As the Flame of Catholic Dissent Dies Out

[chriso]

And here I was thinking I was making those nifty quotations that I see all of you doing. But I’m new to this forum and obviously failed. If anyone feel like instructing me feel free to.

Insted of just clicking on the box labeled “Quothe” click on the “unlabeled” one just to the right of it… it simply has a " on top of it… but when you scroll over it you should see it’s called “multi-quothe”

Anyway… thats how I learned to do it… please dont hammer on me too fiercly now that you can dredge up all my old stuff at once!

 

[Onegin]

First, in quoting your post, I noticed that you put a / before the first quote tag. That’s why your quotes weren’t showing up!

Anyways, I hope you’ll forgive the lengthy post - I dont’ usually get wordy but I wanted to address all your points:

Well actually, since there is one God only, whatever God thinks is beautiful is beautiful. That must be the final definition. But I can’t imagine we don’t agree on that.

This is true. However, as we can’t read the mind of God, I was speaking as to how we, as persons, can recognize beauty and ugliness in earthly things.

That’s where we differ. I feel convinced that even a bad song sung with true faith is beautiful to God. The singing being beautiful does not, however, mean that the composing or spreading of that song is beautiful to God.

If someone does something based on an incorrect understanding with true faith, I agree that God is going to look at that person’s faith and not their knowledge of what liturgical music is best (or what have you). However, we have to consider that person’s subjective intent separate from the question of whether the thing itself (the music being used in Mass) is good or bad. I don’t believe the person’s intent changes the character of the thing itself. That was the point I was trying to stress earlier.

I think it is a case of lowering God to the standards of the modern man. God’s house should look like any old house so that people will be more comfortable. God’s music should sound like normal music so that we can speak to God in our own tongue. God’s art should prompt us to look into ourselves so that we can tell God what we’re like.

Yes, this is the concept of banality that has been introduced into the Church. The idea that man should be content building things that are boring and every day and that these things are fit for higher activities (like worship of God). Again, this is an incorrect viewpoint because it encourages man to drag God down to his level (as you mentioned) while also encouraging the viewpoint that man is incapable of striving towards higher things (again, the protestant influence).

I still believe God can take an ugly thing and make it into something beautiful.

Well, God has redeemed us from the depths of sin, so this is quite true. At the same time, we shouldn’t go seeking the ugly things or be content with them. Our call is to reject the ugly and false and pursue the beautiful and true.

We must realize that all we can do is sing with cracked voices and cracked hearts. Our heavenly father is good enough to proclaim it beautiful, anyway.

The problem with this line of reasoning is that it has the tenancy to encourage people to use any sort of music and justify that based on the reasoning you provided. No, there is no compare to the Heavenly choirs. But there is a comparison between waving around a tambourine in Mass and a schola cantorum. If you haven’t read it, I would highly suggest reading Pope Pius XII’s encyclical “Musicae Sacrae” which provides a wonderful explanation of this distinction.

Some go so far as to claim we should only have music in our churches written prior to 1900 or 1800 or 1700. I think that’s madness. If we would do that we would not have Rachmaninov or Bruckner or Pärt

Again, the encyclical provides a wonderful discussion on this. The idea isn’t to reject all new music, it is to reject that music which is improper for Mass and embrace the music that is proper. Unfortunately, in the last few decades, there haven’t been many (any?) examples of this.

And even though I am very impressed with the way the national shrine in Washington looks even modern architecture (modern not modernist nota bene) can be fantastic. Keep in mind that Gaudi is up for beatification …

Agreed. Unfortunately, I think we can agree that in past decades, like music, modern church architecture has taken a definite turn in one direction so we haven’t seen many other options represented.

Here is the bottom line: We agree that the modern architecture is a mess, the modern music is a mess, etc. The way to combat these things, to return to the beautiful churches and music is to take a definitive stand for truth and to absolutely reject the lukewarm mentality that “anything is okay as long as the good intent is there.” This type of attitude will never help the Church and will never help those who are struggling to understand the good and the beautiful amidst a culture of confusion.

