![o{]:¬)](http://www.wdtprs.com/blog/wp-images/topimage.JPG)
Blogs I look at react to the Washington D.C. Mass - UPDATED
This entry may be updated from time to time. Please check back often!
o{]:¬)
Some reactions from the internet. My emphases and comments throughout:
Over at DC Catholic there is an entry responding to my own comments here at WDTPRS:
I was in attendance today and found the experience incredibly moving. I would like to caveat my comments by saying I only attend the Extraordinary Form, but I couldn’t stop from weeping tears of Joy. [A "Yes" vote… though not for the music, perhaps.] Was the music what I like? No. Was it a traditional liturgy? No. But the presence of the Holy Father seemed to repair any faults in the Mass. I guess it’s not something that one can appreciate via TV or radio. [From a personal, experiential view, this is okay, I suppose. I am very glad it was a great experience! But the concern so many had for the music choices goes way beyond just how we feel at this great event! We must avoid reducing the issue of the music to "taste". There is a great more to this matter than simply what we like and don’t like.]
Today I reaffirmed my baptismal vows to the Successor of St. Peter. Today, God gave me the grace to see a glimpse of Heaven, where a huge multitude of faithful were adoring God with genuine outpourings of faith and fidelity.
I was sitting with a group of gentlemen in discernment for the priesthood in the Archdiocese and there were native speakers of every language spoken at the Mass, Vietnamese, Spanish, and even Igbo.
The Holy Father’s visit to the city where I live provided me with an abundance of grace and I cannot, in good conscience, criticize the liturgy. [Fair enough.]
Over a Ten Reasons:
"Look how wonderful we are, Your Holiness!"At Argent by the Tiber
Whoever wrote Archbishop Wuerl’s welcome for the Papal Mass at Nationals Stadium should resume his career as a diversity consultant.
Ditto for the liturgist. The "multicultural" music (Raymond Arroyo’s description) for the offertory and the beginning of the Eucharistic prayer simply has no place in the Mass. We’ve heard so much about "active participation" by the laity. Explain to me how anyone in attendance can hum these … pop stylings, much less sing them. (Is that a bass guitar and saxophone I hear as Communion is distributed?) Appalling. [A "No" vote?]
"Perhaps those responsible for this are unfamiliar with Pope Benedict’s many writings on the liturgy," Fr. Neuhaus said. [On EWTN] One can hope New York is more faithful to the Spirit of that liturgy.
Music at the outdoor Mass
...horrid, horrid….NOOOOOOOOOOOO! not Marty Haugen….Holy, Holy, Holy
After that horrible psalm then the dreadful offertory salsa music, which Raymond Arroyo called, "Amazon flavor"...then the awful Veni creator with Indian flute to be crowned by Haugen.
Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrghhhhh
Update…yikes with the Christ has died….and then the fanfare with the Great Amen. Horrid, horrid.
So far, they have managed to mangle the Gregorian chants. The Gloria, then Veni, now Ubi…then this communion dreadful meandering stuff….who wrote this? I haven’t looked at the Mass companion booklet.
Oh, and furthermore, this style of music really is ugly for the human voice. Did you hear how the quality of singing degenerated?
Oh, no, now electronic piano. AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHH
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Nooooooooo, clapping at Holy Communion. THIS.IS.JUST.DREADFUL. HOW.TOTALLY.EMBARRASSING
The Holy Father is now sitting during Communion…his head is bowed. Please forgive us, Holy Father.
What is this dreadful setting of Pange lingua gloriosi? How hard would it have been for the choir to have learned the chant? No, we have to turn this into an operetta type duet.
Oh, caterwauling now…yes, my new mantra…overweening display of mult-culturalism.
Panis angelicus….stop.the.clapping…Mr. Domingo would prefer you to meditate. Good grief!
Papa…let us pray…
Update…the Mass is ended.
Do you know what is tragic about this mess of music? Those of us working in the parish level who are working hard to bring music back into line will now have another hill to climb. Guess what we’ll hear? "Well, if it’s good enough for a Papal Mass, it’s good enough here."
bangs head on my desk
Come Holy Spirit, descend upon us and renew us. Fill us with your power. Inspire us with Truth and Beauty.
And now over the pond we go to my friend Fr. Blake at St. Mary Magdelenen in the UK said:
I made a point of having a late lunchand going to EWTN to watch Mass from Washington, I am not sure I can cope with much more, so far there has been a fat priest in lounge suit waving his arms about, bastardised Missa di Angelis Gloria with chime bar accompanyment, a not very nice responsorial psalm, [you can say that again] more appropriate to a musical on Broadway. [Or a circus.]The Crescat offers this:
The first and second reader and cantor of the psalm have all been women, and they seem to have been chosen for their overacting ability, rather than any ability to communicate the Word of God prayerfully. There is a distinct absence of a sense of prayer and real spiritual participation here.
How blessed one is being a priest, I would be tempted to lapse inside a year if I had to endure this stuff week after week, how the laity are tortured by the clergy! Shameless self indulgence on behalf of someone, the worst aspects Americanism. [hrumpf!]
I can’t endure more!
Words like meaningless, culturally bankrupt, saccharine, lack of intellectual conviction, trivial, decadent, debased, rootless, superficial, inauthentic, inconsequential, secular, horizantalist come to mind, none of these words come to mind when [one] thinks of the Pope.
Is this really the image that AmChurch wants to present to itself and the world?
Badly done Archbishop Wuerl, very badly done.
[Another "No" vote.]
seriously, so how many of you …
A very good question. I think the answer is "yes", actually. Bu they had another agenda.... just ended up putting the Papal Mass on mute to escape the music?
[No doubt that was a "No" vote!]
Did the event organizers read anything the Pope has written on sacred music?
NLM took a wait and see stand (posted before the Mass).
It is perhaps worthwhile to note that people should manage their expectations with regard to these events. If you are expecting liturgies as you might see them at in St. Peter’s Basilica, Rome, or which fully confirm with Pope Benedict’s liturgical vision, that would not be terribly realistic for a variety of pragmatic reasons.Uh huh.
In view of this, the NLM’s own approach and focus for these events will be upon those things which can be understood as helping push forward one or another aspect of Benedict’s programme for liturgical reform in continuity.
So far they haven’t posted anything else. Is this an example of "If you don’t have anything nice to say…."... you know the rest?
At Thrown Back Fr. Johansen has some comments. Here are some excerpts.
I also was struck by the apocalyptic tone of many comments [about the Mass on the blogosphere] as well. Quite a few suggested that the DC Mass indicated that the Reform movement had failed, and that we were henceforth doomed to Haugen, Haas, and the St. Louis Jesuits per omnia saecula saeculorum. [Yes. That silliness has also been hurled about on WDTPRS.] Please, people, get a grip. I do believe Jesus had something to say about "the gates of Hell" prevailing, and all that. [I think Father just compared listening to the music of Haugen, et al., to Hell.] Have some faith. Since the liturgy belongs to the Church, and is the "source and summit" of our faith, it seems to me that Our Lord’s promise to the Church extends to the liturgy as well. The Kingdom of God always advances in fits and starts, never in a straight line. One setback is hardly cause to abandon the field. Yes, I’m sure some will be tempted to use the DC Mass as "evidence" to perpetuate the Americanized "Spirit of Vatican II" liturgy. But really, that whole way of thinking is becoming more and more patently dated by the day. It just isn’t flying anymore, because more and more people are becoming aware of what Vatican II really taught about the liturgy, and Pope Benedict’s teaching in this area is having an inexorable effect. The priests ordained in the last 10 years are almost universally tradition-friendly, and that trend is only expanding. The current liturgical disorder wasn’t created overnight, and it won’t be undone overnight.Shouts In The Piazza has some observations.
...
Which brings me to the larger point. Archbishop Wuerl, in his greeting of the Holy Father at the beginning of the Mass, stressed the different cultures and ethnicities represented at the Mass. Fr. Neuhaus observed that the spirit of "multiculturalism" pervaded the Mass. A different EWTN commentator, after the Mass, gushed about how the Mass represented the "diversity" of the Church in America. Others waxed about how the Mass was an opportunity for the Church in America to show the Holy Father who we are. The problem: That’s. Not. What. Mass. Is. About.
The Mass is not an "opportunity" for me, or we, to "show" anyone anything, let alone "who we are." The Mass is not about "representing" the diversity (or anything else), of those who participate in it. The Mass is about re-presenting the eternal Sacrifice of Christ at the Last Supper and Calvary. It’s about Him, not me, and not even about we.
We live in the age, as Mark Shea has coined the term, of "Generation Narcissus". Our collective motto as a society is "It’s all about me." In liturgical terms, this translates to the "Self-Actualized Community Celebrating Itself in Its Okayness". In our pride and self-centeredness, we want to turn the liturgy around to focus on ourselves. As a priest I have encountered this in many ways. This attitude commonly rears its head in weddings. When, from time to time, I have had to say "no" to the unreasonable liturgical demands of some bride, I have heard the reply "but this is my wedding". To which my response is, "yes, it is, but it’s not about you. At confirmation, graduation, and other special Masses, frequently the organizers try, in ways verging upon the silly, to concoct ways to "involve" all the confirmands or graduates, to give them all something to "do" in the liturgy, because it’s "about" them.
This kind of thinking was evident in the DC Mass. There was a seemingly never-ending parade of cantors, musicians, and pieces of a dizzying variety of styles and ethnic origins, all aimed at trying to "include" every possible different ethnic and racial group. This process had what Amy Welborn aptly called a "frenzied" quality. It seemed frenzied because it was so obviously labored, and so obviously detracted from experiencing the liturgy as any kind of unified whole. This "multicultural" approach failed liturgically, and it also failed in it’s own putative aim: rather than celebrating unity in diversity, or some such thing, it ended up exaggerating the ethnic differences and working against the communio that the liturgy is intended to bring about.
No, the problem, as I heard another priest once say, is that most Catholics "don’t know anymore what the Mass is for. " And not knowing what something is for, we will tend to make it for ourselves. Part of the cause for this state of affairs is the collapse of catechesis in the 70’s and 80’s. ...
...
The liturgy, as Pope Benedict has written, should form our culture. But for the last thirty years the prevailing culture, and it’s winds of trend and fashion, has been allowed to to de-form the liturgy. This is the lesson that our bishops and priests must learn. Once again, the evidence of this tendency was glaring in the music at yesterday’s Mass. This process has both damaged the liturgical life of the Church, and weakened Catholic culture. The reversal of the process cannot begin with the prevailing culture that surrounds us – it contains much that is simply antithetical to the Faith. We must begin with the liturgy – as it is understood and lived in the continuity of the Church’s Tradition. We must allow ourselves to be formed by the liturgy, so that we can be conformed to the Something that the liturgy is about. Then we will, almost without consciously trying, begin to rebuild and reform the culture of the Faith and of the world.
Was the music really that bad?
YES! [That sure is a "No" vote!]
