So when are these so called "liturgicists" gonna be removed permanently from their positions?!!. This was not the Pope's fault!!. You could see the only piece he liked was the one by Placido Domingo. What an embarissment like I knew it would be when we read about the selection weeks ago!.
Perfectly and eloquently stated, Shawn!
Thank you for putting into exalted prose the depth of disgust the rest of us feel.
And I sincerely hope you are correct about the definitive result that today's catastrophe will have for the future.
Jeff, it is not multiculturalism. It is aculturalism - a lack of anything the word "culture" has ever meant Although it was universal music; anyone around the world could listen and tell it was horrible.
Thank You for this thoughtful post. I am new to this website (blog) but really needed an outlet today after watching with embarrassment what went down at Nationals Stadium. You see it as do I... this is a watershed for liturgical music run afoul... and as I could easily forget what happened today and move on, I am worried for the future. How will all this effect what I do in my parish each week? Will there be changes mandated from the council of bishops or even the Vatican?
More constructively, how can this be turned to good? By doing what we've always done: presenting an alternative, the REAL way of doing music in Mass. How can chant not be more churchly than that? We should be ready, when people say "well if that's so bad, what would YOU have done?" to point out that we would only do what the Church requires of us and not presume to know better. That is our opportunity here, which I am glad to see aristotle taking up.
Ditto to what Gavin said.
This blog is a gathering point for many leaders of musical groups committed to the Pope's Marshall Plan to revive an ethereal, transcendent ethos of the Mass.
Rather than focus on what was abominable....rather than worry about what may be foisted on us "since the Pope did it in Washington"....rather than focus on the negative, this should give us hope. When we continue to strive for excellence in music, liturgy, vestment-fabrication, architecture, etc.....the world will see that the Catholic identity that we subscribe to is good, true, and beautiful...and they will want it.
Thanks for the article Jeffrey. It was cathartic.
"...rather than worry about what may be foisted on us "since the Pope did it in Washington"...."
I hadn't even thought of that!
Very well stated and excellent post.
It was hideous. It was vulgar. It was cheap Broadway. All brought to you by our brilliant American bishops. There is no hope in sight. I have said it before and I say ti again: The Novus Ordo cannot be fixed. It generates and promotes vulgarity.
How disgusting that it could be so bad as to make the "mass of creation" seem slightly bearable. The whole thing was an ilicit shamefull mess. God have mercy upon the am-church.
I was in a meeting when the Papal mass began. When I was in the car, I immediately turned on the radio, and the first thing I heard was the Mass of Creation "Christ has died..." I nearly drove off the road.
As Fr Neuhaus said on EWTN after the mass, "what a mish mash" of music. Well said.
And, really, as Shawn said, this misguided and ill-informed caricature of "multiculturalism" is, in my opinion, really just racist (intentional or not).
I think that's the message that should be repeated to the American bishops: "These caricatures are racist!" Believe me, they'll start listening when they think they're being viewed as politically incorrect...
Excellent post, Jeffrey.
Now, the first thing that needs to be done, politely, respectfully, and with the tradition and documents of the Church behind us, is to make a mighty stink. These people need to understand that they don't own the field any more, that everything they do will be examined and that all the shabby stuff, not worthy of the great act that is being celebrated, will be exposed relentlessly. They need to start looking over their shoulders and know we are watching and taking notes.
Secondly, of course, we need to present the alternative as the beautiful, holy, dignified and unifying thing that it is.
I think today may very well have been a tipping point. Let's all tip away.
I propose we send bags on nuts to the AB of Washington and the USCCB to let them know what we think of this nightmare.
Sometimes I wish Benedict lived up to his reputation as a brute and as God's enforcer, sadly, and thankfully, he is holier and more prudent than I.
When I watched the broadcast from the stadium all I wanted to do was cry because it was much worse than what I expected. Really painful indeed.
jeffry
excellent post and truly cathartic.
One point Id like to make...
A year before Benedict was made pope, I had a discussion with a priest friend of mine. He stated that Ratzingers "reform of the reform" was really a fringe movement thaty would have little bearing on mainstream catholcism. Now, as a result of our pope comming tio america, the mainstream is beginning to realize that the emporer has no clothes and that most contemporary catholic music simply doesnt work. the difference between this mass and a JPII mass wasnt the music-it was in the REACTION to the music.
Im hearing phrases such as the heurmeneutic of rapture discussed at NPR!!!!
I think Jeffry really hit it with hise comment about how this mass will be seen as the beginning of the end. Truly the folks responcible for this music wont be dealing with the rubber stamp praise of papel liturgies past. If this can generate honest real dialogue about a true reform of the reform then this can only be a good thing.
the progressives time is indeed over.
Jeffrey Tucker wrote the piece...
Anyways, it is with shame that I read this post. Not shame for the bravery of this piece, but of the "performance Mass" that the world witnessed. Ugghhh.
It's simply unfortunate though, that the Pope will probably not ever make a statement "condemning the Nationals Mass I had to sit through." I'd love it if he gave an admonishment, but the reality is, what's done is done, and he can't really comment on the travesty of worship that was witnessed today.
It is definitely true that we can learn alot from this experience. But in the minds of the so called "expert lay liturgists," they won...they got the mass they have been imposing on millions of Catholics to be "performed" on the Papal world's stage, so to speak. So, I feel that while we've learned something, to the run of the mill Catholic who's always had to sit through this drivel (and still go to mass) it's another mass that they have witnessed and will continue to winess for some time to come. I hate it as much as the next person (on this blog) but it aches me that right now, I feel a little helpless. The pope's statments and writings on Liturgy in the past seem to fall on deaf ears. The change will come slowly, but God willing I hope that it will continue to come!
God bless you all and may our patience be rewarded with lovely, orthodox, reverent, and respectful Liturgy.
But, then again...we have the wonderful program that, in stark comparison to this abomination, will, praise God, be offered in the Archdiocese of NY this Sunday. One can only judge BAD TASTE in light of beauty.
Now, if only they had managed to leave out the Festival Canticle (which the Missouri Synod lutherans use in place of the Gloria in their service...) at the end...
Very well written analysis. It's becoming plainer and plainer to me, that "progressive liturgists" don't give a tinker's damn about Sacrosanctum Concilium. They are a bunch of navel gazers. The liturgy is "all about them." By the way, Wuerl has proven to be a disastrous appointment. Tom
Brilliant, Jeffrey, thank you very much. Let's hope it really is this turn of the tide.
Not surprisingly, Jeffrey Tucker has encapsulated presciently the essential travesty of the music in the Washington Papal Mass. This debased, neutered version of Catholic liturgy must be opposed to its face, not just derided behind semi-closed E-doors or simply denounced from the sidelines.
Church Music Association of America members in the Archdiocese of Washington knew from the first announcement of the papal itenerary that kind of music would entirely rule the day. The structures of ignorance, incompetence, and subversion which fueled these well-placed fears are those needing reform and resection. Anything less leaves the malignancy alive and all too well entrenched.
I have not seen the encore mass on EWTN, but I may not watch for fear. Sad to hear these comments about a Papal Mass that should have been a beautiful, and inspiring moment in American Catholic history.
Shawn, I think you and the other commentators here need to take a serious look at yourselves. I think YOU are an impediment to the changes you desire.
First of all, make your own case for what you find beautiful and spiritually rewarding and stop invoking the Pope's name. The Pope did not just get off the plane and find every set and decided. There was detailed review by the Holy See of every aspect of the trip including the Mass and the Pope had every opportunity to take pro-active measures to suit himself.
In fact, the program booklet for the Mass (I was there) called for the Holy Father to chant the Sanctus yet he elected to recite it.
Second, there is no evidence that there was any "top-down" imposition of forced multi-culturalism in the way you suggest. As a Washingtonian, it was clear to me that the music drew from a fair cross-section of the parish choirs and they sang pieces they use in their worship. For good or ill, this is simply what you get if you embrace the parish communities.
I'm not making any defense of the music. I'm suggesting that those who (falsely) invoke the Pope's name are trying to promote their position through top down authority and they give further evidence of this mindset when they assume anything to the contrary of their views is also imposed by some authority.
True liturgical renewal will only come about when you and others like you give up on an imposition of certain liturgical standards by the authorities (which the authorities themselves know would be pastorally disasterous) and actually make yourself part of a local Christian community and patiently deal with real people as brothers and sisters in Christ, helping them to (most likely, very slowly) come to see beauty and spiritual reward in certain liturgical forms. And maybe in turn, they will teach you something about love, pastoral care, fellowship and Christian witness.
However laudable your goal, you are on the wrong path to acheive it.
The difference is that this latest post by Katherine was not deleted from this comment page as some other comments were deleted from anothe web site.
Excellent post! I agree wholeheartedly. I must admit that I was appalled at what I saw and heard.
As a priest, I cannot but think of my brother priests, who out of love for the Sacred Liturgy and a desire to be faithful to the liturgical norms passed on to us, have worked so hard to root out from their parishes much of the same music we heard today. I fear that many will now once again have to fight battles that they hoped were over.
Let us continue to pray for our Holy Father.
katherin
thanks for reminding me why i became a traditionalist.
I can add one nice point for the day: the music at CUA when the Pope was present was once again very nice. The choir inside the Pryzbyla Center sang the Tu Es Petrus, and a small choir led the students outside in singing the Regina Caeli (intending to surprise the Pope) when he emerged after the talk was over. The music at the Mass was most unfortunate, but once again in a smaller and lower profile setting sanity prevailed. The Pope's address to the Catholic university presidents was also most edifying for me, as a graduate student and instructor in philosophy.
This IS what the novus ordo and the mentality it came from invites by its very nature. It has done precisely what it was meant to do.
Yes, it is the Novus Ordo we all hear "if only it was said devoutly" well guess what it was not today, and really side by side the TLM is the superior Mass period. Todays show was horrid, sad, poor, and truly made me sad to watch which I did with no sound, just could not bear it.
It's still the hippy-generation pretending to be experts in what everyone else is suppose to like and which most probably can't stand.
I SANG in a folk band for years, all the while longing for sacred polyphony, but there was no choir. The choir-killers destroyed one of the best choirs in the area.
I'll bet far fewer people the music was aimed at truly liked it.
Now, if we talk about the music in the crypt church before vespers - oy! That was Catholic to the core!
As a seminarian studying for the priesthood and getting ready to serve in America, I am truly embarassed that the Holy Father was subjected to this. This was a deliberate insult to every attempt he has made to restore the sacred in our Church. Clapping during communion? That with everything else, it could be clearly seen that he was mad. I hope the Holy Father does something to correct the liturgy in our country. It is appaling and embarassing.
Isn't it an even bigger insult when everyone knows what the Holy Father appreciates and is obviously trying to do with the liturgy and they, on his birthday as well, can't give him a gift, but, once again, display that it's all about "us".
For a ray of hope:
http://fumare.blogspot.com/2008/...icts-
visit.html
Katherine, want to talk about "imposition of liturgical standards?" What do you think liturgical "progressives" have been doing these past 4 decades with disastrous consequences? Tom
ps: You're an Obama supporter? That tells me volumes.
Couldn't agree with you more.
Seems like a big step backward - Across the country and in churches will be heard: "After all, if this is the music during the Pope's Mass..."
It puts those in sympathy with PB16's views on the defensive -- in a way it seems to leverage his own power and influence against what he says and believes.
Will we get clarity or a correction from Vatican officials? Will (maybe) Pope Benedict more clearly see what is going on here?
So far during his visit I take solace in the Pope's great speeches -- true gifts and meditations for these times. But when looking more concretely I see Bishops-as-usual (George giving a talk is a succint summation), a music mass that's an affront to his Holiness' strong preference, and communion - no questions asked - for Choice politicians.
The visit is still early, but for now I have to wonder if this is a more of a momentum buster than builder for our return to a more sacred liturgy and holier church.
Great post, Jeffrey.
Now, if the music that will be in New York is as good as people say it is, here's what we should do:
Let's be as effusive in praising the good music and liturgical practices that occur in New York as we have been critical of what happened today. Write to the USCCB, email the USCCB, post comments on blogs, post comments on the USCCB's blog, talk to your bishop maybe--let people know not merely your disgust with the bad, but your desire for the good.
And God bless Placido Domingo; I was touched when the Pope thanked him (I sure would have thanked him if I were there; he was the only respite from that musical train wreck during Communion), and then when he went to kiss the Pope's ring. Bravo!
We still have to go through this in New York
Wow if anyone can actualy say in all honesty that THAT thing was a Catholic Mass he needs his head examined. It's about time Catholics recognize what this is, a new Church built on heresy, sacrelige and sodomy. If this happens under Benedict it truly is a new religion and all is lost. I have been hanging on for 10 years now since my baptisim, but I am now decided. The SSPX is where I will be attending from now on. Enough already I have given up with this False Catholic CHurch it's fake liturgy and this Popes crocodile tears.
