Fr. Zuhlsdorf answers the question, "Why Gregorian chant is better than 'Gather Us In' "

  • Thread starter Thread starter marthaferretti
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Lol exactly! It’s the first I’ve ever heard anyone say they dislike or hate Gregorian Chant. Even those who prefer not to participate or have chant in the mass still appreciate its value or artistic form. Heck, just read some of the comment on YouTube, some people are self-proclaimed atheist, but they say they still love the beauty of it.
You probably don’t associate with the kind of people who dislike Gregorian chant. I know lots of people who dislike chant. (I also know lots of people who like chant.)

My feelings about music are as valid as yours. My feelings about music have been formed over 54 years by my life setting and circumstances. Yours have been formed by your life setting and circumstances. Neither is invalid.
As a person who loved to paint and draw in high school, and I ended up in “honors art” so I must know something to art, it annoys me when people try to compare the amazing art of the past that has stood the trials of time with “contemporary art” which in all honesty I can’t find much meaning to it. I usually call it the lazy man art, because it seems the these artist are just trying to separate themselves and try something different, but unfortunately their art just doesn’t look like art.
Just because you can’t find meaning doesn’t mean that meaning doesn’t exist. I personally have no liking for chant and can’t see anything in it, but I accept and appreciate that OTHERS do like it and find it deeply meaningful.
It may be our opinion that Chant holds a higher place in musical worship, but it’s also the opinion of the fathers of Vatican two, many saints, and popes.
Ah, here’s an error. It is NOT our “opinion” that chant holds a higher place in Catholic liturgical worship. That is a statement of the Church. Therefore it should be honored and if possible, obeyed, and those of us who do not like chant have to learn to accept and appreciate it, even if we don’t like it personally.

In the same way, just because Gregorian chant holds a place of honor in the Mass, the Church has not declared all other music forbidden. What this means is that, out of respect for Holy Mother Church, those who do not like all other music forms must find a way to accept the musical forms and seek to appreciate what they bring to the liturgy.

Keep in mind that “musical worship” encompasses more than Mass. I can worship through music while sitting in my living room, or driving, or taking a walk. It is only in the liturgy of the Mass that Gregorian chant has been deemed by the Church as having a higher place than all the other musical forms.
 
////Taking" sounds like you’re reaching into the ciborium or at least has that kind of connotation///

Why did I see Cardinals during a papal mass doing exactly this?
Next time I see a papal Mass, I will have to pay closer attention, but just guessing at your question:

Why did I see Cardinals during a papal mass doing exactly this?

Probably, the Cardinals are con-celebrating the Mass with the Holy Father.

If you can recall the specifics, at the Consecration, each of the Cardinals probably held up his hand and also performed the Consecration.

And then all of them together consumed the Consecrated Host at the same time.
 
You probably don’t associate with the kind of people who dislike Gregorian chant. I know lots of people who dislike chant. (I also know lots of people who like chant.)

My feelings about music are as valid as yours. My feelings about music have been formed over 54 years by my life setting and circumstances. Yours have been formed by your life setting and circumstances. Neither is invalid.
First of all with all due respect you know nothing about my life. I didn’t grow up in pre-vat2 era, and I am not a music major, I don’t even know how to read music. I grew spanish guitar mass worship. Gregorian was never thought to me, the only time I would hear it were in the movies that hollywood made. Is Gregorian my preffered choice of music in “daily life”? No not really, but when it comes to worship and prayer in my heart it does hold the highest honor.
Just because you can’t find meaning doesn’t mean that meaning doesn’t exist. I personally have no liking for chant and can’t see anything in it, but I accept and appreciate that OTHERS do like it and find it deeply meaningful.
Meaning could be there and I know it’s my opinon which it really does not matter, but modern art which makes no sence like the last supper homosexuality, christ in a cup of urine or nude virgin marry is just wrong and it has no meaning. The same applies to contemporary art in my view, but thats my view as I said it’s the lazy mans art anyone can do it with out any talent.
Ah, here’s an error. It is NOT our “opinion” that chant holds a higher place in Catholic liturgical worship. That is a statement of the Church. Therefore it should be honored and if possible, obeyed, and those of us who do not like chant have to learn to accept and appreciate it, even if we don’t like it personally.