Was the rest of the liturgical arrangements really that bad?
NO (except for the histrionic women doing the readings.)
Was it sort of typical of the crap many American Catholics suffer through each week?
YES!
Was it a good thing that the Pope got to see first hand how out of sync a liturgy organized by the USCCB is with what he himself has written and preached about concerning good liturgy?
YOU BETCHA!
Is this going to change the state of the liturgical life of the Church in America?
NAH!
But…Donald Wuerl should probably stop having himself measured for scarlet robes, at least for the time being.
I respectfully posted a comment on the USCCB blog that I was disappointed with the Mass,—its choices of music and “hit parade” feel—especially in light of everything the Holy Father had written about the liturgy and has tried to teach us about the continuity between the past and present. It was removed within minutes.
Comment by TNCath — 17 April 2008 @ 11:44 amIt’s that agenda which is at the heart of it – how many of the senior clergy in the US loathed Ratzinger for decades and their relativist secularist pragmatist world caved in about their heads when The Holy Spirit made him Pope ?
Comment by Paul Priest — 17 April 2008 @ 11:46 amThis was a childish form of payback – they knew he was there to remonstrate with them [however benevolently, charitably and helpfully] and they wanted to let His Holiness know this was their patch !
Shame on them !
He’s offering them a lifeline and they are basically spitting in his face.
I find myself wondering what the organizers’ agenda really could have been? Is it possible that this was supposed to be a “we’ll show the Holy Father and the world why he’s wrong about the liturgy” event that went horribly, horribly wrong for those in charge?
Because no matter what the agenda was—and I agree that there was one—I think it has backfired in a way no one involved could have imagined.
Comment by Antiquarian — 17 April 2008 @ 11:46 amHonestly – I had to turn it off because it was so,so very bad. The responsorial psalm completely did me in completely. My daugther said I turned red – yes, I was totally embarrassed.
Comment by avecrux — 17 April 2008 @ 11:48 amI’m glad I turned it off – sounds like it got worse.
After months of lurking, I have to register just to add my voice to the chorus of those who were appalled by the Washington DC Mass. Once again we faithful Catholics attempt to watch Mass and see a circus. Oh well, I liked the Consecration.
Comment by we love being married — 17 April 2008 @ 11:50 amAs a parishoner in the ADW and having read pre-Mass coverage in The Standard, I can only say that I was not surprised. I will wait for the replay on EWTN (on an audit and could not watch the Mass live) to confirm the horror stories.
Comment by JML — 17 April 2008 @ 11:54 amFather Z: I’m not sure the good folks at the USCCB have yet gotten your “Save the Liturgy, Save the World” message. Perhaps, just to be on the safe side, you ought to re-send it.
Comment by Henry Edwards — 17 April 2008 @ 11:55 amFr. Neuhaus on EWTN indicated he thought the music choices indicated ignorance of what the pope has written about the liturgy. Rightly or wrongly, it seemed like rebellion to me.
Also, I appreciate that we are catholic, but this is a visit to the church in the United States. So why the filipino, chinese, african and japanese intercessory prayers? It was maddening.
Comment by Lee — 17 April 2008 @ 11:59 amOn the positive side – we have the Holy Father in our midst as Catholic Christians. That’s pretty traditional.
And Msgr Guido Marini was there actively directing the acolytes and others before the Mass. The fan club was happy about that.
And the altar had seven candlesticks and the crucifix in the middle.
I guess I don’t always belong in this crowd because sometimes I do not look for things to complain about.
I have lived as a layman and priest in DC for 45 years and I haven’t seen this much Latin in a Mass ever. There’s something else positive…
The Church moves slowly over here sometimes too.
Comment by Haurietis Aquas — 17 April 2008 @ 12:04 pmHenry: All they need to do is hit the F5 on their keyboards.
Comment by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf — 17 April 2008 @ 12:06 pmI am ashamed that the Holy Father had to witness this horrid spectacle. The organizers should be embarrassed but no chance of that, I’m sure.
Comment by Renee — 17 April 2008 @ 12:06 pmwell I wrote this on the USCCB website [see how long it lasts ?] :
Since when has John Paul II been accredited with the title “The Great” by the Vatican ?
I’m not suggesting he doesn’t deserve such an accolade but isn’t this rather hastily inappropriate ?
The Mass was far from a success – it seems that the liturgical organizers were devoid of understanding that the sacrifice of the mass is a return to calvary and as such the music is intended to promote this and inspire the faithful towards prayerful devotion – after a more traditional beginning the subsequent inappropriate caterwauling cacophony was more redolent of a Frisco hippy mass circa 1972 than a Papal Mass.
It seemed that the organizers had spent a great deal of time researching and studying His Holiness’s excellent book ; The Spirit of the Liturgy ; and decided to enact the diammetrical opposite in his presence – perhaps this was less of a liturgy and more a means of provoking confrontational hostility to His Holiness’ agenda in the U.S. ?
Comment by Paul Priest — 17 April 2008 @ 12:07 pmJust a thought ?
I was very disappointed that there were no Latin prayers. This is something that the Holy Father surely had control over. Perhaps expecting people in attendance to respond in Latin would have been too much, but saying the Eucharistic prayer (e.g.) in Latin would have exposed the tens of thousands present and possibly millions of viewers just what is possible.
Comment by vox borealis — 17 April 2008 @ 12:21 pmDisappointment, sadness, humiliation, embarassment, .....now what can we do….they have torn down what was slowly beginning to be built up….... good music for the Holy Sacrafice of the Mass…..we have been set back and we are in trouble….is there any hope….I’m feelin’ mighty low…can anyone shine a light in this.