Katherine,
"First of all, make your own case for what you find beautiful and spiritually rewarding..."
We do this quite frequently. I can only assume you don't read here very often if you don't recognize this.
"...and stop invoking the Pope's name."
Why wouldn't we invoke his name, as well, for that matter, other popes names, Church documents, Church decisions and so forth?
After all, Benedict has a set of clearly enunciated liturgical ideas both as Shepherd of the Church as well as a Cardinal. His statements and those other mentioned are relevant.
We also aren't just about our own personal positions and opinions. Our personal opinions and positions must be characterized by a formation in the liturgical tradition, theology and teaching of the Church; they are not to be purely self-referential.
To demonstrate that means quoting the sources you are suggesting we shouldn't quote.
"The Pope did not just get off the plane and find every set and decided. There was detailed review by the Holy See of every aspect of the trip including the Mass and the Pope had every opportunity to take pro-active measures to suit himself."
How these international events are done seems fairly well established by now.
That said, are you trying to suggest that the liturgy as it was effected today is consonant with the liturgical thought of Benedict?
To even suggest that is a "stretch" is itself a stretch. His thinking is quite clear from his writing, as well as from his practice. We can provide you with many, many examples if you are so inclined.
"In fact, the program booklet for the Mass (I was there) called for the Holy Father to chant the Sanctus yet he elected to recite it."
I'm not certain what you think this demonstrates. In both cases you seem to be wishing to take today's Mass as the exemplar, which, given the fact it isn't consonant with typical papal liturgy.
"Second, there is no evidence that there was any "top-down" imposition of forced multi-culturalism in the way you suggest."
I never suggested it, and I can't recall what Jeffrey point was here, so perhaps Jeffrey can comment on this point.
That said, it seems rather like the big bang theory to think that various accidentals came together and just incidentally happened to form a program that included the various elements noted here.
"As a Washingtonian, it was clear to me that the music drew from a fair cross-section of the parish choirs and they sang pieces they use in their worship. For good or ill, this is simply what you get if you embrace the parish communities."
Shouldn't local parish practice conform with Catholic liturgics and liturgical theology rather than vice versa?
"I'm not making any defense of the music. I'm suggesting that those who (falsely) invoke the Pope's name..."
How is it falsely invoked when the invocation is directly taken from his teaching and even provided for in quotation from him?
"...are trying to promote their position through top down authority..."
This is also misrepresentative. For one thing, the work we do here functions on both the academic level and also upon the grass roots level.
In that view, it is a mixture of legislation, Church teaching, liturgical tradition and grassroots apologetics, catechesis and action.
"...and they give further evidence of this mindset when they assume anything to the contrary of their views is also imposed by some authority."
This is a fairly vague claim and also a false one. NLM contributors are quite able to distinguish between prudential disagreement, issues of legitimate liturgical diversity, etc.
"True liturgical renewal will only come about when you and others like you give up on an imposition of certain liturgical standards.."
There are liturgical standards however, and in point of fact, we continuously mention the pastoral side of this question and how that must be approached sensitively.
Again, I don't get the sense you really read here. Instead you seem to have taken issue with a statement and then jumped to vast conclusions.
Of course, there is an irony in what you say as well, and someone has pointed that out. One of the reasons why we are attuned to that need is preicsely because the liturgical progressivist did the exact opposite and have done exactly what you have noted.
"...and actually make yourself part of a local Christian community and patiently deal with real people as brothers and sisters in Christ, helping them to (most likely, very slowly) come to see beauty and spiritual reward in certain liturgical forms."
Frankly, this is pretty judgemental to presume people here aren't that.
I have to say -- this is some of the best writing I have ever read about these issues. Thank you. You've given us all a greatly-worded essay on which to build our own arguments when we want to write about such things.
Erick
This is solid evidence of the zeitgeist of the USCCB and their staff. To their taste, the papal Mass today is a very nice display of- cooperation and inclusiveness of the diverse cultures of modern society. Everyone had a good time.
Really, I've had it! Show me where the Holy Father ad-libbed liturgical texts, where he changed the rite, where he omitted things,... For Pete's sake, they had the whole Gloria! They had the liturgical texts! This is something many parishes can only dream of! I didn't like the music either, but apart of the music, almost EVERYTHING was right! How can people earnestly deny that this was a Mass???
I should add that my criticism is in no way geared at Jeffrey Tucker. I had some comments in mind...
anon:
Can you honestly say it's what the Church really wants? That's the standard - not what you (or I)may think is beautiful.
Does anyone know if the comments board at the USSCB is posting anything? Maybe the Comminsar over there is shaking in his boots I sure hope so, you vill not say anysing about our Multicultural Broadway Mess or else!!!!!
My Protestant room mate kept asking me to turn off the TV because the music was so awful.
Also, I must add my agreement to the assertion that this sort of multi-cultural music is ultimately racist.
Jeffrey,
I disagree with many things you wrote.
1) First, why would/should traditionalists feel happy about today's Mass? We have seen or heard about worse things that have happened in other places, with other people, priets, bishops,etc...
I completely, as I have said before, disagree with the N.O. and, if it were up to me, it would stop existing as a liturgical option in the Church. However, it does not cause happiness to any true traditionalist when things like today's episode happen. Maybe sedevacantists might be happy about it...
You might not like it that many traditionalists might be saying "I told you so," but that does not mean that traditionalists are happy or having a "grand time." (Many) Traditionalists views were just proven to be correct!.. probably, to the pain of many reform-of-the-reform promoters/supporters. By saying that what happened today is "indefensible," you are really saying that the *N.O.* is indefensible - as believed by many people... if not that, at least not necessary at all.
Guys, read "La Tunica Stracciata" (The Torn Tunic) by Tito Casini. It will give you a great idea as to what the N.O. really leads to - sonner or later, even at Papal Masses, as we have just seen/read/heard.
2) Many of you are trying to make it look like it happened because of other people and not because of the N.O. Well, I think people who think this way *should* open their eyes.
The N.O., in and of itself, lends to these sort of things and worse ones. For as long as there is a N.O. as published by Paul VI and maintained by all the successive Popes, every priest, bishop and the laity will have a "democratic right" to choose from the many options allowed to them. Horrible things like the ones from today are either encouraged, allowed or ignored in the N.O. either because people don't care, because they consider it uplifting or because they are used to it... or, worse still, because it is a "tradition."
You will never see that in the traditional Mass - not twice.
