A
ArthurQArch
Guest
Is it just me, or is today’s liturgical music geared toward females? I know that question sounds a little harsh, but it seems to be 90% fluffy emotionalism with no real substance.:harp:
Can you provide an example or two of what you mean ? How exactly is it geared towards females? And are you seriously implying that ‘fluffy emotionalism with no real substance’ is the kind of liturgical music that appeals to women ?Is it just me, or is today’s liturgical music geared toward females? I know that question sounds a little harsh, but it seems to be 90% fluffy emotionalism with no real substance.:harp:
Ummmm…maybe you ought to quit while you are ahead. I don’t think we ladies are going to take too kindly to the implication that all that appeals to us is fluffy emotionalism with no real substance.Is it just me, or is today’s liturgical music geared toward females? I know that question sounds a little harsh, but it seems to be 90% fluffy emotionalism with no real substance.:harp:
*I truly just stumbled into this thread…and I see this??? hahaha That’s funny!Can you provide an example or two of what you mean ? How exactly is it geared towards females? And are you seriously implying that ‘fluffy emotionalism with no real substance’ is the kind of liturgical music that appeals to women ?
Over to you, whatevergirl :tiphat:
![]()
Good one!Do you mean hymns like On This Day O Beautiful Mother, Immaculate Mary, Sing of Mary, Hail Holy Queen Enthroned Above, or some good ole classics like Mother Dear O Pray For Me, Ave Maris Stella, Mother Dearest Mother Fairest, Hail Queen of Heaven, Rose of the Cross? Then the answer is yes![]()
I admit to a lack of understanding of most women. But you all seemed to miss the sarcastism, e.g. the little gal playing her flute. That being said, some specific music that makes me want to grab my “seamless garment” and dance a jig on the pew are modern “classics” like Rain Down, Gather Us In, Lord of the Dance, or Peace is Flowing.CB Catholic,
The implication that women, as a gender, are fluffy, emotional and of no real substance indicates to me a lack of knowledge and understanding of women.
I should have felt insulted by this comment for myself and for all people of the female gender, but I couldn’t help but giggle when I read this. Surely, the OP isn’t serious.Is it just me, or is today’s liturgical music geared toward females? I know that question sounds a little harsh, but it seems to be 90% fluffy emotionalism with no real substance.:harp:
I initially had the same reaction until I thought about it. My parochial vicar noted, in a homily, that somehow, society has been “Oprah-fied” in that everything is about warm and fuzzy feelings. Even the Holy Father made a similar observation when he noted, in his book, Jesus of Nazareth, that we should not make a caricature of Jesus, merely considering him as some benevolent person. That is not the Jesus of the Gospels.I should have felt insulted by this comment for myself and for all people of the female gender, but I couldn’t help but giggle when I read this. Surely, the OP isn’t serious.
As a female, I care little for a number of the songs written for liturgy within the last few decades. This is mainly because most of it is too superficial for me, lacks little depth and is poorly written. In regards to giving certain kinds of music a gender, I don’t really think that can be done. As someone else mentioned, many of those songs were written by men. There is a side I think in all people (unless you are really hardened) in which they have a thing for the saccharine and the corny - including myself. I don’t want it in my spiritual life, although I know I must have liked it when I was a child because I remember liking certain cutsie songs for mass, although was always in awe whenever I heard something deep and majestic. There are adults who still want the saccharine and the corny in their liturgical music for various reasons - men and women. I will grant that it’s less men than women. Although, if I remember correctly, I saw a lot of men and women in the 80s doing the “fluffy”, pseudo-folk like music hymns of their young adulthood from the 60s/70s at mass. My dad liked that stuff back then too. He thinks it’s horrible and really superficial today, but his spiritual life has grown a lot too.
I have found many of the compositions in Spirit and Song, as well as United in Christ/Unidos en Cristo, to lack that much-needed emphasis that the USCCB noted. In fact, most, if not all, of the composition written by Bob Hurd, Bernadette Ferrell, Cary Landry, Christopher Walker, Marty Haugen, David Haas, Fr. Ricky Manolo, CSP, the SLJ, and, Mary Frances Reza, have that lackluster deficiency. Most of them are about feelings and syruppy things and very few do not have an authentic Sensus Fidei, sense of the Faith. In fact, they manage to water down the Faith, as evidenced in such ditties as “Come to the Feast/Ven al Banquete”, “O Love of God/O Amor de Dios”, “Christ, Be our Light”, “Song of the Body of Christ”, “Gather Us In”, “Hail Mary/Gentle Woman” (the second half of that song is pretty bad; the musicality is awful), “Only a Shadow” and others.Is there an obscured presentation of the centrality of Christ in salvation history and an insufficient emphasis on the divinity of Christ? Do our liturgical songs present Jesus as the culmination of the Old Testament and the fulfillment of God’s plan for our salvation? Is the indispensable place of the incarnation in the plan of salvation sufficiently presented? Is Jesus the Savior often overshadowed by Jesus the teacher, model, friend, and brother? Is there an appropriate balance? Is there an imbalance in our emphasis on the humanity or divinity of Jesus Christ? At times, can we detect a negative undertone in speaking of the divine nature of Christ, as if divinity is equated with being “distant and unreal.”
The last jig I saw danced in a pew was a 3 year old who had to go potty. I can’t remember if “Rain Down” was being sung.I know I shouldn’t be laughing, but the whole dancing a jig comment…I am sorry, that’s funny.
![]()
I don’t see the link between fluffy emotionalism with no real substance and feminism. Perhaps modern church music has been created to match most sermons.Is it just me, or is today’s liturgical music geared toward females? I know that question sounds a little harsh, but it seems to be 90% fluffy emotionalism with no real substance.:harp:
It really wasn’t written to be sung by the assembly. It was a choir piece written for a funeral.I forgot to add that I loathe “On Eagles Wings.” One of the worst liturgical pieces I’ve ever heard. Everybody seems to love it and nobody can sing it. But everybody tries.
Actually, the melody of “Lord of the Dance”, when it’s not sung like a jig with really bad text as is it in our hymnals, can be very beautiful. In vocal art song recitals, it is sung with the original Shaker text (“Simple Gifts”) and with much more elegance and refinement. It’s one of my favorites to do in the English portion of my recitals.ArchQArch,
Lord of the Dance is actually very old. It just wasn’t Catholic. Some of the contemporary liturgical music is simplistic so people who ordinarily wouldn’t sing will be encouraged to do so. But there’s a lot of good contemporary liturgical music, too. A lot of the responsorials that came out of OCP in the late 80’s and early 90’s were absolutely beautiful. I’m thinking especially of “The Cry of the Poor”. I loved, still love but don’t hear it played much anymore, “You Are Mine.” There was plenty of emotionalism and “fluffiness” in the old music, too. There were some downright tear-jerking, sentimental hymns we sang in the 50’s that even then I thought must have appealed only to the elderly ladies who said the Rosary all through Mass. Sentimentality isn’t the exclusive domain of contemporary liturgical music.