When will there be uniformity in the Mass liturgy?

[toughcritic]

I am a member of two parishes: Our local, suburban very modern building with no statues, candles, liberal, feel good parish with lots of hand clapping, Protestant and Evangelical music, monologues instead of sermons. I hate it. I am also a member of a distant traditional parish in a magnificent church with stained glass windows, statues, gorgeous choir, orchestra and Mozart, Bach, Gounoud Masses, Latin High Masses and the Extraordinary Form of the Mass, many altar boys, sermons on Catholic theology, processions, reverence in dress and decorum etc. To go to one church you would not recognize any of the traditions of our Church, the other is an absolute Heavenly experience. Why does not the Holy Father regulate and set the standard for liturgies? It is so
frustrating and sad that the liberal parishes are not teaching or practicing our great history and traditions.

 

[OraLabora]

I think the standards have been set.

Blame the bishops for not enforcing them.

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

Why does not the Holy Father regulate and set the standard for liturgies?

There are regulations and standards for liturgies. However, within those regulations and standards there is room for varitations.

It is so frustrating and sad that the liberal parishes are not teaching or practicing our great history and traditions.

So what you’re saying is that because you like one variation of liturgy everyone should also like it? As long as the Mass takes place within the scope of the prescribed rubrics then nothing is wrong. Masses in Africa, Latin America, and the Caribbean all have their own “local flavor” while adhering to liturgical rubrics.
Even after Trent there was not a single liturgy. Any liturgy that was 200 years old or more was allowed to be retained.
For every criticism of “liberals” who go too far in one direction there is an equally valid criticism of “conservatives” who go to far in the other direction and try to undo the recent Church reforms.

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

I think the standards have been set.

Blame the bishops for not enforcing them.

The problem is that its not easy or even possible to enforce every last thing. A priest isn’t going to be removed from ministry because he skipped the gloria on a Sunday.

 

[OraLabora]

Nobody is suggesting removing anyone from ministry. But there should at least be some effort to ensure that the liturgy is followed, and that the boundaries of acceptable variation are not exceeded.

 

[lizaanne]

The Holy Father is working on it… it will come.

~Liza

 

[Ponyguy]

I am a member of two parishes: Our local, suburban very modern building with no statues, candles, liberal, feel good parish with lots of hand clapping, Protestant and Evangelical music, monologues instead of sermons. I hate it. I am also a member of a distant traditional parish in a magnificent church with stained glass windows, statues, gorgeous choir, orchestra and Mozart, Bach, Gounoud Masses, Latin High Masses and the Extraordinary Form of the Mass, many altar boys, sermons on Catholic theology, processions, reverence in dress and decorum etc. To go to one church you would not recognize any of the traditions of our Church, the other is an absolute Heavenly experience. Why does not the Holy Father regulate and set the standard for liturgies? It is so
frustrating and sad that the liberal parishes are not teaching or practicing our great history and traditions.

I understand your frustration, and I’ll wager that a lot of the priests do, as well.

However, this is the “enlightened” 21st century, and there comes the practical question of attendance at not only the Mass itself, but actual participatory membership in the parish, and “$tuffing of Church offering envelopes.”

Like it or not, this is the real world, and parishes must take a business-like as well as a liturgical approach to staying around: Very coarsely and bluntly put, the church is offering a “product,” and for people to pursue that “product,” it must offer what the people are willing and anxious to “purchase.” Newly formed suburban churches face costs of construction, building codes and maintenance, all of which must be balanced against the needs desires and capabilities of the new parish. The current cost of construction of a classically tall, steeple-topped traditional stone church well-populated with statues, and sized to capably house the anticipated congregation would be more than most newly-formed parishes could possibly afford; hence the current low, wide, spacious design trend. Once the architectural design parameters have been hammered to a compromise, and the church built, the pastor must attract sufficient attendance and sufficient “collection basket content” to avoid fiscal bankruptcy. If people aren’t “moved” by the Mass offered at one church, many will search and find Mass at a church where they do feel “comfortable.” And, sadly, some will simply stay home and read the Sunday Comics.

 

[Timothysis]

I understand your frustration, and I’ll wager that a lot of the priests do, as well.

