TAS2000-"In general, the music must be approved by the USCCB for use at mass. However, many parishes/musicians/etc. use the philosophy that if it is in a hymnal or published by a"church" music compnay it is OK! Sadly, that is how we get so many questionable, or even downright heretical songs being played in Catholic churches. And as always with music, what one person likes, another will hate passionately. Unfortunelty, I do not know if the USCCB approves the words only, or if they actually approve the music. Does anyone out there know?"
Hi folks, I generally don’t post here, but this is a very good question. Having been a RC music director for 3.5 decades I believe this analogy guides my own choices of when, why and how should mass settings be changed or implemented. Succinctly put: if we gather at a birthday party, do we change or improvise the melody of “Happy Birthday?” (In English-speaking USA) So, as that is the simplest philosophical template, I will opt to use successful settings of the ordinaries/acclamations for years, not just seasons or months, years. However, one must recognize when certain settings have reached (pardon the pun) their sunset. For example-the ubiquitous St. Louis Jesuit “mass” (really a conglomerate) has musically become quite dated. By contrast, IMHO, the Bob Hurd “Roll Down the Ages” eucharistic acclamations have a timeless musical aesthetic to my tastes, and we’ve been singing them for, oh, ten or so years. Another “new” worthy setting, Richard Proulx’s Missa Oecumenica, has been sung without change for about 4 years in my parish.
To comment upon TAS’s post: The only aspects of liturgical propriety the USCCB oversees are the texts of the ordinaries; and actually that information was more or less disseminated unofficially over the net. What I imagine is that all the major publishers (even those beyond the BIG 3) editorial reviewers check for verbatim settings of the latest approved text revisions before proceeding to review the music for publication. For example, I would imagine that should a revision of the “memorial acclamation” of the Eucharistic Prayer is approved, we’ll see a host of editorial revisions in a whole lot of missals/hymnals/worship aides. Outside of that, publishers need only to receive the imprimatur of the local bishop for “official accreditation.”
As TAS mentions, issues of taste often dictate what happens at the parish level, the diocesan level (if the local bishop even cares,) and at the national level among those who decide the content of their “hymnals.” Taste is, to some extent, what drives the market place along with trends and promotion. This is a reality that has both blessings and curses attached. What really matters is that there ought to be some person at each parish with some credentials (whatever they be) assigned to distinguish the “wheat” from the “chaff.” And, despite what popularity the movement to re-constitute the “sacred” among all liturgies by prescribing a predominant diet of Gregorian plainsong/polyphony and stolid, orthodox hymnody, there are beautiful new works of music in all styles being composed in this generation that should take their place generations down the road in our enduring traditions.
You never know.
