There's a church around here that has big screens set up. I have avoided that parish for years now but I'd imagine PowerPoint is involved somehow now. Their DoM is also some kind of recording artist...

These are all faults that happen every sunday in souther baptist churches.

Along with soloists who bring their own tracks and end up standing silent when the sound guy plays: the wrong track, the wrong cd....while musicians very capable of playing are sitting there....

The background on most of the slides looks like it came from the opening credits of the "Looney Tunes" shorts. Just sayin'.

Oh, and they might want to update their Mass texts.

I agree, Adam. But I found it much harder to produce white-on-black than I would have thought. Part of the problem was trying to produce the music using the (free) tools that I have, and there was also a need to make the white fonts more bold than when we did black-on-white.

We also got into interesting discussions about using a background color that reflected the liturgical color of the day, or one that more matches the color scheme of the inside of our church.

Any artwork used is purely decorative, basically a meditative aid to substitute for a blank screen.

This is something that's still under development at my previous parish - it's not easy.

And, of course, never, never, never any animation or clipart. Totally inappropriate.

>>I agree, Adam. But I found it much harder to produce white-on-black than I would have thought. Part of the problem was trying to produce the music using the (free) tools that I have,

Photoshop. One click.
There must be some free tool that does reverse-images also.

>>and there was also a need to make the white fonts more bold than when we did black-on-white.

Make your font bigger. Use Garamond.
Most people (in corporate PowerPoint world also) try to make their fonts too small and put too much on the screen.

>>We also got into interesting discussions about using a background color that reflected the liturgical color of the day, or one that more matches the color scheme of the inside of our church.
NO.
The whole point of black background is that it is less obtrusive.
Since it is a projection, the black is actually a lack of anything.
So then you are just projecting what is required.

>>Any artwork used is purely decorative, basically a meditative aid to substitute for a blank screen.
NO.
No artwork.
There is absolutely nothing that can be projected on a wall by a projector that could possibly be edifying in a liturgical context.
The whole point behind black-screen, white text is minimize and/or mitigate the awfulness of a projector use.

>>And, of course, never, never, never any animation or clipart. Totally inappropriate.
No art whatsoever.


The second you cross the line into adding a background color, putting in a nice image for meditation, or even choosing a second font (for variety) all hope that it will ever be a tasteful and restrained aide to worship is lost and you enter into cheezeball territory. Even if the one piece of art isn't bad, or the second font choice is perfectly fine, it opens the floodgates for creativity and fun, which means it's only a matter of time before someone does something truly horrendous.

It's very similar to the less-evil cousin, the printed worship aide.
They should be printed in black ink on good, white paper. There should be a single, tasteful font used throughout. There should be no artwork.
Because even if YOUR choice of artwork is good. Even if YOUR mix of fonts is perfectly fine... the annoying church office lady who takes over the making of programs when you leave or go on vacation (or who steals the task from you in some weird liturgical powerplay) will not notice the difference between your traditional line-art and her pagan-lady-praying-to-fire ("It's the Holy Spirit").

You mean, you don't use the flowing fields of wheat movies behind the presentation of the gifts, bubbling brooks during baptism? With appropriate new age mindless music?

>>It makes me wonder what discussions were taking place when books were first introduced into Masses hundreds of years ago.

I understand that Plato was sure that writing would be the downfall of civilization.

I find them a distraction because they take you away from looking at what it really going on.

I propose that being at Mass where video cameras project the priest at the altar may not be valid if you spend your time watching the priest on the video screen instead of the priest.

Think about it.

If this is "acceptable", then why not watch him from home and have the Extraordinary Ministers on camera fill pre-addressed envelopes with consecrated hosts and have alter persons accompany them with lit candles to the big blue mailbox on the corner adn drop them is for later consumption at home.

In fact, have then pre-sanctified, mailed off with an effective date for consumption, including the time of the TV video Mass. "This host only valid for consumption while viewing the 11:00 Mass from St. johns. No other TV Mass at an other time satisfies your obligation."

Envelopes should read, "THIS ENVELOPE CONTAINS THE PRESENCE OF THE LORD _ DO NOT FOLD STAPLE..."

My strong preference is for well-made hand booklets.

But I think there are some (very few) instances where a projection screen is better or the only possibility.
(Or where previous controlling forces have foisted one upon you unwillingly).

In these cases, it is good to know what the least-bad way of doing it is.

In my opinion (from direct, practical experience):
-White on black
-Garamond or another high quality, serif, liturgical-book font (Garamond was used in the 1979 American BCP)
-Giant font size
-no artwork, no decoration, nothing not 100% needed by the congregation
-do not use as an aide to mediation, as a presentation tool for the homily, or as a place to put welcome announcements. If the congregation does not need to be reading or singing something out loud, there should be nothing on the screen
-no bullet points
-no animations or slide transition. In fact, you can use a PDF viewer in full screen mode. (This is actually a great idea- because if you're going to do it in a PDF, you can build the document in InDesign or something instead of PowerPoint)
-resist all attempts to add or be clever

What drove me away finally from Protestant churches was the way that Gnostics took over the last one I belonged to. They had a wonderful pastor and, boy, did they hate him. He was Black, they were white liberals, and his loyalty to Scripture really made them mad.

One trick they pulled, when I think he was still Asst. Pastor, was cry out about the system we used--two reliable old hymnals (one denominational, one not) and a projector for all the then-new "praise and worship" songs. But this was just pretext: they ginned up a "crisis," stacked the committee, and imposed the new denominational hymnal, which was "inclusive."

Those of us who were orthodox kicked and screamed, so the Elders said we should not use any hymns that varied from the Creeds. Fat chance. But as the orthodox streamed out the door, I was a band leader, and any hymn whose "inclusive" text excluded Christ got sung with the old text projected. Ooooo, boy, was I unpopular.

I think screens can work, but am not sure why you would use them.

As for that hymnal, I somehow remembered the word "etiolated," and thought that might apply. It did: it's what happens when you cover plants and they turn white becase there can't synthesize chlorophyll or whatever is the correct way to say that. So it means "bleached white by lack of light." The "inclusive" hymnal excluded the Light of the Gospel, and the church went from attempting to be a "church for all peoples" to a church for white people who wore natural colored fabric.