanding is that the Use of Girls as alter servers began outside of Rome, while the Pope was incapacitated.

Men have their calling to serve the church and woman have their calling. In the history of the church it was always this way. Some say it was Gods wish while others think it was part of the cultrual hierarchy.

It is part of the feminist movement. If the Job of the Alter boy is discern vocations. Than one must assume that the intention of the instalation of Alter Girls is to accomadate woman to the priest hood. AS it was done in the ePISScopal church and other protestANT churchs.

It doesnt take a rocket scientist to see that as in the instance of teh installation of Homosexuals in the priesthood that this is disruptive to the church.

I agree. There have been so many abuses with the mass it it can be hard to discern what is legitimate, what is illicit and what started out as illicit, but Rome gave into because so many of us act as rebellious adolescents.

It is like the story of the college campus where there was a lawn and a sign said keep off the grass. The sign was ignored by the lazy and disobedient self serving. Soon a path was worn. Instead of correcting those who disobeyed the college just paved a path over the lawn. That is what happens with mass abuses too often. The rads push their agenda and if it is not too over the top, Rome gives in. The rest of the faithful are at the mercy of the self appointed, arrogant heterodox ones.

 

[katherine2]

fix:

I am not backing away from my comment. There is a current of radical feminism that is in our culture and our Church. My original point was that less boys want to be servers with the influx of girls. This is no earth shattering revelation. I think I even posted an article of this site a few months ago about this topic.

Does my hyperbole mean every single instance of a female altar server is about a radical agenda?

Every single instance? Maybe not. But it is a declaration that in general these pious young girls are pushing a radical agenda. That is false and it appears you are not man enough to apologize for your extremism.

 

[katherine2]

Bill_A:

It is part of the feminist movement. If the Job of the Alter boy is discern vocations. Than one must assume that the intention of the instalation of Alter Girls is to accomadate woman to the priest hood. AS it was done in the ePISScopal church and other protestANT churchs.

First of all, its altar, not alter.

Second, the job of an altar boy is not to discern vocations, though that might be a side benefit.

 

[fix]

katherine2:

Every single instance? Maybe not. But it is a declaration that in general these pious young girls are pushing a radical agenda. That is false and it appears you are not man enough to apologize for your extremism.

I was not referring to the girls, but their parents!

 

[katherine2]

fix:

I was not referring to the girls, but their parents!

You said you opposed altar boys having to serve with alter (now I’m doing it, cripes!!)… I mean altar girls because the boys “should have a lib free zone for a few years”

Explain why 'the zone" should be read as the territory occupied by the parents of altar girls (got it right that time!) and not the young ladies themselves.

 

[KDoerr]

Habitually arriving late. Very disrespectful, to the Lord, to our lovely Priest and to other parishioners.

 

[fix]

katherine2:

You said you opposed altar boys having to serve with alter (now I’m doing it, cripes!!)… I mean altar girls because the boys “should have a lib free zone for a few years”

Explain why 'the zone" should be read as the territory occupied by the parents of altar girls (got it right that time!) and not the young ladies themselves.

I apologize for not being an attorney that parses each word before it comes out of me. My intention was to convey that the parents are the ones inticing the girls to be altar girls. Some of the parents do it becuase they have an agenda and some do it becuase they are trendy and have not thought about the implications very deeply.

I think the altar boys should be free to be young men learning about the priest and what he does. I was an altar boy and my priest encouraged me to think about the priesthood. It makes good sense. We are all too PC these days. Sheesh.

 

[Church_Militant]

Maybe I’m just lucky, but none of these things seem to apply to the parrish where I go. Overall it’s really great.
I also find that I’m mostly focused on the Eucharist so I may be missing some stuff…but I doubt that those things are as important as who is present on that altar.

 

[katherine2]

fix:

I apologize for not being an attorney that parses each word before it comes out of me. My intention was …

Maybe if you would tone it down a bit, you would keep out of trouble.

I think the altar boys should be free to be young men learning about the priest and what he does. I was an altar boy and my priest encouraged me to think about the priesthood. It makes good sense. We are all too PC these days. Sheesh.

I don’t see why you should be telling a pastor that when he has both boys and girls, that the boys can’t be learning about what a priest is and does.

