"If I don't respond, is that a sin, Father?"

I see Eliabeth II, Queen of Great Britain, Northern Ireland etc, surived this weekend's celebration of the 70th anniversary of her accession to the throne. She made a three-minute curtain call on the balcony of Buck House yesterday, accompanied by Prince Charlie, the Duchess of Marlborough, Will and Kate and their sprogs.

Video clips seen over the weekend show the Royal Family and everyone else singing "God save the Queen". This is a venerable tune, written centuries ago by George Frideric Handel, which Americans might recognize as "My country, `tis of thee". It has served as the national anthem of the Disunited Kingdom and numerous countries, and is still the "royal anthem" in Canada and some other Commonwealth countries.

As I watched Charlie singing, I couldn't help but wonder if he means it. Perhaps he fears that his "mummy" (he called her that when speaking at St Paul's the day before) is going to live forever and he'll never get to be King Charles III. Don't worry kid. From the looks of things, "Brenda" is unlikely to make it to the 70th anniversary of her coronation, 2 June 2023. (Lifetime pct .983.) Eventually Prince William will be singing "God save the King" for you... with equal sincerity I'm sure.

A custom that Americans are spared [thank goodness! Ed.] is the obligatory toast to the Queen which precedes any formal dinner, in the same countries where "God save the Queen" is sung. (In Canada, when the MC says "Charge your glasses!", they fill `em with water! Shocking!)

The MC says, in a loud and solemn voice, "The Queen", and all present are supposed to respond, "The Queen", after which people who have served in a royal regiment may add, "God bless `er!" It's all terribly anachronistic and phony, and I wouldn't be surprised to leaern that in Northern Ireland there are many who refuse to make the appropriate response, if indeed the toast is offered at all.

Following this line of thought, [How much longer? Ed.], we have something foisted on Catholic worshippers by Hannibal Bugnini and the other Protestants and Freemasons responsible for the "improved" New Mass. I refer to the "Prayers of the Faithful" (derived from the Anglican "bidding prayers"), stuck in between the Creed and the Canon. 

These prayers can go on for quite some time, depending on the wokeness of whoever writes them, since the people are enjoined to pray for "those who rule over us" -- the Pope, the bishops, the Queen, the government, the authorities, yada yada yada -- and whichever people and whatever causes are in fashion on the day, e.g. refugees, social justice, rain, more yada yada yada. 

The usual format is to name the person or thing being prayed for, then say the layperson reading the prayers (they're prayers of the faithful, you see) says "We pray to the Lord", in whichever language is being used (but no Latin), and the faithful are supposed to respond "Lord, hear our prayer."

My question, as a traditional Catholic, and someone with a rather low regard for "those who rule over us", is: what if I don't respond? What if I don't feel like praying for this Pope, or for the police, or for asylum-seekers? Is it a sin not to respond? (Do we even have "sins" any more?) Will I go to hell, would it just be a venial sin? [Wozzat? Ed.]

And one more thing. Signore Bugnini and the other anti-Catholics who the Vatican put in charge of "reforming" the Mass told us it was important that people should be more involved, and should participate more in the ritual. No more going to hear Mass, as in the bad old days before 1963.

The worst manifestation (IMHO) of this desire that the people should do something is the so-called "Rite of Peace", which now follows the Our Father just before communion. Before we receive Our Lord in the Holy Eucharist, we are supposed to take a couple of minutes and exchange a sign of peace with our neighbours, just the same as the Pentecostals do.

It could have been worse. The original plan was for it to have been a kiss of peace, which the celebrant was supposed to share with the deacons and altar servers and laypeople participating in the ceremonies. It turned out some of the priests were enjoying that a bit too much, so the instruction was amended to "a handshake or other suitable gesture."

Even that got out of hand [no puns, please. Ed.] as the new woke priests actually came down from behind (not in front of) the altar and started wandering up and down the aisles shaking hands with everyone within reach. So also, worshippers were encouraged to shake hands with those beside them, behind them, in front of them, up in the choir loft, etc. It became a bit difficult to get everyone settled down and back into reverent mode.

One silver lining in the cloud of the Wuhan flu was that "social distancing" put a temporary end to the shaking of hands, because most people's arms were too short. Fist- and elbow-bumps wouldn't work either. But, lest they be accused of reverting to pre-Vatican II norms, most dioceses kept the "Rite of Peace", substituting a nod for a handshake. So people kind of wobbled at each other, while some flashed the "peace sign", a secular humanist gesture from the hippy-dippy `60s. 

Now that things have loosened up, people attending Novus Ordo services don't know exactly what they should do during this interruption to what should be the most solemn part of the Mass. My question would be: What if I don't feel like doing anything? 

I'm not a very sociable guy to begin with [the word "hermit" comes to mind. Ed.], but to me, going to Mass is not a social occasion, a cheery community get-together where we all join hands and sing "Kumbaya". It is, or should be, just me and the priest and God. What if I refuse to acknowledge the presence of others? Is that a sin, Father? &c, as above.