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

[Joysong]

Furthermore, most of what Fr. Neuhaus (and many of us who value the importance of genune Sacred Music) noted in his commentaries about the debacle at DC finds finds its basis in this book (along with other writings that the Holy Father has issued on the subject). No one was quoting anything from the originial version of The Spirit of the Liturgy.

You sound like a broken record stuck on the same track, while refusing to move on. ‘Debacle’ is solely the opinion of SOME of you, and not reflective of the majority. Your opinion and Fr. Neuhaus’s is relative, based on your own perceptions, with which you repeatedly attempt to force feed down the throats of so-called illiterate Catholics. Something strongly tells me you never read the V-II’s document on Religious Freedom.

Granted, nobody quoted the original version, yet I believe some of you need desperately to read it, in order to get out of your stuck track. I would say it is more pertinent than JCR’s version, even though the Cardinal addressed separate issues, because Guardini addressed the liturgy as a whole, not as compartmentalized.

[SIGN]Man, this is getting OLD![/SIGN]

 

[30miller]

log on to the EWTN document library.

Joysong, here's your exact quote from your post: "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."  Where exactly is your  underelined in-your-face "DOCUMENT LIBRARY" phrase there? That is what I was responding to.
Now as great as EWTN is - they themselves and all their ardent supporters including myself (and not just with cheap rhetoric but with regular contributions as I trust all those like yourself are as well) have never made the claim that their document library is the "Library of Congress", so to speak, of the Catholic Church.
I was responding to your post - not your later revisionist post.

 

[Joysong]

It is so well written and inspirational, and I would imagine the Pope knew most of it by heart." Where exactly is your underelined in-your-face “DOCUMENT LIBRARY” phrase there? That is what I was responding to.

Nice spin, 30miller.

If you were in truth responding to my phrase, then you would have quoted it and addressed it specifically, rather than be indignant that you failed to find the book in Religious Catalogue instead of the Library. You need to come out of the cave and be a bit more cordial to the posters on this forum.

 

[30miller]

It’s been a week, I go on vacation…I come back and this discussion is STILL going on? …
Last I checked, there has been no papal press release sending Archbishop Wuerl to the see of Siberia over this.The fairest implication one can make is that the Pope and his liturgy team were just fine with the liturgy…
We need to stop putting words and beliefs in the man’s mouth.

  Please inform us in the future as to your vacation schedule and when exactly we are to correspondingly mute ourselves.
 Your "Last I checked...fairest implication" illogic would then say that the Pope is "just fine" with the infamous "clown mass" in the Oakland diocese ([youtube.com/watch?v=NsC4wRPybpA](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NsC4wRPybpA)) BECAUSE no papal press release sent Oakland's bishop to the see of Siberia.  Complete non sequitur.
 So "Putting HIS OWN WORDS in the man's mouth" needs to be stopped. That's absurd.

 

[30miller]

Joysong;3599195]Very evident of your charity to politely ask for clarification.

Now that your steamrolling may have calmed a bit, kindly log on to the EWTN document library. You may be surprised that I was not off my rocker. And while you’re there, it might be a good exercise in liturgical formation to read that book.

Thanks for the steamrolling crack (certain posters seem to get away with this for some reason) - BUT you never said “document library” in the post I responded to - you simply said EWTN. That’s what I responded to because my 8-year old could have found Spirit of the Liturgy by Cardinal Ratzinger on the EWTN site (if not later informed that he could only go to the document library).

 

[30miller]

Nice spin, 30miller.

If you were in truth responding to my phrase, then you would have quoted it and addressed it specifically, rather than be indignant that you failed to find the book in Religious Catalogue instead of the Library. You need to come out of the cave and be a bit more cordial to the posters on this forum.

Joysong - please don’t misquote me and falsify my post. You presented my post by underlining something that I did not underline or emphasize and you cut off the beginning part which I did emphasize (highlighted blue) and was my main reference. You talk about spin. Spin is nothing compared to detraction.
When you choose to “quote” a response post - please do not doctor up the quoted part to suit your opinion du jour. Thanks.
P.S. Thanks also for the “cave” crack. Show your true colors.

 

[qui_est_ce]

I was watching the taped version of the DC mass again. Regardless of the music, and Wuerl’s position on not denying the Eucharist to pro-abortion politician’s, Wuerl’s beaming face when he welcomed the Pope was beautiful. He seemed unable to stop joyouosly smiling. I found his demeaner very moving and reflective of the hearts of the faithful who joined in the moment must have felt.

 

[Joysong]

You have failed to make your point clear after three tries, Miller. I am not a mind reader, but it seemed clear based on the written words before me, that you were indignant because I steered you to the wrong area of EWTN. My human error, I suppose. It happens frequently on a message board.

Then you said you were responding to my phrase, but never listed which one. The only thing that resembled a “phrase” was the comment on the book itself. Obviously, we are not coming across perfectly clear to one another. Your unkind snippets about my “kool aid” set the tone way back for a very uncomfortable dialogue, so it was easy to believe you were nitpicking again in my failure to list the full EWTN link. And the beat goes on, indicating that your 8-yr. old could have found it, further complicated by your rash judgment of detraction.

Yes, I will maintain that this is typical of cavemen. If you want to discuss this topic in a more civilized adult manner, I’m open. But if you wish to hijack this thread with unseemly comments, not only to me, but others as I noticed, then take it to PM.

 

[holdencaulfield]

There were times I felt sorry for the poor Pope, as well…then I realized this is the kind of stuff we all have to listen to (on a less grand scale!), so maybe he will empathize with us!!!

I agree maybe he will see our point of view.

 

[30miller]

You have failed to make your point clear after three tries, Miller. I am not a mind reader, but it seemed clear based on the written words before me, that you were indignant because I steered you to the wrong area of EWTN. My human error, I suppose. It happens frequently on a message board.

Then you said you were responding to my phrase, but never listed which one. The only thing that resembled a “phrase” was the comment on the book itself. Obviously, we are not coming across perfectly clear to one another. Your unkind snippets about my “kool aid” set the tone way back for a very uncomfortable dialogue, so it was easy to believe you were nitpicking again in my failure to list the full EWTN link. And the beat goes on, indicating that your 8-yr. old could have found it, further complicated by your rash judgment of detraction.

Yes, I will maintain that this is typical of cavemen. If you want to discuss this topic in a more civilized adult manner, I’m open. But if you wish to hijack this thread with unseemly comments, not only to me, but others, then take it to PM.

Please call me 30 or MR. miller, thank you. Most people know it’s impolite to simply call one by their “last name” only. You really don’t see others post that way on this forum. To be expected though, for sure.
Words have actual meanings, you know. You did not originally post “I (joysong) steered you to the wrong area of EWTN” - you simply “steered” us to EWTN - i.e. no “area” specifically. I went to EWTN - no area specifically and immediately found what you falsely stated was not there (The Spirit of the Liturgy by Cardinal Ratzinger), and went from there. Get real.

 

[Joysong]

And getting “real” would also expect that when you were INADVERTENTLY guided to EWTN and failed to find what I referred to, you would have asked POLITELY for clarification, rather than jump on me as though I were deliberately deceptive. It is common courtesy.

 

[benedictgal]

I think the problem is that most people will simply go on feelings as far as opinions are concerned and not base them on the facts, such as the liturgical documents released by the Apostolic See. Nor, it is quite apparent, would these same folks be willing to also go on the words of the Holy Father, both pre and post conclave, regarding Sacred Music.

The choice of the word debacle is certainly appropriate for what took place during the DC Mass as far as the musical selections were concerned. This was not supposed to be a celebration of cultural diversity in the United States. If that were the case, then, the planners completely missed the point of the Mass. We don’t celebrate ourselves nor do we pay homage to our cultural diversity. We are gathered to adore God through the Holy Sacrifice. He is the focus of the Mass; not us. That is why the Holy Father even has a particular altar arrangement that moves the focus from him and returns it to God.

The musical selections certainly did not have that in mind. One can certainly approve of haing these songs, but, not in the manner in which they were presented. Had these pieces been done with an organ or a piano, in a much more subdued manner, they may have been tolerable. However, they weren’t and turned into something more appropriate for a Ricky Martin concert of a jazz lounge.

 

[Joysong]

http://bestsmileys.com/angry2/6.gif And the record plays on … and on … and on!

Well perhaps I should say it again and we’ll have a contest on who can say it often enough before the thread gets closed.

Debacle is YOUR, … repeat YOUR, … repeat YOUR perception, YOUR personal opinion, not the perception of the many.

 

[brotherhrolf]

Couldn’t have said it better myself, benedictgal. Cultural diversity? Where were the Cajun fiddlers? Hint: Cajuns keep their music in the dance hall and not in church.

There was a perfect spot for cultural diversity when JP II came to New Orleans in 1987. There was no ragtime, no Dixieland, no jazz, no Cajun music, no Vietnamese music, no salsa, no second line, no Mardi Gras Indian chants…no nothing other than Catholic music appropriate to the Mass.

I shudder to think what Missa “Chank a chank” would sound like. Just because OCP publishes it, it doesn’t mean it’s appropriate.

 

[aloysiusg]

Exactly which OCP tune was it that was inappropriate?

 

[Margarite]

I must say that the music was horrid! I am grateful for the amount of time that the choir director spent on the music, but it was time wasted because the music, well, it was horrid.

Someone said you that it is mean to say this, well, if I see a piece of art that I think is horrid, I will say so, even if it took the artist years to do. There is so much great music within the Church that leads our thoughts to God, and it was sad that at a mass with the pope, the music had to distract us.

