Rio 2013 - a new invitation to indigneous peoples

[trickster]

First of all l am impressed with this Pope! I am not the kind of Catholic who is overly-attached to a 2000 year western european history that has defined both the beauty and the limitations of our global church. I believe that as Native Americans/Aboriginal Canadians we need to create sacred spaces, utilize aboriginal images and symbols, facilitate the development of a “local catechism” that speaks to our people and I believe that was the true message of Vatican II.

In all of my threads, I have recieved both praise and “creative critisism” as only one can - if you are percieved as a progressive from Catholic Answer followers I take it with a grain of salt. I have been labelled progressive, radical and all that stuff which is not a bad thing…but my message is that we ought to be able to introduce drumming, dancing, and other forms of expression within our Mass that makes it truly ours and contributes to the beauty and diversity of masses all over the world.

That, to me is the first step in evangelizing indigenous communities, and enhancing our long - established spiritual traditions on this continent.

Thoughts?

Trickster
Bruce Ferguson

 

[april32010]

the Mass isn’t yours

 

[LongJourney]

the Mass isn’t yours

Ambivalent statement. The Mass belongs to everyone. Therefore, beyond those things which are standard and necessary, it can change, as the people who celebrate it begin to take It into themselves. Read CCC 849-856.

 

[Aelred_Minor]

The mass, and the Church as a whole, should not be self-referential. When it becomes self-referential it dies. This message is one of the threads that have run through the pontificates of both Benedict XVI and Francis. It’s really not about us. This has implications for those with a disordered obsession for preserving or restoring European liturgical traditions, but it also has implications for congregations or individuals who want to reshape the liturgy to reflect their own cultures. The results of both efforts might in some cases be fine in themselves, but the attitude in which they are pursued is toxic.

 

[trickster]

the Mass isn’t yours

Hi April. I am not sure how you got the idea that I was trying to appropriate the Mass. We are all clear that the Mass and the Liturgy are the global formats and prayers of the church. All I am saying is that within that framework there is flexibility to build in forms from different traditions. We see that in Africa, India, in fact in different parts of Europe. All I am noting is that First Nations and Native Americans need to do that work.

trickster

 

[trickster]

the Mass isn’t yours

Yes, you are right April. I re-read what I said and I do use the words “our mass”. Thanks for pointing that out…that was obviously not my intent…ah…words and languages are such limiting and finite tools aren’t they…but they are all we have I suppose.

Trickster
Bruce Ferguson

 

[trickster]

Ambivalent statement. The Mass belongs to everyone. Therefore, beyond those things which are standard and necessary, it can change, as the people who celebrate it begin to take It into themselves. Read CCC 849-856.

thank you Long Journey…

Trickster
Bruce Ferguson

 

[trickster]

The mass, and the Church as a whole, should not be self-referential. When it becomes self-referential it dies. This message is one of the threads that have run through the pontificates of both Benedict XVI and Francis. It’s really not about us. This has implications for those with a disordered obsession for preserving or restoring European liturgical traditions, but it also has implications for congregations or individuals who want to reshape the liturgy to reflect their own cultures. The results of both efforts might in some cases be fine in themselves, but the attitude in which they are pursued is toxic.

Ah Aelred Minor…my old sparing partner…how have you been… it’s been a long time.

I agree with your points around self-referential. I also agree with your statements about disordered obsessions…and I take your point “for congregations or individuals who want to re-shape the liturgy to reflect their own cultures”. You are right and as I said to April I understand - as we all do - that the Mass and the Liturgy are the global prayers and worship of the church. They reflect realities that are beyond all cultures.

I was more getting to the point that whether it is the Extraordinary mass (traditional mass) or an ordinary folk mass…the symbolism that comes from the cultures or traditions reflect the greater truth that the church is involved in. Therefore I think it is valid to find symbolisms, space, formats and traditions that do not have the glorification of the culture as the primary objective but to bring the greater truths to a people who would understand the multi-level meanings of a message using symbols that are common place in a culture. I think I am weak here on explaining myself but the cultural symbols honour the liturgy or the process that the church is engaged in as global faith community. All I am saying is that we can use Native American/Aboriginal Canadian experience and tradition to contribute to the richness of the global church. We see it in India, China and Africa as examples.

“The attitudes in which they are pursued is toxic”…you are right. They get side tracked by a political or theological perspective and miss the point the church is making. Hope that makes sense…look forward to a deeper discussion with your thinking on this.

Trickster
Bruce Ferguson

 

[robert_chacon]

Trickster you start off by defining yourself as other than Western European. If what you are speaking about is allowing different cultures to incorporate their elements of music, and art or even speaking style into the Mass that help elevate to the purely sacred in a way that is entirely consistent with the Mass , then I think that is exactly what the Pope and Vatican did support, and I do think it truly enriches the Universal Church. When you experience the Mass in Africa or in certain parts of Latin America it is an amazing experience. However, as soon as you introduce ANY element from ANY culture that brings ANYTHING that is contrary to entire intent of the Mass, which is to participate in the death , resurrection and body, blood ,soul and divinity of Jesus Christ, then you crossed the line. I believe this is the instinctual response many more traditional people have against the “guitar” mass. In the Western Culture ,at least in the US the guitar sound equates to Country or rock and roll music, or a number of other things before it associated with the sacred. In other words, some things are too closely associated with the profane or at least less than reverential. Im not saying I agree with that the guitar is inherently inappropriate, but I am of the age where the guitar is generally not the most spiritually edifying musical instrument to my ears. However, in the right context music with guitar has helped rise my soul to great heights in praise and worship settings and even at Mass. So I think there is room for debate. But what is essential here is ones attitude about the reason for any alteration to the cultural context of the Mass.

The push back you are getting here , I think, is more about attitude than actual implementation. I agree with the sentiment that the Mass does not belong to anyone to change to their own personal needs or tastes. WE must conform to Christ and His Church. However, I do not believe this means that ONLY Western music, art, speech (old English , for example “ye”, and “thou”) are inherently Catholic! However, the theology and format, including roles of the Mass CANNOT be changed. When we are looking to bring ones culture into the Mass it should not be for the self indulgent politically correct notion that always points to ME, Mine, that I deserve to be recognized. This is what another poster called self-referential, I believe. Changes simply for this purpose are inappropriate . When elements of Western culture have no meaning to another non Western culture, and there is an alternative sacred element from that culture that can replace the Western element then that, I believe, if I understand Church documents correctly, is appropriate.

Unfortunately, this culture is so self-referential and indulgent, some of us are concerned whenever people want to make changes in the Church because it most often isnt to help one reach the divine and get to heaven, but rather to condescend the Divine to the base desires of humanity. Its the same thinking that animates people to object to a Church teaching because they cant surrender their will to God , so instead they want God to make sacred their sin, such as when people object to the teaching on contraception, or marriage, or homosexuality.

 

[Aelred_Minor]

Ah Aelred Minor…my old sparing partner…how have you been… it’s been a long time.

I agree with your points around self-referential. I also agree with your statements about disordered obsessions…and I take your point “for congregations or individuals who want to re-shape the liturgy to reflect their own cultures”. You are right and as I said to April I understand - as we all do - that the Mass and the Liturgy are the global prayers and worship of the church. They reflect realities that are beyond all cultures.

I was more getting to the point that whether it is the Extraordinary mass (traditional mass) or an ordinary folk mass…the symbolism that comes from the cultures or traditions reflect the greater truth that the church is involved in. Therefore I think it is valid to find symbolisms, space, formats and traditions that do not have the glorification of the culture as the primary objective but to bring the greater truths to a people who would understand the multi-level meanings of a message using symbols that are common place in a culture. I think I am weak here on explaining myself but the cultural symbols honour the liturgy or the process that the church is engaged in as global faith community. All I am saying is that we can use Native American/Aboriginal Canadian experience and tradition to contribute to the richness of the global church. We see it in India, China and Africa as examples.

“The attitudes in which they are pursued is toxic”…you are right. They get side tracked by a political or theological perspective and miss the point the church is making. Hope that makes sense…look forward to a deeper discussion with your thinking on this.

Trickster
Bruce Ferguson

As I remember it we agreed about as often as we disagreed, Trickster.

The way you describe your liturgical ideas here it sounds like your attitude is actually about right. I would remain concerned over the experiment though, for several reasons.

First, such efforts can so easily be co-opted by those who simply want an “indigenous mass” (meaning, a mass celebrating indigenous culture).

Second, there is a crisis of orthodoxy within the Church right now and the introduction of non-Western elements into the mass caries with it the danger of implicit or explicit endorsement of pre-Christian ideas incompatible with authentic faith and reason.

Third, there is the danger of replacing the sacred with the profane. We have seen so much of that in the United States: folk masses, polka masses, electric guitars, and so forth. However, from my impression of American Indian culture (north of Mesoamerica at least) I suspect this is not much of a danger in this case. A sense of the sacred is not something you generally lack.

Fourth, there are things which may be sacred and may have a valid place in natural religion, but which do not have a place in the Mass. Intuitively I think dance is likely to be one of these things. There may be contexts outside of mass in which sacred dance could play a role for those whose cultures include such things, but it is hard for me to see how it could be incorporated into the Roman Liturgy without turning into either a distraction or a performance. It is possible that I am wrong about that though.

Finally, I really hope you won’t take offence about this, but I have doubts over how much American Indian (under whatever name is preferred) cultures are really still distinct from Western culture. No doubt it varies according to tribe and region and even individual families, but I wonder if these cultural traditions are sometimes too far removed from anyone’s real culture that they were raised in not to constitute self-conscious cultural restoration and thus cultural navel-gazing. An example of this that is quite clear to me is certain African American masses that are filled with West African music and liturgical dance in spite of the fact that the people attending and performing (no other word for it than that) were not raised in that culture at all.

 

[trickster]

Trickster you start off by defining yourself as other than Western European. If what you are speaking about is allowing different cultures to incorporate their elements of music, and art or even speaking style into the Mass that help elevate to the purely sacred in a way that is entirely consistent with the Mass , then I think that is exactly what the Pope and Vatican did support, and I do think it truly enriches the Universal Church. When you experience the Mass in Africa or in certain parts of Latin America it is an amazing experience. However, as soon as you introduce ANY element from ANY culture that brings ANYTHING that is contrary to entire intent of the Mass, which is to participate in the death , resurrection and body, blood ,soul and divinity of Jesus Christ, then you crossed the line. I believe this is the instinctual response many more traditional people have against the “guitar” mass. In the Western Culture ,at least in the US the guitar sound equates to Country or rock and roll music, or a number of other things before it associated with the sacred. In other words, some things are too closely associated with the profane or at least less than reverential. Im not saying I agree with that the guitar is inherently inappropriate, but I am of the age where the guitar is generally not the most spiritually edifying musical instrument to my ears. However, in the right context music with guitar has helped rise my soul to great heights in praise and worship settings and even at Mass. So I think there is room for debate. But what is essential here is ones attitude about the reason for any alteration to the cultural context of the Mass.

Yes, we are on the same page. I would only add that when one tries to implement cultural elements into a proper usage in the Mass and liturgy would not be done unilaterally; we would have to do so in with our local bishop, of course. I agree with all your points in the above paragraph.

The push back you are getting here , I think, is more about attitude than actual implementation. I agree with the sentiment that the Mass does not belong to anyone to change to their own personal needs or tastes. WE must conform to Christ and His Church. However, I do not believe this means that ONLY Western music, art, speech (old English , for example “ye”, and “thou”) are inherently Catholic! However, the theology and format, including roles of the Mass CANNOT be changed. When we are looking to bring ones culture into the Mass it should not be for the self indulgent politically correct notion that always points to ME, Mine, that I deserve to be recognized. This is what another poster called self-referential, I believe. Changes simply for this purpose are inappropriate . When elements of Western culture have no meaning to another non Western culture, and there is an alternative sacred element from that culture that can replace the Western element then that, I believe, if I understand Church documents correctly, is appropriate.

We are on the same page again…and I indicated this to Alefred’s points. You are correct.

Unfortunately, this culture is so self-referential and indulgent, some of us are concerned whenever people want to make changes in the Church because it most often isnt to help one reach the divine and get to heaven, but rather to condescend the Divine to the base desires of humanity. Its the same thinking that animates people to object to a Church teaching because they cant surrender their will to God , so instead they want God to make sacred their sin, such as when people object to the teaching on contraception, or marriage, or homosexuality.

Agree again…I would only add that Native spirituality has not been as effected by the forces of modernization or this consumer based world. In fact, when you look at the socio-economic indicators experienced in the aboriginal community I think most would find native people quite spiritual…

Trickster
Bruce Ferguson

 

[trickster]

As I remember it we agreed about as often as we disagreed, Trickster.

The way you describe your liturgical ideas here it sounds like your attitude is actually about right. I would remain concerned over the experiment though, for several reasons.

First, such efforts can so easily be co-opted by those who simply want an “indigenous mass” (meaning, a mass celebrating indigenous culture).

Second, there is a crisis of orthodoxy within the Church right now and the introduction of non-Western elements into the mass caries with it the danger of implicit or explicit endorsement of pre-Christian ideas incompatible with authentic faith and reason.

Third, there is the danger of replacing the sacred with the profane. We have seen so much of that in the United States: folk masses, polka masses, electric guitars, and so forth. However, from my impression of American Indian culture (north of Mesoamerica at least) I suspect this is not much of a danger in this case. A sense of the sacred is not something you generally lack.

Fourth, there are things which may be sacred and may have a valid place in natural religion, but which do not have a place in the Mass. Intuitively I think dance is likely to be one of these things. There may be contexts outside of mass in which sacred dance could play a role for those whose cultures include such things, but it is hard for me to see how it could be incorporated into the Roman Liturgy without turning into either a distraction or a performance. It is possible that I am wrong about that though.

Finally, I really hope you won’t take offence about this, but I have doubts over how much American Indian (under whatever name is preferred) cultures are really still distinct from Western culture. No doubt it varies according to tribe and region and even individual families, but I wonder if these cultural traditions are sometimes too far removed from anyone’s real culture that they were raised in not to constitute self-conscious cultural restoration and thus cultural navel-gazing. An example of this that is quite clear to me is certain African American masses that are filled with West African music and liturgical dance in spite of the fact that the people attending and performing (no other word for it than that) were not raised in that culture at all.

Hi Aelred. I have responded to this post twice…and put a lot of work on answering cause i like your points…and then I timed out and lost all the content…so sorry about the slow response…but I will try again tommorrow for the third time…but this time I will put it on word and if I time out I will just cut and past it and send it back as one document… Geesh…

Bruce