Comments on: Messing with the Mass: The Problem of Priestly Narcissism Today http://adventus.org/en/ericnicolai/messing-with-the-mass-the-problem-of-priestly-narcissism-today/ Wed, 17 Feb 2010 14:19:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: Aiden http://adventus.org/en/ericnicolai/messing-with-the-mass-the-problem-of-priestly-narcissism-today/comment-page-1/#comment-11976 Aiden Fri, 04 Jan 2008 01:00:19 +0000 http://adventus.org/en/ericnicolai/messing-with-the-mass-the-problem-of-priestly-narcissism-today/#comment-11976 Fr. Eric, Good point about the inadequacy of trying to explain all/most liturgical abuse by narcissism. No doubt Dr. Vitz would agree, especially since he's referring to general narcissistic traits as opposed to the NPD found in the DSM-IV. Nevertheless, Dr. Vitz's thesis must certainly be true is some cases. You also raise a good point about the practical limitations of confronting a priest you suspect of being a narcissist w.r.t. liturgical abuse. I suspect it's a bit like denying someone holy communion - one can't really know (except in the most extreme cases) the state of the communicant's soul. Similarly, as you say, the priest who doesn't follow the rubrics might be doing so for all sorts of reasons, but perhaps one way to find out if he's a narcissist would be to get him to read Vitz's article and gauge his reaction to it. I suspect that if he reacts unfavorably to the substance of it - denying that narcissism is a danger - it's very likely that he can't see the log in his own eye. Fr. Eric,

Good point about the inadequacy of trying to explain all/most liturgical abuse by narcissism. No doubt Dr. Vitz would agree, especially since he’s referring to general narcissistic traits as opposed to the NPD found in the DSM-IV. Nevertheless, Dr. Vitz’s thesis must certainly be true is some cases. You also raise a good point about the practical limitations of confronting a priest you suspect of being a narcissist w.r.t. liturgical abuse. I suspect it’s a bit like denying someone holy communion – one can’t really know (except in the most extreme cases) the state of the communicant’s soul. Similarly, as you say, the priest who doesn’t follow the rubrics might be doing so for all sorts of reasons, but perhaps one way to find out if he’s a narcissist would be to get him to read Vitz’s article and gauge his reaction to it. I suspect that if he reacts unfavorably to the substance of it – denying that narcissism is a danger – it’s very likely that he can’t see the log in his own eye.

]]> By: Fr. Eric Nicolai http://adventus.org/en/ericnicolai/messing-with-the-mass-the-problem-of-priestly-narcissism-today/comment-page-1/#comment-11973 Fr. Eric Nicolai Tue, 01 Jan 2008 20:55:55 +0000 http://adventus.org/en/ericnicolai/messing-with-the-mass-the-problem-of-priestly-narcissism-today/#comment-11973 Mary Ann, thank you for your illuminating comment. I appreciate your attempt to save the good intentions of these rebels that you mention. I can only imagine that they are seeking some good in what they propose. But I don’t see how a hint of narcissism can be good or how being “too humble” can end up not really serving the Church. In some ways you could say that we’re all a bit tainted by narcissism due to the very wounds of original sin plus our own personal sins. But being humble is a positive thing, in fact it is almost impossible to overestimate the value of true humility for the Church, because a humble soul knows that he is merely an instrument and that any good that comes through him is from God. You probably mean the false humility of thinking it is ride to desire the highest greatness of contemplation. I would suggest that what you’re thinking of when you speak of rebels in the good sense is really the virtue of daring, or audacity, or even living fortitude to be faithful, or to do the right thing when the tendencies around you make you lean to mediocrity or “going with the flow”. I remember seeing a graffiti on a wall in Rome many years ago that has always stuck with me. It said in big bold red letters scrawled in front of a school: “Only the dead fish go with the current”. A rebel is someone ready to go against the current, but only when the current is leading you downhill to mediocrity. I suppose I could go on and on about daring and humility, but with regard to the liturgy, the most important thing today is that we should regain respect for the liturgy and a great care so as not to let it be manipulated. As Cardinal Ratzinger says: “That we learn to know it again a the living entity that has grown up and has been given to us, in which we take part in the heavenly liturgy. That we do not seek self-fulfillment in it but rather the gift that comes to us”. He then speaks of a need for a “reform of the reform” that would put an end to the trampling all over the liturgy with one’s own inventions. But he also mentions something about the attitude to the past that Dr. Vitz alludes as a narcissistic trait. Ratzinger makes the key point that if we reject liturgical tradition or despise the Church’s whole past, then how can one even trust her present? (see the Interview with him in God and the World, p. 415). Mary Ann, thank you for your illuminating comment. I appreciate your attempt to save the good intentions of these rebels that you mention. I can only imagine that they are seeking some good in what they propose. But I don’t see how a hint of narcissism can be good or how being “too humble” can end up not really serving the Church. In some ways you could say that we’re all a bit tainted by narcissism due to the very wounds of original sin plus our own personal sins. But being humble is a positive thing, in fact it is almost impossible to overestimate the value of true humility for the Church, because a humble soul knows that he is merely an instrument and that any good that comes through him is from God. You probably mean the false humility of thinking it is ride to desire the highest greatness of contemplation. I would suggest that what you’re thinking of when you speak of rebels in the good sense is really the virtue of daring, or audacity, or even living fortitude to be faithful, or to do the right thing when the tendencies around you make you lean to mediocrity or “going with the flow”. I remember seeing a graffiti on a wall in Rome many years ago that has always stuck with me. It said in big bold red letters scrawled in front of a school: “Only the dead fish go with the current”. A rebel is someone ready to go against the current, but only when the current is leading you downhill to mediocrity. I suppose I could go on and on about daring and humility, but with regard to the liturgy, the most important thing today is that we should regain respect for the liturgy and a great care so as not to let it be manipulated. As Cardinal Ratzinger says: “That we learn to know it again a the living entity that has grown up and has been given to us, in which we take part in the heavenly liturgy. That we do not seek self-fulfillment in it but rather the gift that comes to us”. He then speaks of a need for a “reform of the reform” that would put an end to the trampling all over the liturgy with one’s own inventions. But he also mentions something about the attitude to the past that Dr. Vitz alludes as a narcissistic trait. Ratzinger makes the key point that if we reject liturgical tradition or despise the Church’s whole past, then how can one even trust her present? (see the Interview with him in God and the World, p. 415).

