Traditional Catholicism - Indigenous Friendly?

[RogerDeCourcy]

What makes you think dancing as prayer needs defending and why do you think more than one defense from a biblical source is necessary? Singing carries certain connotations as well, but we still sing. Indeed, eating and drinking carry connotations, but the central act of our liturgy is one of eating and drinking. It doesn’t matter what connotations dancing may have in an environment separate from prayer because those connotations do not apply. The rest of your post is mere opinion, which I can respect, but not accept as authority or law or the last word on the matter. Simply because you think something looks silly, doesn’t mean it doesn’t have meaning for others. It certainly wouldn’t be wrong, except in your opinion, of course, but hey, you would just be a gawker, right? So, I would think that those who dance and those who appreciate the dance wouldn’t have much use for your opinion.

This is relativism: Things mean what one wants them to mean and there is no shared meaning.

Another reason against dancing: when it has been done, it has looked crass; made up by the locals.

Actions are symbolic. The meaning of dance, in the West, in the Roman Rite, is not compatible with reverence, at a sacrifice i.e. where something is symbolically killed as an offering.

You know your local church has lost the plot when it lets women dance at Mass.

 

[severus68]

This is relativism: Things mean what one wants them to mean and there is no shared meaning.

Another reason against dancing: when it has been done, it has looked crass; made up by the locals.

Actions are symbolic. The meaning of dance, in the West, in the Roman Rite, is not compatible with reverence, at a sacrifice i.e. where something is symbolically killed as an offering.

You know your local church has lost the plot when it lets women dance at Mass.

“made up by the locals”, “let women dance at mass”? Please tell us what you mean.

 

[Tsuwano]

Since an authority is needed, an authority will be given.

This is a 1975 essay from the Congregation for the Sacraments and Divine Worship regarding dance in the liturgy.

What is notable is that it does not preclude all dancing. In principle, some dancing is actually extant in a very limited form in the Ethiopian, Syriac and Byzantine liturgies. In practice, none of this ‘dancing’ is like the so-called liturgical dance of today. One cannot use these as a reason to incorporate dance into a liturgy.

Dance by its very nature draws people’s senses to focus upon the moving body, which is antithetical to the principle of focusing worship upon God. Even music is constrained by these same principles, which is to promote prayer and reverence in mass, and hence the discouragement of the use of secular melodies or excessive dissonance that would be a distraction to God-centered worship. To my knowledge, there are many African cultures which consider dance part of their language, but even they conduct their Holy Masses with reverence and restraint.

Tsuwano, I agree with you that dancing is indeed a wonderful show of joy, but in the Holy Mass, we are asked to revere God’s Holy Presence with utmost respect. We are to worship in solemnity with the fullness of our body and mind, and not to control of either in the House of the Lord.

Thank you for citing legitimate authoritative arguments concerning dance in the liturgy and not relying on mere personal opinion. I note that the authority states that dance is not precluded in the liturgy, though, like you, I agree that it should not be a daily or ordinary occurrence. As you note, even music is constrained by the same principals which deal with dancing. Though I disagree with your statement that to focus on the moving body is necessarily antithetical to worship of God, I certainly understand that dance can be distracting in aiding us to focus on God. My argument is not so much about dancing or not dancing within the liturgy, but about whether dance is inherently immoral and an offense against God as one poster suggested and inappropriate to prayer. I claim that it is not and cite the famous Biblical example of David dancing before the Lord.

 

[Tsuwano]

This is relativism: Things mean what one wants them to mean and there is no shared meaning.

Another reason against dancing: when it has been done, it has looked crass; made up by the locals.

Actions are symbolic. The meaning of dance, in the West, in the Roman Rite, is not compatible with reverence, at a sacrifice i.e. where something is symbolically killed as an offering.

You know your local church has lost the plot when it lets women dance at Mass.