I think if the director had read some of Pope Benedict’s books, he would have realized that the pope prefers chant, Latin, organ, etc… music that is more traditional, and more beautiful than any of this modern mumbo jumbo. Every week at my local parish we have to go through the same thing. We have to listen to this modern music which is just migraine material. I have a headache every time I go to a NO mass because of the music. Whenever I approach the choir director, and I try to do so very kindly and just correct them a little on what they were doing, they become very rude, insulting, and angry. I are not attacking them personally, in fact I am not attacking at all, I am just simply pointing out what is wrong with what they are doing.
Recently I confronted a choir director who was singing protestant hymns and she confessed to being a convert, but refused to listen. Then she proceeded to yell and say shut up when I had not raised my voice, or been rude in any way. Then she called the security guard and had me and my family escorted off of church property. I wrote a letter to the priest, but he did not respond.
I don’t know about y’all, but I am Catholic, and I am not going to sit still while they sing protestant or non-Catholic “hymns” at me
Sorry for being so long winded, but I am so tired of this I could just scream:bigyikes:

 

[anamchara]

Last I checked, there has been no papal press release sending Archbishop Wuerl to the see of Siberia over this. The fairest implication one can make is that the Pope and his liturgy team were just fine with the liturgy. We need to stop putting words and beliefs in the man’s mouth.

Thank you!

What we have is a conflict with what some have read with some have seen. However, I can still read! I can see how those people who are great readers can have conflict in what they see (e.g. the D.C. Mass) BUT I contend that what the Vatican has done by approving the Mass and the music (multiculturism and all) give one the best “interpretation” of the printed word. I think the Vatican has very talented people there who can both READ and SEE. If they have no conflict because of their approval of the Mass in D.C. then I SEE (visually) no conflict.

As Jesus often said - He who has ears to hear let him hear – he who has eyes to see let him see.

MonFrere

This is good insight MonFrere. One of the things I am frankly not understanding is the inability for some to accept that the DC Mass was **not **in error.

Your opinion and Fr. Neuhaus’s is relative, based on your own perceptions, with which you repeatedly attempt to force feed down the throats of so-called illiterate Catholics.

Something strongly tells me you never read the V-II’s document on Religious Freedom.

This is the problem I am having with some of these posts. Well put Joysong. The thing is, the writings in question pre-date our Holy Fathers pontificate. It is non-dogmatic teachings which are not binding. Now, I do feel we need to pay heed to such teachings and weigh them accordingly within our own prayerful conscience and of course with the guidance of our clerics. But we are spending a grave amount of time arguing over writings which do not hold the same weight as a papal encyclical or out right dogma. Joysong, correct me if I’m wrong here as I trust your opinion.

 

[anamchara]

. Then she proceeded to yell and say shut up when I had not raised my voice, or been rude in any way. Then she called the security guard and had me and my family escorted off of church property. I wrote a letter to the priest, but he did not respond.
I don’t know about y’all, but I am Catholic, and I am not going to sit still while they sing protestant or non-Catholic “hymns” at me
Sorry for being so long winded, but I am so tired of this I could just scream:bigyikes:

I think it’s awful that it got to the point of having you and your family removed off the Church grounds. Personally, I think you went to far but that is probably a different thread. Meeting the priest first would have been better. You are entitled to your opinion on music of course. I don’t have any issues with that,it’s when those with this personal taste try and force it on others. This seems to be what we are debating in here.

 

[anamchara]

Exactly which OCP tune was it that was inappropriate?

They get their knickers in a twist over the OCP they seem to have trouble accepting that the Church has approved the OCP and as of yet nothing has been taken out that they think is inappropriate which causes them a great deal of angst. I’ll admit some of the songs don’t appeal to me and are over used but over all I don’t think there is anything wrong with OCP.

 

[qui_est_ce]

Whenever I approach the choir director, and I try to do so very kindly and just correct them a little on what they were doing, they become very rude, insulting, and angry. I are not attacking them personally, in fact I am not attacking at all, I am just simply pointing out what is wrong with what they are doing.
Recently I confronted a choir director who was singing protestant hymns and she confessed to being a convert,

She “confessed” to being a convert? Excuse me, but I thought we were told to evangelize by Jesus Christ. Is a convert somehow inferior to a cradle Catholic? My experience has been that converts usually know more about the teachings of the Church than Cradle Catholics. Our choir director is a convert and was even a Lutheran pastor at one time!

I had not raised my voice, or been rude in any way.

I guess you don’t consider being confrontational as being rude. Yes, we have “helpful” people do this in our parish too. None of these people are ever in choir or part of Liturgy committee. The organ is too loud. The cantor is terrible. We should not sing songs in Spanish (for some reason, they never complain when we sing in Polish - our pastor is Polish, or when we sing in French or German. We should only sing in Latin. We shouldn’t sing at all. We sing too much, we don’t sing loud enough. In our parish, the pastor is head of Liturgy committee, and the music is reviewed for appropriateness at the monthly meetings.

I wrote a letter to the priest, but he did not respond

Maybe he’s in on the conspiracy.

I don’t know about y’all, but I am Catholic, and I am not going to sit still while they sing protestant or non-Catholic “hymns” at me

Excuse me, but the purpose of music and singing is not directed “at” you. It is for the praise and worship of God. To sing is to pray twice. I gues you won’t be singing “Jesu Joy of Man’s Desiring” or “Awake ye Sleeper” anymore.