Technology and the Mass

[sacredcow]

We have had a great experience at my Parish implementing technology. The key is to orient it toweards greater participation without distraction. It takes planning. We opted for one central screen that bottoms at a good 8 feet above the top of the roof over the alter. (we have a covering/vault over our altar).
-we opted against multiple TV screens as that would look silly and be distracting…kind of like a sports bar. I’ve seen several “sports bar” setups in churches and they not only look bad, but the TV’s barely are different in what they display from what you are actually seeing live.
-we use a wireless presentation system that will only show powerpoints and short videos in the church, opting instead to put the full video system/dvd player and screen in the hall.
-the wireless system avoids all the cabling, and if a guest speaker comes to the church, we can literally put his laptop or tablet anywhere in the church and project it onscreen.

There was an immediate, noticable difference in participation from day one. The Pastor observed that he liked now seeing the people looking up instead of being buried in books. We kept the books for those who want them. We actively sought feedback, and have received only one letter from soneone saying the screen was a distraction. Many, many compliments have come in.
I think the key is to make a minimal impact on the worship environment, and keep it simple, simple, simple.
Our youth group have jumped all over this new technology, and are planning various worship and social events around it. Young people are very, very comfortable around this technology.
As Catholics, we should not fear technology, but rather master it with sound principles.

“ALL things work together for good to them who love God.”

addendum: when we were ready to roll out our new presentation system, we called for volunteers to run the powerpoints and the laptop, and learn the sound system. Every single one of the 8 volunteers we got are under age 18. Not ONE taker from 18 or older. The youngest is 11. They are now actively involved and greatly appreciated by the congregation.

 

[TheRealJuliane]

We have had a great experience at my Parish implementing technology. The key is to orient it toweards greater participation without distraction. It takes planning. We opted for one central screen that bottoms at a good 8 feet above the top of the roof over the alter. (we have a covering/vault over our altar).
-we opted against multiple TV screens as that would look silly and be distracting…kind of like a sports bar. I’ve seen several “sports bar” setups in churches and they not only look bad, but the TV’s barely are different in what they display from what you are actually seeing live.
-we use a wireless presentation system that will only show powerpoints and short videos in the church, opting instead to put the full video system/dvd player and screen in the hall.
-the wireless system avoids all the cabling, and if a guest speaker comes to the church, we can literally put his laptop or tablet anywhere in the church and project it onscreen.

There was an immediate, noticable difference in participation from day one. The Pastor observed that he liked now seeing the people looking up instead of being buried in books. We kept the books for those who want them. We actively sought feedback, and have received only one letter from soneone saying the screen was a distraction. Many, many compliments have come in.
I think the key is to make a minimal impact on the worship environment, and keep it simple, simple, simple.
Our youth group have jumped all over this new technology, and are planning various worship and social events around it. Young people are very, very comfortable around this technology.
As Catholics, we should not fear technology, but rather master it with sound principles.

“ALL things work together for good to them who love God.”

addendum: when we were ready to roll out our new presentation system, we called for volunteers to run the powerpoints and the laptop, and learn the sound system. Every single one of the 8 volunteers we got are under age 18. Not ONE taker from 18 or older. The youngest is 11. They are now actively involved and greatly appreciated by the congregation.

Nice! The oldsters somehow gained control of ours, at least for the vigil mass. No one under 80, I think. Maybe that’s why there are so many total fails…On Sunday, it’s better.

 

[Tigg]

Some people simply lack the life experience to realize just how beautiful things can be. They equate proposals to the bad examples they have already experienced. Quite sad.

What I believe is sad is that in the beautification of your visual sense, you don’t seem to realize how much it would compete with our mystical one and the transcendency of our God.

 

[sacredcow]

What I believe is sad is that in the beautification of your visual sense, you don’t seem to realize how much it would compete with our mystical one and the transcendency of our God.

there is a dichotomy here that is not absolute…there are ranges of how we employ technology i.e.; a disco ball running in church would be a distraction…most would agree I hope. Your point is well taken insofar as when we make careful and prudent decisions about technology, we avoid the “competition” you mention. There are non-catholic christians who still look at us as image worhsippers because we have artwork and statues that distract from pure worship. Could we not make your same argument against stained glass, mosaics, statues, murals, crucifixes, sanctuary lamps, altars, shiny gold items and any other item that we “see?” It all comes down to balance, understanding, and obedience to the core principles of liturgical directives. I myself am very comfortable with the “simpler is better” approach to technology. it has worked well in our parish. when we bring something into the order of Grace, giving it a spiritual purpose, we sanctify its use.

