Video during mass

[tafan]

1. Loudspeakers may be used even during liturgical functions, and private devotions for the purpose of amplifying the living voice of the priest-celebrant or the commentator, or others who, according to the rubrics or by order of the pastor, are expected to make their voices heard.
2. The use of any kind of projector, and particularly movie projectors, with or without sound track, is strictly forbidden in church for any reason, even if it be for a pious, religious, or charitable cause.

De musica sacra et sacra liturgia
Instruction on Sacred Music and Sacred Liturgy
Sacred Congregation for Rites - September 3, 1958

Fr, from which document are those paragraphs taken?

 

[on_the_hill]

Not to answer for FrDavid96, but I found it in this document:

De musica sacra et sacra liturgia

Instruction on Sacred Music and Sacred Liturgy

Sacred Congregation for Rites - September 3, 1958

 

[pnewton]

1. Loudspeakers may be used even during liturgical functions, and private devotions for the purpose of amplifying the living voice of the priest-celebrant or the commentator, or others who, according to the rubrics or by order of the pastor, are expected to make their voices heard.
2. The use of any kind of projector, and particularly movie projectors, with or without sound track, is strictly forbidden in church for any reason, even if it be for a pious, religious, or charitable cause.

De musica sacra et sacra liturgia
Instruction on Sacred Music and Sacred Liturgy
Sacred Congregation for Rites - September 3, 1958

That is from 1958. It also was referring to Sacred Music. I cannot imagine how this discipline from then would apply to a bishop today, but I’d be willing to bet the bishop is aware of the recent history of the Church.

Later documents override past instructions in disciplinary matters.

 

[FrDavid96]

That is from 1958. It also was referring to Sacred Music. I cannot imagine how this discipline from then would apply to a bishop today, but I’d be willing to bet the bishop is aware of the recent history of the Church.

Later documents override past instructions in disciplinary matters.

If you “cannot imagine” how the discipline applies, then you don’t understand how Catholic laws work. The fact that you cannot imagine it is not an indicator that a Church law no longer retains its force.

Laws retain their force unless they are abrogated (or otherwise changed) by newer laws.

No new law has abrogated the instruction Musica Sacra*. It’s still the law of the Church.

---

• at least not the paragraphs we’re discussing. I have not read the entire Instruction to see if there’s anything else in there that might have been changed.

 

[pnewton]

No new law has abrogated the instruction Musica Sacra*. It’s still the law of the Church.
.

Well, I won’t argue on this, but only note there is at least one bishop that does not agree with this, or believes it applies to Musica Sacra, not to the use he actually used it for. He has the authority to make that call.

BTW - I have never cared for the practice and we never use it. No horse in this race.

 

[FrDavid96]

Well, I won’t argue on this, but only note there is at least one bishop that does not agree with this, or believes it applies to Musica Sacra, not to the use he actually used it for. He has the authority to make that call.

BTW - I have never cared for the practice and we never use it. No horse in this race.

Just because someone does something, does not mean that he has the authority to do it.

 

[Karen107]

To the OP… I believe this is where some change came in about in the liturgy in regards to using videos or letters from with consent by the Bishops in liturgy…

vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19631204_sacrosanctum-concilium_en.html

CONSTITUTION
ON THE SACRED LITURGY
SACROSANCTUM CONCILIUM
SOLEMNLY PROMULGATED BY
HIS HOLINESS
POPE PAUL VI
ON DECEMBER 4, 1963

1. This sacred Council has several aims in view: it desires to impart an ever increasing vigor to the Christian life of the faithful; to adapt more suitably to the needs of our own times those institutions which are subject to change; to foster whatever can promote union among all who believe in Christ; to strengthen whatever can help to call the whole of mankind into the household of the Church. The Council therefore sees particularly cogent reasons for undertaking the reform and promotion of the liturgy.

IMO, the videos and letters don’t mean to take away from the liturgy, it brings it more to the people in a more cohesive way. In fact like one poster mentioned, the early Churches probably read the letters sent to them by Paul and Peter, and various Bishops, which we still read in the liturgy of the Word today… Isn’t that what the Church does to unify the body of Christ?

edits I found this written in there:

1. Transmissions of the sacred rites by radio and television shall be done with discretion and dignity, under the leadership and direction of a suitable person appointed for this office by the bishops. This is especially important when the service to be broadcast is the Mass.

 

[tafan]

To the OP… I believe this Papal letter is where some change came in about in the liturgy in regards to using videos or letters from with consent by the Bishops in liturgy…

vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19631204_sacrosanctum-concilium_en.html

CONSTITUTION
ON THE SACRED LITURGY
SACROSANCTUM CONCILIUM
SOLEMNLY PROMULGATED BY
HIS HOLINESS
POPE PAUL VI
ON DECEMBER 4, 1963

1. This sacred Council has several aims in view: it desires to impart an ever increasing vigor to the Christian life of the faithful; to adapt more suitably to the needs of our own times those institutions which are subject to change; to foster whatever can promote union among all who believe in Christ; to strengthen whatever can help to call the whole of mankind into the household of the Church. The Council therefore sees particularly cogent reasons for undertaking the reform and promotion of the liturgy.

IMO, the videos and letters don’t mean to take away from the liturgy, it brings it more to the people in a more cohesive way. In fact like one poster mentioned, the early Churches probably read the letters sent to them by Paul and Peter, and various Bishops, which we still read in the liturgy of the Word today… Isn’t that what the Church does to unify the body of Christ?

I recently read the documents of Vatican II under advice of a spiritual director. I am 99% positive that the document sited here has nothing to say about the matter.

 

[Karen107]

I just edited above…

1. Transmissions of the sacred rites by radio and television shall be done with discretion and dignity, under the leadership and direction of a suitable person appointed for this office by the bishops. This is especially important when the service to be broadcast is the Mass.

Anyway, I imagine this is where the practice stemmed from.

 

[1ke]

Really?

I’ve checked the Roman Missal. I cannot find any place in the Mass for playing videos.

Can you quote the text in the Roman Missal or in the GIRM where the Church describes the part of the Mass that incorporates a video presentation into the Mass?

I cannot find it.

Please describe the part of the Missal that says “read a letter from your bishop here”.

Written or video, same thing. Just because technology changes doesn’t mean that the tradition of the bishop providing a homily to his scattered flock is any different.

 

[ProVobis]

Please describe the part of the Missal that says “read a letter from your bishop here”.

Written or video, same thing. Just because technology changes doesn’t mean that the tradition of the bishop providing a homily to his scattered flock is any different.

How does one figure that written or video is the same thing?

1. The use of any kind of projector, and particularly movie projectors, with or without sound track, is strictly forbidden in church for any reason, even if it be for a pious, religious, or charitable cause.

Seems to me projectors and video would be, for the sake of this clause, technologically equivalent, not something written.

Maybe other gadgets need to be revisited in light of this “strictly forbidden” clause, which seemingly has never been explicitly taken out of force.

.

 

[Digitonomy]

Please describe the part of the Missal that says “read a letter from your bishop here”.

Written or video, same thing. Just because technology changes doesn’t mean that the tradition of the bishop providing a homily to his scattered flock is any different.

I don’t agree. The written letter is read by the voice of the priest or deacon, just as if he were reading his own homily. That is not the case for a video.

The homilist may certainly use props, photographs, etc in the service of delivering his message. While there is not universal agreement on this, I think the majority of bishops (whose job it is to interpret and apply the law within their dioceses) agree that the paragraphs cited above from De Musica Sacra no longer have the force of law. Under this interpretation, props could include audio or visual recordings.

However, I am a stickler for the idea that the homily must actually be delivered by the responsible cleric. You can’t just have the priest sit there while the AV expert flips the switches. And while I’d prefer a more involved homily that introduces and perhaps builds up to or builds from the recording, I think a very basic introduction that simply says “The bishop has asked that we play his appeal this week, we should be attentive to his message” would still qualify as a homily.

 

[ProVobis]

The homilist may certainly use props, photographs, etc in the service of delivering his message. While there is not universal agreement on this, I think the majority of bishops (whose job it is to interpret and apply the law within their dioceses) agree that the paragraphs cited above from De Musica Sacra no longer have the force of law. Under this interpretation, props could include audio or visual recordings.

The bishops’ conferences interpret IGMR for their country. Thus there is a different GIRM for the U.K. and the U.S., for example. I don’t think an individual bishop can decide that an 1958 strict prohibition is no longer in force for his diocese.

 

[Neofight]

knowing the rules and regs are great (thank you Fr. D for providing references for your concern, I knew they were not in the missal or GIRM), but sometimes strict legalism prevents a deeper and loving communication with Christ.

I for one was not distracted, scandalized, or upset by a video message about CAA…the video gave me plenty to reflect on about stewardship and how as we do to the lessor we do to Christ.

Therefore, it was homiletic, and gave me cause to give prayer of thanks for the blessings given to me, and prayers of discernment for what we as the Body of Christ can do for others.

In the end, I don’t view these rare deviations from the prescribed liturgy as abusive, or illicit, and is especially not a crack in the sanctity of the liturgy that will allow the flooding of heretical behavior to destroy our Holy Church…if the gates of the netherworld will not prevail, neither will a video production!

 

[pnewton]

I still cannot get past that Musica Sacrum was addressing music in Mass, not the homily and is not the General Instruction. Context matters and provides the universe for which a statement is to be taken.

 

[ProVobis]

I still cannot get past that Musica Sacrum was addressing music in Mass, not the homily and is not the General Instruction. Context matters and provides the universe for which a statement is to be taken.

pn, it applies to both the music and the liturgy.

De musica sacra et sacra liturgia
Instruction on Sacred Music and Sacred Liturgy

It’s also noteworthy that since 1969 (?) the homily is now part of the Mass.

 

[pnewton]

pn, it applies to both the music and the liturgy.

De musica sacra et sacra liturgia
Instruction on Sacred Music and Sacred Liturgy

It’s also noteworthy that since 1969 (?) the homily is now part of the Mass.

Thanks for that. I have only seen the one title.

 

[otjm]

Just because someone does something, does not mean that he has the authority to do it.

Well, our then archbishop did the same thing - sent out videos to be played during the time of the homily. so have the subsequent ones.

Given that he was, prior to that time, he was a official of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and some time subsequently served as Prefect for that congregation, I suspect we can all rest assured that there is sufficient authority to do so.

 

[pianistclare]

Well, it appears that Bishops from around the US did it yesterday. Must be a recommendation from the USCCB.
Our Archbishop, former president of the USCCB and holding a Doctorate in Liturgy, does this every year: Slick video, appeal for funds with a summary of how they are dispersed, tied in to the readings, talk about our obligations, and then followed up with the priest reading from the Archbishop’s instructions to “walk people through” the filling out of the Annual Appeal forms, including providing a pencil and mailing it for them. Ushers employed to pass out forms to heads of households, collect them up, and bundle them for mailing.
We’re pretty used to it. Most people (including leadership) don’t like it. But I don’t think they dislike it for liturgical reasons…they dislike being tapped for more $$$.
The pastors are directed to get it done, and on a specific day.
They comply with their Bishop’s wishes.

We even have a version in Spanish (in which the Spanish pronunciation is pretty bad. )

 

[pnewton]

But I don’t think they dislike it for liturgical reasons…they dislike being tapped for more $$$.
The pastors are directed to get it done, and on a specific day.
They comply with their Bishop’s wishes.

We even have a version in Spanish (in which the Spanish pronunciation is pretty bad. )

I dislike it as well, but as I see it, if people would give without prompting, we wouldn’t need the appeal.