Just a couple of comments, hopefully offered in the same generous spirit of your reply.
a) If Vatican II produced a Constitution on Sacred Liturgy (which it did) then those matters which this constitution pronounced were guided by the HS, weren’t they? To argue that the HS didn’t lead the Church in Vatican II to give the highest praise to Gregorian chant is also to argue that the HS didn’t lead the Church in Vatican II to call for e.g. “active participation”. But I doubt anybody would say that the call for active participation in the liturgy was not from the HS. So one must either grant the the entire Constitution on Sacred Liturgy was guided by the HS, or that none of it was. There is no in-between.
b) I am glad that you appreciate Gregorian chant, and it bothers me not at all that you also appreciate other forms of sacred music (I do as well). But the question asked of me, and which I pass on, was, why is Gregorian chant almost never heard (can we even say studiously avoided?) by a movement which claims the particular inspiration of the HS? That is the mystery.
I agree absolutely with you, on both points. I really don’t think gregorian chant is given enough room in liturgy, and am very glad the Holy Father decided to do something about it. It has, as you have pointed out, a place of the highest esteem in the tradition of the Church. And I didn’t mean to imply otherwise, nor did I mean to imply that the constitution of Vatican II was unguided by the Holy Spirit - what I meant to emphasize is that, given it’s position, we also must consider other forms of music which, although the don’t have the same rich history of usage in the liturgy, can be of great use (be it liturgical or pastoral) to the people.
I would also agree with you on the second point. I actually think that Gregorian chant can be used… very effectively in the charismatic movement, especially during adoration and meditations, as well as during “charismatic” masses.
But that’s a matter of circumstances, really. How many Gregorian chant choirs do you know? Sure, we got Benedictines, but gathering ten+ priests who are trained in singing G. c. is no small feat. The “youth bands” who often play at charismatic Masses are simply by far more available and it is much more practical to have them sing. It may also be that sometimes such form of fast paced singing can be an easier way or a means for a person to “open themselves up” to the Holy Spirit. The text of such songs is easily understood, and it is imminent, almost forcefully present and it really can lead to ones opening to the praise and sheer joy of worshiping the Lord, and into a state of simple openness for Christ, and the gifts of the Holy Spirit. It does have it’s pastoral uses, which - in these particular cases, I believe - are more convenient than a Gregorian chant choir.
I hail from a relatively small parish - and at high Mass we have an adult choir sing - they are actually quite good, but they’re not trained to sing Gregorian chant. We simply don’t have the manpower at the parish-level to introduce a widespread use of G. c., since it requires not an unnoticeable amount of real talent (not to say that other forms of singing don’t, but just to point out how specific the G. c. is). So, we manage with what we’ve got.
I don’t think it’s a lot different at any small to medium parish, or even large ones, who don’t have a tradition of singing Gregorian Chant.
God Bless.
