Visual projector aids at Mass

[Sarabande]

RE: huge churches where very few can see…

I often think this must be the case in the huge cathedrals, where the cruciform space does not lend itself to the “best view”. I haven’t been to Mass in a huge medieval cathedral, has anyone here? Could you see the priests and what they were doing up front?

Glad some people brought this up, because I, myself, have forgotten about this.

In the cathedral at our diocese, which was built in the 19th century, you can see from every angle, EXCEPT when you have large, special masses and they put out folding chairs in the areas which are usually open. Those areas were not meant to be used for seating. If you sit in those areas, you can’t see everything. What they do is place small, removable tvs so that you can actually see the mass. They do not put up lyrics for music or inspirational, religious images.

The televisions are rather inconspicuous. You don’t really notice them unless you are sitting right near one. This would be a good example of how this kind of modern convenience is used sensibly. It’s a much different experience than the churches I’ve been in which have the large project screens which almost becomes the focal point and are often the first thing you notice when you walk in.

Over in Europe, I’ve attended mass in many different churches and cathedrals as I tend to church hop several masses in a day when I’m over there and have the time. I think I’ve been fortunate enough that I haven’t sat in any space where I didn’t have a “good” view.

 

[drafdog]

This is rather a mountain being made of a mole hill.
The projector at the church I attend is used frequently to provide text for:
the gospel acclamation
the hymns as they are sung
English text for Latin motets sung by the schola
the archbishop’s video address to the people of the archdiocese.
How text being projected on a screen differs from distributing a printed copy of the text escapes me. I can see no reason for banning it unless it is in deference to copyrights.

Reb Levi

 

[ProVobis]

RE: huge churches where very few can see…

I often think this must be the case in the huge cathedrals, where the cruciform space does not lend itself to the “best view”. I haven’t been to Mass in a huge medieval cathedral, has anyone here? Could you see the priests and what they were doing up front?

Can’t say that I have but I have been to churches where there are so many columns that unless you sit in the middle, you have to keep sliding back and forth in your pew to see what’s going on. I guess the same problem exists, however, when you have small children with you and the church is packed. When standing, these kids (or the smaller people) can’t see anything. (Maybe that’s why they frown on people standing in front of you at ball games. )

 

[Elizium23]

Projectors are a tool and therefore can be used for good or bad. The question is whether they are used wisely in the liturgy. They were previously prohibited but I believe that clause of the document is no longer in force, and anyway many bishops have not only allowed but mandated their usage during Mass, even during the homily, such as for transmitting important messages such as the Annual Diocesan Appeal.

Projectors are not necessarily a liturgical abuse. But I will tell you what I feel is a great abuse, is the sheer amount of disposable paper generated every week for song sheets, missalettes and handouts, often with the Word of God printed thereon, that are crumpled up and discarded like toilet paper after the liturgy is over. This is a colossal waste of money and effort and resources. This is not “thinking green”. Projectors can themselves be an answer to this wastefulness. When the responses and Scriptures and hymn lyrics and music can be projected on the wall for all to see, imagine how much paper that can be saved with this kind of thing. Contrariwise, I think it is in poor taste to try and “spice up” the liturgy by taking liberties and projecting “inspirational” ephemeral images. I am kind of a Luddite in this regard and I like my images permanent and tangible.

I recall the medieval controversy of clockwork images used in churches. This was judged to be at best distracting and at worst deceitful. I think similar judgement should be used in deciding what ephemeral projections are offered during the sacred liturgy. We should always keep in mind that we have no reason to keep ourselves in the stone age: all liturgy is based on technology of a certain level. Without technology, we would have no bread, no wine, no sacred vessels and no vestments. Very few people today object to the use of microphones and PA systems for amplification of sound, so that is an example of recent technology which is wisely employed in a widespread fashion. So I think projectors have their place as well. But it is a niche, a role that should be carefully considered and planned so that it does not detract but adds to our worship of the True God.

 

[27lw]

I personally think that projectors would be kind of an ugly distraction at Mass, however, I think that the basic problem is:
too few priests + too big parishes = big uncomfortable liturgies.

Ultimately the problem is that we could use a few more thousand priests. Hopefully this issue will get better in time! I’m not sure we have to put up with ugliness in the liturgy, though. It’s a big issue.

 

[Cat]

Projectors are a tool and therefore can be used for good or bad. The question is whether they are used wisely in the liturgy. They were previously prohibited but I believe that clause of the document is no longer in force, and anyway many bishops have not only allowed but mandated their usage during Mass, even during the homily, such as for transmitting important messages such as the Annual Diocesan Appeal.

Projectors are not necessarily a liturgical abuse. But I will tell you what I feel is a great abuse, is the sheer amount of disposable paper generated every week for song sheets, missalettes and handouts, often with the Word of God printed thereon, that are crumpled up and discarded like toilet paper after the liturgy is over. This is a colossal waste of money and effort and resources. This is not “thinking green”. Projectors can themselves be an answer to this wastefulness. When the responses and Scriptures and hymn lyrics and music can be projected on the wall for all to see, imagine how much paper that can be saved with this kind of thing. Contrariwise, I think it is in poor taste to try and “spice up” the liturgy by taking liberties and projecting “inspirational” ephemeral images. I am kind of a Luddite in this regard and I like my images permanent and tangible.

I recall the medieval controversy of clockwork images used in churches. This was judged to be at best distracting and at worst deceitful. I think similar judgement should be used in deciding what ephemeral projections are offered during the sacred liturgy. We should always keep in mind that we have no reason to keep ourselves in the stone age: all liturgy is based on technology of a certain level. Without technology, we would have no bread, no wine, no sacred vessels and no vestments. Very few people today object to the use of microphones and PA systems for amplification of sound, so that is an example of recent technology which is wisely employed in a widespread fashion. So I think projectors have their place as well. But it is a niche, a role that should be carefully considered and planned so that it does not detract but adds to our worship of the True God.

Wonderful post. Lots of good stuff here. Thanks for posting.

I can go along with you when it comes to projecting inspirational images. This has been done for decades in Protestant churches, and it’s boomer stuff. Out of date and embarrassing–a sure sign to younger people that the church hasn’t kept up with the times. Kind of like bag phones.

Besides, one person’s inspirational image is another person’s discouraging image. E.g., right now, any images of the majesty of winter snow would probably be met with boos and hisses from a congregation in my city!! I would be booing the loudest!