popestpiusx Posted February 1, 2005 Share Posted February 1, 2005 I think what is contributing to the complexity of this issue, and why many on my side of the eisle cannot understand why Lifeteen exists, is that this is the first time in history that it has been suggested that teens need something special to attract them to the Faith. Why is a "Teen Mass" necessary? It has never been an issue before. It seems to me that the answer to that question must address the following: 1)How are today's teens different than teens have been for a couple thousand years? What is it about them that necessitates a special Mass? 2)It seems to me that the only way to address the question is to look at human nature, which does not change. We must ask what best conforms to human nature, or rather, what best assists mankind to rise above his fallen nature. That is not to discount the legitimate diversity of spiritualities that exist in the Church. This is certainly to be defended. What I am simply asking for is a legitimate intellectual defence of the necessity or efficacy of lifeteen in terms of the timeless principles of the Church. That is to say, how does lifeteen conform to these principles? How does it "fit" into the constant and unbroken patrimony of liturgical history and theology? Note that I am not accusing anyone of anything here. I am merely asking. My mind, on this issue, can be changed if someone can come up with good reasons why it should. Those reasons must be rooted, as I said above, in the constant teaching and practice of the Church. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
popestpiusx Posted February 1, 2005 Share Posted February 1, 2005 [quote name='jezic' date='Feb 1 2005, 12:06 PM'] why would people need to debate life teen, that is more what i understand. My earlier questions didn't mean we need to change anything, i just don't understand why this should be a debate at all. If it is a valid mass then fine, if not then stop it. [/quote] The question cannot be boiled down to mere validity. There is much more to consider when discussing the suitability or legitimacy of any form of liturgy or spirituality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XIX Posted February 1, 2005 Share Posted February 1, 2005 [quote name='XIX' date='Feb 1 2005, 09:55 AM'] Any specific examples of "liturgial abuses?" [/quote] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
popestpiusx Posted February 1, 2005 Share Posted February 1, 2005 XIX If that is for me, I have nothing for you. I don't discuss the merits of something (or lack thereof) based on abuses that may exist within it. I am referring to the very existence of the thing itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oik Posted February 1, 2005 Share Posted February 1, 2005 The discussion really divides into to question-points? Is LifeTeen the source of problems in relation to liturical practices and lack of faith, ie, does it offer a watered down or candy-coated entertainment version or not? and Are LifeTeen masses full of and prone to abuses? I think BurkeFan has some great points and I generally agree with the idea that LifeTeen is a stepping stone in ones Faith Earlier someone mention that if it weren't for LifeTeen, then they would not be here. this is a problematic statement *IF* it implies that LifeTeen has conferred any Grace to the individual unto which they were allowed to recieve. I don't think that's the point that was being made, but I think the kinda of language used really alarms because it *CAN* imply the aforementioned. Really, it isn't the case that an upbeat Mass is any more sacramental than a "boring Mass." However, i see Lifeteen's point, and it is a point of vanity (though in a positive sense), that Mass has to be attractive. What jgirl points out for herself, is that she herself works in LifeTeen, on the catechetical side, to insure that the Mass and Catholicism is indeed presented to those whom it does normally not appeal to. At this point though, the real question is whether or not it is condusive (sp?) to teaching catechesis to *seemingly* sacrifice a portion of beauty and place the focus on the experience one individual has as opposed to the real beauty of the mass in where we experience the celebration as a communally? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XIX Posted February 1, 2005 Share Posted February 1, 2005 [quote name='popestpiusx' date='Feb 1 2005, 12:18 PM'] XIX If that is for me, I have nothing for you. I don't discuss the merits of something (or lack thereof) based on abuses that may exist within it. I am referring to the very existence of the thing itself. [/quote] So the Mass should never be altered? (no pun intended) This is why people bring up the very first (undeveloped) Masses that St. Paul spoke out against. "Changing the Mass" is not unprecedented. The Tridentine Mass was a novelty once. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dUSt Posted February 1, 2005 Share Posted February 1, 2005 If this turns into a debate about which mass is better, it will be shut down. Let's keep it on the topic of specifically Lifeteen. I think Lifeteen is good in a sense of attracting teens to the faith through fresh and innovative ways (that's what phatmass tries to do), but I think, and have always thought, that Lifeteen has no business changing the mass. The recent obedience demanded by Cardinal Arinze has helped me be more accepting of Lifeteen, and I'm glad that they have "conformed" a little more, but I'm still skeptical as to whether or not they encourage true orthodoxy to the faith. I prefer the phatmass method (obviously) of keeping what is sacred and holy exactly like it is, and utilizing the "mainstream" methods of attracting people completely seperate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
popestpiusx Posted February 1, 2005 Share Posted February 1, 2005 Also, whether the thing itself conveys with proper solemnity and clarity the Truth of what is taking place on the altar, is a subject for discussion. Or whether the attraction is simply the result of the the pop atmosphere (modern music, etc.) and is therefore based on a rather shallow emotional sentimentality. This is why I said it is very difficult for me to understand. It has never been suggested before that teens are somehow incapable of being attracted to (and as a result, devoted to) traditional forms of liturgy, and therefor require a special "teen focused" Mass to facilitate that attraction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
popestpiusx Posted February 1, 2005 Share Posted February 1, 2005 Relax, dust. I'll behave! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
popestpiusx Posted February 1, 2005 Share Posted February 1, 2005 [quote name='XIX' date='Feb 1 2005, 01:23 PM'] So the Mass should never be altered? (no pun intended) This is why people bring up the very first (undeveloped) Masses that St. Paul spoke out against. "Changing the Mass" is not unprecedented. The Tridentine Mass was a novelty once. [/quote] All I'm going to say to this is, you need to study liturgical history. All liturgical development (which has always been organic) is judged on how it 1)Conveys the Truth of what is taking place 2)Conduces one to sanctity 3)Puts us in contact with eternity. Stated otherwise, how it trancends time or place; that is, its timelessness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted February 1, 2005 Share Posted February 1, 2005 [quote name='dUSt' date='Feb 1 2005, 02:33 PM'] I prefer the phatmass method (obviously) of keeping what is sacred and holy exactly like it is, and utilizing the "mainstream" methods of attracting people completely seperate. [/quote] AMEN! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rachael Posted February 1, 2005 Share Posted February 1, 2005 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oik Posted February 1, 2005 Share Posted February 1, 2005 the accuracy of the transmission of our faith to the younger generation is hardly a light issue. It is proper to be skeptical (within reason) of anything that would hurt, hinder, or damage this transmission. So why bang your head against the wall? It great to discuss and (if we are seeking Christ) only good can from discussing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jezic Posted February 1, 2005 Share Posted February 1, 2005 well i don't know what a phatmass is. I saw the explanation earlier, now if only we had those here ....... personally i think i would like a french traditional mass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jezic Posted February 1, 2005 Share Posted February 1, 2005 what happened to lifeteen that there was a problem for some people with it? I don't really know that much about it .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts