Sanctus Bells: should they be brought back?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lepanto
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
L

Lepanto

Guest
In my experience, most “Ordinary Form” parishes did away with sanctus bells years (decades) ago, and most Catholics under 20 or 30 may have never even heard them or know what they are.

Do you think sanctus bells should be re-instituted and used regularly? Why or why not?

Here’s an excellent resource on the topic:

geocities.com/sanctusbells/
 
I would like them returned to the NO Mass, I think it will add to the reverence of the Real Presence and add emphasis on the consecration.
 
A few of the parishes I’ve been to still utilize them.
Some of the newer built parishes currently do not use them (as they probably did not have them when the Church was opened).

At my old parish, we used to use them, but had to go without them for a spell. They broke apart while a server was ringing them 😛
Can’t say for sure if they’ve been replaced yet.
 
I believe the point was to call attention to the particular point in the mass while it was in Latin and people were not all able to follow along. Therefore, it is not necessary in the vernacular since we all should be well aware of this point in the mass unless we are just daydreaming. I personally find the bells startling and they break my concentration.
 
I guess it’s important to point out that they never were banned or done away with.

This is one of those liturgical points that seems more about preference than anything else.

Personally, I think it’s a link to our heritage and done occasionally makes some sense. I’m just not sure if they are truly needed for ordinary use at a Sunday mass.
 
They have been brought back in some parishes I have been at recently. It is a personal preference of the priest than a mandatory requirement. I think there is no need for them (should be optional local parish preference of course) since the mass changed from TLM to NO. In TLM they were used at a time when the people in the pews did not know where everything was in mass because of the Latin. Since the mass is in local languages, there is no real need for the bells as everyone can follow along in their native language.
 
jc-servant said:
**I believe the point was to call attention to the particular point in the mass **while it was in Latin and people were not all able to follow along. Therefore, it is not necessary in the vernacular since we all should be well aware of this point in the mass unless we are just daydreaming. I personally find the bells startling and they break my concentration.
Click to expand...
Not so.

The bells are rung to create a joyous noise to the Lord in delight over the miracle taking place atop the altar of sacrifice. Tower bells are also rung to let those know who are not present at Mass that something miraculous is taking place inside the building. In select parts of the world, entire towns genuflect or bow towards the church when they hear the bells.

People who want to limit or eliminate the use of sanctus bells during the Mass offer your argument and it is fallacious. Actually more than just fallacious. it is a pernicious argument.

While I love the bells (particularly when the big tower bells are rung) their use should ultimately be up to the individual priestly celebrant.
 
There is absolutely no reason to not have them, they point to the importance of the moment, like a trumpet will herald the triumphant return of Christ on the last day. It is a celebration of the moment.

Now if the altar server goes nuts and just keeps ringing them, then that would be a distraction and he should tone it down. They should be done to highlight the moments in the Mass, just as every other little part of our tradition points to the greater glory of God in the Mass.

Each action signifies something and they should not be removed because of personal preference, but should be used to point to Christ at Mass.

This is why we have respect, bells, the crucifix, genuflecting, kneeling all in deference to God and His Presence. We must put God first, then ourselves this way we don’t get distracted into thinking that just because we don’t like something it should be tossed.

God Bless
Scylla

It is interesting to see that no-one knew what was going on at Mass before in Latin and now that we do everyone is so much more educated in the faith. Or maybe people were not so ignorant as we think they were back then.
 
scylla said:
There is absolutely no reason to not have them, they point to the importance of the moment, like a trumpet will herald the triumphant return of Christ on the last day.

Now if the altar server goes nuts and just keeps ringing them, then that would be a distraction and he should tone it down. They should be done to highlight the moments in the Mass, just as every other little part of our tradition points to the greater glory of God in the Mass.

Each action signifies something and they should not be removed because of personal preference, but should be used to point to Christ at Mass.

This is why we have respect, bells, the crucifix, genuflecting, kneeling all in deference to God and His Presence. We must put God first, then ourselves this way we don’t get distracted into thinking that just because we don’t like something it should be tossed.

God Bless
Scylla
Click to expand...
Actually there is. The worst of all are servers who don’t ring the bells correctly. Some celebrants also get startled by them.
 
Spiller said:
Actually there is. The worst of all are servers who don’t ring the bells correctly. Some celebrants also get startled by them.
Click to expand...
So the solution is to ring them properly, not to get rid of them.
By the same logic if someone drops a kneeler and makes too much sound which startles the Priest should we get rid of kneelers?

Ring the bells at the proper time and who in their right mind would be startled? Ring them for an appropriate time and they are a joyous noise. Just because someone might do something in an inappropriate manner does not make the proper use wrong.

God Bless
Scylla
 
The parish I grew up in never got rid of them, and I remember as an altar server having to go back in to the Sacristy during Mass to ring them (they had a mechanical bell system).

The parish still uses Sanctus bells at the Consecration and will until the priest (of 32 years, mind you) is forced/allowed/talked in to retiring.

However, every subsequent parish that I have belonged to since my high school graduation does not utilize Sanctus bells.

I have no preference either way.
 
jc-servant said:
I believe the point was to call attention to the particular point in the mass while it was in Latin and people were not all able to follow along. Therefore, it is not necessary in the vernacular since we all should be well aware of this point in the mass unless we are just daydreaming.
Click to expand...
I think it is very shaky to assume that most Catholics today correctly understand (or believe in) what is happening at the consecration.
 
Spiller said:
Some celebrants also get startled by them.
Click to expand...
I don’t understand how this can be, since the bells are rung at predictable points in the Mass.

Surely, wouldn’t crying babies would be considered more startling? :confused:
 
jc-servant said:
I believe the point was to call attention to the particular point in the mass while it was in Latin and people were not all able to follow along. Therefore, it is not necessary in the vernacular since we all should be well aware of this point in the mass unless we are just daydreaming. I personally find the bells startling and they break my concentration.
Click to expand...
Not quite true,

The purpose of the bells was just like any other use of Church bells, to show joy.

The Eastern Catholics and Orthodox use them as well, and they have been saying the Divine Liturgy in the vernacular for centuries.
 
Lepanto said:
I think it is very shaky to assume that most Catholics today correctly understand (or believe in) what is happening at the consecration.
Click to expand...
Bringing back Sanctus bells probably won’t change this assumed situation either.
 
Lepanto said:
I don’t understand how this can be, since the bells are rung at predictable points in the Mass.

Surely, wouldn’t crying babies would be considered more startling? :confused:
Click to expand...
As the author of that booklet you’re downloading, let me give you an example.

We had a pastor here locally that hated the bells. He actually took our set (shown on the cover of the booklet) and placed them in our parish museum so NO ONE could use them. He even forbade them at Masses celebrated by other priests. He made comments that sanctus bells would never be rung at that parish again. He was backed-up by the “liturgical committee” who claimed not only were the bells unnecessary (they used the fallacious Latin argument) but that their use had been outlawed by VC2. That rubbish caused me to write the booklet.

While waiting for our new pastor, I started ringing a set I had bought, at Masses celebrated by our parochial vicar who focuses on our Spanish-speaking population. He loves the bells and they are now commonly rung at all Masses celebrated in Spanish.

When our new pastor arrived (a good guy), I served his first Sunday and took it upon myself to ring the bells. A few days later he patiently explained that the bells startle him and asked me not to ring them at the Masses I serve for him – but that each celebrant could make up their own minds. 👍 I routinely ring them for different celebrants as do others. 👍

I respect his position – I believe it’s genuine and I cannot begin to imagine the state of mind of different priests at that point in the Mass but I COULD see how it would startle some…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top