However, this is the “enlightened” 21st century, and there comes the practical question of attendance at not only the Mass itself, but actual participatory membership in the parish, and “$tuffing of Church offering envelopes.”

Like it or not, this is the real world, and parishes must take a business-like as well as a liturgical approach to staying around: Very coarsely and bluntly put, the church is offering a “product,” and for people to pursue that “product,” it must offer what the people are willing and anxious to “purchase.” Newly formed suburban churches face costs of construction, building codes and maintenance, all of which must be balanced against the needs desires and capabilities of the new parish. The current cost of construction of a classically tall, steeple-topped traditional stone church well-populated with statues, and sized to capably house the anticipated congregation would be more than most newly-formed parishes could possibly afford; hence the current low, wide, spacious design trend. Once the architectural design parameters have been hammered to a compromise, and the church built, the pastor must attract sufficient attendance and sufficient “collection basket content” to avoid fiscal bankruptcy. If people aren’t “moved” by the Mass offered at one church, many will search and find Mass at a church where they do feel “comfortable.” And, sadly, some will simply stay home and read the Sunday Comics.

I think that this post is that biggest bunch of bunk I have read on this forum.

So, now the Catholic faith has been reduced to a simple matter of economics? Yeah, I’ll buy that for a dollar…

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

Nobody is suggesting removing anyone from ministry. But there should at least be some effort to ensure that the liturgy is followed, and that the boundaries of acceptable variation are not exceeded.

If it were that easy it would be done already. This isn’t a matter of blaming bishops for not enforcing something that is, in reality, difficult to enforce.

 

[TheDoctor]

Why does not the Holy Father regulate and set the standard for liturgies?

I may be wrong, but I believe this has been done for years. The GIRM and RS clearly spell out how the liturgy is to be done.

I am a member of two parishes: Our local, suburban very modern building with no statues, candles, liberal, feel good parish with lots of hand clapping, Protestant and Evangelical music, monologues instead of sermons. I hate it. I am also a member of a distant traditional parish in a magnificent church with stained glass windows, statues, gorgeous choir, orchestra and Mozart, Bach, Gounoud Masses, Latin High Masses and the Extraordinary Form of the Mass, many altar boys, sermons on Catholic theology, processions, reverence in dress and decorum etc. To go to one church you would not recognize any of the traditions of our Church, the other is an absolute Heavenly experience.

I’m sorry, but no where in the rubrics can I see where stained glass, multitudes of altar boys, exact contents of sermons, or a dress code are elucidated.

If you want to discuss these, there are numerous threads where it has been debated, but we need to understand the difference between what the Church requires in the liturgy and what personal aspects we may or may not like.

 

[Cat]

Why are Mozart and Bach OK and Haugen and Mullins not OK?

 

[ProVobis]

Why are Mozart and Bach OK and Haugen and Mullins not OK?

Cat, define “OK”.

 

[Monty61]

If it were that easy it would be done already. This isn’t a matter of blaming bishops for not enforcing something that is, in reality, difficult to enforce.

It is difficult to enforce. And there are priests and lay people who take advantage of the difficulty in enforcement for whatever reason. They are wrong, and they should be self-enforcing. The Catholic faith depends upon self-enforcement, self-evaluation, and self-correction.

There seems to be a school of liturgical thought that demands rejection of all previous tradition in favor of constant innovation. I recently read “How not to Say Mass” by a Fr. Smolarski, S.J. that stated (I paraphrase) “if the rubrics are silent on a certain aspect of the liturgy, it should not be assumed that that aspect should be conducted in the way it was in previous rubrics.”

Yet in discussing the washing of the hands before the Canon, he goes on for pages about how you must wash the “whole hand, not just the fingers” OK, fine. But then as justification, he says that Buddhists and Muslims all have whole hand washing as a feature of their liturgies.

The illogic of this reasoning is mind boggling. Here is a Catholic priest, a Jesuit no less, telling us that we have to reject prior Catholic liturgical practice, and seek liturgical guidance from Muslims! What Muslims do… GOOD! What Catholics did 41 years ago… BAD!

 

[Ponyguy]

Ponyguy:

understand your frustration, and I’ll wager that a lot of the priests do, as well.