 

[Jegudiel]

Originally Posted by Jegudiel
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.

You’re simply wrong when you suggest “you are going to Mass for the wrong reason.” I go to Mass to be at the foot of Calvary when Jesus Christ is sacrificed to His Father for our sins. Nothing I wrote suggests anything different.

I also didn’t in any way suggest “It’s not about the surroundings and furnishings” – you did. Unlike others though I strongly support things like extravagant Papal Masses. Yes, a Mass in one’s living room provides the exact same sacramental grace, but the grandeur, the solemness, the beauty, etc. is also important.

Given your comments Mass should only be celebrated in a white sterile room with a unpainted concrete floor and that’s simply not the Catholic way if resources permit otherwise.

 

[Jegudiel]

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.

Possibly with your design. Not with mine.

 

[TheRealJuliane]

Possibly with your design. Not with mine.

I don’t have a design. You know, you are extremely defensive about your idea. Did you think we were going to fall all over you with kudos or something?

lolz.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[Jegudiel]

What I believe is sad is that in the beautification of your visual sense, you don’t seem to realize how much it would compete with our mystical one and the transcendency of our God.

What part exactly? Please be specific. There is nothing I described that would compete with the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

One thing I have always wondered about is all the bric-a-brac stuck on the walls of older churches. The very sort of things that compete for our attention during the Mass. Do you include such bric-a-brac in things that “would compete with our mystical one and the transcendency of our God”? That’s the very reason I mentioned electronically veiling the stations just before Mass began. To aid in our focus to the altar.

 

[Jegudiel]

I don’t have a design. You know, you are extremely defensive about your idea. Did you think we were going to fall all over you with kudos or something?

I was hoping for a few additional ideas, that’s why I posted. I was also expecting a great deal of noise. I was not disappointed.

 

[Jegudiel]

there is a dichotomy here that is not absolute…there are ranges of how we employ technology i.e.; a disco ball running in church would be a distraction…most would agree I hope. Your point is well taken insofar as when we make careful and prudent decisions about technology, we avoid the “competition” you mention. There are non-catholic christians who still look at us as image worhsippers because we have artwork and statues that distract from pure worship. Could we not make your same argument against stained glass, mosaics, statues, murals, crucifixes, sanctuary lamps, altars, shiny gold items and any other item that we “see?” It all comes down to balance, understanding, and obedience to the core principles of liturgical directives. I myself am very comfortable with the “simpler is better” approach to technology. it has worked well in our parish. when we bring something into the order of Grace, giving it a spiritual purpose, we sanctify its use.

Thank you.

People DID carp about some of the things you mentioned. The beloved Gothic Architecture was universally derided as being “ugly” and “cheap.” Thank goodness some pressed on. Many believed for example that electricity was the work of the Devil and that it should never be allowed in churches. I’m sure at least a few argued about the possibility of the power going out in the middle of a Mass (still a possibility today) once they began having evening Masses that is.

One thing is clear based on the tenor of many posts. Most here have never experienced a first class performing arts center. One person characterized the dimming of lights as a “light show.” In reality if done correctly it’s difficult to even perceive, although one will eventually realize it’s darker or lighter.

 

[Jegudiel]

I read about two other ideas that I would incorporate into a church design. First I would passively shield (as opposed to actively blocking) the church from receiving cell phone calls. The practice is common in newly built theaters.

I would also have the audio system plumbed into a low power AM transmitter for use inside of the church. That way folks who have trouble hearing could just bring or borrow a simple AM radio with headphones to hear the Mass more clearly.

