Saint Vincent de Paul Parish in Baldwinville and silence before Mass

Those who are bent on making their own unauthorized changes to the liturgy or who otherwise promote or tolerate various liturgical abuses often fail to appreciate how such an endeavor can constitute grave sin.  I know this because some have accused me of making a mountain out of a molehill for my opposition to various liturgical abuses.  Dr. Germain Grisez explains: "There are many reasons why it is wrong for priests intentionally to make unauthorized liturgical changes.  Two are especially important.  First, such changes sometimes embody or imply deviations from Catholic faith; even when they do not, they often omit (see here for example) or obscure something of the liturgy's expression of faith.  Thus, the Church teaches: 'The law of prayer is the law of faith: the Church believes as she prays.  Liturgy is a constitutive element of the holy and living Tradition' (cf. DV 8).  For this reason no sacramental rite may be modified or manipulated at the will of the minister or the community.  Even the supreme authority in the Church may not change the liturgy arbitrarily, but only in the obedience of faith and with religious respect for the mystery of the liturgy.' (CCC, 1124-1125).

Dr. Grisez continues, "..in the Eucharist, a priest acts in the person of Christ, who joins humankind to the Father; but in making unauthorized changes, a priest obscures Jesus' action, focuses attention on himself, and becomes an obstacle to the relationship between God and His People that priests are ordained to serve...Priests are agents ordained to deliver God's gifts to His People.  If they deliver some substitute for what Jesus has entrusted to them, they interpose themselves between - and defraud - both God and His People...

There are five additional reasons why unauthorized changes should not be made in the liturgy.  First, the liturgy is the worship of the Church as a body, and those who are ordained act as Church officials in performing liturgical roles.  So, insofar as a priest makes unauthorized changes, he misrepresents as the Church's what is in fact only his or some limited group's.  Even if this misrepresentation deceives no one and is intended for some good end, it is at odds with the reverence necessary for true worship.  Second, this essential irreverence and the obvious arbitrariness of intentional unauthorized changes strongly suggest that the Eucharist is not sacred, and this suggestion tends to undermine not only faith in Jesus' bodily presence in the consecrated elements, but faith that the Eucharist is Jesus' sacrifice made present for the faithful to share in.  Third, a priest who makes intentional, unauthorized changes acts with deplorable clericalism by imposing his personal preferences on the laity and violating the rights of those who quite reasonably wish only to participate in the Church's worship.  Fourth, intentionally making unauthorized changes sets a bad example of serious disobedience to the Church's norms, and this bad example is likely to encourage some people to think and do as they please not only in liturgical and canonical matters, but in matters of faith and morals.  Fifth...unauthorized liturgical changes often become a needless, divisive issue for the faithful, thus impeding the charity that the Eucharist should express and foster."

Still think that liturgical abuse is a small matter of little significance?  If so, this reflects on your own immaturity and not the objective truth that liturgical abuse constitutes grave matter.  How grave?  Again, Dr. Grisez:

"The reasons why priests should not make unauthorized liturgical changes also make it clear..that a priest's intentionally doing so is of itself matter of grave sin.  Of course, many changes are in themselves very minor, and a few perhaps even are real improvements.  But though this kind of sin admits  parvity, such small changes also are scandalous, not only because they give the faithful a bad example of disobedience but because they contribute to a clerical culture in which liturgical abuse is widely tolerated and sometimes even expected, so that some are encouraged to engage in far graver abuses.  Now, even a sin venial in itself becomes grave scandal when one foresees that it is likely to lead others to commit grave sin; thus, the element of scandal makes grave matter of even minor liturgical abuses likely to encourage more serious abuses by other priests.  Due to widespread confusion and negligence of some bishops, many priests undoubtedly lack sufficient reflection regarding this sin."


This past Sunday and the previous Sunday at Saint Vincent de Paul Parish in Baldwinville, Massachusetts, devout Catholics attempting to prepare for Holy Mass through prayer (including myself - I was attempting to pray my Rosary) were subjected to loud conversation and riotous laughter from a group of women who were taking part in some sort of support group.  The group sat in church - in front of the tabernacle no less - and engaged in inappropriate socializing without any regard for Jesus truly present in the Eucharist within the tabernacle Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity.

And this with the blessing of the "pastor" Father Francis Roberge.  At every Vigil Mass on Saturday afternoons, the choir and band will rehearse without any regard for the faithful who are trying to prepare for Mass.

As Father Peter M.J. Stravinskas, Ph.D., S.T.L., says in his book The Catholic Answer, Book 2: "Socializing is inappropriate in the body of the Church; that is for the vestibule and parish hall." (p. 195).  Monsignor Peter J. Elliott, in his book entitled Ceremonies of the Modern Roman Rite, has this to say: "The Church should be open well before the liturgy for those who wish to pray privately.  Silence is the best preparation for the celebration of the liturgy.  Apart from suitable music, no intrusion on the people's right to tranquility before the Eucharist should be tolerated, for example, musical or choral rehearsals, announcements which could be given later, or distractions in the sanctuary or elsewhere.  People may meet and talk before Mass, but in an area set well apart from the place where the liturgy is about to be celebrated." (Ceremonies of the Modern Roman Rite, No. 233, p. 87).

The General Instruction of the Roman Missal has this to say: "Sacred silence also, as part of the celebration, is to be observed at the designated times....Its purpose, however, depends on the time it occurs in each part of the celebration. Thus within the Act of Penitence and again after the invitation to pray, all recollect themselves; but at the conclusion of a reading or the homily, all meditate briefly on what they have heard; then after Communion, they praise and pray to God in their hearts. Even before the celebration itself, it is commendable that silence be observed in the church, in the sacristy, in the vesting room, and in adjacent areas, so that all may dispose themselves to carry out the sacred action in a devout and fitting manner."  (GIRM, No. 45).  

Silence should also be observed after Mass until one is outside the Church building, both for respect toward the Blessed Sacrament, and toward those members of the faithful who wish to prolong their thanksgiving after Mass.

When I politely informed the women who were engaging in inappropriate and loud conversation and laughter of this and that perhaps they could meet downstairs in the parish hall, I was told there was no room there.  I was also subjected to hate-filled glares and angry commentary from a small group of unhappy souls who obviously have a problem with the Church's teaching and liturgical rubrics.

As Father Vincent Miceli, S.J., reminded us some years back, "Rampant immorality is [an] obstacle opposing the work of evangelization.  Since conduct follows from convictions, once Catholics cancel their creed from their lives, their conduct inevitably becomes depraved....The decay on all sides of Christian morals makes it not only difficult to bring in those outside the Church, but even to stay in themselves and hold their fellow Catholics within the Church." (Essay entitled The Evangelization of the United States).

Small wonder parishes are not thriving.  Indeed many are in crisis as the pews continue to empty.  Conduct flows from convictions.  What then shall we make of the conduct of Catholics who disrespect Jesus' Presence in the Most Blessed Sacrament while keeping other Catholics from their prayer?  What shall we make of a "pastor" who permits such a situation?

At no time have I witnessed either the "pastor" of St. Vincent de Paul Parish or its deacon preparing for Mass through prayer.  I have witnessed both of them engaging in conversation and running to and fro in the church.  But I have not witnessed a spirit of prayer.

 

What a shame!


Because I tell the truth about the dissent and liturgical abuse which has been part and parcel of the Worcester Diocese, I will, no doubt, continue to be ostracized.  But I will be in good company:  See here: http://protectthepope.com/?p=10315

Archdiocese of Boston: Catholic Bloggers faithful to the Magisterium causing harm to the community?

"Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil, who change darkness into light, and light into darkness, who change bitter into sweet, and sweet into bitter! Woe to those who are wise in their own sight, and prudent in their own esteem!" (Isaiah 5: 20, 21).


