What exactly counts as a liturgical abuse?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Art321
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Depends on who you ask…for some…almost anything counts. And for others…almost anything goes…🤷
 
Art321 said:
Have to agree! This is just plain disturbing…:eek:

Also would you agree that the priest giving demonstrations? Say for example to bringing in matericals into the church to help him?
Click to expand...
It depends when and what. During the homily, there are not all that many restrictions on what the priest can use. If he wants to draw diagrams on a blackboard, or hand out a lecture summary, or pass around frankincense and myrrh for people to experience, or do something else to help communicate and demonstrate his point, there is really nothing preventing this. If he gets out props during the Responsorial Psalm or the Our Father or something, that would be a bit more problematic (and bizarre).
 
To this question, I was going to make a separate thread but I will use this as an opportunity to ask ’ What counts as blasphemy against the Holy Spirit?’
 
The_Curt_Jester said:
This? Puppet Mass

And watching that late at night is just plain creepy…
Click to expand...
Since 2000 the Church celebrated about 2 billion masses.

How beautiful would be the world if only the less than a dozen puppet masses would be the abuse.

What kind of mentality sets the extreme rarity as characteristic?

As for the question: the abuse of the Liturgy is when it is around people and not around God.

This comes from those who celebrate the human success instead of the humiliated Christ, but comes from the side of those too, who abandon the unity with Christ living among us through Hid mystical body the Church, for the sake of the rubrics.
 
Art321 said:
The question says it all.
Click to expand...
What counts as a liturgical abuse?

Quite simply, anything that is deliberately done, worn, said or sung that is in contravention of the General Instructions of the Roman Missal, or deliberately not done, worn, said or sung in contravention of the GIRM.

The General Instructions of the Roman Missal is the liturgical law. It is prescriptive (it tells us what to do), not proscriptive (telling us what we must not do),

It is very easy for any priest to say Mass well - he must just Say the Black and Do the Red. More than once, the Pope has made it clear that no one, not even if he be a priest has the authority to change anything in the Mass.

Of course, some liturgical abuses are more serious than others, but any liturgical abuse is wrong. Unfortunately, over the past 40 years or so, we have been inundated with abuses, in the name of making the Mass more - something, whether entertaining or otherwise - by priests and lay people who think that it is their right, no, duty, to tweak what the Vatican has decreed.

No wonder some of us are so sensitized to abuses that we immediately recognize them and suffer intensely from being subjected to them, and other have become so desensitized to them that they can no longer recognize any abuse.

For too long I have had to choose the parish I attend by the level of abuses - the lower, the better, but have found none within reach where there are none.
 
Joan_M said:
For too long I have had to choose the parish I attend by the level of abuses - the lower, the better, but have found none within reach where there are none.
Click to expand...
Well…it would be nice if we were all perfect…but we are not…
 
Anything that is not specifically authorized in the Rubrics. If it is not mentioned it is NOT authorized.
 
Art321 said:
The question says it all.
Click to expand...
If it is not stated in the official liturgical books, It shouldn’t be done. If it is done, that’s a liturgical abuse.

It can range from smaller things like kneeling during the penetential rite, or giving blessings during communion, or even not showing a sense of reverence, or larger things like tinkering with the words of the Mass, or skipping things.

There’s really no way to list them all.
 
I somehow think I’ve seen that awful video before. Once was more than enough. However many or few such “liturgical” circuses there have been is not the point: such things should never happen. Even one is a disgrace, and there have certainly been more than that. :😦

In addition to the stupid puppet-people-on-stilts (which really look like fugitives from a Carnivale-type celebration), notice the barefoot gyrators in gauzy white waving their arms and doing some sort of interpretive dance routine. 😦 How charming.
 
A liturgical abuse is when a person ( layman, deacon, priest or bishop) exceeds their assigned authority and acts in a way contrary to the liturgical instructions issued by the correct eccesial authority.
 
Brendan said:
A liturgical abuse is when a person ( layman, deacon, priest or bishop) exceeds their assigned authority and acts in a way contrary to the liturgical instructions issued by the correct eccesial authority.
Click to expand...
And traditionalist laymen are appointed by whom as judges?

