Praise And Worship

[Lord Philip]

[quote name='Lil Red' post='1412324' date='Oct 31 2007, 10:08 PM']i saw no sarcasm, i saw someone seriously trying to understand where you are coming from.
i'm glad to know it's about 'demolishing the competition' and not winning souls for Christ or anything. or actually having posts that are based in charity and love.
[/quote]

Ad hominem. EVERY SINGLE TIME. I have NOT ONCE heard an exchange with my arguments. NOT ONCE. All you people can do is try to attack my character or pick out little mistakes here and there. With every passing post I am more convinced the other side has no real voice to substantiate its claim that 'praise and worship' music is fitting for the Mass.

For shame.

[Lord Philip]

[quote name='aalpha1989' post='1412357' date='Oct 31 2007, 10:33 PM']speaking of sarcasm....

would you consider this about winning souls for Christ? cause i never thought their souls were in danger. i don't think they're gonna go to hell for believing praise and worship is part of the mass. it's not about 'demolishing the competition' (nor did i ever say it was), but instead about how to best worship God. There's someone who is right and someone who is wrong. Maybe I was a bit too harsh.

i agree with Lord Phillip. he has proven to have mastered the art of logic better than i have. why would i not want to see him do well in a debate? not only have i seen him do well, but...

no one has come close to hurting one of his points. his logic stands and it's like y'all are throwing popcorn at it. he is the only one in this thread who has shown to have put thorough thought and effort into forming an informed opinion on the matter. he also conforms to the documents set forth by the Vatican including but not limited to [url="http://www.catholicliturgy.com/index.cfm/FuseAction/DocumentContents/Index/2/SubIndex/17/DocumentIndex/243"]De Musica Sacra[/url], specifically chapter III. Must we really pull out all of cappie's arguments to show that Lord Phillip's argument is the one held by the Church?

The reason I've been 'cheering on' Lord Phillip, so to speak, is that I knew these documents and I knew the basic premise behind them, but had never thought about it so deeply as Lord Phillip.

I am sorry if I offended everyone by the "demolish" comment, I did not think twice about it. When I am "demolished" in an argument I admit it (maybe after a few hours, but I can admit it). I don't hurt my own feelings. I thought you could take it, especially since I did not mean anything derrogatory towards you. I did not go about this in a charitable way and should have rephrased my comment. I apologize. Sincerely.

No sarcasm.[/quote]

Thank you, Alpha. In regards to the document you referenced, let me quote an oft said adage:

[i]Rome has spoken, the case is closed[/i]

This formula used to evoke love and loyalty, but now in this depraved age people feel that it is their duty to be dissenters. The Church is our [i]mater et magistra[/i] our Mother and our Teacher. Let us obey.

God bless,

Philip

[Jaime]

[quote]I certainly hope that those individuals who sincerely appreciate Praise & Worship music during the Mass don't look @ your post as the "be all, end all". And, while you certainly are entitled to your opinion (as we all are), I hope that your comment about P & W being "an abuse" is understood as simply that - your opinion.[/quote]

Actually that's not opinion

And while you don't have a degree in Theology or music. I've got them

[inDEED]

[quote name='Lord Philip' post='1412358' date='Oct 31 2007, 09:34 PM']With every passing post I am more convinced the other side has no real voice to substantiate its claim that 'praise and worship' music is fitting for the Mass.[/quote]

Here you go, Phil:

[b]Sacrosanctum Concilium[/b]

[quote]All other things being equal, Gregorian chant holds pride of place because it is proper to the Roman Liturgy. Other types of sacred music, in particular polyphony, are in no way excluded, provided that they correspond to the spirit of the liturgical action and that they foster the participation of all the faithful.[/quote]

Now, you go find me a Catholic text that states that P & W is a liturgical abuse.

[inDEED]

[quote name='hot stuff' post='1412368' date='Oct 31 2007, 09:38 PM']Actually that's not opinion

And while you don't have a degree in Theology or music. I've got them[/quote]

It is opinion until you show me Catholic text that states it's not.

Oh, and thanks for the update on my degree. While I did receive my degree in Religious Studies and have 5 years of experience in ministry, I suppose those don't quite compare to the feathers in your cap.

Gimme a break...

[inDEED]

Oh, and I'm a practicing Catholic with a mind to think outside of the walls of an internet message board, too.

[Lord Philip]

[quote name='MIKO' post='1412306' date='Oct 31 2007, 09:50 PM']you're right. i sincerely apologize... i just think like his comment wasn't necessary. mine certainly wasnt either...

but he didnt have to write "fortunately, you guys arent in charge..." im just saying

i love the MASS, i LOVE THE EUCHARIST, I LOVE spending time with Christ and adoring Him in BOTH PRAISE AND WORSHIP and IN SILENCE...

i think what philip and others are getting confused with is (and i cannot blame them)
there are people who exploit the mushiness and feel goodness of praise and worship and it actually DOES become about them, not Christ.. i AGREE with that sentiment...

BUT THERE ARE OTHERS, who seriously do GIVE THEIR HEART OF LOVE FOR GOD in their praise and worship songs... and sometimes, the tingles, and consolation is NOT there.. and guess what! they STILL GIVE THEIR HEART TO GOD...

i think the people philip might be referencing are people who praise and worship only when it feels good... but those who sing, regardless of emotion and feel goodness and mushiness of the praise and worship songs... those are courageous people, lovers of God, who desire to glorify God more than anything else they "get out of praise and worship"

separate the two types of people who praise and worship... those who do do it for the feel goodness of it, and those who do it to seek God's face...[/quote]

Miko,

This is NOT a psychological issue. Do you think I have been arguing psychology? I am not saying ANYTHING about what people feel from different types of music. I am making OBJECTIVE (how many times to I have to say that?) statements about musical aesthetics.

