What do you consider liturgical abuses?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Nicea325
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
N

Nicea325

Guest
As the Director of Catechetical Ministry as a local parish in So.Cal, I had this discussion with an elderly woman who is always praying inside the church. She stated certain types of music are an abuse. Unfortutanely, I could not end the discussion,because I had to leave. I am not sure what type of music she meant,but other abuses do you notice?
 
I think beating someone with the lectionary would be a liturgical abuse.🤷
 
oneGODoneCHURCH said:
I think beating someone with the lectionary would be a liturgical abuse.🤷
Click to expand...
Lapey said:
What if the bishop were to hit the altar boy with his crozier…that would qualify too!!!😃
Click to expand...
:rotfl:

In all seriousness, we have to get into the “heavy” things for me to consider it an abuse. Either a big “no no” or continuing to do something even after the bishop said to stop.
 
I’ve never noticed outright ‘abuses’. I’ve noticed things that seemed somehow ‘off’ but I don’t know enough to say if they were ‘abuses’ or not. For example our parish has a projector that shines right at Jesus’ left hand (on the crucifix of course). I find this disturbing. Don’t ask me why, I just don’t like it.

Another parish I’ve been to has a screen that slides down and OBSTRUCTS ones view of the altar. This I found slightly offensive. Why the heck is a projector screen more important then the altar and tabernacle???

In one parish all the people sing: In him, with him, through him in the unity of the Holy Spirit (whatever the words are) along with the priest.

In yet another I’ve seen them sing ‘praise’ songs that you’d find in a Protestant church complete with clapping and the like.

They continually make announcements from the lectern… but in RCIA class they made it clear the lectern was ONLY for reading Scripture.

I’ve seen people hop on and off the Sanctuary (where the altar is - that’s what it’s called right? Sorry, I’m new at this) during Mass, before Mass and after Mass without a pause to our Lord, just treating it like any other ‘stage’.

Are these liturgical abuses? I have no idea. Are they in bad taste? I’d say OH YEAH. 🤷
 
what I consider to be liturgical abuse is irrelevant.
There are church documents that govern Mass and the sacraments, so I rely on the priest, whose job it is to interpret and apply those documents and celebrate liturgy, to define what is and is not abuse. As long as I don’t witness anything that clearly invalidates the Eucharist, I roll with it. Personal preference is not the determinant of abuse.
 
puzzleannie said:
what I consider to be liturgical abuse is irrelevant.
There are church documents that govern Mass and the sacraments, so I rely on the priest, whose job it is to interpret and apply those documents and celebrate liturgy, to define what is and is not abuse. As long as I don’t witness anything that clearly invalidates the Eucharist, I roll with it. Personal preference is not the determinant of abuse.
Click to expand...
Exactly. 🙂 I think we could all use a lesson in respecting authority. :\
 
  1. Certainly any action or situation that cause a purported sacrament be invalid - or make the congregation doubt the validity of the sacrament.
  2. Any action that is illicit (I note there may be extraordinary circumstances where certain rubrics cannot be followed - a situation almost never found in a parish in the western world - and that would be the one exception).
Is there a reason why this obvious answer is not known? Say the black/do the red. It’s very easy. If you don’t, it’s an abuse. A disingenuous torturing of the texts and rubrics is an abuse. As to other matters, the Holy See generally has guidance out there.

Matters of taste are not an issue. Thus lousy music is not an abuse despite how lousy.
 
puzzleannie said:
what I consider to be liturgical abuse is irrelevant.
There are church documents that govern Mass and the sacraments, so I rely on the priest, whose job it is to interpret and apply those documents and celebrate liturgy, to define what is and is not abuse. As long as I don’t witness anything that clearly invalidates the Eucharist, I roll with it. Personal preference is not the determinant of abuse.
Click to expand...
johnnykins said:
  1. Certainly any action or situation that cause a purported sacrament be invalid - or make the congregation doubt the validity of the sacrament.
  2. Any action that is illicit (I note there may be extraordinary circumstances where certain rubrics cannot be followed - a situation almost never found in a parish in the western world - and that would be the one exception).
Is there a reason why this obvious answer is not known? Say the black/do the red. It’s very easy. If you don’t, it’s an abuse. A disingenuous torturing of the texts and rubrics is an abuse. As to other matters, the Holy See generally has guidance out there.

Matters of taste are not an issue. Thus lousy music is not an abuse despite how lousy.
Click to expand...
I’m with Puzzleannie on this one. IMHO too many people are way too quick to scream “Abuse!” at the slightest chance when faced with something they don’t particularly like. If a Sacrament is being made invalid, I have issues with it. Otherwise, it’s not worth the pain involved (including the pain of sitting there seething with anger over something that really doesn’t hurt Jesus, when you should be peacefully contemplating the solemnity of the Mass).

For example: let’s say your parish uses extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion. Now, the rules are clear that they are not supposed to pick up the plate/chalice off the altar; they are supposed to be given it by the priest. There’s a good reason for this, too: it’s to help keep the distinction between clergy and laity clear.

But if you’re engaged in a letter-writing campaign, storming the sacristy, confronting people in the vestibule after Mass, and leaving angry messages on the pastor’s voicemail, it’s time to let it go.
 
I would like a definition from a document.

Redemptionis Sacramentum mentions abuses that were to be corrected.

