A different way of looking at the NPM fish

amindthatsuits

As someone who was there for the opening procession at NPM, let me offer a different conclusion than some might draw.

There is no question that people of a particular view of things hogged the planning of the "plenum" sessions. They did not have the hearts and minds of many very well-intentioned people in attendance.

Three things are worth noting: in several years reading this list, I don't recall ANY mention of recent liturgical liberties of this magnitude. Was this Gettysburg: the Tidewater Mark of the Liturgical Novelty Seekers?

The other thing worth noting is that no one mentioned Pope the Bl. John Paul II, and yet in conversation with normal people his name drew smiles. There is one view of Vatican II, and that is that it was some horrible rupture in the tradition of the Church. Therefore, the fight is over which side "wins" in following the Council--or restoring the older tradition. Seen that way, the papacy of John Paul was nothing more than a successful attempt to keep the Church together to provide a stage for people to duke it out.

Then there is the much more orthodox view, which is that Vatican II is completely of a whole with the tradition with the Church. As it was never declared infallible, then it falls to the Magisterium to interpret it. Seen that way, John Paul's teaching is a very deep and blessed well of wisdom in applying the teachings of the Council and the entire Church. Traditionalists must accept the Novus Ordo and think with the Church about all the old liturgical practices. To the "left," the answer on liturgy was quite clear: I have read all your books, I have seen what you do at Mass, here is my considered opinion--everything must be in conformity with the nature of the Mass, in keeping with the great tradition of Catholic liturgy. Se his Chirograph on Sacred Music.

And guess what? To the extent that they think in those terms, I get the sense the average faithful Catholic is uninterested in fights and is interested in what John Paul had to say.

The third thing to note is that age and ethnic uniformity of the attendees. One speaker commented how the US would not be majority white in 2040--glowing, as if the very white interpretation of "multiculturalism" would then triupmh. Oh, I felt like shouting, then we are getting more people from countries whose cardinals made sure that liberal Europeans and Americans did not get to elect the Pope and cheered the election of Joseph Ratzinger because "now we will have clarity," in the words of Francis Card. Arinze. You mean the US will have lots of those people? Sounds good to me.

Oh, and we might lay off the fish kites (not puppets) now that we have had our say. One lady I in the Chant institute was very grateful to read John Paul's chirograph, which I ran off fore everyone, and ALSO thought the fish were "beautiful." She no significance otherwise.

Just a thought.

Kenneth

Jeffrey Tucker

I heard that Ken C speech. It was interesting. But it had nothing to do with liturgy really. It was a presentation of fashionable multicultural theory implausibly applied to liturgy -- and then with no certain conclusions other than to make people squeamish and confused and supposing that doing what's in the books is probably imperialist and racist.

And then look at the audience: almost entirely pasty faced, well fed, and aging. Sorry to say. But it's just true. It shouldn't and doesn't matter except that it does when this crowd appoints itself the interpreter and coddler of the world's disenfranchised. Talk about imperialism and condescension.

I love and respect Ken but this talk was patronizing and essentially off topic.

Adam Wood

this crowd appoints itself the interpreter and coddler of the world's disenfranchised. Talk about imperialism and condescension.

DING DING DING We have a winner.

kevinf

of the world's disenfranchised

Some would call Jesus the caregiver for these people. And they were not the ones at the NPM convention.

amindthatsuits

Jeff, my point exactly. This was an aging white liberal crowd, and the feeling I was left with was that they are worried "that people have forgotten." The youthfulness of the CMAA Colloquium crowd gives me hope. Yes, the fish thing was a step backwards, but way, WAYYYYY back. Does this kind of thing happen a lot? I suspect not. So use JPII to teach people about the Liturgy. Show that "we" are the ones following the Council. Not with "TRUE Spirit of Vatican II" talk, but by taking the Council documents and JPII's teaching and the GIRM and saying, "See, this is what the Church wants."

Kenneth

amindthatsuits

And, true, too, Jeff, I kept wondering what any of the multi-culti boilerplate had to do with Liturgy--except the planted axiom that the numeric "triumph" of non-whites some time in the future would mean the end of the traditional liturgy, and not its reaffirmation. A big if.

The closing speech, by Bob Hurd, was quite another thing entirely, one that is perhaps more important that people have missed.

Kenneth

CharlesW

White liberals make far too many assumptions. Having a large number of African immigrants in my congregation has been an eye opener. They are far more traditional and conservative than many whites. These non-whites could triumph, and the Church would be better off in plenty of places.

Secondly, who appointed those NPM Oprah-ites to be anyone's conscience? Are they holier than the rest of us? Do they know more about either life or music? Is their collective angst something any rational person should even care about? I don't think so. I learned long ago to never let such folks manipulate me into feeling guilty about anything.

Welcome to the MusicaSacra Forum!

Categories