Why do liturgical abuses and irregulartities exist in 2017?

[Duesenberg]

I’ve been thinking about why liturgical abuses and irregularities exist (at least in the USA) here in 2017 given:

• Today’s free-flow of information via the Internet.
• The rather stable nature of sacrificial liturgies of the Church, which aren’t being constantly revised.
• The relative simplicity (compared to other processes or systems in this world) of all the Church’s sacrificial liturgies.
• The highly educated and trained state of our clerics.

What I cannot understand is how any (arch)bishop or priest could possibly celebrate a Catholic sacrificial liturgy in either an abusive or irregular manner (outside of an emergency situation of course) given the awesomely paramount importance they play in the Mission of the Church? That really befuddles me. There’s no other organization, agency or institution on Earth with a more important mission. Not even close. Those that do have extremely important missions of their own (based on secular measures) would never allow the level of abuses and irregularities many of us commonly encounter in the celebration of sacrificial liturgies in the Church.

Some apply the universal excuse – because humans are involved and we are a fallen people, etc. That doesn’t really ring true because there are far more complex processes or systems executed daily in this world that have no where near the importance of the Church’s sacrificial liturgies yet they are performed flawlessly (or near flawlessly), time and time and time again.

Some will bring up the “personal preferences” vs. the violation of actual instructions. I get that, but that’s not what I’m asking about either. I’m talking about actual abuses and irregularities based not on my own tastes, but on not following what the Church clearly directs.

Others will say that the Church is not a laboratory, bank, military, gov’t, etc., and there is “more to it than just following the rules.” No, the Church is none of those things, but it still doesn’t answer my question. Some will say “liturgical abuses have always existed”, which might be true, but again, it doesn’t answer my question.

Another member here mentioned his ordinary held a “Mass Camp” where clerics were trained/retrained on how to celebrate the Mass sans abuses and irregularities. It sounds like it was successful, which is wonderful. I wonder why it was needed and why it was successful? Was it because their bishop finally let it be known that abuses/irregularities would no longer be tolerated?

I think quite a number in the Church – particularly in the US and Western Europe share my befuddlement and it harms the Church.

 

[jas84173]

I’ve had priests forget to say the Gloria or the Creed on feasts and Solmnities that prescribe it.
I also have a priest who doesn’t do the Kyrie following the Penitential Act when they are supposed to unless it was already said as the form in the Penitential act.
The Missal is quite easy to follow. I don’t really know how these errors are made.

 

[stpurl]

One word answer:

Pride.

Pride as in, “I will decide what to do or not do at my mass for my people in my way because I know better than anyone else what God wants.”

 

[Spyridon]

They existed in the Kingdom of Judah in 650 B.C.

They existed in Jerusalem in 100 B.C.

They existed in Jesus’ day.

They existed in every century between the 1st - 21st.

Nothing new under the sun.

 

[Duesenberg]

One word answer:

Pride.

Pride as in, “I will decide what to do or not do at my mass for my people in my way because I know better than anyone else what God wants.”

OK, so let’s take this a bit deeper. Priestly celebrants know what the Church actually directs, but they do something contrary because they feel they personally know what God most wants even when it contravenes what His Church directs?

How could that be? Because they personally know their congregants and feel if they do something (which contravenes the rubrics) it will somehow better nourish their faithful? Is there any other excuse for their behavior?

 

[Duesenberg]

I’ve had priests forget to say the Gloria or the Creed on feasts and Solmnities that prescribe it.

If they actually forgot then I get that.

The Missal is quite easy to follow. I don’t really know how these errors are made.

Yes it is. Are they all errors?

 

[jcm2017]

No it’s really a conspiracy aimed at undermining your authority.

 

[Duesenberg]

This quote from St. John Paul II really makes me think:

“The liturgy! Everybody speaks about it, writes about it, and discusses the subject. It has been commented on, it has been praised, and it has been criticized.” The music is often poorly chosen and sung. Art and architecture are frequently mundane at the expense of the heavenly. Preaching and presiding can lack dignity. Participation is regularly associated with liturgical ministry. Liturgical language is deemed inaccessible by many. Opinions abound about “what’s wrong.”

It sounds as if he was frustrated, which is of concern to me. It also makes me ponder more.

 

[Hereiam]

I am either sheltered (which I doubt), or I am fortunate to be in the only perfect parish on earth (which I also doubt), but I just haven’t be exposed to any significant irregularities, and I would think no liturgical abuses (viewing irregularities as a simple mistake, and an abuse as intentional deviation).

 

[Obl_OSB]

Lack of catechesis or instruction, lack or reverence, laziness, or lack of proper oversight by clergy/ministry leads. Prayer and instruction are an adequate response. In the parish with which I work our priest and I often discuss liturgical norms and hold times of instruction for those involved in the various ministries. This has helped. Pax Christi!

 

[JacobMaximilian]

A big part of it is simple ignorance as ridiculous as it sounds. For example, there was an error in the translation of one of the rubrics in the English edition of the GIRM, simply because the bishops simply didn’t know that there’s a difference between the entrance/offertory/communion antiphons as found in the missal versus the Gradual Romanum. With ignorance like that when it comes to our Bishops, how can we expect Fr.Joe at your average suburban parish to be better educated? You point out that information is widely available today, with the internet and such, but the fact of the matter is that the sheer volume of legislation on the mass is prohibitive. Because of that, most priests have simply stopped trying and just go with the flow.

