G
Greenfields
Guest
Well…I read comments here then began reading the article.I made it through the second paragraph where he says his thoughts wander.That’s all I needed to read :grinning_face_with_smiling_eyes:
- Status
M
Mary888
Guest
People who claim to know how to walk on water… should be asked to … walk on water imho.
L
Lev
Guest
I really don’t understand his problem. The piano for instance is much closer the pipe organ that he so loves. The instruments used in the earliest Churches would have been stringed instruments like the lyre and harp. Brass instruments like the horns and trumpets and woodwind instruments and drums.
Psalm 150
4 Praise God with drum and dance!
Praise God with strings and pipe!
5 Praise God with loud cymbals!
Praise God with clashing cymbals!
6 Let every living thing praise the Lord!
Praise the Lord!
Jesus didn’t denounce those things.
Also the first liturgies would have been in the vernacular being Aramaic, Hebrew, Greek or Latin.
And if you want to see a monstrosity, Gaudi’s Church in Barcelona is just that. I did not like the look of that place at all.
A
Aquinas11
Guest
Excellent read
E
Edmundus1581
Guest
Off to a good start!
“Last Sunday I was away from home; this normally means trouble”.
Yup!
By happy coincidence, last Sunday I was away from home too, and was able to confirm something I have alleged several times in these discussions - that I have been in a church, even a Cathedral, where I was the only person singing the hymns along with the cantor. This time it was a Cathedral.
The hymn list was a good mix of traditional and modern, and the cantor and organist strong. We used hymn books. I am generally against overheads in Mass, but they do seem to encourage congregational singing.
This looks promising. I hope to return to read the article and join the discussion.
ps. good title “Effete liturgy”
“Last Sunday I was away from home; this normally means trouble”.
Yup!
By happy coincidence, last Sunday I was away from home too, and was able to confirm something I have alleged several times in these discussions - that I have been in a church, even a Cathedral, where I was the only person singing the hymns along with the cantor. This time it was a Cathedral.
The hymn list was a good mix of traditional and modern, and the cantor and organist strong. We used hymn books. I am generally against overheads in Mass, but they do seem to encourage congregational singing.
This looks promising. I hope to return to read the article and join the discussion.
ps. good title “Effete liturgy”
Last edited:
E
Erikaspirit16
Guest
I read the article. I would have–and have–written the same thing, but perhaps with less humor and more anger. I can’t disagree with anything he says–or the way he says it.
First, you have to consider where it appeared: “Crisis.” Since I subscribed for many years and now get Crisis online, I’m very familiar with it. It’s not called “Crisis” because the editors think things are just peachy keen in the religious world. If you had a similar article written by someone from “the People of God” for example, you would see the opposite side of the coin.
Personally, I understand that different people have different tastes. Fine. But, despite the fact that everyone talks about “inclusion” and “diversity,” there is precious little of it on the local level. In fact, as you can see from simply reading the comments here, the (what to call it…) let’s say “non-traditional” point of view now dominates to the extent that it does two things simultaneously (even though they are self-contradictory). First, it ignores anyone who objects. Second, it demonizes anyone who objects (“uncharitable,” “lack of humility,” etc. etc.)
But in fact, a large percentage of Catholics feel this way (like a more “traditional” approach). And to exclude them from parish councils, liturgy committees, music committees, etc. is the direct opposite of “inclusion” and “diversity” which the same people profess to believe in. But don’t.
There are, of course, reasonable ways to address the problem. Have a “traditional” Mass at one time (and not 9 pm at night or 6 am in the morning). Or designate one parish/church in an area as a more “traditional” church. Or celebrate Latin Mass once each week. And so on. A little effort would go a long way. But the present situation (“we’re doing it our way, and it you don’t like it, … off”) is not inclusive, diverse, charitable, or in any way, shape, or form good for the Church as a whole.
