What was the most egregious liturgical abuse you ever witnessed?


I’ll sort of repeat myself, which I don’t usually do. I used to go to Mass (for over five years) at a parish that had the usual Novus Ordo Mass, but virtually all the songs during the Mass were Gregorian chant–yes, the genuine old chant. I can’t remember exactly, but for sure the Gloria, the Creed, the Sanctus, the Agnus Dei were all sung that way. They didn’t switch up every Sunday with a new version–it was exactly the same every time. Someone else mentioned “different introits, graduals, …” but they didn’t sing those.

So I guess my points are that 1) it’s still out there, although rare and 2) as I said before EVERYONE sang, which of course was the point of the “active participation” business in Vatican II. So I’m all for it.

Why did it stop? By a coincidence, the music director moved to a new state exactly at the time the priest was transferred. So that was that.


No. They use the same chants as before the Council, with a few exceptions. Some chants have been revised based on paleographic studies. For the most part the Mass chants in the 1974 Gradual are from the 1908 Vatican Edition of the Gradual. The exceptions tend to be Year B, as St Mark was not read in the older Rite. Also the feast of Christ the King being recent, from the 1920s, all its Mass pieces are neo-Gregorian.

Also, the structure of the main Benedictine schema is exactly the same as before the Council, save for the Calendar, and whether Prime is kept or not (if not, its psalmody is distributed into other hours using a few possible schemas). Unlike the Roman Office, reformed at Trent and in 1910 under Pius X, the main monastic schema has never undergone substantial reforms since the 6th century.

There are now however three new Monastic schemas but the all use the same antiphons. All three are optional, Schema A remains as the 1500 yo schema. It is still used in post-conciliar form at Solesmes itself, which uses the OF Mass as well, in Latin.

For the Office, the antiphons are from the 2005 Monastic Antiphonale with the same comments as above. One oddity is that the antiphons are from the Vulgate and the psalms from the neo-Vulgate. Reconstiting the antiphons into the neo-Vulgate would be a heculean task and would break too many complex and traditional melodies.

Monasteries never used the Liber, incidentally, as the Monastic Office is substantially different from the Roman Office. They used the 1934 Antiphonale Monasticum for the Office, and Graduale Romanum for the Mass.

So your guess is way off. And our schola would take umbrage with your statement that Gregorian chant is not heard outside of monasteries in the OF.


I’m in England. In our church, we usually have 3 Extraordinary Ministers (A, B & C). They stand in a sideways line well away from the priest, not behind him (and outside the Sanctuary). When the priest has received, he walks over to the EMs and gives each of them the Precious Body. He then goes back to the altar, picks up the two Chalices for the congregation and gives them to A & B.

A & B receive and then B offers the Precious Blood to C, who receives.

C then goes to stand beside the priest to distribute the Precious Body. A and B stand at the sides of the church with the Chalices. It works well.


I can understand people having a specific preference for a style of music. Strictly speaking as an artform, music is subjective - different people have different tastes.

But I must say, it’s amusing to me when people dislike Hillsong due to them being a protestant worship group (when lyrically there’s quite a few songs in which there’s no issues with on a theological level), while turning around and saying the following guys are fine:




Sadly many indeed do not.

The deserve the dignity intrinsic to all humans. Respect however is earned – or lost.


I have absolutely no idea who “Hillsong” is, but when they write a Mass–As Mozart and Bach did–let me know. You don’t need to be Catholic to create a work of art that can be admired by Catholics. Literature, painting, music, etc…


Many of the propers for the Roman Rite of Mass were revised after the council. The Gregorian chants written for the old propers can’t be used in the new rite, so how can they be the same?


Wrong again. The propers were not “re-written” after the council. You cannot re-write the Bible and the vast majority of the propers are from scripture, both psalms and other verses. The chants are the same, the melodies are the same, but some of them have been moved around. As I write this, I am sitting in front of both the 1974 Graduale Romanum (post-Conciliar) and a 1926 edition of the Graduale Romanum,

Let’s look at the propers for the 26th Sunday in Ordinary Time (post-Council) and 20th Sunday after Pentecost (pre-Council).

Introit: Omnia quae fecisti (Dan. 3, 31, 29, 30, 43, 42, v. ps 118)
Gradual: Oculi omnium (Ps. 144 15 v. 16)
Alleluia; Paratum cor meum (Ps. 107, 2)
Offertory: Super alumina Babylonis (Ps. 136, 1)
Communion antiphon: Memento verbi tui (Ps. 118, 49, 50)

The texts and melodies are exactly the same.

It’s pretty much the same throughout. As I mentioned, some adaptations were needed for Year B because of the readings from St. Mark, but often appropriate verses from the corresponding synoptic gospel verse can be used.

Another example, week III in Ordinary Time corresponds to Week III after Epiphany in the old Gradual but there are variants for years A and B.

In. year C: Adorate Deum (Ps. 96, 7, 8 and 1)
In. year A and B Dominus secus mare (Mt. 4, 19, Ps. 18); pre-council it was used for the Vigil of St. Andrew, Apostle; in Year A the text from Matthew is read about Jesus leaving for Galilee after the arrest of John the Baptist. In Year B, the corresponding text from Mark is read, therefore it is deemed appropriate to use the Introit which is a verse from Matthew’s text.
Gradual: Timebunt gentes (Ps. 101, 16, v. 17)
Alleluia: Dominus regnavit (Ps. 96, 1)
Off.: Dextera Domini (Ps. 117, 16, 17)
Communion: Mirabantur omnes (Luke 4, 22)

Again the melodies are the same. The same also applies to the great traditional antiphons for the seasons.

Vatican II was not the great train wreck some traditionalists make it out to be. I strongly urge you to study what actually is in the pre- and post-Conciliar liturgies instead of relying on hearsay from prejudiced interlocutors. Since the Propers are mostly scriptural, some moving around was needed to ensure that texts were appropriate to the readings. But again, the texts and melodies are the same. There have been very few new Gregorian chant composed for the Mass since the Council, but quite a few composed in the 20th century, for example for the feast of Christ the King.



The situation is a bit different for the Divine Office. Recently (2010) the first volume of a Roman Antiphonary for the Divine Office was produced by Solesmes, some 40 years after the Liturgy of the Hours appeared. Here, new antiphons were introduced. Well, not really “new antiphons” but, for the most part, when psalms were split another verse was used for a second antiphon, and in many cases no melodies existed for those.

Until the antiphonary appeared, communities wishing to use the LOTH simply didn’t use an antiphon for the second half of the psalm. Instead the psalm was prayed straight through under one antiphon only, as the rubrics do allow. The antiphons with their traditional melody were taken from the monastic antiphonary.

For the new Roman Antiphonary, Solesmes did compose some new melodies to apply to the texts (again largely psalm verses), but the first antiphon of a psalm, or the antiphon of psalms that remained whole, are from traditional sources, for example the antiphon Dixit Dominus for Psalm 109 at Sunday Vespers (in fact this antiphon is the first verse of the psalm itself). You’ll also find the great “O” antiphons for the last week of Advent, and other traditional favourites.

Liturgy is a fascinating topic. Please do approach it with an open mind, and be prepared to listen to folks who have gathered some expertise on the subject.


Again, you are quite wrong. Looking at the index of introits for example, the new 1974 Graduale shows 15 “modern compositions” (i.e. with no ancient manuscripts supporting them) out of a total of about 150 antiphons. Of those 15, only one does not appear before the Council, composed after the council as a proper text for the feast of the Assumption for the day Mass which previously used a text from the Commons and which can still be used ad libitum (and which itself is a modern composition, but that appeared before the Council). All the others are in my 1926 Gradual as well. One more, does not appear in the 1926 Gradual as it is from the monastic propers, which my 1926 Gradual does not include.

Similarly, there are 8 modern Graduals in the 1974 Gradual. Only one does not appear in 1926, and it is an optional Gradual for feasts of the Virgin Mary. Alternate traditional texts can be used.

There are many more “modern” alleluia verses, again, most appear in the 1926 Gradual as well. And the same for offertories and communion antiphons, though many offertories were simplified with complex verses removed (but there is no restriction on using them).

What has happened is a lot of texts got dropped, for example as we no longer mark Septuagesima on the calendar, the Dies Irae was dropped from the funeral Mass (but is still in the liturgy as a hymn for the 34th week of Ordinary Time in the Divine Office), etc.

Not surprising since Sacrosanctum Concilium states:

“114. The treasure of sacred music is to be preserved and fostered with great care.”

So your statement that “many” Mass propers were “revised” after the council is flatly wrong. Your statement : “The propers that were revised required that the chants must also have been revised to fit the new text.” is also flatly wrong. Your statement “the result: new chants” is also flatly wrong. Your statement: " Similar to their older counterparts, perhaps even the same melodically, but new nonetheless, if not in musical notation, at least in text." is also flatly wrong. 99% of the texts are straight from the old Mass texts, melodies as well. I have now given you factual evidence to demonstrate that you are, in fact, wrong in your assumptions.

RH, i have been a Gregorian chorister for 15 years, I studied under one of Canada’s most renowned Gregorian choirmasters and scholars of his era, and I am a member and past director of the Gregorian Institute of Canada and co-organizer of its 2017 Colloiquium.

I do have some knowledge on the matter, which with all due respect you clearly do not as you make assumptions with no basis in fact and without even consulting the relevant texts, assumptions which seem to be coloured by your own prejudices, or at least what you heard from some people who have an agenda to disparage the new Mass.



You do understand the Eucharistic Ministers are priests, bishops, etc.

I’d imagine you are crowing about dressing down an Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion, which, unless you have been appointed by the Pastor as some sort of EMHC manager, is disturbing in and of itself.


Are you bragging about bringing a woman to tears? Even if correcting this woman had been your place, it should not have been done in a manner which would bring somebody to tears.


I absolutely agree. While the EMHC was undoubtedly wrong to refuse the child, we must assume she had a reason that seemed good to her at the time. Erikaspirit, I can understand you being upset on the child’s behalf, but did you ask the EMHC why she did what she did? Then you could have gently queried her reasoning.

Always give people the benefit of the doubt.


Yeah, that’s certainly nothing to boast about.

I was serving a Sunday Mass when a couple with their two kids locked eyes with me. They were sometimes attendees of my Eastern Catholic church and the EMHC wouldn’t give them communion. Given the configuration of our church, they could not make their way to the priest. I went down into the nave and gave them communion.

The EMHC went apoplectic after Mass. I just ignored him, went to the priest and told him what was up. He thanked me. End of story.


Was it in this thread where someone mentioned the children saying the Our Father in the Sanctuary?

Well, I finally witnessed it yesterday and it made me slightly uncomfortable. On the other hand, there were many children and their parents at church. Even had a primary school choir!


Well, the thing is that priests deserve to be treated with recognition of the dignity intrinsic to the priesthood.
Our pastors, who have been entrusted with the direct responsibility for our pastoral care, deserve all that much more respect.

It is like the respect due to the President of the United States. He may be acting in a way that is unbecoming to one who holds his office, but it would only compound his error to refuse to show the respect due to his office when in his presence. To do otherwise disgraces the President less than the citizen who does not seem to appreciate the gravity of the office that God has granted to the President of the United States.

If this is true of elected leaders, how much more it is true of those who have a share in the sacred duty handed down by the Apostles: Obey your leaders and defer to them, for they keep watch over you and will have to give an account, that they may fulfill their task with joy and not with sorrow, for that would be of no advantage to you. Heb. 13:17

St. Paul is saying very directly that we are to avoid being a sorrow to our pastors.

By the way: What was the point of this thread, again? Someone asked, but I missed the answer.


I think you may be in my diocese and went to my parish at one point. If so, that situation is no longer in effect with the new pastor.


are you in Ohio?


No, Tennessee. We had a glass ‘ciborium’ that was a gift from a parishoner along with a glass ‘chalice’ . Both of these items disappeared about 1 week after our prior pastor left. I remember whenever our Bishop would come to our parish, we’d have to go to an older, more traditional ciborium and chalice. There were many at my parish that were among the ‘Spirit of V2’ folk. I pray that this parish in Ohio has corrected this issue.


i dont beleve it has :mask::mask:

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.