Comment by Jeanne Hunter — 17 April 2008 @ 12:27 pmPhew! I am not alone! It was absolutely diabolical! I didn’t feel I’d been watching a Mass at all. Was it a variety show or a Billy Graham rally or a bit of both? Dreadful, dreadful cacophonous music – and, as someone above pointed out, Pange Lingua but what a “tune”!
! because it’s true, it did sound more like a variety act…...but before the end of Mass
! Our beloved Holy Father was sitting there in the midst of all this and I suppose he felt obliged to clap too and acknowledge the man.
Comment by Hoka2_99 — 17 April 2008 @ 12:28 pmWaving of arms, warming everyone up! And then Panis Angelicus sung by a man I didn’t recognise [later identified as Placido Domingo], applauded
Now I hardly dare wonder what the Mass at Yankee Stadium is going to be like.
I must watch again my tape of the Marienfeld Mass from WYD Cologne, because I remember that as a rather uplifting experience.
I was afraid to comment on an American forum in case this was simply an American “experience” and I’m so used to European Masses in Saint Peter’s basilica and various beautiful baroque cathedrals…......
but, evidently, this was not the case.
On the other hand, I am increasingy convinced by the arguments of those who say the ordinary form is not fixable…
Comment by Haurietis Aquas — 17 April 2008 @ 12:39 pmI hope Archbishop Wuerl didn’t expect the Holy Father to come back anytime soon.
Comment by Katherine — 17 April 2008 @ 12:39 pmDo we have any reason to believe that Pope Benedict XVI and Monsignor Marini were displeased with today’s Papal Mass?
Comment by Tom — 17 April 2008 @ 12:39 pmI, too, was horrified by the choices for music. It was awful. Perhaps this is shallow of me, but I was also shocked by the female cantor’s apparal. It didn’t look like she woke up thinking, “Gosh, I’m going to be cantoring at a Papal Mass today. Perhaps I should put on something nice.” I’m just saying, if we don’t think something’s a big deal, we dress as though it’s not important.
As for the issue with calling John Paul “the Great,” we should remember that such honorifics belong not to the auspices of the Vatican, the Roman Curia, or any nation. If that were so, do you think that William the Conqueror would have needed to conquer England so that he could get a new nickname? Such titles are bestowed by the people, and if they stick, they stick. It was the people who so-titled Gregory and Leo, not a Vatican summit. Besides, indications are that Benedict agrees: recall his words about our “great, late pope, John Paul.”
Here’s praying that the Mass in NYC is a more solemn celebration and not something akin to Mahoney-fest East Coast!
May God be praised, now, and forever, and forever!
Comment by Ed — 17 April 2008 @ 12:48 pm“No Comments” on the USCCB blog post.
Could the fix be in?
Eh … could be!
Comment by Gerry — 17 April 2008 @ 12:49 pmWhy are so many people surprised at the poor quality of liturgy that transpired today at Nationals Stadium?
1. This is the United States (the so-called “American Church”).
2. We are dealing with a stadium Mass.
3. We are dealing with the Novus Ordo.
Did anybody actually expect quality liturgy to transpire today at Nationals Stadium?
Today’s Mass in question demonstrated again as to why the Traditional latin Mass, compared to the Novus Ordo, is the superior Mass.
The Novus Ordo, even during Papal Masses, can devolve easily into man-centered liturgy.
The Traditional Latin Mass is immune to such nonsense.
Pray that Pope Benedict XVI returns to the Traditional Latin Mass—the Mass that he was ordained to offer.
Pax.
Comment by Tom — 17 April 2008 @ 12:54 pmMy 2 cents to the USCCB blog on what in my mind is as big a travesty as the showcase of “how great we art” that went on earlier today.
To the moderator,
I won’t even comment on the events at the park. I address this to you, or all of you. The blogosphere is afire with the spirit of indignation over your censorship of comments. The catholic faithful who care are incensed and, surprise, you are not operating in a vacuum. It is common knowledge that more than 300 people have commented here and you have made the decision to try and silence them. As I write this there are 0 comments in the public space on this blog. Did you think you would get away with this little manipulation ? The time of people controlling the flow of information and ideas is long gone. Those who care about our church are engaged and active, those who don’t care can’t be bothered. Which of these groups is in ascendancy do you think ?
I believe that the USCCB and it’s minions will be called to task for this little charade.
Don’t expect it to be posted but hope I tweaked someone.
Comment by R.French — 17 April 2008 @ 12:56 pmI went to the USCCB site and posted this simple, unoffensive comment and it didn’t make it past “The Party’s Censor”:
“The Mass was wonderful.
And such lively music.”
Gangsters…
Comment by Miguel — 17 April 2008 @ 12:56 pmMy comment at the USCCB website was not a glowing review either. And was poop-canned. Based on how many postings made it through, it would seem more people are like us than are like them.
Comment by The Rockin Traddy — 17 April 2008 @ 1:01 pmSorry Tom,
You are indeed wrong. There is great surprise because this spectacle put on even in the presence of the Holy Father is NOT because of the Novus Ordo. I celebrate both the Novus Ordo and Ancient Use, and I can assure you nothing close to that garbage is found in either. Incredible that it took place, and also incredible that you disparage the Sacred Liturgy of the Church in either form simply because it’s terribly celebrated. Kyrie, eleison!
Comment by sacredosinaeternum — 17 April 2008 @ 1:03 pmNLM had to close it’s comment box because the rage was boiling!
