The Catholic Message Board

Having read the above with interest, it seems that the phenomenon was -- if they can change A, then let's change B. With constant, undirected, trendy change being a marker for secular modernity, one ends up with the CoE. And modern music.

To the comments on the difficulty in finding pianists and choristers, my sister, when a teen, had a paying job playing piano for services at some Protestant church with which she had no other affiliation.

Highlander wrote: ↑Mon Oct 06, 2025 12:25 pm Having read the above with interest, it seems that the phenomenon was -- if they can change A, then let's change B. With constant, undirected, trendy change being a marker for secular modernity, one ends up with the CoE. And modern music.

Small changes lead to a demand for more changes, which become more and more dramatic and extreme until the demand becomes that everything be completely swept away. This is the pattern for revolution.

The same thing happened with theology. Let's look at Hans Kung. He started as an ecumenical theologian who argued that the Catholic and Protestant doctrines of justification were compatible. A questionable thesis, but nothing necessarily extreme or revolutionary. By the late 60s, he was openly denying Papal Infallibility. Then he started to deny the Nicene Creed and denied that Christ was eternal. By the end of his life, he had essentially apostasized from Christianity and held to some kind of Religious Pluralism idea that all religions offer a way to God, all religions except, apparently, Christianity.

Taking your at your word, I'll bet that Kung fellow got lots of speaking engagements and Visiting Theologian academic postings and honorary degrees and articles published in various cutting edge outlets and TV appearances as a Church spokesman.

My knowledge of theology and recent Church history is minimal, especially compared to about anybody else posting here. So my experience with change is pretty limited to anecdotal experience. Such as when members of various women's orders and those falling under the umbrella of the activist LBGT+lotsofotherletters took (A) statements from several Popes, Bishops, and such that the Church be more aware of them to demand (B) that the Church change to restructure itself into their image.

Some interesting anecdotes (if not data) about how the laity felt about the liturgical "reforms" of 1958 and onward:

https://handmissalhistory.com/newmass1964part2/

Personally I had no idea that people hated the liturgical commentator introduced by Pius XII. So I learned something there!

Reforms were not uniform. The NY Archdiocese did not make many changes all at once. The first was Mass on Saturday evening, which was a practical change. That was in '66. ETA: also Mass in English was instituted that year as well.
Next was 1968 when the altar was pulled away from the back wall, turned around, and the tabernacle moved to a side altar.
While the New Mass was instituted by 1970, we did not switch to communion in the hand right away. That was a year or maybe two later.

By making changes gradual, there was less of a push-back. I always liken it to the proverbial frog in a pot of boiling water.

anawim wrote: ↑Tue Oct 07, 2025 10:42 am... the proverbial frog in a pot of boiling water.

There is that. OTOH, change is more often now a thunderclap accompanied by trumpets and marches and dictates from the change agents. Academia is peppered with such change. So are blue city policies ... announced with fanfares and implemented immediately. Pot of boiling water change seems to happen when change agents want to conceal the change underway; lightning bolt change seems to happen when change agents have the power of fiat -- law, public concern, public interest, financial prudence, freedom of speech, individual rights be damned. Such as public schools and California's High-Speed Rail project.

The thing is, the changes were being introduced gradually but there were many people who still disliked them even so. And yet their voices were not being heard - instead, everyone was told what a rousing success the liturgical "reform" was, and how it was being embraced by the laity.

Why is contemporary liturgical music so terrible?

The 1960's and 70's.

Peetem wrote: ↑Wed Oct 08, 2025 9:34 pm Why is contemporary liturgical music so terrible?

The 1960's and 70's.

I mean yes, but that raises the question of why we're so wedded to the liturgical practice and music of the 60s and 70s. Why are the Church authorities all soixante-huitards?

Gesundheit.

peregrinator wrote: ↑Thu Oct 09, 2025 10:25 am soixante-huitards

Now, there's a term I need to work into my conversation. All I gotta do is learn how to pronounce it.

Meanwhile in England and Wales there has been a 75% drop in attendance at Mass.

Riverboat wrote: ↑Thu Oct 09, 2025 10:13 pm

peregrinator wrote: ↑Thu Oct 09, 2025 10:25 am soixante-huitards

Now, there's a term I need to work into my conversation. All I gotta do is learn how to pronounce it.

swa-SONT hwee-TARR (more or less)

peregrinator wrote: ↑Fri Oct 10, 2025 6:58 am

Riverboat wrote: ↑Thu Oct 09, 2025 10:13 pm

peregrinator wrote: ↑Thu Oct 09, 2025 10:25 am soixante-huitards

Now, there's a term I need to work into my conversation. All I gotta do is learn how to pronounce it.

swa-SONT hwee-TARR (more or less)

Sounds like something that I had to wear for ballet class.

The song "Go Make a Difference" by Steve Angrisano... your liturgical minister kept using that song over and over. Kids would always act goofy and start making up different words for "Difference" like "Taco".

Then you add all of the corny clapping that people would add to it.

Finally he caught on that this song just brings out wacky goofiness in the kids and that it doesn't pay to yell at the kids... since that's just a wacky, goofy, lame song.

Also note that it falls into the group I mentioned above: Songs that are about us, not about God.

Riverboat wrote: ↑Thu Oct 09, 2025 10:13 pm

peregrinator wrote: ↑Thu Oct 09, 2025 10:25 am soixante-huitards

Now, there's a term I need to work into my conversation. ...

Which team do you prefer? The 49ers of the soixante-huitards?

There you go.

What on Earth does that phrase mean?

My own opinion is that, as the saying goes, it takes a long time for an ocean liner to change direction. Certainly, the fact that banality is music has hit everyone in the West, not just the Catholic Church, but also the mainline Protestants and the evangelicals, is a cultural thing. And I think things are turning around, but it will take a long time for everything to completely change direction.

There is a growing movement in both Catholicism and in evangelicalism for a more reverant liturgy. Many evangelicals are growing disgusted with the current model of evangelical worship, which has been mocked as "a rock concert followed by a Ted talk." And there is currently, among evangelicals, a trend towards embracing liturgy.

Among Catholics, young Catholics are rediscovering the Latin Mass, and there is a growing attraction to it, which I think is the real reason for the crackdown on the Latin Mass by Francis, because people of his and later generations, who fought so hard to destroy the Latin Mass, as not going to allow it to be restored. It will probably take a long time for the entire generation influenced by "the Spirit of Vatican II" to die off before the full restoration of reverence in the Mass. The crackdown on the Latin Mass is the dying gasp of a generation that is worried about their vision of the Church dying out.

As Fr. Benedict Groeschel once said, "If you ever meet the Spirit of Vat. II, drive a stake into its heart".

anawim wrote: ↑Sun Oct 12, 2025 10:00 am As Fr. Benedict Groeschel once said, "If you ever meet the Spirit of Vat. II, drive a stake into its heart".

Someone once said, I am afraid the Spirit of Vatican II it's name, because I fear it nmight say "I am legion for we are many"