Question about possible liturgical abuses

[Joannm]

99 times out of 100, if someone calls the bishop’s office about an issue at a parish the response is going to be, “did you talk with the pastor?” Issues that can be solved at a local level should be solved there. Only when that fails will the bishop’s office get involved.

Well, the arch/bishop isn’t going to be personally involved unless there’s a huge issue at stake. 99 times out of 100 if the bishop’s office needs to be involved it falls to his administrative assistant(s) to deal with.

I know this for a fact. The bishop gets a letter with a complaint about the liturgy, more than likely he does not read it but his secretary does. He sends it to the Worship Office who then sends a copy to the pastor who contacts the person who make the complaint (if the complainant had the you know what to sign it). If it is not signed, the bishop’s secretary sends it to the circular file. And that’s how it works, at least in our chancery.

 

[CB_Catholic]

And I stand by what I wrote. The example of the pharisees does not apply here because what they did had nothing to do with liturgy. Furthermore, the OP is being sincere in his zest to see if what was reported to him was in fact, an abuse.

Jesus’ actions in the Temple called to mind the psalm passage that reads “zeal for your house consumes me.” Those who defend the integrity of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass do so because they love Christ and his Church.

If there is abuse going on, then, it is a moral wrong. It is not about being pharisaical, as the Pharisees did not concern themselves with liturgy.

And Jesus’ actions had nothing to do with the Liturgy either. They were conducting business on Temple grounds and making the Father’s house into a marketplace.

You haven’t addressed the crux of the matter, what the OP wants to do. You haven’t even commented on the morality of that. Or going to Mass just to catch a priest and a parish committing a liturgical abuse. The OP asked about opinions on that. Sometimes our zeal for something can blind us to the implications of our actions and lead us into unacceptable and even sinful behavior. We can’t see the forest for the trees. Of what value is that to our soul? Should we set a precedent here? Go around to churches and start recording their Liturgies so we can catch abuses and report them? Without any directive from those in authority? Are laypeople now to police the churches around them? When that happens, we have then lost our focus on Christ and put it on something else. It is not always zeal for Holy Mass that is behind this. It can become one’s own personal agenda.

And that is sad. I would hate to see our Church go in that direction. Church history has shown us what can happen when we go down that road. If we want to stop the abuses, it needs to be done in a morally upright manner and according to proper respect for authority.

 

[Joannm]

. Church history has shown us what can happen when we go down that road. .

I believe it was called the Inquisition.

 

[benedictgal]

And Jesus’ actions had nothing to do with the Liturgy either. They were conducting business on Temple grounds and making the Father’s house into a marketplace.

You haven’t addressed the crux of the matter, what the OP wants to do. You haven’t even commented on the morality of that. Or going to Mass just to catch a priest and a parish committing a liturgical abuse. The OP asked about opinions on that. Sometimes our zeal for something can blind us to the implications of our actions and lead us into unacceptable and even sinful behavior. We can’t see the forest for the trees. Of what value is that to our soul? Should we set a precedent here? Go around to churches and start recording their Liturgies so we can catch abuses and report them? Without any directive from those in authority? Are laypeople now to police the churches around them? When that happens, we have then lost our focus on Christ and put it on something else. It is not always zeal for Holy Mass that is behind this. It can become one’s own personal agenda.

And that is sad. I would hate to see our Church go in that direction. Church history has shown us what can happen when we go down that road. If we want to stop the abuses, it needs to be done in a morally upright manner and according to proper respect for authority.

Actually, what Jesus did had a lot to do with liturgical integrity. The merchants and money changers were dealing in the buying and selling of animals used for the sacrifice. Furthermore, the place where they set up shop was a sacred area, the portion of the temple reserved for the Gentiles as their worship space.

We lose our focus on Christ when we start tinkering with the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and treating it as our own personal property to do with as we please. This is serious stuff. Maybe there are some who would trivialize it and make light of it, but, such attitudes are, in my opinion, wrong.

The Church gives us the tools to use to help maintain the integrity of the Mass. One such tool is Redemptionis Sacramentum wherein the Church spells out what should be done in matters of abuse.

 

[benedictgal]

I believe it was called the Inquisition.

I find it sad to characterize those who would seek to defend the integrity of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass as wanting an inquisition. It reminds me of the insults leveled against the former Joseph Ratzinger when he was elected Pope with some in the media calling him the Grand Inquisitor.

 

[TBolt1000T]

I figured that I was wanting to go about it in the wrong way, and that’s why I posted this thread, so that I could learn the right way. I’ll tell both of my friends that they should talk to the pastors of those parishes, and that if those pastors have bad attitudes and refuse to correct the problems, that our archbishop should be contacted. I have faith that our archbishop will see to it that the abuses, where ever they are found, are stopped. Otherwise, I’ll just stay out of it, other than praying for those involved.

As I’ve said before, I have a tendancy to be overzealous, especially when it comes to the Eucharist, and I’m sorry if I offended anyone.

 

[felsguy]

I figured that I was wanting to go about it in the wrong way, and that’s why I posted this thread, so that I could learn the right way. I’ll tell both of my friends that they should talk to the pastors of those parishes, and that if those pastors have bad attitudes and refuse to correct the problems, that our archbishop should be contacted. I have faith that our archbishop will see to it that the abuses, where ever they are found, are stopped. Otherwise, I’ll just stay out of it, other than praying for those involved.

As I’ve said before, I have a tendancy to be overzealous, especially when it comes to the Eucharist, and I’m sorry if I offended anyone.

God bless you for it. It’s refreshing to have an OP genuinely ask for advice, receive it, process it, and accept it instead of simply seeking validation for a decision they’ve already made and are determined to follow, no matter what response they may receive.

