Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [liturgy-l] Lutheran Mass for Christmas

Expand Messages
  • Dwight J. Penas
    In some places I have worshiped, there is the Entrance Processional at the beginning and the Recessing Processional at the end. Except for my uncertainty
    Message 1 of 113 , Dec 1, 2009
      In some places I have worshiped, there is the "Entrance Processional" at the beginning and the "Recessing Processional" at the end. Except for my uncertainty as to "recessing" and "processing" at the same time, it was an effort to stick to high falutin' jargon, you must admit.

      Dwight Penas
      A baseball player who expects to excel in the game without adequate exercise of his body is no more ridiculous than the Christian who hopes to be able to act in the manner of Christ when put to the test without the appropriate exercise in godly living. -- Dallas Willard (1990)

      -----Original Message-----
      From: Douglas Cowling <cowling.douglas@...>
      To: liturgy-l@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Mon, Nov 30, 2009 10:22 pm
      Subject: Re: [liturgy-l] Lutheran Mass for Christmas

      On 11/30/09 10:59 PM, "Daniel Lawson" <k95dl01@...> wrote:

      > I was taught that it's only a "recessional" if you walk backwards;
      > otherwise, you're processing out.

      There's only one Recessional and it's by Kipling. And everyone misreads it
      and thinks it's about not forgetting the fallen.

      God of our fathers, known of old--
      Lord of our far-flung battle line
      Beneath whose awful hand we hold
      Dominion over palm and pine--
      Lord God of Hosts, be with us yet,
      Lest we forget - lest we forget!

      The tumult and the shouting dies;
      The captains and the kings depart:
      Still stands Thine ancient sacrifice,
      An humble and a contrite heart.
      Lord God of Hosts, be with us yet,
      Lest we forget - lest we forget!
      Far-called, our navies melt away;
      On dune and headland sinks the fire:
      Lo, all our pomp of yesterday
      Is one with Nineveh and Tyre!
      Judge of the Nations, spare us yet,
      Lest we forget - lest we forget!
      If, drunk with sight of power, we loose
      Wild tongues that have not Thee in awe--
      Such boasting as the Gentiles use
      Or lesser breeds without the law--
      Lord God of Hosts, be with us yet,
      Lest we forget - lest we forget!
      For heathen heart that puts her trust
      In reeking tube and iron shard--
      All valiant dust that builds on dust,
      And guarding, calls not Thee to guard--
      For frantic boast and foolish word,
      Thy mercy on Thy people, Lord!

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Walt Knowles
      Tom, I respect the thinking you ve done on this--and the perspective from which you have done it; what I want to know is not what you know but rather why
      Message 113 of 113 , Dec 9, 2009
        I respect the thinking you've done on this--and the perspective from
        which you have done it; what I want to know is not "what you know" but
        rather "why you think you know it" or "where you got it from."

        That's not because I think you are wrong as much as it is an insatiable
        curiosity about how people have formed their ideas about how liturgy has
        been enacted over history--and to be honest, because I have axes of my
        own to grind.

        You are appear to be working from the received narrative, as presented
        to people who actually want to do liturgy, and particularly as you and I
        both learned that narrative in the heady days in the 10-15 years after
        Vatican II. Much of that narrative was constructed in response to
        particular questions and directives of that council. Great people, like
        Lucian Deiss or Joseph Geleneau, both of blessed memory, acted out their
        faith commitment in both practice and scholarship. Would that I could
        even hold a candle to their work.

        Neither you, nor I, nor anyone else alive today, has any direct
        knowledge of how early liturgy sounded, looked or felt. All we have are
        tantalizing hints out of which to construct images. As Roman Catholic
        liturgists (and those of us who are the students of--RC liturgists of
        that period), after the council, tried to work out how to do worship in
        continuity with the church of the past, they worked first of all from a
        faith commitment grounded in the actions of the council (i.e., they
        accepted Pius XII's reading of Prosper that the /lex credendi/
        determined /lex orandi/, even though it seems that /Sacrosanctum
        Concilium/ said otherwise). They then filled in their understanding of
        historical sources from that faith commitment--which, of course, was
        built on the scholarly work of Josef Jungmann, whose work was based on
        the faithfulness of the Benedictines at Maria Laach, whose faith was
        built on the scholarly work of .... until we get back to Moses, who got
        it straight from God ;-) ). They also filled in their readings of the
        past from the close fellowship of retreats in Benedictine communities.
        How do I read the evidence? Not nearly as well as they did, frankly, but
        from a different pedigree that intersects that conversation at many
        points. I don't share the faith commitment to the Magisterium and
        Council that Roman liturgists basically have. /Sacrosanctum /is an
        interesting statement of where my brothers (and not very many sisters)
        found themselves in 1962. The actions of the council are intriguing,
        valuable, and inspiring, but as an outsider, it seems to me that they
        would have been much more honest to have admitted that what they were
        doing was abrogating Trent and Vatican I, and finding common cause with
        the churches of the reformation--particularly as the cultures of
        northern europe diverged from those of southern europe in the late 15th
        and early 16th centuries. Because I come from a different perspective,
        my tendency is to fill in my blanks through experiences in my formation,
        and from the "Golden Age of All Liturgy--High Mass at St Mary
        Magdalene's, Toronto, Easter Sunday, 1974." ;-)

        So when I look at the early liturgy, I tend to look to people like Paul
        Bradshaw (/The Search for the Origins of Christian Worship/), Peter
        Jeffery (/Re-envisioning past musical culture/), Robert Taft (all kinds
        of stuff), Anton Baumstark (/Comparative Liturgy/) or even William
        Palmer (one of the founders of the Oxford movement, but also, I'd argue,
        the founder of the discipline of /Liturgiewissenschaft/), rather than
        even Jungmann or Dix. So I look at particularities (take a look at
        Michael Aune's articles in /Worship, /two years ago or the article in
        the last issue of /St Vladimir's Theological Quarterly/). But it's not
        just a head game. All of this for me is practical; it affects the way I
        celebrate mass, the way I choose music, the way I preach, and the way I

        And when I poke you for "where does this idea come from," I'm not
        necessarily denying the idea, I'm asking where you got it. Your own
        experience is a great source. From my teachers is another great
        answer--though I'll probably ask where they got it from. But nobody can
        have read everything, but I'm willing to bet that the 450 members of
        this group /have/ probably ready everything--at least that is in
        English. This group has ruined my book budget more times than I care to
        admit. So be proud of what you've read and give it back. I want to know.
        This group is not composed of teachers and students (though we all
        should be doing both), but collaborators in our search to understand

        Sometimes a question is just a question (to paraphrase a certain
        Viennese psychoanalyst). Where do the ideas of the warm little community
        in a house church come from? Where do the ideas of the kind of music
        that they sung come from? (there I will say that as one looks the early
        texts, almost all of the words used, most importantly "ode" and "psalm"
        are words that refer to solo or small ensemble performance rather than
        communal singing.) And should you find the questions obnoxious, cover
        it with charity, because I'm trying to share what it for me "the most
        fun I can have with my clothes on."

        Walt Knowles
        Berkeley, CA

        Tom Poelker wrote:
        > Walt,
        > I think that you are crediting me with more knowledge and to be making
        > more of a claim than I would for myself.
        > I am not expert in the history of liturgy and I can accept what you say
        > as being more accurate than what I may have taken from my limited
        > historical study in preparation for a more practical than academic
        > liturgical degree.
        > If my assumptions are open to correction, I can accept that, but I do
        > not think that I was making assumptions as deep or as detailed as you
        > are able to perceive.
        > From the little I know in comparison to what you have studied in great
        > detail, the Mass as codified by Paul V was an end product of evolution
        > from a pretty simple sharing around a room by a small number of people
        > of apostolic messages and later of the Gospels and the Jewish
        > scriptures. That the earliest music was congregational singing of
        > psalms, hymns, and other songs. That the sharing of the message was
        > accompanied by table sharing and a memorial of the sharing of bread and
        > wine as body and blood of Jesus.
        > It is impossible, of course, to share the body and blood of Jesus and
        > not also commemorate the Paschal sacrifice, but it is my understanding
        > that the earliest celebrations of thanksgiving with scripture and song
        > and meal was not distinctly or by specific mention sacrificial and that
        > it was not in conscious distinction from temple worship of Jews and
        > Roman and Hellenistic practices.
        > It is my further impression, that such sharings of the good news and of
        > a meal continued to develop in private spaces, house churches, over
        > several centuries. That the major change and the beginnings of a
        > clerical class came with the establishment of Christianity as the state
        > religion following its adoption by Constantine. This does not mean that
        > there was no leadership earlier but that the class distinction was most
        > likely considerably smaller before religious roles were conflated with
        > civil administrative roles. I take it that the adoption of distinctive
        > clerical garb begins in this era.
        > Now, I can not demonstrate any of this from my own research. For me it
        > is of the nature of conventional wisdom and accepted as fact by those
        > whom I have read and was taught to respect. Therefore, if you can
        > educate me differently, treat me as a willing student rather than as an
        > opponent, I am quite willing to read and learn.
        > I am sorry if my assumptions seemed offensive to you. I took them to
        > be common among most academic students of liturgy, but I am willing to
        > be corrected or to have them identified with a specific "school" of
        > liturgy and gain familiarity with other "schools" of liturgical scholarship.
        > Again, perhaps because of ongoing discussions of your experience, I
        > think you read more into my words than I either specified or meant to imply.

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.