However, this is the “enlightened” 21st century, and there comes the practical question of attendance at not only the Mass itself, but actual participatory membership in the parish, and “$tuffing of Church offering envelopes.”

Like it or not, this is the real world, and parishes must take a business-like as well as a liturgical approach to staying around: Very coarsely and bluntly put, the church is offering a “product,” and for people to pursue that “product,” it must offer what the people are willing and anxious to “purchase.” Newly formed suburban churches face costs of construction, building codes and maintenance, all of which must be balanced against the needs desires and capabilities of the new parish. The current cost of construction of a classically tall, steeple-topped traditional stone church well-populated with statues, and sized to capably house the anticipated congregation would be more than most newly-formed parishes could possibly afford; hence the current low, wide, spacious design trend. Once the architectural design parameters have been hammered to a compromise, and the church built, the pastor must attract sufficient attendance and sufficient “collection basket content” to avoid fiscal bankruptcy. If people aren’t “moved” by the Mass offered at one church, many will search and find Mass at a church where they do feel “comfortable.” And, sadly, some will simply stay home and read the Sunday Comics.

II think that this post is that biggest bunch of bunk I have read on this forum.

So, now the Catholic faith has been reduced to a simple matter of economics? Yeah, I’ll buy that for a dollar…

Timothysis, Thank you for your “reply;” (I’m trying hard to not take it as an insult and an affront to my experiences.)

Timothysis, have you ever been a part of, or served upon, a church or parish building committee? Have you ever had to participate in the compromise “discussions” (read “wars, arguments, near-fistfights, etc.”) of building a new church? One older group of parishioners wants a “proper church” with an assortment of statues, stained glass windows, and a cathedral-style ceiling. Opposed to them are a younger clique of newlyweds and parents of younger children who seek to “bring the church into modernity” and make it a “place that the parishioners want to be;” and “something we can afford to build without choking our children in long-term debt.” The older people yearn for a church “like what they grew up worshiping in,” while the younger group thinks that such a building is way too costly, hard to heat and air-condition as well as not space-efficient. Our church dealt with this kind of a battle for about a year after our old church burned down several years ago.

Then later there were also the “talks and discussions” in the liturgical committees about some of the visiting priests who would help by saying Mass when the need arose; one (or more of) the visiting priests was of recent “European heritage,” having been brought to be ordained a priest in America from Poland (I think…) and his mastery of English was not as developed as native English-speaking priests. Parishioners howled about having to listen to his homilies delivered in broken English, and claimed that his presence would diminish church offerings because people would go elsewhere to a Mass in a neighboring town, or maybe not at all. Some claimed that his homilies rang “hollow” because as a recent immigrant, he knew nothing of American ways of family life, marriage difficulties, economic difficulties, etc. Our parish had Diocesan bond payments to satisfy, and we were barely making it at the time, so “putting butts in the pew and bucks in the basket” was of paramount interest and importance.

Catholicism is not OF this world, but it is IN this world; regardless of what we would like or love to do, we simply must deal with worldly realities. A parish needs a church building. It must be paid for by the parish. The church building will be whatever the parishioners decide they want to have, within the framework of what they can afford.

The liturgies performed within the confines of whatever church is built or presently existing, are decided not only by the priest, but by the liturgical committee and the people within the particular church’s hierarchy. Of course, the pastor must approve whatever the committee decides to do, but it’s not all the pastor or the priests’ decisions. The priest cannot perform a processional ceremony, or do a May Crowning, organ recital, or any other procedure by himself; without the eager assistance and participation of the parish volunteers, the Pastor and his parish “hierarchy” are helpless.

I think my reply was certainly quite relevant to the OP’s intent.