Isn’t only the authority who created the instruction is appropriate authority to judge?

The is a principle: orders without sanctions are not obligatory. If the Apostolic See, Conference of Bishops over their territory, Bishop over his territory, pastor in his parish does nothing, what canon gives right to a laymen to declare abuse?

Any one can complain to the authority, but anyone had to leave the decision to the authority.

**Liturgical abuse is, what the authority declares so. **
 
TheMc said:
If it is not stated in the official liturgical books, It shouldn’t be done. If it is done, that’s a liturgical abuse.
Click to expand...
I think there are some good examples of improvization here.

I think, to define “liturgical abuse” succinctly, we’d have to say that an abuse is an action willingly omitted, added, or improvised during the sacred liturgy.
 
laszlo said:
And traditionalist laymen are appointed by whom as judges?
Click to expand...
As judges, no one. Rome has required all the faithful to logde a complain when listed liturgical abuses are committed. In Redemptions Sacramenum, several grave abuses were listed so that they might be publically known and acted upon by any Catholic.

Redemptionis Sacramentum
  1. Complaints Regarding Abuses in Liturgical Matters
Click to expand...
[183.] In an altogether particular manner, let everyone do all that is in their power to ensure that the Most Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist will be protected from any and every irreverence or distortion and that all abuses be thoroughly corrected. This is a most serious duty incumbent upon each and every one, and all are bound to carry it out without any favouritism.
Click to expand...
[184.] Any Catholic, whether Priest or Deacon or lay member of Christ’s faithful, has the right to lodge a complaint regarding a liturgical abuse to the diocesan Bishop or the competent Ordinary equivalent to him in law, or to the Apostolic See on account of the primacy of the Roman Pontiff.[290] It is fitting, however, insofar as possible, that the report or complaint be submitted first to the diocesan Bishop. This is naturally to be done in truth and charity.
Click to expand...
Isn’t only the authority who created the instruction is appropriate authority to judge?
Click to expand...
Correct, that is the very heart of Canon 16
The is a principle: orders without sanctions are not obligatory. If the Apostolic See, Conference of Bishops over their territory, Bishop over his territory, pastor in his parish does nothing, what canon gives right to a laymen to declare abuse?
Click to expand...
See above, if Rome has declared something to be an abuse, either through Instructions such as Redemptionis Sacramentum, or via Notatae, then the layman has every right.
Any one can complain to the authority, but anyone had to leave the decision to the authority.
Click to expand...
Correct, but it must decision must remain with the correct authority. A local pastor, for example, does not have the authority to use glass chalices, for example. Therefore the decision is not his, but rather Rome’s, as they are the legislative authority on the matter.

For such violations, Rome has indicated that the faithful may leverage the means at their disposal to see that it is corrected. The listed first step is the diocesan bishop. But since, as you pointed out, the decision is to be made by the one who created the instruction, it may proceed to Rome if a decision in accord with the instruction is not made.
 
laszlo said:
And traditionalist laymen are appointed by whom as judges?

Isn’t only the authority who created the instruction is appropriate authority to judge?

The is a principle: orders without sanctions are not obligatory. If the Apostolic See, Conference of Bishops over their territory, Bishop over his territory, pastor in his parish does nothing, what canon gives right to a laymen to declare abuse?

Any one can complain to the authority, but anyone had to leave the decision to the authority.

**Liturgical abuse is, what the authority declares so. **
Click to expand...
For something to be an abuse, it doesn’t have to be declared so. It simply is or it isn’t. When laymen say that an abuse is an abuse, they aren’t “declaring it an abuse” by their own power, but rather, they are simply calling it what it already is.

If I have a blue ball, and you come up and say “It’s a blue ball!”, are you declaring it a blue ball by your own authority? No, you are simply stating what it is.
 
TheMc said:
For something to be an abuse, it doesn’t have to be declared so. It simply is or it isn’t. When laymen say that an abuse is an abuse, they aren’t “declaring it an abuse” by their own power, but rather, they are simply calling it what it already is.
Click to expand...
Or simply reporting on what the creator of the instruction has already judged it to be.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top