Outrages Over More Liturgical Abuses

[centurionguard]

Perhaps this gripe has been rehashed in the past here at C.A.F.
But I would like to know if their are other Catholics out their who are still seeing Liturgical Dancing happening in their local parish communities and diocese’s in the United States, Canada, the U.K., and Australia ? When is this kind of abusive **** going to stop ?
How many New Age seminaries are infecting newly ordained priest’s who for some unorthodox reason adopt this kind of behavior into the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass ? It’s springing up in a lot of Catholic diocese’s around the world. Heck ! I’m seeing it crop up in parishes within my own diocese. This really saddens me.

A number of years ago the Catholic website New Oxford Review printed an article about this.

OUTRAGE OVER LITURGICAL ABUSES (“Liturgical Dances”)

newoxfordreview.org/article.jsp?did=0507-delgado

Liturgical Dancing is absolutely forbidden in the Latin Rite of the Catholic Church (in the Western Church). The reason for this is that dancing in the Western culture is a common and pedestrian activity. It is a folk activity. In the West dancing does not have, on our culture, the element of the sacred. There is nothing wrong with dance, or folk music, and the like, but in the Mass only those things which have a connotation as associated with the sacred are allowed. The connotation of dance is the classical or artistic dance, or Saturday night sock hop, or nightclub dancing, or recreational dancing, or mixer dances where people can meet the opposite sex. We, in the West, to not have in our culture any connotation of the sacred in our dancing. This, in the West, it cannot be included in the Mass except by special indult in the case perhaps of an ethnic parish with a cultural background of true sacred dancing.

There are other cultures where dance has been apart of sacred expression for thousands of years. It is part of the culture. It is part of the people, not just an entertainment. In those cultures the Church allows Liturgical Dancing because in those cultures the dancing that is done during the Mass is culturally sacred.

The issue is that only that which has a sacred purpose, only that which is suitable for sacred expression, only that which facilitates the sacred time and place of the Mass can be included in the Mass. Thus any dance, instrument, music, or song that is not suitable for sacred expression cannot be used. Folk music and dancing and the like is fine for a non-liturgical meeting outside of the Church such as a youth group at camp or in fellowship hall, but the folk nature of those activities, by definition, is not sacred.

 

[pigtown]

There have been many, many changes in the Catholic Church. This is just one of them. When I was a little girl, more than 50 years ago, women always wore dresses and head coverings to church. Today they even wear shorts in the summer. I’ve even seen men and women wearing jeans to Mass. No way could females assist at Mass; today girls are serving as altar girls. Women even distribute Communion! This is not the same Catholic Church I grew up in.

 

[jhcooper]

My sentiments are with you. An Orthodox friend who married a Catholic and is rasing her children Catholic comments that the Catholic Church has “lost it.” This makes one wonder why any young man would want to be a priest in a church which cannot decide if it wants to be Protestant or Catholic and has destroyed its own culture and tradition and a growing number attend mass not for the Eucharist but to be entertained. I know how Tuvia in Fiddler on the Roof felt. Good luck!

 

[Paco_Nyad]

…Liturgical Dancing is absolutely forbidden in the Latin Rite of the Catholic Church (in the Western Church)…

That’s simply not true, no matter what the NOR would like to suggest.

While the definition of what constitutes “dance” is a whole other discussion, “dance” is not prohibited where it is part of the culture that has been made part of the Mass from the very beginning of the Masses introduction into any given area.

I’m not at all sure that some sort of “dance” or movement hasn’t pretty much always been part of the Mass in some places like parts of Hawaii or some African countries.

 

[centurionguard]

That’s simply not true, no matter what the NOR would like to suggest.

While the definition of what constitutes “dance” is a whole other discussion, “dance” is not prohibited where it is part of the culture that has been made part of the Mass from the very beginning of the Masses introduction into any given area.

I’m not at all sure that some sort of “dance” or movement hasn’t pretty much always been part of the Mass in some places like parts of Hawaii or some African countries.

My reply is not to make argument for the sake of argument but only to state that yes it may have been the New Oxford Review who published the article but it was an Archbishop who submitted the article. Perhaps in some cultures as you state it might be permissible. However; that I cannot find any Vatican documents that support such findings. In the mainstream Western Latin Rite liturgical dancing is not allowed and is further an insult and blasphemous.

 

[benedictgal]

That’s simply not true, no matter what the NOR would like to suggest.

While the definition of what constitutes “dance” is a whole other discussion, “dance” is not prohibited where it is part of the culture that has been made part of the Mass from the very beginning of the Masses introduction into any given area.

I’m not at all sure that some sort of “dance” or movement hasn’t pretty much always been part of the Mass in some places like parts of Hawaii or some African countries.

Francis Cardinal Arinze, the former prefect for the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith explained it in an question and answer session about six years ago:

There has never been a document from our Congregation for Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments saying that dance is approved in the Mass.

The question of dance is difficult and delicate. However, it is good to know that the tradition of the Latin Church has not known the dance. It is something that people are introducing in the last ten years – or twenty years. It was not always so. Now it is spreading like wildfire, one can say, in all the continents – some more than others. In my own continent, Africa, it is spreading. In Asia, it is spreading.

Now, some priests and lay people think that Mass is never complete without dance. The difficulty is this: we come to Mass primarily to adore God – what we call the vertical dimension. We do not come to Mass to entertain one another. That’s not the purpose of Mass. The parish hall is for that.

So all those that want to entertain us – after Mass, let us go to the parish hall and then you can dance. And then we clap. But when we come to Mass we don’t come to clap. We don’t come to watch people, to admire people. We want to adore God, to thank Him, to ask Him pardon for our sins, and to ask Him for what we need.

…Somebody can say, “but the pope visited this county and the people danced”. A moment: Did the pope arrange it? Poor Holy Father – he comes, the people arranged. He does not know what they arranged. And somebody introduces something funny – is the pope responsible for that? Does that mean it is now approved? Did they put in on the table of the Congregation for Divine Worship? We would throw it out! If people want to dance, they know where to go.

Now, down here in South Texas, and I imagine in El Paso as well, there are the Matachines who perform a ritual dance for Our Lady of Guadalupe that is about 500 years old. However, in our case, the dance is performed before the Mass and is not part of the Mass.

 

[FrDavid96]

There is no such thing as “liturgical dance” in the Roman Rite. It is not a cultural adaptation because such adaptations must be approved by the Holy See.

This is what the Congregation for Divine Worship has to say on “liturgical dance”:

“For that reason it cannot be introduced into liturgical celebrations of any kind whatever: that would be to inject into the liturgy one of the most desacralized and desacralizing elements; and so it would be equivalent to creating an atmosphere of profaneness which would easily recall to those present and to the participants in the celebration worldly places and situations.”
Read the full text here: adoremus.org/Dance.html

 

[FrDavid96]

That’s simply not true, no matter what the NOR would like to suggest.

While the definition of what constitutes “dance” is a whole other discussion, “dance” is not prohibited where it is part of the culture that has been made part of the Mass from the very beginning of the Masses introduction into any given area.

I’m not at all sure that some sort of “dance” or movement hasn’t pretty much always been part of the Mass in some places like parts of Hawaii or some African countries.

And at where does the Church say that? Given that your post contradicts the actual teaching of the Church with regard to so-called liturgical dance, I would very much like to know the source of your information.

 

[Paco_Nyad]

My reply is not to make argument for the sake of argument but only to state that yes it may have been the New Oxford Review who published the article but it was an Archbishop who submitted the article. Perhaps in some cultures as you state it might be permissible. However; that I cannot find any Vatican documents that support such findings. In the mainstream Western Latin Rite liturgical dancing is not allowed and is further an insult and blasphemous.

When I read something like “Liturgical Dancing is absolutely forbidden in the Latin Rite of the Catholic Church (in the Western Church)” I’m inclined to stop reading and move on to the next article. It’s a polarizing and inaccurate comment that kills one’s credibility.

