A Haven for A Few
  • The incursion of chant into the humdrum musical lives of many churches seems to ignite a furor of anger.

    This is stupid.

    Countless Catholics have abandoned the church over music. Being forced to sit through music that we would never ever listen to on the car radio, over dinner, or at any time just so that we can fulfill our Sunday obligation?

    Is it true that people will commit the sin of not attending Sunday Mass because of the music. I choose my words very carefully when I say, hell yes.

    Let's being back chant. Let's bring back silence.
  • miacoyne
    Posts: 1,805
    Let's bring our catholic faith back. The mass is where we recieve the Truth. We also experence 'AWE' of God, with chants and silence. There's no awe in the song 'Awesome God', (if you don't know this song, you are very behind. This must have hit the Top Ten list of today's most popular 'litrugical music.' ) I don't know whether I should cry or laugh when I see eveyone at the mass singing this traecherously 'cool' song , even with hand motions and have a good time. (including the priest on the altar.) When that song started one time, I just left ('luckily it was toward the end of the mass). No one was leaving before the song end, but me. (I'm sure people thought I'm being very impolite.) I never wanted to come back to mass here again.
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,507
    While I sympathize with your frustration, Frogman, I must disagree with your plan.

    This is my plan: take small steps, train new leaders,do everything well and cheerfully. People don't always recognize the solution to all their problems. Be patient.
  • GavinGavin
    Posts: 2,799
    Noel, your post hit the nail right on the head. I'm not sure if you're referring to those who skip Mass because they hate chant, or because of the modern music, but you really are dead on.

    It's a personal matter to me, as I have long since ceased practicing Catholicism. While I'm not so shallow to give up religious practice due to music (well, maybe I am...), it was certainly the impetus. How anyone can see the leadership of God in a system where "bishops" disseminate hymnals packed with heresy, and punish, with the aid of the State, those who faithfully practice their faith is beyond me. I don't have the faith to believe in a church that won't take itself seriously anymore. THIS is why chant HAS to come back, NOW. Every time a sing-song is sung at Communion, it sends the signal "this is not important." And some of us pick up on it.

    I'll take your money, sing your chants, play your organs, but when I'm not working, I'm in the pews at an Anglo-Catholic church or standing in a Divine Liturgy. If you really believe all that stuff in the catechism, you will not allow for one profane or heretical note in your church.
  • My God is an awesome God la la la la la la.....

    Kathy, I'm not sure what kind of plan I espoused! What I was saying is that while some people say they have left the church over music....so really have. And it is sad.

    Now for a plan....first small step, silence after Communion, no announcements, blessing and dismissal and the organ plays. Fix the end of Mass first. People walk out during communion because they don't want to be there for the rest, which can include up to 5 minutes of rambling announcements about things people forgot to submit to the bulletin. Raise the Mass above the mundane.
  • Gavin,

    Thank you for your post. I think that many of us should sit down this afternoon and just think over what you have said and evaluate whether or not we have the guts and intelligence to work through this....
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,507
    Once it works, people stop complaining. The necessary ingredient is having the support necessary to bring things along to the point where they work. I suppose that's where my situation is most unusual: the degree of support.
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,507
    --Whoops, I'm sorry, Frogman. Apparently I read you wrong. I thought you meant, bring back chant, right away, and don't worry if they leave. But now I think you meant the opposite. (But actually I'm not sure what you meant.)
  • ...
  • I was rambling!

    I think that every parish should offer a Mass of the Current Music; A Mass of Guitar Music; A Mass of Gregorian Chant; A Mass without Music; and whether it should be NO or TLM? Well, that's up to them.

    But to DENY people who want Chant....because "most people" want MCM....it's not right.
  • Blaise
    Posts: 439
    Is this the:

    "Our God is an awesome God He reigns
    From heaven above......

    La la la

    Our God is an Awesome God"

    And that song is an awful song.

    Gavin,

    What is this "Anglo-Catholic Church" you are speaking about? Is it Anglican Orthodox, TAC, or ECUSA or whatever else is out there?
  • Yes, but in my version it starts, "Our god is an awesome God la la la la la..."

