What can be done about Liturgical Abuses?

[Mannyfit75]

I keep reading some articles and discussions about Liturgical Abuses.

I like to know ask the following questions:

1. Why do they happen?
2. Aren’t priest trained how to properly to perform Mass at the seminary?
3. Why are most liturgical abuses go unpunished?

Darn, this is suppose to go the Sacrament and Liturgy Forum. :banghead: :doh2:

 

[Catherine_Grant]

Darn, this is suppose to go the Sacrament and Liturgy Forum. :banghead: :doh2:

Don’t hurt yourself! I moved it.

 

[Petergee]

1. I’d say mostly pride. Priests (and sometimes lay “liturgy directors”) think that they know better than the hierarchy and “improve” the Mass by adding, deleting and making changes which they know are not allowed. And sometimes ignorance and indifference play a part.
2. I suppose they are, but apparently there is not sufficient attention given to the fact that the liturgy must not be changed except in those places where the text indicates alternatives or ad hoc insertions may be made.
3. Mainly because most of them are very minor and not worth making a big fuss about. Many of the things which some here describe as “abuses” would be better described as minor errors.

 

[otjm]

I keep reading some articles and discussions about Liturgical Abuses.

I like to know ask the following questions:

1. Why do they happen?

there is not one simple answer to this; they can occur because of poor teaching at the seminary, a belief that the rules are gudielines, not absolutes, an attitude of rebellion, a feeling that they know what is relevant, boredom, and a whole host of other reasons.

1. Aren’t priest trained how to properly to perform Mass at the seminary?

Not necessarily; or they may have been and have forgotten what they were taught (do you remember exactly what you were taught 20 years ago?), or they may have been a priest at a time where there was a presumption that experimentation was permissible.

1. Why are most liturgical abuses go unpunished?

For any number of reasons. 1) people complain about what they don’t like, but is permissible, and Bishops stop listening; 2) people don’t report in a way that provides solid evidence that can be effectively used; 3) the bishop never hears it (it is stopped at the chancery level); 4) the bishop feels that liturgical experimentation is acceptible to a greater or lesser degree; 5) the bishop is short of priests and isn’t about to deprive a parish of a priest, which might happen if he confronts the pastor; and a whole host of other reasons.

 

[puzzleannie]

I keep reading some articles and discussions about Liturgical Abuses.

I

what can be done by whom? if you mean by the pastor, yes he has been properly trained, and he is responsible for the conduct of liturgy, as well as all other actions in the name of the parish, by those under his authority. If he himself is the source of the problem, it is for the bishop to take action. He can do this only if he has accurate, precise documentation (of real abuse, not just offenses to personal preference). the protocol for making such reports has been given dozens of times on this forum, and is from the Catholics United for the Faith website, cuf.org.