Well, if I were Byzantine-Slav, at least. It won't let me embed, but check out this video sent to me by a loyal reader, fulfilling in many respects some of my off-beat liturgical music fantasies:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=reB9TxoBgSY
Now, if only we could get some of the Latin chant set like that, then maybe God would actually make our Church alive again, instead of the ossified skeleton it's become (all the more so in the out-of-touch clergy's "praise and worship" attempts at self-resurrection).
I've discussed before toying with that idea as a project, and this is good proof that it could be done.
Though it's certainly not Gospel (and though the Africans themselves should simply cast off the yolk of Roman imperialism and just use an Alexandrian rite), I've also always liked the Missa Luba:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=reB9TxoBgSY
Now, if only we could get some of the Latin chant set like that, then maybe God would actually make our Church alive again, instead of the ossified skeleton it's become (all the more so in the out-of-touch clergy's "praise and worship" attempts at self-resurrection).
I've discussed before toying with that idea as a project, and this is good proof that it could be done.
Though it's certainly not Gospel (and though the Africans themselves should simply cast off the yolk of Roman imperialism and just use an Alexandrian rite), I've also always liked the Missa Luba:
16 comments:
I don't know if I'd look to the East to show us how to make the Church come "alive" with its music. I think it is beautiful, along with much of the work of Peres and the kind of "Eastern" sounding reconstructions of older Western chant but... Besides some historical footnotes like the Nestorian forage into China, one doesn't see much of an evangelical thrust in the East.
I also like the "Missa Luba" and see it as an "authentic" application of "inculturation" but, who kicked it off according to this little video? A Belgian priest who started a group called "Les Troubadours du Roi Beaudouin". It wasn't some ground swell, grassroots whathaveyou.
Then, to adopt some Alexandrian Rite. What a hoot...and only if Rome mandated it in the first place...Aside from the truly ossified observances of the schismatics who seem to have "preserved" their rites out of pure spite for Rome, it is indeed Rome that preserves tradition-local and universal. If it wasn't for Rome telling Easterners to knock it off with adopting fiddlebacks and everything else Roman, they would morphed their own rites into something basically Roman without any falsely so-called Roman "imperialism".
I'm not saying look to the East for "alive" music, I'm saying look to the black churches.
The point of that first video wasn't that it was Eastern, it was that it was a Gospel setting of something taken from liturgical chant. The fact that it was Eastern actually made it a little less than perfect in this case, hence "A Dream Come True, SORT OF"
As I said, I'm still looking for such a setting of LATIN chant.
As for an "evangelical thrust"...the East had one as much as the West up through the First Millennium but at that point, there were few uncivilized pagans left. Other monotheists (ie, the Muslims) are much harder to convert, as are "civilized" pagans (ie, the Chinese and Indians).
Further, I wouldn't count the post-Columbian conversions of the Americas and parts of Africa, etc, as evangelization so much as a byproduct of Western Colonialism, even if a good byproduct.
I suppose "Gospel" infused chant of some sort would be another arrow in the quiver along with tent revival preaching for the evangelization of the ineffectively churched masses of Suburbia and beyond, no? I gotta wonder what the point of trying to get an infusion from the rotting corpse of Protestantism (ala charismaticism) is actually going to do for us...
Some of the 1st Apostolic Episcopal Evangelical Communion Church type groups are starting to get somewhat liturgical and wear our getups (mixed with Eastern and Anglican outfits). Maybe they have something you'd like.
I think as long as the Catholic hierarchy holds to its own awful status quo...they're going to keep losing people to churches like that.
Western Rite Orthodoxy is always the Siren for me, though.
Well, St. Paul did say that people will have itching ears and they will gather false teachers to themselves...
When it comes to maintaining our identity and traditions it isn't the Hierarchy's fault that people are supposedly leaving. There are so many factors that figure into the whole mess that is the post-Vatican II era. I'd be hesitant blaming personal pet peeves for Church problems. The urge to be a rebel is rarely meritorious. Railing against the "status quo" Church and "status quo" Trads is probably pretty frustrating. Of course, one knows where that leads and it would be no surprise if you end up outside of the Ark of Salvation and with some liturgically eclectic schismatics.
Nah, too easy.
On the other hand, I have no idea of YOUR agenda.
Why bother sitting here commenting on all this if you disagree?
My agenda? I suppose the typical "sexually repressed", Thomistic RadTrad.
