At most Catholic parishes throughout the world the Mass is divided into two sections. The Liturgy of the Word and the Liturgy of the Eucharist. I have come across a third section at some parishes. The Liturgy of the Bulletin. This is where the celebrant towards the end of the Mass reads the whole bulletin pretty much verbatim. This is almost always done in a monotone voice. Though I do wonder if a more traditional parish would chant the bulletin?
Now I could see the highlighting of one or two items from the bulletin but when it seems to be longer than the Easter sequence at it becomes rather silly.
Oh you mean during the time when we are supposed to be offering a prayer of Thanksgiving for just having received the Holy Eucharist.
Of course, you may chant anything you want. I often sing the appropriate phrase from the British Highway Code in Anglican chant while walking to work from the train station:
Crrross perpendicular | to . the | Pa-ve-ment.
My current parish tops the others when they repeat the same announcement several Sundays in a row and when they announce a telephone number — just once, of course — for further information
Number and intesity of calls? Sure, that counts. Didn’t we just hear the parable of the just judge?
I do love the line “a more traditional parish”…
I had always thought when I was taught my Baltimore Catechism that the Catholic church not to defect had to be ONE, HOLY, CATHOLIC and APOSTOLIC
When one can go from church to church much like the Protestants do in search of the right minister who is essentially hired and brought in after inteviews to find a “more traditional parish” or church, has the church not defected into a bunch of little fiefdoms run by corrupt power hungry Bishops created by Paul VI after Vatican II with little or no fear of Rome?
I think the experiment is over and a return to that dirty word that people have tried to run from as Catholics for fear of being called all kinds of names like schismatic, old, rigid, whatever-is the only answer, a complete return to Faith, Morals, and yes, Tradition
Actually this is a reinstitution of an aspect from the earliest masses in the first century.
“Got strong legs? Please join our Church running group tonight as we join together to run away from centurions. Running starts at 7pm and continues until the middle of next century.
“Interested in interfaith dialogue? Next Wednesday the Council on Ecumenism will meet with Pagan and Jewish leaders. The topic will be Please Stop Feeding Us to the Lions. Lemon bars and punch!
“If you enjoy reading Scripture, join our Scripture group every Thursday evening as we read the only 3 pages of John that we have. Bring something to write furiously with.”
In my parish, we read about 3 announcements before the processional. At my wife’s parents’ parish, they read several announcement after the Prayer After Communion, just before the final blessing. Both appear liturgically acceptable to me since neither has it in the middle of one of the two liturgies.
In my parish the lector reads a couple of announcements of imminent occurrence (such as “the Respect for Life committee will be handing out baby bottles to help pregnant mothers in the vestibule after Mass. Please join us for coffee and donuts today.”) right after the prayers of the faithful, as collection begins. The main reason I don’t go to the Spanish Mass (I’m Puerto Rican) is that they always had everybody sit down and keep you hostage right before the final blessing for announcements, speeches, etc.
Hoo-boy, you hit the nail right there. The Liturgy of the Bulletin.
Why, why why we have to listen to the same-old same-old? It is exhausting. Nevermind the traditional wedding announcment which IMO is a small “t” (tradition instead of Tradition) but important one, but other useless stuff. Collection, routine RCIA schedule, routine CCD schedule etc etc.
My priest in the past year moved the announcements to about 5 minutes before the beginning of Mass. And even then he only highlights just the very important bits, not read the bulletin verbatim.
I think that, along with keeping the time after Holy Communion as a time of reflection, his other motive was to prod the stragglers to get their seats in time for Mass.
“Nevermind the traditional wedding announcement which IMO is a small “t” (tradition instead of Tradition) but important one, but other useless stuff.”
The announcement of upcoming weddings is called the “Publication of Banns” Catholics who get married by Church Banns as opposed to Marriage Licence- ( in Toronto, when both of the couple are practising Catholics they can choose to marry by banns, if not they can choose Marriage Licence) is more than a “small t” tradition; it is a requirement of Canon Marriage Law, that the Banns must be published for 3 weeks before the wedding. This allows for members of the Congregation – who may not know that these two are getting married – to inform the priest if they know of any impediment (like one is hiding a civil marriage) to the marriage. So the Publication of Banns is a Canonical Legal Thing.
The Announcements at our parish are done after the Post Communion Prayer, and before the Final Blessing, and never include more that 5 mentions +the Banns.
I struggle with this, having struggled to keep my two wiggles still and reasonably QUIET for the important parts of the Mass, and wanting to instill in them the habit of waiting until Mass is really and truly over before leaving…so I have to wrestle them for another 5min or more while we sit back down. Then all of a sudden it’s time for Mass prayers and such again, and hard to recapture their attention to “catch” the final blessing.
Too funny! “Liturgy of the Bulletin” perfectly describes it.
In the Extraordinary Rite, the Bulletin is chanted in Latin.
If the priest or someone else doesn’t “sell” what’s important in upcoming events, just reading them in a bulletin won’t get anyone excited about participating. That’s one of the reason people don’t feel connected to their parish. Great things happen, but only the people directly envolved know anything about it. Important activities need to be “sold”, if not sometime before, during, or after mass, then when?
How about the heads of committees calling people individually to ask if they’d like to participate? As a former DRE, I used to rely on the bulletin for volunteers, until someone said the following to me: “Jesus didn’t put items in the bulletin…he CALLED people, one by one.” Not the easiest thing to do, but I would think that would show true community, if people tried to know each other’s strengths and talents and called on them for specific things.
I agree, it would be great if we really did feel like we all worshipped in one, holy, catholic and apostolic church. So many people today define themselves as “traditional” or “orthodox” and define those who embrace Vatican II as “liberal” or “progressive”, who in turn label the “orthodox” as “restorationists” who “fear change”. All these labels need to go. I consider myself Roman Catholic. That’s it, that’s all. I never studied the Baltimore Catechism (too young), I completely embrace Vatican II, and yet I also consider myself faithful, moral, and yes, “traditional”.
Vatican II was not an “experiment”, it was meant to bring the church back to the true basics of original Christianity, back to its basic principles. Vatican II never veered from the church teachings.
I’m sure that to many outsiders, for a church is supposed to be one, holy, catholic and apostolic, we seem very divided, wicked, narrow, and unchristian.
And BTW, the only “little fiefdom” I can think of is Bishop Finn’s in Kansas City-St.Joseph and his extreme makeover of that diocese. Wow. There is a perpetrator of confusion and disorder – who shows a complete disregard for authority. “Let’s close all the windows quickly” were probably his first words to the people of that diocese.
With all due respect, Heidi, you’re an idiot. Bishop Finn is my Shepherd, and this diocese NEEDED an “extreme makeover” in the worst way. Your nasty accusation against him (that he has “no respect for authority”) is hilarious, as that is the complete opposite of the truth (and probably why *you* hate him so much). Bishop Finn in fact has the greatest respect for REAL authority, i.e., Church/Roman/magisterial authority. It is true that he listens sweetly to the crypto-protestants and other deeply confused sheep in his flock, but has the courage, integrity and true charity not to cave in to their wordly demands.
Put down the Pickles McBrien and Hans Kung, Heidi. Read our beloved Holy Father’s works, and get to know the Catholic faith!
There is a perpetrator of confusion and disorder – who shows a complete disregard for authority.
Umm, the Bishop is THE authority of the diocese by his virtue of office.
Take Cat’s advice and get thee a copy of the Catechism – and read it.
Cat – owch! Pull those claws back!
How can you say “with all due respect” and then be so utterly disrespectful?
I do not hate Bishop Finn. I am glad you like him so much.
I, however, think he has made some huge mistakes.
I believe he is disrespectful of authority because
he has rejected the reform program of John XXIII, Paul VI and the Second Vatican Council, by, for example cancelling the diocese’s nationally renowned lay formation program, firing lay personnel with decades of experience in the diocese (without consulting those involved) and replacing them with priests etc. etc. This breeds deep disrespect for those below him and for the authority of his above mentioned predecessors, IMHO.
FWIW I don’t read Hans Kung or McBrien. Up here in Canada we read Encyclicals – like those spawned by the spirit of Vatican II…
At a solemn high mass, incense and bells are used during the Bulletin Rite
Seriously though…my parish has banished announcements from the liturgy except in extraordinary circumstances. The pastoral assitant explained to me: “we’re teaching our parishoners to READ”
My Parish Priest thinks that no one reads the bulletin. No one was responding to anything there, and ever after weeks of advertising people would come up to him and say things “So what’s happening with the Cross and Icon” so now he just reads it to us. I don’t know if it makes much difference, as I think instead of not reading, they are now not listening.
I love the distinction. Tradition, Sacred Tradition that is, what the Pope infallibly required never to change as per Vatican I has all but been trampled on and thrown out the window and Modernism, condemned by St Pope Pius X has all but been embraced
Church and diocese shopping has become the norm, and we wont allow our children to be allowed to be exposed to the catechism that today is being taught, as well as the liberal 1983 code of canon law and I really can not take these eucharistic ministers and persons who think because they do a reading from the bible now and hand out communion they are better than the rest
What is so bad about waiting a few more minutes on line in reverence contemplating what one is about to receive from consecrated hands, that of a priest, or better yet kneeling when receiving on the tongue? My children were not even taught that was an option and to receive in your hands!
Pray for a full restoration!
Brian Day –
I do have a copy of, and have read, the Catechism and the corrections promulgated by JPII (the corrections made to harmonize it with the official Latin text), the Compendium of the Catechism by Pope Benedict, and the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church from the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace.
