Catholic Folk Masses--Uncomfortable?

[pnewton]

I never said “They’ll Know” was written as a secular song. It’s not sacred music, though–it’s a religious song. “They’ll Know” does not fulfil the criteria laid out by the Second Vatican Council and various popes for what is sacred music.

That is your opininion, not mine. Your definition of sacred leaves a great deal of room for judgement. Mine does not. It uses objective criteria. There is nothing mentioned in any document that would objectively exclude this song. The documents all have avoided such an action as to allow room for some judgement, opinion and culture. Before you ask, yes, I have read every contemporary document the Church has put out.

 

[pnewton]

Lex orandi, lex credendi applies just as much to music sung at the liturgy as it does to the words of the liturgy.

Absolutely, which is why I use that song once or twice a year. It is a message that if integral to Catholicism. As I said, is is an instruction from Christ to us.

What is ironic, is that I think I have only used it as a recessional which is technically after Mass has ended anywat.

 

[mhazell]

That is your opininion, not mine. Your definition of sacred leaves a great deal of room for judgement. Mine does not. It uses objective criteria. There is nothing mentioned in any document that would objectively exclude this song. The documents all have avoided such an action as to allow room for some judgement, opinion and culture. Before you ask, yes, I have read every contemporary document the Church has put out.

I’d suggest you haven’t read enough of them in detail, then. The following have my emphases:

“The custom legitimately in use in certain places and widely confirmed by indults, of substituting other songs for the songs given in the Graduale for the Entrance, Offertory and Communion, can be retained according to the judgment of the competent territorial authority, as long as songs of this sort are in keeping with the parts of the Mass, with the feast or with the liturgical season. It is for the same territorial authority to approve the texts of these songs.” (Musicam Sacram 32)

"The musical tradition of the universal Church is a treasure of inestimable value, greater even than that of any other art. The main reason for this pre-eminence is that, as sacred song united to the words, it forms a necessary or integral part of the solemn Liturgy.
"Holy Scripture, indeed, has bestowed praise upon sacred song, and the same may be said of the fathers of the Church and of the Roman pontiffs who in recent times, led by Saint Pius X, have explained more precisely the ministerial function supplied by sacred music in the service of the Lord.
“Therefore sacred music is to be considered the more holy in proportion as it is more closely connected with the liturgical action, whether it adds delight to prayer, fosters unity of minds, or confers greater solemnity upon the sacred rites. But the Church approves of all forms of true art having the needed qualities, and admits them into Divine Worship.” (Sacrosanctum Concilium 112)

“The dignity and lofty purpose of sacred music consist in the fact that its lovely melodies and splendor beautify and embellish the voices of the priest who offers Mass and of the Christian people who praise the Sovereign God. Its special power and excellence should lift up to God the minds of the faithful who are present. **It should make the liturgical prayers of the Christian community more alive and fervent **so that everyone can praise and beseech the Triune God more powerfully, more intently and more effectively.” (Pius XII, Musicae Sacrae 31)

"If hymns of this sort are to bring spiritual fruit and advantage to the Christian people, they must be in full conformity with the doctrine of the Catholic faith. They must also express and explain that doctrine accurately. Likewise they must use plain language and simple melody and must be free from violent and vain excess of words. Despite the fact that they are short and easy, they should manifest a religious dignity and seriousness. When they are fashioned in this way these sacred canticles, born as they are from the most profound depths of the people’s soul, deeply move the emotions and spirit and stir up pious sentiments. When they are sung at religious rites by a great crowd of people singing as with one voice, they are powerful in raising the minds of the faithful to higher things.
“As we have written above, such hymns cannot be used in Solemn High Masses without the express permission of the Holy See. Nevertheless at Masses that are not sung solemnly these hymns can be a powerful aid in keeping the faithful from attending the Holy Sacrifice like dumb and idle spectators. They can help to make the faithful accompany the sacred services both mentally and vocally and to join their own piety to the prayers of the priest. This happens when these hymns are properly adapted to the individual parts of the Mass, as We rejoice to know is being done in many parts of the Catholic world” (Musicae Sacrae, 63-64)

Is it really possible, given the above, to say that “They’ll Know” and other similar songs fulfils the criteria for sacred music? I don’t think so. (I know that this can be written off as my opinion, but you can’t say I haven’t backed it up with the relevant documentation.)

