Irreverent Mass

[WILKM]

You’re not quite correct on this. What Cardinal Arinze said was “The Church is not saying that everything should be Gregorian music. There is room for music which respects that language, that culture, that people. There is room for that too, and the present books say that is a matter for the bishop’s conference, because it generally goes beyond the boundaries of one diocese. The ideal thing is that bishops would have a liturgical music commission which looks at the wording and the music of hymns, and when the commission is satisfied, judgement is brought to the bishops for approval, in the name of the rest of the conference. What should not be the case is individuals composing anything and singing it in church. This is not right at all . . . no matter how talented the individual is. That brings us to the question of the instruments to be used. I will not now pronounce and say never guitar; that would be rather severe. But much guitar music may not be suitable at all for the Mass. Yet, it is possible to think of some guitar music that would be suitable, not as the ordinary one we get every time, but with the visit of a special group, etc. The judgement would be left to the bishops of the area. It is wiser that way, also, because there are other instruments in many countries which are not used in Italy or in Ireland, for instance.”
The Church has long recognized the pipe organ as the ordinary means of instrumentality at the liturgy because it lends itself to congregational singing and is easily heard throughout a large space, but it does not limit useful musical instruments to the organ only. In different situations and on different occassions other instruments, as Cardinal Arinze has said, may be used with the concordance of the bishop or bishops of that area. Naturally, any instrument, including the pipe organ, should lend itself to the sacred nature of the liturgy and enhance the worship of the congregation, but to say that guitars are condemned for use at Mass is not true.

Just wondering if Traditional Catholics would condemn African drum music at Mass. I used to live in Zimbabwe and also in South Africa and, on the odd occasion, had to attend African Masses due to missing English speaking Masses for whatever reason. The congregation sung whilst the African drums were played and it was beautiful. Many Africans prefer their traditional music as it is what they can relate to when singing at Mass.

 

[una_fides]

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck…

It’s either Pope Paul’s Mass or it’s some other kind of Mass.

If it’s Pope Paul’s Mass, then you have to accept it as much as the SSPX has to.

If it isn’t Pope Paul’s Mass, then who promulgated it?

I’m not a theologian but if you’re calling the clown Mass invalid, I would say that would be a serious charge.

And please don’t jump to the conclusion that I condone this kind of abuse either. I’m just trying to point out the inconsistency of some of those arguments directed against the trads.

Ok. so let me try to finally put this argument to rest since it keeps popping up on this thread. No one is arguing whether a “clown mass” is a valid or invalid representation of the NO mass. What we are saying is that it is an abuse and should not be done because it is an abuse! Proper liturgical vestments have been already defined as well as the words that priests are supposed to say at Mass. If a priest dressed up in a clown costume and performed a TLM Mass would you then be opposing TLM Masses because you oppose priests dressing up like clowns to perform them?

Let’s suppose for example a couple wanted to get married, but instead of an ordinary minister–I don’t know—let’s say they trained a monkey to hold a book and utter some gibberish and then hand them some rings. Now if you were to oppose such weddings would you therefore oppose all weddings? Or would you only oppose this abuse?

We are opposing the abuses and those who obstinately perform them; we are not opposing the Mass itself (when properly and lawfully performed).

 

[Neil_Anthony]

Cardinal Arinze has expressly condemned the use of musical instruments that are more noted for their secular function- so guitars are definitely out.

He has also condemned liturgical dancing and putting the Most Sacred Blood into glass wine glasses, but I have seen both of these in masses with Bishops. Putting the Blood of Our Lord in an ordinary wineglass is doing what the Roman soldiers did to Christ before His death.

Why do you guys spend so much time worrying about how other people’s masses are. I’m sure you don’t go to these parishes with the unusual liturgies, so why does it bother you so much? If these people don’t intend to be disrespectful, and I think we can agree that they don’t INTEND it, then why do we need to let it bother us so much? Schisming away from the church won’t make those liturgical practices stop any more than just going to another more normal parish.