Heidi, Cat & Brian,
I took the Lay Ministry Course in a large diocese in Canada. It was run by lay&religious (in comfortable shoes) – almost all with an agenda.
I now recommend to priests I know to be careful who they ask to attend these courses. You need to be discerning, vocal and willing to weed out the “Spirit of Vatican II” crap – (that really has nothing to do with Vatican II).
No mention of sin. No mention of the Culture of Death …Abortion, Euthanasia, IVF, contraception, living a homosexual lifestyle.
No mention of NFP, marriage between a man and a women to the exclusion of others.
Yes, the Social teachings of the Church were discussed but not regarding life issues.
We should be getting priests teaching these courses to lay men and women mainly due to the fact that Canada by and large is a poorly catechised country and we need faith-filled courageous men to show us the Way
– because that my friends is their job.
Amen Teresa. You said it.
We also need to foster vocations to the priesthood (and religious!) so that we will have good people to lead they way – people who are well grounded in the REAL intent of Vatican II.
Blessings to you.
What was the real intent of Vatican II? Are not teachings supposed to be clear so that the shepherds can clearly lead the sheep or vague so that the intent can be used to foster such confusion that it is leading souls to damnation
When reading the documents of the Council of Trent, it seems very clear to me what was meant. When reading through these 16 documents, one can read one paragraph that sounds totally in line with what the church had always taught, and then the second completely different and diversionary from Truth
As long as they read it in Latin at the TLM mass.
I am no expert on Vatican II, but I would suggest, in a very tiny nutshell, that Vatican II was designed as an overhaul of the way the Church conducted itself and celebrated the liturgy, so that she would be more accessible to the people. But I suspect that it is not Vatican II that you have a problem with but subsequent interpretations of its documents.
Cardinal Ratzinger put it best ten years after the Council closed: ‘what devastated the Church during the last decade was not the Council, but the refusal to receive it’. It is not that Vatican II is defective or lacking. It simply hasn�t been given a real chance. The Synod Fathers, recognizing the present situation of the Church, suggest that, it is due to ‘an incomplete understanding and application of the Council’. The cause of confusion and �diversionary� practices as you call them, or the ‘shattering’ of Catechesis, as Cardinal Ratzinger called it is not the teaching of Vatican II but the travesty, the hideous distortion of it, so stridently propagated by so many today.
More recently, in a speech to the Roman Curia, in December 2005, Pope Benedict XVI decried those who interpreted the documents of Vatican II in terms of “discontinuity and rupture”. The proper interpretation, he said, is that proposed at the start and at the close of the Council by Popes John XXIII and Paul VI. On opening the Council, Pope John XXIII stated that the Council intended “to transmit the doctrine pure and entire, without diminution or distortion”, adding: “It is our duty not only to guard this precious treasure, as if interested only in antiquity, but also to devote ourselves readily and fearlessly to the work our age requires. … This sure unchangeable doctrine, which must be faithfully respected, has to be studied in depth and presented in a way that fits the requirements of our time. For the deposit of the faith, that is, the truths contained in our venerable doctrine, is one thing, and the way in which they are enunciated, while still preserving the same meaning and fullness, is another.” After thus quoting his predecessor, Pope Benedict XVI then declared: “Wherever this interpretation has guided reception of the Council, new life has grown and new fruit has ripened. … Today we see that the good seed, though slow in developing, is nonetheless growing, and our profound gratitude for the Council’s work is growing likewise.”
Yes, I do things at that time needed a little tweeking, but somehow it went way over board
I think though as any lawyer who read through these documents would say with so much vagueness (by the way these documents I think added up in words is longer than all of the other councils combined correct me if I am wrong, I read this in a book), along with the revised code of Canon Law of 1983, retranslations of the bible (NAB 4 or 5 times over these past 40 years), new rites of sacraments, new translation of the mass and removing many of the ancient prayers, and the innovations and customs, we essentially have a new church promulgated by one Council like never seen before
Just think we need to get back to our roots
Heidi’s “‘Let’s close all the windows quickly’ were probably his [Bishop Finn’s] first words to the people of that diocese.'” recalls the last words of Pope Pius XII. “If you open the windows, the paperweights are in the …”.
Announcements? Oh, you mean the second homily?
I like the fact that the Church places announcements between the final prayer and the final blessing, because people are standing at that point and thus the announcements should be very brief. So if your priest says to sit down, or has to move the announcements to a different part of the Mass, uh oh!
Aside from an announcement of something like reminding the faithful of an upcoming Holy Day of Obligation, there aren’t too many other things I find so important that Mass should be “disrupted” …. especially when I can just read it in the bulletin anyway. (I sometimes wonder if there is a secret class in all seminaries called “learning to love to hear your own voice.”)