Clapping at funeral

[mrmiiike]

I still am very puzzled. Do you think God really gets upset when we show,a majority of time thru intructions of a Priest, our love and appreciation for someone in Church by clapping of hands…how is shouting out some phrase any different? Is clapping for new Priests any different than clapping for ‘old’ Priests that just helped the Congregation out?

 

[jmcrae]

I still am very puzzled. Do you think God really gets upset when we show,a majority of time thru intructions of a Priest, our love and appreciation for someone in Church by clapping of hands…how is shouting out some phrase any different? Is clapping for new Priests any different than clapping for ‘old’ Priests that just helped the Congregation out?

The clapping at an Ordination, or when candidates for Baptism or Confirmation are being presented, isn’t “thank you for your service” clapping, or “Wow, you are so cool” clapping - rather, it is a sign of approval - it signifies, “Yes, we approve for these people to come among us in a new role, spiritually.” As a priest, as one of our fellow baptized members, or as a Confirmed member of our Church. We are approving of their change in status; not applauding their activities or their personalities.

 

[mrmiiike]

Sorry, I just don’t get it? I am 72 years old and have never been told or read that to clap in a Catholic Church during, after, before, any service was a sin. Don’t the Clergy have more to worry about among their flock than to fret over clapping??

 

[Joe_Kelley]

Note that you are referring to the rite of election which is not the Mass.

No. I am referring to the Rite of Sending at a mass in which the parish approves sending the Catechumens and Candidates to the Rite of Election.

 

[zab]

Sorry, I just don’t get it? I am 72 years old and have never been told or read that to clap in a Catholic Church during, after, before, any service was a sin. Don’t the Clergy have more to worry about among their flock than to fret over clapping??

mrmiiike,
I wouldn’t call it is a sin, unless it either was an intential act of disrespect or an intentional disregard to do something that you knew was not proper. It is kind of like men wearing hats indoors, particularly in church. It is more common today for men to wear hats indoors today than it was decades ago. But one place men will be repremanded for wearing a hat indoors is in court. Regardless of how popular it might be at the country music awards or the Grammy’s, it is still not proper in court and the judge will let you know it. Is there something sinful about wearing a hat indoors? Not always, but it can be a sign of disrespect. And when you know something is considered disrespectful and you do it anyway, then it is wrong.

I’m just not certain that all pastors have knowledge that it is wrong to ever clap in church.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

I recall Pope Benedict saying [whether before or after becoming pope I am not sure] that when they applaud it is no longer liturgy.

 

[Little_Dove]

mrmiiike,
I wouldn’t call it is a sin, unless it either was an intential act of disrespect or an intentional disregard to do something that you knew was not proper. It is kind of like men wearing hats indoors, particularly in church. It is more common today for men to wear hats indoors today than it was decades ago. But one place men will be repremanded for wearing a hat indoors is in court. Regardless of how popular it might be at the country music awards or the Grammy’s, it is still not proper in court and the judge will let you know it. Is there something sinful about wearing a hat indoors? Not always, but it can be a sign of disrespect. And when you know something is considered disrespectful and you do it anyway, then it is wrong.

{I’m just not certain that all pastors have knowledge that it is wrong to ever clap in church.}

I think you have hit the heart of the matter. It seems that what is a sign of disrespect and impropriety in one Parish/diocese is heartily endorsed in another. Case in point, holding hands during the “Our Father.” In one parish, we were instructed (correctly, I believe) not to hold hands. While in another, we are looked at as uncharitable in not holding hands. Same thing with clapping, in one parish it would be unthinkable to clap, while in another, it can be a sign of being unappreciative and surly not to clap. Is this a time that obedience to the Bishop/priest in whose diocese/parish you find yourself is the guide?
God Bless!
To Jesus, through Mary!

 

[mrmiiike]

Again, show me, quote me, something tangible that clapping in Church when asked by the Clergy is WRONG, DISRESPECTFUL, SINFULL. No more opinions, something tangible.

 

[benedictgal]

Again, show me, quote me, something tangible that clapping in Church when asked by the Clergy is WRONG, DISRESPECTFUL, SINFULL. No more opinions, something tangible.

You can’t get more tangible than what the former Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger wrote in 2000 when he penned his great work, “Spirit of the Liturgy”:

“Wherever applause breaks out in the liturgy because of some human achievement, it is a sure sign that the essence of liturgy has totally disappeared and been replaced by a kind of religious entertainment. Such attraction fades quickly - it cannot compete in the market of leisure pursuits, incorporating as it increasingly does various forms of religious titillation.”

While you may argue that this is not a Magisterial document, it is written by the man who eventually became Pope.

