Why are people so against life teen mass?

[DanteAlighieri]

Well, while some people like Arius and Luther were concerned with increasing numbers in order to accomplish their diabolical inspirations that resulted in shattering the Church, others are concerned with consistency and solidarity. Gregorian Chant has always been music of the Church. Rock, on the other hand, has always reflected the profane and thus is not appropriate to be used during Liturgy. What we want to hear at Mass, as individuals, is irrelevant.

If you read my previous post above, you’ll see that I agree with the notion that most popular forms of music are inappropriate for Mass. That said, I think the above emphasized statement is an outrageously unfair generalization. Not all that is unsacred is profane, friend.

Furthermore, we are not debating whether Gregorian chant is the only appropriate form of music for Mass (a position with which I disagree); rather, we are debating why LifeTeen-styled “praise and worship” music is INappropriate.

Again: it comes down to the purpose of the forms of music (NOT the lyrics, people!). Appropriate Mass music is reverent; rock music is inherently not reverent – and, at times, IRreverent. Same for jazz…and funk…and blues…etc. It has nothing to do with how sincerely devout the lyrics are; it has everything to do with the involuntary reaction we have to music – a reaction that is hard-wired into us.

Think about it: if you’re enjoying a piece of rock music, or a jazz band, or a blues musician, you tap your foot, or pat your hand on your leg, or close your eyes and bob your head, or spin in circles – all in time with the music – because you are moved by and wrapped up in the music.

Is that the purpose of song in Mass?

Peace,
Dante

 

[The_Theotokos]

If you read my previous post above, you’ll see that I agree with the notion that most popular forms of music are inappropriate for Mass. That said, I think the above emphasized statement is an outrageously unfair generalization. Not all that is unsacred is profane, friend.

Actually, I was using the word ‘profane’ in the more academic sense, thus being anything relating to the secular world. In this true context of the word, it cannot be argued that rock music is indeed ‘profane’ while Gregorian Chant is not.

Furthermore, we are not debating whether Gregorian chant is the only appropriate form of music for Mass (a position with which I disagree); rather, we are debating why LifeTeen-styled “praise and worship” music is INappropriate.

I wasn’t suggesting a new debate over what music forms are appropriate at Liturgy. I was merely pointing out the reality that the Church has always had its own music and thus does not need music from the secular world.

Again: it comes down to the purpose of the forms of music (NOT the lyrics, people!). Appropriate Mass music is reverent; rock music is inherently not reverent – and, at times, IRreverent. Same for jazz…and funk…and blues…etc. It has nothing to do with how sincerely devout the lyrics are; it has everything to do with the involuntary reaction we have to music – a reaction that is hard-wired into us.

Think about it: if you’re enjoying a piece of rock music, or a jazz band, or a blues musician, you tap your foot, or pat your hand on your leg, or close your eyes and bob your head, or spin in circles – all in time with the music – because you are moved by and wrapped up in the music.

Is that the purpose of song in Mass?

I’m not sure I am following what side of the argument you are on, but to answer your question, the purpose of music at Liturgy is to express prayer at a different level. Now, relating this back to the topic of this thread, a rock song that talks about praising Jesus is not a functional expression of a liturgical prayer.

 

[Charles_22]

If you read my previous post above, you’ll see that I agree with the notion that most popular forms of music are inappropriate for Mass. That said, I think the above emphasized statement is an outrageously unfair generalization. Not all that is unsacred is profane, friend.

Furthermore, we are not debating whether Gregorian chant is the only appropriate form of music for Mass (a position with which I disagree); rather, we are debating why LifeTeen-styled “praise and worship” music is INappropriate.

Again: it comes down to the purpose of the forms of music (NOT the lyrics, people!). Appropriate Mass music is reverent; rock music is inherently not reverent – and, at times, IRreverent. Same for jazz…and funk…and blues…etc. It has nothing to do with how sincerely devout the lyrics are; it has everything to do with the involuntary reaction we have to music – a reaction that is hard-wired into us.