 

[brotherhrolf]

I am a baby boomer. Not all of my generation was ready to whip out the guitars much less being forced to sing Simon and Garfunkle at one’s Catholic boys high school graduation Mass in 1969.

I grew up with the Mass in Latin. I was an altar boy until my senior year in high school (1969). I despise the myth that “we didn’t know what was being said”. Baloney! The EF is not some mysterious ritual that you have to speak Latin to understand. Get a Missal! I can still see my mother’s finger directing me how to read it during Mass.

I sang in my cathedral’s choir for 20 years. Guess what? There are composers out there who are composing modern Latin motets. I’ve sung them. There are even wonderful reverent motets in English. We are not Protestants and we don’t have to sound like the praise band at the mega-church down the road.

To my 28 year old friend: When I grew up, there was this amazing concept called “submission to the magisterium of the Church”. It powered my parents. It powers me.
There were a whole bunch of us who did not like what was happening and happen it did within a two year period. The concept of petitioning one’s archbishop was not even on the radar screen. My folks quit attending the main Mass in our parish on Sunday for the 8am Mass and then went to the vigil Mass on Saturday to avoid all the “innovations”.

I have driven 25 miles one way since 1983 to attend a reverent OF parish. I had to get permission to do this in 1983. (See submission to the magisterium). I am one baby boomer who was perfectly happy with HMC as I knew it. I know I am not alone.

 

[Onegin]

But, thanks for clarifying your belief, I hope I’ve explained mine well enough that you see we agree on most points excepting I probably lean a bit more towards caution with the new changes, and you probably lean a bit more towards caution in ensuring the new changes actually get done and take root. (which position I also support, just maybe not with the same fervence as you)

Thanks for understanding my concerns, and thanks for sharing yours. I wish you lived here in Alaska, I’d surely enjoy having coffee with you and discussing this to great length!

Thank you for your post.

I’d like to add that it may seem sometimes like I am advocating “radical” changes, or advocating that things done quickly or rashly. I do not see a concern in the same way because, unlike the radical changes that were made during Vatican II, the ones that I so strongly advocate for on these forums are to *return *to what the Church practiced and believed prior to Vatican II. They are not new beliefs in any sense, but they are beliefs and practices that have fallen into neglect and obscurity over the last few decades.

So, in a sense, the positions I advocate are the precise opposite of radical because they are positions that the Catholic Church has held for the last 2,000 years. The radical destruction has been done - it is now time that the Church return to what she is known for, continuity and tradition in the face of cultural attack.

I’ve posted this in the past, but as I’ve been pretty inactive here for a while, I’ll reiterate: Like many here, the views I take on this forum are a direct result of my own continued learning and growth. I am a huge proponent of the belief that, while the Catholic faith contains many mysteries, the basics of our faith are very easy to understand. I reject the notion that a person needs to have a theology degree to understand the faith or even to speak authoritatively about it! In recent years, I have begun to truly understand and appreciate the beauty there is in such simplicity. I have come to wholly embrace the belief that there are things in life that always wrong and always right, that the truth is beautiful and falsehood is ugly and that you may never mix truth and falsehood and still keep the truth. The more I learn about Catholic Tradition, the more I embrace it’s simplicity and beauty. How refreshing it is to have a firm grasp on these moral concepts in a world where there is such confusion!

This is what my generation of Catholics needs! We grew up after Vatican II, after all remnants of tradition had been stripped away, and we are sick of the justifications, obfuscations, and explanations. We don’t want to be told that we have to understand hermeneutics of continuity, philosophy and moral theology to know if something is right or wrong in a particular case. We want strong leadership from Rome, real answers and a clear understanding of our faith. And this is the reason that so many of us in this generation have gone digging for answers and, in doing so, we have discovered a buried treasure in the Traditional Faith.

