Papal Mass in DC (was it me or was the music crazy?)

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ana
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
anamchara said:
  1. I plan on getting the darn thing and reading it so I can dispute the seriously bias and often rude comments made by many on here.
  2. I’m hungry and need to grab a bit to eat.
Click to expand...
Don’t overcommit yourself to getting “the” darn thing. Pope Benedict has written “many” darn things (as you call them) about the liturgy. So as you don’t get in over your head, why not just continue as you have - just continue “disputing the seriously bias and often rude comments made by many on here”. Or else why not just head for the fridge.
 
I suppose that was to be a kibitz to Anamchara?

While so many here on CAF recommend Cardinal Ratzinger’s books, I wonder just how many knew that he took much of his teaching from the original Spirit of the Liturgy written by his German priest colleague, Father Guardini, and in his honor, wrote a sequel to it.

In fact, when you go to EWTN, the only book of that title is for Rev. Guardini, not Cardinal Ratzinger. It is so well written and inspirational, and I would imagine the Pope knew most of it by heart.

A thought occurred to me that while he was then Cardinal Ratzinger and spoke of his liturgical preferences, now that he is Pope, he does not follow them.
  • He prefers ad orientum celebration, but faces the people.
  • He disliked applause, but gave no indication of that at the DC mass, and entered wholeheartedly in the tributes paid to him.
  • He said he did not like communion in the hand, yet at every papal mass, one does not see any evidence that he would withhold it from a communicant whose hand is extended.
How many times have we said or written things in our earlier maturity that we have changed our minds about later? If his words were to be adhered to by the entire Catholic populus, then all priests would celebrate ad orientum, distribute only on the tongue and never permit applause.

Yet a few words about music are supposed to be the essence of his teaching and etched in stone? If that were true, all he needs to do is issue another Motu Proprio mandating Gregorian chant, etc., exclusively. No, the document from which he drew his source material is much richer than to simply limit his teachings to a choice of music. The liturgy is MUCH, much more.

Some of you may want to look up the statements in the original book about the importance of culture being the essence of religion. Who is to certify whether or not the planners were entrusted with this information regarding multi-culture, as a result of his choice to celebrate the votive mass of the Holy Spirit, and then followed his intent with their interpretation of his wishes. Not a single one of us is able to judge, and that is the bane of this entire discussion.

Indeed, while the music was not to everyone’s taste, I saw threads where people were deeply moved. I have seen some quotes from then C. Ratzinger, depicting the sensuality and earthiness of rock music, yet it is utterly false to say that the music in DC was rock, pop, earthy, etc.
Unless one was there to experience the outpouring of God’s grace upon that entire day, it is impossible to know the fruit of people’s prayer.

THAT my friends, is what I deplore. The judging opinions that condemn the music continuously:
… without having been there,
… without knowing the motivation of the planning,
… without sensitivity of the people’s hearts in that worship setting, known only to God.
… without being aware of the harm their negative tongue does to the listener/reader.

Gee you guys get four cents today! A two-for! :cool:
 
mom_of_ten said:
Mon Frere,

“english” should be capitalized…and “may” should be: “might”.

Forgive my humor, if it in any way has offended you.

God Bless You All 🙂
Click to expand...
momoften,

Anyone who is a mom of ten who cannot find humor amidst the confusion of 11 others afflicted with original sin - would be a candidate for suicide. BUT you’re alive to tell me about my grammar. You’ve got MY respect.

MonFrere
 
Joysong said:
In fact, when you go to EWTN, the only book of that title is for Rev. Guardini, not Cardinal Ratzinger. It is so well written and inspirational, and I would imagine the Pope knew most of it by heart.
Code: 
What in the world are you talking about? I just went to EWTN's site - to the Religious Catalogue - typed in "the spirit of the liturgy" in the search in the upper right of the screen - and up comes one hit - The Spirit of the Liturgy by CARDINAL RATZINGER.
And despite the fact that aloysiusg seems to think that it's "flaming" you  for  any of the rest of us to point out the  misinformation  you are spreading - I'll go ahead  and press the "submit reply" button below anyway.  Sorry, I will not drink your kool aid for obvious reasons.
Also - put in "ratzinger" in EWTN's religious catalogue search and up comes 4 PAGES of books by our Pope. If Joysong and Aloysiusg wish to transfer their thoughts and feelings to the Pope - why can't they quote any of the Pope's writings to back them up.  The idea that Joysong puts forth - that the Pope has obviously put aside all the thoughts of his pre-pope days (as evidenced by his countless books and publications) and drank the Kool Aid and is on board with the banality of the Novus Ordo Mass as presented in D.C. is absurd.
And Ignatius Press is the exclusive publisher of the Pope’s works in this country - and you can go right to their site at Ignatiuspress.com as well.
Click to expand...
 
I’m amazed. I left for work returned. Checked this thread. Saw oodles new contributions. And NO ONE HAS CHANGED THEIR MIND.

I think they should add music to the things that people should never discuss - politics and religion. Such futility!!:harp:

MonFrere
 
aloysiusg said:
Thankfully we don’t have to put any German umlauts in!!

BTW, did anyone notice that the third verse of “Holy God, We Praise Thy Name” was done in German? We did that for the Pope - don’t even know if he caught it or not, but on the video of the mass I thought our pronunciation came across rather well, all things considered.
Click to expand...
Aloysius - thanks for the links to the choir performances before the Mass - I didn’t see any of that on EWTN and it was nice to see. Thanks again!
 
Joysong said:
I suppose that was to be a kibitz to Anamchara?

While so many here on CAF recommend Cardinal Ratzinger’s books, I wonder just how many knew that he took much of his teaching from the original Spirit of the Liturgy written by his German priest colleague, Father Guardini, and in his honor, wrote a sequel to it.

In fact, when you go to EWTN, the only book of that title is for Rev. Guardini, not Cardinal Ratzinger. It is so well written and inspirational, and I would imagine the Pope knew most of it by heart.

A thought occurred to me that while he was then Cardinal Ratzinger and spoke of his liturgical preferences, now that he is Pope, he does not follow them.
  • He prefers ad orientum celebration, but faces the people.
  • He disliked applause, but gave no indication of that at the DC mass, and entered wholeheartedly in the tributes paid to him.
  • He said he did not like communion in the hand, yet at every papal mass, one does not see any evidence that he would withhold it from a communicant whose hand is extended.
How many times have we said or written things in our earlier maturity that we have changed our minds about later? If his words were to be adhered to by the entire Catholic populus, then all priests would celebrate ad orientum, distribute only on the tongue and never permit applause.

Yet a few words about music are supposed to be the essence of his teaching and etched in stone? If that were true, all he needs to do is issue another Motu Proprio mandating Gregorian chant, etc., exclusively. No, the document from which he drew his source material is much richer than to simply limit his teachings to a choice of music. The liturgy is MUCH, much more.

Some of you may want to look up the statements in the original book about the importance of culture being the essence of religion. Who is to certify whether or not the planners were entrusted with this information regarding multi-culture, as a result of his choice to celebrate the votive mass of the Holy Spirit, and then followed his intent with their interpretation of his wishes. Not a single one of us is able to judge, and that is the bane of this entire discussion.

Indeed, while the music was not to everyone’s taste, I saw threads where people were deeply moved. I have seen some quotes from then C. Ratzinger, depicting the sensuality and earthiness of rock music, yet it is utterly false to say that the music in DC was rock, pop, earthy, etc.
Unless one was there to experience the outpouring of God’s grace upon that entire day, it is impossible to know the fruit of people’s prayer.

THAT my friends, is what I deplore. The judging opinions that condemn the music continuously:
… without having been there,
… without knowing the motivation of the planning,
… without sensitivity of the people’s hearts in that worship setting, known only to God.
… without being aware of the harm their negative tongue does to the listener/reader.

Gee you guys get four cents today! A two-for! :cool:
Click to expand...
 
Every time the Holy Father celebrates Mass on the Altar of the Confession at St. Peter’s he faces liturgical east because that is how the altar was set up. Furthermore, in the documentary Pope Benedict XVI: My Vatican, which aired on EWTN, the Holy Father is seen celebrating Mass ad orientsium in his private chapel. In fact, he celebrates the NO in Latin. Although, from what I saw in the broadcast with the way the books and cards were arranged, he may have been celebrating the TLM on that occasion.

Applause is a sign of respect to the Vicar of Christ. In fact, the final act of respect that the faithful showed to Pope John Paul II occured when the Gentlemen of His Holiness (his pallbearers), lifted the coffin at an angle one last time so that they people could bid a collective farewell to the Supreme Pontiff. This farewell came in the form of applause.

