Catholic's and musical taste

  • Thread starter Thread starter itrytofight
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I

itrytofight

Guest
Well, I posted my comment on the articles on his blogsite. Here’s what I posted:

Well, golly, I am a 57-year old woman who has played piano (classically-trained by a Lutheran organist) since childhood, and stated learning the pipe organ three years ago.

I disagree with so much of what this author is saying. I don’t think he has presented any proofs that certain music is “Catholic” or “Christian” while other music isn’t “Catholic” or Christian. The author offers his own tastes and preferences and those of other Catholics, including ancient Catholics who never dreamed of the variety of music that would be created through the following centuries.

His statements about Bach are just plain incorrect. Bach is all about rhythm. When I am learning a Bach prelude on the organ, and back when I was a child learning the Bach inventions, the metronome was my friend to keep a rock-steady (or Bach-steady, if you prefer) BEAT. Also, the various rhythm patterns of Bach pieces are extremely important and must be played precisely in order for the listener (and the player) to hear the interaction between the themes.

The author seems to think that Bach is “the music of God”. My husband would disagree. He finds Bach’s music “too frantic.” It literally sets his teeth on edge. (He will get a special reward in heaven for listening to me learning Bach pieces on our organ at home!)

This is illustrative of my comment in my first paragraph–it’s all about personal taste. My husband is quite knowledgeable about many styles of music, and is trained in classical guitar. He definitely doesn’t fit the author’s rather snobby stereotype of Catholics who listen only to rap, pop, and metal.

But my husband still doesn’t like Bach and finds it jarring (his own words).

As for me, I am a dream-come-true for the author. A few years ago, we were watching TV, and a song was played, and everyone was waving lighters. The words were nice: something about a small town girl and “don’t stop believin’.” My husband was enjoying the song and the joke in the show was that “this was JOURNEY! Oooh, ahh!” When the song was over, I said, “So is Journey a singing group?”

My husband nearly fell through the floor. Apparently Journey is some incredibly famous and beloved pop group. But I had never heard of them. In fact, I had never heard the song. And at this moment, I can’t name even one other song by Journey.

When I was growing up, I was too busy and too broke to listen to most pop and rock music. I was practicing piano for several hours a day. I had two or three “pop” albums that my mother had bought at yard sales–“Mamas and Papas,” and a few Beatles albums. That’s it.

We had a television, but it only got one channel, and so I missed out on a lot of the TV that other kids were watching.

So I never listened to pop or rock and I still don’t. I don’t own an iPod and never will. I didn’t own an MP player when those were popular. I never owned a boom box. My dad bought me a transistor radio when I was in 5th grade, but that’s the only radio I ever owned other than the one in my car.

I just had an old record player growing up, and big stack of (yard sale) classical albums and my beloved Liberace!

So I live the author’s recommendations to abstain from all popular music for many months. I’ve abstained all my life.

But…I dislike chant of all types. Since converting to Catholicism ten years ago, I’ve tried, honestly, to learn to like chant, both Gregorian and otherwise. Can’t stand it. It’s so aimless.

So…back to my original paragraph–it’s really all about personal taste, and my conclusion is that God made us all different and that our musical tastes are created by GOD, not Satan. I believe that ALL musical styles come from God, and often are perverted by worldly people who do not know God. I think that Christians need to seek to redeem all styles of music and take them back from the devil. It makes no sense to me that God would allow humans to love and create so many different styles of music, but that He would only accept a few styles as “appropriate” for His worship. That limits God, and I don’t think we have any business limiting God.

e with so many things this author has written.

Here’s what I posted on his blogsite:
 
I agree 100% with the author. I believe that many have been desensitized to authentic beauty in music. We are inundated with Katy Perry, Lady Gaga, and a host of other faux-musicians who have deformed our ability to appreciate that which is truly beautiful while simultaneously corrupting our society by praising vice and calling virtue “bigotry”.

Unfortunately, this desensitization has carried over into the liturgy. People need to become reacquainted with the vast and glorious patrimony of the Catholic musical tradition. Instead, we have replaced this beauty with “pop” hymns that do not give proper glory to God.

