In my first real work as a liturgical organist, the "boss" banned all music by Dan Schutte. In fact, I tried to sneak one in one day and got caught. Never did it again. This was quoted over at NLM and I read the whole thing over at the Boston Pilot.

“Sing to the Lord” is very clear that many different types of music, varieties of music, styles of music, and music from different ages and times in the Church’s history and tradition are all appropriate, and that includes contemporary styles of music. It also says very clearly that Gregorian chant has this place, they call it “pride of place.” I think what is happening is that the bishops of the United States have seen that with the renewal of the liturgy, and music being one part of that which has happened since the Second Vatican Council, they have noticed that many parish communities have given up Gregorian chant. My take on “Sing to the Lord” is simply that the bishops are saying don’t forget about this very important part of our Roman Catholic tradition. You walk into many parishes you never hear Gregorian chant. The bishops are saying that’s a tragedy if that happens. But they are also very clear to say that other styles of music, including contemporary styles of music, are also appropriate.

Let me tell you a story.

A principal calls a veteran fifth-grade teacher into her office and informs her that her students' standardized test scores dropped 40% over the course of the year. She asks for an explanation and tells her that the superintendent insists that she (the principal) observe the teacher's class to help determine the quality of the academic environment to determine the causes of the dramatic decline in test scores.

The teacher says that it's natural for test scores to fluctuate depending on the class so there's nothing wrong with her teaching. She refuses to admit the principal to her classroom because it would be intrusive and demeaning for her to be observed considering her many years of service to the school.

This news saddens me... and so close to the Retired Religious Collection!

A few points:

1. They won't answer questions and refer the Vatican to their constitutions. This assumes that they are living in accordance with their constitutions! Isn't this the point of the inquiry?

2. "Violence?" Are you for real? These sisters need to get a grip on reality if they think this is violence!

3. When my students refuse to answer a question about their behavior honestly, it usually means they have something to hide. Just saying.

4. When you're proud of something, you may not go around broadcasting it, but you're not ashamed of it either. If their lifestyle is ecclesiastically healthy, why won't they just answer the questions?

5. This inquiry is going forward whether they answer the questions or not. They will no doubt accuse the Vatican of getting their facts wrong when they release the findings, so here's their chance to speak... TAKE IT! No one is silencing you. You claim the Church won't listen then you give up your golden opportunity.

I was really disappointed by this editorial in last Wednesday's Boston Globe regarding the dispute between Bishop Tobin and Representative Kennedy. So I wrote a letter to the editor which was published on Saturday. The point of my letter is that faith becomes a problem when one disagrees with the position. When one agrees (e.g., slavery) faith informing policy is not an issue and separation of church and state is never mentioned.

I AM disappointed by the Globe’s editorial on the dispute between Bishop Thomas J. Tobin and Representative Patrick Kennedy (Nov. 25). While there are some logical errors, I take specific issue with the incorrect facts and inaccurate comparisons that are frankly appalling when published by a respected news organization.

Abortion is in a different category of church teaching and cannot be compared to capital punishment or war. Catholics believe there is never a situation in which abortion can be morally right (the jargon is “intrinsically evil’’). This has been part of the church’s teaching from the very beginning. Capital punishment and war can be morally right depending on the circumstances. While there are guidelines for applying these teachings, good Catholics can and do disagree on their application.

To imply that a Catholic in public office cannot vote according to his beliefs is preposterous. What politician doesn’t? The Globe has yet to write an editorial criticizing someone who believes abortion is right, because that’s the position of the editorial board. Our Catholic faith tells us that slavery is wrong. Will you write an editorial criticizing Kennedy because his faith informs him of the immorality of slavery? Will you condemn a bishop for standing up to a Catholic politician who believed it was right and accuse him of meddling in politics?

Finally, the Globe said that it “seems likely’’ that Bishop Tobin has singled out Kennedy and has not requested the same of the other Catholic members of the Rhode Island congressional delegation. The fact is only Representative Kennedy has made this dispute public. The Globe owes Bishop Tobin an apology for insinuating something that cannot be substantiated.