 

[Duesenberg]

how can we expect Fr.Joe at your average suburban parish to be better educated?

I would truly expect Fr. Joe to have the education and training necessary to celebrate the Mass flawlessly as defined by the Church. Am I ignorant to expect that?

the sheer volume of legislation on the mass is prohibitive.

Is that really the case? The Mass is fairly stable in terms of its construct. There’s not a new revision every week or month. Is it really too much to ask for celebrants to know the GIRM and other associated documents? That’s an honest question, not a rhetorical one.

 

[JacobMaximilian]

I don’t think you’re ignorant to expect that at all. But the fact of the matter is that if our bishops aren’t experts in the liturgy, how can our priests be? They’re the ones in charge of educating seminarians, and many are themselves former seminary professors.

As regards the volumes of legislation on the liturgy, a big part of the problem is that the rules keep continually changing. Take for example the recent change to the rules regarding mass translations. Now multiple that by one thousand, and that should give you an idea of how crazy legislation on the liturgy has been since Vatican II. The fact of the matter is that the rules keep changing back and forth every couple of decades, and the older generation of priests have simply gotten so fed up with the continual changes that they simply have given up, and so they just do what all the other priests are doing. Fortunately, the younger generation of priests have started reading stuff like the GIRM and so, although their masses aren’t abuse free, at least they intend them to be.

That being said, liturgical abuse is a very complicated question, and I only intended to expound on one of a multitude of causes

 

[JacobMaximilian]

Honestly, the only way we’ll probably ever be able to have abuse free liturgies is if the bishops start appointing Canon lawyers to regulate the way mass is said (of course, when they did that before Vatican II, the mass still wasn’t said perfectly, so that only begs the question of what liturgical abuse is)

 

[Augustinian]

What I cannot understand is how any (arch)bishop or priest could possibly celebrate a Catholic sacrificial liturgy in either an abusive or irregular manner

Mistakes are made, that’s why pencils have erasers. Don’t fool yourself into thinking that they are perfect in any profession or avocation.

 

[Duesenberg]

I don’t think you’re ignorant to expect that at all. But the fact of the matter is that if our bishops aren’t experts in the liturgy, how can our priests be? They’re the ones in charge of educating seminarians, and many are themselves former seminary professors.

I wouldn’t consider myself anywhere near a “expert” on the celebration of the Mass. No way. However with a day or two worth of preparation, I could conduct a lecture/lab on how to be in compliance with the GIRM and other cognizant church documents. I would expect that any priest or bishop could do a far better job on this matter.

As regards the volumes of legislation on the liturgy, a big part of the problem is that the rules keep continually changing.

Not really. The Mass (all forms) is quite stable. As it pertains to the parish priest, the last substantial changes were in 2011. “Keeping up” with changes to the Mass should be something that any priest should be able to do with ease. If it’s not, then there is a problem that needs to be solved.

That being said, liturgical abuse is a very complicated question, and I only intended to expound on one of a multitude of causes

I think you are right! Compared to a complex, engineered system or processes (or even very simple ones), following the rubrics for the celebration of the Mass is hardly overwhelming or even challenging. There are a great many factors at work that drive the problems we are talking about and I’m trying to understand them a little better.

 

[JacobMaximilian]

For the record I’m not trying to justify liturgical abuses; I hate them just as much as you do if not more.

There is a ton of liturgical legislation that simply doesn’t get into the Roman Missal, and so to say that the Mass is quite stable simply because there hasn’t been a new edition of the Missal, is extremely misleading. I was trying to find an article I read the other month which discusses this and even provides a illustration of the point, but unfortunately its proving harder to find than I thought. I’ll be sure to post it here if I find it later.

 

[Duesenberg]

For the record I’m not trying to justify liturgical abuses; I hate them just as much as you do if not more.

I know, I appreciate that.

There is a ton of liturgical legislation that simply doesn’t get into the Roman Missal,

Correct, therefore it shouldn’t impact the local parish priest. He might be interested if he’s a liturgical wonk, but such legislation won’t impact his celebration of the Mass.

 

[JacobMaximilian]

You apparently didn’t even read my argument from above

The fact of the matter is that the rules keep changing back and forth every couple of decades, and the older generation of priests have simply gotten so fed up with the continual changes that they simply have given up, and so they just do what all the other priests are doing.

 

[Duesenberg]

The fact of the matter is that the rules keep changing back and forth every couple of decades, and the older generation of priests have simply gotten so fed up with the continual changes that they simply have given up, and so they just do what all the other priests are doing.

I read what you wrote. What I am saying is the amount of changes which impact the average parish priest is entirely manageable.

Given the limited number of changes in the Mass over say the last 30 years, I cannot imagine why any priest would have “given up”?

I honestly don’t understand why they cannot keep up with the minimal changes yet they can emulate other priests?

And just who influences how these other priest celebrate the Mass?