Is guitar music OK at Mass?

[anamchara]

Personal preference? How can that be when the vast corpus of HMC’s musical heritage has not been heard in your average parish in over 40 years? How many people have grown up with what my choir director calls sacro-pop and Muppet music over the last 40 years and have absolutely no idea of the treasures available?

 

[Strummer]

Personal preference? How can that be when the vast corpus of HMC’s musical heritage has not been heard in your average parish in over 40 years?

You seem to be confusing contexts on two different levels. In the first place, I was refering to the personal preference(s) of JMJ_Coder (and those who side with him). So you see great value in older traditions? Bully for you but I find it snobbish affrontery in the extreme to foist your aesthetic upon those for whom it does not hold the same value. Look, even in the secular world nearly every single pair of functioning ears has been exposed to some portion of the great classical works yet the vast, vast, vast majority do not choose to listen to classical because it does not reach them as effectively as their music of choice. Please note that I am NOT saying either style of music is “better” but merely trying to note which is most effective at communicating to a wide audience.

How many people have grown up with what my choir director calls sacro-pop and Muppet music over the last 40 years and have absolutely no idea of the treasures available?

“Sacro-pop”…cute. Demeaning and arrogant, but cute. I easily grant you the ignorance of a large majority of modern-day parishoners have with regards to sacred music tradition. But I also hold that that is irrelevant to the question at hand: what works with a given crowd. This is your second point of “contextual confusion”: equating “preference” with “exposure”. While one’s preference might change following an increase of awareness, it does not alter the here and now. Furthermore, I would contend that even given the exposure you might recommend, you’d still see a large number (perhaps, yes, even a majority) still side with the more modern music for it gathers them into prayer more effectively than some “sacred” exhibition of choral pyrotechnics.

I’ve sung in a cathedral choir for the last 24 years. There are only four paid professionals in our choir. The rest of us are parishoners who are willing to put in three hours of practice every week. We sing primarily acappella or with the organ which was restored (along with the choir loft) in 1992 - the 200th aniversary of my parish.

Not satisfied to merely toot your own horn you polish it up as well, eh? Fine. You are very fortunate to be in such a wealthy parish. Four paid professionals?!?! My last parish had an incompetant choir director drawing a pitance and an accompanyist getting even less and nothing for the musicians. My current (much larger, about three times yours) parish has, I believe two or three paid music positions to cover the five Sunday Masses that have any sort of music. Frankly your attitude comes off as something akin to “well, if they don’t have any bread, let them eat cake.” God has blessed you. Rejoice. But do not deign to dictate how the rest of us get on with our worship lives within our own dioscese.

 

[pnewton]

and asked me about us singing the Veni Creator Sequence in Latin much less the macaronic Veni Sancte Spiritus from Taize …or the entrance hymn Come, Holy Ghost or the recessional To Jesus Christ Our Sovereign King. With the exception of the Taize hymn, everything else I heard as a child.

I had the good fortune of marrying a cradle Catholic. Through RCIA and before I started leading singing, I never heard a lot of Catholic Classics. My wife had to fill me in on these beutiful old hyms, as well as correct my atrocious Latin. I think everyone who leads music needs to take a step back and incorporate these great classics. I have no doubt that your fellow parishoners will really enjoy the effort.

 

[cruisin]

Well looks like this has been going on for a while. Nothing new here, most churches, both catholic and protestant, have been having this debate for sometime now i’m sure.

I guess the very question is, what makes an instrument or style of music sacred?

My answer to this is a follow up question or 2

Does the music Glorify God? Does it sing his praises?

I grew up in a church with many of the old hymns.

Amazing Grace, Amighty fortress, Jesus is all the world to me and still love to sing them.

but I have also learned that there are some great writers who have pened the scriptures to music. There is a polpular praise song that starts out "Like a deer panteth for water so my soul longeth after you… " There is also a greatup beat tune we use to teach the kids and adults Romans 16:19.

My last question is… Would you rather them kids are in church singing praises to God with their Instruments, or singing secular music in the local taverns.

I don’t believe you can call any particular Genere of music more sacred than another. It’s all about God and nothing but God.

KJV
Psalm 150
Ps 150:1 Praise ye the LORD. Praise God in his sanctuary: praise him in the firmament of his power.
Ps 150:2 Praise him for his mighty acts: praise him according to his excellent greatness.
Ps 150:3 Praise him with the sound of the trumpet: praise him with the psaltery and harp.
Ps 150:4 Praise him with the timbrel and dance: praise him with stringed instruments and organs.
Ps 150:5 Praise him upon the loud cymbals: praise him upon the high sounding cymbals.
Ps 150:6 Let every thing that hath breath praise the LORD. Praise ye the LORD

PRAISE THE LORD!!!

