My first Charismatic Mass

[Alex_Luciano]

Hello everyone! I just wanted to share my experience at a charismatic mass I attended just this evening. I have never felt so compelled to get something “out of my chest”. First a bit of background. I am a fervent lover of the Mass, it is to me (and should be to every Catholic) the most important and beautiful sacrifice that we can offer God our Father and the most sublime act of worship. It is because I truly believe that that I write this. I have been “looking around” for a spirituality that can help me through some spiritual struggles I’m going through right now and I have attended different “types” of Masses. I live in Orlando Fl and I truly feel like there can be no diocese more plain and dry than this one. I am very interested in TLM but unfortunately it is almost non-existent in our diocese. I would die for an ad orientem NO Latin Mass but that discussion is for another day. So I went to this Mass today hoping to experience something refreshing and liturgically beautiful. I thought that since charismatics claim a “personal” relationship to Christ and a special devotion to the Holy Spirit that their masses would be very reverent and beautiful. I was sooo WRONG. The priest skipped the gloria (it was a weekday mass so maybe he can?), the responsorial psalm was omitted, the alleluia was not recited nor sung, The readings I’m pretty sure were not the ones for today, the lavabo was skipped, no prayers of the faithful, no agnus dei (he jumped from the deformed rite of peace to the communio) and he didn’t even look at the missal during the Liturgy of the Eucharist and there were songs in between almost everything. Did I mention he is a monsignor!! I couldn’t even take communion I felt so upset. Am I being uncharitable? I was so upset during the whole thing and even writing down abuses that I couldn’t take in the homily or even think. I pray the Lord bring us a holy bishop with a love of holy Tradition real soon cause I’m about to go mad!

 

[baltobetsy]

Well, I can see how writing down abuses during the homily could impair one’s preparation to receive Holy Communion.

 

[BernadetteM]

I have attended several Charismatic Masses. Years ago I attended one celebrated by Dominican priests who themselves were not charismatic and the Mass was done reverently and in line with the rubics.

At the most recent ones I found the same things you mentioned. The Mass lasted maybe 15 0r 20 minutes and many prayers were left out. The music was of poor quality and loud.

Although there are many disturbing things with these Masses, I go for the healing part and do know that the Holy Spirit is there. Most of the people who attend are going for the healing of a physical or spiritual condition and I do know that my dauthter was given a spiritual healing. So I have mixed feelings.

I also think that many of the innovations in our OF Masses stem from these Masses. Now they are just accepted as part of the Mass without question by most Catholics in the pew.

Since you live in Orlando, I don’t know for sure but there might be a chance on an Anglican Use parish forming there after the Ordinariates are established. I know an Anglican priest who is coming over to Rome through the Ordinariate resides there if my memory is correct. If one is established, it might take a year or more and you have not found a parish you are comfortable with, try an AU parish. I think you would find them very traditional and reverent.

Yours in the Hearts of Jesus and Mary

Bernadette

 

[LindaSK]

I went to a Healing Mass at a neighboring parish, not aware that it was a Charismatic Mass. I will not make that mistake again! I did not leave feeling any sense of healing, only with a sense of anxiety. It was disturbing. I can appreciate what you are feeling. Never again!

 

[Bbigam]

The priest skipped the gloria (it was a weekday mass so maybe he can?), the responsorial psalm was omitted, the alleluia was not recited nor sung, The readings I’m pretty sure were not the ones for today, the lavabo was skipped, no prayers of the faithful, no agnus dei (he jumped from the deformed rite of peace to the communio) and he didn’t even look at the missal during the Liturgy of the Eucharist and there were songs in between almost everything.

There’s not normally a Gloria at daily Mass, but if they were celebrating the Feast of St. Matthias (proper to yesterday) then they should have had it. Maybe it was a votive Mass that wouldn’t include the Gloria and would use different readings? That might be licit, not sure. The Alleluia can be left out, at least at daily Mass, and in fact it’s not allowed to be recited - it must be either sung or omitted. Skipping the responsorial psalm, lavabo, prayers of the faithful, and Angus Dei are certainly not licit.

So songs in between everything but leaving out proper parts of the Mass? Not okay.

 

[CatholicLife]

I went to Mass like that a couple of months ago. It was disturbing and it looked more like a protestant prayer service than an actual Mass…

 

[VociMike]

On a slightly different note (ahem), I’ve always wondered why “Charismatic” Masses don’t employ lots of Gregorian chant, given the strongly positive things the Holy Spirit had to say about it in Vatican II. If any Mass gave “pride of place” to chant, wouldn’t it be a Charismatic Mass? Maybe somebody can explain.

 

[OraLabora]

The priest skipped the gloria (it was a weekday mass so maybe he can?)

Yesterday when you wrote this, it was May 14th which is the feast of Saint Matthias. For a normal weekday Mass, and for Memorials (optional or mandatory), the Gloria is omitted. But for a feast like yesterday, the Gloria is mandatory and should not have been skipped.

I can’t say for certain if the readings were right or wrong, as I don’t know what was read but for the feast of St. Matthias, the first reading should have been from Acts 1, 15-26, the responsorial psalm would have been 112 (vulgate numbering), and the Gospel from John 15, 9-17.

From the lack of Gloria and Agnus Dei, it sounds like the priest seriously abused the liturgy.

 

[Sirach2]

You asked, “Am I being uncharitable?” I believe so, but more so to Our Lord whom you refused to receive in Holy Communion, and to the Monsignor who may have had reasons for what you “think” you saw.

Most of the objections voiced in your post were answered by others and were quite valid. May I ask if you checked with the Monsignor to determine if this was an optional votive mass? I suspect this may have been the case for a private liturgy such as for the gathered community of charismatics, because you indicated it was an evening mass. The regularly scheduled mass for the parish was probably already celebrated in the morning for the Feast of St. Mathias.

As for the lavabo, could you have missed it? My pastor does the offertory prayers in silence, which I absolutely love! It gives me necessary time for reflection. Having no altar server during the week, he washes quietly and quickly at the credence table, and not at the altar, so one might miss it.

Was the responsorial sung by the people in lieu of reading it? You said there were lots of hymns, so maybe you did not recognize it as a response to the reading. It may be a regular psalm well known to the community that had gathered. It is not unusual or forbidden for a choir to do the same psalm response from a hymnal for an entire month, rather than use the psalm for the day in the sacramentary.

The only thing I can see as objectionable is omitting the agnus dei. And that doesn’t fall under “gravisima” as far as mass abuses is concerned. It may not have been intentional, but simply an oversight. We have an 80-year-old priest who fills in when the pastors are away, and sometimes he does forget.

As for the prayer of the faithful, could it be that it was unfamiliar to you, such as inviting petitions from those in the pews, which I would think may be permissible for a votive mass.

Why would the celebrant need to look at the missal, if he knows all the prayers by heart? Being a monsignor of many years’ celebrations, that is quite likely, especially since he does not have to read in latin.

If you are regularly a traditional mass attendee, I’m sure much of this seemed unorthodox to you. I would go to the celebrant and ask questions before airing your anger on the internet. Keep in mind that in spite of what you believe are abuses, the mass is truly the HOLY sacrifice of Jesus Christ, priest and victim, and it is painful to read that someone is angry enough to ignore this Most High Lord in communion and besmirch a liturgy. May God give you His peace and help you reconcile this matter with the person you should have gone to first.

 

[boatbearer]

You asked, “Am I being uncharitable?” I believe so, but more so to Our Lord whom you refused to receive in Holy Communion, and to the Monsignor who may have had reasons for what you “think” you saw.

Most of the objections voiced in your post were answered by others and were quite valid. May I ask if you checked with the Monsignor to determine if this was an optional votive mass? I suspect this may have been the case for a private liturgy such as for the gathered community of charismatics, because you indicated it was an evening mass. The regularly scheduled mass for the parish was probably already celebrated in the morning for the Feast of St. Mathias.

As for the lavabo, could you have missed it? My pastor does the offertory prayers in silence, which I absolutely love! It gives me necessary time for reflection. Having no altar server during the week, he washes quietly and quickly at the credence table, and not at the altar, so one might miss it.

Was the responsorial sung by the people in lieu of reading it? You said there were lots of hymns, so maybe you did not recognize it as a response to the reading. It may be a regular psalm well known to the community that had gathered. It is not unusual or forbidden for a choir to do the same psalm response from a hymnal for an entire month, rather than use the psalm for the day in the sacramentary.

The only thing I can see as objectionable is omitting the agnus dei. And that doesn’t fall under “gravisima” as far as mass abuses is concerned. It may not have been intentional, but simply an oversight. We have an 80-year-old priest who fills in when the pastors are away, and sometimes he does forget.

As for the prayer of the faithful, could it be that it was unfamiliar to you, such as inviting petitions from those in the pews, which I would think may be permissible for a votive mass.

Why would the celebrant need to look at the missal, if he knows all the prayers by heart? Being a monsignor of many years’ celebrations, that is quite likely, especially since he does not have to read in latin.

If you are regularly a traditional mass attendee, I’m sure much of this seemed unorthodox to you. I would go to the celebrant and ask questions before airing your anger on the internet. Keep in mind that in spite of what you believe are abuses, the mass is truly the HOLY sacrifice of Jesus Christ, priest and victim, and it is painful to read that someone is angry enough to ignore this Most High Lord in communion and besmirch a liturgy. May God give you His peace and help you reconcile this matter with the person you should have gone to first.

Awesome posting. Excellent insight and balance.

 

[JerrySeibert]

I just want to go hug my Priest. Great post’s and responses. Thank Goodness I have two Pastor’s who are reverent with no “Bells and Whistles”.

 

[Alex_Luciano]

You asked, “Am I being uncharitable?” I believe so, but more so to Our Lord whom you refused to receive in Holy Communion, and to the Monsignor who may have had reasons for what you “think” you saw.

Most of the objections voiced in your post were answered by others and were quite valid. May I ask if you checked with the Monsignor to determine if this was an optional votive mass? I suspect this may have been the case for a private liturgy such as for the gathered community of charismatics, because you indicated it was an evening mass. The regularly scheduled mass for the parish was probably already celebrated in the morning for the Feast of St. Mathias.

As for the lavabo, could you have missed it? My pastor does the offertory prayers in silence, which I absolutely love! It gives me necessary time for reflection. Having no altar server during the week, he washes quietly and quickly at the credence table, and not at the altar, so one might miss it.

Was the responsorial sung by the people in lieu of reading it? You said there were lots of hymns, so maybe you did not recognize it as a response to the reading. It may be a regular psalm well known to the community that had gathered. It is not unusual or forbidden for a choir to do the same psalm response from a hymnal for an entire month, rather than use the psalm for the day in the sacramentary.

The only thing I can see as objectionable is omitting the agnus dei. And that doesn’t fall under “gravisima” as far as mass abuses is concerned. It may not have been intentional, but simply an oversight. We have an 80-year-old priest who fills in when the pastors are away, and sometimes he does forget.

As for the prayer of the faithful, could it be that it was unfamiliar to you, such as inviting petitions from those in the pews, which I would think may be permissible for a votive mass.

Why would the celebrant need to look at the missal, if he knows all the prayers by heart? Being a monsignor of many years’ celebrations, that is quite likely, especially since he does not have to read in latin.

If you are regularly a traditional mass attendee, I’m sure much of this seemed unorthodox to you. I would go to the celebrant and ask questions before airing your anger on the internet. Keep in mind that in spite of what you believe are abuses, the mass is truly the HOLY sacrifice of Jesus Christ, priest and victim, and it is painful to read that someone is angry enough to ignore this Most High Lord in communion and besmirch a liturgy. May God give you His peace and help you reconcile this matter with the person you should have gone to first.

I don’t “think” I saw anything, I know I saw a very abused liturgy. Perhaps I was a bit uncharitable towards the celebrant but to say I was uncharitable to Christ is a bit much. I felt anxious and like something was not right, who would want to receive communion in such a state? Either way one is not obligated to partake in communion at every mass so that is quite besides the point. Trust me, any reasonable person looking at this mass could see the problems. I only missed the lavabo because it didn’t happen. The altar servers brought the lavabo to the priest and placed it in the altar. The priest didn’t look at it once and a lady had to go up and get it from the altar since the altar servers left it there towel and all. And no the responsorial psalm was nowhere to be found, not in the guitar and drum songs or the priest’s singing during the mass. And it is not what I believe, it is what it was. I wrote here to get some things cleared up, I go to daily mass frequently so I know what the mass looks like. I am not subjective when it comes to this. And I’m not airing any “anger”, I was just upset and surprised at how terribly this liturgy was celebrated. What is really painful is to see the terrible disfigurement of what should be the pinnacle of Christian faith and charity, the Sacrifice of the Mass. I wanted to speak to the priest and probably should have but I did not feel it opportune considering he flew in from South America and all his compatriots were waiting in line to speak to him, apparently he has a following. I appreciate that most posters helped me clear up my doubts (and concurred that something was not right) rather than judging whether I “ignored” our Lord. I appreciate your response but there is no reason to imply that I ignored or dishonored our Lord, that also seems uncharitable.

 

[Sarah_Angel]

I think it’s important to note that Charismatic Masses that I’ve been to have all been liturgically sound and include everything needed in the Mass.

So the problem isn’t in that it’s a Charismatic Mass, it’s that the people running them seem to think that they can be ‘liberal’ with the way they worship. That can be true with any kind of Mass celebrated.

 

[Sirach2]

Alex Luciano:

Perhaps I was a bit uncharitable towards the celebrant but to say I was uncharitable to Christ is a bit much.

*Perhaps? * If we use Webster’s definition of charitable, we find: kindly or lenient in judging people, acts, etc.: charitable in his opinions of others.
So un-charitable would suggest that “perhaps” you were.

With regard to being “uncharitable toward Christ” by your refusal to communicate, if one reflects on the very essence of charity - love of God - it is probably true you were not in a frame of mind to love and receive Jesus, who had given himself for you in that liturgy, regardless of what the omitted accidentals of the liturgy happened to be. The consecration and essence of the mass was in tact. It would have been a worthy action to receive him and offer reparation and love in that circumstance. That is the context of my response, simply using your own wording, but in a higher theological sense.

And I understand that you know what you saw. Looking at the definition “kindly or lenient in judging people, acts” which of our two posts would you say fits this definition? You sat with pencil and paper in hand during the homily, ready to document all of your expectations of abuse - none of which are of grave matter, nor did they render the mass void. The liturgy was essentially Christ offering himself to the Father for you, and I don’t see how the Father could have thereby been displeased.

 

[CDNowak]

And I understand that you know what you saw. **Looking at the definition “kindly or lenient in judging people, acts” which of our two posts would you say fits this definition? **

Neither. You’re crossing the line in making any reference to “uncharitable toward Christ”. Unless you are going to say that the whole Church through the medieval era was uncharitable toward Christ because the received Communion rarely, you have no grounds to make that claim.

FWIW, an abused Mass that is not obligatory, that is disturbing peace of mind, distracting from prayer, I would probably have left.

 

[Sirach2]

FWIW, an abused Mass that is not obligatory, that is disturbing peace of mind, distracting from prayer, I would probably have left.

It has not yet been determined that serious abuses occurred, since most of the objections that the OP raised were shown to be valid. If he is used to a TLM, this would naturally cause a disturbance in his mind, but this is why I suggested he speak with the Monsignor or another charismatic who is well informed about that form of liturgy. Questions are the best way to open doors to learning and dispel anxiety. I agree with your post the other day, where you said:

The Mass, regardless of form, has one essential character. If a new form of the Mass could be introduced, it must differ not in the essential sacrifice, but only in the externals.

