Life Teen Mass

[Amppax]

[quote name='USAirwaysIHS' timestamp='1344744687' post='2466373']


The clown mass comparison is a valid point, too. Just because something isn't sinful doesn't mean it's what we should be doing.

[/quote]

No it really isn't. But if you think it is, fine.

[Vincent Vega]

So thent just because something isn't sinful, that justifies doing it? In other words, the bare minimum is enough for God?

Edited for bizarre sentence construction.

Edited August 12, 2012 by USAirwaysIHS

[Aragon]

I don't really think Praise and Worship Lifeteen style-Masses are appropriate. The liturgy isn't something that the community creates according to its own aesthetic preferences, it's something handed down to us from generation to generation and therefore any development in it must be organic and in continuity with the past. Vatican II says gregorian chant should be given pride of place, so why do less than 5% of Catholic parishes use chant in their Sunday Mass?

When the Mass begins to look more like a concert than a Sacrifice then something is going wrong.

[missionseeker]

First, I just wanted to say I was previously responding on my phone. On the mobile version there is no multiquote and I didn't realize there were three pages, so i didn't see where the other had been pointed out. Sorry for the repeat of that.

[quote name='ThePenciledOne' timestamp='1344621826' post='2465636']
As in there is an [b]ideal[/b], but if that cannot be achieved then there are other acceptable musical forms for the mass. And when I say 'acceptable', I mean perfectly fine.

I just met with one of my friend's who is in seminary to become a Jesuit and we talked about this very topic. And one of the fruits of that conversation, I will merely posit and say that we(American Catholics) read canonical teaching/law and Church teaching/law through strictly an Anglo mindset(still influenced by the founding puritans/theists). And this perspective is that we hold law to an ideal and you should always be in that ideal, which from my friend's experience/perspective(he holds a bachelors in theology) is not withstanding how Roman law should be seen at all.
[/quote]

I don't understand most of what you are trying to say here because it sounds like you are saying you SHOULD try for an ideal.
[quote name='ThePenciledOne' timestamp='1344658419' post='2465896']
Cause of course that's Law....



Ok, and?
[/quote]

If you know what the Church says and don't care, that's disobedience. Disobedience is not good. If a person knows that there are things not permitted at Mass and continues to use them anyway, that's sinful.

[quote name='ThePenciledOne' timestamp='1344660824' post='2465917']
I think the crux of my misunderstanding is that I don't see an error in not fulfilling the ideal for liturgical music. Besides that, not following liturgical guidelines or whatever is not even considered a sin.

And all these 'facts' are given over to me and others, who have little background in theology/basic understanding of Catholic liturgical writing and thus must trust what the rest of the 'scholars' on here have to, which (and I shall say bluntly) is extremely one-sided.
[/quote]

Some of us have spent many years studying this stuff. Some of us have studied this stuff under people who studied this stuff with popes. You can call it unfair or onesided. But generally the Church takes a stance on one side of the fence or the other. Not both.


[quote name='ThePenciledOne' timestamp='1344695234' post='2466022']
Because, of course those two contain the same gravity...
[/quote]

While you may not see it, they actually do. There is disregard of the liturgical norms in both. One may be more exaggerated than the other, but they are both based in defiance of church documents that clearly state these things are not allowed.

[quote name='ThePenciledOne' timestamp='1344731700' post='2466287']
You're assuming that God is only happy with our attempts to give 'everything'. I won't assume what God wants exactly from us except His Love. And given my own experience our Father is happy with any attempt as long as we are striving for Him. Sure, some of our attempts may be worse or better than others, but in the end His Love remains the same while ours hopefully grows for Him.

Sure, Gregorian chant may be the ideal, but if no one can sing worth a beaver dam then grab the guy who can play acoustic guitar well [i]and[/i] prayerfully then shoot get him at Mass! That way the music is actually praising the Father even more gloriously than what could have been done by people whose voices sound like the dead.

And your attempted comparison smells of elderberries.
[/quote]

What God wants from everyone is sainthood. That requires more than just a half attempt at something because we like it. Usually it requires a lot of work at something because we smell of elderberries at it or we hate it.
The idea that you would have an entire parish where no one is capable of singing is bologna. One where no one wants to, possibly. But one where no one can? Ridiculous.



[quote name='ThePenciledOne' timestamp='1344744324' post='2466371']
That's what matters.

