I
irisheyes66
Guest
That’s the sad fact and the source of this debate.
The music should be, IMO, that formal whenever we are in the presence of Jesus Christ.
- Status
S
Spiller
Guest
OK, that’s fair – but just keep in mind that many disagree with you and in no way does the Church suggest your personal preference is the only valid way.
I
irisheyes66
Guest
I guess I just can’t imagine a time to be informal in the presence of Jesus Christ.
S
Spiller
Guest
You are very correct. There was certainly an absence of grace and tact that one would hope to see in such situations.
I do think it’s OK to outline what the Church actually directs – hopefully without prejudice. Given EWTN’s audience, I think it might even be OK to gently question things. But to make the comments you have shown and to be so darned recursive during the Mass (!) was over the line.
The impact of such comments are tremendous – and most are not positive.
S
Spiller
Guest
And while I have a very difficult time not placing my own opinion of what is “best” or my own desires ahead of what the Church actually instructs, I do try to reign myself in. I particularly try to look at the Mass with as wide a viewpoint as I can muster – and it’s still not wide enough.
J
JimR-OCDS
Guest
The music at a Cathedral Mass is what should be at all parish Masses?
My parish is a little small town parish, where about 100 people attend Mass. A Cathedral style of music would be as out of place as country music in a Cathedral. Just ain’t going to happen.
Jim
My parish is a little small town parish, where about 100 people attend Mass. A Cathedral style of music would be as out of place as country music in a Cathedral. Just ain’t going to happen.
Jim
A
anamchara
Guest
He made some other comments which I found distasteful. He also made a comment referring to the music as “mere chatter”. He made his dislike of the music very clear. At one point they were both making comments about how it was apparent to them that certain people (those who put the Mass together) had not read the Popes writings on liturgy.
I guess they forgot that everything was approved and said writings are not law. And no, I don’t think this means it’s a free for all. I thought the Mass was inspired and nicely celebrated.
B
benedictgal
Guest
I wouldn’t be too quick to start shooting slings and arrows at Fr. Richard John Neuhaus. First of all, he is a highly educated priest who has a strong background in scripture. Those of you who are members of the various Tiber Swim teams should find it fascinating to know that he is a member of one of the 1990s teams. Because of his own experience as a Lutheran Pastor, he can speak very well on both traditions because he undertands them.
Furthermore, he personlly knows the Holy Father and was with him when the former Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger paid a visit to New York City several years ago. In fact, several folks in the liberal camp and other protesters booed Cardinal Ratzinger and caused quite a raucus at an event where the prelate was scheduled to speak. Incidentally, the speaking engagement was at the invitation of Fr. Neuhaus.
Fr. Neuhaus has also read the writings of the Holy Father as well as the pertinentn Church documents on music. Therefore, when he speaks, his comments are based on a well-formed and deeply scholarly formation.
As far as whether or not St. Patrick’s musical selections would work at a small country church, I actually believe they would. In this case, size doesn’t matter. A small group singing these bautiful hymns during Mass (and even a cantor leading the faithful in same) would make just as beautiful an addition to the Mass as having a full-blown philharmonic chorale.
I wonder if a retired Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger had been invited to make commentary during the DC Mass how his comments would be received. He certainly would have made mention of the same things that he’s noted in his books. Had he been saying pretty much what Fr. Neuhaus mentioned, how would people take his commentary? I suspect that many would be entirely dismissive of him because in their eyes, he is a theologian and not a liturgist. No doubt, the same folks raking Fr. Neuhaus over the coals would certainly not hesitate to do the same to a retired Joseph Ratzinger.
Just food for thought.
Furthermore, he personlly knows the Holy Father and was with him when the former Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger paid a visit to New York City several years ago. In fact, several folks in the liberal camp and other protesters booed Cardinal Ratzinger and caused quite a raucus at an event where the prelate was scheduled to speak. Incidentally, the speaking engagement was at the invitation of Fr. Neuhaus.
Fr. Neuhaus has also read the writings of the Holy Father as well as the pertinentn Church documents on music. Therefore, when he speaks, his comments are based on a well-formed and deeply scholarly formation.
As far as whether or not St. Patrick’s musical selections would work at a small country church, I actually believe they would. In this case, size doesn’t matter. A small group singing these bautiful hymns during Mass (and even a cantor leading the faithful in same) would make just as beautiful an addition to the Mass as having a full-blown philharmonic chorale.
I wonder if a retired Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger had been invited to make commentary during the DC Mass how his comments would be received. He certainly would have made mention of the same things that he’s noted in his books. Had he been saying pretty much what Fr. Neuhaus mentioned, how would people take his commentary? I suspect that many would be entirely dismissive of him because in their eyes, he is a theologian and not a liturgist. No doubt, the same folks raking Fr. Neuhaus over the coals would certainly not hesitate to do the same to a retired Joseph Ratzinger.
Just food for thought.
J
Joysong
Guest
Fr. Newhaus speaks:
http://bestsmileys.com/angry2/10.gif
vs.
Cardinal Ratzinger speaks:
http://bestsmileys.com/angles/2.gif
No comparison.
http://bestsmileys.com/angry2/10.gif
vs.
Cardinal Ratzinger speaks:
http://bestsmileys.com/angles/2.gif
No comparison.
A
anamchara
Guest
LOL! perfect!
I am so pleased with how reasonable and beautifully kind our Holy Father is. This visit has really strengthen my faith. He has me thinking If I was disciplined enough I’d join a religious community :getholy:
D
donmaximuso27
Guest
There was nothing wrong with the commentary of Fr. Newhaus, this is nonsense. He knows the Holy Father personally and knows well the works of the Holy Father of when he was Cardinal. The musis was atrocious and completely inappropiate for a mass. There is an abundance of traditional polyphony and chant from many different cultures, that they could have used instead. Clearly, it contradicted what the Holy Father wrote on the importance of sacred liturgy.
B
benedictgal
Guest
I think there are those who failed ot understand my comparison. Let’s say things turned out differently in April 2005 and the smiling man appearing on the loggia of St. Peter’s Basilica was not Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, but, someone else. Had that been the case, Cardinal Ratzinger would have returned to Bavaria and lived out his retirement as planned.
He’s already written three books on the Liturgy and has written countless other documents and delivered addresses on same. So, his views are already widely known. His detractors, many of whom perhaps are participating in these forums, don’t agree with everything he has said. Again, remember, the scenario is Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger in retirement.
Let’s say that he was invited by EWTN to come and offer commentary on what happened at Nationals Stadium. I would imagine that his words would be similar, if not more direct, than Fr. Richard John Neuhaus.
Ratzinger’s detractors would say the same thing that has been said in not a few of these threads. They would be just as critical of a retired Prefect as they would be of Fr. Neuhaus. They would, perhaps, also go so far as to say that because he is a theologian and not a liturgist, his opinion doesn’t matter.
Therefore, I would submit to you that the words of a retired, non-papal Joseph Ratzinger would have been just as ill-received as were the comments of Fr. Richard John Neuhaus, who, was actually referencing much of what Ratzinger had written in the first place.
So, the scenario that I described both in my previous post and in this one certainly would be seen a lot differently had Joseph Ratzinger not emerged as Pope.
Interestingly enough, those who say Pope Benedict, yes and Fr. Richard John Neuhaus no haven’t really studied the issue very carefully. Pope Benedict has not changed the convictions he held as Joseph Ratzinger. These convictions, especially regarding Sacred Music, were voiced by Fr. Neuhaus. Therefore, to dismiss Fr. Neuhaus, when he, himself, is using the same arguments as the Holy Father makes no sense at all.
He’s already written three books on the Liturgy and has written countless other documents and delivered addresses on same. So, his views are already widely known. His detractors, many of whom perhaps are participating in these forums, don’t agree with everything he has said. Again, remember, the scenario is Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger in retirement.
Let’s say that he was invited by EWTN to come and offer commentary on what happened at Nationals Stadium. I would imagine that his words would be similar, if not more direct, than Fr. Richard John Neuhaus.
Ratzinger’s detractors would say the same thing that has been said in not a few of these threads. They would be just as critical of a retired Prefect as they would be of Fr. Neuhaus. They would, perhaps, also go so far as to say that because he is a theologian and not a liturgist, his opinion doesn’t matter.
Therefore, I would submit to you that the words of a retired, non-papal Joseph Ratzinger would have been just as ill-received as were the comments of Fr. Richard John Neuhaus, who, was actually referencing much of what Ratzinger had written in the first place.
So, the scenario that I described both in my previous post and in this one certainly would be seen a lot differently had Joseph Ratzinger not emerged as Pope.
Interestingly enough, those who say Pope Benedict, yes and Fr. Richard John Neuhaus no haven’t really studied the issue very carefully. Pope Benedict has not changed the convictions he held as Joseph Ratzinger. These convictions, especially regarding Sacred Music, were voiced by Fr. Neuhaus. Therefore, to dismiss Fr. Neuhaus, when he, himself, is using the same arguments as the Holy Father makes no sense at all.