You have not been reading my posts carefully. I have clearly stated in previous posts in this thread that local practices which are incorporated into the local liturgy must be approved by the local bishop and must be reconciled with the ancient beliefs of our fathers in faith. I agree that there are shared meanings of particular actions, especially within the liturgy, which local cultures are not free to abrogate or interfere with. Not all actions,however, are defined in similar ways and some practices which a local culture may find enhances the prayer and liturgy of those people may be used as long as they adhere to the principle I mentioned above. This is not relativism, but rather sensitivity to the myriad ways in which the Holy Spirit is present in the world. Such sensitivity is a part of the Church’s own spirituality and her way of living out her call to be catholic in the truest sense of the word. Actions are indeed symbolic, but perhaps we should ask what particular actions mean in particular cultures before offering across the board condemnation of actions which carry different meanings from those we hold in our own culture. It is not a sin to be sensitive and to seek understanding. Jesus himself practiced it.

 

[odile53]

Okay, I’m speaking as a retired professional dancer here: A retired professional ballerina, who danced with a big ballet company–New York City Ballet.

Dance is not appropriate in the liturgy in cultures where it is not generally a cultural expression. In part this is because incorporating dance into the liturgy would be just adding a performance into liturgy. There is no way that most of the congregation would be able to participate in the dance add-on. In the United States, dance is considered either a performing art or a social activity. In other nations, usually what the West refers to as “developing nations,” genuine cultural dance is permitted if the majority of the faithful can do it.

One of the biggest problems of dance in liturgy is that not many, probably most, cannot do it well. It’s one thing to be able to hide an off-key voice in a multitude of voices accompanied by a big booming organ, pipe or electronic. A bad dancer will stick out like a really sore thumb. There s also no room to do it: A church generally has fixed pews in close proximity. In the cultures where it is permitted, “dance” is usually reserved to the people in the pews swaying side to side in time to their music.

I have gone to some evangelical Protestant services with friends for some occasion or another where something called “praise dancing” was done, by small troupes of dancers (they were probably high school modern dance students,) and I found it superfluous and amateurish. Since these evangelical churches don’t have a set liturgy, I assume that it was considered “okay” (whatever that means) by the churches themselves; my review is strictly artistic, and “amateurish” is the most charitable remark I can make. I think that if dance ever were permitted in a Catholic liturgy, that is probably the quality of the dance that one would see.

However, dance can be used in NON liturgical celebrations, for example, an Advent concert, and it can be done reverently and in a way that is not salacious. A small group of dancers from NYCB participated in a few such concerts, along with musicians from the philharmonic, and the concert did use traditional musical scoring. These were held in churches in New York City, and during these performances (which were paid concerts with the churches in question receiving most of the proceeds) the Blessed Sacrament was reserved from the main altar. We were decently clad, much more covered up than for a stage performance, and the performances were previously approved by the archdiocese as well as the individual churches. But it was not “liturgical dance,” in the sense of dancing as part of a liturgy. And as I mentioned before, I doubt many in the audience would have been able to execute a quarter of what we did.

Okay. A professional performance done in the course of a concert left aside, I have been to a couple of Masses on various feast days where native dancers in full regalia processed in doing a dance step (a shuffle-stomp sort of thing is the easiest to describe it to a non-native dancer,) and processed out at the end of Mass. I’ve described it elsewhere in the course of one of Bruce’s threads, and won’t repeat it here. It was no different than a choir processing in and going to the choir stalls at the beginning of Mass.

With the *exciting *news that Blessed Kateri Tekawitha’s second miracle has been approved by the Holy Father, a delegation of we Iroquois will doubtless be called upon to attend her canonization ceremony and I am sure that there will be some cultural elements in part of the ceremony. I haven’t been home (Akwesasne) in awhile, but I know that already people are starting to form groups that will attend. It will be very interesting and revealing to see what is done during the course of the celebrations.

By the way, I’m thrilled at the prospect of her elevation to the altar and the Church’s calendar of saints: We have a Saint! I’ve been praying for her cause for years and years, and hearing the announcement on the radio just before Christmas was one of the nicest Christmas presents I’ve ever received!

 

[trickster]

Okay, I’m speaking as a retired professional dancer here: A retired professional ballerina, who danced with a big ballet company–New York City Ballet.