Comment by Greg Hessel in Arlington Diocese — 17 April 2008 @ 1:03 pmAt the risk of defending the USCCB blog, I’ve noticed that many blogs are directing people to that post. At this point, even a glowing review praising the music to the skies is likely to be held for quite some while in the moderation queue.
Comment by Will — 17 April 2008 @ 1:07 pmJust returned from the papal mass in DC with my stomach in knots. The worst part was after the mass the jumbotron broadcast began interviewing diocesan officials who went into full spin mode. First comment was “Archbishop Wuerl truly gave the world a great gift today.” Unbelievable! They went on in praise of the “multicultural” music that created an “atmosphere of unity” in a “sea of diversity” and was a “celebration of multiculturalism in the Church.” I couldn’t believe the arrogance of the Archdiocese! What about the gift the Holy Father gave us with his presence?! Or the presence of our Lord?! Instead they just filled us with propaganda as we exited on what a great celebration of diversity we just experienced thanks to Archbishop Wuerl.
Despite all this I was truly blessed by the Holy Father and his words today. I pray he won’t have to endure such a spectacle again.
Comment by Tom — 17 April 2008 @ 1:10 pmWhy do assume that the Novus Ordo always means “in the vernacular”?
Comment by RBrown — 17 April 2008 @ 1:11 pmTom – the tragedy is that “quality” – and by this, I mean sacred and beautiful – liturgy most definitely could have been celebrated today. Without a doubt.
Comment by avecrux — 17 April 2008 @ 1:12 pmWhat happened was by choice. It was not necessary.
Please do not use this event as a straw man argument against the Novus Ordo.
Rather – it shows the desperate need to end liturgical abuse.
Not everybody is displeased with today’s Papal Mass.
Pope Benedict XVI and Monsignor Marini knew what to expect.
The Chicago Tribune just posted a article regarding today’s Mass.
“Rev. Jeremiah Boland, pastor of Holy Family Catholic Church on Chicago’s near West Side, thought the mass was a vibrant reflection of American culture.
“I think this being the capital of the country and this being the national mass by its nature, it wanted to reflect the cultural diversity of the United States,” Boland told me by phone as he waited inside the stadium after helping to celebrate mass with the pope. “The mass … was one of the most beautiful I’ve ever been at.”
“The pope is such a prayerful person,” Boland said. “You have a 46,000 people in the stadium. I can’t imagine maintaining a sense of solemnity. He really led the prayer so beautifully … He spoke so much from the heart and directly about things.”
Comment by Tom — 17 April 2008 @ 1:12 pmShould be: Why do you assume that the Novus Ordo always means “in the vernacular”?
Comment by RBrown — 17 April 2008 @ 1:13 pmThis is no joke. I was just watching the Papal Mass pre-recorded on the EWTN website. A coworker behind me (who is not Catholic nor had any idea of what I was watching) asked me if I was watching a sitcom from the 80s. I think that this says it all.
Comment by Michael Garner — 17 April 2008 @ 3:50 pmThis whole spectacle of musical rubbish came with an agenda, and that agenda was to tell the Holy Father that the USSCB is not going to obey him or the Moto Propio, this was totally embarrsing and by the way I cannot get on to the website of the USSCB, does anyone know whats going on there?? Wuerl should be ashamed of himself but of course he is not. And you wonder why the S.S.P.X. and others have a gripe? This time they have a point more than ever it was a disaster, I thought we had gotten over the Broadway shows????? Ave Maria gratia plena
Comment by Mike W. — 17 April 2008 @ 4:54 pmFrom the little I saw of the mass on TV and some of the comments here, I have to wonder whether Abp Wuerl read The Spirit of the Liturgy.
Comment by RBrown — 17 April 2008 @ 4:56 pmSheer and utter horror, this was complete and totally planned with an agenda by Wuerl and Co. it’s saying to our Holy Father we don’t give a ” ” about the Moto Propio and your authority. The “music” if one can call it that was truly ghastly and very, very sad. Ave Maria gratia plena
Comment by Mike W. — 17 April 2008 @ 5:12 pmI have just watched the recording of today’s Mass on EWTN’s website. Like everyone here, I thought the music was awful. Jan Lewis in the crowd spoke of a feeling of reverence and joy in the presence of the Holy Father so maybe there is something to be said for being there.
No one has commented on the quality of the actual singing. I’ve heard some wonderful music in DC at the Shrine of the Immaculate Conception. But this wasn’t it. The cantor had a vibrato that went way out of tune, I don’t want to be unkind, but why was he picked? Unlike some people here, I don’t decry all recent church music; I’ve been edified by charismatic worship as well as plainchant. But the music at today’s mass was just awful – some of it awful because badly sung, some of it awful because it was, er, awful.
Whoever was responsible for the music at this liturgy has preferred to remain anonymous. I wonder why?
Comment by Calleva — 17 April 2008 @ 5:45 pmP-U!
Placido Domingo’s Panis angelicus was good, but sort of a bone tossed to shut the critics up, I fear.
Comment by Lee — 17 April 2008 @ 5:53 pmI have had another thought – maybe today’s liturgy will be an ‘own goal’ for the modernists who thought to inflict it on Our Holy Father. If they thought to get some kind of bitter revenge on him for the motu proprio, etc, it won’t work. Benedict will now see firsthand what the laity have inflicted on them (as RJ Neuhaus said) and it will concentrate his mind wonderfully on what needs to be done to revive the Church in the USA (and the West, it has to be said). Surely the appointment of orthodox bishops will become a matter of urgency.
