Any word on Sacred Music from the USCCB?

[benedictgal]

I am not being sarcastic or baiting.

I would like to know if you are saying that during an NO Mass, with music from OCP, we DON’T enter the same mystery that Mary beheld." Is this what you are saying?

I hope not, because that seems to me, a humble convert, to be contrary to the teachings of Holy Mother Church about the NO Mass and the contemporary music. According to the teachings I received when I entered the Catholic Church, an NO Mass in English with contemporary music is just as much our “entry to the sacred mysteries” as the TLM with Latin and chant.

Please clarify for me exactly what you are saying. Thank you.

I do not know what your exact formation was or what background you have in liturgy. What I will say is that I do stand by my statements. I do not make these statements just off the top of my head. They come from study (reading the documents) and drawing comparisons with what the Church asks and what is currently out there. I also use a lot of Pope Benedict’s pre-papal writings as a solid guidepost. After all, he was at the Council and you and I were not.

I also planned liturgies for several years, at both the parochial and the diocesan level. Although I do not read music, I do have a pretty good ear for things and sufficient enough background to determine if hymns are suitable for use in the Mass. And, yes, I have used my share of contemporary hymns, after making sure that they conform to what the Church requires. And, I also had to sing my share of the OCP stuff when I was in Catholic school. Even then, my gut told me that there was something not quite right with these songs, but, as a kid, I couldn’t challenge the nuns.

Did you read the links that I posted to the USCCB powerpoint presentation? Have you read any of the links posted by other people regarding sacred music? The Church has her own norms and guidelines regarding what is proper to use for the Mass. Unfortunately, many people took the “spirit of Vatican II” instead of the actual words of Vatican II. I am not entirely opposed to modern hymns; however, when they emphasize the community more than the sacred mysteries that entail the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, then there are serious problems. Praise and Worship hymns have no place in the Mass. They lack the Catholic doctrinal and liturgical theological essence that sacred music calls for in the Mass. They also lack the sobriety that Pope Benedict wrote about in one of the posts I submitted.

I would ask you to compare Pangia Lingua by St. Thomas Aquainas to I, Myself, am the Bread of Life. Look at the words carefully. One is full of solid Catholic Eucharistic and liturgical doctrine and theology. The other is not. Read the books that our Holy Father has written regarding the Liturgy (Spirit of the Liturgy, A New Song for the Lord and Feast of Faith). Read what he has said in Sacramentum Caritatis. If the current state of liturgical music were not such a problem, he would not have issued the statements he has made regarding the subject, nor would have Pope John Paul II, as liturgical music, or lackthereof, was an item that was listed as one of the shadows plaguing our liturgies today that was discussed in the 2005 Synod on the Eucharist.

 

[peary]

I honestly, truly have no interest whatsoever in a foreign language and chant music and ancient historical traditions. I watch it on TV once in a while and just don’t get what all the excitement is about.

One cannot love what one doesn’t know.

 

[benedictgal]

While researching the issue of Sacred Music, I found this encyclical, which was written by Pope Pius XII called Musicae Sacra Disciplina. According to Fr. Alcuin Reid, OSB, in his book The Organic Development of the Liturgy

it is clear that there was papal concern about the trends in liturgical music throughout most of the 20th century before the Second Vatican Council

Even then, it seems that the liturgical music was going through some sort of shift. If not, then why would Pius resort to devoting an encyclical on the subject. Here is something noteworthy from his work:

The Church must insist that (sacred music) remain within its proper limits and must prevent anything profane and foreign from divine worship from entering its sacred music along with genuine progress, and preventing it.

The Church must take the greatest care to prevent whatever might be unbecoming to sacred worship or anything that might distract the faithful in attendance from lifting up their minds to God, from entering into sacred music, which is the servant, as it were, of the Sacred Liturgy.

Thus, sacred music is at the service of the Sacred Liturgy, not the other way around. Protestant Praise and Worship music does not serve the Sacred Liturgy. In the words of Pope Pius XII, it is “profane and foreign from divine worship”. In other words, it is not consistent with the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, let alone Catholic doctrine and liturgical theology.

What those bishops who were attempting to get some meaningful reform back into liturgical music tried to do was to get us in conformity with what the Church requires. As it stands, 53% of contemporary hymns talk about the needs of the community. Sadly 10% only refer to God as Father and 35% even refer to Jesus, directly. These are not mere factoids that I thought up; this comes from the USCCB powerpoint. These are symptoms of a greater problem, a problem that was predicted by Pope Pius XII and which Pope Benedict XVI must now solve.

 

[Wolseley]

If P and W music truly attracts them to Mass and allows them to receive graces from the Lord, then I say P and W music forever!

At the expense of driving everyone else out of the church who absolutely cannot stand that stuff?

That’s good. “P & W is all we’re going to play in this parish, because it bring in the teenagers. For all the rest of you, if you don’t like it, tough. There’s a Baptist church down the street which you’re perfectly free to join.”

Beautiful.

 

[anamchara]

Might I say that those of us who have expressed opinions contrary to yours have cited qualifiable documentation to back up our statements. You, have not.

But you interpret the documents to fit your own personal bias. Throwing up documents on here mean nothing when we use them to try and twist it to our own personal tastes, IMHO.

when it comes to the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Furthermore, as Supreme Pontiff, he writes,

 

[benedictgal]

But you interpret the documents to fit your own personal bias. Throwing up documents on here mean nothing when we use them to try and twist it to our own personal tastes, IMHO.

 

[Strummer]

Did you read the links that I posted to the USCCB powerpoint presentation? Have you read any of the links posted by other people regarding sacred music? The Church has her own norms and guidelines regarding what is proper to use for the Mass.

Indeed! The Church has HER OWN norms and they are NOT yours necessarily.

I do not make these statements just off the top of my head. They come from study (reading the documents) and drawing comparisons with what the Church asks and what is currently out there. I also use a lot of Pope Benedict’s pre-papal writings as a solid guidepost.

Might I say that those of us who have expressed opinions contrary to yours have cited qualifiable documentation to back up our statements.

However, you are projecting your own preferences and desires upon rather vague pronouncements in that documentation. For instance, you also stated,

sacred music is at the service of the Sacred Liturgy, not the other way around. Protestant Praise and Worship music does not serve the Sacred Liturgy. In the words of Pope Pius XII, it is “profane and foreign from divine worship”.

Upon what justification do you apply the Pope’s phrase (out of context)? Answer: your personal preference. The same goes for your interpretation of then-Cardinal Ratzinger’s Appollonian/Dionysian comparisons (wherein the argument is equally as thin as your own, infused with so much personal opinion parading as “logic” that it is not really an argument at all but a statement of preference).

Next witness: You are fond of quoting Sacramentum Caritatis paragraph 42, “Liturgical song” but you seem to only pick the cherries that fit your particular salad. Let’s look at some other, equally tasty fruits.

1. In the ars celebrandi, liturgical song has a pre-eminent place. (126) Saint Augustine rightly says in a famous sermon that “the new man sings a new song. Singing is an expression of joy and, if we consider the matter, an expression of love” (127). The People of God assembled for the liturgy sings the praises of God. In the course of her two-thousand-year history, the Church has created, and still creates, music and songs which represent a rich patrimony of faith and love. This heritage must not be lost. [a heritage of creating music as well as one of music already created] Certainly as far as the liturgy is concerned, we cannot say that one song is as good as another. Generic improvisation or the introduction of musical genres which fail to respect the meaning of the liturgy should be avoided. As an element of the liturgy, song should be well integrated into the overall celebration (128). Consequently everything – texts, music, execution – ought to correspond to the meaning of the mystery being celebrated, the structure of the rite and the liturgical seasons (129). Finally, **while respecting various styles and different and highly praiseworthy traditions, I desire, **[Aha! Here we see the wisdom of the Pope in recognizing that “various styles” and “different…traditions” are worthy of respect and praise even while his personal preference differs. Would that you could learn that lesson.] in accordance with the request advanced by the Synod Fathers, that Gregorian chant be suitably esteemed and employed (130) as the chant proper to the Roman liturgy (131)."