Dance is not appropriate in the liturgy in cultures where it is not generally a cultural expression. In part this is because incorporating dance into the liturgy would be just adding a performance into liturgy. There is no way that most of the congregation would be able to participate in the dance add-on. In the United States, dance is considered either a performing art or a social activity. In other nations, usually what the West refers to as “developing nations,” genuine cultural dance is permitted if the majority of the faithful can do it.

One of the biggest problems of dance in liturgy is that not many, probably most, cannot do it well. It’s one thing to be able to hide an off-key voice in a multitude of voices accompanied by a big booming organ, pipe or electronic. A bad dancer will stick out like a really sore thumb. There s also no room to do it: A church generally has fixed pews in close proximity. In the cultures where it is permitted, “dance” is usually reserved to the people in the pews swaying side to side in time to their music.

I have gone to some evangelical Protestant services with friends for some occasion or another where something called “praise dancing” was done, by small troupes of dancers (they were probably high school modern dance students,) and I found it superfluous and amateurish. Since these evangelical churches don’t have a set liturgy, I assume that it was considered “okay” (whatever that means) by the churches themselves; my review is strictly artistic, and “amateurish” is the most charitable remark I can make. I think that if dance ever were permitted in a Catholic liturgy, that is probably the quality of the dance that one would see.

However, dance can be used in NON liturgical celebrations, for example, an Advent concert, and it can be done reverently and in a way that is not salacious. A small group of dancers from NYCB participated in a few such concerts, along with musicians from the philharmonic, and the concert did use traditional musical scoring. These were held in churches in New York City, and during these performances (which were paid concerts with the churches in question receiving most of the proceeds) the Blessed Sacrament was reserved from the main altar. We were decently clad, much more covered up than for a stage performance, and the performances were previously approved by the archdiocese as well as the individual churches. But it was not “liturgical dance,” in the sense of dancing as part of a liturgy. And as I mentioned before, I doubt many in the audience would have been able to execute a quarter of what we did.

Okay. A professional performance done in the course of a concert left aside, I have been to a couple of Masses on various feast days where native dancers in full regalia processed in doing a dance step (a shuffle-stomp sort of thing is the easiest to describe it to a non-native dancer,) and processed out at the end of Mass. I’ve described it elsewhere in the course of one of Bruce’s threads, and won’t repeat it here. It was no different than a choir processing in and going to the choir stalls at the beginning of Mass.

With the *exciting *news that Blessed Kateri Tekawitha’s second miracle has been approved by the Holy Father, a delegation of we Iroquois will doubtless be called upon to attend her canonization ceremony and I am sure that there will be some cultural elements in part of the ceremony. I haven’t been home (Akwesasne) in awhile, but I know that already people are starting to form groups that will attend. It will be very interesting and revealing to see what is done during the course of the celebrations.

By the way, I’m thrilled at the prospect of her elevation to the altar and the Church’s calendar of saints: We have a Saint! I’ve been praying for her cause for years and years, and hearing the announcement on the radio just before Christmas was one of the nicest Christmas presents I’ve ever received!

All I can say quietly with the utmost joy is AMEN to your response…

Trickster
Bruce Ferguson

 

[RogerDeCourcy]

You have not been reading my posts carefully. I have clearly stated in previous posts in this thread that local practices which are incorporated into the local liturgy must be approved by the local bishop and must be reconciled with the ancient beliefs of our fathers in faith. I agree that there are shared meanings of particular actions, especially within the liturgy, which local cultures are not free to abrogate or interfere with. Not all actions,however, are defined in similar ways and some practices which a local culture may find enhances the prayer and liturgy of those people may be used as long as they adhere to the principle I mentioned above. This is not relativism, but rather sensitivity to the myriad ways in which the Holy Spirit is present in the world. Such sensitivity is a part of the Church’s own spirituality and her way of living out her call to be catholic in the truest sense of the word. Actions are indeed symbolic, but perhaps we should ask what particular actions mean in particular cultures before offering across the board condemnation of actions which carry different meanings from those we hold in our own culture. It is not a sin to be sensitive and to seek understanding. Jesus himself practiced it.

That all sounds great.

But in practice it means Mrs. Robinson in a flowing dress giving it all she’s got at the offertory, or whatever the strongest personalities in the parish decide they’re going to add to the Mass.

Try finding a mass these days said according to the mind of the Church, without local variations, e.g wishing people a happy birthday from the sanctuary.

Here’s the trick: give any novelty 40 years and it will seem normal. And then you can add more and no one will object, as change becomes normal.

Whether this is pleasing to God? Judge by the fruits.

 

[Filii_Dei]

That all sounds great.

But in practice it means Mrs. Robinson in a flowing dress giving it all she’s got at the offertory, or whatever the strongest personalities in the parish decide they’re going to add to the Mass.

Try finding a mass these days said according to the mind of the Church, without local variations, e.g wishing people a happy birthday from the sanctuary.

Here’s the trick: give any novelty 40 years and it will seem normal. And then you can add more and no one will object, as change becomes normal.

Whether this is pleasing to God? Judge by the fruits.

I disagree with your choice of metric. That would endorse the sort of wishy-washy theology and ‘liturgy’ that the Protestants espouse, given how successful they have been in filling their pews. Ironically, they are the same people who use ‘liturgical dance’.

The One True Faith should not be simply about the numbers game, though God forbid that we ignore the true reasons for the declining Mass attendance. We must rediscover our patrimony of tradition, and restore the people’s pride in their Church.

 

[trickster]

That all sounds great.

But in practice it means Mrs. Robinson in a flowing dress giving it all she’s got at the offertory, or whatever the strongest personalities in the parish decide they’re going to add to the Mass.

Try finding a mass these days said according to the mind of the Church, without local variations, e.g wishing people a happy birthday from the sanctuary.

Here’s the trick: give any novelty 40 years and it will seem normal. And then you can add more and no one will object, as change becomes normal.

Whether this is pleasing to God? Judge by the fruits.

Roger, I think that you are very focused on an idealistic mass, the mass was never truly “universal” in the sense that you refer to “the mind of the Church, without local variations” are your words…there was always in the church variations. Did you know for example that the Tridentine Mass is only 500 years old, there were a variety of masses in existence the 1500 years prior to that. DId you know that the purpose of the unified mass was part of the counter-reformation? It unified the church with one voice and one liturgy as a means of withstanding the Protestant assertions against the church, her teachings and practices…

All Vatican II did was return the Mass to its pre-Tridentine form which varied greatly. The only mistake I think we made as a church since 1960 was to not allow the Latin Mass, that was genocidal in effect. In terms of the “happy birthday wishes” well that depends on the size of the community. I know in a small country church, people all knew each other, so it was within small community dynamics that these well wishes happened. These dynamics do not interfere with the holiness of the mass as you will no doubt acknowledge that these come usually at the end of the mass.

For me, as an Aboriginal person, you have to grant me the right and liberation to participate in my church as myself. I am an Aboriginal and therefore cannot help but participate in the Mass as an Aboriginal person and that includes my artistic interpretations, aboriginal world view…otherwise, you take your position that you gave to Tsuwana, then you are closing the door on me and other Aboriginal Catholics…you will be starving us spiritually.

Think about the harshness of your statement…I think God, Jesus and the Church herself are much more open to me, the ideas that I am promoting than many Catholics think. So I think we should hold back on presuming what God would find pleasing…what God finds pleasing is the authenticity and love of worship no matter where it comes from or in what context. I am sure many Protestants can put us to shame…many devout Hindus may draw the love of God more than we do when we have been given so much as Catholics…think about this my brother.

Bruce Ferguson
Trickster

 

[ProVobis]

All Vatican II did was return the Mass to its pre-Tridentine form which varied greatly. The only mistake I think we made as a church since 1960 was to not allow the Latin Mass, that was genocidal in effect.

The reforms were begun in 1948 if not before. Pope Pius XII hired Bugnini specifically for this purpose. Then Pope John XXIII fired him, and Pope Paul VI rehired him. There are some like me who think the end result would have been the same without Vatican II’s SC, albeit delayed a few years.

