The New Rad Trads
  • gregpgregp
    Posts: 632
    The following came from a parish bulletin last month (not mine, fortunately). Three short comments: one, the lack of self-awareness here is stunning. The 'Old Guard' of priests and laity are exhibiting all the worst behaviors they claim to have been victimized/traumatized by in those heady days of yesteryear. Two; there's no realization that no one is following their crusade anymore. Three; why is this being printed in the bulletin of a regular parish at all? There's no threat to the status quo in this diocese. It's very curious.

    So, Ladies and Gentlemen, here they are: the New Rad Trads. We should do better. We must do better.

    "It has been many years since a familiar cry was heard from Mass-goers at Christmas and Easter: “It’s all so different!” This came from people who hadn’t assisted at Mass for years – even 25 or 30 years. All they remembered was the Mass in Latin with the congregation singing occasional hymns.

    "Anyone saying that now would have to be over 55 or so and, even then, the Latin Mass would be the vaguest of memories. I have still not quite figured out why some people seem to be eagerly desire a Latin (Tridentine) Mass. Is it nostalgia? Is it a funny little poke or protest against today’s vernacular Mass? Is it a liking for Gregorian chant? Is it a desire for a ceremony seemingly with a greater aura of mystery?

    "For a 70 or 80 or 90 year old, I can easily comprehend a desire to worship like one did in their youth, but some Latin Mass attendees are in their 30’s and 40’s. It would be a rare case where they really knew Latin and understood every word of an all-Latin liturgy. Very few colleges and even fewer high schools even offer a few years of Latin study any more. I studied Latin for six years, yet still much prefer the current vernacular. I also studied classic Greek, but would not want to worship in that language. I studied Spanish, too, and, though I honestly enjoy the Mass and Sacraments in that language, there still remains an internal blockage which says to me: “this isn’t your way of praying.” It is for the native Spanish speakers.

    "Before the Second Vatican Council gave us the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy – the outline for all post – 1970 Masses in local languages – I remember participating in classes and study groups which were analyzing the history and nature of the Catholic liturgy. We could see a groundswell coming from liturgical experts, along with hot debate, pushing for the Mass and Sacraments in the vernacular. We PRAYED it would be so. Why? Because we saw that the liturgy (which, in translation, means “the work of the people”), over the centuries, had gradually come to be more the “work of the priest”.

    "There is a reason we now call the priest at Mass the “presider” and the people, the “assembly.” The priest presides over or celebrates the Mass with the people. It’s no longer “we’re going to hear the priest say Mass.” The “peoples’ prayer” should be in their familiar language. Never again will the Church get lost in one language – no matter how venerable. It’s no secret that originally the early Masses were in Aramaic – the language of Jesus and the Apostles. (We have some outlines of them still, however the central Eucharistic prayer was not written out yet – it was left to the preside to create.)

    "That was followed by the liturgy in Greek and we possess many of those. However, after Constantine in the 4th century, with the power of the Roman Empire, Latin held sway – and for many centuries, even when only the (few) most educated understood the language. Latin became the language of “the Church” and therefore it took on an almost “holy” aura as though God would be especially pleased or moved by people who used it.

    "Orics (sic) of relief were heard in Church circles around the world from the Council’s end in 1965 to the gradual practical directions for the vernacular in 1970. We were finally unbound from Latin chains. We have just begun to explore and adjust to all this. “The Church moves slowly.” ?Verdad?

    "The freedom felt after the Church switch to the vernacular gave us a period of exuberance in liturgy. I was there. Let’s put ourselves in the late 60’s. People sang a lot together in those days! I was there especially with youth groups. Ray Repp, one of the first on the Church’s fresh musical American Bandstand, began rolling out ditties like: “Here we are, all together as we sing our song – joyfully.” It was sing-along music, but much of it was awful and unliturgical.

    "Guitar Masses were the specialty of the day. Often, because of the lack of new, better, liturgical music, we baptized some secular, popular songs. Remember: “Come on people, now, smile on each other; everybody get together, try to love one another right now.” We were at the end of the folk song craze so we borrowed a few of these in the 60’s and early 70’s which took us once in a while to a more thoughtful place – “Where have all the Flowers Gone” and “Sounds of Silence.” Heck, I remember having a high school band at my first Mass at Holy Cross in _____________ in 1969 playing “Sounds of Silence” during the presentation of the gifts.

    "We were grabbing music from everywhere; it seems, during those early “vernacular” years. Of course, you have to recall the times – a period of very creative, eclectic secular music which we still hear today because of its innovation and often lofty themes. You see, several sources of such thoughtfulness were converging. The Elvis phenomenon was dying down and the very creative Beatles music appeared. The hippies were talking freedom and love (with a drug culture, sadly) and Vietnam War protests were reaching a peak. Bob Dylan told us the “Times are Changin’” and they certainly were.

    "So, anti-war songs, love songs, freedom songs and songs searching for meaning became the context for the new freedom in Church music. I remember, when leading some high school and college youth groups, coming together over cokes and pizza and , with a guitar or two and with a mandolin or banjo at times; sitting in a big circle and singing and singing into the late night – a seemingly endless repertoire of folk, pop and religious music.

    "No wonder some conservative folk were shocked. What happened to Dies Irae?

    "The corner was turned, I think, in the minds of many about youth and their church music about 1973, at least in _________. It was a Christmas midnight Mass. I was presider. Along with an excellent young guitarist and a few others, we put together what could only be called a youth orchestra. Friends called friends with great musical talent. They rehearsed a few times the midnight Mass was what would then have been called a “happening.” We even had a complete drum set.

    "These kids put together a blend of Christmas carols old and new with all the mass responses and with various kinds of innovative beats complete with forms and solos that you would not believe possible. The applause and cheering after mass would not stop and they sang and played for another 40 minutes. Most of the assembly remained to hear it. What a joyful Mass! What a “thumbs up” for Vatican II. I have heard nothing like that since, but I’m still waiting. Put solid Eucharistic prayer, the exuberance and talent of youth and the occasion of a Church festival together and the result is dynamite! Do it in Latin? No way."
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,509
    "These kids with their music. Sounds like a lot of noise! I remember back in my day, now THAT was music!"
  • dad29
    Posts: 2,232
    The applause and cheering after mass would not stop and they sang and played for another 40 minutes. Most of the assembly remained to hear it. What a joyful Mass! What a “thumbs up” for Vatican II. I have heard nothing like that since, but I’m still waiting. Put solid Eucharistic prayer, the exuberance and talent of youth and the occasion of a Church festival together and the result is dynamite!


    Barnum couldn't have said it better.
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,980
    The greatest lesson I remember that age producing - and I was there - is, "it's all about me!"
  • Might be dynamite, might be exuberant, might be talents not buried in the ground, might even be rad, but the one thing it surely isn't, not at any price: it is not trad.
  • I don't get why people would hang around for 40 minutes after mass, given that the presider has given the blessing and the order "Go forth, the mass is ended." Now given in the vernacular so that there is no doubt about what is being said.
    Thanked by 1CharlesW
  • Richard MixRichard Mix
    Posts: 2,799
    it is not trad.
    Well, yes, but I've noticed that one can step in and play 'traditional' and 'folk' services out of the book. It's the 'contemporary' ones where the substitute has to really grope his way through a real tradition of handed down things. Or is "trad." only supposed to stand for "traddie"?
  • gregpgregp
    Posts: 632
    I've noticed that the "Traditionalists" in most parishes are rabid about traditions that go back to when they were young. What was done before or since? Meh.
  • Amen, Greg. I've noticed that, too.
  • melofluentmelofluent
    Posts: 4,160
    Greg and MACW, since we're all Californians from different regions- I've never encountered a wrinkly, aged Trad. I have encountered many wistful nostalgics who have a vague notion that some major puzzle piece is missing, and who thank us for the "gesture" of chant and whatnot. The only true Trads I've encountered are GenX'ers who sensed that something was seriously amiss, and they are few and far between. We are, ahem, extremely compromised and co-opted as a "community." But, it is often just us, I mean musicians, to whom all quarters cry out for relief, a light in the darkness. And God help us, we'll remain stolid and solid and affirmed in knowing what is right and where the next step is.
  • Charles,

    I won't speak for Greg and Mary Ann, but my parish has a good cross section of population.

