Technology and the Mass

[Jegudiel]

Thinking about this, I would have a carillon (musical instrument made of bells) playable from the pipe organ controls. That would be a sublime way to add the ringing of bells to the Gloria.

 

[Stylites]

What I described just might facilitate the spiritual nourishment of souls – something totally forgotten by the “why wasn’t the money used to clothe and feed the homeless?” crowd. Build that something that helps to nourish the faithful in a spiritual manner is also a wonderful way to show respect for God by nourishing His People.

Before you begin such a grand and uplifting project, start by nourishing His People with simple words of love rather than words of scorn and derision.

 

[Jegudiel]

I am sorry to force the OP to repeat himself again and again, but I will echo what many others have said because it is also my opinion.

The things you suggest are not envisioned by the rubrics of the Roman Missal (or any other Missal.) The things you suggest demand a technology level far above what is acceptable for Christian liturgy. The things you suggest would turn it into a theater performance, nay, a circus act.

You are simply voicing your personal opinion. In some cases you’re out-and-out wrong (the use of bells for example.)

Liturgy is the work of the people glorifying God, not ourselves.

And? Are you trying to sell your belief that what I described glorifies ourselves and not God? Sorry but no sale!

Jegudiel, you have not produced a single citation or Church document to reinforce the assertions you have repeatedly made in this thread. Enough of assertions. Give me facts. I want to see documents and studies which prove that you are correct and all the rest of us are wrong. The onus is on you.

Pardone Me?! Do you really think you can spin things around? Really?

Nothing and I mean absolutely nothing I described contravenes any liturgical rubric of the Latin Rite of the Catholic Church. Seems as though you believe otherwise. I cannot prove a negative. The onus is clearly on you to show where I described something that contravenes the rubrics. Good luck with that. You’ll need it…

Finally describing what I outlined as “a circus act” is deeply repugnant. A very nasty and malicious comment meant not to convey fact or otherwise communicate but simply to cause someone else pain. If that’s not something you realize then that’s on you.

 

[Jegudiel]

Before you begin such a grand and uplifting project, start by nourishing His People with simple words of love rather than words of scorn and derision.

Are you going to take you own advice as well?

 

[ConstantineTG]

I attend one almost weekly. While I appreciate the DL I find the churches to be too small and far, far too cluttered for my taste.

While I appreciate the history (and to some degree the supposed meaning) of the iconstasis I do not like them. They simply block too much of my* visual* sense.

I also don’t care for the total absence of musical instruments. The thunder of pipe organs has a very special place in my heart. I also don’t think the East ever developed the use of bells (particularly swinging bells and carillons) to the level they have been in the West. So there goes the audio sense.

The iconostasis is the visual scene. It is our window to those in heaven. And some parishes do a better job in covering the nave in icons.

So thats visual.

There is the singing, that is auditory.

The incense, smell.

Body and blood for Communion, taste. Taste and see the goodness of the Lord!

And touch. We kiss the icons, we kiss the hand of the clergy, we kiss the chalice, we hug each other at the sign of peace.

 

[Jegudiel]

The iconostasis is the visual scene. It is our window to those in heaven. And some parishes do a better job in covering the nave in icons.

So thats visual.

There is the singing, that is auditory.

The incense, smell.

Body and blood for Communion, taste. Taste and see the goodness of the Lord!

And touch. We kiss the icons, we kiss the hand of the clergy, we kiss the chalice, we hug each other at the sign of peace.

So? I’m very well aware of what an interior of a Eastern Catholic or Orthodox church looks like. I know the liturgy very well and the history behind it. It’s simply not my favorite is all. My favorite is the Mass (more specifically the OF Mass) celebrated in all its glory in a large cathedral or basilica.

My interest here is not merely using the 5 senses, but using them to our earthly limits within the context of the liturgy and I have certainly never seen that in the East – at least in my opinion.

 

[ConstantineTG]

So? I’m very well aware of what an interior of a Eastern Catholic or Orthodox church looks like. I know the liturgy very well and the history behind it. It’s simply not my favorite is all. My favorite is the Mass (more specifically the OF Mass) celebrated in all its glory in a large cathedral or basilica.

My interest here is not merely using the 5 senses, but using them to our earthly limits and I have certainly never seen that in the East – at least in my opinion.