 

[ridesawhitehors]

The most common abuse at Mass these days is a sin committed by the every day Catholic —> SACRALIGE.
Irreverence to the Eucharist. Treating communion in such a pedestrian way. Not being holy, not prepared to partake in communion. And not being grateful for the Eucharist. Ingratitude - Not saying a proper “Thank you” after communion. Not truely believing

 

[Annunciata]

Loss of Piety at Mass. Piety seen as some abstract concept that is out of the realm of the human condition…

When some of the astute younger members of the parish tell you that the highlight of the Mass for them is the “Coffee and Donuts” in the Church Hall / Fellowship!!! Then you have to know that the above applies!!!:banghead:
Annunciata

 

[MarkInOregon]

Agomemnon:

(3) Communion in the Hand
This is one of the first abuses ‘legitimized’ by an indult. Pope Paul VI warned that if any loss of faith presents itself the practice is to be halted. America is alway ignoring the Pope.

How did the early Church receive Communion?

For years we were allowed to recieve only one species–would you call the change to allow us to receive both a “legitimized” abuse?

Reverence and faith are in the heart–not in sticking out a toungue or in holding out your hand. Making someone who doesnt believe in the true prescence or who has no respect for the Eucharist isn’t going to get it by sticking out his toungue. That person needs to see us respecting the Eucharist, he needs to be loved by us and he needs much better catechesis and what the Church teaches and why–but no one is going to seek out that teaching if they don’t want what we have–and if we continue to be judgemental and condemning–especially of permitted practices–no one will want what we have–which is the attitude that I am better than you because I receive on the toungue or I genuflect before recieving, etc.

At Mass I pray, I listen to the readings and homily–I try not to pay attention to what others are doing or how they are dressed–that is between them and God and I don’t find it distracts me. I am always amazed at how upset and easily distracted so many of us are. Luckily I don’t attend a parish where lay people give homilies or the words of the Mass are changed–that would bother me.

Anyway thats my two cents
Mark

 

[jdnation]

I picked ‘talking’ I don’t think it’s lack of piety, those who don’t believe generally don’t bother showing up. Some lack of piety may just be simple confusion or ignorance. For me rather, though it’s not on the list, is distraction. My mind tends to wander off every now and then, mostly having to do with God funnily enough, that sometimes I don’t realize the sermon is over or to say a prayer. It’s quite frustrating, I wake up over and over again… even though I never really fell asleep, I was just off somewhere…

 

[miguel]

MarkInOregon:

How did the early Church receive Communion?

For years we were allowed to recieve only one species–would you call the change to allow us to receive both a “legitimized” abuse?

Reverence and faith are in the heart–not in sticking out a toungue or in holding out your hand. Making someone who doesnt believe in the true prescence or who has no respect for the Eucharist isn’t going to get it by sticking out his toungue. That person needs to see us respecting the Eucharist, he needs to be loved by us and he needs much better catechesis and what the Church teaches and why–but no one is going to seek out that teaching if they don’t want what we have–and if we continue to be judgemental and condemning–especially of permitted practices–no one will want what we have–which is the attitude that I am better than you because I receive on the toungue or I genuflect before recieving, etc.

At Mass I pray, I listen to the readings and homily–I try not to pay attention to what others are doing or how they are dressed–that is between them and God and I don’t find it distracts me. I am always amazed at how upset and easily distracted so many of us are. Luckily I don’t attend a parish where lay people give homilies or the words of the Mass are changed–that would bother me.

Anyway thats my two cents
Mark

When you read statistics in the LA Times that the majority of Catholics don’t believe the doctrine of transubstantiation, you have to wonder why. Bad catechesis is one reason. But changes in the way Our Lord is treated at Mass also explains alot. When I was a kid back in the 60’s, we received Holy Communion on the tongue while kneeling down at the altar rail. And the priest always had an altar boy next to him holding a paten under the person’s chin to catch any of the sacred particles that might fall and to protect the host from falling on the floor should the priest drop it. And only the priest gave out Communion. And no matter what Church you went in, the Tabernacle was always front and center. Looking back, this approach did alot for my childlike faith. I saw them doing things at Mass that were consistent with what they taught us in school. The impression was left in my mind that the adults really believed what they were teaching us. Personally, I think we’ve lost something over the years. That’s why I receive on the tongue. And that’s why I teach my kids to also. I don’t look down on the people who don’t.

