Music at mass

[Lazerlike42]

GemmaRose:

In this paragraph, the author uses the same argument to promote older hymns, while criticizing contemporary ones! The broad statement that “‘most’ contemporary songs invite us to glorify ourselves” is absurd. Does the author know each & every contemporary song? Where do his statistics come from? From his own, personal and subjective opinion?

After pondering a bit, I agree with you in part here. The author’s main points are quite true, but the examples he uses are not always perfect.

For example, while I really dislike the song, the lines he quotes from Table of Plenty are not really very problematic - or at least not all of them. Certainly, the lines where the congregation sings God’s words are less than desirable or simply inappropriate. The lines that you quoted aren’t that bad, though in one sense:

Come to the feast of heaven and earth!
Come to the table of plenty!
God will provide for all that we need,
here at the table of plenty.

I think that this certainly makes some sense for an opening hymn. I have been thinking a lot about that. It seems to me that an opening hymn would very appropriately invite people to worship God. It would also seem to me that a closing hymn, most especially of thanksgiving, would be appropriate.

The real problem with them is that they more invite people to receive from God than to give to Him - as I wrote a lot about below.

I do know what the author is talking about. I perform music each Sunday at Mass, and so I end up selecting it as well. I can tell you that as I go through the standard music missal that is found in most Catholic Churches these days each week, the majority of the songs do in one way or another really focus on how we are going to be blessed, or how great we are, or something like that. It’s maddening trying to find one that is appropriate for the season and theme of the readings that really just focuses on God. Certainly, there are contemporary songs that do this. I have seen them. The issue with them is usually the musical style.

 

[benedictgal]

After pondering a bit, I agree with you in part here. The author’s main points are quite true, but the examples he uses are not always perfect.

For example, while I really dislike the song, the lines he quotes from Table of Plenty are not really very problematic - or at least not all of them. Certainly, the lines where the congregation sings God’s words are less than desirable or simply inappropriate. The lines that you quoted aren’t that bad, though in one sense:

I think that this certainly makes some sense for an opening hymn. I have been thinking a lot about that. It seems to me that an opening hymn would very appropriately invite people to worship God. It would also seem to me that a closing hymn, most especially of thanksgiving, would be appropriate.

The real problem with them is that they more invite people to receive from God than to give to Him - as I wrote a lot about below.

I do know what the author is talking about. I perform music each Sunday at Mass, and so I end up selecting it as well. I can tell you that as I go through the standard music missal that is found in most Catholic Churches these days each week, the majority of the songs do in one way or another really focus on how we are going to be blessed, or how great we are, or something like that. It’s maddening trying to find one that is appropriate for the season and theme of the readings that really just focuses on God. Certainly, there are contemporary songs that do this. I have seen them. The issue with them is usually the musical style.

Unfortunately, we use this particular song a lot at my parish. In fact, we used it for the Evening Mass of the Lord’s Supper. The choir director had asked me for (name removed by moderator)ut for this particular liturgy and I told her that At that First Eucharist was more appropriate because of the fact that it was the Evening Mass of the Lord’s Supper and because we were now begninning Triduum. Come to the Feast/Ven al Banquete is more about the community and speaks very little about the Eucharist.

In fact, a lot of the OCP arsenal is very I/Me/We/Us driven, with very little directed towards God. This is music written for a consumer driven society that is more on the pop side than on the sacred. As Pope Benedict XVI notes in the Spirit of the Liturgy:

On the one hand, there is pop music, which is certainly no longer supported by the people in the ancient sense (populus). It is aimed at the phenomenon of the masses, is industrially produced, and ultimately has to be described as a cult of the banal. “Rock”, on the other hand, is the expression of elemental passions, and at rock festivals it assumes a cultic character, a form of worship, in fact, in opposition to Christian worship. People are, so to speak, released from themselves by the emotional shock of rhythm, noise, and special lighting effects. However, in the ecstasy of having all their defenses torn down, the participants sink, as it were, beneath the elemental force of the universe. The music of the Holy Spirit’s sober inebriation seems to have little chance when self has become a prison, the mind is a shackle, and breaking out from both appears as a true promise of redemption that can be tasted at least for a few moments.

Then there are those horrid salsa-type songs that belong more to the Miami Sound Machine or to Shakira than to the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Bienaventurados, the song perfomed during the DC Papal Mass, comes to mind.

The problem is that, collectively, we’ve become tone deaf to what Sacred Music is that we almost don’t recognize it anymore. Those of us who do care are quickly shouted down and insulted and told to change with the times. I’m not against new hymns coming into the Church’s treasury of Sacred Music. However, there are standards that must be met.

 

[SacredHeartFan]

OK that answers that question but here is another imposing question to me:

If I were to go and take let’s say the Salve Reginia and give it a modern beat with a nice gutair and drum acompinait (spelling?) would it be wrong to play at mass? After all it’s an old and sacred song.

 

[VociMike]

OK that answers that question but here is another imposing question to me:

If I were to go and take let’s say the Salve Reginia and give it a modern beat with a nice gutair and drum acompinait (spelling?) would it be wrong to play at mass? After all it’s an old and sacred song.

Well, it would be useful if you can think through why you would want to do this. What would be your purpose in adding a modern beat, guitars and drums? In what way do you feel that would be improving the song in question? Who do you think would benefit from your new version of the song?

If we can explore your reasons for wanting to make such a change, maybe we can find an answer as to whether it would be right or wrong for Mass.

 

[stringbeanduck]

If we can explore your reasons for wanting to make such a change, maybe we can find an answer as to whether it would be right or wrong for Mass.

Yes do talk more into that matter.

Aside from that, here’s thoughts.

Why should we allow modern music in Mass?

Because it appeals to the younger crowd. We need more folks in Mass

That’s the general q and a about this topic and many ones like this one. But wait a moment… Do we come to mass to be served and choose how we want to worship Christ or is our 1hr each week to give to Him? I think some people feel " its my 1 hr and I choose how I’ll worship the Lord." This ideology is part of what contributed to the 33,000 christian denominations we have today. Guys we know modern music seems more “upbeat” so why do you all think the younger crowd likes it especially in Mass? Because traditional hymns are not “fun” for them. I want get at 3 major points of why I disapprove of modern “upbeat” drumy music in Mass.

1 It draws more of the younger crowd with a disregard to those believe Mass should be celebrated in a more traditional way… Why? Because…
2 The younger finds it more INTERESTING rather than traditional chants and hymns.
3 Mass is not to entertainment us. Do you all think it was happy clappy time at the last supper?

Now hey I do like 80’s, 90’s, and now pop type songs with drums but NOT whilst in Mass.

 

[pnewton]

While the Mass is not to entertain, there is not prohibition on enjoying the Mass either.

 

[Sarabande]

OK that answers that question but here is another imposing question to me:

If I were to go and take let’s say the Salve Reginia and give it a modern beat with a nice gutair and drum acompinait (spelling?) would it be wrong to play at mass? After all it’s an old and sacred song.

Are you asking if you set the Salve Regina melody with a rhythm that is typically used for more “pop” or “folk” music, would it still be appropriate to play at mass?

Doing that would be like setting the melody for Beethoven’s 5th Symphony to an electro-dance music rhythm and saying that it is still Beethoven’s 5th. It isn’t. The piece is now based on Beethoven’s 5th having been totally transformed into something different. It is no longer classical even if the melody came from a classical work and in a way that the composer intended. Perhaps it sounds cool or different, but it is still no longer the same piece and would no longer be considered for performances in classical music concert halls.

The same would go with a “traditional” piece of sacred music or chant. They are no longer how the composer intended or how it was traditionally “performed”. “Popping” it up would make it inappropriate for mass (although maybe enjoyable to some people outside of mass). BUT, if a composer took the melody and incorporated into an original piece of music that kept with the Church standards, it would still no longer be the original traditional piece of music, but still be appropriate for mass because it was not composed in a secular style. An example of this Maurice Durufle’s use of the themes of Gregorian chants within his original work “Requiem”. He composes within the standard incorporating the chants and created something original. Listen to what he did with “Agnus Dei” chant. It’s not my favorite version of it but all I could find to listen completely

BTW - when this has been done in mass (although Requiem masses aren’t really done anymore - now only certain movements of the piece have been used) an organ was only used as Durufle composed three versions - one for organ and choir (for mass obviously), one for organ and string orchestra, and one for organ and full orchestra. He composed it 1947 - not that long ago comparatively speaking.

youtube.com/watch?v=N6ySRRqe1ks

Here is the Sanctus of a concert with just organ and choir:
youtube.com/watch?v=uIG1NPGdMC4

 

[SacredHeartFan]

Ok now that I have that question answered, here’s another:

Could they have a special youth mass? and then a more trditional one?

 

[VociMike]

Ok now that I have that question answered, here’s another:

Could they have a special youth mass? and then a more trditional one?

What would be different about the “youth” Mass? What changes would you want to make, and for what reasons? In what way would a “youth” Mass be somehow better (for young people, presumably) than a “regular” Mass?

BTW, at one of the “youth Masses” in town here the average age seems to be about 55.

 

[Lazerlike42]

SacredHeartFan,

I would direct you back to my to long posts explaining what the Mass is for and why the music ought to be a certain way. The Mass really is all about God and not in the least bit about us. It ends up being about us because God loves us so much that when we give our whole selves to Him, He does the same back to us, but we need to be willing to just receive that without expecting it or viewing it as something we are owed in any way.

The reason that so many people have a hard time about this is that the Mass is a total self giving to prayer, without holding anything back. It’s something we are not at all used to. It’s the antithesis of everything we experience in our day to day lives. As much as somebody might enjoy a youth Mass or it might encourage somebody to go to Mass, it’s probably not appropriate to the nature of the Mass, and what we need to do is to accept that, as a personal sacrifice if we need to, and really walk in the spirit of total self-giving that the Mass is by letting the music and everything else at the Mass be totally directed towards God.

Now I don’t *completely *understand why it is that certain music is not appropriate for the Mass, but I trust in the Church when She tells me that this is so. So rather than try to make the Mass about me in any way by thinking my preferred musical style ought to be used, I must let the music be what the Church has taught is proper to praising God in that setting.

 

[GemmaRose]

So you think people should be deciding to come to Mass on the basis of the music? Sorry but I fundamentally disagree with that.
No, not to decide to come to Mass, but I think that people should have a choice to decide on which Mass to go to. If contemporary liturgical music is what moves them to deeper prayer, they should have that option. If chant does the same for others, they should have the option. As a musician, I have had the experience of people being drawn to a particular Mass because of the music.

Other posters argue that new music is the reason people have left the church. What is your opinion on that? (In my opinion, that argument doesn’t hold water because how would you then explain the differences in sizes of Confession lines 50 years ago and today?)

The food we come to Mass to get comes from Our Lord which for most Catholics reaches its fullest expression in receiving His Body and Blood and hearing his Word.
I agree. You know this and I know this. However, approximately 70% of Catholics do not believe in the Real Presence. They’ll never learn if we can’t get them inside the church.

The only smell to be added into that equation is incense.
No problem with incense.

If you think the music is so delectable now then just wait till Gregorian Chant is restored to a place more inkeeping with the esteem the Church holds it in.
Your opinion.

You can’t expect every Homily to be entertaining, spiritually fulfilling and/or amusing and you can’t expect every Priest to be a St Thomas Aquinas or G.K. Chesterton. You can’t seriously advocate that its a good thing for a Priest to not tell the congregation about sin, the state they should be in to receive Communion or the value and significance of that Communion. You are contradicting yourself, people will never understand unless someone tells them the truth, you can’t expect the Priest to couch every Homily so that it offends no one and then criticise him when his Homily says nothing.

Well if I remember correctly not much longer than 50 years ago there was the TLM, which in many places had more suitable music which was more vertically focused and wasn’t driven by the gratification of the congregation. The real difference is 50 years ago we had a greater number of Priests who would call a sin a sin and give a Homily which wasn’t afraid to tell the congregation that. Now we are starting to get more Priests and Seminarians who are willing to do the same. We have Orders which restore Church music to its proper place, and put the focus of the liturgy back where it belongs, not in the hands of ‘music leaders’ which can only be a good thing.

That is not what I meant ! I re-read my own post and I could have worded it so much better!!!

What I was trying to say and which I totally muddled (lesson learned: don’t post while feeling sick and before the antibiotics take effect!), is that people don’t want the bland, but will complain about the spicy. But the spicy, the homily that does speak of sin, etc., is what people need to hear, but don’t want to hear, so they complain to the Bishop “who contacts the priest who then tones down his sermon to baby pablum which doesn’t help to catechize the poorly churched masses who are attracted to the music but not getting fed and so they leave.” Priests who don’t comply get transferred. I have had priests tell me that this is what happens. (Maybe it doesn’t happen in every diocese.)