I don’t see how a light show will make the Liturgy better. In the Byzantine Rite we do not use instruments. You know why? Because instruments are man made. The only instrument God made is our own voices for singing, that is why we sing only with our voices.

A light show doesn’t glorify God, only makes a show. If you want to be entertained, just watch TV on a Sunday morning.

 

[Jegudiel]

I don’t see how a light show will make the Liturgy better. In the Byzantine Rite we do not use instruments. You know why? Because instruments are man made. The only instrument God made is our own voices for singing, that is why we sing only with our voices.

A light show doesn’t glorify God, only makes a show. If you want to be entertained, just watch TV on a Sunday morning.

I didn’t describe a “light show.” How terribly repugnant to suggest I did.

I prefer the accouterments of pipe organs. So do a great many Greek Orthodox parishes. It’s nice to see at least one Orthodox state church realizes something better when they hear it – an instrument made possible only by the gifts of God in terms of technology, craftsmanship, etc.

The inside of an Eastern church in no way glorifies God any better than what I described no matter what you might believe.

 

[ConstantineTG]

I didn’t describe a “light show.” How terribly repugnant to suggest I did.

I prefer the accouterments of pipe organs. So do a great many Greek Orthodox parishes. It’s nice to see at least one Orthodox state church realizes something better when they hear it – an instrument made possible only by the gifts of God in terms of technology, craftsmanship, etc.

The inside of an Eastern church in no way glorifies God any better than what I described no matter what you might believe.

Dimming lights, LCD TVs, that is a light show.

 

[Elizium23]

Pardone Me?! Do you really think you can spin things around? Really?

Nothing and I mean absolutely nothing I described contravenes any liturgical rubric of the Latin Rite of the Catholic Church. Seems as though you believe otherwise. I cannot prove a negative. The onus is clearly on you to show where I described something that contravenes the rubrics. Good luck with that. You’ll need it…

Finally describing what I outlined as “a circus act” is deeply repugnant. A very nasty and malicious comment meant not to convey fact or otherwise communicate but simply to cause someone else pain. If that’s not something you realize then that’s on you.

You started this thread, you are the one making bald-faced assertions that everyone else is wrong and that you are right. You are the one with blue-sky ideas for the liturgy that have no basis in tradition and really have no traction in the modern world as the Church is timeless.

I did not ask you to prove a negative. I asked you to prove a positive. The rubrics are interpreted in a restrictive way. Allow me to quote a document, Sacrosanctum Concilium, written by the Vatican II council, which was the source of liturgical reforms at that time and produced the Mass we know today as the Ordinary Form.

22. 1. Regulation of the sacred liturgy depends solely on the authority of the Church, that is, on the Apostolic See and, as laws may determine, on the bishop.

1. In virtue of power conceded by the law, the regulation of the liturgy within certain defined limits belongs also to various kinds of competent territorial bodies of bishops legitimately established.
2. Therefore no other person, even if he be a priest, may add, remove, or change anything in the liturgy on his own authority.
3. That sound tradition may be retained, and yet the way remain open to legitimate progress Careful investigation is always to be made into each part of the liturgy which is to be revised. This investigation should be theological, historical, and pastoral. Also the general laws governing the structure and meaning of the liturgy must be studied in conjunction with the experience derived from recent liturgical reforms and from the indults conceded to various places. Finally, there must be no innovations unless the good of the Church genuinely and certainly requires them; and care must be taken that any new forms adopted should in some way grow organically from forms already existing.

As far as possible, notable differences between the rites used in adjacent regions must be carefully avoided.

You are not the Holy Father, and I doubt that you represent a competent Episcopal Conference legitimately established. So by what authority do you presume to “add … or change anything in the liturgy”?

Allow me to quote another Church document, De Musica Sacra, 1958.

71. The use of automatic instruments and machines, such as the automatic organ, phonograph, radio, tape or wire recorders, and other similar machines, is absolutely forbidden in liturgical functions and private devotions, whether they are held inside or outside the church, even if these machines be used only to transmit sermons or sacred music, or to substitute for the singing of the choir or faithful, or even just to support it.