For example, this past Sunday, the Feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross, the organist began to play the beautiful hymn “Adoramus Te, Christe” as cover music as the celebrant distributed Holy Communion to the Eucharistic Ministers. I was elated. However, the music abruptly changed as the cantor approached the lectern and blurted out “Please turn to so and so page and join in the singing of insert hymn written in 1987.” The solemnity of the moment was broken as “Adoramus Te, Christe” - a beautiful hymn so fitting for the Feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross - gave way to to the egregiously bad music of the 1980s.
 
Perhaps contemporary church music is like the parables of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, something easily grasped that will draw the “average” or “unsophisticated” Catholic (and the occasional Samaritan) closer to God.

Gregorian Chant and the church music of J. S. Bach are more like the Gospel of John and the writings of Thomas Aquinas, works in which the scholars and the elite can discover immense depths while the average Joe skims the surface (and may yet enjoy it).

Nothing wrong with that. God moves in a mysterious way, His wonders to perform.
 
Beryllos said:
Perhaps contemporary church music is like the parables of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, something easily grasped that will draw the “average” or “unsophisticated” Catholic (and the occasional Samaritan) closer to God.

Gregorian Chant and the church music of J. S. Bach are more like the Gospel of John and the writings of Thomas Aquinas, works in which the scholars and the elite can discover immense depths while the average Joe skims the surface (and may yet enjoy it).

Nothing wrong with that. God moves in a mysterious way, His wonders to perform.
Click to expand...
The problem is contemporary church music isn’t drawing anyone. If anything, it seems to be having averse effects. The catchy tunes of today’s liturgy may evoke emotion - but that emotion quickly fades. The sublimity of chant connects with the soul on a deeper level.

A modern congregation of “average Joe” Catholics could, with some time and effort, learn and adapt to the more frequent use of traditional hymns and chant - and they’d be better off for it. Many dismiss the idea saying that “it will drive people away” - but if it is true that (as many great Catholic philosophers have asserted) beauty is NOT in the eye of the beholder, then is it not true that Gregorian chant and the polyphonic hymns based around it should rightfully be the music setting of the liturgy even if at first people are displeased by it? Why has bad taste been allowed to prevail? Why subjectivity where there is none? And how does fact that it is “easily grasped” justify it? In the liturgy should we not be praising God with the most beautiful hymns we have to offer Him?
 
christus_vincit said:
The problem is contemporary church music isn’t drawing anyone. If anything, it seems to be having averse effects. The catchy tunes of today’s liturgy may evoke emotion - but that emotion quickly fades. The sublimity of chant connects with the soul on a deeper level.

A modern congregation of “average Joe” Catholics could, with some time and effort, learn and adapt to the more frequent use of traditional hymns and chant - and they’d be better off for it. Many dismiss the idea saying that “it will drive people away” - but if it is true that (as many great Catholic philosophers have asserted) beauty is NOT in the eye of the beholder, then is it not true that Gregorian chant and the polyphonic hymns based around it should rightfully be the music setting of the liturgy even if at first people are displeased by it? Why has bad taste been allowed to prevail? Why subjectivity where there is none? And how does fact that it is “easily grasped” justify it? In the liturgy should we not be praising God with the most beautiful hymns we have to offer Him?
Click to expand...
Upon what do you base your conclusion that “contemporary church music isn’t drawing anyone” ?

Many great Catholic Church philosophers have asserted that beauty is NOT in the eye of the beholder. But isn’t it possible that music does not have to be “beautiful” in a “Catholic traditional sense” to touch the listener/singer/player? Just as visual art doesn’t have to look like real people or scenery or pieces of fruit to be considered “great art,” neither does all Mass music have to be Gregorian chant or polyphonic hymns to be suitable for worship of God.

BTW, if it were not so tragic, I would laugh at the idea of using polyphonic hymns in the Catholic Mass. Because of the deplorable state of music education in private, public, and even homeschools in the last 20 years, very very VERY few people truly know how to read music.

Although some people (very very VERY few!) are capable of learning their part by ear in a polyphonic arrangement, most people have to read music to be able to sing this kind of music.

Perhaps in university cities and towns, you will have a large enough population of people willing to commit to a church choir to be able to put together a small choir for at least one of the Sunday Masses .

But in most cities and towns, there are so few people who can do this kind of music. christus_vincit and others reading this thread–it’s not realistic. Sorry.

Unless…you have an answer to help make up for the musical ignorance prevalent in our society today? :confused: I don’t have an answer. I wish I did.

But I know that creating untrue stereotypes of those who do not listen to or like Gregorian chant an polyphony, and berating people for their musical tastes, and accusing them of choosing the world’s ugliness over God’s beauty is NOT going to win friends and influence people, and it will NOT convince anyone to delete Lady Gaga from their iPods and replace it with chant and polyphony. Quite the opposite…that kind of attitude will drive people away. Even St. John Bosco used circus tricks to attract the children to come to Mass.
 
Just a thought: judging by the predominant liturgical music in the Catholic church today, I would say there is not a less qualified group in the world to address anything about musical taste than group of Catholics.
 
Cat said:
Upon what do you base your conclusion that “contemporary church music isn’t drawing anyone” ?

Many great Catholic Church philosophers have asserted that beauty is NOT in the eye of the beholder. But isn’t it possible that music does not have to be “beautiful” in a “Catholic traditional sense” to touch the listener/singer/player? Just as visual art doesn’t have to look like real people or scenery or pieces of fruit to be considered “great art,” neither does all Mass music have to be Gregorian chant or polyphonic hymns to be suitable for worship of God.

BTW, if it were not so tragic, I would laugh at the idea of using polyphonic hymns in the Catholic Mass. Because of the deplorable state of music education in private, public, and even homeschools in the last 20 years, very very VERY few people truly know how to read music.

Although some people (very very VERY few!) are capable of learning their part by ear in a polyphonic arrangement, most people have to read music to be able to sing this kind of music.

Perhaps in university cities and towns, you will have a large enough population of people willing to commit to a church choir to be able to put together a small choir for at least one of the Sunday Masses .

But in most cities and towns, there are so few people who can do this kind of music. christus_vincit and others reading this thread–it’s not realistic. Sorry.

Unless…you have an answer to help make up for the musical ignorance prevalent in our society today? :confused: I don’t have an answer. I wish I did.

But I know that creating untrue stereotypes of those who do not listen to or like Gregorian chant an polyphony, and berating people for their musical tastes, and accusing them of choosing the world’s ugliness over God’s beauty is NOT going to win friends and influence people, and it will NOT convince anyone to delete Lady Gaga from their iPods and replace it with chant and polyphony. Quite the opposite…that kind of attitude will drive people away. Even St. John Bosco used circus tricks to attract the children to come to Mass.
Click to expand...
Your concerns are based on the common presupposition that the Church does not have the ability to change the culture. You rightfully lament musical illiteracy but instead of desiring to combat it, it seems you have despaired.

I know what I’m suggesting may seem radical and unrealistic - but it is an ideal we should strive to achieve. EVERY parish should have a choir directed by a woman or man who has a degree in Sacred Music. Children’s choirs should be prevalent. Learning traditional Sacred Music should become integral to the religious education of Catholic youth as it was in the past. Of course few today can read or sing the music of the past - but we need to bring it back! There will be a steep learning curve, no doubt!

The proper vision is not to force the youth to delete Lady Gaga from their iPods, but to lead them from a young age to appreciate the true beauty of Catholic music so that they never want that filth on their iPods in the first place.
 
Now I know I’m not the brightest bulb, that’s for sure. But is there anyone else here that does not understand these articles? Or if you all do understand them, could you at least summarize them for the common man?

I get lost when he does things like calling The Sound of Silence an “atheistic hymn.”

Or, in part 1, when he tries to make an argument about why some music is objectively superior to other music, but all he ends up doing is saying, “compare these two songs… DUH!”

Or when he asks if Padre Pio would enjoy the music you’re listening to, as if:
  1. We would know.
  2. It matters.
 
