Does musical inculturation apply to the use of pop and rock styles in American liturgies?

[opus101]

In my work as a liturgical organist and cantor at Mass, I have found many beautiful songs in the Breaking Bread hymnal provided by the Church. In fact I doubt there will ever be enough time to use all of them, and every year there are new ones. Marty Haugen, Bob Hurd and many other gifted composers give us Gods words in beautiful settings.

Why do some musicians feel the need to bring outside music to the Mass? The music is to support the Mass, not to entertain.

Mia2klm, you’ll probably find the topic of this thread (Bishop Sample’s pastoral letter “Rejoice in the Lord”) quite interesting. Here is a link:

forum.musicasacra.com/forum/discussion/5255/cardinal-burke-speaking-on-sacred-music/p1

 

[Pat_the_elder]

Now you’re all done theoligising and being (musically) more Catholic than the Pope lol- Can buc_fan33 give me some more good modern hymns please.

 

[Cat]

Catholic “liturgical” music seems to be remarkably consistent in only one thing: inconsistency. For all these documents, in effect, they are nothing but hot air. Nice little treatises, but nothing we should pay too much attention to, that seems to be the message.

De Musica Sacra? Nope
Sacrosanctum Concilium? Nope
Musicam Sacram? Nope
General Instruction? Nope
Tradition of the Latin Church? It doesn’t matter, 'cause what did tradition ever do for us? Oops…

These things mean nothing in practice, absolutely nothing.

You sound disillusioned. Are you?

Maybe it’s because our family has been involved with the sport of figure skating since I was a little girl that I don’t believe it’s possible to be cut-and-dried specific when it comes to art (music).

A few weeks ago, I attended a skating competition where the scores for the Juvenile teams were all over the place. At this level, the old 6.0 scoring method is used, and it’s totally up to the judges, not a technical caller or technical assistant, to score the teams according to what they see. Now wouldn’t you think that the judges, all trained for many years in figure skating, would “see” the same thing, or at least see simliar things? But no–the scores for my daughter’s team (she’s the coach) were 6,7,2,7,3,4,7,3,4. (There were 13 teams, so the lowest placement was 7). Obviously, every judge saw something different.

After the Salt Lake City Olympics, the International Skating Union mandated the International Judging System, which assigns a point value to each element in the program. Oh, boy–NOW things will be “objective,” right? NOW the judges will all be on the same page.

Nope. Now we have a technical caller, and it’s up to this person to “call” the element. If he or she does not “see” the element, he/she will not “call” it and it can’t be judged. But if he/she does “call” the element, then the judges have to assign a Grade of Execution (GOE) to the element. They can pick from the following GOEs: -3, -2, -1, 0, +1, +2, +3.

Again, all the judges are well-trained, and they undergo extensive evaluation to make sure that they truly know the sport well.

So you would think that they would all be pretty much in the same ballpark when it comes to assigning GOEs.

Nope. At any given competition, I’ve seen elements get GOEs ranging all the way from -3 to +3 by the judges. They all see the same thing, and yet they all “see” it differently.

I think the same thing happens when it comes to Mass music, at least in the United States where the culture is so diverse and every kind of music is done. Various documents are written, but every bishop “sees” something different in these documents.

I think that this happens not because the bishops are in error or are “liberal-minded”, but because bishops are shepherds (pastors), and they interpret these documents according to the needs of their particular flock of sheep.

We, the laypeople, are NOT shepherds (pastors), and so we don’t have a sense of what the sheep need at any given time. This is not our calling. We are not “spiritually-gifted” to be “shepherds” like our bishops and priests. When we try to do a shepherd’s job, we don’t succeed. In fact, considering how stupid sheep are, it’s possible that we will lead the flock right over a cliff to their doom!

And that is why I don’t think it’s terribly useful for us to scrutinize the documents and try to interpret them. WE don’t have charge of the sheepfold. We are the sheep. We are supposed to FOLLOW, not lead.

I think that Holy Mother Church is infinitely wise to allow the shepherds to take care of the sheep in their pasture, and make decisions concerning the music that the sheep are allowed to make during the Mass. Yes, Holy Mother Church could lay down the “law” and spell out a specific Mass with specific music and hymns, but this music might not work with certain sheep in certain parts of the world, including the U.S.A.

I am in awe of Holy Mother Church for being wise in this regard!

 

[Cat]

Please allow me to add one thing to my post above.

In the figure skating world, the scores vary greatly from the judges.

BUT…there is provision for disciplining or removing a judge who consistently scores outside of the normal range.

E.g., if any of the judges had scored my daughter’s team with a “13” (last place), that would be an outlier. This kind of thing can happen, and no one says anything to the judge if it just happens once in a while. But if the same judge continues to be way off in all competitions, consistently giving a good skater or team last place, and a bad skater or team first place, that judge WILL be called up for discipline, and if the wonky scoring continues, the judge will not be allowed to judge.

Also, word gets around if a judge is “bad,” and the “bad” judge will not be invited to judge competitions. This also cuts off their judging “career.” (Figure skating judges are not paid–this is a volunteer activity.)

What I’m saying is that if a bishop is WAY off when it comes to music, doing things like inviting Adam Lambert to sing a concert during the Mass–then Holy Mother Church will eventually get around to disciplining this errant “shepherd.”

But I’m talking WAY off, not just allowing Haugen and Haas songs during OF Masses.

 

[Cat]

It seems that they are just writing exercises done by the Pope and the Bishops to take up their spare time.

Read my post above. Pay special attention to the boldfaced sentence about the pastoral calling of the bishops. I hope my comments are helpful to you and others.

 

[pnewton]

We are not “spiritually-gifted” to be “shepherds” like our bishops and priests.

I think “spiritually-gifted” is a better description of what I was trying to say. Priests undergo eight years of formation for their job, and that’s just the formal part. When one considers all the devotional time they put in, I find it hard to argue that they are not more well-versed in pastoral guidance than the classically trained organist. Musical expertise is only half of the equation in deciding music for a parish. I would even say that the technical aspects are not as important as the spiritual.

 

[Cat]

I think “spiritually-gifted” is a better description of what I was trying to say. Priests undergo eight years of formation for their job, and that’s just the formal part. When one considers all the devotional time they put in, I find it hard to argue that they are not more well-versed in pastoral guidance than the classically trained organist. Musical expertise is only half of the equation in deciding music for a parish. I would even say that the technical aspects are not as important as the spiritual.

Definitely. Excellent post.

Musicians–and I am one–tend to be somewhat myopic. Music is all and everything.

In fact, this is true of many artists in many arts fields. My daughter is a stage manager. There are many times when she is totally unaware of what’s happening in the world outside of her theater. I’ll say something about the election, and she’ll say, “What election?” Or I’ll mention a major tragedy, and she’ll say, “Wait…what happened?!”

This is just another reason for the bishops and priests, our shepherds (pastors) to be “in charge” of determining what Mass form is best for their sheep, and what musical styles and instruments shall regularly be part of that Mass. They know what’s going on with the flock.

 

[TCCOV]

I reiterate- the OP of this thread asked yet another (nebulous) question that serves only to spark yet another skirmish in this “110 Year Music Wars.” (Tra le…)
Friends, venting and ranting, speculating and excoriating and, in general, postulating about what’s wrong with “the system” based upon a combined criteria of your own imaginings is a waste of energy and time.
Looking or pointing out prelates who will ride in (like a Knight) and with their sacred lances solve thousands of concerns and problems is folly, IMO. As is decrying that no one pays any attention to the litany of legislative documents (the real ones from Tra le to SP/GIRM 2010…) is simply a falsehood. Lots of regular and quite accomplished, gracious, and trained/untrained musicians and clerics are very familiar with the documents and work DAILY to not only speak their minds about proper worship in the marketplace of parish commerce, but implement corrections, quietly re-orient repertoires, train singers to read and sing using “archaic” as well as conventional notation and with adjusted choral techniques that differ from chant to polyphony to hymn to song. We are all dealt hands of problems and providences in our liturgical vocations; deal with those, as was mentioned, with love and charity at heart first. I’ve spent too many years on this planet letting anger be my energy source- it hasn’t helped one iota. I don’t want to go all Rodney King here, so I’ll cease with this homily.
One thing I’d like to offer YoungTradCatholic: a while back in the thread you made a correlation, almost analogy, comparing the posture of making the sign of the cross theoretically the same as music. Two words: inestimabile donum. There is no higher art in liturgy than sacred music. That’s in black and white in official documents.

 

[Brendan_64]

Why do people feel the need to ‘jazz’ up the Liturgy and ‘modernise’ through using pop music?

