P
ProVobis
Guest
Actually much of Bach’s repotoire included non-vocal music which is often used as a prelude or postlude or in recitals. All to the better glory of God.
- Status
P
Peeps
Guest
I don’t think it should “either/or”. I think it should be both.
The more singing, the better. The world does not sing–have you been to a ball game lately and watched how many people just stand there while the National Anthem is played? (When a soloist or group sings it, we’re not supposed to join in unless they invite us to join them.)No one sings, except the paid professionals!
So when the Church sings, it’s a witness to the world! We are DIFFERENT! Fanny Crosby, who was blind, wrote, “We sing for we cannot be silent! His love is the theme of our song.”
The Mass is designed with times of silence, and those should be observed. But the Mass also includes times of singing, and THOSE should be observed, too, unless one is physically unable to join in. Even people with major (and minor) developmental issues will often sing when the rest of the congregation sings–such a beautiful sound!
From the very first century, Christ’s Church has sung. At first it was Psalms, and then in the early centuries, various people wrote hymns that were included in the Mass and sung by the people. In the Middles Ages, people began to lose the “privilege” of singing in church (political wrangling by the leaders), but during that time, the people sang throughout their day, blessing their word with various songs that were more like prayers. Then we lost the privilege of singing as a professional choir took it over.
Now we can sing again, and we shouldn’t be too quick to wish it gone!
Last edited:
Tis_Bearself
Patron
What were the reasons the other half were staying?
P
PetraG
Guest
When some of us say “robbed” we mean “denied what is rightfully theirs.” It doesn’t imply that they necessarily want it, but that it is of value. For instance, when someone has never been asked to remember and be able to use math facts because they have a calculator, such that they can’t do simple math in their heads, they have been denied something they ought to have. If you don’t know how to make change, you’ve been denied a basic skill. If you hear the Kyrie in Greek or the Sanctus in Latin and you don’t understand what’s being said, you’ve been denied something that a Catholic by rights ought to have.
Others who feel they were robbed mean it in a more personal way–that is, that they personally had a religious patrimony and that it was yanked out from under them or lost out of the indifference of others, but that they felt it really is something a Catholic would have felt entitled to for centuries and yet it was gone in a flash.
Absolutely!
The time to teach children about God and the Catholic faith is right in the beginning and before their reach the second grade in school. The reason: in the first years of their lives, children consider their parents as gods and take in everything their parents say and do as gospel. Once they reach elementary school, they start to have other adult authority figures directly in their lives in an almost daily basis (teachers) and peer pressure among their classmates that becomes more and more intense as they age. The results: their parents no long have “god status” in the eyes of their children.
Hence, the biggest impact a parent can make in their child’s religious education and life is in the child’s first years of their life.
S
snarflemike
Guest
As best I can remember, the Eucharist and having the truth were the big ones. I’ll try and find the post.
S
snarflemike
Guest
Here is the FB post about Bishop Barron’s talk on young people leaving the Church, and some 1400 comments from young people saying why they remain in the Church.
O
otjm
Guest
One could get into a discussion as to whether the changes made to the Mass should have been introduced over a longer period of time; what is, is and we either deal with it or rebel against it.
Given that Trent outlawed a number of variations of the Mass which had been around for less than 200 years, I suspect people back then had hard feelings too. They may have also asked questions why 200 year, and why the forms such as the Dominican and Carthusian rites, which were longer in time, made it but theirs didn’t.
One could also get into a long discussion as to whether Benedict’s easing of restrictions was wise or not; given that it appeared to be at least partly intended to move reconciliation with the SSPX forward, the next appearance is that didn’t work.
It appears that a post has been removed, so I will let the matter rest.
Given that Trent outlawed a number of variations of the Mass which had been around for less than 200 years, I suspect people back then had hard feelings too. They may have also asked questions why 200 year, and why the forms such as the Dominican and Carthusian rites, which were longer in time, made it but theirs didn’t.
One could also get into a long discussion as to whether Benedict’s easing of restrictions was wise or not; given that it appeared to be at least partly intended to move reconciliation with the SSPX forward, the next appearance is that didn’t work.
