Having culture in the mass

[Joe_5859]

When I spoke to a Priest, he said that when our Cardinal Pio Taofinu’u (May he Rest in Peace) spoke with the Pope, we were granted an indult.

I’m surprised no one has commented on this part of your post yet. This is really all that you need to know.

Obviously, there are many opinions (and since most of us posting here live in the West, you are going to get that perspective). But if your previous bishop obtained an indult from Rome—and presuming that indult has not expired and remains in force—then I don’t think anyone can say that it is “wrong” for this to occur in the liturgy where you are at.

 

[SepeliniM]

Cheers mate. Appreciate it. <3

 

[SepeliniM]

Thank YOU!!!

 

[SepeliniM]

Just watched !
Cheers

 

[blackforest]

Oh I love this man! Wasn’t he the one who had some delightfully witty retort to pro-choicers? Off to dig for the video . . .

 

[Fets]

To be honest, I think one could define the lady’s dance in the video as refined movements. I think what he’s getting at is that it is a form of dancing which is very different from Western conceptions of dancing. For us, dancing is normally romantic and normally involves a man and a woman. We don’t have ritualistic religious dancing where one person does it.

He must be speaking in a cultural way when he says “Latin”. Like the Latin Church, because Samoa and most of Africa and Asia all have Latin Rite Catholicism.

All of these ideas are further supported by this document, which is from the Vatican dicastery which Cardinal Arinze used to head, and which is now interestingly headed by Cardinal Sarah. This document is from 1975, and it looks like very little changed between it and Arinze.

https://www.ewtn.com/library/curia/cdwdance.htm

“The dance has never been made an integral part of the official worship of the Latin Church.”

“The first: to the extent in which the body is a reflection of the soul, dancing, with all its manifestations, would have to express sentiments of faith and adoration in order to become a prayer.”

"Concretely: there are cultures in which this is possible insofar as dancing is still reflective of religious values and becomes a clear manifestation of them. Such is the case of the Ethiopians. In their culture, even today, there is the religious ritulalized dance, cleary distinct from the martial dance and from the amorous dance.

“However, the same criterion and judgment cannot be applied in the western culture.
Here dancing is tied with love, with diversion, with profaneness, with unbridling of the senses: such dancing, in general, is not pure.”

And lastly, Samoan dance is mentioned specifically at the very end:
“We can recall how much was derived from the presence of the Samoans at Rome for the missionary festival of 1971. At the end of the Mass, they carried out their dance in St. Peter’s square: and all were joyful.”

 

[angell1]

I agree, in retrospect, Catholicism has suffered historically when over-zealous people puritanicaly purged out all cultural traditions.

the church is not synonymous with European culture only

 

[Loud-living-dogma]

I agree, in retrospect, Catholicism has suffered historically when over-zealous people puritanicaly purged out all cultural traditions.

the church is not synonymous with European culture only

Is it a matter of purging out, or bringing in? It’s not like Samoan culture is an integral part of Mass, right? Whereas certain European elements are (or are supposed to be, like sacred polyphony and Gregorian chant).

 

[HopkinsReb]

angell1:

I agree, in retrospect, Catholicism has suffered historically when over-zealous people puritanicaly purged out all cultural traditions.

the church is not synonymous with European culture only

Is it a matter of purging out, or bringing in? It’s not like Samoan culture is an integral part of Mass, right? Whereas certain European elements are (or are supposed to be, like sacred polyphony and Gregorian chant).

How is Gregorian chant an integral part of Mass? Mass was offered for nearly a millennium before Gregorian chant was invented.

 

[Loud-living-dogma]

Oh you know, those documents of Vatican IiI that say that Gregorian chant has pride of place. I can’t remember exactly what is said about sacred polyphony but it is in there too

 

[HopkinsReb]

Oh you know, those documents of Vatican IiI that say that Gregorian chant has pride of place. I can’t remember exactly what is said about sacred polyphony but it is in there too

Pride of place is not the same thing as integral. “Integral to the Mass” means that the Mass cannot be conducted without it. Were you imprecise with your words, or do you believe that only chanted Mass is valid?

 

[OraLabora]

I’m with you OP. How does that one young lady doing her dance enhance the congregation’s worship of God?

