Holy Week Liturgy video -- what do you think?

[VociMike]

I will offer a couple of my own comments now. In the first place, this is just an ugly, a really ugly, setting to have Mass (and I have been there in person). It may be all that they have, but right from the get-go one has to get (mentally) past the chairs and the ductwork and the harsh lights and the supporting beams and all the other utilitarian trappings. Students at a Catholic university deserve much better. It’s the Mass, for goodness sake! Do students have class in such an ugly setting? Are their dorm rooms that ugly? Really, is there any uglier setting on the entire campus? Shouldn’t the Mass be held in the most beautiful setting on a Catholic campus? Oh, and what about kneeling?

Secondly, I really don’t like the screens. They become the center of attention, taking the focus off the altar. In this culture, where the screen is, that’s where our attention is. Get rid of them.

Finally, what the heck is with all that whooping and clapping during e.g. the Gloria? Why does the university tolerate such rock-concert behavior in a Mass?

 

[cathsem]

No one is baptized or received into the Church since that is more properly reserved for Holy Saturday.

As a choir member, I have sung “The King of Glory Comes” with tambourine and bodhran accompaniement. But I have to say I have never seen people in ANY Palm Sunday procession wave palms in time to the music or run up and down the aisles wafting bowls of incense.

It was my understanding that the opening shots I saw were of Palm Sunday. I saw enough. It did not resemble any Holy Week liturgy with which I am familiar or, I have to say, of any Passiontide liturgy that I ever experienced before Vatican II. You probably won’t know that Passion Sunday preceded Palm Sunday before Vatican II and that all the statues and the crucifix were draped in purple cloth which was removed during Good Friday liturgy.

I wish you could have seen the people on fire with faith in my childhood or, indeed, at my reverent NO cathedral parish. It does not look anything like the video.

The opening segments were of the Palm Sunday liturgy; the later shots were from the Easter Vigil. No one was baptized or received into the Church on Palm Sunday, only during the Easter Vigil as prescribed.

I know for a fact that in photos I saw on the FSSP’s website, there were servers removing purple cloth off a stature and decorating it with Easter lilies during the Easter Vigil. I also saw these rubrics for the Easter Vigil in the 1965 or 1967 Missal.

Now, I will admit that some elements of the liturgy and indeed popular piety at FUS are a bit different, owing to the charismatic heritage of the university. It can’t be denied. The university was almost dead in 1974 until a new university president, Fr. Michael Scanlan, TOR (who has appeared at least once on “Catholic Answers Live”) came and energized it with a charismatic spirituality. The students are still on fire with love for Jesus Christ and their Catholic faith. I’m not denying the piety that you have described; I’m just saying that love/devotion can be expressed in different ways. Furthermore, I admit that I don’t agree with absolutely everything done during these liturgies. My point is to merely state that what was done was done not out of an arrogant dismissal of Vatican instruction or worse, a disregard for the sacredness of the Liturgy, but rather as the result of some reasoned planning. Whether the reasons for everything done were correct is a question I cannot answer. However, it should be pointed out that our local bishop in Steubenville celebrates Mass at the university regularly with similar music. In addition, two and a half years ago, Cardinal Arinze himself celebrated Mass there and complemented the music led by a prominent charismatic singer.

Just to be clear, I am most certainly not impugning the reverence shown at your cathedral.

 

[cathsem]

I will offer a couple of my own comments now. In the first place, this is just an ugly, a really ugly, setting to have Mass (and I have been there in person). It may be all that they have, but right from the get-go one has to get (mentally) past the chairs and the ductwork and the harsh lights and the supporting beams and all the other utilitarian trappings. Students at a Catholic university deserve much better. It’s the Mass, for goodness sake! Do students have class in such an ugly setting? Are their dorm rooms that ugly? Really, is there any uglier setting on the entire campus? Shouldn’t the Mass be held in the most beautiful setting on a Catholic campus? Oh, and what about kneeling?

Secondly, I really don’t like the screens. They become the center of attention, taking the focus off the altar. In this culture, where the screen is, that’s where our attention is. Get rid of them.

Finally, what the heck is with all that whooping and clapping during e.g. the Gloria? Why does the university tolerate such rock-concert behavior in a Mass?

Thanks, VociMike for your comments. In order:

1. Yes, I agree the Fieldhouse is a far better gymnasium than it is an overflow chapel and, yes, the university has dire need of a new chapel. For the record, only a few big Masses are held there; most take place in the regular chapel which was built in 1968 (which, well, let’s just say that if I were a chapel, I would not want to have been built in 1968! )
2. The screens are admittedly less than ideal. They are turned off during any time when there is no music so that the distraction that you describe does not occur. The reason why they are used is that with four major liturgies during Holy Week, the chapel staff is already working a 70+ hour week (and loving it, but it is still taxing), and making programs would be quite a burden and, besides, would not really solve the problem because attention would only be diverted to the programs instead of the screen. Shoot, at least with the screens, they are turned off when they’re not being used and there is no temptation to “read the program” instead of paying attention to the Liturgy.
3. I understand your problem with the clapping/cheering. I would submit, though, that what was present there is something quite different from what one might see at a rock concert. You see, at a concert, the performers are applauded. Then-Cardinal Ratzinger clearly condemns this on p. 198 of The Spirit of the Liturgy when he says that “whenever applause breaks out during the liturgy because of some human achievement, it is a sure sugn that the essence of the liturgy has totally disappeared and been replaced with a kind of religious entertainment.” (italics mine) The context of this quote is that Ratzinger is condemning “dancing pantomines” as human performances in the Liturgy. In my opinion, the applause seen at the Vigil is not applauding a human achievement, but rather is spontaneously applauding the Resurrection of Our Lord. Now, I know that this is likely to strike most of you who are reading these words as odd, if not outright goofy, but this is one area where the charismatic spirituality common at FUS comes out. Charismatics are generally not afraid to express their love for God out loud and at FUS, this is rather commonplace. Where such an expression distracts the Liturgy, it is stopped, but here, it does not seem to distract the Liturgy but is rather a spontaneous burst of sheer joy from the community, realizing that Jesus Christ, the Passover Lamb, has risen from the dead. I know that some may view this expression as disrespectful, but I can assure that even if a bit imprudent, it was at least heartfelt and intended to praise God, not disrespect Him.

 

[brotherhrolf]

The opening segments were of the Palm Sunday liturgy; the later shots were from the Easter Vigil. No one was baptized or received into the Church on Palm Sunday, only during the Easter Vigil as prescribed.

I know for a fact that in photos I saw on the FSSP’s website, there were servers removing purple cloth off a stature and decorating it with Easter lilies during the Easter Vigil. I also saw these rubrics for the Easter Vigil in the 1965 or 1967 Missal.

Now, I will admit that some elements of the liturgy and indeed popular piety at FUS are a bit different, owing to the charismatic heritage of the university. It can’t be denied. The university was almost dead in 1974 until a new university president, Fr. Michael Scanlan, TOR (who has appeared at least once on “Catholic Answers Live”) came and energized it with a charismatic spirituality. The students are still on fire with love for Jesus Christ and their Catholic faith. I’m not denying the piety that you have described; I’m just saying that love/devotion can be expressed in different ways. Furthermore, I admit that I don’t agree with absolutely everything done during these liturgies. My point is to merely state that what was done was done not out of an arrogant dismissal of Vatican instruction or worse, a disregard for the sacredness of the Liturgy, but rather as the result of some reasoned planning. Whether the reasons for everything done were correct is a question I cannot answer. However, it should be pointed out that our local bishop in Steubenville celebrates Mass at the university regularly with similar music. In addition, two and a half years ago, Cardinal Arinze himself celebrated Mass there and complemented the music led by a prominent charismatic singer.

Just to be clear, I am most certainly not impugning the reverence shown at your cathedral.

No, whatever you saw in the FSSP video was wrong. The crucifix was exposed during the Good Friday Liturgy (pre Vatican II) to the chant of This is the Wood of the Cross (Ecce lignum Crucis). The NO has it as a procession chanted three times but before 65 the arms of the cross were exposed to the chant with the head left for last.

Screens? There are no screens in any church in my diocese that I am aware of including the newly renovated and expanded Christ the King at LSU. Jimmy Swaggert has screens, Larry Stockstill’s church (Bethany) has screens, but I’m not aware of any church in my diocese with screens. One could argue that Our Lord didn’t need “screens” to preach the Sermon on the Mount. My comment: This does not appear to be a Catholic phenomena.

Applause? The Lord is in His holy temple; let all the earth keep silent before Him. Habakuk 2:20 This was the absolute norm for us pre-Vatican II types.