Amen

Thanks for hearing me out.

Cruisin

 

[cruisin]

Well looks like this has been going on for a while. Nothing new here, most churches, both catholic and protestant, have been having this debate for sometime now i’m sure.

I guess the very question is, what makes an instrument or style of music sacred?

My answer to this is a follow up question or 2

Does the music Glorify God? Does it sing his praises?

I grew up in a church with many of the old hymns.

Amazing Grace, Amighty fortress, Jesus is all the world to me and still love to sing them.

but I have also learned that there are some great writers who have pened the scriptures to music. There is a polpular praise song that starts out "Like a deer panteth for water so my soul longeth after you… " There is also a greatup beat tune we use to teach the kids and adults Romans 16:19.

My last question is… Would you rather them kids are in church singing praises to God with their Instruments, or singing secular music in the local taverns.

I don’t believe you can call any particular Genere of music more sacred than another. It’s all about God and nothing but God.

KJV
Psalm 150
Ps 150:1 Praise ye the LORD. Praise God in his sanctuary: praise him in the firmament of his power.
Ps 150:2 Praise him for his mighty acts: praise him according to his excellent greatness.
Ps 150:3 Praise him with the sound of the trumpet: praise him with the psaltery and harp.
Ps 150:4 Praise him with the timbrel and dance: praise him with stringed instruments and organs.
Ps 150:5 Praise him upon the loud cymbals: praise him upon the high sounding cymbals.
Ps 150:6 Let every thing that hath breath praise the LORD. Praise ye the LORD

PRAISE THE LORD!!!

may God have all the glory and praise!!

Amen

Thanks for hearing me out.

Cruisin

 

[cruisin]

Sorry for the double post I think there was a problem somewhere. i am not sure what happened.

 

[JMJ_coder]

Hello,

No it wasn’t. I didn’t read Strummers post as you did. You are being bias in my opinion and trying to prove someone else wrong by using a straw man argument. Strummer wasn’t saying people are not smart enough. The poster was being realistic.

No, he was expressing his dismally low expectations of others. Father Corapi once said “the world tends towards mediocrity, and anyone who tries to rise above that the world tries to drag back down”.

Then apparently I should go back to primary school because I’ve heard it and didn’t understand a word of it. Good Lord.

Perhaps you should. I doubt the school would give you any money, but if they failed you to such an extent then you have a reason to complain. We had a thread about the decline in education awhile back. If you like I can find it and link it for you.

You’ve got to be kidding? So if we don’t know old-English and now Latin we are uneducated non catechized people? Excuse me, but that comes off as a rather pompous opinion. Arguably insulting. Not all of us were educated in Latin growing up and you might want to keep in mind that some of us are converts who didn’t grow up in the Church and most RICA groups to not teach Latin.

If you don’t know your parts in Latin for the Mass, then yes, you have not been fully catechized. If you don’t know what “et cum spiritu tuo” or “Deo gratias” or “Laus tibi, Christe” mean, then whoever taught you, be it RCIA or CCD or whoever - has failed you and the Church.

 

[JMJ_coder]

Hello,

And you would in no way be considered “unintelligent” for not understanding Russian. It simply was not an effective mode of communication.
Also, BTW, while you are off by 500 years or more on your history of English, I doubt you would understand much of what is considered the early modern English of the Elizabethean era were it spoken as it was commonly done at that time. Not for the words but the accent of the times was such that you’d be unlikely to identify more than maybe 50% of the words. Go back to Old English (circa 450CE to 1150CE, if memory serves) and I doubt even most modern scholars would comprehend more than a rudimentary level.

Ah, but there is a time limit. The point is, it really comes down to personal preference. This whole debate, which started as a question of instrumentation and morphed now to the music itself, is really a question of *preference *and taste and how far one might go to impose his/her own preference upon the liturgy.

I agree, this thread has evolved into a different topic (perhaps it was inevitable).

To be sure, a liturgical experience can be so far outside one’s aesthetic that it hinders rather than aids the individual worshiper. But I would submit that this can be the case at either end of the scale. While some might call for a certain “uniformity” of experience as a means of uniting a vast community, others seek to reach the community which then unites in their experience of worship.

It’s not just a matter of preference or personal aesthetics - Pope Benedict XVI says: “as far as the liturgy is concerned, we cannot say that one song is as good as another.”

What?! Reading the words and knowing their definition is not the issue. It is whether those words (and melodies) reach the heart and soul of the worshiper. That IS appreciation, NOT understanding.

You have been seeming to indicate (at least as I have read you) that people cannot appreciate it because they can’t understand it.

Eh, it’s alright, I guess. Some dull and predictable rhymes, some weak word choices (“amiable”?) and one passage of opposing imagry that confuses the point (plunged into a sea of…charity?) But it scans reasonably well (as long as you say “heav’n” for “heaven”, an established and acceptable tradition). It’s okay but…“regal”? Well, if it works for you I hope you sing it often and let your soul rejoice in it.

Actually, this song is a marvel of Catholic music. It’s poetic imagery and solidness of doctrine is, yes, “regal”.

Just don’t force it on me every Sunday, OK?

Yeah, we should all be singing something we can all dance to.

Uh, no. It is not. There is a major difference between intelligence (the ability, among others, to learn and apply knowledge) and knowledge (a store of facts and experiences). I hold that the majority of worshipers do not hold the facts and experiences necessary that would open the doors of their hearts and minds to the worship experience you seem to propose. Yes, I suppose we could “educate” the worshipers in these alien-to-them forms. OR we could reach them right now in their own vernacular. I say, why wait when their souls are hungry now?

There are two things here. One is trying to reach people where they are. I agree. But, we must not let them wallow there. We must raise them up to the splendor of truth.

 

[JMJ_coder]

Hello,

Perhaps because people have heard it and don’t feel the same way as you do about it? The comment your choir director made is belittling. Maybe clever use of words there, but not very charitable.

I find the descriptions fairly accurate.

How can people disregard what we have today? I don’t know if people have not been exposed. It could be that they don’t want all that back again. Maybe they had it as kids and hated it.

While there are a handful of hymns and songs that are or have been created in the last half-century, they are usually the exception and not the rule. We can disregard a good deal of what is out there today because it is plain junk. It fails in the areas of being good musically, textually, and doctrinally.

 

[JMJ_coder]

Hello,

You seem to be confusing contexts on two different levels. In the first place, I was refering to the personal preference(s) of JMJ_Coder (and those who side with him). So you see great value in older traditions? Bully for you but I find it snobbish affrontery in the extreme to foist your aesthetic upon those for whom it does not hold the same value. Look, even in the secular world nearly every single pair of functioning ears has been exposed to some portion of the great classical works yet the vast, vast, vast majority do not choose to listen to classical because it does not reach them as effectively as their music of choice. Please note that I am NOT saying either style of music is “better” but merely trying to note which is most effective at communicating to a wide audience.

“Sacro-pop”…cute. Demeaning and arrogant, but cute. I easily grant you the ignorance of a large majority of modern-day parishoners have with regards to sacred music tradition. But I also hold that that is irrelevant to the question at hand: what works with a given crowd. This is your second point of “contextual confusion”: equating “preference” with “exposure”. While one’s preference might change following an increase of awareness, it does not alter the here and now. Furthermore, I would contend that even given the exposure you might recommend, you’d still see a large number (perhaps, yes, even a majority) still side with the more modern music for it gathers them into prayer more effectively than some “sacred” exhibition of choral pyrotechnics.

The point is, this is not the secular world. In the secular world I’d have no problem with 99.99% of this music. In fact, I enjoy listening to some of it. But we are not dealing with the secular world, we are dealing with the sacred world - the Church and the Liturgy. And as Pope Benedict said: “as far as the liturgy is concerned, we cannot say that one song is as good as another.”

Not satisfied to merely toot your own horn you polish it up as well, eh? Fine. You are very fortunate to be in such a wealthy parish. Four paid professionals?!?! My last parish had an incompetant choir director drawing a pitance and an accompanyist getting even less and nothing for the musicians. My current (much larger, about three times yours) parish has, I believe two or three paid music positions to cover the five Sunday Masses that have any sort of music. Frankly your attitude comes off as something akin to “well, if they don’t have any bread, let them eat cake.” God has blessed you. Rejoice. But do not deign to dictate how the rest of us get on with our worship lives within our own dioscese.

What difference if they are professional or not. Listen, any human with two good ears and who is not tone deaf can learn to sing well.

