Teenagers and Church Music

[snhs]

Reading a document in personal study does not qualify anyone other than adopting the view of the author. It is never a substitute for experience. If you believe it is, then you are like the guy on TV who was asked to do abdominal surgery through telephone instructions. “Shouldn’t YOU be doing this?” he asked. How willing are you to let a teenager do brain surgery simply by reading about it? And how willing are the bishops or priests to be corrected by a teenager with a mind full of book learning? It is rather odious and lacking in humility, IMO.

So because I’ve never experienced an abortion I can’t take a view on it? Because I’ve never been euthanasied I can’t take a view on that? I thought your argument had problems before, but this is getting a bit ridiculous.

I wonder how willing Newton’s professors were when he was teaching them about gravity? Age has no monopoly on truth.

 

[Jean_Anthony]

Let’s stick to the topic, everyone, and let’s be civil and charitable. Thank you all.

 

[MrS]

He was not simply sharing his views, but correcting my conversation with another poster in a condescending fashion, even though I was not guilty of putting words in JPII’s mouth, as he inferred. Big difference, MrS.

Thanks for explaining Joysong… I though you took offense to the age of the poster, when the offense was that he chose to correct you.

 

[japhy]

He was … correcting my conversation with another poster in a condescending fashion, even though I was not guilty of putting words in JPII’s mouth, as he inferred.

Let us review the conversation, then.

1. VociMike quoted Pope John Paul II: “Evidently, this does not mean copying Gregorian chant, but rather seeing to it that new compositions be pervaded by the same spirit that gave rise to and so molded that chant.”
2. You replied, saying: “I think this part of JPII’s statement is critical to understanding his message – i.e., that the ‘same spirit’ pervades all music, the spirit of reverence and awe.”
3. I replied, pointing out that the Pope’s statement did not include the notion “that the ‘same spirit’ pervades all music, the spirit of reverence and awe”.
4. You replied, saying that my difference of interpretation was a matter of emphasis (of your statement). You suggested again that the Pope meant that “all new music must be molded with the spirit of reverence and awe, which underlies GC”.
5. I replied, pointing out that the Pope did not say “the spirit of reverence and awe … underlies [Gregorian Chant]”, but rather that the Pope was basing his document on Pope St. Pius X’s, who defined criteria for sacred music. I suggested that those criteria better establish what the “spirit” was than simply “reverence and awe”.
6. snhs replied to your “bolding” post, saying that I was emphasizing the words of the Popes, and you were emphasizing your own words and passing them off for what the Pope said (or meant).

I am trying to simply let the Popes speak for themselves, and let “authority interpret authority”. I disagree that Pope John Paul II said that the same spirit underlies all music, and that spirit is of “reverence and awe”; I support looking back at the document the Pope was quoting and praising, to see the context for what the spirit underlying Gregorian chant is.

Update: Let us heed the warning of the moderator, and not let this thread get locked up like so many others. Clearly we can discuss “Teenagers and Church Music” in a civil manner. Let’s stay focused on the issues and not the participants in the discussion.

 

[benedictgal]

SNHS has made a lot of solid observations. The experience he brings to the table is unique because he is a teenager, a member of the “target audience” that these Youth Masses is supposed to reach.

If I read his posts correctly, what I gather he is saying is that youth crave something deeper than the superficial, happy-clappy stuff that is being offered to them as “music” for the Mass. Young people intrinsically yearn for something greater than the ordinary, than what is presented to them by well-meaning, but, severely misguided music directors who think that new and novelty is the way to go.

The fact of the matter is that even the great propoent of WYD, Pope John Paul II didn’t buy into that argument as he noted in ihs Chirographh on Sacred Music:

1. With regard to compositions of liturgical music, I make my own the “general rule” that St Pius X formulated in these words: “The more closely a composition for church approaches in its movement, inspiration and savour the Gregorian melodic form, the more sacred and liturgical it becomes; and the more out of harmony it is with that supreme model, the less worthy it is of the temple”[33]. It is not, of course, a question of imitating Gregorian chant but rather of ensuring that new compositions are imbued with the same spirit that inspired and little by little came to shape it. Only an artist who is profoundly steeped in the sensus Ecclesiae can attempt to perceive and express in melody the truth of the Mystery that is celebrated in the Liturgy[34]. In this perspective, in my Letter to Artists I wrote: “How many sacred works have been composed through the centuries by people deeply imbued with the sense of mystery! The faith of countless believers has been nourished by melodies flowing from the hearts of other believers, either introduced into the Liturgy or used as an aid to dignified worship. In song, faith is experienced as vibrant joy, love and confident expectation of the saving intervention of God”[35].

