B
buffalo
Guest
Every time you attend Mass you assist along with the angels.
- Status
S
SacredHeartFan
Guest
Talk with the Liturgy Coordinator or bishop in your diocese or archdiocese about buying the Adoremus Hymnal like the one used on EWTN for all the parishes. It is alot of money but if every parish bought their own books it could work.
J
James0235
Guest
I am talking about this thread here. It doesn’t seem like you have actually read it.
Of course we are talking about the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite here. And that is because the quote from the Holy Father that was used in the 1st post in this thread was concerning the OF.
Again, this suggests that you haven’t really been following this particular thread.
It does not necessarily follow that the collapse of the Liturgy means that is may not be possible to bring it back.
The Holy Father’s quote in context:
**“I am convinced that the ecclesial crisis in which we find ourselves today depends in great part upon the collapse of the liturgy, which at times is actually being conceived etsi Deus non daretur: as though in the liturgy it did not matter anymore whether God exists and whether He speaks to us and listens to us.” **
People treating the Liturgy as if it does not matter anymore if God even exists. This type of attitude leads to a loss of any sense of the sacred in the Liturgy.
I think Rickwood was on to something when he wrote:
**Using my own parish I will take a guess. I think the great majority get involved with the liturgy (either planning or as a EMHC, reader, server, etc.) because they want to be seen and recognized.
And in some cases they want POWER…**
To restore a sense of the sacred to the Liturgy is to restore the Liturgy itself. The Mass obviously isn’t celebrated poorly everywhere. But, in many places Liturgical abuses are certainly the norm.
Putting a stop to abuses and getting people involved in the Liturgy for the right reason is necessary to restore it.
Again, what thread are you reading? Surely not this one.
Of course many are fond of this statement. Those who say it are merely quoting the Catholic Church.
Nevertheless, the priest must remember that he is the servant of the Sacred Liturgy and that he himself is not permitted, on his own initiative, to add, to remove, or to change anything in the celebration of Mass.
GIRM 24
How can you possibly take issue with that?
So, now we come to the truth. Your issue isn’t with this thread or anything said herein. Your issue is with THE HOLY FATHER!
He is the one who said:
"I am convinced that the ecclesial crisis in which we find ourselves today depends in great part upon the collapse of the liturgy".
I won’t question your word here. Although as your complaint about this thread (that it is merely bashing the OF Mass) has been shown to be a lie then no one would be out of line to question your word on anything else.
That might be your experience. But, it is not the experience of everyone here. In this diocese Liturgical abuse is certainly the norm. Nothing so serious as to invalidate the Mass. But, it seems as though most of the priests were actually taught years ago that changing the Mass to make it more “relevant” or “entertaining” is not a bad thing. Our former bishop decided to stick his head in the sand and ignore all of the letters begging for his help.
Thankfully, the younger priests are far less likely to have this attitude.
Might I suggest you actually read the documents of Vatican II. Pope Paul VI gave us the 1970 Roman Missal. And Pope Benedict XVI confirms that it is the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite of the Mass. And they both have the authority to do just that.
But, it is not what the bishops of the Council were calling for. Never did the documents of the Council call for, in your words, “a new Liturgy.”
Again, you have failed to show where any bashing has taken place. You have done nothing in this thread other than:“Great positive threads like this…”Please. I’m sure the “woe is me” whine fests about the horrible OF liturgy will go on *ad infinitum *here. It would be nice though if one could at least acknowledge them for what they are rather than trying to pretend that they are “uplifiting” in some way. There have indeed been a few positive suggestions for ways things could be improved–even if most of them are simply “preference” issues. But the bulk of this has unquestionably just been a “bash fest”
- Complain about the phrase “collapse of the Liturgy” which was actually said by the Holy Father himself
- Complain about a “whine fest” and a “bash fest” while failing to provide a single example
You are deliberately trying to get this thread locked or deleted.
I would say goodbye. But, as it is clear that your only purpose in this thread is to troll I will instead say good riddance!
James
J
James0235
Guest
J
japhy
Guest
I think, in light of that extended quote from Ratzinger’s 1997 book, the oft-quoted preface (also by Ratzinger) to the 1992 French edition of Msgr. Klaus Gamber’s Reform of the Roman Liturgy (originally published in 1979 in German) finds its proper context. Here is the relevant portion (found in English on the back cover of the English translation of the book):
It is difficult to say briefly what is important in this quarrel of liturgists and what is not. But perhaps the following will be useful. J. A. Jungmann, one of the truly great liturgists of our century, defined the liturgy of his time, such as it could be understood in the light of historical research, as a “liturgy which is the fruit of development”…
What happened after the Council was something else entirely: in the place of liturgy as the fruit of development came fabricated liturgy. We abandoned the organic, living process of growth and development over centuries, and replaced it – as in a manufacturing process – with a fabrication, a banal on-the-spot product. Gamber, with the vigilance of a true prophet and the courage of a true witness, opposed this falsification, a and, thanks to his incredibly rich knowledge, indefatigably taught us about the living fullness of a true liturgy.
I do not think it can be argued convincingly that what Ratzinger was referring to here, and what Gamber was opposing in his book, was merely the liturgical abuses plaguing the reformed liturgy (as has been stated on these forums before); rather, it was the process by which the liturgy was reformed and the resulting “product”. I think this is far more likely (in fact, I am certain of it) when this quote is placed next to the “disintegration” quote.
Please do me a favor: don’t get this or any other Liturgy & Sacraments thread locked or deleted!
C
Cat
Guest
japhy, I fear that I am failing to get across my point. I apologize. Maybe I should turn off the Olys and just concentrate on posting.
Yes, I see these verses and readings in our missals.
But I see no music. I see the words… They are right in front of me (in English). But no music.
You are telling me that no one needs to select the introit, graduales, etc. OK, I agree. The Church has already done it for us. Wonderful.
But I can’t play these things! And if I were sitting in the congregation, I can’t sing these things! There’s no MUSIC!
To paraphrase Clara Peller (God rest her soul)–“Where’s the music?!”
No notes. No staffs. No key signature. Nothing. Just the words.
Or is the instrumentalist supposed to ad-lib? Is this how chant works? It’s ad-libbed according to certain “rule of chant lines?”
I don’t mean to sound sarcastic here, but music doesn’t just materialize because the “Church selects readings.”
Someone has to send for the music catalog, study the catalog, send for samples, study the samples, and order the music/sheets/books, and then unpack them, put them in the pews, and set them in the shelves so that the instrumentalists can find them, and then tell the instrumentalists and cantors/choirs which page numbers the various introits, antiphons, graduales, etc. are located on e.g., Page 24. Introit.
Am I getting this across now?
My point is, a real person–a liturgical director, a choir director, a music minister, the priest, a really bright volunteer–SOMEONE human has to do some GRUNT WORK and tell the musicians and the people what to actually sing–the notes, key-signatures, melody, starting pitch, etc.
Or else I will just sit there at the piano and look pretty!
japhy, you sound like a Pentecostal Protestant! Did you know that many of these churches don’t plan any music–they just led the Spirit lead the people in spiritual singing! (Have you ever heard it? Think “cats.”)
Amen brothers and sisters!
J
japhy
Guest
Sorry, I didn’t scan in and post the pages of the Graduale Romanum. Trust me, there is music for these words!
Here’s a sample of what it looks like. This is the Introit for Gaudete Sunday (3rd Sunday of Advent). Please don’t freak out.
http://www.ceciliaschola.org/img/gaudete.gif
If you can’t read it, that’s to be expected… you’ve probably never seen chant notation. Neither had I until last summer. After a little exposure and practice, it makes sense. The “C”-looking thing at the top of the staff tells you where “C” is. There is no “time” (like 4/4, 3/4, etc.). Notes all have the same length; this length is extended by the dot after a note (and in one or two other ways). Notes go left-to-right and generally bottom-to-top (if they’re on top of each other). The notes on Gaudete (the first word) are done in this order (the bottom line is the note “D”): “Gau” is D-C, “de” is E-C-E-D, “te” is D-E-F (F = two counts). There are rests at the vertical bars after “Gaudete”, “semper”, “hominibus”, “Deum”, etc.
That weird set of vowels at the end, E-u-o-u-a-e, is part of the Gloria Patri (“Glory to the Father, and to the Son, etc.”); there are a set of eight or so “tunes” for the Gloria Patri et Filio et Spiritu Sancto : sicut erat in principio, et nunc, et semper, et in saecula saeculorum, amen. (The underlined vowels are E-u-o-u-a-e.) The tune for this doxology is denoted by the notes for the Gloria Patri (which are shown) and for the ending of the second half, the saeculorum, amen. No, it doesn’t seem obvious to you (or anyone)! It’s an abbreviation that developed over time, and people who can read and sing chant learn these tunes.
And again, the ideal would be that these things would be sung in Latin to the chants found in the Graduale; but other tunes can be found, and translations can be used with other tunes as well. I’m sure there are projects out there to provide alternate tunes (and vernacular translations with alternate tunes); and if all else fails, simple psalm tones can be used.
(Not everything has to be sung by the congregation; there are some parts of the Mass that are probably best left to the choir.)
For the Ordinary of the Mass (again, that’s the Kyrie, Gloria, Credo, Sanctus, and Agnus Dei, along with the responses throughout the Mass), Pope Paul VI gave us the booklet Jubilate Deo which you can print out online and make booklets of for your parish, free of charge. (It was a gift to the Church!) Yes, it’ll take time to learn the tunes and the words, but the Pope thought it could be done 35 years ago, and the Council thought it could be done 45 years ago, and it was actually done before then!
For the Propers (which are best left to the choir), if the choir wanted to do the Latin, all they need is a copy of the Graduale. And I don’t think it’s unreasonable to supplement the Propers with hymns: let the choir chant the Proper, and follow it with a hymn. And there’s no Proper text for the recessional; choose whatever hymn you think is appropriate there.
For the Ordinary, there’s a recently published “Parish Book of Chant”. I strongly recommend it. Only $14/copy, and there might be a discounted bulk rate. It’s got dozens of hymns as well as the Order of Mass. (It doesn’t have the Propers.)
For the Propers (in Latin), again, I recommend the Graduale Romanum; or better yet (for a parish just beginning Latin chanted propers), the Graduale Simplex! It has simpler arrangements. If you want to chant translations, well, that might require a bit of research or a bit of creativity.
Sigh… I hope you weren’t serious in thinking that there wasn’t actually any assigned music for these texts.
C
Cat
Guest
Please allow me to describe something that happened at the Catholic Family Conference Masses a few weeks ago.
All of the responses were sung in Latin.
OK.
But…
PRINT off the words so that everyone can read them (I suggest using OVERHEADS–yes, those “Protestant” overhead!!!-- so that people don’t have to fumble with page numbers and rustle pages, and so that they can look UP instead of burying their heads in a book. You know that the Protestant converts probably don’t know the words. And don’t assume that all Catholics know them either. Give us the words.
TEACH the proper pronunciations–even if that means the priest will actually say the words and ask the congregation to repeat the words after him. Doesn’t exactly add to a “worshipful” atmosphere, but isn’t it better to learn it correctly rather than murder the pronunciation? After all, it is the “Language of the Church,” right? Shouldn’t we respect it enough to do it right?
