What is sad is that this could pass as a serious article, and garner a LOT of praise, over at the NCR.

Change the Mass every year or so. Have Pope Blessed John XIII create a Missal and then ditch that for failed-at-attempt-to-be-beatified Pope Paul VI’s Missal and then have that Pope do something unprecedented in 2000 years of Catholicism - ban a Sacred Mass that has existed for at least 200 years - and then change that Missal a year or so later and keep on changing the Missal, relentlessly.

Allow the Mason Bugnini to Change the Prayers of Good Friday in the 50s and then put him in charge of writing the new mass. Then, have Pope Blessed John XIII again change the Prayers of Good Friday so as to curry favor with The Jews and not pray for their conversion. And add a genuflection when we pray for the Jews but not for their conversion; then, when the Jews continue to carp and complain, have Pope Benedict XVI write another new Good Friday Prayer for the Jews in which we do not pray for their conversion and then have him issue Summorum Pontificum and follow-up with further legislation making it clear that the Usus Antiquior will be “reformed” so as to be brought into line with the New Mass because the Mass is the Mass is the Mass unless it is Usus Antiquior, redolent as it is with a no-longer-applicable Theological orientation.

Keep changing the Mass; everywhere; always; the revolution must never stop

In the spirit of diversity, invite people of reknown, (note, I did not say authority as that would imply a hierarchy in knoledge or wisdom or holiness) from other churches and houses of worship to come speak within the mass, lay hands, what have you.

15. Realize that God can work equally through any religion, since there is no church that as the answers. Invite your local Wicca coven to come a celebrate the Mass for you! It’ll be a hit with the young people!

Thanks for the article, Tim.  It’s kind of a strange consolation after growing up as a teenager in one of these parishes, that took your 14 steps to town and back.

The latest trend is to practice Tai Chi in the “living room” right before Mass.

I think of Joseph Conrad.  “The horror! The horror!”

Why not get rid most pews and hire a rock band and dance half naked into the church like in a disco?
That will attract the youngsters!

Then we can make Hans Kung pope and go all to hell… literally.

Like.

You forgot the dancing!

On a slightly more serious note, I used to belong to parish that this article describes to a T.  Right down to the “Resurrection People” rubbish.  It was awful.

Liking NCR on facebook was one of the best things I’ve done.  Always something interesting to read.

wait a minute - this is hitting a little too close to home…

You forgot to add make sure you implement Transcendental Meditation and call it “Centering Prayer.” You can then be entertained by watching St. Teresa of Avila turn over in her grave.

Then, since we are all equal, have the liberal nun (who is, by the way, in charge and is the priest’s boss anyway) give the homilies!
On weekdays, forget about the Mass, have a communion service led by Sister or some other devout extraordinary minister of the Eucharist.

Deconstruct Usus Antiquior to make it more like a protestant service because the purpose of the Mass is to please those who reject us not to offer The Pluperfect Unbloody Holy Sacrifice of The Mass to God as an act of propitiation.

Jean Guitton wrote: “The intention of Pope Paul VI with regard to what is commonly called the [New] Mass, was to reform the Catholic liturgy in such a way that it should almost coincide with Protestant liturgy. There was with Pope Paul VI an ecumenical intention to remove, or, at least to relax, what was too Catholic in the traditional sense in the Mass and, I repeat, to get the Catholic Mass closer to the Calvanist Mass.”

Have the Vatican Two Church select women to serve as Diocesans Chancellors so they can boss around the Male celibate Priests.

Eliminate all mandatory penitential mortification of the flesh so as to ensure a rise of effeminancy within the church

You also left out “come dressed as you are, the less clothing for the women the better.” Sadly enough, almost everything you listed is the way our old church in Texas was in the Dallas metro area. Oh, and how about “I know you saw those kids walk out and put the Eucharist in their jeans pocket, but we can’t assume that it was for nefarious purposes, you had no right to stop them.” Must stop now before my head explodes.

Tim—

You hit the nail on the head.  You just described my church…er, faith community, to a T!

The power of your response lies in its accute specificity!

Oh, yes.  So very witty.  You zinged them alright, those “Catholics.” 

Hmm.  What’s this?  The General Instruction of the Roman Missal says what?

That the bread used for the eucharist must be recently baked? “Have the appearance of food”?  Be able to be broken so that the people can partake of the broken pieces? 

320. The bread for celebrating the Eucharist must be made only from wheat, must be recently baked, and, according to the ancient tradition of the Latin Church, must be unleavened.

321. The meaning of the sign demands that the material for the Eucharistic celebration truly have the appearance of food. It is therefore expedient that the eucharistic bread, even though unleavened and baked in the traditional shape, be made in such a way that the priest at Mass with a congregation is able in practice to break it into parts for distribution to at least some of the faithful. Small hosts are, however, in no way ruled out when the number of those receiving Holy Communion or other pastoral needs require it. The action of the fraction or breaking of bread, which gave its name to the Eucharist in apostolic times, will bring out more clearly the force and importance of the sign of unity of all in the one bread, and of the sign of charity by the fact that the one bread is distributed among the brothers and sisters.

AND what’s this?  The General Instruction of the Roman Missal says that the choir must “clearly. . .[be]. . .a part of the gathered community” and not hidden in a loft somewhere?

312. The choir should be positioned with respect to the design of each church so as to make clearly evident its character as a part of the gathered community of the faithful fulfilling a specific function. The location should also assist the choir to exercise its function more easily and conveniently allow each choir member full, sacramental participation in the Mass.

AND what’s this you say?  That the General Instruction of the Roman Missal allows for the tabernacle to be placed in its own chapel?

314. In accordance with the structure of each church and legitimate local customs, the Most Blessed Sacrament should be reserved in a tabernacle in a part of the church that is truly noble, prominent, readily visible, beautifully decorated, and suitable for prayer.

The one tabernacle should be immovable, be made of solid and inviolable material that is not transparent, and be locked in such a way that the danger of profanation is prevented to the greatest extent possible.126 Moreover, it is appropriate that, before it is put into liturgical use, it be blessed according to the rite described in the Roman Ritual.127

315. It is more in keeping with the meaning of the sign that the tabernacle in which the Most Holy Eucharist is reserved not be on an altar on which Mass is celebrated.

Consequently, it is preferable that the tabernacle be located, according to the judgment of the Diocesan Bishop,

  Either in the sanctuary, apart from the altar of celebration, in a form and place more appropriate, not excluding on an old altar no longer used for celebration (cf. above, no. 303);
  Or even in some chapel suitable for the faithful’s private adoration and prayer and which is organically connected to the church and readily visible to the Christian faithful.

Oh, but then we know better, don’t we!  We know better than the universal law of the universal Church!  We know that REAL CATHOLIC is what WE say it is.  We know that it’s funny when we make fun of those “Catholics” who do things we don’t agree with.  And we know it’s OK because Jesus’ great command was not love one another, but mock one another.

David,

What’s that you say? “Jesus’ great command was not to love one another, but to mock one another”? Anyone else’s Irony Meter going berserk?

Indeed, the GIRM does allow for the Tabernacle to be outside the Sanctuary, as was the pre-medieval practice (most often, it was a hanging pyx). Notice, though, that “in the Sanctuary” is option number 1, and it can “even [be] in some chapel suitable…” That “even” seems to carry a lot of weight, as if the two options are not equal options.

Besides, in this tongue-in-cheek article (we REAL CATHOLICS call that ‘humour’) the finishing point is the ‘broom cupboard’ remark. There’s no problem with the Tabernacle being in it’s own chapel e.g. at Leeds Cathedral, England, it’s in the chapel next to the Sanctuary, complete with frescoes, icons, and an original Pugin rerodos. Splendid! The problem is when it (He) is banished to a corner of the church, such that you look like a Whirling Dervish trying to find it (Him) so you can genuflect. That happened far too often.

David, I think the choir is clearly part of the congregation by singing, not by being seen.  Reducing everything to physical proximity so we can stare at each other is a rather infantile notion community within the liturgy.  When the choir is visible, people inevitably will watch the choir, regardless of what’s happening liturgically.  When you can only hear the choir (who is hopefully singing the Mass instead of just singing stuff at Mass), you can connect what’s being sung to the action at the altar. That’s real participation.  There are many practical & even theological reasons for the choir being in a loft.  I’ve sung from both.  I despise being front & center; it feels creepy & just plain wrong.

You seem offended, but this post resonates. Many a person’s faith has foundered because of violently imposed “renovations” & all kinds of fruit-loopy ideas & practices forced on them, the mandate for which cannot be found in Sancrosanctum Concilium or any other Vatican II document, only in the ever-changing variety of secondary literature, like the GIRM. 

Fortunately, things seem to be correcting themselves nicely these days, thanks to Pope Benedict.  I love the word “abrogate.”

Mark G. and chatto are correct. David is incorrect. Sorry - just had to say that. Now I feel better. Peace be with you.

Did you write up this list after attending “mass” at Christ the King Cathoic Community in Las Vegas?  It is eeerily similar to what I witnessed going on there.  JMJ pray for us.

hey David. yes you are correct the new GIRM has codified a lot of the liturgical abuse and addle headed practices of the last 45 years.

All the mary queens that run this Amchurch saw to that.

Wow! This fits a large new church I went to for Sunday Mass while visiting Odessa,Fl. I could not even find the tabernacle without asking. (Down a hallway off the foyer) The readers read from different spots (round church) The extraordinary minister of the Eucharist had to be told to administer the Eucharist on the tongue of my 10 yr. old. (he kept trying to pull up her hands). It was disturbing. I shudder to think what the people are paying for this huge new church, and yet receiving so much less of the Church’s gifts than they should be.

Deus miserere, how did we, the people of the 60’s and 70’s ever allow this to happen.  Sheep are stupid animals, they follow their shepherd, but the shepherds they followed were not guided by the Holy Spirit anymore.
We are all to blame for not speaking out loud and clear.

David, (not of the Wendell variety)
I’m somewhat amused by your crack about the choir loft.
Speaking as one who’s been on stage for show and/or concert choirs AND in several church choirs, I can offer you some thoughts from personal experience.

Being front and center of attention obviously makes sense for a show choir doing choreography or for a concert choir performing music.  Everyone’s there for precisely that purpose.

Singing in a choir in church constitutes a different matter entirely.
Oh, don’t get me wrong, there’s still a healthy concert choir aspect to it, certainly you don’t want to mess up.
But actually, that’s precisely the point:  We DON’T want to make a big event out of something that’s not what we expected.

I genuinely dislike the arrangement for my parents’ parish.  The priest doesn’t sit directly behind the altar, but the space is small enough that the “choir area” where the mike stands and music stands are..might be all of 15 feet—if that—from the altar.  Granted, we didn’t stand there the entire time, but I’m not fond of the movement we needed to make to rejoin the congregation.
I definitely did not care for being very definitely in the spotlight all the way from the gift offering after the homily to communion!  Sure, we weren’t quite the main event, the priest held front and center with the prayers. Even so, if I’d sneeze, wipe sweat from my face, or do anything but stand there like a statue, noone could miss my movement unless they sat WAY in back on the other side of the altar.

In other words, I could all too easily distract someone from the Mass, itself.

I can handle being off to the side, if needed, because that’s MUCH less conspicuous, but….

Frankly, I MUCH prefer the choir loft!
I’ve found that, whatever music we intend to perform, it’s always wise to have my whole collection of music readily available.  We don’t change plans midstream very often, but when we do, I don’t care much for making it obvious.  If we need to add, drop, or change music, we want to be able to do that quietly, out of public view, and quickly.

If something really goes goofy, we can always share music or do something else that might look strange to watch.
Keep in mind, I’m there to pray too, not merely to be a performer.

I will readily acknowledge that I’ve been in choir lofts where I felt like I was a third party; the priest was up front, the congregation down below, and the choir in the loft.  Even in that spot though, we’re not the center of attention, which I like.
I happen to like my parish choir loft though.  We’re up and back from the rest of the congregation, yes, but not very far and not physically barred by large obstructions.

I have a very clear view of the sanctuary and, if we listen, we can keep in time with the congregation fairly easily.

It’s not that tough.

Suffice to say, we do quite well in the back!

Now, if the building only had the acoustics to make our Chant sound like Solemnes…
Well, we can’t have EVERYTHING, I guess….

Sad thing is, I worked in a parish almost identical to the one described.  The only one they had yet to do was get rid of reconciliation, but no one went to reconciliation.

Intorduce the DEMOCRATICHISM: Catechism by popular demand. Everyone gets to vote (except of course the Holy Spirit and 2000 years of Magisterial Tradition) on what stays and goes in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. If it’s too difficult to practice or may require some sort of effort - scrap it as archaic, medieval and just plain old fashioned. We all know that the “people of God” are infallible and so let every one vote.
BTW, the Democratichism has a shelf life of two years or whenever the “people of God” decide it needs to be revised.

I get it.  This list is masquerading as humor - but the sarcasm contributes only to anger and despair over excesses in our contemporary church.  It does not call us to prayer, to virtue but to a cynical and nasty attitude. I find it hard to imagine Jesus approaching conflict with this tone.

Ubi caritas??  Where is charity?  Is there need to mock those who do not agree?  Let us set aside all things that divide us, instead embrace the Christ who unites us.

What I find saddening in two quips:

When I am restrained from the Sacrificial character of the Most Holy Sacrifice, I find it MUCH, MUCH, MUCH more difficult to recognise Christ in other people and even myself. If you want me to fill an empty bowl with soup for a beggar or you want me to embrace a leper, then please supply me with spiritual strength. I cannot do it on my own. I need God to be condescended not me turned into a carved and voiceless god.

Whenever and wherever secular music rightly glorifying God replaces the ancient and prayerful chants I notice two things happen. It is like clockwork. Firstly, the secular music of praise, that has moved into the Liturgy, is usually not replaced by similar secular good and moral music, thus leaving society culturally naked, and likewise leaves the extra-Liturgical aspect of the “Faith Community” void of substance. Secondly, the ancient prayerful chants become a plaything in the market of the proud. The chants lose their sanctity by becoming a toy exhibited only in concert halls of the rich.

This would be hilarious, were it not already true in so many places.  As such, it’s sad. 

Kate, one can confront the anger and despair over such excesses by asking ourselves what it means to be Catholic:  by seeking out the sacraments and what they are, and to understand what the Mass is.  This takes a lot of time, and a lot of thinking and soul-searching, but it’s worth it.

And Ric, please.  Do not mistake “charity” for glossing over the truth and for refusing to engage those who “disagree.”  And how can Christ “unite us” if our liturgy can’t even tell us who he is, what he is, where he is, and how to seek him?  The truth of the matter is that we are Catholics, and we need to worship like Catholics.  Catholic worship is not to be divorced from the basics of Catholic theology.  Everything in this article, whether it’s satire or not, is a direct negation of what the Catholic faith is.  We are not Catholic merely because of some label or because we choose to call ourselves such.  As for your ubi caritas, here’s one for you:  lex orandi, lex credendi—“the law of prayer is the law of belief.”  As we pray, so shall we live.

I have been so saddened about the disrespect shown in churches around the country: after Mass they have to chatter in the main church, no genuflection or bow before the altar or tabernacle (if you can find the tabernacle), very short shorts/skirts, low cut tops, clothes so tight or opaque they show everything, church interiors that look like conference rooms, and I could go on and on.
How the tears of Heaven must be flowing.

For those in general who are pointing out that Christ said “love one another” and not “mock one another”:  I don’t think that love and charity are a matter of saying that “anything goes” or mere “tolerance.”

In so far as these sorts of innovations being lampooned here has indeed reduced the quality of worship, thereby having an impact on our understanding of our relationship to God, this is problematic.  Catholicism is a very visual faith, and it’s meant to appeal to heart and mind.  Whether or not you “agree” is immaterial:  that’s just the way we roll.  It is not fine and dandy and “live and let live” when our children lose their faith and don’t know what the sacraments are.  If we understand that God is love—deus caritas est—then how is a dumbing-down of the Mass and a confusion of our understanding of the faith of God “love”?

Surely one of the most destructive actions was giving up the word “confession” and replacing confessionals with lit rooms resembling counseling offices.

During mediocre sermons and godawful songs, I recommend reading the Catechism. There is much good and pious information in the catechism. Such reading also reduces the irritation quotient.

Thirteen of the fourteen for my church. It makes me wonder why the kneelers were spared. Mary, Queen of the Church, pray for us.

At the Childrens Mass make sure the little ones can “play priest” and perform the Offertory (the real priest will step to the side of the altar and say the words to make it official) and then the kiddies can gather around the altar for the Consecration. Yep, I’ve seen this a my former parish - notice I said “former” parish.

Why not have the youth group perform the Passion Play instead of having
it read by the Priest assisted by the Deacon or Lectors.  Also if
Parishioners who want to remain after Mass and pray after Communion can’t
stand the chatter let them go somewhere else to pray as I was once told
by a “pillar” of my Parish

Why are to many posts devoid of Christian charity?  Satire is missing in those posts, but so is anything resembling charity.  Shame on some of you.

Has any of you ever had the experience of reading the comic strip “Dilbert” and wonder if the guy who writes it works at your company?

I have a very similar feeling about reading this article and the posts - the recent one by Hugh “go somewhere else to pray” - I was essentially told that by a recent pastor at my parish.

Just too many things here are all too familiar to me!  Cardinal Burke’s recent statement that going to Mass could be an “occasion of sin” with some of the abuses that are taking place is definitely something worth pondering!

>Ken/ Hugh: at least your pastor did not ask you “Why dod you need Adoration?”... let me rephrase that… FORMER pastor.

Hey, rejoice, fellow disheartened catholics! See what our vicar of Christ is doing, by word, example and deed! He’s changing completely the misdirection of our church. May God give him the time necessary to complete the job, and once again our church will be a house of prayer.

I’m not sure he’s changing misdirection as much as just retreating to the past.  Our vicar is stifling the Spirit so many have enjoyed for the past few decades.  Granted, there have been (liturgical) abuses, but we’ve been closer to our roots than ever, and he’s pulling us away from that.

Why do bishops have to retire at 75, but popes can be much older?  (I have a similar question about presidents.)  I wonder if he can find a nice retirement villa on the Riviera…

” I find it hard to imagine Jesus approaching conflict with this tone.”

Not me. Twice he took a whip to the money-changers in the Temple and as for what He called The Pharisees?

Our Lord and Saviour was a man. He was not Phil Donahue.

To those who love to defend liturgical abuses by claiming it is “charitable” to look the other way (And what else? Hug and sing Kumbaya?), remember that Jesus didn’t look the other way when the money changers were being disrespectful in the temple area.  Notice that David couldn’t just quote the GIRM, he had to chop up thoughts, paraphrase and add his own 2 cents to get it to say what he wants it to say to justify his desired watered-down liturgy and “worship space.”  Sorry David.  We don’t want Protestant worship and worship spaces.  That’s why we’re Catholic.  Please join us.  Quit trying to change us!  If you NEED to be front and center in the choir in the sanctuary, that speaks volumes about why you go to Mass in the first place.  Read up on what the Mass is about first.  I suggest “What Happens At Mass?” by Father Jeremy Driscoll, OSB.  It walks you through each part of the Mass and explains for you why we say and do what we do at Mass.  Once you have that down pat, I’m certain that you will back off on the points you attempted to raise, and you will never experience the Mass the same way again!

For our brother Rick Reed & others, would that we could return to my past, where the focus was on Jesus’ real presence in the tabernacle, and silence was a given, and none of these current divisions existed as concerned our liturgy.
  But the worst result of priests and bishops monkeying with our liturgy has been the disrespect and indifference shown to Jesus in His own house. As we know, His house is to be a house of prayer. Do any of the 14 changes above enhance that?

#16 Turn the priest around from offering the Sacrifice to God and turn him into a game show host so that he may entertain the people while offering The Lord’s Supper on what appears not to be an altar but rather a picnic table.

Speaking of choirs: continue to rotate songs so that the same song is never sung two weeks in a row. Ensure that the notes fly up and down in a random pattern so that even the choir members struggle to follow the tune. Announce songs or hymns only once and as swiftly as is possible, never wait for the people in the pews to find the page.

In response to this excellent satire, I consider some commenters’ calls for “charity” just another symptom of the problem that got the Church in this mess in the first place . . . the Tyranny of Nice.  We’re so full of what is good, we can’t see what is right.

As a Catholic priest I am embarrassed by the hatred I find on so many blog responses—of course not all.  I try my best to be faithful to the Magisterium and the “mind of the Church.”  Of course there are priests who are not in accord with the Church; but there are also arrogant and hate-filled lay people claiming to be “true and faithful Catholics” who are equally guilty in their own way.  May God help those of us struggling with the effects of original sin found in our world to be faithful and loving.

Vermont Crank seems to have forgotten that John the 23rd needs TWO ‘X’s XXIII), otherwise we get somebody from the Dark Ages.  [John XIII (the 13th) reigned AD 965-972, right after the “Antipope” Leo VIII.]

This may be the funniest thing I’ve read in a long time.  Though I am not Catholic, so much of this applies to my Southern Baptist church that I feel the author may have visited us a few times.  We have gotten so afraid that people won’t like us or won’t think we accept everyone and everything that we have forgotten why we are there.  I am still praying for an in-your-face message from Fr. Corapi at my church someday—probably won’t happen, but, hey, I didn’t think “becoming like the world” would happen either.  I’m old enough to remember when our best clothes and our best behavior were expected in God’s house.  And guess what, we loved and accepted everyone who came; we just didn’t change to be like them.  There was a better way—God’s way.  Thank you for this humor with such a serious message.

After all is said and done on this post, There is nothing holier than for me to walk into a darkened Catholic Church and see one person on their knees praying with head bowed. The tabernacle is in the middle of the alter where it belongs, and I kneel and pray like I was brought up and no one will ever tell me to do different….For all that matters is God.

How does the church described in the article feel like a Catholic Church? Maybe in bizzaro land.  Curious article.

Tim Drake - quite appalling. Why does anyone want to liberalize the Mass?
Just to feel modern?? This is where we go wrong. Too many novelties in religion make it a political party. The Holy Mass is not a democracy and it has to be followed in the age-old Traditional way where the Liturgy glorifies
God and santifies man. If the Mass is changed and liberalized, very soon we will have no Mass at all, as everything will become a stage show. The 21st century man has to know that Liberalism itself is a sin! We ofcourse have
technology but where is our soul?

James Ronald Dissanayake ( Ronnie)
6 Keells Housing Complex
Enderamulla - Wattala
Sri Lanka
+ 94 11 2 947991

I am Eastern Orthodox, but grew up Methodist and one of the saddest things I have ever seen was when I visited the church I was baptized in a few years ago, and the “Contemporary” services that they’re going to to attract younger Christians, and encouraged me to go to. I’m sorry but even the Protestant in me liked the structure of the liturgy; if I want to see a bunch of people sitting on the ground barefoot, strumming guitars I’ll watch footage of Woodstock.

“Our vicar is stifling the Spirit so many have enjoyed for the past few decades.  Granted, there have been (liturgical) abuses, but we’ve been closer to our roots than ever, and he’s pulling us away from that.”

I will respectfully disagree with this assertion completely.
If the Holy Father has done anything, he has pressed us to even acknowledge that we HAD roots, roots that we’ve long neglected or even nearly torn out and thrown away.

Frankly, as a teen, I learned to despise “teen Masses” precisely because they seemed to intentionally eject the dignity of the Mass I attended on Sunday.  Honestly, I thought it patronizing, because I felt they didn’t think we could handle the real thing.

In the past few decades, we’ve tried to uproot some of the needless rigidity of what MUST be done, but too often, we’ve replaced that with what may NEVER be done.

I don’t like re-inventing the entire culture of the Church once every 25 years.  I honestly don’t think we’re so blessedly creative as to be able to develop something worthwhile from scratch that often.

If we have more coming into the Mass that my grandparents would recognize from around 1950, I think that’s good.  I LIKE having something in common with them!  (Especially since they both died before I was born….)

To Bob and Ronnie and others:
It appears that some readers have failed to note that this is satire. I’m not advocating for these “changes,” and anyone who has read my work over the past decade will realize that.

It’s one of the dangers of satire. The same thing happened to Mark Twain. He wrote satire to address the very real problem of racism, and there were people who didn’t “get it.”

Truth be told, my mind had been working on this piece for the past few years. I hesitated in writing it, and posting it, because I worried that people would misunderstand or not get the serious point I was trying to make, which is to demonstrate how far we’ve gotten away from the Sacred and our relationship with God.

For those who have accused me of a lack of charity, you might like to know the direction I had originally intended to go with the piece. Then you would see that what I’ve written instead is quite charitable.

Some have mistaken satire for ridicule, mocking, or sarcasm, but they are not the same. For ridicule would have involved citing specific churches or individuals, which I did not do.

As humorous as the post might be, the sad reality that so many readers have pointed out, is that we can find 90% of this in our churches. That, my friends, is the point.

Tim:
What a hilarious satirical piece - I’m glad you decided to publish it. Unfortunately, the Catholic church is made up of people: thus, broken, imperfect worship will be here as long as we are. Thanks for giving us all some things to think about and laugh about today.

Bring in belly dancers to spice things up…

Then we can argue that belly dancers offend the sacredness of the icons and the statues in the Church, therefore it would be best to move out all icons and statues to the national museum where they will be properly handled and cared for by considerate caretakers.

David - Thank you.

Antonov - You don’t know how true your suggestion is, but there’s no need for belly dancing to get rid of the art. Some years ago I wrote a piece called “Where Does Art Go When it Dies?” In it, I wrote about a beautiful painting of Pope Leo XIII that had been removed from a local Church and relegated to an attic, subject to the heat and cold and mice and bird droppings. When I found the artwork and told the diocese it shouldn’t be there, they told me I could have it. I kept it in my office for several months (though, my office, too, wasn’t the place for it, as it was quite a large piece). Eventually, I brought it to the local history museum, which welcomed it with open arms and currently has it in their collection. The religious artwork once accepted, now rejected by the Church, was accepted in the most unlikely of places, a secular museum.

You can’t make this stuff up.

Yes it’s a pity.

I am surprised, it was a lucky guess, I was just making this up for fun. Thanks for the input (and for saving that precious artwork, Leo XIII was a veteran, no wonder why he was relegated to the attic)

Its incredible how any liturgical fallacy you can come up with for fun, it turns out someone has already found it before you and acted upon it..
Another thing Tim, I find that satire today is the best way to address these issues, at least for us who aren’t in an executive position to change these things in the Church (I am a friar). Otherwise we would get paralyzed by the pain and sorrow all those changes do cause for someone seeking the “Sacred” in a church, and not just the hip hop style celebrations that only satisfy our senses without watering our deeper urge for “Sacredness”.
Thanks again

Wsquared and Deacon Tom - well said. I am grateful for my parish priest.  Our Mass is orthodox compared to what I read in all the blogs. I honestly think that these priests that allow all this stuff have lost the faith or want to destroy the church from within. Otherwise, they would leave the Catholic faith and become Protestants.

Sacerdos,
I’m not following where you’re seeing hatred in here?  I see a lot of sarcasm perhaps, but considering that I’ve run across many of these abuses myself, I can’t blame people for being desperately upset.
I remember attending Mass at a church once in which half the congregation, adults included, wore jeans and t-shirts.  For Sunday Mass, no less.

As I’ve learned more and more of the previous 40 years, I understand many, many people have attempted making reasonable requests of priests and bishops; too many of these have been tossed aside.

Notice this entry doesn’t actually accuse anyone of wrongdoing, it merely makes a mockery of rampant abuses.

It could be naming names too…..

It’s interesting that most of the comments are about external ideals and practices, leaving me to wonder if the right clothes or the choir in a certain area is all it takes to have good church.  It’s also interesting - and not at all surprising - that many see the “ideal” Mass in their rear view mirrors instead of looking ahead.  The western European aspect of Roman Catholic worship is not exciting to much of the rest of the world, is it?  We Catholics really don’t know how to pray together.  Oh, we all gather at the same time in the same place, but do we really pray together or do we pray at the same time?  We seem to be quick to chastise someone else’s worship style if it doesn’t agree with ours, never giving a thought that the other way may turn out to be better.  We draw our lines in the sand, draw our lines in the pews (and in too many cases, sit way too far away from others to enter into community prayer), and if someone else’s way doesn’t match ours to a “T”, they are heathens out to destroy the Church.

Really?

Are we really so close-minded that we can’t accept that others worship differently?  Are we so sightless and bold enough to tell God how we are going to worship him?  Does God only like one type of music and only one language (and are we sure we have it right?)?

These are all man-made ideals that allow us to substitute external actions for the lack of internal meaning.  We build expensive churches and chapels rather than feed the poor, all in the name of “doing it right”.  Jesus cleared the temple of many things, including hypocrites.  But he didn’t appear to say anything about the music they were playing as they sold their pigeons.

@Rick Reed - Ah, such sentiments are good evidence of just how all of the “that would be nice” changes crept into the Mass little by little.  I don’t blame anyone because from my perspective, depending upon your generation, true teaching and catechesis on the Mass was non-existent.  Thoughts like whether the Mass is “exciting,” and “MY prayer” or “YOUR prayer,” and “others worship differently” evidences a lack of knowledge or understanding about what truly happens at Mass.

There is a theology/meaning behind everything we say and do at Mass.  In addition, Holy Communion, both in terms of going up to the altar as one people, and then actually receiving the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus is how we come together as community, not in our own, individual, made-up ways of worshiping.  That is what private and personal devotions are for, not during the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.  There is a purpose, a meaning, and definite symbolism in each and every aspect of the Mass the tells our senses what truly is happening from a sacred and “super"natural (above our human nature) perspective.

I highly recommend that you pick up a copy of “What Happens at Mass” by Father Jeremy Driscoll, OSB.  Its a rather thin book and not too expensive, but once you read it, I bet that your perspective will change dramatically and you will never experience the Mass the same way again.  I base my favorite RCIA powerpoint presentation on that book with Father Driscoll’s permission, and I can’t tell you the number of incredibly positive comments I get each time.  I also give copies of the book to my Spiritual Directees, and to anyone who tells me that they get nothing out of the Mass or that it’s boring.  The response afterwards is always dramatic!

I get absolutely nothing from recommending this book, other than the satisfaction of helping people who simply were never taught what the Mass is truly about.  They go through the motions every Sunday trying to find new and different ways to keep making it interesting for them, while all the while never realizing what truly is going on which is mind-blowing!

As for the comment about expensive churches v. the poor, that’s a well-worn criticism.  However, I recommend reviewing the Old Testament on the building of the Ark of the Covenant, and the New Testament when the woman used incredibly expensive oil to anoint Jesus when t could have been sold and the money given to the poor.  Jesus answers your question for you!

Peace Rick and all others here!

Deacon Tom, I absolutely agree with you.  I don’t remember if I have read the book you recommend, but I’ll check my office shelves when I go in.  I too give workshops on the Mass and how it’s about OUR prayer, not MY prayer.  2 weeks ago, I led (with a visiting priest) a group of liturgical ministers through an “instructional” Mass.  After, one of our liturgical ministers came to me and said that she just wasn’t sure about the unity/community aspect of Holy Communion.

I’d love to see your PPT.  Perhaps the moderator of this list can put us in touch?

Rick, I’m afraid you’ve lost me completely with all this.
I comment in particular on the location of the choir for the reasons I gave:  A choir “performs” for Mass in the sense that we intend to better enable every person to revel in God’s presence and Word.  A choir does NOT perform in the sense of pop music; we’re not there to entertain the crowd.  Certainly a parish may pray to God in dead silence or if the music..comes out quite poorly.  But especially if it IS done poorly, you can surely see the distraction from the main event this creates?

Much the same logic goes to the manner in which people dress.  Yes, God knows a person’s heart, mind, and soul better than do they and does not “need” a person to dress up for him to show how much he’s trying.  But that was never the point, was it?
We human beings have always demonstrated a degree of what’s on our minds by the way we dress.  If we go to a graduation or a football game, we dress differently, don’t we?
Why then would we dress like a bum for Mass?
Dressing up really has more to do with how much of our time, energy, thought, and will we’re willing to give for God than it does demonstrate how wonderful we already are.

I fail to comprehend why people struggle so much to grasp these concepts.

As to the Western European aspect of Catholic worship not being so exciting to the rest of the world; as to “if someone else’s way doesn’t match our, they’re heathens”...
I have no idea if that means that you prefer liturgical dance, prefer round churches to rectangular (arguably “community minded” churches vs churches designed like crosses), or if you mean something else entirely.

So far as I’m aware, different orders within the Church may arrange their physical buildings differently for different reasons, many of which may be quite legitimate.  As well, to my knowledge, there are five separate rites within the Catholic Church in communion with Rome.  Or is it seven?  Either way, there ARE other rites which differ from the Latin Rite in some respects.
Having been to a Byzantine Divine Liturgy three times, I can honestly say I’ve seen a different liturgy that I thought beautiful and virtuous.

Then there’s the point about why we build beautiful churches instead of giving money to the poor.
Well, I think that’s a decision—or series of decision—based on prudence.  There will be occasions when it’s appropriate to have Mass in a gym, in another public building (I’ve been to Mass in a hotel ballroom before), or even outside.  Those are all well and good for their particular purposes, but we don’t go to a particular building EXCLUSIVELY for Mass, do we?  What about Adoration and prayer?
What if a person simply wants to talk to God alone for awhile?
What if the parish wishes to offer classes to the faithful in this subject or that?
THESE are ALL reasons for why we build churches and make them beautiful.  They’re designed to lead us out of our (sometimes) humdrum existence and inspire us.
That’s a very difficult task for a well-lit, white-walled giant room with a horde of folding chairs.

Finally:
Whose looking in the rearview mirror?
If I look in my “rearview”, much of what I see is..all-school Mass in the school gym (with comparatively tacky artwork), music that’s more suited to a campfire sing-a-long than to focusing on the Almighty in our midst, parish sanctuaries that make Christ seem like a now-and-again-friend, and liturgical efforts that make me wonder if the priest realizes that I might have some distinctive needs of my own for which to pray.

No, I don’t think I’m looking in the rearview very much.
Throughout my teens and early 20’s, we focused a great deal on making that personal connection with God and talking to Him “from our hearts”, connecting with Him like a nice friend.  Those are all worthwhile.
BUT I’m not that creative, I can’t simply say something to God and have it be meaningful for a long time.

If anything, I’m making good use of the traditions and practices that’re FINALLY being handed down as a means of coming closer to God.

I LIKE having something to lean on besides my own imagination.  I LIKE having something to help me find the path that God wants me to walk.

There’ll always be a risk of being too strict about things, yes.  But considering how little we’ve made use of our own religious culture since I was little, I’m shocked that so many people become furious when our Spiritual Fathers dare to remind us that we DO have rules.

Those rules aren’t intended to lock us in a cell somewhere.
They’re aimed to bring us closer to God.

I can’t imagine why we’d be so willing to toss our heritage so lightly.

Good Lord, now I have no excuses to NOT make Confession because I royally botched it concerning my failure to resist one of the Seven Biggies: Envy. I wouldn’t have given my entire soul to have written this satirical masterpiece, but pretty damn close to it.
  Maybe I missed it, but there didn’t seem to be any mention about what Father’s supposed to wear in this (anything BUT) “new and improved” set up? Does he still wear those (cough, mutter, sputter, “human constructs”) of robes, or even the simple white tunic, etc.?
  Maybe it depends on the region. Way up north he could come in dressed in woodsman’s garb or like PBS’ Norm Abrams, wearing a plaid shirt every weekend and daily Mass. Down in the Sunbelt he could show up looking like Jimmy Buffett, shorts, flip-flops and Don Ho shirts, (or “weathered-lookin’” tees.) Thankfully commonsense, laws against public nudity and good taste would prevent him from showing up in his pre-Baptismal garb. On the other hand, it’d sure help him as a “stage prop” if he was trying to engage in constructive dialogue about the need for accountability and transparency in our lives. In the end, y’know, the Lord gets to see us as our moms n’ docs did when we arrived. It’s, like y’know, the other stuff we pick up along the way that we have to “reconcile” ourselves with and “share” with God.
  C’mon! If Catholic parishes are willing to go so far in this direction, they might as well truly ditch “Confession” (on a parish by parish basis, because even the Magisterium doesn’t have the authority to scratch one of the “major” Sacraments on a world-wide basis.) These new ever so comfy/huggy parishes (or “whatevers”) that allowed themselves to be overtaken by such hyper-gotta-be-contemporary-sorts who are SO INTO (sigh, get me a fan, and quick!) promoting the need for their fellow sheep to embrace full transparency and accountability, will, no doubt, soon find ways to “incorporate” an age-old relic of Evangelical Protestantism, oh yes, the handy old altar call bench.
  Never mind with our ancient creeds and rituals. Nope. For those alrelady (legitimately)Baptized, a sinner’s prayer and a promise to obey God and not Satan will suffice. Well, not quite so fast. If the move things along that fast, “doing worship” will only take about 45-60 minutes. That’s way too short n’easy (even on during the hottest and most imaginably humid mornings one could barely tolerate.) Besides, Father still has to get in at least his 45 minutes, not to mention his warming up prayers to “help hold him up” when he eventually gives his “message” on points in wholesale portions.
  Besides, you’re not just going to get some “Greek language” background on a certain verse, you might even get a lesson on how to speak Greek like the Greeks of St. Paul’s time! Oops, did I just write “St.”? Bad form. In this new and very informal kind of atmosphere, “human constructs” denoting sainthood are literally ancient history. And while it’s not enough for the sheeple to have been seranaded (and bored half to death) by such inane contemptible “christian” musak, when the new padre of this “revitalized” Catholic “worship form” really “gets going” you won’t know that he ever got going in the first place because he will have “shared his message” (no more delivering homilies)in such a sing-songy-er-spongy way so as to leave the lambs awestruck that they “finally got to hear the Gospel” in such a way that was not preachy, stern, “judgmental,” (big no-no nowadays, uh uh!
  Of course, the danger for this kind of “new padre” is that his method of “message sharing” may well leave some lambs dozing, and well, “losing out on the opportunity to be ‘fed’ what Jesus told St. Peter (“Feed my sheep”)—I’m pretty hardcore old fashioned when it comes to honorifics, and titles, especially the earned kind. If anybody has a problem with that, let them have the comforting pleasure of exiting upside down—so if the Church decides to allow parishes the option of designating their Eucharistic Prayer merely “symbolic” ... no thanks to the new style padre and his new style of delivering messages, some of his sheep will miss dinner because he lacked the necessary personality style and charisma to convince his Lord’s sheep that they were somehow being spiritually nourished.
  One thing for sure, this new kind of message sharing padre should always have; the courage of John Paul II, the open transparency of Barack Obama and the personality of Barney the dinosaur.
  Conservative Catholics upset with Fr. Cutie’s messy defection to Episcopalianism have less to worry about from the Episcopalians that one man’s saga. Should the day ever come that more and more traditionalist Catholics, growing ever more disgusted with this Barney-like mushification of their Masses, may discover the decorous manner in which the Episcopalians conduct their Eucharistic Services, which word for word, almost parallel our Mass. Furthermore, when they notice how much more loving reverence the Episcopalian priests show to their Hosts than some of “our” (hopefully forever fictional) padres parodied above, who will grumpily blame our more traditionalist Catholic brethren from wanting to “do worship” at their local Episcopal parish?
  Jimmy Buffett’s a Catholic; maybe still lapsed. But I doubt he’d like to step into a Mass and find it resembling a Parrothead gathering in some Key West saloon.

15. Do nothing to encourage reverent dress.  Jeans, jeans, jeans!!!  Or worse…

Hi again. I’m the guy that sees all this through my rear view mirror. And what is missing from today’s church isn’t latin, but SILENCE. As you enter the new church, you hear people greeting each other, conversations, welcomes, and people focused on each other. Maybe a few focus on Jesus in the tabernacle, or try to despite the racket. It is said that 70% of catholics don’t believe in the real presence. To see the attention given to Jesus in this new church of ours, it’s difficult to believe 30% do believe.

“

Some people are allergic to incense. And burning it has been known to set off fire-alarms. This can cause problems with the characters from Health & Safety.

Many items came into use only gradually - most suppposedly Catholic art is insipid or hideous anyway. The Orthodox don’t use kneelers, BTW.

There is a lot to be said for not having all that clutter - if crucifixes, the Stations, statues, bells, incense all vanished, the Church would not be any different *theologically*.

BTW, there is no *doctrinal* objection to having Hosts that are made with leaven: the Orthodox use leaven, & they offer a true Sacrifice. In the Latin Rite of the CC, the use of leaven *is forbidden by canon law*, & invalidates the offering: there is no Mass where this is done, but the semblance of one. This does not mean that the devotion of those present is not real, but it does mean that they will not have fulfilled the precept that directs them to go to Mass. And it means that no Consecration of the Eucharistic Gifts has occurred; which has implications for the use of Mass-stipends. 

To quote someone who should know:

“The bread used in the celebration of the Most Holy Eucharistic Sacrifice must be unleavened, purely of wheat, and recently made so that there is no danger of decomposition. It follows therefore that bread made from another substance, even if it is grain, or if it is mixed with another substance different from wheat to such an extent that it would not commonly be considered wheat bread, does not constitute valid matter for confecting the Sacrifice and the Eucharistic Sacrament. It is a grave abuse to introduce other substances, such as fruit or sugar or honey, into the bread for confecting the Eucharist. Hosts should obviously be made by those who are not only distinguished by their integrity, but also skilled in making them and furnished with suitable tools (Redemptionis Sacramentum 48).”

Jaimie, I take it you’re not big on the idea of blowing hundred bucks to to buy ripped jeans A & F is able to get as cast offs from knock-off sweatshops (which it paid only fifty cents a pair) and letting your kids wear them outside the house, (never attebd Mass in them.) But be thankful that they’re THERE.
Charles (Woodbury) ... I fully agree with you about the SILENCE part. In fact, I make it a point to get up earlier to attend 8 a.m. Mass, what old timers would call the “low Mass,” unsung, uncluttered and greatly unappreciated ... except by those among who enjoy our time with spent with the Lord so much that we don’t want it unnecessarily stretched out simply so that the local liturgical committee could point to its efforts and say it put in yet another Sunday’s “justification” for their continued existence or necessity. There’s nothing like hearing a choir lead by a tone deaf soloist, loud band (er, “orchestra”) or organist who seems like he or she would feel more at home playing Southern Gospel hymns or Catholic hymns to that kind of rythym. Okay if you live in the South or are attending Mass there while on vacation. It’s a bit jarring to hear such a lively “beat” in a coastal vacation spot in Maine. Ayuh, I witnnessed this jarring regio-cultural mish-mash 20 years ago and I still can’t stop chuckling at all the funny faces cast by so many vacationing Quececois visiting their North Americain version of the Riviera.
  Imagine what this parish would’ve done to a Latin Mass? As for all those old mossback hippie relics from their Kumbaya heydays and all their worries about the return of Latin. Too bad for them. With apologies to the late and Honorable Governor of the Lone Star State, if Caesar’s Latin was good ‘nuff for Jesus first followers, it’ll be good enough for God’s children today.
  Now if anybody dares to correct me on the real language Jesus and his apostles used, I’ll find myself a Roy Bean and let him settle this matter once’ n’ fer all!

Hahahaha! Loved it! That was hilarious! I became a Catholic, by the way, and I don’t know how I somehow “wised” up and rejected the marketing and vanity of the other ‘churches’ but somehow I did- and for that, I’m grateful. This was a really enjoyable article and it’s nice to know that others feel the same. I think my favorite priests would agree with it completely but I feel they might scold me for reposting it. haha. I think I’d be fine with scolding over this one. ;-D Peace be with you all! <3

Here’s what I posted on FaceBook today: “Masstimes site should state whether it’s a guitar Mass or not! Got stuck with “Lord of the Dance” too! Was waitin’ for Kumbaya! Pray for me!”

Really?  Kumbaya?  That’s the extent of your argument?  That tired old horse?  You’re not even trying. Deacon Tom!  Is Mass about what “I” want?  Will God only listen to my prayer if it’s accompanied by music I like?

Wow.  So much for the meaning of (small c) catholic.

Sadly, folks don"t want the truth, they want feel good messages that don’t convict them of sin and the need for repentance and conversion, demand a life progressing toward holiness and eternity with God; after all you can have your best life now. So, sure why not reduce everything down to eye level and create an atmosphere that’s austere by design and as clean as a whitewashed sepulchre; it will then be a fine place to bury those souls who are dead to God.

Well, good thing my own parish reacted a while ago and corrected almost all of this thing.

If you want to help stop abuses in the Mass at your church, pray to the Holy Spirit, know your facts, pray for your priests, go to confession, encourage religious education for adults, stop being a complaining spectator and get on the liturgy committee.

Regrettably, Virginia, the part about the liturgy committee may not work, and some of the others may be somewhat less effective than you’d wish.
Adults have a way of being busy, lacking willingness to expend more time and energy on catechesis.  And..depending on the parish, enacting changes in the liturgy may nearly require something similar to a hostile take-over, with all the..“exciting conflict”..that such efforts tend to spawn.

Granted, it can be done over a period of time, but for my experience at least, those who’re set in their ways don’t always give ground willingly.

Pray for the Pope and the Church, it is only too true that the error of protestantnism had rooted into the Catholic Church, the loss of faith are great, five years ago we just move to another Church, thanks God for Pope Benedict XVI for the Traditional Latin Mass, more reverance, more peace and less distraction, no more contradiction and no more water down sermon, for some reason our friends from our former Church decided to give us the cold treatment, but the way we see this is that we are in the Holy Mass for Christ Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and not for them and their feeling good liturgy and performing arts, they now got a new pastor who asked me why we leave for the TLM, I just say I change my rubric, kneeling and receiving the Holy Eucharist from the hand of priest and on the tongue.

Why stop with applauding the musicians.  At my church we applaud the altar boys, the ladies who “prettied” the sactuary, the lectors, the Eucharistic Ministers (Don’t even get me started on that one)...Just once I’d like to hear the priest say “What do you say we give it up for God????  Let’s hear it for the Father, Son and Holy Spirit!  Put your hands together for the One we just sacrificed on the altar!”  *sigh*...

Make lists of things that demonstrate how much better We are than They are.

Every single one of these is actually a good suggestion.  If you want more members this is the way to go.

Percy - Isn’t Martin Luther the poster boy for list making?  Just sayin’!

Big - That hasn’t panned out in the churches that have implemented these innovations.  These innovations only began creeping in after Vatican II.  Prior to Vatican II, Mass attendance was 75%.  Today it is 30% if we’re lucky!  The documents of Vatican II did not envision these changes.  They came about as a result of faulty implementation of the documents, and the failure is evident from the Mass attendance numbers.

I have mixed feelings about this.  I think the sarcasm is great.  And I do get the message of the article.  And when my pastor decided to remove the free-standing altar and go with all masses said “ad orientum” at the “back altar,” I had to balance out going to the church where the tabernacle is off to the side or the church where the priest said mass with his back to the people.  (Note:  God is everywhere.  We cannot turn our back on Him unless we choose to sin.) 

But few of your tongue-in-cheek suggestions are truly implemented in Catholic Churches.  I don’t know of any Catholic Church that calls itself, officially, Community Center, but I do not some that talk of themselves as a Community rather than a parish.  The only parish that I know of that makes music the focal point of Mass, is one that considers itself very orthodox, and has gone almost exclusively to music that is at least 100 years old.  All the parishes I have attended use bells, Holy Water, Candles, and incense, but few use clappers.  All of them are well pointed with beautiful artwork, including some modern art very tastefully done.  The key hear is “tastefully done.”  And all have the Stations of the Cross; however, one had them in the stained glass windows.  All of them have kneelers, but some do not use them very often.  None have screens, except the big screen TV which is brought out when the Archbishop has a message on video.  All use pre-made hosts, but some use whole wheat rather than the bleached white bread hosts.  The kids always complain that it tastes like cardboard.  The only thing that is added, other than when we have a graduation, etc., is that after all masses at my home parish we say the Spiritual Adoption prayer between Communion and the Final Blessing.  At my home parish socializing was kept to a minimum by the recitation of the Rosary until about 5 minutes before Mass actually begins, although most of the parishioners know this and don’t come in until the last minute.  (I know because I am a lector and am standing at the ambo watching them come in as I wait for Father’s signal to start.)  I know of only one parish where there is a special room for the Eucharist and the Tabernacle.  They have an adoration chapel that is off the front entrance.  However, there is a tabernacle in the sanctuary that houses the Eucharist to be used at mass. 

Now, I do there should be room for both the horizontal and the vertical.  And I do like the homilies to be personable and at my level, not preached from a pulpit over my head, or even from the ambo.  Even our very conservative pastor steps down into the main aisle to give the homily.  And when it is a school mass he dialogues with the children. 

I would like to point out that to assume that these “suggestions” are the way it is in the Catholic Church today is to show a decided lack of knowledge of what it is like in real parishes.

I forgot to add that the Liturgy of the Word should be horizontal, not vertical; the Liturgy of the Eucharist should be vertical not horizontal.

My parish gets a check for 11 of the 14.  I began this well-written post thinking I was in for playful satire, but instead you have stirred some painful realizations and connected dots.  Dang.

I disagree completely with the assertion of “big”.  We don’t need more members, we need truer members.  Didn’t Pope Benedict predict that the Church might become smaller?  I am ok with that…

@Jeff Johnson. Interesting remarks Jeff, but I’m having some difficulty agreeing with your idea about the Church’s size. Perhaps it’s just me, but when I see this come up now and then, I instinctively see the not so hidden hand of Opus Dei and its elitist conceptions of how the Church should be run and look like.
  For instance, who’s going to be the judge of “truer members” even after they’ve in, perhaps, as early as their infant baptisms? The Church doesn’t “kick out” her members. We don’t “church” people. Even excommunication is meant to help the wayward member heal his relationship with God; not as some half of the old carrot n’ stick means of keeping Peter’s barque afloat.
  What next? Asking people during the Offeratory to fill out weekly attendance sheets? You won’t want that if your parish priest is as dull as plastering spackle on drywalls and you start attending Mass in another town. One day you’ll be getting a call, or if your spouse is non-Catholic or upset enough with the parish and church that she lost interest (different than faith) ... and you get asked “Hey, where’s ...?” No fun, believe me. Then one day, somebody might overhear you make a remark that’s just so ever a bit “unorthodox” to the ears of somebody in parish hall or an adult class, and you get a call for that, too.
  Where does it end? Or does it if enough of those interested in playing a half-cross between Torquemada and Cotton Mather dominate your parish, perhaps the end will come when a new priest is finally assigned and he begins Mass to a less than half-filled Church.
  I’d be out of that parish long before that day occured. And if the entire Church went that way, I’d be banging on a red-Episcopalian door.
  You’re definitely a man with his heart in the right place; but this isn’t the kind of Rodeo you want to ride in. And deep in my heart, I’m not exactly sure it’s really what Benedict had in mind.
  We can’t be sure on every new member nor can we be totally sure on the “cradle Catholics.” We trust them all to remember their obligations to God and that it’s not our job to play God; especially when it comes to judging souls. And when I say we, I also include priests. Only the Pope is infallible and even he doesn’t use the Doctrine of Papal Infallibility as a judge’s gavel.

Steven,
I strongly disagree with your assessment.
Our late Pope, John Paul II, firmly endorsed Opus Dei AND enabled FSSP; Pope Benedict authored Summorum Pontificum and recently challenged his bishops to take that motu proprio more seriously.  I think it difficult to grouse about Opus Dei or anyone else having elitist tendencies.  If anything, our two latest popes would seem to suggest that we take our own rules more seriously, not less.
Then too, I’m not precisely buying your concern about a church that’s less than half full.  For our English-speaking Mass at my parish, the nave often DOES wind up about half full or slightly less.  I’m fine with that.  I’d be happier to be standing room only, sure, but I attend Mass there—and sing in choir when I have a chance—precisely because our pastor DOES take the rubrics pretty seriously.  ..And the parish doesn’t seem to wish it different.

I understand your point about becoming elitist, but I grew up with a Church that worried about that perhaps too much.  I think the greater problem now lies in refusing to actually be serious about our faith and its rules.
If I wished, I could attend any number of parishes in this area in which congregation might well be 75% full or better..and for me, it’s almost always a letdown.  I have nothing against guitars and small choirs per se; I DO have something against applauding a choir at the end of Mass, I DO have a problem with a parish that doesn’t genuflect to the tabernacle when arriving for Mass—or departing from it, I DO have a problem with neglect of any particular decorum that would demonstrate that anything important might actually be happening in the Mass.  Yet that latter bunch tends to be precisely what I see when I attend Mass anyplace but in my own parish.

Something to think about:  If you have a serious problem with following the Church’s declared rubrics, are you sure that your problems end there?  In my experience, they rarely do.

@John. My own parish “packs ‘em in” ever weekend, too. But it’s also a parish that was merged between two regular Catholic parishes, one serving predominately ethnic Poles and the other serving the needs of the town’s “Anglo” Catholic population. “Anglo,” yeah right. Try mostly Irish, and you can imagine how well being called “Anglos” went over with them, not to mention being told they had to merge with their Polish neighbors, whom they didn’t see eye to eye on a lot of things. But the parish was successfully merged in this largely rural and farming area tucked between two college towns. (Because you never know who else is reading our replies, I don’t want to spill any more geographical beans.)
  Yes, some parishes are vibrant and coming alive again; but I also wonder if it has something to do with a new parish priest, regardless whether or not he’s a “JPII Generation Priest” ... whatever, or some old guard of fuddies have finally been replaced in their parish councils, esp. the ones who can do the most damage, liturgical and music!
  I’d BAN OUTRIGHT ALL GUITARS, electric pianos, bugles and Catholic CCM. Having gotten that out of my system, I’d also love to see the local ordinary change its weekly televised Mass to at least demonstrate some appreciation for our beautiful and ancient liturgical traditions. To watch the weekly bishop’s Mass, you couldn’t be blamed for thinking the diocese forgot that time didn’t stop and stand still in 1968. Thank God my parish has a very quiet “low Mass” with no music, though on Christmas morning and early Christmas morning, there is music.
  My problem isn’t with the rubrics, it’s the politics of what appears to be an ideological conservative takeover of the Church, led largely by Fr. C. John McCloskey. He’s a brilliant man, no doubt. But I’m wary of where his selective recruiting of mostly (if not all) politically ideological, if not entirely theological conservatives and quips about “Catholic liberals” is taking the Church on this side of the pond. And don’t get me going about the new influx of Anglicans coming in and more or less saying, “we’re the new vanguard in town” and “the rest of you who’ve been here for so long and gotten by with your ‘liberal views’ will just have to adjust.”
  Say what? Of course I’m having a little fun with the age-old constant battle between the old guard in any organization and the more spirited newcomers. It’s one of the most significant stories that’s often taken for granted in American history and seldom given the attention is deserves. (For this reason we’ll always have perpetual need for “immigratin reforms.”)But you can easily imagine the tensions building between the new and old, especially on third-rail topics like abortion. About a half year before my mom died 25 years ago, she shared with me her real views about the abortion issue. You imagine my shock to learn that this mother who wouldn’t let any of her three boys ever let their fannies touch the pew seats during the Eucharistic prayer, rolled her eyes at the very idea of women priests and priests getting married, and NOBODY in our immediate family would DARE utter thoughts about leaving, or defending a cousin who did while she was alive. And she prayed the Rosary every day. BUT, and this was the kicker. She grew up in an old mill town where opportunities for women were rare and what few there were weren’t so hot and it bothered her and as a result, she and she related, my grandmother, too, despite however loyal they believed themselves as Church members, admitted to being politically pro-choice.
  Although I was shocked and gently disagreed with her still, I came away from that little talk (I was in my thirties with one infant son) so you can imagine how full of young fatherhood I was. (Still am despite what my kids think of their “old man.” heh heh)
  Who was I, or who was anybody, to challenge a woman like that; never mind the fact she was my mother. She explained her situation so deftly and honestly so as to leave no room for misunderstandings because she admitted she had a problem with the Church on this issue, and its influence inosofar as instructing the Faithful how to vote, who to support, etc.
  When I lost a job after 12 years, my two former bosses, both proud liberals who happened to be “cradle” and active Catholics, (along with several other pro-choice Catholics, were so generous ... yet they knew I was in opposition to them on this issue.
  If the day ever comes when people like my mother and my friends are forced to throw their hands up and join in with liberal Protestants, I’ll be with them, too. I believe my wife will never join because of the narrowness she’s seen coming out of the more conservative wing.
  Sad to say, I can’t blame her, my mother or my very good friends. I just can’t. If you want a smaller church, a more theocratically exclusive Church here, guided by an official magisterium of a very academically and well-esconced conservative clique of pundits, Father McCloskey will be your guide. To his credit, he’s made no bones about this being one of his goals. But if it’s a “magisterium” that could more or less push out “liberal Catholics” and women like my late mom and my friends, and (God forbid, Please!, accept Ann Coulter in and give her the red-carpet treatment,) yes, I will be heading for the nearest red Episcopal doors.
  It’ll be a smaller Church alright. But is it worth the price?

