RobNY:
The problem with the music is two-fold.
First of all, it applies to this, and much of other other modern hymns-- so many of them are so insipid and weak. They’re really embarassing to listen to, some of them. Either over syrupy or just plain bad. How can you expect people to take the Mass seriously if the music is so laughable? (I can’t pull some of the lyrics out of the air now, but we all know at least one song like that.) Quite honestly, I’ve heard merciless mocking of the insipid songs that my school chooses. Don’t get me wrong, shame on them for mocking a component of the Mass, but at the same time, shame on us for degrading the dignity of the Mass.
Second is this-- music should lift us *up *to the vertical nature of the Eucharist, not horizontally to the material, secular nature of other music. It should aid in contemplation at the Eucharist especially. I understand that people may disagree with me, but I want something where I’m able to contemplate at the Eucharist-- no drums! Is it too strange to believe that when people hear ‘rock’ oriented music they act more casually, as perhaps they might at a venue where rock is typically played, and that when people hear other music, they respond likewise to it?
-Rob
Re: your first problem: I completely agree. As the LifeTeen music coordinator at my church, one of my priorities is to eliminate and prevent such bad lyrics. That can be difficult sometimes, as I have discovered that my own personal preferences for lyrics may not be that of others, or even the vast majority of others, and that my personal tastes may not actually be perfect (what!! not perfect?!?). It is always an ongoing task. The problem of insipid lyrics isn’t limited to the modern and post modern era though.
Re: your second problem: You are presenting something of a false dichotomy. While the primary function of liturgical music should be to lift our thoughts towards God, this does not necessitate a complete absence of any horizontal aspect. In the liturgy, it is not just I who worships God, but it is I as a part of the whole people of God gathered there who worship God. Thus we say, “We believe”, not just “I believe.” And the texts themselves are not solely focused towards God, but also speak horizontally to us. For example, the Psalms exhort us to praise God.
But let me remind you that drums existed long before “rock” was ever a word, even in reference to stony objects in the ground. Since drums do not produce a very sustainable pitch, they are almost exclusively used for accenting
rhythm, which is the real issue when it comes to liturgical music.
Most of the time, however, when people talk about rhythmic music, they do not really mean to use the word “rhythmic”, for almost all musical forms are rhythmic, even Gregorian chant. What they are trying to describe is a
type of rhythmic music. This raises the question of whether certain types of rhythm are more or less suitable for the liturgy, why this is, and how we should go about defining them so that these principles can be readily applied by future generations.
The Christian musician ought to be aware of the effects of different rhythms and harmonies and be sure to use them in such a way that they foster the appropriate response, which is devotion and worship to God.
I see nothing wrong with using physical things, the stuff of earth, towards that end. When the Word became incarnate, he revealed to us that the physical is not intrinsically evil. In fact, God used a physical body, and a very physical cross, to win for us our salvation.
So, if a particular musical pattern elicits an emotional response, I as a musician should not cease and desist. No, I should make sure that I do my part to lead that emotional response to the foot of the cross, and to the tabernacle, to adore the Lord.