Not everyone dances that Pope Francis tune
RNS’s David Gibson reveals:
The head of liturgical music for the Philadelphia archdiocese, who was also to play a key role orchestrating the huge outdoor Mass concluding Pope Francis’ trip to the U.S. in September, is resigning his post over long-standing differences with Archbishop Charles Chaput.
John Romeri, who has headed the archdiocesan liturgical music office for five years, said he will resign effective June 30 because “there are simply irreconcilable differences” with Chaput over the role and style of music at Mass.
Romeri did not respond to requests for comment, and it was unclear whether he would still play a role in preparations for the papal visit.
A spokesman for Chaput, Kenneth Gavin, said in an email that he could not comment on personnel matters and “there are no additional updates.” But he said that the archdiocese “will be prepared for the visit of the Holy Father on all fronts, including music for the Mass on the Parkway.”
That is the third time this week the Philadelphia archdiocese has had to reassure people everything will be OK with the Pope’s upcoming visit and the World Meeting of Families. First the head of the Pontifical Council behind the big money event is revealed to be key to a fraud investigation. Next a key player in the WMOF event turns out to be a lesbian activist. (The archdiocese said it was just ill-informed blogging.)
Now this.
In his resignation announcement, which he buried in a list of liturgy news last month, Romeri indicated that he and Chaput had clashed almost from the time Chaput was appointed to Philadelphia in 2011, a year after Romeri arrived.
Romeri wrote that these “several years of discontent” on Chaput’s part culminated with the music Romeri arranged this April for Holy Week and Easter. The approach, he said, “was not well received by the archbishop.”
So Archbishop Chaput was the unhappy one. Perhaps the Pope’s upcoming visit was just too much for him to endure. Maybe this is part of that transforming effect Chaput says Pope Francis will have on Philadelphia.
Why does he keep saying there’s going to be so much joy though?
Gibson writes:
A clash over liturgy so close to such a major papal event, and one in which the liturgy plays such a central role, could complicate what is already a huge undertaking for the Philadelphia archdiocese and the Vatican. But such hurdles are hardly unprecedented.
Papal visits are tremendously complex, stressful and expensive projects for the dioceses hosting the pope. There is intense jockeying among bishops to try to host the pope and much maneuvering within a host diocese over where the pope will visit and who will get to meet him — and how each papal event will be organized.
Then everything must be run through a committee and approved by the Vatican. The process almost guarantees arguments, especially over liturgies, which are often flashpoints for internal church battles.
Outdoor papal Masses also tend to be huge events that must communicate a sacred rite in broad strokes to a diverse assemblage. So the music and design often have a popular, modern style that can irk liturgical traditionalists.
Is it possible that Mr. Romeri felt some moral compunction about facilitating the kind of un-Catholic abomination we’ve already witnessed in Rio and Manila? Perhaps he fears bad weather?
Many speculated that this difference in liturgical tastes might have contributed to the falling out between Chaput and his music director.
Romeri is said to have more of a “high church” sensibility in liturgy than Chaput, who has expressed a preference for the newer Mass in English and simpler styles of worship.
While Chaput is often described as a doctrinal and cultural conservative, in the Catholic church, that does not necessarily equate with liturgical traditionalism, which is its own distinct — and proud — brand
That’s what shrill liberals call subtlety.
Save the Liturgy –>Save the Church –>Save the world for our Sovereign Lord, Jesus Christ our King.
Here’s a few things that need to be brought into the light:
1) Archbishop Chaput has been quoted, suggesting that Catholics see the movie, “The Giver.” There are several problems with this suggestion:
—-God, The Father is often referred to as the Giver, so despite any poetic license, God, Our Lord is The Giver — not some character in a book or movie.
— There are some very heavy themes in this movie and book. Suicide, for one. This is not something that the faithful should see. Whether it is a reality or not, the faithful should not watch a movie where suicide is a theme. The Index of Forbidden Books and the understanding of the reason for the Index, says that should even one line or one paragraph suggest or highlight something that is contrary to the faith, you would not read (and not watch).
—When one thinks of the Garden of Eden, God told Adam and Eve not to eat from the Tree of Good and Evil. Humans ultimately were not supposed to know evil, but because the Serpent persuaded them to eat from the Tree of Good and Evil, they fell.
—The Book, The Giver, was banned by secular schools for its violence and occult themes and sexual suggestions. Why would an Archbishop promote an author or a movie that promotes such themes? Plus, by promoting the movie, you are giving your tacit approval of the book, which is definitely not for children or Catholics.
—It is disturbing that the Archbishop would give such rave reviews of the movie and the stars of the film. Since when do Archbishops applaud the acting of Hollywood movie figures who are clearly not people Catholics should look to for example.
2) Archbishop Chaput likes to include Native American practices in the mass. ““I’ve gone on a vision quest and prayed in the sweat lodges. It’s a part of my heritage,” he wrote.
From Crux article:
But that fusion of culture and religiosity was not always welcome by the church.
“Much of the church really did consider Indian spirituality to be devil worship, or at least problematic,” said Christopher Vecsey, professor of religion and Native American studies at Colgate University.
After Vatican II, however, “the notion was that local people express themselves through culture, and that they should be able to express their Catholicism through that culture as well.”
But Archbishop Chaput thinks it is just fine to include Native American rituals into Masses. We do not conform the mass to us — WE CONFORM TO THE MASS.
It’s not about culture…it’s about Jesus’ death on Calvary. How narcissistic can you be to include your Native American ritual into Jesus’ death on Calvary. Culture has nothing to do with Jesus’ sacrifice.
Archbishop says: Indian culture expresses `beauty of Christ in a fresh new way’
This statement is also offensive. Christ doesn’t need to be presented in a “fresh new way.” Christ died on the Cross for our sins. He suffered a cruel and painful death so that we can go to heaven. There is not culture associated with the ritual of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. It is an adoration of God, not man or man’s culture.