Taking pictures during the mass

  • Thread starter Thread starter mexolic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

mexolic

Guest
Should people take pictures during mass? Iv’e seen this for years on Christmas televised from St. Peter’s Basilica. It reminds me of a red carpet event in Hollywood.
I understand people are exited to see the pope. Would taking pictures during mass, even
if it includes the pope, be considered in bad taste?
 
No big deal. It is not like taking someone’s pictures is stealing anyone’s soul or anything like that.

It definitely won’t destroy the Catholic Church.
 
mexolic said:
Should people take pictures during mass? Iv’e seen this for years on Christmas televised from St. Peter’s Basilica. It reminds me of a red carpet event in Hollywood.
I understand people are exited to see the pope. Would taking pictures during mass, even
if it includes the pope, be considered in bad taste?
Click to expand...
Well it does take away the whole meaning of going to Mass.
 
I would say that this falls under appropriateness. If it is disruptive to do so, then it would be inappropriate and rude to take pictures, but in the case of St. Peter’s Basilica, it is common and does not detract from the celebration unless you trying to get a good picture distracts you from the reason you are there in the first place 😉
 
People took pictures at my wedding Mass and I’m not nearly as cool as the pope! People always take pictures of important Masses in their lifetime. Baptism…Confirmation…etc. I even have a step-mother who insists on photographing family members in front of caskets! :eek: As long as they aren’t climbing over people to get a good shot or anything, I can’t say it’s ever been a problem for me before.
 
vjnycguy said:
Well it does take away the whole meaning of going to Mass.
Click to expand...
Nonsense. If anything, it demonstrates a person’s understanding of the importance of the event and a desire to commemorate it. Masses are photographed all the time and none of them have ever been rendered invalid because of it. I’m willing to bet the top five most meaningful Masses in your life are preserved on film.
 
Flash photography can be annoying and disruptive to priest and assembly alike. A tripod and electrical cables in the aisle can be disruptive and a hazard to those with low mobility. Someone constantly moving around the nave trying to get an angle is not actively participating in Mass, and a similar annoyance to all.

If the above concerns can be avoided, then I would say photography at Mass is an acceptable thing. I understand that some priests tell the wedding photographers that they can wait until it is over, though. Permission should always be sought from someone in charge, because it is easier to ask permission than forgiveness, and it’s also better than having an usher confiscate your SD card…
 
It comes down to time and place. First off, if it is a solemn point, such as consecration, it’s probably going to be seen as rude in the extreme by fellow parishoners (no prohibitions I know of in photographing Jesus in the Eucharist – if there were, a whole host [no pun intended] of televised masses would not exist, but a flash or a beep or a SLR shutter going off is bound to annoy someone). Second, if the pastor has said he does not want photography in mass, no photography during mass shall there be.

And, as other people have mentioned, Mass is not a tourist destination. There are times where pictures are appropriate – weddings, confirmations, baptisms, etc. (again, so long as the pastor has not said “no photography”), but why would someone need to take photos of any given Sunday liturgy outside of for the parish bulletin or a newspaper or some such? The photos aren’t themselves a substitute for Mass. Only beign there with God will suffice. 🙂
 
Rejoice_Always said:
This Papal Mass was rendered entirely meaningless because a photograph was taken?
Click to expand...
No… someone goes to Mass to celebrate the Eucharist. If someone there came to celebrate the Eucharist then they probably won’t take a picture, although if someone is there to take a picture they should do it quickly and silently as to not cause a distraction.
 
vjnycguy said:
No… someone goes to Mass to celebrate the Eucharist. If someone there came to celebrate the Eucharist then they probably won’t take a picture, although if someone is there to take a picture they should do it quickly and silently as to not cause a distraction.
Click to expand...
Is it not clear that it doesn’t matter what the photographer does, or whether or not he is there to celebrate the Eucharist? The Eucharist is the Eucharist even if there are distractions, such as photographs being taken. Even the photographer can celebrate the Eucharist.

I find it wonderfully amusing that anyone would think something like this could detract from the Eucharist. 🙂
 
I can possibly understand the aversion of some people to unwanted technology used in liturgy. Modern inventions such as the piano and the film projector can be used in ways that provide an unwanted intrusion into the sacred character of the Mass. However, technology like this is morally neutral, a tool that we use for a variety of purposes; some may contribute to the greater good in varying ways. A film projector, for example, is explicitly prohibited in official Church documents dating back a few decades, but it has been tacitly approved in many dioceses to facilitate the showing of instructional or promotional videos. My parish has used it to instruct people on the new GIRM and to appeal for contributions to the diocese’s yearly campaign. These uses are approved by the bishop and pastor, and they are not without merit, so to me they are acceptable uses of technology.

The camera is a relatively new (in Church terms) medium of artistic expression. It allows ordinary people and organizations to capture images of reality and publish them for all to see. Is that not a technology that can be used ad maiorem Dei gloriam? Does it not enlighten and uplift the faithful who see images of holy priests and bishops celebrating the Eucharist, which is the “source and summit of Christian life”? I know that I would be spiritually poorer if I did not have easy access to myriad images of the Holy Father, so distant in Rome, and if I had not seen his elegant liturgies so beautifully celebrated, if I could not appreciate the sumptuous splendor of the architechture, vestiture, and pontificalia of the Vatican. These material goods were donated by the faithful for the glory of God and the good of the whole Church, and it is the right of every Catholic to enjoy them.

I recently saw Archbishop Aquila installed in the Denver Archdiocese. What a celebration! The music and the preaching were top-notch. As I am currently homebound, I also participated in Mass solely by viewing it on TV on Sunday, listening to a few YouTube homilies, and then the deacon came in person on Monday to bring me Holy Communion. What a crime if I had not been able to hear God’s Word on His holy day, just because I cannot leave my home.

You may argue about the methods of obtaining them, but photographs are an objective asset to the People of God, and the faithful should not be denied the experience of Mass just because you find cameras distasteful. Let the photographers act reverently and respectfully and let us all enjoy God’s gifts.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top