The 'Liturgy Police'

  • Thread starter Thread starter NewsTheMan
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
N

NewsTheMan

Guest
I didn’t want to derail another thread, and I thought this topic deserved its own thread, so here it is.

I’ve seen a lot of - well, perhaps not accusations -finger pointing and gesticulating that people who are concerned about the sacred liturgy are Pharisaical Liturgy Police. If someone complains about a priest ad-libbing, or about the congregation holding hands or what have you there are some who will brush it off and say something like “don’t be a Pharisee! Don’t be the Liturgy Police that pays attention to the wrong-doings of others instead of what is going on at the Mass.” There is something in that statement, something true. However, a lot is wrong with it.

Perhaps a few things to keep in mind. It seems obvious to me that anybody who goes to Mass in order to see abuse/complain certainly does not have their heart in the right place and can correctly be called the Liturgy Police. That much is obvious. However, it is also equally obvious - and I believe I speak for most if not all complaint posts on CAF - that people go to Mass with the right intention but are smacked in the face with abuses and novelties and things that just don’t make sense at a Mass. Things that are forbidden. Things that are wrong. Let’s not tip-toe around the issue, there is no need for that. I think it’s important to keep that in mind. Similarly, there is room for righteous indignation. I’m not citing the cleansing of the temple by Jesus as an example lest I misuse the Gospel for my own ends as so frequently happens. However, we can get upset at irreverence. We can get righteously angry if we see something that is offensive to our Christian Catholic sensibilities. This is also not something we should fear - as if being offended means we are weak. Be proud that you are offended by a mockery of the Mass! Of course, this doesn’t entail walking out (save for perhaps a clown mass, etc) or storming off to the priest and shouting at him GIRM in hand.

So. Does noticing abuse/irreverence mean you are not paying attention to the Mass and focusing on the wrong things? No. That would hardly be possible - how could one notice an abuse if one were paying attention to anything but every single word of the Mass? Every single sentence has meaning! Many understand this well. Also, many of us are well versed in the Mass in as much as we have studied it or heard it being said correctly - if we’re doing it right by age 20 you have been to over 1000 Masses. So it’s in no way indicative of someone not paying attention to the Mass if they notice an abuse. Rather the opposite. It means you understand and acknowledge the depth of the Mass when it is celebrated properly. It means you respect how and what the Church says!

Does noticing and complaining about an abuse/irreverence/wrong-doing mean you disrespect priests? Does it mean you consider yourself above the priest? Certainly not. Once again, it seems quite the opposite. If I were to think of my priest as a mere idiot I would brush it off as a fools mistake; in the same way I don’t fault someone who I dislike for their actions - I merely say “should I expect any different from such a person?”. It is precisely because I respect him as a person, and precisely because I respect his office, that I complain. Yes, priests have a hard job. Nobody says otherwise. Do you not let the policeman know that a criminal just ran past him because he also has a hard job? To whom much is given much is expected. The priest has a duty to celebrate the Mass correctly. A duty to us, to the Church, to the Bishop, to God. I do not see myself higher than a priest by complaining. I see myself as a sheep in need of a shepherd. I cannot do this on my own - I cannot offer Mass. More can be said on this - but ponder this. If we correct the simple arithmetic mistake of an accountant do we then imply we are masters of accountancy? If we know a wanted criminal who has yet to be found lives next door and we report it to the police do we consider ourselves detectives? Furthermore, you are respecting the Magisterium who says how Mass is to be celebrated.

Lastly, it seems clear to me that nothing could be further from the truth when some say that we should just be humble by bearing it and giving in. That is false humility and helpful to nobody. It destroys the Church. Since we are a liturgical faith, this is the centre of our lives. We have a right to a Mass that is celebrated properly - the Mass is a gift to us, yes, and a treasure. However, imagine this. Imagine you are promised a gift, a life saving gift, but you cannot get it in person from the giver, so the giver appoints someone to give it to you. When you receive it, the giver gives it to you and it works, but it has been opened and toyed with. It has marks all over and a new wrapping paper because in his opinion his wrapping paper was better. How would you react? This is the same kind of thing.