Renewed and deeper thought about the principles that must be the basis of the formation and dissemination of a high-quality repertoire is therefore required. Only in this way will musical expression be granted to serve appropriately its ultimate aim, which is “the glory of God and the sanctification of the faithful”[36].

There are those who have criticized me for putting quotes from the documents and the popes into my posts. However, these quotes fully substantiate the positions that I have taken and I’ve tried my best to put these words into practice when planning liturgies.

Too bad the publishing houses that promote the kind of banality that is supposed to pass for “liturgical music” don’t seem to pay attention to what the Church has written.

 

[ethelzguy]

The crux of the debate seems to be how one chooses to interpret various documents.

Unfortunately, one (or two or three) document(s) do not singularly define the Catholic faith. It seems that some fastidiously cling to a small sampling of Church documents, or articles/writings by a given priest, bishop, or cardinal. Said documents and writings are cut, pasted, highlighted, and bolded…in or out of context…to support a given argument.

While a document or writing states that some things may be preferred over others, that doesn’t mean that said document is ordering us to exclude others. If exclusion was intended, why didn’t said document state so clearly?

Clearly this is exemplified by this debate over music at Mass, teen Masses in particular.

Until we are willing to step outside of just a smattering of writings and accept that, we are all beating our heads on the bricks.

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

 

[Cat]

Freedom within the guidelines set out. Far too often the music used by groups like LT not only fails to meet the criteria but flies in the face of it.

**Which Bishops? And what approval have they given it? Just what do you think that approval means? Is it simply a statement that its free from doctrinal error or has this Bishop or his delegate sat down and listened to all of the tunes to judge them in accord with the Church’s expectations of what Music is suitable for the Mass?

It also isn’t seemly for Bishops to neglect to follow the leadership of the Church. **
I was under the impression that the Catholic Church was universal, why are you trying to turn this into a them and us mentality? If you want the Mass to be the best we can make it then you should be able to justify the music you obviously consider appropriate for Mass in accord with the criteria set by the Church. Your failure to do so does your position no favours.

You like it, fine. Now explain why it is suitable for use in the Mass. Not by talking about how much you or these other people you speak about like it, not be justifying it as a pew packing measure nor as some sort of nostalgia for a misspent youth but by the criteria the Church has set. Namely explain why it is holy and why it is art, and thats not even taking into account whether its universal or a setting of the texts of Mass.

Oh, what martyrdom you are willing to endure for the faith, sacrificing the songs of the seventies if and only if the Church decides to explicitly ban them from Mass. What more do you want from them than the guidelines we already have? Benedictgal has outlined the position from several Popes, multiple Conferences and Cardinals and still you persist while failing to back up your position with anything other than what ‘our’ wants are. Do you seriously expect the Vatican or one of its Congregations to approve every song before it can be used, or would you expect an edict along the lines of ‘no praise and worship music is suitable for use in Mass’? Of course that wouldn’t solve anything because they’d just invent a new genre or blanket term to keep all the old favourites anyway.

Just what power do you think local Bishops have over us? I’ve got to tell you if the Bishop of Rome teaches one thing and the Bishop of wherever teaches something at odds with it then I can tell you right now which one I’m most likely to go by. Similarly the documents which have been referred to carry more weight than the view or statements of the local ordinary. A far more serious sin would be willfully disregarding the teachings and rules set by the Church, a fact you should perhaps bear in mind.

Boldface mine–Bishop Thomas Doran of the Diocese of Rockford (our home diocese), Bishop Walter Hurley of the Diocese of Grand Rapids, and Bishop Raymond Burke of the Diocese of St. Louis.

These are the three bishops where my family (my husband myself, older daughter, younger daughter and her husband) live. Therefore, this is where my husband and I have attended Masses.

From what I understand, Bishop Doran and Bishop Burke are among the most orthodox, conservative bishops in the United States.