I couldn’t watch much more than the opening, Mike. I was born before Vatican II and grew up in the pre-Vatican II church. These folks may be on fire for the Lord, but their actions belong more in Brother Jimmy’s and Brother Larry’s churches. I grew up in HMC in which personal piety was being “on fire for the Lord”.

Cathsem, your posts do you honor. Your zeal for Our Lord is noted. But I have to say that what I have seen is more in line with evangelical protestantism than the Catholicism of HMC.

I can say this with confidence. If you had shown this video on film in 1964, no one, absolutely no one, would ever have considered it to be Catholic. 1964 is not so long ago (at least in my mind) and since I’m only 55, I have to think that there are a whole bunch of us baby boomer types who do remember the Church before Vatican II.

 

[cathsem]

No, whatever you saw in the FSSP video was wrong. The crucifix was exposed during the Good Friday Liturgy (pre Vatican II) to the chant of This is the Wood of the Cross (Ecce lignum Crucis). The NO has it as a procession chanted three times but before 65 the arms of the cross were exposed to the chant with the head left for last.

Screens? There are no screens in any church in my diocese that I am aware of including the newly renovated and expanded Christ the King at LSU. Jimmy Swaggert has screens, Larry Stockstill’s church (Bethany) has screens, but I’m not aware of any church in my diocese with screens. One could argue that Our Lord didn’t need “screens” to preach the Sermon on the Mount. My comment: This does not appear to be a Catholic phenomena.

Applause? The Lord is in His holy temple; let all the earth keep silent before Him. Habakuk 2:20 This was the absolute norm for us pre-Vatican II types.

I couldn’t watch much more than the opening, Mike. I was born before Vatican II and grew up in the pre-Vatican II church. These folks may be on fire for the Lord, but their actions belong more in Brother Jimmy’s and Brother Larry’s churches. I grew up in HMC in which personal piety was being “on fire for the Lord”.

Cathsem, your posts do you honor. Your zeal for Our Lord is noted. But I have to say that what I have seen is more in line with evangelical protestantism than the Catholicism of HMC.

I can say this with confidence. If you had shown this video on film in 1964, no one, absolutely no one, would ever have considered it to be Catholic. 1964 is not so long ago (at least in my mind) and since I’m only 55, I have to think that there are a whole bunch of us baby boomer types who do remember the Church before Vatican II.

Brotherhrolf, I thank you for your response. Certainly we are coming at this issue from different perspectives, but it seems that you and I share a deep love for our Catholic faith and Holy Mother Church.

Perhaps I was mistaken about the crosses, even though I could have sworn I saw them removing a purple shroud from a statue and decorating it with Easter lilies.

With the screens, I know that they are different, but they are only used as a substitute for hymnals or programs. When a rite is taking place at the ambo or altar, they are off. I don’t believe that their use is prohibited in liturgical law.

As for the applause, this appears to be an area where your background and mine (I’ve been involved with the charismatic renewal for 7+ years now–I’m only in my 20s) conflict, though not hopelessly. We both seem to agree that reverence and awe are due our Lord, but just disagree as to how that can be offered. As far as personal piety goes, I agree with you 100%. I pray the Rosary and pray a silent Holy Hour daily, as do many students at FUS. (We have perpetual adoration when school is in session; oftentimes, the chapel is overflowing.) However, such palpable signs of joy are extremely rare, occurring only (at least in a Liturgy) at the Easter Vigil. It really is one of the differences among charismatics that we tend to express our love for the Lord externally a bit more than is the traditional norm in the Catholic Church; however, this does not seem to violate any Church teachings or laws. (If it does, I have confidence that FUS would obey without delay upon correction.) Keep in mind that the Psalms do speak of making a joyful noise unto the Lord and praising him with “loud clashing cymbals.” (Psalm 150) Thus, it appears, that though silent adoration is certainly commendable and appropriate, it is not the only permissible posture before Our Lord.

I know that this description is quite different from a pre-Vatican II Liturgy, but the intentions that occur in both really are the same, namely to adore our truly present Lord in His Real Presence. Ultimately, it is this bond by the Eucharist that makes both expressions Catholic. While such a video would likely be unrecognizable as Catholic to a 1964 viewer, I question whether this matters since it seems as though it is born out of a spirit of love for the Sacred Mysteries.