SPEND the money on a good sound system. Yes, the poor need so much and the parish needs a new roof and there’s that mission to be paid for, but if you’re going to do songs and verses in a foreign language, then at least make sure that we can HEAR it! Otherwise we’ll never pick it up. Honestly, it sounds like gobbledy-gook when we can’t hear it. Is THAT what the Language of the Church is supposed to sound like–gobbledy-gook?
PRINT out the music to “chants” or whatever. Some people can sing by ear, but I guarantee that most of us who are trained musicians need MUSIC. Notes, staffs, etc., not just words. Again, this could be on an…dare I say the word again on CAF?–an overhead.
UTILIZE well-trained musicians who are comfortable singing in the style of the music. You all know that I love contemporary music, but I don’t think someone with an Amy Grant-style of singin has any business singing an ancient chant in her “Angels Watchin’ Over Us” style. If you want people to appreciate the music, then do it well. Hire someone if you have to. I would respectfully suggest that MEN sing these chants. When women sing them, especially CCMers, it sounds so effeminate and fruity, not strong and powerful. No wonder people like me are turned off and would prefer listening to ROCK–at least it’s got some guts to it. I can’t imagine marching to the lions singing such girly songs. Again, I don’t think this is the correct style for this kind of music. If you can’t do it right, then wouldn’t it be better to do CCM or whatever your parish is equipped for, rather than presenting a weak version just for the sake of doing “Latin?”
Thanks for reading these suggestions.
All of the responses were sung in Latin.
OK.
But…
- The cantors were “contemporary” singers, who used the same style to sing the Latin. This meant that the words and the “melody” line were done with a “sliding” techinque that is often used in contemporary music. I couldn’t understand the words or pick up the “melody.”
- There were no copies of the “melody” line available to the congregation. Perhapst these “chants” or whatever they are are so well-known that the planners just assumed that EVERYONE would know them. Well, again, they assumed WRONG.
- The sound system was so bad that we couldn’t really hear anything that well.
- All of this made me feel left out, like a “poor relation.” Have you ever been to a family reunion where everyone is talking about some event or relative, and you have no idea what they’re talking about and no way of finding out? You feel totally left out of the family. That’s the way I felt. I listened respectfully. But I would have preferred to join in with my Catholic brothers and sisters.
PRINT off the words so that everyone can read them (I suggest using OVERHEADS–yes, those “Protestant” overhead!!!-- so that people don’t have to fumble with page numbers and rustle pages, and so that they can look UP instead of burying their heads in a book. You know that the Protestant converts probably don’t know the words. And don’t assume that all Catholics know them either. Give us the words.
TEACH the proper pronunciations–even if that means the priest will actually say the words and ask the congregation to repeat the words after him. Doesn’t exactly add to a “worshipful” atmosphere, but isn’t it better to learn it correctly rather than murder the pronunciation? After all, it is the “Language of the Church,” right? Shouldn’t we respect it enough to do it right?
SPEND the money on a good sound system. Yes, the poor need so much and the parish needs a new roof and there’s that mission to be paid for, but if you’re going to do songs and verses in a foreign language, then at least make sure that we can HEAR it! Otherwise we’ll never pick it up. Honestly, it sounds like gobbledy-gook when we can’t hear it. Is THAT what the Language of the Church is supposed to sound like–gobbledy-gook?
PRINT out the music to “chants” or whatever. Some people can sing by ear, but I guarantee that most of us who are trained musicians need MUSIC. Notes, staffs, etc., not just words. Again, this could be on an…dare I say the word again on CAF?–an overhead.
UTILIZE well-trained musicians who are comfortable singing in the style of the music. You all know that I love contemporary music, but I don’t think someone with an Amy Grant-style of singin has any business singing an ancient chant in her “Angels Watchin’ Over Us” style. If you want people to appreciate the music, then do it well. Hire someone if you have to. I would respectfully suggest that MEN sing these chants. When women sing them, especially CCMers, it sounds so effeminate and fruity, not strong and powerful. No wonder people like me are turned off and would prefer listening to ROCK–at least it’s got some guts to it. I can’t imagine marching to the lions singing such girly songs. Again, I don’t think this is the correct style for this kind of music. If you can’t do it right, then wouldn’t it be better to do CCM or whatever your parish is equipped for, rather than presenting a weak version just for the sake of doing “Latin?”
Thanks for reading these suggestions.
J
japhy
Guest
I agree with you. That was not a pastoral implementation of Latin in the Mass. You can’t just expect (today) that people know the Latin responses or know the tunes. Not providing a song-sheet (or whatever it’s called) is a terrible mistake and leaves people feeling left out, ignorant, or out of place (like you felt). You should contact the organizers and let them know about this! Don’t let them let it happen again! (To be specific, I mean you should tell them that if they are using Latin – which I am personally in favor of – they should provide the congregation with “worship aids”!)
How long was this conference? I’d imagine there should have been an opportunity (either before the Mass, or at another time or on another day) to go over the Latin, how to pronounce it, and how to sing it.Cat, you are on a roll.
My parish has a male cantor whose voice is, I think, far better suited to chant than to the type of singing our parish requires of its cantors. I totally envision him singing middle-eastern chants rather than these American compositions that really test his range and ability; I’m not saying he can’t sing, I’m saying the stuff given to him isn’t the type of music he seems comfortable singing.
J
James0235
Guest
Someone definitely should have planned better. It doesn’t a genius to figure out that most people have never been exposed to Latin in the Mass and therefore they have never been given a chance to learn the words.
But, no one was more surprised than me when I first starting reading the documents of VII years ago:
Nevertheless steps should be taken so that the faithful may also be able to say or to sing together in Latin those parts of the Ordinary of the Mass which pertain to them.
(Vatican II, Sacrosanctum Concilium 54)
If more parishes would take VII seriously then all Catholics would know the basic parts of the Mass in Latin.
On top of that The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops says that there are 3 particular chants that every Catholic should know “at a minimum”. But, they are just not being taught to anyone. I know of exactly 2 parish around here where the congregation is taught the basic Mass parts in Latin as well as a little Gregorian chant.
James
B
benedictgal
Guest
I own the book. It is called “A New Song for the Lord”; it was written in the mid to laste 1990s, 1996 or 1997. This quote appears in either the front or back cover. I don’t have the book in front of me because I lent it to my parochial vicar.
Among the things that the former Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger sharply criticizes are music and the celebration of the “community”, rather than the worship of the Lord. In fact, towards the end, he uses his brother, Msgr. Georg Ratzinger, who served as the choirmaster for the Regensberg Choir as a prime example of how the music should be treated.
The first part of the book is a lengthy theological discourse on the liturgy, tracing its roots. The second part of the book deals with the problems at hand today. What was just as ruefully true back in the 1990s is just as painfully apparent today. In fact, if you were to read all three books, Feast of Faith, A New Song for the Lord and The Spirit of the Liturgy, you will find a blueprint for the Holy Father’s plans to reform the reform. What he wrote about back then is taking shape now.
And, to Thurifer, I’m sorry I’m late, but, thank you for the kind words. I try to be of assistance to anyone who writes. It may take me a while to get back, but I do the best I can.
C
Cat
Guest
We did talk to the Conference planners and I will make sure to contact them next year well in advance of the Conference (hopefully there’ll be a Conference–numbers were down this year). They live in our city.
I think–bless their hearts–that they have a very difficult task when it comes to doing Mass at these Conferences. There is a huge spectrum of Catholics who attend.
It is probably safe to say that most of the attendees are “conservative” Catholics.
But among the attendees, the range is pretty wide. There are the “converted evangelical Protestants” like me who think that the OF is extremely staid and traditional compared to any Protestant worship service we have ever attended!
And on the other end of the spectrum, there are the TLMers/homeschoolers wearing long dresses (at least all the females in the family!) and seem to feel uncomfortable with speakers like Tim Staples.
There are the goth and stoner-type Catholics with the multiple piercings and the Extreme In-Your-Face Catholic T-shirts!
And there are the…not sure what nickname to give them, but they are the Catholics who are dressed in business suits (men and women), full make-up (women), and carry coach bags (women) and lap tops (men and women) and they smell like Chanel No. 5. (Frankly, I’m always amazed that these people are willing to sit on…folding chairs!)
And there are the Hispanic Catholics. I’m not sure that all of them speak English, but I’m glad they’re there for the sake of their children. Many, many children!
And there are the sweet old people who can barely climb into the bleachers!
And there are the non-Catholic inquirers.
I wonder if this is one reason why people stay away from these Conferences. It is difficult from a human standpoint to feel comfortable sometimes with such a diverse group. And if you have a “run-in” with someone on the opposite end of the spectrum than you, it can be downright unpleasant. I’m sure it’s a culture shock for some of those TLM/homeschoolers to meet up with people like me and my husband, or worse, those “EXTREME” Catholic types with the tattoos of Our Lady of Guadalupe across their bare backs (tank tops)!
I’m actually wondering if it wouldn’t be better for the Conference to decide on an “identity” and go full-blast with it, even if it does alienate those who simply can’t accept that “identity.” E.g., go full-bore Traditional–all the women must wear skirts, no t-shirts, no CCM at all, no piano in the Mass, Latin chants, no hymns, no Communion in the hand, etc.
Or they could go the opposite direction and gear the Conference towards the CCMers, converts and “t-shirt” crowd.
But that would probably be a bad thing. It’s probably best that we all just learn to get along, right?! And appreciate each other’s differences and accept that we are all at the Conference to learn more about God and our Catholic faith from some of the best speakers and musicians in the U.S.
It’s no wonder that those who are charged with the planning of the Mass go with the Latin, which generally doesn’t offend anyone (unlike a rock band and Life Teen selections, which would probably cause quite a few attendees to walk out!). I wasn’t offended by the Latin, just disappointed to feel left out of it. But the rest of the Mass was glorious! And the CCM was very beautiful, IMO! Very worshipful, considering that our Mass was in a gymnasium.
I think–bless their hearts–that they have a very difficult task when it comes to doing Mass at these Conferences. There is a huge spectrum of Catholics who attend.
It is probably safe to say that most of the attendees are “conservative” Catholics.
But among the attendees, the range is pretty wide. There are the “converted evangelical Protestants” like me who think that the OF is extremely staid and traditional compared to any Protestant worship service we have ever attended!
And on the other end of the spectrum, there are the TLMers/homeschoolers wearing long dresses (at least all the females in the family!) and seem to feel uncomfortable with speakers like Tim Staples.
There are the goth and stoner-type Catholics with the multiple piercings and the Extreme In-Your-Face Catholic T-shirts!
And there are the…not sure what nickname to give them, but they are the Catholics who are dressed in business suits (men and women), full make-up (women), and carry coach bags (women) and lap tops (men and women) and they smell like Chanel No. 5. (Frankly, I’m always amazed that these people are willing to sit on…folding chairs!)
And there are the Hispanic Catholics. I’m not sure that all of them speak English, but I’m glad they’re there for the sake of their children. Many, many children!
And there are the sweet old people who can barely climb into the bleachers!
And there are the non-Catholic inquirers.
I wonder if this is one reason why people stay away from these Conferences. It is difficult from a human standpoint to feel comfortable sometimes with such a diverse group. And if you have a “run-in” with someone on the opposite end of the spectrum than you, it can be downright unpleasant. I’m sure it’s a culture shock for some of those TLM/homeschoolers to meet up with people like me and my husband, or worse, those “EXTREME” Catholic types with the tattoos of Our Lady of Guadalupe across their bare backs (tank tops)!
I’m actually wondering if it wouldn’t be better for the Conference to decide on an “identity” and go full-blast with it, even if it does alienate those who simply can’t accept that “identity.” E.g., go full-bore Traditional–all the women must wear skirts, no t-shirts, no CCM at all, no piano in the Mass, Latin chants, no hymns, no Communion in the hand, etc.
Or they could go the opposite direction and gear the Conference towards the CCMers, converts and “t-shirt” crowd.
But that would probably be a bad thing. It’s probably best that we all just learn to get along, right?! And appreciate each other’s differences and accept that we are all at the Conference to learn more about God and our Catholic faith from some of the best speakers and musicians in the U.S.
It’s no wonder that those who are charged with the planning of the Mass go with the Latin, which generally doesn’t offend anyone (unlike a rock band and Life Teen selections, which would probably cause quite a few attendees to walk out!). I wasn’t offended by the Latin, just disappointed to feel left out of it. But the rest of the Mass was glorious! And the CCM was very beautiful, IMO! Very worshipful, considering that our Mass was in a gymnasium.
P
pnewton
Guest
Dog gone, you!
It took me forever to work through “Spirit of the Liturgy” (I think you are one of the two people who recommended it) and now you have another one?Okay, I’ll add it to my list of things to do. Afterall, the last recommendation was well worth the time and effort.
J
japhy
Guest
But… this spectrum is a “sample” of the Catholic Church! Perhaps the reason they seem so different to you is that you’re used to “sectarian” (for lack of a better word) liturgies. Masses for families, Masses for teens, Masses for Latinos, Mass for “conservative Catholics”, Masses for [insert group here].
The Church knows that there is a liturgy – unaltered, unadapted, unadultered – can reach all these people and bring them to offer, with one voice, true worship of God. It might require a sacrifice from them (some groups moreso than others) but the idea of a “comfortable liturgy” is a Protestant concept, not a Catholic one.
Let me say that again: a “comfortable liturgy” is probably one that you’ve had too much of a hand in! And I say this as someone who wants to see a return to Latin, chant, ad orientem, etc.! Mass in the Extraordinary Form (which I’ve attended only three times) is not easy for me! It’s hard for me to concentrate, it’s hard for me to be that prayerful, that silent, that focused, that humble. It might be what I prefer, but that doesn’t mean I’m “comfortable” in it. It’s a challenge for me, and I think any honest Catholic who prefers the E.F. of Mass would agree that it’s a challenge for them, too, which is one of the reasons why they are so drawn to it.
They should adopt a truly Catholic (universal, and that doesn’t mean “multicultural”) identity. They should employ Latin and chant. They should opt for more traditional instruments (organ over piano, bow-ed instruments over others), and even a cappella singing. They should employ the vernacular for the readings, the prayer of the faithful, and the homily. They should enforce a modest dress code. They should allow people to receive Communion in the manners permissible in the United States: standing or kneeling, in the hand or on the tongue. They shouldn’t eschew celebrating the Liturgy of the Eucharist ad orientem.
There’s no reason to eliminate hymns and even CCM from the entire conference, but the Eucharistic liturgy, the Mass, should be a truly Catholic encounter with worship of the Triune God.
Sounds good to me… so long as those “differences” that you “appreciate” are not substantial to the practice of the faith.
G
Guitar
Guest
"Cat:
pnewton:
And Cat, I agree with your assessment of many many things but I cannot agree that women should not sing chant. Try Gothic Voices “A Feather on the Breath of God” for loveliness and Stevie Wishart’s/Sinfonye’s three-CD series of Hildegard von Bingen’s work for earthiness … I know von Bingen’s chant is a bit different as chant goes and I know parish women don’t sing like Gothic Voices or Wishart’s selected singers but even so … the only time I hear chant is when leading a 99% female congregation at a nun’s funeral and I hear anything but “effeminate” and “fruity” on those occasions.
Guitar, if she may quote herself, had this 'umble suggestion to offer about 15 pages back:
Neumes are not impossible to learn to read - not even that hard, actually - but I can assure you I know quite a few folk who might give it a go from modern notation but who will/do find neumes a mental hurdle, especially amongst singers/cantors who read ordinary notation haltingly or not at all.
And Cat, I agree with your assessment of many many things but I cannot agree that women should not sing chant. Try Gothic Voices “A Feather on the Breath of God” for loveliness and Stevie Wishart’s/Sinfonye’s three-CD series of Hildegard von Bingen’s work for earthiness … I know von Bingen’s chant is a bit different as chant goes and I know parish women don’t sing like Gothic Voices or Wishart’s selected singers but even so … the only time I hear chant is when leading a 99% female congregation at a nun’s funeral and I hear anything but “effeminate” and “fruity” on those occasions.
N
ncjohn
Guest
I’m really sorry that you just don’t get it James, but I sense you are just in a mindset that will not even let you consider any opinion outside what you have been fed. As such I will not waste any further time or bandwidth in compiling the long list of examples that support what I say. They are easily found by anyone looking for them. As to “complaining” about the phrase, I would beg you to show me one place where I have done any such thing. The only thing I stated was that the phrase itself tries to imply that the liturgy is fundamentally flawed, which is by definition bashing it when one takes that statement as the premise that this “collapse” needs to be reversed. It would not need to be reversed if one didn’t think liturgy was screwed up. If you think it’s screwed up that is bashing it. You are welcome to do that but you don’t get to do it and then claim that you’re not.
I have been to well more than a thousand OF masses–probably closer to two, a pretty good sample size–since their inception, all over this country and a few others, and I have never found one with any serious level of abuse in it. I have attended some boring ones, but most have been faith-filled and focused on God. Naturally that doesn’t mean that there aren’t abuses or places where such liturgies are not the norm, but it does strongly suggest statistically that it cannot possibly be as widespread as you and so many others here believe.
If one only comes here to get validation of their fears that the liturgy is “collapsing” or “collapsed”, the liturgy police here will be happy to affirm them and paint all as dark in the Church. Yes, the Church has its problems right now but it isn’t the liturgy itself.
Just for the record, one last time, I fully and totally disagree with the concept that the liturgy itself is “collapsed” and that this allgeged collapse needs to be “reversed”. If the Pope does in fact believe such a thing I’ll just have to respectfully disagree with him, which is totally ok since this is no infallible statement or objective truth.
Oh, and by the way, I was reading Vatican 2 documents before you were born and have studied them several times since. I have read the positions of the neo-conservatives and radical traditionalists to try to understand their feelings and objections. But my exposure goes far beyond that so please check your judgments and sarcasm that I am some uninformed rube at the door. They won’t fly here. You may not like my conclusions but they don’t arise from lack of study.
I do sympathize with you if you are truly experiencing abuse-ridden liturgies. But please understand that that isn’t necessarily the reality outside of your world. Many, many of us are experiencing exactly the opposite and have been led to God in tremendous ways through this very liturgy you are so down on.
I wish you peace,
J
japhy
Guest
I have heard very good things about the dioceses in North Carolina, so I am glad to hear that you have never experience abuses to the liturgy.
And that disagreement is completely your right. Others on this thread think differently. Surely this thread can discuss the matter without attacks.
Please do me a favor: don’t get this or any other Liturgy & Sacraments thread locked or deleted!
A
AMDGtoo
Guest
Wow. If you agree with the Pope–you are “bashing”. If you pay attention at Mass (and unfortunately the abuses simply “pop out”)–you are judged a “liturgy policeman”–even when none are mentioned. If you discuss possible solutions to the problems that the Pope mentions, you are uncharitably told to “sit down and shut up” and told that “life experience” or even reliance on actual Church documents means nothing. Sad.
J
Jean_Anthony
Guest
Please keep the discussion civil, everyone. Thank you.
- Status