Think about it: if you’re enjoying a piece of rock music, or a jazz band, or a blues musician, you tap your foot, or pat your hand on your leg, or close your eyes and bob your head, or spin in circles – all in time with the music – because you are moved by and wrapped up in the music.

Is that the purpose of song in Mass?

Peace,
Dante

I usually do none of those things when I listen to any form of music, though I almost certainly wouldn’t do those things to anything which you might view as church music. I personally think that there are times when some sacred form of folk music is appropriate, IOW, folk music which can lift the soul to a higher appreciation/devotion of God. I’m sure some of the music which we now consider sacred, or church music, was very much folk music at one time, as they didn’t just spring forth from some collective body,

 

[ibkc]

I for one think that Gregorian music is quite beautiful. But I have no desire to have Gregorian music at worship (or, for that matter, to have the mass said in Latin). We have elevated European culture of centuries ago as the supposedly universal standard. I’m pretty sure that if Jesus had stepped into a Gregorian mass in first century Israel, he would have thought, “What the heck was that? Pretty, but not authentic worship.”

I am not just pretty sure, but VERY sure that He would do no such thing. Gregorian chant is descended from the chants in use by the Jews from long before Jesus’ time. Not only is it an authentic expression of worship which developed organically over a long period of time, its origins are not even European.

I see no need to embalm the Mass.

Giving chant pride of placement in the Mass is not embalming it.

 

[DanteAlighieri]

Actually, I was using the word ‘profane’ in the more academic sense, thus being anything relating to the secular world. In this true context of the word, it cannot be argued that rock music is indeed ‘profane’ while Gregorian Chant is not.

I think you meant “It can be argued…”, right?

I wasn’t suggesting a new debate over what music forms are appropriate at Liturgy. I was merely pointing out the reality that the Church has always had its own music and thus does not need music from the secular world.

But I am not arguing that NO secular music is inappropriate – classical music, for example, is often quite appropriate.

I’m not sure I am following what side of the argument you are on, but to answer your question, the purpose of music at Liturgy is to express prayer at a different level. Now, relating this back to the topic of this thread, a rock song that talks about praising Jesus is not a functional expression of a liturgical prayer.

Agreed, and agreed. This is my basic point.

I think we’re on the same page.

Peace,
Dante

 

[DanteAlighieri]

I usually do none of those things when I listen to any form of music, though I almost certainly wouldn’t do those things to anything which you might view as church music. I personally think that there are times when some sacred form of folk music is appropriate, IOW, folk music which can lift the soul to a higher appreciation/devotion of God. I’m sure some of the music which we now consider sacred, or church music, was very much folk music at one time, as they didn’t just spring forth from some collective body,

That you are not a foot-tapper does not disprove my argument. Though I have no statistics to back this up, I think it’s safe to call a common-sense position that most folks, to one degree or another, are foot-tappers.

The key point here, however, is that the PURPOSE of music in Mass is liturgical – NOT expressive. While I have no problem with guitar accompaniment in the event that there is no choir, I do not think that so-called folk music is appropriate.

Peace,
Dante

 

[MyJesuitSon]

Here is my take on the subject: personally, I don’t care for it. My reason? I think it denigrates the sacredness of the Mass. The Mass is both a celebration and a sacrifice. We are in essence re-living the events at Calvary present at our Mass. It is not a praise & worship service, and I don’t have any problem with singing as loud as we can to give glory and honor to God the Father when it is appropriate. I also don’t buy the “young people are leaving in drones” argument. People stop going to Mass either because they don’t understand what is taking place or they don’t believe in what is taking place. Think of this: if we all truly believed that God (Creator of the Universe, Wisdom, Almighty and Omnipotent, who makes the sun rise and the stars twinkle, and knows every hair on your head), in the person of Jesus Christ, is present in the Eucharist, honestly we would kick the doors down to be there. Too often what goes on in Life Teen Masses is the focus is on the celebration & the music and not on the presence of the Divine. Just my humble opinion.

