Apologist Dave Armstrong defends Ad Orientem posture

[ProVobis]

? I’m a bit confused. Yes, of course we share in the Sacrifice of Christ through the Sacrament of the Eucharist. Was that what you were asking?

Actually the opposite.

I was getting a little off track but trying to lead to the OT where people would benefit by the fact that the high priest would offer the best he could offer to please God and they couldn’t even enter or see the Holy of Holies.

 

[otjm]

Then modernist hymnals will be tossed, and I won’t be forced to hear week after week hymns about us rather than about Him, the One we are receiving in Holy Communion.

God’s Peace

So I take it that a hymn which is taken from the Psalms is modernist?

 

[johnnyc176]

Thankfully the TLM is flourishing and even the OF is being celebrated more reverently. There is still the residue of the ‘spirit’ of Vatican II but positive signs abound.

 

[ProVobis]

So I take it that a hymn which is taken from the Psalms is modernist?

Only if it’s in 2015 English

 

[dcana]

So I take it that a hymn which is taken from the Psalms is modernist?

No, I didn’t say all the hymns in the “modernist” hymnals are bad, but many are. Even more than the hymnals themselves, it’s the hymns that music directors exclusively choose to use that are bad. They are insipid, lame, deficient, grating on the ear, and not at all suited for Holy Mass at best and the former plus being heretical at worst, or at least easily lend themselves to being interpreted in an heretical way. At least, that’s what I’ve experienced. But if we switched to hymnals such as this one, such would not be possible. We have almost two millenia’s worth of exquisitely beautiful chants, polyphony, and hymns that are eminently suited to Holy Mass to choose from, why not put them to good use?

 

[otjm]

No, I didn’t say all the hymns in the “modernist” hymnals are bad, but many are. Even more than the hymnals themselves, it’s the hymns that music directors exclusively choose to use that are bad. They are insipid, lame, deficient, grating on the ear, and not at all suited for Holy Mass at best and the former plus being heretical at worst, or at least easily lend themselves to being interpreted in an heretical way. At least, that’s what I’ve experienced. But if we switched to hymnals such as this one, such would not be possible. We have almost two millenia’s worth of exquisitely beautiful chants, polyphony, and hymns that are eminently suited to Holy Mass to choose from, why not put them to good use?

Because, for the most part, congregations prefer hymns, and do not appreciate the two millennia’s worth of said music.

And by the way, anyone who truly knows Gregorian chant will know that what we sing now may or may not be the way it was originally sung, as the notations in the oldest music simply don’t exist.

Further, one of the most effective aspects of chant is semi echo effect, which is not possible to reproduce in the vast majority of churches in the US; one almost needs to go back to Europe and the Romanesque and Gothic churches and cathedrals.

 

[otjm]

No, I didn’t say all the hymns in the “modernist” hymnals are bad, but many are. Even more than the hymnals themselves, it’s the hymns that music directors exclusively choose to use that are bad. They are insipid, lame, deficient, grating on the ear, and not at all suited for Holy Mass at best and the former plus being heretical at worst, or at least easily lend themselves to being interpreted in an heretical way. At least, that’s what I’ve experienced. But if we switched to hymnals such as this one, such would not be possible. We have almost two millenia’s worth of exquisitely beautiful chants, polyphony, and hymns that are eminently suited to Holy Mass to choose from, why not put them to good use?

The hymnal you note is for the EF; the vast majority of Masses said in the US are the OF. So either we are talking past each other, or you simply don’t like the OF. That is perfectly fine, but the discussion is about the OF, per the title of the thread.

 

[dcana]

Because, for the most part, congregations prefer hymns, and do not appreciate the two millennia’s worth of said music.

Well, that would have to be slowly changed, wouldn’t it? Couldn’t people learn to appreciate - even prefer - beautiful music if they were actually exposed to it? I think so.

And by the way, anyone who truly knows Gregorian chant will know that what we sing now may or may not be the way it was originally sung, as the notations in the oldest music simply don’t exist.

It sounds good to me.

Further, one of the most effective aspects of chant is semi echo effect, which is not possible to reproduce in the vast majority of churches in the US; one almost needs to go back to Europe and the Romanesque and Gothic churches and cathedrals.

A sad state of affairs. So it wouldn’t be perfect. Oh well. Maybe they can feed the output of the mixer to into a reverb effect! I envision the OF mass using the actual propers of the mass set to music, along with some sacred hymns such as are found in the Campion missal, and with the ordinary parts of the mass chanted in Latin (at least the shorter ones: the Kyrie, Sanctus, and Agnus Dei). That would be just lovely. Maybe one day.

It’s a good conversation we’re having but we’re getting off the subject of the thread.

My apologies. Carry on.

 

[ProVobis]

The hymnal you note is for the EF; the vast majority of Masses said in the US are the OF. So either we are talking past each other, or you simply don’t like the OF. That is perfectly fine, but the discussion is about the OF, per the title of the thread.

But for the record Jubilate Deo was issued by the Vatican for the OF (each and every parish actually) and has been so far overwhelmingly rejected or ignored.

 

[otjm]

But for the record Jubilate Deo was issued by the Vatican for the OF (each and every parish actually) and has been so far overwhelmingly rejected or ignored.

And thank you for making my point.

And lest that be confusing, other than my own personal preferences (which is for Gregorian chant done correctly and properly, and my own preference to not hear Palistrina in a Mass), I am not suggesting a rightness or a wrongness to the Church’s preference in music, but rather commenting on the obvious - that people don’t want this in general.

