Chant banned?

[Justin1224]

On Sunday I usually get to our church about 1 hour to 45 minutes before mass so we can reherse some of the girls that our mini choir will be singing. This moring as I was entering, people who were at the previous mass were leaving. A man who was leaving with his family stopped to say hello to an elderly man who sings in our choir. The younger one said to him that there group who has sung chant before should get together to practice. The older one said to him some like that they bishop won’t allow it, and wondered if he meant at mass?

 

[NPC]

Far from banning Gregorian Chant, the Church affirms that it ought to be given pride of place.

The Second Vatican Council, contrary to what some people might like to think, sought to encourage Gregorian chant:

Sacrosanctum Concilium - Chapter VI, Sacred Music
116. The Church acknowledges Gregorian chant as specially suited to the Roman liturgy: therefore, other things being equal, it should be given pride of place in liturgical services.

The Council did not seek to overturn but to re-affirm what Pope Pius X said in his instruction on sacred music from 1903 - Tra le Sollecitudini:

II. The different kinds of sacred music
3. These qualities are to be found, in the highest degree, in Gregorian Chant, which is, consequently the Chant proper to the Roman Church, the only chant she has inherited from the ancient fathers, which she has jealously guarded for centuries in her liturgical codices, which she directly proposes to the faithful as her own, which she prescribes exclusively for some parts of the liturgy, and which the most recent studies have so happily restored to their integrity and purity.

On these grounds Gregorian Chant has always been regarded as the suprememodel for sacred music, so that it is fully legitimate to lay down thefollowing rule: the more closely a composition for church approaches in its movement, inspiration and savor the Gregorian form, the more sacred and liturgical it becomes; and the more out of harmony it is with that supreme model, the less worthy it is of the temple.

The ancient traditional Gregorian Chant must, therefore, in a large measure be restored to the functions of public worship, and the fact must be accepted by all that an ecclesiastical function loses none of its solemnity when accompanied by this music alone.

Special efforts are to be made to restore the use of the Gregorian Chant by the people, so that the faithful may again take a more active part in the ecclesiastical offices, as was the case in ancient times.

I don’t know what your bishop’s position actually is, but it is clear that he has a duty to foster rather than hinder the use of Gregorian chant. This was certainly the vision of Pope Paul VI when he put together the small chant book Jubilate Deo in 1974; it had the “minimum requirements” for the faithful’s Gregorian chant repertoire. A copy was sent to EVERY bishop in the world. Unfortunately, as far as I can see, few are actually encouraging the repertoire contained in it, but officially, the Church’s position on Gregorian chant has not changed. HERE is a short article on Jubilate Deo - it makes the point that the Church’s position has been very recently affirmed by Pope Benedict XVI in Sacramentum Caritatis:

“I desire, in accordance with the request advanced by the Synod Fathers, that Gregorian chant be suitably esteemed and employed as the chant proper to the Roman liturgy”

You should not hesitate in attempting to introduce Gregorian chant into the choir’s repertoire.

 

[benedictgal]

To further agument the discussion, I would recommend that you read the Chirograph on Sacred Music, the document that Venerable Pope John Paul II wrote back in 2003 to mark the 100th anniversary of the Motu Propio issued by Pope St. Pius X.

In this document, Pope John Paul II notes that:

1. With regard to compositions of liturgical music, I make my own the “general rule” that St Pius X formulated in these words: “The more closely a composition for church approaches in its movement, inspiration and savour the Gregorian melodic form, the more sacred and liturgical it becomes; and the more out of harmony it is with that supreme model, the less worthy it is of the temple”[33]. It is not, of course, a question of imitating Gregorian chant but rather of ensuring that new compositions are imbued with the same spirit that inspired and little by little came to shape it. Only an artist who is profoundly steeped in the sensus Ecclesiae can attempt to perceive and express in melody the truth of the Mystery that is celebrated in the Liturgy[34]. In this perspective, in my Letter to Artists I wrote: “How many sacred works have been composed through the centuries by people deeply imbued with the sense of mystery! The faith of countless believers has been nourished by melodies flowing from the hearts of other believers, either introduced into the Liturgy or used as an aid to dignified worship. In song, faith is experienced as vibrant joy, love and confident expectation of the saving intervention of God”[35].

You can read the document in its entirety at:

adoremus.org/Chirograph-SacredMusic.html

Musicam Sacram, the authoritative document written by the Holy See back in 1967, remains in force as well. It states that:

1. In sung liturgical services celebrated in Latin:

(a) Gregorian chant, as proper to the Roman liturgy, should be given pride of place, other things being equal.34 Its melodies, contained in the “typical” editions, should be used, to the extent that this is possible.

(b) "It is also desirable that an edition be prepared containing simpler melodies, for use in smaller churches."36

(c) Other musical settings, written for one or more voices, be they taken from the traditional heritage or from new works, should be held in honor, encouraged and used as the occasion demands.36

You can find this document at:

adoremus.org/MusicamSacram.html#anchor15520705

I hope this helps.

 

[NPC]

Benedictgal - I know this is not directly related to the O.P.'s question, but do you know to what extent, if any, the contents of Tra le Sollecitudini have been overruled? Was reading through it a week or two ago, and was interested to see that he forbade the use of the piano at liturgical services:

1. The employment of the piano is forbidden in church, as is also that of noisy or frivolous instruments such as drums, cymbals, bells and the like

Surely this isn’t still in force?? I gather that it is very common in the United States to have a piano in the church to accompany services…

 

[OraLabora]

Funny this should come up; our small choir (about a dozen men) sang Gregorian Chant for Sunday Mass yesterday at a rural parish. The priest was in tears of joy at the end. (Or maybe we were off-key and hurt his ears ). We did the Propers and the Kyriale.

