The liturgical diversity is becoming divisive

  • Thread starter Thread starter Love_is_Patient
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Cat said:
I

So what exactly are we talking about here in this thread–true abuses? Or personal preferences?
Click to expand...
I’m pretty sure I agree with you. One problem is that what some view as personal preferences others see as abuse (from the angle of the idea that nothing whatsoever can be “added” to the Mass). Some see only abuse/non-abuse, some see all preferences.

I think most if not all of what you mention would fall under “preferences” (though I think it’s wiser to call them pastoral preferences rather than personal ones…after all, liturgy is about us/community fundamentally not me/individual). Personally I may not care for a LifeTeen Mass. But if a bishop is ok with it, and it is well-suited to a given community, I’m not going to rant and rave and claim it’s an abuse (assuming, as I htink you note, the Rite is followed correctly).
 
diggerdomer said:
I’m pretty sure I agree with you. One problem is that what some view as personal preferences others see as abuse (from the angle of the idea that nothing whatsoever can be “added” to the Mass). Some see only abuse/non-abuse, some see all preferences.

I think most if not all of what you mention would fall under “preferences” (though I think it’s wiser to call them pastoral preferences rather than personal ones…after all, liturgy is about us/community fundamentally not me/individual). Personally I may not care for a LifeTeen Mass. But if a bishop is ok with it, and it is well-suited to a given community, I’m not going to rant and rave and claim it’s an abuse (assuming, as I htink you note, the Rite is followed correctly).
Click to expand...
An abuse is something that can be proven as such from authoritative documents, right? So it’s “on paper.” It’s “hard copy.” It’s “measurable.” (I work in a lab!)

E.g., it is an abuse to skip portions of the Mass on the days when these portions are part of the liturgy. (I’m not referring to weekday Masses, which are shorter than Sunday Masses because of some of the omissions that are allowed). The reason that leaving out portions of the Mass is an abuse is because these portions are specified in the GIRM and other documents.

A personal preference is something that is left up to the celebrant by the documents, right? E.g., although Gregorian chant is given “pride of place,” the celebrant does have several options according to the GIRM, including using regular “hymns.” Although some Catholics would prefer the use of the chant all the time, it is not an “abuse” for the priest to select hymns all the time instead.

I personally think that the biggest problems we have with “divisive” behavior is not over abuses or even preferences, but over what I label as “deficiencies.”

E.g., according to documents, the pipe organ is considered the best choice for a Mass. I can’t argue with that. It’s right there in the documents, plain as my nose. It’s not ambiguous at all.

But obviously, many parishes do not own a pipe organ or even have an organist, so they use a piano or (gasp!) guitar to accompany the music.

Even though I play the piano and love to play for Mass, even I would label “piano at Mass” as a “deficiency.” The ideal is for a glorious pipe organ played by an expert. But that’s just not going to happen in our parish–we have the glorious pipe organ, one of the best in the area. But we don’t have the expert. And many other parishes are in the same boat.

**And here’s the problem as I see it–some people have a very low tolerance for “deficiencies” in the Mass. **

Remember, a “deficiecy,” at least by my definition, is not an abuse. Although the pipe organ is considered the “best choice,” it is not an abuse to use another instrument, to use an electric organ, or to make use of a musician who can’t play worth a hoot.

I personally have an extremely high tolerance of almost any deficiency, possibly because as a musician myself, I know how difficult it is to have “the best” constantly. It’s just not feasible, not only because of the expense, but because there aren’t enough great musicians to go around!

So I’ve learned to be content, even if the pianist plays by ear and misses a lot of notes. I’m happy that the person is willing to play and serve the Lord and his/her fellow Christians. To me, the important thing is to offer up the talents and let the Lord use them. In my point of view, it’s better to be a mediocre musician who is willing to play rather than a great musician who refuses to play.

Anyway, that’s what I think–people get upset over deficiencies. And I tend to think we would all be a lot happier and get along better if we had more forebearance and willingness to settle for less than “the best” much of the time. That way, when we do experience “the best,” we appreciate it more!

Of course, if circumstances allow you to experience “the best in Masses” every time, wow! Enjoy! Be thankful! You are most fortunate, because I suspect that most parishes do not get “the best,” (especially when it comes to music) at every Mass. Like I said, it’s just not feasible for most parishes.
 
Ockham said:
Rather than promoting the ignorance is bliss angle, perhaps continuing education into the faith is the better plan. I’ve been learning quite a bit in the past year or so from this forum, other sites, blogs, etc. The more I learn about the faith the less likely I’m to endorse the liturgical diversity and more concerned about the abuses. Church teaching is based upon absolute truth from Jesus Christ. It is consistent, solid, and clear. The information is out there and easily accessible. As Catholics we have a duty to be knowledgable in our faith and practice it to the best of our abilities.
Click to expand...
Oh, I agree with you. However, I think that there will always be “Joe Average” Catholics…nuttin’ wrong with that…but a vast majority of Catholics will never care to go beyond where they are in their faith journey.

That doesn’t mean we don’t try, but it’s an uphill struggle. 👍
 
Cat said:
If the weaker Christian is educated and learns that their Mass is full of incorrectnesses, both minor and major, HOW will this help him/her to become a stronger Christian?
Click to expand...
You won’t help the flock by dumbing it down. The way to strengthen is to teach and correct where necessary. If the Mass is “incorrect” then it is to everyone’s benefit to realize it and fix it. The Catholic faith is based on Christ’s absolute truth, logical, and sound. I suspect the weak and those who fall away due so because of a lack of knowledge.
 
Ockham said:
You won’t help the flock by dumbing it down. The way to strengthen is to teach and correct where necessary. If the Mass is “incorrect” then it is to everyone’s benefit to realize it and fix it. The Catholic faith is based on Christ’s absolute truth, logical, and sound. I suspect the weak and those who fall away due so because of a lack of knowledge.
Click to expand...
I certainly agree with you. Even as a Protestant, we knew that Christians are strengthened and converts are won to faith in a strong, vital worship service (we didn’t have Masses) as compared with a wimpy, watered-down, politically-correct worship service. I think that vibrant, reverent, musically-brilliant, abuse-free, and completely Catholic Masses will glorify the Lord Jesus Christ, strengthen faithful Catholics, bring wayward Catholics home, and attract Protestants weary of the half-life Christianity of Protestant fellowships.

I agree with you that it is never wrong and indeed, always right and proper, to attempt to correct abuses or improve deficiencies in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. This is a noble calling and those who are called to the task of purifying the liturgy should do with all their hearts the work that the Lord has given them to do.

What I’m saying is that those who are called by the Holy Spirit to try to “fix” the Mass should do their work in private.

Calling out a priest or bishop and pronouncing his abuses or inadequacies in public is not, in my opinion, helpful. I believe that a public denunciation of priests only creates dissention, and undermines the authority of the Church, and calls attention to the denouncer.

Of course there are always exceptions. If a priest is involved in sinful actions and others are at risk or in any danger (e.g., a pervert priest, a gambler who is using church funds, etc.), then it is right to move quickly to protect others, and this may involve a public exposure.

But in most cases of priestly inadequacies or faults, it would be best to work behind the scenes, as the Bible says. Make an appointment to see the offending priest privately, talk with him, and if this doesn’t bring about the necessary change in the liturgy, then move on up the ladder to those who are his authorities. We have the right to do this, but it should be done privately, in such a way as to not spread confusion and doubt among those who are weaker and less-informed.

There are many things that weaker, uneducated Christians need to be catechized in, but priestly failures should not be high on that list. Christians need to learn more about Jesus, the Church, the Sacraments, the Bible, the saints, history, apologetics, morals, faith. If they are interested in learning about liturgy, fine–perhaps they are called to be reformers of the liturgy. But to offer open classes in “liturgical abuse” seems to me to be rather self-depracating when there are so many other worthwhile class topics. Why give weak people an excuse to question the Church? Make them strong first so that they can bear the information that their parish is flawed.

