Visiting priest today / crazy mass

[captainmike]

Is this a joke? He is NOT the “Pope of Rome” there is no such thing. He is the Pope if the Catholic Church, but in Rome he is the Bishop. This is like saying he is the Pope of Texas…completly incorrect.

he is the pope, first and foremost. show me one eucharistic prayer from the past 1000 years where the church has approved of referring to the pope as the “bishop of rome” in the mass. i’ll bet you can’t find one.

again, “bishop of rome” is what anglicans say in their worship services. why? because they reject the notion that he is the pope.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Is this a joke? He is NOT the “Pope of Rome” there is no such thing. He is the Pope if the Catholic Church, but in Rome he is the Bishop. This is like saying he is the Pope of Texas…completly incorrect.

Oh mea culpa, it’s after 10 p.m. my time and I’ve been taking care of a sick child most of the day, forgive me for my GRIEVOUS ‘error’.

So tell me, Maureen we both agree (I trust) that Joseph Ratzinger is currently BOTH the Bishop of Rome and the Pope of the Catholic Church.

Are those two titles perfectly equal? In the Catholic Church, whose members we are? Really?

If we were to use only ONE of the two titles, which ONE title would more completely and accurately reflect who he is?

Why use a title which however technically accurate it might be to reflect a PART of who a person is, does not reflect the WHOLE. . .especially when that title is used OUTSIDE the Church to falsely claim that the Pope is ‘only’ a bishop and nothing more?

 

[captainmike]

another thing he did that was strange: he interrupted the “Our Father” to bless a couple that had been married during the Mass. why not do that later on?

i’m going to send a letter to the bishop.

 

[captainmike]

Why use a title which however technically accurate it might be to reflect a PART of who a person is, does not reflect the WHOLE. . .especially when that title is used OUTSIDE the Church to falsely claim that the Pope is ‘only’ a bishop and nothing more?

exactly. likewise, why refer to God as “Creator”? Yes, God is the creator, but that hardly describes all that he is. It would be like my kids calling me “Provider” rather than “Dad.”

 

[Catholic90]

Another thing he did that really irritates me: He used the word “screwed” a couple of times in his homily. E.g., “We screwed up.” Totally inappropriate, and this was a life teen Mass.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

I don’t know that I’d go so far as to send a letter to the bishop.
If he’s a visiting priest, then surely your ‘regular’ priest will be returning soon, right? I would make careful note of these things and then talk with your regular priest, very tactfully (after all this visiting priest is a priest and entitled to respect as a priest). Asking your priest to help you to understand ‘a few things that puzzled you’, being so different from the usual Mass, should come across as being respectful and thoughtful.

 

[captainmike]

sorry, but that is not a nice word. the fact that it has become so widely used doesn’t change that fact. no place for it anywhere, but certainly no place for it in mass.

 

[captainmike]

I don’t know that I’d go so far as to send a letter to the bishop.
If he’s a visiting priest, then surely your ‘regular’ priest will be returning soon, right? I would make careful note of these things and then talk with your regular priest, very tactfully (after all this visiting priest is a priest and entitled to respect as a priest). Asking your priest to help you to understand ‘a few things that puzzled you’, being so different from the usual Mass, should come across as being respectful and thoughtful.

you may be right. i will pray about it.

 

[929dad]

another thing he did that was strange: he interrupted the “Our Father” to bless a couple that had been married during the Mass. why not do that later on?

i’m going to send a letter to the bishop.

During a Mass where 2 people are wed, the Our Father is, as you say, interrupted. The directions, which I don’t have in front of me at the moments, direct that the “Libera nos” or “Deliver us, Lord…” is omitted and the nuptial blessing takes its place. Here, at least, the priest did what the Church directs.

In charity, I might also suggest that you begin with the Pastor of your parish. He may not be aware of what has taken place and should always be the first person to contact. These forums have identified the proper procedures many times over and that is where to begin.

 

[captainmike]

During a Mass where 2 people are wed, the Our Father is, as you say, interrupted. The directions, which I don’t have in front of me at the moments, direct that the “Libera nos” or “Deliver us, Lord…” is omitted and the nuptial blessing takes its place. Here, at least, the priest did what the Church directs.

thank you

 

[captainmike]

the vatican has taken years to make a few changes to our mass. it wants to make sure that the new words are 100% right.

so, why would any priest ever ad lib anything? the mass doesn’t need to be improved by individual priests.