I would like you to write Bishop Burke and Bishop Doran (you can google their addresses) and tell them that “it is not seemly to neglect to follow the leadership of the Church” because they allow Life Teen Masses (at least, Bishop Doran does) and OCP music sung in their OF Masses.

Please write back on this forum and let us all know what these men respond to your rebuke.

I don’t know much about Bishop Hurley. Perhaps you do? He also allows OCP music in the OF Masses in the parishes in his diocese, so perhaps you could write him as well.

I am very serious here. I am not speaking tongue-in-cheek or being sarcastic. If you honestly feel that bishops who allow Life Teen Masses and who encourage the use of OCP hymnals in their dioceses are "neglecting to follow the leadership of the Church, then you should tell them. You and benedictgal go right ahead. And everyone else who agrees with you.

I am extremely curious to know how these bishops respond to you. You, after all, are claiming to have knowledge that these men don’t have, namely that the music that they encourage in their parishes is not appropriate for the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, based on your personal interpretation of various documents of the Church and various writings of Pope Benedict XVI.

BTW, Bishop Doran has his doctorate in Canon Law. But I assume that you know as much as he does about Canon Law and all the other documents, since you feel comfortable accusing him of “neglecting to follow the leadership of the Church.”

I am looking forward to hearing the response. If Bishop Doran, Bishop Burke, and Bishop Hurley say that you are correct and that they have been wrong all these years to allow OCP music and Life Teen Masses and that they will ban it, THEN I will apologize to you for opposing your viewpoints so adamantly and readily admit that you have been correct all along and that I have been wrong.

 

[ethelzguy]

I have made this point numerous times at CAF.

It is easy to sit at a keyboard, pontificating as to what the Church should or shouldn’t be doing, or what it is doing wrong.

Especially with regard to LifeTeen and music.

Approaching a Bishop in person or by letter, I suspect would make some of the posters here think twice.

I, too, would like to see somebody here, go toe to toe with their Bishop. Tell THEM what’s wrong with the music at their Masses in general, and LifeTeen in particular.

Oh, to be a fly on the wall…

 

[MrS]

I am looking forward to hearing the response. If Bishop Doran, Bishop Burke, and Bishop Hurley say that you are correct and that they have been wrong all these years to allow OCP music and Life Teen Masses and that they will ban it, THEN I will apologize to you for opposing your viewpoints so adamantly and readily admit that you have been correct all along and that I have been wrong.

It appears that you know little of how the hierarchy of the Church operates.

Most bishops discipline behind the scenes. And they do so when they feel the time and opportunity are correct… not when a poster from CAF emails them.

.

 

[ethelzguy]

It appears that you know little of how the hierarchy of the Church operates.

Most bishops discipline behind the scenes. And they do so when they feel the time and opportunity are correct… not when a poster from CAF emails them.

.

Hey Mister Ess

Shouldn’t that be “time and opportunity IS correct”?

eml

 

[KingAlfred]

I’m happy to see teenagers get up and sing and play instruments at Mass. It’s a strongly positive statement and act. There’s nothing more inspiring than a children’s choir. Young people who are committed to the Greater Good are the hope and future of this world. .

 

[Cat]

Freedom within the guidelines set out. Far too often the music used by groups like LT not only fails to meet the criteria but flies in the face of it.

Which Bishops? And what approval have they given it? Just what do you think that approval means? Is it simply a statement that its free from doctrinal error or has this Bishop or his delegate sat down and listened to all of the tunes to judge them in accord with the Church’s expectations of what Music is suitable for the Mass?

It also isn’t seemly for Bishops to neglect to follow the leadership of the Church.

I was under the impression that the Catholic Church was universal, why are you trying to turn this into a them and us mentality? If you want the Mass to be the best we can make it then you should be able to justify the music you obviously consider appropriate for Mass in accord with the criteria set by the Church. Your failure to do so does your position no favours.

You like it, fine. Now explain why it is suitable for use in the Mass. Not by talking about how much you or these other people you speak about like it, not be justifying it as a pew packing measure nor as some sort of nostalgia for a misspent youth but by the criteria the Church has set. Namely explain why it is holy and why it is art, and thats not even taking into account whether its universal or a setting of the texts of Mass.