There are people on this board, ockham–you’ve been in threads with them, too, who actually refuse to attend Holy Mass because they are convinced that the Masses are completely irreverent and non-efficacious. This is not right. This is not what the Church teaches. I’m reading an older book about the Eucharist right now, and according to the priest who wrote the book, Christians should strive to assist at as many Masses as possible. When Christians stay home from Mass because they despise the imperfections in the Mass, Satan has triumphed and souls are in danger.

It’s the same way with parents and children. When they are little and vulnerable, children need to believe that their mommies and daddies are invincible, perfect, and beautiful. As they get older and more mature, they can learn that Mommy and Daddy have flaws and are mere human beings after all.

We should strive always to protect the weak and build them up, not give them an excuse to remain in their misery. Telling people that their priest is perpetuating abuses is NOT going to build them up. Working to fix the abuses in a proper way, in private, WILL build up weaker and stronger Christians and bring glory to God.

And it goes without saying that when right prevails and the abuse is eliminated or the deficiency is corrected, don’t ever take the the credit. Give the credit to the Church and the priest. Build up the Church and the priest.

Perhaps because we are online here, we often feel totally anonymous. If we say that our priest selects music with non-Catholic theology, or our priest deliberately leaves out portions of the liturgy, etc.–we think that no one will know WHICH priest and which parish we are referring to.

But that’s just not true. A reasonably good hacker like my husband can figure out who you are, where you live, and what parish you reside in. I actually have my real name and all kinds of personal information in my signature because I list the website of my novels. A lot of people on this board give many clues as to their identity.

Also, many of us have our country, state, and geographic location listed. This really causes problems for me when I read comments from posters saying that they have NEVER seen an abuse-free, reverent Mass. I mentally vow never to travel to their part of the country because they have convinced me that Catholics there are totally reprobate! It bothers me to think that entire sections of the country are fallen away from the Church–it causes me to doubt the power and efficacy of the Catholic Church. It causes me to question authority, and that’s not good at all.

Finally, some people justify this kind of discussion about abuses and their priests in an online setting because they claim that they are just trying to learn more. I respectfully suggest that the BETTER way to learn would be to inquire first of their priest, and then at their diocescan headquarters about any abuses or deficiencies in their Mass. We really have no idea who we are talking to on this board, do we? But at your parish and diocese, you can speak with a real person in person, and you can learn about that person, as to whether they are respectable and righteous people with impeccable reputations.

If someone doesn’t trust anyone at their diocese, then why on earth would they trust an anonymous person on an online site?! That makes no sense! They are taking our word for it that we are really who we say we are. That’s not wise at all.

If your diocese is really so corrupt, then travel a few hundred miles to the NEXT diocese, one that you CAN trust, to get your questions answered.

And of course, as benedictgal does, people can read and study on their own, and then bring their questions to canonical lawyers and other experts in their diocese.
 
Ockham said:
You won’t help the flock by dumbing it down. The way to strengthen is to teach and correct where necessary. If the Mass is “incorrect” then it is to everyone’s benefit to realize it and fix it. The Catholic faith is based on Christ’s absolute truth, logical, and sound. I suspect the weak and those who fall away due so because of a lack of knowledge.
Click to expand...
I certainly agree with you. Even as a Protestant, we knew that Christians are strengthened and converts are won to faith in a strong, vital worship service (we didn’t have Masses) as compared with a wimpy, watered-down, politically-correct worship service. I think that vibrant, reverent, musically-brilliant, abuse-free, and completely Catholic Masses will glorify the Lord Jesus Christ, strengthen faithful Catholics, bring wayward Catholics home, and attract Protestants weary of the half-life Christianity of Protestant fellowships.

I agree with you that it is never wrong and indeed, always right and proper, to attempt to correct abuses or improve deficiencies in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. This is a noble calling and those who are called to the task of purifying the liturgy should do with all their hearts the work that the Lord has given them to do.

What I’m saying is that those who are called by the Holy Spirit to try to “fix” the Mass should do their work in private.

Calling out a priest or bishop and pronouncing his abuses or inadequacies in public is not, in my opinion, helpful. I believe that a public denunciation of priests only creates dissention, and undermines the authority of the Church, and calls attention to the denouncer.

Of course there are always exceptions. If a priest is involved in sinful actions and others are at risk or in any danger (e.g., a pervert priest, a gambler who is using church funds, etc.), then it is right to move quickly to protect others, and this may involve a public exposure.

But in most cases of priestly inadequacies or faults, it would be best to work behind the scenes, as the Bible says. Make an appointment to see the offending priest privately, talk with him, and if this doesn’t bring about the necessary change in the liturgy, then move on up the ladder to those who are his authorities. We have the right to do this, but it should be done privately, in such a way as to not spread confusion and doubt among those who are weaker and less-informed.

There are many things that weaker, uneducated Christians need to be catechized in, but priestly failures should not be high on that list. Christians need to learn more about Jesus, the Church, the Sacraments, the Bible, the saints, history, apologetics, morals, faith. If they are interested in learning about liturgy, fine–perhaps they are called to be reformers of the liturgy. But to offer open classes in “liturgical abuse” seems to me to be rather self-depracating when there are so many other worthwhile class topics. Why give weak people an excuse to question the Church? Make them strong first so that they can bear the information that their parish is flawed.

There are people on this board, ockham–you’ve been in threads with them, too, who actually refuse to attend Holy Mass because they are convinced that the Masses are completely irreverent and non-efficacious. This is not right. This is not what the Church teaches. I’m reading an older book about the Eucharist right now, and according to the priest who wrote the book, Christians should strive to assist at as many Masses as possible. When Christians stay home from Mass because they despise the imperfections in the Mass, Satan has triumphed and souls are in danger.

It’s the same way with parents and children. When they are little and vulnerable, children need to believe that their mommies and daddies are invincible, perfect, and beautiful. As they get older and more mature, they can learn that Mommy and Daddy have flaws and are mere human beings after all.

We should strive always to protect the weak and build them up, not give them an excuse to remain in their misery. Telling people that their priest is perpetuating abuses is NOT going to build them up. Working to fix the abuses in a proper way, in private, WILL build up weaker and stronger Christians and bring glory to God.

And it goes without saying that when right prevails and the abuse is eliminated or the deficiency is corrected, don’t ever take the the credit. Give the credit to the Church and the priest. Build up the Church and the priest.

Perhaps because we are online here, we often feel totally anonymous. If we say that our priest selects music with non-Catholic theology, or our priest deliberately leaves out portions of the liturgy, etc.–we think that no one will know WHICH priest and which parish we are referring to.

But that’s just not true. A reasonably good hacker like my husband can figure out who you are, where you live, and what parish you reside in. I actually have my real name and all kinds of personal information in my signature because I list the website of my novels. A lot of people on this board give many clues as to their identity.

Also, many of us have our country, state, and geographic location listed. This really causes problems for me when I read comments from posters saying that they have NEVER seen an abuse-free, reverent Mass. I mentally vow never to travel to their part of the country because they have convinced me that Catholics there are totally reprobate! It bothers me to think that entire sections of the country are fallen away from the Church–it causes me to doubt the power and efficacy of the Catholic Church. It causes me to question authority, and that’s not good at all.

Finally, some people justify this kind of discussion about abuses and their priests in an online setting because they claim that they are just trying to learn more. I respectfully suggest that the BETTER way to learn would be to inquire first of their priest, and then at their diocescan headquarters about any abuses or deficiencies in their Mass. We really have no idea who we are talking to on this board, do we? But at your parish and diocese, you can speak with a real person in person, and you can learn about that person, as to whether they are respectable and righteous people with impeccable reputations.