 

[RogerDeCourcy]

Roger, I think that you are very focused on an idealistic mass, the mass was never truly “universal” in the sense that you refer to “the mind of the Church, without local variations” are your words…there was always in the church variations. Did you know for example that the Tridentine Mass is only 500 years old, there were a variety of masses in existence the 1500 years prior to that. DId you know that the purpose of the unified mass was part of the counter-reformation? It unified the church with one voice and one liturgy as a means of withstanding the Protestant assertions against the church, her teachings and practices…

All Vatican II did was return the Mass to its pre-Tridentine form which varied greatly. The only mistake I think we made as a church since 1960 was to not allow the Latin Mass, that was genocidal in effect. In terms of the “happy birthday wishes” well that depends on the size of the community. I know in a small country church, people all knew each other, so it was within small community dynamics that these well wishes happened. These dynamics do not interfere with the holiness of the mass as you will no doubt acknowledge that these come usually at the end of the mass.

For me, as an Aboriginal person, you have to grant me the right and liberation to participate in my church as myself. I am an Aboriginal and therefore cannot help but participate in the Mass as an Aboriginal person and that includes my artistic interpretations, aboriginal world view…otherwise, you take your position that you gave to Tsuwana, then you are closing the door on me and other Aboriginal Catholics…you will be starving us spiritually.

Think about the harshness of your statement…I think God, Jesus and the Church herself are much more open to me, the ideas that I am promoting than many Catholics think. So I think we should hold back on presuming what God would find pleasing…what God finds pleasing is the authenticity and love of worship no matter where it comes from or in what context. I am sure many Protestants can put us to shame…many devout Hindus may draw the love of God more than we do when we have been given so much as Catholics…think about this my brother.

Bruce Ferguson
Trickster

You’re wrong on a few points here.

• The Roman Rite goes back to the catacombs. Pius V only codifed what already existed. It’s older than the Orthodox rites.
• The Priestant Reformation itself was an attempt to get back to the early Church’s rite. The error: it assumes that this was the ideal and that the ‘accretions’ from year 0 to 1500 AD were so much patina to be rubbed off. We see how that’s worked for them.

I think you’d get more spiritual benefit if you stopped thinking about yourself and what you want in a Mass and start thinking about what would be pleasing to He whom it’s directed.

It’s as simple as this: you will one day die in the body and be judged. Our creator incarnated as Man and suffered a terrible fate. He did this to pay back for our wickedness. STILL men will not heed and the Devil and fallen angels work 24/7 to make sure as many of us as possible joing them in their misery.

Now, given that this is the case, what is owed such a being in His rite of worship? Should we let people ‘make it up as they go along’?

I can’t and won’t go to such events if I can find the older form which, by itself, helps keep continuity in and safeguard against meddling with our worship and by extension, our faith.

If the old rite was still in every parish I wouldn’t be so worried, but I can see the new Mass mutating over the years before my eyes.

 

[Tsuwano]

That all sounds great.

But in practice it means Mrs. Robinson in a flowing dress giving it all she’s got at the offertory, or whatever the strongest personalities in the parish decide they’re going to add to the Mass.

Try finding a mass these days said according to the mind of the Church, without local variations, e.g wishing people a happy birthday from the sanctuary.

Here’s the trick: give any novelty 40 years and it will seem normal. And then you can add more and no one will object, as change becomes normal.

Whether this is pleasing to God? Judge by the fruits.

As a lay missionary in Japan for 25 years I can attest to attending liturgies where local practices are utilized in the liturgy and which enhance the prayer life of those attending the liturgy. These practices, from bowing instead of kneeling during the liturgy to Japanese hymns sung with Japanese rythms and cadences, help the people to focus on God in their worship and are far from distracting. You seem to think that the liturgy has never changed in the 2,000 years since the last supper. In that, you would be wrong. Change is a normal part of human experience and it is a part of our Catholic heritage as well. It was not considered “normal” to worship in a Church building at one time in our history. Instead, Christians worshipped in the houses of other Christians. It is possible to list other examples. The Church is a living entity and it changes. What does not change is the presence of the Holy Spirit in our midst and the promise of the Lord that he will be with his Church throughout all the changes of history. He is the center point and our liturgy points to his constant presence among us. I believe the Church is still a light for the world, and I believe this is very good fruit indeed. And,if this is the fruit of our history as a Church, it is not because the Church is an unchanging stone. It is because the Spirit is constantly with us.

