I was not referring to a liturgical ranking as in - Solemnity, Feast, Memorial. I was using the word solemnity as a descriptive term, meaning:
Yes, I know. That was the effect I was going for.
I would argue that “absolute sacredness and solemnity” is impossible for over 99.98% of humanity, maybe all of us. So, by your standard, we cannot hope but be inadequate, inappropriate and intolerable in our celebration. Fortunately, our Lord recognizes our short-comings and loves us anyway. Furthermore, I would suggest that as a corporate celebration, we must be wary of “leaving our worshipers behind” with our loftiness just as we need to be wary of taking our eyes off the grace and splendor of Our Lord. For some, the simple accessiblity of the guitar brings them into a state of communion far better than (for them) off-putting chant. For others, it is the reverse. The Church is big enough to allow for each.
By the grace of God we can accomplish anything. On our own it is impossible.
Yes, but that also say “off we go into the wild, blue yonder.” Ever ben in a Mass like that?
Yes, but that also say “off we go into the wild, blue yonder.” Ever ben in a Mass like that?
Is that at one of those hippie masses were they would invalidate the Eucharist by putting “additives” (read magic dust) into the bread?I am afraid I must reject your argument as a false dichotomy. The negation of chant does not mean the only thing left to sing is Kum-bay-yah. There are one or two other pieces we might play. Still, while I hear your warning against dumbing down our liturgy into pabulum, we must not be so fearful of that potentiality that we take NO action toward temporal inclusion.
The Parish at my sister’s house was amazing. The choir during Holy Communion, had Latin Song as their Communion Hymn. It was done without any instructment. Just their voices. It was uplifting… Oh! How I desire that all Masses were like that…I don’t believe you to be a dissenter. I actually think there are more people out there who have similar thoughts - at least the people I know. What you want is the ideal. Where I attend mass and also work as a musician, we never have guitars - always organ and at our high masses, a choir, which does chant, polyphony and other appropriate sacred choral works. I am very fortunate in that and very thankful that I live in a city where I can experience this and be a part of. But there are many parishes which don’t have the resources, instruments or talent to effectively produce what is ideal. So, you have to work with what you have. It wouldn’t be right to deny them of music altogether if they don’t have those resources. Those who rely on sacred music to pray need something to help them. And as I always state, anything badly played - organ, voice, guitar, etc. - will always sound bad no matter how beautiful the composition.
Given the choice with a horrific “organist” who knows nothing about music, or a choir that sounds like a bunch of fighting cats to a guitarrist who has mastered the art of performing the guitar, such as our forum friend, Guitar, playing hymns or other appropriate works classical or otherwise, I would go with the guitarrist. I have just as much respect for someone who has mastered any instrument and play with equal reverence as someone who has mastered the organ or the voice.
Perhaps it’s not the “ideal”, especially if you are in a large church/cathedral or older church that lends itself better to a majestic instrument like an organ and a choir. But that talented guitarrist/musician is certainly someone who can truly get across the spirituality in musical prayer during mass much more effectively than the former choices. Otherwise, I’ll be praying to keep my mind off of the disruptive noise. Whereas, the latter will actually aid in my focus on the mass rather than take away from it.
BTW - I’m also considered old-fashioned and grew up in the 80s/90s as well.
But ,must there be a negation of chant. Why are some people so eager to abandon the rich treasures of the Church. For instance, the liturgical music I love the most is Byzantine. I also love the other Eastern musical traditions of the Church and Gregorian Chant. There are also a host of other traditional hymns that are good. I don’t think there is that much that is memorable from the last half century (mostly all the modern composers are writing for the Praise and Worship crowd) - but I’d have to take it on a case-by-case basis.
What do you mean by this temporal inclusion (I have heard several meanings from different persons) and why is this so important?
And I disagree with that. The patrimony of the Church is timeless. Those who lived a hundred or two hundred years ago did not think it was outmoded and dated even though Gregorian Chants date starting in the 7th century.
Your instrument is not inappropriate.
Who is calling for a “negation” of anything save for those calling for abolition of guitars?
Oh, so this is about what you like, not about what is liturgically sound. I understand you now…
Simply put, it means communicating in a mode that people understand, that they can relate to.
