Posted on 06/26/2006 11:48:53 AM PDT by FJ290
"It shouldn't be at all difficult to get rid of the trend of pop Masses. None of us here like them, for a start. The music is banal. I attend the 7:30 am masses when at all possible -- NO music is better than bad. O Praise the Lord, I love this Pope."
Oh, let's talk about Pet Peeves. My personal favorite is the 1/2 measure or 2 the bands leave off at the end of the stanza. I say, if it's in 4/4, you have to have FOUR BEATS in every measure. Call me picky.
LOL...I always thought I was the only one who ever noticed that...
I understand your argument. I've heard the argument in different forms myself. In Baptist churches over style of service. Not that they could necessarily point to a specific verse for their argument but rather, 'that's how we've always done it'. Of course they would use the Bible for their argument even when the verses they used didn't fully support the argument. In the end, that is a man made, not God made, argument. And no offense but this statement by the Pope is the same argument
I look to the Psalms. Make a joyful noise. To me that means however the praise is done, if it's praising God, it's acceptable. It may not fit others' tastes and that's why we have different churches and in some cases different denominations.
Mind you, I'm not the sort that likes drums and guitars in church but for some it works. I just think there are more musical ways to praise God than Gregorian chants.
We non-Catholics need to have our own discussion of church music as there are those on this thread whose position is that we have nothing to contribute to the discussion.
The dancing scene? Apparently, that is a group of American Episcopalians engaging in ritual "liturgical dancing" during a service at one of their parishes.
I saw one once where a single female dancer (50-ish) bopped and ran around the church in some sort of Peter Pan fairy costume. The liberal pastor had gotten involved in some goofy modernist "liturgy" circles. The mid-life crisis hits people in different ways. If they started out as a flaky liberal kook it can take on some pretty bizarre acting out forms.
I don't believe that you are an atheist....:)
People are used to Cheetos, too. And yet, they still have no substance. Thirty years of 'used to' ditties does not a tradition make. People were used to the hymns before the ditties came in. Change is the nature of life.
"I don't believe that you are an atheist....:)"
Let me put it to you this way. John Paul II was very much for contemporary music at Mass. Did then, Cardinal Ratzinger, who was being groomed by John Paul II to be his successor, have an affinity for contemporary music at Mass that only changed when he became Pontiff? Probably not, yet he supported John Paul II.
Now that Cardinal Ratzinger is Pope Benedict XVI, he is making changes as he sees fit. And like our current Pope did when he was a Cardinal, I will support him, though I might not agree with him.
Best Regards
Sergio
Nice to know it's not just me. I refuse to sing the pop crap during Mass.
CHIROGRAPH
OF THE SUPREME PONTIFF
JOHN PAUL II
FOR THE CENTENARY
OF THE MOTU PROPRIO
"TRA LE SOLLECITUDINI'
ON SACRED MUSIC
1. Motivated by a strong desire "to maintain and promote the decorum of the House of God", my Predecessor St Pius X promulgated the Motu Proprio Tra le Sollecitudini 100 years ago. Its purpose was to renew sacred music during liturgical services. With it he intended to offer the Church practical guidelines in that vital sector of the Liturgy, presenting them, as it were, as a "juridical code of sacred music"[1]. This act was also part of the programme of his Pontificate which he summed up in the motto: "Instaurare omnia in Cristo".
The centenary of the Document gives me the opportunity to recall the important role of sacred music, which St Pius X presented both as a means of lifting up the spirit to God and as a precious aid for the faithful in their "active participation in the most holy mysteries and in the public and solemn prayer of the Church"[2].
The holy Pontiff recalls that the special attention which sacred music rightly deserves stems from the fact that, "being an integral part of the solemn Liturgy, [it] participates in the general purpose of the Liturgy, which is the glory of God and the sanctification and edification of the faithful"[3]. Since it interprets and expresses the deep meaning of the sacred text to which it is intimately linked, it must be able "to add greater efficacy to the text, in order that through it the faithful may be... better disposed for the reception of the fruits of grace belonging to the celebration of the most holy mysteries"[4].
2. The Second Vatican Council followed up this approach in chapter VI of the Constitution Sacrosanctum Concilium on the Sacred Liturgy, in which the ecclesial role of sacred music is clearly defined: "The musical tradition of the universal Church is a treasure of inestimable value, greater even than that of any other art. The main reason for this pre-eminence is that, as sacred melody united to words, it forms a necessary or integral part of the solemn Liturgy"[5]. The Council also recalls that "Sacred Scripture, indeed, has bestowed praise upon sacred song. So have the Fathers of the Church and the Roman Pontiffs who in more recent times, led by St Pius X, have explained more precisely the ministerial function exercised by sacred music in the service of the Lord"[6].
In fact, by continuing the ancient biblical tradition to which the Lord himself and the Apostles abided (cf. Mt 26: 30; Eph 5: 19; Col 3: 16), the Church has encouraged song at liturgical celebrations throughout her history, providing wonderful examples of melodic comment to the sacred texts in accordance with the creativity of every culture, in the rites of both West and East.
The attention my Predecessors thus paid to this delicate sector was constant. They recalled the fundamental principles that must enliven the composition of sacred music, especially when it is destined for the Liturgy. Besides Pope St Pius X, other Popes who deserve mention are Benedict XIV with his Encyclical Annus Qui (19 February 1749), Pius XII with his Encyclicals Mediator Dei (20 November 1947) and Musicae Sacrae Disciplina (25 December 1955), and lastly Paul VI, with the luminous statements that punctuated many of his Speeches.
The Fathers of the Second Vatican Council did not fail to reassert these principles with a view to their application in the changed conditions of the times. They did so specifically in chapter six of the Constitution Sacrosanctum Concilium. Pope Paul VI then saw that those principles were translated into concrete norms, in particular with the Instruction Musicam Sacram, promulgated on 5 March 1967 with his approval by the Congregation then known as the Sacred Congregation for Rites. In this same context, it is necessary to refer to those principles of conciliar inspiration to encourage a development in conformity with the requirements of liturgical reform and which will measure up to the liturgical and musical tradition of the Church. The text of the Constitution Sacrosanctum Concilium in which it is declared that the Church "approves of all forms of true art which have the requisite qualities[7], and admits them into divine worship", finds satisfactory criteria for application in nn. 50-53 of the above-mentioned Instruction Musicam Sacram[8].
3. On various occasions I too have recalled the precious role and great importance of music and song for a more active and intense participation in liturgical celebrations[9]. I have also stressed the need to "purify worship from ugliness of style, from distasteful forms of expression, from uninspired musical texts which are not worthy of the great act that is being celebrated"[10], to guarantee dignity and excellence to liturgical compositions.
2) If her husband were a competent composer, this would not be a problem ... Something tells me that this is not the case ... 1. It is actually hard to tell which one of them is the husband and which is the wife. The husband is what Ahhnahld would call a "girlie man" (considers the KofC to be a macho man club) and the wife is...Pat-like (SNL).
2. The husband is a poor composer - he considers the STL Jesuits to be great music creators.
1) KofC is a wonderful organisation for family men ... manly, for sure, but hardly "macho". Seems like maybe hubby "has issues" ... and so does the "li'l lady".
2) Saint Louis Jesuits delenda est.
Obviously, my source for the above comment was incorrect, thank you for pointing that out.
I will however say that I wasted 23 years as a lapsed Catholic. About 5 years ago I started visiting various Churches and Masses until I went to our current Parish.
Though I wasn't really into what was being said, I did return for the music. It was also that music that opened my heart to what Fr. John was saying in his homily.
Fr. John's words fanned the little ember that was remaining and turned it into a nice fire.
Now I go to hear the Word, but that wouldn't have happened without the music. Jesus would have sacrificed Himself even if it would have gained him only one soul. So, if the music can gain one soul is it really a bad thing?
I understand completely if it is an issue of it not being appropriate during the Mass (like jeans and a t-shirt to a formal gathering), but to say the music has no worth, as some have alluded to, IMHO, goes a bit to far.
Once again, my thanks for correcting my mistake and my apologies for having taken so long to reply. (Had to wait to get home from work.)
Best Regards
Sergio
As for music, I think we Christians have a right to hear the sacred music decreed by the Chuerch Fathers meeting in Council. The local priest does not have a right to promote or permit unappproved music. Liturgy is the work of the Church, the entire Church.
LOL. I always wondered how to spell "nyuck".
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.