Oh, what martyrdom you are willing to endure for the faith, sacrificing the songs of the seventies if and only if the Church decides to explicitly ban them from Mass. What more do you want from them than the guidelines we already have? Benedictgal has outlined the position from several Popes, multiple Conferences and Cardinals and still you persist while failing to back up your position with anything other than what ‘our’ wants are. Do you seriously expect the Vatican or one of its Congregations to approve every song before it can be used, or would you expect an edict along the lines of ‘no praise and worship music is suitable for use in Mass’? Of course that wouldn’t solve anything because they’d just invent a new genre or blanket term to keep all the old favourites anyway.

Just what power do you think local Bishops have over us? I’ve got to tell you if the Bishop of Rome teaches one thing and the Bishop of wherever teaches something at odds with it then I can tell you right now which one I’m most likely to go by. Similarly the documents which have been referred to carry more weight than the view or statements of the local ordinary. A far more serious sin would be willfully disregarding the teachings and rules set by the Church, a fact you should perhaps bear in mind.

I am extremely upset in my soul over this post. I read this in the morning on my break at work, and it was like a heavy weight. I waited all day to respond, and the weight is still there.

What this post says to me is that I cannot trust my Bishop and my priests.

And to me, this means that I cannot trust the Catholic Church.

What am I do with this?

I am not “allowed” to just let the Bishop and priest approve of the people who select the music for my parishes. According to you, snhs, I have to read through all kinds of documents and encyclicals and writings and histories in order to be fully informed, and I have to make the decision about whether the music in the Masses that I attend is “suitable.”

snhs, you ask why I think the music is “suitable” for Mass. I HAVE NO IDEA! How do you like that for an answer? I DO NOT KNOW!

I am not an expert in Church Rubrics, GIRMs, and Papal encyclicals. I’m not an expert on music.

You want to know something, snhs? Most Catholics are in the same boat as me. They don’t know an awful lot.

I am a convert who is still working on reading through the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Of course, it’s probably the WRONG Catechism, since it’s the one that came out during Pope John Paul IIs reign, and apparently THAT Catechism is flawed. So I’m probably wasting my time to read it.

snhs, unlike you, I have to trust my priest and my bishops to regulate the Masses for me. I lack the knowledge to tell them how to do it.

Again, snhs, most Catholics are the same as me.

Our priests select various people to be in charge of the Liturgy in the parishes that I play piano for–it’s called “chain of command” and they have the authority from the Pope to do this.

And so I have to trust that the people my priest selects are worthy of the calling and know what they are doing.

And I THOUGHT that was what the Catholic Church is all about–trusting in the Authority of Jesus Christ that He has delegated to the Pope and the Bishops, and the priests.

That’s why I LEFT the Protestant churches–because I wanted to be under the Authority of the Pope and the Bishop. I did not want to be my own authority anymore.

snhs, I am NOT ASHAMED to confess to you that I trust my bishop, Thomas Doran, and my priests, and the people that they hire, to choose good music that is worthy of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

And snhs, I apologize if I was muddled in my post this morning. I do not think music is suitable for Holy Mass because I “like it.” No, never!

I think music is suitable for Holy Mass because it is approved by my Bishop and priests. I submit to THEIR leadership.

And I apologize for coming across as a “martyr” because I used the word “submit.” I didn’t mean that to imply that I would “grit my teeth and submit even if I hate it.” No, what I meant is that I am willing to obey my Bishops and priests, because to me, they represent my Lord Jesus. In the same way that I submit to my husband, in love and trust, I will submit to my Bishop and priests. No “martyrdom”, snhs–only joy and love.

If I cannot trust my Bishop, priests, and hired staff at my parishes, then I cannot trust the Catholic Church, and I may as well quit now and go back to nothing.

snhs, do you see why I am upset and disturbed in my soul? You have said an awful thing, a thing that is capable of destroying the trust and faith that many Catholics, especially new Catholics, have in their Bishop and priests.

You do realize that most of the parishes in the U.S. use the OCP published music materials. So according to you, ALL of these bishops are doing something wrong and defying the Church and giving their parishes “bad” music.

No wonder the Catholic Church putzes along in the U.S. People like you and benedictgal are constantly telling us that we can’t just “accept” the Mass music–we have to study everything ever written and question the Bishop that does not agree with our interpretation of the documents.

