Jimmy,

Perhaps if these small infractions so distract you from the essence of the prayer you are participating in, you should just “check out,” say the Rosary, and ignore everything else. I am confident that the state of perfection of that Mass is less of a concern to Christ than the fact that a religious community of believers came together to profess their faith in Him and to celebrate the Euchrist.

I’d leave the rest to Father Gender Edit’s bishop.

Hmmm…I like “I Am the Bread of Life”, and its original version is not gender edited. Is there anything wrong with quoting Jesus for extended passages? At the very least, if it is a problem, it’s a very minor one compared to hymns like the one that goes “I myself am the bread of life, you and I the bread of life” etc. That’s downright blasphemous.

We have a father edit who occasionally preaches at our parish. He refuses to give the final blessing and instead says “As we feel the blessing of God welling up with in us may we go in love and peace to serve one another”. And I think “for Pete’s sake father (he doesn’t like it when we call him father), would you just give us the blessing.” In my mind a priest who refused to be a priest is as bad as a parent who refuses to be a parent.

As for undoing the reading, our Father Edit delights in using the major feast of the year to talk about how what we celebrate isn’t really true.

On the Feast of the Holy Trinity - “When we say that God is three persons we don’t really mean that he is three persons.Rather we mean that God makes has three ways of expressing God’s being as creator, sanctifier and redeemer”.

On an Easter Sunday preaching on the resurrection account in Luke. When the author of the Gospel tells us that the Apostles experienced Jesus’ presence he didn’t mean that Jesus was really there. He meant that they experience him being alive in their hearts and that as long as they kept his teaching alive he would in that sense live on”.

On the fest of the Body and Blood of Christ - “When jesus says ‘This is my body’ he didn’t mean that the bread actually became his body, rather he meant that when we gather in his name and use the symbols of bread and wine he becomes present in the body of gathered beliers”

On Christams “It’s not really his story: it’s our story because God is clothed in human flesh every time a human is born. The only difference between Jesus and us is that he believed it and we don’t”

It has become a bit of a game to me to see if I can accurately predict how he will twist and undo the themes of major feasts. The sad thing is that I can usually predict it with near perfect accuracy.

Jimmy, it sounds like you went to Mass in Rochester NY!  We have churches here that not only change the words like you experienced, but they list all of the changes in the front of the missal.  What I have also noticed is that our Diocese makes a bigger deal about the Gospel than the Eucharist.  No more bells, but they put the missal on the altar, and then carry it to the lectern for the Gospel.  I don’t have a problem with elevating the Gospel, but why the deemphasis on the Eucharist, the most important part of the Mass?  I hope the new Missal brings things back to normalcy.

I often wonder if people really understand what they’re saying when they tell someone complaining of gross liturgical violations that said violations aren’t what’s really important.  If what is said and how it is said at the Mass isn’t important then *nothing* we ever say is important.  Christ died to give us the Mass, the martyrs shed their blood to protect it and the Church has sheltered it in her bosom for centuries.  It is, also, the only catechetical setting the great majority of Catholics will ever see in their adult lives; insofar as lex orandi lex credendi, if we change what we say at Mass we change what we *teach* at Mass, which affects what those many people will believe.  No, there is nothing more important to the world than Holy Mass - as St. Pio said, “It would be easier for the world to survive without the sun than to do without Holy Mass.”

I completely feel your pain, Jimmy. 

I know at other times I’ve heard you talk on Catholic Answers about how any change, despite the intention (even if it is sound) is at the very least distracting.

The scariest part is that priests assume some measure of responsibility for their flock’s sins.  Those that could have been prevented by preaching (teaching, I should say) about the reality of sin and the need to actively keep the house safe and remain awake for the homecoming of the bridegroom fall in the lap of such lax priests. 

Jesus wasn’t just the Priest, He was the Victim as well, and our ordained priests are Priest-Victims in the same way, by offering themselves to help the flock, even in the face of ridicule and unpopularity.

As Father Zuhlsdorf says:  Save the Liturgy, save the world!

Paul warns us in Scripture that false teachers would come, intending to teach a different Gospel. Anyone there not as uncomfortable as JImmy was, will soon not have any faith to celebrate, if they are that unaware that they are being taught wrong.

“Gentle Jesus meek and mild” was preaching about the possible damnation of those who heard him. If the priest was reversing the message he just read moments before, Christ may well have stiff words for him. Like “I never knew you.”

Thank you Peter Rival. I was thinking on how to charitably respond to the first unfortunate post and there was so much wrong with the post that I did not know where to start. You said it very well. Amen to you and Jimmy.

I don’t see the difficulty with singing “I am the Bread of Life” in the voice of Jesus.  We understand some of the Psalms to foreshadow Christ’s passion; and some of these are written in the first person.  If you pray them, as you do in the Divine Office, you pray them “in the voice of Jesus”.  And given that “I am the Bread of Life” is taken directly from the Gospel, we aren’t putting words in Christ’s mouth; they are His words.

I agree, though, making the song gender-neutral is just wrong.

Jimmy,

I witnessed much of these sorts of abuses when I attended Catholic high school. If i recall correctly all the students (some not even baptized or Christian!) were allowed to partake of the Eucharist. We also had the student rock band playing Hillsong during the mass. I was a Protestant but I’m now converting to the Catholic faith, and I can tell you, the mass being so similar to the Protestant service really put me off. It wasn’t until I visited a Latin Mass parish that I was able to get over my fears.

I witnessed much of these sorts of abuses when I attended Catholic high school. If i recall correctly all the students (some not even baptized or Christian!) were allowed to partake of the Eucharist. We also had the student rock band playing Hillsong during the mass. I was a Protestant but I’m now converting to the Catholic faith, and I can tell you, the mass being so similar to the Protestant service really put me off. It wasn’t until I visited a Latin Mass parish that I was able to get over my fears.

+1 for the Latin mass (ordinary form or extraordinary form).

Why are you assuming that “Dominus vobiscum” should always be rendered as “Dominus (sitis) vobiscum”? Also even with the Latin subjunctive in an independent clause it can have an element of obligation. “The Lord be with you” is not the same as “May the Lord hopefully be with you” as you seem to be implying in your strange theology of God’s presence.  A proper rendering of the Latin could be “Dominus (estis) vobiscum.” I think there are more important things to be concerned with.

One other thing, theologically God is always with us, it is his desire. When we sin we simply choose to ignore him, but it doesn’t stop his presence from being there giving us grace and desiring us to use it.

“Why are you assuming that ‘Dominus vobiscum’ should always be rendered as ‘Dominus (sitis) vobiscum’?” He’s not assuming anything: that’s how it IS rendered in the Roman Missal. Geesh.

A local Priest decided to tie Sunday’s first reading to modern racism. Really.

While some might argue that you’re being a tad too demanding, following the correct liturgical practices is important on so many levels.  God has shown and shared Himself with us through Christ and His Church.  If we change the liturgy in these little ways so as to make ourselves feel better more comfortable, what we’re really trying to do in essence is change the nature of our God.  And, I doubt He looks too kindly upon that.  As far as the music is concerned, Anthony Esolen, I believe, suggested that maybe the reason more Catholics don’t sing in Mass is because of the sad quality of the (OCP?) hymns.  I draw the line, for instance, at “Sing a New Church.”  Keep up the good fight!

“When the author of the Gospel tells us that the Apostles experienced Jesus’ presence he didn’t mean that Jesus was really there. He meant that they experience him being alive in their hearts and that as long as they kept his teaching alive he would in that sense live on”.

So… the same way Elvis lives on in the hearts of his fans? Nice.

I completely understand Jimmy’s rant on Pr. (parent) Gender Edit. When Jimmy showed the example of what Jimmy’s visiting priest said, it made me feel Jimmy’s pain and hope that Jimmy could attend a better Mass soon, hopefully with Jimmy’s regular priest.  Otherwise Jimmy should get in Jimmy’s car, drive to Jimmy’s house and get on Jimmy’s computer to find another Mass in Jimmy’s area that Jimmy could attend, because a gender edited Mass just sounds goofy to Jimmy’s ear…and mine as well, as probably most of Catholic humankind.

Perhaps Jimmy could send Pr. Gender Edit a copy of School House Rocks, and maybe he’d get the subtle hint:

Now, I have a friend named Rufus Xavier Sarsaparilla,
And I could say that Rufus found a kangaroo
That followed Rufus home
And now that kangaroo belongs
To Rufus Xavier Sarsaparilla.

Whew! I could say that, but I don’t have to,
‘Cause I got pronouns,
I can say, “HE found a kangaroo that followed HIM home and now IT is HIS”

You see, (uh) HE, HIM, and HIS are pronouns,
Replacing the noun
Rufus Xavier Sarsaparilla,
A very proper noun.
And IT is a pronoun, replacing the noun, kangaroo!

I used to have a pastor who would start half his homilies with, “This Gospel really doesn’t sound like Jesus, does it?” and then proceed to say that what Jesus says in the Gospels is not what Jesus really meant to say, or that the Gospel writers were writing their opinions instead of Jesus’s words.

After a rousing homily in which he condemned the entire Church, called for the death of John Paul II (2002), and the abolition of Canon Law, this priest resigned when a pornography scandal was publicized

I hate it when “He” and “His” are replaced by “God” and “God’s”  It grates on my nerves.  It’s even worse when you’re traveling, and you find the nearest Mass to attend with no idea about the parish only to find everyone in the whole congregation doing it, along with clapping and shouting at various points of the Mass, numerous other liturgical changes, and a homily that rants against radical right-wing conservatives.  This is not what Mass is for.

This past weekend I went to Mass at a nearby parish that I do not normally attend, and the priest’s homily was a paean to universalism. 

He began it with that joke about a group of people newly arrived in heaven and being given a tour by St. Peter.  At one point, they pass by a room and are told to be very quiet. “That room is for the Catholics—they think they’re the only ones here!”

Hey, I’m comfortable with CCC #847, but the way he preached made it seem as if Catholicism were on the same level as every other Christian denomination.

And then, the real kicker: Once he concluded his homily, he invited two members of a local Lutheran congregation to speak about their experiences with the popular Alpha course, which the parish is offering next month.  (Alpha, created by an Anglican pastor, is sort of like a Protestant version of RCIA, which has been adapted for use in Catholic parishes—but why offer an “ecumenical Christian” course when RCIA covers the same ideas, and then some?)

Sadly I think that many priests will simply ignore the new translation and say what they want to say instead, which is basically what many of them do now.  Nevertheless, I continue to hope for the best.

Musically, some attempts at gender neutrality are awful.

I dont recall the song, but I do recall one verse had numerous varied refs to the Almighty, and simply rendered them all “God.” God this, God that…Good lyrics transformed into bad lyrics.

One tin-ear classic: “If today you hear his voice, harden not your hearts;”
is neutered into
“If today you hear God’s voice, harden not your hearts.”
A hard G inserted like a speed bump into otherwise smooth lyrics.

ELC,
I noticed how you completely ignored what I was saying and focused on one small point - that “the Latin subjunctive in an independent clause ... can have an element of obligation.”  On another point, since you are arguing from authority (i.e. the Church says it so it is so), lets stay in your ballpark and remember that inferiors are not allowed to judge their superiors.  So just as kings had no right to judge pontiffs, neither do laity have the right to judge their priests!  Lets end modern Donatism shall we.

“Why are you assuming that “Dominus vobiscum” should always be rendered as “Dominus (sitis) vobiscum”?...A proper rendering of the Latin could be “Dominus estis vobiscum.”

Umm, no it wouldn’t. “Sitis” and “estis” are second person plural forms of the verb “esse”, so your proposed renderings in both the subjunctive and indicative are grammatically senseless. Do you mean “sit” and “est”, respectively?

But more directly to your larger point, the mood of the implied verb is derived from context. Look at parallel uses of the pax/dominus vobiscum in the Vulgate NT and you find that the “full form” of the greeting uses the subjunctive. For example 2 Thess. 3:16: “Dominus sit cum omnibus vobis” (“May the Lord be with all of you”); 2 Cor. 13.13: “Gratia Domini nostri Iesu Christi, et Charitas Dei, et communicatio Sancti Spiritus sit cum omnibus vobis” (“the grace of our lord Jesus Christ, the love of God and the communion of the Holy Spirit be with all of you”). There are no versions of the greeting that use the indicative, at least that I could find. 

This, in the Latin liturgy, clearly a subjunctive (whether jussive or optative) is implied.

vox borealis,
yes you are right in sit/est, I was stupidly having the verb agree with the object and not the subject, however my point on obligation which was the offense the blogger was complaining about (claiming a change in theology) still holds true.  For instance Oremus means “let us pray” not “may we pray” (as a question or conditional) or “let us possibly pray” it is more imperative in the since of this is what is going to happen.  The same applies to “the Lord be with you” the priest is imparting the Lord’s presence onto the individual and so in a sense, regardless of ones personal feeling or whether or not the priest has the power to change the words, the same meaning is implied / the same theology is present in “the Lord be with you” as “the Lord is with you.”  Ecclesia Supplet!

Jimmy, what is the rule for priests when celebrating mass? Are they permitted to alter the words to fit their PC desires, or must they follow the text that is in front of them?

Father Gender Edit is a product of his times as well as his seminary. The Church in America uses a translation of the Bible (New American Bible) that openly ditches masculine pronouns used in the original languages in favor of plurals whenever they can get away with it. A good way to check on your translation is to flip to Psalm 1, “Beatus Vir” in the Latin—it should begin with “Blessed is the man” or “Blessed be he” if it not PC.

My family left a parish a couple of years ago because the pastor routinely changed the wording of the Mass. What especially grated was when he changed the words of the Creed. He changed the phrase “was born of the Virgin Mary and became man,” to “became A man.”

If Jesus was just A man, he meant nothing to me. After all, there are billions of “men” in the world whose lives never intersect with mine, even today. But two thousand years ago?

But if in his nature he was something other than man—something altogether apart from human—and then he “BECAME MAN”, then the relevance to me, two thousand years later, is infinite.

Another jarring emendation was when the pastor changed, “May the Lord accept the sacrifice at your hands, for the praise and glory of his name, for our good, and the good of all his Church,” to “for the praise and glory of GOD’S name, for our good and the good of all GOD’S Church.”

When I heard this, all I could think of was the Seinfeld episode where a character was always referring to himself in the third person, as “Jimmy.”

What’s the problem with emulating Christ’s way of referring to God as “Father,” with all the pronouns that implies?

Are we to conclude that women don’t know about “God the Father”? Or does Jesus insult women by referring to the “Father”?

Should we, who are more enlightened—albeit, more mealymouthed as well—be praying, “Our Parent, who art in heaven”?

And who’s this guy “Art” anyway?

(Sigh.)

Listen, my children. On a trip to Indiana I stopped at a lovely modern church in northern Ohio for a Saturday evening Mass. I noticed from the first that there was a tighly packed group sitting directly in front of the altar; a scattered and apparently embarrassed group scattered around the church; and a large group who stood around the walls talking loudly. A woman with a very lovely voice came out to rehearse the opening hymn, which was “Jerusalem, My Destiny” which I can’t sing because it makes me puke. Not only did the talkers not shut up, they increased their volume. The Sitters sat up straighter, sang as loudly as they could (not very loud) and paused only to throw dirty looks and the talkers. The celeberant, when he appeared, was apparently very upset and made a few minor gaffes, which were corrected by the leader of the Sitters. The Talkers continued to talk, and indeed to walk around, until the Gospel, when they shut up. Some of them never sat down. Meanwhile the rest of the congregation appeared to be looking for another side to pass by on. I left without receiving Communion. I was not in union with those people.
Little children, love one another. Also, what was that verse about splinters and beams?

Hmm… I’m not sure what I think about this article. While the particular sensitivities to language are useful, I think there are some basic problems in liturgical theology in this piece.
First, there is too much focus on the Eucharistic presence of God being a privileged presence. While it is true that God has a special presence in the Eucharist, the presence of God in the community cannot be ignored. (Kallistos Ware from the Orthodox tradition in his idea of the double epiclesis and I believe it was Kilmartin but I don’t have my sources who affirms the many modes of Christ’s presence in the liturgy, and his first one he mentions is Christ in the community.) Basically, if God is not there in one way, He might be in others. (Note: I’m only retaining the masculine for Christ being the sacramental sign of God, and the need for personability of God.)
Second, as to the homily and to the use of Fr. Edit or Fr. Gender Edit in this article, these are problematic because we’re not seeking to see the self of the priest giving the homily. In placing these labels, one does not seek to understand what sensitivities or parts of the self the priest is identifying with that urges him to make these changes to language.
Finally, I understand the need for good rubrics to speak the efficacious sign of God’s love in liturgy and what is required. This is an important point that the author of this article does bring up well. My only probe is that does the gender inclusive language and the switch of the subjunctive negate that sacramental presence in its many various modes. Also, if we like the gender-exclusive language, what image of God are we promoting in our sacraments, is it one which seeks an infinite God, who is utterly transcendent, but utterly immanent at the same time and as God wills?
Now my comment is long enough as it is, but in thinking about the pros of the new Mass translation promoting reverence, we do have to think of potential problems that can arise, like is language used to affirm an image of God which is not that listed above, and what our Tradition affirms as true. Also, in the new Mass translation will reverence really be increased just by the use of words more in line with the original scripture, or will concerns like the lack of poetry make worship burdensome for those who seek to engage. These are my thoughts…

Your concern over what is ultimately a non-issue reflects a lack of theological education, especially in the realm of translation, as well as an inability to truly embrace Christianity while your arms are wrapped tightly around the “cult of Catholicism.”