That tells you what people think of the N.O. when they think they can do such things and get away with it -- particularly, in the presence of the Pope and even more when the Pope is the Celebrant of the Mass.
Mr. Tucker, I admire your self-control. You expressed excellently the anger, disgust and shame that I felt myself.
I only wish there were a Vatican hotline that I could call to apologize to our Holy Father.
[Continuation]
3) Many of you are either trying to blame Mgr. Guido or trying to remove "blame" from the Pope as if neither of the two could do anything.
This is just foolish! The Pope, as we ALL KNOW, is the supreme legislator in the Church and he can change the Liturgy (Paul VI did!). He is the only one person who has "absolute" (in a sense) authority when it comes to the Liturgy - there is *no* way "reformers" of the reform can actually ignore this and still think of themselves as liturgical thinkers.
As opposed to what "Liam" said in one of the comments, the Pope is not legalistically bound to follow what the Rubrics say, especially if it is to do/say something that is traditional. So, if he really wanted to go back to say the old, traditional form for the Consecration of the Chalice, HE COULD do it without any problem whatsoever!
He could, too, decide not to wear what they (according to many of you) "made" him wear. You are all trying to pretend that the Pope had no choice in any of this - That is *not* true.
I'm not saying that he intentionally wanted things the way they turned out, but I do think he is very aware that he can (and in my opinion, should) be stricter when it comes to things like these, even if he is just a guest.
He might not want to appear like an authoritarian Pope, but when things like this happen, he should. Please, don't defend the "indefensible."
4) As somebody else said before, many similar things happened when JPII said Masses publicly. Why is the NLM expressing "shame," "disgust," and "pain," etc., now? Is it because subconsciously we all expected much more from this Pope - who has been called (in *this* very blog) the "liturgical Pope"?
The Pope, and everyone else who speaks about "continuity" should also speak about *consistency.* If Mass settings are going to change every time the Pope says Masses in different places, then people, priests, bishops are going to get the wrong message! They are going to be confused and think that anything goes.
In sum, I think that it is out of place to try to remove the N.O. from the whole context of what happened today. And it is also completely out of place to say or imply that traditionalists are, in a way, happy that such things happen. Remember that it was not traditionalists who came up with the N.O.
Y'all should check out the CNS piece on the mass. Apparently, "latin was well represented." You could have fooled me. Here it is: http://www.catholicnews.com/data...cns/
0802093.htm.
I feel your (well stated) pain. The "War on Horror" has only begun. One battle was lost, but the effort to educate must continue. The Church is only now beginning to recover from the 1960s-'70s hangover. Those liturgists who insist on serving "cheap wine" are guilty of bad taste, to be sure. The more websites like NLM and WDTPRS continue to insist that God deserves the best we can offer, people will rise to the occasion and begin to again honour and/or produce works of art and soul. The work of education must necessarily include the aesthetics of good taste while acknowledging our great dependence on the wonders that God has previous inspired. I confess, I love the work of Palestrina. Weening people off trite music will take a lot of effort. Think about how difficult it is to get people to exercise and stop eating junk food. People today are addicted to banality, made dull by that cheap wine. The good news is... there's plenty of good wine waiting to be served. Once people get a taste of the good stuff, they'll never go back.
All is not lost, people!
http://picasaweb.google.com/
Clea...sidenceBuilding
Speaking as a 'traditionalist', I find outrageous the notion that we could be happy at what happened today; it is not "traditional" to rejoice at evil.
Sensible traditionalists are not rejoicing; they feel the disappointment and anger of those who sincerely believed in a reform of the reform.
I do hope and pray, however, that more and more priests and faithful draw the right conclusions from today's horrible events and return entirely to the traditional Roman rite. This is the locus of true reform today.
LatinMass, the point you are missing about the "for all", "for many" is that while we may know that distinction, the Pope would no doubt be very conscious of "leading by example" since many would well take such a thing as an example that one can have "creative license" with the liturgy.
As for Jeffrey's comment, he clearly intended to mean some traditionalists, or even a certain kind of traditionalist who might see this as an opportunity. He is not speaking to anyone and everyone attached to the usus antiquior, which includes, incidentally, quite a number of the NLM's contributors.
Pope Benedict is, I would still propose, the liturgical Pope, and one Mass does not change that.
One difference here lay in where people wish to focus. Some seem to want to put the onus upon Benedict and Marini, whereas others would point to the American organizers.
The latter is the point of critique for Jeffrey.
As for the former, there's clearly a programme going on and it won't happen overnight.
As I noted earlier on, don't expect miracles for these liturgies. Look for a few signs instead.
One final note. We have here at the NLM spoken of the fact there are inherent issues in the modern Roman missal that can cause problems. You may recall my own post about Fr. Pacwa's article on the lturgy just a couple of days ago. That fact is one of the very premises that there needs to be a reform of the reform, which ultimately involves revisions to the missal itself.
Maybe some good can come from this travesty. Perhaps the Pope will see what a disgrace the US episcopal conference is and the crap liturgies they make most of us suffer through. And perhaps he will DO something about this instead of just talking.
...just as I suspected! Dissapointed with you Shawn
[The site you keep wishing to push is a schismatic, sedevancatist site, Patrick. Of course I am not going to have it promoted here. Save yourself the time, everytime I see it, I will delete it. - Shawn]
Did they change the music list? None of that seemed at all what was on the list submitted to the Vatican.
A little quick work with the plans?
katherin
You are judging trained liturgical specialists. You words are that of a person fully enveloped into the American feel good culture. Your words also expose a person who thinks that to judge is a sin...I suggest you learn your Faith in a greater degree and stop allowing yourself to float along on feelings alone.
The only way this mass would be acceptable to anyone is that person who believes the Eucahrist is a symbol of Jesus and not the Real Presence. I thank God that Our Holy Father got to see what most of America has been subjected to in the average parish. He will protect us...he is our father...and will not abandon us.
latinmass:
Have you ever heard "To Jesus Heart All Burning"? There are a lot of horrible songs that use to be sung at the Mass prior to Vatican II. It is naive to believe that every country parish in the world was able to produce wonderful Gregorian Chant and polyphony.
Katherine:
When were the people of the pews ever consulted about the foolishness that has gone at Mass? I do not remember being consulted over the issue of inclusive language but they changed the English lectionary in Canada to inclusive language.
Professional Liturgists are the "most" dogmatic and authoritarian people I have ever met. They love to say, "it is a pastoral issue". Nonsense!!! They have no clue. They make it an issue and bishops and priests for years take their word for it.
In my years of a priest, I have not used inclusive language and guess what! Not one complaint! But it was a pastoral issue that caused the change. Baloney
THANK YOU, Fr. Beachey!
In one Catholic magazine, one of the featured monthly authors, who wrote about Scriptural themes, once wrote in criticism of "inclusive" language.
Then he was never seen in the magazine again.
Go figure.
It is up to all of us involved in church music and liturgy never to give up that which we know is right. I want to thank NLM and Jeffrey Tucker for this post and everything you do.
I ranted with a few of my own comments this morning during the mess of the Mass in Washington. It was a revealing moment that messages here were only seconds after the disaster being presented on live tv or internet.
I'm actually looking forward to New York...I have to think that the organizers read this blog and Father Z and know what is being said and thought and are taking down some points.
This mess this morning should shame the USCCB and those responsible.
This is indeed a serendipitous moment...I agree,this is the beginning of the end
Shawn,
If the Pope would really, really, strictly "lead by example," he would/should not have allowed half of the things that went on today.
Also, many priests and bishops do not need any help in the creativeness department when it comes to the Liturgy. So, that is a very weak point or excuse. The "creative license" that you mention was granted to the entire Church in 1964 (before that, very relatively few places did crazy things Cf. for illustrations).
What do you think people/priests are going to gather from this in America and elsewhere?
Most people, traditionalists especially, do not want "signs and wonders." Traditionalists want *action.* The Pope should just talk about improving the Liturgy, the musical settings for the Mass, etc. He should do it universally.
As we saw with the change to the Good Friday prayer, the waiving of the five year period wait to open the canonization process of JPII, and restoring the old method of voting to elect a pope and a few other things, he *can* do things overnight.
It is only things like a motu proprio for the traditionalists, better music and translations for the Mass, and such things that do not happen overnight.
Anon.,
As far as I can tell, music during the Mass was to be only in Latin, unless a parish, diocese, etc. had permission from the Holy See to do otherwise.
I have never heard that hymn or "song" as you call it.
Tell me, did they use drums, guitars, tamborines, etc., to go along with that "song"?
Actually, anon., "To Jesus Heart All Burning" is one of my favourites, though I haven't heard it for years. Thank you for mentioning it: I will carry it in my grateful head all day.
My sympathy to our American brothers and sisters on the music at the Washington Mass. But lift up your hearts, because the Vespers was prayerful and pleasant, and "Rome wasn't built in a day". It will take time and patience. You have shown that America is capable of both good and bad - as the Pope has suggested in his speeches - and I have some hope that, because the musical rationale, choice and execution at Washington was SO bad, planners of future big liturgies will be much more circumspect. Which would be a blessing for us all.
One cannot remove the Novus Ordo in itself, if the the Holy Father signed off on this disaster today than I feel betrayed and stupid for believing in the Moto Propio, God forgive me if I prove to be wrong but what happend today was rancid and not what I expected. Could it be that what some Websites are saying the Traditionalists are having carrots dangled in front of them called the Moto Propio just to shut us up?? I truly hope with all my heart this is not the case. If so than one must believe the S.S.P.X. after all.
"To Jesus' Heart All Burning" was, according to Thomas Day in his book, "Why Catholics Can't Sing" a tune borrowed from a bar song and given Christian words.
My mother remembers it being sung at mass before the Novus Ordo. She told me they sang the same hymns every week from a hymnal called "The St. Basil Hymnal". Anon. is right -- there was bad music before the council too.
First, let's get this straight... Evil doesn't exist in the crappy music that we heard today, it's not present in the Novus ordo, not present in any of the poor people who posted their thoughts here. Real evil is in our abysmal treatment of each other, whether it be the killing fields of some war or how we treat one another on this blog. Evil, historically, lies within the accuser, not the accused. We get so hung up on our tradition, no one talks about scripture, the other pillar of our faith. We get so hung up on our rules, we forget the spirit in which they are created. The music at the mass today was, for the most part, not sacred and misguided. I, probably like you, was praying that at the beginning of Communion when the Ubi caritas chant was intoned that the entire chant would continue, or perhaps it would move into Durufle's beautiful setting. Should have known better. But we can correct that over time so maybe in 10 years when the Pope comes back something like this doesn't happen. Do pay attention to what happens in NYC, as they have programmed some glorious SACRED music. We can make progress, but not by demonizing those who might have a different view. This is the 21st century. The Church, all of us, need to become skilled at persuading, not condemning. Be good shepherds with your musicians, catechize your parishioners, figure out how to love the "liturgical jazz guitarist" who irks you the most, discontinue the vile remarks, and let's get to work renewing the Mass!
Amen, Jeff!
Very, very well said, Jeff. God love you so.
Fr. Beachey,
Do you think if we could just listen to the Pope's we might get it right...finally?
I put it right up there with "Bring Flowers of the Rarest."
You are right, bad music and liturgical abuse did not start at Vatican II.
We need to go back to Tra le Sollecitudini and read it and maybe finally, implement it. It certainly was not considered today, in fact, today was everything that Pope Saint Piux X condemned.
Ironically, he coined the phrase particpatio actuoso badly translated as "active" as opposed to actual, full or true.
Maybe one day we'll listen to him, Piux XII in Mediator Dei, Pope John Paul II...Benedict XVI. These were and are the most important liturgical Popes.
Having read nearly all of the comments in this post and the one before, I'm rather glad that I missed the Holy Father's Mass (never thought that I would say that in my lifetime).
I only hope that the Mass at St Patrick's and Yankee stadium are more reverent.
It is truly embarrassing that our bishops would disrepsect the pope in such a way. If that is how they truly feel about him, they should have remained in their own diocese - until the Holy Father can replace them that is.
A most disappointing Mass performance, especially since the Holy Father has made clear his preference for traditional music. I was also surprised by his use of the word "all" instead of "many" at the consecration of the wine, as Pope Benedict made a point last year of recommending it be changed. Well, prehaps we'll be surprised and witness an Extraordinary form of the Mass tomorrow in new York! Well...we can always dream,,,can't we?
I was there. Thanks for this commentary.
I seriously thought of Ricky Martin's "The Cup of Life" during one of the songs.
Here's the deal the Mass today was done without priestly innovations, no abuse, and all according to Vatican 2 norms, so why was it a disaster? If it was a TLM it would have been the same as it was for 500 years, yet it was ghastly. Someone please explain to us what went wrong if it was not the Novus Ordo itself?
Jeff,
I think your note offers important and good comments. Just a couple of nuances that I think are important.
When you say that the problem is that "...we get so hung up on our tradition, no one talks about scripture, the other pillar of our faith. We get so hung up on our rules, we forget the spirit in which they are created" it could create an impression that all people who value tradition and so forth do this, but of course, that is not the case as we know.
I think we need to be clear that we need both scripture and tradition, to follow the letter and the spirit of the law. I say this because, unfortunately, another extreme that is all too often found today are those who would reject church law or tradition, seeing it as somehow pharasaical.
At any rate, I just wanted that to be out there as an additional nuance to what you have noted.
The Papal Mass today was celebrated according to liturgical norms and liturgical reforms. So why have NLM and so many posters attacked today's Mass? Do you reject the Church's teacings?
There was nothing at the Pope's Mass today that wasn't in line with the Church's teachings on the Mass.
"I was also surprised by his use of the word "all" instead of "many" at the consecration of the wine, as Pope Benedict made a point last year of recommending it be changed."
I would be surprised if His Holiness changed it. He will follow the present approved text, until it is amended through the proper channels.
I think it is a mistake to assume that the Pope can change anything he wants. The rubrics are as binding on the Pope as they are on any celebrant.
Well stated, Mr. Tucker. Thoughtful, charitable and spot-on. God bless.
It is with much regret that I write this post because I am greatly disappointed with the music chosen for this Mass. We have failed at setting a precedent for truly sacred music.
Given the fact that the Holy Father has made the renewal and restoration of the liturgy as a chief priority in his pontificate (April 20th Homily–his first as Pope, wherein he notes that the liturgy is the central point of his pontificate) and has written substantially on the matter, especially where it concerns Sacred Music, why would the folks at DC choose music from a publising house that is known for sub-par songs. The psalm response we are hearing may be lovely as a stand-alone song, but, it should be chanted and not have so much musical interlude. It sounds like something that is better suited for opera than for the Mass.
It’s as though the DC planners were disregarding the Holy Father’s statement in Sacramentum Caritatis wherein he notes that “clearly not one song is not as good as another” when it comes to the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. From what I have read on a blog, the music for the NYC Mass is far superior.
The message that I interpreted from last night’s address to the bishops indirectly hits the liturgy. Everything flows from the Mass. If the bishops truly believe, as the Council taught, that the Mass is the source and summit of our life as a Church, then, we must take the Holy Sacrifice as our starting point. If the bishops are supposed to be true shepherds, they must draw their strength from the Mass and must conform themselves to Christ. During the Mass for the ordination and/or installation of a bishop, the Gospel account from St. John, wherein our Lord commissions St. Peter to feed and tend his sheep and lambs is proclaimed. Our bishops need to be reminded that this is their main responsibility. Our pastors, too, must draw their strength from the Mass, as well.
I was also disappointed with the commentary made by the folks on the Papal visit website. It’s rather odd that they would repeatedly quote from Sacramentum Caritatis, yet, completely ignore this very telling section of the document that states:
Liturgical song
42. In the ars celebrandi, liturgical song has a pre-eminent place. (126) Saint Augustine rightly says in a famous sermon that “the new man sings a new song. Singing is an expression of joy and, if we consider the matter, an expression of love” (127). The People of God assembled for the liturgy sings the praises of God. In the course of her two-thousand-year history, the Church has created, and still creates, music and songs which represent a rich patrimony of faith and love. This heritage must not be lost. Certainly as far as the liturgy is concerned, we cannot say that one song is as good as another. Generic improvisation or the introduction of musical genres which fail to respect the meaning of the liturgy should be avoided. As an element of the liturgy, song should be well integrated into the overall celebration (12
. Consequently everything — texts, music, execution — ought to correspond to the meaning of the mystery being celebrated, the structure of the rite and the liturgical seasons (129). Finally, while respecting various styles and different and highly praiseworthy traditions, I desire, in accordance with the request advanced by the Synod Fathers, that Gregorian chant be suitably esteemed and employed (130) as the chant proper to the Roman liturgy (131).
How can anyone state with a straight face that much of the music would fit into the parameters indicated by Sacramentum Caritatis? How could anyone state, with all honesty, that these songs fit in with the Servant of God, Pope John Paul’s Chirograph on Sacred Music, where he states:
4. In continuity with the teachings of St Pius X and the Second Vatican Council, it is necessary first of all to emphasize that music destined for sacred rites must have holiness as its reference point: indeed, “sacred music increases in holiness to the degree that it is intimately linked with liturgical action”[11]. For this very reason, “not all without distinction that is outside the temple (profanum) is fit to cross its threshold”, my venerable Predecessor Paul VI wisely said, commenting on a Decree of the Council of Trent[12]. And he explained that “if music - instrumental and vocal - does not possess at the same time the sense of prayer, dignity and beauty, it precludes the entry into the sphere of the sacred and the religious”[13]. Today, moreover, the meaning of the category “sacred music” has been broadened to include repertoires that cannot be part of the celebration without violating the spirit and norms of the Liturgy itself.
St Pius X’s reform aimed specifically at purifying Church music from the contamination of profane theatrical music that in many countries had polluted the repertoire and musical praxis of the Liturgy. In our day too, careful thought, as I emphasized in the Encyclical Ecclesia de Eucharistia, should be given to the fact that not all the expressions of figurative art or of music are able “to express adequately the mystery grasped in the fullness of the Church’s faith”[14]. Consequently, not all forms of music can be considered suitable for liturgical celebrations.
I am by no means a liturgical expert; however, having read Pope Benedict’s three books on the liturgy and his numerous writings on the subject, as well as Pope John Paul’s statements (along with the Universal Church’s documents on Sacred Music), I can say with all honesty that this was truly a dark blemish on what should have been a glorious occasion.
The Holy Father’s homily and his presence was comforting. At least, he has now experienced first-hand what many of us in the pews have to endure Sunday after Sunday.
Multiculturalism is noble, but an entirely secular virtue. It is a celebration of the differences that exist when there is no shared culture.
Perhaps there was a time when the Catholic Church had a shared culture that was capable of bridging regional differences. The vestiges of that shared culture have been on the retreat for more than a lifetime now. The natural propensity to innovate in continuity with the tradition has largely given way to a tendency to innovate by extra-cultural eclecticism (discontinuously).
Most practitioners of sacred art now simply do not have the continuity with tradition necessary for organic development. This is why some recent treatments of ancient (e.g. plainchant) material sound "forced" or self-conscious, and some modern lyrics with their aimless repetitions of a few Latin words from forgotten prayers seem, to those familiar with the ancient tradition, arbitrary or macaronic.
Paradoxically, because transient secular culture makes the greatest use of mass communications media, whereas sacred art is necessarily practised at a local level, it is to be expected that the dominant monoculture will be transient and secular, while the sacred is forced into pockets of (literal) parochialism. This is the inevitable consequence of the modern popular monoculture.
I think it is possible to recover the shared Catholic artistic tradition, but it cannot be done without either the use of global communications or global cooperation (or preferably both).
Quote from William "The Papal Mass today was celebrated according to liturgical norms and liturgical reforms. So why have NLM and so many posters attacked today's Mass? Do you reject the Church's teacings?
There was nothing at the Pope's Mass today that wasn't in line with the Church's teachings on the Mass."
Have you read any of the Popes books on the Liturgy?. Have you ever attended a TLM (Extra-Ordinary Form Mass)?. Have you ever heard Gregorian Chant or Tallis at a Mass?. Which church teachings are you referring to. The Baptist Church teachings!? Maybe the US Episcopal Church teachings?.
{sung in a horrible minor key}
"Lord, send out your spirit and renew the face of the earth, and renew the face of the earth..."
"Lord, send out your spirit and renew the face of the earth, renew the face of the earth, renew the face of the earth, of the earth, of the earth, renew the face of the earth..."
"Lord, send out your spirit and renew the face of the earth, renew the face of the, renew face earth of, Lord, renew spirit face of the, renew the face of the earth, Lord, send out your spirit...."
AAAAAAAAAAAAGH!!!!!
Excellent post.
Wow...what to say. The music was truly banal. What a shame.
I don't fault the singers...I know that they are the 'foot soldiers' and are just being told what to sing by the director of music, but honestly....the music selection was pretty bad.
The responsorial psalm was truly horrid. Can you say "Andrew Lloyd Webber"????
I knew that this would all happen because of earlier reports...and sure enough...the earlier reports were terribly accurate.
Hopefully, things will be better in NYC.
Excellent post!
My thoughts are simply this:
The overall choice of music displayed this morning at the Papal Mass was painfully appalling, scandalous, and utterly disrespectful of the sacred liturgy of the Church.
Very well-written post Jeffrey. It's important to note that this is not a uniquely American phenomenon. The same sort of nonsense is going on in Europe, South America, Australia, Britain, Ireland, etc. Wherever there are guitars and Catholics drunk on V2 "spirit" and multiculturalism the liturgy is in danger.
Along with the modern, multicultural music, I am unsettled by the majority of people in attendance. Dressed for a day at the beach and yelling at the Holy Father while trying to touch him like he is a pop star.
The Pope's own Master of Ceremonies was in this country prior to this trip...Hmmm
It will be interesting to see what if anything becomes of this, whether it will be in the form some official statement from the Vatican Press Office or what?
i was very uplifted by the pope's homily. However, the music and extreme emphasis on a multicultural show was a distraction from the holy sacrifice. This is a shame. I was very disappointed, and did not expect this for a papal mass. To me, this mass was so many steps backward in terms of bringing holiness and sacredness back to the mass--and removing a show atmosphere from the holy sacrifice.
I am actually re-watching the re-broadcast (on the EWTN) of the Papal Mass today...and I am truly disturbed and probably will not be able to sleep tonight.
Wow...the music was truly tacky and just utterly horrible.
I am a hispanic Catholic...and I feel patronized by the sheer volume of 'multicuturalism' displayed in the Papal Mass....I find it very objectionable and very unsettling.
That wasn't a mass today, that was a power play by the bishops. I was astonished by the blantant act of disrespect.
Today's debacle seems to me to be the natural outcome of the USCCB's recent document on music and the sacred liturgy, "Sing to the Lord": a little something for everybody, but nobody's really satisfied. The chickens, my dear bishops, have come home to roost.
"Why doesn't he (the Holy Father) DO something??!?" Oh, he will, to be sure. But in his own time and in his own way. If memory serves me, the American bishops begin their ad limina visits to Rome next year (or maybe 2010), and you can be sure His Holiness will take every opportunity to address in those closed-door meetings what needs to be corrected.
Based on what the world saw and heard today in Nationals Stadium, one might justifiably wonder whether Catholics in America by and large worship not at the altar of the God "who makes the two into one" but at the altars of the idols "Tolerance" and "Inclusivity" - which deities promote the diversity of the many, shrinking in horror at the prospect of the many becoming one. "E pluribus unum" stood on its head.
I couldn't sleep and happened upon your blog as I was surfing the net. How disappointing to read about the Mass music. Then I turned on EWTN to see if a rerun was on. I came in on the consecration and watched the rest. You are so right. The music was inappropriate and not even well sung, EXCEPT for Placido Domingo at the end. How gracious of His Holiness to personally thank Mr. Domingo and how reverent Mr. D. was to the Pope.
In many ways I am glad to hear a common sentiment among those here who are priests, religious or seminarians. Each of us so far has emphasized our embarrassment. This I think is a very telling sign concerning the thought of clerics and clerical candidates. It emphasizes a certain paternal and filial love for the Holy Father and that is a good sign for the future.
There are those who have said that the atrocities against the natural rights of ears demonstrated at this was was some how indicative of the Ordinary Form of the Mass of the Church. Logically speaking such arguments are non sequiturs. There is nothing in the so-called Novus Ordo that necessitates liturgical abuse or even just bad taste. Rather there is a separate issue that is the cause.
The cause of such abuse can be found in the hermeneutic that is used in approaching the liturgy. This manner of thinking was not born out of the Novus Ordo but has, rather, been forced upon it by those who would see their agenda of Modernism flourish. There are plenty of real deficiencies in the text of the Novus Ordo even in the official Latin to discuss so to impose a fallacious argument upon it does no good for the correction of these real issues. Such arguments have no basis in logical thought but only in emotional banter which is anathema to the truly Catholic mind.
In addition:
There are also those who have stated that the Mass in DC didn't violate any of the liturgical rules. This position is in error not because of what the then Cardinal Ratzinger wrote but rather it is in error because the liturgical rubrics for sacred music is quite clear. The problem one may have is that in most parishes including the more orthodox parishes have no sense of Sacred Music. The controlling documents on Sacred Music from St. Pius X until now are all at odds with the demonstration that we had today at the National's Stadium.
Br. Gabriel said:
B. your mischaracterization and misquoting of Pope Paul VI is not only intellectually dishonest[...]
I think everyone should read the address of Pope Paul VI. upon the introduction of the Novus Ordo and decide for himself.
"This novelty is no small thing." (Paul VI.)
Indeed.
As I said before - your quotes are out of context as the document itself makes clear. I fear that some people read Church documents like Protestants read Scripture. Rather, a document is always in context in two ways. First, it is context with itself and second it is in context with that which came before unless specifically stated otherwise.
Katherine, I think that you will find that quite a few people around here are committed enough to the local parishes that you talk about (And this is easily verifiable from looking at the sidebar) that they actually give up their time to act as musical directors and such things. As a general rule, it would be good if we assumed that people who critique are passionate enough about the Church for them to take it beyond words. As to the invocation of the Pope, it is not just the Pope who is invoked (and when invoked extensively quoted), but a whole host of authors. It is the point of blogging to do so.
anon., okay, so "To Jesus heart all burning" was sung at Mass, prior to Vatican II, and Mass was not always said with its full glory. But that is just to justify the first liturgical movement. The fact that Mass was not said as wonderfully as it could have been only needs to spur us onwards to do so, and not to accept a second-rate substitute. Secondly, even if there were things in dubious taste prior to Vatican II, there is a difference between bad taste (which can crop up anywhere) and liturgical abuse, and liturgical laxity.
I tend to think, Br. Gabriel, that the NO can be redeemed eventually, but that it is in serious need of overall reworking, beginning with those "real defeciencies" you mention.
The archbishop apparently sought a parish-based director because he wanted the papal Mass to reflect parish worship at its best, Mr. Stehle said. It was not to be a performance by professionals, but an act of worship by everyone present.
"People should be able to come to this celebration and know that their participation is not just permitted, but encouraged," he said.
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/0...3/854309-
54.stm
Er, mission accomplished?
A powerful post.
A more general comment. The traditional movement has a reputation for being divisive and negative. Too many letters to the Bishop, comments about trivial items in an otherwise fitting Mass and a general lack of charity. I know one member of a personal prelature who vented his frustration with a particular priest by walking out of a small chapel at the start of Mass, leaving the door to bang in his wake. Sadly, it is with such expressions as these that the traditional movement has become associated.
The comments box rules could not only sum up guidance for those who comment here, but also the way in which any of us should approach any commentary on the liturgy.
Now is as good a time as any to praise the leadership offered on this blog. It is positive and displays a true love for Church and an understanding of where the Church in her universality is at, and where she needs to go.
Thank you!
Thank Heavens, some of those music pieces were so multi-lingual that they cannot be implemented in any parish.
You are quite right, the USCCB are deleting like fury from their comments box, my two-line lamentation was gone after an hour, and it is amusing that, as I write, there are 322 post on this thread, nearly all negative, and 106 posts on Mr Tucker's music thread, but ONLY $ surviving on the USCCB. I think we know the posters of this blog well enough to judge that USCCB must have received say 50 comments, at a conservative estimate, thus less than 10% are deemed suitable, and while all perfectly sound, none praises the music!
http://usccb.wordpress.com/2008/......rk/#comment-
265
I am totally heartbroken. This Mass was so painful to watch. I am a fallen away Catholic that returned 2 months ago. I cannot tell you how upset I was watching this display. It vividly reminded me why I walked away from the church 30 years ago.
The USCCB wants to know the reasons so many Catholic have left. Well, here is one of them. Our sacred traditions and foundations have been totally trashed. I feel this display yesterday was a slap in the face to the Pope and to millions traditional Catholics.
Just skimming the post from the southern hemisphere .....
I'm reminded of the comments of a friend regarding the public Masses during Pope John Paul II's visit to Australia for the beatification of Bl Mary McKillop:
"It's just the parish novus ordo 'writ large'"
It seems apposite to the experience you've just had in Washington.
[This isn't meant to be any comment on the OF per se, just a view of what transpired in those cases]
Peter
I can't read all 111 to-date comments, so pardon me if I repeat someone more eloquent. Just one point regarding Jeffrey's typically passionate post:
You can point to all the outraged commentaries and blog posts you want, but in the end the only responses that matter (in a policy-making sense) is that of bishops and pastors. And it seems pretty clear to me that the vast majority of that particular audience saw exactly what they wanted to see at Nats Stadium. Does Jeffrey expect even some of them to go home, saying: "Never in my diocese!"? I, on the other hand, suspect quite a few of them will go home, saying: "Huh, we could outdo that anyday!" So long as the paradigm cultivated in the past couple of decades prevails, these spectacle liturgies will continue to ramp up expectations that place Catholic liturgy in direct competition with the Olympics Opening Ceremonies and Superbowl Halftime Show.
Mr. Tucker's commentary was very fine indeed and I am in broad agreement. For those lamenting what this all means for the future, however, I think it's important to recall that a revised Missal is on the way. By most accounts, the revised translations of the Gloria and Sanctus, among other things, will require the slate to be wiped clean of the Mass settings of the last 40 years. As I understand it, a system of governing the Catholic publishing houses is being put into place to monitor what they promote. It seems to me that there is real cause for hope and patience here. I have just read Benedict's "The Spirit of the Liturgy." It is a source of great encouragement to me that the same man who wrote this is now in charge of the new Missal. I suspect the new Missal will be much less permissive of variations from the clergy and much more specific about what kinds of music are appropriate and permissible. Perhaps I'm just being naive, but I think Mr. Tucker may just be on to something -- that fiasco yesterday may be the beginning of the end.
What a shame for the Catholic Church in America that this is the example of the Liturgy televised world-wide. Fr. Niehaus was correct when he said that it's sad that those preparing the Liturgy didn't familarize themselves with the Pope's feelings and instructions regarding Music in liturgy. As a Catholic Church Musician, I am embarrassed by what I heard. Hopefully the execution of the music was better "live" than what was picked up by the television / radio feed, however the selections (with few exceptions) were abominable. The orchestrations can't even be considered musical. Truly a mish-mash mass! What was the purpose of that AWFUL arrangement of the Gloria from the Missa de Angelis? Why not just sing the Chant as intended?
What was that? kokopelli on the flute or whatever windpipe that was whining away at Mass? Ughhh!
The music was just a little bit disneyesque, no? Maybe the mousekatear missal and hymnal will be forthcoming from one of the reigning publishing houses (or maybe not!)
I do hope EWTN will put out a dvd of this Mass. I will put it right next to my copy of their dvd of the beautiful funeral Mass of John Paul II. I want to remember and revisit both these Masses, each for very different reasons...both presided by the same Priest, our Holy Father, but, oh, the contrast. In one Mass, it seemed to me that I saw those reading or making music in what I would call actual participation...in