In much the same manner, during the rite of Ordination for deacons, priests and bishops, the ritual calls for the faithful to give their ascent that the candidate for ordination is acceptable. Obviously, they don’t raise their hands and vote “aye”; they applaud. This also occurred when my diocese was erected. After the Apostolic Delegate read the letter from Pope John Paul II, we applauded to give our ascent to become a diocese and we applauded to accept our first bishop.

The applause that the Holy Father talks about is when the music becomes more about a performance where we are celebrating ourselves rather than focusing on Christ. One should not confuse that with the aforementioned examples.

Regarding his book, The Spirit of the Liturgy, the Holy Father chose to name his book after the one by Msgr. Romano Guardini in tribute to the late prelate’s work. Interestingly enough, the former Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger once noted that his edition of the book was on Pope John Paul’s nightstand.
 
sorry guys - that was a mistake to quote all of that…let me try again!
 
MonFrere said:
momoften,

Anyone who is a mom of ten who cannot find humor amidst the confusion of 11 others afflicted with original sin - would be a candidate for suicide. BUT you’re alive to tell me about my grammar. You’ve got MY respect.

MonFrere
Click to expand...
HA HA!!! Thanks Mon Frere! I needed that laugh at the end of a long day. PEACE and “respect” right back at ya’ 🙂
 
Speaking as a musician, I for one hate it when the congregation applauds us - we are not there as performers, we are there as ministers.
 
MonFrere said:
I’m amazed. I left for work returned. Checked this thread. Saw oodles new contributions. And NO ONE HAS CHANGED THEIR MIND.

I think they should add music to the things that people should never discuss - politics and religion. Such futility!!:harp:

MonFrere
Click to expand...
MonFrere, I would not expect anyone to change their mind necessarily - I just want people to be open to the thought that other people are allowed to differ in their outlook, and that when presented with someone of a differing opinion, that you can at least have a civil discussion with them - it doesn’t have to be all vitriol. And I would offer up mom of ten as proof of this - she seems to be accepting (others are as well) that you, me and a few choice others saw things differently, and she does not chastise us for that, which I respect greatly.
 
30miller said:
If Joysong and Aloysiusg wish to transfer their thoughts and feelings to the Pope - why can’t they quote any of the Pope’s writings to back them up.
Click to expand...
I made this point earlier. So, I see no harm in making it again – it’s probably a demonstration of my stupidity - but that shouldn’t surprise my critics.

FACT: Benedictgal quoted from the writings of Cardinal Ratzinger concerning, among other things, the damage that rock and roll does to the mind. She also quoted some of Cardinal Ratzinger’s thoughts on song.

FACT: The Vatican APPROVED the music for the D.C. Mass.

Many people who disapprove of the music at the D.C. Mass mention Cardinal Ratzingers writings about liturgy. BTW – I’ve read through his book Spirit of the Liturgy and I learned a lot by doing so. The comment often goes HOW CAN YOU RECONCILE THE TWO - the D.C. Mass with the Cardinal’s writings.

OK - Here’s how they can be reconciled. As amazing at it may seem. THERE IS NO CONFLICT. The real problem is the way people are interpreting Cardinal Ratzinger’s writings. People see a few similarities between the two but there’s really no conflict.
Cardinal Ratzinger seems to be talking about “hard rock” that dulls the mind making it incapable of good reason. I don’t thing anything approached this at the D.C. Mass. I don’t thing anyone was tempted to smoke a little weed after the offertory.

I propose that maybe, just maybe, some are making the same mistake that Protestants make concerning the interpretation of the Bible. They read the Bible – make their assumptions - THEN look at history and when things don’t fit their assumptions and interpretations they accuse those in the historical record of not following the Bible.

What one needs to do is to take the writings of the Fathers AS the interpretation of the Bible. It demonstrates how they believed it. This is why tradition is so important and sola scriptura just doesn’t work. You CANNOT take the writings in a vacuum.

I propose that one CANNOT take Cardinal Ratzinger’s writings and interprete them in a vacuum. Vatican approval of the music for the D.C. Mass is a valid demonstration of the “interpretation” of Cardinal Ratzinger’s writings. If one takes BOTH TOGETHER then one can see a reflection of what he actually meant by his words. The kind words commending the liturgy after the fact lends credence to my interpretation. There is really no conflict between the Cardinal’s writings and the music of the D.C. Mass. Any conflict is in reality superficial or coincidental.