 

[MarkThompson]

Have you looked at the “new” missal they are introducing? God is pure spirit and neither male or female so they are replacing most of the gender references with God.

Contrary to some answers given above, it actually is true that the new translations will replace “Father” with “God” in a lot of places – not in the congregational parts, but in places like the Opening Prayer and the Prayer Over the Gifts.

Why? Because the Latin generally has Deus, not Pater. Deus means “God.” In the 1970-era translation, they wanted to include more relatable “family” language, so they gave us “Father.” That’s not what the prayer really says, though. You can be assured that, starting on November 27 (in the U.S., at least), when you hear “God” the Latin says Deus, and when you hear “Father” it says Pater. (Er, except when priests change it when they shouldn’t. Tsk, tsk.)

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Contrary to some answers given above, it actually is true that the new translations will replace “Father” with “God” in a lot of places – not in the congregational parts, but in places like the Opening Prayer and the Prayer Over the Gifts.

Why? Because the Latin generally has Deus, not Pater. Deus means “God.” In the 1970-era translation, they wanted to include more relatable “family” language, so they gave us “Father.” That’s not what the prayer really says, though. You can be assured that, starting on November 27 (in the U.S., at least), when you hear “God” the Latin says Deus, and when you hear “Father” it says Pater. (Er, except when priests change it when they shouldn’t. Tsk, tsk.)

I may have missed those (though I think a few at least go on to say, “Father” later) but I’ll stand by the fact (as you mention Mark) that it is not because of a wish to downplay the Father (male) role but rather an issue of being specific. Deus (God) is NOT the same as Pater (Father).

It is not as though the translators are saying, “Oh but look at all those Paters, it’s so male’, let’s just say a nice gender-free “God” INSTEAD.”

Still, I’m probably a little frazzled (and definitely tired) so especially if I was snarky in any way to Maureen, I apologize.

She apparently is quite right that there are going to be more instances of “God” in place of Father in some areas and I freely admit that on my too cursory reading I did not realize that. She was right in that and I was wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong.

 

[ConstantineTG]

he starts off the Mass “In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of their Holy Spirit.”

on four occasions (at least) during the Mass, he replaces the word “Father” with “God” or “Creator.”

He refers to the Pope as the “Bishop of Rome.”

when he dismisses us, he does so “in the name of God, who is Father, Son and Holy Spirit.”

if he ever returns, I won’t be sticking around.

Well, theologically He is correct on several aspects. The Bishop of Rome IS the Pope. When we are in the period of sedevacante in between the death or resignation of one Pope and the election of the next, the commemoration at Mass is for the Bishop of Rome rather than any specific person (ie, “together with X our Bishop and the Bishop of Rome…” rather than “together with X our Bishop, Benedict our Pope…”)

Also, God IS the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. I know this reference is not common usage in the Roman Catholic Church, but that is how is it in the East. God is always Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

“Their Holy Spirit” perhaps takes from the Filioque, where the Holy Spirit is said to proceed from the Father and the Son.

I don’t agree with changing with words, but at least he got the theology right.

 

[MarkThompson]

I may have missed those (though I think a few at least go on to say, “Father” later) but I’ll stand by the fact (as you mention Mark) that it is not because of a wish to downplay the Father (male) role but rather an issue of being specific. Deus (God) is NOT the same as Pater (Father).

It is not as though the translators are saying, “Oh but look at all those Paters, it’s so male’, let’s just say a nice gender-free “God” INSTEAD.”

Still, I’m probably a little frazzled (and definitely tired) so especially if I was snarky in any way to Maureen, I apologize.

She apparently is quite right that there are going to be more instances of “God” in place of Father in some areas and I freely admit that on my too cursory reading I did not realize that. She was right in that and I was wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong.

I should have added that in a lot of places the Latin has Domine, which will now be (correctly) translated “Lord” in places where it has been rendered as “Father.” As an example, which took me literally about two seconds to find, here’s the Prayers Over the Gifts for the First Sunday of Advent:
LATIN:
Suscipe, quaesumus, Domine, munera quae de tuis offerimus collata beneficiis, et, quod nostrae devotioni concedis effici temporali, tuae nobis fiat praemium redemptionis.

