D0RK4JP2 Posted October 24, 2004 Share Posted October 24, 2004 Let's see how we go with this one... JMJ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrea348 Posted October 24, 2004 Share Posted October 24, 2004 hmmm.....the answer i was looking for wasn't there....picked the closest one to what i thought.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soldier4Him Posted October 25, 2004 Share Posted October 25, 2004 i agree with andrea..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socrates Posted October 26, 2004 Share Posted October 26, 2004 I believe it's only approved in Africa and perhaps other cultures where dance has always been a part of religious worship - but I don't know the details of this. (And isn't most of Africa part of the Western Church?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birgitta Noel Posted October 26, 2004 Share Posted October 26, 2004 Ya, and I believe it's approved in Hawaií where hula is a key part of the culture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
popestpiusx Posted October 26, 2004 Share Posted October 26, 2004 [quote name='Birgitta Noel' date='Oct 26 2004, 02:15 PM'] Ya, and I believe it's approved in Hawaií where hula is a key part of the culture. [/quote] That's just plain stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theoketos Posted October 26, 2004 Share Posted October 26, 2004 [quote name='popestpiusx' date='Oct 26 2004, 04:29 PM'] That's just plain stupid. [/quote] That is not charitable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shelly_freak Posted October 27, 2004 Share Posted October 27, 2004 [quote name='popestpiusx' date='Oct 26 2004, 04:29 PM'] That's just plain stupid. [/quote] Why? Dance in alot of cultures is lifted up to God. I've been on retreats where my friend's talks about prayer have been dancing or ballet. Dancing, if done reverently is a great way to give thanks and praise to God. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qfnol31 Posted October 27, 2004 Share Posted October 27, 2004 From EWTN on why it's okay (originally from the Vatican): Dancing and Worship The dance has never been made an integral part of the official worhship of the Latin Church. If local churches have accepted the dance, sometimes even in the church building, that was on the occasion of feasts in order to manifest sentiments of joy and devotion. But that always took place outside of liturgical services. Conciliar decisions have often condemned the religious dance because it conduces little to worship and because it could degenerate into disorders. Actually, in favor of dance in the liturgy, an argument could be drawn from the passage of the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, Sacrosanctum Concilium, in which are given the norms for adaptation of the liturgy to the character and the traditions of the various peoples: "In matters which do not affect the faith or the well-being of an entire community, the Church does not wish, even in the Liturgy, to impose a rigid uniformity; on the contrary, she respects and fosters the genius and talents of various races and people. Whatever in their way of life is not indissolubly bound up with superstition and error, she looks upon with benevolence and if possible keeps it intact, and sometimes even admits it into the Liturgy provided it accords with the genuine and authentic liturgical spirit."[1] Theoretically, it could be deduced from that passage that certain forms of dancing and certain dance patterns could be introduced into Catholic worship. Nevertheless, two condition could not be prescinded from. The first: to the extent in which the body is a reflection of the soul, dancing, with all its manifestations, would have to express sentiments of faith and adoration in order to become a prayer. The second condition: just as all the gestures and movements found in the liturgy are regulated by the competent ecclesiastical authority, so also dancing as a gestre would have to be under its discipline. Concretely: there are cultures in which this is possible insofar as dancing is still reflective of religious values and becomes a clear manifestation of them. Such is the case of the Ethiopians. In their culture, even today, there is the religious ritulalized dance, cleary distinct from the martial dance and from the amorous dance. The ritual dance is performed by priests and levites before beginning a ceremony and in the open are in front of the church. The dance accompanies the chanting of psalms during the procession. When the procession enters the church, then the chanting of the psalms is carried out with and accompanied by bodily movement. The same thing is found in the Syriac liturgy by means of chanting of psalms. In the Byzantine Liturgy, there is an extremely simplified dance on the occasion of a wedding when the crowned spouses make a circular revolution around the lectern together with the celebrant. Such is the case of the Israelites: in the synagogue their prayer is accompanied by a continuous movement to recall the precept from tradition: "When you pray, do so with all your heart, and all your bones." And for primitive peoples the same observation can be made. However, the same criterion and judgment cannot be applied in the western culture. Here dancing is tied with love, with diversion, with profaneness, with unbridling of the senses: such dancing, in general, is not pure. For that reason it cannot be introduced into liturgical celebrations of any kind whatever: that would be to inject into the liturgy one of the most desacralized and desacralizing elements; and so it would be equivalent to creating an atmosphere of profaneness which would easily recall to those present and to the participants in the celebration worldly places and situations. Neither can acceptance be had of the proposal to introduce into the liturgy the so-called artistic ballet[2] because there would be presentation here also of a spectacle at which one would assist, while in the liturgy one of the norms from which one cannot prescind is that of participation. Therefore, there is a great difference in cultures: what is well receieved in one culture cannot be taken on by another culture. The traditional reserve of the seriousness of religious worship, and of the Latin worship in particular, must never be forgotton. If the proposal of the religious dance in the West is really to be made welcome, care will have to be taken that in its regard a place be found outside of the liturgy, in assembly areas which are not strictly liturgical. Moreover, the priests must always be excluded from the dance. We can recall how much was derived from the presence of the Samoans at Rome for the missionary festival of 1971. At the end of the Mass, they carried out their dance in St. Peter's square: and all were joyful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phatcatholic Posted October 27, 2004 Share Posted October 27, 2004 dork4jp2.........do u have the answer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D0RK4JP2 Posted October 27, 2004 Author Share Posted October 27, 2004 THE ANSWER: From the instruction, "Religious Dance, An Expression of Spiritual Joy" by