Another Question to Ponder

How many liturgical abuses can you find in the following picture:

Answer: None.

But  many of the complaints people have about liturgical abuse in their churches could be placed upon the Mystical Supper.

For example, there was no Gregorian Chant being used. Forget about Latin: everything was done in the vernacular.  The consecration was done upon a table. There was no fasting before communion. And, of course, the Nicene Creed wasn’t recited (at least that meant the Apostles did not debate one another over the filioque).

This is not to say there is no legitimate development of liturgy; all liturgical development is done in an inculturated fashion to help the people participating in it. But sometimes people get so attached to one form of the liturgy that the big picture is lost; if they demand one later form of the liturgy as the perfect model of all liturgy, something is wrong, because it would make the Lord’s own celebration of communion defective. It wasn’t.

We must admit that liturgical abuse can be a proper concern. It is because it means there is a lack of proper discipline and obedience. That’s the real fruit and source of all liturgical abuse. And one must be cautious that, in rejecting real liturgical abuse, one does not follow through with one’s own disobedience in return: the sin of another can not be used to justify the sin of one’s own. That, however, is another problem and the one which many people do not want to deal with.