Now you limit your comments to “mainstream Western Latin Rite” which is probably closer to the truth if you mean the Latin Rite in (at least most of) the Western World. I think it would be wonderful if the GIRM was exceedingly specific in what could place across the world it’s not.

There is liturgical dance or “movement” that is indeed permissible during the Mass in some parts of the world – despite what the documents say (or do not say.) I also think it’s reprehensible for some to leverage that ambiguity to install such dance/movement in areas where it has never been a longstanding cultural tradition.

 

[FrDavid96]

When I read something like “Liturgical Dancing is absolutely forbidden in the Latin Rite of the Catholic Church (in the Western Church)” I’m inclined to stop reading and move on to the next article. It’s a polarizing and inaccurate comment that kills one’s credibility.

Now you limit your comments to “mainstream Western Latin Rite” which is probably closer to the truth if you mean the Latin Rite in (at least most of) the Western World. I think it would be wonderful if the GIRM was exceedingly specific in what could place across the world it’s not.

There is liturgical dance or “movement” that is indeed permissible during the Mass in some parts of the world – despite what the documents say (or do not say.) I also think it’s reprehensible for some to leverage that ambiguity to install such dance/movement in areas where it has never been a longstanding cultural tradition.

Who gets to decide what is “permissible during the Mass”?

The Holy See has said that in the Latin Rite, dance is not permitted. When you say the words “despite what the documents say”, that’s another way of saying “despite what Rome says.” The Holy See has the final word on what may or may not be done during Mass. That same Holy See has made it clear that dance is not to be done during the Mass, so why should anyone think otherwise?

When you say “It’s a polarizing and inaccurate comment that kills one’s credibility” you are saying that Rome is not a credible source on liturgical matters. I for one have a very difficult time accepting that, as I consider the Holy See to be a credible source indeed.

 

[Paco_Nyad]

And at where does the Church say that? Given that your post contradicts the actual teaching of the Church with regard to so-called liturgical dance, I would very much like to know the source of your information.

Part of the problem is the definition of “dance.” Cardinal Arnize talks in one statement about the procession of gifts. The way some people move during the procession in some countries in Africa would be decried as “dance” in Iowa. But it’s not in that certain part of Africa. Let me quote from your Adoremus article:

“There has not been an express ruling from the Holy See against so-called “liturgical dance” – primarily because, as Cardinal Arinze also observed, dance-like movements during processions are customary in some countries, and thus may be a legitimate form of “inculturation” of the Litugy in these regions. This kind of ritual dance has been introduced into several papal liturgies in recent years – on occasions usually connected with African or Asian culture. These are special exceptions, however, that are to be seen in the context of the Holy Father’s unique universal role, not as precedent-setting liturgical variations.”

 

[benedictgal]

Part of the problem is the definition of “dance.” Cardinal Arnize talks in one statement about the procession of gifts. The way some people move during the procession in some countries in Africa would be decried as “dance” in Iowa. But it’s not in that certain part of Africa.

Paco, please note the rest of what Cardinal Arinze observed:

The question of dance is difficult and delicate. However, it is good to know that the tradition of the Latin Church has not known the dance. It is something that people are introducing in the last ten years – or twenty years. It was not always so. Now it is spreading like wildfire, one can say, in all the continents – some more than others. In my own continent, Africa, it is spreading. In Asia, it is spreading.

Now, some priests and lay people think that Mass is never complete without dance. The difficulty is this: we come to Mass primarily to adore God – what we call the vertical dimension. We do not come to Mass to entertain one another. That’s not the purpose of Mass. The parish hall is for that.

…Don’t misunderstand me, because when I said this at one place somebody said to me: “you are an African bishop. You Africans are always dancing. Why do you say we don’t dance?”

A moment – we Africans are not always dancing!

The fact remains that there is no authoritative document issued by the Holy See concerning, let alone approving, dance in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. In fact, Cardinal Arinze’s final statement is quite telling:

And somebody introduces something funny – is the pope responsible for that? Does that mean it is now approved? Did they put in on the table of the Congregation for Divine Worship? We would throw it out! If people want to dance, they know where to go.