I must wonder if you really comprehend the documentation you present. It’s really not the firm foundation you seem to think it is. You are not citing well-reasoned arguments (certainly not convincing ones) but justified opinions. Certainly you are also entitled to your opinions and I would go further that you seem to have justified them for yourself quite well. But do not expect the rest of us to follow your reasoning for ultimately it is not reason but preference you are following. And the same could be said for us, I suppose.

Perhaps you might take a page out of Cat’s book who, though she has “no interest whatsoever in a foreign language and chant music and ancient historical traditions” recognizes that “that you and others are thrilled by it.” She then goes on to state…

I support with all my heart the TLM and believe that it should be available to ALL Catholics.

But then, maybe you have found that page. You state that you “have used my share of contemporary hymns, after making sure that they conform to what the Church requires” which is all “we” are asking really.

 

[Strummer]

Perhaps I might alleviate some of your angst. You’ve referenced the USCCB’s powerpoint a couple of times as some sort of clarion call to action (or, at least, worry). Specifically you cite…

As it stands, 53% of contemporary hymns talk about the needs of the community. Sadly 10% only refer to God as Father and 35% even refer to Jesus, directly. These are not mere factoids that I thought up; this comes from the USCCB powerpoint.

Did you not notice that this “statistical analysis”, and I am using the term VERY loosely, applies to JUST 20 SONGS?!?! The “55%” they cite means there are a total of 11 songs in question. Eleven! That’s what you’re worried about? Tell ya what. I have no idea what songs they reviewed (the “20 most popular”? defined how? Out of how many?) but if we agreed to just toss those 11 into the dustbin can we drop this whole hand-wringing over liturgical music? And if “Shine, Jesus, Shine” and “Lord I Lift Your Name on High” are not in there, you can add them as a bonus. (I can barely stand those two either.) Do we have an accord?

 

[Brendan]

If the Pope came to our parish I’m sure he would be very pleased.

 

[Strummer]

…but not once have you included documentation that would substantiate your comments.

And, quite frankly, neither have you. Not really.

If you are criticical of my personal tastes than I wonder how you would react at a Papal Mass, given the fact that Pope Benedict has established Gregorian Chant and polyphony as the Norm.

Can you at least give us the credit to recognize that a Papal Mass is something a bit different from our regular Sunday Mass? If he wants GC at his Mass then by all means give him GC!

You will find that barely 10% of the hymns refer to God as Father, something that the USCCB labeled as highly deficient.

Incorrect. 10% ***of the hymns surveyed ***or 2 out of the 20. Do you really think 20 hymns sufficiently represent the totality of hymnoty employed today?

 

[benedictgal]

And, quite frankly, neither have you. Not really.

Can you at least give us the credit to recognize that a Papal Mass is something a bit different from our regular Sunday Mass? If he wants GC at his Mass then by all means give him GC!

Incorrect. 10% ***of the hymns surveyed ***or 2 out of the 20. Do you really think 20 hymns sufficiently represent the totality of hymnoty employed today?

Strummer, the fact of the matter is that Sacred Music and Praise and Worship songs are two entirely different entities. If you want to challenge writings of Popes and doctrinally sound and eminent theologians, than that is your issue. However, the Church does have her standards.

You neglect the fact that Gregorian Chant is the NORM for the Church. It is the Church’s default music, so to speak. Furthermore, I challenge you to look at your hymnal objectively (not just at the songs that you like, but the whole enchliada) and tell me that they do conform to Liturgicam Authenticam (whose links have been posted throughout this thread). Oh, but I forgot, you don’t seem to regard any documentation that I have posted as substantial.