Oh, and I would definitely take you up on that coffee suggestion if I didn’t live half a world away! Such is the fate of things, but you sound like a really thoughtful and intelligent person and it was a pleasure having this discussion with you.

 

[DomusAurea]

Onegin - lets agree to almost agree

Chriso and Onegin - thanks for the help with the quoting!

 

[sedonaman]

I just finished reading Sisters in Crisis by Ann Carey. It is a history of the sisterhood from the ‘60s to the present. She divides them into “change-oriented” and “traditionalist” as opposed to liberal and conservative. Those who were traditionalist for the most part were happy living in a convent with other sisters, praying together, working together in their order’s original mission, and wearing religious garments, and kept fairly quiet. Those who were change-oriented were unhappy with communal living, praying together “one mass a week was enough”], not being involved in their favorite political causes, and above all wearing identifiable religious garments; these were the vocal ones who went off and took control. Those who kept quiet suffered in their silence.

As a result, the number of new recruits fell off drastically because you didn’t have to join a convent and take vows to engage in a political movement. By the time the Vatican found out about what was going on, it was too late to make them scale back to what Canon Law specified without the media painting them as a bunch of patriarchs beating up on some poor helpless nuns.

Some of these change-oriented sisters left the religious life, but why any of them entered a traditionalist 2,000-year-old institution was not explained. They must have known in the beginning what they were getting into, and no one held a gun to their heads and said, “Put on that habit!”

Basically, the fate of the sisterhood [and actually the whole Church] from the ‘60s to now is a microcosm of what has been happening to the society at large, i.e., Leftism and all its revolutionary defiance took over. The author says it was unfortunate that Vatican II occurred at the same time that a great social upheaval was happening in the U.S. The result of all these revolutionary intellectuals’ rantings is what I like to call “the Gospel in reverse” because Jesus commissioned his followers to “Go forth into the world and preach the good news, teaching what I have taught you.” By attempting to bring secular ideas into the church, they were following the opposite: “Go forth into the world and find out what’s going on and bring it back into my church.”

 

[PJM]

Originally Posted by SonofMonica
The good and bad news for orthodox Catholics is that the contracepting liberals don’t have (many) kids. If we just keep our heads down and do what we’re supposed to, we will win.

So… so long, baby boomers! I’m 28 years old, and my generation is about to take charge, and we can’t stand your stripped-down ugly churches and the guitar strumming '70s songs you like to sing. We don’t want to hear you tear down the church’s all male “patriarchy.” And we don’t appreciate you moving the altars and the tabernacles and trying to protestantize God’s Church. If you wanted a different Church than the Catholic Church, you should have left the Catholic Church instead of trying to destroy it. You can’t win…

I am a converting Anglican, coming from a rich liturgical parish. You have no idea how much it pains me to leave altar rails, communion kneeling, incense and pipe organs and chant, and have to come into a Catholic Church which seems to detest these things. My Episcopal Church was more Catholic than Catholic, but now I have to put up with guitar strummers and liturgical garments made out of felt and laity running around in the sanctuary like they own the place! But I guarantee you this: we who cling to God’s word and the Tradition of the Church (and the traditions of the Church), we will win. God promised it…

Liberals have had their season of destruction and death .

My dear friend in Christ, WECOME HOME [please excuse the MESS while we remodel]

As a life long [very fustrasted] Informed, Praticing Catholic, I KNOW YOUR PAIN. I actually cried when they removed our pastor, brought in a temp who in short order, removed our Communion rail, and then soon was transferred.

There are not too many actually informed Catholics these day’s; but we are making a come-back. ***Christ is Present and God wins.***Thank you for your post!

 

[chriso]

I just finished reading Sisters in Crisis by Ann Carey. It is a history of the sisterhood from the ‘60s to the present. She divides them into “change-oriented” and “traditionalist” as opposed to liberal and conservative. Those who were traditionalist for the most part were happy living in a convent with other sisters, praying together, working together in their order’s original mission, and wearing religious garments, and kept fairly quiet. Those who were change-oriented were unhappy with communal living, praying together “one mass a week was enough”], not being involved in their favorite political causes, and above all wearing identifiable religious garments; these were the vocal ones who went off and took control. Those who kept quiet suffered in their silence.

