According to EWTN (I didn’t watch the
\nproceedings), there are two pieces of news on the the proposed music
\ndocument that had been scheduled to be considered at the Fall USCCB
\nmeeting: 1) it has been downgraded from particular law to advisory,
\nwhich means that it will not have the same binding status and will not
\nrequire Rome’s approval, and 2) it has been otherwise withdrawn because
\nthere were 100 pages of proposed changes and there was no way it could
\nbe tackled at the USCCB meeting.<\/p>\n
Very interesting. This According to EWTN (I didn’t watch the proceedings), there are two pieces of news on the the proposed music document that had been scheduled to be considered at the Fall…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3448","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-liturgy"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.splendoroftruth.com\/curtjester\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3448","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.splendoroftruth.com\/curtjester\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.splendoroftruth.com\/curtjester\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.splendoroftruth.com\/curtjester\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.splendoroftruth.com\/curtjester\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3448"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.splendoroftruth.com\/curtjester\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3448\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.splendoroftruth.com\/curtjester\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3448"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.splendoroftruth.com\/curtjester\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3448"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.splendoroftruth.com\/curtjester\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3448"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
\ndocument was suppose to be a response to Liturgiam Authenticam (and it
\nis late in submission in the first place) for Episcopal conferences to
\nsubmit to the Congregation for Worship and the Discipline of the
\nSacraments for review. I don’t think the document “Sing To
\nThe Lord” they submitted to the CDW meet the requirements of Liturgiam
\nAuthenticam since it was on vague guidelines and not the translations
\nof scriptural texts used in Sacred Music. It was thought by
\nmany that the CDW would likely reject their submission, something that
\nis all to familiar for our bishop’s conference. So possibly
\nthis move is to save face as Bishop Trautman leaves the BCL to be
\nreplaced by Bishop. Seratelli.<\/span>
\n
\nI also see a problem with just changing
\nthis from particular law to advisory. For one Liturgiam
\nAuthenticam still needs to be replied to. Liturgiam
\nAuthenticam was issued in five years and called for submissions by the
\nEpiscopal conference within five years. “Sing to the Lord”
\nhas been seen as a mishmash of the defense of more traditional sacred
\nmusic while at the same time being a defense of the status quo.
\n We can only hope that it’s switch to advisory won’t be used
\nin the same way that another document that was never approved,
\nEnvironment and Art in Catholic Worship, was used as dogma within the
\nUnited States.<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"