Contemporary music at mass

  • Thread starter Thread starter whyeyeman
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
It may have been new, but it transported ones mind to the heavenly realm. Rock/pop music does not do this.
 
For YOU. I know many very faithful christian people who use “modern music styles” as a tool to get in spiritual mood.
Every teenager seems to think the world in his head is the only world :roll_eyes:
 
Pope Benedict XVI
At the General Audience on Wednesday, 14 February [2007], in the Vatican’s Paul VI Audience Hall, the Holy Father concluded his series of Catecheses on the Apostles of the Church with the following Commentary on women at the service of the Gospel, translated from Italian.
Women in the Early Church

The generous contributions by many women as found in the New Testament testifies to the feminine (name removed by moderator)ut in overall Church development

Dear Brothers and Sisters,

Today, we have come to the end of our journey among the witnesses of early Christianity mentioned in the New Testament writings. And we use the last step of this first journey to dedicate our attention to the many female figures who played an effective and precious role in spreading the Gospel.

In conformity with what Jesus himself said of the woman who anointed his head shortly before the Passion: “Truly, I say to you, wherever this Gospel is preached in the whole world, what she has done will be told in memory of her” (Mt 26:13; Mk 14:9), their testimony cannot be forgotten.

The Lord wants these Gospel witnesses, these figures who have made a contribution so that faith in him would grow, to be known, and their memory kept alive in the Church. We can historically distinguish the role of the first women in early Christianity, during Jesus’ earthly life and in the events of the first Christian generation.

…

In short, without the generous contribution of many women, the history of Christianity would have developed very differently.

This is why, as my venerable and dear Predecessor John Paul II wrote in his Apostolic Letter Mulieris Dignitatem: “The Church gives thanks for each and every woman… The Church gives thanks for all the manifestations of the feminine ‘genius’ which have appeared in the course of history, in the midst of all peoples and nations; she gives thanks for all the charisms which the Holy Spirit distributes to women in the history of the People of God, for all the victories which she owes to their faith, hope and charity: she gives thanks for all the fruits of feminine holiness” (n. 31).

As we can see, the praise refers to women in the course of the Church’s history and was expressed on behalf of the entire Ecclesial Community. Let us also join in this appreciation, thanking the Lord because he leads his Church, generation after generation, availing himself equally of men and women who are able to make their faith and Baptism fruitful for the good of the entire Ecclesial Body and for the greater glory of God.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Okaaay, so what do you mean by modern genres?
Rock, does not belong in the church.
Pop, doesn’t belong in the church
Jazz, electronic, country, etc. does not belong in the church.

You know what does belong in the church?
Worship. Worship is a genre, and because it can sometimes use “modern genre” instruments like a guitar or the drums or can sometimes have a 7th or 9th chord in it, this doesn’t mean it is evil.
And sometimes, worship music cannot be just put into one genre. Sometimes, it has elements of many genres. A worship song can have a synth in it, it can have an electric guitar even, but the song is still meant to bring glory to God.

So no, Led Zepplin doesn’t belong in the church, and Taylor Swift doesn’t belong in the church.
But a genre doesn’t influence a song’s goodness or sinfulness. The words/intention does, like I said earlier.

You’re entitled to your opinion, but it’s not fair for you to spew it as fact. I’m sure there are people who disagree with me, and there are people who agree, too. And like I said earlier, that’s okay.

One thing I know for sure, is that I’m not going to hell for worshiping God with a worship song that kinda sounds poppy. And you’re not going to hell for worshiping God with a Gregorian chant, or an old hymn. That’s okay, worship God in whatever way you see fit.
 
Really? How are you defining “song”? For instance, Schubert’s Ave Maria, often used in liturgies, although not liturgical - - when was that a “pop” song? When was a Gregorian chant a pop song?
 
So you think every monk chanting gregorian was without sin because we still use the composition he made today?
 
It’s not simply my opinion, it is objective fact. Pope Saint Pius X agrees with me:

"The employment of the piano is forbidden in church, as is also that of noisy or frivolous instruments such as drums, cymbals, bells and the like.

“It is strictly forbidden to have bands play in church, and only in special cases with the consent of the Ordinary will it be permissible to admit wind instruments, limited in number, judiciously used, and proportioned to the size of the place provided the composition and accompaniment be written in grave and suitable style, and conform in all respects to that proper to the organ.” - Tra Le Sollecitudini VI, 19-20
 
Last edited:
whyeyeman said:
Why did the man always act as the priest of his family in old testament times?
Click to expand...
I don’t think “always” is correct.

It is true that in the early OT, the father of the family is often seen sacrificing animals, but once the Hebrews had a tabernacle (eventually a temple) and a priesthood, things looked very differently. Eventually, all sacrifices were supposed to be done in the tabernacle or temple by the priests, not just anywhere and by anyone.
 
Fine. Whenever a family had to make a sacrifice, the man acted as the priest.
 
Last edited:
Xantippe said:
I don’t think “always” is correct.

It is true that in the early OT, the father of the family is often seen sacrificing animals, but once the Hebrews had a tabernacle (eventually a temple) and a priesthood, things looked very differently. Eventually, all sacrifices were supposed to be done in the tabernacle or temple by the priests, not just anywhere and by anyone.
Click to expand...
The Levitical priesthood was instituted due to the disobedience of the Jews.
 
whyeyeman said:
Whenever a family had to make a sacrifice, the man acted as the priest.
Click to expand...
But he didn’t. Once there was a tabernacle or temple, the priest acted as a priest.

Also, if you read the OT, it wasn’t even the case that the head of the household would bring the sacrifices to the priests–one often reads in the OT of women bringing sacrifices.

See, for example 1 Samuel 1, where Hannah (Samuel’s mother) brings sacrifices to the priests to express gratitude for the gift of her firstborn son Samuel, after years of barrenness:

“So the woman remained and nursed her son, until she weaned him. 24 And when she had weaned him, she took him up with her, along with a three-year-old bull, an ephah of flour, and a skin of wine; and she brought him to the house of the Lord at Shiloh.”
 
The man is still the spiritual head of the household. Traditional values man!
 
exnihilo said:
The Levitical priesthood was instituted due to the disobedience of the Jews.
Click to expand...
???

I would really like to see a cite for that.

At least in the OT, it seems clear that the Levitical priesthood came in at right around the same time as the formal codification of the Jewish law.
 
The 10th century was a barbaric time for Europe… and parts of Europe hadn’t even been fully evangelized yet this early in Church history. I think you may be conflating the 10th century with later medieval periods.
FYI - this was also a particularly dark period for the Roman papacy. Google tenth century popes and you’ll see what I mean…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top