Gibson's Passion

Redwolf · Post by **Redwolf** » Sat Feb 21, 2004 1:03 pm

I sure wish I could find a parish that gave Gregorian Chant pride of place. The music in the Catholic churches hereabouts is utterly vile. If you want to hear Gregorian Chant properly done in Santa Cruz (not to mention some of the glorious traditional Mass settings), you have to go to my old Episcopal Parish. I think it's tragic that the Catholic Church in America -- at least here in the West -- seems to have totally abandoned its rich musical tradition

Redwolf

elendil · Post by **elendil** » Sat Feb 21, 2004 1:06 pm

I think it's tragic that the Catholic Church in America -- at least here in the West -- seems to have totally abandoned its rich musical tradition.

You mean they're "feckless," like me?

Sonovagun, here we are talking music again!

Lorenzo · Post by **Lorenzo** » Sat Feb 21, 2004 1:34 pm

Vatican ll may have tried to change the world's perception,
but here's a book that better relates the history.

Product Description:
The Vatican's 1998 report "We Remember: A Reflection on the Shoah" purportedly exonerated the Church of complicity in the Holocaust. In The Popes Against the Jews, David I. Kertzer argues that the report is "not the product of a Church that wants to confront its history." Kertzer's book refutes the Church's thesis that the Holocaust grew out of "an anti-Judaism that was essentially more sociological and political than religious." In fact, Kertzer asserts, those dimensions of European anti-Semitism developed "in no small part due to the efforts of the Roman Catholic Church itself." The racial laws of fascist Italy and the Nuremberg Laws of 1930s Germany, for example, were directly modeled on the Church's own rules governing treatment of Jews: until the collapse of the Papal States in the late 19th century, Jews living in these territories were forced to wear yellow badges and live in ghettos. Kertzer's arguments make for compelling reading because they're presented in story form, based on the actions of the popes themselves. Access to long-sealed Church archives allowed Kertzer to reconstruct some of the most shocking, secret conversations that occurred in the Vatican in the decades leading up to World War II. --Michael Joseph Gross
http://www.target.com/gp/detail.html/60 ... 0375706054

Redwolf · Post by **Redwolf** » Sat Feb 21, 2004 1:35 pm

elendil wrote:
I think it's tragic that the Catholic Church in America -- at least here in the West -- seems to have totally abandoned its rich musical tradition.
You mean they're "feckless," like me?

Sonovagun, here we are talking music again!

See, it always comes back around to music in the end!

I would say that church music in my neck of the woods is beyond "feckless." In my parish, what passes for music is four people (only one of whom can sing in tune), two out-of-tune and over-miked guitars, and a distressing lack of anything resembling preparation. There's no passion to it...it's more depressing than anything else. In fact, I'm thinking of going to early Mass, just because, at this point, no music at all seems better than bad music.

The other Catholic churches in town are nearly as bad...seems like no one remembers what "harmony" means, these days.

I miss my choir

Redwolf

Wombat · Post by **Wombat** » Sat Feb 21, 2004 1:53 pm

jim stone wrote: There is no way to extrapolate from
this to mass Jewish guilt, obviously, any more
than one can blame on the French the acts
of the collaborationist government during the
German occupation. Best

No logically reputable way, to be sure. But there is a process; it's called scapegoating. This process isn't in the least concerned with historical balance, fairness or accuracy; it seems to be, for some, a political ploy, and, for others, a temporary relief from anxiety. All genocides seem to be fuelled by lies and gross exaggerations. If we could, as a culture rather than as isolated individuals, learn how to recognise and expose the liars and to resist the exaggerations we would be on the way to becoming as civilised as we would like to think we already are. Those worst afflicted seem to live, almost literally, in the past, as though by committing a new and larger atrocity they could wipe out an old and smaller one.

ciberspiff · Post by **ciberspiff** » Sat Feb 21, 2004 2:31 pm

jim stone wrote:I read a moving and extraordinary essay by John Sack
[...]

I wouldn't normally bother with the drivel in this thread, but this crossed the line for me.

John Sacks and Chuck Provan are opportunists who would sell their grandmothers if it would benefit their wallet. They portray revisionists as harmless beings, just normal folks who are apologists for those who jobs was to exterminate children. They buddy up to murderers and those who deny the holocaust in hopes of padding their own pockets. This speaks volumes to the kind of people they are. No one should believe that they speak for anyone but themselves or have any evidence for the nonsense they put out as truth.

If you feel the need to attend and speak at a revisionists convention, that's your business. The fact is the revisionists are holocaust deniers, history rewriters and apologists. If that is the kind of people you want to associate with you have to live with it and the notoriety. Just remember when you lay down with dogs, you get up with fleas.

And the real reason no one writes about Provan or Sacks exploits is there is no interest in them. They have nothing worthwhile to say or listen to, other than to those of like minds. Why should the ADL or other group waste their time on this nonsense when there are more meaningful battles to fight.

missy · Post by **missy** » Sat Feb 21, 2004 2:34 pm

ok - I have to post, since I'm one of "those" musicians at Mass.

Our "contemporary" group consists of 2 - 12 string guitars, 1 - 6 string, 1 - electric bass, me on dulcimer (and whistle or bodhran if appropriate), an electric keyboard, some drums, and at least 4 other singers besides those playing. We have two excellent sopranos.
We have practice once a week for the following Sunday.

BUT -

all of us do this on a volunteer basis, no pay. It's our way of giving back to the Church. So - if you don't like the music at YOUR church, see about starting a group up. But be advised that you'll have to work "within" the existing sound system (which is usually NOT set up for acoustic instruments, much less a whistle) you'll have to play whatever is in the hymnal set that your church has purchased (and you'll probably not have a say it that, either), and, of course, you need to stick to what's appropriate for the calendar at that time.

I mean, common, this is a MUSIC board! Who better to help with the music than someone posting on here???!

Missy

jim stone · Post by **jim stone** » Sat Feb 21, 2004 2:48 pm

ciberspiff wrote:
jim stone wrote:I read a moving and extraordinary essay by John Sack
[...]
I wouldn't normally bother with the drivel in this thread, but this crossed the line for me.

John Sacks and Chuck Provan are opportunists who would sell their grandmothers if it would benefit their wallet. They portray revisionists as harmless beings, just normal folks who are apologists for those who jobs was to exterminate children. They buddy up to murderers and those who deny the holocaust in hopes of padding their own pockets. This speaks volumes to the kind of people they are. No one should believe that they speak for anyone but themselves or have any evidence for the nonsense they put out as truth.

If you feel the need to attend and speak at a revisionists convention, that's your business. The fact is the revisionists are holocaust deniers, history rewriters and apologists. If that is the kind of people you want to associate with you have to live with it and the notoriety. Just remember when you lay down with dogs, you get up with fleas.

And the real reason no one writes about Provan or Sacks exploits is there is no interest in them. They have nothing worthwhile to say or listen to, other than to those of like minds. Why should the ADL or other group waste their time on this nonsense when there are more meaningful battles to fight.

Those who wish to see for themselves what the John Sack essay,
'Inside the Bunker,' amounts to can find it
in the collection 'The Best American Essays of 2002,'
edited by Stephen Jay Gould (Houghton Mifflin Company).
The book is out in paper and its full of extraordinary
essays, IMO, anyhow. The Sack article was first published in
Esquire, February 2001. Best

elendil · Post by **elendil** » Sat Feb 21, 2004 2:48 pm

I wouldn't normally bother with the drivel in this thread, but this crossed the line for me.

Geez, another one who can't stand this stuff but can't let go.

ciberspiff · Post by **ciberspiff** » Sat Feb 21, 2004 3:10 pm

elendil wrote:
I wouldn't normally bother with the drivel in this thread, but this crossed the line for me.
Geez, another one who can't stand this stuff but can't let go.

Ah yes. You yet again prove your ignorance is only surpassed by your lack of class.

jim stone · Post by **jim stone** » Sat Feb 21, 2004 3:15 pm

To sort this out, Ciber was alarmed and outraged by
my praise for the Sack article, and expressed himself
in terms that flowed from these feelings.
Elendil's response wasn't meant meanly.
So perhaps we can take a breathe.

elendil · Post by **elendil** » Sat Feb 21, 2004 3:46 pm

Well, class is, to some extent, a matter of personal style. I would be interested to discover the source of my ignorance. However, if you'd like to also delve into my lack of class, please feel free.

rebl_rn · Post by **rebl_rn** » Sat Feb 21, 2004 3:57 pm

I know this is kinda going OT from the OT topic of discussion, but here's my thoughts on music during the liturgy.

I believe the church needs to respect and maintain its traditions and traditional music. I also enjoy most of the modern praise and worship stuff, and we do what I hope is a nice blend of both at my church. We are a very small parish (catholic but not Roman Catholic) and the music is not very good, since I am the worship leader along with one other person, and I'm not very good. But that's not what is important. I am reminded of something I read in the book "An Arrow Pointing to Heaven" which is a devotional biography of Christian singer/songwriter Rich Mullins and an absolutely incredible book.

In the book they relate the story of a praise and worship session Rich attended in a barn a few days before he died. The musicians were all amateurs and the music was, by all accounts, pretty bad. Singing out of tune, etc. So someone asked Rich and a member of his band to lead the music for the rest of the evening. Rich went up to the microphone and said, "I love to be in the church. I love to listen to people sing and play with their hearts. In my profession we worry a lot about being in tune and sounding good. But this music is the music that is the most pleasing to God because it is so real, and it comes from the hearts of the children of God." As he said this, Rich got choked up and began to cry.

I try to remember this as I struggle with my lack of talent on Sunday morning. Sure, I'd love to have a virtuoso piano player or guitar player or organist come join us and play along, but that's not what's important. Also remember, it's "Make a JOYFUL noise", not a BEAUTIFUL noise.

Beth

elendil · Post by **elendil** » Sat Feb 21, 2004 4:06 pm

If I may say, one of the beauties of the old chant is that it can be accomodated to most voices and talents, yet retains its dignity and beauty. I can still do some of the plainsong hymns from the days when I was an altar boy: Pater Noster, the Preface: Vere dignum et justum est... etc. The talent in most parishes back then wasn't much better than now (as far as I can recall), but I think the intrinsic merit of the music and the available talent were a better fit. Beautiful music, IMO, needn't be difficult music. I think. I may only be displaying my ignorance, lack of class or, God help me, both.

Daniel_Bingamon · Post by **Daniel_Bingamon** » Sat Feb 21, 2004 5:48 pm

What amazes me is how many of Christianity knows very little of the Jewish roots. Like, some people have a passing knowledge that the Last Supper was a passover seder. Or, the sop that Jesus and Judas reached in for was the taking of Bitter Herbs (Marror).

How about the meaning of the unleavened bread. After the temple was destroyed, Rabbinic Judaism rigthfully replaced the eating of the lamb with unleavened bread. Because it is unleavened, it is perfect and without blemish.
How about John 10:22, "Then came the Feast of the Dedication of the Temple", how many people know that he attended the temple for Chanukah? But yet, Chanukah is not celebrated by Christianity. Too bad, because it has so many riches in it.

People who use words like "Christ Killer" immediately show their ignorance of knowing why he was here, they have no foundation in the knowing that the Messiah suffered death because of the sins of the world.

They don't know the words, "Hineh, Seh Ha Elohim hanoseh chatat ha olam". Behold, the lamb of God, the lamb who takes away the sin of the world.