 

[Tsuwano]

Okay, I’m speaking as a retired professional dancer here: A retired professional ballerina, who danced with a big ballet company–New York City Ballet.

Dance is not appropriate in the liturgy in cultures where it is not generally a cultural expression. In part this is because incorporating dance into the liturgy would be just adding a performance into liturgy. There is no way that most of the congregation would be able to participate in the dance add-on. In the United States, dance is considered either a performing art or a social activity. In other nations, usually what the West refers to as “developing nations,” genuine cultural dance is permitted if the majority of the faithful can do it.

One of the biggest problems of dance in liturgy is that not many, probably most, cannot do it well. It’s one thing to be able to hide an off-key voice in a multitude of voices accompanied by a big booming organ, pipe or electronic. A bad dancer will stick out like a really sore thumb. There s also no room to do it: A church generally has fixed pews in close proximity. In the cultures where it is permitted, “dance” is usually reserved to the people in the pews swaying side to side in time to their music.

I have gone to some evangelical Protestant services with friends for some occasion or another where something called “praise dancing” was done, by small troupes of dancers (they were probably high school modern dance students,) and I found it superfluous and amateurish. Since these evangelical churches don’t have a set liturgy, I assume that it was considered “okay” (whatever that means) by the churches themselves; my review is strictly artistic, and “amateurish” is the most charitable remark I can make. I think that if dance ever were permitted in a Catholic liturgy, that is probably the quality of the dance that one would see.

However, dance can be used in NON liturgical celebrations, for example, an Advent concert, and it can be done reverently and in a way that is not salacious. A small group of dancers from NYCB participated in a few such concerts, along with musicians from the philharmonic, and the concert did use traditional musical scoring. These were held in churches in New York City, and during these performances (which were paid concerts with the churches in question receiving most of the proceeds) the Blessed Sacrament was reserved from the main altar. We were decently clad, much more covered up than for a stage performance, and the performances were previously approved by the archdiocese as well as the individual churches. But it was not “liturgical dance,” in the sense of dancing as part of a liturgy. And as I mentioned before, I doubt many in the audience would have been able to execute a quarter of what we did.

Okay. A professional performance done in the course of a concert left aside, I have been to a couple of Masses on various feast days where native dancers in full regalia processed in doing a dance step (a shuffle-stomp sort of thing is the easiest to describe it to a non-native dancer,) and processed out at the end of Mass. I’ve described it elsewhere in the course of one of Bruce’s threads, and won’t repeat it here. It was no different than a choir processing in and going to the choir stalls at the beginning of Mass.

With the *exciting *news that Blessed Kateri Tekawitha’s second miracle has been approved by the Holy Father, a delegation of we Iroquois will doubtless be called upon to attend her canonization ceremony and I am sure that there will be some cultural elements in part of the ceremony. I haven’t been home (Akwesasne) in awhile, but I know that already people are starting to form groups that will attend. It will be very interesting and revealing to see what is done during the course of the celebrations.

By the way, I’m thrilled at the prospect of her elevation to the altar and the Church’s calendar of saints: We have a Saint! I’ve been praying for her cause for years and years, and hearing the announcement on the radio just before Christmas was one of the nicest Christmas presents I’ve ever received!

Like you, I rejoice in the news that Blessed Kateri will soon be canonized. Not only is she a gift of God to the native peoples of America, but to the worldwide Church as well. I also thank you for your thoughts concerning dance within the liturgy. You provide solid and practical reasons, I believe, why dance should not be utilized within the western liturgy, and these, rather than the thought that dance displeases God, pursuade me more than so called moral arguments.