Mass shouldn’t be about entertaining the congregation or shoving in songs here and there. I feel there should only be 3 hymns at Mass (the Entrance, the Offertory, and the Closing) and these should be of a suitably reverent form. I think we ought not to have a Communion hymn, as this should be a time for people to solemnly reflect.

Mass isn’t about singing songs that sound nice, hymns are prayers, not something geared to appeal to modern musical tastes.

When did you last hear someone say, “I’m going to go to Mass more often because my church has got some really good foot-tapping music”?

 

[agapewolf]

When did you last hear someone say, “I’m going to go to Mass more often because my church has got some really good foot-tapping music”?

All the time actually. And then many of them started going to adoration, some on a retreat, etc.

 

[opus101]

All the time actually. And then many of them started going to adoration, some on a retreat, etc.

How about inviting them to a foot-tapping retreat, songfest, etc. first, preferrably one that catechizes about the Mass , and how it is very different than that particular get-together? THEN they can “start going” to Mass.

Personally, I think we’ve sometimes gotten everything backwards.

 

[opus101]

When one considers all the devotional time they put in, I find it hard to argue that they are not more well-versed in pastoral guidance than the classically trained organist. Musical expertise is only half of the equation in deciding music for a parish.

Agreed, but one of my concerns is that BOTH are necessary. For instance, if a Bishop or priest has a very limited background in music, so much so that he cannot discern the difference (musically, not just textually) between a popular religious song and a popular sacred hymn, he may THINK that he is acting in accordance with Church directives by selecting a certain piece of music, but , in effect, be way off the mark.

Another concern is that this mistake will have its effect (as it most certainly has) on the faithful and on their view of the Mass and their religious formation. There is a REASON why the Church has always been so very careful about the style of music used in the sacred liturgy. The directives are not made up by a bunch of pharisees who just like to make up rules, and although it may seem that some of those who support them act that way sometimes, there are those who are sincerely concerned about all of this out of love for Christ and His Church, and out of love for souls.

Although it is true that some people “like” the questionable selections, and think that it helps to stir up religious feelings in them, it has to also be said that the same is true for the non-denom mega church members down the street. That type of music does not have the Catholic understanding of worship (the holy sacrifice of the Mass) as its end. It is something for outside of the Mass.

I think that many people, including priests and bishops, are unable to make the distinctions that need to be made. Pastorally, they know their flock and its needs - and surely, with the very vast repertoire of sacred music that exists, and the new selections being composed as we dialog here, they can (with the assistance of other priests and bishops who are more expert in the area than they are) make suitable choices.

I agree with you that it is the local Bishop who makes the decisions. My question is not about why there is variation from diocese to diocese, nor is it about why there is a variety of interpretations about magisterial directives that are not very specific. I want to know why very understandable, clear directives are sometimes disregarded completely, and why it seems that not many people have the least bit of a conscience problem with that.

 

[pnewton]

For instance, if a Bishop or priest has a very limited background in music, so much so that he cannot discern the difference (musically, not just textually) between a popular religious song and a popular sacred hymn, he may THINK that he is acting in accordance with Church directives by selecting a certain piece of music, but , …

The more I think about it, the less I think musical training is relevant, as every priest is taught the basics. Setting aside the extreme examples that people like posting from YouTube (or where a priest really knows better, let’s say), and looking strictly at the music a priest might select who does not have expertise in music as appropriate. He thinks it is fine based on the needs of the parish and the education he has received, albeit limited. I can not see where it would matter if some expert on liturgy who is not present might not see it as appropriate. If it takes an expert to recognize such inappropriateness, then it should only matter to that level of expertise, not the 99.99% of Catholics lacking this education.

I just can’t imagine God has preference in time signatures and keys. This level of particular perfection in liturgy seems to be way beyond what the Church is teaching. Pop music can be inappropriate because of the attitude that the secular is befitting for liturgy. I see that. However, absence the attitude, I see no offense to God for those who truly try and follow these principles, expert or doofus.

 

[opus101]

I can not see where it would matter if some expert on liturgy who is not present might not see it as appropriate. If it takes an expert to recognize such inappropriateness, then it should only matter to that level of expertise, not the 99.99% of Catholics lacking this education.