    I guess my attention drops quicker than yours!
  • miacoyne
    Posts: 1,805
    Well, you guys are much better on this. Not behind at all. I couldn't understand what they are singing at all. It was all mumbling and suddenly shouts out. So 'cool.'
    I questioned to my priest about this song, and he didn't have much objection, because 'awe' is a right word for God, he says. I couldn't expain it well how it's presented, like my buddy so and so is awesome, so is God. And also the music!(musical part is harder to explain.)
  • Be clear about it: Anglo-Catholics are Protestants--Protestants with a great love for many aspects of Catholicism, but Protestants nonetheless.
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,211
    Let's make a distinction, Daniel.

    On one hand, that description of Anglo-Catholics as "Protestants with a great love for many aspects of Catholicism" fits many people.

    On the other hand, one international group of traditionalist Anglicans, the Traditional Anglican Communion, has adopted Catholic teaching in full, so it's not really fitting to speak of them as Protestants.

    Their leaders declared that they believe everything in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, and to express this publicly, they signed a copy and gave it to Abp. DiNoia of CDF.

    And in their contacts with the Church, they are placing no pre-conditions on their entry into full communion: they have simply asked the Holy See how to proceed.

    In the US, the TAC is represented by the "Anglican Church in America", so if this rapprochement becomes complete, those are the congregations who would be entering into full communion. It's not a huge body, probably a few dozen congregations around the US.

    From the news today, it seems the talk about a personal prelature is just another rumor. A CDF official told the NC Register correspondent that nothing's been decided.
  • D.B. Page - This is a good time to pose the question: what makes Anglo-Catholics any more Protestant (or, less Catholic) than the Orthodox? And, let us ignore here, for the sake of argument, the fact that there are (as we know well) very many Anglicans who are NOT Anglo-Catholic, nor would wish to be. There is, of course, the matter of Apostolicae Curae: but, is there anything else of substance?
  • Which begs the question of "How many supposedly Roman Catholics are really Protestant in all but name?"
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,973
    "CommentAuthorMichael O'Connor CommentTime1 hour ago
    Which begs the question of "How many supposedly Roman Catholics are really Protestant in all but name?"

    About half of them, at least.
  • Maureen
    Posts: 678
    Everybody has been very prickly this week, all over the Net. I don't know if it's sadness over events in Washington, worry about the economy, or just some kind of Superbowl effect. But it doesn't help to take out our anger on each other. It also doesn't help to get all angry about chant. You don't sell something by screaming at people, "You ignoramuses and heretics! Bow to the greatness of chant because I say so!" You have to be winning, or at least give chant room to speak for itself.

    These people are not your enemies. They are your future schola members, your future students, your future supporters. God has given them into your hands, to care for and to care for the music in days to come. They will never know any better if you don't show them.
  • Of course there is a great deal of value in all Christian bodies, and many preserve important elements of the Catholic faith. My saying that any person or group is Protestant is not intended as an insult. It is simply a fact. Most Baptist Protestants are less likely to become Catholic than most high-church Anglicans. But each must make an unconditional profession of faith in order to become Catholic. The *pastoral* question of catechesis varies vastly between non-Catholic groups, and those things which place anyone nearer the heart of the Church and obedience to its Magisterium are of unquestioned value.
  • Maureen,

    To put it politely, I don't know where you are coming from? I'm not at all sad over events in Washington. No one on this page is angry about chant.

    If we are railing it is against people who are against chant...and these people will not and cannot be shown. You can lead a horse to water and he will stand there, but he WILL NOT KICK YOU AND BITE YOU for because you took him to water....

    These are the people who want to sing the Ave Maria by Schubert, Be Not Afraid and other stuff at funerals because that's what they have always done!
  • GavinGavin
    Posts: 2,799
    Noel, thank you for your kind response to my overly personal ramblings. "I think that every parish should offer a Mass of the Current Music; A Mass of Guitar Music; A Mass of Gregorian Chant; A Mass without Music" This needs to be said. As I said, it'd be one thing if the bishops were encouraging heterodox expressions of the Catholic faith. It's quite another for them, and other "pastors of souls" to actively work to THWART anyone expressing a remotely orthodox expression of said faith.

    People can pray for my return to Catholicism all they like. But it seems to me more productive to give people a faith worth taking seriously so that they don't feel inclined to leave.
  • I wonder what would happen if Rome mandated that, starting in one week, all music at Mass must be Gregorian chant? I'm sure about half the members of the faith would declare that they were leaving the church, sit out one week, and be back the next. Only a few rabid "Church-open-to-the-world" types would find somewhere else to go.