1. The use of any kind of projector, and particularly movie projectors, with or without sound track, is strictly forbidden in church for any reason, even if it be for a pious, religious, or charitable cause.
2. Approved customs, and the various ways of ringing bells, according to the occasion, should be carefully preserved. Local Ordinaries should set down the traditional, and customary practices, or prescribe them if there are none.
3. Attachments designed to amplify the sound of the bells or to make them easier to ring, may be permitted by the local Ordinary after consultation with experts. If there is doubt the matter should be referred to the Sacred Congregation of Rites.
4. Besides the various customary, and approved ways of ringing bells mentioned in paragraph 88 some places have an arrangement of smaller bells, hanging in a bell tower, for the purpose of ringing out various melodies. This is commonly called a carillon. It is to entirely excluded from liturgical use. These small bells may not be consecrated or blessed according to the solemn rite in the Roman Pontifical, but they may receive a simple blessing.

As you can see, there are some quite clear prohibitions on “automatic instruments and machines” such as the type you envision for your theater production. You can also see that a carillon is to be entirely excluded from liturgical use, which is exactly what you envision with the “organ … controlling a carillon … for the singing of the Gloria.”

Your suggestions are not suitable for the holy sanctuary, nor for the sacred liturgy, nor for the reverence due to the Most Blessed Sacrament of the altar.

 

[Jegudiel]

Dimming lights, LCD TVs, that is a light show.

You’re factually wrong. Not sure what else to say.

 

[Elizium23]

You’re factually wrong. Not sure what else to say.

Cite your source!

 

[Jegudiel]

You started this thread, you are the one making bald-faced assertions that everyone else is wrong and that you are right. You are the one with blue-sky ideas for the liturgy that have no basis in tradition and really have no traction in the modern world as the Church is timeless.

So? You’re clearly getting agitated because I’m not buying your opinions as facts. The ringing of bells (as just one example) before, during and after Mass are neither “blue sky” (not that it would matter if they were) or lacking in tradition.

You’re simply not telling the truth.

I did not ask you to prove a negative. I asked you to prove a positive. The rubrics are interpreted in a restrictive way. Allow me to quote a document, Sacrosanctum Concilium, written by the Vatican II council, which was the source of liturgical reforms at that time and produced the Mass we know today as the Ordinary Form.

The onus is on you.

You are not the Holy Father, and I doubt that you represent a competent Episcopal Conference legitimately established. So by what authority do you presume to “add … or change anything in the liturgy”?

What did I add to the liturgy? What did I “add” that is controlled by any official Church document? Answer: nothing.

Allow me to quote another Church document, De Musica Sacra, 1958.

As you can see, there are some quite clear prohibitions on “automatic instruments and machines” such as the type you envision for your theater production. Your suggestions are not suitable for the holy sanctuary, nor for the sacred liturgy, nor for the reverence due to the Most Blessed Sacrament of the altar.

Pure bunkum. What “automatic instruments?” One person tried to say I suggested pre-recorded music during the Mass. Sorry but I didn’t. The stations wouldn’t change during the Mass (although the dozens of video monitors at St. Pat’s in NYC continually change so people can actually see the Mass.) No problem there The carillon would be just fine.

Be as negative as you like but what I described would be wonderful. Some people like yourself simply have not had enough exposure to different things to realize that.

 

[Jegudiel]

Cite your source!

Did you miss the part about the onus being on you? You make claim after claim with no backup. When you finally cite something you offer your tortured interpretation…

 

[Jegudiel]

You started this thread, you are the one making bald-faced assertions that everyone else is wrong and that you are right. You are the one with blue-sky ideas for the liturgy that have no basis in tradition and really have no traction in the modern world as the Church is timeless…

You need to be honest with yourself. You don’t like what I outlined. That’s OK. I’m sure there are a number of reasons but one of them is definitely not because I mentioned something that is forbidden or discouraged by the Church.

You don’t like what I outlined and rather than face the fact your dislike is based on your own personal tastes, you are bound and determined to try and find some Church document that backs up your opinion. You want some authority! Good luck because you aren’t going to find any for I too have studied the documents you are currently misinterpreting.

It would have been honest for you and others to voice your personal opinions as such. Instead nasty comments are tossed around in frustration because you and others cannot find anything from the Church that supports your opinion. In the end it’s just that – *your opinions. *

My reason for posting this was in the hopes of hearing about a small handful of other good ideas – such at the carillon which I added myself. Who knows, that might still happen. I’m well aware of the reactionary stance of many that post here and was willing to endure some silliness in order to get even a little constructive (name removed by moderator)ut. For after all just how seriously can one take people who toss around comments like “light show” and “a circus act” in response to what I outlined?

