Secular Music, Catholic Purposes

This post is going to be sort of an open thread. I really want to have a discussion about this issue because I am not sure how to think about it.

When I made the video: "We Are Catholic." I made it with a secular song, "All We Are" by: Sugarland. They are a country band, and the words and meaning seemed to fit the purpose of the video. I wanted something fast paced and "peppy" to grab and keep the attention of the teen group I was creating it for. This song wasn't the original choice, it just happened to be on my computer, and I mocked up some images to it. Someone liked it so much they told me I had to use it.

Ok, now this might simply come down to preference. "I don't like secular music" or "I don't like this particular song." My question is: would this video (or any video of its kind) really get more attention if it used a "Liturgical" or "Sacred" song? Would the impact be the same? If so, what kind of song?

Now, I am not worried about people saying they don't like the song, because a lot of people are still posting: like Fr. Ray Blake. His message was: "Hate the music but I love the images." I am not worried about my video per se, I am more interested to know what people think about using secular music in these sort of situations. Marc Barnes from Bad Catholic recently wrote a piece for VirtuousPla.net about Liturgical Music. Now this video obviously isn't the Liturgy, but do you think the same rules should apply? What do you think?

Would my video have been better if it used something like "Panis Angelicus"? If so, how would it be better? Would it still capture the attention of everyone in a viral sort of way?

OPEN THREAD.

†††

Coffee Talk: Voting for Non-Catholics

So I wanted to try something some other blogs do to get some discussion going. I have noticed that I post quite a bit, and get readers, but not the ego-filling commenting surge that I need want helps keep a blog vibrant! COFFEE TALK!

Seriously though, commenting is a good way to keep a blog nice and interesting, so from time to time I will  post some quick little topic so that we can all chime in. So if you don't normally comment, just drop a quick note, even if it is to simply vote or state your thoughts on the topic. (This is what Father Z and Faith and Family Live do on a regular basis.)

Today's topic is: Should Catholics vote for candidates that aren't Catholic? Why or Why Not? This may seem like a silly question, but can a Catholic in good conscience vote for someone that they know from the get go does not share the same virtues and values as themselves? Is it true that Catholics and Protestants de facto hold a different set of virtues/values than one another?

Let me know your thoughts in the comment box - and remember: be kind to others.


NB: I get this topic from recent reports that there are those that think Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann hold anti-Catholic beliefs. I think these are silly ploys by the left to disenfranchise them from the Catholic vote, but it does raise an academic question.

•••

Outside vs. Inside

What is more important? I don't think there is much debate over this one. Yet, there is a disturbing trend in Catholid modernity circles that flips this thinking on its head. Much like Protestant thinking, the outside draws us in, and once inside we are filled with what is drawn in.

This isn't the same as as being drawn inside, by that which resides always, on the inside. This is an important distinction.

Thoughts? Comments?

The hermeneutic of rupture: The reason why modernists hate the Usus Antiquior

For a long time I have always wondered, "Why do modernist¹Catholics hate the Tridentine Latin Mass and other more Traditional practices?" In fact, someone, a more recent convert at my parish asked me this weekend, "Why don't people at our Church like saying the Rosary?" Now this question seems loaded, and in fact it might even be loaded to put it in here like this - but it serves to make a good point: there are those that really, really, don't like traditional practices, but why?

Pope Benedict XVI - Link

I have always had my theories. Some stemmed from deeply analytical reasoning based in social history, theological evolution, and community constructs -in other words I made a bunch of stuff up. But I never had that "Aha!" moment where it all came together in a nice clean package. You know, the kind of nice clean package where it all adds up and makes sense? Sort of like in a movie, where the bad guy has some secret to his guilt, and the good guys are putting together clues, interviewing the bad guy, letting him walk out of the station knowing he is guilty but they don't have that one perfect clue? Do you know what I am talking about? Well I never had that, until now.

Let's go back to my analogy real quick. So in those movies, there finally comes the climatic moment when everything finally adds up. Every director does it a little different, but I am thinking of the version where the bad guy is sitting in a police station or courtroom, acting all smug and full of himself because he knows, that the good guys know, that unless he reveals the secret, he won't be found guilty. Then one of the good guys says something, seemingly harmless which fills the bad guy with two things: fear and anger. Then, in a seemingly incongruent act, the bad guy completely looses his cool and reveals the secret like he is being tortured with hot pokers to the eyes. Crime solved, criminal arrested, case closed.

Well, like I said, I had one of those moments reading a Damian Thompson article.²  Thompson found a thread on the Commonweal Blog, where Bobbie Mickens threw a conniption over Universæ Ecclesiæ. It is a quick humorous take, on a rather silly topic, but inside of this article is that nugget, that reveal, the secret to why those modernists believe in the hermeneutic of rupture. Here is the Mickens comment from Commonweal in Thompson's article from the Telegraph:

Letting aside the dubious validity of Summorum Pontificum for a moment (I’m happy to debate that with anyone in another moment), par. 13 of the newly released Instruction says that diocesan bishops are to “monitor liturgical matters” in their sees “always in agreement with the MENS of the Holy Father clearly expressed by the Motu Proprio”.

The mentality/intention/spirit (you choose the best word) of the Holy Father? What of the “mens” of the Council?

The very fact that the Council Fathers, by overwhelming majority, voted to reform the Tridentine Rite certainly means that – regardless of how one today judges the final result of that reform – the bishops realized that the pre-conciliar liturgy (lex orandi) no longer responded to the ecclesiology (lex credendi) that had developed over the preceding century and came to fruition at Vatican Council II.

Thus, to return to the pre-reform Roman Rite does not correspond – indeed, it is a betrayal – of the “mens” of the Council.

Never in the history of the Church were there two forms of the one Roman Rite. There were various Latin and Western liturgies, which in the post-Trent reform were cobbled into the Tridentine Rite. The Mass of Gregory the Great? The Ancient Roman Rite? Not according to the historical facts. It was as post-Reformation or Counter Reformation liturgy. And it certainly has no place in an ecumenical post-Vatican II Church.

So, if you would kindly pay attention to the yellow highlighted portions of Mickens statement. In there you will find a few things:

1. That the Vatican II council is supreme, even as compared to the Pope.
2. The Church is better served by the council because it was democratic.
3. The smoking gun though is: that Vatican II created rupture and a new Church has emerged - one that is ecumenical and Protestant focused. 

Number three is why modernists hate tradition, especially the Tridentine Rite. You see, I never understood why people would want to stay and claim to be Catholic, but push for things like Female Priests, Homosexual Marriage within the Church, Liturgical Innovation, and other modernist novelties. I thought maybe it was faulty theological understanding. Maybe it was a desire for one specific thing, which had at its root some faulty theological understanding. This comment has made me realize that it isn't that folks want what Catholicism is, they want something different. They want a Protestantized version of Catholicism. To them, the teachings of Catholicism are not rooted in theology. To them, the Faith is malleable and capable of change - through a democratic process. To them, everything is should be Protestant-American centric. 

This is why our Masses look like Protestant Services. This is why our Churches look Protestant. This is why our Homilies sound Protestant. This is why our theology sounds Protestant. This is why our music not only sounds Protestant, but is Protestant in many places.  We are trying to be ecumenical in everything we do. These modernists, whether they are clerical, religious, or lay, have been transforming the Catholic faith into their idea of an American-Protestantesque version of it. Why? Well because when you look at the Protestant faiths across this country - they have beliefs and theologies that mirror what these modernist Catholics push for. Women clerics, "gay marriage", lay administration, democratic bodies of decision making, shifting theology determined by "votes", and "Social Justice" causes that barely resemble their scriptural basis. 

•••••†•••••

Bobbie Mickens, sitting in the police interrogation room revealed the secret. In his fear that the Ancient Liturgy of the Usus Antiquior was finally reclaiming its proper place in the Hermeneutic of Continuity he went batty. You see, the Catholic faith in its true and authentic form, easily seen and experienced in the Sacred 'precious treasure' of the Extraordinary Form, is a testament to the theology and beliefs of the Catholic faith. As Father Z. says:

Faith, doctrine, liturgy, identity are all interlocked. They are facets reflecting the bright core of the same jewel of our beautiful and true Catholic Thing. At the core of the jewel, and any doctrinal formulation or definition which can be taught and memorized and studied, or within in any prayer or oration of our liturgical worship there is a single content convered to us: Jesus Christ, speaking, teaching, revealing, healing, raising, forgiving, saving.

So one of the biggest threats to these modernists is the Liturgy. When we reformat the Liturgy, and thereby the Mass, what we experience changes us. It also then changes how we encounter the Eucharist. This makes us long for and desire for more of the Sacred, which eventually will have an affect on our theology and doctrine. So you see, this is why the modernists fear the Usus Antiquior. It is more than a form of the Mass. This is about theology and doctrine as well. It is also about their existence and belief. Maybe Father Z. is right - Save the Liturgy, Save the World. 

Notes:   ___________________________________________________________

1. I don't like using the term "liberal" here because of the political connotation. I think you get what I mean - Spirit of Vatican II type of people.
2. Some of you may have read the article at Father Z's place.

†††

The humble gesture

“There are groups, of no small influence, who are trying to talk us out of kneeling,” wrote then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. “‘It doesn’t suit our culture’, they say (which culture?) ‘It’s not right for a grown man to do this — he should face God on his feet’.”

Cardinal Ratzinger continued: “The kneeling of Christians is not a form of inculturation into existing customs. It is quite the opposite, an expression of Christian culture, which transforms the existing culture through a new and deeper knowledge and experience of God.

Kneeling does not come from any culture — it comes from the Bible and its knowledge of God . . . The Christian Liturgy is a cosmic Liturgy precisely because it bends the knee before the crucified and exalted Lord. Here is the center of authentic culture – the culture of truth. The humble gesture by which we fall at the feet of the Lord inserts us into the true path of life of the cosmos.” – Pope Benedict XVI

††† 

'Recovering our sense of the Sacred'

Another gem from Fr. Acervo's blog. I am mining there today and discovering riches that we all could use. From his talk about Recovering our sense of the Sacred:

But we can’t blame all of our problems on the culture. Not only have we lost the sense of the sacred in terms of our senses being dulled. We’ve lost the sense of the sacred in the sense that we’ve let the culture influence the Church when it should be the other way around. As the secular creeps into the Church, the sacred is pushed away. The Church looks more and more like the culture until suddenly, the Church has lost her identity. The salt of the earth has lost its flavor, and it is no longer good for anything (cf. Mt 5:13).

This is an area near and dear to my heart. I pray for this daily, I strive and work towards this in my own personal ways. We must do this to ensure that those who are seeking the Faith and don't know it through reason can find the faith through... the Sacred in a spiritual way, through faith.

» •••†••• «

does the external...the Sacred, matter?

Some say that the way we believe, our theology, our form, these external things don't matter, because it is substance that matters more, and without substance form is meaningless. They sometimes argue that the Catholic church, especially behind the reform of the reform of Pope Benedict, is merely striving for form over substance. Yet, I couldn't disagree more. The reason to solidify our theology and our Liturgical prayer is to place our hearts into the Heart of the Church. Fr. Acervo explains [my emphasis]:

“For in the Blessed Eucharist is contained the whole spiritual good of the Church”. If we really believe this, then we must also hold that what we do in church, what we believe happens in a church makes an enormous difference. If the Eucharist (and again this also refers to the Mass) is the source and summit of the Christian life, then what we’re doing with regards to the Eucharist must make an enormous difference. The attitude that we bring to the Mass, our gestures and our postures, make a difference. For the priest, the way he celebrates the Mass makes a difference.

As Father explains, the Mass is the source and summit of our lives. Therefore it logically follows that it is the Heart from which all substance of our belief and action springs. Father correctly reiterates over and over, that what we do at Mass, everything that we impose on the Mass makes a differences, it matters, it has a direct connection to our belief and helps to create our substance. Good form springs good substance, Fr. Acervo explains through an example:

If I receive Communion well, I grow in grace, which has a positive effect on the whole Church. A bad reception of Holy Communion does harmful things to me and then to the entire Body by extension.

So then, we must understand that the efforts to reclaim a proper form is actually a desire to reclaim a proper substance. When we read the Pope, if we read him, we gain an understanding of his total overall purpose. To judge his reforms and discussions of form solely as a discussion over style, we lose the meaning and substance behind their purpose. Of course then we will argue that it is form over substance, because we ourselves are the ones that have ignored the substance. So, it is incumbent upon us to strive for a good attitude, proper posture, proper understanding of what we are to think and do about the Mass.

» •••†••• «

the Mass as the heart of the Catholic faith - the source and Summit

So how should we think about the Mass? What should be our focus and what is the focus of the Mass? We need to remember the Mass is about God and the Church. As individuals, we are asked to come, but our attendance, participation, and even our actions are not required. Even more importantly, what the priests do, and what is done at Mass Fr. Acervo explains better than I:

"...The Mass does not belong to the priest. It is Christ’s Mass which He entrusted to the Church, and the Church in turn entrusts it to priests. It is the priest’s obligation and duty to be obedient. And as we’ve been talking about, it makes a difference..."