    BTW has everyone been reading the vitriol being expressed towards Benedict XVI? I know that he is strong enough to take it, but he deserves our prayers at this time. Those who know nothing have no clue where the focus of his decision was. To many who already hate Catholicism, this just added "holocaust deniers" to "child molesters" as the defining qualities of our Church.
  • Michael brings up a good point. Rome did not say, "Do music in popular styles." but removed the restrictions against this practice. Who were they going after? I studied in summer sessions with Rembert Weakland and he, I have read is blamed for bringing in the guitars, but 4 or 5 years earlier in his work teaching organ and chant and the accompaniment of chant, there was no indication of any dissent or lack of high regard for music in the church....

    So, who did they intend to emasculate by dropping the restrictions? No one was clamoring for it....

    And Maureen, what I am pushing for is the right for every person to attend an EF of the Mass....well, now we have that in many places. So how about the right to attend an OF Mass without being bombarded with with bad texts and bad music.
  • miacoyne
    Posts: 1,805
    Mass is such a Beautiful gift from God. It's a shame that we are ruinning that beautiful gift by tailoring it to fit into our taste. No wonder people cannot see the beauty and appreciate it anymore. Only if people can see it as the most wonderful and most beautiful gift on this earth from above, we don't have to 'encourage' them to come to the mass anymore.
    But for many these days, it's just one more thing to do on Sunday, or an event to choose from a sports game or other recreational activities. The music has a lot to do with this by our mixing recreational music with music that is sacred. The function of recreational music on this earth is not to glorify God and sanctify people. (By the way, I like all sorts of recreational music, but outside the church.)
  • Blaise
    Posts: 439
    Frogman,

    Lol, I remember more from that song than I care to know, or even that I knew I knew---unfortunately, the catchy lyrics and the quasi-rock music make it impossible to get out of the head. (The brain is an amazing device---just find some catch words and it will fill in the rest.)

    "...with wisdom (stress "wiiiiis----dom") power and love, Our God is an awesome God."
  • This is a Roman Catholic forum, and I , as an Anglican, have carefully avoided engaging in debates over issues about which Roman Catholics and Anglicans can be assumed to disagree. For example, although I do not consider myself a protestant, I have never attempted to persuade people here that I am not.

    Chonak, however, made a statement that I believe to be demonstrably false. He wrote: "On the other hand, one international group of traditionalist Anglicans, the Traditional Anglican Communion, has adopted Catholic teaching in full, so it's not really fitting to speak of them as Protestants."

    The Traditional Anglican Communion is dominated by extreme evangelicals. They have adopted the English Prayer Book of 1662 and the 39 Articles of Religion as a doctrinal standard. Its members have agreed to disagree about ordination of women, eucharistic theology, and much else. The Anglo-Catholics who have allied themselves with the group have nothing in common with the others except their condemnation of homosexual relations.

    The 1662 Prayer Book is far more Protestant than any Prayer Book used in the American Episcopal Church since the Revolution. Furthermore, the 1979 American Prayer Book, at the time it was adopted, was by far the most Catholic book adopted by any province since the Reformation. It relegated the 39 Articles--filled with Reformation polemic--to an appendix of historical documents. To say that the Traditional Anglican Communion is Catholic and ECUSA is not is patently absurd.

    If one of the TAC bishops did, indeed, say that he (or TAC) subscribed to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, you may rest assured that the majority of his peers would disagree with him vehemently.

    The TAC schism is ridiculous. In a communion that has always accommodated a wide variety of theological positions--even to the point of tolerating plain heresy (such as the teaching of Jack Spong, my former bishop), schism over an ethical issue, viz., whether homosexual relations are compatible with Christian principles, is absurd. What is more absurd is that the TAC bishops agree to disagree about almost everything else. Their common stand on this one issue is all that unites them.

    Those who believe that only those in communion with Rome are Catholics will, of course, say that neither TAC or ECUSA is Catholic.

    If the Catholic Faith is defined as that body of doctrine which was generally accepted throughout the church before the 1054 schism and, especially, that which was articulated by the seven ecumenical councils, then the Episcopal Church--far less ambiguously than the Traditional Anglican Communion--teaches the Catholic Faith in its formularies. (See "How the Episcopal Church Teaches the Catholic Faith" at www.gracechurchinnewark.org. At the same site see also the article by the esteemed theologian, John Macquarrie, on what still separates Anglican and Roman Catholics.)

    Of course, many Episcopalians--the majority, in fact--do not hold the Catholic Faith. Many Roman Catholics also do not hold the Catholic Faith. ECUSA does teach it, however. "Legem credendi lex statuat supplicandi"--Prosper of Aquitaine.
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,211
    Thanks for the post, Bruce. Given your description of them, I have to wonder whether we're even talking about the same group. There are so many factions and denominations in the "continuing Anglican" movement!

    The TAC, for example, is described here and its US member-church, the "Anglican Church in America", is described here. They follow the 1928 Prayer Book; at least that page says they do. They have made contacts with Rome, and asked how to proceed to reach full unity with the Holy See.


    This is not related to the "Anglican Church in North America" which announced its formation in December. That group includes many evangelicals, so I wonder if that might be the organization you're describing. Some of the member denominations in it take Evangelical and even Reformed doctrinal positions (e.g., the Reformed Episcopal Church), so those are indeed quite far from Catholic doctrine in some important areas.
  • miacoyne
    Posts: 1,805
    "People can pray for my return to Catholicism all they like. But it seems to me more productive to give people a faith worth taking seriously so that they don't feel inclined to leave."

    If i'm crossing the border line of you personal space, please forgive me, Gavin. (Although I learned that personal spaces of Americans are much larger than those of Orientals, I still have to get used to it.) I believe our Church needs every bit of efforts from someone like you to bring back the sacredness to our liturgy. You are a talented musician, God gave you the talent and the chance to study, and know a lot about faith. God wants you to do something for Him. No? But you are outside the church. There are lots of good priests who need help from lay people, because their superiors might not agree with their 'Pastoral' decisions. I hope you don't feel pressure, but I'm going to pray for you and all the musicians who left the church because of the frustrations and disappoinments in doing their music ministry work. You can do a lot to help in giving people a faith worth taking seriously so that they don't feel inclined to leave. : )
  • I can see now that what Chonak has written about the "Traditional Anglican Communion" is correct.

    I was confusing this group with the Pittsburgh-Fort Worth-Quincy group attempting to affiliate with Akinola (Nigeria) and other evangelical bishops from the Southern Cone.

    I am forwarding the postings related to this question to a friend who knows a lot about dissident Anglicans. He will be interested in looking at the TAC Web sites, if he has not done so already.
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,211
    If anyone unfamiliar with the various continuing-Anglican groups would like a beginner's guide to the subject, the Christianity Today blog published a "taxonomy" of them in 2006.

    I recently made a list of groups and denominations in that category and came up with 21 (but there are a couple dozen more, really), so distinguishing this alphabet soup of churches is a bit like that Monty Python routine about the Judean People's Front vs. the People's Front of Judea, etc.
  • The incursion of chant into the humdrum musical lives of many churches seems to ignite a furor of anger.

    Man, you got that right Froggenmeister. I can remember a couple of years ago teaching Gloria VIII in bits and pieces to the congregation when I was at the ghosthouse. After my Saturday Mass, I got this one really NASTY e-mail (which I forwarded to the pastor for his entertainment) saying that I am "singlehandedly dividing the parish!"

    Apparently the e-mailer was right because I landed up getting fired on 11/15/2007 and haven't had a steady parish since. A few sub jobs, most of which require biting major bullets, if you know what I mean.

    BMP
  • Brian, the emailer was wrong. You had at least one accomplice (the emailer).
  • For every anedcotal "proof" that is proffered as evidence that "chant," per se, has, is and will be rejected by the influential laity and clergy, there is an unpublished but more profound testament that chant is welcomed. I can categorically state that there has been no resistance to such an "incursion" (which is a prejudicial characterization that speaks more to a subjective and general response than the probable reality of "what happened") in my parish. Granted, we don't have an EF, we don't have a Latin NO, we don't have any Benedictine attributes......yet...
    Our priests are using the tones to chant all the collects (which I enthusiastically remind them is the primary obligation in MS) and the prefaces. We chant the Introits and the Communio either from Bruce's AG or Richard's C, and not one Mass goes by without someone young or old, asking for more of "that."
    I am teaching the history of chant to our 1-8th graders, and guiding their respective cognitions towards what we know to be true: 1. chant is substantially and rubrically living beyond 1500 years; 2. subsequent generations such as they and their children's children will have to engage in "what is both 'native' to our worship culture AND what is beautiful and worthy to be sung in praise of God Almighty. I'm not selling this, I'm teaching this because it matters beyond anyone's personal preferences or egos.
    All that said and aside, it serves no one, least of all God or the Faithful, for any individual to force-feed any aspect of the true reform down anyones' throats because of one's own self conscious sense of right and righteousness. Dealing with the sensibilites, emotions, prejudices and vagaries of one's parish constituents is part of the job, and a very serious one that requires more than musical genius and philosophical surety.
    As of now, the prevailing documents still provide a fairly clear template to those with eyes to see and ears to hear how to progress towards solemnity. And, of course, it should go without saying this "responsibility" doesn't fall solely upon the musician to initiate and implement. And there remains a systematic order of options that any discerning and liturgically sensible musician can call upon to the fulfillment of their primary obligation: assisting the Faithful towards real FCAP, not the pre-digested, packaged stuff that is sold at convention arenas.
    We who share our "wares" here have one criterium that should guide us as we labor to share the treasuries we love: and that is humility. Solemnity will naturally follow true humility every day, 24/7/365.
  • miacoyne
    Posts: 1,805
    "I am teaching the history of chant to our 1-8th graders, and guiding their respective cognitions towards what we know to be true:"

    Hi, do you teach this as a part of music class (or religion)? I'd like to know more about this.

    And what you said is very true. I'm reading 'Catholic Music,' by E. Schaefer, recommaneded in another thread, and found very informative. He gives practical guides for the future 'Sung Mass' for different parishes.
  • Briefly, Mia, it is within the context of their "music" class (40 minutes per week.) However, the curricular "thrust" of my teaching philosophy when taking the job, and agreed to by the principal, is that the "goal" is neither to teach singing or music, per se; but to teach these children how to be "singing Catholics always" at worship.
    I took advantage of momentum coming from intensive to introduce grades 3-7 to a summary history of chant that borrowed heavily upon my ancient copy of Sr. Goodchild's elementary text Gregorian Chant for Church and School. To that I added examples of the Cistercians of HeiligenKreuz such as "In paradisum" (with which many of the older kids could recall that I sing at the end of funeral Masses at which they were servers; I was mortified/gratified when a couple asked me if that was "me" singing on the CD!) Then I had them examine chant notation using modern notation versus neumes; I have a very large manuscript (authentic) of a chant book on the classroom wall. They were very interested and involved with compare/contrast issues between the two types of notation. Then I had them listen to "In paradisum" and the "Song of Farewell (Old Hundreth)" that are published on opposite pages of the Breaking Bread hymnal; then they were asked to differentiate all the musical and textual differences. What I did not do was ask them to assess any sort of value judgment. But I led them to understand the clear difference that meter imposes upon text versus the freer declamation of chanted text rhythm. They get it, all the way down to 1st grade!
    The last aspect of the first lesson was the introduction of "getting" chant phrasing via teaching them the "Our Father" using the Snow version, not Rice version (yet.) I compared that to the chunkiness/clunkiness of reciting it as we do and learn the words ala the Pledge of Allegience to our flag: "I pledge allegience..........to the flag.......of the ....."
    Then we sing the Our Father. The first lesson then concluded with having them turn to the Pater Noster version in OCP's "Chant Mass (Jubilate Deo)" and listening to that chant. Then the lesson ends with the money question: which version seems to them "more Catholic." And I leave that question unanswered until the second lesson, when the kids examine the issues of chant and polyphony versus "alius cantus aptus." That lesson plan I'll leave for another posting.
    The other auxiliary things that are done happen at Friday school Masses, wherein our two "senior" priests (around my age) do chant their portions rather completely to which the kids have been taught the sung responses for four years now and do quite fully and well. And I have begun to chant select Propers or certain chanted hymns after a Communion song that they know. Just a start, you know.
  • miacoyne
    Posts: 1,805
    Wow, I am very impressed, and interested in another thing, maybe , for my future 'work.' This is much much thorough study than just singing chants. I love it! Last week, a high school religion teacher (someone I don't know) sent an email asking whether I could come to the class and talk about chants for seniors. This is a good opportunity to spread chants, but I was a bit over whelmed. Because there's so much I want to talk about, but I want to give them something they can remember. Your post gives me good ideas. And in the future I might be interested in going back to teaching children as a music teacher, if I do, it will be very different from what I did in the past. Please keep posting.(You might want to start a new thread.) I'm sure many people here will benifit from it. Thank you so much.
    ( So parents don't ask why you don't teach any other 'normal' songs? When I did Ward method in the past, I had a bit , very minor, of problem parents asking that. But I didn't have time to do all in a short period.)
  • For those tempted to introduce chant....a bumper sticker
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,973
    My parish has no problem with chant, they just want to do other things, too. They actually like chant.
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,507
    I can only echo Charles' very sage comments, in my own way.

    When I was thumbing around after grad school, I had this odd job helping with sociology research at Catholic U. I got on this project called Pastors in Transition, which became this book: http://www.amazon.com/Pastors-Transition-Clergy-Church-Ministry/dp/0802829082/ref=sr_11_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1233624421&sr=11-1
    The book is a study on why pastors of 5 Protestant denominations have left parish ministry. Very high on the list of reasons was conflict in the local church that escalated until the pastor left or was removed. I conducted a lot of interviews with pastors, and from what I heard, it did seem that some parishes are just impossible. But on the other hand, sometimes it sounded as though the pastor was very much at fault. The problem wasn't always with his (her) ideals, but usually with his methods. He (she) came out of seminary with certain ideal doctrines or practices in mind, and immediately started pushing this certain agenda somewhat relentlessly. People got mad, the pastor got frustrated.... well, we all know the story.

    I'm not saying that inflexible moral leadership is always wrong. However, I don't think they are usually called for. Granted, there is an emergency liturgical situation--but how do we fix it? I think it has to be done artistically, so to speak. Given this situation: the ideals, the available resources, the pastor, the liturgical starting point, the parish's history of conflict--what should be done first?

    There's this lady who has been asking me for a year why we don't sing Eagles Wings on Sundays. It's become quite a running joke between us, and yet I know it really hurts her that we don't sing the songs she loves at the parish she loves. She's sooooo dedicated, and nothing I say seems reason enough to her, so it really hurts her, and it hurts me that it hurts her. That's not a good enough reason to sing a problematic song, but I certainly have her in mind when I work on the parish program. I want to be a gentle guide, even though I'm willing to be demanding too.
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,973
    Mine is the lady who always asks if we can sing, "The Old Rugged Cross" on Good Friday. Of course, we can't. The pastor would not approve. It's not just the pastors who leave. A high percentage of school teachers leave education within 5 years of starting teaching. As a teacher, I can understand that. You are right about some parishes having a reputation for being difficult. It seems around these parts, that the wealthier the parish, the more likely it will be difficult.
  • Kathy, thanks for sharing this experience and its insights.

    I think that there's an important parallel between (1) the common expectation in many Catholic parishes that we should 'sing the songs people like' and (2) the highly individualized connections and commitments of many Protestant Christians to their local congregation. In both situations, there's frequently a markedly subjective, incipiently consumerist way of thinking about what one is 'getting' at church. The direct response of the individual to maleable choices is tacetly placed above joyful adherence to Tradition and to thinking with the Church. Many of us converts to Catholicism revel in the freedom that comes from not being forced to have an unique, subjectively personal preference about every external element of faith. Instead, the great adventure of the Catholic faith (to borrow from Chesterton) gains its vitality from discovering on ever-deeper levels the truth of Christ in the sacramental, moral, theological, and liturgical patterns established by the saints. Liturgical/musical practices of the past 40 years have often cut us off from this freedom found in the Church's teaching authority. This is not the fault of 'the people' as much as the somewhat confused shepherds who have implicitly believed that 'throwing open the windows' inevitably meant finding a metaphonic baby and its bathwater to pitch out. This impulse is at the heart of the profound decline in numbers and moral authority in so-called mainstream Protestantism. This tendency was recognized a century ago and called Modernism.
  • Therein lies the fundamental fault line of Vatican II. Was it really necessary to open the Church to the world? Was this not a failure of the Church to entice the world to the Church? What is done is done and must be seen as God's will, but men are so capable of error that perhaps the New Liturgical Movement is God's way of knocking on the door of the Church and asking us to fix what may have been decisions based on worldly pressures rather than His plan. A Church that seeks relevance in the world is asking to become irrelevant.
  • miacoyne
    Posts: 1,805
    Could it be that this was a necessary step (organic growth from the previous practice) for the faithful to seek for the true 'Reform,' which is on our way?