M
maximus
Guest
Thanks for all your (name removed by moderator)uts, like another person I was considering writing a letter about what I thought was less than charitable commentary. I do not like it when an anti-Catholic from our separated brethren or a pagan detractor uses uncharitable language against us. I expect knowledgeable and highly intelligent Catholics to conduct themselves with charity of word, because it goes a long way in trying to evangelize and bring people home to the church founded by Christ. I hold them both in high regards and have always enjoyed them speaking and doing interviews, I just did not like the way they did the color analysis for the DC mass and the events at the Seminary it could have been softer and with less talking. I listen to the podcasts of the coverage because I wish to hear our Pope; I don’t have cable. On Sunday, CBS carried the NYC mass and the announcers were very good and keep quiet once the mass started.
I guess maybe the format for large papal masses in the future should be a Tridentine High mass and that way everything is standard.
God bless,
I guess maybe the format for large papal masses in the future should be a Tridentine High mass and that way everything is standard.
God bless,
L
Lucyabe
Guest
Gee, I watched both Masses on EWTN, and even some of the reruns, and I didn’t find them too critical or too verbal DURING the Masses, certainly not during the most important, reverent parts of the Mass. Most of their criticisms of the music, particularly, were made after the D.C. Mass - I thought. I was thinking how awful the D.C. “Liturgical” music was during it, and was glad to hear their opinions were the same as mine. Our Holy Father has said he wants more traditional music, and it is like they mostly went in the opposite direction. Gregorian chant?? And what about the Agnus Dei, they forgot to sing dona nobis pacem - what gives there? Did they forget, or were they rearranging something else?
I thank God we have EWTN!
I thank God we have EWTN!
L
Lucyabe
Guest
Interestingly enough, those who say Pope Benedict, yes and Fr. Richard John Neuhaus no haven’t really studied the issue very carefully. Pope Benedict has not changed the convictions he held as Joseph Ratzinger. These convictions, especially regarding Sacred Music, were voiced by Fr. Neuhaus. Therefore, to dismiss Fr. Neuhaus, when he, himself, is using the same arguments as the Holy Father makes no sense at all.
ALL I WANT TO SAY IS BRAVO!! VERY WELL SPOKEN!
ALL I WANT TO SAY IS BRAVO!! VERY WELL SPOKEN!
A
Andreas_Hofer
Guest
I can just imagine Cdl. Ratzinger mentioning how the planners had “manufactured” a “banal, on-the-spot product” instead of drawing on the timeless tradition of the Church. And then I imagine that getting a red censored smiley from you. But those, of course, are his words about the ordinary form in general. I can’t imagine what he might let loose on that horrendous responsorial psalm!
One of the constants of papal directives on sacred music has been that nothing smacking of profane music is to be admitted to the sanctuary. Does loungey-sounding band music strike you as a profane or sacred genre? That is, after all, what we heard for the psalm. I submit it is profane music, and thus a liturgical deformation. That is precisely the sort of “decadent” music the popes have long combatted.
Perhaps you would accept the example of St. Paul, who admonished Peter (i.e., the pope) to his face before others. Then again, I don’t really believe those who defend the music of that liturgy will listen to a saint, but just in case it touches anyone’s conscience . . .
Hint: proof-texting the saints is susceptible to counter-proof-texting (no, it’s not a “text,” but if we wanted we could look up the Universal Doctor on the sometime duty to reprimand sinful clerics).
It takes one person to do Gregorian chant (chant is always unison), and 4 people for polyphony (maybe 6 for more complicated pieces). My Mass has roughly 50 attendees and a choir of 4. We get chant and polyphony on a regular basis. And if you look at the musical legislation of the past century, you’ll find that we’re supposed to be taking steps to do just that in all our parishes. It’s an ideal that we were making progress toward until the liturgical movement derailed in the '60s.The music at a Cathedral Mass is what should be at all parish Masses?
My parish is a little small town parish, where about 100 people attend Mass. A Cathedral style of music would be as out of place as country music in a Cathedral. Just ain’t going to happen.
