God if this city for Mass

[superamazingman]

I told myself I wan’t going to get involved in another one of these but here goes:

In thread after thread, this idea and a related one are the stepping off point for arguments. Here we have the implication that the liturgical practices of the Catholic Church are responsible for apostasy, disbelief, and falling away to other religions. And the related absurdity that if the Church would just go back to the 1950’s style of Mass, we wouldn’t have all the breadth of evils that present themselves “in the modern age” As if these evils have not existed in the human heart since the beginning of time!
This idea completely misrepresents the nature of the Church as guided by the Holy Spirit, and reduces it to a free-for-all debating society that is somehow beiing swayed by the whims of evil liberals, or evil conservatives. Have some Hope and Trust for God’s sake!

This idea also detracts from the responsibility that every human of every age bears to worship God -as that worship is practiced in the Church- and integrate that Mass into their daily lives, guided by the Church. This responsibility is not simply or solely founded on liturgical languages and practices and musical style, but on a living faith in Jesus Christ.

In a sense, the well intended desire for traditional things can actually become a denial of the real power at work, Jesus Christ through the Mass. Christ saves souls, not latin, not the organ. Drum kits at Mass do not change the reality of Mass.

I have an older sibling that grew up in our very Catholic family, with a very Catholic Latin Mass with cott and all the trimmings. Today she not only has fallen away, she cannot stand the Catholic Church. She hates it. by the logic above, we could blame traditional practice for all of that, as well as the world wars and all the rest. But that would be absurd. The reality is she was ring-slapped once too many times by angry nuns. She was never able to integrate the faith into her life.
In the end, this is all her choice, let’s not put the blame for her “exodus” on the Latin Mass or the pipe organ, that would be absurd.

Hmm… If latin doesn’t matter, why would Vatican II mandate that it be the primary language of worship? Somehow, I think you’re looking at this wrong, because it does matter. Same with gregorian chant, sacred polyphony, and the organ: They are the primary music of the Mass. That’s what vatican II says. And other documents clearly state that the closer a piece of music is in sound and style to chant and polyphony, the more suitable it is for the Mass. The further it is, the less suitable.

The eucharist is still present, it’s still a valid Mass. But that doesn’t mean we can do whatever else we want as long as it’s valid. A priest could walk into a bread factory, scream “this is my body”, eat a little, and walk out, and it would be a valid Mass. But somehow I don’t think that would be good. Doing so would not “change the reality of the Mass” (to use your words), but would still be gravely wrong.

 

[Moore11]

We have about 33% attendance of “Catholics”. Of those about half contribute money or fill out papers like you say.

Half contribue money? Oh man, if only we had that kind of participation

On another note, and closer to the OP The mayor of my town goes to our parish, perhaps the song was an ode to him?
But we should get more specific:
God of this district 21?
God of this neigborhood?
God of this street?
Joking of course.

 

[Moore11]

Hmm… If latin doesn’t matter, why would Vatican II mandate that it be the primary language of worship? Somehow, I think you’re looking at this wrong, because it does matter. Same with gregorian chant, sacred polyphony, and the organ: They are the primary music of the Mass. That’s what vatican II says. And other documents clearly state that the closer a piece of music is in sound and style to chant and polyphony, the more suitable it is for the Mass. The further it is, the less suitable.

The eucharist is still present, it’s still a valid Mass. But that doesn’t mean we can do whatever else we want as long as it’s valid. A priest could walk into a bread factory, scream “this is my body”, eat a little, and walk out, and it would be a valid Mass. But somehow I don’t think that would be good. Doing so would not “change the reality of the Mass” (to use your words), but would still be gravely wrong.

I agree, and I definitely lean more to this thinking than Clem’s but I don’t want this to turn into a NO EF debate…
But, it probably will.

 

[superamazingman]

I agree, and I definitely lean more to this thinking than Clem’s but I don’t want this to turn into a NO EF debate…
But, it probably will.