None of your comments contribute anything to my arguments (since there is now a fad where people are saying to me "I am not talking to [i]YOU[i]" let me qualify saying "my" arguments with the fact that you mention my name in an attempt to rebut me).

God bless,

Philip

[aalpha1989]

All other things being equal, Gregorian chant holds pride of place because it is proper to the Roman Liturgy. Other types of sacred music, in particular polyphony, are in no way excluded, provided that they correspond to the spirit of the liturgical action and that they foster the participation of all the faithful.

That's exactly what we're arguing. We are arguing that they do NOT correspond to the spirit of liturgical action.

quick edit for humilty. not sure i have the right in this thread to say "we are arguing". I'm just sorta tagging along for the ride. I know that I for sure do NOT have the "qualifications" which some people seem so intent on knowing. I'll just chip in here and there.

Edited November 1, 2007 by aalpha1989

[inDEED]

[quote name='aalpha1989' post='1412389' date='Oct 31 2007, 09:49 PM']That's exactly what we're arguing. We are arguing that they do NOT correspond to the spirit of liturgical action.[/quote]

You DO understand that your argument is about your OPINION, do you not?

I firmly believe that P & W CAN correspond to the spirit of liturgical action. In fact, I see it done every Sunday @ Mass.

[Lord Philip]

[quote name='inDEED' post='1412369' date='Oct 31 2007, 10:42 PM']Here you go, Phil:

[b]Sacrosanctum Concilium[/b]
Now, you go find me a Catholic text that states that P & W is a liturgical abuse.[/quote]

First of all, I do not claim it is as serious as abuse. I would need to hear arguments from either side on that one. But categorizing it with clown masses, while somewhat logical, seems a little extreme to me at this time. But I am open to debate on this topic since I am ignorant.

Second, I am very familiar with the text you quoted from: are you? Do you know what it means when it refers to polyphony? This statement you quoted FAR FROM vindicates your position, inDEED. Do you know what they are referring to when they say "sacred music"? Let me be the first to tell you that they most certainly do not mean popular music forms. I could quote several authoritative ecclesiatical texts to you, but instead of nailing you in the head with authority, I want you to understand why the authority says what it says.

Additionally, you are assuming that 'praise and worship' music "correspond[s] to the spirit of the liturgical action." Since that is the point in question, it must be said (again) that we have a logical fallacy: circulus in demonstrando. I am SO tired of logical fallacies...anyone have anything coherent to say?

God bless,

Philip

[aalpha1989]

"spirit of liturgical action" is not an opinion. nor are documents such as de musica sacra which state
"But there are some instruments which, by common estimation, are so associated with secular music that they are not at all adaptable for sacred use."

If they're not talking about guitar/drum set, what are they talking about? Certainly not the organ/small stringed/bowed instruments (which they specifically mention as liturgical "friendly" instruments). guitar/drum set are an integral part of praise and worship. *shrugs*, don't see a way out of concluding that praise and worship is not suited for Mass.

[Jaime]

[quote name='inDEED' post='1412374' date='Nov 1 2007, 12:43 AM']It is opinion until you show me Catholic text that states it's not.

Oh, and thanks for the update on my degree. While I did receive my degree in Religious Studies and have 5 years of experience in ministry, I suppose those don't quite compare to the feathers in your cap.

Gimme a break...[/quote]

Yeah

That was directed to Phillip on the degree thing. I confused you (you both kinda look a like

[aalpha1989]

[quote name='aalpha1989' post='1412389' date='Nov 1 2007, 12:49 AM']All other things being equal, Gregorian chant holds pride of place because it is proper to the Roman Liturgy. Other types of sacred music, in particular polyphony, are in no way excluded, provided that they correspond to the spirit of the liturgical action and that they foster the participation of all the faithful.

That's exactly what we're arguing. We are arguing that they do NOT correspond to the spirit of liturgical action.[/quote]


[quote name='Lord Philip' post='1412405' date='Nov 1 2007, 12:56 AM']Since that is the point in question, it must be said (again) that we have a logical fallacy: circulus in demonstrando. I am SO tired of logical fallacies...anyone have anything coherent to say?

God bless,

Philip[/quote]

See, I got it, I just don't have the fancy words. That's why Philip is leading the charge. oh wait, i don't wanna get too confrontational...I meant that's why Philip is arguing much more than I am.

sorry, couldn't resist.

[Jaime]

Oh and here is your Church quote from "Music in Catholic Worship"

[quote]2. Does the music express and interpret the text correctly and make it more meaningful? Is the form of the text respected? In making these judgments the principal classes of texts must be kept in mind: proclamations, acclamations, psalms and hymns, and prayers. Each has a specific function which must be served by the music chosen for a text. In most instances there is an official liturgical text approved by the episcopal conference. "Vernacular texts set to music composed in earlier periods," however, "may be used in liturgical texts."'3 As noted elsewhere, criteria have been provided for the texts which may replace the processional chants of Mass. In these cases and in the c[b]hoice of all supplementary music, the texts "must always be in conformity with Catholic doctrine; indeed they should be drawn chiefly from holy scripture and from liturgical sources[/b]."'4[/quote]


As I said, not opinion

[Maggyie]

Hey y'all, let's keep in mind, they will know we are Christians by our love and not by our witty sarcasms or deprecating statements. As Alpha pointed out no one's salvation is at stake. Yeehah, for real.

Edited November 1, 2007 by Maggie