Once again, if I am wrong and the pope, CDWDS, or our local bishops say that any of these practices should not be followed, I will obey because as a Catholic, I accept that Jesus made the Church hierarchically, and I follow the apostles.

 

[VociMike]

Thanks, VociMike for your comments. In order:

1. Yes, I agree the Fieldhouse is a far better gymnasium than it is an overflow chapel and, yes, the university has dire need of a new chapel. For the record, only a few big Masses are held there; most take place in the regular chapel which was built in 1968 (which, well, let’s just say that if I were a chapel, I would not want to have been built in 1968! )

Yes, I agree about the chapel as well. But I think you understate the number of Masses said in the Fieldhouse, given all the conferences that FUS hosts. As I said before, it simply is not suitable that the location for “major” Masses at a Catholic university should be the ugliest venue on campus.

1. The screens are admittedly less than ideal. They are turned off during any time when there is no music so that the distraction that you describe does not occur.

I have to disagree. Their very existence keeps drawing one’s attention to them, waiting for the next “screening”.

The reason why they are used is that with four major liturgies during Holy Week, the chapel staff is already working a 70+ hour week (and loving it, but it is still taxing), and making programs would be quite a burden and, besides, would not really solve the problem because attention would only be diverted to the programs instead of the screen. Shoot, at least with the screens, they are turned off when they’re not being used and there is no temptation to “read the program” instead of paying attention to the Liturgy.

We’ll just have to disagree here as to the relative diversion of giant screens on both sides of the altar, vs. small booklets in the hand. I still insist that they are vastly worse (I don’t see them used at the Vatican…), and they’re not even that effective. They require a clear line of sight (tough luck for short people), and they don’t put up the music, just the words. And they destroy whatever asethetics the sanctuary might otherwise posess.

1. I understand your problem with the clapping/cheering. I would submit, though, that what was present there is something quite different from what one might see at a rock concert. You see, at a concert, the performers are applauded. Then-Cardinal Ratzinger clearly condemns this on p. 198 of The Spirit of the Liturgy when he says that “whenever applause breaks out during the liturgy because of some human achievement, it is a sure sugn that the essence of the liturgy has totally disappeared and been replaced with a kind of religious entertainment.” (italics mine) The context of this quote is that Ratzinger is condemning “dancing pantomines” as human performances in the Liturgy. In my opinion, the applause seen at the Vigil is not applauding a human achievement, but rather is spontaneously applauding the Resurrection of Our Lord.

I always thought one of the marks of adulthood was being able to adapt one’s behavior to location and circumstances. This notion that if it’s spontaneous (whatever that might mean here), it’s OK, is bogus, and we all know it. None of us acts spontaneously in every circumstance, so why is it now OK in the Mass? Why is worship of the Lord now an excuse to act exactly the same way we act at a rock concert or a sporting event? Since when? Says who? Was the Church really just repressed for all those centuries, until the 70s freed us to worship in a better fashion? (and “fashion” seems to be exactly the right word, as this behavior seems much more learned and copied than truly spontaneous)

 

[brotherhrolf]

Dear Cathsem: the sincerity of your resonse is overwhelmingly evident. And I have no doubt in my mind that you and your confreres are sincere in your beliefs.

The sincerity of your beliefs is not in question…the orthodoxy is. I am a firm believer in that we Catholics have two thousand years of ritual and worship behind us. I am comforted that I worship in the same way as my Irish, Scot, French, and Bavarian ancestors did. Unum iglesium catholicum. I am confident that my ancestors did not wave palm fronds nor run around wafting bowls on incense on Palm Sunday.

So, we have a big disconnect. The things I saw at the beginning of the video were not part of any Catholic ritual/liturgy in all of my 55 years. The would be seen in Brother Jimmy’s and Brother Larry’s church.

Please explain to me how what I saw equates to the Chuch in which I grew up either today or in pre-Vatican II terms.

I do not want to be Protestant. I do not want to follow Brother Jimmy or Brother Larry. Please explain to me how these practices make us more fully Catholic?

 

[chicago]

I am comforted that I worship in the same way as my Irish, Scot, French, and Bavarian ancestors did. Unum iglesium catholicum. I am confident that my ancestors did not wave palm fronds nor run around wafting bowls on incense on Palm Sunday.