First of all, it shouldn’t take an “expert” to recognize such appropriateness. Unfortunately, we’ve had such a bad musical situation in the Church for so many decades that, due to lack of enough exposure to sacred music, it is harder for many to tell the difference. (May I repeat that I’m not talking about you or your parish? I’m speaking in general, from my own experiences in my area and surrounding cities.) Our frame of reference is completely clouded over.

Also, it SHOULD matter to all, not just those with the background to understand the situation more clearly. There are real spiritual and doctrinal formation issues at hand that are effected by the music, and not just the lyrics. The style of music reflects what we believe about the Mass, and it also effects our perceptions about the holiness of what is happening there. Music has a huge effect on us psychologically as well. It has the effect to make us swoon, cry, feel religious, etc., when we otherwise wouldn’t. It can keep us trapped in an emotional type of spiritual jail fed only by the senses, making us associate worship with pure emotionalism, sometimes effecting a kind of passing “enthusiasm” as described by Dr. Alice von Hildebrand and Msgr. Ronald Knox. This might not be something that many of you have experienced numerous times, but I certainly have. Evidently, it is something that we have had to deal with repeatedly throughout the history of the Church. Personally, I think it is happening again with regard to sacred music. ronaldknoxsociety.com/enthus.html

I just can’t imagine God has preference in time signatures and keys.

Who intimated such a thing? And we haven’t even mentioned anything about time signatures and keys. I don’t even see how those things play into sacred vs. secular music. When you say this it makes it seem like this is what the discussion has been about.

This level of particular perfection in liturgy seems to be way beyond what the Church is teaching.

Oy. I guess we will have to notify Bishops Sample and Olmsted and the Holy Father and let them know that they are expecting a “particular perfection in liturgy” that is “way beyond” what the Church is teaching…but wait…they are the teaching Church…

Also, you make it seem as if it is an unattainable goal for the average parish. How hard is it to sing a hymn? How hard would it be to learn to sing the responses in the simple chant that is printed right there in the missal? I imagine that you do this and more, but you seem to not be as aware of what goes on, on a very regular basis, in other areas of the country.

Pop music can be inappropriate because of the attitude that the secular is befitting for liturgy. I see that. However, absence the attitude, I see no offense to God for those who truly try and follow these principles, expert or doofus.

Again, this is always what happens in these threads. No matter how much one stresses that the criticism is not toward individuals, and no matter how often one explains that it is not being suggested that sins are being committed by the individuals involved (due to ignorance or even due to the fact that no one in authority explains or enforces the teachings), someone always comes up with statements such as this.
It casts a bad light on others, making it seem that they were speaking on behalf of God, or judging others.

 

[pnewton]

Oy. I guess we will have to notify Bishops Sample and Olmsted and the Holy Father and let them know that they are expecting a “particular perfection in liturgy” that is “way beyond” what the Church is teaching…but wait…they are the teaching Church…

As you said,“Who intimated such a thing?” I was not referring to them. The guidelines by Bishops Sample are only slightly more specific than the Church and still leave a wide range.

Also, you make it seem as if it is an unattainable goal for the average parish.

That would depend on what you mean by “it”. Good liturgy and music in accordance to Church teaching is very attainable. Good liturgy and music in accordance with the interpretation of a profession liturgist or an “expert” in musc is irrelevant.

How hard would it be to learn to sing the responses in the simple chant that is printed right there in the missal?

Yes, but why? Bishop Sample has mandated another setting in his diocese, for example. Chant may not be the best option everywhere. The Church allows for diversity, not narrowness.

 

[opus101]

In addition, some might be interested in these statements made by Msgr.Knox in his book “Enthusiasms”. I think that similarities can be drawn from them that relate to the current situation of sacred music in the Catholic Church.

I will continually make this disclaimer: this is not intended to depict any of the people who have been posting in this thread. However, it seems to relate to things that I have experienced personally in my area and the surrounding cities.

“…at the root lies a different theology of grace.”

“…the issue is between some kind of authority and unrestrained private judgement.”

'…the issue hangs on the question whether the Divine Fact is something given, or something to be inferred."

 

[opus101]

As you said,“Who intimated such a thing?” I was not referring to them. The guidelines by Bishops Sample are only slightly more specific than the Church and still leave a wide range.

No one has spoken of any other guidelines than those. No one has said that there isn’t a wide range, in fact it has been said that there is a huge, vast repertoire of sacred music to choose from. You are making it seem that this thread has attempted go beyond the Church and insert interpretations and suggestions that have not already been clearly stated. In fact, this thread is only about what has been very specifically said by Bishop Sample and the Church, and has not gone beyond it.

Good liturgy and music in accordance to Church teaching is very attainable. Good liturgy and music in accordance with the interpretation of a profession liturgist or an “expert” in musc is irrelevant.

And what is your point? I don’t recall anyone talking about professional liturgists. And whether or not a person might be an “expert” in music is not the issue, but they certainly DO need to be able to make distinctions, objectively, between compositional styles of music or they might end up turning the musical aspects of a Mass into something that is quite unfitting for the holiest action on earth.
You speak of “interpretation”, but I’m not (as I’ve said) speaking of things that are cloudy and up for interpretation. I’m speaking about very clear, straight-out information. Sacred music versus popular religious music.

Yes, but why? Bishop Sample has mandated another setting in his diocese, for example. Chant may not be the best option verywhere.

Good grief, P. You seem to want to paint a picture of what has been going on here which is not in accord with reality. No one said that chant was the best option everywhere. But since you said it might not be a good option for some places, can you give me some reasons why not? I’m referring to the use of some of the simple chant as is printed for the ordinary in our Missals. AND REMEMBER, I am NOT saying that it is the best option for everyone. Maybe I should, but I’m not.

from “Rejoice in the Lord Always” p. 14):

“It must also be recognized that some parishes and missions simply do not have the same pool of trained and qualified musicians as others. This does not mean that they should not also benefit from a prayerful and sung celebration of the Mass. It might mean that simpler forms of sacred music such as simple sacred plainchant and hymnody would best fit the occasion and the local situation. In small churches and congregations, more instruments and cantors singing into a microphone and amplified throughout the church is not the solution. Simple and basic forms of sacred music, done well and sung by the congregation can create a more solemn and beautiful celebration of the Mass. It is worth noting that a Sung Mass need not be elaborate and the principle of noble simplicity should guide it.”

P., you also said “The Church allows for diversity, not narrowness”. I’m practically speechless. It has been emphasized over and over again that the repertoire of sacred music comprised of chant, hymns, psalms and more is terribly vast and inexhaustable.
It is not narrow. Furthermore, it is what it is, and it isn’t what it isn’t.

.

 

[pnewton]

. And whether or not a person might be an “expert” in music is not the issue, but they certainly DO need to be able to make distinctions, objectively, between compositional styles of music or they might end up turning the musical aspects of a Mass into something that is quite unfitting for the holiest action on earth.
You speak of “interpretation”, but I’m not (as I’ve said) speaking of things that are cloudy and up for interpretation. I’m speaking about very clear, straight-out information. Sacred music versus popular religious music.

I think this is the base of our disagreement. I do not think the issue of music is as objective as you seem to. I think the disparity in music throughout the Church, and even this discussion is a testament to just how all music cannot be objectively classified to universally fit all situations. The very wording of the Church documents lead me to believe that this is not an objective issue.

 

[opus101]

I think this is the base of our disagreement. I do not think the issue of music is as objective as you seem to. I think the disparity in music throughout the Church, and even this discussion is a testament to just how all music cannot be objectively classified to universally fit all situations. The very wording of the Church documents lead me to believe that this is not an objective issue.

O…M…Gsh. I need a drink.

 

[opus101]

I think this is the base of our disagreement. I do not think the issue of music is as objective as you seem to. I think the disparity in music throughout the Church, and even this discussion is a testament to just how all music cannot be objectively classified to universally fit all situations. The very wording of the Church documents lead me to believe that this is not an objective issue.

The issue of music may not be that objective when we are talking about the interpretation of a certain piece, or about a certain composer. We might have very different approaches to performing a Chopin “Nocturne”, or a Bach “Prelude and Fugue” - nevertheless, the Chopin Nocturne remains a Chopin Nocturne, the Bach Fugue, a Bach Fugue.

Music is an art, and therefore highly subject to interpretation.

BUT that’s not what we’re talking about!!!

We’re talking about sacred music versus religious pop/rock music. There is enough of the accepted sacred music to fill your whole career as church musician and to fit any occasion. If not, then a spoken Mass is not illicit.

There is no situation where one is required to profer profane/secular music in the sacred liturgy. It can always be done with no music at all, if that situation would ever arise, which it wouldn’t.