To me, this thread isn’t about music at all. It’s about willingness to submit to our Bishops and trust their judgement about the music in their diocese. I TRUST THEM. Am I a fool? Perhaps. But I would rather trust the Bishops and priests, who are ordained by the Lord, than trust my own foolish mind, which for years, kept me Protestant and away from Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament.

If the rest of you want to accuse our Bishops of slacking and being “liberal” and allowing themselves to be led around by the nose by the moguls at OCP, that’s too bad. I hope you will think about keeping your mouths shut in front of new Catholics and converts. It’s hurtful to our faith.

 

[MrS]

Hey Mister Ess

Shouldn’t that be “time and opportunity IS correct”?

eml

time…one thing
opportunity… another thing

plural

verb used would be are… like in “… they are…”

if you prefer “…they is…” where they is substituted with time & opportunity…

go for it.

And that is Mr S, sir, to you

 

[benedictgal]

It is interesting that Archbishop Burke was mentioned in the previous post. Prior to his iminent departure to Rome, he created an office of sacred music for his Metropolitan See.

Zenit recently interviewed the director of the office, Fr. Sam Weber. Here is what he had to say:

Q: Many complain about popular or secular forms of music creeping into the liturgy, but this has been a perennial problem for the Church. What causes this recurring problem, and how have the great renaissances in sacred music such as those fostered by Palestrina and Pope St. Pius X turned the tide?

Father Weber: Yes, you could say that the concern about secular – or frankly anti-Christian – musical styles supplanting sacred music in worship is perennial – though it may manifest itself differently in different cultures and historical periods.

For example, in early centuries, all music other than chanting was strictly forbidden by Church authorities, because use of musical instruments had strongly pagan associations.

In the 19th century, the style of opera had so greatly influenced Church music that Pope St. Pius X warned strongly against this “profane” music, and forbade composing music imitating operatic styles. He initiated the 20th Century Liturgical Movement by his 1903 document, “Tra le Sollecitudini.”

In particular he encouraged Gregorian chant, which he said in the third paragraph of the document, “has always been regarded as the supreme model for sacred music,” thus “it is fully legitimate to lay down the following rule: The more closely a composition for Church approaches in its movement, inspiration and savor the Gregorian form, the more sacred and liturgical it becomes; and the more out of harmony it is with that supreme model, the less worthy it is of the temple.”

It was Pope Pius X, also, who coined the phrase “active participation” of the people. And he also said in paragraph five of the document that “modern music is also admitted to the Church, since it, too, furnishes compositions of such excellence, sobriety and gravity, that they are in no way unworthy of the liturgical functions.”

After the Second Vatican Council it was the pop and folk style music of the late 1960s and 1970s that dominated newly composed music for worship – Catholic and Protestant. ***Despite the Constitution on the Liturgy’s emphasis on the “pride of place” for Gregorian chant in the liturgy, the council’s teaching was ignored, and chant virtually disappeared. ***

The reasons for this are many and complex. But one major element was plain confusion and misunderstanding. ***The liturgical reform following the Council was astoundingly rapid, and serious upheavals in the secular world of those times also affected the anti-authoritarian mood within the Church.

This was played out dramatically in the liturgy. Changes were made precipitously with too little consultation with the bishops*.**

During the papacy of Pope John Paul II, we began to see a sober reassessment of the post-conciliar liturgical changes, culminating in his last encyclical, “Ecclesia de Eucharistia.”

The present “renaissance” in liturgical music we are now seeing is in large part due to Pope Benedict XVI and his many scholarly works on the subject even before he became pope.

The historic heritage of sacred music, then, always serves as an indispensable teacher and model of what best serves the celebration of sacred worship, and leads worshipers to greater holiness.

---

His observations are sharp and on the money. I would also say that they are very applicable to the issue of teenagers and music.

 

[benedictgal]

Fr. Weber also offers some food for thought that I think we need to take into account, especially where it cnocerns teenagers and sacred music:

Understanding and appreciating this universality in Catholic music for worship might be seen as one facet of the obedience of faith.

We need to remember, of course, that the Council teaches under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. God is telling us both how he wants to be worshiped, and what best serves the religious needs of those gathered for sacred rites.

Before all else, ***worship is about God. It is the duty of the creature to know, love and serve the Creator, and to render to God the service of prayer, praise and thanksgiving that is his due. *** Worship is about us, the creatures, only insofar as we desire with all our hearts to serve God as he tells us he wants to be served.