 

[pnewton]

I’d suggest you haven’t read enough of them in detail, then. The following have my emphases:And I suggest that it is presumptious to assume that because I do not apply them as you do, that I have not read them.

Is it really possible, given the above, to say that “They’ll Know” and other similar songs fulfils the criteria for sacred music?

In my opinion, yes, in my parish and at certain times.

 

[mhazell]

And I suggest that it is presumptious to assume that because I do not apply them as you do, that I have not read them.

How else are they to be applied, then? They seem quite clear to me…

 

[benedictgal]

I’d suggest you haven’t read enough of them in detail, then. The following have my emphases:

“The custom legitimately in use in certain places and widely confirmed by indults, of substituting other songs for the songs given in the Graduale for the Entrance, Offertory and Communion, can be retained according to the judgment of the competent territorial authority, as long as songs of this sort are in keeping with the parts of the Mass, with the feast or with the liturgical season. It is for the same territorial authority to approve the texts of these songs.” (Musicam Sacram 32)

"The musical tradition of the universal Church is a treasure of inestimable value, greater even than that of any other art. The main reason for this pre-eminence is that, as sacred song united to the words, it forms a necessary or integral part of the solemn Liturgy.
"Holy Scripture, indeed, has bestowed praise upon sacred song, and the same may be said of the fathers of the Church and of the Roman pontiffs who in recent times, led by Saint Pius X, have explained more precisely the ministerial function supplied by sacred music in the service of the Lord.
“Therefore sacred music is to be considered the more holy in proportion as it is more closely connected with the liturgical action, whether it adds delight to prayer, fosters unity of minds, or confers greater solemnity upon the sacred rites. But the Church approves of all forms of true art having the needed qualities, and admits them into Divine Worship.” (Sacrosanctum Concilium 112)

“The dignity and lofty purpose of sacred music consist in the fact that its lovely melodies and splendor beautify and embellish the voices of the priest who offers Mass and of the Christian people who praise the Sovereign God. Its special power and excellence should lift up to God the minds of the faithful who are present. **It should make the liturgical prayers of the Christian community more alive and fervent **so that everyone can praise and beseech the Triune God more powerfully, more intently and more effectively.” (Pius XII, Musicae Sacrae 31)

"If hymns of this sort are to bring spiritual fruit and advantage to the Christian people, they must be in full conformity with the doctrine of the Catholic faith. They must also express and explain that doctrine accurately. Likewise they must use plain language and simple melody and must be free from violent and vain excess of words. Despite the fact that they are short and easy, they should manifest a religious dignity and seriousness. When they are fashioned in this way these sacred canticles, born as they are from the most profound depths of the people’s soul, deeply move the emotions and spirit and stir up pious sentiments. When they are sung at religious rites by a great crowd of people singing as with one voice, they are powerful in raising the minds of the faithful to higher things.
“As we have written above, such hymns cannot be used in Solemn High Masses without the express permission of the Holy See. Nevertheless at Masses that are not sung solemnly these hymns can be a powerful aid in keeping the faithful from attending the Holy Sacrifice like dumb and idle spectators. They can help to make the faithful accompany the sacred services both mentally and vocally and to join their own piety to the prayers of the priest. This happens when these hymns are properly adapted to the individual parts of the Mass, as We rejoice to know is being done in many parts of the Catholic world” (Musicae Sacrae, 63-64)

Is it really possible, given the above, to say that “They’ll Know” and other similar songs fulfils the criteria for sacred music? I don’t think so. (I know that this can be written off as my opinion, but you can’t say I haven’t backed it up with the relevant documentation.)

