A comment on the Holy Father’s Mass at Nationals Stadium [Fr. Z]

[drafdog]

As a head of state the Pope is expected and in fact paid to make a spectacle of himself. If one believes the remarks made by previous posters, many of whom have thanked God that finally we have a pope who will bring back reverence for the liturgy, the Pope has done an admirable job.
I said in a previous thread that the concept of a mass celebrated in a sports arena could only be the product of a person who has a skewed sense of symbol.
I heard a report on PBS that there were some 46,000 faithful at a mass celebrated by 250 bishops and 1200 priests. The math indicates that each celebrant could have had an intimate and reverent mass with 32 congregants. And wouldn’t that have been a far better way to celebrate the Eucharist? I can’t imagine why anyone would think that putting together an event like a single mass for 46,000 would be a good idea. The faithful want to see the Pope? Let him drive in a motorcade over a three mile route. Figuring 1.5 feet per person and standing two deep on both sides of the street, you can easily accommodate 46,000 persons.

Matthew

 

[pnewton]

I just commented on mass of creation because it seems like we use it every mass and it gets old

Perhaps that was the very reason it was chosen, it would be the best well know among the most Catholics.

Fr. Z is not exactly what I would call fair and balanced reporting, but at least he did not presume to speak for God, like Rafael did (That liturgy was an abomination to God) or called Catholics “unfaithful” for sticking out their “paws.” Perhaps we ought to just let the Holy Father speak for himself if he has something to say about this Mass and stop putting words in his mouth.

I think the whole idea of Mass at a stadium is nuts anyway. I do not think there is a good way to do that.

 

[donmaximuso27]

For kicks I looked up the Gregorian Chant from the Catholic Encyclopedia, let’s see “…Taken as synonymous with plain chant…of the middle ages, … later compositions, written in similar style down to the sixteenth century and even in modern times.” It continues to discuss how it was distingished from other chants, and how it points to Gregory the Great (590-604). Unless I am missing something, it looks like it come from a European tradition. Nothing wrong with that. It’s just not represenative of the music and culture shared in America.
By the way, your definition is that music not in compliance with Church Dictrine, cannot be inspired by God to honor him. How about those of Jewish origin, or Eastern tradition or hundreds of protestant hyms. Their music does not praise and honor Him? That must include the Jewish hyms sung for his Holiness when he visited the Jewish Synogogue this afternoon.
Just admit that you just don’t like anything that falls out of your definition of sacred music.

Peace,
FAB

The persecution of the early church often prevented a stable, consistent liturgy from being developed. Also, we know little of the music of the ancient church because musical notation did not exist. However, we do know that hymns did exist and were often based on the Psalms and other Scripture. The music that developed in the early church throughout the east was in fact accapella and involved chants. You assume St. Gregory was the first to develope chant. This is nonsense. He was incluenced by composers such as St. Ambrose, and this tradition traces its way back to east. Also, we are speaking of mass and what music to use, not ecumencial services. During mass, the music must be sound with Catholic theology, obviously.

 

[Dauphin]

I don’t anything about what you folks are discussing as far as what is acceptable music or not for a liturgy, but my question is:

Who set up the whole event with the music, etc? Didn’t Pope Benedict or his assistants ask that it be done in a certain way? I guess I’m just confused as to how this irreverent mass could be conducted and planned as it was when it is the Pope for goodness sake ?

Just curious.

Peace…

MW

This is what we’re trying to figure out. It’s shaken alot of people.

What happened at that Mass runs contrary to everything the Pope has every said about liturgy. Either the Pope’s gone hippy, or he somehow couldn’t help what happened.

Another possibility is that he tolerated it for some reason… that seems most likely.

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

As a head of state the Pope is expected and in fact paid to make a spectacle of himself. If one believes the remarks made by previous posters, many of whom have thanked God that finally we have a pope who will bring back reverence for the liturgy, the Pope has done an admirable job.
I said in a previous thread that the concept of a mass celebrated in a sports arena could only be the product of a person who has a skewed sense of symbol.
I heard a report on PBS that there were some 46,000 faithful at a mass celebrated by 250 bishops and 1200 priests. The math indicates that each celebrant could have had an intimate and reverent mass with 32 congregants. And wouldn’t that have been a far better way to celebrate the Eucharist? I can’t imagine why anyone would think that putting together an event like a single mass for 46,000 would be a good idea. The faithful want to see the Pope? Let him drive in a motorcade over a three mile route. Figuring 1.5 feet per person and standing two deep on both sides of the street, you can easily accommodate 46,000 persons.

Matthew

The pope is more than a side show. He is the Vicar of Christ on earth. It is an honor and privilege to attend a mass celebrated by the successor of Peter. If you don’t like it for whatever warped reason you have, don’t go.
Prayers & Blessings
Deacon Ed B

 

[I_Believe]

Perhaps that was the very reason it was chosen, it would be the best well know among the most Catholics.

Fr. Z is not exactly what I would call fair and balanced reporting, but at least he did not presume to speak for God, like Rafael did (That liturgy was an abomination to God) or called Catholics “unfaithful” for sticking out their “paws.” ** Perhaps we ought to just let the Holy Father speak for himself if he has something to say about this Mass and stop putting words in his mouth.

I think the whole idea of Mass at a stadium is nuts anyway. I do not think there is a good way to do that.**

I gotta say, you are quite right on both counts. Quoting the Pope is one thing, but assuming we know what he thinks is silly. And I agree, outside of a necessity because of persecution, the Mass should be prayed in a consecrated church, oratory, cathedral, chapel, basilica, etc. A large gathering of the faithful is fine for listening to the Pope speak and praying with him , but “temporary sanctuaries” are really a bit much.

 

[pnewton]

A large gathering of the faithful is fine for listening to the Pope speak and praying with him , but “temporary sanctuaries” are really a bit much.

I like this idea. I wish they would stick with Mass in the appropriate venue. There easily could have been a common gathering for addressing people en masse and showcasing American culture. Then there could be greater freedom as to music and even blatant entertainment.

 

[Mystic_Warrior]

This is what we’re trying to figure out. It’s shaken alot of people.

What happened at that Mass runs contrary to everything the Pope has every said about liturgy. Either the Pope’s gone hippy, or he somehow couldn’t help what happened.

Another possibility is that he tolerated it for some reason… that seems most likely.

Thank you so much for your reply. I thought I was going to get completely ignored. I really am curious. I’m non-Catholic but I would want the Pope to have the best and most reverent mass to celebrate while he is here. For me, that’s just plain good hospitality to a guest, regardless of who it is.

It’s too bad he had to tolerate the situation. It’s disgraceful to have him here (a feat in itself) and treat him that way. And I’m non-Catholic!

Peace…

MW

 

[MrS]

The pope is more than a side show. He is the Vicar of Christ on earth. It is an honor and privilege to attend a mass celebrated by the successor of Peter. If you don’t like it for whatever warped reason you have, don’t go.
Prayers & Blessings
Deacon Ed B

Nice, deacon, nice. IMHO you are not part of any solution. And for what it is worth, I agree that the Mass in a stadium is destined for show, not reverence.

Christ fed the 5000 in the open air, but He said the first Mass in more humble and “controlled” surroundings. Just a thought.

 

[drafdog]

The deacon seems not to have read my previous post, a fault that is all too common on fora. I was speaking of the Pope as a head of state, not as a spiritual leader. Everyone plays many roles in life and it is frequently the case that in the performance of one role, one diminishes the effectiveness of another role. This is what happens when the Pope tries to accommodate his role as head of state with his role as priest. You have seen why the Vatican has forbidden priests to engage in politics. The Pope seems to have a great deal of difficulty realizing that the dangers are magnified in his own case.
I stand by my previous statement that heads of state are frequently called upon by circumstances to make spectacles of themselves.

Matthew

 

[MomblessedX3]

Maybe I am just really ignorant about the music. I can honestly say that I did not enjoy it, but I can often say that about my own local Catholic Church. What I don’t understand is what was sacreligious about it at the stadium mass.

Can someone explain it to me?
Thanks

 

[Dauphin]

Maybe I am just really ignorant about the music. I can honestly say that I did not enjoy it, but I can often say that about my own local Catholic Church. What I don’t understand is what was sacreligious about it at the stadium mass.

Can someone explain it to me?
Thanks

Aside from how obviously unfitting the music was for the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass (think about what it is), it seemed to reflect the theme of the Mass as a “show” in which we present our cultures and our communities as the focus, obscuring the true meaning of the liturgy. Nothing could be a more direct contradiction of what the Pope has written on extensively about liturgy.

If some don’t understand the gravity of what happened, it’s likely because they don’t recognize that the Mass is the most important thing in the world. It is Christ’s very Body and Blood presented on the altar. It is the centre and summit of the Church’s life. Offering true and exclusive worship to God is a matter of profound importance, that ultimately orients our entire life towards him. It is so important, it is the first commandment of God.

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

The deacon seems not to have read my previous post, a fault that is all too common on fora. I was speaking of the Pope as a head of state, not as a spiritual leader. Everyone plays many roles in life and it is frequently the case that in the performance of one role, one diminishes the effectiveness of another role. This is what happens when the Pope tries to accommodate his role as head of state with his role as priest. You have seen why the Vatican has forbidden priests to engage in politics. The Pope seems to have a great deal of difficulty realizing that the dangers are magnified in his own case.
I stand by my previous statement that heads of state are frequently called upon by circumstances to make spectacles of themselves.
Matthew

My friend, you have a completely skewered view of what the papacy is. First and foremost, the pope is the Vicar of Christ and the Successor of Peter. He is the spiritual leader of us all. You can no more separate his papal role as priest, from anything else he does, as that is what he is, first and foremost, our high priest here on earth. . To limit the number of people blessed to attend a papal mass by the confines of the size of a building, whether it be a mission, church, cathedral or basilica, would in my humble opinion be entirely wrong. Years ago, I was blessed to attend a papal mass, celebrated outdoors with over 700,000 people in attendance. At that time, I was not yet a deacon, but as an extraordinary minister of the Eucharist was picked to be one of the Eucharistic ministers. This is a wonderful memory I will carry with me to my grave. A mass outdoors, whether in a stadium, under the trees, or in the garden of Gethsemani where I have been blessed to assist at mass as a deacon, or a mass as was celebrated today at St. Patrick’s are all equally efficacious, since the merits of the mass is infinite, and there are no degrees to infiniteness. No one twisted the Holy Father’s arm to celebrate outdoors. No one forced Pope John Paul II to celebrate outdoors. This is where the most people could participate. and if it is good enough with our Holy Fathers, it certainly is good enough for me.
Prayers and blessings
Deacon Ed B

 

[BlyssfulDreamer]

I have to agree that the music was atrocious. That is just my opinion and personal preference. It reminded me of a “clap-clap- feel good” thing and not the reverential music I thought it would have been.

 

[MomblessedX3]

Aside from how obviously unfitting the music was for the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass (think about what it is), it seemed to reflect the theme of the Mass as a “show” in which we present our cultures and our communities as the focus, obscuring the true meaning of the liturgy. Nothing could be a more direct contradiction of what the Pope has written on extensively about liturgy.

If some don’t understand the gravity of what happened, it’s likely because they don’t recognize that the Mass is the most important thing in the world. It is Christ’s very Body and Blood presented on the altar. It is the centre and summit of the Church’s life. Offering true and exclusive worship to God is a matter of profound importance, that ultimately orients our entire life towards him. It is so important, it is the first commandment of God.

That sort of felt like an attack. I can only hope it wasn’t focused on me.
I can understand your position and I agree with it to an extent.
However, what you viewed as a “show” I viewed as a way to make the mass more meaningful to EVERY Catholic in the US and world.
I also feel that any time you get that many people in one place whether for a sporting event or a sacred mass…there will be an unusual excitement that may not feel so reverent!
JMHO

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

I have to agree that the music was atrocious. That is just my opinion and personal preference. It reminded me of a “clap-clap- feel good” thing and not the reverential music I thought it would have been.

I am not knocking your opinion, as you are certainly entitled to it, just as are all of us. I am simply asking and pointing that much of what we see and hear, in music that we do not like, is cultural. The Church is universal. Do I like everyone’s music, no I don’t. What you and I like as Church music is mostly European and goes back 100s of years or more. As a universal Church, we say we embrace everyone. If we embrace everyone, we must embrace them as they are. (If their culture embraces sinful ways, we correct them.) Some of their music may go back, in some cultures, as far or further than ours. It is the words that are sung that make the music sacred, not the notes or melodies that are used to express them.
Prayers s& blessings
Deacon Ed B

 

[Dauphin]

That sort of felt like an attack. I can only hope it wasn’t focused on me.
I can understand your position and I agree with it to an extent.
However, what you viewed as a “show” I viewed as a way to make the mass more meaningful to EVERY Catholic in the US and world.
I also feel that any time you get that many people in one place whether for a sporting event or a sacred mass…there will be an unusual excitement that may not feel so reverent!
JMHO

It wasn’t an attack. I was just speaking in general terms. I’m sorry if it came across differently.

 

[brotherhrolf]

I am not knocking your opinion, as you are certainly entitled to it, just as are all of us. I am simply asking and pointing that much of what we see and hear, in music that we do not like, is cultural. The Church is universal. Do I like everyone’s music, no I don’t. What you and I like as Church music is mostly European and goes back 100s of years or more. As a universal Church, we say we embrace everyone. If we embrace everyone, we must embrace them as they are. (If their culture embraces sinful ways, we correct them.) Some of their music may go back, in some cultures, as far or further than ours. It is the words that are sung that make the music sacred, not the notes or melodies that are used to express them.
Prayers s& blessings
Deacon Ed B

Mais cher Deacon Ed! C’a va’ mon fils?" Let me get this straight. I can go on Amazon and I can select sacred music from the Baroque period which was written by Cuban and Mexican composers. I sing music written in French by Cajun composers from the 19th and 20th centuries. I live in a state which has historic attachments to Cuba and Latin America. (Hey how many of you can say your church was once part of the Diocese of Havana). Guess what? Those antecedents did not sing sacro-salsa or sacro-merengue anymore than my other cultural antecedants sang sacro-pop much less sacro-two step.

The Mass we heard today is the Mass of our ancestors. I looked on the faces of the choir and they reflect the faces of my choir. Those faces reflect our faces in ethnic diversity but united in singing that corpus of music from which we as Catholics can draw.

I have seen Mass broadcast live from the Cathedral in San Antonio. I have also seen and heard sacred music from the San Antonio Vocal Arts Ensemble. There is no Missa “Chank a Chank” over here. Given that there are any number of liturgical compositions written by ethnic composers, why, pray, are we subjected to the sacro-salsa/sacro-merengue?

We are an ethnic group as Cajuns, right? French is still spoken here, right? So, where do you draw the line? Mariachi music for Mass in San Antonio is OK but we Cajuns draw upon the corpus of music that HMC has spread before us?

New Orleans received as big an influx of Cubans in 1960 as did Miami. There is no Cuban community in New Orleans. The profound connections between Havana and New Orleans meant that they became part of the cultural landscape. The same thing goes for the Haitians.

And our fellow Vietnamese. Must be the French they spoke.

All of us are Catholic. Forty years ago none of us would have had any problem in attending a Papal Mass since all of us would have been used to Mass in Latin. I am not sorry. Forty years ago this Irish Cajun kid could have gone anywhere in the Roman Catholic world and have been able to participate. Sorry Deacon Ed, but I have not forgotten this. I simply cannot get those Baroque Cuban and Mexican motets out of my head. Such beautiful music that Esteban Salas wrote in comparison to the dance hall music of Washington.

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

have you seen liturgies, masses in Viet Nam, in Africa, In India,in the Far East, Oceania etc. it is not all as you say mon ami. Many of these areas are only now being brought into the true fold and some of the music they bring with them is truly inspiring. I have to admit, I do not like it all, but some is truly amazing.
Prayers & Blessings
Deacon Ed B

 

[ProVobis]

Nice, deacon, nice. IMHO you are not part of any solution. And for what it is worth, I agree that the Mass in a stadium is destined for show, not reverence.

Is that where the term “grandstanding” came from?

I heard they even gave free bobbleheads to the first 10,000.

Hey, at least it’s better than taking a Communion souvenir home.