Saying with the priest “In him, with him, through him in the unity of the Holy Spirit” is not allowed.
  1. The proclamation of the Eucharistic Prayer, which by its very nature is the climax of the whole celebration, is proper to the Priest by virtue of his Ordination. It is therefore an abuse to proffer it in such a way that some parts of the Eucharistic Prayer are recited by a Deacon, a lay minister, or by an individual member of the faithful, or by all members of the faithful together. The Eucharistic Prayer, then, is to be recited by the Priest alone in full.
Click to expand...
My understanding of an abuse, is that which is not proscribed in the GIRM. I think that some object to the word abuse because of the connotation it has to other subjects. Illicit is used at times but I do not know of an official document that would explain the difference between illicit and abuse.

It has taken many years but my parish no longer has abuse or illicit actions during at least at one Mass.

The parish I am attending while away from home has too many to list.:nope: I know they are abuses because Redemptionis Sacramentum mentions that they are.
 
adrift said:
I would like a definition from a document.

Redemptionis Sacramentum mentions abuses that were to be corrected.

Saying with the priest “In him, with him, through him in the unity of the Holy Spirit” is not allowed.

My understanding of an abuse, is that which is not proscribed in the GIRM. I think that some object to the word abuse because of the connotation it has to other subjects. Illicit is used at times but I do not know of an official document that would explain the difference between illicit and abuse.

It has taken many years but my parish no longer has abuse or illicit actions during at least at one Mass.

The parish I am attending while away from home has too many to list.:nope: I know they are abuses because Redemptionis Sacramentum mentions that they are.
Click to expand...
I agree with you. The issue I have at my parish is the giant mural of Mary at the center of the sanctuary and Jesus is off to the side. If I am correct, the mural of Mary needs to be concealed and Jesus must be at the center? I could be incorrect?
 
adrift said:
I would like a definition from a document.

Redemptionis Sacramentum mentions abuses that were to be corrected.

Saying with the priest “In him, with him, through him in the unity of the Holy Spirit” is not allowed.

My understanding of an abuse, is that which is not proscribed in the GIRM. I think that some object to the word abuse because of the connotation it has to other subjects. Illicit is used at times but I do not know of an official document that would explain the difference between illicit and abuse.

It has taken many years but my parish no longer has abuse or illicit actions during at least at one Mass.

The parish I am attending while away from home has too many to list.:nope: I know they are abuses because Redemptionis Sacramentum mentions that they are.
Click to expand...
I think this is a good place to apply the doctrine Vita parum brevis est (Life is too short).

If someone is profaning the Eucharist, that’s terrible. If a fellow parishioner is chanting along with the priest at a time when he shouldn’t be, I’m not hurt by it, neither is Jesus, and neither is the parishioner. For that matter, even if the priest is feeling lazy and sits down during Communion, asking the extraordinary ministers to distribute Holy Communion in his place – a clear violation of the rubrics and every document on the subject I can think of – I’m more inclined to simply assume that he’s sick that day and move on.

Vita parum brevis est.
 
Godfollower said:
I think this is a good place to apply the doctrine Vita parum brevis est (Life is too short).

If someone is profaning the Eucharist, that’s terrible. ** If a fellow parishioner is chanting along with the priest at a time when he shouldn’t be, I’m not hurt by it, neither is Jesus, and neither is the parishioner.** For that matter, even if the priest is feeling lazy and sits down during Communion, asking the extraordinary ministers to distribute Holy Communion in his place – a clear violation of the rubrics and every document on the subject I can think of – I’m more inclined to simply assume that he’s sick that day and move on.

Vita parum brevis est.
Click to expand...
What was stated was
In one parish all the people sing: In him, with him, through him in the unity of the Holy Spirit (whatever the words are) along with the priest.
Click to expand...
This is the whole parish not some misguided individual. If the Church didn’t care, than why the rule in the first place? Rules should be suggestions and each parish should do its own thing? Jesus isn’t hurt by disobedience?:eek:
Profaning the Euchrist is more than terrible. Disobedience is terrible.
Taken from this site
What does the Church say to those who have committed or turned a blind eye to abuses?
Click to expand...
Let bishops, priests, and deacons, in the exercise of the sacred ministry, examine their consciences as regards the authenticity and fidelity of the actions they have performed in the name of Christ and the Church in the celebration of the sacred liturgy. Let each one of the sacred ministers ask himself, even with severity, whether he has respected the rights of the lay members of Christ’s faithful, who confidently entrust themselves and their children to him, relying on him to fulfill for the faithful those sacred functions that the Church intends to carry out in celebrating the sacred liturgy at Christ’s command. For each one should always remember that he is a servant of the sacred liturgy (186).
Click to expand...
 
Nicea325 said:
I agree with you. The issue I have at my parish is the giant mural of Mary at the center of the sanctuary and Jesus is off to the side. If I am correct, the mural of Mary needs to be concealed and Jesus must be at the center? I could be incorrect?
Click to expand...
I know of nothing, other than common sense, that would not allow this.
 
adrift said:
I know of nothing, other than common sense, that would not allow this.
Click to expand...
I totally agree with you. In fact it was concealed,but a couple of years it was exposed. Why? I have no clue and why our former pastor even allowed it. Hopefully our new in-coming pastor will correct it? 🤷
 
Very interesting
4. On the Joining of Various Rites with the Celebration of Mass
Redemptionis Sacramentum

[79.] Finally, it is strictly to be considered an abuse to introduce into the celebration of Holy Mass elements that are contrary to the prescriptions of the liturgical books and taken from the rites of other religions.
 
puzzleannie said:
true, automatic absolution if you bash the choir director when she starts with Peace is flowing like a river.
Click to expand...
i cringe at that sound of the song! Brings back horrible memories of CCD! That song annoyed all of us who were kids, and they still do it at my parish until this day! Oh well 🤷
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top