I think the greatest need in the Church today is adult catechesis, and the homily is the greatest place for that because the people who might not come to an evening class, meeting, Bible study, etc., have come (hopefully) to Mass. I think it’s important to get them in the Church, and whatever draws people in is something good. If more people are drawn by contemporary music (as long as it is solid, good, liturgical music) than by another form of music, then use the genre that most people prefer.

A well-catechized Catholic would not leave the Church even if the only music played at Mass was “rap” because a well-catechized Catholic would know they are there to praise God, to worship as a community, and most importantly would know and believe what is happening on the altar. (No, I’m not suggesting that “rap” be employed.) Why should we lose the poorly catechized to the Pentecostal church down the block because their worship services are more alive and joyful? Why can’t there be joyful worship during Mass? Isn’t Mass supposed to be a little bit of heaven on earth? In heaven, won’t we be worshipping God joyfully? Or will our faces look as though we had just lost our best friend, as most faces in our congregations now look?

Somehow, I just don’t believe that the only music used by the heavenly choir to praise God is Gregorian chant.

 

[snhs]

No, not to decide to come to Mass, but I think that people should have a choice to decide on which Mass to go to. If contemporary liturgical music is what moves them to deeper prayer, they should have that option. If chant does the same for others, they should have the option. As a musician, I have had the experience of people being drawn to a particular Mass because of the music.

Other posters argue that new music is the reason people have left the church. What is your opinion on that? (In my opinion, that argument doesn’t hold water because how would you then explain the differences in sizes of Confession lines 50 years ago and today?)

I agree. You know this and I know this. However, approximately 70% of Catholics do not believe in the Real Presence. They’ll never learn if we can’t get them inside the church.

Your opinion.
…
I think the greatest need in the Church today is adult catechesis, and the homily is the greatest place for that because the people who might not come to an evening class, meeting, Bible study, etc., have come (hopefully) to Mass. I think it’s important to get them in the Church, and whatever draws people in is something good. If more people are drawn by contemporary music (as long as it is solid, good, liturgical music) than by another form of music, then use the genre that most people prefer.

A well-catechized Catholic would not leave the Church even if the only music played…Why should we lose the poorly catechized to the Pentecostal church down the block because their worship services are more alive and joyful? Why can’t there be joyful worship during Mass? Isn’t Mass supposed to be a little bit of heaven on earth? In heaven, won’t we be worshipping God joyfully? Or will our faces look as though we had just lost our best friend, as most faces in our congregations now look?

Somehow, I just don’t believe that the only music used by the heavenly choir to praise God is Gregorian chant.

The Mass is the Mass. If the Church says, as it does of Gregorian Chant, that it is to be held in high esteem and is such a suitable type of music for the Liturgy then how can we say that other types of music, which are completely different, are equal or, as you advocate, in some cases preferable. The Church doesn’t define specifically which music is acceptable, but by singling out Gregorian Chant they give a good indication of how we should decide on the music at the Mass.

I don’t think anyone will leave the Church, if they are properly catechised, because the music has become too liberal. Nor do I think people true to the faith would ever leave because the music was too conservative. However it creates division within the Church which shouldn’t be there which is not a good idea.

Are they Catholic if they don’t believe in the Real Presence? I would submit that the music no matter how good, or well suited to their preference is not likely to give them sudden insight into it. If however the music becomes so like secular song that it sounds like something they’d hear in the background of an advert it is far easier for them to tune it out and keep their thoughts on earthly things, whether the guitarist is out of tune or the vocalist is really able to sing notes that high. The other side obviously is we use music completely out of the ordinary, something which accomplished the same purpose for our ancestors as the great Cathedrals and Churches, to turn their thoughts to something beyond the humdrum of life and on to the things of the next.

No the Church’s opinion actually. (I just happen to agree with it though )

Again I disagree, you say “whatever draws them”. It might draw them if we had them clapping along or if we had semi clothed female dancers on either side of the Altar. That aside they will never be properly catchised if we are teaching them that the Church will resort to changing the music to pack the pews, or try to keep up with the Evangelical lot down the block. And where is the evidence that more people are drawn by this kind of music? Besides which the Church is not a democracy, we don’t decide to dump opposition to contraception or anything else if a majority would prefer it. If we start getting a few Church approved visions where the Virgin Mary raps out a message or the choirs of angels announce the Lord’s preference for Pop then I’ll go along with it, until then I think we should keep the Gregorian Chant going.

One of the other points is that although some modern tunes may be theologically correct they often don’t transmit the same depth or intricacy of philosophy as older songs. Someone was complaining in another thread that older hymns were too wordy, but they are needfully so because they are teaching fairly in depth teachings which more modern hymns manifestly fail to do.

True, a well catechised Catholic probably wouldn’t leave the Church. However a particularly well catechised Catholic would also be aware that he can fulfil most of his obligations to the Church by going to illicit Masses, which are nonetheless valid. They would only need to go to a Church in Full Communion once a year or so, and our Churches would be losing some of the most knowledgeable and faithful Catholics who are most needed to help with things like Adult Catechism etc.

Mass is the Sacrifice of Our Lord, you’ll have to excuse us for looking slightly serious about such a thing. Our Lord died for our sins we’re there to thank him, not to derive joy for ourselves. We are never going to have even the slightest glimpse of Heaven on Earth if we are so focused on Earthly things that we do not allow our minds to transcend them.

Well when an Angels comes and gives us a copy of the Heavenly Hymnbook I don’t think anyone will complain about using it. Until then we should keep Gregorian Chant in the esteem the Church requests.

 

[benedictgal]

The Mass is the Mass. If the Church says, as it does of Gregorian Chant, that it is to be held in high esteem and is such a suitable type of music for the Liturgy then how can we say that other types of music, which are completely different, are equal or, as you advocate, in some cases preferable. The Church doesn’t define specifically which music is acceptable, but by singling out Gregorian Chant they give a good indication of how we should decide on the music at the Mass.

Aain I disagree, you say “whatever draws them”. It might draw them if we had them clapping along or if we had semi clothed female dancers on either side of the Altar. That aside they will never be properly catchised if we are teaching them that the Church will resort to changing the music to pack the pews, or try to keep up with the Evangelical lot down the block. And where is the evidence that more people are drawn by this kind of music? Besides which the Church is not a democracy, we don’t decide to dump opposition to contraception or anything else if a majority would prefer it. If we start getting a few Church approved visions where the Virgin Mary raps out a message or the choirs of angels announce the Lord’s preference for Pop then I’ll go along with it, until then I think we should keep the Gregorian Chant going.

One of the other points is that although some modern tunes may be theologically correct they often don’t transmit the same depth or intricacy of philosophy as older songs. Someone was complaining in another thread that older hymns were too wordy, but they are needfully so because they are teaching fairly in depth teachings which more modern hymns manifestly fail to do.

Mass is the Sacrifice of Our Lord, you’ll have to excuse us for looking slightly serious about such a thing. Our Lord died for our sins we’re there to thank him, not to derive joy for ourselves. We are never going to have even the slightest glimpse of Heaven on Earth if we are so focused on Earthly things that we do not allow our minds to transcend them.

Well when an Angels comes and gives us a copy of the Heavenly Hymnbook I don’t think anyone will complain about using it. Until then we should keep Gregorian Chant in the esteem the Church requests.

You made some very valid and sound points. I am reminded of an address that Francis Cardinal Arinze gave wherein he covered some issues relevent to Gregorian Chant.

Good music helps to promote prayer, to raise the minds of people to God and to give people a taste of the goodness of God.

In the Latin Rite what has come to be known as the Gregorian Chant has been traditional. A distinctive liturgical chant existed indeed in Rome before Saint Gregory the Great (+ 604). But it was this great Pontiff who gave it the greatest prominence. After Saint Gregory this tradition of chant continued to develop and be enriched until the upheavals that brought an end to the Middle Ages. The monasteries, especially those of the Benedictine Order, have done much to preserve this heritage.

Gregorian Chant is marked by a moving meditative cadence. It touches the depths of the soul. It shows joy, sorrow, repentance, petition, hope, praise or thanksgiving, as the particular feast, part of the Mass or other prayer may indicate. It makes the Psalms come alive. It has a universal appeal which makes it suitable for all cultures and peoples. It is appreciated in Rome, Solesmes, Lagos, Toronto and Caracas. Cathedrals, monasteries, seminaries, sanctuaries, pilgrimage centers and traditional parishes resound with it.

It is not true that the lay faithful do not want to sing the Gregorian chant. What they are asking for are priests and monks and nuns who will share this treasure with them. The CDs produced by the Benedictine monks of Silos, their mother house at Solesmes, and numerous other communities sell among young people. Monasteries are visited by people who want to sing Lauds and especially Vespers. In an ordination ceremony of eleven priests which I celebrated in Nigeria last July, about 150 priests sang the First Eucharistic Prayer in Latin. It was beautiful. The people, although no Latin scholars, loved it. It should be just normal that parish churches where there are four or five Masses on Sunday should have one of these Masses sung in Latin.

In another address, which I have at home, Cardinal Arinze addresses the problem of providing “entertianment” during the Mass. This should not be treated as the days of Bread and Circus at the Roman Forum. If the saving mysteries of the Passion, Death and Resurrection of Our Lord Jesus Christ are not enough to bring the faithful to Mass, then, the catechesis has certainly been poor, either at the CCD level or at RCIA.

 

[benedictgal]

Actually, I was able to find it. I had saved the link to this computer as well.

This is what Francis Cardinal Arinze, the Prefect for the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, has to say on making the Mass “interesting.”.

1. Making the Mass Interesting
   Many priests are concerned with making the Eucharist celebration interesting. And they are not wrong. The Mass is not a dull carrying out of rituals. It is a vital celebration of the central mysteries of our salvation.

Care should be taken to prepare well for each celebration. The texts to be read, sung or proclaimed should be well studied in good time. The vestments and all altar fittings and furnishings should be in good taste. The people who carry out the roles of priest celebrant, altar servers, leader of song, readers of lessons, etc., should be at their best. The homily should give the people solid liturgical, theological and spiritual nourishment. If all that is done, the Mass will not be dull.

But when all is said and done, we have to come back to the fact that the Mass is not there to entertain people. Such horizontalism would be out of place. People do not come to Mass in order to admire the preacher, or the choir or the readers. The priority movement or direction of the Mass is vertical, toward God, not horizontal, toward one another. What the people need is a faith-filled celebration, a spiritual experience which draws them to God and therefore also to their neighbor. As a by-product, such a celebration will capture the people’s interest and attention.

It is also useful to remark that repetition of faith formulae and symbols, or of familiar words and gestures, need not make a liturgical celebration uninteresting. It matters, however, to what extent these formulae are understood, hence the importance of catechesis. In our daily lives, is it uninteresting for us to repeat our names or those of our loved ones? Do we not love our national anthem and sing it with piety? How much more that this has to do with our Christian identity!

If it helps to repeat, may I recall that liturgical celebrations allow for flexibility, provided that this is done according to approved norms. Redemptionis Sacramentum itself exhorts the bishop not to stifle alternative choices provided for by the liturgical norms: “The bishop must take care not to allow the removal of that liberty foreseen by the norms of the liturgical books so that the celebration may be adapted in an intelligent manner to the church building, or to the group of the faithful who are present or to the particular pastoral circumstances”. (RS 21) It is for this reason that the bishop does well not to be tempted to introduce unnecessary restrictions in his diocese, such as ordering that only one particular Eucharistic Prayer be used at Mass. The bishop’s authority is never firmer than when he uses it to ensure that the general norms which safeguard the tradition are observed.

A general advice about whether the liturgical celebration is interesting or not is, to simply celebrate it with faith and devotion and according to the approved norms, and leave the rest to God’s grace and people’s cooperation with it.

Too much emphasis has been placed on the horizontal and not enough on the vertical elements of the Holy Sacrifice. That is a big, big problem. Much of today’s music centers around I/Me/We/Us that we forget about the Wholly Other who should be at the front and center of the Sacred Liturgy.

 

[pnewton]

I think the musicians that try to entertain are a rarity. Most who use praise and worship intend that praise and worship to be focused on God, not each other. I do not use this genre myself, but I beliece the entertaininment/ horizontal argument is a false representation of their intent. I think some of the Haugen stuff is more likely to fall in this category, as it’s difficulty make it more suited to a choir than congregation.

