It's become a shibboleth word. Here's an example of the iterative things it might be understood to be proxy for when it's used as shibboleth word:

http://www.blessedtrinitycleveland.org/From the Desk of/12 characteristics exerpts.pdf


Of course, shibboleths are common on all sides of the liturgical culture wars.

Now we're talkin'! What a great topic to wake up with on a Sunday's morn.
I want a parish that's full-bodied and enriched, like a painting by Rubens.
Or one that breathes diaphramatically with both lungs. Or at least not on life support.
Howsabout a polished parish, as in not tarnished (not Slavic, not that there's anything wrong with that?)
An exclusive parish? All are welcome, provided they want to know, love and be transformed by the Christ, the REAL Christ.
I could go on...gotta get ready fo' Mass, we doin' Richard's "Simple Latin Propers."
A Proper Parish?

So if a parish is vibrant, it is wiggly. Or shaking. Or agitated, or something.

There's always room for Jello.

I think when entering into a discussion with someone who is likely to spout such meaningless buzzwords, one should use it first, staking a claim, as it were.
"Our parish is quietly vibrant" -- who could argue with that?
Same for "uplifting."
Quick, before Ms. Hearum Clankin can say, "Oh, the kids need something more uplifting than Gregorian chant," fire off the first salvo -, "I think we should do the most uplifting music for children we possibly can -- like Palestrina and Gregorian chant!"

Interesting document, Liam - I'd say the infrequency of attendance at Mass for the average Catholic shows that people taking anything too seriously is something we don't have to worry about, thank you very much.
And I am probably alone in this, but I resent the kind of "welcoming" at Mass that implies some are only guests, rather than part of "Here comes everybody." If youre Catholic this is as much your home as anyone else's.
And finally, some programs could do with a little more recognition that some folks.... well, they just aren't gifted, at least not in the way they seem to think.

(Save the Liturgy, Save the World)

Gavin

Yes.

Then there are electric ear cleaners...

Vibreverent.

Victoria doesn't have any secrets. ;-)

Happy shiny people holding hands.

G, love your comment

It's worth noting that, in certain political circles, "vibrant" is a dysphemism for "ethnically diverse", or a euphemism for "full of troublemakers not of our people." That's not its use here, but also not NOT its use; i.e., a vibrant parish will probably also be ethnically diverse.

It means active.

Um.... sorry, nope.

Drum cage next to the altar.

Tell me you've really seen that?
Wait... what IS a "drum cage"? I may be imagining the wrong thing.
Although I know a percussionist or two who might well be caged.
And actually, one who is, for all intents and purposes at the moment.
Never mind, carry on....

(Save the Liturgy, Save the World)

I was told that they were a "progressive" congregation and hence do "progressive" music.

I hope you told them how sensible that was -- you don't want music that sits on one single chord forever.
Even garage bands, (and fake organists like me,) usually can manage three.
Of course, they may just have meant that they don't start at the end of every piece and play back to the beginning. I would have questioned the wisdom of that.

(Save the Liturgy, Save the World)

It's become a shibboleth word.

I would like to take this opportunity promote one of my attempts at linguistic tweakoneering: SHIBBOLEFT

We do not speak unknown tongues.

Well some of us might.
Is that a problem?

Shiba what?

Well some of us might.
Is that a problem?

Only a problem if they are the Pentecostal type that no one else understands. I have often wondered what exactly those folks are communicating with when they babble unintelligibly.

I have often wondered what exactly those folks are communicating with when they babble unintelligibly.

Us folks who pray in this way are doing the following:
1. following the command /prophecy of Jesus and recommended by God through St Paul
• Mark 16:17 And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues;
• 1 Cor 14:5 I would like every one of you to speak in tongues,
2. talking to God
• 1 Cor 14:2 For anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to people but to God.
3. edifying himself
• 1 Cor 14:4 Anyone who speaks in a tongue edifies themselves
4. praying with their spirit
• 1 Cor 14: 14a, 15a, 16a, For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, ... 15 So what shall I do? I will pray with my spirit, …I will sing with my spirit, …
5. using an extraordinary charism of the Holy Spirit, which charisms we should know about; they are also to be welcomed and used
• 1 Cor 12:1, 8 – 10 1Now about the gifts of the Spirit, brothers and sisters, I do not want you to be uninformed. 8To one there is given through the Spirit… 10 speaking in different kinds of tongues
• Lumen Gentium12 It is not only through the sacraments and the ministries of the Church that the Holy Spirit sanctifies and leads the people of God and enriches it with virtues, but, "allotting his gifts to everyone according as He wills,(114) He distributes special graces among the faithful of every rank. By these gifts He makes them fit and ready to undertake the various tasks and offices which contribute toward the renewal and building up of the Church, according to the words of the Apostle: "The manifestation of the Spirit is given to everyone for profit".(115) These charisms, whether they be the more outstanding or the more simple and widely diffused, are to be received with thanksgiving and consolation for they are perfectly suited to and useful for the needs of the Church. Extraordinary gifts are not to be sought after, nor are the fruits of apostolic labour to be presumptuously expected from their use; but judgment as to their genuinity and proper use belongs to those who are appointed leaders in the Church, to whose special competence it belongs, not indeed to extinguish the Spirit, but to test all things and hold fast to that which is good.
6. doing something recommended for private prayer but regulated for liturgical prayer
• 1 Cor 14: 16-19 when you are praising God in the Spirit, how can someone else, who is now put in the position of an inquirer, say “Amen” to your thanksgiving, since they do not know what you are saying? 17 You are giving thanks well enough, but no one else is edified.18 I thank God that I speak in tongues more than all of you. 19 But in the church I would rather speak five intelligible words to instruct others than ten thousand words in a tongue.

