Or what about that Alleluia?

For those interested, the World Youth Day July 23rd Mass is on YouTube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3oWBLmG1XY

It's a problem. This whole event is a problem in terms of liturgical music.

The contrast between that horrendous Alleluia and the deacon beautifully chanting the Gospel immediately after was striking.

I only hope there's not a repeat when the Pope's there.

The papal liturgies (without music printed) for the entire week can be found here.

For an international gathering like World Youth Day, it's remarkable that all liturgies are in Portuguese, with only a couple of Latin elements. Also, the 'Hino da JMJ Rio 2013' for the 'Canto de entrada' at Sunday Mass (p. 145) isn't an encouraging prospect...

(I should have said, the showmanship is polished, except perhaps for the lip sync error just after 1:43:43)

Here's a link to the English language Liturgy Book:

http://saltandlighttv.org/worldyouthday/includes/pdfs/english_prayer_book_WYD_2013.pdf

The text of the official theme song captures the theme chosen by Pope Benedict quite well. The music? Well, that's just contemporary Brazilian pop music. I would have preferred something more subtle - Jobim should have been commissioned to compose the music!

Kathy asks an important question: Is there any participation from the PIPs at these WYD events (actually, at any big event papal liturgies)? Perhaps any venue which is not a stadium is going to have such sound delays as to make participation impossible for all but those closest to the altar.

Perhaps all the music for JMJ Rio 2013 is newly composed. If so, don't expect even the front rows to join in, except in often-repeated refrains.

I had a role in the organization of Bl. John Paul's 1987 pastoral visit to the USA. I think all agree that the best sung participation by the PIP's occurred at the Phoenix Mass. As I remember, it was pretty much selections from "Glory and Praise," the predominant hymnal for the Phoenix diocese in those days. The sung eucharistic acclamations was the setting by Fr. Bob Dufford. Sun Devil Stadium was a great site, and the people sang their hearts out.

@cgz: I'm not a defender of large venue papal Masses. I'm not even a fan of televised Masses!

I said nothing about people's singing being "the measure of a Mass" - whatever you may mean by those words. I was only speaking about how the PIPs sang.

@Julie Coll: Please say more. I don't understand your crypic comment.

It seems to be an issue throughout Brazil. If you are to believe the news, this kind of music is being used frequently in parishes to counter the evangelical Protestant megachurches that are popping up and stealing members from the fold in droves. Unfortunately, it seems to fly in the face of what John Paul II and Benedict XVI have said about such international gatherings and the use of the Latin language.

Incidentally, looking at the liturgy book Fr. Krisman has posted, they didn't even use the Latin Sanctus & Agnus Dei that are printed in there. It is disappointing to say the least. I wonder if there was a change of plans between the time the book was printed and last night.

As I'm typing, I'm watching the Mass from Nossa Senhora da Apraecida. It's a little more encouraging...not perfect, but a far cry from last night. The deacon is doing a beautiful job chanting the Gospel to a solemn tone.

A passing fad suffering a slow death with cpr from desparate supporters

Yes, that was my sense. It's like Entertainment | Liturgy | Entertainment | Liturgy

and so on

by comparison, of course, the liturgical elements seem dull. This is what happens when you mix purposes and voices. The Catholicism part seems like an imposition that doesn't belong.

Yes and the cognitive dissonance likely occurs to people on both sides of this issue (liturgy and entertainment). I'd be optimistic this will eventually lead to thoughtful choices being made with regard to the music serving the liturgy.

So well-done entertainment music versus poorly done "traditional" music?

Is there any participation from the PIPs at these WYD events (actually, at any big event papal liturgies)?

I've attended a number of papal liturgies in Rome, and I believe that participation is indeed possible. Many of the major Masses in St. Peter's are preceded by one of the Hours from the Office, quietly and beautifully done. The chanted Masses are in the common language (Latin), and provision is made for alternation between two choirs, one of which leads the congregation, and so everyone participates. Far fewer people sing along when an Italian hymn is sung, on Christmas for example.

Even when someone else is singing--when the deacon chants the Gospel, for example--everyone seems to be participating through active listening.

In my personal experience, once everybody put their cameras and ipads down and made themselves available, the opportunities for active participation at Pope Benedict's major Masses were very rich indeed.

Add to that the great number of women religious and priests who attend papal Masses in Rome and who are familiar with some of the Latin chants of the Kyriale, and the comparison of papal Masses in Rome and outside it is weakened even further.

It's really not about this. At 1st Advent Vespers, I was in a large area of St. Peter's without religious and priests--mostly because all the university-affiliated people were in a separate section, because they are special guests at that service every year. Only a single sister and I seemed to have been familiar with the LOH among everyone in a big area. At least we were the only ones singing confidently. Everyone else (after the initial ridiculous frenzy) seemed to hunker down and try to make out how to sing along too. It was really nice participation of your more singalong type.

Regarding the big spaces, I think chant would go a long way towards making this effective. One of the many problems is that each WYD wants to recreate the wheel. They sing things nobody knows, in the local language. Of course no one can join in.

I wish they would just try a Taize chant a cappella and see how it goes. I think it might work. It works in St. Peter's square, but for different reasons, including spatial confinement. I think it might work on a field just because it's repetitive and simple enough to waft over long distance, and perhaps--a key--familiar enough to a critical mass of attendees.

Greatly saddened. Wouldn't care for the poor have precluded the intentionally mediocre?

Fr. Krisman,
I'm very reassured to hear that you're not an advocate of outside Masses. I have thought they are a dreadful mistake for decades - more or less since I was old enough to form an opinion.


"measure of a Mass": the American bishops once wrote something to the effect that good celebrations of the Mass nourish faith, and bad celebrations weaken or damage faith. In that venue, they then insert "full, conscious, active participation", and mean by it - by implication but not by direct claim - decibel level from PIP and number of laymen not in their pews because of liturgical ministry. If "the people sang their hearts out" is measured against what these bishops wrote, it was a good Mass. If, mind, we remember what measures Mass, then how loudly or lustily the people sang is, finally, irrelevant. Did the choir of angels sing or weep? Did the Church Triumphant sing or weep? Did the Father, Son and Holy Ghost accept the offering and bestow rich blessings or not?

God bless,

Chris

@cgz: my problem with the entirety of your third paragraph is that I do not accept your premise. You state that the American Bishops do not "directly claim" something yet you know what they really mean.

I appreciate what SKipR wrote.

This makes me ill.
In WHAT respect is this a Catholic Mass? How can anyone reconcile this with the documents of the church?

It is no wonder that Directors of Religious Education everywhere insist on a "Contemporary Mass" to "engage" the youth and of COURSE the youth will opt for this music when given the choice. It is because it is what they have been TOLD they want. No one has taken the time to even mention traditional Catholic music. Chant aside, I doubt that, before my time at my current parish, the youth would have even been able to sing a few notes of traditional HYMNODY like "Holy God, We Praise Thy Name."

During the Academic Year, I succumb to the pressure of a "contemporary Mass" (for the time being) but have balanced it by using the same repertoire we use at the other Masses - I just play them on the piano. During Lent, however, there is no compromise. All Masses use minimal organ, Gregorian Chant, and traditional hymns. I can tell you, when we use the piano and try to cater to the "taste" of the youth, the amount of eye-rolling on the part of the youth to whose taste this music is supposed to appeal is embarrassing for everyone involved (including the Director of Music...) The only one that is mildly pleased is the DRE. When we switch to Lent, the kids might look bored at Mass, but they CERTAINLY aren't rolling their eyes.

I know I'm preaching to the choir (no pun) here, and I know we generally try to take a more mild attitude toward differences in liturgical and musical taste, but this is crossing the line and is downright disgraceful. Even the spotlights direct the liturgy on "ME ME ME." Terrible.

Again, my apologies but if I can't vent here, it's going to happen in front of my Pastor and I'll be out on the street.

Hahaha, I know. But I've seen enough on this community to know some people take issue with strong opinions either way. I exaggerate, though. I doubt I'd be put on the street. My pastor generally shares my views, but takes a bit more of the eclectic "please everyone" route which, if you couldn't tell, has been rearing its ugly head this week. Frustrating though it is, I'm sure we would both agree THIS is unacceptable, and for that (among many other things) I am grateful. For the record.

I know this might be slightly off-topic, but I think it's more than a tangential question, considering our common lived experience of the Catholic liturgy these past 43 years.

In light of the different Masses we've been discussing the last few days, I'm reminded of the famous comment by the former head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani, who, in his study of the New Mass had this to Pope Paul VI (cf. The Ottaviani Intervention)

"the Novus Ordo represents, both as a whole and in its details, a striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Mass as it was formulated in Session XXII of the Council of Trent."

Now, while fully accepting both the validity of the Novus Ordo and the authority of the Church to make changes in the liturgy, and in no way being associated with any dissident traditionalist groups, I still have to ask the question:

Is it possible that Cardinal Ottaviani could have been correct in his assessment?

Just askin'.

www.vatican.va
English
Resource Library
II Vatican Council

Sacrosanctum Concilium (Dec 4, 1963)

20. Transmissions of the sacred rites by radio and television shall be done with discretion and dignity, under the leadership and direction of a suitable person appointed for this office by the bishops. This is especially important when the service to be broadcast is the Mass.

Inter Mirifica (Dec 4, 1963)

11. [...] They ought always to be mindful, however, that a great many of their readers and audiences are young people, who need a press and entertainment that offer them decent amusement and cultural uplift. In addition, they should see to it that communications or presentations concerning religious matters are entrusted to worthy and experienced hands and are carried out with fitting reverence.

"... a striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Mass as it was formulated in Session XXII of the Council of Trent."

Is it possible that Cardinal Ottaviani could have been correct in his assessment?

Of course, but in part that was the point. This was a great part of the criticism of the old order of Mass: that it expressed a certain sacramental theology that was (1) excessively clerical, (2) excessively negative, and (3) excessively focused on sacrifice to the exclusion of communitarian aspects. The Council of Trent in Session XXII strongly reinforced the sacrificial and clerical elements of our theology of the Mass, because that was the relevant response to what was happening in the sixteenth century. But one can place a distorted emphasis on confessedly valid and important aspects of theology, and that was a criticism leveled against the old Mass: e.g., three Confiteors in a single Mass represents an excess of the negative theology of abasement, while not expecting the congregation to participate in any of them signifies a distorted clericalism. Nor is it the case that there was no theology of the Mass until the Council of Trent came along, as some of the polemics on this issue seem to presuppose.

It takes a higher order of thinking, then, to determine what sort of theology it is that we do want the Mass to express, and in what measure and balance. Cardinal Ottaviani did such thinking, of course, and expressed his considered opinions (not in the sound-bite fashion that makes for easy posting on internet boards); it just so happens that his opinions were minority ones. In any event, however, it is important not to over-simplify what such a "change in theology" means: people like sedevacantists think, "A religion is its theology. Thus new theology means a new religion," or else "The traditional theology is that Mass is a sacrifice. So if there has been a 'change' in theology, that can only mean that they no longer consider the Mass a sacrifice, thereby making their Masses invalid." It is not an issue of a binary state.

Some would call the theology of the new Mass "fuller," and others "weaker," than that of the old. My own view is a bit of both; in particular that the modern Mass, both as contained in the documents and as expressed in ordinary praxis, in many ways expresses a fuller mix of what we believe as Catholics yet routinely gets the balance wrong in the other direction -- the cure for a situation of three Confiteors with congregational participation in none is not no Confiteors at all, which is the frequent state of things. Likewise I don't approve of the theology expressed by old "perfidious Jews" prayer, but I don't think the solution is to pray that they be better Jews, as we currently do. I'm sure we will arrive at a via media someday.

Susbstituting anything else no matter how well sung, is inappropriate.

I'm not arguing for entertainment, but really, "anything else"? Funny how the GIRM does not say that.