On November 12, 1988, Our Lady told Father Stefano Gobbi of the Marian Movement of Priests that, "My Adversary often wounds you, making use of good persons and persons whom you have also helped in many ways. Sometimes he makes use of your very own confreres. The times which I have foretold to you have come, when those priests who venerate me, listen to me and follow me are being derided, scorned and opposed by other priests, who are nonetheless sons of my maternal predilection....Prepare yourselves to experience the indescribable suffering of being abandoned by the most trustworthy, mocked by confreres, set aside by superiors, opposed by friends, persecuted by those who have accepted a compromise with the world and who have associated themselves with the secret cohort of Masonry. Do not allow yourselves to be seized with discouragement. These are the times for courage and witness. Your voice must proclaim, in an ever more powerful manner, the word of the Gospel and all the truths of the Catholic faith. You must unmask every error whatsoever, overcome subtle snares, reject every compromise with the spirit of the world and give to all an example of your fidelity to Christ and to His Church...Do not allow yourselves to be seized with fear. The time of your immolation has now come. You will be persecuted. It will even be that those who oppose you, who calumniate you, who despise you, who push you aside and who persecute you will believe that they are doing something pleasing to the Heavenly Father and even to me, your immaculate Mother."

Indeed, Catholic bloggers faithful to the Church's Magisterium now find themselves being calumniated. Mark Leccese, a journalism professor at Emerson College, is referring to such bloggers as "dissidents." In a recent article entitled "An unbalanced story on the Archdiocese of Boston and its dissidents," Mr. Emerson wrote, "..there..exists a sizeable and vocal number of Catholics in Boston and around the world who argue more theologically conservative positions than the Cardinal or the Pope.."

This is simply an embroidered way of suggesting that bloggers who have been exposing error within the Archdiocese of Boston believe themselves to be "more Catholic than the Pope." This is a falsehood. Which is why Mr. Leccese cannot cite one example of where bloggers have advanced "more theologically conservative positions than the Pope." One has only to visit the Blog Bryan Hehir Exposed and to actually read some of the excellent posts to see that each and every post is backed up with the Magisterial teaching of Christ's Church. And readers of this Blog know that I only advance the Church's teaching.

The Archdiocese of Boston has also engaged in dishonesty. Responding to bloggers who have raised a multitude of legitimate and very serious concerns, including the promotion of dissent from Church teaching and various scandals such as the Kennedy funeral and an event honoring Mayor Thomas Menino, who is also pro-abortion and supportive of same-sex "marriage," the Archdiocese said in a statement that, "Cardinal O'Malley and his staff are dedicated to building unity in Christ and Christian community within the Archdiocese. Toward that end, we have reached out to bloggers on numerous occasions to ask them to enter into a professional and Christ-centered conversation with us. We are concerned about the harm caused to individuals and to the community by anonymous and unfounded claims on blogs."

Readers of this blog know full well that when Archdiocesan officials were asked - repeatedly - to cite just one example of a post which is "inaccurate" they lapsed into silence. Harm to individuals and the community? Such harm is a result of dissent from Church teaching, not the defense of the same. It is most significant that Bishop Rene Henry Gracida has been posting articles from Catholic bloggers exposing the leaven of infidelity within the Boston Archdiocese at his wonderful Blog in a series entitled "The Boston Virus."

Does the Archdiocese of Boston consider His Excellency to be advancing "unfounded claims" as well? Would Mr. Leccese consider Bishop Gracida to be a "dissident" as well? And how can the Archdiocese honestly claim to be dedicated to "building unity in Christ" when it is really advancing a false irenicism?

God preserve us from such nonsense!

And so while Mayor Thomas Menino, who supports abortion and same-sex "marriage" has been honored by the Archdiocese of Boston, while Father Bryan Hehir has "respect" for the Democratic National Committee (which also advances these evils), Catholic bloggers who promote and defend the Magisterial teaching of the Church are accused of harming individuals and the community.

Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil.

Related reading: A Catholic priest from the Boston Archdiocese who has ridiculed Cardinal Bertone while opposing clerical celibacy. The Archdiocese of Boston has never accused him of harming community.