I’m not making this an EF NO debate. That’s what the Church says for both the Extraordinary Form AND the Ordinary Form (novus ordo).

The primary music for the novus ordo is gregorian chant, and the primary language should be latin. It’s right there in Sacrosanctum Concilium 36 and 116. No need to bring the EF in at all.

 

[Moore11]

I’m not making this an EF NO debate. That’s what the Church says for both the Extraordinary Form AND the Ordinary Form (novus ordo).

The primary music for the novus ordo is gregorian chant, and the primary language should be latin. It’s right there in Sacrosanctum Concilium 36 and 116. No need to bring the EF in at all.

I know, but you know how it goes.
People find out you dont like the Lifeteen Mass and all of the sudden you are the crazy EF traditionalist that is so closed minded that you cant see strait.
you know, like if you are a conservative who doesn’t like gay marriage you are a hateful gay basher…
Same here, would I like to see chant and th Organ, and latin, HECK YEAH but if you say it then boy oh boy you are in for it and accused of hating everything that is not chant or latin or the organ…

 

[superamazingman]

I know, but you know how it goes.
People find out you dont like the Lifeteen Mass and all of the sudden you are the crazy EF traditionalist that is so closed minded that you cant see strait.
you know, like if you are a conservative who doesn’t like gay marriage you are a hateful gay basher…
Same here, would I like to see chant and th Organ, and latin, HECK YEAH but if you say it then boy oh boy you are in for it and accused of hating everything that is not chant or latin or the organ…

I could honestly care less if I get called a hater for “hating” everything that is not chant or latin or organ. I’ll stand with the Church. If they want to stand against me, they can stand against the church and what she teaches.

I’m just following the spirit of Vatican II

 

[clem456]

Oh, I think you are correct. I think you and I are thinking along the same lines and while there may be tiny differences about what we like we probably would sit at a Mass together and be offended at the same things and pleased by the same things. But I also think that our Parishes could be different as well. I dont know what yours is like and vice versa. One the whole I agree, there is room for culture (whatever that is) but you have to see that sometimes that is abused and used to the whims of a few. If you have never experienced that, then I am moving to your town!

No, I’ve seen abuses and actually would like to see the Mass done in a more traditional way, especially with more silence. I have heard jokes and songs I don’t like. We have a running dispute with our pastor, who is a tremendous leader but has his quircks, about the placement of the tabernacle, which is off in a side chapel. The organ and choir have their backs to it!!! The bishop knows and we are on notice the next paintbrush that gets lifted, back it goes to it’s rightful place.

But I live here… I do EMHC visits to the hopsital and nursing home, I’m on ministry teams, there’s a lot of work to be done. We have almost 50 ministry teams in this parish! Whether I like the music etc or not, the Mass nourishes the parish, it is the life of the parish. The Mass -as it is-, not the way I’d like it to be. Speaking for myself, our “modern” Mass moves me and inspires me and nourishes me, saves me. It is Jesus HImself

 

[superamazingman]

I know, but you know how it goes.
People find out you dont like the Lifeteen Mass and all of the sudden you are the crazy EF traditionalist that is so closed minded that you cant see strait.
you know, like if you are a conservative who doesn’t like gay marriage you are a hateful gay basher…
Same here, would I like to see chant and th Organ, and latin, HECK YEAH but if you say it then boy oh boy you are in for it and accused of hating everything that is not chant or latin or the organ…

I could honestly care less if I get called a hater for “hating” everything that is not chant or latin or organ. I’ll stand with the Church. If they want to stand against me, they can stand against the church and what she teaches.

I’m just following the spirit of Vatican II

 

[clem456]

Hmm… If latin doesn’t matter, why would Vatican II mandate that it be the primary language of worship? Somehow, I think you’re looking at this wrong, because it does matter. Same with gregorian chant, sacred polyphony, and the organ: They are the primary music of the Mass. That’s what vatican II says. And other documents clearly state that the closer a piece of music is in sound and style to chant and polyphony, the more suitable it is for the Mass. The further it is, the less suitable.