MonFrere
 
aloysiusg said:
Speaking as a musician, I for one hate it when the congregation applauds us - we are not there as performers, we are there as ministers.
Click to expand...
I agree with you right there! 👍 When we start applauding the choir, then it becomes a performance.

I see the choir as a means to help us engage in prayer. Granted, if we were to go to St. Peter’s Basilica for Mass, we pray with the Sistene Chapel Choir as they sing the introits. If we know the words we can sing along, if we choose; but, if we don’t, we make their prayer our own. We appropriate it for ourselves, much like we do the rest of the Mass. Obviously, we can’t pray the Eucharistic Prayer with the priest, but, we join him in offering the Holy Sacrifice by inserting ourselves with Jesus. Jesus perfects our weak sacrifice and joins it to His perfect one.
 
benedictgal said:
If we know the words we can sing along, if we choose; but, if we don’t, we make their prayer our own. We appropriate it for ourselves, much like we do the rest of the Mass.
Click to expand...
benedictgal - I would offer up to you the thought that many people at the DC mass, obviously not knowing the words to the songs of the multi-cultural choir, chose to make the prayer of the choir their own. And believe, that choir, as was true for all 4 choirs, was indeed praying as they were singing. I had a close-up view and I could see it in their eyes. You may or may not believe me on that but I will hold true to what I saw.

peace,
al
 
aloysiusg said:
Speaking as a musician, I for one hate it when the congregation applauds us - we are not there as performers, we are there as ministers.
Click to expand...
I remember hearing a quote from someone who was at Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address, he said something like ‘no one clapped b/c it was so profound. It would be as inappropriate as clapping after The Lord’s Prayer’.
I was cringing when the soloist got rounds of applause after singing the “Our Father” on the White House lawn. Not that she didn’t do a superb job(she did) but it’s a prayer. When you clap it seems like the whole prayer aspect is reduced.
 
MonFrere said:
I made this point earlier. So, I see no harm in making it again – it’s probably a demonstration of my stupidity - but that shouldn’t surprise my critics.

FACT: Benedictgal quoted from the writings of Cardinal Ratzinger concerning, among other things, the damage that rock and roll does to the mind. She also quoted some of Cardinal Ratzinger’s thoughts on song.

FACT: The Vatican APPROVED the music for the D.C. Mass.

Many people who disapprove of the music at the D.C. Mass mention Cardinal Ratzingers writings about liturgy. BTW – I’ve read through his book Spirit of the Liturgy and I learned a lot by doing so. The comment often goes HOW CAN YOU RECONCILE THE TWO - the D.C. Mass with the Cardinal’s writings.

OK - Here’s how they can be reconciled. As amazing at it may seem. THERE IS NO CONFLICT. The real problem is the way people are interpreting Cardinal Ratzinger’s writings. People see a few similarities between the two but there’s really no conflict.
Cardinal Ratzinger seems to be talking about “hard rock” that dulls the mind making it incapable of good reason. I don’t thing anything approached this at the D.C. Mass. I don’t thing anyone was tempted to smoke a little weed after the offertory.

I propose that maybe, just maybe, some are making the same mistake that Protestants make concerning the interpretation of the Bible. They read the Bible – make their assumptions - THEN look at history and when things don’t fit their assumptions and interpretations they accuse those in the historical record of not following the Bible.

What one needs to do is to take the writings of the Fathers AS the interpretation of the Bible. It demonstrates how they believed it. This is why tradition is so important and sola scriptura just doesn’t work. You CANNOT take the writings in a vacuum.

I propose that one CANNOT take Cardinal Ratzinger’s writings and interprete them in a vacuum. Vatican approval of the music for the D.C. Mass is a valid demonstration of the “interpretation” of Cardinal Ratzinger’s writings. If one takes BOTH TOGETHER then one can see a reflection of what he actually meant by his words. The kind words commending the liturgy after the fact lends credence to my interpretation. There is really no conflict between the Cardinal’s writings and the music of the D.C. Mass. Any conflict is in reality superficial or coincidental.

