Posted on 07/08/2002 9:20:41 PM PDT by narses
Where, pray tell, did I even mention the SSPX?You didnt. Does that mean I cant ask the question, or cant bring it up? Are you sympathetic the SSPX?
Which Bishop or group is the parish you attend affiliated with?
You dont have to answer, of course, but I will ask things from time to time. This is a discussion.
patent +AMDG
Is that like the living and breathing Constitution the liberals talk about? ;-)
The Council of Trent was a dogmatic council and the ideas of St. Thomas Aquinas have defended the Catholic faith from many attacks over the centuries. It is true that St. Thomas had some ideas that were inaccurate given the scientific knowledge we have today. But his Summa Theologica overall is a great defense of the faith. One of the Modernists' tactics has been to not teach Aquinas in the seminaries.
Pope St. Pius X, in his encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis condemns Modernism and illustrates its errors. I still stand by my statement that given a choice between the Council of Trent or St. Thomas Aquinas vs. something proposed by a Modernist (read heretic), I will follow the Council of Trent or St. Thomas Aquinas. We are discussing Communion in the hand, not predestination or dancing at weddings. AFAIK, the "modernism in the 1400's" of which you speak is not the same Modernism of which I speak.
Communion in the hand is a discipline associated with the New Mass. As Fr. Baker, SJ said at the first Tridentine Mass at Holy Rosary Church in many years, one can't mix rites and in the Tridentine Rite during Communion one kneels and receives on the tongue. Am I not allowed to be critical of a discipline? I am critical of it not because it is associated with the New Mass, but because I see it as a potential for much mischief (read sacrilege). I am not questioning the intent of the vast majority of communicants who receive Communion in the hand, but rather those who saw this as an opportunity to more easily desecrate the Real Presence.
I had the privilege of attending mass at a catholic church on the island of Maui, 12 years ago. The mass is referred to as the Hawaiian Mass (not hula mass). The female members of the choir wore beautiful dresses, made from local fabrics with leis around their necks. Sorry, no grass skirts with coconut cups.
The choir sang from the choir loft which is in the rear of the church. One would have to do an about face to actually see them. They say certain prayers and sing some hymns, in their native tongue of Samoan, and will often use "sacred gesture". This is done after Communion, in a very reverential manner.
Cynthia Kupau of Maryknoll High School demonstrates hula in worship as she expresses the "Our Father" prayer, using sacred gesture.
"The first Christians here, the Calvinists, made us feel shame. They believe that the hula is lascivious, it doesn't belong in the house of the Lord."
Kim said: "Theology is the explanation of faith coming out of a cultural context. So if you get theology out of Western Europe ... into a Pacific Island culture, it is not going to fully translate." People who think never the twain shall meet might reflect on the fact that "Jesus was born into a cultural context: He was a Semitic Jew, not a European."
Kim has discussed liturgical use of hula with purists who object that "Hawaiian culture is being taken out of context. They are afraid that Hawaiian culture is going to be usurped, be taken over by Christianity. A lot of Hawaiians blame Christians for the overthrow of the queen, so for them it is offensive.
"Yes, if we are Christian, we only believe in one God," Kim said. "So do I believe in Pele? Not as a goddess. She is an ancestor." A Christian Hawaiian need not discount beliefs in gods and aumakua, he said. "We could look at them, we can see aspects of them in the one true God.
A lot of us "Americans" DON'T WANT a "folk Mass." There's a basic problem with the line of reasoning that just because there is nothing essentially or substantially wrong with something, that, therefore, it must happen if a minority faction controlling the "liturgy committee" or "music ministry" decide so. Or even if the pastor has outrageous bad taste, all of the sudden the Mass becomes the liturgical equivalent of Godspell, Hair, or Jesus Christ, Superstar. A lot of Catholic Americans do not culturally identify with counter-cultural tendencies, with New Agey folk music, or this "Go Tell It on the Mountain" hand-clapping, giddy revivalism overtaking some parishes. If people want to become Baptists or Church of the Happy Consciousness types worshipping that way, there are plenty of non-Catholic denominations that cater to those tastes.
You remember those, too. It may very well be the case that bad taste in music, art, or vestments do not alter the validity of the sacraments. That's all very well and good. That much Catholic theology...I do understand. But, I mean, really, just because the Mass remains valid EVEN IF the priest wears purple bellbottoms, that's no reason to put us all through the ordeal. Common sense and good taste may not alter the validity or lack thereof of the Mass, but they are a great comfort to see in Catholic priests and laity.
Bless me father, for I have spin ...
Okay, what about the Black Catholic liturgical music? Like the Hawaiians, the African Black Catholics have "inculturated" the mass throughout Africa.
Here in America, it is interesting to note that there are 20 million black catholics (US, Haiti, Dominican Republic)and more than 200 million worldwide.
Consider the following comments by Elliot Wimbush, a master cantor and musician.
Catholic liturgical music has been criticized for being so slow to change or welcome different elements or song writing structures. Its not like Methodist services where folks have been listening to Amy Grant for over 10 years.
WIMBUSH: Because Vatican documents are so specific as to what music should or shouldnt sound like in the context of liturgy, it really is confining.
In a book Im working on called "Breaking the Bonds of Liturgy" talks about how we should use liturgy as a platform to praise, not as the cage in which we put it. A lot of the things that we do in liturgy dont lend themselves to the free expression of praise.
If we are doing a song for the offertory in some parishes, once the priest washes his hands, I dont care where you are in the song, its over. You stop. But if youre doing a song that is beginning to resonate and the assembly is really beginning to sing, we need to let them sing.
If I understand liturgy correctly, and I think I do, liturgy is about the work of the people and about the prayer of the people being united in body. Thats what happens in the Mass. So anything we can do to promote it, to encourage it, to nurture it, to pull it out, then thats what we need to do. Anything that minimizes it, that truncates it for the sake of scheduling, is something we need to revisit.
To keep our distinct religious traditions alive, the use of Kente cloth, gospel music, and African drumbeats are not sufficient. These external material signs of culture must be transformed into sacraments of a deeper consciousness of our collective sojourn and communion with God and one another, which is at the root of our distinct African American spirituality.
As Catholic Christian followers of Christ each of us is called to engage in the evangelizing and liberating mission of the Catholic Church as it seeks to transform itself and in a manner which conforms with Jesus' preaching of the reign of God. In other words "We are summoned by the Holy Spirit and called to New Life".
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.