How's the Music?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mathias64
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Mathias64

Guest
I’d llike to get a first hand spread of opinions on what music is “preferred” and “proper” at Mass. I will start by saying I prefer very contemporay music. In fact, my band and I wrote our own rock-style mass when Lifeteen first started here. We played it every Sunday for 2 years, and everyone seemed to love it. Then, as the program took off, an equally contemporary Matt Maher/Tom Booth mass from Spirit & Song was adopted. Our mass has since been adopted by at least one other parish for the Easter season. It’s called the Mass for the Servant’s Heart. We then wrote a lenten version called Mass for the Hungry Heart. What’s the experience & opinion out there? I never shy away from a lively debate on this subject. Age is no factor - I am a 64-year-old Beatles fan.
 
I’m 50 and grew up on the “guitar rock” music at Mass.

Guitar music must allow for more vocal chord changes than electric organ music.

Today at Mass, when we sing music with the electric organ, I remember how we sang those songs to a guitar beat when I was 15 & I get a lot more enjoyment when I sing those songs.

I’ve noticed that groups singing to electric organ tend to get monatone and to lack expression.

I wish it didn’t have that effect on me, but pneumatic pipe organ music, is like fingernails down a blackboard to me.
 
I’ve grown to appreciate a chorus of voices with no instrumentation at all. I’ve gone from, “any instrument is okay,” to, “no instruments at all.”
 
I did the contemporary music thing as music director for churches a long time ago, and got sick and tired of it. So much of it seems repetitive and calculated to trigger a manipulated emotional response. I love contemporary Christian bands such as Third Day, don’t get me wrong; and I love great rock music.
But now as an organist for a quite traditional church, I enjoy playing the old stuff so much more. There is so much doctrine and scripture in ancient hymns and chant. Additionally, I find the actual playing much more challenging and satistying.
Just my two cents, but I certainly understand the appeal of contemporary music.
 
I’ve grown to appreciate a chorus of voices with no instrumentation at all. I’ve gone from, “any instrument is okay,” to, “no instruments at all.”
I’ve fallen in love with some sacred music. Very very beautiful.

Unfortuneately, we don’t have any at our Masses.
 
Although in theory I support the idea of musicians creating worhsip music with any instrumentation they can make great music with - in practice, I dislike the rock-mass and folk-mass, CCM, Bob Hurd, Dan Schutte, Marty Haugen and the OCP songbooks - 'cause I don’t hear it as great music. I am not part of the “organ-only” or “chant-only” crowd (although if that was all there was, that wouldn’t bother me ). I also dislike hand-clapping (people can’t find the beat!), finger-snapping (same reason), key and time signature changes in the middle of songs (missed by most of the congregation), and suburban southern californian choirs who try to sing gospel or, worse yet, black sprituals. Not that these things are bad in themselves - just that they rarely get executed above mediocre level.

Church is church. Gospel-singing church is gospel-singing church. Bar-room is bar-room. Open mic night is open mic night. :cool:
 
The music at our local parish tends to be whatever the person in charge for that Mass wants and/or more likely, has available to them.

We have the ability for an organ, but only one elderly organist who is not always able to play for Mass. Our cantor is AMAZING…and the bonus is he can play guitar on a basic level. So sometimes our only accompaniment is guitar. Sometimes we have an extra singer or two with the cantor. Depends on who has spouses to help with the kids, who’s at that service, etc.

It’s very haphazard here. There’s nothing wrong with that. It just is what it is.

Those of you with any kind of music that’s planned more than 30 minutes before Mass should feel immensely blessed!!!
 
We have a pipe organ,a grand piano, a full choir, a more or less contemporary music group (no rock style and no guitars), trained Cantors, a youth orchestra, you name it. There is a wide range of musical talent in our parish, including professional singers and opera singers and musicians. We are a music director’s dream. But the acoustics stink, and that diminishes everything. I’ve never been in a church with such bad acoustics, and why this was not considered when they built the new church is beyond me. You get 500 people at Mass and it sounds like nobody is singing. I go to my daughter’s small country church with maybe 200 people at Mass, a music group of 6 or 7 people, no organ, a keyboard, a flute and a guitar, and they are raising the roof. When they sing “Alleluia” it sounds like the heavens opened. Go figure.🤷
 
Hi! You might want to check out this thread from a couple of years ago for a lively debate of music in the church: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=222389

I am one of the poor souls who has found her vocation as a church music director; I have served in a rural Catholic community in Northern California for several years and was an Episcopal music director before my conversion to the Roman Church. My parishes here have used OCP materials for many many years, and we have blessed few good musicians to spread around. I do my best to meet the musical needs of all the parishoners, and it is a difficult task to say the least. I have a Master’s in music and have worked professionally as a performing classical musician and an orchestra manager and librarian before deciding to commit myself to church music. My job is to help the people “pray twice” to their Lord through song in the Mass. I figure I have succeeded on any given weekend when I have one person complain that the music was too loud, one complain that it was too soft, one say it was too traditional and one say that it was too contemporary. :rolleyes: When I use Latin chant in the mass, I will have several people come weeping to me saying how much they appreciate it and another several come and say if I do it again they will leave the church.

Pray for your music leaders. Merry Christmas! 🙂

Kim
 
I think it’s ridiculous to talk about what you like or I like, or what you prefer or what I prefer.

We should worship with the mind of the Church.
 
In our parish we use organ (played by a fabulous classical guitarist) and 1 or 2 strummed guitars. Most of the stuff they play was written for piano and sounds a lot better played on that instrument.

I’ve already lived through the late 60s and early 70s folk Masses, thank you, now I’d like Gregorian Chant, please. Actually, I’d settle for a 50/50 mix of traditional/contemporary – and a choir director who knows how to choose music based on quality and rubrics.
 
precisely - so what is that?
From Vatican II Sacrosanctum Concilium:

**VI SACRED MUSIC **
112. The musical tradition of the universal Church is a treasure of inestimable value, greater even than that of any other art. The main reason for this pre-eminence is that, as sacred song united to the words, it forms a necessary or integral part of the solemn liturgy.
Holy Scripture, indeed, has bestowed praise upon sacred song 42], and the same may be said of the fathers of the Church and of the Roman pontiffs who in recent times, led by St. Pius X, have explained more precisely the ministerial function supplied by sacred music in the service of the Lord.
Therefore sacred music is to be considered the more holy in proportion as it is more closely connected with the liturgical action, whether it adds delight to prayer, fosters unity of minds, or confers greater solemnity upon the sacred rites. But the Church approves of all forms of true art having the needed qualities, and admits them into divine worship.
Accordingly, the sacred Council, keeping to the norms and precepts of ecclesiastical tradition and discipline, and having regard to the purpose of sacred music, which is the glory of God and the sanctification of the faithful, decrees as follows.
113. Liturgical worship is given a more noble form when the divine offices are celebrated solemnly in song, with the assistance of sacred ministers and the active participation of the people.
As regards the language to be used, the provisions of Art. 36 are to be observed; for the Mass, Art. 54; for the sacraments, Art. 63; for the divine office. Art. 101.
114. The treasure of sacred music is to be preserved and fostered with great care. Choirs must be diligently promoted, especially in cathedral churches; but bishops and other pastors of souls must be at pains to ensure that, whenever the sacred action is to be celebrated with song, the whole body of the faithful may be able to contribute that active participation which is rightly theirs, as laid down in Art. 28 and 30.
115. Great importance is to be attached to the teaching and practice of music in seminaries, in the novitiates and houses of study of religious of both sexes, and also in other Catholic institutions and schools. To impart this instruction, teachers are to be carefully trained and put in charge of the teaching of sacred music.
It is desirable also to found higher institutes of sacred music whenever this can be done.
Composers and singers, especially boys, must also be given a genuine liturgical training.
116. The Church acknowledges Gregorian chant as specially suited to the Roman liturgy: therefore, other things being equal, it should be given pride of place in liturgical services.
But other kinds of sacred music, especially polyphony, are by no means excluded from liturgical celebrations, so long as they accord with the spirit of the liturgical action, as laid down in Art. 30.
117. The typical edition of the books of Gregorian chant is to be completed; and a more critical edition is to be prepared of those books already published since the restoration by St. Pius X.
It is desirable also that an edition be prepared containing simpler melodies, for use in small churches.
118. Religious singing by the people is to be intelligently fostered so that in devotions and sacred exercises, as also during liturgical services, the voices of the faithful may ring out according to the norms and requirements of the rubrics.
119. In certain parts of the world, especially mission lands, there are peoples who have their own musical traditions, and these play a great part in their religious and social life. For this reason due importance is to be attached to their music, and a suitable place is to be given to it, not only in forming their attitude toward religion, but also in adapting worship to their native genius, as indicated in Art. 39 and 40.
Therefore, when missionaries are being given training in music, every effort should be made to see that they become competent in promoting the traditional music of these peoples, both in schools and in sacred services, as far as may be practicable.
120. In the Latin Church the pipe organ is to be held in high esteem, for it is the traditional musical instrument which adds a wonderful splendor to the Church’s ceremonies and powerfully lifts up man’s mind to God and to higher things.
But other instruments also may be admitted for use in divine worship, with the knowledge and consent of the competent territorial authority, as laid down in Art. 22, 52, 37, and 40. This may be done, however, only on condition that the instruments are suitable, or can be made suitable, for sacred use, accord with the dignity of the temple, and truly contribute to the edification of the faithful.
121. Composers, filled with the Christian spirit, should feel that their vocation is to cultivate sacred music and increase its store of treasures.
Let them produce compositions which have the qualities proper to genuine sacred music, not confining themselves to works which can be sung only by large choirs, but providing also for the needs of small choirs and for the active participation of the entire assembly of the faithful.
The texts intended to be sung must always be in conformity with Catholic doctrine; indeed they should be drawn chiefly from holy scripture and from liturgical sources.
 
I’ve grown to appreciate a chorus of voices with no instrumentation at all. I’ve gone from, “any instrument is okay,” to, “no instruments at all.”
Me too. I’m a 30-yr old rock and jazz guitarist, but during Holy Mass, I’m strictly an unaccompanied chant guy!
 
I prefer music I can sing: regardless of style. It seems like a lot of of the songs my Church does are full of range (which is great to show off the abilities of the choir) but I’d like to sing too.
 
In my experience, the music at the vast majority of Catholic Churches is, in a word, “garbage.” I would much prefer no signing at all to what most parishes offer.

What is ironic is that the greatest liturgical music ever written was written for the Catholic Church, and it was jettisoned wholesale years ago for banal, treacly, oft-times heretical, unsingable dreck.

It’s a truism that Catholics don’t sing. We don’t because the music is so terrible, syncopated and silly that no one with any taste whatsoever (and then assuming it’s orthodox) would want to sing it. Even at that, the range and usual lack of music for the congregation guarantees a cringing silence from the pews. (Maybe it’s a secret penitential process?!)

Honestly, the music at most Masses is nothing short of an embarrassment.
 
Oh how I long for the day of church lofts full of choirs.
 
Hi! You might want to check out this thread from a couple of years ago for a lively debate of music in the church: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=222389

I am one of the poor souls who has found her vocation as a church music director; I have served in a rural Catholic community in Northern California for several years and was an Episcopal music director before my conversion to the Roman Church. My parishes here have used OCP materials for many many years, and we have blessed few good musicians to spread around. I do my best to meet the musical needs of all the parishoners, and it is a difficult task to say the least. I have a Master’s in music and have worked professionally as a performing classical musician and an orchestra manager and librarian before deciding to commit myself to church music. My job is to help the people “pray twice” to their Lord through song in the Mass. I figure I have succeeded on any given weekend when I have one person complain that the music was too loud, one complain that it was too soft, one say it was too traditional and one say that it was too contemporary. :rolleyes: When I use Latin chant in the mass, I will have several people come weeping to me saying how much they appreciate it and another several come and say if I do it again they will leave the church.

Pray for your music leaders. Merry Christmas! 🙂

Kim
Good points all. Very tough to please everybody. Your comments lead me to think that the varied reactions to music programs reflect real cultural differences, even among Catholics, at the root of the disagreement. I think its why the folks songs grate - because they aren’t my culture (or anybody’s really, but that’s an aside).
 
From Vatican II Sacrosanctum Concilium:

**VI SACRED MUSIC **…
This is the kind of thing that I read and scratch my head, because it does not comport with my observations. Please understand, I am a convert (1998). I only know what I have seen since that time. One of my first impressions of the Catholic church in America (I lived in Europe previously) was the bland, almost childish (If you think this is harsh, take the example that protestant hymnbooks will often have more than one voice line to sing), approach to music. Fortunately, my coversion had nothing to do with the music. Notwithstanding, how does anyone square the above “decree” with actual practice?
 
In my experience, the music at the vast majority of Catholic Churches is, in a word, “garbage.” I would much prefer no signing at all to what most parishes offer.

What is ironic is that the greatest liturgical music ever written was written for the Catholic Church, and it was jettisoned wholesale years ago for banal, treacly, oft-times heretical, unsingable dreck.

It’s a truism that Catholics don’t sing. We don’t because the music is so terrible, syncopated and silly that no one with any taste whatsoever (and then assuming it’s orthodox) would want to sing it. Even at that, the range and usual lack of music for the congregation guarantees a cringing silence from the pews. (Maybe it’s a secret penitential process?!)

Honestly, the music at most Masses is nothing short of an embarrassment.
I agree.

For me, it’s not only that chant is more *worthy *and *venerable *than “contemporary” music or even hymns. Nor is it because the Vatican II Council called for Gregorian chant’s “pride of place” in the liturgy—it’s because chant is easier to sing. I am not a trained musician; I can’t read music. But I can follow along with even complicated chant after only hearing it two or three times. (This, of course, was always how chant was transmitted from one generation to the next.) In the best scenario, however, the singing would be better left to the choir (which ought to be tucked away in a choir loft in the back of the Church—the sound carries better that way without artificial amplification and it avoids the impression that liturgical music is somehow performed, as though the liturgy were the product of human effort). I would rather not be bothered with worrying about my singing voice during Mass.

Latin chant is just “far away” enough that I can tune it out for prayer, yet if I wish to engage the music by following along with the text in English translation, I can mentally join with it in prayer.

And don’t even get me started on the differences in content. So often even traditional-sounding hymns have been modified so that they push some sort of “agenda”. More often than not they contain very questionable theological ideas, that, if the well-formed Catholic were to seriously consider what he was singing, he would cringe and blush.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top