As a result, the number of new recruits fell off drastically because you didn’t have to join a convent and take vows to engage in a political movement. By the time the Vatican found out about what was going on, it was too late to make them scale back to what Canon Law specified without the media painting them as a bunch of patriarchs beating up on some poor helpless nuns.

Some of these change-oriented sisters left the religious life, but why any of them entered a traditionalist 2,000-year-old institution was not explained. They must have known in the beginning what they were getting into, and no one held a gun to their heads and said, “Put on that habit!”

Basically, the fate of the sisterhood [and actually the whole Church] from the ‘60s to now is a microcosm of what has been happening to the society at large, i.e., Leftism and all its revolutionary defiance took over.

Our diocese up in the interior is still considered a “mission” due to the lack of roads and infrastructure… we still consider ourselves fortunate to be able to see a Priest once a quarter, and to be so fortunate as to get to use a conference room or school room to gather. Only recenly did they construct a small convent in our largest city Anchorage. We used to have the Daughters of St Paul tending a tiny bookstore in Anchorage, I’d spend way more in there than I should have in hopes they’d be able to stay, and because I loved for my kids to see the kind and gentle souls there. When they left Alaska about 15 years ago, only a few remained here assigned as administrators and such, and many of them stopped wearing the habits and so on. I remember one sunday when they were appealing for contributions for the religous retirement account and one of them addressed the congregation following Mass. When she was done I offered to double up my contribution if she agreed to wear her habit the following sunday. Then I explained to her how prescious it was for me to be able to have my kids see the closest thing to the Blessed Mother this side of heaven. She graciously agreed, and we brought the kids back next week to see if she kept her word! She did, and boy did she get some hugs from some very impressionable kiddos! I hope and pray to see a resurgence of the call to our Religous as well as the Priesthood.

 

[chriso]

The idea that man should be content building things that are boring and every day and that these things are fit for higher activities (like worship of God). Again, this is an incorrect viewpoint because it encourages man to drag God down to his level (as you mentioned) while also encouraging the viewpoint that man is incapable of striving towards higher things.

The idea isn’t to reject all new music, it is to reject that music which is improper for Mass and embrace the music that is proper. Unfortunately, in the last few decades, there haven’t been many (any?) examples of this.

I must confess, I’m not an expert in the status of Catholic Churches across all of America, but we do have relatives in several other states whom we have visited and attended Mass with and no matter what level of architecturally advanced structure they worship within, they have all clearly strived to create a “holy place” within. I know that here in Alaska, we’re often as not gathered into a basement or warehouse or place of business or family home in many of the smaller villages. Many of our newer church buildings while constructed under heavy budgetary constraints still manage to create a “holy space” in spite of their plain-ness. I actually often think critically of our typical “catholic” understanding and application of the principles of tithing. (another area I feel we as laity are sorely lacking in, but seemingly our intellectial leadership “dissidents” would prefer to address things like replacing the Pope and Bishops with women, or forcing Rome to accept abortions and contraception than to understand why we wont dig deeper into our pockets) If we gave more, maybe we could afford the fancier, more traditional appearing structures many folks find more appealing.

Obviously, our needs within the alaskan communities differ from many places in the world and in the US as well. At least in some cases, I believe an allowance can be made for having done the best we could with what we had available. The same can be said for music, I’m not sure I can agree that there has been no examples of “modern” music proper for use in church… (John Michael Talbot for exapmple) I’m just ashamed to find that most of it appears to have been authored by Protestents…

 

[Onegin]

I must confess, I’m not an expert in the status of Catholic Churches across all of America, but we do have relatives in several other states whom we have visited and attended Mass with and no matter what level of architecturally advanced structure they worship within, they have all clearly strived to create a “holy place” within. I know that here in Alaska, we’re often as not gathered into a basement or warehouse or place of business or family home in many of the smaller villages. Many of our newer church buildings while constructed under heavy budgetary constraints still manage to create a “holy space” in spite of their plain-ness. I actually often think critically of our typical “catholic” understanding and application of the principles of tithing. (another area I feel we as laity are sorely lacking in, but seemingly our intellectial leadership “dissidents” would prefer to address things like replacing the Pope and Bishops with women, or forcing Rome to accept abortions and contraception than to understand why we wont dig deeper into our pockets) If we gave more, maybe we could afford the fancier, more traditional appearing structures many folks find more appealing. Obviously, our needs within the alaskan communities differ from many places in the world and in the US as well. At least in some cases, I believe an allowance can be made for having done the best we could with what we had available. The same can be said for music, I’m not sure I can agree that there has been no examples of “modern” music proper for use in church… (John Michael Talbot for exapmple) I’m just ashamed to find that most of it appears to have been authored by Protestents…

I think you’re absolutely correct in pointing out that budget shouldn’t be a restraint. I’ve been to several very nice chapels and churches that were obviously decorated on a shoestring budget but they did what they could rather than stripping down the building of all beauty and just using the empty “space”. Oftentimes, this involved rescuing statues and decor from garage sales and Catholic churches that were “wreckovating.” One church that I know of was able to obtain a beautiful high altar that way. Here’s a photo that I’ve always loved that illustrates the example of using what you have to the best of your ability:

http://img11.imageshack.us/img11/9194/korjeepsvc.jpg

My main issue arises with those dioceses that shell out millions of dollars building a sparse, minimalistic structure that would have cost just the same (if not more) than a beautiful Church that might have inspired the faithful.

 

[PJM]

=chriso;I must confess, I’m not an expert in the status of Catholic Churches across all of America, but we do have relatives in several other states whom we have visited and attended Mass with and no matter what level of architecturally advanced structure they worship within, they have all clearly strived to create a “holy place” within. I know that here in Alaska, we’re often as not gathered into a basement or warehouse or place of business or family home in many of the smaller villages. Many of our newer church buildings while constructed under heavy budgetary constraints still manage to create a “holy space” in spite of their plain-ness. I actually often think critically of our typical “catholic” understanding and application of the principles of tithing. (another area I feel we as laity are sorely lacking in, but seemingly our intellectial leadership “dissidents” would prefer to address things like replacing the Pope and Bishops with women, or forcing Rome to accept abortions and contraception than to understand why we wont dig deeper into our pockets) If we gave more, maybe we could afford the fancier, more traditional appearing structures many folks find more appealing.

Obviously, our needs within the alaskan communities differ from many places in the world and in the US as well. At least in some cases, I believe an allowance can be made for having done the best we could with what we had available. The same can be said for music, I’m not sure I can agree that there has been no examples of “modern” music proper for use in church… (John Michael Talbot for exapmple) I’m just ashamed to find that most of it appears to have been authored by Protestents…

***It seems to me that while money is always an issue. The design issues stem more from "Environment and art in Catholic Worship [theoretically “KIA” then actual money issues.

It stems from a Grevious lack of understanding of who God is, where God is and WHY God is; thus we are sadly stuck with “gathering space”[actual Bishops term for what used to be churches] with there far less need for evident houses of Divine Worship, as “we are the church” and God is at best, secondary: to US, and we can gather anywhere, as the foucus is us, the community, not in anyway the building. [or God?] *

Love and prayers,**

 

[wisdomseeker]

***It seems to me that while money is always an issue. The design issues stem more from "Environment and art in Catholic Worship [theoretically “KIA” then actual money issues.

It stems from a Grevious lack of understanding of who God is, where God is and WHY God is; thus we are sadly stuck with “gathering space”[actual Bishops term for what used to be churches] with there far less need for evident houses of Divine Worship, as “we are the church” and God is at best, secondary: to US, and we can gather anywhere, as the foucus is us, the community, not in anyway the building. [or God?] ***

Love and prayers,

unfortunately our leaders let themselves to be intimadated by the enemies of the Church. after VII, everybody was supposed to be friends, we stopped to think that the Church have any enemies. we all had to become friends no matter what. well, the enemies have turned the Catholics against the Church and that is why the destruction of the buildings. here down south. most Catholic Church are hidden and look like shacks. but you will encounter most protestants churches by the roads and they have much better looking then the Church. it si a total shame. they continue to build the uglies down here.
i was reading an article from our diocese website in which the person was criticizing Catholics, saying that we were to busy kneeling and dropping kneelers, that is why we could not listen to what the priest had to say. this is the kind of people we have to put up with down here. the priests down here are more interest in promoting protestants ministers than talk about the passages we just read. these are the Franciscans.
every Mass, after the readings the priest has to tell us a story about some protestant minitster as if they are truly inspired by God, what i dont hear is about the Saints of the Church, these were the ones inspired by God.

Peace.

 

[sedonaman]

… I remember one sunday when they were appealing for contributions for the religous retirement account and one of them addressed the congregation following Mass. When she was done I offered to double up my contribution if she agreed to wear her habit the following sunday. Then I explained to her how prescious it was for me to be able to have my kids see the closest thing to the Blessed Mother this side of heaven. She graciously agreed, and we brought the kids back next week to see if she kept her word! She did, and boy did she get some hugs from some very impressionable kiddos! …

There, you see? I never understood why it was such a problem for nuns to wear religious garb when on duty just like priests have to. But then the book mentioned that the issue was more one of defiance than anything else. I heard one remark that she got more respect from even the general public when she did wear her habit.

 

[brotherhrolf]

The Brothers of the Sacred Heart who taught me from 1964 - 1969 wore cassocks in May of 1967. When we came back to school in September, they were in black slacks, white shirts and black ties. It was very disconcerting. There were pictures of a Mass on our alumni website last month in which a new brother was accepted into the order. Several of the brothers, including one that taught me way back when, had gone back to wearing their cassocks. It gave me great hope.

 

[Mimi]

(just jumping in here - I’m only up to post #27)

Archbishop Calls Priests To Holiness and Orthodoxy
Seville, Spain, Jan 5, 2010 (CNA).- In his first pastoral letter during the Holy Year of St. James, Archbishop Juan Jose Asenjo of Seville, Spain urged priests to be examples of holiness and closeness to the Lord, as well as to overcome mediocrity and to teach authentic Catholic doctrine in communion with the Church.

In his extensive letter, the archbishop noted that while the materialism and utilitarianism of today’s world has made it difficult to live the Gospel, the main issue the Church must face is internal.

“Many of the problems we complain about so often are present in us priests,” he said. “If we were holier, more zealous, better examples, more apostolic, mystical and better witnesses, with a strong experience of God, the Christian life would flourish more in our people, who need the close companionship of holy priests,” the archbishop added.

That’s why my bishop imported some priests from Spain!! I wish he would get some more. He even started a school. At least it’s a start. I live in a very politically liberal state and my parish has some dissident elements. So glad to see this starting to turn around.

Thank you, young Catholics, for being part of this forum and giving us hope for your generation and the future of the Church in America! Beware that it is being deliberately hijacked by some by those in Call to Action (most of whom grew up in the '60’s or succumbed to the “spirit of Vat II” garbage) and Alinskyan Organizers (who say they are for “social justice”, but are really anti-Catholic).

Pray for Holy priests and sisters!!