First, you have to consider where it appeared: “Crisis.” Since I subscribed for many years and now get Crisis online, I’m very familiar with it. It’s not called “Crisis” because the editors think things are just peachy keen in the religious world. If you had a similar article written by someone from “the People of God” for example, you would see the opposite side of the coin.
Personally, I understand that different people have different tastes. Fine. But, despite the fact that everyone talks about “inclusion” and “diversity,” there is precious little of it on the local level. In fact, as you can see from simply reading the comments here, the (what to call it…) let’s say “non-traditional” point of view now dominates to the extent that it does two things simultaneously (even though they are self-contradictory). First, it ignores anyone who objects. Second, it demonizes anyone who objects (“uncharitable,” “lack of humility,” etc. etc.)
But in fact, a large percentage of Catholics feel this way (like a more “traditional” approach). And to exclude them from parish councils, liturgy committees, music committees, etc. is the direct opposite of “inclusion” and “diversity” which the same people profess to believe in. But don’t.
There are, of course, reasonable ways to address the problem. Have a “traditional” Mass at one time (and not 9 pm at night or 6 am in the morning). Or designate one parish/church in an area as a more “traditional” church. Or celebrate Latin Mass once each week. And so on. A little effort would go a long way. But the present situation (“we’re doing it our way, and it you don’t like it, … off”) is not inclusive, diverse, charitable, or in any way, shape, or form good for the Church as a whole.
C
CaptainPrudeman
Guest
That does not give them the right to insult whole congregations simply because they celebrate mass in a different way.
E
Erikaspirit16
Guest
Who’s insulting whom? I don’t see any insulting words being used to describe people. I see satire in terms of making fun of what goes on. And I have no quarrel with “them” celebrating Mass however they want. But I do have a problem if “they” completely control all Masses within a 25 mile radius of my house–which is the case. THAT is the insult–that I am given no choice unless I want to drive 50 miles round trip.
L
Lev
Guest
That is the case for many foreign language Masses. The frequency of Masses in other languages or forms will necessarily be dictated by demand.
M
Moose
Guest
Yikes…not sure that I understand the reflected acrimonious assault on Mr. Esolen.
He’s fairly well known and somewhat renowned as a studious and (conservative) member of the one, holy catholic , apostolic faith we all (?) share.
That said, I found nothing he said to be rude, virulent, hateful, undeserving and/or otherwise distasteful.
This American church of ours cannot be said to be well grounded or even well administered since V-2.
It just cannot - argue as you may…you are misguided.
His dissatisfaction in the experience des,cribbed is likely pretty typical of many catholic Churches and catholic services that are catholic with a small “ c” .
The ONE church requires commonality that the USCCB is verse to and as such the North American experience for faithful Catholics is schizophrenic at best and trending Protestant at its most frequent.
Has nothing to do with this Pope or the last Pope or any Pope for that matter.
This is a direct result of a fouled American ethos that is evidenced by a society that has as its life-giving impetus a soulless narcissism which disabuses the sacred as profane and worships the profane as praise worthy.
Sad too. A worldwide filial correction is called for. May it begin soon.
He’s fairly well known and somewhat renowned as a studious and (conservative) member of the one, holy catholic , apostolic faith we all (?) share.
That said, I found nothing he said to be rude, virulent, hateful, undeserving and/or otherwise distasteful.
This American church of ours cannot be said to be well grounded or even well administered since V-2.
It just cannot - argue as you may…you are misguided.
His dissatisfaction in the experience des,cribbed is likely pretty typical of many catholic Churches and catholic services that are catholic with a small “ c” .
The ONE church requires commonality that the USCCB is verse to and as such the North American experience for faithful Catholics is schizophrenic at best and trending Protestant at its most frequent.
Has nothing to do with this Pope or the last Pope or any Pope for that matter.
This is a direct result of a fouled American ethos that is evidenced by a society that has as its life-giving impetus a soulless narcissism which disabuses the sacred as profane and worships the profane as praise worthy.
Sad too. A worldwide filial correction is called for. May it begin soon.
A
AngelusDomini
Guest
What a nasty piece of writing. We can all have a whinge about things we may not like but this is just over the top. Doesn’t like having a priest welcoming people - maybe be grateful there’s a priest there. Doesn’t like the building - be thankful it’s standing and Mass doesnt have to be celebrated in secret. Doesn’t like the music on a piano - pay for the organ to be restored/tuned.
I like to have a moan aa much as the next person but it’s worth putting things in perspective and being a realist.
I would take a guess that this writer would be the type to label others as ‘entitled’ or ‘snowflakes’ if they dared to criticise anything he likes.
I like to have a moan aa much as the next person but it’s worth putting things in perspective and being a realist.
I would take a guess that this writer would be the type to label others as ‘entitled’ or ‘snowflakes’ if they dared to criticise anything he likes.
H
hope
Guest
I like being greeted by my priest. This issues was addressed in 2003. I do not know of any other. If you do, I would be interested in seeing itI actually like being greeted by our priests if they are in the narthex when I arrive. And you know, I think it’s custom in some parts of the world to stand after receiving communion.
P
Peeps
Guest
So because I play the piano at Mass, I “disabuse the sacred as profane and worship the profane as praise worthy”??
That’s what you think of me?
I play the organ, too, but it’s not an instrument that I am totally comfortable with, and I have to find time during the week to practice at my parish if I’m going to be able to play it. In other words, I want to play well, not shabbily, for my Lord and my fellow Christians. Does that sound like I am "profaning the sacred? "
I am hurt by your words and your judgment of me and all the others like me.
That’s what you think of me?
I play the organ, too, but it’s not an instrument that I am totally comfortable with, and I have to find time during the week to practice at my parish if I’m going to be able to play it. In other words, I want to play well, not shabbily, for my Lord and my fellow Christians. Does that sound like I am "profaning the sacred? "
I am hurt by your words and your judgment of me and all the others like me.
A
Aquinas11
Guest
Not to mention the irony of the insults in the thread at the author , while complaining about…insults?
Looks like insults aren’t his sin. His sin is defending Traditional Catholicism
Last edited:
J
JulianN
Guest
Well, according to that author.
J
JulianN
Guest
I made the assumption because you said, “Every criticism he makes is valid.” Should I not have assumed that’s what you meant?
A
angel12
Guest
Not at all. It is certainly possible to defend Traditional Catholicism without saying that a priest greeting his parishioners looks like he’s going to “perhaps offer to carry their luggage.” And without calling the commentator “a Church Lady.” Without snarkily calling the parish “Our Lady of Perpetual Motion” and “Our Lady of Bustle and Business” and " Our Lady Seat of Wellness" and “Saint Secular of Southern California.” Without calling those still in line to receive Holy Communion “those whose order-numbers were still to be called.”
It would seem that his attendance at his preferred form of Mass, despite it being so much superior to this particular Mass, has not instilled much charity or humility. At least, he certainly doesn’t show any in this article.
A
Aquinas11
Guest
Just proved my point
H
hope
Guest
I didn’t find any reference of his to piano playing. When I read the article, it was not about the piano being profane. He was criticizing the way it was played as more of a performance rather than worship. We have both a piano and organ. The organ isn’t doing well a fund has been established to get a new one until then we have the piano. Many Church’s that I have been to have either no organ or both. The tendency is to use the piano. Our church has two pianos but I have never seen one, in the choir loft, used. We have a man who plays his guitar. It is wonderful. We also have a trumpeter who comes once a year. It is very uplifting. I do believe you misread.
Last edited:
Exactly.CilladeRoma:
Case in point:
"“When I entered, the priest was stationed in the vestibule, ready to greet people on their way in—and perhaps offer to carry their luggage. I do not want to be greeted on my way in.”
Well, boo-hoo.
If anyone has a problem with a priest warmly greeting you as you enter the church before Mass, then it’s you that has a problem, and not the priest nor the parish.
Last edited:
- Status