Actually, the song in question does not fulfill the criteria for sacred music. The focus lies too much on what we are doing and it tantamount to a celebration of ourselves. God needs to be the focus. Furthermore, the musicality is such that it does not lend itself to the sacred.

Bear in mind that a lot of this stuff was written immediately after the Second Vatican Council adjourned. When Pope John XIII called for a new springtime for the Church, he did not mean that he wanted to have flower child/Joan Baez music. The documents clearly state what Sacred Music should be. Even Pope Paul VI, Pope John Paul II (who founded WYD) and Pope Benedict XVI (a classically-trained musician in his own right) say as much.

 

[redrosetea]

I don’t care for the noise level of this type of music…We have a choice at our church and I opt for the mass with a cantor and organ

It seems much more reverent to me, and the older I get the less interested I am in hearing loud peppy songs at church

 

[pnewton]

How else are they to be applied, then? They seem quite clear to me…

For one, we can take the word sacred for its true and literal meaning: that which is set apart for a specific use. There have been many cases of religious music being written for entertainment purposes, such as, Sounds of Silence, Bridge over Troubled Waters, Wind Beneath My Wings.

Also, they need to be free of doctrinal errors. They need to be appropriate to the actions at the time. I do not know what you mean about how I apply these documents. I read them and follow them as do you, even if we do not agree. I also have specific cultural issues to deal with. This is why specific songs are not listed in these documents. Should the Church every set a list of songs that are not approved (or approved) I will follow it, as I did with You Are Near. The Church has not allowed for such a list yet either from Rome, the individual bishops or CAF.

The Church documents do not say that music must be of European origin and at least 500 years old. No specifics are given, except the criteria of being sacred. The general guidlines I have always tried to follow.

 

[Thomone]

WOW I gave an opinion and found a community of haters. This is not the Catholic Church I know. I play guitar, I sing, I praise. I am respectful to the Eucharist.

I do not find any joy in a pipe organ and old hymns. I learned my Latin reponses as an alter boy, I don’t ever want to learn them again. I find no value in Gregorian chant.

Yes, I am Catholic. And I know there will be many posts to disagree with me. I chose to praise my Lord in a different way. Who are you to judge me? The Bible tells me who my judge is, and it isn’t a group of haters.

I need to leave this site, this is not my Church.

 

[pnewton]

WOW I gave an opinion and found a community of haters. This is not the Catholic Church I know. I play guitar, I sing, I praise. I am respectful to the Eucharist. … Who are you to judge me?

Come now. No one has hated you of what you say. They have disagreed with you. Some think the Church supports them and ususally will acknowledge their opinion, or more accurately, their understanding of Church teaching. We must not respond to such things by thinking this is hate. That too is a judgement of others, although I am sure you did not mean it that way.

This place has a wide range of Catholics, almost all of whom are very orthodox in their faith. If this is something you are not comfortable with, then it is not the place for you. You can also approach discussion as something that can teach us where we have our own blind spots, as we all do. Some here will cheer you on. Some will not. Some may even bait you to get a reaction.

Like life.

 

[redrosetea]

WOW I gave an opinion and found a community of haters. This is not the Catholic Church I know. I play guitar, I sing, I praise. I am respectful to the Eucharist.

I do not find any joy in a pipe organ and old hymns. I learned my Latin reponses as an alter boy, I don’t ever want to learn them again. I find no value in Gregorian chant.

Yes, I am Catholic. And I know there will be many posts to disagree with me. I chose to praise my Lord in a different way. Who are you to judge me? The Bible tells me who my judge is, and it isn’t a group of haters.

I need to leave this site, this is not my Church.

I don’t hate anybody…I think that nothing is better than chant…I love it…The last time I heard rock/folk artists at church it was so loud I had to cover my ears and my husband wanted to leave…Music should not be that loud any place ,It can damage your hearing

I love John Michael Talbot, and would be willing to attend a mass where it is sung…quietly

 

[benedictgal]

WOW I gave an opinion and found a community of haters. This is not the Catholic Church I know. I play guitar, I sing, I praise. I am respectful to the Eucharist.

I do not find any joy in a pipe organ and old hymns. I learned my Latin reponses as an alter boy, I don’t ever want to learn them again. I find no value in Gregorian chant.

Yes, I am Catholic. And I know there will be many posts to disagree with me. I chose to praise my Lord in a different way. Who are you to judge me? The Bible tells me who my judge is, and it isn’t a group of haters.

I need to leave this site, this is not my Church.

Unfortunately, you have, as I see it, completely missed the point of the criticism of the song. This is not a direct criticism aimed at you Yes, it is your right to like the song. None of us ever said that it was not. However, examining the song in light of the authorittaive documents of the Holy See and the statements made by various Popes give a very strong indication that it is not at all appropriate for the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

Some will say that it is putting Jesus’ words to song. The only part of that song that does that is the refrain, nothing else. The thrust of the song focuses on the wonderful things that we are doing and shows little reference to offering worship and adoration to the Divine Majesty of God. The musicality is also something that is deficient. Compare it to Fleetwood Mac’s “Tusk”. One would flow right into the other.

Nonetheless, to accuse people who do not agree with your opinion as haters is to comopletely miss the boat.

 

[mhazell]

Yes, I am Catholic. And I know there will be many posts to disagree with me. I chose to praise my Lord in a different way. Who are you to judge me? The Bible tells me who my judge is, and it isn’t a group of haters.

It is not about what you choose (as if it ever was!), but about what the Church has decreed.

And, like it or not, the Church says that Latin should be a key part of the liturgy, Gregorian chant is particularly suited to the liturgy and should take pride of place in it, and the pipe organ is the instrument par excellence in the Western (Latin) Church.

I’m sorry that you find no joy in the Church’s ancient musical and liturgical traditions, but be assured, no-one is judging you. Outside of the Mass, you can listen to what you want–I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve said that, yet few people seem to be paying any attention!

At the Mass, though, since the liturgy is no-one’s private property–not mine, not yours, not anyone else’s–it would seem right to follow what the Church tells us is the highest form of sacred worship, rather than settle for what is at best second-rate liturgical music.

My personal opinion is that the sooner we get rid of the insipid 1970s folk claptrap, the better it will be for all concerned. But that is just my opinion. (It’s also, as I already mentioned, my girlfriend’s opinion, and she is a big fan of folk music.) Some of the questions that really should be asked before every Mass are these: is the music that has been selected truly sacred music? Is it in harmony with the liturgical action, not detracting from it? Does it have the dignity and seriousness that the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass requires? And I think that if people started to be really honest about it, much of the time the answers would be “no”.

 

[Cat]

It is not about what you choose (as if it ever was!), but about what the Church has decreed.

And, like it or not, the Church says that Latin should be a key part of the liturgy, Gregorian chant is particularly suited to the liturgy and should take pride of place in it, and the pipe organ is the instrument par excellence in the Western (Latin) Church.

I’m sorry that you find no joy in the Church’s ancient musical and liturgical traditions, but be assured, no-one is judging you. Outside of the Mass, you can listen to what you want–I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve said that, yet few people seem to be paying any attention!

At the Mass, though, since the liturgy is no-one’s private property–not mine, not yours, not anyone else’s–it would seem right to follow what the Church tells us is the highest form of sacred worship, rather than settle for what is at best second-rate liturgical music.

