Former Louisiana Bishop In Middle of Liturgical Abuse Controversy

This is getting some play on the Catholic blogs today. Louisiana Catholics from the Diocese of Lafayette might have special interest since the Archbishop in question that is laying down the law(finally) was Bishop of Lafayette from 1986 to around 1994. That is Archbishop Harry Flynn.

It appears that The Archbishop is finally telling the Lady of Liturgical Abuse in his Diocese that enough is enough. This Parish is fairly infamous and even I have read about their antics before.

Amy Welborn has a good overview of the situation here at her post The case of St. Stephen’s which is a good read with a lot of links.

She has this link to a Catholic blogger that talks about a recent Church Mass he attended last year:

The "Sacramental Minister" and a woman walked together up to the altar, took their microphones and the "Mass" began with the female “minister” welcoming everyone and asking visitors to introduce themselves. The "Sacramental Minister" then said the introductory prayers and then stepped back and let the female “minister” lead the congregation in saying the Kyrie Eleison.

Then a middle aged man gave the second reading, the Epistle, letting us know that it would be accompanied by a poem by an environmental poet. It was Earth Day. Halfway through the reading, a woman (possibly his wife) joined the lector and assisted him in finishing the poem. Relieved, thinking to myself, well I’m glad that’s over, now we can get down to the meat of the Mass.

But the Sacramental Minister, legs crossed, looking extremely uncomfortable, remained seated next to the female “minister” and the couple proceeded to read the Gospel, taking turns. The couple remained at the microphone and then proceeded to give the homily, again in turn.

After the Gospel/Homily abomination, the Creed was omitted and there were “General Intercessions” coming from various members of the congregation. The Sacramental Minister remained seated, still ill at ease, crossing and uncrossing his legs, leaning over his knees, hands in his pocket, while the female “minister” continued to control the flow of the service.
At this time, I declared to myself that I was not in attendance at a Mass and made my plans to go elsewhere at 5:00 to a St Paul parish.

It got worse. The gifts were presented, pita bread and the de rigueur Kool Aid pitchers of wine, normally used by dissenting parishes. The Sacramental Minister remained seated. They were presented to laypeople. At this point, I started to lose track of what was going on. There was just too much wrong.

The female “minister” then said the priest’s “Blessed are you Lord” prayer while the Sacramental Minister watched.
Then at the “consecration” of the host and the wine into the Body and Blood of Christ, THE ENTIRE CONGREGATION RECITED THE WORDS OF THE CONSECRATION ALONG WITH THE PRIEST!!!!!!!!!!!!!

He resumed saying the Eucharistic Prayer and when he raised the platter of pita bread at the “Great Amen”, THE FEMALE "MINISTER" RAISED THE K-MART GLASS GOBLET OF WHAT WOULD HAVE BEEN THE PRECIOUS BLOOD UNDER NORMAL CIRCUMSTANCES.
There was more, including the fact that the Extraordinary Ministers assumed the lead in the distribution of Communion and the Sacramental Minister had to search for people who wanted it from him.
I won't document the errors; you can pretty well see them for yourself.

Now of course this is just the tip of the iceberg. I have recalled looking at Parish bulletins from this Church and what was being taught in workshops and seminars as to various aspects of the Catholic faith was to say the least troubling.

As Amy points out this has hit the secular papers. Father Z really does a good job on the piece that appeared in the Star Tribune of Minneapolis at St.Paul/Mpls: dust up at St. Stephen’s .

For the other viewpoint a blogger The Wild Reed -Thoughts and reflections from a progressive, gay, Catholic perspective who attends this Church and is talking about the poor "exiles" and their plight. The latest being here at The Shrinking Catholic Tent . He writes:

A couple of weeks ago I mentioned that the parish I attend was recently ordered by the archdiocese to conform its various liturgies to the rubrics of the General Instruction of the Roman Missal.As I noted in my previous post, I’m sure that for many Catholic parishes, these rubrics serve well to express and reflect their faith and community life. Yet for the past 40 years, the Catholic parish that I consider my spiritual home, St. Stephen’s in South Minneapolis, has developed its liturgy in ways that reflect the presence of the Spirit as discerned in the unique gifts and needs of its members and in our shared life together.This development has been a very intentional and faith-filled embodiment of the Second Vatican Council’s call for “full and active participation” of the laity in “liturgical celebrations” (Sacrosanctum Concilium, 1963). Yet many now feel that, in one fell swoop, this embodiment – along with the Spirit that nurtured and inspired it – has been discounted by the archdiocese in its demand that it be abandoned for the rubrics of GIRM.I can’t help but think that in this situation, the “form,” which Jesus said “profits nothing,” has been elevated above the “Spirit,” which gives life.

I was wandering around his blog and just by chance found this entry of his he wrote last year The New Motu Proprio: "Nothing but Headaches for Bishops, Priests, and Laity"? He as you can see was singing a slightly different tune last July. He said in part:

It will be interesting to see if this happens, but I’ll admit that I remain a bit skeptical. It’s not as if I don’t have concerns about how the liturgy is currently celebrated. . . . In recent years, I’ve endured Pentecosts where the church was decorated like it was a children’s birthday party, Halloween masses where the celebrant wore a clown wig, and various other exercises in liturgical creativity that ended badly. The more I study what those involved in the liturgical movement of the 20th century were trying to accomplish, the more that significant gaps between our current practice and that vision emerge.

I’m still not clear, however, on how liberalizing access to the 1962 rite is going to help solve these problems. Much of the mainstream criticism of contemporary liturgy focuses more on how the Roman Rite is celebrated than the rite itself. . . .There are times when I think what many critics of contemporary liturgy want is not so much the 1962 rite but the 1962 rubrics. They want an end to what Cardinal Arinze once termed the “do-it-yourself Mass.” They want a liturgy that their parish community receives as gift rather than as a vehicle for their collective self-expression. . . . [Actually, I think when a liturgy is developed by a believing community to serve as a meaningful expression of this community’s life and collective experience of the sacred within and beyond its midst, then it is experienced as both vehicle and gift. I don’t think these two experiences of liturgy have to be mutually exclusive.]

While the promulgation of Summorum Pontificum is not keeping me up nights, I remain convinced that the Mass we are called to celebrate can be found within the rite as it exists today. We have what we need there to worship God in a way that is “right and just.” If we have failed to do that, it is not primarily because the rite is deficient but because we have been deficient in excavating and bringing forth its riches. Whatever the impact of Summorum Pontificum, that task remains.

He is still off but at least he recognized there was anproblem back then.

Anyway as you can tell at Amy's link there is much discussion if Archbishop Flynn acted fast enough. My own personal opinion is no. However I am wary of criticizing him. First because he is a Bishop and we are not in his shoes.

I have only met Archbishop Flynn twice. Once in Lafayette and only briefly and later in Shreveport where he came down from current "post" to speak at the Red Mass.

I have no reason to doubt his devotion to the Church. In fact his first position as Bishop was in Lafayette. The dates of his tenure also show that he had to heal the wounds of the Sexual abuse Priest scandal that had hit there before he became Bishop. In fact there was a TV movie made about this that no doubt many will recall.

Anyway I am Glad he is acting now.