How long will we accept mediocrity or worse?
  • PaixGioiaAmorPaixGioiaAmor
    Posts: 1,473
    Well it sounds like the creature that you are dealing with is similar to my former parish.

    They believed that the Church is truly a democracy, and that the power of ORGANIZING and demonstrating for change could be and would be effective.

    In short, this might just be a place to leave.
    Thanked by 1Wendi
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,451
    The more people comment on this thread, the more I wonder...

    Who is this "WE" that the title speaks of?

    Most of the people around here are not just unaccepting of mediocrity, they are actively working on bringing excellence wherever they are able.

    What's more - even the people (here, elsewhere) who promote or allow [what some person might consider] mediocrity almost certainly don't think that what they are doing/experiencing is "mediocre."
    (This is not to excuse crappiness or argue for relativism and subjective taste. I'm just stating a fact about how people are: People who are incompetent specifically do not know that they are incompetent.)

    So - while I'm all for exploring cultural trends in the Church, and being critical of whatever needs to be criticized - I guess I don't understand the point of suggesting that somehow the tiny handful of dedicated practitioners here aren't doing enough.
    Thanked by 2CHGiffen Andrew Motyka
  • donr
    Posts: 971
    Slow and steady is the right method. People appreciate an explanation or reasoning behind what, why and who.
    Every time I make a change; say from Regina Coeli to Salve Regina I tell them why I'm making the change and what the translation is. Most people don't like change and don't like things they don't understand. So if you make the change slowly and help them understand you will have a better turn out.
    There will always be people who complain its part of our nature.
    I have people complain that I am not going fast enough and some who think I'm going to fast. But most just accept it.
    The proof is in the pudding -
    There are 5 Masses each Weekend. I only do the 8AM mass. It is by far our most populated Mass.
    The others are attended well but the 8AM is the best attended.
    Now that may because people like to attend early so they can get other things done on a Sunday, but I certainly have not pushed any to other Masses.
    I have also started to notice more traditional hymns at the other Masses (which used to be all happy clappy).
  • melofluentmelofluent
    Posts: 4,160
    TM24, don't be sorry for not knowing what MAY WE PRAISE YOU "is." But, understand the oldest of my saws: don't classify music by extraneous associations, that's called prejudice.
    When did you do that? By linking the concept of "what constitutes sacred music?" with another open ended term, "glory and praise." MAY WE PRAISE YOU is essentially a choral anthem written by John Foley of the SLJ's that is extremely sacred, beautiful and universal. There are lots, literally lots of such works that many of "our" people put under the G&P tent, even tho' that particular hymnal and its contents had its sundown quite a while back.
    The point is- your example of "putting a smattering of 'sacred music' mixed in with G&P" doesn't mean a thing if the director doesn't KNOW the breadth of repertoire from all quarters reasonably and thoroughly.
    I'm convinced that if many more of us would apply ourselves to that process, fewer of us would bounce from job to job, continually having the same conflicts with pastors and parishioners over and over again. Cookie cutter liturgy isn't always the ideal solution for all parish situations.
  • PaixGioiaAmorPaixGioiaAmor
    Posts: 1,473
    Melo,

    I agree with you that one could do much, MUCH worse than "May We Praise You." I'd willingly play that and don't see any real problem with it.

    But in my own opinion, which is just that, I believe you are overstating its case a bit. I'm not sure I'd go as far as "Sacred, beautiful, and Universal." Would you put it on par with Palestrina's "Sicut Cervus?"

    Sorry, but I'd label it "Adequate, ok, and functional."
  • teachermom24
    Posts: 327
    At least if you explain why, and just do what needs to be done to restore the liturgy, those who really are concerned about growing in holiness will have that opportunity. Those who just want to be mad about it will be no matter what method you choose.


    Precisely! Just as good parents guide their children. I do not waste my time listening to whining and complaining about what I have said will be done in our home. I don't introduce the right way to do things (cleaning, school work, home schedules, etc) slowly. Boom! Here it is kids. I will explain what is happening, why the change is needed and expect everyone to comply. Unless someone can come up with a good reason why this should not be implemented (NOT "I don't like it"), it starts immediately. Where instruction is needed, it's given.

    There's a reason the priest is called "Father".
    Thanked by 5irishtenor francis Wendi ClergetKubisz Jenny
  • melofluentmelofluent
    Posts: 4,160
    But in my own opinion, which is just that, I believe you are overstating its case a bit. I'm not sure I'd go as far as "Sacred, beautiful, and Universal." Would you put it on par with Palestrina's "Sicut Cervus?"

    PGA, at least you make a qualitative argument. But I stand by my point that wholesale and categorical dismissal of guilt by association ought be rejected by catholic artists. No, MWPY's charisms aren't the same as SCervus. But assessment ala that model is more akin to filling bracket choices for the NCAA Mens' Basketball 64 top contenders, we have to qualify our choices. Ask me, eg. if MWPY is on a par with "Es ist ein Rose entspruchen" and your comparison dynamic changes. That's the point of my contention.
    Resourcement or entrenchment, two things that mystify me.
    Thanked by 1Andrew Motyka
Add a Comment