Vatican Mass - Today
  • miacoyne
    Posts: 1,805
    I deeply regret to see this.
  • melofluentmelofluent
    Posts: 4,160
    Nothing new under the post Tra le sollecitudini era's sun, now is there? And instead of Bartolucci Screamers there are Ramirez gritos. C'est la vie.
    How can one cope, or accept this emerging reality that is likely to stay for another hundred years, as S. Pio's motu was ignored after 1903 for all intents and purposes?
    For every "Adios Reina de Cielo" make sure an Ave Maria is chanted. Just even the scales, justify it. We can, as DoM's do that at the least.
    Thanked by 1JulieColl
  • From the various camera shots, it looks like the only "happy" ones are the performers!
    Thanked by 1ClergetKubisz
  • JulieCollJulieColl
    Posts: 2,465
    Ay caramba!
  • Really!?!
    500 x 282 - 497K
    Thanked by 1ryand
  • matthewjmatthewj
    Posts: 2,694
    We have to balance this out and say much has improved and some parts of the Mass yesterday were better than they would have been 12 years ago.

    The Alleluia before the Gospel was quite nice, the Gospel was chanted well (by a Phoenix Seminarian), the Introit was sung, some of the choral singing was very good.

    Watch the whole Mass and I think you'll be pleasantly surprised.
  • SalieriSalieri
    Posts: 3,177
    No, there is nothing that excuses this.
  • Good Lord.
  • ryandryand
    Posts: 1,640
    Donald Trump.
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,160
    For those unfamiliar with this work, Misa criolla is a 1964 setting of Mass texts by Argentine composer Ariel Ramirez; thus it is from the other end of Latin America than Our Lady of Guadalupe. It's popular as a concert work. Pope Francis is reported to like it enough to give CDs of it as gifts.

    The musical styles for the various "movements" are taken from regional dance forms. The work is 50 years old, and chosen because of that anniversary. It's IMHO somewhat dated, and not suited for liturgical use. Because of its age, it's possible that its texts may not be precisely those approved.

    On the beneficial side, its performance at St. Peter's Basilica reminds us that it is completely licit at times to present a Mass ordinary setting which includes no congregational singing.
  • And maybe not only not congregational, but from a previously authorized translation, like 1965 that avoids the poetic and rhythmic problems inherent in the new ICEL translation?!
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,500
    I was kinda surprised that that lady didn't bust out into some alto version of some Whitney Houston number at Communion: And aiii-yiy-yiy-yiy will always love you hoo hoo hoo...
  • Liam
    Posts: 4,945
    "On the beneficial side, its performance at St. Peter's Basilica reminds us that it is completely licit at times to present a Mass ordinary setting which includes no congregational singing."

    Um, no it doesn't. It merely reminds us that illicit practices occur even at St Peter's. The Roman way very unlike the Anglospheric way in this regard: the Roman way doesn't assume 100% congruence of norms with with reality, but by the same token does not thereby modify the norm. This drives people raised in an Anglospheric legal culture up the wall.
    Thanked by 1francis
  • ronkrisman
    Posts: 1,388
    @Steve Collins, You lost me, bro. What does ICEL have to do with Spanish?
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • With dated music. With outdated translations. Spanish has problems also - the use of some sort of song that includes some sort of "Glory to God" but that was NOT the "Gloria". This happened regularly in Houston. My point is that once authorized translations do not contain any heresy, but we are never again allowed to use them because ICEL rules the roost, AND collects on their copyrights, therefore old stuff makes them no profit. And we Anglophones are stuck with still faulty (musically and poetically) translations.
    Thanked by 2Gavin francis
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,160
    Steve, are you wishing that you could keep using some Mass settings with the old ICEL texts? Would that be for the congregation?