Maybe not the way you worship. However, you are not the 999,999,999 other Catholics in the world.

So if a young lady got up in Mass, and did a solo dance interpretation of Bach or Beethoven, you’d be totally fine with that too?

No I wouldn’t, because that is not a part of our culture. But what the OP describe is part of their culture. Unity does not equal uniformity.

To my sense of liturgical aesthetic, Mass in Gregorian chant is tops. But it is part of my cultural patrimony. I prefer it to polyphonic Masses, but the latter are part of our culture and are OK too. So too is (hopefully tasteful) modern music part of modern culture.

Which is why Sacrosanctum Concilium said:

1. 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 its true and authentic spirit.

1. 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.
2. 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.
3. In some places and circumstances, however, an even more radical adaptation of the liturgy is needed, and this entails greater difficulties. Wherefore:

1. The competent territorial ecclesiastical authority mentioned in Art. 22, 2, must, in this matter, carefully and prudently consider which elements from the traditions and culture of individual peoples might appropriately be admitted into divine worship. Adaptations which are judged to be useful or necessary should then be submitted to the Apostolic See, by whose consent they may be introduced.

Since Rome allows it, it is futile to wring our hands we don’t like this or that option allowed by the Church.

 

[OraLabora]

Pride of place is not the same thing as integral. “Integral to the Mass” means that the Mass cannot be conducted without it. Were you imprecise with your words, or do you believe that only chanted Mass is valid?

Indeed! And in fact it is given pride of place. Pride of place does not mean “in every place, at every time”. Gregorian chant wasn’t even used everywhere at all times in the pre-Conciliar era. Low Masses could be preceded and followed by popular local music before the opening verse or after dismissal. The vast majority of Masses pre-Council were quiet spoken Masses. And even on high occasions, polyphony could be used.

Today, Gregorian chant is still used in many places, in Benedictine monasteries, and of course the Vatican itself, not to mention multiple amateur scholas around the world.

Oh you know, those documents of Vatican IiI that say that Gregorian chant has pride of place.

If you love chant so much, and I most certainly do myself and can understand where you’re coming from, there are two approaches one can take. One, complain about it; probable result, zero. Two: do something about it, like form a schola or choir, or join one; probable result, you’ll also have loads of fun and be spiritually uplifted. That’s what I and about a dozen other men in our schola have done. I am in fact going to a rehearsal tonight to practice for Lauds of Holy Saturday which we will chant at the cathedral, as well as an upcoming Mass in May.

Gregorian chant is not easy, it takes an investment of time and patience. It would be nice to have Gregorian chant everywhere, but nothing sounds worse than mangled Gregorian chant. The Vatican does not have a fleet of C-130s ready to deploy around the world, filled with highly-trained paratrooper choristers ready to drop into every parish prepared to have your next Mass in Gregorian chant.

 

[Loud-living-dogma]

Pride of place is not the same thing as integral. “Integral to the Mass” means that the Mass cannot be conducted without it. Were you imprecise with your words, or do you believe that only chanted Mass is valid?

Indeed! And in fact it is given pride of place. Pride of place does not mean “in every place, at every time”. Gregorian chant wasn’t even used everywhere at all times in the pre-Conciliar era. Low Masses could be preceded and followed by popular local music before the opening verse or after dismissal. The vast majority of Masses pre-Council were quiet spoken Masses. And even on high occasions, polyphony could be used.

Today, Gregorian chant is still used in many places, in Benedictine monasteries, and of course the Vatican itself, not to mention multiple amateur scholas around the world.

Oh you know, those documents of Vatican IiI that say that Gregorian chant has pride of place.

If you love chant so much, and I most certainly do myself and can understand where you’re coming from, there are two approaches one can take. One, complain about it; probable result, zero. Two: do something about it, like form a schola or choir, or join one; probable result, you’ll also have loads of fun and be spiritually uplifted. That’s what I and about a dozen other men in our schola have done. I am in fact going to a rehearsal tonight to practice for Lauds of Holy Saturday which we will chant at the cathedral, as well as an upcoming Mass in May.