In the same way, just because Gregorian chant holds a place of honor in the Mass, the Church has not declared all other music forbidden. What this means is that, out of respect for Holy Mother Church, those who do not like all other music forms must find a way to accept the musical forms and seek to appreciate what they bring to the liturgy.

Keep in mind that “musical worship” encompasses more than Mass. I can worship through music while sitting in my living room, or driving, or taking a walk. It is only in the liturgy of the Mass that Gregorian chant has been deemed by the Church as having a higher place than all the other musical forms.
When I said our opinoin I meant to include those memebers in CAF who share my opinion, which as you can see are plenty in the TC forum sorry I did not make myself much clearer. I never said there is no room for other reverent beutiful music, but what I see is that we have become so lazy as a society and have been put the fear that chant would be too hard to learn or much worst it is never revealed to the young generation which happened to me. The reason? Because young people don’t like that old dead music so they give us happy clappy music which almost all teens, inlcuding my self when I was a teen, find cheesy and even boring.
 
Because only Gordon Lightfoot can sing “Gather us in” properly? 🤷
 
I know next to nothing about music in the Liturgy

What I sense is wrong with many of the “Gather us in” type music is that it draws too much attention to itself outside of the flow of the Mass. The integration seems lost so easily, like a musical interlude rather than an integral part of the Mass.

For some reason chant doesn’t seem to draw so much attention to itself.

We must decrease, and He must increase, as St John reminds us.
 
But that’s just it. Pitches that can be added or subtracted as needed so the theological meaning isn’t compromised. In chant you can do that; in what we call hymns today, you can’t, or at least it’s difficult. You try to find the right syllables, and often even verses full of them, to fit some catchy tune. What’s your focus, writing something Mass-related and theologically correct or finding clever semi-spiritual, semi-secular lyrics to sell to a semi-perceptive crowd?
As a trumpet player, I will be the first to tell you that I refuse to do any meddling with lyrics (except maybe to fix grammar…but not with Sacred music). The Mass part settings I’ve written don’t use secular lyrics, and I don’t touch anything that’s not public domain (thus I only use the Latin texts…), and I go WAY out of my way to find the full texts with all of the accents on the letters. (Keep in mind that because I’m not the best at vocal music, and thus a complete collection of my Mass parts would consist of 2 Kyries and a Sanctus. Symphonic writing is easier for me, not that I wouldn’t like to write a few good Mass settings that can get Mass o’ Creation of the top of the list of Mass settings that are played too often.) Also, catchy tunes are easier for a congregation to sing with than chant, which is why people tend to use them more.

And Markomalley, my comments weren’t aimed at you specifically. I’ve seen the same assumption many times when reading through music threads. (But you happened to be the one to post it in THIS thread…:D) It’s not a hard conclusion to come to because Martin Luther was very prolific in his hymn writing (many of which are simply German translations of Latin texts, but most of them aren’t in Catholic hymnals save, “Ein Feste Burg” (which shouldn’t even be thought of within six miles of a Catholic Church, and one or two other ones). Austria and Bavaria, however remained mostly Catholic and were the biggest contributor to classic favorites like “Grosser Gott”. I’m of German decent, and Germans sing (or in my case, play) in Church like Italians talk with hands.:rolleyes: One only needs to hear Biber’s great “Missa Salisburgensis” to understand. (Just be careful…the 3+ organs, and hoards of timpani, trumpets. and singers could be…less that nice to your eardrums.:D:p)
 
That is the opinion of one Priest, one who obviously does not like, or appreciate, contemporary music.

