In my research for a rebuttal I was offering at another thread, I came across this interesting passage from the Lineamata (Instrumentum Laboris) that was the working document for the 2005 Synod on the Eucharist. This particular section makes a very telling statement:
In other responses some lamented the poor quality of translations of liturgical texts and many musical texts in current languages, maintaining that they lacked beauty and were sometimes theologically unclear, thereby contributing to a weakening of Church teaching and to a misunderstanding of prayer. A few responses made particular mention of music and singing at Youth Masses. In this regard, it is important to avoid musical forms which, because of their profane use, are not conducive to prayer. Some responses note a certain eagerness in composing new songs, to the point of almost yielding to a consumer mentality, showing little concern for the quality of the music and text, and easily overlooking the artistic patrimony which has been theologically and musically effective in the Church’s liturgy.
This particular instrument came about as a result of a survey that was sent out to bishops and others who are involved in the liturgy. The survey included questions regarding liturgical abuses and problems within the scope of the liturgy, itself. These were called “shadows”.
Frankly, if the bishops and the Synod Fathers did not find the current state of liturgical music, and this includes what is sung at Life Teen Masses, so very problematic, they would not have addressed this issue; nor would Pope Benedict XVI have devoted a section in Sacramentum Caritatis that compliments what the Synod Fathers were studying:
- In the ars celebrandi, liturgical song has a pre-eminent place. (126) Saint Augustine rightly says in a famous sermon that “the new man sings a new song. Singing is an expression of joy and, if we consider the matter, an expression of love” (127). The People of God assembled for the liturgy sings the praises of God. In the course of her two-thousand-year history, the Church has created, and still creates, music and songs which represent a rich patrimony of faith and love. This heritage must not be lost. ***Certainly as far as the liturgy is concerned, we cannot say that one song is as good as another. Generic improvisation or the introduction of musical genres which fail to respect the meaning of the liturgy should be avoided. As an element of the liturgy, song should be well integrated into the overall celebration (128). Consequently everything – texts, music, execution – ought to correspond to the meaning of the mystery being celebrated, the structure of the rite and the liturgical seasons (129). ***Finally, while respecting various styles and different and highly praiseworthy traditions, I desire, in accordance with the request advanced by the Synod Fathers, that Gregorian chant be suitably esteemed and employed (130) as the chant proper to the Roman liturgy (131).
I believe that both statements are interconnected. As I have said in previous posts, on paper, LifeTeen looks good, as far as the original intent to reach out to the young is concerned. However, when abuses start creeping in like having folks literally gather around the altar and using songs that are not appropriate for the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, then things become problematic. Neither the Synod Fathers nor the Holy Father would have made such very telling statements if they didn’t believe that there were some serious problems.
Incidentally, I had called the liturgical gurus at EWTN on an unrelated manner, but, somehow, the convesation turned to LifeTeen. Evidently, EWTN had been approached by LifeTeen folks about the possibility of televising some of their services. EWTN said “no”, as they believed that the LT Masses were problematic. For me, that was a very interesting insight. Granted, EWTN does have “Life on the Rock” as an outreach for young people. However, they elected to pass on Life Teen.