 

[zab]

Again, show me, quote me, something tangible that clapping in Church when asked by the Clergy is WRONG, DISRESPECTFUL, SINFULL. No more opinions, something tangible.

Below is something written by Pope Benedict XVI before he became pope. It is worth considering. But I have not heard of any directive not allowing clapping.

Wherever applause breaks out in the liturgy because of some human achievement, it is a sure sign that the essence of liturgy has totally disappeared and been replaced by a kind of religious entertainment. Such attraction fades quickly - it cannot compete in the market of leisure pursuits, incorporating as it increasingly does various forms of religious titillation (Ratzinger, Spirit of the Liturgy).

The quote from above, in my understanding, seems to pertain more to something like breaking into applause for the choir for example rather than some short clapping at the end of Mass to show support for someone the celebrant has called our attention to.
If a little clapping in support for your priest is the least alledged disrespect happening at your church, I would not worry myself about it.

 

[FAB]

Below is something written by Pope Benedict XVI before he became pope. It is worth considering. But I have not heard of any directive not allowing clapping.

The quote from above, in my understanding, seems to pertain more to something like breaking into applause for the choir for example rather than some short clapping at the end of Mass to show support for someone the celebrant has called our attention to.
If a little clapping in support for your priest is the least alledged disrespect happening at your church, I would not worry myself about it.

The pope’s writings before he became the pontive do not rise to the level of Church Doctrine. It is his opinion and not one universally shared. A local ordinary could issue a letter concerning conduct at the liturgy for his diocese, but thenit would only be effective in that diocese. Pope John Paul II wrote hundred of books, but only those documents issued as official church teaching have any effect. The same is tru in this case.

Peace,
FAB

 

[mrmiiike]

thanks for the clearification. Now there are more important questions to solve.

 

[TobyLue]

The pope’s writings before he became the pontive do not rise to the level of Church Doctrine. It is his opinion and not one universally shared. A local ordinary could issue a letter concerning conduct at the liturgy for his diocese, but thenit would only be effective in that diocese. Pope John Paul II wrote hundred of books, but only those documents issued as official church teaching have any effect. The same is tru in this case.

Simply because the Pope has not spoken Ex cathedra on the matter is not a free licence for us to do whatever we want. The GIRM is not written down as been ex cathedra or a church doctrine because that can and has changed and will probably change again. Many of the Encyclicals that the Popes have written are not written as Church doctrine but we must obey them non-the-less.
Why are there so many abuses during the mass? Its because of disobedience and/or not really following the GIRM and taking the “if it feels right, do it” attitude. As has been stated before: it is not proper, is not called for and thus we should comply. Up until the point that the Vatican inserts a “…at this point the priest MAY call for a round of applause…” then it should not be done. Simply because some Bishops call for applause does not make it right. Can we claim that we know better or we feel holier than the Pope? Too many take the attitude, of “…eh the pope is in Rome and not in the USA, what does he know about American customs. I’m gonna clap whenver I please.” Isnt that being arrogant?

 

[mrmiiike]

I am not arrogant, maybe ignorant, but let us put this to ‘bed’. thanks for your (name removed by moderator)ut.

 

[Little_Dove]

Simply because the Pope has not spoken Ex cathedra on the matter is not a free licence for us to do whatever we want. The GIRM is not written down as been ex cathedra or a church doctrine because that can and has changed and will probably change again. Many of the Encyclicals that the Popes have written are not written as Church doctrine but we must obey them non-the-less.
Why are there so many abuses during the mass? Its because of disobedience and/or not really following the GIRM and taking the “if it feels right, do it” attitude. As has been stated before: it is not proper, is not called for and thus we should comply. Up until the point that the Vatican inserts a “…at this point the priest MAY call for a round of applause…” then it should not be done. Simply because some Bishops call for applause does not make it right. Can we claim that we know better or we feel holier than the Pope? [Too many take the attitude, of “…eh the pope is in Rome and not in the USA, what does he know about American customs. I’m gonna clap whenver I please.” Isnt that being arrogant?]

More often, I think, the flock tries to be obedient to the authority of the local Bishop or the priest…and fervently hopes and prays for the day that all Bishops will be in complete communion with the Holy Father! Then, the poor flock wouldn’t be so confused!

