DR. EDWARD MULHOLLAND was born in the Bronx, New York. He earned his master’s degree in classics from the University of London, England, and received both a licentiate and a Ph.D. in philosophy from the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome. Dr. Mulholland was the first director of NCE (formerly known as American Consultants for Education, ACE) in 1995. From 1996-1998 he served as the head of the Humanities Department and the dean of the Journalism School at the Centro Universitario Francisco de Vitoria in Madrid, Spain. From 1998-2005, he was Professor of Philosophy at Our Lady of Thornwood Education and Training Center in Thornwood, New York and Professor of Classical Languages at the Center of Humanities in Cheshire, Connecticut. He served as Chair of Catholic Formation at Pinecrest Academy in Cumming, GA from 2005-2011, and is currently Asst. Professor of Classical and Modern languages at Benedictine College in Atchison, KS, where he lives with his bride Valerie and their six children.
I did listen to the whole interview, and was struck by the fact that the interviewer, whoever he was (a) sounded young and callow (b) was opinionated but also very ignorant and (c) spoke far too much. Dr Mulholland had a pretty raw deal, I would say, but was too polite to say so. The proportion of talk between an interviewer and interviewee should be very different. An interview is not the place for the interviewer to fly his own kites, but to elicit words of wisdom from the interviewee, with brief questions rather than lengthy statements.
I did not hear anything that really got into the subject. It was all very superficial stuff.
The texts used by Dr. Proulx are nearly all scripture-based. The same goes for marty Haugen's texts. For example, there are a huge range of scripture quotes in 'Gather us in'.
I'm not sure what the relevance here is. I don't remember the interviewer saying any place, "And none of these texts contain any Sacred Scripture at all." That wasn't the point at all. Can somebody give me the timecode where the statement is made that "none of these substitutions contain any Scripture" ?
Marty Haugen is not a Unitarian.
Thanks. That may be an error. Online it says he belongs to a Church founded in 1957. However, I'm not sure this minor error has any effect on the conversation. In other words, the interview wasn't really focused on the Religion of a single composer. Did it come off that way?
I did listen to the whole interview, and was struck by the fact that the interviewer, whoever he was . . . (b) was [sic] opinionated but also very ignorant
In that case, it ought to be easy for you to present us with several substantive flaws in his reasoning and argument.
I did listen to the whole interview, and was struck by the fact that the interviewer, whoever he was . . . (b) was [sic] opinionated but also very ignorant
In that case, it ought to be easy for you to present us with several substantive flaws in his reasoning and argument.
Cannot wait to hear them!
You mean you want me to listen to it AGAIN ?!!! Once was more than enough.
I relented. Without listening to the interview a second time, one of the things I recall is that the interviewer thinks that the antiphons of the Missal are the texts given by the Church, and that therefore we ought to be singing them in preference to anything else. That is both naive and inaccurate, but alas it is something that one often hears propounded by people who have heard it from somebody else.
— In fact the Church provides several options for singing at those points in the Mass, so it is incorrect to try to characterize these texts as the "given texts". — Additionally, in the universal GIRM the Missal antiphons are not even given as an option for singing. The USA, exceptionally, has inserted them as a local addition along with the Gradual Romanum in the first option. — Thirdly, we know from those who worked on the 1970 Missal that they never intended those actual texts to be sung. The texts are there to remind us that we should be singing something at those points, but not those texts. They are only there for recitation if there is no singing.
President, Jeff Ostrowski, said about the interview:
“The audio quality wasn’t very good, but we’ve already figured out ways to make the next interview higher quality. Overall, I think the interview was pretty good, especially for it being our very first one. I’m glad Fr. Mann has agreed to come back on the program after we’ve had time to 'mature,’ so to speak, in our interview techniques.”
Jeff, in my view, the 'interview' was immature and highly ignorant.
Is it true that parishes 'toss aside' the propers, and replace them with 'reflections'?
I know of no parishes who use non-scriptural sources for the introit.
At Belmont Abbey, for example,Fr. Alan Rees has set the propers to beautiful gregorian based music.
At my own church, we use the propers as a basis for the choice of music. Some songs, for example 'Abba Father, send your spirit' have a far higher scriptural content than the original proper. We also sing some settings from Psallite, and often sing the proper of the Sunday to a grail psalm tone.
I do not see why Fr. Mann objects to Dr. Proulx being an Anglican. In fact, the Anglicans are usually very observant in singing the propers.
Fr. Mann should know that Marty Haugen is not a Unitarian. 'Gather us in', for example, is a very powerful classic eucharistic hymn, and is not a 'reflection'.
The Gospel is compulsory, and the propers remain optional.