    It's hard enough for us -- at least, for me -- to get used to saying the new version. I can only imagine that continuing to sing the old version would complicate things.
  • I'm not talking about the 1970, totally flawed translation of the Gloria, but the first translation we used, in the interim from 1965 to 1972. It used the translation from the RH page of our personal Missals, and was set to numerous musical settings, some new, some old, some even Gregorian chant. Composers were pressured into providing this music as quickly as possible so that the US Bishops could eliminate Latin as quickly as possible. THAT is the translation of the Gloria that I want available. Saying the new ICEL version is much easier that singing it! We used the Gloria XV for about 6 months when it first came out. It's horrible! Everyone hated it. We won't use it ever again. In a few years we might teach the congregation the original Latin Gloria XV, but not until they've lost the bad taste in their mouths and ears.
  • The new translation, but for an occasional thee, thou and ghost, is hardly different from that of Anglican usage. What is wrong with it? Nothing! We should be dancing in the aisles over finally having got a translation that preserved the literary content and form of the Latin, instead of that horribly savaged version that was in use until several years ago. Ditto Sanctus. One admits readily that the syllabification and musical underlay as given in the missal are less than artful. Fr Columba's work, including especially the creed, is far superior. Discovering why his work was turned down would be but another adventure into the cruel labyrinth of amateurish institutional mediocrity that is Catholic liturgydom. Can you clarify, Steve? Perhaps I'm misunderstanding your point.

    As for the travesty at the head of this conversation, it is astounding, dumbfounding, that anyone would or could have the brazen barbarity to enter such precincts and act as these people acted without any sign of having been profoundly embarrased to do so. I've been thinking all day of what the Jews were putting up with ere Judas Maccabeus entered the scene. Perhaps we need such a man in Rome. Wait... we had one... his name was Benedict... and they pilloried him. It is as if our very holy of holies has been desecrated.
    Thanked by 2Gavin francis
  • Sacred music, being a complementary part of the solemn liturgy, participates in the general scope of the liturgy, which is the glory of God and the sanctification and edification of the faithful. It contributes to the decorum and the splendor of the ecclesiastical ceremonies, and since its principal office is to clothe with suitable melody the liturgical text proposed for the understanding of the faithful, its proper aim is to add greater efficacy to the text, in order that through it the faithful may be the more easily moved to devotion and better disposed for the reception of the fruits of grace belonging to the celebration of the most holy mysteries. 2. Sacred music should consequently possess, in the highest degree, the qualities proper to the liturgy, and in particular sanctity and goodness of form, which will spontaneously produce the final quality of universality. It must be holy, and must, therefore, exclude all profanity not only in itself, but in the manner in which it is presented by those who execute it. It must be true art, for otherwise it will be impossible for it to exercise on the minds of those who listen to it that efficacy which the Church aims at obtaining in admitting into her liturgy the art of musical sounds. But it must, at the same time, be universal in the sense that while every nation is permitted to admit into its ecclesiastical compositions those special forms which may be said to constitute its native music, still these forms must be subordinated in such a manner to the general characteristics of sacred music that nobody of any nation may receive an impression other than good on hearing them.


    On these grounds Gregorian Chant has always been regarded as the supreme model for sacred music, so that it is fully legitimate to lay down the following rule: the more closely a composition for church approaches in its movement, inspiration and savor the Gregorian form, the more sacred and liturgical it becomes; and the more out of harmony it is with that supreme model, the less worthy it is of the temple.


    5. The Church has always recognized and favored the progress of the arts, admitting to the service of religion everything good and beautiful discovered by genius in the course of ages -- always, however, with due regard to the liturgical laws. Consequently modern music is also admitted to the Church, since it, too, furnishes compositions of such excellence, sobriety and gravity, that they are in no way unworthy of the liturgical functions. Still, since modern music has risen mainly to serve profane uses, greater care must be taken with regard to it, in order that the musical compositions of modern style which are admitted in the Church may contain nothing profane, be free from reminiscences of motifs adopted in the theaters, and be not fashioned even in their external forms after the manner of profane pieces. 6. Among the different kinds of modern music, that which appears less suitable for accompanying the functions of public worship is the theatrical style, which was in the greatest vogue, especially in Italy, during the last century. This of its very nature is diametrically opposed to Gregorian Chant and classic polyphony, and therefore to the most important law of all good sacred music. Besides the intrinsic structure, the rhythm and what is known as the conventionalism of this style adapt themselves but badly to the requirements of true liturgical music.


    The employment of the piano is forbidden in church, as is also that of noisy or frivolous instruments such as drums, cymbals, bells and the like. 20. It is strictly forbidden to have bands play in church, and only in special cases with the consent of the Ordinary will it be permissible to admit wind instruments, limited in number, judiciously used, and proportioned to the size of the placeprovided the composition and accompaniment be written in grave and suitable style, and conform in all respects to that proper to the organ.