 

[Cat]

benedictgal, I am a convert from evangelical Protestantism (2004). My diocese is considered one of the most orthodox and conservative in the United States and our bishop is universally respected. He and his predecessor have welcomed the TLM (run by Christ the King priests) since the mid-80s. The TLM happens daily less than two miles from my house.

I have played the piano in church since I was a child. I have never been in charge of choosing music or heading up the music ministry of any church, although I have been the director of several children’s choirs.

That is my formation.

And I must humbly ask you to please answer my question. Perhaps you did, but I am too dense to see the answer.

Please allow me to rephrase my question.

Are Catholics still entering the sacred mysteries of the Mass at an NO Mass in which contemporary music from OCP is used?
The impression that I am receiving from you is that Catholics who attend NO Mass where OCP music is used are NOT entering the sacred mysteries of the Holy Mass, but instead, are merely spectators at a Protestant worship service.

Is this what you are saying?

If this IS what you are saying, then I must disagree strongly, based on the teaching that I have received in my diocese from well-trained lay ministers and priests, and our excellent bishop, Thomas Doran. The valid NO Mass, including those in which music from OCP is used, takes Catholics to the foot of the cross and into the realms of heaven and allows us to receive Jesus Christ, Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity, as fully as the TLM does.

To those who prefer TLM and dislike OCP songs, the NO Mass may not “feel” as “mysterious,” but it IS, not because we “feel” that it is “mysterious,” but because the Holy Father SAYS that it is.

Indeed, based on the teaching that I have received, I would even say that a valid Mass in which heretical songs are used will still allow Catholics to enter the sacred mysteries.

Please forgive me if I am reading something into your comments that you do not intend to say.

 

[Wolseley]

There is no hope of reconciliation here.

The Holy Father needs to split the American church into two sections: those who favor “folk” music and innovative liturgies, and those who favor traditional Catholic music and strict adherence to the rubrics.

One is one, and the other is the other, and never the twain shall meet. Just split it in half, and be done with it.

 

[anamchara]

Amchara, have you bothered to read any of the links that have been posted?

Naw and even if I did, I doubt I’d come to the same conclusions as you. I am in line with strummers reponses. However, I’ve been on Catholic forums long enough to not trust other amature opinions on Church documents. I trust my bishop and my priest and of course the Pope oh and cannon lawyers.

I challenge you to pick up one of your hymnals and examine it in light of all of the documents.

We use what is allowed. I’ll say it one more time. If the Church decides to do away with the music our director picks then that’s fine.

You are so wuick to insert rolling eyes into your comments, but not once have you included documentation that would substantiate your comments.

I’ll try not to use the rolling eyes anymore. I’ll admit to over use of said eyes. As far as documents, I wouldn’t do that nor do I feel I need to.

The fact that Pope Benedict made these very strong statements regarding Sacred Music pre and post papal election shows that he does have a profound understanding of what is required for the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

So you and the Pope are in agreement. You should go work for him.

If you are criticical of my personal tastes than I wonder how you would react at a Papal Mass, given the fact that Pope Benedict has established Gregorian Chant and polyphony as the Norm. Furthermore, the Constitution on Sacred Liturgy establishes the aforementioned chant as the norm for liturgical music.

I am NOT critical of anyones taste, but nice try. I am in full support of the TLM. I was very happy for the tradtional movement when the MP came out. The thing I don’t like is posters who try and force it on others by degrading NO to nothing but “happy clappy, Protestant music Mass”

Read the USCCB powerpoint.

You seem to keep stomping your feet and yelling “read this” “read that” why? Not everyone is going to think like you. I respect your opinions but you don’t seem to respect others, why does it always have to be " they just don’t understand the documents, that’s why they don’t agree"

 

[benedictgal]

And I must humbly ask you to please answer my question. Perhaps you did, but I am too dense to see the answer.

Please allow me to rephrase my question.

Are Catholics still entering the sacred mysteries of the Mass at an NO Mass in which contemporary music from OCP is used?
The impression that I am receiving from you is that Catholics who attend NO Mass where OCP music is used are NOT entering the sacred mysteries of the Holy Mass, but instead, are merely spectators at a Protestant worship service.

Is this what you are saying?

If this IS what you are saying, then I must disagree strongly, based on the teaching that I have received in my diocese from well-trained lay ministers and priests, and our excellent bishop, Thomas Doran. The valid NO Mass, including those in which music from OCP is used, takes Catholics to the foot of the cross and into the realms of heaven and allows us to receive Jesus Christ, Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity, as fully as the TLM does.

To those who prefer TLM and dislike OCP songs, the NO Mass may not “feel” as “mysterious,” but it IS, not because we “feel” that it is “mysterious,” but because the Holy Father SAYS that it is.

Indeed, based on the teaching that I have received, I would even say that a valid Mass in which heretical songs are used will still allow Catholics to enter the sacred mysteries.

Please forgive me if I am reading something into your comments that you do not intend to say.

Cat, I never said that OCP hymns made the Mass invalid. The Mass is valid, despite the Praise and Worship and OCP hymns. My new parish uses OCP heavily; I choose to not sing hymns that I find questionable and lacking. Did I fulfill my Sunday obligation? Yes, I just have to suffer through the bad. That is not to say, however, that I won’t try to gently persuade my new pastor to cut the OCP umbilical chord (at least as far as the English stuff is concerned). Unfortunately, as far as Spanish hymns are concerned, we are stuck with OCP.

Now OCP has been taken to the woodshed on a a couple of matters. They were told that the hand-clapping Gloria by Christopher Walker needed to be removed from the service music portion of their hymnals (and transferred to the regular hymnal section) because that translation was nowhere near the official Gloria listed in the Roman MIssal (Sacramentary). The same holds true for one of their Sactus and Agnus Dei versions. You cannot take liberties when it comes to the parts of the Mass. The Gloria to which I referred bore no resemblance to the actual Gloria.

I would urge you to go back and read documents such as the USCCB powerpoint and Liturgicam Authenticam, as well as Spirit of the Liturgy and Sacramentum Caritatis.

Now, I never said that I disdained modern hymns. They just need to conform to the standards set forth by the Church, mainly Liturgical Authenticam. A review of the USCCB powerpoint in comparison with a contemporay hymnal would do a world of good.

 

[lak611]

benedictgal, I am a convert from evangelical Protestantism (2004). My diocese is considered one of the most orthodox and conservative in the United States and our bishop is universally respected. He and his predecessor have welcomed the TLM (run by Christ the King priests) since the mid-80s. The TLM happens daily less than two miles from my house.

I have played the piano in church since I was a child. I have never been in charge of choosing music or heading up the music ministry of any church, although I have been the director of several children’s choirs.

That is my formation.

And I must humbly ask you to please answer my question. Perhaps you did, but I am too dense to see the answer.

Please allow me to rephrase my question.

Are Catholics still entering the sacred mysteries of the Mass at an NO Mass in which contemporary music from OCP is used?
The impression that I am receiving from you is that Catholics who attend NO Mass where OCP music is used are NOT entering the sacred mysteries of the Holy Mass, but instead, are merely spectators at a Protestant worship service.

Is this what you are saying?

If this IS what you are saying, then I must disagree strongly, based on the teaching that I have received in my diocese from well-trained lay ministers and priests, and our excellent bishop, Thomas Doran. The valid NO Mass, including those in which music from OCP is used, takes Catholics to the foot of the cross and into the realms of heaven and allows us to receive Jesus Christ, Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity, as fully as the TLM does.

To those who prefer TLM and dislike OCP songs, the NO Mass may not “feel” as “mysterious,” but it IS, not because we “feel” that it is “mysterious,” but because the Holy Father SAYS that it is.

Indeed, based on the teaching that I have received, I would even say that a valid Mass in which heretical songs are used will still allow Catholics to enter the sacred mysteries.

Please forgive me if I am reading something into your comments that you do not intend to say.