“Not very” is the answer. Cheers.

 

[Rainaldo]

Let Jegudiel have his multimedia liturgies and see what comes of it. He has no idea, as young as he is … under 30, I’m estimating … that each and every one of his ideas has been tried … and found wanting. But let him try it out, he’s not convinced.

 

[bmullins]

The Mass is often enriched by its surroundings, by it’s furnishings, etc. It may not “need” it but I for one would prefer attending a Mass at St. Peter’s versus a Mass at my local parish.

There is not one thing I mentioned that would detract from the Mass. Not one.

Then might I humbly say, you are going to Mass for the wrong reason. It’s not about the surroundings and furnishings. It is about being involved and giving up your heart in sacrifice to God to join with the sacrifice of Christ on the cross. It’s about the Eucharist, about the very Word of God.

 

[Fiasco]

Nothing I mentioned was “runaway technology.”

Most of us here would beg to differ.
If you want to surround yourself with all of that stuff, thats your business, but some of us are more than a bit fed up with it. And with your superior attitude towards those of us who think your ideas are ...... er......not good...... You started this thread; we didnt. If you don`t like what most of us are saying, then…maybe the problem lies with you, do you think?

I didn’t mention “Powerpoints” by the way.

i didn`t say you did.

Hmmm…

Bees do something similar. They make honey: good natural stuff.
Actually, that sound reminds me of Johnny Cash`s “I Walk The Line”.

There is not one thing I mentioned that would detract from the Mass. Not one.

What a relief!!!

What “flashing images?”

You’re really not comprehending what I described…

The panels would revert from either a “veiled” status or displaying a saint back to the stations. That transition might take a from 1-10 seconds depending on how gradual you would want it. That would be it.

[CENSORED]!!!

I would LOVE to hear people very quietly discussing the stations. That’s far healthier than what most people do today – ignore them.

How about a simple sign, instructing people not to talk before and after Mass? Very green as well: no power source required.

Some just lack the vision…

Arrogance and petulance?

Finally describing what I outlined as “a circus act” is deeply repugnant. A very nasty and malicious comment meant not to convey fact or otherwise communicate but simply to cause someone else pain. If that’s not something you realize then that’s on you.

Spare us the theatrical prose! Shakespeare couldn`t have written better.

Oh really? I’m sorry to hear you were terribly offended by words so innocent and reasonable. At any rate good luck with your wonderful project and write back when you have something concrete to share.

Go easy on him! He`ll wake up soon enough. We Hope!

Let Jegudiel have his multimedia liturgies and see what comes of it. He has no idea, as young as he is … under 30, I’m estimating … that each and every one of his ideas has been tried … and found wanting.** But let him try it out, he’s not convinced.**

Thank Goodness we are!!!

The breathtaking choice of words!!!

 

[maryjk]

Finally describing what I outlined as “a circus act” is deeply repugnant. A very nasty and malicious comment meant not to convey fact or otherwise communicate but simply to cause someone else pain. If that’s not something you realize then that’s on you.

Actually, that was what I thought. I am going to Mass not the theater or to the circus. I am not there to be entertained, I am there to worship.

It has really come down to your claim that anyone that doesn’t agree with your vision, just doesn’t understand it. Sorry, I have seen what you are describing, and I am glad I haven’t found it in a Catholic Church.

 

[TheRealJuliane]

So because they don’t make the effort to do things right, that’s a reason to denigrate using video screens? I think not. I suspect there are thousands of parishes that use such technology with great success.

I stated my experience. I do not like the screens. They are prone to technological failure and then we are all standing there with nothing to be done, because there is no back-up, having no hymnals. Technology, no matter how carefully constructed, usually fails at the moment it is needed the most. And then there is the normal human operator failure. PEBCAC.

Just doesn’t work well in my experience. You don’t have to bite someone for giving her experience.

p.s. What you describe in your OP would be good for, as one poster suggested, a Catholic museum or other type of institution. Maybe one of the Catholic colleges could fund that in their chapel on campus? Just a thought.