My personal opinion is that the sooner we get rid of the insipid 1970s folk claptrap, the better it will be for all concerned. But that is just my opinion. (It’s also, as I already mentioned, my girlfriend’s opinion, and she is a big fan of folk music.) Some of the questions that really should be asked before every Mass are these: is the music that has been selected truly sacred music? Is it in harmony with the liturgical action, not detracting from it? Does it have the dignity and seriousness that the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass requires? And I think that if people started to be really honest about it, much of the time the answers would be “no”.

And exactly what difference would that “no” make?

Are YOU going to change the Mass? You and a few others? How?

It won’t happen.

Are you going to write a letter to the bishop? Apparently all the letters that people have been writing for the last 40 years haven’t made a difference in Catholic Mass music. The Church still hasn’t specifically written out any “Forbidden List.”

Are you going to go on an online board and quote document after document proving that you are right and the offending parish is wrong?

Meanwhile, others still interpret the Church documents totally differently than you. And these are the people who cared enough to seek employment in musical fields and take positions of leadership in local parishes planning the liturgical music.

What good will all your negativey do? Meanwhile, the music/liturgy director is going to continue to use more English then Latin, and no one is around who plays the pipe organ, and it really doesn’t matter because the Church documents allow the vernacular and allow other instruments than the pipe organ. These things have not been forbidden.

And you’ll be miserable sitting in a Mass listening to “claptrap.” Why do that to yourself and others?

Why not just settle down, trust the bishop to do his job and allow appropriate music, and try to find a way to appreciate whatever music (or lack of music) that you are given in any given Mass?

Or find a Mass that does offer the kind of music that you feel is appropriate for Mass and go there all the time.

“God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, courage to change those things I can, and wisdom to know the difference.”

If you are in a position to make changes, go for it. But if you are not in that position, accept and learn to appreciate.

I personally think that negativity finds its way into the Mass and is contagious to all the people sitting in the pews. Before you know it, everyone hates the Mass, and most people don’t even know why because you’re sitting there stewing, not actually sharing your likes and dislikes and knowledge about Church documents. And that’s when people leave the Mass and head down the road to the big megachurch with the beautiful rock music. They may not understand why everything feels so cold and negative in their Mass.

If we only had one of those heat sensor lamps that could see into human hearts and pick out the cold ones sitting in Mass, the ones who are only finding fault.

 

[mhazell]

And exactly what difference would that “no” make?

Are YOU going to change the Mass? You and a few others? How?

It won’t happen.

And to think you’re the one telling me off for being negative! How deliciously ironic!

Are you going to write a letter to the bishop? Apparently all the letters that people have been writing for the last 40 years haven’t made a difference in Catholic Mass music. The Church still hasn’t specifically written out any “Forbidden List.”

I’m not looking for a “forbidden list”, or anything of the sort. What I am looking for, and what I will promote, is a proper and thorough application of the guidelines for what constitutes sacred music. As I’ve previously said, we need to be far, far more critical and discerning of the music we use in the Mass–doing so, however, will involve the repudiation of many assumptions that have built up over the last 30-40 years or so (e.g. all genres of music can be made sacred; anyone who can play an instrument has a “gifting” to do so in church; we should try and make the liturgy “relevant” and “hip”; *actuosa participatione *means singing at every possible moment; etc.).

What good will all your negativey [sic] do? Meanwhile, the music/liturgy director is going to continue to use more English then Latin, and no one is around who plays the pipe organ, and it really doesn’t matter because the Church documents allow the vernacular and allow other instruments than the pipe organ. These things have not been forbidden.

Correct–they have not been forbidden.

There are, however, conditions attached to their use. If those conditions are not fulfilled, then those instruments should not be used. And you can’t get around the fact that Vatican II carves out a privileged place for the pipe organ and Gregorian chant, which is more than can be said for other instruments and settings.

And if the music director is unaware of what Vatican II and papal documents call for as regards the liturgy, then frankly they are a poor music director.

And you’ll be miserable sitting in a Mass listening to “claptrap.” Why do that to yourself and others?

Because it is the Mass.