Given the nature of the new prefect for the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, the response in the negative will probably much more strongly worded.

 

[Paco_Nyad]

This reminds me of one individual who was fulminating over the use of “profane” musical instruments during the Mass. He ranted and raved how pianos and guitars and drums, etc. etc. were unacceptable for use at the Mass and that NO Eastern Catholic Church would EVER find itself using a drum for instance!!

I didn’t have the heart to tell him about the Ethiopian (Ge’ez) Catholic Liturgy – which often includes drums…

 

[benedictgal]

Who gets to decide what is “permissible during the Mass”?

The Holy See has said that in the Latin Rite, dance is not permitted. When you say the words “despite what the documents say”, that’s another way of saying “despite what Rome says.” The Holy See has the final word on what may or may not be done during Mass. That same Holy See has made it clear that dance is not to be done during the Mass, so why should anyone think otherwise?

When you say “It’s a polarizing and inaccurate comment that kills one’s credibility” you are saying that Rome is not a credible source on liturgical matters. I for one have a very difficult time accepting that, as I consider the Holy See to be a credible source indeed.

You certainy hit the nail on the head, Fr. David. Furthermore, as I have said on many of these threads, we are not called to be creative with the Mass (although there are certain legitimate means of creativity like picking from the approved readings and prayers for a particular Mass), we are called to receive what the Church has given us down through the centuries.

 

[Like]

That’s simply not true, no matter what the NOR would like to suggest.

While the definition of what constitutes “dance” is a whole other discussion, “dance” is not prohibited where it is part of the culture that has been made part of the Mass from the very beginning of the Masses introduction into any given area.

I’m not at all sure that some sort of “dance” or movement hasn’t pretty much always been part of the Mass in some places like parts of Hawaii or some African countries.

I’ll guaranty it is NOT allowed in Hawaii & is not part of the Hawaiian culture.

 

[Paco_Nyad]

I’ll guaranty it is NOT allowed in Hawaii & is not part of the Hawaiian culture.

I’ve been given more than one guarantee that didn’t hold-up to scrutiny. Hula is definitely a part of Hawaiian culture, or at least parts of Hawaiian culture. That’s not debatable. I have also been to Mass in Hawaii that had Hula dancers. I asked a local about the dancers (he didn’t seem too enamored of them) and he said it was a long held tradition at least at that parish.

So I did a quick Google and found:

HONOLULU – *"On December 21 Bishop Francis DiLorenzo notified Catholic priests statewide that the hula would once again be allowed in church during the Mass. Last May the Vatican, reacting to a complaint from a parishioner, extended its general ban on dancing during mass to include hula. The prohibition was a disappointment to many religious Catholics: Honolulu’s major dailies each ran several editorials and cartoons in support of reinstatement.

Previously, Hawaii had been one of the few jurisdictions in the world where the indigenous dance form was not just tolerated but was integrated into Catholic services, such as during communion or in connection with funerals.

When he visited Rome in September, Bishop DiLorenzo discussed the ruling with church officials, who urged him to apply for an exemption from the general ban. The Vatican lost no time in granting the request–just two weeks after the diocese announced that an appeal was being prepared.

However, the exemption carries some caveats. The hula must be announced in advance so that those who are offended by it may attend Mass elsewhere, and it must be danced to express worship, prayer, or reflection–not performed as entertainment."*

thefreelibrary.com/VATICAN+OKAYS+HULA+DURING+MASS-a053980442

Does anyone know if this special exemption still exists? There a more in-depth (and better written) story at

articles.latimes.com/1998/dec/25/news/mn-57588

 

[benedictgal]

I’ve been given more than one guarantee that didn’t hold-up to scrutiny. Hula is definitely a part of Hawaiian culture, or at least parts of Hawaiian culture. That’s not debatable. I have also been to Mass in Hawaii that had Hula dancers. I asked a local about the dancers (he didn’t seem too enamored of them) and he said it was a long held tradition at least at that parish.