 

[SacredHeartFan]

What would be different about the “youth” Mass? What changes would you want to make, and for what reasons? In what way would a “youth” Mass be somehow better (for young people, presumably) than a “regular” Mass?

BTW, at one of the “youth Masses” in town here the average age seems to be about 55.

Using music that teens would be attracted to. After their attracted they might listen to the lyrics and start to understand why they are there. Most teenagers are dragged or just don’t go to mass.

 

[Lepanto]

Using music that teens would be attracted to. After their attracted they might listen to the lyrics and start to understand why they are there. Most teenagers are dragged or just don’t go to mass.

This is nothing new. I remember when I was a teenager the powers-that-be tried to dumb-down the Mass for we teens, and they played music that was “popular” back then. We all saw right through it.

Most of the Catholic kids I grew up with aren’t practicing anymore despite (or perhaps because) of the silly patronizing. Trust me, the teen music Mass can’t compete musically with a rock concert.

All of us–teens or not–deserve a reverent Mass according to the norms of the Church, not designer Masses.

 

[stringbeanduck]

This is nothing new. I remember when I was a teenager the powers-that-be tried to dumb-down the Mass for we teens, and they played music that was “popular” back then. We all saw right through it.

Most of the Catholic kids I grew up with aren’t practicing anymore despite (or perhaps because) of the silly patronizing. Trust me, the teen music Mass can’t compete musically with a rock concert.

All of us–teens or not–deserve a reverent Mass according to the norms of the Church, not designer Masses.

Agreed,

They should also be educated of the sacred traditions in the church and the reasons why they are being “dragged” to Mass. And why they should stop having to be dragged to Mass and make the effort to go on thier own. I don’t see the good in bribing them with praise and worship music.

 

[VociMike]

Using music that teens would be attracted to. After their attracted they might listen to the lyrics and start to understand why they are there. Most teenagers are dragged or just don’t go to mass.

OK, so you want to add some imitation of their secular culture into the Mass, right? Does that actually work? Do teens who aren’t coming to Mass decide to come to Mass because there are vague imitations of secular music at Mass? Seriously, how many other teens would be put off by such music, which would not have any of the production values of the “real thing”? I think the whole question is highly debatable, and IMHO is just a form of pandering. But I recognize that many who suggest this are quite sincere.

Now, besides music what other imitations of their secular culture should be introduced into the Mass? Should the priest and servers dress like them? Talk like them? If introducing contemporary teen culture into the Mass is a good thing, where should it stop (if anywhere)?

Note that this is very much in opposition to what the Church teaches, which is that there is to be a firm distinction between sacred and profane, and that the profane is not to be allowed into worship. Granted, many parishes and priests violate this rule, but the Church teaches it nonetheless.

Whatever else teens are, they are very countercultural. Very much in opposition to the culture of their elders. Might you not also be able to attract them by giving them a very countercultural liturgy, one that their parents might not like, one full of “smells and bells”? Here’s a survey that may cause you to reconsider your assumptions about what teens want and what they consider appropriate for liturgy:
reformedworship.org/magazine/article.cfm?article_id=542

One quote: *“The findings showed, however, that this large and diverse group of adolescents gave the highest ratings of appropriateness to traditional choral music and the lowest to Christian rock music.” *Goes against the conventional wisdom, doesn’t it.

Another quote: “What does it all mean? At the very least, musicians and other church leaders who establish music policy in church ought to take a careful inventory of their previous assumptions. It may be time to reexamine our justifications for including certain types of music in church—especially if we are doing so for the sole purpose of ‘keeping the young people happy’.”
So if you want to bring in young people, start a schola or polyphonic choir and tell them no adults will be allowed in.

 

[brotherhrolf]

So if you want to bring in young people, start a schola or polyphonic choir and tell them no adults will be allowed in.

To SHF: if you aren’t driving yet, get your folks to take you to the cathedral for 10 am Mass one Sunday and listen to all the high school kids in our choir singing chant and polyphonic motets. My oldest is only a few years older than you and took it upon himself to learn to chant the Pater Noster. As Mike pointed out, “smells and bells” would floor the folks in St. Amant, Gonzales, or P’ville.