Things like liturgical dance make me mad too, but then I stop to realize that I just don’t understand things like dancing and ballet. So I just wouldn’t ever go to a parish that had it. I’m sure the people who are very artsy and into dancing and ballet understand it, and to them its not an insult.

 

[una_fides]

It depends on what you mean by irreverent and by participate. The post Vatican II mass is no more irreverent than the pre Vatican II mass. The use of guitars or any other musical instrument during the liturgy doesn’t make the mass irreverent any more than the use of an organ in the old liturgy did. A mass is made irreverent by the intention of those who participate in it. If, by participating in a mass, you intend to poke fun at the ritual or at the beliefs of the people who are gathered there in worship, then you are irreverent, not the mass.

That depends on your perspective. I think you should respect those who may disagree with you on this one. If it’s not irreverent to you, doesn’t mean it is irreverent to another faithful Catholic. You may think and assume that you are right, but you must also be more concerned to not offend someone else’s conscience. Read and meditate on Romans 14 (especially verse 21).
God bless.

 

[Jeanette_L]

That depends on your perspective. I think you should respect those who may disagree with you on this one. If it’s not irreverent to you, doesn’t mean it is irreverent to another faithful Catholic. **You may think and assume that you are right, but you must also be more concerned to not offend someone else’s conscience. Read and meditate on Romans 14 (especially verse 21). **God bless.

And this goes both ways, does it not? How many of those in the ‘ultra traditionalists’ camp think about how they offend those poor souls whose intentions are pure when they go to these Masses, and yet they are treated or spoken of as though they are not really Catholic but heretics? Who is then offending and wounding whom? How the heart of Christ must be grieved by so much ‘righteous indignation’.

The above meditations would be well served to start in the ‘ultra traditionalist’ quarters.

 

[Robster7]

I’d say no sin if you didn’t know it was going to be irreverent (which is left undefined, by the way). What is irreverent can be subjective (folk, rock vs. gregorian chant or traditional hymns). Musical styles in and of themselves are not irreverent per se; assuming lyrics are doctrinally, liturgically, and scripturally appropriate.

Changing words at Mass, depends on what and how the priest changes them. Assuming it’s not the consecration or anything changing the meaning of somethng, it would be illicit. If it were, say just paraphasing without changing essence of what’s being said. I dont like it myself; and it’s forbidden, but I dont think it is necessarily irreverent. Willful, maybe

Rob ster

 

[Tsuwano]

Just wondering if Traditional Catholics would condemn African drum music at Mass. I used to live in Zimbabwe and also in South Africa and, on the odd occasion, had to attend African Masses due to missing English speaking Masses for whatever reason. The congregation sung whilst the African drums were played and it was beautiful. Many Africans prefer their traditional music as it is what they can relate to when singing at Mass.

I think many European and North American missionaries have had this same experience; the recognition of the Lord’s presence and beauty in ways and forms that are unusual and different from their expectations. I have no doubt that many foreign missionaries now serving in North America and Europe encounter the same.

 

[una_fides]

And this goes both ways, does it not? How many of those in the ‘ultra traditionalists’ camp think about how they offend those poor souls whose intentions are pure when they go to these Masses, and yet they are treated or spoken of as though they are not really Catholic but heretics? Who is then offending and wounding whom? How the heart of Christ must be grieved by so much ‘righteous indignation’.

The above meditations would be well served to start in the ‘ultra traditionalist’ quarters.

Yeah, I agree with you on that. Initiating conversations by calling people heretics and condemning them to hell is the best way to end a conversation.
That said, I think that a lot of the “ultra traditionalist” reaction in such instances is derived from liturgical abuses. Certainly there are those who simply do not like change and are upset and possibly even are scandalized by it, but I think that a lot of them are sincere just as many of those who are engaging in liturgical abuses and who are, in many cases, unknowingly or unintentionally committing acts that God views as abominable or at least highly offensive and which are destructive to the faith and unity of the Church.
Yes, the sword here is double sided, but that fact does not take away from anything that we are complaining about when it comes to abuses that we experience and of which we hear. Something must be done. No, the answer is not calling people heretics. The answer is love. True love will admonish someone who is in error (i.e. a material heretic - someone who does not necessarily know their teaching is contrary to that of the Church). Those who know their teachings are contrary to the Church and have been confronted and yet persist (= manifest heretics) must be confronted by those in authority above them and their abuses whether doctrinal or liturgical must be put to an end within the Church.
We both want the same thing–unity. Let’s both continue to pray for it and pray for an end to all abuses, whether an ultra-traditionalist’s condemnations or an obstinant priest’s irreverent abuses.

 

[JReducation]

Cardinal Arinze has expressly condemned the use of musical instruments that are more noted for their secular function- so guitars are definitely out.

He has also condemned liturgical dancing and putting the Most Sacred Blood into glass wine glasses, but I have seen both of these in masses with Bishops. Putting the Blood of Our Lord in an ordinary wineglass is doing what the Roman soldiers did to Christ before His death.

I doubt that the good Cardinal was banning guitars. Otherwise we would not have Silent Night for Christmas.

Did you forget that it was originally written to be played on a guitar and was played that way for more than 100 years? Also, St. Francis and St. Teresa of Avila introduced guitars and tamborines into the mass more than 800 years ago?

I don’t think that’s exactly the interpretation that the Cardinal was looking for. The reason against the glass goblets is for practical reasons. They can shatter.

JR

 

[JReducation]

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck…

It’s either Pope Paul’s Mass or it’s some other kind of Mass.

If it’s Pope Paul’s Mass, then you have to accept it as much as the SSPX has to.

If it isn’t Pope Paul’s Mass, then who promulgated it?

I’m not a theologian but if you’re calling the clown Mass invalid, I would say that would be a serious charge.

And please don’t jump to the conclusion that I condone this kind of abuse either. I’m just trying to point out the inconsistency of some of those arguments directed against the trads.

First, let’s clarify one thing. The proper title is the Ordinary Form (OF) not the Pauline Mass or Pope Paul’s mass. Paul VI approved it.

Second, it is not the Tridentine mass, it is the Extraodinary Form (EF) Trent introduced it, but it wasn’t until almost 40 years later that Pius V restructured it and worked out the kinks.

How long as the OF been around? About 43 years? I think it’s fair to say that it takes about that long to work out the kinks in any liturgical renewal.

By the way, I do not approve of Vegas at mass.

JR

 

[una_fides]

I don’t think that’s exactly the interpretation that the Cardinal was looking for. The reason against the glass goblets is for practical reasons. They can shatter.
JR

I honestly haven’t done any research as to the Church’s stated reasoning on the purpose for banning glass goblets. Did you read that somewhere or is that your practical interpretation. I would also think that glass goblets can make the Precious Blood appear more like it’s common drink.
Also, wouldn’t you agree that a parish that uses glass goblets anyway despite the Church’s official banning of their use would be demonstrating active disobedience and divisiveness?

 

[JReducation]

Yeah, I agree with you on that. Initiating conversations by calling people heretics and condemning them to hell is the best way to end a conversation.
That said, I think that a lot of the “ultra traditionalist” reaction in such instances is derived from liturgical abuses. Certainly there are those who simply do not like change and are upset and possibly even are scandalized by it, but I think that a lot of them are sincere just as many of those who are engaging in liturgical abuses and who are, in many cases, unknowingly or unintentionally committing acts that God views as abominable or at least highly offensive and which are destructive to the faith and unity of the Church.
Yes, the sword here is double sided, but that fact does not take away from anything that we are complaining about when it comes to abuses that we experience and of which we hear. Something must be done. No, the answer is not calling people heretics. The answer is love. True love will admonish someone who is in error (i.e. a material heretic - someone who does not necessarily know their teaching is contrary to that of the Church). Those who know their teachings are contrary to the Church and have been confronted and yet persist (= manifest heretics) must be confronted by those in authority above them and their abuses whether doctrinal or liturgical must be put to an end within the Church.
We both want the same thing–unity. Let’s both continue to pray for it and pray for an end to all abuses, whether an ultra-traditionalist’s condemnations or an obstinant priest’s irreverent abuses.