If someone doesn’t trust anyone at their diocese, then why on earth would they trust an anonymous person on an online site?! That makes no sense! They are taking our word for it that we are really who we say we are. That’s not wise at all.

If your diocese is really so corrupt, then travel a few hundred miles to the NEXT diocese, one that you CAN trust, to get your questions answered.

And of course, as benedictgal does, people can read and study on their own, and then bring their questions to canonical lawyers and other experts in their diocese.
 
Cat, I suspect you are reacting to an issue I’m not familiar with. If people are to be critical of a clergyman then they need to do so with respect and charity. However, liturgical abuses are sins and failing to address them may be also by complicity. Are you familiar with the parish in Australia that got excommunicated due to liturgical abuses? Maybe if parishioners had spoken up earlier and guided the flock back on track they would still be in the Church today.
 
Ockham said:
Cat, I suspect you are reacting to an issue I’m not familiar with. If people are to be critical of a clergyman then they need to do so with respect and charity. However, liturgical abuses are sins and failing to address them may be also by complicity. Are you familiar with the parish in Australia that got excommunicated due to liturgical abuses? Maybe if parishioners had spoken up earlier and guided the flock back on track they would still be in the Church today.
Click to expand...
You raise a lot of valid points. First and foremost, growing in the Faith of the Church, learning about the Church, should not stop once the RCIA classes (for converts) and the Confirmation classes are over and done. Many dioceses, I would wager that most, do in fact offer courses for adults who want to learn more about the Faith and grow. My own diocese offers these courses every Fall and Spring. There are also books that we can read by bona fide authors, such as Pope Benedict XVI, Dr. Scott Hahn and Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen. If you are interested in the liturgy, I would recommend that you read the books by Pope Benedict that treat the subject, studying them in tandem with what the authoritative documents of the Church have to say. I have found that reading his books, with the documents, gives me a better perspective on things because I am basing my understanding on his intepretation, even though he was not Pope at the time. Bear in mind, though, that what he believed as the former Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, he still holds true today as Pope Benedict XVI.

Part of our responsbility as Catholics is to continue studying our Faith and growing in it. We need to do some work on our own to agument and supplement what we learned. It is certainly not an issue of “ignorance is bliss”.

When you fall in love with someone, you don’t stop getting to know them after the wedding. Every day, you learn something new about the one you love. It’s the same way with the Church, especially when it comes to the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

Unfortunately, as I have experienced it down here, not very much attention is paid to the proper celebration of the Mass. Well-meaning, but, misguided folks seem to think that they can adapt and amend the Mass to suit their particular groups and movements. As Pope Benedict XVI has pointed out, that is certainly not the case. We should conform ourselves to the Mass, not the other way around.
 
benedictgal said:
When you fall in love with someone, you don’t stop getting to know them after the wedding. Every day, you learn something new about the one you love. It’s the same way with the Church, especially when it comes to the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.
Click to expand...
This is not a good analogy to prove your point. In Marriage, both partners change over time. 😉
 
Newbie2 said:
This is not a good analogy to prove your point. In Marriage, both partners change over time. 😉
Click to expand...
Actually, I think it works. The Church does change over time (in Her human elements) as we can tell by the “reforms” that have always occurred.
 
diggerdomer said:
Maybe. Maybe not. Depends on the marriage.
Click to expand...
That’s why it’s not so great an analogy. The Church shouldn’t be giving in equally to the wants of the bishops, priests and parishioners who would like to make their own changes in the liturgy, and that’s what benedictgal has always been consistant about.
 
benedictgal said:
When you fall in love with someone, you don’t stop getting to know them after the wedding. Every day, you learn something new about the one you love. It’s the same way with the Church, especially when it comes to the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.
Click to expand...
For what it’s worth, I find this analogy by benedictgal and many other wise people have used to be fairly accurately from a human individual standpoint. This is a marriage between Christ and the Church right? In fact, one could metaphysically describe it as Christ’s consummation with the Church. I hope I am appropriate there. Basically it is Christ’s ultimate physical act of love for the all peoples who God calls into his flock, which is what the Catholic Church is as a visible Bride of Christ.