Mimi

 

[SonofMonica]

Thanks all of you for being so supportive of me (and those of my ilk) coming into the Church with grand designs of helping out with “cleaning up.” I’ve seen such charitable and Christian responses here (and sent friend requests to many of you). It is good to know that there are many faithful Catholics left in the Church, and not just the kind that like to raise fuss, but the kind that know that the best way to combat Satan is to remain in constant prayer and faithfulness to the Church, in spite of those who seek to destroy the Church. So I do want to clarify my post that so many have found positive, because I want to make sure that it does not inspire a “warring spirit” with our brothers and sisters, and to make sure that it didn’t imply that I’m coming in to complain and write letters and things such as that.

We must never pit those who prefer “guitar masses” (however ugly they may sometimes be) against those who prefer TLM or pipe organs, as though the two were somehow fighting a valid battle on some equal playing field of preferences. We are not at war with our brothers and sisters, and what we “prefer” in terms of external forms of worship isn’t the point. (And as I pointed out, the dissenters can’t win, anyway!) The reason that I don’t like the moving of the tabernacles is because of the theological implications–the temptation to minimize an important aspect of the faith. So when I say I am coming in to help “clean up,” I mean to contend for the Faith Once Delivered, not to fight for my preferred form of music against those with a different preference. We must fight the spiritual battle, and the external forms of worship will take care of themselves–they will come from a properly attuned heart and a properly formed conscience and a proper understanding of scripture and tradition. Remember, the baby boomers of which we are complaining have been unable to defeat the Church because of the total bankruptcy of their desires and positions! Not because we stooped to their level to “defeat” them! They didn’t need any help–as the illustration of contraception displays so beautifully.

I think that the temptation from looking at things like guitar masses v. TLM as the battlefront itself is that we may begin to equate Satan and his desire to destroy the Church, with God and his desire to build it up. Satan and God are NOT opposites. Satan is a mere angel, and a fallen one at that! Let Saint Michael the Archangel deal with Satan and all the ravenous things he wishes to do to our Church on Earth. To think of ourselves as being in a battle with those who are on “Satan’s side” or to accuse our brethren of “giving in to Satan’s lies of liberalism” is to ascribe WAY too much power to Satan. St. Mike’s got the temporal stuff covered. As I said in my initial post, those who seek to destroy the Church on Earth cannot win because their theology offers NOTHING! And besides, Jesus promised our victory. But what is FAR less assured is the salvation of their souls. If we can support that, the externalities will take care of themselves.

So, as we pray Saint Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle… let us remember that the battle against He who seeks the ruin of souls will be won in prayer, because that’s where the war front is–at the spiritual level, at the theological level. Many of the traditional external forms of worship (chant, etc.) came about as a result of people understanding the theology and realizing that the God we worship is worthy of the best we have to offer (which is still lacking!). If people begin to truly learn about God, how will they be able to resist the desire to to offer him the kind of worship depicted in Revelation? So, let us extol the things of beauty, and explain the importance of them! As stated or implied in my initial post, there is no real need to denigrate those who hate the Church or prefer theologically bankrupt forms of worship. They have already lost the battle against the Church!

 

[chriso]

I guess along with the rest from the implications of “guitar masses” I wish we could drop the labeling of “baby boomers”, for according to many statisticians, I am one of them. However, I dont prescribe to any of the notions of these “dissenters” this thread refers to. I’d be more inclined to call them “city slickers” from my perspective, but I imagine that’d offend many who live in cities who also dont prescribe to those misguided notions.

I have played guitar for a small congregation here who for years had no musical accompanyment, at the request of the local Priest which terrifed me at the time. Since then, we have reqruited a violinist and an occastional harpist. Is it a “guitar mass”? Or a “violin mass”? Or a “harp mass”? Or “our mass”? I believe it is none of these… it’s “Christ’s Mass” and its our job to prayerfully and reverently strive to lift our voices and our instruments to him in his honor, and glory, and in praise along with all the choirs of angels and saints. I wonder if, when at some point an organist shows up at the chapel I play for, I’ll be kicked to the curb after faithfully and fearfully playing for them for all these years?