 

[trickster]

You’re wrong on a few points here.

• The Roman Rite goes back to the catacombs. Pius V only codifed what already existed. It’s older than the Orthodox rites.
• The Priestant Reformation itself was an attempt to get back to the early Church’s rite. The error: it assumes that this was the ideal and that the ‘accretions’ from year 0 to 1500 AD were so much patina to be rubbed off. We see how that’s worked for them.

I think you’d get more spiritual benefit if you stopped thinking about yourself and what you want in a Mass and start thinking about what would be pleasing to He whom it’s directed.

It’s as simple as this: you will one day die in the body and be judged. Our creator incarnated as Man and suffered a terrible fate. He did this to pay back for our wickedness. STILL men will not heed and the Devil and fallen angels work 24/7 to make sure as many of us as possible joing them in their misery.

Now, given that this is the case, what is owed such a being in His rite of worship? Should we let people ‘make it up as they go along’?

I can’t and won’t go to such events if I can find the older form which, by itself, helps keep continuity in and safeguard against meddling with our worship and by extension, our faith.

If the old rite was still in every parish I wouldn’t be so worried, but I can see the new Mass mutating over the years before my eyes.

Fair enough Roger and interesting points I will re-check my understanding and get back to you on this. All forms of mass are human constructs. The mass is informed by cultural context of the space and time in which they were created. I don’t think most Catholics believe that the skies open up one day and the form created by Jesus himself descended upon the earth…that perhaps is our difference in understanding…

Being facetious (spelling?) here Roger…take care and let me do my research and once this homework is done I’d be honored to explore this more with you.

RIght now, I am borrowing computers and so I am having trouble keeping up and engaged in this thread, but I am very interested in it…there are some things - like the criticism of the aborigines of Australia welcoming Benedict - statements like those need to be challenged and they do demonstrate a fixation on western civilization’s notions of appropriateness, decency…etc…so I look forward to that conversation…but let me get fixed up with my permannet computer which I should have in a week or so…

Cheerz and Blessing Roger

Bruce Ferguson
Trickster (Aboriginal concept of Transformation)

 

[trickster]

As a lay missionary in Japan for 25 years I can attest to attending liturgies where local practices are utilized in the liturgy and which enhance the prayer life of those attending the liturgy. These practices, from bowing instead of kneeling during the liturgy to Japanese hymns sung with Japanese rythms and cadences, help the people to focus on God in their worship and are far from distracting. You seem to think that the liturgy has never changed in the 2,000 years since the last supper. In that, you would be wrong. Change is a normal part of human experience and it is a part of our Catholic heritage as well. It was not considered “normal” to worship in a Church building at one time in our history. Instead, Christians worshipped in the houses of other Christians. It is possible to list other examples. The Church is a living entity and it changes. What does not change is the presence of the Holy Spirit in our midst and the promise of the Lord that he will be with his Church throughout all the changes of history. He is the center point and our liturgy points to his constant presence among us. I believe the Church is still a light for the world, and I believe this is very good fruit indeed. And,if this is the fruit of our history as a Church, it is not because the Church is an unchanging stone. It is because the Spirit is constantly with us.

Tsuwano…thank you so much, what you said you said beautifully and well. I am also honored to meet you as a missionary! I look forward to your thoughts, any references you may want me to study or read around the thinking behind contemporary mission work (theories of inculturation - ideas around where gospel meets culture and culture meets gospel…how we become Catholic as aboriginal people, AND how the church - by virtue of the Body of Christ becomes aboriginal…)

bLESSINGS

Bruce Ferguson
Trickster

 

[trickster]

Like you, I rejoice in the news that Blessed Kateri will soon be canonized. Not only is she a gift of God to the native peoples of America, but to the worldwide Church as well. I also thank you for your thoughts concerning dance within the liturgy. You provide solid and practical reasons, I believe, why dance should not be utilized within the western liturgy, and these, rather than the thought that dance displeases God, pursuade me more than so called moral arguments.