If I may offer a brief opinion based on my experience of praying in this way, and my much less extensive experience with chant.

• Catechism of the Catholic Church 2721 The Christian tradition comprises three major expressions of the life of prayer: vocal prayer, meditation, and contemplative prayer. They have in common the recollection of the heart.
Vocal prayer is where we start. Easy to learn as a child, hard to perfect, it can degenerate into ‘praying with our lips’, without the attention of the heart.
Meditation engages the mind – it increases our prayer in the direction that vocal prayer has already pointed use engaging our thoughts, memory, imagination, etc etc.
Contemplative prayer is essentially wordless – we engage at a deeper level again, beyond the words of our prayers, beyond the cleverness of our meditations, it is ‘the simple expression of the mystery of prayer. It is a gaze of faith fixed on Jesus, attentiveness to the Word of God, a silent love. It achieves real union with the prayer of Christ to the extent that it makes us share in his mystery.’(CCC 2724)
Leaving aside that progression in prayer needs purgation and illumination of one’s whole life, there is one obvious and common difficulty – how to get from prayer with words and concepts to wordless prayer.
Good ways of praying have a built in help in this.
Consider the rosary. We learn it first as vocal prayer, later we start to meditate on the mysteries, letting our minds rise above the words to deeper things. Ultimately this disengagement from the words towards meditation is preparing us for that further step into contemplation.
Consider chant. We labour over the text and music, learning it as essentially vocal prayer. As we develop ease in singing a particular chant, we can really meditate on the scripture text, relish the words that are highlighted by the music and so on, this is meditation. But those long melismatic phrases, extended beyond what seems necessary for even a meditative dwelling on the text, are the way in which chant seduces us out of meditative prayer into contemplation, getting the words and music out of our way, so to speak, (or so to chant) to enable us to move into a more contemplative engagement, not with the chant but with the Lord.
Finally consider praying in tongues, and more particularly singing in tongues, its more natural expression. One begins with vocal prayer – but there are only so many times in one prayer session you can say ‘Praise you Jesus’ without getting somewhat dry. When praying in tongues, one continues into a more active meditation on the attributes of God, it is not mindless, but simply wordless. In my personal experience this sort of praying is a good preparation for the silence of contemplative prayer, simply because it has reinforced that direction of moving from plodding vocal prayer, into less word based meditative engagement with God. Again my experience of healthy charismatic prayer is that it usually ends up in silence – not an empty silence but the full silence of contemplation, of wonder and awe in God’s presence.

Some caveats – my formative experiences were within the context of a sound Catholic community –but I have encountered other communities where the expression of this type of prayer has seemed to me less healthy. Usually this was where there was attenuated contact with the scriptures as a basis of prayer, or a distrust of silent contemplative prayer as the proper direction or termination of all types of prayer. These difficulties are not confined to charismatics. One local religious congregation dedicating to chanting the office seven times a day, and doing so beautifully, also write and publish books on Christian reading of tarot cards among other oddities.
For me praying in tongues has been an inestimable blessing. Your mileage may vary. But after singing in tongues, Gregorian chant becomes so obvious and easy, and prayerful that my only real solution for people who complain they don’t like chant because it is too long drawn out and incomprehensible (especially in Latin) is to suggest they become familiar and comfortable with singing in tongues.

There you go. Scuttling off to put my head back below the parapet now.

I am looking for a church that wants a 'contemplative' music program. Let me know when you find one of THEM!

That's radical, man.

This speaking in tongues seems an influence from the charismatics on Catholics. With what the Church offers us already, why the need to seek the sensational?