 

[puzzleannie]

I am a member of two parishes: Our local, suburban very modern building with no statues, candles, liberal, feel good parish with lots of hand clapping, Protestant and Evangelical music, monologues instead of sermons. I hate it. I am also a member of a distant traditional parish in a magnificent church with stained glass windows, statues, gorgeous choir, orchestra and Mozart, Bach, Gounoud Masses, Latin High Masses and the Extraordinary Form of the Mass, many altar boys, sermons on Catholic theology, processions, reverence in dress and decorum etc. To go to one church you would not recognize any of the traditions of our Church, the other is an absolute Heavenly experience. Why does not the Holy Father regulate and set the standard for liturgies? It is so
frustrating and sad that the liberal parishes are not teaching or practicing our great history and traditions.

well one thing I predict is that the former parish will not have good liturgical music until either a)the pastor pays professionals to provide it or b)talented laity come forward to offer the gifts the second parish enjoys.

 

[evener]

In a diocese my children live in, the congregation remains standing through Holy Communion to the last blessing. We visited them and always kneeled and adored God as we were taught, and I wrote a letter to their bishop complaining about this change, only to be told that’s the way his diocese wants to do it.
Now I really doubt that the bishop who changed this liturgy was swamped by requests of his laity to do this. More likely for some no doubt good motive, he decided to do a diocese-wide vatican 3, he, and some other bishops also, I’ve been told.
Is this something the Holy Father our pope would approve? Why can’t our liturgy be the same coast to coast as it was before the “reform”?
Thank you, lizaanne, for your uplifting comment. In a few days, we’ll go visit our children & grandchildren, and I know what I must do. Somewhere the disobedience has to stop. So while angels and saints that fill the church are on their knees in adoration, I will remain standing, but with my chin on my chest.

 

[Phemie]

In a diocese my children live in, the congregation remains standing through Holy Communion to the last blessing.

I don’t know how to break it to you but that’s what the Church calls for in the General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM). The universal Church calls for kneeling only at the Consecration.

The American Bishops have chosen to impose kneeling from after the Sanctus to after the Great Amen and also from after the Agnus Dei to Communion (although after the Agnus Dei is left up to the local bishops) but that is a local adaptation.

 

[WetCatechumen]

In a diocese my children live in, the congregation remains standing through Holy Communion to the last blessing. We visited them and always kneeled and adored God as we were taught, and I wrote a letter to their bishop complaining about this change, only to be told that’s the way his diocese wants to do it.
Now I really doubt that the bishop who changed this liturgy was swamped by requests of his laity to do this. More likely for some no doubt good motive, he decided to do a diocese-wide vatican 3, he, and some other bishops also, I’ve been told.
Is this something the Holy Father our pope would approve? Why can’t our liturgy be the same coast to coast as it was before the “reform”?
Thank you, lizaanne, for your uplifting comment. In a few days, we’ll go visit our children & grandchildren, and I know what I must do. Somewhere the disobedience has to stop. So while angels and saints that fill the church are on their knees in adoration, I will remain standing, but with my chin on my chest.

Kneeling from the Agnus Dei to the end of Holy Communion is a pious American custom, but that is all it is. The rubrics do not proscribe kneeling during that time. You are free to adopt any posture (kneeling, sitting, standing) that you wish.

 

[Alindawyl]

Kneeling from the Agnus Dei to the end of Holy Communion is a pious American custom, but that is all it is. The rubrics do not proscribe kneeling during that time. You are free to adopt any posture (kneeling, sitting, standing) that you wish.

In the United States, the GIRM explicitly calls for the faithful to kneel from right after the Sanctus until the Amen. The GIRM also explicitly calls for the faithful to kneel again from right after the Angus Dei, with the allowance in this case that the diocesan bishop is permitted to specify otherwise if he deems it prudent.

There’s some debate about permitted postures AFTER having received Communion. But there isn’t any ambiguity about Sanctus to Amen or immediately after the Angus Dei.

 

[Phemie]

In the United States, the GIRM explicitly calls for the faithful to kneel from right after the Sanctus until the Amen. The GIRM also explicitly calls for the faithful to kneel again from right after the Angus Dei, with the allowance in this case that the diocesan bishop is permitted to specify otherwise if he deems it prudent.

There’s some debate about permitted postures AFTER having received Communion. But there isn’t any ambiguity about Sanctus to Amen or immediately after the Angus Dei.

There is no ‘if he deems it prudent’ about a bishop’s decision on posture after the Agnus Dei. “GIRM 43: (…)The faithful kneel after the Agnus Dei unless the Diocesan Bishop determines otherwise.”