Like others, I put up with the claptrap partly because if I did not, I wouldn’t attend any Mass in my diocese. But mainly I put up with it because the focus of the Mass is the sacrifice of Christ.

I do, however, make my feelings known to my parish priest if there is something that is particularly bad (e.g. changing the words of the Agnus Dei, etc.). And, God willing, hopefully I will be taking a greater role in catechesis and liturgical formation in my parish. Don’t delude yourself with the idea that I just sit around and whinge.

Why not just settle down, trust the bishop to do his job and allow appropriate music, and try to find a way to appreciate whatever music (or lack of music) that you are given in any given Mass?

My parish priest lacks confidence in the bishop’s ability or will to “do his job”, even aside from my own personal feelings. We’ve had a few conversations about it. The major problem with the bishops’ conference in England and Wales, in my opinion, is that the vast majority of them seem to read Vatican II as a break with tradition, rather than the way our Holy Father reads Vatican II–as a continuation of our traditions.

One cannot understand Vatican II if one does not read it in the context of everything that has come before it. In the next few years, starting with the promulgation of the new translation of the Missale Romanum, hopefully this will become apparent.

If you are in a position to make changes, go for it. But if you are not in that position, accept and learn to appreciate.

No-one should accept or appreciate the de-mystification and de-sacralisation of the Mass. It is partly this attitude you are encouraging that has got us into this mess in the first place!

I personally think that negativity finds its way into the Mass and is contagious to all the people sitting in the pews. Before you know it, everyone hates the Mass, and most people don’t even know why because you’re sitting there stewing, not actually sharing your likes and dislikes and knowledge about Church documents. And that’s when people leave the Mass and head down the road to the big megachurch with the beautiful rock music. They may not understand why everything feels so cold and negative in their Mass.

If you wish to believe that I spend my time at Mass “stewing”, that’s entirely up to you. It’s a bit presumptuous of you to think that, but, hey, it’s your call.

As I said already, I do share my criticisms of the liturgy in my parish. I also encourage people to read the Church documents I cite.

If we only had one of those heat sensor lamps that could see into human hearts and pick out the cold ones sitting in Mass, the ones who are only finding fault.

God forbid such a thing!

 

[benedictgal]

And exactly what difference would that “no” make?

Are YOU going to change the Mass? You and a few others? How?

It won’t happen.

Are you going to write a letter to the bishop? Apparently all the letters that people have been writing for the last 40 years haven’t made a difference in Catholic Mass music. The Church still hasn’t specifically written out any “Forbidden List.”

Meanwhile, others still interpret the Church documents totally differently than you. And these are the people who cared enough to seek employment in musical fields and take positions of leadership in local parishes planning the liturgical music.

What good will all your negativey do? Meanwhile, the music/liturgy director is going to continue to use more English then Latin, and no one is around who plays the pipe organ, and it really doesn’t matter because the Church documents allow the vernacular and allow other instruments than the pipe organ. These things have not been forbidden.

Why not just settle down, trust the bishop to do his job and allow appropriate music, and try to find a way to appreciate whatever music (or lack of music) that you are given in any given Mass?

Or find a Mass that does offer the kind of music that you feel is appropriate for Mass and go there all the time.

I personally think that negativity finds its way into the Mass and is contagious to all the people sitting in the pews. Before you know it, everyone hates the Mass, and most people don’t even know why because you’re sitting there stewing, not actually sharing your likes and dislikes and knowledge about Church documents. And that’s when people leave the Mass and head down the road to the big megachurch with the beautiful rock music. They may not understand why everything feels so cold and negative in their Mass.

If we only had one of those heat sensor lamps that could see into human hearts and pick out the cold ones sitting in Mass, the ones who are only finding fault.

Cat, have you actually sat down and read the authoritative documents of the Holy See on music? Have you read the writings dating back to Pope St. Pius X who had to wage his own battle to purify sacred music from the influences of opera and theater? Even Pope John Paul II, in his Chirograph on Sacred Music, noted that today’s music stands in need of purification.

To accuse people of being cold and negative because they do not like the warm and fuzzy music is to miss the point completely. Furthermore, the folks who leave the Mass in favor of the rock music at the mega eccclesial community down the street probably were never catechized in the liturgy from the start.

We don’t go to Mass to get warm and fuzzy. That is to make the Mass the equivalent of a Hallmark Card. A lot of the folk music is simply warm and fuzzy stuff leftover from the Woodstock/Joan Baez/Simon and Garfunkel period. It lacks any spiritual depth, is commercially produced and, as Pope Beneict noted, is just another part of the cult of the banal.

In many other threads you have raised some sort of objection to Traditional Sacred Music, often criticizing Latin because you do not understand it. You are certainly entitled to your opinion. However, every document of the Holy See from the Motu Propio of St. Pius X to Sacramentum Caritatis, by Pope Benedict XVI, have extolled Latin and Gregorian Chant. Furthermore, Chant does not have to be Latin. O Come, O Come, Emmanuel is a Gregorian Chant that dates back to the 9th century. The Attende Domine, the quintecessential Lenten Hymn has its English translation, Hear Us O Lord or Have Mercy on Us, O Lord, Graciously Hear Us (sinners we stand here before you).

How many of the folk pieces have you ever heard plead for God’s mercy on us? How many of these songs get to the very core of what the Faith is all about? Have you read the lyrics and compared them to the two hymns that I listed above? Or, how about the Pange Lingua, the chant that is used for the Holy Thursday procession? That venerable hymn, composed by no less than St. Thomas Aquinas himself, encapulates the Church’s belief in the Holy Eucharist? And yes, it is available in English. For several years, it was chanted in English, Latin and Spanish at the Cathedral.

With all due respect, I would like to read your reaction when the music document that the Secretary to the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacaments told me about is released. He agreed with my concerns about the sad state of music used here in the United States. In an earlier thread, you dismissed him as being some other bishop. He is the second-ranking official in the CDWDS, not just another prelate.

 

[Cat]

Cat, have you actually sat down and read the authoritative documents of the Holy See on music?

To accuse people of being cold and negative because they do not like the warm and fuzzy music is to miss the point completely.

We don’t go to Mass to get warm and fuzzy.

With all due respect, I would like to read your reaction when the music document that the Secretary to the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacaments told me about is released. He agreed with my concerns about the sad state of music used here in the United States. In an earlier thread, you dismissed him as being some other bishop. He is the second-ranking official in the CDWDS, not just another prelate.

I am looking forward to reading that. I really am.

Yes, I have read many of the documents that you cite, and I do not have the same interpretation of them as you do. I see them as supportive of varying instruments and musical styles. I read them before I ever joined this Board or read any of your posts. I read them without bias of any type, because I was a new Catholic trying to learn the facts and rules about church music.

I did not accuse someone of being negative because they don’t like the warm and fuzzy music. I realize that musical preferences will vary and many people do not like modern music. (I don’t like most pop songs on the radio.)

I accuse them of being negative because they seem to find fault with so much, and I wonder how such an attitude can be conducive to a good Mass. It was the sin of complaining and criticizing that kept the Children of Israel out of the Promised Land. If the priest has declared it “clean,” then it is clean. Let him do his job and stop complaining.

benedictgal, I know good and darn well that we don’t go to Mass to be warm and fuzzy. I know that. I am part of an excellent parish and diocese where adult catechesis is superb. I know that Mass is the re-presentation of the Sacrifice of Our Lord Jesus Christ at Calvary. We are actually (sacramentally) present at His DEATH, at his grisly execution. I know that.