]]> By: Fr. Eric Nicolai http://adventus.org/en/ericnicolai/messing-with-the-mass-the-problem-of-priestly-narcissism-today/comment-page-1/#comment-11972 Fr. Eric Nicolai Tue, 01 Jan 2008 20:12:42 +0000 http://adventus.org/en/ericnicolai/messing-with-the-mass-the-problem-of-priestly-narcissism-today/#comment-11972 Eric, the distinction that you mention between abuse and innovation becomes fairly clear when one considers the liturgy as a treasure that has been given me, and that it I something that does not really belong to me to do as I wish. It is not like a machine that you can take apart and dismantle and then see if it works in this way or that. It is rather like a living being, pulsating with tradition yet also growing, like a baby that I’ve been asked to care for. As Cardinal Ratzinger says, “I must serve it and respect the inner laws of this living being”. Abuse will come with my attitude, when I think that I can actually manufacture something better, like an expert who thinks himself almighty in and of himself. Ratzinger recognized that at times certain elements that have been introduced over the years have to be pruned away, but that is for the Church to decide in her teaching and magisterial role, not for me as an individual priest to jump into. In practical terms this really comes down to being faithful to the rubrics and serve the liturgy, particularly the Holy Mass, as the Church wants her to be served. When I celebrate the Mass, I must rectify my intention, and want the people not to see me, but to see Christ, who is at the centre of any celebration. Many priests have the experience of going to celebrate Mass at a parish that is not their own and where the people are not accustomed to how he functions. One often hears the comment after Mass: “Thank you Father, I loved your homily”. Yet a few weeks ago I went to a parish and someone said to me: “Thank you father, I loved your rubrics...” Which suggests to me that people are happier with the priest not being original and just with following the script. Part of that script is preparing a good short homily. They are not going there to be entertained or wooed, but to stand in front of a God who gives himself totally them and invites them to a response. Having said that, there is room in the liturgy not so much for innovation but for different options, and a certain leeway for the priest to choose among several analogous formulas. Perhaps that might end up in a form of innovation, but certainly that is not the first quality that I would pursue in any liturgical celebration. Eric, the distinction that you mention between abuse and innovation becomes fairly clear when one considers the liturgy as a treasure that has been given me, and that it I something that does not really belong to me to do as I wish. It is not like a machine that you can take apart and dismantle and then see if it works in this way or that. It is rather like a living being, pulsating with tradition yet also growing, like a baby that I’ve been asked to care for. As Cardinal Ratzinger says, “I must serve it and respect the inner laws of this living being”. Abuse will come with my attitude, when I think that I can actually manufacture something better, like an expert who thinks himself almighty in and of himself. Ratzinger recognized that at times certain elements that have been introduced over the years have to be pruned away, but that is for the Church to decide in her teaching and magisterial role, not for me as an individual priest to jump into. In practical terms this really comes down to being faithful to the rubrics and serve the liturgy, particularly the Holy Mass, as the Church wants her to be served. When I celebrate the Mass, I must rectify my intention, and want the people not to see me, but to see Christ, who is at the centre of any celebration. Many priests have the experience of going to celebrate Mass at a parish that is not their own and where the people are not accustomed to how he functions. One often hears the comment after Mass: “Thank you Father, I loved your homily”. Yet a few weeks ago I went to a parish and someone said to me: “Thank you father, I loved your rubrics…” Which suggests to me that people are happier with the priest not being original and just with following the script. Part of that script is preparing a good short homily. They are not going there to be entertained or wooed, but to stand in front of a God who gives himself totally them and invites them to a response. Having said that, there is room in the liturgy not so much for innovation but for different options, and a certain leeway for the priest to choose among several analogous formulas. Perhaps that might end up in a form of innovation, but certainly that is not the first quality that I would pursue in any liturgical celebration.

]]> By: Mary Ann http://adventus.org/en/ericnicolai/messing-with-the-mass-the-problem-of-priestly-narcissism-today/comment-page-1/#comment-11970 Mary Ann Tue, 01 Jan 2008 10:44:22 +0000 http://adventus.org/en/ericnicolai/messing-with-the-mass-the-problem-of-priestly-narcissism-today/#comment-11970 I have thought long and hard about this subject as I have friends who are priests and take much liberty with the liturgy(against their bishops orders). They tend to see them selves as rebels or engaging in 'loyal dissent'. But yes i must admit many have these Narcissistic traits and their motivations are both to improve their church AND to show themselves and others how clever(creative, powerful, innovative) they are. I suppose it comes down to the fact that a hint of narcissism is needed in reformists; otherwise they would be too humble to put forwards their ideas and challenge the status quo. I have thought long and hard about this subject as I have friends who are priests and take much liberty with the liturgy(against their bishops orders). They tend to see them selves as rebels or engaging in ‘loyal dissent’. But yes i must admit many have these Narcissistic traits and their motivations are both to improve their church AND to show themselves and others how clever(creative, powerful, innovative) they are. I suppose it comes down to the fact that a hint of narcissism is needed in reformists; otherwise they would be too humble to put forwards their ideas and challenge the status quo.

]]> By: Eric http://adventus.org/en/ericnicolai/messing-with-the-mass-the-problem-of-priestly-narcissism-today/comment-page-1/#comment-11965 Eric Mon, 31 Dec 2007 23:36:53 +0000 http://adventus.org/en/ericnicolai/messing-with-the-mass-the-problem-of-priestly-narcissism-today/#comment-11965 Interesting... How can one differentiate between a liturgical "abuse" and a liturgical "innovation?" Or are all changes, major and minor "abuses." I ask because sometimes a change makes things more meaningful/understood to the congregation in attendance. Interesting…

How can one differentiate between a liturgical “abuse” and a liturgical “innovation?” Or are all changes, major and minor “abuses.” I ask because sometimes a change makes things more meaningful/understood to the congregation in attendance.

]]>