Thus in this marriage, every Holy Sacrifice of the Mass can be thought of as the renewal of the vows between Christ and the Church. Well, Christ is God and God really knows how to love. So while God is loving us in his infinite way, the Church and its members are trying to love God back as much as she can. We as members of this Church are all called to fully, faithfully, freely, and fruitfully give ourselves to Christ at Mass in the same concept as Christ gave, giving, and will continue to give to us as a whole within the Catholic Church.

So yeah I think it is a great analogy. And while God has always infinitely loved us, we are fallen human beings are much much much weaker in our love. But we are called to love still and each time we go to Mass we are called to love more. A tall order for many but when you are given infinite love, the only way to truly appreciate that is to imitate that infinitely love by growing your own.
 
StillWondering said:
For what it’s worth, I find this analogy by benedictgal and many other wise people have used to be fairly accurately from a human individual standpoint. This is a marriage between Christ and the Church right? In fact, one could metaphysically describe it as Christ’s consummation with the Church. I hope I am appropriate there. Basically it is Christ’s ultimate physical act of love for the all peoples who God calls into his flock, which is what the Catholic Church is as a visible Bride of Christ.

Thus in this marriage, every Holy Sacrifice of the Mass can be thought of as the renewal of the vows between Christ and the Church. Well, Christ is God and God really knows how to love. So while God is loving us in his infinite way, the Church and its members are trying to love God back as much as she can. We as members of this Church are all called to fully, faithfully, freely, and fruitfully give ourselves to Christ at Mass in the same concept as Christ gave, giving, and will continue to give to us as a whole within the Catholic Church.

So yeah I think it is a great analogy. And while God has always infinitely loved us, we are fallen human beings are much much much weaker in our love. But we are called to love still and each time we go to Mass we are called to love more. A tall order for many but when you are given infinite love, the only way to truly appreciate that is to imitate that infinitely love by growing your own.
Click to expand...
Actually, God also used the analagy in Hosea. Recall that the Lord asked Hosea to marry Gomar. The way Hosea’s marriage was heading was mirrored in God’s relationship to Ancient Israel.
 
Newbie2 said:
The Church shouldn’t be giving in equally to the wants of the bishops, priests and parishioners who would like to make their own changes in the liturgy,
Click to expand...
I didn’t say (or imply) that, and I don’t think anyone on this thread has either.

All analogies are just that, analogies. Some work better than others.
 
Cat said:
…
I agree with you that it is never wrong and indeed, always right and proper, to attempt to correct abuses or improve deficiencies in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. This is a noble calling and those who are called to the task of purifying the liturgy should do with all their hearts the work that the Lord has given them to do.

What I’m saying is that those who are called by the Holy Spirit to try to “fix” the Mass should do their work in private.

Calling out a priest or bishop and pronouncing his abuses or inadequacies in public is not, in my opinion, helpful. I believe that a public denunciation of priests only creates dissention, and undermines the authority of the Church, and calls attention to the denouncer.

Of course there are always exceptions. If a priest is involved in sinful actions and others are at risk or in any danger (e.g., a pervert priest, a gambler who is using church funds, etc.), then it is right to move quickly to protect others, and this may involve a public exposure.
…
Click to expand...
I found this post by Cat to be very solid. Great post =).

Well, basically does it not come down to culpability. We are here talking on the forums to learn, grow and gain insight. But why? Well for our own spiritual benefit if it’s about spirituality. For this though it is a little about spirituality and a lot about long term practical stability as well as proper respect for God, right? So the followup to this is taking action for positive change, *if *your community needs it. For some, they are in a great parish and nothing is needed, for others they really need to step up instead of hoping someone else will.

I’m just chiming in here like this because I think the thread steared a little off track. Saying that does not negate the fact that I learned a great deal.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top