Why all the fuss about clapping, cheering, etc at Mass?

[benedictgal]

“Wherever applause breaks out in the liturgy because of some human achievement, it is a sure sign that the essence of liturgy has totally disappeared and been replaced by a kind of religious entertainment. Such attraction fades quickly - it cannot compete in the market of leisure pursuits, incorporating as it increasingly does various forms of religious titillation.” - Pope Benedict XVI - Spirit of the Liturgy

Correct me if I am wrong but I have the impression that benedictgal sees a complete overlap between the act of clapping during Mass and its possible source/intent as described by Benedict XVI.
We must consider that anamchara discussed clapping as a musical tool (commonly used in history) and not as an expression to recognize human achievement.
If we follow the process that I think benedictgal is using we can reach the situation where any musical instrument (human voice too) could be rejected.
I think that the Pope makes a very specific distinction between act and intention. As benedictgal said in other posts, we clap in church to show our approval during the ordination of new priests.
The point here is if clapping can be considered a customary religious musical instrument in todays western world. I would say not so if it were associated with the European culture; however (out of my own ignorant stereotypes) I would say yes if it were associate with some other cultures.
I personally hate clapping during Mass. However, if it is because of musical choices () I choose to tolerate it, even if it really bothers me, because I do not consider it intrinsically wrong.

However, the composers themselves are introducing that element into Mass. Take Christopher Walker’s Gloria, which has now been taken off the rolls of service music (after many complaints directed towards OCP).

The issue of clapping as part of a hymn does take the degree of solemnity out of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. It reduces it to a concert-like experience where solemnity and dignity are thrown out and feel-good sappy stuff replaces it.

Now, regarding the orientation towards Liturgical East, Fr. Jack, this posture is actually very prayerful and most helpful to both the celebrant and the People of God. We are not distracted by the priest and the celebrant, in turn, doesn’t have to engage in personality and creativity, thus inadvertently making himself the focus of the Eucharistic Sacrifice. A friend of mine celebrates Mass using the Liturgical East posture for the Liturgy of the Eucharist whenever he can. The Mass has actually become more prayerful because he is truly leading us in prayer.

 

[anamchara]

We must consider that anamchara discussed clapping as a musical tool (commonly used in history) and not as an expression to recognize human achievement.

We do sometimes clap to the music yes. It’s not every Sunday. It doesn’t bother me at all. I think there is room in the Mass for upbeat clapping at times. I understand many don’t like it.

We also clap at the end of Mass after the priest has left is outside the Church shaking hands and giving his greetings. Normally, because Catholic are in such a big hurry to fly out of Mass not many of us are left finishing up the last song so we all give a nice clap to the music people. It is out of respect for their hard work. I don’t see a big problem with this.

 

[japhy]

Surely, then, the Pope’s writings as Benedict XVI or as Cardinal Ratzinger can be equally disagreed with–except, of course, if he should speak Ex Cathedra.

We can disagree with him, certainly, but we shouldn’t disregard what he says. We must also remember that some of the things he wrote are written in a certain capacity (such as Dominus Iesus, when he was prefect for the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith). You cannot disagree with certain things in that document (those which must be “firmly believed”) and retain the title “Catholic”. You can disagree with the “Benedictine” arrangement of the altar (the placement of candles and crucifix) and with him celebrating ad orientem sometimes, but you can’t disregard it: he’s making a statement about the liturgical tradition of the Church, something which Vatican II did not do away with (nor did it intend to).

A strong historical case can be made for priest and people to face the east during worship as long as one’s historical journey begins with the fourth century and the introduction of public buildings as houses of worship. When liturgy stopped being the celebration of people who actually knew each other and the priest who had been chosen from their midst new ideas to govern worship emerged. When the notion of sacrifice was developed to the point of overpowering communion, new forms of celebration emerged.

And who are we to gainsay that organic development? Who are we to abrogate the new forms that emerged? And is it your argument that there is no evidence, prior to the fourth century, of a common direction for worship during the Mass?