So I did a quick Google and found:

HONOLULU – *"On December 21 Bishop Francis DiLorenzo notified Catholic priests statewide that the hula would once again be allowed in church during the Mass. Last May the Vatican, reacting to a complaint from a parishioner, extended its general ban on dancing during mass to include hula. The prohibition was a disappointment to many religious Catholics: Honolulu’s major dailies each ran several editorials and cartoons in support of reinstatement.

Previously, Hawaii had been one of the few jurisdictions in the world where the indigenous dance form was not just tolerated but was integrated into Catholic services, such as during communion or in connection with funerals.

When he visited Rome in September, Bishop DiLorenzo discussed the ruling with church officials, who urged him to apply for an exemption from the general ban. The Vatican lost no time in granting the request–just two weeks after the diocese announced that an appeal was being prepared.

However, the exemption carries some caveats. The hula must be announced in advance so that those who are offended by it may attend Mass elsewhere, and it must be danced to express worship, prayer, or reflection–not performed as entertainment."*

thefreelibrary.com/VATICAN+OKAYS+HULA+DURING+MASS-a053980442

Does anyone know if this special exemption still exists? There a more in-depth (and better written) story at

articles.latimes.com/1998/dec/25/news/mn-57588

However, you can’t use this to justify having women in flowing gowns dancing up and and down the aisle carrying incense bowls. What the Hawaiians did fell under the bounds of inculturation. But, in the Latin Rite, there is no tradition for dance, whatsoever.

 

[FrDavid96]

I’ve been given more than one guarantee that didn’t hold-up to scrutiny. Hula is definitely a part of Hawaiian culture, or at least parts of Hawaiian culture. That’s not debatable. I have also been to Mass in Hawaii that had Hula dancers. I asked a local about the dancers (he didn’t seem too enamored of them) and he said it was a long held tradition at least at that parish.

So I did a quick Google and found:

HONOLULU – *"On December 21 Bishop Francis DiLorenzo notified Catholic priests statewide that the hula would once again be allowed in church during the Mass. Last May the Vatican, reacting to a complaint from a parishioner, extended its general ban on dancing during mass to include hula. The prohibition was a disappointment to many religious Catholics: Honolulu’s major dailies each ran several editorials and cartoons in support of reinstatement.

Previously, Hawaii had been one of the few jurisdictions in the world where the indigenous dance form was not just tolerated but was integrated into Catholic services, such as during communion or in connection with funerals.

When he visited Rome in September, Bishop DiLorenzo discussed the ruling with church officials, who urged him to apply for an exemption from the general ban. The Vatican lost no time in granting the request–just two weeks after the diocese announced that an appeal was being prepared.

However, the exemption carries some caveats. The hula must be announced in advance so that those who are offended by it may attend Mass elsewhere, and it must be danced to express worship, prayer, or reflection–not performed as entertainment."*

thefreelibrary.com/VATICAN+OKAYS+HULA+DURING+MASS-a053980442

Does anyone know if this special exemption still exists? There a more in-depth (and better written) story at

articles.latimes.com/1998/dec/25/news/mn-57588

Your post brings up an important point. Legitimate enculturation is possible, and to be encouraged. At the same time, the very definition of “legitimate” means that the Holy See approves it.

When we see such things happening elsewhere, it is not done with the approval of Rome but specifically in defiance of Rome.

That’s an essential distinction.

 

[Like]

Originally Posted by Like
I’ll guaranty it is NOT allowed in Hawaii & is not part of the Hawaiian culture.

Thanks for the links & I will retract my above post for now.

PS: This part of my previous post…"& is not part of the Hawaiian culture" I worded wrong as hula has always been Hawaiian culture.

What I meant was that it was not Hawaiian culture in the Mass.

Sorry!

 

[Like]

Your post brings up an important point. Legitimate enculturation is possible, and to be encouraged. At the same time, the very definition of “legitimate” means that the Holy See approves it.

When we see such things happening elsewhere, it is not done with the approval of Rome but specifically in defiance of Rome.

That’s an essential distinction.

Mahalo Fr. David:thumbsup: