Paul at Alive and Young fisks the article by Elizabeth Harrington that I posted on the other day. He makes some good points in reaction and ends in noting:
I am going to go out on a whim here and assume that Elizabeth writes this article because she has been confronted by individuals in most uncharitable ways. If you do have to bring up a liturgical issue in a parish or diocese be sure to do your homework on the topic first. Then if you must present it to a liturgist or priest be sure to do it gently and with charity.
That is always the danger whenever we have an "us and them "attitude and we turn problems we perceive with the liturgy into confrontations.
It is quite easy to get upset when the liturgy is abused and if we carry this anger when we talk to a person involved we will likely achieve nothing.
I remember one occasion when I spoke to a priest after Mass that I tried to be charitable and first complimented him on his very good homily before I addressed my concern. Though I got the runaround from him and a reply that stretched credibility and I am afraid I left with some parting replies that I immediately felt bad for afterwards. I should have prayed first before talking to him.
What struck me about Elizabeth Harrington article was how she had developed what appears to be a defensive attitude and an "us against them" attitude. The problem with so many liturgical experts is that they just never acknowledge that there is such thing as a liturgical abuse (or you get the idea a liturgical abuse is celebrating a Mass with accord to the rubrics.) That sometimes people are correct in their liturgical gripes and that the situation needs to be resolved. Having an elitist view where only the liturgical expert can talk about the liturgy is quite ironic since so many liturgists put so much emphasis on the people involved in the liturgy in the first place.
3 comments
I once brought up to my pastor an issue in his mass, in this case that he was consecrating the wine in a large pitcher, then pouring it into individual chalices, rather than in the other order. He immediately got defensive, and seemed offended, but not too long later he did change his practice. I believe if such suggestions are made in charity, a reasonable person will probably consider it, even if the initial reaction is defensive, or hostile.
One thing that I find helps is to never use the words (or some deriviative) “The rubrics say so.” Instead of just pointing to the book and expecting the priest to follow, try to find out why the particular action is done or phrase is used. That way, you’ll learn more about the liturgy, and hopefully the priest will be more open to a rational discussion on the liturgy rather than what he may perceive as an attack. Admittedly, not all priests will be open to any idea that the laity presents, but I think most would be open to respectfully presented information on the liturgy, regardless of who presents it.
To read some Australian Catholic news boards you would think that Elizabeth Harrington was the only liturgist in Australia. One only has to read this piece to see why, it is typical of many of her opinions.