Hate to inform you, but at one time, Gregorian Chant was also new, and perceived to be “different” and “unsuitable”.
GChant dates back to the beginning of the Church. The Jewish practice of chanting the psalms was carried over. It was called Gregorian after Pope Gregory who codified the melodies.
The participation of the people is a LOT more important than whether or not a piece of music has a long history with the church.****
Participation is above all else internal not external. The external participation envisaged before, during and after the council involved the chanting of the dialogue between the priest and people at Mass amongst bodily gestures etc.
Do we go back to those days, when, “The difference between Protestants and Catholics is that Catholics don’t sing”?.
All the Parishes I’ve ever been to the people haven’t sung, save a few. Why? The lyrics are boring and don’t rhyme and adequately catechise and the melodies are too hard to sing esp. when compared to simple chant.

The Entrance, Offertory and Communion Chants (yes they are called Chants) were traditionally the domain of the choir. Singing 4 songs is the last option.

Musicam Sacram stated that “but the second and third, wholly or partially, may never be used without the first. In this way the faithful will be continually led towards an ever greater participation in the singing (#28).” The first is the dialogue between the Priest and people.
I pray every day that the “traditionalists” never get sway over the Church again. If they do, they will drive out a very large proportion of the Roman Catholic faithful.
Vat II say GChant should be given principium Locum (first place) in liturgical services, that it should be fostered. It is the music proper to the Roman Rite (most Catholics) according to the Church. Yet other music seems to have first place over Gregorian Chant…
 
Actually "Gather us in " and “bult a city of God” fit nicely with Catholic Doctrine. THe mass is a communial worship and Christ called us to build the Kingdom, to bring it here on earth.
Gather us in has the line
“…not in some heaven light years away…”
but what about the heavnely Liturgy?
the heavenly reality of the Mass?

Vat II: "…the purpose of sacred music, which is the glory of God and the sanctification of the faithful…(SC #112)
 
Gather us in has the line
“…not in some heaven light years away…”
but what about the heavnely Liturgy?
the heavenly reality of the Mass?

Vat II: "…the purpose of sacred music, which is the glory of God and the sanctification of the faithful…(SC #112)
One need deep humility to understand that we are not God.

God is the fulness of everything, we live in a world which is constructed from contradicting elements, and at one time we can see only one element.

Yes, there is heavenly Liturgy, heavenly Mass, but also there are the earthly obligations, and those fill up most of the times of our life. We can reach the heavenly only buy fulfilling the earthly obligations, this is out sanctification.
 
One need deep humility to understand that we are not God.

God is the fulness of everything, we live in a world which is constructed from contradicting elements, and at one time we can see only one element.

Yes, there is heavenly Liturgy, heavenly Mass, but also there are the earthly obligations, and those fill up most of the times of our life. We can reach the heavenly only buy fulfilling the earthly obligations, this is out sanctification.
At the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass we enter into the Heavenly Liturgy. Our music should reflect this.
 
All the Parishes I’ve ever been to the people haven’t sung, save a few. Why? The lyrics are boring and don’t rhyme and adequately catechise and the melodies are too hard to sing esp. when compared to simple chant.
This is a very simplistic and inadequate explanation of why people, specifically Catholics at Mass, don’t sing.

Do you honestly think that the lyrics to great modern hymns like How Great Thou Art are boring? Or traditional hymns like Crown Him With Many Crowns?

As for not rhyming–isn’t that one of the characteristics of most chant? So if people don’t sing hymns because they don’t rhyme, then it follows that they certainly won’t sing chant because it doesn’t rhyme either.

As for the songs not adequately catechising people–well, if people don’t understand the poetry in a hymn, then yes, they will come away confused. (I personally think that some people deliberately choose to be obtuse when it comes to the poetry in songs like Gather Us In, but I am probably being uncharitable . After all, there is a lot of poetry that I don’t understand.)

So how will Latin chant make catechesis more likely? Most of us do not know Latin.

I assume we will follow along with the English (or whatever language) translation. Of course, we have to assume that that translation is done correctly. That is one of the dangers of being catechized in a foreign language.

But of course we should be able to trust our Church to make sure that the translations are correct, right?

Oh, wait–many don’t seem to be able to trust the Church now. After all, the Church allows songs like Gather Us In in the Mass.

So why should people trust the Church to give correct translation of Latin texts when the Church has clearly made a huge mistake in allowing a “four hymn” Mass, and allowing hymns like Gather Us In and not enforcing the “Gregorian chant place of prominence” statement in local parishes all over the world? Obviously the Church is not to be trusted, right?

Do you see the danger of accepting some teachings but not others?

I know all about this from 47 years of experience in the evangelical Protestant churches.

Catholic friends, don’t do this. Accept ALL that the Church teaches us.

If you don’t like Gather Us In, that’s OK, since we are all entitled to our opinion which will be shaped by our life circumstances and upbringing. But don’t undermine the Church by stating that hymns like this are “wrong” for the Mass, or that the “4 hymn setting” is “wrong” for the Mass. The Church has said that these things are acceptable–why does anyone challenge that? Defend your Church, don’t undermine her.

Finally, you say that the melodies are too hard. I say that people are smarter than that. If people can’t learn the melodies of hymns that have been sung for almost 40 years, then they will most certainly never, ever be able to learn how to sing amelodic chant, or read Latin, and certainly they will never be able to simultaneously sing or listen to Latin and read a translation.

The melodies are NOT too hard, neither are they too high. LIttle children learn these melodies and sing them well. As for the range–the hymns in our missalettes and hymnals are written in the alto/bass (lower voice) ranges. If people have learned how to sing correctly, they can sing these hymns.

And even if they can’t sing them for some reason (post nasal drip from allergy season), they can listen raptly and enthusiastically, which is what the Church asks us to do when we come to Mass.

And we can pray the words and ask the Holy Spirit to use the songs, even the songs we don’t like, to teach us what God wants us to know.

I honestly think that all of us need to lose the attitude here and do what our Church tells us to do in all things, not just the things we like.

Yes, that means working towards including Gregorian chant in Mass, although I think that it is not such a simple goal as some of you think it is. For most of us in the U.S., Gregorian chant is something foreign and new, and we need to learn it. But at the moment, there are not enough “teachers” in the U.S. Even though some people believe that we can learn from online sources, that really doesn’t work for most of us, especially older people.

**I think that those people who want Gregorian chant restored to a prominent place in the Mass should come up with a plan to train more teachers and come up with another plan to make sure that these teachers are distributed throughout the U.S. into all the dioceses and are adequately funded to be able to bring their knowledge to parishes and help believers to learn and love Gregorian chant. **

You see, it’s not as easy as you want to think it is. This sounds like something that will take several years, if not more, to implement. You don’t change a musical culture in a few months, especially with no teachers. And as you know from your past experience after Vatican II, you don’t rush in and make changes overnight, because you will lose a great many people. Even though sometimes it seems like it would be a good thing to lose all the chaff out of the Church, we really don’t want to lose any of Christ’s people, do we?

**So IMO, this thread should change from being a rant against Gather Us In and become a thread discussing strategies for making Gregorian chant the pre-eminent music form in all Masses in the U.S. **

That would be a much more constructive use of time and mental energy. Oh, yes, it’s easier and much more fun to bash the music forms that others love, and come up with clever and witty insults against “Gather Us In.”

But why not put your cleverness and wit to good use and come up with some realistic ways to obey Holy Mother Church and restore Gregorian chant? 🙂
 
Gather us in has the line
“…not in some heaven light years away…”
but what about the heavnely Liturgy?
the heavenly reality of the Mass?

Vat II: "…the purpose of sacred music, which is the glory of God and the sanctification of the faithful…(SC #112)
Christ called us to build the Kingdom of God here and now. when we gather to worship we are building the Kingdom, in the mas we are connected to the saints, God is present, Christ is with us , the Holy Spirit fills us, along with all the choirs of angels. The mass is heaven on earth.
The verse is the song is to rmind us of that fact. An no matter what songs are sungs or how the liturgy happens, it is still heaven because our Lord is present.
 
I find it interesting how different people define what is appropriate and more Catholic by pointing to certain dates. Traditionalists have a fixed set of dates between which they claim authentic Catholicism is practiced and anything outside of those dates is less than authentic. More progressive Catholics point to a different set of dates as their argument for where Catholicism lives.

Also, isn’t it strange how traditionalists and modern Catholics support their positions based on the teaching authority of the Church when it suits their position and rail against the Magisterium when it doesn’t support their argument. Very curious.
 
Allelu Allelu Allelu Alleluia."

I HATE that one!!!
This is a children’s song.

We sang it at VBS, camps, Pioneer Clubs, other children’s meetings.

And usually we sang it with very young children ages 8 and under. It is an “active” song, where the children stand up and sit down during certain phrases of the song. We also had them raise their hands during the “Praise Ye The Lord” lines. It’s lots of fun, and it’s a great way to work some wiggles out of active little bodies. (Catholics do the same thing in Mass, with all the sitting and standing and kneeling at appropriate times.)

It isn’t meant to be a liturgical song. It’s one of the “singspiration” songs, created to be sung in a singspiration service." It is usually never sung in a worship service, unless it was arranged in a more “formal” setting. I’ve heard that done, and it’s very pretty. The song actually has a very pretty melody, although usually it’s sung fast and melody isn’t the point. The point is to have fun praising the Lord together.

I’m not going to criticize you for “hating” this little children’s song. I just want to make sure you realize exactly what this song is–a children’s song. To me, it makes no sense for a grownup to “hate” a children’s song. What matters is how children feel about it. And also what matters is that it is sung in the proper setting–in children’s meetings like VBS, camps, etc.
 
GChant dates back to the beginning of the Church. The Jewish practice of chanting the psalms was carried over. It was called Gregorian after Pope Gregory who codified the melodies.
No it doesn’t. Gregorian Chant was codified in the 10-13th centuries and was named after Pope St. Gregory the Great as a marketing ploy. It likely arose from a Carolingian synthesis of Roman and Gallican chant.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregorian_chant#History
 
Gregorian chant might have been new at one point in time, but it has stood the trials of time to end up the preffered choice of music for the Latin Rite.
I’ve never understood this argument, specifically the ramifications and correlates of it. How long does a piece need to survive before it is deemed worthy for the liturgy? What happens in the interim? Does it stay under the radar for 100 years being hated by some, loved by others? By what criteria should a piece survive? Is there no room for innovation?
 
I find it interesting how different people define what is appropriate and more Catholic by pointing to certain dates. Traditionalists have a fixed set of dates between which they claim authentic Catholicism is practiced and anything outside of those dates is less than authentic. More progressive Catholics point to a different set of dates as their argument for where Catholicism lives.

Also, isn’t it strange how traditionalists and modern Catholics support their positions based on the teaching authority of the Church when it suits their position and rail against the Magisterium when it doesn’t support their argument. Very curious.
It is interesting. We are all Catholics but what I find much mote interesting are those who want a strick interpetation of Church Doctrine, such as with the chant, saying that the church is not a demracracy, but yet want to continue to question practices approved by the Church, such a recieving communion in one’s hand instead of on the tongue.
You are right in saying many pick and choose based on were they think thinks should be, instead of putting faith in the leadership of the magisterium as guided by the Holy Spirit.

Music is a very personal thing, it is capable of setting the mood for the liturgy and to relate to the readings. There are reasons, based on sound liturgical bases to use differnt music for the different times of the Church. The chant and indeed one style of music cannot meet all the different facets needed for the liturgy.
The Magisterium, knowing this, encorages the continual development of sacred music and different mass settings.
There will be lots of new music, revised older music, including new settings of the chant with the revised missal. Some is good, and some so as much. It would though as be a mistake and an error in teaching as Fr. Z suggest, that the Chant should be the only music used in sacred liturgy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top