Historically, Gregorian chant is in direct, organic development with ancient cantilation – chanting – patterns of the psalms in temple and synagogue. This was the background and experience of the first Christians. So our chanting today is in direct relationship with theirs.

One can see, then, that when we sing the chant, we are truly “in connection” with our fathers and mothers in the faith.

Jesus, Mary and Joseph heard and sang many of these patterns of sacred chant in synagogue and temple worship. The apostles, the martyrs, the great saints whose witness continues to inspire us today, were all nourished on these traditions of sacred chanting.

Even the saints and blesseds of our own day – Blessed Teresa of Calcutta, St. Pio of Pietrelcina, St. Gianna Beretta Molla, for example – all sang, heard and knew the chant and the traditions of sacred music inspired by the chant.

They were formed in this “school of sacred music” that is the chant, and, to borrow a phrase from St. Athanasius, the “gymnasium of spiritual exercises” that is the Psalter – the Psalms of David.

To use chant as a model, even for the so-called “Youth Masses” is to put us into connection with the roots of our faith, wiht our sacred heritage.

 

[japhy]

The crux of the debate seems to be how one chooses to interpret various documents.

Yes. I prefer the “hermeneutic of continuity” myself. I prefer not to read into documents (that is, apply my own interpretation), but to let another document or authority provide the proper interpretation for me. I suppose I could stop “copy and pasting”, but then my arguments would probably be considered merely my opinion, and I would have no argument left to make.

Unfortunately, one (or two or three) document(s) do not singularly define the Catholic faith. It seems that some fastidiously cling to a small sampling of Church documents, or articles/writings by a given priest, bishop, or cardinal. Said documents and writings are cut, pasted, highlighted, and bolded – in or out of context – to support a given argument.

Can you suggest what other documents we should include in our discussion then? I would suggest the following:

• Tra le Sollecitudini (Pope St. Pius X, 1903)
• Divini Cultus (Pope Pius XI, 1928)
• Musicae Sacrae (Pope Pius XII, 1955)
• De Musica Sacra (Sacred Congregation of Rites, 1958)
• Musicam Sacram (Sacred Congregation of Rites, 1967)
• Centenary Chirograph on TLS (Pope John Paul II, 2003)

There are some other documents that have a few relevant paragraphs as well (such as Sacramentum Caritatis).

(And what’s so bad about taking a quote in context to prove a point?)

While a document or writing states that some things may be preferred over others, that doesn’t mean that said document is ordering us to exclude others. If exclusion was intended, why didn’t said document state so clearly?

The Church doesn’t “prefer” Gregorian chant as one prefers vanilla over chocolate (but will gladly have chocolate anyway). The Church promotes Gregorian chant, esteems it as the supreme model of sacred music, and calls it Her own (that is, it is the form of music proper to the Church’s liturgy). There is no reason not to promote Gregorian chant in every parish.

No one here is saying that, starting tomorrow, there will be no more hymns, only chants in Latin. But we are saying that Gregorian chant has gotten lip service (at best); I’m afraid this lip service will continue unless the Church steps in. Take Archbishop Burke, for example: before he was reassigned, he established an institute for sacred music in his archdiocese, and the director, Fr. Weber, O.S.B., is dedicated to restoring chant’s “pride of place”.

Until we are willing to step outside of just a smattering of writings and accept that, we are all beating our heads on the bricks.

 

[japhy]

It is easy to sit at a keyboard, pontificating as to what the Church should or shouldn’t be doing, or what it is doing wrong. Especially with regard to LifeTeen and music. Approaching a Bishop in person or by letter, I suspect would make some of the posters here think twice.

I, too, would like to see somebody here, go toe to toe with their Bishop. Tell THEM what’s wrong with the music at their Masses in general, and LifeTeen in particular.

Ok, I’ll do just that, then. I will write a letter to my Bishop (Bishop Paul Bootkoski, diocese of Metuchen, NJ) about the state of music in our diocese; I’ll ask if there has been any consideration of establishing an Institute for Sacred Music. (I will be attending a LifeTeen Mass at a nearby parish this Sunday evening. I’ll report on its liturgy and music, too.)

 

[japhy]

What this post says to me is that I cannot trust my Bishop and my priests. And to me, this means that I cannot trust the Catholic Church.