I am not looking for a warm fuzzy experience. I do not ever court feelings in Mass. In fact, in my evangelical tradition (over 40 years), feelings and emotions were DISCOURAGED. Yes, that’s the truth. We followed the Campus Crusade for Christ “Fact-Faith-Feeling” model, in which feelings were never to be used as an indicator of our relationship with Jesus. We were almost staid in our worship. It was like pulling teeth in my churches to get people to even clap their hands. THAT’S my background–no emotions in worship. No warm fuzzies. Just the facts, ma’am.

In fact, there is an editorial in this month’s issue of Christianity Today (evangelical magazine) by Chuck Colson reminding people that feelings are not to be used in place of doctrine. He actually labels the emphasis on feelings as a form of gnosticism.

Right on, Chuck! THAT’S the tradition I grew up in. Facts and faith, not feelings.

So a staid, quiet Mass is quite to my liking.

I like traditional hymns very very much and grew up playing many of them, yes, even the Catholic hymns because our Protestant church sang many of them.

I dislike Latin because I don’t understand it, so I have taken to singing (softly so that no one can hear) the English translation when we do Latin hymns at my parish. (I also dislike hymns in Spanish, Swahili, and any other non-English language. I can tolerate Stille Nacht because of my family’s German heritage and because I took five years of German in school and kind of understand the language. So this isn’t just a “Latin-phobia”. I just prefer to understand the language.)

I am not a hippie who only likes music that makes me feel good. I don’t own an I-Pod and I don’t understand those who do. I don’t listen to music in the car. I seldom attend a concert. I usually don’t play music in the house when I am alone. I don’t get the whole “You have to feel the music” thing. I never have understood that.

I don’t dance. I was brought up in a Baptist tradition that taught us that dancing is a sin (along with drinking alcohol).

I think you would find that I am more conservative than you are when it comes to music.

I really like old hymns and I have a collection of very old hymnals (including German hymnal).

But I do not agree that the new hymns (40-year-old hymns) are “warm and fuzzy” or that they fail to have the “sense of faith.” I find many of the “new” hymns very deep and thought-provoking, and it’s my opinion that they communicate the sense of faith very well.

At this point, it seems that the Catholic Church agrees with me. So far, most of these hymns are still accepted as OK for Mass. As I said in another post, I do not believe that Secretary to the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacaments (forgive me for not remembering his august title–I did not intend to dismiss him as just another prelate) will strike these hymns from the list of approved hymns, and I do not believe that he will make any pronouncements that forbid certain styles of music or certain instruments in the Mass.

I personally believe that his document will be very general and merely be a “cautionary” warning to the Faithful to try to pay more attention to the lyrics and dismiss anything that seems to conflict with Catholic theology, and to not utterly abandon traditional music in Mass.

And if he demands pipe organ music (which he won’t), he’d better have a camp full of pipe organists available somewhere! It won’t happen barring a miracle from God. A pipe organist is about as rare as a figure skater who still does school figures. There are some around, but they’re a rare breed these days. Too bad–I wish there were more pipe organists. I love the pipe organ when it is well-played. (I don’t really like it when it is poorly-played. It’s kind of painful.)

 

[MoneyCounter]

We have a “Contemporary Group” that includes guitars, pianos, violins, harmonicas, full drum sets, oboes, clarinets, tambourines, singers who laugh and joke, a non-catholic drummer who wears sunglasses on his head during Mass (and they are positioned in the front of the congregation – it’s like they are playing a “gig”). Give me a break.

 

[pnewton]

I’m not looking for a “forbidden list”, or anything of the sort. What I am looking for, and what I will promote, is a proper and thorough application of the guidelines for what constitutes sacred music.

…as you would have them applied. This is the reason we talk in circles as much as we do here. Good faithful Catholics do not always see eye to eye when it comes to particulars.

 

[Cat]

…as you would have them applied. This is the reason we talk in circles as much as we do here. Good faithful Catholics do not always see eye to eye when it comes to particulars.

Exactly. Thank you, pnewton. Short and correct.