As I see it is that the problem lies in words such as Traditionalists, abuse, heretics, schismatics, neo-cons and modernists are liberally used on CAF.

I’m beginning to question the effectiveness of this ministry. Ministry is for the purpose of education and evangelization, not humiliation or condescention.

To minister is to serve and to evangelize is to proclaim good news.

What’s so good when someone opens a response with “Hello Heretic”?

JR

 

[una_fides]

Second, it is not the Tridentine mass, it is the Extraodinary Form (EF) Trent introduced it, but it wasn’t until almost 40 years later that Pius V restructured it and worked out the kinks.

For the sake of clarification: the TLM (Traditional Latin Mass) (aka EF) has been around much longer than that. Its form originated in the sixth century and many of the prayers date back to the very early Church. Thus, the Church has been using this form for much longer than some people realize.

 

[JReducation]

You’re not quite correct on this. What Cardinal Arinze said was “The Church is not saying that everything should be Gregorian music. There is room for music which respects that language, that culture, that people. There is room for that too, and the present books say that is a matter for the bishop’s conference, because it generally goes beyond the boundaries of one diocese. The ideal thing is that bishops would have a liturgical music commission which looks at the wording and the music of hymns, and when the commission is satisfied, judgement is brought to the bishops for approval, in the name of the rest of the conference. What should not be the case is individuals composing anything and singing it in church. This is not right at all . . . no matter how talented the individual is. That brings us to the question of the instruments to be used. I will not now pronounce and say never guitar; that would be rather severe. But much guitar music may not be suitable at all for the Mass. Yet, it is possible to think of some guitar music that would be suitable, not as the ordinary one we get every time, but with the visit of a special group, etc. The judgement would be left to the bishops of the area. It is wiser that way, also, because there are other instruments in many countries which are not used in Italy or in Ireland, for instance.”
The Church has long recognized the pipe organ as the ordinary means of instrumentality at the liturgy because it lends itself to congregational singing and is easily heard throughout a large space, but it does not limit useful musical instruments to the organ only. In different situations and on different occassions other instruments, as Cardinal Arinze has said, may be used with the concordance of the bishop or bishops of that area. Naturally, any instrument, including the pipe organ, should lend itself to the sacred nature of the liturgy and enhance the worship of the congregation, but to say that guitars are condemned for use at Mass is not true.

In reality the good Cardinal was giving the Bishops some advice on how to handle liturgical music and correct deficits. He was not ordering them to do anything. He was encouraging the Bishops’ Conference of a country or a province to have a professional liturgical committee, rather than all of these spontaneous and untrained people deciding what goes or doesn’t go into a liturgy.

 

[JReducation]

For the sake of clarification: the TLM (Traditional Latin Mass) (aka EF) has been around much longer than that. Its form originated in the sixth century and many of the prayers date back to the very early Church. Thus, the Church has been using this form for much longer than some people realize.

I agree. I just don’t understand where people got this name Tridentine. It was around for a long time. It evolved slowly. The Council of Trent laid down some ground rules and Pius V finally made it the ordinary form for that time until now. Now it’s the Extraordinary Form (EF).

If we call things the way that the Church calls them, we would probably have less conflict over them.

JR

 

[Tsuwano]

In reality the good Cardinal was giving the Bishops some advice on how to handle liturgical music and correct deficits. He was not ordering them to do anything. He was encouraging the Bishops’ Conference of a country or a province to have a professional liturgical committee, rather than all of these spontaneous and untrained people deciding what goes or doesn’t go into a liturgy.

You’re absolutely right. I agree with you.

 

[NeedImprovement]

Many of the psalms speak of singing to the Lord with stringed instruments, playing for him, praising him with the harp and the ten-stringed lyre…etc, just the passage from the canticle of Isaiah 38 concludes in the breviary -“We shall sing to stringed instruments in the house of the Lord all the days of our life.”

I played music for a living for 17 years; in the nightclubs and then in larger venues- rock, punk, new wave, fusion, rhythm & blues,blues,folk, a little bit of jazz. From time to time during that span I was asked to play litugically…but I declined.

The combination of touring and being a practicing Catholic gave me the opportunity to see a vast cross-section of celebrations of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. I initially declined the invitation to play for the liturgy on guitar because (I think you’ll appreciate this from your perspective @ JuanCarlos), quite bluntly, I saw a ton of litugical guitar players doing it the wrong way.

For it to be done the proper way, one needs to know the liturgy, the proper liturgical songs, and especially to know their instrument. For a guitarist, it isn’t enough to know which chords to play at which time. first one has to know how to play them in a manner appropriate to the pertinent liturgy and song.

A guitar pick is such a little piece of plastic/resin, yet many a liturgical guitarists still can’t imagine how much damage can be done to peoples prayer intentions by way of distraction (both voluntary and involuntary) when a pick is used improperly. I preferred not to use a pick when I finally did begin playing litugically.

I began playing for celebrations of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass with palliative care patients (sick & dying). Their attention span at Mass wasn’t very long and several liturgical songs placed in the right spots helped them to stay focused. I specifically asked the chaplain if I could set up and play behind all the patients…much as many of the choir lofts are in the back of the churches so as not to be a visual distraction to them during the Mass. There isn’t time to do those things any more right now because I’m kept busy trying to ensure the more important pastoral needs for these people are met…such as getting them to Mass.

From my vantage point several general rules became apparent: Speaking solely of guitar as the litugical instrument, I would say it is as important to know what not to play as what to play, and one should never play in a fashion that interferes with the lyrics. First and foremost, if it in any way detracts or diverts attention away from our beloved Lord Jesus Christ in the Most Holy Sacrament of the altar…just don’t do it.

Liturgical music is a many splendored thing. I recorded the Ave Maria (Schubert’s) with a rock guitar playing the melody, and when the notes were bent in the right place it became gorgeous to both young and old. There are Benedictine monks from Senegal that play their liturgy with stringed instruments. They have put out several collections of recordings. One particular selection has a truly awesome rhythm section going on African drums as they sing the Magnificat…and one still feels the sanctity coming through in the song ( a little easier if one understands french).

 

[JReducation]

Many of the psalms speak of singing to the Lord with stringed instruments, playing for him, praising him with the harp and the ten-stringed lyre…etc, just the passage from the canticle of Isaiah 38 concludes in the breviary -“We shall sing to stringed instruments in the house of the Lord all the days of our life.”

I played music for a living for 17 years; in the nightclubs and then in larger venues- rock, punk, new wave, fusion, rhythm & blues,blues,folk, a little bit of jazz. From time to time during that span I was asked to play litugically…but I declined.

The combination of touring and being a practicing Catholic gave me the opportunity to see a vast cross-section of celebrations of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. I initially declined the invitation to play for the liturgy on guitar because (I think you’ll appreciate this from your perspective @ JuanCarlos), quite bluntly, I saw a ton of litugical guitar players doing it the wrong way.

For it to be done the proper way, one needs to know the liturgy, the proper liturgical songs, and especially to know their instrument. For a guitarist, it isn’t enough to know which chords to play at which time. first one has to know how to play them in a manner appropriate to the pertinent liturgy and song.

A guitar pick is such a little piece of plastic/resin, yet many a liturgical guitarists still can’t imagine how much damage can be done to peoples prayer intentions by way of distraction (both voluntary and involuntary) when a pick is used improperly. I preferred not to use a pick when I finally did begin playing litugically.

I began playing for celebrations of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass with palliative care patients (sick & dying). Their attention span at Mass wasn’t very long and several liturgical songs placed in the right spots helped them to stay focused. I specifically asked the chaplain if I could set up and play behind all the patients…much as many of the choir lofts are in the back of the churches so as not to be a visual distraction to them during the Mass. There isn’t time to do those things any more right now because I’m kept busy trying to ensure the more important pastoral needs for these people are met…such as getting them to Mass.

From my vantage point several general rules became apparent: Speaking solely of guitar as the litugical instrument, I would say it is as important to know what not to play as what to play, and one should never play in a fashion that interferes with the lyrics. First and foremost, if it in any way detracts or diverts attention away from our beloved Lord Jesus Christ in the Most Holy Sacrament of the altar…just don’t do it.

Liturgical music is a many splendored thing. I recorded the Ave Maria (Schubert’s) with a rock guitar playing the melody, and when the notes were bent in the right place it became gorgeous to both young and old. There are Benedictine monks from Senegal that play their liturgy with stringed instruments. They have put out several collections of recordings. One particular selection has a truly awesome rhythm section going on African drums as they sing the Magnificat…and one still feels the sanctity coming through in the song ( a little easier if one understands french).

Thank you for this excelent post. I know a lot about liturgy and the theology of the liturgy, but am not a musician. It was good to hear about this from the other side. When people complain about guitars in liturgy, I’m always reminded of Silent Night originally played with a guitar. But I have no idea how to play it.

JR

 

[una_fides]

First and foremost, if it in any way detracts or diverts attention away from our beloved Lord Jesus Christ in the Most Holy Sacrament of the altar…just don’t do it.

Amen.

I attended a “folk mass” in which the musicians were obviously drawing some attention to themselves by playing some Italian sounding music. I doubt it was even sacred music at all. After they finished playing, after the people had just received the Holy Eucharist, most of the people erupted in applause. The priest (not the pastor but a more traditional priest, who strongly holds to the Catholic faith) told the people to keep their applause to a minimum and explained that the purpose of Mass is to adore and worship our God and that He is to be the focus. He went on to explain that the purpose was not to be entertained or to draw any attention to ourselves or the music but only direct ourselves to God. He repeated then that they should keep their clapping to a minimum. After the closing song, the stubborn crowd again erupted in applause must louder than they had before!!!
thus, i think it is safe to conclude that these modern forms of music obviously draw people’s focus away from God and onto the music themselves. And why would stirring music be used at Mass when the purpose is for us to “be still and know that He is God.” It is music which stills and then uplifts our soul by which we can best experience and truly appreciate the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass without distractions.

 

[JReducation]

Amen.

I attended a “folk mass” in which the musicians were obviously drawing some attention to themselves by playing some Italian sounding music. I doubt it was even sacred music at all. After they finished playing, after the people had just received the Holy Eucharist, most of the people erupted in applause. The priest (not the pastor but a more traditional priest, who strongly holds to the Catholic faith) told the people to keep their applause to a minimum and explained that the purpose of Mass is to adore and worship our God and that He is to be the focus. He went on to explain that the purpose was not to be entertained or to draw any attention to ourselves or the music but only direct ourselves to God. He repeated then that they should keep their clapping to a minimum. After the closing song, the stubborn crowd again erupted in applause must louder than they had before!!!
thus, i think it is safe to conclude that these modern forms of music obviously draw people’s focus away from God and onto the music themselves. And why would stirring music be used at Mass when the purpose is for us to “be still and know that He is God.” It is music which stills and then uplifts our soul by which we can best experience and truly appreciate the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass without distractions.

Sometimes certain things do draw forth spontaneous applause. We have to be moderate and flexible in all things, except sin.

JR