OLD TRANSLATION:
Father, from all you give us we present this bread and wine. As we serve you now, accept our offering and sustain us with your promise of eternal life.

NEW TRANSLATION:
Accept, we pray, O Lord, these offerings we make, gathered from among your gifts to us, and may what you grant us to celebrate devoutly here below gain for us the prize of eternal redemption.

 

[MarkThompson]

Well, theologically He is correct on several aspects. The Bishop of Rome IS the Pope. When we are in the period of sedevacante in between the death or resignation of one Pope and the election of the next, the commemoration at Mass is for the Bishop of Rome rather than any specific person (ie, “together with X our Bishop and the Bishop of Rome…” rather than “together with X our Bishop, Benedict our Pope…”)

No, during the sede vacante there is no Bishop of Rome, and the clause is omitted. Father Z just had a post on this the other day.

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

he starts off the Mass “In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of their Holy Spirit.”

on four occasions (at least) during the Mass, he replaces the word “Father” with “God” or “Creator.”

when he dismisses us, he does so “in the name of God, who is Father, Son and Holy Spirit.”

A priest should not be changing the words of the Mass. However, that being said, nothing he said invalidated the Mass

He refers to the Pope as the “Bishop of Rome.”

I’m not sure of the context, however, he is 100% correct. The Pope is the Bishop of Rome. Simply google “pope bishop of rome vatican.va” and you’ll see plenty of official Church documents refering to the Pope as the bishop of Rome.

if he ever returns, I won’t be sticking around.

I hope you’d at least find Mass elsewhere since nothing he did invalidated the Mass.

another thing he did that was strange: he interrupted the “Our Father” to bless a couple that had been married during the Mass. why not do that later on?

i’m going to send a letter to the bishop.

Well, in this particular instance the priest is following the liturgy by the book. So writing to the bishop isn’t going to accomplish anything on that point.

 

[Elizabeth502]

Dear OP,
It’s often interesting to wait until several pages of a thread have been completed, before readng it, so this is what I did myself. When one comes into it and reads the whole thing, it comes off as kind of amusing. I know you’re not trying to be comical, and the experience I take it was unsettling for you, but I see a lot less ‘calculation’ on the part of this visiting priest than you do.

I actually think that he might have been nervous. People show their nervousness in surpriisng ways. (You say he was “super-confident.”) I have no reason to doubt your word that his surface manifestation might have appeared quite confident. But that can be deceiving. Just this weekend one of our priests, to my surprise, admitted during his homily that he gets internally very worked up (anxious) just before he does any public speaking (including homilies), and has to do various exercises to calm himself down. One would never know it: When speaking, he appears confident and expansive, and even loud – not irritatingly so, but loud in the way that many confident extroverts are loud (speaking with a flourish). So appearances can be deceiving. (And sometimes people compensate for their anxiety by working especially hard to cultivate a confident exterior – not to deceive, but to help themselves transfer the confidence interiorly.)

The giveaway to me was when you finally described this as a teen Mass. Putting that together with some of the language he used, with the deferential messages he seemed to be giving, which he might have been using to appeal to these Mass goers, it seems to me he might have been “trying too hard,” that’s all. Some adults, including priests, feel that they have to “work” at relating to teenagers, with the result that it sometimes comes across as a forced familiarity. They’re so anxious to “connect” that they sometimes say inappropriate things.

I wouldn’t take it as any real harm done. If he’s a visitor, it sounds as if you won’t see him often. Perhaps just speaking privately to the pastor, while the experience is fresh for him as well, will alert the pastor to take him aside if there’s a ‘next time,’ to calm this visitor down a bit. (And maybe after the first time he would be relaxed anyway.)

 

[ConstantineTG]

No, during the sede vacante there is no Bishop of Rome, and the clause is omitted. Father Z just had a post on this the other day.

That was not my experience after Pope John Paul II’s death and prior to Pope Benedict’s election. Perhaps something changed since then?

I know today in the UGCC, the commemoration for the Patriarch of the Ukrainian Church is omitted during Divine Liturgy after the resignation of His Beatitude Lubomyr Cardinal Husar. His successor will be elected later March.

 

[laszlo]

The ‘truth’ is not the same as the ‘full truth’

Every expression is correct in itself, but to change the wording is sinful.

Try to talk about that with him, with the pastor, or report it to the diocese.