Yes, I should of been more clear in my writings…I was never talking about the dance as part of the liturgy…but dance as a part of an external process…something that is complimentary or helpful as a tool…

As a dancer you are more aware than I of the power of dance, movement on the human psyche and how it changes our feelings and thoughts…that can be very useful in healing around mental health and substance abuse issues so needed in our community…and even in the African case, the traditional dances were borrowed and edited to address new ideas and thoughts introduced by Christianity…and I believe that we can do that too and this would be spiritually nourishing for us and prepare our minds for the solemnity and power of the mass…I see a potential role of dance in devotionals or sacramentals (I think that is the right word) that builds an inventory of tools that allow us to grow our spirituality and our love for Jesus.

Anyways…look forward to your thoughts as always…

Bruce Ferguson
Trickster

 

[severus68]

As a lay missionary in Japan for 25 years I can attest to attending liturgies where local practices are utilized in the liturgy and which enhance the prayer life of those attending the liturgy. These practices, from bowing instead of kneeling during the liturgy to Japanese hymns sung with Japanese rythms and cadences, help the people to focus on God in their worship and are far from distracting. You seem to think that the liturgy has never changed in the 2,000 years since the last supper. In that, you would be wrong. Change is a normal part of human experience and it is a part of our Catholic heritage as well. It was not considered “normal” to worship in a Church building at one time in our history. Instead, Christians worshipped in the houses of other Christians. It is possible to list other examples. The Church is a living entity and it changes. What does not change is the presence of the Holy Spirit in our midst and the promise of the Lord that he will be with his Church throughout all the changes of history. He is the center point and our liturgy points to his constant presence among us. I believe the Church is still a light for the world, and I believe this is very good fruit indeed. And,if this is the fruit of our history as a Church, it is not because the Church is an unchanging stone. It is because the Spirit is constantly with us.

So very well put, thank you.

 

[RogerDeCourcy]

In practice, what liturgical dancing means in the West is something like this:
youtube.com/watch?v=nZ5it20gKqw

I never said the Church didn’t change. What I’m saying is that recent changes have been harsh and banal. When you let the ‘community’ alter a sacred rite, you get errors creeping in. You even get people arguing that the rite is invalid! What a state of affairs after 2000 years!

A curious thing has occurred: the old mass wasn’t abrogated when the new one was introduced. As a bishop or priest, you can say either. One way or another, whatever works is going to persist. Trads say conservative Bishop’s seminaries are full while liberal bishop’s are not. A pointer to the future?

 

[trickster]

The reforms were begun in 1948 if not before. Pope Pius XII hired Bugnini specifically for this purpose. Then Pope John XXIII fired him, and Pope Paul VI rehired him. There are some like me who think the end result would have been the same without Vatican II’s SC, albeit delayed a few years.

Intersting, I didn’t know that…it makes perfect sense though…cause all was not well before the council and we also need to understand the pressure for change and the trend towards the council too…so I agree that the increased diversificaiton of celebrating mass was happening…

Paul worked directly for Pius Xii…? Is that correct?

Bruce

 

[trickster]

In practice, what liturgical dancing means in the West is something like this:
youtube.com/watch?v=nZ5it20gKqw

I never said the Church didn’t change. What I’m saying is that recent changes have been harsh and banal. When you let the ‘community’ alter a sacred rite, you get errors creeping in. You even get people arguing that the rite is invalid! What a state of affairs after 2000 years!

A curious thing has occurred: the old mass wasn’t abrogated when the new one was introduced. As a bishop or priest, you can say either. One way or another, whatever works is going to persist. Trads say conservative Bishop’s seminaries are full while liberal bishop’s are not. A pointer to the future?

Yeah Roger…I liked the video…and what I saw was a respectful treatment of the Mass…culture is so much a part of who we are and who we are authentically should be expressed in our devotion to Our Lord…urban cuture is also a culture too…so this does not seem unusual…the dancing was respectful…not sure if I see any “harshness” or “brutality”.

Clearly, this was done in full knowledge of the shepherd’s in Los Angeles…and I am sure the bishops know their stuff and are directly accountable to Rome…so not sure what you find so problematic?

Thoughts?

Bruce