Gregorian chant is not easy, it takes an investment of time and patience. It would be nice to have Gregorian chant everywhere, but nothing sounds worse than mangled Gregorian chant. The Vatican does not have a fleet of C-130s ready to deploy around the world, filled with highly-trained paratrooper choristers ready to drop into every parish prepared to have your next Mass in Gregorian chant.
[/quote
I’m pretty sure you could have some well-prepared chant groups, but do you think pastors would use them? And make the rich aging boomers mad? Fat chance.

 

[OraLabora]

I’m pretty sure you could have some well-prepared chant groups, but do you think pastors would use them? And make the rich aging boomers mad? Fat chance.

We do it all the time, in a small city of 100k. The trick is not to overdo it. We sing once a month, and rotate around different parishes.

Edit: and I would add, that our entire schola is made up of aging baby boomers, so I can’t agree with your uncharitable generalization. We’ve had a few young members come and go but it’s we oldies who provide the stability and continuity. I myself am 60, and we range from early 50s to 80.

 

[otjm]

You beat me to the quote, as I was also going to note the paragraphs from SC. Clearly (as has been noted elsewhere since the close of the Council), the church was specifically focusing on the fact that the Church is world-wide, and cultures differ - some greatly from other cultures.

I can remember an Archdiocese wide Mass some years ago; when the gifts were being brought up to the altar, it was done by Filipinas, who approached the altar in a manner similar to the Samoan clip. Some Eurocentric Catholics took exception to that after the Mass; it is always “interesting” to see something which the Church permits and wonder what the cause of the reaction negatively is due to.

Having been involved in a schola while in college seminary (during Vatican 2, not after) where we cut a record of Gregorian chant, I have a very strong appreciation for it; so strong that I absolutely abhor the appalling attempts I have hear by people who haven’t the faintest idea how it should be sung. Gregorian Chant had been on the decline well before Vatican 2 rolled around, and those actually trained in it are fewer and fewer as time goes by. Even the occasional attempts to prop it up in various dioceses are lacking, as a partial week symposium (rarely if ever accorded a standing room only attendance by choir directors) is only going to touch lightly on the surface. The result, as I have heard it in my archdiocese, is limited to one (professional or semi-professional) choir I know of, and after that choirs which absolutely slaughter it. Gregorian chant done properly is hard ( your “not easy” is politely put) with a very knowledgeable choir leader, and requires regular practice. It is not something the laity in the pews can 'sing along" with by any stretch of the imagination. Done poorly to anyone who actually understand how it should be done is the equivalent of fingernails dragged over a blackboard. As in, cringe worthy.

And to those who want to repeat the bit from SC about "pride of place, put up or … go buy a CD of the Monks of Santo Domingo de Silos ; if you are not part of the solution, then let it go. Repeating the mantra without stepping up to do something is essentially meaningless.

 

[Loud-living-dogma]

We are not in control of the music at Mass. Bishops are. If they wanted chant, they could implement it.

 

[OraLabora]

We are not in control of the music at Mass. Bishops are. If they wanted chant, they could implement it.

Doing nothing will get exactly that result. Nothing. We simply knocked on doors until we found parishes willing to let us have a Mass from time to time. We also got some solid credibility by singing at funerals and at special events. Like any sales job, we had numerous doors slammed in our faces, but the odd place open to hearing us. It built up over time. We also found a parish willing to let us use their church as our “home base” for rehearsals. It’s a modern church, but built to traditional spec (still has a communion rail, tabernacle on the main altar, etc.) that also have great acoustics, and is beautifully bathed in natural light.

You can also offer recitals outside of Mass, which we also do. They have been very successful. The idea is to get people to know chant by every reasonable means possible, and create a demand. Its a slow arduous process, but it worked for us.

It did help that our first choirmaster was also the choirmaster of the local Benedictine abbey, which is THE place for Gregorian chant in Canada (among men; a women’s abbey outside of Montreal does the same for women). He brought a lot of credibility to our schola, as he was the expert in Gregorian chant in Canada. Alas he passed away recently at age 88, and I attende his funeral last Saturday,

 

[VanitasVanitatum]

I think it is one of those things that should be done separately, but the Church has her reasons.

 

[otjm]

And I would be surprised if there was a waiting line of other monks wanting to fill his place.

Requiescat in pace.