I agree with Hoka2_99 above – applauding Placido Domingo turned the Sacrifice of the Mass into a show. There were people taking photos of Domingo as he sang – how can this be reverent and prayerful?
I note from ‘Spirit Daily’ that several prominent ‘pro-life Catholics’ (non sequitur) were planning to line up for communion among the huge crowds, in deliberate disobedience to the Holy Father’s ruling on this.
Comment by Calleva — 17 April 2008 @ 5:55 pmTom: The Traditional Latin Mass is immune to such nonsense.
Noooooo…. it is not at all immune to nonsense.
There can be bad music at celebrations of the TLM as well, music so bad it would make the angels flee.
Comment by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf — 17 April 2008 @ 6:23 pmFr. Z wrote: “There can be bad music at celebrations of the TLM as well, music so bad it would make the angels flee.”
Amen to that! A rather colorful monsignor in our diocese would insist that Rubenstein’s “Melody in F,” commonly known as “Welcome sweet springtime, we greet thee in song!” be played at his Sunday Masses. He would also conclude each Tuesday night Novena with “Good Night, Sweet Jesus” at the end of Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament. While this ditty was being sung, Monsignor would personally lay a blue baby blanket over the tabernacle. So, yes, things weren’t always wonderful liturgically in the “good old days.”
Comment by TNCath — 17 April 2008 @ 6:45 pmStanding beside Archbishop Wuerl’s grave after the funeral service, some of his supporters wondered aloud why the archbishop was never elevated to cardinal. In other news…
Comment by peretti — 17 April 2008 @ 6:52 pmA most unfortunate Mass presentation! However, I’m sure it didn’t offend any of our non-Catholic brethearn, as they helped devise it in the first place. It was particularly suprising to hear even Pope Benedict use the words “for all” at the consecrtion of the wine, instead of “for many”, which last year he recommended be used. Well, maybe we’ll be pleasantly surprised and see the extraordinary form of the Mass, repleat with Gregorian Chant, tomorrow when Pope benedict says a mass in New York. But, I won’t hold my breath!
Comment by Michael Christensen — 17 April 2008 @ 7:26 pmSo much for the thus vaunted “Marshall Plan” for the church – this does not really exist. It is business as usual. It is about time people put the blame for shoddy un-Catholic liturgy where it belongs – indeed, with the hierarchy and their hand-picked liturgical organisers. It beggars belief that anyone can believe otherwise. To celebrate it is to consent to it. It is time for large dose of reality. The Neo-Cats are being courted into the church as well: their liturgy or their liturgy, that is the choice they give the church. There needs to be more than just a change of processional cross and a few dalmatics to restore Catholicism to the modern church and The Holy Mass in Latin.
Comment by LeonG — 17 April 2008 @ 7:52 pmRe: “Marshal Plan” for the liturgy
It really comes down to the logistics.
How to get all those ‘trained liturgists’ and ‘music ministers’ (with signed certificates!) to give up their OCP hymnals without arming the Swiss Guard and preparing the racks and thumbscrews from the Spanish Inquisition?
Comment by shana sfo — 17 April 2008 @ 8:51 pmThis is what I wrote on the USCCB blog:
The music was truly awful, insulting to the Holy Father and embarassing to Catholics who actually come to pray at Holy Mass.
If anyone was seeking to prove how spiritually empty such “performances” are, to illustrate how devoid of awe, reverence, and true adoration of God these “pieces” are, and how people of faith are truly discouraged to actually pray during this type of discordant circus…(as we have all tried to manage for years)…. well done.
If anyone was hoping to illustrate to the Holy Father and the world what we have been suffering these past years from the liturgists from hell…. well done.
These points were clearly illustrated as will be the response of those of us who have barely survived the devastion of the liturgy and vote “NO” to this “expression of our cultural diversity.”
I believe we express our unity in diversity quite clearly with the universal language of prayer in Latin.
By the way, I am not a pre-Vatican II Catholic. I have been Catholic for 20 years this May. I will now seek to attend TLM. I hope to learn the Divine Office in Latin. I am not the only one.
Enough of this nonsense.
Comment by Coletta — 17 April 2008 @ 9:27 pmImmaculatae
Our Holy Father came with the message of hope, and yet “hopeless” is all I can say about the music employed in the papal mass. If they can do this without any shame in front of our Holy Father whom they know very clearly is no friend of this senseless novelty, then is there anything or anyone who can stop them? No, I see no hope.
Comment by Theodorus — 17 April 2008 @ 9:32 pmIf we need to do the Inqusition in order to get rid of this mess, I’m on board for being lead prosecutor…
The Holy Father knows what we go trough on a weekly basis…maybe in a surprize anouncement he’s going to ban OCP and all this mess. Ave Maria gratia plena, ora pro nobis.
Comment by Joe of St. ThĂ©rèse — 18 April 2008 @ 12:21 amCan I be considered for turning the thumbscrews please? It would help me with my anger management.
I am also a good carpenter and could build a rack if required.
Comment by Gregory the OK — 18 April 2008 @ 12:58 amApparently the music planners thought they could justify any piece of trashy music by slapping a few words of Latin on it.
It’s like the pretense of heretical theologians who think they can fool simple people by dropping a few Latin phrases.
The problem with today’s Mass music is not the lack of Latin, but the lack of beauty and dignity. If the whole thing had been in English and Spanish, but with decent music, I’d be perfectly willing to give credit where it’s due.
Comment by RC — 18 April 2008 @ 1:59 amThe good thing is that the Sunday Mass at Yankee Stadium will be a huge contrast, and that it’s the Mass most working people are likely to watch.
Comment by Maureen — 18 April 2008 @ 5:47 amI was banging nails. Thank GOD-JESUS CHRIST-Scrapped my hands, and blistered them abit. Comes with the craft of wood, and mortar. That’s the music I enjoy. At Sacrifice of the Mass-Latin-Gregorian, its Sacred, and of JESUS CHRIST!
Comment by rr — 18 April 2008 @ 6:04 amI had to turn the music off. Compared to the beautiful celebration of vespers in the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception, it was unrecognisable. However I do feel we need to bear in mind it was still the mass and it was still the pope celebrating it.
I felt that the Archbishop was trying to give glory to America rather than to God… Another thing that seems to have been forgotten.
The Sky News correspondent asked a priest in the UK, how come so many people have to be involved… The priest replied, ‘they don’t, they just want to say I did a reading at the Papal Mass’. It should be us saying, I wanted to be and pray with the Pope in his mass.
Comment by John Paul Ritchie — 18 April 2008 @ 6:08 amThe Bishops’ news site is so unbelievably slanted. I had read many of the websites about the Pope’s visit. Many of them include his messages. Read the CNS and see if you notice a different message. Especially what they say the Pope is saying(not true) to Catholic college educators/theologians etc. regarding truth and reason. (They say it backwards.)
Comment by Coreen Herrick — 18 April 2008 @ 7:15 amWe can only “hope” and pray that this gives the Holy Father renewed enthusiasm and desire for the reform of the Sacred Liturgy!
Comment by Fr. Jay Finelli — 18 April 2008 @ 8:32 amHi Father. Love the blog. Just had to add my two cents.
Very disappointed in the Mass. Terrible music. I also really don’t like it when languages other than English
Comment by Emil Berbakov — 18 April 2008 @ 8:39 amare used in American N.O. liturgy. Spanish is dominant now, but it won’t be forever. Soon it will be Tagalog,
Creole, Hindi…How many differnet languages do we have to know in order to attend Mass? And the folks that come
up with theses ideas get their pants in a bunch about Latin!
I was disappointed in what transpired yesterday, but not really all that surprised. After living in Durham, NC, for a few years, I’ve become so accustomed to liturgical aberrations and defective music that almost nothing shocks me anymore. I hope beyond hope that the NLM is correct in prophesying that yesterday signals the end of an era, but I certainly wouldn’t wager money on that possibility. We have to remember that an entire generation of Catholics has been formed within this liturgical context, to say nothing of the kind of catechesis they have had to endure. Although there is a resurgence of interest in tradition among younger Catholics, the vast majority don’t even seem to recognize that there’s a problem. Many of the faithful interviewed after yesterday’s Mass spoke glowingly of the beauty and cultural richness of what took place. And, most of the music directors that I’ve interacted with actually want to push for more liturgical experimentation, not less. Let’s be honest: the cat was let out of the bag a long time ago, and it’s going to be a long time coming before we see significant, widespread changes on this front.
Pope Benedict has given us reason to hope, but it doesn’t seem like he’s ready to adopt a heavy handed approach on the matter. In fact, it seems to me like the ball is in our court now. The hierarchy has released a whole slew of documents on sacred liturgy and sacred music. We’ve all read Tra le Sollecitudini and Musicae Sacrae. We’re all familiar with Ratzinger’s many thoughts on the subject. Sacramentum Caritatis… Redemptionis Sacramentum… the list goes on and on. The problem is not with magisterial teaching; it’s with the way so many priests and lay faithful interpret it, ignore it, or outright defy it. For this reason, I’ve started to see why there’s a group of traditionalists who refer to themselves as “the remnant.” We are the remnant. I’m not ready to give up on the Novus Ordo, or anything extreme like that, but much of what goes on in American parishes today is simply not authentically Catholic. Therefore, it’s up to us, who realize what’s at stake, to do all that we can to preserve the faith, to fight for tradition, and to pass it on to the next generation. Thankfully, our Holy Father has empowered us to do so. We can’t stop modernists and revisionists from perpetuating spectacles like we witnessed yesterday, but we can make a difference on the ground wherever we might find ourselves, asking God to multiply the fruits of our humble work, and asking for the Blessed Virgin Mary, our Mother and Queen, to intercede on our behalf. But, this is a long battle ahead of us, and one not likely to be resolved in our lifetime.
On a different note, I think we have to stop worrying about what the SSPX crowd is doing and saying. I long for the day when we are reunited in full communion with these traditionalists, but the fact of the matter is that they have broken communion with the Holy See. For those of us who truly care about the Catholic Church, this path is simply not available to us. Total fidelity to the Vicar of Christ is not something tangential, but at the very heart of the Catholic faith. While observing the fallout from yesterday’s Mass, I couldn’t help but think that the SSPX is indirectly responsible for the mess that we’re in. Certainly, I understand their disgust at certain post-conciliar developments, but when they took the schismatic route their all-important witness to the Church was lost. Over the last few decades, we absolutely needed these traditionalists in the fold to serve as a counter-balance the “progressive” wing of the Catholic Church. When Lefebvre and his followers left, they gave the impression that the Catholic life can be lived outside of communion with the Bishop of Rome. What is needed in our historical moment, however, is not a weakening or questioning of the Petrine ministry, but a full-flowering of this ministry. God, in his providence, has gifted us with a Pontiff who is empowering faithful Catholics everywhere to restore the Divine Liturgy to its full glory and prominence, and yet the SSPXers can’t take full part in this restoration b/c they have chosen schism over reform. Let’s stop wringing our hands over what SSPXers may be thinking or saying about us. We have been called to something much higher. We have been called to preach the Gospel in its totality to all peoples through total obedience to the Supreme Pontiff, Christ’s Vicar on earth.
