I'm not interested in piling on. We're not the target audience of this Mass. They do not care whether we like it or not.
But if I were them, I would look at this Mass (and I'm only as far as the homily) and suggest they be honest with themselves: is it accomplishing what they want it to accomplish? I think there are a lot of signs that it's not.
The whole notion of a Mass having a target audience is absurd. The Mass is the Church's most solemn expression of liturgy, which has been given to the Church by Christ. The audience is the whole world, if someone wants to put it in those terms.
The people who organized this "Mass" rather consider the Church's liturgy to be a blank slate, a plaything into which to insert whatever the heck they want to express what they feel. The texts of the Missal and the tradition of the Church quite obviously take a back seat to the musical performances and the liturgical dancing. How rude of the archbishop to try to celebrate Mass in the background of that show!
I'm confounded that large parts of the Church in the US are still deeply entrenched in liturgical silliness. It's the fault of bishops and priests who allow it and encourage it; they are the liturgical gatekeepers.
There actually were bishops there, supposed custodians of tradition. What angers me about Traditionis Custodes (and I don’t attend a Latin Mass) is the assertion that there should be a unique form of the Latin Rite as the supposed motivating force for the document. Yet we see examples on YouTube in those dioceses where there has been the most vigorous clamp down on Latin masses that Novus Ordo liturgical abuses continue unabated. Evidently, there is a unique form of the Latin Rite for thee but not for me. Ugh.
I can't bring myself to watch the whole thing straight through, but while it may be vulgar and hokey, a quick spot check didn't seem to show too many outright rubrical violations (a lay person read the intentions of the Universal Prayer, despite two deacons being present, but that was all I saw). Now one might want to argue that at an event attended by thousands of people you might want to aim for something better than vulgar-and-hokey-but-rubrical (and I would be sympathetic to such an argument), but I didn't see any "abuse" (in the technical sense), nor any reason to use quotation marks when calling it a "Mass."
I’ve been to TLMs where the quality left a lot to be desired. But you surely cannot be serious with this line.
We have been asked to sing the Gregorian propers and a Latin ordinary for a special Mass that is not even under ordinary diocesan auspices (shoot, even if it were, the bishop is happy to accommodate us; he’s got very good sense and is just a nice person all-around) but figuring out how to do this is a bit of a nightmare, and there’s always a surprise particularly with rotating priests and one-off things — how much ritual, will the celebrant sing, will he even allow chanted readings (never mind if you have qualified ministers), and that’s in the best case. But for the most part, there is always (mutual?) distrust and the possibility of it all coming down based on the whims of the cleric.
Deacon Bauerschmidt, I’d argue that the music is completely inappropriate for Lent even if we might be OK with it in other contexts, and there are moments where it descended to pure performance. The real frustration is that this has the seal of the archbishop. Never mind the TLM or Traditiones custodes. The Latin NO which I described above is dead on arrival in that diocese (though ironically not necessarily in Orange, since the Norbertines are there).
There’s also something to be said for the manner of celebrating; maybe it doesn’t break a single rubric, but the organizers don’t even ask the question of what animates the rubrics. This is worse than hokey, as they choose to pick the worst options whenever they have one. The most excessive way of doing things, and in fairness to them, they don’t even seem to be aware that they could do differently. But the sobriety is completely lacking, and I’m not even talking about the “old” or “traditional way”. This is over the top compared to the average Mass where the music isn’t the best (in quality or in execution), where there is a lot of lay involvement disproportional to the congregation’s size, and so on.
I often reflect on how, when pressed to do a Latin Mass with chant, Fr Ruff made a bunch of decisions which wouldn’t have been the ones that I’d make, particularly for a small group, but the REC style is out of place even for people who are not in my camp.
Also, this is a small point, but it is a good example of sloppy and inattentive formation and preparation: the introduction to the Penitential Act and the sign of peace are in the book. Why do people memorize something else? This is the same problem with the form of confession, where the American bishops recently got approval for a new translation — but only the old is valid and licit in other countries. (Seminaries need to investigate Anki for those in formation.)
BTW, I’m happy to see the new altar situation in your cathedral. Hopefully one day it can be used as installed…
Matthew, I don't think I disagree with anything you write. My point was simply the narrow one that not many rubrics were violated. That, of course, is a very low bar, and insufficient for "good liturgy" (a point on which thoughtful traditionalists and thoughtful progressives might agree).
It was an outright abomination. I wouldn’t be surprised if God sent nuclear fallout to New York for the abomination that just occurred in the cathedral. Make reparation and console your God.
Yes, but the problem is that the music is not even a four-hymn sandwich of poor hymns. It's a whole thing unto itself…
The eucharistic discipline is better than in the past, which is a low bar, and I still see better in average parishes — and I also think that we're just disappointed that it's not even something close to the slippery middle ground with respect to music (others might say dignity…), not that it's the worst out there. But there are genuine liturgical abuses to be found as Chaswjd pointed out, even as the bishops of the same diocese will shut down a TLM or even meddle with a Latin NO.
@fcb - The fact that "not many rubrics were violated" doesn't speak well for the rubrics. If this - even legally speaking - is as legitimate expression of the Roman rite as one with full Gregorian chant, then there isn't much Roman rite left.
“The more a piece approaches the Gregorian form in its style and savor, the more worthy it is of the temple, and the less in uniformity it is with this model, the less worthy it is of the temple…”
La Wreck has been la même wreck for years. Why do y'all destroy your serenity by watching? Why pick that scab?
That's not my church. Yes, it shares physical and juridical space with my church. Just like Christus der König in Ruhstorf an der Rott does. (I used to play Der Ententanz 6 times a night for a street full of drunken Cincinnatians; trust me when I say it's inappropriate for Communion.) If I pay undue attention to that church, I'll be tempted to think it's mine, and to run from that Church faster than the Apostles split Gethsemane when the Romans showed up. May God save me from that.
To participate in the discussions on Catholic church music, sign in or register as a forum member, The forum is a project of the Church Music Association of America.