Whoa, that’s quite a fruit salad you’ve got there with all thos apples and oranges in the same bowl. Although there is rich value in anachronistic music, in the realm of liturgical effectiveness, such value has diminished somewhat. NOT by any fault of the music, which indeed is timeless, but by our vernacular slipping ever further away from that particular mode. Still, there settings where such music could be made more effective but they are quite grand and require more money and talent that 95% of parishes can muster.
“…and he will hold his manhood cheap who did not fight with us on St. Crispin’s Day!” Why such a call to arms? Why, too, do you seem to imply a termination date for the Church’s musical tradition? Do you do the same for the Magisterium or any other aspect of the Church?
I love that!!!To paraphrase the rallying cry of the NRA, musical instruments don’t kill reverence, musicians do. Trust me, a ham handed organist over time can put anyone’s faith in peril!
I agree with much of what you say here.This is true. I believe it is mainly because of the very low pay or the lack thereof. We’re expected to volunteer our time every week or to accept a very little salary. Most good musicians can’t afford to do that, so they take church jobs at other denominations which pay better. I don’t blame the churches. Many just don’t have the money to afford good talent. I try to volunteer at my parish once in a while (which is actually a fairly well-off parish), mainly because people I knew were telling me how bad the volunteer cantors were and would make them cringe in their pews. Unfortunately, after this season, I will have to stop, as I have way too much going on as a musician for my outside gigs/performances and because I have a paid position as a cantor at our cathedral. That’s not much, but it does help in paying for my music lessons.
We have to start somewhere. There are people in the sidelines who are already up to that level waiting to be brought back in and they are coming back in. But as you said, it’s happening slowly. At least in my area, people are wanting better music and musicianship, so they are working harder to get it. BUT what we were really need to do is foster it in our children at school and at church and rebuild the foundation that was lost to many in my generation and in the generation before me. I was one of the fortunate ones who didn’t get completely lost.
You hit the nail on the head. A classically trained pianist, I was hired ten years ago at what was then a modest but acceptable (to me) pay for my experience as our parish music director. (I accepted the position after many months of the parish waiting for someone to step forward, and much cajoling from family and friends). Well, here we are all these years later, and not one single evaluation of my position has occurred. A pat on the back, while nice, is hard to cash. I’ve not been given even one cost of living adjustment, which means I’m making much less than before in real dollars. Our organist, after serving the church for 35 years with very few pay raises along the way, recently asked for a raise. (only because she was retiring from her day job and would now be on a fixed income) After several months of deliberation, our “finance” committee awarded her the staggering sum of five extra dollars per week, which (I’m sure they had no idea) was nothing but an insult. This woman plays at three masses every week!! All the while, I have put heart and soul (with lots of help, no doubt) into making our music program one of the best in our area, investing much more time that I agreed to when I took the job. I developed a youth music ensemble, and an adult ensemble in addition to the choir that was there when I started. Over time, however, my enthusism has been dampened by the indifference to any financial consideration of the work.
Out one pianist had to leave because of job conflicts. She worked at one other parish and had a full-time teaching job. I totally understood her financial considerations and the need to make ends meet. We blessed her on her way and left on good terms.
There are several things that contribute to financial viability of paying employees better. One thing is that many Catholics are not supporting their parishes to nearly the extent that they need in order to put them on solid financial ground. Consider many of our Protestant bretheren for whom tithing 10% is de rigeur. I’m sure if you looked at the number-of-parishoners to collection-income ratio, we’d see that many people are giving the same paltry amount they did 40 years ago, all the while paying serveral times that for premium cable channels on their TV’s. Maybe we need to be regularly reminded to revise our idea of what “generousity” really entails in supporting our churches.
My personal opinion only:
I agree with you. Everyone knows what solemn is. When we understand the sublime nature of the mysteries we celebrate at mass, we are much less likely to provide music that would be more suitable for a pep rally. I think the “celebration of us” way of thinking generates it’s own music, and the kind of sound mortal flesh makes when approaching it’s Creator and Savior will naturally be quite different, more solemn and humble, etc. I think it’s a mistake to focus on the instruments themselves, but rather to understand the kind of music that should best accompany such an amazing thing as Holy Mass. There is likely to be a range even of what music is considered solemn, but it’ll still bring us closer to what the church intends if we err on the side of obedience.