 

[Earthen_Vessel]

On the music point as to what’s appropriate for Mass, I don’t think the decision can be based on style. People’s preferences for musical styles is like their preference in colors or ice cream flavors. All musical styles can be worshipful and uplifting, and all musical styles can also be abused. The answer should be based on how that particular style of music is being used. Just sayin’.

 

[benedictgal]

On the music point as to what’s appropriate for Mass, I don’t think the decision can be based on style. People’s preferences for musical styles is like their preference in colors or ice cream flavors. All musical styles can be worshipful and uplifting, and all musical styles can also be abused. The answer should be based on how that particular style of music is being used. Just sayin’.

Actually, Pope St. Pius X defined this in his Motu Propio on Sacred Music written 106 years ago. His issue was the use of opera and theatrical music. Here is the beginning of the document:

Among the cares of the pastoral office, not only of this Supreme Chair, which We, though unworthy, occupy through the inscrutable dispositions of Providence, but of every local church, a leading one is without question that of maintaining and promoting the decorum of the House of God in which the august mysteries of religion are celebrated, and where the Christian people assemble to receive the grace of the Sacraments, to assist at the Holy Sacrifice of the Altar, to adore the most august Sacrament of the Lord’s Body and to unite in the common prayer of the Church in the public and solemn liturgical offices. Nothing should have place, therefore, in the temple calculated to disturb or even merely to diminish the piety and devotion of the faithful, nothing that may give reasonable cause for disgust or scandal, nothing, above all, which directly offends the decorum and sanctity of the sacred functions and is thus unworthy of the House of Prayer and of the Majesty of God. We do not touch separately on the abuses in this matter which may arise. Today Our attention is directed to one of the most common of them, one of the most difficult to eradicate, and the existence of which is sometimes to be deplored in places where everything else is deserving of the highest praise – the beauty and sumptuousness of the temple, the splendor and the accurate performance of the ceremonies, the attendance of the clergy, the gravity and piety of the officiating ministers. Such is the abuse affecting sacred chant and music. And indeed, whether it is owing to the very nature of this art, fluctuating and variable as it is in itself, or to the succeeding changes in tastes and habits with the course of time, or to the fatal influence exercised on sacred art by profane and theatrical art, or to the pleasure that music directly produces, and that is not always easily contained within the right limits, or finally to the many prejudices on the matter, so lightly introduced and so tenaciously maintained even among responsible and pious persons, the fact remains that there is a general tendency to deviate from the right rule, prescribed by the end for which art is admitted to the service of public worship and which is set forth very clearly in the ecclesiastical Canons, in the Ordinances of the General and Provincial Councils, in the prescriptions which have at various times emanated from the Sacred Roman Congregations, and from Our Predecessors the Sovereign Pontiffs.

Now, in the wake of the Second Vatican Council, Pope Paul VI made this observation, as noted in the Chirograph on Sacred Music that Pope John Paul II wrote:

1. In continuity with the teachings of St Pius X and the Second Vatican Council, it is necessary first of all to emphasize that music destined for sacred rites must have holiness as its reference point: indeed, “sacred music increases in holiness to the degree that it is intimately linked with liturgical action”[11]. For this very reason, “not all without distinction that is outside the temple (profanum) is fit to cross its threshold”, my venerable Predecessor Paul VI wisely said, commenting on a Decree of the Council of Trent[12]. And he explained that “if music - instrumental and vocal - does not possess at the same time the sense of prayer, dignity and beauty, it precludes the entry into the sphere of the sacred and the religious”[13]. Today, moreover, the meaning of the category “sacred music” has been broadened to include repertoires that cannot be part of the celebration without violating the spirit and norms of the Liturgy itself.

So, there is already an indication that something is amiss. Furthermore, when the Synod on the Eucharist was convened, a survey was sent out to bishops and others regarding the current state of the liturgy. One of the concerns, shadows, if you will, that popped up was the music used at Youth Masses, which was considered problematic. Pope Benedict, in his Apostolic Exhortation, Sacramentum Caritatis, responded to this concern by saying that as far as the liturgy was concerned, one cannot say that “one song is just as good as another.”

 

[Earthen_Vessel]

I agree Benedictgal, but I also don’t see anything at odds with what I wrote above. My point is that the Church isn’t really in the business of defining what music is. What the Church really is doing is saying what **profane **music is. There’s a big difference.

It’s like water. It can be used to drown someone or to give a thirsty man a drink. One use brings death, the other gives life. The water in itself is neither good nor evil. How one uses it is what makes the difference. And I don’t think anything that you quoted above would be at odds with that.

 

[benedictgal]

I agree Benedictgal, but I also don’t see anything at odds with what I wrote above. My point is that the Church isn’t really in the business of defining what music is. What the Church really is doing is saying what **profane **music is. There’s a big difference.

It’s like water. It can be used to drown someone or to give a thirsty man a drink. One use brings death, the other gives life. The water in itself is neither good nor evil. How one uses it is what makes the difference. And I don’t think anything that you quoted above would be at odds with that.

Profane, in this case, does not mean in the manner we use it today. Profane here means secular influence. That is the problem with the Praise and Worship genre. The music sounds like it would come out of a secular radio station. It’s like that South Park episode when the boys decided to be a Christian band. They would take a pop or secular tune, make a reference to Jesus and then call it a Christian song. This type of music is better for a concert setting than the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

The Church is actually in the business of defining what the music is. Here is what Pope John Paul II, the founder of WYD, wrote in that same Chirograph I quoted:

1. On various occasions I too have recalled the precious role and great importance of music and song for a more active and intense participation in liturgical celebrations[9]. I have also stressed the need to “purify worship from ugliness of style, from distasteful forms of expression, from uninspired musical texts which are not worthy of the great act that is being celebrated”[10], to guarantee dignity and excellence to liturgical compositions.

Even he was acknowleding that there was a problem, a disconnect, if you will, with the music and the texts.

He also makes this other point:

St Pius X’s reform aimed specifically at purifying Church music from the contamination of profane theatrical music that in many countries had polluted the repertoire and musical praxis of the Liturgy. In our day too, careful thought, as I emphasized in the Encyclical Ecclesia de Eucharistia, should be given to the fact that not all the expressions of figurative art or of music are able “to express adequately the mystery grasped in the fullness of the Church’s faith”[14]. Consequently, not all forms of music can be considered suitable for liturgical celebrations.

1. Another principle, affirmed by St Pius X in the Motu Proprio Tra le Sollecitudini and which is closely connected with the previous one, is that of sound form. There can be no music composed for the celebration of sacred rites which is not first of all “true art” or which does not have that efficacy “which the Church aims at obtaining in admitting into her Liturgy the art of musical sounds”[15].

So, here, he is defining what should and should not be used.

 

[Earthen_Vessel]

I still don’t see a definition of music in those quotes. I see words like “true art.” You ask 50 bishops or 50 laymen what “true art” is and you’ll likely get 100 different answers.

I’ve been to the last 3 World Youth Days and each time the music in the liturgy was both beautiful and modern. In Australia, it was even adapted to the culture of the indigenous peoples. And that precise moment was when the book of the Gospels was being brought to the altar. It certainly wasn’t Gregorian Chant (which, by the way, I love).

 

[benedictgal]

I still don’t see a definition of music in those quotes. I see words like “true art.” You ask 50 bishops or 50 laymen what “true art” is and you’ll likely get 100 different answers.

I’ve been to the last 3 World Youth Days and each time the music in the liturgy was both beautiful and modern. In Australia, it was even adapted to the culture of the indigenous peoples. And that precise moment was when the book of the Gospels was being brought to the altar. It certainly wasn’t Gregorian Chant (which, by the way, I love).

But, if you notice, the music was much more subdued than in previous years. I saw the telecast.

However, if you look at what the Holy Father wrote in his book The Spirit of the Liturgy, you will find that the former Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger pulled no punches in giving a clear-cut definition:

First of all, there is the cultural universalization that the Church has to undertake if she wants to get beyond the boundaries of the European mind. This is the question of what inculturation should look like in the realm of sacred music if, on the one hand, the identity of Christianity is to be preserved and, on the other, its universality is to be expressed in local forms.

Then there are two developments in music itself that have their origins primarily in the West but that for a long time have affected the whole of mankind in the world culture that is being formed. Modern so-called “classical” music has maneuvered itself, with some exceptions, into an elitist ghetto, which only specialists may enter – and even they do so with what may sometimes be mixed feelings. The music of the masses has broken loose from this and treads a very different path.

On the one hand, there is pop music, which is certainly no longer supported by the people in the ancient sense (populus). It is aimed at the phenomenon of the masses, is industrially produced, and ultimately has to be described as a cult of the banal. “**Rock”, on the other hand, is the expression of elemental passions, and at rock festivals it assumes a cultic character, a form of worship, in fact, in opposition to Christian worship. **People are, so to speak, released from themselves by the emotional shock of rhythm, noise, and special lighting effects. However, in the ecstasy of having all their defenses torn down, the participants sink, as it were, beneath the elemental force of the universe. The music of the Holy Spirit’s sober inebriation seems to have little chance when self has become a prison, the mind is a shackle, and breaking out from both appears as a true promise of redemption that can be tasted at least for a few moments.

Pop music and even Rock music have invaded the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass through LifeTeen. You may not want to admit it, but, that has been the case ever since the movement’s inception. These songs are tinged with not only a secular genre, but, the texts are not often compatible with Church teaching and liturgical theology. I have been to some Masses where a full rock band was in place and it certainly was not appropriate nor proper to the Mass.

It is as though proponents of this genre do not realize that something incredible, solemn and extraordinary is happening here. Do they not realize that at every Mass the veil between heaven and earth and time and space is lifted and that we are just as present at Calvary as were the Blessed Mother and Sts. John and Mary Magdelene? It is as though this is completely lost upon them. Furthermore, we are not the only ones at Mass. We are joined by the Church Triumphant (the saints in heaven) and the Church Suffering (the souls in purgatory). They join their prayers to ours. Thus, the Mass is something cosmic because it takes in the entire Church, not just the warm bodies in the pews.

Even though modern music was used at WYD, it was certainly much more subdued. We also need to separate the issue of inculturation. Inculturation refers to the indigenous people, and that is certainly applicable to the Aborigenes and to the African tribal nations that greeted the Holy Father last week. However, this does not apply to youth.

 

[Earthen_Vessel]

I know nothing of Life Teen, so I’m neither defending it nor criticizing it. I’m only talking about music. Surely some music is uplifting and some is not. We are not in disagreement there. I don’t think Jimi Hendrix type guitar playing would be appropriate in a Mass, because of the types of emotions it is intended to evoke. On the other hand, maybe music by someone who plays like a Phil Keggie (sp?) would be entirely appropriate. I think each case needs to be looked at in terms of its own merit.

There are some people who don’t like guitars of any kind at the Mass. That makes no sense at all to me. Guitars are universally accepted as musical instruments. Hence it’s suitable for making music. The only remaining question is, “Does the music inspire the soul to open itself to the Holy Spirit.” If yes, it’s all good. If no, leave it out of the liturgy.

I think that’s a good common sense approach, don’t you?

 

[benedictgal]

I know nothing of Life Teen, so I’m neither defending it nor criticizing it. I’m only talking about music. Surely some music is uplifting and some is not. We are not in disagreement there. I don’t think Jimi Hendrix type guitar playing would be appropriate in a Mass, because of the types of emotions it is intended to evoke. On the other hand, maybe music by someone who plays like a Phil Keggie (sp?) would be entirely appropriate. I think each case needs to be looked at in terms of its own merit.

There are some people who don’t like guitars of any kind at the Mass. That makes no sense at all to me. Guitars are universally accepted as musical instruments. Hence it’s suitable for making music. The only remaining question is, “Does the music inspire the soul to open itself to the Holy Spirit.” If yes, it’s all good. If no, leave it out of the liturgy.

I think that’s a good common sense approach, don’t you?

Yes, so long as we also keep the authoritative documents of the Holy See in mind. What is also a blessing is that we have a Pope who is also a musician, a classically-trained musician at that. His brother was the long-time choirmater for the Cathedral at Regensberg. Thus, Pope Benedict certainly has a keen interest in sacred music. He has done a lot to clean up his own house at St. Peter’s. From the looks of it, he wants to clean up the Universal Church as well.

 

[Earthen_Vessel]

Absolutely. Have a good weekend Benedictgal. Peace.

 

[benedictgal]

Absolutely. Have a good weekend Benedictgal. Peace.

You, too!

I am going to head home in a little bit. I’ve been tending with a sick Boston Terrier and a sick dachshund. Hopefully, both will pull through.

 

[Charles_22]

That you are not a foot-tapper does not disprove my argument. Though I have no statistics to back this up, I think it’s safe to call a common-sense position that most folks, to one degree or another, are foot-tappers.

The key point here, however, is that the PURPOSE of music in Mass is liturgical – NOT expressive. While I have no problem with guitar accompaniment in the event that there is no choir, I do not think that so-called folk music is appropriate.

Peace,
Dante

My foot tapping explanation was not an attempt to disprove your point, at least not in it’s entirity, but rather to show that you don’t know how music affects all people. So obviously you made a blanket statement which is not as true as you made out. I admit I have different reactions to different music, but it’s not like this attitude I see with increasing frequency, where people want to basically condemn anything which isn’t classical (like I ever understood classical music in the first place) or liturgical, and I’m not just talking that these condemnations are being levied just for the sake of what goes on during Mass, but outside in our personal lives as well. Despite that you aren’t doing that I presume, it does start to get very old.

I can’t provide you any examples off of the top of my head, but I’m willing to bet some of the music you would consider liturgical would indeed also have fit into the folk category, be that in it’s beginnings or not. How much of our church music is protestant in origin for a start? I have to wonder whether you consider the folk rock music of the sixties, as what I’m talking about, when that need not be the case. I don’t think Kumbaya:blushing: belongs, though it may nonetheless.

Oh, for the vast majority of parishes out there, it’s every bit a fact of life that very often there are no choirs at the Masses, and concertos, which I wouldn’t understand, are even more a matter of infrequency. I suppose if everybody lived beside a cathedral, this might not be the case.

 

[Matt33]

Oh, for the vast majority of parishes out there, it’s every bit a fact of life that very often there are no choirs at the Masses, and concertos, which I wouldn’t understand, are even more a matter of infrequency. I suppose if everybody lived beside a cathedral, this might not be the case.

I don’t knkow in the US is that is a “vast majority” that would imply well over 50% But I know that I would love to be in one of those parishes rather than the “lifeteen” music at my parish. Kinda like I would rather eat plain bread than doggie doo.

 

[Orpheus2112]

I haven’t read through all of the posts here, but I did get the gist that most folks just don’t care for the music.

Same here. I’ll go to a Life Teen Mass and I don’t think that they should be forbidden; it’s nice to have that option for those who like it. But I really can’t stand that music, and I will only go to the Life Teen Mass if I’ve missed all other opportunities to attend Mass that day.

I also really cannot stand how certain parts of the Mass are lengthened because a song is inserted where normally there is simply a repeated phrase.

If someone digs it, that’s cool. If someone prefers a regular NO Mass then that’s cool too.

I just don’t dig it.:yawn: