“Cathedrals,” [the rector] said, “are kind of the epicenter for culture presentation and development.”

Exactly WHOSE "culture," Father?

Bravo for Mr Kenny!
Now, how do we cleanse the Church of sacro-pop, sacro-rock, sacro-C&W, sacro-Deiss, sacro-Haugen-and-worse, and so on, which are welcomed into the Church precisely because of their non-sacral aesthetic by those who can't stand, or are embarrassed at, real Christian worship. It is astonishing, the utter inability of the sacerdotal persons involved in this calumny to find anything at all incongruent in this blasphemous and irreverent hollywoodesque cavalcade. Too bad that they don't have holy minds to go with their 'holy orders'!

(Mr Kenny should be ordained right now - and every one of these priests, and their bishop, de-frocked and made janitors.)

In a similar vein, Charles, I have often (pretty much every week, unless there were decent wedding flowers left behind) considered taking some floral scissors and cutting out all the sprays in altar flower arrangements. They don't make me look at the crucifix, they make me think, "wow, do they not see the flower monsters that I see, with all the weird tentacles waiting to grab a server?"
I actually mentioned it to one of our priests (but outside of our parish) and he seemed to think it a decent idea, and that there probably wouldn't be anyone around to see it was me if I just waited until after a Mass some time.

Since we're in Lent, though, I really want to throw out the altar "arrangement" of...dry reeds?

Who pays for these things? Are they really okay with the flower monsters in the sanctuary? If I ever donated money for altar flowers, it would be with the stipulation that I get to choose the arrangement - though, I sort of suspect they'd reject my offer.

From the CDW:

http://www.adoremus.org/concerts.html

Churches, however, cannot be considered simply as public places for any kind of meeting. They are sacred places, that is, "set apart" in a permanent way for divine worship by their dedication and blessing.

As visible constructions, churches are signs of the pilgrim Church on earth; they are images that proclaim the heavenly Jerusalem, places in which are actualized the mystery of the communion between man and God. Both in urban areas and in the countryside, the church remains the house of God, and the sign of his dwelling among men. It remains a sacred place, even when no liturgical celebration is taking place.

In a society disturbed by noise, especially in big cities, churches are also an oasis where men gather, in silence and in prayer, to seek peace of soul and the light of faith.

That will only be possible in so far as churches maintain their specific identity. When churches are used for ends other than those for which they were built, their role as a sign of the Christian mystery is put at risk, with more or less serious harm to the teaching of the faith and to the sensitivity of the People of God, according to the Lord's words: "My house is a house of prayer" (Lk 19:46).

SomeOne else cleansed the temple once upon a time, long, long ago.
The priests were amongst the most vociferous in demanding that he be crucified.
What is it about priests, the stewards of all that is holy???


(And, no, one doesn't lose sight of those many priests who are exemplary in their holiness.)

MJO, why the inclusion and indictment of Deiss? Just curious.

Matthew, that's pretty much what I do when I'm home from Benedictine. I go to St. Peter's with my family fairly often and they at least do the introit and communion propers, but I'm sick of hearing the Missa de Angelis or Jubilate Deo Mass every Sunday of the year -_-

Melo -
Admittedly, there is a very great difference between Deiss and some of the other stuff that I listed. One might begrudingly even say that Haugen, too, is better that some of that other stuff. That being granted, I see Deiss as inapt for liturgy because his music simply lacks that ceremonial, ritual, gorgeous and inspirational character appropriate for liturgical celebration. It is rather anemic and not very much different from the Taize genre - nice, if one likes it, for private devotions or para-liturgical exercises, but not for the profound splendour of public liturgy. Still, though, his music is far better than the company I put him in up above. Thanks for the question: you made me think twice.

"dry reeds"

They remind me of the brooms from the Sorcerer's Apprentice.
Someone really likes "floral" displays that look like they'll come to life and get you, any second now..

That’s why I’m stunned. These people do know better...

Maybe they had purple flowers.

Doesn't this town have a botanical conservatory or something? That's where this display belongs (or any other secular public building), not the Cathedral.

In several more years, Mary Poppins will be co-opted by mother church as have been so many originally pagan personages who have displayed saintly characteristics. (cf St. Cecilia)

I expect the Graduale of 2116 will contain propers for Blessed Maria Popinia, Doctor of the Church, Patroness of Sweeps, Oscar winner.