The eucharist is still present, it’s still a valid Mass. But that doesn’t mean we can do whatever else we want as long as it’s valid. A priest could walk into a bread factory, scream “this is my body”, eat a little, and walk out, and it would be a valid Mass. But somehow I don’t think that would be good. Doing so would not “change the reality of the Mass” (to use your words), but would still be gravely wrong.

No debating the preference and pride of place for Latin and pipe organ in V2. The practice of the Church is what it is. Why is that? Does that practice bring you Hope and Trust or fear?

I assume you’ve also read the sections of V2 dealing with cultures and the liturgy?

Your second paragraph…please don’t do that kind of thing. Ok?

 

[superamazingman]

No debating the preference and pride of place for Latin and pipe organ in V2. The practice of the Church is what it is. Why is that? Does that practice bring you Hope and Trust or fear?

It does give me hope and trust. It took some time to get used to, but now I love it. It’s the same for everyone: they may not like it right away. They may not like it ever. But like any other thing the church corrects us about, it doesn’t really matter what we think or how it makes us feel. The liturgy is something given to us by Christ to safeguard, not something we do as we wish.

I assume you’ve also read the sections of V2 dealing with cultures and the liturgy?

Yes. That doesn’t mitigate the other parts about Latin/organ/chant’s primacy.

Your second paragraph…please don’t do that kind of thing. Ok?

You totally missed the point. It would still be a valid Mass, just like these “youth Masses”, but that doesn’t make it right at all. Or maybe I’m not understanding what you are trying to say?

 

[UNDroxx12]

This whole thread is such bull*****.
The end.

 

[Moore11]

Wow.

 

[Goknights77]

So…this thread is a bit ridiculous, just saying. I wonder what the youth minister would think of it…

 

[Corki]

So…this thread is a bit ridiculous, just saying. I wonder what the youth minister would think of it…

Why would it matter? Youth ministers are not usually known for having expertise in Liturgical music.

(BTW, speedy come back)

 

[superamazingman]

So…this thread is a bit ridiculous, just saying. I wonder what the youth minister would think of it…

what specifically about it?

 

[aragonjohn1]

No debating the preference and pride of place for Latin and pipe organ in V2. The practice of the Church is what it is. Why is that? Does that practice bring you Hope and Trust or fear?

I assume you’ve also read the sections of V2 dealing with cultures and the liturgy?

Your second paragraph…please don’t do that kind of thing. Ok?

From the vatican II document Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy

The Council also calls for a revised liturgical calendar to emphasize, first, the richness of Christ’s salvific work; second, the salvific importance and maternal solicitude of Mary; and third, the witness of the martyrs and saints. The Fathers also call strongly for the encouragement of both internal individual and external social penance during Lent.

In the area of sacred music, Gregorian Chant and the pipe organ are accorded pride of place, and instruction is given for the use of other musical compositions and instruments. Such instruments arealways to be“suitable for sacred use” so that they “accord with the dignity of the temple, and truly contribute to the edification of the faithful” (120). Texts for chants and hymns are to be drawn from Scripture and liturgical sources.

And on the culture

“Norms for adapting the Liturgy to the culture and traditions of peoples
37. Even in the liturgy, the Church has no wish to impose a rigid uniformity in matters which do not implicate the faith or the good of the whole community; rather does she respect and foster the genius and talents of the various races and peoples. Anything in these peoples’ way of life which is NOT indissolubly bound up with SUPERSTITION and ERROR she studies with sympathy and, if possible, preserves intact. Sometimes in fact she admits such things into the liturgy itself, so long as they harmonize with the original languages and traditions.
38. Provisions shall also be made, when revising the liturgical books, for legitimate variations and adaptations to different groups, regions, and peoples, especially in mission lands, provided that the substantial unity of the Roman rite is PRESERVED; and this should be borne in mind when drawing up the rites and devising rubrics.

• vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19631204_sacrosanctum-concilium_en.html

Shalom
God bless

 

[Moore11]

So…this thread is a bit ridiculous, just saying. I wonder what the youth minister would think of it…

That is not relevant, nor is it the way the Church works.
But I think I know what you are trying to say.
I have said nothing here that is any sort of surprise to anyone who knows me. Nor have I said anything that is not a valid and orthodox Catholic opinion.

 

[JGMendes4049]

I assume you’ve also read the sections of V2 dealing with cultures and the liturgy?

Of course!

Sacrosanctum Consilium, emphases mine:
[38.] Provisions shall also be made, when revising the liturgical books, for legitimate variations and adaptations to different groups, regions, and peoples, especially in mission lands, provided that the substantial unity of the Roman rite is preserved; and this should be borne in mind when drawing up the rites and devising rubrics.

[39.] Within the limits set by the typical editions of the liturgical books, it shall be for the competent territorial ecclesiastical authority mentioned in Art. 22, 2, to specify adaptations, especially in the case of the administration of the sacraments, the sacramentals, processions, liturgical language, sacred music, and the arts, but according to the fundamental norms laid down in this Constitution.

[38.] Servata substantiali unitate Ritus romani, legitimis varietatibus et aptationibus ad diversos coetus, regiones, populos, praesertim in Missionibus, locus relinquatur, etiam cum libri liturgici recognoscuntur; et hoc in structura rituum et in rubricis instituendis opportune prae oculis habeatur.

[39.] Intra limites in editionibus typicis librorum liturgicorum statutos, erit competentis auctoritatis ecclesiasticae territorialis, de qua in art. 22 § 2, aptationes definire, praesertim quoad administrationem Sacramentorum, quoad Sacramentalia, processiones, linguam liturgicam, musicam sacram et artes, iuxta tamen normas fundamentales quae hac in Constitutione habentur.

 

[Moore11]

Of course!

Sacrosanctum Consilium, emphases mine:
[38.] Provisions shall also be made, when revising the liturgical books, for legitimate variations and adaptations to different groups, regions, and peoples, especially in mission lands, provided that the substantial unity of the Roman rite is preserved; and this should be borne in mind when drawing up the rites and devising rubrics.

[39.] Within the limits set by the typical editions of the liturgical books, it shall be for the competent territorial ecclesiastical authority mentioned in Art. 22, 2, to specify adaptations, especially in the case of the administration of the sacraments, the sacramentals, processions, liturgical language, sacred music, and the arts, but according to the fundamental norms laid down in this Constitution.

[38.] Servata substantiali unitate Ritus romani, legitimis varietatibus et aptationibus ad diversos coetus, regiones, populos, praesertim in Missionibus, locus relinquatur, etiam cum libri liturgici recognoscuntur; et hoc in structura rituum et in rubricis instituendis opportune prae oculis habeatur.

[39.] Intra limites in editionibus typicis librorum liturgicorum statutos, erit competentis auctoritatis ecclesiasticae territorialis, de qua in art. 22 § 2, aptationes definire, praesertim quoad administrationem Sacramentorum, quoad Sacramentalia, processiones, linguam liturgicam, musicam sacram et artes, iuxta tamen normas fundamentales quae hac in Constitutione habentur.

And, Boom goes the dynamite.

 

[anandkpillai]

I wonder if any one recalls what Jesus said in the Gospel when his disciples complained to him about others healing in his name and such.

Mark 9:40 - “For he who is not against us is for us”

Let us embrace others who worship our God in their own way. More so, when the church leaders have not judged those who are singing their praises to God in their own way.

Besides, I doubt such songs are being played outside the order of the mass. It should be played at the appropriate times, as in during the start or end. Maybe, too during the collection.

Hence, it does not disrupt mass, it just supports it.