the Congregation for the Sacraments and Divine Worship, written in 1975, and it describes itself as a "qualified and authoritative sketch" to be "an authoritative point of reference for every discussion on the matter." > [D]ance has never been made an integral part of the official worship of the Latin Church. If local churches have accepted the dance, sometimes even in the church building, that was on the occasion of feasts in order to manifest sentiments of joy and devotion. But that always took place outside of liturgical services. Conciliar decision have often condemned the religious dance because it conduces little to worship and because it could degenerate into disorder. [b]> Concretely: There are cultures in which this is possible insofar as dancing is still reflective of religious values and becomes a clear manifestation of them. Such is the case of the Ethiopians. In their culture, even today, there is the religious ritualised dance, clearly distrinct from the martial dance and from the amorous dance. The ritual dance is performed by priests and levites before beginning a ceremony and in the open air in front of the church. The dance accompanies the chanting of the psalms during the procession. When the procession enters the church, the the chanting of the psalsm is carried out with the accompanied by bodily movement. > The same thing is found in the Syriac liturgy by means of chanting the psalms. In the Byzantine Liturgy, there is an extremely simplified dance on the occasion of a wedding when the crowned spouses make a circular revolution around the lectern together with the celebrant. > Such is the case of the Israelites: In the synagogue their prayer is accompanied by a continuous movement to recall the precept from tradition: "When you pray, do so with all your heart, and all your bones." And for the primites peoples the same observation can be made.[/b] But the document is forcule in stating that this does not mean religious dance can be used in the liturgy in Western culture: [b]> However, the same criterion and judgement cannot be applied in the wester culture. Here dancing is tied with love, with diversion, with profanities, with unbridling of the senses: Such dancing, in general, is not pure. >For that reason it cannot be introduced into liturgical celebrations of any kind whatever: that would be to inject into the liturgy one of the most descralised and desacralising elements; and so it would be equivalent to reating an atmostphere of profaneness which would easily recall to those present and to the particpants in the celebration wordly places and situations. [/b] In some places a kind of pseudo-ballet or 'interpretative dance' has been tried in liturgy, but the document indicates this is equally prohibited: [b]> Neither can acceptance be had ofthe propsal to introduce into the liturgy the so-called artistic ballet because there would be presentation here also of a spectacle at which one wouls assist, while in the liturgy one of the norms from which one cannot prescind is that of participation. > Therefore, there is a great difference in cultures: what is well received in one culture cannot be taken on by another culture. The traditional reserve of the seroiusness of religious worship, and of the Latin Worship in particular, must be be forgotten.[/b] This does not mean that religious dance cannot be done at all. It can be done, but only when three conditions are met: 1) that it not take place during the liturgy (eg, not during Mass) 2) that it not take place in strictly liturgical areas (eg, sanctuary or nave - front of Church) 3) that priests do not participate in the religious dance. The document specifies: [b]> If the proposal of the religious dance in the West is really to be made welcome, care will have to be taken that in its regard a place be found [i]outside of the liturgy[/i], in [i]assembly areas which are not strictly liturgical [/i]. Moreover, the priests [i]must always be excluded[/i] from the dance [emphasis added]. [/b] I hope this settles it for everyone. JMJ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
popestpiusx Posted November 2, 2004 Share Posted November 2, 2004 [quote name='Theoketos' date='Oct 26 2004, 05:43 PM'] That is not charitable. [/quote] [quote name='Theoketos' date='Oct 26 2004, 05:43 PM']That is not charitable.[/quote] The use of hula at Mass is not charitable. In fact, it is plain stupid. [quote]Dance in alot of cultures is lifted up to God. I've been on retreats where my friend's talks about prayer have been dancing or ballet. Dancing, if done reverently is a great way to give thanks and praise to God. [/quote] Not at Mass. I've seen these rediculous dancing girls at MAss before as they prance down the eisle in there liatards with streaming ribbons and bowls of incense. The only thing I will say (and the most charitable thing I can think of) is that it is plain stupid. Let me give some examples: [img]http://www.recongress.org/2004/images/satyng/tmb_MVC-162S.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.recongress.org/2004/images/satyng/tmb_MVC-184S.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.recongress.org/2004/images/sathis/tmb_MVC-114S.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.recongress.org/2004/images/sathis/tmb_MVC-115S.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.recongress.org/2004/images/nige/tmb_MVC-079S.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.recongress.org/2003/pix/friday/med_black7.jpg[/img] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
popestpiusx Posted November 2, 2004 Share Posted November 2, 2004 Here's your Hawaiian nonsense: [img]http://www.recongress.org/2004/images/haw/tmb_MVC-843S.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.recongress.org/2004/images/haw/tmb_MVC-185S.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.recongress.org/2004/images/haw/med_MVC-189S.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.recongress.org/2004/images/haw/med_MVC-837S.jpg[/img] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
popestpiusx Posted November 2, 2004 Share Posted November 2, 2004 More nonsense: [img]http://www.recongress.org/2003/pix/closing/med_b3020033.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.recongress.org/2003/pix/sat/med_MVC-024S.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.recongress.org/2003/pix/sat/med_MVC-026S.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.recongress.org/2003/pix/sat/med_MVC-057S.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.recongress.org/2003/pix/sat/med_MVC-027S.jpg[/img] I think that is sufficient. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birgitta Noel Posted November 2, 2004 Share Posted November 2, 2004 Dear PSPX, Your remarks are more than uncharitable, they are downright rude. While I agree that in most instances liturgical dance is absurd there have been clear provisions for its acceptability in certain cultures. Some of which you have posted photos of. Just because you don't like or agree with something doesn't give you the right to belittle a culture's traditions. Respectfully, Birgitta Noel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts