"Organic changes are just a lot of unapproved innovations that eventually became popular."

[pnewton]

I am reminded of years back when I converted to Catholicism. I was reading about the word “magisterium” and the different levels. One thing I remember was the idea of the universal magisterium, that is, since the Holy Spirit is active in all Christians, the movement of the Holy Spirit can be seen throughout the Church Universal. It has been a while, so forgive me if I am unclear here. I think one example of this is the acceptance of saints by universal acclaim. This is not the practice now, but at a time it was, and could be again. Even in this, the Holy See must still recognize these saints and include them or not on the calendar, the martyrolgy, the liturgy…

So in this light, organic development would be those actions which arise in various areas of the world, or a country, without promotion, not specifically forbidden, and recognized as being harmonious with the spirit of the liturgy. This is my understanding.

 

[Phemie]

Can you give any examples of any of the above?

Remember, I am trying to understand how things develop organically.

The EF developed organically. I’m certainly no expert but one example of this is the Prayers at the Foot of the Altar. They were once said by the priest by himself before Mass. At some point someone decided to say them in front of everyone and over the course of years it became the way Mass started.

 

[Digitonomy]

Is the internet, with its proliferation of blogs, interfering with organic progression?
Mark Thompson:

If you would like an example of organic change that will very likely be accepted in the future, the best one I can think of is the giving of blessings to noncommunicants in the Communion line

I fear this is the case because it is so widespread.

With the internet, there seems to be more of a possibility of petitioning one’s way to get what one wants. If everyone is doing something anyway, then why not allow it right?

I think to some extent the converse may be true. On the issue that Mark mentions, the practice had become fairly prevalent, even before use of the internet became widespread. I think that the spread can be attributed to laity involved in RCIA, and also teachers at parish schools and CCD classes of the most recent generation of Catholic adults. Presumably they picked it up at conferences or in Catholic education and liturgy publications.

I submit that it is only the widespread commiseration of those opposed, and repeated discussion of the proper channels to correct such apparent abuses, that inspired japhy to pursue his letter that led to at least partial clarification of the Vatican’s position on this issue. Maybe he can pop in and confirm or deny my theory.

TrueLight:

So now I’m thinking it’s a lot harder to define organic change because everyone seems aware of what everyone is doing, so practices are likely to spread even faster unless there is a clamp-down.

I think this is true, although again I think this predates widespread use of the internet, and I think the internet actually provides a bit of a break on the spread of such changes, so that e.g. liturgical dance has in my estimation probably become less common as suspicious parishioners have online resources to educate themselves and challenge local practice.

By the way, one innovation that successfully jumped into official use is the use of variant dismissal formulas. For as long as I remember, up until last year, the most common dismissal (maybe 70% of the time) was “The mass is ended; go in peace to love and serve the Lord,” a formula which is not currently approved, nor has it ever been approved.
In other cases, the priest or deacon would come up with something that sounded a bit less formal, such as “Go and spread the Good News of Jesus Christ.” The Holy Father, apparently inspired by such rulebreaking of a reflective nature, introduced three new dismissal formulas in 2008, which are now part of the new translation.