Comment by RMarr — 18 April 2008 @ 8:55 amFr. Blake – just one word comes to mind. “stupid.”
Mark shea? A blithering idiot.
I had expected a “Holy Show” from Bp. Donna Girl. He never disappoints.
Comment by mike c — 18 April 2008 @ 9:10 amThe Marshall Plan in not merely liturgical. It is based on the principle that Christian Revelation is unique (cf the next Syndod of Bishops). As that principle begins to be re-established, multi-culturalism will begin to wither. As multi-culturalism begins to decrease, the inclination to Latin liturgy and Gregorian Chant will begin to increase (He must increase, but I must decrease).
Comment by RBrown — 18 April 2008 @ 9:11 amI’ve read several people on the blogosphere say that they hope that New York learns its lesson from the spectacle in DC. But, the odds are that a whole lot can’t be done to change it at this point. So, I anticipate more of the same.
Let’s hope I’m wrong.
Comment by phatcatholic — 18 April 2008 @ 9:26 amI was struck with how self-effacing the pope was yesterday: All the applause, cameras, big altar—and there was Pope Benedict, his face absorbed in reflective prayer… It was obviously not “about him” in his mind, judging from his whole comportment. On the other hand, one did get the feeling of swagger and working the crowd from those (bishops and otherwise) around the pope and involved in reading, singing, welcoming… I think the note the Pope struck was true, and will sound out longer than the others ultimately. He is a beautiful person.
Comment by Beth — 18 April 2008 @ 9:26 amGreat point, Beth!
Comment by phatcatholic — 18 April 2008 @ 9:29 amNo matter how you slice it, this is a big win for the Traditional Latin Mass. More people will become frustrated with the Novus Ordo, and perhaps give up on it, and perhaps it will motivate the Holy Father to support it more.
Comment by James DePrisco — 18 April 2008 @ 9:34 amMark Shea is part of “Generation Narcissus.” He’s said on his blog that he doesn’t care for liturgical tradition. He just wants his “blocking.” Others affiliated with him are celebrating the “joy” of the Mass at Nationals Stadium, the “first encounter” many with have with Catholicism. Now that’s a damn shame (to quote Harry Truman). Not dignity, not contemplation, but the worst of the contemporary world. That’s what the Archdiocese of Washington is offering those who might want to become Catholics.
Comment by Janice — 18 April 2008 @ 9:37 amI have been watching “The Tudors” on Showtime. I was forcibly struck both watching that horrible display in Washington, but even more so learning that Nancy Pelosi et.al. intended to present themselves for Communion, that we are in fact living a situation similar to that in Tudor England when Henry demanded fealty from the English clergy – and got it. He defied Rome; he won. We “American Catholics” appear to be doing something very similar. It’s horrible, and demoralizing.
When I confess and promise to “avoid the near occasion of sin,” what if the “near occasion of sin” is Sunday at my N.O. church, with its preening, self-congratulatory, anything-goes approach to the Mass?
Comment by Nancv — 18 April 2008 @ 9:43 amCriticism is one thing, but uncharity is quite another. The only thing that calling Fr. Blake “stupid” or Mark Shea an “idiot” does is make enemies of those who would otherwise be your allies.
Comment by dcs — 18 April 2008 @ 9:43 amMichael Christensen said: It was particularly suprising to hear even Pope Benedict use the words “for all” at the consecrtion of the wine, instead of “for many”, which last year he recommended be used.
You’re quite mistaken. Pope Benedict did not recommend that “for many” be used instead of “for all.” Rather, he has directed that in the new English translation now being prepared, “pro multis” should be correctly translated as “for many.” But he has issued no directive or even recommendation that the currently-approved English mistranslation “for all” be replaced with “for many” in the English Mass texts now in use. If he had taken it upon himself to substitute “for all” with “for many” yesterday, he’d have given the ad-libbers and creative liturgy rewriters aid and comfort.
Comment by JP — 18 April 2008 @ 10:07 amThis morning at Mass, one of our priests described the experience of hearing confessions at the stadium before the Papal Mass. He said that many of the penitents were making their first confessions in 20 or 30 years, and that the look of joy on their faces as they left the makeshift confessionals was very moving, and probably led more individuals back to the sacrament. My son attended the Mass along with other young men from their school, and described the atmosphere as very reverent and quiet once the Mass began. He and his classmates had shed their jackets, loosened their ties, and rolled up their shirt sleeves upon arrival, but all of them instinctively put their jackets back on when Mass began. Like most commenters here, they didn’t care much for the music, but still had a prayerful experience that they will never forget.
Comment by Eileen — 18 April 2008 @ 10:33 amThe cultural populism behind the selection of music for yesterday’s Mass is just one example of the bigger problem: the fear that many Catholics have of offending and alienating people with the teachings and traditions of the Church. You think that Gregorian Chant is strange? Well, guess what, it was always strange. As Martin Mosebach has noted, it was strange even to Charlemagne and Aquinas. The Gospel is strange, and Christianity is strange.
The issue is not the strangeness of the Church’s musical tradition but whether this strangeness is worth it. Does it compel us to change ourselves in ways that are appropriate to the liturgy? Some of the greatest minds of the Church, including the Holy Father, have answered this question in the affirmative. When will the people with the power to change things start taking their arguments seriously?
17th century Jesuit