    Pope Pius X, Tra le sollecitudini
    courtesy of www.adoremus.org
    Thanked by 1M. Jackson Osborn
  • melofluentmelofluent
    Posts: 4,160
    Well, uh, thanks Steve, for the citation. But you, and many irate here, grossly missed my point, to which the ever-wise Liam alluded- there is nothing new under the sun.

    Let me ask: besides me, has anyone else programmed the anon "Gaudete" that doubtless has Iberian blood running full through its veins, for tomorrow's Introit. If you have, but think it irrelevent to the DNA of Ramirez's piece, of which I have never programmed in any situation, think again.

    Also consider that carping here solves nothing.
    As I said earlier, do what you can when you can. I did our in-law's grandmother's (counterpart to my wife) funeral in Long Beach this morning. Prior to that, another lady's funeral was to proceed but had no music. I let the chapel people know that I was available, which at the last minute they accepted. Spanish language. But I chanted the SEP Introit, the Spanish verses of "Open my eyes" and "Amen: El Cuerpo de Cristo" and in Latin, "in Paradisum" for total strangers.

    That is what matters, not yet another "Event Mass" for some PC raison d'etre. Stop your yammering, and keep on hammering.
    Thanked by 1noel jones, aago
  • matthewjmatthewj
    Posts: 2,694
    Let me ask: besides me, has anyone else programmed the anon "Gaudete" that doubtless has Iberian blood running full through its veins, for tomorrow's Introit.


    Why would people use a Christmas piece for an Advent Introit?
  • Don't you think he means The Introit, Gaudete, not the mediaeval carol? The introit, too, is by Anonymous.
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • In Latin America this mass is the equivalent (Sorry, I cannot think of a better analogy) of the musical Jesus Christ Super Star. Latin Americans know this is not liturgical music. The fact that it CAN be used liturgically (I did not use the word "Should" but "Can) shows the great differences between a catholic nation a protestant nation. The reaction in this forum is proof of that.
    Thanked by 1BruceL
  • matthewjmatthewj
    Posts: 2,694
    Don't you think he means The Introit, Gaudete, not the mediaeval carol? The introit, too, is by Anonymous.


    It doesn't make sense to ponder whether or not anyone has ever programmed the proper Introit of a specific Sunday.
  • melofluentmelofluent
    Posts: 4,160
    Sorry, MJM, I had just come off a four hour drive from Long Beach, and misspoke the hymn for the Introit, my bad. The musicological point stands, though.
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    How can one cope, or accept this emerging reality that is likely to stay for another hundred years
    Don't worry... we are about to drive off the cliff... and heaven will not put up with this beyond a very short time.

    CORRECTION:

    Don't worry... but be very concerned about what is to befall us. Pray the rosary.
  • Someday a person is going to legally change their name to Anonymous and then start collecting overdue copyright fees.
    Thanked by 2bonniebede BruceL
  • JulieCollJulieColl
    Posts: 2,465
    . . . and this fitting postscript to the festive Misa Criolla at St. Peter's: a priest in the Diocese of Puglia leads a troupe of young people in the chicken dance at his Gaudete Sunday Mass.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CwDIBIxVvfU
  • Quomodo sedet solo civitas..... (From the Lamentations of Jeremiah)
  • Just thought I would let you know - in case you have not finished your Christmas shopping that you can now get this, to accompany those CD's of the Missa Criolla.

    remember this guy?
  • ronkrisman
    Posts: 1,388
    Did everyone forget this?

    http://youtu.be/0622EHp7LcQ
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    jeezzzzzzz... war stories that never loose their ill effects.
  • bhcordovabhcordova
    Posts: 1,152
    As a Hispanic, I find the "Mexican Word of the Day" post insulting and highly inappropriate. Is such bigotry routinely allowed on this site?
  • Is such bigotry routinely allowed on this site?


    No, it isn't. The offending comment had nothing to do with the liturgical appropriateness of Misa criolla and should have been removed.
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,160
    Yes, that was pretty bad. Sorry I didn't remove it sooner.
    Thanked by 2bhcordova BruceL
  • ryandryand
    Posts: 1,640
    Donald.
  • ryandryand
    Posts: 1,640
    Trump.