God Bless!
To Jesus, through Mary

 

[FAB]

Simply because the Pope has not spoken Ex cathedra on the matter is not a free licence for us to do whatever we want. The GIRM is not written down as been ex cathedra or a church doctrine because that can and has changed and will probably change again. Many of the Encyclicals that the Popes have written are not written as Church doctrine but we must obey them non-the-less.
Why are there so many abuses during the mass? Its because of disobedience and/or not really following the GIRM and taking the “if it feels right, do it” attitude. As has been stated before: it is not proper, is not called for and thus we should comply. Up until the point that the Vatican inserts a “…at this point the priest MAY call for a round of applause…” then it should not be done. Simply because some Bishops call for applause does not make it right. Can we claim that we know better or we feel holier than the Pope? Too many take the attitude, of “…eh the pope is in Rome and not in the USA, what does he know about American customs. I’m gonna clap whenver I please.” Isnt that being arrogant?

Dear TobyLue:
Many people on this site have a misunderstanding of the authority of the Pope. He is primarily the Bishop of Rome and leader of a small country called the Vatican. Not everything he says or does has the authority of Ex cathedra. Certainly not a passage he wrote in a book when he was a Cardinal. These men offer their opinions to each other daily as a way of dicernment to know how the Holy Spirt is directing them to lead the His Church.
The Girm are specific guidlines as to what is to be done in the liturgy. There are many things that it does not address that are done and can be done which is not addressed. That is why it is up to local ordinary to address issues that may be abuses. My diocese as example has a 300 page two sided documents that clarifies and gives specific instructons. It was produced under the direction of our bishop, not the Vatican, because that is the way the church works.
When the Pope does issue a documument it is not done in a vaccumn. All the Bishops of the world are consulted. Derference is given to him.
The GIRM is changing, it has been in the provcess of being revised for close to 10 years and has a few more before it is complete.

Peace,
FAB

 

[benedictgal]

Dear TobyLue:
Many people on this site have a misunderstanding of the authority of the Pope. He is primarily the Bishop of Rome and leader of a small country called the Vatican. Not everything he says or does has the authority of Ex cathedra. Certainly not a passage he wrote in a book when he was a Cardinal. These men offer their opinions to each other daily as a way of dicernment to know how the Holy Spirt is directing them to lead the His Church.
The Girm are specific guidlines as to what is to be done in the liturgy. There are many things that it does not address that are done and can be done which is not addressed. That is why it is up to local ordinary to address issues that may be abuses. My diocese as example has a 300 page two sided documents that clarifies and gives specific instructons. It was produced under the direction of our bishop, not the Vatican, because that is the way the church works.
When the Pope does issue a documument it is not done in a vaccumn. All the Bishops of the world are consulted. Derference is given to him.
The GIRM is changing, it has been in the provcess of being revised for close to 10 years and has a few more before it is complete.

Peace,
FAB

The GIRM is not the one that is changing; rather, it is the Roman Missal, that is to say, the prayers and propers of the Mass. The GIRM was revised in 2000 (Latin) with our adapations coming into play around 2002.

Furthermore, Redemptionis Sacramentum came into being to clarify a lot of the abuses that sprang up due to gross misinterpretations of both the GIRM and the other documents resulting from Vatican II.

 

[FAB]

The GIRM is not the one that is changing; rather, it is the Roman Missal, that is to say, the prayers and propers of the Mass. The GIRM was revised in 2000 (Latin) with our adapations coming into play around 2002.

Furthermore, Redemptionis Sacramentum came into being to clarify a lot of the abuses that sprang up due to gross misinterpretations of both the GIRM and the other documents resulting from Vatican II.

GIRM = General Instuctions for the Roman Missal , how is one being changed and not the other? What I have seen are changes to both. I also haven’t seen yet revisions that as you say are to correct “gross misinterpetations”.

Peace,
FAB

 

[benedictgal]

GIRM = General Instuctions for the Roman Missal , how is one being changed and not the other? What I have seen are changes to both. I also haven’t seen yet revisions that as you say are to correct “gross misinterpetations”.

Peace,
FAB

You are misreading what I wrote. The problem is not with the GIRM. It has been with the way certain people have interpreted the document to mean.

The gross misinterpretations are what both Redemptionis Sacramentum and Ecclesia de Mysterio address. These include the issue of the laity preaching (which is not supposed to happen), the changing of the texts of the prayers of the Mass, the manner in which communion is to be distributed when EMHCs are used and the purification of the vessels.

I am afraid that you have the two things confused. The GIRM was changed first, and tightened up. There were problems with the translation of the Roman Missal that we have today; these were caught by Cardnial Medina when he was Prefect for the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments. The current translations were loose paraphrases of what the Latin text says. That is why the CDWDS, under his tenure, wrote the document Liturgiam Authenticam, which was promulgated by Pope John Paul II in 2001. This is the driving force behind the new translation of the Roman Missal.