The Church’s statements on music are hortatory, not mandatory.

 

[Trad_Catholic27]

Actually otjm when the Church says that Chant and Polyphony are to be sung in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass then common sense should tell the parish to obey the Church .

We must obey Vatican 2 100 percent especially the parts considering the Liturgy.

 

[otjm]

Actually otjm when the Church says that Chant and Polyphony are to be sung in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass then common sense should tell the parish to obey the Church .

We must obey Vatican 2 100 percent especially the parts considering the Liturgy.

As I said, it is hortatory, not mandatory. Your sense of the need for obedience is misguided.

 

[ProVobis]

As I said, it is hortatory, not mandatory. Your sense of the need for obedience is misguided.

Supposedly Pope Paul “asked” the bishops to find a way to make Jubilate Deo work, or something to that effect. I suppose you can call that hortatory, but if my mother “asked” me to do something, I sure considered it a command.

 

[otjm]

Supposedly Pope Paul “asked” the bishops to find a way to make Jubilate Deo work, or something to that effect. I suppose you can call that hortatory, but if my mother “asked” me to do something, I sure considered it a command.

And therein lies the problem.

If the Church wanted to turn things around, they could easily make certain music mandatory. For nigh on 50 years, and a number of re-writes of the GIRM, they have clearly chosen not to. Not that there are not some who want, even dream, of that happening; but they refuse to see what is right in front of them.

The music will be used, even as it is currently being used, in some parishes. It is a bit akin to the issue of the EF being celebrated; it is most definitively in a minority. There are some few people, if they could be “pope for a day”, would implement that as the first rule made.

But they are not; Francis is, and as the last 4 Popes and the current one did not and do not appear intent on making certain music mandatory, so then it will not be mandatory.

Many people have the impression of a top-down structure in the Church; one that Rome says “jump” and parishes and diocese ask “how high” on the way up. I am not sure if that has ever been the case. And while Rome does make rules, there is also the reality in the Church for the better part of the last 2,000 years, that some things have come from the bottom up. Music appears, at this time, to be one of those.

Looking back to when the EF was made available, there were those, including some in these threads, who in so many words predicted that there was coming a tidal flood of immense proportions, such that the OF might even be eventually replaced.

That hasn’t happened, and a very wise individual said that he didn’t think that it would happen - Benedict 16 in his accompanying letter.

None of that is to pass on the worthiness of the Church’s desire that certain music be given pride of place. I am not challenging that; simply pointing out the Rome is not ignorant of what goes on in the US, and the fact that they do not object to it.

 

[ProVobis]

If the Church wanted to turn things around, they could easily make certain music mandatory.

Before we go on, I’m not sure it would be that easy, not from the congregational perspective anyway. Sure, it could deny copyrights and legislate things from the business point of view, but it seems most have their mind up concerning old and new music. In fact most have their minds made up about the vernacular, which way the priest should face, whether they should kneel, stand, sit, or sneel, how they should dress, and so forth.

I really don’t see this as a EF vs OF issue. There are differing philosophies and cultures even within the OF itself, which is about what the 25% or so of all Catholics regularly attend. The rest find other things to do on a Sunday morning. Whether all are happy or not doing what they do is a different story.

 

[Trad_Catholic27]

The reasons why their are so much problems in the Church today is because of the lack of respect for authority in the Church. Let’s be honest here since when did the Vatican ever allow Bishops the right to go against The Rubrics of the Novus Oro Mass set forth by Vatican II they never did.

Also regardless of how many liberal Catholic’s believe that the Church should change Her teachings on sexual ethics and morals it will never happen. In order for the parishes to change the Bishops need to give up some of their control over to Vatican that how it was before Vatican II.

 

[otjm]

Before we go on, I’m not sure it would be that easy, not from the congregational perspective anyway. Sure, it could deny copyrights and legislate things from the business point of view, but it seems most have their mind up concerning old and new music. In fact most have their minds made up about the vernacular, which way the priest should face, whether they should kneel, stand, sit, or sneel, how they should dress, and so forth.

I really don’t see this as a EF vs OF issue. There are differing philosophies and cultures even within the OF itself, which is about what the 25% or so of all Catholics regularly attend. The rest find other things to do on a Sunday morning. Whether all are happy or not doing what they do is a different story.

That is correct.

 

[Vico]

“Ad Orientem”: In Defense of Priests Facing the Altar

Bishop Conley of the Diocese of Lincoln, Nebraska said: But the symbolism of facing together, and awaiting Christ, is rich, time-honored and important. Especially during Advent, as we await the coming of the Lord, facing the east together—even symbolically facing Christ together at the altar and on the crucifix—is a powerful witness to Christ’s imminent return.

catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=23297

 

[TARRAT]

How can a priest have a mass not facing the altar? Sometimes he faces the altar and a wall that is not involved in the sacrafice, sometimes he faces the altar and the people who are also involved in the sacrafice.

 

[smead2942]

Sometimes he faces the altar and a wall that is not involved in the sacrifice, sometimes he faces the altar and the people who are also involved in the sacrifice.

The Jesus Christ is both the sacrifice and the priest. Facing Orient (east) in union with the congregation, which represents the Second Coming of Jesus, =/= “facing a wall”. The majority of prayers said during the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass are addressed to God, NOT the people.