While, the details are necessary and whatever, the above is what really matters. Praise Him!
[/quote]

That's like saying "well the priest didn't say the words exactly right, but I guess it was close enough"

Details are necessary. And they matter. Without them, we'd be protestants.

[the171]

Missionseeker, did I mention how much you just made my day with that post? You really did. My heart is smiling.

[Noel's angel]

[quote name='ThePenciledOne' timestamp='1344731700' post='2466287']
You're assuming that God is only happy with our attempts to give 'everything'. I won't assume what God wants exactly from us except His Love. And given my own experience our Father is happy with any attempt as long as we are striving for Him. Sure, some of our attempts may be worse or better than others, but in the end His Love remains the same while ours hopefully grows for Him.

Sure, Gregorian chant may be the ideal, but if no one can sing worth a beaver dam then grab the guy who can play acoustic guitar well [i]and[/i] prayerfully then shoot get him at Mass! That way the music is actually praising the Father even more gloriously than what could have been done by people whose voices sound like the dead.

And your attempted comparison smells of elderberries.
[/quote]

1. You are rude
2. You either don't read what people write, or you just don't want to understand
3. You are wrong

Gregorian chant is not difficult to sing. If more places used it, more people would know it, and therefore we wouldn't have to grab the nearest guitar player. Yes, if there is a situation where you cannot reach the ideal, by all means use what you have, BUT don't let that be your norm.

[ThePenciledOne]

[quote name='missionseeker' timestamp='1344746000' post='2466389']
I don't understand most of what you are trying to say here because it sounds like you are saying you SHOULD try for an ideal.
[/quote]

Sure, but the reality of it is that if an ideal cannot be met then you have to do the best to your ability.

[quote]
If you know what the Church says and don't care, that's disobedience. Disobedience is not good. If a person knows that there are things not permitted at Mass and continues to use them anyway, that's sinful.
[/quote]

Never said to disobey the Church. Sure, I will admit I wrestle with teachings of the Church, but never outright disobey them. And honestly if I am struggling with only the liturgical teachings on music in the Mass then I am safer than struggling over something with more gravity...say abortion or premarital sex...


[quote]
Some of us have spent many years studying this stuff. Some of us have studied this stuff under people who studied this stuff with popes. You can call it unfair or onesided. But generally the Church takes a stance on one side of the fence or the other. Not both.
[/quote]
And of course I can see that from your or anyone else's online avatar.

[quote]
What God wants from everyone is sainthood. That requires more than just a half attempt at something because we like it. Usually it requires a lot of work at something because we smell of elderberries at it or we hate it.
[/quote]

Sure, but you're assuming everyone is willing to give of themselves like that. (It'd be nice, but then we wouldn't be on earth we'd be in heaven). I don't know where you live, but most of the people at my church are still just people and choose to only give so much. I'll admit that I don't succeed in God's will all the time, but I still try my best.



[quote name='Noel's angel' timestamp='1344780094' post='2466472']
1. You are rude
2. You either don't read what people write, or you just don't want to understand
3. You are wrong

Gregorian chant is not difficult to sing. If more places used it, more people would know it, and therefore we wouldn't have to grab the nearest guitar player. Yes, if there is a situation where you cannot reach the ideal, by all means use what you have, BUT don't let that be your norm.
[/quote]

1. My bad, I apologize if I came up rude.
2. I do read and it's more like we are speaking past one another.
3. Wrong about what? Wrong that I am not seeing it the 'right' way?

The thing is that chant has very much fallen to the wayside and whether that's because of interest culture what have you, it has. And the ideal is very much just that, an ideal. Sure, we shouldn't allow second rate things to become the norm, but its either that or nothing. I've stated some of this before, but anyways I've never heard from any priest that chant has primacy. I have ever only heard it from here on and 'trads' (for lack of a better term) at FUS.

And a side note: Has anyone been to the Vatican and attended Mass there? In all honesty I'd like to know what sort of music they use there.

[BG45]

[quote name='ThePenciledOne' timestamp='1344784764' post='2466487']
I'll admit that I don't succeed in God's will all the time, but I still try my best.
[/quote]

And perhaps I'm wrong (and I'm sure I'll be corrected if I am), but I've always assumed that's pretty much the goal of striving for Sainthood. We're flawed, we mess up, we seek Reconciliation and the other Sacraments, but no matter what, we just continue to do our best at what He desires of us.

For what it's worth, I don't think you've been very rude in this thread, just saying that you wrestle with the issues surrounding what is "appropriate" music and what isn't. Though if we go entirely by the documents that have been quoted in this thread, finding a Mass in the United States with "appropriate" music is somewhere in the neighborhood of winning Publisher's Clearinghouse (at least from my personal experience attending Mass in a dozen or so different states).

With the experience I mentioned earlier, there was no appropriate music, because there was no music...maybe that's against a document I'm unaware of, maybe not; unlike some in this thread I don't have a degree in Sacred Music from a Catholic university and I've not studied under people who have studied under Pope's.

[Vincent Vega]

[quote name='BG45' timestamp='1344800969' post='2466542']
With the experience I mentioned earlier, there was no appropriate music, because there was no music...maybe that's against a document I'm unaware of, maybe not; unlike some in this thread I don't have a degree in Sacred Music from a Catholic university and I've not studied under people who have studied under Pope's.
[/quote]
Nope, Masses with music are permissible (though again, not the ideal - GIRM 393: [spoiler]393. Bearing in mind the important place that singing has in a celebration as a necessary or integral part of the Liturgy,[151] all musical settings for the texts of the Ordinary of Mass, for the people’s responses and acclamations, and for the special rites that occur in the course of the liturgical year must be submitted to the Secretariat of Divine Worship of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops for review and approval prior to publication.[/spoiler] ).
I'd prefer a music-free Mass to one where prohibited instruments were used.

Edited August 12, 2012 by USAirwaysIHS

[Ice_nine]

I don't know much about these music debates . . . and what's the deal with these haagen daz people y'all are always hating on?

njgadgn

[ardillacid]

Last weekend I went to an FSSP mass, then a mass featuring Marty Haugen. I'll give you ten dollars if you can guess at which one my mind was blown away.

[missionseeker]

The one with Marty Haugen. Sheer banality will kill you

[the171]

[quote name='ThePenciledOne' timestamp='1344784764' post='2466487']


And a side note: Has anyone been to the Vatican and attended Mass there? In all honesty I'd like to know what sort of music they use there.
[/quote]

Chant, polyphony. No guitars. Not even for masses especially for youth. Mr. Pope doesn't like that.

[quote name='the171' timestamp='1344826546' post='2466691']


Chant, polyphony. No guitars. Not even for masses especially for youth. Mr. Pope doesn't like that.
[/quote]

They have masses especially for te youth. What i meant was that there are no guitars.

[missionseeker]

[quote name='ThePenciledOne' timestamp='1344784764' post='2466487']
Sure, but the reality of it is that if an ideal cannot be met then you have to do the best to your ability.



Never said to disobey the Church. Sure, I will admit I wrestle with teachings of the Church, but never outright disobey them. And honestly if I am struggling with only the liturgical teachings on music in the Mass then I am safer than struggling over something with more gravity...say abortion or premarital sex...



And of course I can see that from your or anyone else's online avatar.



Sure, but you're assuming everyone is willing to give of themselves like that. (It'd be nice, but then we wouldn't be on earth we'd be in heaven). I don't know where you live, but most of the people at my church are still just people and choose to only give so much. I'll admit that I don't succeed in God's will all the time, but I still try my best.





1. My bad, I apologize if I came up rude.
2. I do read and it's more like we are speaking past one another.
3. Wrong about what? Wrong that I am not seeing it the 'right' way?

The thing is that chant has very much fallen to the wayside and whether that's because of interest culture what have you, it has. And the ideal is very much just that, an ideal. Sure, we shouldn't allow second rate things to become the norm, but its either that or nothing. I've stated some of this before, but anyways I've never heard from any priest that chant has primacy. I have ever only heard it from here on and 'trads' (for lack of a better term) at FUS.

And a side note: Has anyone been to the Vatican and attended Mass there? In all honesty I'd like to know what sort of music they use there.
[/quote]

1) I have been to the Vatican and attended Mass there. No guitars. No hand clapping. No fluff.

2) The popes have written many times that Chant has primacy of place. Including in the very documents of Vatican II.

3) I wrote a really long response and I hope you will read it. I'm not trying to condemn anyone here, and I acknowledge that there is a certain amount of wiggle room when it comes to culpability and vincible and invincible ignorance. That said, it is the duty of every Catholic to educate himself in his faith. You said that you've been struggling with this, so I am just trying to help you understand. You know, when it comes to many other things in the faith - questions of morality and doctrine or whatnot - I find that people are more than willing to accept advise from those who have more knowledge. When it comes to appropriate things in the liturgy there is always a hesitancy to acknowledge that there is a more appropriate and less appropriate category -ESPECIALLY when music is involved. (Not saying this about you, but in general the people I've spoken to about music all have behaved the same way.) I know that USAir has been studying sacred music since I've known him and I have been studying it for the last 11 years. I'm in no way a theologian, but there is a right and a wrong for music in the church. USAir has already posted links to many documents, so I am not going to, but you should really take the time to peruse them.

Anywho, here ya go.


The problem with thinking that chant fell to wayside is that it didn’t. It was systematically pushed. In the 1960s, there were certain members of clerical, religious, and “liturgical reform” groups who, after Vatican II, told parishioners that the Church no longer allowed chant. Because congregations then were used to hearing doctrine and Church teachings from the pulpit and Catholic schools, when these leaders said “it’s no longer allowed” people followed that. Therefore, [i]all instances of this kind of liturgical abuse are the direct result of the disobedience and willful deception of priests, bishops, and other religious groups who perpetuated these untruths to the faithful. [/i]

Another problem that liturgical music faces is simply modernity. Our society encourages us to make choices based on what we like, what feels good, what’s “right for you” (whatever the heck that phrase means.) rather than what we have carefully considered and discerned to be true and good and beautiful. This turn from a perception of reality from outside of one’s self to a perception of reality embodied[i] by[/i] one’s self is even evident in the music and the lyrics of hymns or songs sung at Mass.

[i]E[/i]ducated westerners consider music to be a language; one that expresses complex truths about the world and humanity. Even in chant, there are many, many instances of “word painting” with the melody (which just means that the construction of the melody is such that it invokes images of the text. An example of this is when the melody ascends for “in excelis Deo” or descends at “descendit” in the creed). The melody of the rhythm of music unite to make a statement (in a well constructed piece of music) People have tried to say that this is not true, but when that happens we wind up with hideous 12 tone music and things like John Cage’s 4:33. The principles of music are based on physics and when you learn those principles you can manipulate the music to express things.

When rock and pop were invented, they were, mainly, a form of revolt. The rhythms, melodies, and lyrics affirmed the idea that beauty was subjective, that morality changed, and that one should not have regard for others as much as they do for their own person. The rhythms replicated the things the lyrics spoke about: sex and drug and alcohol. I’m not saying it’s a sin to listen to rock, but because of its history, [i]rock music and all forms that are related to it are in no way appropriate for use at the Mass[/i].

The reason the Church places Gregorian chant above all other music is that it has no bearings whatsoever in secular things. Its roots are found in the chants of Jewish synagogues. When the liturgy developed, the chants developed organically with and around and FOR the liturgy and therefore are the most suitable for use in the liturgy. Is a liturgy with no chant bad? Not necessarily. I would even argue that sacred polyphony enhances the beauty of chant and that hymns can compliment it. But it is the ideal and that is why it is so.

The largest problem that I have encountered when it comes to sacred music vs. P&W is that –as testament to modern society – the arguments for P&W are not based on Church documents or really anything more than “this is what we like” or “this is what we can do” or “this is what makes me feel close to God” (which, do you not find it interesting that no one groups P&W in WITH sacred music? That itself should say “these are not the same and do not have the same purpose).If we cannot separate what we think or desire from the Mass, then how can we say that we are giving Him our all? Or even attempting to meet an ideal? Why is there so much resistance when the Church’s directives are presented? Do we think we know better than the Church how to please her Bridegroom?

The liturgy is not comprised of a human act. It is a Divine act and a divine gift. There is a very subtle twist in the way that liturgy is perceived since Vatican II and the focus has come to be on the participants, not the Giver. Many places, the tabernacle is not even in a visible place, but off to the side like God doesn’t even matter! You can see it in the designs of churches whereas they used to be built in the shape of a cross, with the ceiling pointed toward heaven, they are now built in circles, emphasizing the importance of the people. You can see this in the lyrics of modern songs vs. the text of the chants: “I am the Bread of Life” “Gather us In” “Here I am, Lord” “Here I am to Worship” “we are called” “We are your people” as opposed to something like the Te Deum (We praise thee, O God : we acknowledge thee to be the Lord. All the earth doth worship thee : the Father everlasting. To thee all Angels cry aloud :
the Heavens, and all the Powers therein.To thee Cherubim and Seraphim : continually do cry,Holy, Holy, Holy) or Gaudeamus ([i]Let us all rejoice in the Lord, celebrating the feast day in honour of [name of saint and phrase about their life], and highly extol the Son of God)[/i]

