Suggestion for Liturgical Abuse: Re-train priests and bishops about the correct way to do the Liturgy

[Mannyfit75]

This is just an idea. Would it be a good idea if the bishops in their diocese mandate a class course on liturgical abuse and give priest the idea what ought to be done in the liturgy and what ought not to be done?

I think many priests and bishops commit liturgical abuse is because they do not know any better. If they were inform how to perform the Liturgy the Right (Rite) way, we would not have such an issue.

It should be mandated by the Congregation of the Divine Worship and Liturgy (not sure if that’s the right office) with the Pope’s blessings.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

This is just an idea. Would it be a good idea if the bishops in their diocese mandate a class course on liturgical abuse and give priest the idea what ought to be done in the liturgy and what ought not to be done?

I think many priests and bishops commit liturgical abuse is because they do not know any better. If they were inform how to perform the Liturgy the Right (Rite) way, we would not have such an issue.

It should be mandated by the Congregation of the Divine Worship and Liturgy (not sure if that’s the right office) with the Pope’s blessings.

Liturgical abuses do not occur because they do not know how the liturgy should be done. They are done, in most cases, because they are thought to be improvements over how the liturgy should be done.

Just talk to those who are doing them and you will see this.

A priest is taught how to do the liturgy correctly while in the seminary and he has access to the Missal and the GIRM. He knows where to find the right way, its just that his way seems better to him.

 

[Servulus]

That seems like a good idea at first glance, Manny, but I wonder if it would really do the job. As a former training manager, one of the things I learned is that training only helps solve performance problems that are caused by a lack of skill or knowledge. I’m not sure that’s the source of some of the liturgical problems we see discussed here. After all, most of the folks on the forum haven’t had formal training in liturgy. We’ve learned what we know from our own reading and research, driven by a desire to know what’s right and see it done. It seems to me that any priest with a desire to make certain the liturgies for which he’s responsible are performed correctly has the resources already available to keep his knowledge current.

You’ve probably experienced similar situations in the military. If the troops aren’t doing something correctly, the easy answer is to throw them into a training class. But if they already know what to do, when to do it, and how to do it the training will have little impact on their performance. In those cases, we need to determine the cause(s) of the problem and develop solutions accordingly.

I suspect that, in many cases, the cause is what might be called an “imbalance of consequences”. The priest perceives that it’s rewarding to deviate from the norm(s) [e.g., self-fulfillment, personal convenience, or avoidance of conflict with activist elements in the parish] or that it’s punishing to follow the norms [e.g., loss of popularity, confrontations with this or that committee, or additional time/effort required]. In those cases, no amount of training will correct the problem.

It would be interesting to see someone undertake an in-depth review of liturgical abuses in an attempt to identify the principal causes.

Good food for thought.

 

[Dandelion_Wine]

My initial thought Manny was what the others had already expressed - it’s not a lack of training or knowledge in the right way to do things, it’s an unwillingness.

BUT, with that said, maybe it would demostrate that the Bishop wants things to be done right and thus give priests less wiggle room knowing their Bishop wants it done right. AND it’d take the “I didn’t know” excuse away.

 

[Andreas_Hofer]

My initial thought Manny was what the others had already expressed - it’s not a lack of training or knowledge in the right way to do things, it’s an unwillingness.

BUT, with that said, maybe it would demostrate that the Bishop wants things to be done right and thus give priests less wiggle room knowing their Bishop wants it done right. AND it’d take the “I didn’t know” excuse away.

As much as abuse does seem to stem from pride, not ignorance, I think your last point about taking away the excuse would still make a “rubrics” class helpful from the standpoint of a bishop being able to say “Now I’ve seen to it that no one can claim he’s just doing what he was taught, and I’m holding you to this new standard I’ve put in front of you.” Even more than a class about proper mechanics of liturgy, though, I think dioceses struggling with liturgical abuse (from my experience the vast majority) would benefit from a course or two on the spirit of the liturgy - why do we have regulations, how does liturgy relate to faith, what is the value of tradition, etc.

Perhaps the biggest issues a bishop needs to be clear on for his priests is “What counts as a “pastoral reason” for deviation?” “What cases allow for such deviations and which are non-negotiable?” and on the declarative side “If you’re unsure about a case, ask when possible before you act - don’t presume.”

 

[stbruno]

In our diocese, deacons have mandatory continuing education hours they must comply with based on years of service and our age. However, there is nothing like that for the priests because our chancery must believe that the priests would not comply.

As long as we are in a priest shortage…I think veyr little will be mandated. More reasons to pray.

 

[Elzee]

I think it’s a great idea. Our priest admitted last year during a dinner at church that he couldn’t remember the prayer that’s supposed to be said as a few drops of water are mixed with the wine during Mass ( I held back the urge to tell him what it was. ) He said the deacon always says it so he has forgotten it. At first this sounded reasonable - anyone can forget over the years…but then I realized he says daily Mass everyday without a deacon!! Sometimes twice a day!!