Does anyone dare suggest that the apostles in the upper room thought of themselves as identifying with the “paschal mystery” as they ate the bread and wine which Jesus shared with them. How about the consciousness of the disciples at Emmaus? It took time to develop a eucharistic consciousness, practice, and ritual. And, over the course of history, there has been no shortage of developments and maldevelopments in this regard.

Yes, it took time to develop the sense of the Eucharist (although St. Ignatius knew it was the very flesh of his Redeemer in AD 106), but we know that the Holy Spirit leads the Church into all truth, so organic development seems appropriate. Why would we turn the clock back several centuries and ignore the organic development that occurred since the 4th century?

All of these matters have been addressed in the renewal of the liturgy. There have been missteps and mistakes. Some priests have taken liberties that have distorted the liturgical action. Some priests have overpowered the liturgical action with their personalities, but this is not common practice. Most priests have been doing their very best to be faithful to the reform. Most laity are enormously grateful for the reform.

But we must distinguish between the reform as Vatican II prescribed it and the reform that has taken place since then. Pope Benedict has mentioned the two hermeneutics, one which ruptures tradition, the other which preserves it. And were the laity crying out for such a reform? Did they ask for a new rite of the Mass? Was a new rite of the Mass the purpose of Vatican II? Do Catholics understand the Mass any better now that it has been reformed? (I would say many don’t, given the abuses and alterations they subject it to.)

Some like to suggest that we would far more practicing Catholics were the liturgy to be arranged more like it had been before the reform. This is absolutely gratuitous, with no data to support the claim. To even imagine that people will flock to Mass when it once again is arranged in such a way as to render its actions all but unintelligible, completely befuddles me.

The Second Vatican Council called for catechesis (education, formation) above all else in liturgical matters. Re-read Sacrosanctum Concilium n. 14 and see how it envisioned that “full, conscious, active participation” would be brought about.

 

[Phemie]

“neither do they forbid standing on your head” yawn.

clapping after communion when making announcements, say when applauding for someone given recognition. seems ok.

clapping after the closing song - wrong. people don’t know the GIRM says not to.

*45. Sacred silence also, as part of the celebration, is to be observed at the designated times.
54
Its purpose, however, depends on the time it occurs in each part of the celebration. Thus within
the Act of Penitence and again after the invitation to pray, all recollect themselves; but at the
conclusion of a reading or the homily, all meditate briefly on what they have heard; then after
Communion, they praise and pray to God in their hearts.
Even before the celebration itself, it is commendable that silence to be observed in the church, in
the sacristy, in the vesting room, and in adjacent areas, so that all may dispose themselves to
carry out the sacred action in a devout and fitting manner.
*

After the final song is after Mass is over. But AFAIC we don’t applaud the priest for celebrating Mass and we shouldn’t applaud any other minister who properly does what his/her ministry calls for. OTOH, how hard is it to go tell the choir they’ve enhanced your worship?

 

[Sarabande]

After the final song is after Mass is over. But AFAIC we don’t applaud the priest for celebrating Mass and we shouldn’t applaud any other minister who properly does what his/her ministry calls for. OTOH, how hard is it to go tell the choir they’ve enhanced your worship?

Our music director/organist does not like applause after mass. Many of the musicians I work with feel the same way. We don’t become angry with the people, because we know that they aren’t doing it out of malice. It’s just that the secular and sacred worlds have been so intermixed that people don’t realize that there are appropriate times and places to do certain things, say certain things or dress a certain way. Applause is great when at a concert or recital or big speech. It’s really not appreciated during or after mass. We’d rather just have someone come up to us or the priest to express their thanks.

I’ve heard applause for everything from chant (once someone actually applauded after the actual chanting of a very calm and sober psalm - it was the strangest thing) to rock-like music in church. So, I believe this is a cultural habit that will be hard to break. And I think it’s because we can attend “concerts” in all genres of music from chants/hymns to classical and to rock in secular venues.

Another reason why we don’t like applause, (“We”, meaning many of my colleagues and I. I can’t speak for all musicians.) is because we know it gives some judgemental people sitting in the pews an excuse to say that if the musicians are good and are doing their jobs with the music, that means they are showing off and turning it into a show. In reality, many times, especially with difficult sacred pieces, an organist might be shaking after playing that piece and putting all of his love and prayer into it for God or the cantor and choir taking great pains to sing their best for God.

So when a person in the pews is touched to the soul because the musician is also playing from the soul, and applauds for not knowing any better, the compentant musician suddenly become “villified” as a show-off musician. So, these judgemental people would prefer to have mediocrity in order to not get the applause. AND even when the bulletins or the priests ask congregations not to applaud because the music is being done as a prayer and for the glory of God, people still do it.

 

[Sheeniac]

After the final song is after Mass is over. But AFAIC we don’t applaud the priest for celebrating Mass and we shouldn’t applaud any other minister who properly does what his/her ministry calls for. OTOH, how hard is it to go tell the choir they’ve enhanced your worship?

Just a brief reply to the last sentence… I’m not a member of the choir, but I do act as an EMHC since I was confirmed in May 2007. In years past, there was an annual volunteer appreciation dinner (I was not invited so I have no idea about the details). This year, Father sent a card and a cute thank you magnet.

His parents are both very ill, and he had no time to plan a dinner for those who did extra work for the parish. He mentioned that every year, people said that there was no need for him to thank them.

That’s how I feel, and I am glad that others in my parish feel the
same way. I do my little extra for the Church, for God, for my parish, and to ease the concerns of our priests. I do my little extra so that I might inspire someone else to come forward and help lift the burden of carrying the weight of the parish from Father’s shoulders.

So I need no thanks, nor would I want someone to clap if I were singing (they’d be clapping that I had STOPPED singing, I am sure!). And evidently, I am not alone.

Those who do a little extra, or do a lot, are typically not motivated by applause of any type, I would think.

And for the poster who keeps mentioning the thought police.... Show some charity to us!  We, or at least I, view certain things as a matter of right and wrong, leading to God, or leading away from Him, etc.  I don't offer my opinions on what is best because I love telling people what to think - I do it out of concern that we maintain our Catholic traditions/Traditions.  After all, the Church belongs to us all, even those who have long passed from this earth.

I also believe that notion of obedience seems to have vanished from our minds.    Is it that hard to just say the Mass the way it the book says to say it?  Is it that hard for us (the laity) to follow the rules for one hour a week rather than trying to change things to make us feel better?

:confused:

 

[Sheeniac]

Our music director/organist does not like applause after mass. Many of the musicians I work with feel the same way.

I wish I had read your post before I replied to the previous one. You said what I meant to say, but with such eloquence.

It’s funny how music can mean so much in Mass. Yes, I love the silence of the daily Mass, but our 10:30 Sunday mass is wonderful. I sometimes use my physical position while EMHCing as a means to search the choir loft for those who look out of place: There have been times I would have bet money that some angels stopped by to help sing!

Am I the only one who feels cheated when the choir only does 6 verses out of 9?

BTW - does the priest make that decision? We have one visiting priest whose masses tend to get the full musical treatment (I love it when I see him!!).

 

[JReducation]

“neither do they forbid standing on your head” yawn.

clapping after communion when making announcements, say when applauding for someone given recognition. seems ok.

clapping after the closing song - wrong. people don’t know the GIRM says not to.

*45. Sacred silence also, as part of the celebration, is to be observed at the designated times.
54
Its purpose, however, depends on the time it occurs in each part of the celebration. Thus within
the Act of Penitence and again after the invitation to pray, all recollect themselves; but at the
conclusion of a reading or the homily, all meditate briefly on what they have heard; then after
Communion, they praise and pray to God in their hearts.
Even before the celebration itself, it is commendable that silence to be observed in the church, in
the sacristy, in the vesting room, and in adjacent areas, so that all may dispose themselves to
carry out the sacred action in a devout and fitting manner.
*

You’re not going to get any objection to the observance of silence at the prescribed places in the mass. We were simply saying that at times there is a spontaneous clapping that is unexpected, but it happens. Such is life.

I have been to three masses at the Vatican and there has always been clapping and cheering at the end as the Holy Father exits. The other prescribed moments of silence are always observed. The same in my home parish.

Sometimes something special happens, but that’s not a weekly thing.

JR

 

[Sarabande]

BTW - does the priest make that decision? We have one visiting priest whose masses tend to get the full musical treatment (I love it when I see him!!).

Sometimes it is the priest. Prior to the priests and pastor who are currently at my parish, we had priests who would complain if we did more than one or two verses of a hymn. One of them would ask to only sing one verse for the entrance and only about 2verses for the recessional.

Now we do sing many more verses of hymns. I believe our archbishop now also likes good sacred music, which is a great help since my parish is our cathedral. He placed a young priest who is a true musician and someone I’ve respected highly for his humility, devotion to God and his musicianship to be the director of liturgy for the archdiocese and the music for the archdiocesan masses and events have become so much better. It’s no longer a cheese-fest.

 

[JReducation]

I know that Father Jack knows this, but do the lay people here all know that many of our parishes are administered by religious congregations and religious orders that bring their own charism to the celebrtion of the liturgy and their own traditions as well?

For example, don’t expect to find Franciscans, espcially Capuchins using Gregorian Chant. As my teenage son would say, “It ain’t gonn happen.” They have been around for 800 years and have always avoided Gregorian Chant at mass and in the Liturgy of the Hours. When Francis of Assisi founded their Order the Benedictines did not admit anyone who could not sing. Gregorian chant was paramount to their life of prayer and liturgy. To avoid such exclusion from his brotherhood, not as a criticism of the Benedictines, the Franciscans recited the Divine Office or sung hymns that Francis compose using the music and language of the minstrals of his time. In other words, when everyone else was using exclusively Latin, Francis’ Brothers were using Latin and Italian. Gregorian chant is not part of their tradition. You may see it in a parish where it’s part of the parish and a Franciscan is there for a visit, but not in a parish administered by Franciscans.

Don’t expect to see Marianists converting their parish to the EF. They are a community of Brothers where the Lay Brothers have all of the authority, not the priests. The priests cannot be superiors in that community, unless there is not Lay Brother to lead the community. Out of respect for their lay brothers they will go with the tradition of their congregation. They may incorporte an EF mass into their schedule, if and when possible. But they see themselves as educators, not parish priests. They take on parishes to help out bishops who are short of diocesan priests as do many religious communities.

We have to be open to the influence of the charisms of religious founders. Because we have a shortage of diocesan priests in the USA and many of our parishes are staffed by religious Brothers, Monks, Friars and Societies.

If we make our requirements too narrow, we run the risk of some religious communities pulling out of parishes.

I saw this happen in one diocese where the bishop was very authoritarian. He demanded certain policies in his parishes that one religious community said that they could not comply with, because what the bishop wanted and what their founder wanted were difficult to pull together. The religious decided to pull out leaving four prishes without priests. It was a cordial parting between the religious and the diocese, but it was a loss to the people in those parishes. If I’m not mistaken, one parish had to be closed and merged with another.

Priests who belong to religious communities can leave a parish and a diocese if they feel uncomfortable. The religious superior may not always have priests to replace the one that requests a transfer for good reasons.

We have to be careful what we ask for and we have to ask nicely. Just because someone is a priest does not mean that he has an ogligation to the diocese. Always check out what if your priests are religious or diocesan. If they are religious, chances are that the charism of their community is going to influence how they celebrate the liturgy. Diocesan priests and bishops understand and respect this, because these communities do us, the laity a favor.

Imagine running a diocese with a shortage of diocesan priests where religious don’t want to be, because the laity infringe on their charism. That would be a nightmare for the bishop and unfair to the diocesan priests who would find themselves stretched beyond the limits.

Let’s be prudent and holy.

St. Teresa of Avila once said, “I can tolerate an intelligent man much better than I can tolerate a saint.”

JR

 

[anamchara]

For example, don’t expect to find Franciscans, espcially Capuchins using Gregorian Chant. As my teenage son would say, “It ain’t gonn happen.” They have been around for 800 years and have always avoided Gregorian Chant at mass and in the Liturgy of the Hours. When Francis of Assisi founded their Order the Benedictines did not admit anyone who could not sing. Gregorian chant was paramount to their life of prayer and liturgy.
JR

I didn’t realize this JR. Your post was interesting.

For some, getting rid of religious that don’t want comply would be just fine with them. I have heard Catholics speak of a smaller Church which is very sad in my mind.

 

[benedictgal]

I know that Father Jack knows this, but do the lay people here all know that many of our parishes are administered by religious congregations and religious orders that bring their own charism to the celebrtion of the liturgy and their own traditions as well?

For example, don’t expect to find Franciscans, espcially Capuchins using Gregorian Chant. As my teenage son would say, “It ain’t gonn happen.” They have been around for 800 years and have always avoided Gregorian Chant at mass and in the Liturgy of the Hours. When Francis of Assisi founded their Order the Benedictines did not admit anyone who could not sing. Gregorian chant was paramount to their life of prayer and liturgy. To avoid such exclusion from his brotherhood, not as a criticism of the Benedictines, the Franciscans recited the Divine Office or sung hymns that Francis compose using the music and language of the minstrals of his time. In other words, when everyone else was using exclusively Latin, Francis’ Brothers were using Latin and Italian. Gregorian chant is not part of their tradition. You may see it in a parish where it’s part of the parish and a Franciscan is there for a visit, but not in a parish administered by Franciscans.

Don’t expect to see Marianists converting their parish to the EF. They are a community of Brothers where the Lay Brothers have all of the authority, not the priests. The priests cannot be superiors in that community, unless there is not Lay Brother to lead the community. Out of respect for their lay brothers they will go with the tradition of their congregation. They may incorporte an EF mass into their schedule, if and when possible. But they see themselves as educators, not parish priests. They take on parishes to help out bishops who are short of diocesan priests as do many religious communities.

We have to be open to the influence of the charisms of religious founders. Because we have a shortage of diocesan priests in the USA and many of our parishes are staffed by religious Brothers, Monks, Friars and Societies.

If we make our requirements too narrow, we run the risk of some religious communities pulling out of parishes.

I saw this happen in one diocese where the bishop was very authoritarian. He demanded certain policies in his parishes that one religious community said that they could not comply with, because what the bishop wanted and what their founder wanted were difficult to pull together. The religious decided to pull out leaving four prishes without priests. It was a cordial parting between the religious and the diocese, but it was a loss to the people in those parishes. If I’m not mistaken, one parish had to be closed and merged with another.

Priests who belong to religious communities can leave a parish and a diocese if they feel uncomfortable. The religious superior may not always have priests to replace the one that requests a transfer for good reasons.

We have to be careful what we ask for and we have to ask nicely. Just because someone is a priest does not mean that he has an ogligation to the diocese. Always check out what if your priests are religious or diocesan. If they are religious, chances are that the charism of their community is going to influence how they celebrate the liturgy. Diocesan priests and bishops understand and respect this, because these communities do us, the laity a favor.

Imagine running a diocese with a shortage of diocesan priests where religious don’t want to be, because the laity infringe on their charism. That would be a nightmare for the bishop and unfair to the diocesan priests who would find themselves stretched beyond the limits.

Let’s be prudent and holy.

St. Teresa of Avila once said, “I can tolerate an intelligent man much better than I can tolerate a saint.”

JR

However, the priests on EWTN are Franciscan and they have no problem having some sort of chant during their Masses.

I understand about the charisms, but, that still does not take away from the fact that they have to obey the rubrics and norms of the Church when it comes to celebrating the Mass.

The Paulists are on the theologically liberal side of the spectrum. I was taken aback by some of what came out of the ambo during the preaching; however, as theologically liberal as some of them were, very many of them were faithful to the Mass, right down to the music. Now, there were a couple who changed words here and there, especially during the Eucharistic Prayer (and that was a huge abuse) and one who told us to hold hands during the Pater Noster (I abstained), but, a good part of them were faithful.

Now, the Saleians, at least the ones down here, are an entirely different manner. St. John Bosco stressed fidelity to Rome and to the Holy Father. Somehow, the message got garbled up when it got to my part of Texas. The nuns have tried to rail-road liturgical dance (the wheels finally fell off the bus this year) and the priests have done some very strange things to the Mass. This is not part of their charism at all. I know; I was educated at our Salesian school for nine years and was very active in the alumni association until the school’s liturgies went downhill faster than an avalanche.

 

[benedictgal]

You’re not going to get any objection to the observance of silence at the prescribed places in the mass. We were simply saying that at times there is a spontaneous clapping that is unexpected, but it happens. Such is life.

I have been to three masses at the Vatican and there has always been clapping and cheering at the end as the Holy Father exits. The other prescribed moments of silence are always observed. The same in my home parish.

Sometimes something special happens, but that’s not a weekly thing.

JR

However, in Italy, clapping is a sign of respect. That is why they clap as the Holy Father recesses from the altar. Remember, too, that they also clapped as JPII’s casket was taken from St. Peter’s Square back into the basilica for burial. In fact, the pallbearers lifted the casket at a slight angle so that the people could have one final look.

The only time that the people do not clap is during the Holy Thursday procession (at St. John Lateran) and during Good Friday. Everything was quiet. You could literally hear a pin drop as the Holy Father was entering and recessing for the Good Friday liturgy.

 

[bkovacs]

I’m a recent convert. I used to be a “quasi-charismatic Baptist,” and yes, we did have dancing, clapping and cheering in some of our services. So I’m kinda used to it.

I was following another post where someone was ranting about holding hands during the “Our Father”. They didn’t think that the hand-holding was appropriate as per “the rules” of worship.

Okay, I’ve never appreciated the “dancing”, but I have no problem with the cheering, clapping and hand-holding. I think they are unifying. I’m a bit confused as to what the fuss is all about. Seems like everyone is really up in arms about this stuff!

Is it WRONG to clap and cheer and (cough… cough…) dance during a service? Or to hold hands when we pray the “Our Father?” Maybe I’m so accustomed to “non-liturgical, unorthodox” worship that I don’t know any better. Are these things that these worshipers should be confessing? Were such expressions frowned upon in the early church?

This is a legitimate question from a new Catholic, so please don’t take offense. I guess I’m not quite understanding why there’s so much consternation about a different “flavor” service.

Thanks!

The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is suppose to be a very holy, reverent, and sacred time with God. Not a jumping around celebration :clapping: :extrahappy: . You can do that in the gymnasium!. If you really want to see what a traditional Catholic Mass is, then try to find a Tridentine Mass in your area.

 

[JReducation]

However, the priests on EWTN are Franciscan and they have no problem having some sort of chant during their Masses.

You make a good point here that deserves a respectful response. The Eternal Word Missionaries do not belong to the Order of Friars Minor, which St. Francis founded. They are a public association of the faithful. The Rule of St. Francis is not their rule. They have a Constitution which their founders wrote for them. They follow many of the traditions and customs of the Franciscan family and are members of the Franciscan family, but are not members of the Friars Minor. The Friars Minor only have three branches: Capuchin, Conventuals and Observants.

In addition, the EWTN friars on TV are celebrating mass at the Poor Clare monastery. The Poor Clares are a different order from the Friars Minor. They follow the rule that St. Francis wrote for St. Clare and was later rewritten by Pope Gregory to bring it closer to the Benedictine traditiion. Therefore, you will find some common elements with the Benedictines, such as Gregorian chant or modern chant.

The reason why the Friars Minor do not chant is a simple one. When they were founded, the only other form of worship known within the Church was the Benedictine form, with chant, etc. The Benedictines made important contributions to the development of the EF over the centuries. The Benedictines at the time only accepted those who could sing, because chanting was essential to their mass and the Divine Office. Francis wanted to avoid having to send vocations away, so he simplified the celebration of the mass and the Divine Office by introducing several elements:

1. The sermon had to be in the language of the people, not in Latin as was the practice at the time.
2. The singing was to use the local music.
3. The Divine Office was to be read and not chanted.

The tradition was approved by Pope Innocent III and later Pope Honorius placed a papal bull on it so that no one except another pope can change it. It has never been touched by any pope since Honorius.

I understand about the charisms, but, that still does not take away from the fact that they have to obey the rubrics and norms of the Church when it comes to celebrating the Mass.

This is also an important point. They have to obey the rubrics, with the exceptions that the Holy See grants them. For example, I can speak of the Franciscans best, because I studied them more closely. They have their own sacramentary and their own lectionary. There are days where their readings and prayers are going to be different from those of the universal church. They also have their own liturgical calendar. There are days when they will drop a saint from the calendar of the Church to replace it with a saint of the Order. Some days are solmenities for them, that are not solemnities for the Universal Church. For example the feast of St. Francis in the Roman Calendar is the Solmenity of St. Francis on the Franciscan Calendar. The priest wears white instead of green and the mass is celebrated as a Sunday mass with three readings and the Gloria. It is also a holy day of obligation for anyone in the First, Second and Third Orders of the Franciscan family.

I believe this is also the case with the Benedictines and the Dominicans.

The one Capuchin Cardinal that we have in the USA has already stated that he allows some parishes to have an EF mass, but that he does not see the need to have a large number of them in his diocese. This comes from his connections to his Capuchin Superior General. My take on this, because I have not interviewed either one, is that they do not see it as a need on a grand scale.

The Paulists are on the theologically liberal side of the spectrum. I was taken aback by some of what came out of the ambo during the preaching; however, as theologically liberal as some of them were, very many of them were faithful to the Mass, right down to the music. Now, there were a couple who changed words here and there, especially during the Eucharistic Prayer (and that was a huge abuse)

The degree of abuse depends on how serious were the changes.

and one who told us to hold hands during the Pater Noster (I abstained),

This was approved by the US Catholic Conference and is a common practice in many parishes. But it’s not an obligation.

Now, the Saleians, at least the ones down here, are an entirely different manner. St. John Bosco stressed fidelity to Rome and to the Holy Father. Somehow, the message got garbled up when it got to my part of Texas. The nuns have tried to rail-road liturgical dance (the wheels finally fell off the bus this year) and the priests have done some very strange things to the Mass. This is not part of their charism at all. I know; I was educated at our Salesian school for nine years and was very active in the alumni association until the school’s liturgies went downhill faster than an avalanche.

I wish that I could help here, but I don’t know what they did.

I hope the other stuff that I explained helps clarify some things.

JR

 

[cecilia97]

As a cradle Catholic, I’ve personally just always felt that clapping, dancing, etc serve to call attention to “me” instead of Jesus and the Mass. Holding hands calls attention to “us”.

The only thing I really can’t stand is clapping (applause) after Mass for the choir. It’s not a concert and they are not performing for our approval. I used to be a church musician and, trust me, most would prefer that people quitely come up and shake hands and say “thank you” instead of applauding.

 

[JReducation]

However, in Italy, clapping is a sign of respect. That is why they clap as the Holy Father recesses from the altar. Remember, too, that they also clapped as JPII’s casket was taken from St. Peter’s Square back into the basilica for burial. In fact, the pallbearers lifted the casket at a slight angle so that the people could have one final look.

The only time that the people do not clap is during the Holy Thursday procession (at St. John Lateran) and during Good Friday. Everything was quiet. You could literally hear a pin drop as the Holy Father was entering and recessing for the Good Friday liturgy.

I hope I didn’t mislead you into thinking that I disgree with clapping. I was saying that proper silence during those parts of the liturgy that call for it is to be observed.

I spoke about clapping at the Vatican to indicate precisely what you are saying. Clapping is often part of the liturgy, even at the Vatican, because it is part of the culture of the people or the place.

I was a missionary in South America, clapping is very much a part of the liturgy there. The Native Americans used to clap when they were pagans. They brought that custom with them into Christianity. They clap when they sing, as do the indigenous people of Africa. Even in modern day USA, black people clap when they sing Gospel Music. In Black parishes this is very common.

It is not a sign of disrespect, but a sign of worship and joy among all these different cultures, especially among the Hispanics, Portuguese, Italians, Africans and Native Americans of South America.

Among Anglo-Americans it is often a spontaneous form of gratitude or appreciation.

The liturgy does not forbid expressions of joy and enthusiasm. There is nothing in the rubrics against it. The rubrics are clear on the difference between joy and theatrics.

JR

 

[anamchara]

The liturgy does not forbid expressions of joy and enthusiasm. There is nothing in the rubrics against it. The rubrics are clear on the difference between joy and theatrics.

JR

can you paste this in a sticky?

 

[bkovacs]

You make a good point here that deserves a respectful response. The Eternal Word Missionaries do not belong to the Order of Friars Minor, which St. Francis founded. They are a public association of the faithful. The Rule of St. Francis is not their rule. They have a Constitution which their founders wrote for them. They follow many of the traditions and customs of the Franciscan family and are members of the Franciscan family, but are not members of the Friars Minor. The Friars Minor only have three branches: Capuchin, Conventuals and Observants.

In addition, the EWTN friars on TV are celebrating mass at the Poor Clare monastery. The Poor Clares are a different order from the Friars Minor. They follow the rule that St. Francis wrote for St. Clare and was later rewritten by Pope Gregory to bring it closer to the Benedictine traditiion. Therefore, you will find some common elements with the Benedictines, such as Gregorian chant or modern chant.

The reason why the Friars Minor do not chant is a simple one. When they were founded, the only other form of worship known within the Church was the Benedictine form, with chant, etc. The Benedictines made important contributions to the development of the EF over the centuries. The Benedictines at the time only accepted those who could sing, because chanting was essential to their mass and the Divine Office. Francis wanted to avoid having to send vocations away, so he simplified the celebration of the mass and the Divine Office by introducing several elements:

1. The sermon had to be in the language of the people, not in Latin as was the practice at the time.
2. The singing was to use the local music.
3. The Divine Office was to be read and not chanted.

The tradition was approved by Pope Innocent III and later Pope Honorius placed a papal bull on it so that no one except another pope can change it. It has never been touched by any pope since Honorius.

This is also an important point. They have to obey the rubrics, with the exceptions that the Holy See grants them. For example, I can speak of the Franciscans best, because I studied them more closely. They have their own sacramentary and their own lectionary. There are days where their readings and prayers are going to be different from those of the universal church. They also have their own liturgical calendar. There are days when they will drop a saint from the calendar of the Church to replace it with a saint of the Order. Some days are solmenities for them, that are not solemnities for the Universal Church. For example the feast of St. Francis in the Roman Calendar is the Solmenity of St. Francis on the Franciscan Calendar. The priest wears white instead of green and the mass is celebrated as a Sunday mass with three readings and the Gloria. It is also a holy day of obligation for anyone in the First, Second and Third Orders of the Franciscan family.

I believe this is also the case with the Benedictines and the Dominicans.

The one Capuchin Cardinal that we have in the USA has already stated that he allows some parishes to have an EF mass, but that he does not see the need to have a large number of them in his diocese. This comes from his connections to his Capuchin Superior General. My take on this, because I have not interviewed either one, is that they do not see it as a need on a grand scale.

The degree of abuse depends on how serious were the changes.

This was approved by the US Catholic Conference and is a common practice in many parishes. But it’s not an obligation.

I wish that I could help here, but I don’t know what they did.

I hope the other stuff that I explained helps clarify some things.

JR

So when Pope Pius V came out with Quo Primum, and pretty much made the TLM bound. The Franciscans were somehow the exception to the rule. They were excluded. Mass in vernacular, no chanting , etc… I don’t think so!.

Quote “My take on this, because I have not interviewed either one, is that they do not see it as a need on a grand scale”

Yeh but the Pope probably sees the need on a grand scale. Until the NO Mass is made more reverent, sacred, etcc. And not joyful party, but the sacrifice of the Mass. As it should have been after V2.
Here is an interesting link on Liturgical Music. This applies to the NO Mass as well.
materecclesiae.org/letter.php?lid=16

 

[bkovacs]

Who are you to decide that when we clap at our parish we are only doing it for a" performance" and not out of respect? So because it was in Rome you assume it was out of respect but anyone else doing that, it couldn’t possibly be?

Seems like a bit of thought police to me

Who are you clapping to? God!, or more than likely the choir, guitar players or priest.