Many Catholics don’t like the Mass of Pope Paul VI because of the way it is celebrated by priests and congregations. Priests, though, have fomented liturgical abuse, minor and major. Congregations do what their priests allow them to do.
What isn’t a liturgical abuse in the Mass of Pope Paul VI:
1. Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion
2. Altar girls—although it was accepted after having been a liturgical abuse, meaning they were not allowed but priests allowed it
3. Communion in the hand—although it was born of disobedience, a liturgical abuse
4. A variety of styles of hymns and the manner in which parts of the Mass are chanted is allowed and thus not a liturgical abuse
What is liturgical abuse in the Mass of Pope Paul VI?
1. The priest changing the words of the Mass to suit his tastes. Although, there are certain places where the rubrics does say “in these or similar words” but I think that is only at the introduction of the Penitential Act
2. Forcing people to stand to receive Holy Communion
3. Forcing people to receive Holy Communion on the hand
4. Communicants receiving Holy Communion in the hand in a way that is not prescribed—very common today
5. The priest praying prayers as though he is proclaiming them to the congregation—overacting as he does, especially at the consecration of the Bread and Wine
6. The priest not wearing proper vestments and at time no vestments
Any others?
13 comments:
An abuse regarding EMHCs: having them distribute the sacred species while clergy watch. Also using EMHCs when the congregation is not particularly large.
At this point, I do not think the Novus Ordo is reformable, at least not for another generation. Hopefully the TLM will flourish and the Novus Ordo will just be a bad memory in the long life of the Church
Communion in the hand wasn’t a liturgical abuse, it was a permissible experiment (in a number of countries).
It is up to the bishops conference to determine the norm for receiving communion ie standing / kneeling (although granted communion should not be denied if you insist on doing your own thing)
A permissible experiment born out of a rebellion forcing the pope into a fait accompli. Wow! How experimental!
Nick
I watched a new rite requiem mass at the Brompton oratory. They replaced the psalm with the Dies irea / excluded the alleluia and peace be with you during the communion rite.
Many traditionalists would approve but aren’t these abuses too?
The Dies Irae should not replace the psalm or Gradual, but is a Sequence prior to the Gospel. I don’t think omitting the Alleluia is an abuse and certainly omitting the sign of peace is not an abuse. In this country the alleluia at a spoken Mass is not said, right or wrong, thus the nature of the flimsy rubrics.
Thank you for your clarification, Father.
I have been an EMHC at my Novus Ordo parish for the last 20+ years. In my Diocese (Cleveland), after being nominated for EMHC duty by our pastor, we are required to be trained and certified by the Diocese, which is rigorously enforced.
We learn that we are not to come forward to assist at Mass unless we are specifically scheduled or asked by our pastor. We *never* go forward in the place of validly Ordained priests, deacons, or if a seminarian is present. (The *only* exception to this was when a retired priest who was crippled was unable to offer Communion while holding onto his walker.)
We are told, if we witness the mishandling of the Blessed Sacrament during Communion, that we are to inform the officiating priest - immediately. This includes a Communicant walking away with the Host without consuming it, or removing it from his/her mouth after receiving it, etc.
We are to *always* defer to the wishes of our pastors or parish priests. We serve at their pleasure and that of the Bishop.
At my parish, we make no distinction or fuss whether our people receive standing or kneeling, or in the hand or on the tongue. It is a matter of personal preference of the Communicant, which is permitted by the Church and are equally valid.
If everyone in the congregation wants to receive from Father, that's fine by me and my fellow EMHCs. That, too, is a matter of preference on the part of the Communicant.
I and other EMHCs also assist by bringing Jesus to the hospitalized and homebound. My pastor routinely puts in 12+ hour days and often works on his day off to keep up with running two parishes, a grade school, a Newman Center, and far, far more. He simply does not have time to see every parishioner who is incapacitated and wants to receive Communion. I assist as an EMHC at a large local hospital, one day per week, here in NE Ohio, which has a large Catholic population. The Catholic priest who is the full-time chaplain hands me and another EMHC a list of patients who request Communion - which is usually at least 40-50 patients on each list. It takes me at least 4 hours to visit each patient, offer Communion, pray, and offer a couple of minutes of Catholic fellowship. I have also had to consume Hosts that the patient could not consume after having been placed in his/her mouth. The Chaplain is up to his ears with hearing Confessions, Anointing the Sick and dying, and comforting the dying and their families - as well as bringing Communion to still more patients. Anyone who insists on receiving Communion from a priest while hospitalized may have a very long wait - or not receive at all. And those who are immobilized, in pain, and frightened are most in need of receiving Jesus.
If I am told today by my pastor and bishop that I am no longer an EMHC, I will accept that under obedience to them and to my Church.
Peace to you, Father, and to all here!
I’d say replacing the psalm with the dies irea and omitting the alleluia is not allowed. Also he didn’t just omit the “let us offer each other a sign of peace” but did not say “peace with you” at all.
According to the General Instruction for the Roman Missal, the Alleluia or the verse before the Gospel is omitted if not sung, while on Sundays and Solemnities, it must be sung in full.
Perhaps this will just lead to the Dies Irae becoming a permissible option as determined by the episcopal conferences. After all, they're just experimenting with restoring a lost liturgical practice.
Nick
I haven’t seen the video, but I suspect the Responsorial Psalm was replaced with the Gradual, which is allowed in the Ordinary Form and is taken from Graduale Romano. I don’t see what is illicit about the Dies Irae being chanted as a Sequence but before the Alleluia. But then again the Sequence could be chosen to replace the Introit, as per the GIRM, substitute some other ditty for the Introit. And of course it could be a Communion song too. Sirius XM Radio here broadcasts the daily Mass from Saint Patrick’s in New York. The Mass must be completed in a half hour. Cardinal Dolan omits the General Intercessions and the Sign of Peace.
I have also had to consume Hosts that the patient could not consume after having been placed in his/her mouth.
Surely this is not necessary?
The unconsumed host could be placed in a glass / container of water and kept in the tabernacle until dissolved then poured down the sacrarium or ground.
———-
Step-by-step disposal method
Break the host: Break the host into small pieces to help it dissolve more quickly.
Soak in water: Place the pieces in an ablution cup or other container and cover them with water. Allow the host to become fully saturated, which can take up to an hour.
Pour into sacrarium or ground:
Pour the water and dissolved host into a sacrarium, a special sink that drains directly into the earth.
If a sacrarium is not available, pour the liquid onto the ground in a place that will not be walked on, such as behind a flower bed or at the foot of a statue.
Avoid regular sinks: Do not pour the liquid down a regular drain or common sink.
Alternative options
Consumption: If a host is dropped, the minister can either consume it if it is still clean, or present it to the communicant again.
Burying: The host can be buried in the ground in a respectful, undisturbed location.
Burning: In some cases, burning the host is also an acceptable method, followed by burial of the ashes.
Source: EWTN
Over proclaiming the prayers is not an abuse but poor ars celebrandi.
On the other hand, at the opposite end of the scale, pronouncing the words of institution so slow and disconnected so not to be a fluid sentence is also extremely irritating, as is elevating the host and chalice for ridiculously long periods of time (sometimes as long as 30 seconds or more) - presumably as a demonstration of piety by the celebrant. They should be elevated for as long as it takes to say ‘my lord and my god’.
Post a Comment