It would behoove you to identify what’s truly important in life. The clock is ticking, and we know not the hour.

Robert P.

I’ll give you a tip, I’m going for an MA in Theology right now and looking to do doctoral work, so I find it insulting that you are attacking my theological education with no real thought, engagement, or critique (which only shows a weakness in your own scholarship.) Also, how people receive the liturgy is very important, the sensus fidelium (sense of the faithful) is not just important when it affirms what we believe. (e.g. the formulation of the Immaculate Conception of Mary doctrine, by I believe Pius XII, someone can correct me if I’m wrong.) The sensus fidelium matters because it is a means of discernment of the Holy Spirit. To not deal with the psychology of how people receive liturgy becomes extremely problematic because bad liturgy can cause OCD behaviors and overscrupulousness (e.g. Martin Luther). Good liturgy should encourage people to engage the reality of loving God and neighbor and not separating the two. Robert, if you want to engage, don’t put me in a box, and actually engage my questions. Because yes we do not know the hour, and that is why we must have mercy and love toward all people and seek the self of the other and not just their object qualities.

I have been taught that the priest is an icon for and represents Christ on earth.  I would argue that the characteristic which Christ evidenced more than any other, arguably along with or subordinate to or above Charity, is obedience (to the Father).  The bishop, figuratively, says to Fr. Gender-Edit, “here father, take the Red Book and go to my people at St. Whatever and lead them home, reading and doing what it says.”

When the priest distorts the readings and other Mass liturgy, he not only misleads the people but is being disobedient to his bishop. 

Pat

Maybe Fr. Gender Edit and his cronies should read Vatican II

“Regulation of the sacred liturgy depends solely on the authority of the church, that is, on the apostolic see, and, in accordance with law, on the bishop…No other person whatsoever—-not even a priest—- may add, remove or change anything in the liturgy on their own authority.” (Sacrosanctum Concilium, 22)

I think what many priests see the Mass as their property which they are sharing with the people who come to church. But the Mass is the prayer of every Catholic. It is a communal prayer. What priests maybe don’t realize is that when they change the words of the Mass they are robbing people of the ability to pray with the universal Church in the words of the Church. Mass becomes privatized and many Catholics find themselves alienated and angered.

I hope the new Mass translation throws priests off enough that they may actually follow the prayers in the Missal. Some will continue to do their own thing. But my prayer is that others will see the value of the Mass as it is written in the official books.

Form and Matter, matter.  If it didn’t why not just use Coke and Twinkies for the bread and wine.  Or allow for women priests.  Or replace the Trinitarian formula for baptism with “in the name of the Creator, and of the Redeemer and of the Sanctifier” or “of the Creator, and of the Liberator and of the Sustainer”?  Oh wait didn’t Papa B just recently tell us those are invalid baptisms!?!  Seems to me he had something to say about neutering the Gospel and Mass, and women priests as well.  Gee maybe that’s why he felt a need to give us a new translation of the Roman Missal.  Protestants have a free pass to say and do what they want.  They are after all pro-test-ants.  But we are Catholics, so let us worship as such.

For those who feel the desire to mess with the Mass, consider God’s punishment of Nadab and Abihu in the OT when they messed with the incense recipe.  God loves us and is pleased when we worship Him, but just “any old thing” isn’t worship—it’s presumption and pride.  Dangerous, dangerous ground.

Does anyone really know God and how God works?  Wherever there is love there is God.  Rigidity of heart and mind would seem to block out God whichever point of view one may have concerning liturgy.

This is one reason why I “mouth” the words, instead of “speaking” the words out loud.

I’ve already heard about a priest in our diocese who has an extensive emailing list and has been encouraging priests to just ignore the new translation….and another priest who is trying to start a group (of priests) calling themselves the “just say no” group…also encouraging priests to refuse to use the new translation.  How very sad.

Several years ago we had a visiting priest come to our parish.  Just prior to the Consecration he showed us his chalice which had been given to him by his family at the time of his Ordination.  It included his mother’s melted down wedding ring.  He proceeded to suggest that we might wish to do this should one of our sons or daughters decide to enter the priesthood.  I was so shocked that I didn’t react.  Should he return to our parish and start that story again, I intend to stand up and walk out.

Jimmy,  As you can tell you’ve sturred up quite the bees nest.  I think that it’s simply unloving for a priest to assume the Mass is his and change it.  I also think it’s unloving to not preach the truth about some of the “unpopular rules” of the Church such as the evil consequences of contraception and co-hapitation etc..  If I had heard the truth earlier in my life it very well may have been very different and for the better.
Thank you Mr. Akin for your courage and using your knowledge for good.

To any who took this article negatively:  it’s quite simple, really.  The words of the Liturgy are set, and the Priest has no right to modify them.  When a Priest (or lay person in the congregation) modifies the liturgy, they are saying: “my personal objections/confusions are more important to me than my duty to OBEY.”  That’s hardly a Catholic response.