Each culture has it’s own unique expressions of piety. What seemed “right” to a Catholic of a certain era in many American parishes might be unfamiliar to someone on another continent or country. Even from parish to parish we might see various manifestations. (Mother Angelica often spoke of how they used to have fireworks going off outside once a year for Midnight Mass or something at her home parish “back in the day”. She also related stories of people in places she had visited clapping for the consecration in an expression of joy). Similarly, if a Catholic culture (as what they have at Franciscan certainly is, supports a particular way of showing it’s devotion which is legitimate (as what is seen in the video basically is, even if every last detail might not be preferred by some of us), then I’d question any question of “orthodoxy”.

 

[maria29]

Yes, I agree about the chapel as well. But I think you understate the number of Masses said in the Fieldhouse, given all the conferences that FUS hosts. As I said before, it simply is not suitable that the location for “major” Masses at a Catholic university should be the ugliest venue on campus.

I am curious to where else they should hold it where they can fit everyone in? The problem the school has with building a new chapel (which believe me anything over what they have now would be a vast improvement) is that they are on a small parcel of land on top of the hill. Also the problem too is lack of funds.

I have to disagree. Their very existence keeps drawing one’s attention to them, waiting for the next “screening”.

**Most people know the screens are only there for the words for the songs. **
We’ll just have to disagree here as to the relative diversion of giant screens on both sides of the altar, vs. small booklets in the hand. I still insist that they are vastly worse (I don’t see them used at the Vatican…)

But they do at World Youth Day! Plus can you imagine the cost of printing over 1500 booklets? RIght now they don’t have to pay anyone to do the lights and screen. IT’s University professors and students.

, and they’re not even that effective. They require a clear line of sight (tough luck for short people), and they don’t put up the music, just the words. And they destroy whatever asethetics the sanctuary might otherwise posess.

I always thought one of the marks of adulthood was being able to adapt one’s behavior to location and circumstances. This notion that if it’s spontaneous (whatever that might mean here), it’s OK, is bogus, and we all know it. None of us acts spontaneously in every circumstance, so why is it now OK in the Mass? Why is worship of the Lord now an excuse to act exactly the same way we act at a rock concert or a sporting event? Since when? Says who? Was the Church really just repressed for all those centuries, until the 70s freed us to worship in a better fashion? (and “fashion” seems to be exactly the right word, as this behavior seems much more learned and copied than truly spontaneous)

**WHile I can agree that some of this is true, what about the people who are truly filled with the Holy Spirit? And since we don’t know its hard to comment about everyones actions. I think the problem that i have with this more is the fact that if this kind of music isn’t always played i know some people have a hard time going to that mass. **

 

[netmilsmom]

I will tell you this right now, if this is accepted as a norm in Liturgy, the LAST place I’m going to spend my money to send my kids to college is FUS.

And I stood in that very gym for my Uncle’s retirement.

If I am spending money for a Catholic education, they should not be pushing the limits of the rubics.

If someone cannot make the education Catholic, I’d rather send them to a secular school in the area where at least I am not expecting Catholic.

 

[cathsem]

Dear VociMike: Thanks for your continued comments. I guess we both agree on your first point (I had forgotten the summer conferences), and I agree fully that a new chapel is desperately needed. (There was a wonderful article on this subject in one of the student publictaions last spring.)

On the issue of the screens, I understand and appreciate your point, but I must confess that I just disagree. I cannot ever recall myself or anyone I know staring at the screens the whole time waiting for the next slide like they were at a concert. Ultimately, I propose to leave the issue up to the chaplain and our local bishop as to whether it is appropriate. If he says that it is not, the university I’m sure would find a solution.

As to the issue of the applause, I most definitely understand your position and actually agree with most of it. I’m not proposing that we always act spontaneously in every circumstance, we must discern whether it is prudent or not. As an alumnus who is now in seminary, I can attest that I wouldn’t even THINK of reacting in such a manner during most Masses because it would draw attention to myself instead of to Our Lord, and would thus be imprudent. However, I cannot think of a reason why such a reaction would be intrinsically evil. Just because applause breaks out at secular events does not necessarily make it evil any more than the playing of organ music during the seventh inning stretch at Wrigley Field makes organ music wrong in Church. Since, in my view, the action is morally neutral, the intention is good (take my word for this), and the circumstances of being in a charismatic community where such reactions are not likely to distract others’ attention from the Lord seem to allow it, I cannot think of a reason why the applause should be prohibited. Once again, however, if our Bishop, university president or chaplain, or one of the leaders that the Lord has placed over us were to command us to stop, we would obey at once.