A lot of people felt that way over the sexual abuse scandal. Just because we cannot trust certain priests and bishops does not mean we cannot trust the Church.

I am not “allowed” to just let the Bishop and priest approve of the people who select the music for my parishes. According to you, snhs, I have to read through all kinds of documents and encyclicals and writings and histories in order to be fully informed, and I have to make the decision about whether the music in the Masses that I attend is “suitable.”

I don’t think you have to look at it that way. You could, instead, pray that people who have read the documents of the Church relevant to sacred music are heard by the priests and bishops (and parish music directors, etc.).

You want to know something, snhs? Most Catholics are in the same boat as me. They don’t know an awful lot.

And we’re not saying you have to read all these documents. However, those of us who have read them (and consequently know more about the issue) are trying to educate others; at the very least, we’re trying to bring about a change.

It’s a very scary thing to suddenly come into knowledge. You’re confronted with the choice to act upon it or to ignore it. There are times I wish I did not know what I know about the liturgy, because I know eventually I will have to ask my pastor some “tough” questions. He’s already used the “liturgical police” comment once to me (via email) when I asked him about the visiting priests who pour the Precious Blood from one chalice to another. It’s uncomfortable.

I am a convert who is still working on reading through the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Of course, it’s probably the WRONG Catechism, since it’s the one that came out during Pope John Paul IIs reign, and apparently THAT Catechism is flawed. So I’m probably wasting my time to read it.

No, you’re not. But that Catechism (nor the ones that came before it) does not exist in a vacuum, which is why people come here and ask questions about it sometimes, to get clarification and context. For instance, CCC 841 says this: The Church’s relationship with the Muslims. “The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day.” (Lumen Gentium n. 16; cf. Nostra Aetate n. 3)

In order to understand just what the Catechism means by that single sentence, you’d need to see the two paragraphs it’s referring to (and preferably those in context). The Catechism isn’t exhaustive.

If I cannot trust my Bishop, priests, and hired staff at my parishes, then I cannot trust the Catholic Church, and I may as well quit now and go back to nothing.

A Catholic doesn’t become infallible the moment he is ordained (or hired at a parish, for that matter). We’ve had some absolutely rotten-to-the-core Popes in the past, but they didn’t stop the Catholic Church. (Nor did they stop you from joining, although it’s possible you simply didn’t know about them.)

To me, this thread isn’t about music at all. It’s about willingness to submit to our Bishops and trust their judgement about the music in their diocese.

I’ve been to a Mass that was horrendous, where the priest did not feel at all obliged to celebrate Mass according to the Roman Missal. I’m not talking about things like Latin, ad orientem, chant, etc. I mean simple things, like standing when the Gospel is read, reading the Gospel himself, and reading the prayers correctly. He made up his own words in some places, shortened some prayers, and added a part where we (standing around the altar) passed the paten holding the bread (before the consecration) around and prayed over it. I cannot trust that priest, but I can trust the Church.

If the rest of you want to accuse our Bishops of slacking and being “liberal” and allowing themselves to be led around by the nose by the moguls at OCP, that’s too bad. I hope you will think about keeping your mouths shut in front of new Catholics and converts. It’s hurtful to our faith.

Have you ever considered that it’s not just laypeople who make it difficult for those of us who want Latin and chant restored to the Mass? Have you considered that there are priests and bishops who are generally opposed to such things? I was totally unaware of Latin and chant for the first 20+ years of my life; I’d been told that Vatican II got rid of them. Should I no longer trust the Church because other Catholics have lied to me?

I’m sorry that you are hearing about this, but I think this kind of discussion goes with the territory (being a forum on the liturgy and the sacraments).

 

[snhs]

I would like you to write Bishop Burke and Bishop Doran (you can google their addresses) and tell them that “it is not seemly to neglect to follow the leadership of the Church” because they allow Life Teen Masses (at least, Bishop Doran does) and OCP music sung in their OF Masses.

Please write back on this forum and let us all know what these men respond to your rebuke.

I don’t know much about Bishop Hurley. Perhaps you do? He also allows OCP music in the OF Masses in the parishes in his diocese, so perhaps you could write him as well.

I am very serious here. I am not speaking tongue-in-cheek or being sarcastic. If you honestly feel that bishops who allow Life Teen Masses and who encourage the use of OCP hymnals in their dioceses are "neglecting to follow the leadership of the Church, then you should tell them. You and benedictgal go right ahead. And everyone else who agrees with you.