    Cheers,

    Chris
    Thanked by 1melofluent
  • gregpgregp
    Posts: 632
    Right! It has nothing to do with age, necessarily. One has to possess the ability to see that "history did not begin with my birth". Unfortunately, that's a rare commodity. I think certain groups (such as Classical Musicians) tend to have more people capable of seeing that because you learn from the start that most of the great 'art music' was composed before you were born.
  • francis
    Posts: 10,825
    most all of the great 'art music' was composed before you Mozart was born.

    fixed.
    Thanked by 1TCJ
  • VilyanorVilyanor
    Posts: 388
    I don't know how old the writer was, but he is older and more stodgy than those who remember the Tridentine Mass from their youth. Anyone who lets their own tastes and preferences completely supersede what the Church has taught (be it in Liturgy or in Doctrine) is confined to their own dusty, dead timeframe, rather than God's and the Church's time, which is ever ancient and ever new. Modernism isn't really modern at all, it's as old and as dead as the philosophies it reincarnates. Truly, whitewashed tombs.
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,482
    it's as old and as dead as the philosophies it reincarnates


    True statement.

    I keep being (almost) surprised when I run into what I thought were novel modern heresies in ancient and medieval sources. What's even more entertaining is the moderns who think they have come up with some new thing that no one has ever thought of before. "Yes - well, we used to think [some doctrine], but that's all been overturned now that we discovered [something they knew about in Ancient Greece]."
  • SalieriSalieri
    Posts: 3,177
    Nichil novum sub sole.
  • VilyanorVilyanor
    Posts: 388
    Exactly, Adam! A quick, but excellent read that makes that exceedingly clear is Peter Kreeft's "the Journey". As each of the false philosophies are encountered, they are depicted as changing between a modern propagator of that philosophy, and the original pre-socratic philosopher. It's good stuff.
  • eft94530eft94530
    Posts: 1,577
    Adam Wood: entertaining is the moderns who think they have come up with some new thing that no one has ever thought of before

    In 1994 I was reading carefully through
    http://www.amazon.com/Fundamentals-Catholic-Dogma-Dr-Ludwig/dp/0895550091
    and
    http://www.amazon.com/The-Christian-Faith-Doctrinal-Documents/dp/0818908939
    and noticed a Trinitarian heresy was proposed in the 1800s.

    If someone had done a little Statistics (combinations permutations) on the topic,
    a bunch could have been identified and squashed
    before anyone stumbled upon them.
    Thanked by 2Adam Wood JulieColl
  • JulieCollJulieColl
    Posts: 2,465
    Dr. Ott's book is a treasure. It was a great help to me when I was in my twenties and was searching for a rational basis for the articles of the Catholic faith.
    Thanked by 1eft94530
  • mahrt
    Posts: 517
    The question is the sacredness of the liturgy (it is the Constitution on the SACRED Liturgy). That is why it is better to say "priest" than "presider." "Presider" is cognate with "president," a term which is also used--president of the liturgical assembly. But these are regularly used for a member of the group which the group elects to oversee the work of the group; this corresponds better to the Lutheran notion of minister. "Priest" implies a sacred function--his call is from Christ and his function is to be set aside for the sacred purposes of the liturgy.

    I recall the first Mass which included English; I had learned to follow the Latin Mass with a hand missal, and when it was told that we would be having the vernacular, I looked forward to it with great anticipation. When it came, I said "is that all there is?" It was a bit of a disappointment; the change to English actually brought a de-emphasis upon the sacredness of the liturgy. The music that followed realized that de-emphasis in spades. The camp-fire atmosphere left a lot to be desired.
    Thanked by 2eft94530 francis
  • Except that "priest" is ambiguous, because there may well be several priests involved in the sacred action at the altar (and I include priests downvested as deacon or subdeacon). And in Latin you don't even get the clarity of articles: "sacerdos dicit" could be "a priest says" just as easily as "the priest says."

    Qui bene distinguit, and all that. :-)
    Thanked by 1Gavin
  • Mark,

    One could use the term "priest celebrant" if the confusion risk is dire. On the other hand, in the world of con-celebration, priest celebrant could easily be rendered "priest celebrants" to make the world even more confusing. Would "celebrant", by itself, solve the problem? (Speaking personally, I think "concelebration", to borrow an expression from Fr. John Zuhlsdorf, should be safe, legal and rare.

    Cheers,

    Chris
    Thanked by 2CHGiffen Gavin