Evangelization Efforts

[zalzan]

Getting back to evangelism and music. There is a great site called [url="http://www.catholicjukebox.com"]www.catholicjukebox.com[/url] which is a wonderful meeting point and showcase for Catholic musicians. I highly recommend people check it out, and consider promoting more contemporary styles of music in our worship, in keeping with Church teaching and encouraged by our Bishops' Conference.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='zalzan' timestamp='1302719298' post='2228254']
You are clearly a person who deals in rigid absolutes. There is a slo a serious problem with your hermeneutic. I did not reject it. I stated you have to interpret Church teaching by other teaching, and also by rank. This is especially true where pastoral considerations come into play. We could have a whole discussion about how Church teaching develops. Sacrosanctum Concilium is our most recent binding, Dogmatic Teaching on the Liturgy. It supercedes, even if it in some instiances compliments, Pius X's teaching.
In addition to Sacrosanctum Concilium, we have the teaching of our local ordinaries in Sing to the Lord.

I am sorry to hear that you feel we have nothing to discuss, but this is more of a function of you imposing your own flawed hermeneutic rigidly on my own intentions and Church Teaching. With Church teaching we must take a broad view and respect parameters that are set up in it, as opposed to trying to force it into some kind of "rigid uniformity."
[/quote]
Your local ordinaries have no authority if they contradict legitimate Church teachings. If my bishop says that Christ had only one nature, he's a heretic. He's not implementing local teachings; he's wrong.
S.C. does nothing to contradict T.L.S.. It partially abrogates Pope St. Pius X's directive that mixed choirs are not allowed, but it maintains consistently that only *sacred* music is to be used, and of *sacred* music, Gregorian Chant holds pride of place within the Latin Church. There is no intellectually honest reading in the world of this document that allows such drivel as Haugen, Haas, Hurd, and Canedo.
I am rigid only where the Church Herself is, for the purpose of legitimate, reverent, faithful worship.

[zalzan]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1302720033' post='2228261']
Your local ordinaries have no authority if they contradict legitimate Church teachings. If my bishop says that Christ had only one nature, he's a heretic. He's not implementing local teachings; he's wrong.
S.C. does nothing to contradict T.L.S.. It partially abrogates Pope St. Pius X's directive that mixed choirs are not allowed, but it maintains consistently that only *sacred* music is to be used, and of *sacred* music, Gregorian Chant holds pride of place within the Latin Church. There is no intellectually honest reading in the world of this document that allows such drivel as Haugen, Haas, Hurd, and Canedo.
I am rigid only where the Church Herself is, for the purpose of legitimate, reverent, faithful worship.
[/quote]


Ah, now we finally come to it! I was hoping this would not happen. You have set yourself up as an authority over our own local ordinaries, with your implication that their approval of the artists you mention sets them somehow at odds with Rome. Church teaching tells us that we must "cleave" to our bishop. You have instead chosen to cleave to a distorted hermeneutic that takes Church teaching out of context and ignores the principles of development of doctrine as well as the pastoral parameters established. I myself trust our Bishops, the Successors of the Apostles, who are in full communion with Rome (no excommunications, interdicts or censures lately that I have heard of).

I also note that Rome has recently taken up the issue of evangelization again, and one of the remarks I saw indicates a concern that our efforts have been stagnant. I sense great things coming in the work of evangelism.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='zalzan' timestamp='1302720851' post='2228272']
Ah, now we finally come to it! I was hoping this would not happen. You have set yourself up as an authority over our own local ordinaries, with your implication that their approval of the artists you mention sets them somehow at odds with Rome. Church teaching tells us that we must "cleave" to our bishop. You have instead chosen to cleave to a distorted hermeneutic that takes Church teaching out of context and ignores the principles of development of doctrine as well as the pastoral parameters established. I myself trust our Bishops, the Successors of the Apostles, who are in full communion with Rome (no excommunications, interdicts or censures lately that I have heard of).

I also note that Rome has recently taken up the issue of evangelization again, and one of the remarks I saw indicates a concern that our efforts have been stagnant. I sense great things coming in the work of evangelism.
[/quote]
Are you telling me that if my bishop says that Christ has one nature only, that he is not a heretic?

[zalzan]

here is a blurb I found referenceing the "New Evangelism." We as Catholics at the grass roots level really need to be on board with the Pope and the Bishops in finding better w ays to evangelize. The interesting thing about it is its emphasis on evangelizing areas previously
established by the Church.


[url="http://www.oecumene.radiovaticana.org/en1/Articolo.asp?c=429515"]http://www.oecumene....lo.asp?c=429515[/url]

Edited April 13, 2011 by zalzan

[zalzan]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1302720976' post='2228273']
Are you telling me that if my bishop says that Christ has one nature only, that he is not a heretic?
[/quote]

Where in heaven's name did you get that from my statement? I thought we were speaking about liturgical music and evangelism? I never mentioned the Divine Nature, you did.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='zalzan' timestamp='1302721692' post='2228278']
Where in heaven's name did you get that from my statement? I thought we were speaking about liturgical music and evangelism? I never mentioned the Divine Nature, you did.
[/quote]
I established quite clearly that not everything a hierarch says is within his authority, therefore common sense and discernment is necessary.

[zalzan]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1302721840' post='2228280']
I established quite clearly that not everything a hierarch says is within his authority, therefore common sense and discernment is necessary.
[/quote]

Really, and you consider yourself competent enough to "discern" this? Would one not first defer to the Cardinal Archbishop, then the Papal Nuncio? I have no problem with that, but you yourself have no authority whatsoever to contradict your local ordinaries, especially in a public forum. Such a thing would not cross my mind out of obedience. Consider the following from Sacrosanctum Concilium:

[i][b]A) General norms[/b][/i]

22. 1. Regulation of the sacred liturgy depends solely on the authority of the Church, that is, on the Apostolic See [i]and, as laws may determine, on the bishop[/i].

2. In virtue of power conceded by the law, the regulation of the liturgy [i]within certain defined limits[/i] belongs also to various kinds of competent territorial bodies of bishops legitimately established

now, if we further read the teaching, we see that the "limits" are delineated; bishops can make pastoral judgements regarding music based upon culture and need, with a guiding principle that doctrinal soundness and sacredness are upheld.

If one is going tp publicly accuse our Bishops of promoting "drivel" or of acting in disobedience to Rome, you had better be very sure of yourself.

From St. Paul (!Cor):

"For it seems to me that God has put us apostles on display at the end of the procession, like those condemned to die in the arena. We have been made a spectacle to the whole universe, to angels as well as to human beings. We are fools for Christ, but you are so wise in Christ! We are weak, but you are strong! You are honored, we are dishonored! To this very hour we go hungry and thirsty, we are in rags, we are brutally treated, we are homeless. We work hard with our own hands. When we are cursed, we bless; when we are persecuted, we endure it; when we are slandered, we answer kindly. We have become the scum of the earth, the garbage of the world—right up to this moment."

I have personally known several bishops and at least one Cardinal Archbishop. They were remarkable individuals. I would never in a million years want to treat them as Paul tells us he is used to being treated. When we dismiss our bishops, even our local ordinary, we do so at extreme peril.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='zalzan' timestamp='1302722809' post='2228288']
Really, and you consider yourself competent enough to "discern" this? Would one not first defer to the Cardinal Archbishop, then the Papal Nuncio? I have no problem with that, but you yourself have no authority whatsoever to contradict your local ordinaries, especially in a public forum. Such a thing would not cross my mind out of obedience. Consider the following from Sacrosanctum Concilium:

[i][b]A) General norms[/b][/i]

22. 1. Regulation of the sacred liturgy depends solely on the authority of the Church, that is, on the Apostolic See [i]and, as laws may determine, on the bishop[/i].

2. In virtue of power conceded by the law, the regulation of the liturgy [i]within certain defined limits[/i] belongs also to various kinds of competent territorial bodies of bishops legitimately established

now, if we further read the teaching, we see that the "limits" are delineated; bishops can make pastoral judgements regarding music based upon culture and need, with a guiding principle that doctrinal soundness and sacredness are upheld.

If one is going tp publicly accuse our Bishops of promoting "drivel" or of acting in disobedience to Rome, you had better be very sure of yourself.

From St. Paul (!Cor):

"For it seems to me that God has put us apostles on display at the end of the procession, like those condemned to die in the arena. We have been made a spectacle to the whole universe, to angels as well as to human beings. We are fools for Christ, but you are so wise in Christ! We are weak, but you are strong! You are honored, we are dishonored! To this very hour we go hungry and thirsty, we are in rags, we are brutally treated, we are homeless. We work hard with our own hands. When we are cursed, we bless; when we are persecuted, we endure it; when we are slandered, we answer kindly. We have become the scum of the earth, the garbage of the world—right up to this moment."

I have personally known several bishops and at least one Cardinal Archbishop. They were remarkable individuals. I would never in a million years want to treat them as Paul tells us he is used to being treated. When we dismiss our bishops, even our local ordinary, we do so at extreme peril.
[/quote]
Please point out where Rome has promoted the cringe-worthy 'music' of Haugen, Haas, Hurd, and Canedo.

[zalzan]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1302723134' post='2228292']
Please point out where Rome has promoted the cringe-worthy 'music' of Haugen, Haas, Hurd, and Canedo.
[/quote]


Easily done. Approved by ICEL and our local ordinaries here in the USA. In doing so, the Bishops are acting withing the bounds of the pastoral authority given them. Rome itself does not get involved with approving specific musical arrangements. It has handed this authority to conferences and local ordinaries.

If you examine the document "Musicam Sacram" you will see the expression "competent territorial authorities" used multiple times...i.e:

55. The [i][b]competent territorial authority[/b][/i] will decide whether the vernacular texts traditionally associated with certain melodies may be used, even though these texts do not correspond exactly to the approved translations of liturgical texts.



57. New melodies for the priest and ministers must receive the approval of the[i][b] competent territorial authority[/b][/i]. [40]

however my favorite excerpt is this, since it establishes parameters:

61. The attempt to adapt sacred music in those areas that possess their own musical tradition, especially mission lands, requires special preparation on the part of musicians. [42] The issue is one of harmoniously blending a sense of the sacred with the spirit, traditions, and expressions proper to the genius of those peoples. All involved must possess a sufficient knowledge of the Church's liturgy and musical tradition as well as of the language, the popular singing, and the other cultural expressions of the people for whom they labor.

[zalzan]

oops...for got to add: (from Musicam Sacram)

62. Musical instruments either accompanying the singing or played alone can add a great deal to liturgical celebrations.

"The pipe organ is to be held in high esteem, for it is the traditional musical instrument that adds a wonderful splendor to the Church's ceremonies and powerfully lifts up the spirit to God and to higher things.

"But other instruments also may be admitted for use in divine worship, with the knowledge [i][b]and consent of the competent territorial authority[/b][/i] . . . This may be done, however, only on condition that the instruments are suitable, or can be made suitable, for sacred use, are in accord with the dignity of the place of worship, and truly contribute to the uplifting of the faithful." [43]

63. One criterion for accepting and using musical instruments is the genius and tradition of the particular peoples. At the same time, however, instruments that are generally associated and used only with worldly music are to be absolutely barred from liturgical services and religious devotions. [44] All musical instruments accepted for divine worship must be played in such a way as to meet the requirements of a liturgical service and to contribute to the beauty of worship and the building up of the faithful.


I love this quote, because for about 900 years, organs were considered "worldly" pagan toys and forbidden in Catholic worship. However, the Church gives us the principle of whether a given instrument can be rendered suitable for worship. Also, even if you look at electric guitars or drums, in the late 1900's these almost were exlusively identified with rock music and debauchery. Now, these instruments have a more widespread acceptance in a variety of musical styles.

Again, this all speaks to evangelism. The purpose of liturgical music is to bring people deeper into worship.

[Chamomile]

[quote name='zalzan' timestamp='1302721456' post='2228275']
We as Catholics at the grass roots level really need to be on board with the Pope and the Bishops in finding better w ays to evangelize.
[/quote]


Evangelization springs from personal sanctity and adherence to the Truth. It is rooted in quiet prayer. It is born and nurtured by the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, the Source and Summit of our Catholic life.

The Mass itself does not need to be "evangelized" by music or anything outside itself (which is, at heart, what you are saying, even though you don't realize it), as it is the perfect sacrifice of Our Lord and Savior.

Music is something that should always, always lift our hearts and minds higher to God, especially during the Sacred Liturgy. If it doesn't do that, silence is better. If there is any doubt that the music may take away from the Real Presence of Our Lord - and thus place the focus on that rather than on the Pascal Mystery - silence is better.

I love music, but it can become a god. [b]Especially when you think that is a greater tool to bring one closer to God than the union of a soul with the Body, Blood, Soul, & Divinity of His Son Incarnate[/b]. I bold this because even the most subtle form of disbelief in the Real Presence can allow one to fall into heresy, and I pray that doesn't happen to you because of a disagreement about music.

Please, I kindly ask you to stop arguing about music in the Mass (Nihil, you too ), so that we can discuss what we were originally discussing.

[Chamomile]

[quote name='zalzan' timestamp='1302698155' post='2228131']
Today, music is a key means of evangelization. I firmly believe that as our liturgical music catches up to the present our efforts at evangelism will grow. I live in Florida, and I have about 5 evangelical christian radio stations available here (compared to zero when I lived in NH). The music is beautiful, theologically sound, and is leading people to Christ continually. Absent from this forum is Catholicism. Matt Maher is currently the only contemporary Catholic musician with "hits" on the Christian billboards, and he has been very well received.

The person above mentioned the Rosary...it is ironic to me that the only songs I have heard of the radio waves about Mary are on the evangelical stations and not written by Catholics. This should be a clarion call to us that we need to get moving.

I have been discussing with some freidns about doing some musical sttreetcorner outreach and evangelism..just us, a guitar or two and some hand drums.
[/quote]



I was raised a Protestant, so I do sometimes like to listen to "praise and worship music" outside Mass. Sometimes I like it, sometimes it annoys me because it can be really superficial. Matt Maher's songs are quite good and deeper than most of what's on Protestant stations.

I do agree that there can be a good amount of evangelization done in the area of music - have you listened to the Phatmass rap compilation? Really a.wesome lyrics and music on that!

I totally encourage you to do "streetcorner outreach" with music! [img]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/public/style_emoticons/default/clap2.gif[/img]This is a totally legitimate and beautiful way to bring people to Jesus.

I don't understand why you brought up my talking about the Rosary and then started talking about songs... ? Although music does touch people in a certain way, prayer is infinitely more powerful (since it's God who is working), so that's why I think encouraging praying the Rosary is a great means of evangelization. Not to mention it contains the whole Gospel.

So.... I would suggest handing out Rosaries while you play music [img]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/public/style_emoticons/default/pm.gif[/img] Also holy cards, tiny pamphlets on Catholicism, Miraculous Medals, etc!

[Nihil Obstat]

All the poorly-interpreted quotes in the world don't change the facts that were very clearly expressed by Tra Le Sollecitudini. First among these is that Gregorian Chant is to be normative in the Latin rite, and ALL other music is to be judged by its similarities to it.

3. These qualities are to be found, in the highest degree, in Gregorian Chant, which is, consequently the Chant proper to the Roman Church, the only chant she has inherited from the ancient fathers, which she has jealously guarded for centuries in her liturgical codices, which she directly proposes to the faithful as her own, which she prescribes exclusively for some parts of the liturgy, and which the most recent studies have so happily restored to their integrity and purity.

On these grounds Gregorian Chant has always been regarded as the suprememodel for sacred music, so that it is fully legitimate to lay down thefollowing rule: the more closely a composition for church approaches in its movement, inspiration and savor the Gregorian form, the more sacred and liturgical it becomes; and the more out of harmony it is with that supreme model, the less worthy it is of the temple.


This will not change no matter how many hundreds of years pass. Gregorian Chant is our sacred music, and it must always be preserved and celebrated. It is always to be given the very first place in all Masses in the Latin rite.

[Nihil Obstat]

By the way, the ICEL has zero magisterial authority as a body, and ditto for the USCCB.

[Lil Red]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1302726414' post='2228349']
By the way, the ICEL has zero magisterial authority as a body, and ditto for the USCCB.
[/quote]
i was just about to bring that up

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='Lil Red' timestamp='1302742603' post='2228456']
i was just about to bring that up
[/quote]
I figured you were going to.

[zalzan]

[quote name='Chamomile' timestamp='1302725375' post='2228331']
Evangelization springs from personal sanctity and adherence to the Truth. It is rooted in quiet prayer. It is born and nurtured by the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, the Source and Summit of our Catholic life.

The Mass itself does not need to be "evangelized" by music or anything outside itself (which is, at heart, what you are saying, even though you don't realize it), as it is the perfect sacrifice of Our Lord and Savior.

Music is something that should always, always lift our hearts and minds higher to God, especially during the Sacred Liturgy. If it doesn't do that, silence is better. If there is any doubt that the music may take away from the Real Presence of Our Lord - and thus place the focus on that rather than on the Pascal Mystery - silence is better.

I love music, but it can become a god. [b]Especially when you think that is a greater tool to bring one closer to God than the union of a soul with the Body, Blood, Soul, & Divinity of His Son Incarnate[/b]. I bold this because even the most subtle form of disbelief in the Real Presence can allow one to fall into heresy, and I pray that doesn't happen to you because of a disagreement about music.

Please, I kindly ask you to stop arguing about music in the Mass (Nihil, you too ), so that we can discuss what we were originally discussing.
[/quote]


No one is speaking about evangelizing the Mass...I specifically cited church teaching that indicates the Mass fortifies us to go out and proclaim the Gospel. What we receive at mass (Grace), is what we bring out into the world. This applies to the music as well. I agree with your statement that music can become a "god." This happens when people place music in the category of dogma, which is, as you say not its proper place. The real Presence is Dogma, Organs and Gregorian chant are not. However, you cannot seperate music from the paschal mystery. Remember, after the last supper, Jesus and the apostles sang hymns before going to the garden.

I would also point out Sacrosanctum Concilium # 8:
"8. In the earthly liturgy we take part in a foretaste of that heavenly liturgy which is celebrated in the holy city of Jerusalem toward which we journey as pilgrims, where Christ is sitting at the right hand of God, a minister of the holies and of the true tabernacle [[url="http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19631204_sacrosanctum-concilium_en.html#_ftn22"]22[/url]]; [b]we sing a hymn[/b] to the Lord's glory with all the warriors of the heavenly army; venerating the memory of the saints, we hope for some part and fellowship with them; we eagerly await the Saviour, Our Lord Jesus Christ, until He, our life, shall appear and we too will appear with Him in glory [[url="http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19631204_sacrosanctum-concilium_en.html#_ftn23"]23[/url]].

9. The sacred liturgy does not exhaust the entire activity of the Church. Before men can come to the liturgy they must be called to faith and to conversion: "How then are they to call upon him in whom they have not yet believed? But how are they to believe him whom they have not heard? And how are they to hear if no one preaches? And how are men to preach unless they be sent?" (Rom. 10:14-15).

[b]Therefore the Church announces the good tidings of salvation to those who do not believe[/b], so that all men may know the true God and Jesus Christ whom He has sent, and may be converted from their ways, doing penance [[url="http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19631204_sacrosanctum-concilium_en.html#_ftn24"]24[/url]]. To believers also the Church must ever preach faith and penance, she must prepare them for the sacraments, teach them to observe all that Christ has commanded [[url="http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19631204_sacrosanctum-concilium_en.html#_ftn25"]25[/url]], and invite them to all the works of charity, piety, and the apostolate. For all these works make it clear that Christ's faithful, though not of this world, are to be the light of the world and to glorify the Father before men."

If you believe (I do), as Sacrosanctum Concilium says, that the Book of Revelation gives us a depiction of heavenly worship, then you believe, with the Church, that music, and in fact raucous, exhuberant praise are a part of it. Sacred Music is not an adornment, it is essential. Worth mentioning is that in the Book of Revelation, to which the Church directs us in her Dogmatic teaching, the only instrument used to accompany singing in Heaven is the kithara, often translated harp, but more correctly it resembles a lyre or guitar. In fact the word guitar comes from "kithara." In heaven the angels and the elect "sing a new song."

Music, as integral part of our Sacred Worship, cannot be divorced from evangelism. if our music is not helping us proclaim the Gospel, then something is wrong. The hymns we learn and sing at Mass should be relevant in our proclamation to "unbelievers." A hymn, after all, is a song that communicates truth in musical form.

[zalzan]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1302726345' post='2228345']
All the poorly-interpreted quotes in the world don't change the facts that were very clearly expressed by Tra Le Sollecitudini. First among these is that Gregorian Chant is to be normative in the Latin rite, and ALL other music is to be judged by its similarities to it.

3. These qualities are to be found, in the highest degree, in Gregorian Chant, which is, consequently the Chant proper to the Roman Church, the only chant she has inherited from the ancient fathers, which she has jealously guarded for centuries in her liturgical codices, which she directly proposes to the faithful as her own, which she prescribes exclusively for some parts of the liturgy, and which the most recent studies have so happily restored to their integrity and purity.

On these grounds Gregorian Chant has always been regarded as the suprememodel for sacred music, so that it is fully legitimate to lay down thefollowing rule: the more closely a composition for church approaches in its movement, inspiration and savor the Gregorian form, the more sacred and liturgical it becomes; and the more out of harmony it is with that supreme model, the less worthy it is of the temple.


This will not change no matter how many hundreds of years pass. Gregorian Chant is our sacred music, and it must always be preserved and celebrated. It is always to be given the very first place in all Masses in the Latin rite.
[/quote]

First, you have not cited one example of how I have "misinterpreted" Church teaching. Second, as I have already stated, you completely ignore whole sections of Chiurch teaching that allow for local ordinaries to to establish parameters, and which encourage new forms of music beyond gregorian chant.

[zalzan]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1302726414' post='2228349']
By the way, the ICEL has zero magisterial authority as a body, and ditto for the USCCB.
[/quote]

I never stated it had 'Magisterial Authority." Rather it operates within the parameters established by Rome, which gives "competent territorial authorities" the responsibility for managing liturgical matters. You conveniently choose to ignore this key aspect of Church teaching, and this is your flawed hermeneutic.