Sure, this doesn’t mean you need to go around writing things down in a notepad. Or writing 100 letters to every Congregation in Rome. Or bad mouthing your priest. Or coming to CAF every 4 seconds with a complaint. But do not feel bad that something makes you feel off. The liturgy is to be celebrated in a certain way. If you have reasonable tried all paths and none are left open to you, then grin and bear it and offer it up. In the meantime, offer it up and be thankful you even have a Mass. Be thankful you are educated enough in the faith. Pray for your priest and for the congregation. Pray for yourself to have courage but humility and understanding.

And don’t let the “Liturgy Police” accusation get you down. There are worse things to be accused of.
 
Thank you for this post.

I think that people who accuse others of being the liturgy police are content with the way things are and don’t see any problem with it. Perhaps they are not well informed and as a consequence their ignorance leads to resentment of those Catholics who have read relevant documents (like the GIRM) and have a strong opinion about these things.

The problem is that there are criteria for the way mass should be celebrated but for mysterious reasons the majority of Catholics have not experienced that. I guess that is why many of us simply accept what we get and assume it is fine.

Also, it seems that any kind of taking of stand these days is considered to be a form of extremism. This attitude is widespread in the secular culture and it has also entered the church. People teach tolerance and openess and feel threatened when someone asks for objectivity and truth and does not want to compromise. I find this trend very worrying because it weakens the church on so many levels.
 
Let me add another “Thank you” for this post.

Most of the challege is to present the problem to someone who can deal with it. The priest? I have not found one yet that deals well with any criticism, especially of his “unique” way to say Mass. The Bishop? No, he is much too busy to deal with liturgical abuses by his priests (or deacons). And he may just be a short-timer, before he is moved on to another diocese. Of the last seven bishops we have had in our diocese, only ONE has ever attempted to teach liturgical norms (GIRM) to priests and deacons. That’s hardly unusual, based on my travels.

Prayer may be the only answer…I recommend St. Jude, Patron of Hopeless Cases.
 
There used to be a word for people who prefered free forming, abstract, creative, ad libbed worship services. It was spelled P-R-O-T-E-S-T-A-N-T. And I really don’t mean that in a negative way. I remember us Catholics being able to brag to our Protestant friends at public school that you could go walk into any Catholic Church in the world and the Mass was basically the same. Now the opposite is basically the norm. Alas, with the facts on the ground, I wonder why the church publishes an offical Roman Missal anyway. Maybe the Church should just come right out and say that it is only a guideline or a broad outline of agenda topics for the “Eucharistic Celebration” and be done with it. Then no one would have to worry about “liturgical police”.
 
I issue that concerns me the most are the people who complain about a Mass or a priest, but who clearly have not spoken to the priest/pastor about the incident and who, when encouraged to do so, still are not willing. So in that case, it seems that they are not indeed looking for a correct liturgy, but are looking for a place to complain.

Posters also rattle of a list of “abuses” at a Mass, of which maybe one or two are indeed abuses, but the others are legitamate options, personal preferences, or actually correct. There are different correct ways to celebrate Mass, and there always have been. A Mass that is not in the style that a particular poster prefers is not automatically abusive.

I am blessed to live in an area with a strong bishop and priests who celebrate correctly. One of the priests at my parish happens to be a gifted liturgist, so we often have very beautiful Sunday and feast-day Masses. My heart does ache for those who are not so blessed. However, running to CAF are sceraming “abuse” or immediately likening a mediocre Mass to the (once in a lifetime) “clown” Mass, doesn’t help the situation.

We should all be praying for an increase in vocations and good and holy priests. We should all be encouraging the priests we do have to be reverant and correct when celebrating Mass. We should not be looking for opportunities to tear a priest down. I cannot speak for others, but that is what concerns me when I respond to an “liturgy police” thread.
 
There used to be a word for people who prefered free forming, abstract, creative, ad libbed worship services. It was spelled P-R-O-T-E-S-T-A-N-T.
Yes and no. One of the reasons that Trent strictly codified the Mass was that for the prior 1500 years there had been a lot of “free forming, abstract, creative, ad libbing…” However it was generally accepted within Catholicism until it became a huge problem. Protestant worship services only recently became as you describe. They had a general order all their own for about 400 years. So to draw strict Catholic v. Protestant lines isn’t entirely accurate.
I remember us Catholics being able to brag to our Protestant friends at public school that you could go walk into any Catholic Church in the world and the Mass was basically the same. Now the opposite is basically the norm.
I would disagree. Outside of music and perhaps some dancing, the structure of the Mass is the same anywhere I’ve seen it in the world.
Not to mention that even within the Latin Church there were still a few approved liturgies that were older than Trent.
Alas, with the facts on the ground, I wonder why the church publishes an offical Roman Missal anyway. Maybe the Church should just come right out and say that it is only a guideline or a broad outline of agenda topics for the “Eucharistic Celebration” and be done with it. Then no one would have to worry about “liturgical police”.
The problem is that the “liturgy police” sometimes will be entirely wrong and condemn a priest for doing what the Church actually allows.
 
The “liturgy police” should focus on being good Catholics and stop obsessing over nonsense…
 
The “liturgy police” should focus on being good Catholics and stop obsessing over nonsense…
Worshiping our God correctly, as His Church has commanded, is nonsense? That’s exactly the attitude that gets us into these kinds of messes.
 
The “messes” you speak of are what…The Church changed the form of the liturgy to a more backward latin interpretation of the scripture and your worried about “messes.” Being a good Catholic involves tolerance towards people’s preferencess for worshiping God. Being a good Catholic involves promoting social justice and not wasting your time on “messes”.
 
The “messes” you speak of are what…The Church changed the form of the liturgy to a more backward Latin interpretation of the scripture and your worried about “messes.” Being a good Catholic involves tolerance towards people’s preferencess for worshiping God. Being a good Catholic involves promoting social justice and not wasting your time on “messes”.
I have absolutely no clue what most of this means. If you pose an argument, we can discuss it.

By the way, people don’t get to have “preferences” beyond basic music choice, use of incense, vestment style, and things like that. Change the prayers, destroy the liturgy. And if you have a problem with the new translation, then you ought to really logically examine why it was done in the first place.
 
I don’t have time to discuss this issue with a “latin rite catholic.”
 
I do not look down at others. The way you phrase your question is petulant and devoid of charity. I think you want an argument. I merely wanted to stay that worship styles are matters of personal preference and “latin rite Catholics” have made up their mind and arguing asthetics is a waste of time…
 
I take it you are not Latin rite.

Are you insulting Latin rite Catholics?
I think he’s interpreting my saying that I’m a “Latin Rite Catholic” versus a “Catholic” is somehow divisive, when in fact, it’s just me being correct as to my affiliation within the Church.
 
I do not look down at others. The way you phrase your question is petulant and devoid of charity. I think you want an argument. I merely wanted to stay that worship styles are matters of personal preference and “latin rite Catholics” have made up their mind and arguing asthetics is a waste of time…
Actually all three of your posts were devoid of charity and if anyone is being petulant, it is you since you do not discuss with a Latin rite Catholic. If you had phrased your comment like you did above, that would have been fine.
 
Actually all three of your posts were devoid of charity and if anyone is being petulant, it is you since you do not discuss with a Latin rite Catholic. If you had phrased your comment like you did above, that would have been fine.
Actually, i’m getting the notion that “gubernova” is confused and is using “Latin right Catholic” to mean “traditional Catholic” i.e. one who prefers the (Latin) Extraordinary Form.

I could be wrong, though hopefully not, because I would hate to think this person represents any fellow Eastern Catholics with that attitude.
 
Actually, i’m getting the notion that “gubernova” is confused and is using “Latin right Catholic” to mean “traditional Catholic” i.e. one who prefers the (Latin) Extraordinary Form.

I could be wrong, though hopefully not, because I would hate to think this person represents any fellow Eastern Catholics with that attitude.
Maybe so…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top