 

[Tigg]

there is a dichotomy here that is not absolute…there are ranges of how we employ technology i.e.; a disco ball running in church would be a distraction…most would agree I hope. Your point is well taken insofar as when we make careful and prudent decisions about technology, we avoid the “competition” you mention. There are non-catholic christians who still look at us as image worhsippers because we have artwork and statues that distract from pure worship. Could we not make your same argument against stained glass, mosaics, statues, murals, crucifixes, sanctuary lamps, altars, shiny gold items and any other item that we “see?” It all comes down to balance, understanding, and obedience to the core principles of liturgical directives. I myself am very comfortable with the “simpler is better” approach to technology. it has worked well in our parish. when we bring something into the order of Grace, giving it a spiritual purpose, we sanctify its use.

The sacramentals you mention above can raise the heart to God and with devout use can cause an increase of grace by virtue of the treasury and intercession of the Church. Man-made effects can never increase the theological virtue of faith in my soul, or purport grace via ex opere operantis (speaking of personal disposition and the quantity of grace received.) The bells and lighting affects may cause an emotional stirring in my soul, but that would be a self-satisfying thing. Even the spiritual masters warned against sensible consolations that would detract from the true love of God, and I might add, in this case, the Divine Action taking place on the altar.

 

[Jegudiel]

The sacramentals you mention above can raise the heart to God and with devout use can cause an increase of grace by virtue of the treasury and intercession of the Church. Man-made effects can never increase the theological virtue of faith in my soul, or purport grace via ex opere operantis (speaking of personal disposition and the quantity of grace received.) The bells and lighting affects may cause an emotional stirring in my soul, but that would be a self-satisfying thing. Even the spiritual masters warned against sensible consolations that would detract from the true love of God, and I might add, in this case, the Divine Action taking place on the altar.

No.

Given your example, the bells play not only the historic role of calling the faithful to worship, they also give glory to God. (Psalm 98.4 “Make a joyful noise to the Lord, all the Earth…”) They may also promote an “emotional stirring” in your soul and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. We enjoy many beautiful things at Mass – from wonderful organists and vocalists to the use of beautiful sacred vessels – all for God’s Glory. Catholics are not Puritans, thanks be to God.

Once again without any proof you infer that what I outlined would “detract from the true love of God/the Divine Action taking place on the altar” and that’s simply nonsense. If anything what I described would FOCUS one’s attention on the sacrifice atop the altar.

 

[TheRealJuliane]

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.

The more I think about what the OP is describing, the more I feel troubled about the execution. It would give me a disturbed feeling to know that I am being manipulated by the lighting in the sanctuary, to focus, to feel, to think, to notice anything. Now you may say that some of this already happens, in some churches. The parish I attend, the one with the screens instead of hymnals, has at times had someone dim the lights for the consecration. But that’s as far as it goes. There is no spotlight on the priest and the altar, etc.

It all just seems way too STAGED to me…Like a performance venue and not a church.

But obviously, the OP believes his idea has merit. And, that the rest of us are stupid not to understand his vision.

 

[maryjk]

I read about two other ideas that I would incorporate into a church design. First I would passively shield (as opposed to actively blocking) the church from receiving cell phone calls. The practice is common in newly built theaters.

Don’t want any first responders at Mass, huh? Or anyone that may have an emergency while they are there? When first my mom, then my dad was sick, I loved being at Mass. I knew the hospital could get me on my cell phone. I guess you would have preferred that I had just stayed away. Pretty cruel if you ask me.

 

[Luna_Lovecraft]

But obviously, the OP believes his idea has merit. And, that the rest of us are stupid not to understand his vision.

Indeed.

 

[Jegudiel]

The more I think about what the OP is describing, the more I feel troubled about the execution. It would give me a disturbed feeling to know that I am being manipulated by the lighting in the sanctuary, to focus, to feel, to think, to notice anything. Now you may say that some of this already happens, in some churches. The parish I attend, the one with the screens instead of hymnals, has at times had someone dim the lights for the consecration. But that’s as far as it goes. There is no spotlight on the priest and the altar, etc.

It all just seems way too STAGED to me…Like a performance venue and not a church.

But obviously, the OP believes his idea has merit. And, that the rest of us are stupid not to understand his vision.