Important in the explanation of what the Mass is, concerns what it is for us the faithful. What the Mass is and then our relationship to it through our participation of prayer will exemplify what we believe; both about the Mass and our calling as a Catholic in the world. As I always say, Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi - we pray what we believe. This means that we can only pray or participate in the Mass and thereby our greater vocation as a Catholic to that point which we believe. How we choose to pray will be the extent of our beliefs, and no further. So in that understanding, we cannot commit to substance or action of faith unless we are capable and willing to pray and participate in the faith to the extent of our beliefs. Our form in Mass (as individuals, priests, and as a community) is a mirror of our totality of belief. That totality of belief is then a benchmark, a high-water mark for our action and substance. This is because of what the Mass is and what role it plays in our Christian life.

Mass is not merely a “teaching moment” or a “celebration of unity” or a “tedious obligation”. Do this in memory of me: we are fulfilling the Lord’s command and to the degree that we are faithful, blessings are bestowed on the Church. To the degree that we are not faithful, blessings are withheld from the Church. I think we could all agree that we live in a time when the Church needs all the blessings that she can get.

« •••†••• »

I really could go on and on, commenting on all that Father Acervo has to say on this matter, but he said it first and said it much better than I ever could. I have said much of this at other times, but never so well and so concise. He captures beautifully what we need to do in regard to our understanding of the Mass and the Sacred. So I urge you to go and read his full talk: Recovering the Sense of the Sacred.  He lays out what we need to do as the Body of Christ to recover the Heart of our Faith - the Church.

I will leave you with one last paragraph to entice you to read the whole thing:

But for all of us, we must strive to approach the Mass reverently with great love and care being faithful to what the Church gives us without gimmicks, novelty, or innovation. It means that we must participate at Mass properly, which for most doesn’t mean doing something or keeping busy. It means being receptive of God. Despite popular belief, this is anything but passive. It takes great strength to push away all the distractions and tune in to what is sacred. And if each of us does our part, it becomes evident that, you know, something divine not human is going on here. Something sacred. Then we will find what our hearts are truly looking for.

††† 

"The presence of the Living God"

In a recent article in the Catholic Anchor, Archbishop Roger Schwietz, spoke of the importance of creating beautiful churches.

Effort, time, and beauty. | St. Josaphat's, Detroit, MI

As the Anchor reports about his comments:

He spoke of the fact that the early Hebrews viewed the Temple in Jerusalem as the dwelling place of God. This is also reflected in the Catholic belief that Christ is present in every church through his Body and Blood in the Blessed Sacrament.

“Over the centuries, we, in our Catholic tradition, also put a great deal of effort and time and art into making beautiful churches because they contain the presence of the Living God,” Archbishop Schwietz said.

This is a very wise comment coming from our shepherd. One can only see it as a call for change, as many of the churches in this Archdiocese are in stark contrast to these comments. His excellency traced the history and Catechetical reasoning for making churches beautiful; the fact is that churches are the house of the Lord and "they contain the presence of the Living God" - they posses the Blessed Sacrament, the True Presence of Christ.

···•°···

Sadly, many churches in this diocese have been built in a modern style that is absent beauty and lacks the sacred. This isn't to say they are austere and humble, but actually are built with a minimalist design devoid of almost any flair or reflection of God – they are purposely absent of beauty. It is a shame, and one might dare say sacrilegious. Why then does this occur?

I stand with his excellency, and applaud his Catechesis and call for churches to reclaim their beauty through effort and art, so that they might properly reflect that they are the dwelling place of the presence of the Living God. I look forward to the coming changes, and will surely detail any developments in this matter. As good members of the Body of Christ, we must do our part and pray for these things, and pray that our churches transform themselves into worthy tabernacles for the True Presence of Christ.

†††

The Homily

Just a few things I thought I would pass along:

Redemptionis Sacramentum
67. Particular care is to be taken so that the homily is firmly based upon the mysteries of salvation, expounding the mysteries of the Faith and the norms of Christian life from the biblical readings and liturgical texts throughout the course of the liturgical year and providing commentary on the texts of the Ordinary or the Proper of the Mass, or of some other rite of the Church.[147] It is clear that all interpretations of Sacred Scripture are to be referred back to Christ himself as the one upon whom the entire economy of salvation hinges, though this should be done in light of the specific context of the liturgical celebration. In the homily to be given, care is to be taken so that the light of Christ may shine upon life’s events. Even so, this is to be done so as not to obscure the true and unadulterated word of God: for instance, treating only of politics or profane subjects, or drawing upon notions derived from contemporary pseudo-religious currents as a source.[148]

SACRAMENTUM CARITATIS
46. Given the importance of the word of God, the quality of homilies needs to be improved. The homily is "part of the liturgical action" (139), and is meant to foster a deeper understanding of the word of God, so that it can bear fruit in the lives of the faithful. Hence ordained ministers must "prepare the homily carefully, based on an adequate knowledge of Sacred Scripture" (140). Generic and abstract homilies should be avoided. In particular, I ask these ministers to preach in such a way that the homily closely relates the proclamation of the word of God to the sacramental celebration (141) and the life of the community, so that the word of God truly becomes the Church's vital nourishment and support (142). The catechetical and paraenetic aim of the homily should not be forgotten. During the course of the liturgical year it is appropriate to offer the faithful, prudently and on the basis of the three-year lectionary, "thematic" homilies treating the great themes of the Christian faith, on the basis of what has been authoritatively proposed by the Magisterium in the four "pillars" of the Catechism of the Catholic Church and the recent Compendium, namely: the profession of faith, the celebration of the Christian mystery, life in Christ and Christian prayer (143).

†††

Midnight Mass - Christmas: St. Joseph's in Detroit, Michigan

Wanted to post a few pics from where my family attended Midnight Mass on Christmas. Unfortunately, I only took a few pics with my phone as I didn't think to bring the better camera.

We went to:

St. Joseph Catholic Church

Midnight Latin Tridentine Mass

Missa Brevis in G by W. A. Mozart
Ave Verum Corpus by William Byrd
sung and performed by the St. Joseph Cappella, Soloists, and Chamber Orchestra
(preludes begin at 11:30)

The Main Altar

Marian Side Altar

St. Joseph's - Detroit, MI

The Mass was beautiful, the Music was awe inspiring and it really was a Mass that sought the Sacred. 

†††

Renovation & Reinvigoration

The concept of renovating a parish's Sacred Space has been brought up many time here at the blog. The concept is simple: take a bland, boring, space -- your typical modern parish and with simple and inexpensive updates, make a Holy, reverent, and Sacred space. The point is to transform a church building from a church into a parish. It calls to mind the old saying: "When does a house become a home?"

···•°···

Over the past few weeks, the New Liturgical Movement, a favorite website of ours, has been posting real life examples of such transformations. The results are stunning. Some obviously are the result of a little more capital then others, but in general we are talking fairly cosmetic changes, and not really structural. In other words, we are talking about adding to the look and not changing an auditorium style building into a cruciform one, for example.

···°•···

What this does for a parish is that it reinvigorates it. It takes the "old" and sheds it, while implanting the new into the heart and soul of each parishioner at the parish. [Well, I guess except for those SOV-II hold outs hoping for Pope McBrien.] It gives new vitality to their worship. This isn't because external and symbolic things are somehow crucial or even necessary to the worship of the faithful, but because we are beings of sense and spirituality, and the sensory 'speak' to our inner core, our soul if you will, and enliven it with thought and emotion.

I feel as if I harp on this enough in my posts regarding Sacred Space, so I will not repeat my past missives. What I will say is that many parishes are in need of many things few are are crucial as a renovation and reinvigoration of their Sacred Space. And again, this isn't because it is somehow necessary in a theological sense, but because the people are often in need in a spiritual sense.

Here are some of the sneak-peek examples:


St. John the Baptist -- Tryon, NC

Before...

...After

St. James Cathedral -- Orlando, FL

Before...

...After

†††

A quick observation about Sacred Spaces: BNSIC

I was at the Basillica today in the Crypt Church for Mass. (For those keeping score at home, yes I am in D.C.) I realized that even though it was a daily Mass, there was something spectacular about it... something... extraordinary.

It wasn't just the 'place' either, it was the entire Mass. The space though was a significant factor. Now it may be a little unfair to judge most smaller parishes against the Shrine, but honestly- every church should try and represent Sacredness in its own way. I don't not intend to mean that every church should be free to call what it does with its own space Sacred. I mean quite the opposite really.

The way the Mass was celebrated, the hymns that were chosen, the attire of the ministers and clergy, everything had a sense of Sacredness and worship about it. People coming for a visit would stop and 'watch' the Mass because I think they too sensed the special-ness of what was occurring before them.

There is a saying my wife and I remind friends of, and occasionally each other, when it seems as if the emotional aspect of something is lacking:

Do the actions, and the feelings will follow.

Maybe more parishes and priests should follow this advice when it comes to the decor, actions, and settings at Mass. Something needs to help inject the Sacred back into the Mass at many 'smaller' churches.

Published with Blogger-droid v1.6.5