MonFrere
Click to expand...
Sorry, but that argument does not work. I asked earlier if you’ve ever planned liturgies with your local Ordinary. No response. When I planned liturgies for my bishop, including his silver anniversary (priesthood) Mass, I showed him everything, readings, music, the whole caboodle. He glanced over it and said that it was fine with him. He trusted my judgment. Thank God, except for a couple of rare occasions when I got railroaded into something bad by the wife of the Bishop’s executive assistant (and couldn’t debate, even though what she did was plain wrong-but it had his blessing-like substituting Angels We Have Heard on High for the Gloria at the Midnight Mass), things went well. There was nothing that was questionable in what I presented and in what was finally executed, except for the aforemtioned incident.

The fact of the matter is that the music was probably shown on paper. The greater concern was to prevent any strange oddity from popping up in the Mass, like dancing and other weird items.

Some of these songs actually have organ accompanyment, including Bienaventurados. While these hymns are a sub-par quality, at least the organ or the piano will help to make them a little bearable. But, what looks fine on paper can become very different when the actual event occurs. I know that from first-hand experience with the Gloria switch.

In other words, the songs themselves, though not the greatest pieces in the world, would have been passable had an organ or a piano been used. However, the musical settings used augmented the problem and really made a sub-par situation worse.
 
Joysong said:
A thought occurred to me that while he was then Cardinal Ratzinger and spoke of his liturgical preferences, now that he is Pope, he does not follow them.
  • He prefers ad orientum celebration, but faces the people.
  • He disliked applause, but gave no indication of that at the DC mass, and entered wholeheartedly in the tributes paid to him.
  • He said he did not like communion in the hand, yet at every papal mass, one does not see any evidence that he would withhold it from a communicant whose hand is extended.
How many times have we said or written things in our earlier maturity that we have changed our minds about later? If his words were to be adhered to by the entire Catholic populus, then all priests would celebrate ad orientum, distribute only on the tongue and never permit applause.
Click to expand...
OK, we need a little educating 'round here folks…

** He prefers ad orientum celebration, but faces the people.*

There are 2 valid forms of the Latin Rite - Novus Ordo and the Tridentine. Tidentine uses the ‘ad orientum’. Both are legal and acceptable. Just because he prefers it when he celebrates Mass in no way communicates that EVERY priest must celebrate ‘ad orientum’. It DOES show, however, that he prefers the solemnity and reverence of the Tridentine. In fact, you’ll notice that at Wash DC, he had a crucifix on the altar POINTED TOWARD HIM - a clear sign that he is offering the Mass a sacrificial priest, and not as just a ‘celebration with the community’ - a VERTICAL emphasis over the HORIZONTAL.

** He disliked applause, but gave no indication of that at the DC mass, and entered wholeheartedly in the tributes paid to him.*

He is a kind and gracious host in a foriegn land, I think we all know that there is a love between the sheep and it’s shepherd. An exception? Yes. And rightfully so. The applause was meant as a way to show our love and respect for our earthly shepherd. It took the place of 50,000 people trying to hug him. I can rejoice in that.
His objection was applauding to bring focus to human activity, rather than the glory of and to God.

It reminds me of when I took over as organist for a parish that was used to a contemporary format for liturgical music. When I’d get done with the recessional, the parish would turn around to the choir loft and applaud. Very quickly, I learned to go almost directly into a postlude to prevent that from happening, and in fact the priest later thanked me for musically discouraging that display. It used to be that people would kneel and pray St. Michaels prayer and other prayers after Mass…but no more - it’s time to SOCIALIZE!

** He said he did not like communion in the hand, yet at every papal mass, one does not see any evidence that he would withhold it from a communicant whose hand is extended.*

Again, both forms are correct and acceptable, but this Pope realizes that there was indeed a loss of reverence and awe and receiving the Eucharist in this manner. He prefers to recognize the legitimacy of the ‘old’ way of treating the Body of Christ.
This in NO WAY communicates that everyone must receive communion in this way.

These arguments do not reflect mightily in support of your viewpoint.

I have found that for those who prefer the latest contemporary style and method of worship. Nothing less than a papal decree issued from the Chair of Peter stating that “Let There Be Peace On Earth” will no longer be allowed at the Mass" will they accept any argument against their preference.

All I can do is to make sure that I am participating in our liturgy, reading the church documents, and influencing the appropriate direction of the liturgical music, and most of all - praising God and giving Him all the glory.

The rest is up to the Holy Spirit!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top