Jim
I have to confess, too, that I don’t understand why the Church’s ideals would be “out of place” in a country parish. Is there something about being in the country that is supposed to make people strive not to achieve the ideal? Is good music too good for the country? I worked in a rural diocese for a year and was always surprised by how some priests would take anything remotely ornate off of the altar I had prepared for Mass - they thought the low-budget Mass accoutrements that had been mouldering in a country sanctuary for 30 years were “too fancy” for Mass. Your comment reminded me of their attitudes. If “any nine-year-old in Nigeria can sing the Credo in Latin” (as a Nigerian Spiritan told me just a few years ago), it seems like adults in a country parish could manage it, too.
J
Joysong
Guest
It has become necessary to repost my words, for they were misread.
… but the bottom line is, we all heard it, learning or no learning.
… and we have a right to be offended.
… and a right on this message board to express it without being told to ‘study.’
I repeat, had he simply taught the Cardinal’s doctrine in a manner befitting a narrator of a sacred event, I’m sure all of us would agree with the rest of you. But that’s not the way it happened. Listen to the tape.
The millions of listeners who heard his tone of voice, saw his angry countenance, and listened to these actual words depicting a holy sacred liturgy as “exhibitionism,” may be dismissed as ‘unlearned and needing to study’ …
… but the bottom line is, we all heard it, learning or no learning.
… and we have a right to be offended.
… and a right on this message board to express it without being told to ‘study.’
I repeat, had he simply taught the Cardinal’s doctrine in a manner befitting a narrator of a sacred event, I’m sure all of us would agree with the rest of you. But that’s not the way it happened. Listen to the tape.
P
PaixGioiaAmor
Guest
Those four better be highly trained professional musicians.I can just imagine Cdl. Ratzinger mentioning how the planners had “manufactured” a “banal, on-the-spot product” instead of drawing on the timeless tradition of the Church. And then I imagine that getting a red censored smiley from you. But those, of course, are his words about the ordinary form in general. I can’t imagine what he might let loose on that horrendous responsorial psalm!
One of the constants of papal directives on sacred music has been that nothing smacking of profane music is to be admitted to the sanctuary. Does loungey-sounding band music strike you as a profane or sacred genre? That is, after all, what we heard for the psalm. I submit it is profane music, and thus a liturgical deformation. That is precisely the sort of “decadent” music the popes have long combatted.
Perhaps you would accept the example of St. Paul, who admonished Peter (i.e., the pope) to his face before others. Then again, I don’t really believe those who defend the music of that liturgy will listen to a saint, but just in case it touches anyone’s conscience . . .
Hint: proof-texting the saints is susceptible to counter-proof-texting.
It takes one person to do Gregorian chant (chant is always unison), and 4 people for polyphony (maybe 6 for more complicated pieces). My Mass has roughly 50 attendees and a choir of 4. We get chant and polyphony on a regular basis. And if you look at the musical legislation of the past century, you’ll find that we’re supposed to be taking steps to do just that in all our parishes. It’s an ideal that we were making progress toward until the liturgical movement derailed in the '60s.
I have to confess, too, that I don’t understand why the Church’s ideals would be “out of place” in a country parish. Is there something about being in the country that is supposed to make people strive not to achieve the ideal? Is good music too good for the country? I worked in a rural diocese for a year and was always surprised by how some priests would take anything remotely ornate off of the altar I had prepared for Mass - they thought the low-budget Mass accoutrements that had been mouldering in a country sanctuary for 30 years were “too fancy” for Mass. Your comment reminded me of their attitudes. If “any nine-year-old in Nigeria can sing the Credo in Latin” (as a Nigerian Spiritan told me just a few years ago), it seems like adults in a country parish could manage it, too.
I have a choir of about 16. We do polyphony. But there are PLENTY of polyphonic pieces we cannot “get”. If you have people who cannot read music and cannot support a voice part by themselves (which is most people), then stick with chant and very simply polyphony.
J
Joysong
Guest
Indeed it is, Andreas. Are you suggesting in his admonition that St. Paul was disrespectful to Peter or resorted to slurs to make his point? You should check that scripture again. Your point is way off base. Fr. Newhaus was not simply admonishing, instructing, narrating, teaching, or anything else but voicing his own anger publicly.
St. Paul admonished the correct person, rather than display Peter’s error to everyone who would give him audience. If Father wanted to give an admonition to the planners, doesn’t scripture tell us to go privately to the persons responsible? Did he?
A
Andreas_Hofer
Guest
Which is, of course, fine: chant is the ideal anyway, and polyphony is second fiddle.
I didn’t mean to imply that St. Boondocks’ will sound just the same as St. Suburban’s, only that both parishes are capable of offering from the same store which is held out for us to strive for.
- Status