Contemporary=BAD?

[EasterJoy]

It is commonly said that the Roman Rite is characterised by these features, as opposed to the more poetic form of the Eastern liturgies. My ‘list’ was not exaustive, but mystery may be included within solemnity. As for a source, Father Fortescue states these aspects in his ‘Ceremonies of the Roman Rite’.
The music must be directed towards the worship of God and not a mere sideshow which often happens nowadays.

I could not agree more that the direction of the ritual must be towards God and not for our own entertainment, so don’t get me wrong on that. But you’re quoting a document that states that there should be a canopy over the altar, that there should be an uneven number of steps to get to the High Altar, that the altar is to be covered with three cloths, and so on. In other words, perfectly fine standards, and, really, a beautifully detailed description of the Traditional Latin Mass and its settings as practiced in England in 1917, but not the only legitimate standards, nor a basic statement of the standards currently set in place by Rome, but rather a very particular description of one acceptable way.

It isn’t written in stone anywhere that the liturgies of Rome must not approach the poetry of the Eastern liturgies. There isn’t any theological basis for that, there isn’t a necessary cultural basis for it, and there isn’t a practical reason for it. Can we agree that the goal of getting everyone to adhere even to the current standards is a high enough order as it is? If we got something more “poetic” than the traditions of 100 years ago, but still reverent and worshipful, wouldn’t we all be thrilled? Maybe it’s just me, but I don’t think there would be room to grouse that the “logic” wasn’t up to snuff.

 

[CAnnElizabeth]

Kristie – I echo those who have thanked you for your service. I led a music group for five years at a large parish and know what it is to assume that kind of responsibility as an unpaid volunteer, working with other volunteer (sometimes untrained or musically unsophisticated) musicians AND trying to please the clergy and congregation you’re serving. It’s a giant job and very often frustrating and unappreciated. Many times the only feedback you get is negative, no matter how hard you try to please.

Unless you’re receiving many objections IN YOUR OWN PARISH about the music you’re providing, I wouldn’t worry about an anonymous online group. It sounds to me like you are doing your homework and doing your best for your own parish, and God bless you for that.

CAF does seem to me to be an extremely conservative community – which is fine for them but doesn’t necessarily reflect the culture many of us live (and thive) in.

I personally appreciate much of “contemporary” music because of its scriptural accuracy and beautiful melodies. We have some wonderful composers now that deserve to be heard in our churches of today.

There will always be a place for chant and for some of the truly excellent classical music that is our Catholic heritage, but some of the old faithful Catholic hymns of the 19th and 20th century are so cloyingly sentimental I honestly can’t sing them anymore.

Surely the Church is big enough for both old and new.

 

[VociMike]

Surely the Church is big enough for both old and new.

That has never been the issue. The issue is whether any given instance of the new fits the guidelines as laid out by the Church in Vatican II and by almost every pope for the past 100+ years, or whether that instance of the new is “not fit to cross the threshold” into the temple.

I don’t think I’m far wrong in saying that the issue is also whether most composers even know how to write suitable Catholic liturgical music any more, and whether most pastors and music directors even know how to select suitable Catholic liturgical music any more. We are paying the price for 40-50 years of ignorance of Church teachings and outright rejection of Church teachings.

 

[EasterJoy]

That has never been the issue. The issue is whether any given instance of the new fits the guidelines as laid out by the Church in Vatican II and by almost every pope for the past 100+ years, or whether that instance of the new is “not fit to cross the threshold” into the temple.

I don’t think I’m far wrong in saying that the issue is also whether most composers even know how to write suitable Catholic liturgical music any more, and whether most pastors and music directors even know how to select suitable Catholic liturgical music any more. We are paying the price for 40-50 years of ignorance of Church teachings and outright rejection of Church teachings.

There are those who wonder out loud if modern composers know how to write suitable music of any kind any more. You know the old joke, that if the piece is modern, it is hard to tell when the instrumentalists are warming up and tuning their instruments and when the actual “music” has begun! I would argue that of course there are wonderful musicians, it is just that when the good new music is heard, the reaction is more “this is really good, where has this music been hiding all of my life?” and not “who on earth thought this would be a good idea?”

I heard once that someone remarked to John Lennon that the Beatles wrote great music, and he replied that they only wrote average music, but average was what most people like. The story may be entirely apocryphal, but there is some truth in the message. At any rate, we live in time when what is popular is what is played, both in church and out of it.

 

[otjm]

The Roman Rite is characterised by solemnity, sobriety, simplicity and logic. These must be adhered to. Questions to ask oneself include, whether the music is directed towards the Sacrifice or is it for mere entertainment?

I find your last question to be of particular interest.

For some years recently, we had a parish which on Saturday night would have the OF in Latin, and had a choir made up of what seemed to be professional singers; if they weren’t, they certainly could have qualified. All the music was in Latin. The group toured Europe, to no small acclaim.

I would take the RCIA group there because it was the only local Mass which came anywhere near looking like the Mass before the OF. Smells and bells and all of that.

We would get Palistrina or some other music, 4 part intricate harmony, and non-Catholics would come simply to hear the choir perform.

And perform they did; it was a stellar performance. It made for excellent entertainment. And I would go to Mass the next morning simply because it was near impossible to attend that Mass and pay attention to the Mass; the choir put on a performance worthy of paying significant admission.

Different strokes for different folks; I don’t want to attend a Mass using anvils, or sounding like a Gospel Choir from the Southern Baptist church. But I also don’t want to attend a Mass with a choir that is so good that they apepar to be professionals, and doing what appears to be a performance. They did.

Note: I like classical music, I like some of the Masses as written by some of the Masters. I just don’t like them performed at Mass. Sung, maybe. Not performed.

I grew up prior to Vatican 2; I was in the seminary in college when we gathered together to record a record of Gregorian Chant that (given the recording equipment differences between then and now) sounded as good as the monks from - where, Spain? - and I am in no way against the music we had then. But there was a tad bit of difference between the choir my dad sang in and the group I listened to at the Palistrina perfomance.

 

[Eric_Olsen]

Thats nice…go back and read the original post and tell me that is not patronizing and condescending as well!

“Tripe” is patronizing enough…but, “Cupcake”? How would you like it, if someone called you “Cupcake” or “Fruitcake” or something like that? It’s almost picking a fight on purpose. That’s not a charitable way to address someone in a discussion, unless you know the person well enough to be certain the address will be taken as charitable. We can do better than that here.

Besides, it is not what “seems” to you or anyone liberal, conservative or independent to define what is proper or objectively “distracting” for the liturgies of the Roman Catholic Church. Although their exact interpretation may be up for some debate, we have objective standards of liturgy, promulgated by our chief liturgists, the bishops. Your stated standards are far, far narrower than the true standards the Church intends Catholic parishes to aim for.

 

[Eric_Olsen]

And in fact the organ is singled out in the documents of Vatican II which delare that it is “to be held in high esteem” because it “adds a wonderful splendor to the Church’s ceremonies and powerfully lifts up man’s mind to God and to higher things.”

thank you! That needs to be shoved in the faces of the “spirit of VII” crowd who will stop at nothing until every trace of Catholicism is removed form the church and we look like the other 300+ protestant denominations in the USA.

 

[Phemie]

a) The music chosen is at odds with the content or the setting. Sung one way, the words are edifying, but sung another, they make a farce of Holy Scriptures. If you were, for instance, to sing a Psalm, but to a tune that sounded as if it were out of a Monte Python skit, to use an extreme example, that would obviously not be reverent.

The most egregious example I can think of is the tune used for the Our Father at the ‘Family Mass’ we used to have once a month at the only Sunday Mass: At first I couldn’t put my finger on it – it didn’t scan right, they never had the words on the same note two Masses in a row and I would hum the tune that was sooo familiar.

Then all of a sudden I found myself singing “he’s a man, he’s just a man, and I’ve had so many men before, in very many ways he’s just one more…” Yup, someone in their infinite wisdom had set The Lord’s Prayer to Mary Magdelene’s “I don’t know how to love him” from Jesus Christ Superstar. As if the kids who sang at that Mass wouldn’t have found it much easier to actually chant the Lord’s Prayer.

 

[Phemie]

Here’s a thought experiment. If you heard a religious song in another language, a language which you did not speak, and, based on the instrumentation and style of composition and performance, you could not tell if the song was a secular song or a religious song, would such a song be suitable for the liturgy? Why or why not?

(assume there is nothing problematic in the lyrics)

Unfortunately, it works both ways.
I wracked my brain trying to figure out why the tune to the cute Smurf Christmas song I was listening to sounded so familiar. Then all of a sudden it came to me: it was set to the same tune as O Sanctissima.

 

[Charlotte408]

It’s probably best that I just stop coming to CAF, it’s just too frustrating for me.

Here’s the thing. I am a choir director at my parish. I make my selections of music based on the readings and following the guidelines of the music planner (OCP). The music that we play is based on the appropriate readings for that Sunday…there is no “My life sucked til I found Jesus” stuff during the liturgy. On a good day, we’ll have a piano, guitar, bass, drum, and flute plus the vocalists. None of us collects a paycheck from the parish…we are volunteers and we do our best to use our gifts to glorify God. We have no organ music because no one has stepped up to play the organ.

My question is this…why do so many people think that because music is contemporary and uses different instruments, that it is somehow less sacred than more traditional music? I’ve even heard it referred to as irreverent…and I completely fail to see how music that is BASED ON SCRIPTURE can be irreverent. Jesus is no less present on the altar, whether we worship Him with Gregorian chant or clashing symbols (Psalm 150).

Is there some actual church documents that say that we cannot use these instruments? Or is this all just a matter of personal preference?

LOL- I swear you quoted me…lol, if your not, you just recited darn near everything I posted in another thread earlier this morning, either way its all good.

To answer your question, I think it is a personal preference…and I apologize, if it was my post, if my additude towards ‘contemporary’ music in the church put you off…but thats just the way I feel about it…

IMHO- the CC, is VERY traditional…the cathedrals, everything about them…they have an almost historical feel to them, even the newer built ones, the architecture, the artwork…what the Priests wear…everything seems so OG to me…I havent seen it yet, but to see a rock band of sorts, I guess, would just seem displaced. I’ve only seen the ‘contemporary’ style of music in other kinds of churches…

But it totally makes sense that if you dont have an organ or someone to play it, that you would make music with whatever talents/instruments that you have. I think, so long as its done with taste it wouldnt be irreverent…

Again, thats what I think though…

 

[kinderbueno]

We would get Palistrina or some other music, 4 part intricate harmony, and non-Catholics would come simply to hear the choir perform.

And perform they did; it was a stellar performance. It made for excellent entertainment. And I would go to Mass the next morning simply because it was near impossible to attend that Mass and pay attention to the Mass; the choir put on a performance worthy of paying significant admission.

Different strokes for different folks; I don’t want to attend a Mass using anvils, or sounding like a Gospel Choir from the Southern Baptist church. But I also don’t want to attend a Mass with a choir that is so good that they apepar to be professionals, and doing what appears to be a performance. They did.

Of course it seems like a performance. Nobody really does these masterful works anymore!

Now if the rest of the Mass wasn’t offered as excellently, then there’s a problem.

 

[EasterJoy]

thank you! That needs to be shoved in the faces of the “spirit of VII” crowd who will stop at nothing until every trace of Catholicism is removed form the church and we look like the other 300+ protestant denominations in the USA.

I don’t mean to single you out, sorry. Still, you aren’t going to effect change by shoving anything in anyone’s face. That is not ever going to lead to being one as the Lord and the Father are one. We have to arrive at reverence and solemnity by unfailingly charitable means, or there won’t have been a point to it. You can’t reverence God while denigrating your brother. Your mother wouldn’t buy that when you were a child, and Our Father won’t buy it, either! If others in the discussion lack charity today, then we have to make up the difference, don’t you think, full in the knowledge that it will be our turn to fail on another day? Otherwise, I don’t think we’ll ever arrive at having the kind of Mass that God intends.

It is something to rejoice in, that this is a passion of yours. Reverence is worthy of passionate pursuit. I’m just saying, as Steven Covey put it: the main thing is to keep the main thing the main thing.

 

[millersatthefar]

When I was a young fella in my teens I loved to play guitar for the Mass. At the time I had a very poor understanding of music and liturgy, and I had no idea that we could be perceived as anything other than reverent and sincere. One Mass we processed in playing our instruments and some of the people were upset enough to leave the Mass! I thought that those people were crazy.

As I have matured I have come to appreciate the Church’s musical heritage and I find that the classics lift my mind and heart to God. The beauty and simplicity of chant, the eerie echoing polyphony, the astounding depth and complexity of Mozart touch me in ways I can not express. In comparison the music of my youth sounds flat and uninteresting.

I believe that music reflects society. Everyone wants “what they want when they want it” and no one takes the time to learn. The great masterworks of music are difficult and require special effort to play and sing. Who wants to go to all that trouble when there is ready made contemporary music that is simple and easily accessible?

There is a place for contemporary music but, by its nature, it presents the temptation to perform and not to praise. The musicians must have a crystal clear understanding of the nature of the Mass and their responsibility to gently and reverently support the people in our effort to experience Christ in the Eucharist and the Word, to be a part of our experience of God! The moment it becomes about the musicans or the music it becomes a problem.

Choirs were traditionally in the back of the church to be like the angels in heaven, anonymous in their glory.

 

[linebyline]

God gave us the greatest “instrument” in our own voice.

You’ve obviously never heard me sing.

Anyway, a line has to be drawn somewhere. I’ve been in Mass and flat-out stopped singing (maybe that’s a step too far?) because I paid attention to the lyrics and had to wonder, “When exactly does this song start to be about Jesus instead of how swell we are?” It’s happening more and more often ever since our parish switched to a new hymnal last year.

And then there’s music that I couldn’t sing if I wanted to because it was either poorly written or (at best) not written to be sung by a church full of people who aren’t professional vocalists. (Ever wonder why “Happy Birthday” is sung with all the excitement you’d expect at a funeral? It’s because most people can’t sing well, and even fewer can do it in time with others, so the song is slowed way down so everyone can keep up.)

That doesn’t mean music has to be unentertaining, of course, or that the choir is not allowed to do their best for fear of being too entertaining. Just as long as it doesn’t get in the way of the people being able to sing. (Can they follow four-part harmony?)

There was a pretty good article on the subject in This Rock a while back: The Curse of Bad Liturgical Music (part one and part two) While I think the author may have been a bit too picky at times, he makes a good point about how we need to prioritize our music. Singable and reverent are priorities. Entertainment value is not a priority, and can be detrimental if it’s made into one.

 

[Lepanto]

It’s probably best that I just stop coming to CAF, it’s just too frustrating for me.

Here’s the thing. I am a choir director at my parish. I make my selections of music based on the readings and following the guidelines of the music planner (OCP). The music that we play is based on the appropriate readings for that Sunday…there is no “My life sucked til I found Jesus” stuff during the liturgy. On a good day, we’ll have a piano, guitar, bass, drum, and flute plus the vocalists. None of us collects a paycheck from the parish…we are volunteers and we do our best to use our gifts to glorify God. We have no organ music because no one has stepped up to play the organ.

My question is this…why do so many people think that because music is contemporary and uses different instruments, that it is somehow less sacred than more traditional music? I’ve even heard it referred to as irreverent…and I completely fail to see how music that is BASED ON SCRIPTURE can be irreverent. Jesus is no less present on the altar, whether we worship Him with Gregorian chant or clashing symbols (Psalm 150).

Is there some actual church documents that say that we cannot use these instruments? Or is this all just a matter of personal preference?

The problem is that we (the people in the pews) have had nothing but OCP and its ilk shoved down our throats for the past 40 years, without ever hearing Gregorian Chant. That is the exact opposite of what the authors of Vatican II’s Sacrosanctum Concilium said or envisioned.

Please…no more OCP!!

 

[roadsend]

The problem is that we (the people in the pews) have had nothing but OCP and its ilk shoved down our throats for the past 40 years, without ever hearing Gregorian Chant. That is the exact opposite of what the authors of Vatican II’s Sacrosanctum Concilium said or envisioned.

Please…no more OCP!!

Amen to that.
IMO OCP has done more to destroy the faith here in this country than any heresy ever did.

 

[benedictgal]

PERFECT example!!!

I was recently at a Confirmation Mass, which was actually very lovely for the most part. But during the sprinkling rite we sang this sort of a round with the choir that had lines like “quenching” “refreshing”, etc. set to a tune that made me feel like I was singing a Pepsi jingle! I actually felt silly singing it - it totally took away from the rite.

Now - the words themselves were fine (if not a bit corny) - but the tune was so commercial sounding it turned it into a really great example of what NOT to choose.

~Liza

I know I’ve told this story before, but, it bears repeating, especially since I had this experience yesterday. I went to Mass with my dad at his parish and the musical selections were horrid. The entrance song was “They’ll Know We are Christians” (forget about the fact that it was the Ascension). When I heard it I started cringing. My dad was not too thrilled either. After Mass, we were driving to have supper to mark my late mom’s birthday (which would have been today). We were listening to Sirius seventies and, wouldn’t you know, Fleetwood Mac’s Tusk was playing. I asked my dad if that sounded familiar. He asked me why. I told him that Tusk sounds a lot like the opening song at Mass. He listened and said, “You know. You’re right. I never would have thought of that. It just sounded weird.” One song could have bled into the other.

 

[benedictgal]

Amen to that.
IMO OCP has done more to destroy the faith here in this country than any heresy ever did.

I could not agree with you more.

 

[dnu]

I still say all musical instruments should be removed from the Mass, as well as hymns. If I want a Methodist service, I’ll go to one.

 

[EasterJoy]

I still say all musical instruments should be removed from the Mass, as well as hymns. If I want a Methodist service, I’ll go to one.

You teach your opinion about what it means to be Roman Catholic over what the Magesterium teaches about what that means. Be very careful in crossing that boundary.