Since this mass was following “essential character, regardless of form” it could not be classed as abusive regarding the externals, and thereby be worthy of your leaving. Keep in mind that this celebrant flew in from South Africa, and is not under the GIRM regulations for the US. Here is only one example:

The Psalm is called “responsorial” because a response is said by the faithful after each strophe. Even if it does not often happen, the norms allow for the singing or reciting of the Psalm without a response, or for it being substituted by a Gradual. vatican.va/news_services/liturgy/details/ns_lit_doc_20100216_sac-lit-parola_en.html

The OP has not clarified whether a “gradual” was substituted lawfully, or if the entire psalm was sung without a response - also lawful. And this is only one of the many things that upset him, which were really not abusive, yet hopefully gave him the necessary instruction so he won’t be alarmed in the future.

I did except the agnus dei being omitted, and will give the celebrant the benefit of my doubt that it was not intentional.

Re your comment about “crossing the line,” if you failed to understand the intent of my second paragraph, I have nothing further to add.

 

[dconklin]

This would be the time I would desire the sanctifying graces from this wonderful sacrament.

 

[CDNowak]

It has not yet been determined that serious abuses occurred, since most of the objections that the OP raised were shown to be valid.

Yes, the OP’s objections have been shown, as far as possible in this format, to be valid.
From the Apostolic Constitution, SC: “Therefore no other person, even if he be a priest, may add, remove, or change anything in the liturgy on his own authority.”

Since this mass was following “essential character, regardless of form” it could not be classed as abusive regarding the externals, and thereby be worthy of your leaving. Keep in mind that this celebrant flew in from South Africa, and is not under the GIRM regulations for the US.

The character of the Mass demands faithfulness to the Rite (that is, regardless of form, one should adhere to the form as written). It is indeed possible for Mass to be illicit in the externals to the point where it may become a near occasion of sin for those of us aware of Church teaching on the importance of faithfulness in the liturgy. As such there can be good and valid reasons to leave the Mass, that it would be job of a confessor or spiritual director to assess, not an anonymous poster on the web (comparing this uncharitable attitude to the legitimate prudential decision by the OP not to receive does make the OP appear charitable, btw).

The celebrant is bound by the Missal and the GIRM wherever he says Mass. As the Mass occurred here (AFAIK), the Mass should have followed the US adaptations, in addition to the general norms in the previously mentioned documents.

The OP has not clarified whether a “gradual” was substituted lawfully, or if the entire psalm was sung without a response - also lawful. And this is only one of the many things that upset him, which were really not abusive, yet hopefully gave him the necessary instruction so he won’t be alarmed in the future.

I did except the agnus dei being omitted, and will give the celebrant the benefit of my doubt that it was not intentional.

He has said, repeatedly there was no psalm (an omission therefore objectively an abuse), no Agnus Dei (again, an omission), possibly altered readings (if not the readings for a votive Mass, not permitted), omission of the Lavabo. Any of these things would be upsetting enough on its own as they are objectively abuses for the Rite. You are correct in pointing out that they may have been mistakes or errors, but that doesn’t mean you can libel another poster saying that they he didn’t see what he saw (if he is mistaken or lying he will answer for that).

If you wish to be consistent in your charity, you must give Alex the same benefit as you give the priest.

 

[Sirach2]

CDNowak,

I believe my posts were addressed to Alex, and I’m finding it problematic that you intervened to upbraid me with your moderator hat, especially when I pointed out my true meaning when I adopted his own word “uncharitable.” If that is not good enough, and if you seek an argument, you won’t find it in me, as I said before. You are entitled to your opinion, but not to rephrasing my words to make them appear more “libelous.” These were not my words. This is my last post with you. Kindly end this nonsense.

…that doesn’t mean you can libel another poster saying that they he didn’t see what he saw

 

[CDNowak]

CDNowak,

I believe my posts were addressed to Alex, and I’m finding it problematic that you intervened to upbraid me with your moderator hat, especially when I pointed out my true meaning when I adopted his own word “uncharitable.” If that is not good enough, and if you seek an argument, you won’t find it in me, as I said before. You are entitled to your opinion, but not to rephrasing my words to make them appear more “libelous.” These were not my words. This is my last post with you. Kindly end this nonsense.

I rest my case.