Why cannot the NO have traditional hymns (not necessarily in Latin), but hymns in the vernacular that are traditional? Why must one be forced to attend a TLM in order to get decent music? I do not think anyone is asking for all Latin or all chant. We are just tired of being subjected to the OCP stuff. Why not “Faith of Our Fathers” or “To Jesus Christ Our Sovereign King” instead of “Anthem” or “All Are Welcome”?

 

[benedictgal]

Amachara, I have tried to be as respectful as I can to you. You need not take such a condescending tone towards me. Yes, I am an amateur, but, I’m a well-informed and well-read amateur.

Your refusal to read the documents for yourself makes my point. Perhaps you are afraid that the documents will dispel your notions and open your eyes to the truth regarding Sacred Music. I never denigrated the Ordinary form of the Mass. You are putting words in my mouth that are false. My concern is that the music being used in many parishes and dioceses is sorely lacking in conforming to the liturgical norms established by Rome.

Although I do wish that the USCCB had voted by the required 2/3 majority to send the document on Sacred Music to Rome, I will read the text once the USCCB puts it up on its website.

[/QUOTE]

 

[JButky]

The thing I don’t like is posters who try and force it on others by degrading NO to nothing but “happy clappy, Protestant music Mass”

I don’t think there is any suggestion of that in this thread. No one here is “degrading” the NO because of musical content. There is however the “happy clappy music” that is merely an observation and is part of the reason why we are wondering what the bishops are going to do, if anything, on matters of Sacred Music.

It’s obvious from reading papal documents and messages sent from Rome that there is a lot of music that is unacceptable. So the bishops have been charged yet again with fixing it.

We’ve got a hodge podge of stuff, from good to bad and everything in between. It has run unchecked and infiltrated the liturgy because those responsible for overseeing it have avoided doing so. It took 40 years to get us to this point and it’s not going to change overnight.

Joe B

 

[Strummer]

If you want to challenge writings of Popes and doctrinally sound and eminent theologians, than that is your issue.

What I challenge is your prejudiced interpretation of those writings. I also challenge your inclusion of Cardinal Ratzinger’s “preference letter” with the implication that as that man is now Pope that his opinions before his pontificate have more weight or bearing. While one may be a Catholic in good standing and never review any of her writings, you have accepted that challenge (kudos to you for that, btw) and so are responsible for your interpretations and analysis. THAT is what I challenge.

You neglect the fact that Gregorian Chant is the NORM for the Church. It is the Church’s default music, so to speak.

Actually, I think the word used was “default” and not “norm”. This means that, having nothing else at hand, one may fall back upon GC. It does not raise it to a preferred status within the Church.

Furthermore, I challenge you to look at your hymnal objectively (not just at the songs that you like, but the whole enchliada) and tell me that they do conform to Liturgicam Authenticam (whose links have been posted throughout this thread).

That is a fair challenge. I will look into that. However, judging from the PowerPoint, some of those nits were practically too small to pick. I mean, come on now…changing “decendeth” to “decended” means that Christ is no longer with us in the present? Give us more credit than that, will you? Do the bishops think we’re all simpletons?

Oh, but I forgot, you don’t seem to regard any documentation that I have posted as substantial.

I am reminded of a quote by Gen. Colin Powell who said (words to the effect), “Do not tie your argument to your ego such that losing one, you lose the other as well.”

 

[anamchara]

anamchara;3008171:

Iffy, the Pope just fired his “P&W” choirmaster and replaced him with a master of Gregorian Chant.

I was just making a point Brendan that the Pope has a better understanding and acceptance of the diversity in the Church then many posters want to give him credit for. I know certain posters want to believe he is their voice for everything pre-VACII but that is very simple minded in my opinion. Obviously our beloved Pope has a preference for CG and of course being Pope wants to use the default music. I respect him for this. But I doubt he would have a huge problem with the music that is played in our parish. He would visit our cathedral down town if he came here and I’m sure they would pull out all the bells and whistles for him.