Finally, in response to your question about whether the Church was repressed until the 1970s, I say certainly not. The lives of the many saints testify against this. These spontaneous expressions of joy are not intrinsically necessary to worship the Lord, they are just nice in my opinion. I appreciated the freedom to express my love for the Lord out loud a little more at FUS, but now that I am in seminary (a very traditional one mind you), I do not do so. Nonetheless, my love for the Lord has not changed. If one of our shepherds were to rule out such expressions, I would obey. In my view, it’s not that the Church was repressed until the advent of the charismatic movement, but rather that the movement has opened new doors. If the Church decides that some of these doors must be closed, then so be it.

 

[cathsem]

Dear Cathsem: the sincerity of your resonse is overwhelmingly evident. And I have no doubt in my mind that you and your confreres are sincere in your beliefs.

The sincerity of your beliefs is not in question…the orthodoxy is. I am a firm believer in that we Catholics have two thousand years of ritual and worship behind us. I am comforted that I worship in the same way as my Irish, Scot, French, and Bavarian ancestors did. Unum iglesium catholicum. I am confident that my ancestors did not wave palm fronds nor run around wafting bowls on incense on Palm Sunday.

So, we have a big disconnect. The things I saw at the beginning of the video were not part of any Catholic ritual/liturgy in all of my 55 years. The would be seen in Brother Jimmy’s and Brother Larry’s church.

Please explain to me how what I saw equates to the Chuch in which I grew up either today or in pre-Vatican II terms.

I do not want to be Protestant. I do not want to follow Brother Jimmy or Brother Larry. Please explain to me how these practices make us more fully Catholic?

Thank you for your continued kindness and sincerity in this debate. I hope that we can “bridge the gap” to some degree. Please understand that, before anything else, my first priority is to be Catholic. If I am told to cease doing something, I will obey because the Catholic Church is the one true Church that leads to Heaven. Going to Heaven is simply more important than some of my opinions on devotion.

Now, about orthodoxy, remember that this is not a question of orthodoxy (Greek “right belief”) but rather one of orthopraxy (Greek “right practice”). I may be mistaken about practices and what Holy Mother Church allows, but I am not mistaken in what I believe. I believe and profess all that the Holy Catholic Church teaches, believes, and professes to have been revealed by God, who can neither deceive nor be deceived.

Next, to answer your question, while the externals of the liturgies in question certainly differ from much of what has been practiced throughout the ages, the central core remains the same. We both accept and believe in the articles of the Creed and in the nature of Mass as a sacrifice, in which the entire Paschal Mystery becomes sacramentally present to us. We both also believe that the Mass is a foretaste of the eschatological banquet at which (with the help of God) we shall gaze on Our Lord as he is in glory. We will never be closer to Heaven than when we receive Our Lord in Holy Communion.

I can assure you, I also want to follow Jesus and the Church he founded on the rock of St. Peter, not Brother Jimmy or Larry. I’m not saying that these practices necessarily make us better Catholics, but perhaps allow us to express in a different manner our love for the Lord. Are these practices necessary? Certainly not. Are they helpful? In my opinion, yes. But once again, if HMC disagrees, she wins.

 

[cathsem]

I will tell you this right now, if this is accepted as a norm in Liturgy, the LAST place I’m going to spend my money to send my kids to college is FUS.

And I stood in that very gym for my Uncle’s retirement.

If I am spending money for a Catholic education, they should not be pushing the limits of the rubics.

If someone cannot make the education Catholic, I’d rather send them to a secular school in the area where at least I am not expecting Catholic.

Well, netmil(name removed by moderator), I’m sorry that you feel this way. Such expressions are not really the norm in liturgy; keep in mind that the Gloria at the Easter Vigil really only occurs once a year and that no other moment in the whole liturgical year really compares to joy of realizing the truth that Christ is risen from the dead. Furthermore, such expressions, as chicago mentioned, are only acceptable because the culture around the university is so amazingly Catholic…I mean, virtually everybody loves the Lord and only desires to serve the Church in their lives. Most attend Mass daily by their own choice. So many have become priests, brothers, and religious sisters, and so many others are now raising children to be holy representatives of Christ in the world. These results are not seen too frequently.