I am extremely curious to know how these bishops respond to you. You, after all, are claiming to have knowledge that these men don’t have, namely that the music that they encourage in their parishes is not appropriate for the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, based on your personal interpretation of various documents of the Church and various writings of Pope Benedict XVI.

BTW, Bishop Doran has his doctorate in Canon Law. But I assume that you know as much as he does about Canon Law and all the other documents, since you feel comfortable accusing him of “neglecting to follow the leadership of the Church.”

I am looking forward to hearing the response. If Bishop Doran, Bishop Burke, and Bishop Hurley say that you are correct and that they have been wrong all these years to allow OCP music and Life Teen Masses and that they will ban it, THEN I will apologize to you for opposing your viewpoints so adamantly and readily admit that you have been correct all along and that I have been wrong.

I don’t see any need to write to them, because they will already be perfectly aware of that fact. What your last post failed to put forward though is that there are different levels of approval a Bishop can give. In the case of a text he can certify it as free from doctrinal error, for example. Or he could allow a programme of some description to operate in a part of his Diocese or one or two Churches in the Diocese, but that doesn’t necessarily constitute a ‘stamp of approval’. Or one, or many of, the Priests in his Diocese may decide to introduce a programme to the Parish he has assigned them to.

My guess is that there are very few Diocese in America which do not have a LT programme, or equivalents of a similar sort, operating in them, and if you do a search and look at some of the threads on LT you’ll see just the kind of abuses they have had in them, and I’m not talking about inappropriate music but still more serious problems. Many of these have now, according to LT, been remedied. But while they were going on they were occurring in many Diocese across the US. Does that mean that these abuses had the Bishops’ ‘stamp of approval’?

In my post I was not challenging the authority of a Bishop to make such a judgement, what I was questioning is just what ‘approval’ you are claiming they have given, and if they have given it perhaps you can link to the document where they give this approval.

What we should also bear in mind is that a Bishop, or a grouping of Bishops or even a Conference of Bishops do not have the authority to overrule teaching documents which come from the Pope, or which are from previous Popes and are still in effect. So if a Bishop applies guidelines for his Diocese which contradict in the what Pope Benedict XVI has said in one of his Encyclicals or a Moto Proprio, then it is the Bishop who is in error.

I claim the ability to read, to interpret with reasonable accuracy and to put forward my own view on something. I’m not sure where you have got this idea that I am claiming some special authority on this. The fact is I don’t even need to put my interpretation on it, look back at the quotes which have been provided already Pope Benedict XVI, Pope John Paul II, Pope St Pius X and others. If you think, as ethelzguy seems to think, that they have been selectively quoted then you can look up most of the Documents yourself and see it in its full context.

If you look back you’ll see that all of these figures, holy men, one of whom is a Saint, the other on the road towards Sainthood and the last our current Pope speak in favour not of Praise and Worship, or of the OCP hymnals but of Gregorian Chant, how chant should have pride of place. Let me ask you when was the last time you heard a Mass chanted? In what proportion are the songs in your Parish between the modern OCP type stuff and the Gregorian Chant, or to a lesser extent, polyphony?

I think Pope Benedict has a Doctorate as well. When did I claim expertise in Canon Law? And where precisely did I accuse him of “neglecting to follow the leadership of the Church”? I’m fairly certain that I didn’t do so.

You said “It isn’t seemly to insist that you know more than the bishops.”, and I responded “It also isn’t seemly for Bishops to neglect to follow the leadership of the Church”. Do you disagree with that? I’ve never heard of Bishop Doran, but if he is orthodox I’m fairly certain he’d concur.

I respectfully refer you to the quotes Benedictgal has provided. Obviously Archbishop Burke was taking action to deal with it, very interesting that “pop and folk style music” is specifically mentioned and how it was in spite of what the Council had said on it. Perhaps your own Bishop is taking similar action behind the scenes.

 

[japhy]

(I will be attending a LifeTeen Mass at a nearby parish this Sunday evening. I’ll report on its liturgy and music, too.)

That LifeTeen Mass might not happen, since it’s the summer (and I see that some parishes don’t do LifeTeen during the summer, but I wonder why)… but I’ll go try.