You do not know what is in the priest’s heart.  I will first talk to him face to face and find out what his motivation is rather than stir up a bees nest.  It is not Catholic to judge another’s heart.

Every act of every saint and every sinner has a motivation. The fact that one has a motivation to err may, to some degree, effect one’s culpability.  It cannot make error into truth.

I accidentally deleted (I think) my comment before I was finished. I hope I don’t duplicate the part I had already written. I was thanking you, Jimmy, for this piece, and making the point that the type of priest mentioned is so commonplace in the Church today that to attend a Mass celebrated by an orthodox, faithful priest is a very unexpected and lovely surprise! I am currently searching for a new parish home because my (former) pastor is one of these types of priests, only much, much worse. It got to the point that I seriously doubted the validity of his Masses and just had to find another place to worship/attend Mass. All you talked about, he engaged in and, in addition, was downright heretical from the pulpit. One of the commentors mentioned similar things from a priest referenced.  I have heard that Mary was nothing special; just another young woman who got in trouble - no big deal; that the scriptures are not revealed by God or anyone else, but are only the opinions of the writer; that the Church (and the CCC) totally approve of same-sex unions, as long as they are ‘monogomous’ and on and on. He is extremely and outrightly hostile to the Eucharist, which I personally believe, as mentioned by Jimmy, indicates his own moral or psychological problem. It is so difficult to find priests and places to feed ones faith in these circumstances and times, but I find the only thing to be done is to pray for these men - to pray very much! It helps me to know that others struggle in this same arena of persecution.  God bless all….

by the way, I forgot to mention, re your (Jimmy) raising the question of what these dissident priests and those like them, will do about the new Missal and the deadline for it’s implementation in Advent, 2011.  I can speak, in answer, for my former pastor, which I referred to in my previous comment, as well as for another priest I am aware of who is definitely ‘off the rails’ and, like many, accepts no authority except his own self. My former pastor just ignores the entire topic and anyone who mentions it or brings it up.  Literally!  He pretends he’s deaf! So, I’m sure he will just keep on keeping on until the Archdiocese does something (if they do - it’s unlikely they will).  The other priest soundly denounces the new Missal from the pulpit and loudly informs anyone present that he has no intention of using any new Missal and no one can make him, etc., etc.  None of this (attitude) is a surprise to me - it fits with the overall personality and general positions of these type of men - but I thought I’d answer your question insofar as I could, from this area of the country and my experience.  Peace…...

I’m aware of a priest who distributes our Lord with the words:  “Some people believe this is the Body of Christ.”  I think if I were to be offered the Body of my sweet Jesus with those words, I would break into tears right then and there and be unable to receive. 

To the commenters who say that we don’t know what is on a priest’s heart, I would respond that I am very grateful for that because I cannot imagine what would be on a priest’s heart when he offers Mass day in and day out while not truly believing in the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ. 

And I would add that those commenters may be right, that we should discuss our concerns about these type of issues directly with the priest-please believe me when I say that I have discussed liturgical abuse issues with my pastor, others have discussed it with him, the Bishop has discussed it with him, in fact-he brags about his huge “file” of disciplinary action that is stored in the Chancery!  It does no good!  The Church is desperate for priests and these abuses are overlooked in favor of a body who will offer Mass. 

My broken heart grieves for the injustice and ingratitude that is offered to God for all that He has done for us.

Ok, look. Yes, we have a problem- a big one- a prevalent one. God is going to fix it, and the way we are supposed to help is according to the little blue book called Peita that so many orthodox Catholics keep in circulation is through prayer and sacrifice- which also implies love. If your priest is preaching heresy, what are you doing about it? Get out the hair shirts and cinctures, y’all- c’mon, let’s man up. Complaining about it here on line is just gossip, really.

I know how annoying such priests are but the main thing is did he do a proper Eucharistic consecration prayer without !@#$% it? I was at a mass once where under the guise of ecumenical unity a protestant pastor give the homily and then the priest butchered the consecration prayer so much that after mass several of us were wondering if we had to attend mass at another parish for we weren’t sure of this one’s authenticity.

Anyone care to take on my Aunt?  I don’t feel up to the task.

“I agree with Leslie “I am confident that the state of perfection of that Mass is less of a concern to Christ than the fact that a religious community of believers came together to profess their faith in Him and to celebrate the Eucharist.” ...
Much of what is celebrated as the “rites” of mass differ depending on where you live and have been dramatically changed over time”

(Misses the point, I think.  This isn’t a matter of things being ‘lost in translation’)
She continues:
“Reverting to the original focus - the article by Akin is erroneous as well as Rival’s comments. (I quoted him) The Church has most recently adopted the (GIRM) General Instruction of the Roman Missal (Including Adaptations for the Dioceses of the United Sta…tes of America) of 2003 which states specifically “...the celebrant is permitted to adapt them somewhat in order that they respond to the understanding of those participating..” It further states that”.. it seemed that in the use of texts from the most ancient tradition, so revered a treasure would in no way be harmed if some phrases were changed so that the style of language would be more in accord with the language of modern theology..”
This also addresses my point that throughout the world there are various celebrations in the rites of the mass. If Akin was more familiar with his church he would know that we have lost numerous priests & they frequently serve congregations in different countries that have variations in the rites as directed by the Church.

“Finally, it is the vision of the Church itself: the dream of God’s people joined to Christ in Baptism and made “ever more holy by conscious, active, and fruitful participation in the mystery of the Eucharist” (General Instruction of the Roman Missal, no. 5).
In this new Missal, then, the Church’s rule of prayer (lex orandi) corresponds to her perennial rule of belief (lex credendi),...
In this manner the Church, while remaining faithful to her office as teacher of truth safeguarding “things old,” that is, the deposit of tradition, fulfills at the same time another duty,that of examining and prudently bringing forth “things new” (cf. Mt 13:52).

(& for Rival to quote St. Pio?? He is very controversial http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=2047151 )

About ten years ago, this sort of Eucharistic freelancing at my parish church sent me into a crisis of faith. I attended a different church; then a third. But all this left me uneasy. Eventually I became practically “unchurched.”

I prayed a lot and read a lot. (I especially recommend Flannery O’Connor and Walker Percy.) I decided the fault was not only that of the parish priest. I realized that, at Mass, everyone under the roof is a fallible sinner. All that really matters—really!—is the validity of the Holy Sacrament.

If you insist on suffering about RELATIVELY inconsequential matters surrounding the receipt of Our Lord in His memorial Feast, then offer this suffering up to Him in prayer. And save a prayer for the priest.

Jimmy, while I understand your annoyance and frustration at a priest who so willingly ignores such a large part of the gospel reading in his homily, I am shocked that you would jump from that to accusing the man of, as you call it, a “moral fault that has so often appeared in the press” or, if we don’t use obscuring language, sexual abuse of a minor.  The fact that you’d jump from ‘This guy is preaching a watered down gospel’ to indirectly accusing him in a written piece of such a grave sin is… appalling.

DTMcCameron:

Your aunt did a wonderful job of proof-texting the GIRM.  The words immediately preceding her first quote are “Where it is indicated in the rubrics”, i.e. in those specific instances where competent authority has already allowed for alteration.  Further, this is specifically stated in the context of providing additional explanatory statements when and where applicable, i.e. a “teaching Mass”.  The language does not envisage this being a recurring and constant norm.

Her second quote from the GIRM is in reference not to giving permission to the priest to change wording as necessary or opportune but as an explanation of why certain ancient texts were changed in the formulation of the current Missal.  In other words, it speaks *only* of the words as printed an approved by competent authority and does *not* impart any additional permission to change them to the priest.

The fact that there are various rites throughout the world is orthogonal to the question of following a particular rite as given.  All of those rites and their rubrics must be approved by competent authority and participation in them expects such rites and rubrics to be followed.  It is a non sequitur to suggest that a multiplicity of rites implies that none of them need be followed.

Her final quotes from the GIRM, well, I’m not sure what point she was trying to make.  Perhaps she would care to explain how those relate to the question at hand.

Finally, to say that St. Pio was controversial is entirely beside the point.  Logical fallacies in the argument aside, saying that a saint was controversial is like saying that water is wet.  By their very lives as saints they upend common expectations and allowances.  Further, however, one should note that while in life he was investigated he was also cleared of charges.  That some cling more to the charges than to the findings is unfortunate but not unexpected.

Please do thank your aunt for her commentary.  This is an engaging intellectual exercise.

This article is one of the saddest displays of buffoonery I have ever read, sir.  There are real problems in the world.  Your pettiness is a far greater concern to God than any of this ridiculous hyper-religious psycho babble.  Wake up.  Please.  For the sake of humanity and yourself.  Pull your head out of your butt, step out of the church, go get on your knees and help some people (notice I didn’t say pray… God doesn’t need you constantly admiring him or asking for direction… He already gave it… go take action and serve your brothers and sisters who are in desperate need of it).

lonely,
It would do you good to remember that Christ left us two commandments—not one.  And I don’t think He would have done that if one could satisfy the first by fulfilling the second.  Kumbaya, buddy.

I thought there were ten commandments.  I’m curious in what way any of what is mentioned in this article has any relevance to them whatsoever, let alone Faith, Hope, and Love.  Kumbaya indeed.

lonely,
Pick up the New Testament and read it.  You’ll find that Christ distilled the Ten Commandments into two, and that the first needs attention as well as the second.

We’re going back to the old way of saying Mass in 2011 (thank God!) in much of the Mass so saying, “And with your Spirit” (how it used to be)is not exactly literal, in fact, it’s less literal than “And also with you” where you could interpret it as you in mortal form.

Jennifer, if celebrants take liberties with the liturgy of the present Mass, they’ll probably do the same with the new Mass.

But that remains a minor point. What’s important is to be there—to show up. What’s important is to praise our Creator, to receive Christ, to “do this in memory of me.”

When the new verbiage for the Mass starts at the beginning of Advent 2011, be sure to send your Bishop an email if any Priest is not following the approved, REQUIRED wording.
(Note that there are some choices, based upon the approved wording posted on the USCCB web site.)

If your Bishop is not the responsive type, send him an email anyway with copies to the USCCB and the Vatican.  That will work, and the Priest will be told to shape up.

Also, remember that people have a choice of receiving Communion on the tongue as recommended by our Pope or in the hand.  The same is true of kneeling or standing.

Do not hesitate to let you Parish Pastor or Bishop know when there is an issue.  They can not fix anything that they do not know about.

The internet and email can be a great tool if each of us use it properly.

As a convert I will say that it was the Mass that brought me in to the Church.  I married a catholic woman and when we had children I started going to Mass.  Six years later I joined the Church.

The main thing that I love about the Church is that there is structure and that the words and gestures mean things.  I love the Liturgy.  I am very sensitive to the wording because I love it so much.  I went to a Church that did the same things that Jimmy is talking about, and that priest loved the Eucharist very much, but I got tired of seeing the watering down of our faith.  Things like calling the Pope just another Bishop and not ever addressing things like sin, confession, etc..

When I converted I felt like I had been a person who has been in the shallow end of the pool of faith, and when I learned about Catholicism I realized how deep the true faith is.  Priests like this move us back into the shallow end…

Although you have a valid complaint, it seems minor compared to what we experience in my archdiocese.  Here are recent examples of homilies, from 4 parish priests in 4 local parishes:
- Homosexuals are the modern day martyrs.
- During the Mass including during Communion, music should be played loud to drown out the silence of the godless.
- The Catholic Church is in error when it says only Catholics can receive Communion, the Catholic Church should offer Communion to all people.
- Last and probably worst: A Mass in August that included receiving adult converts into The Church,  after the day’s Gospel reading containing some warnings from Christ, the priest explains that Christ is saying that women should be ordained as priests, and by refusing to ordain women for 2,000 years, the Catholic Church has been committing a grave sin for 2,000 years, and on the Day of Judgement we will have to answer to God for this grave sin.
… and you are fretting over “be” and “is” … please.

Fred, et. al.,

You must, of course, realize that it’s this ‘be’ and ‘is’ business that is at the heart of all the nonsensical ramblings (and Protestant-isms..) your priests are responsible for spewing.

A lack of respect for the language of the Mass is a lack of respect for the deposit of Church teaching - lose one, lose both.

Also, lonelymessiah33 is a hilarious and histroionic handle that matches the tone of your comments exactly. As for their substance, you are due to realize that most persevering Catholics aren’t powered by the kind of angst that you are, and that at all events it’s a waste of time to fret at strangers about “helping people” - as if that were the point of the Christian faith (it isn’t - you want the Boy Scouts). And, as your probably some disaffected kid who doesn’t read his Bible, St. Paul’s injunction to “pray without ceasing” in his letter to the Thessalonian church would probably strike you as unlikely advice, though you should try and take it seriously.

I attended Mass said by a priest who did this and I found myself instinctually responding with “I hope so.”

By that I meant, “I certainly HOPE the Lord is with me.  Don’t know how YOU found out, Father, for each and every man in your congregation.  Oops, did I say ‘man’?  I meant ‘persun’.”

To Patrick Lynch regarding Lonelymessiah.  If we as Catholics do not feel angst then there is something terribly spiritually shallow in living our faith.  Praying without ceasing brings us to a deeper love of God and others and consequently opens us up to the suffering all around us. 
If this isn’t happening then we get caught up in the petty affairs of daily life and miss the whole point of following Christ.

We had a priest in the town that I used to live in who routinely would ask God to “look on our faith and out love” rather than “the faith of Your Church” before the Peace.  It would always drive me nuts.  While I tired to give the sign of peace to my bretheren my mind kept trying to figure out exactly what this change was supposed to mean.  Do the priests who ad lib realize how distracting this sort of thing is?

Similar instance recently from a fill in priest.  He was louder than normal right out of the gate.  A little unsettling.  During the homily given by the deacon, I looked up and the priest was missing.  Wondered what was going on.  I eventually found him sitting opposite me with the rest of the congregation.  Just a little strange.

Hi Jimmy,

Don’t let the naysayers here get you down. We can’t correct these abuses without exposing them.

I think that older Priests need to get a “touch up” in seminary so they come out fresh like a young Priest who, from my experiences are very orthodox, at least when it comes to the liturgy.  I think a fair amount of Priests that have a few years under their belts tend to forget some fairly key issues.  I get pretty pretty, along with my fiance, annoyed by the lack of orthodoxy when it comes to the Mass.

It amazes me how even good priests who follow the GIRM faithfully, when they get to the Our Father and the Agnus Dei, all of a sudden begin to insert their own edits.

Is there some discretion in some of the “greeting” texts in the GIRM?

Jimmy may seem trite and picky,  but he has valid concerns. Incremental changes to liturgy can be more effective (and insidious) than huge changes.  It is death by a thousand cuts.  To see how this principle works in action, witness the “progressives” in the United States who rewrite history to support their radical views and eliminate liberty. The Church faces similar threats whivh can only be countered by getting back to tradition.

I have heard most of these same tamperings with the Mass first-hand - I’m almost surprised when I go through an entire Mass and not hear any deviations from the liturgical norms -

As far as subverting Gospel texts, I heard a priest once give a homily on Jesus’ wheat and tares/weeds parable(Matthew 13:24-30). Instead of taking the plain reading of the text that the wheat were the believers and the weeds were the unbelievers, the priest said that some people in the Church are wheat and some are weeds; we each have our good purpose in God’s plan: The wheat provides bread for the Master’s table, and the weeds are thrown into the furnace to provide heat for the Master’s house - They each have their good purpose and so we should all respect each other’s diversity, and love everyone just as God made them, and not judge, etc etc - I couldn’t believe my ears

—-todd

http:\\catholicsojourner.blogspot.com

I had a similar experience on Easter Sunday when the monsignor’s version of the Eucharistic Prayer was changed from “do this in memory of me” to “Jesus told his friends to go out and continue to do this in the future.”  I remember as a child frantically flipping pages through the Missel to find my place whenever the priest would call an audible and change the words to the Eucharistic prayer.  My frustrated father would simply refer to this practice as “going with Eucharistic Prayer No. 5.”

RE: Bruce

“Call an audible!”

Love it (also “Eucharistic Prayer No. 5”)  I’m gonna use those in my Liturgy Cop Reports.

I am beginning to wonder whether God led man to the invention of the automobile because He foresaw that in just a few short decades the faithful, having been abandoned by their own parishes, would need them to go out and find new ones where anti-worship is not tolerated. By all means, go ahead and lament the state of the liturgy in your parish, and offer it to God.  And after you realize that entreating the Fr. Edits of the world to clean up their act is as effective as talking to the wall (and if you have children, realizing that you have a serious obligation to teach them true worship until they’re old enough to recognize it for themselves), get in your car, and use it.  And don’t forget your wallet.  When enough people have done this, and Fr. Edit starts to realize which parishes are getting all the support he used to enjoy, pray God he will start coming around to the Truth.

Do not leave your Parish because a Priest is not doing his job according to the “Roman Missal” for the Liturgy, and the “Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition” regarding Faith and Morals.
When a Priest does not do his job, or is a heretic - - -
1)  talk to him;
2)  If that does no good, send an email to the Diocese Bishop;
3)  If that does no good, send an email to the Vatican, with copies to the Bishop and the US Papal Nuncio.
This works every time.
The same goes for those who preach differently from the “Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition”.  EVERYONE including Priests, Bishops, and Cardinals and the rest of us are REQUIRED to following the teachings in the CCC.
Don’t complain.  Do something.  Be sure to be specific on details including names, dates, times, Parish, etc. etc.
The garbage with bad Priests has to stop !  It’s up to each of us.
Now you know why many Parishes do not prominently advertise and encourage Parishoner’s to own and read the “CCC” - because heretics would be stopped dead in their tracks.

Anne -
You are so right.  People need to take their Parishes back from bad Priests.
My Bishop has a prominent (opening page) link to the CCC on the Diocese web site;
My Parish has a home made poster regarding the CCC in the Narthex, has a link to the CCC on its web site, and sells the CCC in the Parish office.
Everyone in the Parish knows what can and can not be done.  Knowledge is power.
Our Mass is the way it must be.
If readers do not have a copy of the “Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition” - get one and read it.
The 2011 verbiage for the Roman Missal is on the USCCB web site.
If you have to report up to the US Papal Nuncio and the Vatican - so be it.

It came to mind, while I was studying apologetic arguments against the JW’s, that those who must deny Hell, in particular, are those in most need to fear it.

All these comments are heartbreaking to me, as is the article itself. I gave up on the status quo Novus Ordo Mass after being literally evicted from my church by an insane priest about 6 1/2 years ago (related to all the above), and thank God for it: because that drove me to the true traditional Latin Mass. Now, every Sunday or other day I am able to attend, I never have to worry about the changing of the eternal and true words of the Mass memorialized “forever” to the Church by Trent and St Pius V.  I never have to worry about encountering some priest who is being insane or agitprop-oriented or heretical or frankly possessed by a demon (as was, in my opinion, the aforementioned ‘pastor’).  I have reformed my life hugely, purely due to the graces of the True Mass, and yet I have an even ‘huger’, even more steep 7-storey mountain to climb—- but at least I know it, and no one is lying to me about it.  So note: “They will hale you into court and expel you from their synagogues” (Mk 13.9). When they drive you out by their false teaching,  yet count it pure joy, and seek the truth.  It is not at all that far from any one of you, both spiritually and temporally.

Jimmy,
A few years back I was “treated” to a guest priest who spoke of a “great theologian” named Teilhard de Chardin & extolled his Omega Point… the following week we got a new pastor who spent a good chunk of his sermon on the evils of American foreign policy, among other topics… which resulted in me changing parishes… I’m not sure if I even gave an offering the 2nd week… I was annoyed.

The next parish tended to have a bit of what you’re mentioning, but not as blatantly… as well as the gender neutral version of “I am the bread of Life”. There is something fundamently fraudulent & wrong with people who believe they have the right to deliberately change the words of Christ to serve their personal agendas. With regard to the individual & even regional “Tweeks” to the liturgy, this happened before and was adressed by an ecumenical council ... the Council of Trent.

My solution to avoid these vexations to the soul, I now attend Masses in parishes run by orders such as the FSSP or I attend the Eastern Rites…and I am selective on the Catholic Charities that receive my donations.

If I must assist at the Novus Ordo, I genuflect, I will not receive communion in the hand or by a Eucharistic Minister, I kneel at the Agnus Dei,I say “the Peace of Christ Be With You”, I drop my hands after “deliver us from evil” and say “Amen”.

Whenever someone discusses the liturgy with me, I’ll mention the things I’ve observed and drop some seeds for thought in their head… and hopefully they will spread the seeds and maybe even complain to the priests & choir masters when they are out of line.

Best Regards & God Bless,
Mad.

Jimmy,

You should join all of us who are choosing not to call it the “New Translation” of the Mass, but the “Corrected Translation” of the Mass, because it really isn’t something new, but rather something old, more faithful to the original meaning.

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2010/09/new-translation-or-corrected-translation-wdtprs-poll/

Jimmy, our priest actually had an excellent homily on that day about we actually need to practice and struggle like an athlete in training to prepare ourselves for the big game, heaven.  (I’m not doing it justice, but it was really good.)  I guess our music minister must also have read the gospel and found it too harsh as the song during the collection, right after the homily, was “All Are Welcome”.  The rest of the day’s songs were similar.  Nothing like having a music minister who sabotages the priest.

I love how people throw around the word “abuses” for grammatical interpretations and yet downplay actual sexual abuses in the Church.

@Amy: “I love how people throw around the word “abuses” for grammatical interpretations and yet downplay actual sexual abuses in the Church.”

Perhaps I missed something, but I don’t recall seeing Mr. Akin or any of those who responded to this topic downplaying sexual abuse, in the Church or otherwise.  Will you be so kind as to cite examples to support your charge or clarify exactly who you are accusing?  Thanks.

While I am not a Roman Catholic, I have to say that the problems outlined are not unique to catholics.  (I am not entering any area of debate here about the merits or otherwise of “Protestant” or other expressions of Christian faith.)  A great many preachers, teachers and service leaders play fast and loose with liturgical wisdom developed over nearly 2000 years of tradition, and depart from the ultimate standard of faith and practice: Scripture.  As a lay preacher, it is my aim to always aim to edify, console, and challenge those who hear me not more, not less, and not other than what God himself does in the Scriptures.