Some people simply lack the life experiences and the imagination to conceptualize just how beautiful what I described could be. It’s not for every church (or even every Mass in said church) but it has its place.

Some people no doubt have the image of an overhead projector with someone placing slides written in grease pencil on it, someone flipping the lights on and off and scratchy LP’s playing before and after Mass. If that’s the limit of one’s experience and if they don’t realize it, I could see how they would be reactionary to what I posted.

Those of us that have experience more, experienced better understand…

I didn’t say anyone was “stupid” – you did. But some of the comments made say a great deal negative about those making them.

 

[Tigg]

Given your example, the bells play not only the historic role of calling the faithful to worship, they also give glory to God. (Psalm 98.4 “Make a joyful noise to the Lord, all the Earth…”) They may also promote an “emotional stirring” in your soul and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.

Personally, I like bells, especially just prior to the Consecration; I love beautiful architecture and can appreciate the gold, and the exquisite vestments and vessels used at Mass and agree they give glory to God. I am not, however, so fooled by emotional responses that have been caused because my senses have been tintillated by the secular, and personally would not consider this authentic worship of God.

Once again without any proof you infer that what I outlined would “detract from the true love of God/the Divine Action taking place on the altar” and that’s simply nonsense. If anything what I described would FOCUS one’s attention on the sacrifice atop the altar

I’m afraid some deeply contemplative souls who do, indeed, live in the “darkness of faith” might not agree with you. Ever read John of the Cross?

 

[Jegudiel]

We have had a great experience at my Parish implementing technology. The key is to orient it toweards greater participation without distraction. It takes planning. We opted for one central screen that bottoms at a good 8 feet above the top of the roof over the alter. (we have a covering/vault over our altar).
-we opted against multiple TV screens as that would look silly and be distracting…kind of like a sports bar. I’ve seen several “sports bar” setups in churches and they not only look bad, but the TV’s barely are different in what they display from what you are actually seeing live.
-we use a wireless presentation system that will only show powerpoints and short videos in the church, opting instead to put the full video system/dvd player and screen in the hall.
-the wireless system avoids all the cabling, and if a guest speaker comes to the church, we can literally put his laptop or tablet anywhere in the church and project it onscreen.

There was an immediate, noticable difference in participation from day one. The Pastor observed that he liked now seeing the people looking up instead of being buried in books. We kept the books for those who want them. We actively sought feedback, and have received only one letter from soneone saying the screen was a distraction. Many, many compliments have come in.
I think the key is to make a minimal impact on the worship environment, and keep it simple, simple, simple.
Our youth group have jumped all over this new technology, and are planning various worship and social events around it. Young people are very, very comfortable around this technology.
As Catholics, we should not fear technology, but rather master it with sound principles.

"ALL things work together for good to them who love God."

addendum: when we were ready to roll out our new presentation system, we called for volunteers to run the powerpoints and the laptop, and learn the sound system. Every single one of the 8 volunteers we got are under age 18. Not ONE taker from 18 or older. The youngest is 11. They are now actively involved and greatly appreciated by the congregation.

How beautiful! Your parish’s experience is practical proof that technology has its place in the Church and at the Mass. You make a critical point: “The key is to orient it towards greater participation without distraction. It takes planning.” That is so very true!!

The wireless is a wonderful application of technology. I’m curious if there has been thought in your parish to doing something to help those who are hard of hearing? I know some forward thinking churches use small, low power AM transmitters. Wireless Internet would be even cleaner.

May God bless the children of your parish! Kids often have the advantage of not being bogged down with the prejudices of a longer life and they don’t fear technology. I would love to see how they would roll their eyes if someone characterized dimming the lights as a “light show” to them.

Thanks again for the example.

 

[Jegudiel]

Personally, I like bells, especially just prior to the Consecration; I love beautiful architecture and can appreciate the gold, and the exquisite vestments and vessels used at Mass and agree they give glory to God. I am not, however, so fooled by emotional responses that have been caused because my senses have been tintillated by the secular, and personally would not consider this authentic worship of God.

You’re suggesting that what I outlined would “titillate” the faithful with the “secular.” That’s pure bunkum. This isn’t simply a matter of disagreement – what you’re suggesting is factually incorrect.