So, in regard to your suggestion - I think it’s great. But I think abuses are a mixture of our priests don’t know (our priest honestly believes you’re supposed to empty the holy water fonts during Lent) and they do know, but just want to do things their way.

 

[chevalier]

In my humble opinion, some priests actually don’t know better and they don’t see why it would be a problem or why they should care and check with the GIRM. It just doesn’t awaken any sensibilities in them and they think it’s a good idea and all. In some cases, education done properly could help. Some of form of training, albeit not merely just the information on how it’s done. It needs to take some formation, I guess.

As for bishops, well, I suppose in some cases, the best way would be to remind them of obedience to Rome and cut their agendas. Generally, any bishops who think they’re wiser than Rome need to be reminded of something.

 

[kell0618]

How about retraining the laity in Catechesis and Dogma as well?

 

[Asperges_Me]

Sometimes I wonder if would be in the best interest of the Church to finally come out and admit once and for all that the Missal and GIRM are henceforth only guides. Then the bishop and/or pastors can just make up whatever they want, like the Protestants. And we won’t have any more forums like this to complain about or defend the priests’ actions as valid or not. Maybe just leave in the few words of consecration as the only requirements and hope that the priests can get that right at least.

Why do I say this? First of all, complaining about abuses seems to be an excercise in futility at best. You’re supposed to talk to the priest first, who probably knows full and well that the innovation is not approved in the rubrics. After he ignores you or tells you where to go, then write to the bishop who could probably care less. That is unless the abuses are so outrageous, that they cause a serious public scandal. Then what, write to the Vatican or the nuncio, who are probably so busy with other things that concern the worldwide church?

All the while you are labeled a troublemaker or outcast at your local parish. You are accused of not being charitable to the priest. Or maybe he just forgot or he had a bad day or the abuse is a “pastoral need”. It’s funny that for all these excuses I’ve heard about abuses for the NO Mass, I’ve never heard a TLM celebrated incorrectly. Not even once. Not even by elderly priests. Why is that?

Secondly, there is all this talk about unity. Well the only unity I can see from one average NO parish to another is 1) its not the TLM and 2) everybody is uniformly ignoring the Missal and GIRM. Other than that what unity of worship is there?

Thirdly, there is often talk about obedience. The SSPX are disobedient, whereas no matter how close some NO Masses get to being illicit the priests are considered to be obedient because they haven’t been repremanded by the bishop and the bishop hasn’t been repremanded by the Vatican. Which cases are extremely rare indeed. Very low standard to meet once you have “gotten in” so to speak. Is the Halloween Barney priest with the devil EMHC’s gone yet? I haven’t heard so.

I know that this is a rant with many generalizations. So please take it as such. I realize that there are still some priests and parishes out there who are trying to follow the rules and provide a good Catholic culture that is based on a hermenetic of continuity.

But if the Church did finally come out and say that the Missal and GIRM are now only guides, it would really just ratify the situation “on the ground” as it exists now. Either the discipline of priests “reading the black” and “doing the red” needs to somehow be reinstated or finally discarded. At least we the laity would know where we stood. Then we would have the choice to either accept all of the innovations once and for all or make a conscious decision to leave.

 

[Cavaille-Coll]

Liturgical abuses do not occur because they do not know how the liturgy should be done. They are done, in most cases, because they are thought to be improvements over how the liturgy should be done.

Just talk to those who are doing them and you will see this.

A priest is taught how to do the liturgy correctly while in the seminary and he has access to the Missal and the GIRM. He knows where to find the right way, its just that his way seems better to him.

While I will respectfully disagree that priests received correct liturgical training in seminary, especially if they attended in the early 70’s to the mid-80’s, most of the priests I’ve talked with about the liturgical abuses that they were doing felt that their way was better or more effective than what the rubrics ask for. In my experience, most of them are fully aware of what the rubrics say. In fact, if you press your point, you will discover that clericalism is alive and well when they try to pull educational rank on you.

 

[Andreas_Hofer]

While I will respectfully disagree that priests received correct liturgical training in seminary, especially if they attended in the early 70’s to the mid-80’s, most of the priests I’ve talked with about the liturgical abuses that they were doing felt that their way was better or more effective than what the rubrics ask for. In my experience, most of them are fully aware of what the rubrics say. In fact, if you press your point, you will discover that clericalism is alive and well when they try to pull educational rank on you.

I once had to coax a priest for a full half-hour before the start of (Sunday) Mass to get him to agree include the Creed. His reasoning was that it was pastoral to omit it since we didn’t have many missalettes and people probably wouldn’t all be able to recite it from memory. His reasoning was flawed in a whole host of ways, but imagine the basic premise - people don’t know the Creed, so let’s stop giving them opportunity to learn it.