Charismatic Worship

[Nihil Obstat]

I wish we at least used our lovely organ. We have guitar and piano instead. Sometimes it gets very folky/karaoke style.

[jeffpugh]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='10 September 2009 - 01:13 PM' timestamp='1252602831' post='1964475']
I wish we at least used our lovely organ. We have guitar and piano instead. Sometimes it gets very folky/karaoke style.
[/quote]
No comment.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='Sacred Music Man' date='10 September 2009 - 11:11 PM' timestamp='1252642313' post='1964755']
No comment.
[/quote]
Comment all you want. I'm not about to defend it.

[jeffpugh]

Meh, I just didn't want to beat my disdain for this travesty to death, or people will take me less seriously than they do now.

[aalpha1989]

[quote name='nunsense' date='06 September 2009 - 07:49 AM' timestamp='1252237782' post='1961752']
Father Cantalamessa, preacher to the Holy Father, is an avowed charismatic. He has written some beautiful books about the Holy Spirit. For everyone, there are affinities, and St Ignatius said that the Holy Spirit speaks to us through our affinities.

I am very personally Carmelite in spirituality, but I find it odd that most people who quote St John of the Cross, focus more on his two books (Ascent and Dark Night)that deal with the purification of the soul, than on either the Spiritual Canticle or the Living Flame of Love, which deal with the mystical marriage and the transforming union with God. There is a difference between the purgation of the passions, and the ecstasy of union. All I can say is that the man who wrote the LFofL had some experiences far beyond that of most charismatics. He did not focus on experiential experiences because he did not want people to think that they were the method by which one achieved union, but he did not intend for aridity to be the goal either! This is a pet topic of mine as you can see by my signature [img]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif[/img] And I have never become bored or tired of contemplation, no matter what does or does not happen during prayer. It is all a matter of focus and understanding, not control and suppression.

[/quote]


The Living Flame of Love and Spiritual Canticle are about spirituality AFTER the dark night, which is a stage of spirituality which St. John says is quite necessary. Without this dark night of purification, union with the Divine is impossible. People who rely on their emotions through charismatic worship (in my experience) usually skip this purifying stage and so the passions they experience are usually very shallow and not true experiences of the Living Flame of Love. The true experience isn't possible without first passing through the dark night.

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='aalpha1989' date='11 September 2009 - 09:54 AM' timestamp='1252673642' post='1964867']
People who rely on their emotions through charismatic worship (in my experience) usually skip this purifying stage and so the passions they experience are usually very shallow and not true experiences of the Living Flame of Love.
[/quote]

Is that different from people who rely on their emotions through traditional worship?

I ask because sometimes charismatics and traditionalists seem to have a lot more in common than they like to believe. Both can be very emotional and very much attached to certain aesthetics and experiences. When I see people talking about the EF like a new crush they just fell for, frankly, I don't see much difference between them and those who are crazy about charismatic worship. I think we forget, for example, that it's quite possible to faithfully attend an EF Mass disobediently (i.e. if one believes it is inherently superior to the NO or that the NO is invalid).

Someone earlier in this thread pointed out that the preacher to Benedict XVI is charismatic. Why doesn't that raise any eyebrows?

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='LouisvilleFan' date='11 September 2009 - 08:33 AM' timestamp='1252676013' post='1964877']
(i.e. if one believes it is inherently superior to the NO or that the NO is invalid).
[/quote]

Saying that that the prayers and rites of the EF are superior to those of the OF is quite different from claiming that the OF is invalid.

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='Resurrexi' date='11 September 2009 - 05:25 PM' timestamp='1252700719' post='1964988']
Saying that that the prayers and rites of the EF are superior to those of the OF is quite different from claiming that the OF is invalid.
[/quote]

Thank you, Fr. Obvious.

Both of those incorrect beliefs are examples of disobedience to the Church, who teaches that the EF and OF are equally valid and that neither is superior to the other.

[aalpha1989]

[quote name='LouisvilleFan' date='14 September 2009 - 10:00 AM' timestamp='1252936812' post='1966191']
Thank you, Fr. Obvious.

Both of those incorrect beliefs are examples of disobedience to the Church, who teaches that the EF and OF are equally valid and that neither is superior to the other.
[/quote]


Not accurate. The Church (as the Magesterium) has made no statements about whether one form's prayers are superior to another, though any reading of the prayers at all will reveal that the prayers of the ordinary form have been much simplified, to say the least. Not only that, but the current English translation was intentionally mistranslated. One can say with great confidence that the prayers of the EF are superior to those in the current translation, considering that they are wrong. One can also make the claim that the EF prayers are superior to the true prayers of the OF (the Latin), as the Church has not declared either way. There are certainly elements of the OF that may be superior to those in the EF, but that does not mean that the form as a whole is superior. Ratzinger writes in the Spirit of the Liturgy that the physical seperation of the two Liturgies, those of the Word and of the Eucharist, was an improvement because it more clearly identified the two. Anyway, private theologians have spoken on the supremacy of one or the other, but the Magesterium has not.

Believing in the superiority of the EF is in no way an example of disobedience, as the Missal of 1962 was never abrogated (read Summorum Pontificum if you have doubts), and as any priest is permitted to celebrate that Missal.

Personally, I believe the NO can be just as beautiful as the Tridentine, but it rarely is. I don't want to speak for the superiority of the prayers themselves, as I am greatly ignorant and don't know. The newer prayers are certainly much simpler. There is too much flexibility in the rubrics of the OF, and great liturgical theology is lost in most uses of it. The direction of the altar and the language, for instance. The writers of Sacrosanctum Concilium planned on and hoped for a Mass just as reverent and steeped in Tradition as the 1962 Missal, but liberal priests and orders (American Benedictines come to mind) took great liberties in changing some of the most important elements of the Mass.

By criticizing the Ordinary Form you are not in disobedience. Someone who loves the Church works to make the human elements holier. We aren't bound to believe that the rubrics are perfect.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='aalpha1989' date='14 September 2009 - 11:28 AM' timestamp='1252949301' post='1966306']
Personally, I believe the NO can be just as beautiful as the Tridentine, but it rarely is. I don't want to speak for the superiority of the prayers themselves, as I am greatly ignorant and don't know. The newer prayers are certainly much simpler.
[/quote]
Dr. Lauren Pristas has written some excellent articles that compare the prayers of the older missal and the newer missal. Anyone interested in seeing the difference between the two "forms" of the Roman Rite should consult her essays.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='LouisvilleFan' date='14 September 2009 - 09:00 AM' timestamp='1252936812' post='1966191']
Thank you, Fr. Obvious.

Both of those incorrect beliefs are examples of disobedience to the Church, who teaches that the EF and OF are equally valid and that neither is superior to the other.
[/quote]

Find me a document of the Magisterium stating that the prayers and ceremonies of all liturgical rites are equal and that no Catholic may feel that the prayers and ceremonies of one rite are superior to another.

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='Resurrexi' date='14 September 2009 - 07:06 PM' timestamp='1252966017' post='1966476']
Find me a document of the Magisterium stating that the prayers and ceremonies of all liturgical rites are equal and that no Catholic may feel that the prayers and ceremonies of one rite are superior to another.
[/quote]

It's somewhere in the documents approving the Tridentine as the Extraordinary Form and allowing it to be celebrated without explicit permission of the local bishop, but I haven't found it yet. The gist is that both forms need to be held in equal regard.

[iheartjp2]

Although it's not really [i]my[/i] thread, the topic of discussion has definitely moved away from that which it was originally intended to be. If we could confine arguments to those for or against the diocesan approval of charismatic worship in specified parts of the mass, that would be great for those who wish to continue discussing. Edited September 15, 2009 by iheartjp2

[LouisvilleFan]

I was on topic in post 51, but as usual, a side point that isn't even all that important becomes the focus of conversation while what I considered to be good points relevant to the topic of the thread are ignored.

[iheartjp2]

[quote name='LouisvilleFan' date='15 September 2009 - 01:55 PM' timestamp='1253037335' post='1966896']
I was on topic in post 51, but as usual, a side point that isn't even all that important becomes the focus of conversation while what I considered to be good points relevant to the topic of the thread are ignored.
[/quote]

I can see that. It tends to be easier to argue from points that don't even really matter than to argue from the bulk of the post, I guess.