As to commenting, why not? Variety is the spice of life, no?
Based on my Stat Counter data, the above poster is a seminarian, if that helps explain anything to any of my other readers (it certainly does for me).
Taken from a post I made elsewhere:
Not including those in Western and Central Asia (The Middle East (not including North African territories) and other such territories), there are examples of Christianity actually working within an Asian context. A perfect example is that of The Nasrani ,those Christians in Kerala, India who received The Gospel from St.Thomas The Apostle. The point here is not to make this an Eastern vs. Western Ritual issue, but a Catholic one PERIOD.
True, some might argue that this was a unique case given that this particular group was comprised of Jews who lived in this region of India (whether or not they were ethnic Hebrew or Indian converts to Judaism is another matter). But nonetheless they observed elements of their surrounding culture (for the sake of making it less confusing lets call it a Hindustani culture as opposed to a Hindu one) whilst also being Jews and later Christians. At least that was until The Portuguese came and demanded they conform to Latin Christian form (same with The Maronites, though The Maronites were more willing (but the reasons for this are a bit different)), than were The Nasrani. This ultimately lead to the schism between the group resulting in an Orthodox and Catholic counterpart. Nonetheless it proves that it can be done if good faith is put forward to contextualize a given culture and not impose a foreign one on a people.
I mean really how long is the excuse going to hold water (that localizing a Church is going to result in syncretism(All that needs to be done is retain The Ritual (and incorporating SOME local elements)), before people realize that its just a smoke screen for; "They're to different from us, we don't want to put in the effort.". Basically don't compromise what is required for us to believe by The Church, but present in a way that won't be seen as a rupture in the culture.
If you want to read more about The Nasrani here is some information: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_Malabar_Nasrani
I realize the above refers to Asia specifically, but the same could be applied to Africa and elsewhere. Also one should realize that the histories of The Eastern Churches are intrinsically tied to JEWISH communities that existed in those areas, hence on the surface it would appear that they were more "exclusive" in membership.
As to evangelizing missions of The Orthodox (which in this case is a stand in for The East's efforts to evangelize other nations)the case of The Aleut Orthodox church is a perfect example. Not the ideal (as the ideal would be Catholic), but nonetheless how a group should be evangelized to. If only Catholics had referred more to the writings of Fray Bartolome de Las Casas in De Vocationis Modo, we wouldn't be in the mess we are in now in The Americas. I HIGHLY recommend viewing The Mission and Black Robe for a contrast in Missionary efforts.
Insinuation...I like it.
As to the St. Thomas Christians and the local Church, it seems that it must be noted that groups like that truly did grow organically and from apostolic foundation. Localizing a Church today seems more like an exercise in arbitrariness than anything. It seems like we should get our post-Vatican II liturgical act together before going out on theoretical limbs.
Thats the whole problem. There is too much talk about taking this action or this other action and how its all Vatican II's fault, but the truth is all these problems come from BEFORE Vatican II and finally ruptured at Vatican II.
Regardless of whether or not they have an Apostolic foundation, there is a trend that STILL persists when Latin Catholics encounter Easter Catholics. This trend being one of Latinization, in some cases certain groups were cooperative (The Maronites (The reasons for this are many.) (It should be said that Maronites today are rising up to reclaim the TRADITIONS that their forefathers abandoned, to which many Latin Catholics (Trads included) are up in arms over.))whereas others were less cooperative (The Nasrani). The fact is PRE VATICAN II, there was little to no room for a group to localize its liturgy or a contextualization of their culture. What came to happen was an imposition of a foreign culture, which SOMETIMES allowed for SOME elements of the previous culture to blend into it. What excuse can be provided to explain why this was the case ? Pre Christian Greco Roman culture for all its romantic imagery was no less pagan or full of vice than any other culture, YET The Apostles worked to CONTEXTUALIZE their culture.
The "theoretical limbs" you are citing are a HUGE part of the problem as well as an INTEGRAL part of the solution. If we would just buckle down and take the time to FINISH something we start, admit to past mistakes and work from there, we MIGHT just get something ACCOMPLISHED.
As many already know, I've beaten this topic and quote to death, but here I'll present it to support my case:
“In the late 1800s and the early 1900s however, there seems to have been something of a shift in ecclesiastical tolerance of such communities. Many Catholic prelates of North America, taking a cue from the general American spirit of the time, saw in the native way of life a doomed and useless vestige of a bygone era. Well meaning ecclesiastics began to make a concerted effort to eradicate the “Indianness” of the mission towns and to encourage them to conform in culture, behaviour, and language to the Anglo-Saxons around them,… .” - Claudio R. Salvucci, The Roman Rite in the Algonquian and Iroquoian Missions: From the Colonial Period to the Second Vatican Council (MASSINAHAGAN SERIES, Vol.5, 2008) xii
The above is a commentary on what happened to The Mission Liturgy (AKA American Liturgy)developed by French Jesuits in what would later become Canada and The United States of America. What was more important, preserving a Catholic community's identity or shmoozing up to Protestant American culture ? Its a rhetorical question, but nonetheless proves a point, that we need to focus our attention on the BIGGER picture and the repercussions of our actions in the future (Look at the state of The Church in America now, don't you think that if these American Mission Liturgies would have been allowed to continue, we'd be in the current mess we're in ?).
Building on the issue of The Catholic Church in America, notice how Trads (and Catholics of all different strains) hoot and holler about Churches closing and being empty, and point fingers everywhere (some justified, others not), but don't seek out the root cause. If you notice many of these parishes were constructed during the era of National Parishes in America. I don't think I have to detail what a National Parish is (there is an ethnography on this blog, that more than fleshes out the issue, it should be under the entry "Papalgate"), but nonetheless these are the parishes which are closing down (unfortunate yes, but to be expected). While Catholics (Trads especially) complain and vilify foreign language Masses in The US (especially Spanish ones), they fail to realize that the National/Ethnic parishes of yesteryear they rave about did quite a lot of damage. Rather than forcing Catholics to come together in ONE PARISH and preserving their ex homeland's LOCAL TRADITIONS, they felt it prudent to send them to their own ghettoes and be served by Priests there (mind you these Priests conducted Mass in Latin AND the immigrant community's native tongue which in many cases wasn't English). Catholics (Trads included) never got out of these GHETTOES (read that ethnography and take another approach to the term) and thus continue to perpetuate them, consciously and subconsciously.
So what happened when these immigrant Catholics established themselves in this country and moved elsewhere, they left these churches behind. In places like New York where later immigrant groups (Puerto Ricans and Cubans)would come to replace earlier groups (Italians,Irish,Polish,Germans,French, etc.), these Churches were unfamiliar as these groups brought with them a whole different set of values and TRADITIONS. So what happens, instead of Churches accommodating them, they forced them to learn the language (English) and observe foreign values and TRADITIONS. This ultimately lead to some remaining in the Church and losing ties to their culture or others sadly leaving to other churches (Evangelical, etc.),synagogues,mosques etc.. Plainly put, places where their values and TRADITIONS would have a voice. Before the argument comes up of what was more important to these people, their Faith or their culture, ask yourself why was not the same required of earlier groups and by extension, does not the folk culture of a people stem from their Faith and thus should it not also be preserved ?
Yet we Latin Catholics have the moxy to think of Eastern Catholics of being a niche group thats quaint, but never to be held in the same esteem as The Latin Rite. But fail to look at the trail of loose ends we have left along the way (Latinization etc.). If Trads ever wish to accomplish anything, we better start by fixing up the unfinished projects left to us by previous generations, or perhaps maybe its part of "tradition" in many Trad minds to not do something when it is in our power to do so.
"Insinuation...I like it."
I call them as I see them. Posting anonymously on the blog in a reactionary way...well, it doesn't do anything to dispel the accusations about seminaries and priests re: secrecy, rigidity, cavalier attitudes about lasped Catholics (to hell with them, we're not going to change!), etc
"Localizing a Church today seems more like an exercise in arbitrariness than anything."
No, because the Church is supposed to be that way. The "federal" government has abused and vastly overextended its "reserve powers" which were not supposed to be the norm, and this has caused all sorts of problems, not least of all a lack of liturgical diversity and offending the Orthodox for blithely ignoring the boundaries of the geographical patriarchates.
"It seems like we should get our post-Vatican II liturgical act together before going out on theoretical limbs."
But the Ethiopians do have their liturgical act together. It would be a quick fix to the Novus Ordo in Africa to simply replace it with Alexandrian liturgy.
Wow, these comments pages are better than prime-time television.
(The music was beautiful, by the way)
That first video (Hospidi Pomili) sounds a lot like a work by Philip Glass. Now there is someone you would NOT want to compose liturgical music. ~~:(
http://philipglass.com/
Post a Comment