C’mon, Steven, don’t hold it in - the stress may kill you.  :-)

Historically, the guitar is in stronger standing as an instrument to accompaniment of worship than the organ.  I won’t go into details - but it’s easy to look up.  When the organ was first introduced into church, there was great opposition to this profane “bar” (tavern) instrument.  How times have changed!

Yep, changed.

One other important note:  nowhere in the Church’s rubrics is there any note that a Mass is celebrated without music.  The Church doesn’t “officially” sanction a “quiet” Mass.  Mass shouldn’t be done for speed and efficiency.  If one’s idea is to “get Mass over with” so they can have the rest of “their” day free, why bother even showing up?  To get the proverbial card punched?

Why wouldn’t one sing ALL the verses of any particular hymn?  Why wouldn’t one want to lift their voice in praise of God?  Mass is not about adoration, it’s about public prayer and worship.  Given that most Masses seem to last about an hour, that leaves another 167 a week for adoration, private prayer, and other devotional prayer.

Good Evening, Steven,
I assume that you intend for your posting to have a great deal of shock value for me?  Honestly, while I hate to be disparaging, I’ve heard this story—or something like it—dozens of times these last 20 years.  If I find anything shocking, it’s the fact that so many failed to truthfully comprehend the depth and breadth of the Church’s teaching, but critiqued it sternly when She didn’t teach what they wished to hear.

I cannot say I’m surprised that Irish people don’t like being called “Anglos”.  I don’t either.  Sounds like the Polish don’t wish to celebrate Irish identity, nor do the Irish wish to celebrate being Polish.  I can’t imagine why that’s any surprise.  Only rarely have two strong ethnic identities ever been pushed together without clashing intensely.  Many who insist that “diversity” of opinion will help..ultimately demonstrate how little they truly understand of human dignity.  When two cultures get shoved together, they usually neglect God and fight with each other.  Things don’t typically settle until one side finally “wins out” over the other..or enough people grow weary of the bickering and leave both in the cold.

Nor do I find your comments about your mother terribly shocking.  It’s been pretty clear since my late teens that many women wished to see the Church adjust it’s ideal.  Many of these women don’t wish to take on life at it’s fullest in accordance with the natures that God gives each person.  It can be VERY tough to surrender your own will to God; women simply have one of the more obvious roles that will grab lots of attention.
Unfortunately, I’ve heard comments related to the opportunities for women dozens of times.  Sadly, most comments arise from people who, upon my further examination, merely wish to be more like men than society wishes.  Quite a sad state, really.  Too many people seek riches and material wealth when they should be seeking to nurture their juniors.  Or raise more of their own.

I’m afraid you lost me almost completely with the commentary regarding Father McCloskey and the traditional clique.  I’ve heard of him, but I’ve paid him rather little attention.  I usually look to Pope Benedict, my pastor, Fr Zuhlsdorf (I LOVE his blog!), and various other clergy.  I generally understand that our Church has growing opportunities to become better acquainted with our tried and wonderful Catholic traditions.
As for the Anglicans coming in, I didn’t know we had an invasion going on.  I’d like to meet some of these folks; they seem to have some ideas about celebrating faith that we ought to contemplate.

Beings I don’t know you in person, I have no way of knowing why you’re seeming to be in such a snit regarding the practice of the faith.
I will say though, if you or your mother see “narrowness” in the practice of the faith today..well, I’m forced to ask what you mean.

I’ve seen metric tons of narrow attitude.  Much of it has come from those who loathe even the mention of traditional practice.

As to theocratic attitude, I can only guess that you mean that you dislike distinctions between priests and laity?
Why?
If our Church teaches that a priest’s soul has been qualitatively changed by ordination, I can’t imagine why we’d refer to them the same as we did before ordination.
They aren’t the same as we anymore.
Trying to insist that a priest and a lay person could be “interchangeable” or live similar lifestyles..sounds to me like we’re trying to equate a quarterback and a linebacker on the football field.  It’ll have the same disastrous impact too.  That linebacker didn’t become a linebacker so he could direct his team on the field any more than the quarterback became a quarterback so he could slam into someone on the other side of the ball.

Just as quarterbacks and linebackers each have their appropriate functions on the football field, so too do clergy and laity have their appropriate roles in life.

I can’t imagine why that’s a problem.

Steven on Monday, Jun 13, 2011, wrote about his mother and his grandmother’s difficulties in a steel mill town. But I wonder if he has thought about the difficulties of the people left behind in Poland or Ireland. What living in a steel mill town has to do with abortion confuses me.

It would be clearer were he to refer to the true label “pro-abortion” rather than “pro-choice”. Sensible women - and women when they are being sensible - recognize “pro-choice” as simply a licence for men to be profligate - copulation without consequence. This is true of women as well. Babies are not brought by storks.

“Pro-choice” is a corruption of the Church’s teaching that we all have free will. That one may choose to kill a baby is true. But that does not make it right.

Gabriel, I’m not giving up the term “Pro-Choice”.  I am pro-choice:  I choose LIFE!  When I’m asked if I’m pro-choice, I always answer “yes” and immediately qualify it with “I choose life.”  For some, they may see the “true label” as “pro-abortion”, but I take the opportunity to take back the word, as is were.

Gabriel, my mother had several miscarriages before I was born. She was also before the miscarriages greatly weakened due to a bad case of malaria she picked up in Hawaii when my father was stationed over there. She certainly had nothing to apologize for when she died. Her views (and my grandmothers) about voting for candidates who favored improving conditions for women were hardly colored primarily by the abortion issue. Heck, I’m willing to bet that only came up later in life as the issue itself never became politicized till around shortly before she died. But she did relate that if push came to shove, and a candidate who represented the most hope for improving the lives of women, yet happened to be pro-choice, she would vote for that man or woman.
  She didn’t grow up in a steel mill town, though. But her home town was basically a factory town and it could be hell on families, especially if the “man of the house” was injured and sometimes the burden of making sure the rent was paid would often fall on the wife or the oldest kids who could work in the mills years back. (Thank God for the KofC ... because quite often in New England mill towns, many of the apartments were provided by the very same paymasters and if a guy couldn’t work, and his family couldn’t fill in, out his family went.) When my great grandmother died, my grandmother, very young at the time, had to live in a convent-run orphanage till she was old enough to live with her father and brothers. There was no “safety net” which the GOP and its farm team, the Tea Party, wants to dismantle. It was a very cold and unforgiving time during the late 19th Century. Oh, it “pulled families together” alright, especially around funerals when somebody would die due to unsafe working conditions, or if “lucky,” he’d only lose a limb. Rehabilitation services and disability pay? LOL. Strangely there are people today who think that in getting rid of SS, stripping away child labor protections, (which also helped their parental providers by giving them more job protection in an indirect way) ...steps like this will help pull families together and this will force ‘em to become more independent in the long run. Dream on.
  So no, my mom was not “pro-choice” as in “pro-abortion,” Gabriel. She was just more understanding given her rememberances of what life was like before. Both grandmothers worked for a prestigious woman’s college nearby and when I went later to look for old records of their years working in a dorm and its dining room services, there absolutely no records kept. My paternal grandmother, by the way, came over from Ireland as a teenager with her sister. Imagine that; no records. And why do you suppose that? Ah, well, it was a rather prominent WASP school, though it was originally founded to be a seminary (like most colleges in the mid-1800s) for daughters of lower and middle-income families.
  Yes, we are influenced by the times we live in and the circumstances we observe around us. Hopefully they penetrate our hearts in more ways than one. Maybe some of you should keep that in mind when the temptation to look at life from the perspective of seeing life in just two colors, blackl and white, presents itself. Boy, did I hear her remind me of that more times than I can recall; and while I didn’t care to hear those “talks” all the time years back, do I ever miss them now and wish more people heard them from their parents, teachers and mentors. That’s not saying we should all be so open-minded, like a popular joke reminds us, that we risk having our brains fall out, but it never hurts to recognize at least the existence of ambiguities and varying shades of gray, and why they exist. Learning what they are never prevented anybody from still reacing x or y conclusion. But we should never be afraid of learning what they are and maybe even coming to acceptance of them or at least make peace with them. Doing so will keep our minds from becoming steel traps used onl for the sake of collecting that information which we’ve come to THE conclusion it’s all we need to bolster opinions we’ve turned into facts long ago. It’s not a liberal/conservative or Catholic/Protestant or even Christian/non-Christian thing. It’s just a human tendency that leaves us trapped.
  Well John, I’m shocked that you’re not shocked. LOL. Tell you what though, I was shocked some 30 yrs or so ago when I attended a 4 o’clock Mass in my present parish, which used to be a lot “more Polish” than it is now and one day they had a Polka Mass! Well, you can imagine how hard I had to work to keep it in when it played what had to be a more “theologically” and “liturgically correct” version of “In Heaven there is no beer.” Safe to say the Polish translation would’ve substituted “fear” for “beer.” And a lot of guys sitting in the pews were probably fearing there would be no beer, too!
  It sure beat a “Clown Mass” with the padre dressed up as, you guessed it ... a few towns over. Thankfully that was decades ago. And about the same time I surely didn’t mind also attending my wife’s Episcopal parish’s Eucharists. Episcopalians have very liberal ideas, but at least they still respect DECORUM.
  I don’t attend Mass in a perfunctory way. But when you’ve been attending long Evangelical services and found yourself feeling stuck all Sunday on some mornings, believe me, a short Mass, even 45 minutes sans blaring music, is so peaceful. It gives you the time to think about the Mass sans glarin’ n’ blarin’ distractions. (Nothing like hearing a preacher speak of God not being able to reach His sheep because stained glass windows are acting as barriers. Boy, will that wake one up! Hmm, the Almighty is prevented from reaching me thanks to a quarter to half inch window and some lead?)
  I agree with you John about the nature of the priesthood. What I was mostly referring to, and I probably didn’t put it clearly, was a tendency by some folks to create from either the laity or clerical ranks, a perspective on Church-related issues that is almost exclusively ultra conservative and almost doggone downright Tory when one stands back and looks at the writers, etc. You brought a lot of newer ways of looking at my earlier post than I could possibly respond to, and that’s great. But I can’t possibly answer them all. Great food for thought, though. And thanks.

Good Evening,
Steven, I have no idea why being a Tory or not matters in the least here in the US; we haven’t been an English colony in over 200 years.  As for the virtue of Social Security, other “safety nets”, and so forth, I think you have entirely too much confidence in government and, well frankly, entirely too little willingness to deal with life’s challenges.

We’ve done our level best to eliminate suffering in this country these past 70 years or so; we’ve succeeded in making ourselves plenty miserable anyway and we’re heaping national bankruptcy on top of it.
Doesn’t sound like we’ve made much progress.

As for the virtue of empowering women, I think that a marginal concept at best.  You can’t make life better for women by offering various benefits, but stipulating no morals.  Human beings simply don’t work that way.  Much of the “empowerment” has only seen fit to enable men to be irresponsible, enable women to be arrogant, and allowed both to ignore their deepest moral stirrings.

We haven’t improved things much these last 50-70 years.  If anything, we’ve proven precisely how foolish and incompetent we can be when society as a whole doesn’t wish to suffer.

I am afraid that you have described the church I attend on Sunday.  Fortunately, I am able to attend during the week parishes that don’t have these “features”

PS…..an example of what you are talking about came last Advent when a member of the “band” got up to teach us a new version of O Come O Come Emanuel.  She liked her version better she said because it was more “bouncy”!

Joe - Hopefully she got “bounced” right outta there!

John, I hate to put it like this; but your personally insulting reply above is simply too disgusting for far too many reasons I care to waste my precious time tearing apart ... and I could without a problem ... not the least of which dealing with your outrageous dripping sexist comments and misreading of economic history.
  You have some serious soul-searching and history homework to catch up on. I’m not kidding.

Good Evening, Steven,
(Or rather, Good Morning, it’s about 3:45 AM here.)
I regret that you find my comments insulting and sexist, even willfully negligent, but without something concrete to discuss, it’s essentially impossible to challenge you with a different point of view.
I can say though, my last comment appears to have been over 1 week past; I’m not certain what we disagreed about in the first place, though a cursory glance suggests it had something to do with the Church’s doctrine and/or practice.

I’m sorry to hear you’re having such trouble with my perspective, but I can assure you that I’ve done tons of soul-searching over the past 20 years.  I’ve also learned a great deal regarding history and economics.  It’s certainly a sad state of affairs when Catholics disagree so severely, but we’re all allowed our point of view.

God Bless.

John

11 of 14 for my “home” parish.  Zero for the Dominican parish I retreat to.

@John. Interesting reply brother. Hmmm, I thought I was burning too many “cyber candles,” if you’ll pardon the expression. I felt compelled to ask you for that permission since you seem to be the ultimate font of everything a real Catholic should be familiar with. Good Lord, I don’t want to come up short again.
  Sleep deprivation can do lots of terrible things to a person’s judgment. I’ve allowed it to undo many of my previous thoughts and caused me to commit the awful sin of pride, or even just give off the impression I have too much it. I’ll bet I do.
  Try adding a little more “soul searching” to the “tons” you’ve already laid claim to for the past two decades and see what wonders it’ll do for your ability to discern the difference between attempting to come across as an erudite writer, and a simply pompous pundit-wannabe.
  My gosh, John, think of what having back those added zzzz’s can do for you. Just think of the relief you’ll feel when it suddenly dawns on you that you won’t have to keep on searching your soul so much because you won’t be rubbing so many other Catholics with your supercilliousness.

I’ve been giving some thought to acquiring copies of The Register for my parishioners, but have decided against that because of this article. These steps reflect an experience and understanding of church that seems characteristic of reactionaries. After 40 years of public ministry as a deacon and priest, I have seen the beneficial effects of the true fruits of Vatican II. While I have no doubt there have been some problems, distortions, and abuses, such things have been part of the church from the beginning. There has not been and will not in the future be a perfect church made up of imperfect and often willful human beings. Believing that altar rails, bells, more incense, lace and other frilly vestments, no communion from the cup, autocratic know it all clergy, English that sounds like Latin, priests facing east, or even unreformed Latin masses will rein in all the so-called silly “spirit of Vatican II stuff…..dream on.

Are all of these abuses for real? It seems unrealistic that a Catholic parish would use sweetened spongy bread and vacuum up the crumbs (see n.6). What’s the author of this article trying to do, make things look worse than they really are? Pious Catholics will find little use for such an article. We already know things are bad, there’s no need to exaggerate.

Thank you, Fr. Jack, for your words.  I’ve been a music/liturgy director full time for 20 years and am in total agreement with your remarks.  There is much beauty in the current Missal.  V2 didn’t give anyone free rein to do all the abuses.  To be able to participate with my fellow worshipers is the greatest reform that V2 gave us back.  WE pray on Sunday, not “I” pray.

@Fr. Jack: There’s a difference between being merely conservative, and being pious. One can exist without the other. Merely “conservative” Catholics tend to focus on liturgical abuse more than praying for the Church. They like to think they’re right and everyone else is wrong. Though I have yet to meet a pious “liberal” Catholic, I think there are many conservative Catholics who lack this essential quality as well.

Rick Reed…if you refuse to allow anyone to choose anything other than “life”,you are not pro-choice.Whenever I see a “smile,your mother chose life” sticker I thank God that mothers HAVE choices,that we can know we were born because our mothers freely elected to complete their pregnancies and not because the state forbade them to do otherwise.A mother’s love must matter as to whether a child was born.

Back to the satirical innovations…would burning newborns alive on the altar of Moloch add exciting drama to the services?

Louis E., I didn’t take the time to scroll through the multitude of posts, but I’m fairly certain that “I” choose life, but don’t know that I force my opinions on others in a way you indicate.  For me, this is more about subverting the wide use of a word, such as “gay” now means homosexual rather than happy, more so than trying to force an ideal on everyone.  If allowing words to retain their full meaning is forcing an ideal, though, I guess I’m guilty of that.

Fr. Jack,

Are we reading the same article? How do you conclude from this article that Tim Drake (or the entire Register staff) think that no good has come from Vatican II, or (which is even more bizarre) that they believe that the Tridentine liturgy will bring back some sort of perfect church? I don’t see any mention of “frilly vestments” or no communion from the cup. Just as none of the practices mentioned in the were mandated by Vatican II, so opposing them does not make one opposed to the Council.

With all due respect, it seems that you have lapsed into some sort of knee-jerk reaction upon reading something that advocates some traditional practices. I’ve met many of a more liberal persuasion who have similar reactions. Can you blame some conservatives for thinking that the liberal claims of tolerance, diversity, and uinderstanding are little more than nice words?

Thanks, Tim.  Sadly, this reads like the blueprint adopted by my home diocese of Rochester (NY).  The result is plummeting Mass attendance, a crisis in priestly vocations, and scores of parish closures.

“Move the Tabernacle”

back in 1991 my son was baptized in a Houston parish. We had moved there just a few years ago. for the baptism we were able to bring down from Dallas a priest I had known for over 30 yrs. when we went over to the church to check out the lay of the land (so to speak) the first question he asked was “where is the tabernacle?” when the deacon arrived the question was asked again. the answer though was that it was moved over to the side. another strange thing was that the altar cloth had a large butterfly on it.

The only reason to ask “where’s the tabernacle” is because it wasn’t located where you thought it would be. I wonder if the same question would be asked in St. Peter’s Basilica where it’s also located to the side. Of course it’s in a chapel much larger than most churches. I guess you’re unaware that a butterfly is a symbol of the resurrection. Pick. Pick, pick.

@Rick Reed, you wrote: “Are we so sightless and bold enough to tell God how we are going to worship him?  Does God only like one type of music and only one language (and are we sure we have it right?)?”

To answer your first question with a question: If we take pains to conform our public ritual worship to the usages that have been handed down by tradition, are we “telling God how we are going to worship him”? Or are we perhaps letting God tell us, by the indirect means he typically uses, how he would like to be worshiped?

To answer your second question: Of course not. Besides Latin there’s Old Slavonic, Aramaic, Hebrew, Greek—heck, that’s just scratching the surface of acceptable languages for worship. (I tease—sort of)

@Steven,
Twice now you’ve made quite clear that I’ve stated something that you find wholly objectionable.  Oddly, while you don’t seem willing to address the concerns you have fully, you ARE willing—apparently—to come back now and then to inform me that you believe me a lout.  I’m saddened to see that my commentary doesn’t meet with your approval, but if you wish for me to address something, I’ll need to know what’s bugging you.

@Fr Jack,
(I can’t believe I’m having to say THIS to a priest!)  I understand the tabernacle rules to declare that it—the tabernacle—should be placed in a prominent place, especially one of honor.  It may be in a chapel, the better to enable contemplation and prayer, but it’s not to be de-emphasized in any way.  I’d think a chapel in St Peter’s Basilica to be prominent enough to fit the bill; I’d question whether most other churches offer the same consideration.

As to the butterfly, I have never associated that with the Resurrection, nor have I ever heard the idea mentioned with any prominence.  Likely Peterk hasn’t either, thus the concern.  I’d question whether the church’s personnel knew or cared about the symbolism, often enough, they don’t.  I’ve heard of and seen too many occasions in which altars had this decoration or that because someone thought it “pretty”.

I hate to say this, but I think it fair:  Before you start chiding people for being nitpicky, you might inquire about the circumstances.  I’ve heard of and seen entirely too many situations in which someone happily broke the rules because they either didn’t know or didn’t care.
I find I have the most respect for priests who actually follow the rules.  It’s much easier to make sense of the faith when there’s a reasonably traceable rationale behind it.
I’ve seen entirely too much nonsense done in Mass merely because, “I wanted to.”.

BTW, even if a church has technically followed the official rules for a tabernacle, that’s not always a guarantee that all the faithful will realize that God is there.  I once attended a talk or two at a local church.  I couldn’t figure out where God set as I walked in, so I found a seat in a pew.  Before the talk began, I looked about, trying to discern what the art and architecture intended to depict.  Rather tough; “modern” art doesn’t work well for me typically.
Anyway, after a break in the first talk, I used the restroom, then returned to my seat.  Imagine my surprise on realizing that the weird design on the wall behind the speaker..WAS the front of the tabernacle!

I likely would never have guessed this, except I’d walked past the back end of it while returning to the sanctuary.

They almost literally hid it in plain sight!
OOPS!!

“Move the tabernacle and its contents from the front and center of the church off to some other space, preferably another room entirely or perhaps a small broom closet.”

HA HA HA, a small broom closet! That is the best!

It is good to laugh at absurd things. It keeps them in perspective. And people who are ultra-serious about these things HATE to be laughed at.

re: the butterfly

The butterfly was a popular symbol for resurrection among progressive Catholics in the 1920s. I don’t think many people today know this, and as it was pretty much a fad, it isn’t the best choice if you want to communicate.

What is true, and right and good is timeless.  It looks the same in the rearview mirror, no matter the decade.  Perhaps it is not that some Catholics (including Pope Benedict) are trying to drag the Church back to pre-Vatican II times, but that they are trying to drag post-Vatican II forward to the truth. 

      —So many comments about “your” way to worship and “my” way to worship.  What about how God wants us to worship?  That’s the point.  If you are Catholic, you look only to the Church, her Magisterium and Tradition for God’s inspiration on the best way to worship—not to how it makes you feel, or whether it will keep the teens coming.  You do what the Church says and let the Holy Spirit do the rest.  Our Pope has spoken and written extensively on the fact that the documents of Vatican II had a clear and literal meaning which is in union with Catholicism through the ages, but that some have tried to interpret (bend) that clear meaning to cause a rupture from the Catholicism of the ages. 

      If we ignore the rubrics for worshiping Him given to us by God through His inspired Church, and instead worship Him in a way that feels more fitting for our personal desires right now, or is more relevant to the times we live in, then we are no different from the ancient Israelites who fashioned a golden calf.  That turned out badly for them, and it is turning out badly for us.  (O.K., not SO badly…)

      —Now, about nitpicking, Fr. Jack.  If all of these little rules and mores are so insignificant to worshiping God, then why do so many want to change them?  If they do not matter one way or the other, then why must they be eradicated or nuanced?  What is so hard about just following the rules?

      I have a great recipe for lasagna, but if I substitute spam for beef (because beef is too expensive), macaroni pasta for lasagna (because macaroni is more commonly found in my town), and cheddar cheese for mozzaella (because no one cooks with mozzarella any more!) I will have a dish that will nourish the body, no question, but who wants to go out of his way for Spam & Cheddar casserole when you can get an authentic dish of Lasagna for the same price?

      People who know nothing but Spam & Cheddar casserole can be very happy with it (after all, Protestants are happy with it, and theirs has no nutritional value!).  But once you have taken a chance and tasted Lasagna, it’s hard to go back.  This is why the purveyors of Spam & Cheddar, like dear Fr. Jack and Mr. Reed, are so strident.  They are beginning to realize that the shelf-life of the product they bought into with their very lives is much shorter than advertised.

I’m glad to say that, on this scale, our parish scores a big, fat ZERO—our worship is unabashedly GOD-centered! Thank you, Jesus!

Interesting in these comments - particularly from the priest - is the failure to notice that the changes were imposed by no one knows whom in the name of Vatican II which does not record the changes. The changes were sudden. They were made without reference to the laity, which eventually voted with their feet. So much for lay participation.
There is great sneering about traditional devotions from the college boys who think themselves more intelligent than their grandparents; they have been to university - generally Jesuitical - where devotional practices are considered the distractions of old folk. These are embarrassingly publicly pious, with their beads and missals and medals and rosary beads and scapulars. So also the modern with-it priest eschews the roman collar lest he be mistaken for a priest.

Gabriel, I am quite sure your intentions are golden in making the comments you made above. However, there is a clear historical record of how the various changes in the liturgy came to be following the promulgation of the Sacred Constitution on the Divine Liturgy in 1963. I was in my mid-twenties at that time and do recall that the changes came with not a lot of notice. In those days, church leaders were more autocratic than they are today and apparently felt little need to adequately prepare the people. However, the changes were well received as priests explained their significance as time went on. It is a canard that the decline in Mass attendance since the 60’s is directly traceable to the liturgical changes. The two are associated but one is not the cause of the other. Many Catholics opted out, as a matter of fact, because they decided that the Pope and the bishops had no authority to change the Mass. They were, you might say, more Catholic than the Pope. Another reason is that the reformed rites made it clear that there is an essential connection between what we pray and believe on Sundays and how we conduct our lives the rest of the week. Some just couldn’t live with that tension since they weren’t doing so hot in their daily lives.

There would be good reasons not to be mistaken for one of those priests or bishops who brought great harm to the church by their scandalous behavior with young people. I am a priest 24/7/365 regardless of my external garb and everyone to whom I minister knows that clearly.

Sorry to hear that you have become so cynical. I will pray for you.

Fr. Jack - You wrote, “I am a priest 24/7/365 regardless of my external garb and everyone to whom I minister knows that clearly.”  I do not doubt that is true.  But what of the people who do not “know” that you are a priest when you are dressed like everyone else?  Do they approach you to ask for your prayers because they just received a call that their Mother just died?  Do they ask you to hear their confession?  Do they adjust their behavior because a priest is seated at the next table?  Do they look at you and remember the priest who helped them out when they were young and are then drawn back into the Church and back on the path of salvation?  Do you remind them that ours is not meant to be a world full of relativism, but one of objective morals and standards to follow?  Do some priests who shed their clericals relax their own behavior and “forget” who they are?  Not looking for direct answers from you Father, but I simply offer this for meditation and private prayer.  God bless you for your “fiat” and for being a holy priest of God!!!

Father Jack: [the informality of the name is another symbol] Calling someone cynical does not advance the discussion. There may be a clear record of how the changes came about. You must share the information. It was certainly not an upwelling from the laity. You are quite judgmental [a favorite word of the reformers] that those who were put off by the changes did so because “they were more Catholic than the Pope”. The current Holy Father seems to find that the changes were abrupt and often unnecessary; he is scandalizing the reformers by wanting to reform the reform. Is he more Catholic than himself?

The arguments have gone on now for many years. One can rehearse and re-rehearse them until the cows come home. But until bishops begin again to act like bishops - not running for cover when scandal appears - the Church will remain in the parlous state in which it is now.

You may have missed it in your parish but when I was growing up in the 1940s there were many weekly devotions which have now disappeared, and many sodalities and societies which carried the Sunday devotions into the week. Today we have feast days moved from the week into the nearest Sunday, because, we are told, the sheep will not come to weekday Masses. It seems to be the fault of the sheep rather than the shepherds.

When we consider the number of bishops who were martyred at the time when the Church was beset by the same atmosphere of power-grabbing and lying and libertinism which is rampart in our culture, we can but rely on the promise of Our Lord that the Church will prevail.

We are each entitled to arrange the narrative with facts that comport with our point of view, but we are not at liberty to misstate the facts themselves. I do indeed recall the various sodalities and devotions and recall being attracted to them because speaking, praying, and singing in my own language was an important part of them. I was also blessed for a time. To be part of a parish that used the dialogue mass in which all the people participated through the praying or singing the parts of the Mass in Latin. I took five years of Latin in school and it has helped me so much in developing a richer vocabulary with which to enage in rational thought. I excelled also In logic, metaphysics, and epistemology which have served me well in seeking the knowledge of what is right and just.

However, in those good old days, the church was also highly stratified. There were the popes, cardinals, archbishops, bishops, monsignors, curates, brothers, sisters, and laity—in that precise pyramidal order. The laity were relegated tp praying, paying, and obeying while following the marching orders of those who were so much closer to God than they were. You could approach a priest for confession (frequently) or communion (infrequently) but for little else because they were always praying in their fortress like rectories. But at least there was little or no doubting or even asking questions. All was well with packed pews on sunday for the blessedly short mass which we attended under the threat of being condemned to eternal hell fire.

It is at this point in the narrative that my thoughts turn to Vatican II. For you, I presume, this is where the church went off the rails through misinterpreting it’s teachings. For me, it’s where my life changed forever. From it I learned that the church has a mission that involved me as a member of God’s priestly and holy people. I also learned that I have a right and responsibility to participate fully, actively, and consciously—exteriorly and interiorly—in Christ’s perfect sacrifice as offered and celebrated in the Eucharist. How wonderful that mass could be about far more than just watching the Consecration. Christ was truly present in various ways—but especially in the Holy Sacrament—so that I and the entire church could be consecrated to his love and service. No more hurried and mumbled masses in which I was so often a mere passive spectator—even in the Latin dialogue masses.

Pope Benedict is a brilliant scholar and truly holy priest, but this doesn’t mean he has all the answers. He is rather the servant of the servants of God who is forbidden by the clear mandate of his master not to lord it over those he serves. I’ve read a great many of his writings and have profited much from his insights and opinions, but I take exception to his historical reading of the Council and how we got from then until now. It really shows that popes and curial officials appear to have little or no experience of worship in ordinary parishes with ordinary people. Rather they approach their analysis of the mass from abstract documents and the more majestic and cleric centered masses of roman basilicas. I remember being a concelebrant at the high altar in St. Peters when I was a young priest. Talk about WOW! But how different in so many practical ways from mass I’m my own parish.

I’m a real person, Gabriel, not a cutout figure of a “Vatican II priest”. I lead a real community of Catholics in which we all struggle to love and serve the Lord. We are not interested in being led back to a time and a culture which no longer exists. We are resolved to become a holy people.

Father Luke: You do really need a cliche-alarm for your writing. “Pay, pray and obey” Church is a tiresome slur on the Church of your parents and grandparents; you know, the ones who built the schools and the churches which are now being torn down. And you tend to presume my opinions. I do not believe in post hoc, ergo propter hoc. But I do believe that one cannot have a post without an ante.

The point of my reference to sodalities and parish societies [Holy Name, for example] is to demonstrate that there was more evident piety then, than there is now. Confession was every Saturday. Will you tell me that this was bad?

I believe that where the American Church [and the Canadian and the French and the Irish, etc] went off the rails was in the resistance [on the part of the laity, seconded by the episcopate and the clergy - see Bishop Shannon’s account] to Humanae Vitae: which is to say, sex. The Pill was thought to be the great discovery: cutting copulation from its result.

You as a confessor will undoubtedly know of the extent that sex plays in our fallen human nature. And from that resistance follows divorce and remarriage, concubinage, homosexual activity, “unplanned” pregnancy [“the stork wasn’t supposed to come”], and abortion. And the scandals which have rocked the Church itself.

The liturgy is a side issue compared to our human penchant for sin. And the presence of Satan “as a roaring lion, walking about, seeking whom he may devour”. We may have been bullied in our pay pray and obey Church[NOT], but we did not ignore the presence of Satan.

You might give some thought as to how closely many of our dioceses have come to resemble Protestant sects; you know, those sects who mocked nuns, who cannot abide statues of saints, which go through a semblance of the consecration, and have “priests” and “bishops” who are not priests and bishops.

Enjoy life in your world, Gabriel. Live and let live is my sentiment. BTW, what is informal about identifying myself as Fr. Jack. The pope is always referred to by first name, is he not?

Rick Reed,the full meaning of choice requires that there be multiple options.Are you in accord with pregnant women having multiple options when it comes to carrying to term or not?(I certainly prefer “gay” to mean happy).
Fr. Jack,it doesn’t seem that you have anything to offer those faithful who believe that becoming a holy people involves cultivating a sense of obligation to be led back to a time and culture which they believe should never have ended.

“The pope is always referred to by first name, is he not?”

Uh, well..no.
“Benedict” isn’t precisely a first name in the usual sense; it’s almost more part of his honorific title.  We don’t refer to “XVI” as being his last name, do we?
I’ve never heard anyone credible refer to “Pope Joseph” for any length of time, nor did we use “Cardinal Joseph” much; I heard “Cardinal Ratzinger”.
I remember the cultural trend toward use of first names or nicknames beginning during my youth, maybe even my teens.  I thought it cool then, it supposedly made priests “more personal”.  Well, a priest once gently chastised me about that:  He reminded me that I wouldn’t be called, “Mr. John”, though that IS my first name.  I didn’t like it much, but he DID have a good point.
I don’t precisely object to a priest’s first name, even a nickname, but I think it’s not always completely appropriate.  Seems to me a little formality can be a good thing.  I don’t buy all of the idea of making priests more like laypeople actually.  You, men who’ve been ordained, are NOT exactly like we, the lay people of the Church.  I think the honorific title and a last name quite appropriate.

On other parts, I’ve heard this mantra against “pray, pay, and obey” quite a little.  Honestly, given all I’ve seen, “pray” receives a pretty nasty rap.  If anything, I’d suggest that we don’t emphasize “pray” nearly enough.  We can’t expect to convert a nation at all if we have no Rosaries, Stations of the Cross, or other devotions.  We can’t well enact God’s will for our lives if we don’t talk to Him.

It’s quite true that “pay and obey” have been abused.  Well, so have the opposite.  We won’t have praiseworthy church buildings or a morally virtuous city, state, or nation if we persist with a general laissez-faire approach.

Then again, I don’t quite get the view about too much abstraction from Pope Benedict or the curia.  I’d say the Holy Spirit played a profound role in shaping his priesthood.  Being an average Joe doesn’t always fit the need; we need knowledgeable and competent priests, professors, bishops, and cardinals too.  He’s been all of the above, which thrills me.  I’ve heard from entirely too many “knowledgeable” professors and others who fed all manner of rationalism, progressivism, and what-not.  I’m quite thrilled with a pope who can argue philosophy, theology, and other concerns competently.  Then again, Pope Benedict..is far from unique on this.  True, he’s not the public personality that JP II was, but JP II, himself, offered us a great deal of intellectual meat for chewing.  I would be thrilled if, during my (Catholic) high school career, that we would’ve studied his Theology of the Body.  Sadly, I didn’t know this even existed until a few years ago.

I don’t know what your parish needs, but I’d bet a few of them would benefit greatly from hearing a good bit of intellectually savvy material.  I’d bet they hear from militant secularists as much as I do; I’ll bet they could use some healthy, Catholic, ammunition.

BTW,
Fr Jack, can you more fully explain your comment regarding receiving communion more infrequently?
I’m not acquainted with any rules, canonical or cultural, that the Church ever passed against receiving Communion?  Do you refer to something mostly insinuated?  Something else?
I’m not following you here.

Louis E., I’ve come to accept that my choice isn’t everyone else’s choice.  I can’t change that.  I can hope they see my view and follow my lead where appropriate, but I know that there are other choices to other people.  I may not agree, but will, in this great country, defend their right to have a different opinion than mine.

I abhor the killing of anyone, abortion or death penalty.  Not everyone shares my view, but I do what I can to persuade them.  As humans, God gave us the free will to make choices.  Not everyone in the world agrees that my personal choice is right for them.

@Fr. Jack. Don’t you just love these “let’s get back to the good days” holier than thou and more Catholic than the Pope himself Catholics calling themselves “traditionalists”? The man who participated in my wedding with a Congregationalist Minister was the head of the Newman Center next to UMass/Amherst for decades and baptized my first three children and he was affectionally known as “Fr. Joe” Quigley, SJ. If “Fr. Joe” was good enough for J (for James) Joseph Quigley, SJ, “Fr. Jack” sounds great to me, too. BTW, the man who buried both my parents also went by “Fr. Jack” too.
  Hmmm, isn’t stuffiness of the kind demonstrated in these posts a variation of the Daddy of all Cardinal Sins: PRIDE? God Bless ya Fr. Jack!

How sad!  This article unleashed a whole array of uncharitable thoughts and comments.  I hope we listen well to the Gospel this Tuesday.  Jesus looked at the crowds who had just been to the synagogue and realized that they were like sheep without a shepherd.  The Jewish leaders, who should have been giving these people strength to live, were instead bewildering them with subtle arguments about the Law, which had no help and comfort in them.  When they should have been helping people to stand upright, they were bowing them down instead under the intolerable weight of the Law.  The Jewish leaders were offering people a religion which was a handicap instead of a support. 
That’s why Jesus says these people in the synagogue are like sheep without a shepherd.  Jesus encouraged them, lifted them up, and gave them hope. 
And that’s why I pray that while I am never perfect at it that whatever I say or do is always done as an instrument of Christ to encourage, lift up, and offer hope. 
I am not sure what this author was thinking.  It sure wasn’t funny and was seemingly void of any charity.

Rick.capital punishment kills actual people,abortion prevents births of what could become people.
Steven,I’m not religious myself,just consider religions “changing with the times” to be exposing themselves as hypocrites.God is eternal (and does not write books or have an official fan club).

Louis E, that’s exactly my point.  I choose not to support either action, and do my best to convince others to do the same.  But it’s ultimately their choice that will weigh on their consciences.  I do everything I can, but being human, can only do what I can do.  Killing others is not my choice.

Rick,
Seems to me that by the logic you present, we could readily justify allowing suicide, physician-assisted or other acts.  We do not.

I find it quite odd how people will whine that we, Christians, are “imposing our values on others who don’t believe”, yet by that same mantra, apparently they’re allowed to impose THEIR values on US.  Any time two sides propose diametrically opposed views, both cannot win.  One side or the other must prevail.

Our society routinely demonstrates the callous view we take toward life.  We kill our children before they have a chance to live.  We routinely teach those children who survive that they may fornicate without consequences.  Sometimes murder of another child becomes part of the “solution”.  In all cases, there are consequences.  Some physical, some spiritual.  Also, we attempt to redefine even the idea of family, so that two men may be parents, as may two women.  No society can do much better than slowly kill itself when we do not admit to morals.

Ultimately, we’ll have no choice but to impose laws that many people won’t like.  If we don’t, our nation will not survive another 200 years.

Fr. Jack,

You say you have been a priest/deacon for 40 years?  Which means you were in Seminary in the late sixties/early seventies?  Say no more.  That’s all we need to know.  You see no correlation between Vatican II abuses and the lack of priests and people in the Pews?  Then I say you’re not looking.  No, it’s not about frilly costumes or incense.  But it isn’t about butterflies and peace signs either.

“There’s no harm” is not the same as “It brings with it the most good”.  I wonder how many consecrated hosts were found lying in the parking lot before we began taking communion in the hand.  I wonder what percentage of Catholics believed in the True Presence before Vatican II.  I wonder why boys still want to be firemen and policemen post Vatican II and they have stopped wanting to be priest.  Perhaps the “uniform” had something to do with it.  Something that sets them apart and makes them stand out even when they aren’t chasing criminals or putting out fires.  I wonder why my children have gone through 12 years of Catholic School and never been taught by a nun, yet I was taught, pre vatican II by numerous nuns in those same schools.  I wonder if Catholics are flocking to protestant mega churches because they have better music has anything to do with the Vatican II lessons that Mass should be entertaining?
 

Maybe I’m way off base.  Maybe it was coincidence.  Or maybe, just maybe, a lot of liberties were taken with the documents of Vatican II and the results have been disastrous.  What would St. Paul think of our Masses today?  Would St. Terese of Avila attend a rock concert Mass and clap at the end?  How would Augustine react to Mass attendees suddenly having a coffee clutch in the middle of the Liturgy of the Eucharist under the guise of the Kiss of Peace?  What would Aquinas think of women giving the homily, or 20 lay people handing out communion while the priest sat back and watched?  We didn’t face East because we hoped to visit Virginia Beach one day.  We faced East because we believed that at any moment, Jesus would come walking through the door.  We didn’t kneel at Altar Rails because we needed to rest our weary bodies, we knelt because it signified the sanctity of the moment.  Priests didn’t wear black because they wanted to “disappear” they wore their clerical garb because they were set apart.  As someone mentioned, seeing a priest meant you knew who to turn to for help.  I’ve told my children if they ever need help to look for someone in a Police Uniform.  What would they do if the police force stopped wearing those uniforms? 

There are sound and practical reasons for many of the things we did pre Vatican II but there are few sound or practical reasons for many of the changes that took place post Vatican II.  Perhaps it’s not “either/or”, perhaps we need to step back and keep what is beneficial and eradicate that which is either not beneficial or what is downright dangerous. But to claim that Vatican II abuses are not responsible for the lack of Catechisis in the following generations, or the lack of belief in the True Presence, or the empty pews, or the lack of priests and nuns, is well…blind at the least and downright denial at worst.

God Bless

John, may I respectfully suggest that you actually take the time to read the entire set of posts, especially those written by me, before you assume to lodge me in a “camp” supporting a viewpoint.  I never said I supported anything you seem to attribute to me and it’s a hard twist on anyone version of logic to arrive at your comments based on what I know I wrote.  Morals are subjective.  My way is not everyone’s way, but I do what I can to let others know what I consider good and, more importantly, why. 

I don’t prefer to live in a world where I don’t have the choice to know what’s good and why it’s good.  I prefer to live in a world where I have the freedom to attain the knowledge to back up my opinions with facts and feelings.

Go back and read all of my posts before dropping a sentence like the first one in your post.  There’s no need to be offensive.  If one can’t have a civil conversation with an opposing point of view, can one have a civil conversation?  As I look back at some of the posts above (not just yours), I wonder why some work so hard to perpetuate negative stereotypes.

mk, please don’t blame all that’s wrong with the Church on Vatican II.  That is so inherently unfair.  St. Paul, St. Therese, St. Augustine, St. Aquinas… I wonder if they’d recognize the Mass 500 years before their respective times.  The Mass has constantly evolved since its inception, and maybe, just maybe, St. Paul might come closest to recognizing what Popes John (23) and Paul (6) were trying to accomplish.

If deacons historically gave homilies, then Aquinas would quite possibly be comfortable with a woman giving a homily.  But I don’t have the information on hand that shows when women stopped being deacons.  In the early days of the Church, lay people indeed helped carry Communion to those unable to make it to the “Mass”.  I believe that this is one of the oldest ministries entrusted to “lay” people.

Perhaps if one believes that the chasm between lay and ordained is so vast that we can do nothing in common, then one should explore how and why there’s a phrase (and I’m sure I’m messing up the exact terminology at this point) the “priesthood of the baptized”.

Are priests here to lead us in our actions or to do our actions for us?  Vatican 2’s biggest shift was not Mass in vernacular or removing Communion rails, but rather putting the responsibility and burden of salvation back on the shoulders of the people.  All of a sudden, going to Mass carried a sense of purpose beyond showing up and putting one’s time in, as I’ve heard it described.

Mass is not about hiding a priest behind candles or watching his back because God is only in one direction.  Mass is a communal prayer that we all have the responsibility to consciously join.  No longer can we just show up and read a prayer book or say a rosary while the priest prays.  It’s not about formulas or getting the minimum prayers to be “legal”, it’s about taking some time to praise God.

Priests who use Eucharistic Prayer 2 as a norm are short-changing their congregations.  Parishes who have Masses every 90 minutes on Sunday morning are short-changing their assemblies.  Parishes who insist on their choirs in a loft (#13) don’t know where choirs originally were nor how they got to the loft in the first place.

I don’t know the entire history of the Church, but I continue to learn.  Most importantly, I ask “why”.  Asking “why” doesn’t mean that something is wrong, but rather allows one to understand what is going on.  Many of the actions in Mass prior to Vatican 2 emphasized the distance between God and man.  These distances grew through the years as the Mass evolved.  Vatican 2 was an effort to get us back to our roots.

Rick,

I don’t blame Vatican II at all.  I blame the liberties that were taken from the documents.  My understanding is that a Council cannot be “wrong”.  It is “guaranteed” to be error free.  But Scripture is error free and look what the Protestants have done with it.  No disrespect to Protestants per se, but they have taken an error free text and misinterpreted it, which has resulted in a completely false understanding of what Scripture says.  The same, I believe, was done with the Vatican II documents.  It’s not the documents themselves that are at fault, but the misinterpretation of them that is to blame.  This misinterpretation or “loose” interpretation has led to a flock at sea.  I also understand that there were different abuses being perpetrated prior to Vatican II and VII was a way of correcting those.  Unfortunately the pendulum swung to far to the left.  Not every change that occurred after VII were bad.  I am certainly not suggesting that only the Latin Mass should be allowed or that Gregorian Chant is the only music worthy of the Mass.  BUT, some of the changes were either done for the sake of change, done out of a rebellious spirit (feminism/inclusive language…seriously, how brain challenged does one need to be not to know that “MAN"KIND means women?) or done out of a desire to become more like the world.  I’m grateful, more than I can say, that Pope Benedict is trying to correct those mistakes. 

I agree that we might not know where choirs were to begin with, but I can tell you that anything that takes the focus off of God, especially Jesus in the Eucharist, is wrong.  There are guidelines for how Music should be used and what’s it’s function is during the Mass.  It is supposed encourage contemplation, to direct you to what is taking place on the altar…if we are “looking” at the musicians then we are not looking where we should.  Big Screen TV’s in a normal sized Church, 8 Eucharistic Ministers for a Mass of 300, 10 minutes worth of handshaking at the Kiss of Peace, Clapping for all the people who served at the Mass…These are abuses.  We may have emphasized the distance of God before, but now?  70% of Catholics no longer believe that God is even in the building.

Rick,

Morals are subjective.

That is the most telling sentence you’ve written.  Catholics do not believe that Morals are subjective.

“Morals are subjective.”
“My way is not everyone’s way, but I do what I can to let others know what I consider good and, more importantly, why.”

Those two statements make your viewpoint pretty clear, Rick.  You would seem to support a view of moral relativism.  I hope you don’t.  Our Church has condemned this view.  Morals are not subjective, but are rooted in objective Truth.  Sometimes this creates a conflict for daily living.
During a college course, I read a story about a woman who learned that her husband had been in an affair with another.  She promptly took her children to the nearby sea-shore, intending for the family to commit suicide by walking into the surf and drowning.  Apparently, her native culture not only believed this acceptable, but might’ve even believed her morally derelict by not inflicting consequences upon her husband.

I had to struggle with this for some time.  On one hand, I wished to honor someone else’s cultural beliefs and identity.  On the other hand, my faith teaches that suicide and murder are both mortal sins.  How to reconcile these ideas?
I finally had to understand that the story and its consequences had been presented incompletely.  The class didn’t mention that mortal sin requires three things:  Grave matter, knowledge of grave matter, and full consent of the will.  Our Church teaches that grave acts may be mitigated in many cases by lack of knowledge or some force of coercion.
Notice that the Church teaches that sin may be MITIGATED, not ERASED.  Grave matter remains grave matter, regardless of the intervening circumstances.
In the context of the woman’s story, I think her sin would be mitigated both by her lack of knowledge of Truth AND by the possible cultural coercion.  This would NOT mean that her suicide (and also murder of family) would be sinless; it would mean that her sin might not be mortal in this case.

Morals, being rooted in objective truth, do not have the relativistic nature that your comment suggests.

We ARE morally obligated to teach our faith, to expect others to live up to these beliefs, and to help people understand the consequences.  This WILL mean that we’ll conflict with culturally diverse groups.  We always have.
This doesn’t mean that we should browbeat others into our belief system, but neither does it mean we should accept their decisions at face value.

If we don’t have any expectations for ourselves or for others, I can’t declare that our faith means anything important.

Posted by Fr. Jack on Monday, Jul 4, 2011 5:21 PM (EDT):
“Enjoy life in your world, Gabriel. Live and let live is my sentiment. BTW, what is informal about identifying myself as Fr. Jack. The pope is always referred to by first name, is he not?”.

This could be translated as “you are dismissed”. Live and let live is not a Catholic attitude. We - especially priests - are under the gravest obligation to get others into heaven. Even kicking and screaming. You might try answering particular points in the discussion.

The Holy Father’s first name is Joseph. Calling him Joe, or Sepp, would be a bit presumptuous. Rather like calling your parents by their first names.

Informality with priests destroys the mystery of the calling. You have the power to call down God in the Consecration. Consider the poor souls who try to call up the devil.

You also have the power to forgive sins. A sin forgiven by you is a sin forgotten by God.

Wow, let’s see if THIS won’t be twisted:

The.

mk, I try to be mature enough to believe that my morals are not your morals, and my morals are not those of people in the Himalayas, or maybe not those of people in Hawaii, or maybe not of people in New York.  I do what I can to share my morals and try to get others to believe as I believe, but I can’t force it upon them, nor do I get haughty and condescending if others don’t toe my line.  I do my best to share the Good News, but can’t force others to believe or follow my morals.  I’m not the Inquisition.

Rick,

Your statement was not “Some people adhere to a different set of standards, or have different values than I do”...you’re statement was “Morals are subjective”.

They are not.

People’s acceptance of Morality might be subjective, but the Morality itself is Objective.  Nobody is suggesting that you browbeat anyone into submission.  We are only saying that you need to recognize that Morality exists “outside” of you.  Our free wills mean we can obey and recognize that Morality, but we are not free to “change” it.  It is what it is, objectively.  It is wrong to murder and it doesn’t matter what culture you come from.  It is wrong to rape someone.  I don’t care where you live.  It might be acceptable from a legal standpoint but that does not make it moral.  We adhere to Natural Law.  God is the one that determines what is moral and what is not.  Men do not have that ability.  All we can do is follow what God has written on our hearts.  To allow another to continue in his sin, without speaking up, is not an option.  This does not mean that you attack another or embarrass or harass another…it simply means that you recognize, acknowledge and iterate what you know to be right.  It is your obligation as a Catholic.

The one thing that morality is not, is subjective.

As Chesterton says “Men do not differ much about what things they will call evils; they differ enormously about what evils they will call excusable.”

Rick,

Wow, let’s see if THIS won’t be twisted:

The.

LOL.  Actually, you made some good points in your Vatican II comment.  I read your “morality” comment after that one.  I’m not trying to twist your words.  I just want to be clear on what Morality is and what it is not.  That’s my “obligation” as a Catholic!  ;)

Rick,
I find it rather strange that you’re so concerned about “imposing your morals” upon other people.  Most people who would complain about “imposing values” have themselves imposed a lack of morals on all of us by default.  We can commit the sin of neglect if we don’t object to others’ sinful behavior.
Notice that while we DO preach the virtue of chastity and celibacy, we do NOT impose our values on others.  We do not forcibly remove condoms from the shelves at Wal-Mart, we don’t police every person’s bedroom to ensure that the couple inside are married, we don’t do a host of things that we could, in theory, attempt in the name of our morals.

I think most accusations about arrogance, condescension, or related errors..rather misplaced.  Most people only object to reminders about moral behavior..because they wish to commit those sins without any interference.
I’d say the epitome of arrogance to be the insistence that we keep our mouths shut.  If we don’t object, we place our own souls at risk.

I think Dr Laura said it best:  Make certain that your loved ones (and friends) know where you stand.  If they choose to ignore or reject your concerns, that’s mostly their error.  But don’t assume they know and fail to say anything.

Seems to me that’s reasonable.

It is said of Lord Cornwallis, when sent to India, that he forbade the practice of suttee - burning the widow on the husband’s funeral pyre. The local priests complained that he was interfering in their religious practices. He replied “Not at all gentlemen. I am but combining out traditions. You continue to burn the widows; I will continue to hang you for it”.

John, I don’t keep my mouth shut.  I do share my morals and concerns with others.  People who know me have no doubts where I stand.  But at the end of the proverbial day, I also respect others’ right to be different than me.

Gabriel,

I love it!

No person has a “right” to commit or promote immoral acts or beliefs, Rick.

We’re obligated to ensure, to the best of our ability, that law reflects as moral of a frame of mind as possible.
If we fail at that, if we fail to advocate for morals in law, we’re often almost as guilty of the sin as the person who committed it.

John, despite your views, or despite my views, these are not the views of others.  What’s immoral to me or you is not necessarily immoral to someone else.  Where we fail is if we fail to advocate what we perceive (or even know) to be right.

Here’s a (probably lousy) analogy.  At one point, educated men were certain that the universe rotated around the earth.  Anyone who thought otherwise was simply wrong.  Even before that, people were certain that the earth was flat.  Those who thought otherwise were simply wrong.  At one point, certain people knew that suttee was right and proper and the moral thing to do.  The major changes in people’s thinking were made with great struggle.

There are people who are certain that man has never landed on the moon, that it was all fake.  Are they immoral to those who actually walked on the moon?  These are not the greatest of analogies, I’ll admit.  But my point is that I respect others even while I try and hope that my morals are correct and I invite others to share my beliefs.

Even if we fail to persuade others of our viewpoints, we at least try.

Rick Reed - With all due respect, I believe that you are simply confusing scientific or provable fact with moral decisions.  The planetary system (Is Pluto a planet or not?  Ha!) and whether or not “the Eagle ever landed” are one thing, but whether it is immoral or not to kill, steal, commit adultery, lie, etc., are quite another!

It is good to discuss these matters, so I encourage all to continue to do so with love and respect for one another.  God bless you all!

iDeacon,
Well said!

As for how to refer to others, I generally take a cue from the person to whom I am referring.  How do they wish to be called?  If my doctor says, “Call me John,” I call him John.  If a parishioner says, “I prefer to be called “Mrs. Brown,” I call him Mrs. Brown.  If someone prefers to be called “Father Jack,” who are we to say “You shouldn’t be referred to the way you want to be?”  BTW, many of the saints are referred to by their first names.  How many people really know St. (Padre) Pio’s last name, or Blessed (Mother) Teresa’s last name, or St. Francis of Assisi’s last name?  While “Father Jones” might encourage a certain respect for an ecclesiastical office, “Father Greg” might encourage us to see the priest as one in the communion of saints.  Both ways have their place, merits, and limitations.

RicK

Look at this statement:

What’s immoral to me or you is not necessarily immoral to someone else. 

What John and I are trying to point out is that what is immoral to God is immoral to all.  What you are <i>trying<i> to say, I think, is that some people don’t recognize this.  But that is a very, very, very different statement than “What is immoral to me is not necessarily immoral to someone else.”

“HOW” you say something is important.  I hear you struggling with yourself.  It’s like you “Know” that morality is objective, but you don’t quite believe it.  We live in a world where we have been trained to think that we create reality.  A thing IS how we PERCEIVE it.  It’s been ingrained in us.  But it’s wrong. A thing is not beautiful because we say it is.  We say it is beautiful, because it IS beautiful.  A thing is not just because we say it is.  We say it is just, because it IS just.  A think is not moral because we say it is, we say it is moral because it IS moral.  This is not the message that you are sending.  If you put the words “I THINK” before the statement “murder is immoral” you have fallen into the trap of moral relativism.  Perhaps without even realizing it.

Sunsets are beautiful.  They just are.  Some people, however, do not “SEE” that they are beautiful.  But their perception does not change the “fact” that the sunset IS beautiful.  To say “I think” the sunset is beautiful is to say that you have the power to grant or deny beauty.  But you don’t.  We don’t.  We have the faculty to “recognize” beauty when we see it, but we don’t have the power to give or take the reality that something is beautiful.  Granted the waters get muddied sometimes.  Granted it isn’t always black and white.  Granted we can’t always “know” what is right, beautiful or just.  But that has no bearing on whether or not a thing IS right, beautiful or just.  The fault lies with our inability to perceive that which is there.  The fault does not lie with the thing itself.

That’s all John and I are trying to say.  We believe that even though you claim otherwise, the truth is that you believe morality is relative, and that is a very UNCatholic way to think.

It is likely true that “educated people” [like our college graduates] believed that the earth was the center of the universe. They had to be educated into that belief. We are well aware of that practice, called indoctrination.
The earth is flat theory was promoted by Washington Irving in his life Columbus. Few if any believed it against the evidence of their eyes.
I have read a theory that suttee was encouraged to discourage wives from poisoning their husbands.
In my ignorance I know of no cultures which would not accept the greater part of the Ten Commandments: honor thy parents, do not kill, do not steal, do not lie, do not fornicate with another man’s wife, and such like. It seems to me that imposing these rules on anyone would have the effect of protecting those whose rights would other wise be violated. Those who object should perhaps move to the moon. I have little love for the United Nations; but find few objections to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Remove Latin, no one speaks it should be on the top of the list.

Mitch, Latin is still used as the universal lingua franca in Vatican City where our Magisterium toils day and night trying to help the rest of us understand our faith. And the “rest of us” includes people from all over the planet; thus necessitating some form of universal language required of our “higher pay grades” within the Church’s hierarchy to use when communicating ... besides English ... which as I’m sure you’re well aware of from reading about Murdoch’s troubles of late in England, is a very easy language to use when hacking. Now we wouldn’t want the Deposit of Truth hacked, right?
  Besides, if you take out Latin, guaranteed you’ll be getting more CCM and other nonsensical tunes foisted on a very unwilling majority of the laity who are sick and tired of the Peter, Paul & Mary (folk music) schtick. C’mon, is there anybody out there who’ll take Kumbaya even over Palestrina’s worst works…and all of us have bad days?)
  What’s next? Adding Slim Whitmanesque touches to our liturgical music along with Kumbaya and our duller than watching white paint drying on drywall “New Order” liturgical masterpiece (for relieving sleep deprivation for insomniacs? Lordy, mmmmm, mmmm, mmm.

view for more detail   to get new coupon

Do you really feel that Syria spying on dissidents?

These steps are VERY effective.  Our diocese, led by our radical Bishop, has instituted most of them.  As a result the number of worshippers has decined by 2/3 in just over 12 years!

How long O Lord?