In the classroom, the education is top notch with all theology professors taking the Oath of Fidelity as prescribed by Ex Corde Ecclesiae

Liturgically, we are not trying to disobey the rubrics or liturgical law. I assure you once again that if we were instructed to make changes, we would make them. Rather, many of these events in question are the result of the charismatic movement’s renewal of the university (which was virtually dead in 1974 before its revival). I know that the charismatic movement does not speak to everyone’s heart, but it is at least a renewal movement approved by the Church (both by the USCCB and the Holy See; representatives of the renewal have been invited to Rome for an audience with the Pope at Pentecost in both 1998 and 2006.)

 

[cathsem]

Each culture has it’s own unique expressions of piety. What seemed “right” to a Catholic of a certain era in many American parishes might be unfamiliar to someone on another continent or country. Even from parish to parish we might see various manifestations. (Mother Angelica often spoke of how they used to have fireworks going off outside once a year for Midnight Mass or something at her home parish “back in the day”. She also related stories of people in places she had visited clapping for the consecration in an expression of joy). Similarly, if a Catholic culture (as what they have at Franciscan certainly is, supports a particular way of showing it’s devotion which is legitimate (as what is seen in the video basically is, even if every last detail might not be preferred by some of us), then I’d question any question of “orthodoxy”.

Well, needless to say, I agree with you. I was not aware of the Mother Angelica story with the fireworks at Christmas. In my mind, if we can change the culture back to where the major feast days of Our Lord’s life are days for intense celebration both inside and outside the Liturgy, we will be in a better place culturally than we are now. That’s the problem: Too many of us celebrate only in the privacy of our homes and churches. When was the last time you saw a Catholic businessman place a sign on his store saying that they would be closed on December 8th in observance of the Immaculate Conception? How wonderful would such a witness be!

At FUS, the culture really is centered all around the liturgical year. Easter is the most exciting and wonderful night of the year; and why shouldn’t it be? It’s the feast day of our redemption! In fact, each Sunday in Steubenville is celebrated as a mini-Easter with households celebrating a “Lord’s Day” service on Saturday afternoons to dedicate this day to our Lord. When was the last time you really saw Catholics treat Sunday with this much dignity, not just at Mass but as a whole? It has become all too uncommon in our modern Catholic society. If you don’t like the palpable excitement shown on Easter at FUS, what day should replace it as the most exciting and wonderful night of the year? Secular celebrations like sporting events? Dances? Parties? Mardi Gras? Given a choice, I’ll take Easter celebrated with a big liturgy followed by an all-night family-friendly (no alcohol) party.

 

[VociMike]

As to the issue of the applause, I most definitely understand your position and actually agree with most of it. I’m not proposing that we always act spontaneously in every circumstance, we must discern whether it is prudent or not. As an alumnus who is now in seminary, I can attest that I wouldn’t even THINK of reacting in such a manner during most Masses because it would draw attention to myself instead of to Our Lord, and would thus be imprudent. However, I cannot think of a reason why such a reaction would be intrinsically evil.

I hope you did not think my opposition to shouting and clapping was because I thought they were intrinsically evil! Certainly not. But they bring about a mood in the Mass that is quite the opposite of the sober inebriation that is appropriate to the worship of Our Lord (as you recognize).

Just because applause breaks out at secular events does not necessarily make it evil any more than the playing of organ music during the seventh inning stretch at Wrigley Field makes organ music wrong in Church. Since, in my view, the action is morally neutral, the intention is good (take my word for this), and the circumstances of being in a charismatic community where such reactions are not likely to distract others’ attention from the Lord seem to allow it, I cannot think of a reason why the applause should be prohibited. Once again, however, if our Bishop, university president or chaplain, or one of the leaders that the Lord has placed over us were to command us to stop, we would obey at once.

Lex orandi, lex credendi is an ancient Christian insight. This kind of behavior in worship changes the very nature of the worship, and subtley, of the understandings of the faith which underpin that worship. That is one of the strong and clear lessons of the liturgical “so-called improvements” (and I would classify clapping and whooping during the Mass as such) that have gone on for the past 40 years. This kind of behavior distorts the Mass and the faith of those attending. Also, see Cardinal Arinze’s comments this week about things that damage the Liturgy, including “banalization, desacralization and secularization”. The behavior we are discussing is clearly contained in that list.

Oh, and BTW I too want to thank you for your civility in these discussions.