If by charismatics you mean Protestants, not necessarily. There is a long and well documented history of the gift of tongues in the church, including in the early and later church fathers. St Patrick, for instance, describes something of such an experience in his Confessions. I would refer you to the scholarly work of Killian O Donnell OSB.
Secondly, it is only sensational from the outside. As one who knows the experience from the inside, I can assure you it is not an emotional or hysterical phenomenon, it is entirely under the control of the speaker, who can start and stop at will, it is a peaceful and not agitating experience. Hysterical or overly emotional experiences are probably just that, and fake, though again in my experience the incidence of faking the gift of tongues is also rare, though not unknown.
The idea of not going beyond what the church offers us already certainly has merit, however I would argue that the gift of tongues is part of what the Church has always offered, and continues. You are right that the gift of interpretation should also be sought, as should all the higher gifts. Also charisms are just that - gifts, not given to everyone, not to be rashly sought, not to be presumed to replace growth in virtue and holiness, not the plaything of spiritual sensation seekers.
But I still would not like to be negligent of something the Holy Spirit sends :-)

You are right on a number of things there. The day of Pentecost was not the gift of tongues as we see it in Corinthians, as you point out it was a gift with hearing.
I was surprised by the strong and clear historical evidence for the persistence of speaking in tongues from the early church right down throughout the ages, the spotlight it has got in recent decades has obscured somewhat its long history.
Of course, anyone can get caught up in the pleasure of a religious experience to the detriment of genuine prayer. St John of the Cross warns about this when he says that appetites are first conquered in the flesh, only to re-emerge in a spiritual form. So gluttony for food or pleasure, being conquered in the body, then returns in the form of a temptation to spiritual gluttony where the pleasure of spiritual gifts is pursued instead of the giver of the gifts.
Undoubtedly people have left the church having being caught up in religious experiences without adequate catechesis; all the more reason to be able to understand and deal sympathetically with the issue and make it clear how hierarchical gifts (like the priesthood or the papacy) relate to and govern the charismatic gifts. It is important to be able to teach them that all the gifts are welcomed, but that proper discernment about the nature and purpose is not a matter for the individual but for the church, and that right order is given by the Holy Spirit to the Church through the structures (sacraments etc) instituted by Christ.
However, we know how often Gregorian chant is dismissed, despite the clear teaching of the church and numerous other good reasons, simply because it is not to the personal taste of some priest of music director or whatever. For me I find it important, when dealing with things not to my personal taste, to be doubly sure that I am thinking with the Church, that I have some idea of the historical background, and I am putting the needs of the other to the forefront, even where it does not coincide with my personal preferences, or does not seem to me to very needful. It might be very needful to them - and that in itself should engage my sympathetic concern.
I will say, that because I encountered charismatic renewal as a helpful element of my journey from atheism back to Catholicism, it was a while before I encountered any of the phenomena which seem, may be, to be more prevalent in the States, which are more problematic (as you say leading away from the Church).

I know exactly what you mean.
How do you say politely that not following the church's givens for liturgy is very egotistical? I don't know - but it does seem to me ironic that many of those who play around with the liturgy really see themselves as liberating the poor powerless laity rather than imposing their own personal preferences on everyone.
I have a cunning plan. Say it very quietly. Childrens' schola

With thanks to Bonniebede and Charles for their valid assessments of speaking in tongues and the 'charismatic' phenomenon in general, I offer my own reluctance to grant the 'charismatics' of our day a monopoly on the word itself. I, for one, think that if we are all not charismatic we are in trouble. The Church is, arguably by definition, 'charismatic', and all who have a profound and fruitful faith are likewise charismatic, that is to say that the Holy Ghost has filled them with his dower of gifts and spiritual richness to the end that their lives are examplary of Christian life. In short, one doesn't have to be 'charismatic' to be charismatic. Being a good father and a good mother is charismatic. Gregorian chant is experienced by me as profoundly charismatic. Ditto Tallis or Bruckner or most all of our musical patrimony. A mass celebrated with all imaginable solemnities is immensely charismatic. Baking the best apple pie you ever had can be charismatic. Many musicians are paradigms of charismatic life. Well, one could go on, couldn't one? One sure sign that a 'charismatic' person isn't charismatic is that she or he only regards those things (music, speech, style of prayer, liturgical praxis, etc.) as charismatic which are identified with the (rather self-consciously self-referential) 'charismatic' movement. These people, many of whom have the tell-tale holier-than-thou syndrome, should not be allowed their presumed monoply on the word 'charismatic'. All who are filled with a genuine love of God and in whose lives the Holy Ghost is active are charismatic. This is what 'charismatic' really means. In fact, it occurs to me that as in being wise, being charismatic is not something one would say of him or herself, but something of which one was not necessarily aware but was noted by others; which is to say that we might agree that John is very wise, but, if John went about saying that he was wise we would know that he wasn't!

Would that be a Celeste pedal?

Salicional Celeste, as on a 60s Casavant in my city. It sounds as bad as the name implies.

Is that the "Salacious Celeste"?

Don't forget the tremulant!

Well, I make an excellent creme Bavarois!
I'd be delighted to come over there and concoct one for you.
(All expenses paid, of course!)

staring at the back of a priest?