Introit: Nutrito aves
Alleluia: Ego amare ridere
Gradual: Super calle frage listic ex pial a docis
Offertory: Perfecta a matricibus
Communion: Cochlearium saccharo

What about St. Shrek, you say? Well, what about him?

I wonder if the lawyers were called in to access the damage Jesus made when he went through the temple over turning tables.

What about St. Shrek, you say? Well, what about him?

Shrek was de-canonized for deviant behavior. ;-)

Speaking of conflating synonyms leading to a boom, since when does the Swamp Meister's flatulence constitute deviant behavior? Seems totally appropriate both to Shrek and to natural law, just ask my French Bulldogs!

That's really sad, Julie.
I think that liturgy and worship are fun. They are highly, profoundly enjoyable to me on a certain spiritual level. Perhaps 'holy "fun"' would be a way to put it. This kind of 'fun' is wholly human, involving mind, body, spirit and soul in a sometimes near ecstasy - even in penance and contemplation. I'm certain that I am not alone in this. (I hasten to add that my worship is not predicated upon 'experiencing' this sacred 'fun'. That's what makes it special when it happens!)

This is, isn't it?, very different from the kind of 'fun' that these adolescents' supervisors think that their charges need, or are so immature and shallow as to find congruent in their experience of worship. This is a serious indictment of adults and priests who think that worship is, of itself, so boring, such a burden, such a profound embarrassment, that we must dress it up, redeem it, with 'fun' stuff. It is refreshing, indeed, and perhaps justifies a bit of holy Schadenfreud, when we see certain youth who are actually put off by such antics, and are wiser than their elders.

Thanks for the helpful perspective, MJO. Holy fun is singing an EF Missa Cantata with chant and polyphony. Most fun you can ever have in church. : )

It is interesting that Diess, which 30 years ago you used to hear every week in church has totally disappeared. You cannot even find his music in any hymnals anywhere. One HOPES that will be the way of much that we hear today.

the theology of Deiss

http://www.adoremus.org/0413Benofy.html

I am very uncomfortable with including Lucien Deiss in the unlettered group of composers whose work is emblematic of the post Vat II liturgical music mess.

I have an LP of Lucien Deiss conducting a male choir in Paris. (I don't remember the name and it is in the garage with all the other LPs, sigh.) The repertoire is all polyphony, primarily Renaissance. The performances are very beautiful. To me, this recording, along with his chant recordings (see OCP!) and incidental experiences I had with him years ago at workshops, establish his bona fides as a talented and serious classical musician, something one cannot say about the waves of American folk/pop composers.

Here is a site where you can hear him conduct chant:
http://www.musicme.com/#/Lucien-Deiss/albums/Paroles-De-Dieu-3133580130564.html

None of the pop wave musicians wrote anything which approaches this sonority:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RzRh1jwICzM

To my ear, the music of Deiss shows the influence of chant rhythm and melodic (modal) structure. His music seems to have been written in obedience to what he saw as Vat II's requirement for a certain type of congregational singing. I think his music is an attempt to bring serious compositional technique to simple, "singable", music. As such, he has my respect to a greater degree than most of the mainstream post conciliar composers. Like many of the mainstream composers, his texts range from good to excellent.

To be sure, his music is far from universally successful. His rhythm, which reflects both the freedom of chant and its original French language, is sometimes stilted. His melodies are sometimes oddly angular. At his best, though, he provides simple attractive music without maudlin pop/emotional overlay. His choral writing is well crafted and vocally idiomatic. He writes organ and brass accompaniments (himself!!) which work very well in the right context.


I regard Deiss in much the same light as Alexander Peloquin and (to a lesser degree) Richard Proulx: a fine musician who tried mightily to find a way to bring a serious music technique and perspective to a liturgy in the midst of a seismic ecclesial and cultural shift. It should not be surprising that they were not entirely successful. Just the same, I believe that they are to be admired for how well and bravely they soldiered on. While a component of Proulx's music is surviving, Deiss' and Peloquin's seem, at this point, to be dead ends. (To cite an example from an enormously different level of accomplishment, they are like Hindemith-prolific and influencing virtually none.)

Now that I am finished damning him with faint praise, here is the bottom line: I still use some Deiss, and would use more if it were still available in the throw-aways we have in the pews.

A Thomas Tallis, Thomas Morley or William Byrd for our time?

Still looking!