 

[cathsem]

I hope you did not think my opposition to shouting and clapping was because I thought they were intrinsically evil! Certainly not. But they bring about a mood in the Mass that is quite the opposite of the sober inebriation that is appropriate to the worship of Our Lord (as you recognize).

Lex orandi, lex credendi is an ancient Christian insight. This kind of behavior in worship changes the very nature of the worship, and subtley, of the understandings of the faith which underpin that worship. That is one of the strong and clear lessons of the liturgical “so-called improvements” (and I would classify clapping and whooping during the Mass as such) that have gone on for the past 40 years. This kind of behavior distorts the Mass and the faith of those attending.

Oh, and BTW I too want to thank you for your civility in these discussions.

I think that we can for the most part agree that the clapping and cheering is at least for the most part inadvisable during Mass. I understand your mention of “sober inebriation”, but in my view, the charismatics who were clapping were already soberly inebriated (remember, they had been silent for days; I assure you that there was no such clapping at the Good Friday Liturgy, only mourning. ) and were simply expressing their joy briefly. Keep in mind that such expressions are quite rare; I can only remember applause like this during the Vigil–we are dealing with an extreme case. Given the rarity of the occurrence, I don’t think that the practice distorts anyone’s faith, but rather might perhaps enhance because it gives witness to their faith in the reality of our Lord’s Resurrection. Remember the example I gave in an earlier post about one person’s conversion after the Vigil. Now, I grant that one person is not the ultimate judge fo whether it is a good liturgical practice or not, but does show that God worked through some of it.

If such applause occurred everyday, for example, after the Eucharistic Prayer to welcome Our Lord’s presence in the Blessed Sacrament , then I could see how faith in Mass as a sacrifice might be undermined. But this is not the case here; we are instead discussing a rare, once-a-year occurrence at a particularly joyful moment in the liturgical year. I cannot see how that rare of a display would undermine anyone’s faith.

P.S.: I am also thankful that we have been able to keep the discussion charitable and civil and, therefore, actually get somewhere in this discussion as opposed to engaging in a bunch of name-calling.

 

[VociMike]

Well I guess we have arrived at the point where the positions have been laid out. I will close with a quote from Cardinal Arinze’s recent comments, which could have been directed at this very video: “Thus some abuses are due to an undue place given to spontaneity, or creativity, or to a wrong idea of freedom…”

 

[chicago]

Regarding the applause at that particular Mass, it appears from the video that the sudden lighting and revelation of the “resurrection cross” was done in a dramatic manner which would, naturally, contribute to stirring emotions and an appropriate response of joy. Whether this was well advised or not is debatable. Whether such a response would have come about by a simple lighting of the Church and unveiling of statue sacramentals and such beyond the crucifix (which as has been noted is properly unvelied on Good Friday… still a liturgical option BTW), who knows. We must remember, though, that we are not mere spiritual beings, but corporeal ones, also. As such, it is not inappropriate that we should “make a joyful noise” at such a moment. Indeed, it is one at which. liturgically, the Gloria is sung and bells are rung in such response, also. An instictive expression of clapping which happens naturally doesn’t seem entirely out of place in such circumstances as an accompaniment, then.

 

[cathsem]

Well I guess we have arrived at the point where the positions have been laid out. I will close with a quote from Cardinal Arinze’s recent comments, which could have been directed at this very video: “Thus some abuses are due to an undue place given to spontaneity, or creativity, or to a wrong idea of freedom…”

Certainly possible, and if it is ruled so by the Cardinal (who has celebrated Mass in the Fieldhouse) or our local Bishop, I will gladly submit to the mind of the Church.

God bless you, and thank you for the good conversation.

 

[cathsem]

Well I guess we have arrived at the point where the positions have been laid out. I will close with a quote from Cardinal Arinze’s recent comments, which could have been directed at this very video: “Thus some abuses are due to an undue place given to spontaneity, or creativity, or to a wrong idea of freedom…”

One final thought on this quote…It concerns an over-emphasis on horizontalism. Now, I guess this is where the fundamental disagreement between you and me is; I don’t view the practices as overemphasizing the horizontal (a.k.a. communal) dimension over the vertical. I rather see it as an out-loud expression of a profound experience of the vertical dimension (namely, Jesus risen from the dead). If I am understanding your position correctly, you think that these practices overplay the horizontal dimension and cloud the vertical. As I said earlier, I will allow the Vatican and our bishops to adjudicate this disagreement.