 

[TheMc]

OP,

I find nothing wrong with this. I have heard Fr Z say many times that the authorities can’t do much if their only proof is Mr. Smith’s eyewitness account. The faithful have a right to the celebration of the Mass that is celebrated reverently and according to the rubrics.

I find it sad to characterize those who would seek to defend the integrity of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass as wanting an inquisition. It reminds me of the insults leveled against the former Joseph Ratzinger when he was elected Pope with some in the media calling him the Grand Inquisitor.

Looks like you’re in good company then!

 

[TheMc]

A person that sets out to deliberately attempt to harm a pastor, without giving that person any chance to either explain what they are doing or to try to change what they are doing is displaying a significant amount of anger and contempt.

The goal is not to “harm the pastor”. If it is an abuse, and if because of that abuse the pastor is punished or inconvenienced in any way, it is due to his own fault.

While I can’t speak for the OP, I would assume his motivations are to help keep the liturgy sacred, even the liturgical services outside his own parish. As RS says:

1. In an altogether particular manner, let everyone do all that is in their power to ensure that … every irreverence or distortion and that all abuses be thoroughly corrected

It then goes on to say:

1. Any Catholic, whether Priest or Deacon or lay member of Christ’s faithful, has the right to lodge a complaint regarding a liturgical abuse to the diocesan Bishop or the competent Ordinary equivalent to him in law, or to the Apostolic See on account of the primacy of the Roman Pontiff. It is fitting, however, insofar as possible, that the report or complaint be submitted first to the diocesan Bishop. This is naturally to be done in truth and charity.

 

[nicolep]

99 times out of 100, if someone calls the bishop’s office about an issue at a parish the response is going to be, “did you talk with the pastor?” Issues that can be solved at a local level should be solved there. Only when that fails will the bishop’s office get involved.

Well, the arch/bishop isn’t going to be personally involved unless there’s a huge issue at stake. 99 times out of 100 if the bishop’s office needs to be involved it falls to his administrative assistant(s) to deal with.

I know this for a fact. The bishop gets a letter with a complaint about the liturgy, more than likely he does not read it but his secretary does. He sends it to the Worship Office who then sends a copy to the pastor who contacts the person who make the complaint (if the complainant had the you know what to sign it). If it is not signed, the bishop’s secretary sends it to the circular file. And that’s how it works, at least in our chancery.

Yes, I realize that the bishop will not personally being doing these things. His office and staff are still quite busy. That was my secondary point anyway.

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

I know this for a fact. The bishop gets a letter with a complaint about the liturgy, more than likely he does not read it but his secretary does. He sends it to the Worship Office who then sends a copy to the pastor who contacts the person who make the complaint (if the complainant had the you know what to sign it). If it is not signed, the bishop’s secretary sends it to the circular file. And that’s how it works, at least in our chancery.

LOL, I think that’s the majority of dioceses’ MO…

 

[puzzleannie]

It seems to me that RS removes the pastor as the first point of contact and, instead, places the local Ordinary in that aspect.

which is not very wise since the bishop will certainly refer the matter back to the pastor

I have worked in only 3 dioceseses, under 5 bishops but I can assure you that none of those 5 would pay any attention at all to a video that came unsolicited purporting to be films of liturgical abuse, and would entertain no such complaint without first sending it back to the pastor in question.

 

[benedictgal]

which is not very wise since the bishop will certainly refer the matter back to the pastor

However, it is in the document.

 

[Tepeyac]

What about the concept of subsidiarity, the idea that things should be handled at lowest possible level? Isn’t going to the parish priest first more in keeping with this?

 

[JM3]

While I can’t speak for the OP, I would assume his motivations are to help keep the liturgy sacred, even the liturgical services outside his own parish. As RS says:

1. In an altogether particular manner, let everyone do all that is in their power to ensure that … every irreverence or distortion and that all abuses be thoroughly corrected

It then goes on to say:

1. Any Catholic, whether Priest or Deacon or lay member of Christ’s faithful, has the right to lodge a complaint regarding a liturgical abuse to the diocesan Bishop or the competent Ordinary equivalent to him in law, or to the Apostolic See on account of the primacy of the Roman Pontiff. It is fitting, however, insofar as possible, that the report or complaint be submitted first to the diocesan Bishop. This is naturally to be done in truth and charity.

While it is proper for the faithful to report abuses in their own parish, I find your insinuation that we should go on a ‘witch hunt’ to other parishes lacking in charity. The OP, in post #26, made the correct decision.

What about the concept of subsidiarity, the idea that things should be handled at lowest possible level? Isn’t going to the parish priest first more in keeping with this?

More in keeping with charity, yes.

 

[terrig]

I think I witnessed a liturgical abuse this past Sunday. I attended Mass in another parish while traveling. It was more like half a Protestant service and half Catholic. First thing, the priest introduced a lady that had given a large donation to the school, before the first reading, kids walked down the aisle and everyone sang “Jesus Love the Little children of the World” with their arms up in a salute, a Lutheran sang the Psalm (the priest told everyone that after he sang it that he belonged to the Luteran church), there was all kinds of clapping, the priest asked everyone "how’s our progress so far?) and everyone clapped. I never witnessed such things at a Mass. (Our church has announcements near the end of Mass and there may be some clapping but not any interruptions during the Mass.) I felt like everyone was just being entertained. I would bet my life the priest is one of those liberal priests since this church is near Austin, Tx. I didn’t say anything because I’m sure the priest would have told me what an uncharitable person I was for not thinking it was not ok for children to be singing to Jesus in the middle of the Mass. So far this is the most far out Mass I have ever been to. However, I am more grateful for my what now seems “so traditional parish” in Central Texas. I am just trying to get this out of my head because it kind of dramatized me.