In the countryside of the Carptho-Rusyn region of Eastern Europe, the congregation is the choir. Not one of them is a paid professional. They have no instruments. They have no hymnals. But they produce some of the most beautiful sounds imaginable. Everyone knows there part. Those who can come in on bass. It is truly heavenly. They have learned their part since childhood - they know all the variations and the different texts for throughout the year.

 

[Strummer]

The point is, this is not the secular world. In the secular world I’d have no problem with 99.99% of this music. In fact, I enjoy listening to some of it. But we are not dealing with the secular world, we are dealing with the sacred world - the Church and the Liturgy. And as Pope Benedict said: “as far as the liturgy is concerned, we cannot say that one song is as good as another.”

Are you being intentionally obtuse? The parallel I was drawing and which should be abundantly clear is the manner in which certain music connects with certain audiences. The particular context is not important to the analogy.

What difference if they are professional or not. Listen, any human with two good ears and who is not tone deaf can learn to sing well.

The rebuttal you are citing speaks far beyond mere vocal talent. Being able to lead sections and work individual passages with OTHER vocalists takes more than “two good ears”.

In the countryside of the Carptho-Rusyn region of Eastern Europe, the congregation is the choir. Not one of them is a paid professional. They have no instruments. They have no hymnals. But they produce some of the most beautiful sounds imaginable. Everyone knows there part. Those who can come in on bass. It is truly heavenly. They have learned their part since childhood - they know all the variations and the different texts for throughout the year.

Oh, so culturally specific music should be allowed in certain cases but not in others? Eastern Europe = OK; Southern US or Central CA = no good? Do I detect a hint of ethno-snobbery?

 

[pnewton]

If you don’t know your parts in Latin for the Mass, then yes, you have not been fully catechized. If you don’t know what “et cum spiritu tuo” or “Deo gratias” or “Laus tibi, Christe” mean, then whoever taught you, be it RCIA or CCD or whoever - has failed you and the Church.

You are going further than Church teahing here. No one is knowledge of Latin neccessary to join the Catholic Church. If the responses at a parish are in the vernacular, which is totally permissible, there is no need to for a new Catholic to know the Latin responses. It should be sufficient to teach proper conduct at church and the order and theology of the Mass.

 

[Strummer]

It’s not just a matter of preference or personal aesthetics - Pope Benedict XVI says: “as far as the liturgy is concerned, we cannot say that one song is as good as another.”

So, it’s a matter of the Pope’s personal aesthetics and not yours? Is that supposed to sway me? JPII was entertained by hip-hop dancers who performed for him. Am I supposed to like that, too?

No art can be objectively measured. We can draw inferences by the reactions of the audiences and the longevity of the work but even that is sketchy. Then, too, many great works were reviled in their day and only later recognized as genius. None of this in any means that I believe every snippet of hymnody is worthy. Quite the opposite. I just drink from a deeper well.

Actually, this song is a marvel of Catholic music. It’s poetic imagery and solidness of doctrine is, yes, “regal”.

And I have shown where this “marvel” is flawed. Now you can continue to play “follow the leader” and not bother about performing your own analysis and forming your own opinion or you can open your ears, eyes, heart and soul to new beauties of the day even as you savor the brilliance of yesterday. But watch where you step in either time for drek abounds throughout the ages.

Yeah, we should all be singing something we can all dance to.

Naturally…that’s our only choice, right? Solemn classics or disco. NOTHING else was ever created. Puh-lease, such an obvious straw man makes for the weakest of arguments.

There are two things here. One is trying to reach people where they are. I agree. But, we must not let them wallow there. We must raise them up to the splendor of truth.

Now, here we edge toward common ground for I am no advocating the dismissal of all that is ancient. I love the entire panapoly of expression and wish to celebrate all of it. We can reach them where they are, as you’ve agreed, and we can show them where they could reach. Let’s have both! and let’s end this petty bickering about which is “better”. On our journey of worship should we eschew the minivan until we can get the Deusenberg running and fit everyone inside it? Or should we just get moving with what we’ve got?

 

[anamchara]

There are two things here. One is trying to reach people where they are. I agree. But, **we **must not let them wallow there. We must raise them up to the splendor of truth.

Excuse me, but who is this WE that you speak of and THEM? Reading some of these exchanges one would think that we have two camps in the Church. The highly educated ones who know Latin and everything about music and the dumb nuts who sit in the pews waiting with bated breathe for you to educate us. How incredibly condescending. Wow, the audacity of some!

 

[anamchara]

Hello,

No, he was expressing his dismally low expectations of others.

 

[anamchara]

You are going further than Church teaching here. No one is knowledge of Latin neccessary to join the Catholic Church. If the responses at a parish are in the vernacular, which is totally permissible, there is no need to for a new Catholic to know the Latin responses. It should be sufficient to teach proper conduct at church and the order and theology of the Mass.

Ya think?

Thank you.

 

[JMJ_coder]

Hello,

Are you being intentionally obtuse? The parallel I was drawing and which should be abundantly clear is the manner in which certain music connects with certain audiences. The particular context is not important to the analogy.

Context IS the argument. If we are talking outside of the Liturgy, then there is no debate. It is what is appropriate within Mass! As Pope Benedict said: “as far as the Liturgy is concerned, we cannot say that one song is as good as another.”

The rebuttal you are citing speaks far beyond mere vocal talent. Being able to lead sections and work individual passages with OTHER vocalists takes more than “two good ears”.

Nothing that a modicum of effort can’t deal with. You’d be surprised how well an average person who has been modestly instructed can sound.

Oh, so culturally specific music should be allowed in certain cases but not in others? Eastern Europe = OK; Southern US or Central CA = no good? Do I detect a hint of ethno-snobbery?

It’s nothing about cultural music. They sing the chant proper to their Rite, which is Byzantine Chant. In the Latin Rite, it is Gregorian Chant and Polyphony.

 

[JMJ_coder]

Hello,

You are going further than Church teahing here. No one is knowledge of Latin neccessary to join the Catholic Church. If the responses at a parish are in the vernacular, which is totally permissible, there is no need to for a new Catholic to know the Latin responses. It should be sufficient to teach proper conduct at church and the order and theology of the Mass.

Is it necessary to know Latin to join the Catholic Church - no. Just like it is not necessary to know what the teaching on the Immaculate Conception is to join. But would you consider a Catholic well catechized if they don’t what the Immaculate Conception is?

To know the Latin for the Mass is not difficult. The responses are short and easy. The four most difficult parts are the Confiteor, Gloria, Credo, and Pater Noster. But even those are not so difficult that a normal person cannot easily learn them with a modest amount of effort.

 

[JMJ_coder]

Hello,

So, it’s a matter of the Pope’s personal aesthetics and not yours? Is that supposed to sway me? JPII was entertained by hip-hop dancers who performed for him. Am I supposed to like that, too?

No art can be objectively measured. We can draw inferences by the reactions of the audiences and the longevity of the work but even that is sketchy. Then, too, many great works were reviled in their day and only later recognized as genius. None of this in any means that I believe every snippet of hymnody is worthy. Quite the opposite. I just drink from a deeper well.

It is not a matter of preference when it comes to the Liturgy. It is a matter of appropriateness and sacredness. As Pope Benedict said: “as far as the Liturgy is concerned, we cannot say that one song is as good as another.”

And I have shown where this “marvel” is flawed. Now you can continue to play “follow the leader” and not bother about performing your own analysis and forming your own opinion or you can open your ears, eyes, heart and soul to new beauties of the day even as you savor the brilliance of yesterday. But watch where you step in either time for drek abounds throughout the ages.

You said you didn’t like the rhymes and one or two word choices. O.K. - how would YOU change it to make it so much better?

Naturally…that’s our only choice, right? Solemn classics or disco. NOTHING else was ever created. Puh-lease, such an obvious straw man makes for the weakest of arguments.

In the last half-century, with the exception of a handful of works (and they really are the exception), what has been produced is garbage!

Now, here we edge toward common ground for I am no advocating the dismissal of all that is ancient. I love the entire panapoly of expression and wish to celebrate all of it. We can reach them where they are, as you’ve agreed, and we can show them where they could reach. Let’s have both! and let’s end this petty bickering about which is “better”. On our journey of worship should we eschew the minivan until we can get the Deusenberg running and fit everyone inside it? Or should we just get moving with what we’ve got?

Yeah - let’s only use the minivan to transport people to the Duesenberg lot (good choice of car!).

 

[JMJ_coder]

Hello,

Excuse me, but who is this WE that you speak of and THEM? Reading some of these exchanges one would think that we have two camps in the Church. The highly educated ones who know Latin and everything about music and the dumb nuts who sit in the pews waiting with bated breathe for you to educate us. How incredibly condescending. Wow, the audacity of some!

We are those in the Church. Them are those who are new to the Church.

Again, no one is expecting a recitation of Virgil. Knowing one’s part in Latin for the Mass is NOT difficult.

And what is condescending is your pitifully low expectations of people’s abilities.