 

[pnewton]

ridesawhitehors:

The most common abuse at Mass these days is a sin committed by the every day Catholic —> SACRALIGE.

When I first saw this thread I was wondering how productive it would prove since most of the abuse complaints devolve into finger-pointing and griping. This answer made the time I spent monitoring this thread all worth while.

I am not interested in noticing the sacrilege of others in Mass, but rather I catch myself distracted with the most mudane thoughts at the most important times in Mass. While by force of habit I can always present a good appearance during reception of communion and the eucharistic prayers, I know that God sees deeper.

You have give us all a way to improve the honor given Christ in the Mass, by self-examination and reflection.

 

[betra2000]

I do not like it when some people do not pay attention. They are looking through the misals, or talking to the person next to them, or looking aroung the church ignoring what is going on in front of them. It just bothers me that is all.

 

[Bill_A]

I am guilty of that. I like to look at the stained glass art.

 

[MarkInOregon]

Island Oak:

Who’da thunk it…Jesus himself engaged in liturgical abuse. Imagine the GALL of using REAL BREAD, in a ritual that recreates and memorializes the events of the Last Supper, in the same manner our Lord did. What IS this world coming to?!?

I think the “real” bread might refer to the fact that levened bread rather than unleavened bread was used? Jesus used unleavened bread. I think the Host is real unleavened bread also–its just been baked in a form other than a loaf?

The peace of Christ be with you.
Mark

 

[MarkInOregon]

sweetchuck:

I think it’s tragic that EVERYBODY goes to communion, but I NEVER have to wait in line for our parish’s weekly confession. Hmmmm. Hundreds of parishioners take communion each week, 10-20 confess each Saturday (and that is a generous estimation). Do the math.

You are aware it is possible to go to confession privately by appt w/your priest? Granted I doubt hundreds are but the fact that you don’t see someone in line doesn’t mean they don’t go. I never go to confession in my own parish (except for when I go after a penance service) I go to a parish near where I work that has daily confessions–and I have had to wait in line there–on a week day.

We all sound pretty self-righteous with our list of complaints about how others come to Mass. I’m mostly concerned with how I come to Mass and I give others the benefit of the doubt.

…and the cellphone thing annoys me too. If people can’t love God enough to go 1 hour without their cellphones, why would they want to go to church? If people have priorities greater than God, church is an utter waste of time for them, they have already chosen.

Who would call a cellphone on a Sunday morning anyway? Granted, people who leave their cellphones on in church are ignorant and extremely discourteous, but nearly equally so would be the person on the other line.

Remember it is possible for someone to have foregotten to turn a cell phone off, and it is possible for those non-flip ones to be bumped on accidentally in a purse.

Is it too much for people to give other people the benefit of the doubt? Where is our charity, our love and our kindness? I don’t know the state of anyones soul, I don’t know how much money they have or what kind of clothes they own–and I try not to judge people on these matters. Everyone is at a different point in their faith walk–and I for one would rather have someone at Mass dressed “inappropriately” than not at Mass. I don’t find it distracting and by being at Mass they will receive grace, hopefully grown in their faith and at some point hopefully dress more "respectfully, etc.

The peace of Christ be with you.
Mark

 

[MarkInOregon]

jtnova:

Try attending the Traditional Latin Mass, which is making a huge comeback for this reason, and for the reason that it was the first Mass as said for 1962 years before Vatican II and the liberalization and the morals of the church went out the window, as did about 60% of the Catholics who stopped going to Mass altogether, as the Mass today has No reverence, no matter how you cut it

I don’t think your first Masses were in Latin–or even in the form of the Latin Mass used in 1962–I go back and check but I’m guessing that particular Mass dates from around the time of Trent.

The earliest Masses took place in homes, had a meal as well as the Eucharist and took place in the language of the area–Greek often times. The Mass has evolved over time. To imply that the Mass sprung full form in the year -0- and didn’t change for 1962 years is simply incorrect.

Society changed in the 1960’s and 1970’s and keeping the Mass in Latin would not have prevented that nor would it have kept many Catholics from embracing all the secular world promotes. I think extremely poor catechesis has more to do with the problems than the Mass not being in Latin. Catholics no longer know what the Chruch teaches–nor why it teaches as it does–and that is your problem.

The peace of Christ be with you.
Mark