VeritasLuxMea said:
Now I know I’m not the brightest bulb, that’s for sure. But is there anyone else here that does not understand these articles? Or if you all do understand them, could you at least summarize them for the common man?

I get lost when he does things like calling The Sound of Silence an “atheistic hymn.”

Or, in part 1, when he tries to make an argument about why some music is objectively superior to other music, but all he ends up doing is saying, “compare these two songs… DUH!”

Or when he asks if Padre Pio would enjoy the music you’re listening to, as if:
  1. We would know.
  2. It matters.
Click to expand...
From article…
When in 1966 John Lennon garnered immense controversy by — claiming that the Beatles were “more popular than Jesus”, fundamentalists stupidly burned records and called for boycotts,
Click to expand...
Ouch!

“Sound of Silence” maybe he is taking it too literally when he sings to the “neon gods they made” I always thought this song had abit of “despair”.

I agree with him that it is a good idea to have children listen to catholic music - age appropriate…
 
christus_vincit said:
Your concerns are based on the common presupposition that the Church does not have the ability to change the culture. You rightfully lament musical illiteracy but instead of desiring to combat it, it seems you have despaired.

I know what I’m suggesting may seem radical and unrealistic - but it is an ideal we should strive to achieve. EVERY parish should have a choir directed by a woman or man who has a degree in Sacred Music. Children’s choirs should be prevalent. Learning traditional Sacred Music should become integral to the religious education of Catholic youth as it was in the past. Of course few today can read or sing the music of the past - but we need to bring it back! There will be a steep learning curve, no doubt!

The proper vision is not to force the youth to delete Lady Gaga from their iPods, but to lead them from a young age to appreciate the true beauty of Catholic music so that they never want that filth on their iPods in the first place.
Click to expand...
Show me the money.

That’s what it’s all about.

EVERY musician knows that Catholic churches don’t pay their musicians enough to live on.

I’m frankly shocked at the pay offered to organists/music and liturgy directors in the Catholic parishes in our city. We are not a poor diocese by any means. But my friend is making around $12,000 year. She would not be able to survive if it wasn’t for funerals in that parish (several a week, at $150/funeral Mass).

Back in the 1970s, the music minister in my Conference Baptist church was making $62,000/year, PLUS a housing allowance PLUS benefits PLUS several thousand a year for continuing education and expenses to attend several church music conferences each year.

:eek:

I can’t even imagine what the music ministers in Protestant churches make nowadays. Ca-CHING!

So even though I agree with you about the choir director in every parish and all the rest–it is not going to happen without a real shift of thinking not from the local parish level, but from the NATIONAL level.

I respect our bishops (anyone on CAF will tell you that Cat believes in absolute obedience and respect for the apostles of the Lord Jesus). And I think that these bishops will have to be moved by the Holy Spirit to move liturgical music UP on the scale of priorities before the changes that you are suggesting will happen.

The only other possibility is for the people of each parish to make music a priority, but that isn’t likely to happen with such great need in our communities. As much as I love good Mass music, I would not agree to depriving the poor of bread so that I can listen to Palestrina and a Bach organ prelude instead of Haugen and Haas.

In case you’re wondering what I am doing–I started taking organ lessons three years ago, and I’ve now reached a place where I can play those Bach preludes and also the hymns. I’m working on the Mass parts (although I think the setting we’re doing sounds better on the piano). A few weeks ago, I played a lovely organ arrangement of an ancient chant piece (Adoro te Devote) for the prelude.

AND I chair a youth music competition. It has nothing to do with Mass music, but it gives me the opportunity to influence a lot of children and teenagers to think about playing in church.

AND I am active in any of the youth activities for the local chapter of the American Guild of Organists. We’re working on getting a youth organ competition in my parish.

AND I play for our parish children’s choir (65 children), who are being taught contemporary and traditional liturgical music by the excellent director, who has a degree in Music Education.

AND…there’s a lot of other stuff.

But yes, I’m discouraged. I don’t see a lot of progress. In fact, I see more people who prefer the contemporary music and actually tell me that they wish the organ was “gone” (although they always say that if I play it, it’s OK!)

As for your statement that contemporary music doesn’t attract people, I disagree wholeheartedly. First, my husband and I converted from Evangelical Protestantism to Catholicism, and I will testify that the Haugan and Haas hymns definitely helped us to be less afraid of Catholicism.

Second, there are quite a few people who still attend Mass at our parish, but then head down the road to the Protestant megachurch specifically to hear the good music (pure contemporary, done by a professional band). We are kidding ourselves if we think that Christians, including Catholic Christians, are repelled by contemporary music. They love it. The megachurch attracts ten-thousand people each Sunday–that’s almost a tenth of the population of our city. That music certainly doesn’t seem to be turning them off.

It’s not the “contemporary” that repels people. It’s the “mediocre” or even “tepid” in any style of music, including ancient and traditional, that makes people less than enthusiastic about attending church.

I believe that ANY style of music done with excellence and enthusiasm will attract and retain people to church. If the choice is Gregorian chant and sacred polyphony, then it has to be done well, or it will have the effect of driving people away. There is nothing worse than badly-done chant or polyphony. :winter: shudder
 
itrytofight said:
Just two interesting articles from composer Dr. Mark Nowakowski that I want to leave here:

onepeterfive.com/listening-like-catholic-discernment-personal-musical-taste/
onepeterfive.com/listening-like-a-catholic-the-discernment-of-personal-musical-taste-part-2/

Basically his message is any music form close to Gregorian chant is good and anything that strays far, far from that standard is unworthy of a Catholic.

Please post comments and what not here and on the articles. 👍
Click to expand...
What a sad state of affairs when someone is unable to appreciate variety. To limit themselves in such a way. I find the most uplifting music to be today’s epic music and movie scores.

That being said, I prefer to attend a mass with no music, I’d rather simply say the prayers and the responses. Just makes me feel more involved and integral to the mass than listening to it being turned into a mini-opera.

Taste varies, to each their own.
 
Cat said:
Show me the money.

That’s what it’s all about.

EVERY musician knows that Catholic churches don’t pay their musicians enough to live on.

I’m frankly shocked at the pay offered to organists/music and liturgy directors in the Catholic parishes in our city. We are not a poor diocese by any means. But my friend is making around $12,000 year. She would not be able to survive if it wasn’t for funerals in that parish (several a week, at $150/funeral Mass).

Back in the 1970s, the music minister in my Conference Baptist church was making $62,000/year, PLUS a housing allowance PLUS benefits PLUS several thousand a year for continuing education and expenses to attend several church music conferences each year.

:eek:

I can’t even imagine what the music ministers in Protestant churches make nowadays. Ca-CHING!

So even though I agree with you about the choir director in every parish and all the rest–it is not going to happen without a real shift of thinking not from the local parish level, but from the NATIONAL level.

I respect our bishops (anyone on CAF will tell you that Cat believes in absolute obedience and respect for the apostles of the Lord Jesus). And I think that these bishops will have to be moved by the Holy Spirit to move liturgical music UP on the scale of priorities before the changes that you are suggesting will happen.

The only other possibility is for the people of each parish to make music a priority, but that isn’t likely to happen with such great need in our communities. As much as I love good Mass music, I would not agree to depriving the poor of bread so that I can listen to Palestrina and a Bach organ prelude instead of Haugen and Haas.

In case you’re wondering what I am doing–I started taking organ lessons three years ago, and I’ve now reached a place where I can play those Bach preludes and also the hymns. I’m working on the Mass parts (although I think the setting we’re doing sounds better on the piano). A few weeks ago, I played a lovely organ arrangement of an ancient chant piece (Adoro te Devote) for the prelude.

AND I chair a youth music competition. It has nothing to do with Mass music, but it gives me the opportunity to influence a lot of children and teenagers to think about playing in church.

AND I am active in any of the youth activities for the local chapter of the American Guild of Organists. We’re working on getting a youth organ competition in my parish.

AND I play for our parish children’s choir (65 children), who are being taught contemporary and traditional liturgical music by the excellent director, who has a degree in Music Education.

AND…there’s a lot of other stuff.

But yes, I’m discouraged. I don’t see a lot of progress. In fact, I see more people who prefer the contemporary music and actually tell me that they wish the organ was “gone” (although they always say that if I play it, it’s OK!)

As for your statement that contemporary music doesn’t attract people, I disagree wholeheartedly. First, my husband and I converted from Evangelical Protestantism to Catholicism, and I will testify that the Haugan and Haas hymns definitely helped us to be less afraid of Catholicism.

Second, there are quite a few people who still attend Mass at our parish, but then head down the road to the Protestant megachurch specifically to hear the good music (pure contemporary, done by a professional band). We are kidding ourselves if we think that Christians, including Catholic Christians, are repelled by contemporary music. They love it. The megachurch attracts ten-thousand people each Sunday–that’s almost a tenth of the population of our city. That music certainly doesn’t seem to be turning them off.

It’s not the “contemporary” that repels people. It’s the “mediocre” or even “tepid” in any style of music, including ancient and traditional, that makes people less than enthusiastic about attending church.

I believe that ANY style of music done with excellence and enthusiasm will attract and retain people to church. If the choice is Gregorian chant and sacred polyphony, then it has to be done well, or it will have the effect of driving people away. There is nothing worse than badly-done chant or polyphony. :winter: shudder
Click to expand...
You make a number of very good points, and all the work you are doing in the realm of liturgical music is admirable.

My problem with some of the contemporary music is that the Church makes it clear that certain genres/styles of music are to be favored over others with Gregorian Chant at the top of the food-chain. That said, I can appreciate that contemporary music done well (as long as the character of the music compliments the sacred nature of the liturgy) is not all bad. It is also an excellent thing that people such as your husband were able to relate and find familiarity in contemporary hymns.

However, none of this changes the fact that the tradition of sacred music in the Latin Catholic Church is rooted firmly in Gregorian Chant. We should strive at whatever cost to return to these roots, as many Church documents suggest. As you pointed out, however, its a lofty goal until the bishops begin to put more weight on the importance of reverent, liturgical music. Perhaps such action from the bishops would lead to an increase in vocations to the organist and choral professions, and more willingness of the part of the faithful to donate their time to learn the music.
 
Personally I think the black gospel music is better than the vast majority of Gregorian Chant.

There is no moral difference between the major heptatonic scale and the pentatonic scale. There is no moral difference between a 12/8 and a 4/4 time signature. There is no moral difference between 120 beats per minute and 160 beats per minute.

Rhythm is essential to music, and all music has it, whether it is bach, Beethoven, the beatles, or lady gaga.

I listen to music because it sounds good, and to me Dies Irae sounds like a mess. Always has, always will. I like a lot of classical music, especially Beethoven, but I like other music as well. I would rather listen to Mark Knopfler, the Beatles, or Pink Floyd than Bach.
 
jimmy said:
Personally I think the black gospel music is better than the vast majority of Gregorian Chant.

There is no moral difference between the major heptatonic scale and the pentatonic scale. There is no moral difference between a 12/8 and a 4/4 time signature. There is no moral difference between 120 beats per minute and 160 beats per minute.

Rhythm is essential to music, and all music has it, whether it is bach, Beethoven, the beatles, or lady gaga.

I listen to music because it sounds good, and to me Dies Irae sounds like a mess. Always has, always will. I like a lot of classical music, especially Beethoven, but I like other music as well. I would rather listen to Mark Knopfler, the Beatles, or Pink Floyd than Bach.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. I agree with your analysis of the scales, time signatures, etc. It’s all mathematics and therefore morally and spiritually neutral.

I disagree with you about Bach, but I respect and appreciate your tastes and consider them equal to mine!
 
christus_vincit said:
You make a number of very good points, and all the work you are doing in the realm of liturgical music is admirable.

My problem with some of the contemporary music is that the Church makes it clear that certain genres/styles of music are to be favored over others with Gregorian Chant at the top of the food-chain. That said, I can appreciate that contemporary music done well (as long as the character of the music compliments the sacred nature of the liturgy) is not all bad. It is also an excellent thing that people such as your husband were able to relate and find familiarity in contemporary hymns.

However, none of this changes the fact that the tradition of sacred music in the Latin Catholic Church is rooted firmly in Gregorian Chant. We should strive at whatever cost to return to these roots, as many Church documents suggest. As you pointed out, however, its a lofty goal until the bishops begin to put more weight on the importance of reverent, liturgical music. Perhaps such action from the bishops would lead to an increase in vocations to the organist and choral professions, and more willingness of the part of the faithful to donate their time to learn the music.
Click to expand...
I certainly agree with you about the bishops.

I would ask you and others to think about something. At one point in time, a group of church leaders made the statement that Gregorian chant should be “given pride of place in liturgical services” because “it is especially native to the Roman liturgy.”

This statement came out of the Vatican II Council.

As far as I understand this, it is NOT dogma. It is not part of faith or morals, which can never be altered by the Church.

What I would like you to think about is what would happen if a Council on Church Music were convened at this time in history? Would the same conclusion be reached, considering how small the world has become and much more aware everyone is of all the other cultures, races, nations, ethnicities, and of course, musical styles, in this world?

I’m not sure that this same statement would be made.

Also, I would like you to think about what exactly “pride of place” means? Does it mean that Gregorian chant is to be used exclusively, while all other styles of music are forbidden? Obviously not, or most Masses in the world would be in disobedience! But what does the statement mean in practical terms?

To me, it means only that Gregorian chant should always have a historical place in the Church and be honored as music that is “native to the Roman liturgy.” I think it’s very appropriate and laudable for Catholic schools to train their students in the basic of Gregorian chant, the reading of neumes, the Latin language, the “voice” that is used to voice Gregorian chant, etc. I think that it is important for the students to have the practical experience of doing Gregorian chant in a real liturgical setting (the Mass), not just in a concert setting.

One of the big problems with Gregorian chant at this time in history is that many of us see it as a performance style of music, done in concerts or movies, not Masses. Before I became Catholic, the only experience I had with Gregorian chant was in horror movies, and a few decades ago when that group of monks made the Top 40 with their recording of Gregorian chant–they were even being played on pop music radio stations and television shows!

Does this help you to understand why I don’t get the sense of reverence and awe that many cradle Catholics have about Gregorian chant? To me, it’s pop music.

But out of respect for my Church, I agree with you that we should hear more of it. It’s just not practical right now in the United States because of the lack of musical education that most people under the age of 40 have accrued. So if people like you want it, you’re going to have to start actually working towards it. Start by learning to read music if you don’t already know how. Then find a voice teacher and learn to sing properly, making sure that teacher understands that your goal is to sing Gregorian chant. Finally, ask your parish liturgy/music director if he/she is willing to let you do just a little of the Mass in chant. Just a little. Get the people accustomed to it gradually. Don’t throw them into the pool all at once!

If this strategy doesn’t appeal to you, then try to come up with another strategy that will work for you. If you have money, donate it to people who are working to facilitate the use of more ancient forms of music in the Mass. Start with the AGO. Why not join the chapter of this organization in your area? You don’t have to be an organist to join–just a lover of organ music. They have lots of projects going on that will at least be a start towards bringing in more traditional music forms.

I hope this post helps give you some tangible ideas.
 
itrytofight said:
Just two interesting articles from composer Dr. Mark Nowakowski that I want to leave here:

onepeterfive.com/listening-like-catholic-discernment-personal-musical-taste/
onepeterfive.com/listening-like-a-catholic-the-discernment-of-personal-musical-taste-part-2/

Basically his message is any music form close to Gregorian chant is good and anything that strays far, far from that standard is unworthy of a Catholic.

Please post comments and what not here and on the articles. 👍
Click to expand...
I think you might be overstating the blog author’s main point. My takeaway was that Catholics ought to be more discerning about what they listen to. I think that’s a fair point, even if I disagree with a lot of what he says.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top