We do this once a month, rotating around different parishes, and have been doing it for years (I have been involved for 7 years with this choir).

 

[NPC]

Funny this should come up; our small choir (about a dozen men) sang Gregorian Chant for Sunday Mass yesterday at a rural parish. The priest was in tears of joy at the end. (Or maybe we were off-key and hurt his ears ). We did the Propers and the Kyriale.

We do this once a month, rotating around different parishes, and have been doing it for years (I have been involved for 7 years with this choir).

That’s great to hear! I’m not surprised that the priest was moved to tears at the end - people call Gregorian chant “plain chant”, yet there is nothing plain about it. It is so rich and beautiful, uniting all in one voice, linking us to generations upon generations of Catholics, yet it is so simple… It’s amazing that - as far as I can tell - so few church choirs don’t know a single piece of chant; so many have limited themselves to worship music of the past 20-30 years, and neglect the rich centuries-old sacred music tradition of the Church. They don’t know what they’re missing - I wish that each parish church could just get a flavour for Gregorian chant & then maybe it would catch on!

 

[benedictgal]

Benedictgal - I know this is not directly related to the O.P.'s question, but do you know to what extent, if any, the contents of Tra le Sollecitudini have been overruled? Was reading through it a week or two ago, and was interested to see that he forbade the use of the piano at liturgical services:

Surely this isn’t still in force?? I gather that it is very common in the United States to have a piano in the church to accompany services…

While I am not a big fan of pianos being used, this is what Musicam Sacram said:

"The use of other instruments may also be admitted in divine worship, given the decision and consent of the competent territorial authority, provided that the instruments are suitable for sacred use, or can be adapted to it, that they are in keeping with the dignity of the temple, and truly contribute to the edification of the faithful."43

1. In permitting and using musical instruments, the culture and traditions of individual peoples must be taken into account. However, those instruments which are, by common opinion and use, suitable for secular music only, are to be altogether prohibited from every liturgical celebration and from popular devotions.44

Any musical instrument permitted in divine worship should be used in such a way that it meets the needs of the liturgical celebration, and is in the interests both of the beauty of worship and the edification of the faithful.

Now, when the CDWDS wrote to the USCCB in reference to the adaptations to the GIRM, it noted that:

Certain other provisions seem to require further study and specification before being introduced as adapting legislation. What is said here may be understood to apply to nn. 301, 304, 326, 329, 339, 343, and the portion of n. 393 referring to approved musical instruments. In cases where the Conference of Bishops is to legislate, such legislation should be truly specific, and the law intends precisely that any particular episcopal legislation on these matters be enacted in common by the Bishops of the Conference rather than being left to be determined variously in different dioceses. In the absence of any particular legislation on such a matter, specifications contained in the universal law maintain their full force. In other words, the Conference of Bishops may name specific materials or instruments as suitable in addition to those universally deemed so, but in the absence of such specification, only the “traditional” materials or those otherwise specified in the Institutio Generalis Missalis Romani are to be regarded as approved.

Thus, allowance of certain musical instruments does not fall under the scope of the diocesan bishop; rather, it falls under the purview of the national episcopal conference.

 

[OraLabora]

That’s great to hear! I’m not surprised that the priest was moved to tears at the end - people call Gregorian chant “plain chant”, yet there is nothing plain about it. It is so rich and beautiful, uniting all in one voice, linking us to generations upon generations of Catholics, yet it is so simple… It’s amazing that - as far as I can tell - so few church choirs don’t know a single piece of chant; so many have limited themselves to worship music of the past 20-30 years, and neglect the rich centuries-old sacred music tradition of the Church. They don’t know what they’re missing - I wish that each parish church could just get a flavour for Gregorian chant & then maybe it would catch on!

Thanks. We do nothing but Gregorian in fact. One minor exception is that we chant the responsorial psalm on a Gregorian mode but in French.

We’ve had a good teacher, the choirmaster at St-Benoît-du-Lac abbey in Quebec, a Benedictine abbey of the Solesmes congregation. He was in fact also our choirmaster for many years.

 

[NPC]

While I am not a big fan of pianos being used, this is what Musicam Sacram said:

Now, when the CDWDS wrote to the USCCB in reference to the adaptations to the GIRM, it noted that:

Thus, allowance of certain musical instruments does not fall under the scope of the diocesan bishop; rather, it falls under the purview of the national episcopal conference.

Would that not mean that, technically at least, Pope Pius X’s ban on the use of the piano is still in force in non-U.S. countries, given that the exception in the GIRM apply specifically to the USCCB? Pianos - especially digital ones - are gradually creeping into Irish churches, given that most have not got an organ or the powers that be are not willing to invest in one. In fact, Tra le Sollecitudini is partly responsible for the lack of organs in Ireland - because at the beginning of the 20th century there was a major church building boom & it was judged by many in authority that an organ wasn’t necessary or worthwhile after Pope Pius’ publication!

 

[bpbasilphx]

\19. The employment of the piano is forbidden in church, as is also that of noisy or frivolous instruments such as drums, cymbals, bells and the like\

**I’d rather hear a well tuned and well played piano in church than a toy spinet organ that is totally inadequate.

And are not bells–both at the altar and in the tower–called for by the rubrics of the Extraordinary Form?

And how about the noisy and frivolous (from my view point) Holy Week clackers?**

 

[pnewton]

In reference to the OP, one can not know what such an ambiguous comment meant without clarification. Since, of course, chant is not banned, the question would have to be asked what was not allowed when or whether such a thing was ever said. Without further info, it is impossible to say what was meant. In absence of anything official, which will not exist, do what you want and ignore vague guidelines when concrete ones exist.