This shift makes the Mass become something about the people, and from the people, not the Church. The Church is full of history, why throw that away? Why look down at it like it’s a cast away piece of clothing? It’s our right to be able to worship in a manner [i]fitting to the Son of God, PRESENT to us in the Eucharist. [/i]I mean, it’s a freakin’ miracle- quite literally, Heaven coming to earth. Why are we making excuses about what is fitting? Why are we saying “Sorry, God. We just can’t”? It’s not acceptable.
Pope Benedict has written quite extensively on music and the liturgy. Here are some things that he has said

[quote]I would not speak at such length about all of this if I believed that such ideas were attributable
only to a few individual theorists. Although it is beyond all dispute that they are not supported by
the texts of Vatican II, many a liturgical office and its organs firmly believes that the “spirit” of
the council points in this direction. In the sense of what has been described above, an all too Liturgy and Church Music: Benedict XVI
4
widespread opinion today holds that the real categories of the conciliar understanding of liturgy
are a so-called creativity, the activity of all those present, and the reference to a group whose
members know and are drawn to each other. Not only assistant pastors, but sometimes even
bishops have the feeling that they are not loyal to the council if they celebrate Holy Mass exactly
as it is printed in the Missale: at least one “creative” formula must be slipped in, no matter how
banal it might be. Of course, the bourgeois greeting of the audience and if possible also the
friendly greetings at leave taking have already become an obligatory element of the sacred action
which scarcely anyone dare omit

...

At the same time, we can see just what Catholic Christianity is suffering from today. If the
Church appears to be merely an institution, a bearer of power and thus an opponent of freedom
and a hindrance to redemption, then the faith lives in contradiction to itself, because on the one
hand faith cannot dispense with the Church, and on the other hand faith is fundamentally
opposed to the Church. Therein lies the tragic paradox of this trend in liturgical reform. After all,
liturgy without the Church is a contradiction in terms. Where all are active so that all become
themselves the subject, the real agent in the liturgy disappears along with the common subject
“Church.” People forget that the liturgy is supposed to be opus Dei, God’s work, in which He
Himself acts first, and we become the redeemed precisely because He is at work. The group
celebrates itself, and in so doing it celebrates absolutely nothing, because the group is no reason
for celebrating. This is why universal activity leads to boredom. Nothing at all happens without
Him Whom the whole world awaits. Only in light of this fact is the transition to more concrete
purposes, as they are reflected in the Missa Nicaraguensis, a logical conclusion...

Above all, there follow the three ontological
dimensions in which the liturgy lives: the cosmos, history and the mysterium. The connection
with history includes development, meaning that liturgy is part of something living, something
which has a beginning, which continues to exert its influence and which, remains present without
being completed, but rather lives only by being further developed. Some elements die off, others
are forgotten and return later on in a different way, but development always implies partaking of
an open-ended beginning.
And this brings us to a second category which is especially important because it is related to the
cosmos: liturgy so conceived exists basically as partaking. No one is the first and only creator of
liturgy. For everyone, liturgy is participation in something larger, which goes beyond the mere
individual. And in this way each individual is also an agent, active precisely because he is a
recipient.
Finally, relationship to the mystery means that the beginning of the liturgical event never lies
within ourselves. It is rather response to an initiative from above, to a call and an act of love,
which is mystery. There are problems here which need to be explained, but the mystery does not
open itself to explanation. It becomes accessible only by being accepted, in the “yes” which even
today we can safely call obedience, in a biblical sense.
And this brings us to a point which is very important for the onset of art. Group liturgy is not
cosmic, since it lives from the autonomy of the group. Group liturgy has no history, for it is
characterized precisely by emancipation from history and by a “do-it-yourself” attitude, even
when a group uses moveable scenery borrowed from history. And group liturgy knows nothing
of the mystery, for in group liturgy everything is explained and must be explained. That is why
development and partaking are just as foreign to group liturgy as is obedience, which perceives a
meaning greater than that which can be explained.
.[/quote]


here is that: [url="http://media.musicasacra.com/publications/sacredmusic/pdf/liturgy&music.pdf"]http://media.musicasacra.com/publications/sacredmusic/pdf/liturgy&music.pdf[/url]

[Ice_nine]

can someone plz explain to me who these haugen haas people are and why they are so terrible because I keep associating them with delicious frozen desserts forreal.


That would be wonderful. Thanks in advance.