Question: What does Liturgical Abuse mean?

Usually it's used by Roman Catholics to describe something not being done according to the General Instruction of the Roman Missal, their book which describes how the Mass (the name for their Liturgy) should be done. So if a priest or parish says or does something different, it's a "Liturgical abuse."

People who are claiming something is Liturgical Abuse generally do have a negative opinion about it. From a basic standpoint they believe the Liturgy should be done exactly as proscribed. In more specific cases such things as neglecting the Tabernacle, liturgical dance, omitting a crucifix, disallowing Communion on the tongue, etc. are seen as serious signs of deeper problems: lack of belief in the Real presence, lack of reverence for God, laziness about holy services, focusing on human accomplishment and pride, overemphasis on the congregation instead of God, etc.

Yes, if someone is saying something is liturgical abuse they don't mean that it is just an error or misunderstanding, or usually even just bad judgement - they generally intend that the ignoring of the regulations implies a deeper problem.

There are some people though who seem to use the word a little too freely.

HumbleMan said:

I see this phrase in different threads. I come from, and coming out of, an evangelical background, and liturgy was never discussed.

Thanks,

Marc

Click to expand...

The phrase can mean a number of things . Here are some broad categories that can be used to understand what the phrase means:

• Graviora Delicta. Abuses that denigrate, misrepresent, mishandle or in other ways damage the sanctity of the consecration of the bread and wine in the holy Eucharist or that do the same to the already consecrated host or precious blood of our Lord Jesus Christ are very grave abuses of the liturgy and are properly referred to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith for judgement and action. These abuses include such things as:
  • Taking away or retaining the consecrated species for sacrilegious ends, or the throwing of them away.
  • The attempted celebration of the liturgical action of the Eucharistic Sacrifice or the simulation of the same.
  • The forbidden concelebration of the Eucharistic Sacrifice with ministers of Ecclesial Communities that do not have the apostolic succession nor acknowledge the sacramental dignity of priestly Ordination.
  • The consecration for sacrilegious ends of one matter without the other in the celebration of the Eucharist or even of both outside the celebration of the Eucharist.
• Grave Matters. The next serious kind are called Grave matters, a term which in the canonical and moral theology tradition is reserved for those actions which are obliged, or reprobated, under penalty of grave sin (e.g. the Sunday and Holy Day obligation). In other words, they involve objectively grave matter, which if done with knowledge of their gravity and freely constitute mortal sin. For a priest celebrating Mass this is extremely serious, since he has a grave obligation to celebrate the Sacrifice and receive Holy Communion in the state of grace (c. 916). If he, contemporaneously with his celebration, is committing abuses which are gravely sinful then he celebrates sacrilegiously, unless he immediately ceases the abuse and makes a perfect act of contrition.
• Other Abuses. Finally there are other abuses, which being of less seriousness are yet contrary to the norms of the Church and must be corrected.

For a more complete treatment of this matter see this link.

HumbleMan said:

I see this phrase in different threads. I come from, and coming out of, an evangelical background, and liturgy was never discussed.

Thanks,

Marc

Click to expand...

Depends on the context. Half the time no more that "I can't stand it when they play a guitar in church".

Here is an example of Liturgical abuse

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rh_nqtp3VrU

^ I could not sit through any of that weird creepiness.

topcare said:

Here is an example of Liturgical abuse

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rh_nqtp3VrU

Click to expand...

I don't get "liturgical dance" and the costumes are odd looking however I do not see how the costumes or the dance would invalidate the holy Eucharist since the dance appears to be part of the entrance procession. Besides, the video clip is segmented so it is hard to be sure what is the context for the dance & costumes.

I'd be unhappy to see something like that happen in my parish church.

I just googled and that came up