Pope Benedict XVI, then Cardinal Ratzinger, wrote the following on applause in Church:
“Wherever applause breaks out in the liturgy because of some human achievement, it is a sure sign that the essence of liturgy has totally disappeared and been replaced by a kind of religious entertainment. ” (Spirit of the Liturgy p. 198)
Fr. Zuhlsdorf quoted this back to an inquiry concerning applause at Church.
This is precisely right and it is a serious problem. I doubt that any choir that uses a loft does not face this applause problem. A choir that is singing in front of the people will tend to elicit the kind of judgment from people that is rendered in a concert setting. People will want to express their appreciation, forgetting that the purpose of the singing and performing is not entertainment but worship.
Another problem to applause – and this applies even for the applause sometimes given to visiting dignitaries and the like – is that it is an audible distraction from worship. It creates an unmistakably “earthly” sound that just does not belong in the liturgical environment.
Musicians are enormously flattered by applause and if our schola every did receive such a thing, I would likely be inwardly very pleased, while at the same time I would be certain that something had gone very wrong.
I would suggest one exception to this. A great organist will often play a long postlude following Mass. It is polite to stay and listen to this, and it is fine to applaud at the finish. This is long after Mass has ended and the liturgy has come to a close.
30 or so years ago when you went to a concert in an Anglican church, even one of non-sacred music, you were often requested not to applaud. This is rarely the case nowadays. There seems to be a fair amount of applause at papal ceremonies in St Peter's. At the Pope's Westminster Cathedral mass in September there was no applause at his entrance (they're a well-behaved lot in London) but he was clapped on the way out. After addressing the young people in the piazza he then re-entered the cathedral for a short service in a side chapel and this time was applauded by the congregation, which rather spoiled a fine rendition by choir, organ and brass of Bruckner's Ecce Sacerdos!
Can. 1210 "Only those things which serve the exercise or promotion of worship, piety, or religion are permitted in a sacred place; anything not consonant with the holiness of the place is forbidden."
In light of this, I would think applause never appropriate in a church, as it lauds man. I think it especially inappropriate in the current 'culture' of confusion of what worship is in itself, which so often tends to focus on 'the community'.
A few things …
Cardinal Ratzinger misses the second reason for applause in western culture: affirmation and appreciation for what is shared, not how it's rendered. I note the frequent applause on talk shows, not given because the person expressed herself or himself well, but because the people wish to express regard for the sentiment expressed.
Note the instance when Archbishop Dolan elicited applause last Palm Sunday with his words of support for the pope. They weren't affirming how the bishop spoke, merely a group congruence with the expression.
That said, I find it better to put myself and musicians in a place in which we will not receive applause. But if it happens, we accept it graciously and give God the glory.
Why single out the musicians for appreciation? Why not applaud the servers, readers, priest, etc.? Why not the ushers, the sacristan? Why not applaud ourselves for merely being at Mass?
If people really feel the need to express their appreciation, they should wait until all is sung and done and meet the choir director (organist, servers, etc.) afterwards and offer some meaningful comments. Applause at Mass is inappropriate and a limp way of showing real respect for the work done.
Priests can and should gently remind us about the true nature of the Mass. Musicians themselves should take the initiative by writing a brief note for the bulletin about why they are doing what they are doing, and that applause is not necessary nor appropriate.
Lastly, if people really want to show their appreciation for music and musicians, why not pay the organist a decent wage? Man does not live on bread alone (St. Matthew 4:4), but the labourer is surely worthy of his hire (St. Luke 10:7).
But then there is the "What do you do about it?" question.
Yes, priests should make gentle reminders, and all of that. And yes, we should all agree that it's inappropriate and voice our concerns on blogs read by other people who agree with us.
But what's to be done?
A few things I'm trying at my (applause-happy) parish:
1. Avoid "big finishes" and "buttons." Ask the organist to improvise "out of" pieces in such way that there aren't any clap-traps.
2. Studiously avoid any hint of "receiving" the applause. The polite head-nod of humble gratitude is only an encouragement.
3. Lay off the overly dramatic literature. Probably good advice anyway. People don't tend to clap in Church for traditional sacred music (Chant and polyphony). Performance-driven rock and pop are sure to raise a round. Yet another reason to avoid such. The High-Church Choral music of the Anglican tradition could go either way. While usually appropriate (especially in Anglican or Anglican-Use liturgy), you may need to lay off the really great pieces for a while to retrain your congregation, depending on how things are going.
4. Never, ever make a show of disapproving of clapping when it is happening. That's what divas do. It only makes them clap more.
5. Let you choir know how you feel about it. They probably agree with you. They can tell their friends and family.
Anyone else have good ideas?
Is booing ever appropriate at mass?
Is it right to give the audience, er congregation, the right to applaud, but not the right to boo?
I don't like applause, but it happens. Adam's suggestions are very good. If the parish leadership feels strongly about it, put something in the bulletin that isn't too snooty or have the pastor "homilize" briefly on the topic.
At the same time, there are so many liturgical problems out there that I feel like this one is small potatoes.
Now Todd is comparing our liturgical worship with talk shows.
Anyway, I grew up with a priest who, if the congregation applauded at the end of mass, would storm the sanctuary and reprimand everyone over the microphone, telling them that what the singers and musicians offer is a PRAYER and it is silly and wrong to applaud that sort of offering.
Keep in mind that this was a parish entirely guilty of the Gather, S&S, etc. abuses. Even with dancers (and we know Ratzinger's thoughts on that), but again, the priest at least had the sense of sacredness in liturgy to reprimand applause directed toward them as well.
It's all prayer, stop applauding.
Words to live by.
(Unless you think that Regis & Kelly have something to teach us about liturgy)
"Now Todd is comparing our liturgical worship with talk shows."
I think I was being particular, suggesting point-blank the comparison between Oprah and Archbishop Dolan. 😉
"Our" worship? Are you confessing applause for music at your parish? We certainly don't do it at mine. I think I was making observations about "your" churches. Maybe this is why you've chosen to remain anonymous.
That said, Adam and Mary Jane have the best comments above. There are ways to steer applause to better expressions without being juvenile about it. But if you happen to get it, I wouldn't assume the people are cheering a good performance. The physical act of applause has more than one meaning behind it.
By "our" I meant Catholics. Yes, I grew up at a church that would applaud occasionally, and the priest made a point to rebuke his parishioners if they did so.
Back to "our," I mean it in the truly "Catholic" sense… that I don't consider the liturgy here, at your church, or in Rome, to follow any different guidelines. "Our" liturgy is ALL of us Catholics, and we ought not applaud the sung prayer of those who chose to lead, just as we ought not applaud the readings, the homily, the consecration, or anything else that we choose to express "agreement" with.
If we should particularly agree with a sung prayer of the church, perhaps "active participation" is in order. Applause? Certainly not.
My anonymous friend, I don't disagree with you. I merely took exception to your lack of logic in equating my analysis of applause to my alleged support for it. Not to mention your sarcastic insult. Just because I don't echo your exact words, or Jeffrey's, or Pope Benedict's doesn't mean I disagree with you. In fact, it would seem that Archbishop Dolan disagrees with you more than I do.
To be more effective in channeling the impulse to applaud, I think you have to realize what is meant by it.
Or you can just alienate people who make a public show of support for your ministry. I wouldn't applaud that either.
The spontaneous applause for Archbishop Dolan's homily (or other NY Cardinals which is often an encouragement for prolife efforts), or the tradition of applauding a Cardinal or the Pope after the liturgy has already ended, or even applauding choir/organist after a postlude are all very different than the situation of directly applauding the choir week after week after communion and before the Mass has ended. The time after communion is a time cherished by the faithful as a gift, a time to appreciate and praise the gift of our Lord in the Eucharist, or offer an intention. In times when we are often so busy and plugged in, it is a moment of prayer, or exactly what the word means, communion. It therefore amounts to an intrusion into this time of communion to have to focus so much on the choir as performers and then be careful to applaud them.
That said, it is probably true that nothing much can be done to counter this lest the clappers become angry (although I seriously doubt anyone would leave a parish because the parish decided that reverent silence would be more befitting the congregation than applauding the choir right after communion). One solution would be to merely ask the congregation to wait a few moments to applaud the choir and organist after the recessional which makes much more sense. It is peculiar and smacks of a need for immediate gratification to hear a communion meditation and then be required to all applaud, then have the blessing from the celebrant and then sing at the recessional (or "closing song" as some put it).
But the quotation about applause should be considered seriously in places where this happens week after week for it is most likely a symptom of a wider problem that needs to be addressed.
This has been mostly a good discussion. I'll point out that the silence after the homily is no less an important time for interior recollection. I don't see the difference between a homily being applauded or a post-Communion musical piece. Both are intrusive. Both reward "performance." But for the former to be rebuked, one implies a criticism of the clergy, bishops, or even the pope, especially if one blames musicians for the latter.
In most parishes with frequent applause, it is held till the end of liturgy, as a communal affirmation of the entire worship experience. Anonymous #2 related the practice of the silly priest who attempted to browbeat parishioners into submission for post-liturgical applause.
I think Cardinal Ratzinger missed the mark on this. I agree that applause for artistic or ideological performance during the Mass is wrong. I just don't think that's what's going on.
That said, applause in church is a fun topic, isn't it?
Todd, I am not sure where exactly you disagree with Cardinal Ratzinger's statement if you do agree that applause for artistic or ideological performance during the Mass is wrong. When a congregation directly applauds a choir before the liturgy has ended, wouldn't you agree that this is the exact same type of applause which can be found in a concert hall?
Why add clapping as an embellishment, anyway. What about dancing. Or whistling. Or standing ovation. Or "bravo". You can see the absurdity.
All of these things, while certainly may signal "joy" from the one doing the action are just fine in and of themselves. And amen to joy in general. But, some at Mass are grieving. Some are anxious. Some are poor and are doing all they can just to merely lift their minds and hearts to God in that circumstance. Wouldn't silence and quiet be the way to go when we all come, as poor as we are, before Our Creator, with each our own situations?
"(W)ouldn't you agree that this is the exact same type of applause which can be found in a concert hall?"
Not necessarily. Liturgy brings the context of faith, and applause, even for good performance, doesn't emerge unsmudged from the Mass.
"You can see the absurdity."
Not always. Charismatics and black Churches add "Amen" and other acclamations. A liturgical "bravo," except that it's directed at the proclamation of the Word. I don't have a problem in principle with non-silent affirmation. I would have with a consistent applause for choral performance or even for Arhcbishop Dolan's post-Communion Palm Sunday defense of the Holy Father. Both of those would strike me as self-serving.
"Wouldn't silence and quiet be the way to go when we all come, as poor as we are, before Our Creator, with each our own situations?"
Again, not necessarily. Mass is not a celebration of several to thousands of separate individuals, but of a single unified Body, Head and members.
Well, the goal of unity would be furthered with consistency of gestures and prayers of the lay faithful so much as possible. It is a single unified Body but of course we cannot read each others' minds and intentions. Who chooses the "themes" and "tone" of each Mass then, which is intended to "unify" — the liturgist? That may seem unifying from a surface perspective only.