Diversity In The Way Mass Is Celebrated

[OraProMe]

I was thinking a few days ago how great it would be if the Holy Father declared the only music to be used in Mass is gregorian chant and that the eucharistic prayer must be recited ad orientem. I also started reflecting on a (friendly) conversation I had with a priest about the issue and he stated "every Mass celebrated at this parish is done according to the GIRM, straight off the Popes desk". I'm not particularly a fan of the way this parish celebrates Mass but I did some research and the priest was right. I guess for pastoral reasons a more traditional liturgy is right for some but for others a more charismatic or communal Mass is the right liturgy for them. As long as it's within the rules of the Church it should be okay, right? This is something I've found hard to digest and I always pick the more reverent, quiet Mass at my Cathedral over my parish.

Anyway, do you think that there is place for diversity in music and the way the Mass is celebrated aslong as it's allowed by the Church? Or should all Masses be "traditional" in style?

[Archaeology cat]

Well, I think all Masses should be very reverent. If that can happen in any given style (provided it's faithful to the GIRM), I suppose I'm OK with that. I personally prefer the Gregorian chant and would love to see it celebrated ad orientem and for the altar rail to be used. But that's just my preference.

[CatherineM]

As long as it follows the GIRM, I'm okay with it. Our new priests are having to come in and correct a bunch of things that crept in with fast turn over of several priests before them.

[Resurrexi]

I think that the ordinary form of the Mass of the Roman Rite should be celebrated as it is on EWTN, or, even better, as at Brompton Oratory.

[zunshynn]

I've never been to a parish that celebrated the NO completely according to the GIRM. I suppose they're out there, perhaps, I've just never been to one.

I think we've convinced ourselves that the GIRM allows for a lot more diversity than it actually does.

[goldenchild17]

This is something I am coming to struggle with and will probably be uncomfortable with for a little while. But I don't think that the Church can officially issue a defective (not only not invalid, but not even bad) Mass. So I think as long as a Mass is celebrated according to its precepts and in good spirit (i.e. with no intentions to bend the rules or "push" the limits) then I think its possibly fine, though I think any adaptations should be kept to a minimum where possible.

Edited August 29, 2009 by goldenchild17

[CatherineM]

The worst I ever saw was one that used oreos and milk as the elements of communion. I didn't partake.

[Archaeology cat]

[quote name='CatherineM' date='29 August 2009 - 07:21 PM' timestamp='1251570088' post='1957939']
The worst I ever saw was one that used oreos and milk as the elements of communion. I didn't partake.
[/quote]

[Vincent Vega]

[quote name='CatherineM' date='29 August 2009 - 02:21 PM' timestamp='1251570088' post='1957939']
The worst I ever saw was one that used oreos and milk as the elements of communion. I didn't partake.
[/quote]
You're kidding.

[eagle_eye222001]

[quote name='CatherineM' date='29 August 2009 - 02:21 PM' timestamp='1251570088' post='1957939']
The worst I ever saw was one that used oreos and milk as the elements of communion. I didn't partake.
[/quote]

I don't want to believe you............however it's sad I can believe that.

[aalpha1989]

[quote name='OraProMe' date='29 August 2009 - 03:12 AM' timestamp='1251529955' post='1957681']
I was thinking a few days ago how great it would be if the Holy Father declared the only music to be used in Mass is gregorian chant and that the eucharistic prayer must be recited ad orientem. I also started reflecting on a (friendly) conversation I had with a priest about the issue and he stated "every Mass celebrated at this parish is done according to the GIRM, straight off the Popes desk". I'm not particularly a fan of the way this parish celebrates Mass but I did some research and the priest was right. I guess for pastoral reasons a more traditional liturgy is right for some but for others a more charismatic or communal Mass is the right liturgy for them. As long as it's within the rules of the Church it should be okay, right? This is something I've found hard to digest and I always pick the more reverent, quiet Mass at my Cathedral over my parish.

Anyway, do you think that there is place for diversity in music and the way the Mass is celebrated aslong as it's allowed by the Church? Or should all Masses be "traditional" in style?
[/quote]
"OK" does not mean "best"... the GIRM does allow for too much diversity because of the language it uses. It is not specific enough, and we should always strive for the best liturgy possible meaning, no, charismatic masses are not ok. They take the focus off of the Eucharist and place it on whatever individuals are feeling (I realize that this may not be true for some charismatics, but when everyone's doing it individuals feel pressure to pray charismatically and they try to do so by stirring their own emotions). I know that this is a generalization, but I feel safe in making it, having been around a lot of charismatic prayer.

Anyway, just because Masses don't break the GIRM doesn't mean that they are reverent, prayerful, or ideal. The GIRM doesn't specifically say that liturgical dancing is wrong, either, but it is generally agreed that liturgical dancing is an abuse. The GIRM allows for extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion without real reference to when they are permitted and when they are not. I bet you would be surprised that in a lot of cases when they are used they shouldn't really be used.

To be fair, the GIRM should only really be understood in reference to Sacrosanctum Concilium, because I don't think any real liturgical abuses would occur if it was. Because people make reference only to the GIRM, however, and not to any other liturgical documents, there is this great diversity that you speak of and it is dangerous.

[Marie-Therese]

[quote name='goldenchild17' date='29 August 2009 - 01:44 PM' timestamp='1251567841' post='1957920']
This is something I am coming to struggle with and will probably be uncomfortable with for a little while. But I don't think that the Church can officially issue a defective (not only not invalid, but not even bad) Mass. So I think as long as a Mass is celebrated according to its precepts and in good spirit (i.e. with no intentions to bend the rules or "push" the limits) then I think its possibly fine, though I think any adaptations should be kept to a minimum where possible.
[/quote]

Reading this makes me smile.


[quote name='CatherineM' date='29 August 2009 - 02:21 PM' timestamp='1251570088' post='1957939']
The worst I ever saw was one that used oreos and milk as the elements of communion. I didn't partake.
[/quote]

Absolutely disgraceful. Any priest who would preside at such a farce should be seriously dealt with by his bishop. It would be one thing if it were a straggling group of believers celebrating communion with whatever they had on hand because of something like a worldwide nuclear catastrophe. Any other reason is shameful.

Edited for grammar.

Edited August 29, 2009 by Marie-Therese

[iheartjp2]

[quote name='aalpha1989' date='29 August 2009 - 04:24 PM' timestamp='1251577477' post='1957993']
"OK" does not mean "best"... the GIRM does allow for too much diversity because of the language it uses. It is not specific enough, and we should always strive for the best liturgy possible meaning, no, [b]charismatic masses are not ok. They take the focus off of the Eucharist and place it on whatever individuals are feeling [/b](I realize that this may not be true for some charismatics, but when everyone's doing it individuals feel pressure to pray charismatically and they try to do so by stirring their own emotions). I know that this is a generalization, but I feel safe in making it, having been around a lot of charismatic prayer.

Anyway, just because Masses don't break the GIRM doesn't mean that they are reverent, prayerful, or ideal. The GIRM doesn't specifically say that liturgical dancing is wrong, either, but it is generally agreed that liturgical dancing is an abuse. The GIRM allows for extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion without real reference to when they are permitted and when they are not. I bet you would be surprised that in a lot of cases when they are used they shouldn't really be used.

To be fair, the GIRM should only really be understood in reference to Sacrosanctum Concilium, because I don't think any real liturgical abuses would occur if it was. Because people make reference only to the GIRM, however, and not to any other liturgical documents, there is this great diversity that you speak of and it is dangerous.
[/quote]


I was thinking about that last night. I attend a parish that happens to be one of the only parishes in the world that a bishop has allowed to have a professed and overt charismatic identity. It also happens to be one of 3 of the parishes in my city where one can go to a well-structured NO mass on a Sunday (there are 5 parishes in my town, including a student parish ).

It also happens to be one of two parishes in my diocese of 10 counties that has a perpetual adoration chapel.

To disagree on the nature of charismatics or the gifts that they believe to be real and at work in the Church is one thing, but to generalize them all to be 1) un-Eucharistic 2) irreverant and 3) self-centered and entirely focused on emotion isn't fair to all of them. The Church is diminishing in the U.S. and Europe while it's growing in leaps and bounds in Africa and South America [i]because[/i] of the witness of charismatics. Not to get off topic, I just thought that the comment was a bit unnecessary and not really in good taste.

Edited August 30, 2009 by iheartjp2

[picchick]

[quote name='goldenchild17' date='29 August 2009 - 01:44 PM' timestamp='1251567841' post='1957920']
This is something I am coming to struggle with and will probably be uncomfortable with for a little while. But I don't think that the Church can officially issue a defective (not only not invalid, but not even bad) Mass. So I think as long as a Mass is celebrated according to its precepts and in good spirit (i.e. with no intentions to bend the rules or "push" the limits) then I think its possibly fine, though I think any adaptations should be kept to a minimum where possible.
[/quote]


I agree. I am not one for waving of hands and such but this is a point that I have discussed several times on this phorum. I do not think that God hears one prayer or one language more than another. Just because my Mass doesn't speak and chant in Latin the whole time doesn't mean that God hears the Mass less. I do not think the Church should be able to limit music and language as long as it reverent.

I remember one converstation where I was discussing Pie Jesus by Fauré. People told me that it did not belong in a Mass because it was too soloistic. Also I remember discussing Masses by Mozart. Again it was too symphonic for a Mass for some people.

How I see it: People praise God in other ways than just chant and Latin. Why should the Church limit it to only one genre and call that one single genre "sacred"?

[iheartjp2]

As for the topic of the thread, it's simple and yet not. The Church has provided guidelines by which we celebrate something that unites the entire Church. There are, however, different customs that a lot of us wouldn't understand. In Africa, for example, masses last for about 2 or 3 hours instead of the standard 1 hour mass in the West where everyone's checking their watch to make sure they're only in an hour (I know this because I've known people to complain whenever they felt that mass went on "too long" ). There's a proper way to do things and there's a proper order in which they should be done. I think the problem that most of us have is with those who don't take that fact seriously. I was speaking of the charismatic parish of which I'm a member and the two things that make us different from any other parish are 1) the opportunity to praise God in tongues for an appr. one-minute period between "Amen" and a reprise of "for you alone..." during the Gloria. and 2) an opportunity for those who wish to praise God in tongues after the first communion song. Besides those two things, there's pretty much nothing at our mass that you wouldn't see at another. Most people are fine with mass at my parish, it's just that those who have never been recoil at the word "charismatic" for reasons that aalpha gave.