I wonder how it would be if we all stopped going to Mass at the church we found to be “less beautiful”? and only attended the Mass at the most “beautiful” building?

I wonder how it would sound it we each stopped singing as soon as we encountered someone with a voice more “beautiful” than ours? Would it not end up being a “solo” form of worship?

God designed us, created us, to sing his unending praises, (together I assume) not to only hear the voices of the ones with “beautiful voices” according to our mortal judgements. I have a feeling many of us will be surprised when we discover what it is that truly puts a smile on Gods face. I think Christs example and statement about the little children shows us a glimpse of that. I’ll bet he smiles at the sound of their voices at our local kids Mass for a fact, off key and all.

 

[reggieM]

The term “dissenters” refers more strictly to doctrine (usually moral but inclusive of all). Musical styles don’t really fit under that umbrella. The content of lyrics, however, may be neo-modernist. I will argue that Catholic architecture has been powerfully shaped for the worse by dissenters (or better “destructors”) who use subtle means to separate the faithful from the Catholic heritage of the past. The most beautiful church building in my diocese is found in the poorest neighborhood – attended and supported by lower-middle class Catholics. The ugliest buildings are the newest and most expensive – observe the rows BMW’s and Mercedes’ in the parking lot each Sunday and the impoverished nature of Our Lord’s house at the same time. The baby-boomer term is a shortcut for an attitude comprised of a general secularizing tendency, mixed with leftist-progressivism, humanism, anti-supernaturalism and misguided hippie-ism. It’s definitely not limited to one age-group and I’ve been surprised to find a few younger Catholics adopting that position recently (a hippie-70s-leftist revival always gets a fair welcome on college campuses). There are, however, many baby-boom Catholics who are far from that stereotype.
Serving the liturgy is a very good thing. My concern is that too many Catholics (starting with myself) spend too much time looking internally at the Church, their parish, their music etc.
When all of the (theological, doctrinal, moral) dissenters have finally fallen by the wayside, we can rebuild and start having a huge impact on the culture. Our liturgy and devotional life will improve also as a simply consequence of that movement.

 

[sedonaman]

… The baby-boomer term is a shortcut for an attitude comprised of a general secularizing tendency, mixed with leftist-progressivism, humanism, anti-supernaturalism and misguided hippie-ism. …

The baby-boomer term is a shortcut for an attitude comprised of a general secularizing tendency, mixed with leftist-progressivism, humanism, anti-supernaturalism and misguided hippie-ism, all aroused by an over-indulgence in defiance to any and all authority.

 

[chriso]

The baby-boomer term is a shortcut for an attitude comprised of a general secularizing tendency, mixed with leftist-progressivism, humanism, anti-supernaturalism and misguided hippie-ism, all aroused by an over-indulgence in defiance to any and all authority.

And you dont see how your definition would sting considering many of the mainstream media have long labeled me a “baby boomer” by a more commonly accepted definition?

I’m reminded of that class I took for those nearly 3 years where I discovered I was surrounded by what have been titled “dissenters” herein. I’d walk into the rooms and it felt like the floodwaters were pouring in so quickly it was all I could do to keep from drowning in that sea of dissent. Very quickly they labeled me a “conservative catholic” and would condescendingly attempt to toy with me with their little cute slurs and aspersions continually nicking away at any credibility I might have brought to any conversation, not that I’m overly impressed with my credibility, but even a blind squirrel occasionally finds a nut.

Anyway, now that the tide has turned, I sometimes sense a similar flood pouring in from the other side of the argument, and find myself labeled similarly by folks who once sought my support in standing against the changes and abuses being committed by these “dissenters”. Anyhow, I once again will speak the words of caution, albeit now to those from the “other side of the spectrum” with regards to the giddiness and assumptions that one understands the will and intent of Rome, and presuming to assume one knows the best choices for the Churches future. You look and sound a lot like they did when they had the upper hand… neither reminds me of the visions I’ve held of our holy church since childhood, nor of our savior.