It appears that a post has been removed, so I will let the matter rest.
Last edited:
E
edwest211
Guest
Pope Benedict:
“As for the use of the 1962 Missal as a Forma extraordinaria of the liturgy of the Mass, I would like to draw attention to the fact that this Missal was never juridically abrogated and, consequently, in principle, was always permitted. At the time of the introduction of the new Missal, it did not seem necessary to issue specific norms for the possible use of the earlier Missal. Probably it was thought that it would be a matter of a few individual cases which would be resolved, case by case, on the local level. Afterwards, however, it soon became apparent that a good number of people remained strongly attached to this usage of the Roman Rite, which had been familiar to them from childhood. This was especially the case in countries where the liturgical movement had provided many people with a notable liturgical formation and a deep, personal familiarity with the earlier Form of the liturgical celebration. We all know that, in the movement led by Archbishop Lefebvre, fidelity to the old Missal became an external mark of identity; the reasons for the break which arose over this, however, were at a deeper level. Many people who clearly accepted the binding character of the Second Vatican Council, and were faithful to the Pope and the Bishops, nonetheless also desired to recover the form of the sacred liturgy that was dear to them. This occurred above all because in many places celebrations were not faithful to the prescriptions of the new Missal, but the latter actually was understood as authorizing or even requiring creativity, which frequently led to deformations of the liturgy which were hard to bear. I am speaking from experience, since I too lived through that period with all its hopes and its confusion. And I have seen how arbitrary deformations of the liturgy caused deep pain to individuals totally rooted in the faith of the Church.”
“As for the use of the 1962 Missal as a Forma extraordinaria of the liturgy of the Mass, I would like to draw attention to the fact that this Missal was never juridically abrogated and, consequently, in principle, was always permitted. At the time of the introduction of the new Missal, it did not seem necessary to issue specific norms for the possible use of the earlier Missal. Probably it was thought that it would be a matter of a few individual cases which would be resolved, case by case, on the local level. Afterwards, however, it soon became apparent that a good number of people remained strongly attached to this usage of the Roman Rite, which had been familiar to them from childhood. This was especially the case in countries where the liturgical movement had provided many people with a notable liturgical formation and a deep, personal familiarity with the earlier Form of the liturgical celebration. We all know that, in the movement led by Archbishop Lefebvre, fidelity to the old Missal became an external mark of identity; the reasons for the break which arose over this, however, were at a deeper level. Many people who clearly accepted the binding character of the Second Vatican Council, and were faithful to the Pope and the Bishops, nonetheless also desired to recover the form of the sacred liturgy that was dear to them. This occurred above all because in many places celebrations were not faithful to the prescriptions of the new Missal, but the latter actually was understood as authorizing or even requiring creativity, which frequently led to deformations of the liturgy which were hard to bear. I am speaking from experience, since I too lived through that period with all its hopes and its confusion. And I have seen how arbitrary deformations of the liturgy caused deep pain to individuals totally rooted in the faith of the Church.”
S
steve-b
Guest
I was an altar boy in the 50’s… as in all was in Latin then. I’ll just say, Most of my friends from that time aren’t practicing their Catholic faith today. We were all Schooled in the Catholic Church. It wasn’t the Church going away from the Latin to the vernacular that got them to leave. Sin in all its varieties, took its toll in their lives. Let’s face it, Faith takes persistence AND effort. I noticed, in discussions, Neither Effort nor persistence were they willing to put into their faith.
Last edited:
G
GodIsPerfection
Guest
My reference was to Bach’s MUSICAL composition skills. He is widely regarded as the most prolific and one of the greatest composers in history. I do not believe that a small child learning violin would be his musical equal. THAT was my point.
E
edwest211
Guest
A little history:
1960 The FDA approves The Pill. Most women don’t want it or don’t have access to it. Available by prescription.
1967 Time magazine does a cover story about The Pill and presents babies in a false light. A false freedom is proposed: freedom from fear. Fear of what? Babies. Not that gift from God, that bundle of joy. No, women had to start thinking of babies as a problem.
Meanwhile, Pope Paul VI has to deal with dissidents in the Church about priestly celibacy.
http://w2.vatican.va/content/paul-vi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_24061967_sacerdotalis.html
And Catholic institutions of higher education, in a desire to be modern, cut ties with the Church.
1960 The FDA approves The Pill. Most women don’t want it or don’t have access to it. Available by prescription.
1967 Time magazine does a cover story about The Pill and presents babies in a false light. A false freedom is proposed: freedom from fear. Fear of what? Babies. Not that gift from God, that bundle of joy. No, women had to start thinking of babies as a problem.
Meanwhile, Pope Paul VI has to deal with dissidents in the Church about priestly celibacy.
http://w2.vatican.va/content/paul-vi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_24061967_sacerdotalis.html
And Catholic institutions of higher education, in a desire to be modern, cut ties with the Church.
Last edited:
S
steve-b
Guest
AND
As Peter taught HERE
That’s why I said, our faith requires persistence and effort, lots of it. Those friends of mine who didn’t do that, failed in their faith
E
edwest211
Guest
Things got worse in 1968. Pope Paul VI issues Humanae Vitae:
ENCYCLICAL LETTER
HUMANAE VITAE
OF THE SUPREME PONTIFF
PAUL VI
TO HIS VENERABLE BROTHERS
THE PATRIARCHS, ARCHBISHOPS, BISHOPS
AND OTHER LOCAL ORDINARIES
IN PEACE AND COMMUNION WITH THE APOSTOLIC SEE,
TO THE CLERGY AND FAITHFUL OF THE WHOLE CATHOLIC WORLD, AND TO ALL MEN OF GOOD WILL,
ON THE REGULATION OF BIRTH
He chooses not to follow his advisors who recommend loosening restrictions on artificial contraception. He reaffirms constant Church teaching. Within 24 hours, in an event unprecedented in the history of the Church, Catholic theologians take out a full page ad in the New York Times and go far beyond their authority. They tell those reading that artificial contraception may be necessary in some cases.
The National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws is getting off the ground. They have an action plan.
1970s “Things went nuts in the seminaries in the 1970s.” Seminarians were taught Humanae Vitae but they were also lied to. They were told the Church would change her teaching at some point about artificial contraception. It never did. But when they became priests and parishioners asked about artificial contraception, they told them it was ‘a personal conscience matter.’ That wasn’t true.
1970 Time magazine runs a cover story titled The Catholic Exodus: Why Priests and Nuns Are Quitting. It’s about celibacy, again.
content.time.com
And across the US, porn, or Adult Bookstores open everywhere creating the planned addictions.
Christians were attacked. The family was attacked. Church authority was attacked. “Don’t trust anyone over 30!” A loss of faith can occur because the attackers know what they’re doing.
ENCYCLICAL LETTER
HUMANAE VITAE
OF THE SUPREME PONTIFF
PAUL VI
TO HIS VENERABLE BROTHERS
THE PATRIARCHS, ARCHBISHOPS, BISHOPS
AND OTHER LOCAL ORDINARIES
IN PEACE AND COMMUNION WITH THE APOSTOLIC SEE,
TO THE CLERGY AND FAITHFUL OF THE WHOLE CATHOLIC WORLD, AND TO ALL MEN OF GOOD WILL,
ON THE REGULATION OF BIRTH
He chooses not to follow his advisors who recommend loosening restrictions on artificial contraception. He reaffirms constant Church teaching. Within 24 hours, in an event unprecedented in the history of the Church, Catholic theologians take out a full page ad in the New York Times and go far beyond their authority. They tell those reading that artificial contraception may be necessary in some cases.
The National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws is getting off the ground. They have an action plan.
1970s “Things went nuts in the seminaries in the 1970s.” Seminarians were taught Humanae Vitae but they were also lied to. They were told the Church would change her teaching at some point about artificial contraception. It never did. But when they became priests and parishioners asked about artificial contraception, they told them it was ‘a personal conscience matter.’ That wasn’t true.
1970 Time magazine runs a cover story titled The Catholic Exodus: Why Priests and Nuns Are Quitting. It’s about celibacy, again.
Religion: Priests and Nuns: Going Their Way
. . . A priest forever, according to the order of Melchisedec. —the Rite of Ordination THE Vatican last week announced that all Catholic priests would henceforth be asked to make an annual public...
And across the US, porn, or Adult Bookstores open everywhere creating the planned addictions.
Christians were attacked. The family was attacked. Church authority was attacked. “Don’t trust anyone over 30!” A loss of faith can occur because the attackers know what they’re doing.
Last edited:
S
steve-b
Guest
This gets into the pope’s superior authority and why he alone has it.
Last edited:
P
ProVobis
Guest
What confused everyone IMO was the earlier Populorum Progressio Pope Paul wrotein 1967. Note P37 especially.
“37. There is no denying that the accelerated rate of population growth brings many added difficulties to the problems of development where the size of the population grows more rapidly than the quantity of available resources to such a degree that things seem to have reached an impasse. In such circumstances people are inclined to apply drastic remedies to reduce the birth rate.
“There is no doubt that public authorities can intervene in this matter, within the bounds of their competence. They can instruct citizens on this subject and adopt appropriate measures, so long as these are in conformity with the dictates of the moral law and the rightful freedom of married couples is preserved completely intact. When the inalienable right of marriage and of procreation is taken away, so is human dignity.
“Finally, it is for parents to take a thorough look at the matter and decide upon the number of their children. This is an obligation they take upon themselves, before their children already born, and before the community to which they belong—following the dictates of their own consciences informed by God’s law authentically interpreted, and bolstered by their trust in Him. (39)”
“37. There is no denying that the accelerated rate of population growth brings many added difficulties to the problems of development where the size of the population grows more rapidly than the quantity of available resources to such a degree that things seem to have reached an impasse. In such circumstances people are inclined to apply drastic remedies to reduce the birth rate.
“There is no doubt that public authorities can intervene in this matter, within the bounds of their competence. They can instruct citizens on this subject and adopt appropriate measures, so long as these are in conformity with the dictates of the moral law and the rightful freedom of married couples is preserved completely intact. When the inalienable right of marriage and of procreation is taken away, so is human dignity.
“Finally, it is for parents to take a thorough look at the matter and decide upon the number of their children. This is an obligation they take upon themselves, before their children already born, and before the community to which they belong—following the dictates of their own consciences informed by God’s law authentically interpreted, and bolstered by their trust in Him. (39)”
Last edited:
E
edwest211
Guest
In 1968, a book titled The Population Bomb created false hysteria. People who weren’t around then should understand that until the late 1960s, great trust was placed in experts. Mr. Ehrlich did the wrong thing and that wrong prediction led to it being amplified far out of proportion. It wasn’t aimed at scientists but the general public. It diverged from the idea of an America that could solve its problems if we all worked together. No, it created a very bad and wrong atmosphere that was not rational. Mr. Ehrlich should take the blame.
S
steve-b
Guest
It’s a compilation of development being discussed. It covers a whole range of developments AND concerns and criticism… 50 paragraphs later is the point.
- Finally, a word to those of you who have heard the cries of needy nations and have come to their aid. We consider you the promoters and apostles of genuine progress and true development. Genuine progress does not consist in wealth sought for personal comfort or for its own sake; rather it consists in an economic order designed for the welfare of the human person, where the daily bread that each man receives reflects the glow of brotherly love and the helping hand of God.
- We bless you with all Our heart, and We call upon all men of good will to join forces with you as a band of brothers. Knowing, as we all do, that development means peace these days, what man would not want to work for it with every ounce of his strength? No one, of course. So We beseech all of you to respond wholeheartedly to Our urgent plea, in the name of the Lord.
Last edited:
P
ProVobis
Guest
Good point. But as with everything else things are taken out of context. In this case the word conscience. Also the title of the document suggesting progressive ideology.
Last edited:
V
VanitasVanitatum
Guest
I was talking to someone else who mentioned Bach, not you.
- Status