V
VAC
Guest
We absolutely DO have a choice. God gave mankind the freewill to chose to follow him or not.
- Status
V
VAC
Guest
I like this interpretation best so far.I think it means the parishioners are asking for the courage to sing. Heaven knows they don’t sing most of the time!
I think the lyrics of this song are much easier to understand than many hymns written in Old English, and definitley much easier to understand than Latin.
Once again, here’s a thread full of opinions about liturgical music when you asked for facts.
B
babydoc
Guest
I would beg to differ (respectfully of course) on the notion that if a hymn is in the hymnal it must be appropriate.
I am a cantor and chorister and love a variety of musical styles from chant to Palestrina to Mozart to Early American to Spirituals and even to some St. Louis Jesuits and a few Haugen-Haas confections. My philosophy is to worship the Creator of music by singing all these styles with as much excellence as I can muster.
I do have a major problem with some of the modern recasting of textual material to change the perception of Catholic teaching. I was very irritated when singing “For All the Saints” to find “O Blessed Communion, Fellowship divine” changed to “family divine” – as if that innocent noun would offend estrogen-americans. But more insidious are lines such as “Not to preach our creeds and customs but to build a bridge of care” (to the tune of Lord of all Hopefulness). Now I don’t have anything against building bridges of care, but I think it is important to teach our creeds and doctrines too – for salvation’s sake. These wimpy lyrics smack of indiffrentism and universalism.
These and other castrated lyrics are found in the hardbound Gather Hymnal. The rewritten lyrics water down doctrine, destroy the poetry of precise and clever language, and advance a feminizing and neopagan agenda.
Let me state for the record that I am female (tho not pagan) but think that recreating God in a solely feminine, maternal image (even when speaking of the Second Person of the Trinity who was unquestionably born a biological male) is offputting both to males and females who look for the universal truth.
Sorry for the lengthly rant. I am still new to CAL forums.
I am a cantor and chorister and love a variety of musical styles from chant to Palestrina to Mozart to Early American to Spirituals and even to some St. Louis Jesuits and a few Haugen-Haas confections. My philosophy is to worship the Creator of music by singing all these styles with as much excellence as I can muster.
I do have a major problem with some of the modern recasting of textual material to change the perception of Catholic teaching. I was very irritated when singing “For All the Saints” to find “O Blessed Communion, Fellowship divine” changed to “family divine” – as if that innocent noun would offend estrogen-americans. But more insidious are lines such as “Not to preach our creeds and customs but to build a bridge of care” (to the tune of Lord of all Hopefulness). Now I don’t have anything against building bridges of care, but I think it is important to teach our creeds and doctrines too – for salvation’s sake. These wimpy lyrics smack of indiffrentism and universalism.
These and other castrated lyrics are found in the hardbound Gather Hymnal. The rewritten lyrics water down doctrine, destroy the poetry of precise and clever language, and advance a feminizing and neopagan agenda.
Let me state for the record that I am female (tho not pagan) but think that recreating God in a solely feminine, maternal image (even when speaking of the Second Person of the Trinity who was unquestionably born a biological male) is offputting both to males and females who look for the universal truth.
Sorry for the lengthly rant. I am still new to CAL forums.
B
baltobetsy
Guest
Welcome to the forums - it’s great to have you. I, as a female cantor also, agree with you wholeheartedly about the alternate lyrics in Gather and other newer hymnals. The glorious thing about Worship II, also from GIA, and sadly, out of print now, was the use of original poetry for all the hymns. Included in the introduction was a wonderful defense of the use of original texts. Funny how one publisher can hold two contrary positions at the same time.
Sometimes, I “forget” and sing the “right” words to some of the hymns.
Betsy
I was trying to say that Marty Haugen didn’t use the phrase “enter the song” the way I would have. I realize that’s kind of pointless considering that he wrote “Gather Us In” and I didn’t.
I was showing a preference for Tolkien’s writings where people are part of “the music” simply by being part of creation. Of course we have the choice to follow God or not. I was suggesting that following God results in musical harmony and not doing so results in musical dissonance.
V
VAC
Guest
That’s a lovely theory. I’d love to see it in action.
I’m getting off topic here, but from my personal experience, although our choir rarely sings or plays sour notes, I can tell you that my years of involvement in particpating in and leading music ministry could not be described as harmonious.
I agree with the above posters about the rewriting of the old hymns
in politically correct language.
C
Cat
Guest
OTOH, SMHW, musical “dissonance” is not “bad.” It just takes some getting used to. I personally love a lot of the contemporary composers, e.g., Stravinsky and Bartok, who excel in dissonance. For me, it takes more brains and effort to listen to these guys than the traditionalists.
V
VAC
Guest
You have a good point there. One of my music teachers once said “there are no wrong notes in jazz” I never thought of that as applying to classical music, but I found a few free 30 second clips on I tunes of those guys you mentioned.
Micheal Joncas uses lots of dissonant chords (and rhythyms!) in his songs. I think it adds a lot to the songs.
Actually I rather like dissonance in musical pieces too. However, unless a composer means to write something that is kind of the musical equivalent of a thriller movie, he probably won’t end his piece with dissonance.
But in Tolkien’s world the dissonant chords are the wars and strife which somehow become incorporated into the greater work. In terms of salvation history I think the greatest dissonant chord might be associated with the lines from the Exultet,
O happy fault,
O necessary sin of Adam,
which gained for us so great a Redeemer!
J
JMJ_coder
Guest
Hello,
In the area of music, many missalettes contain Amazing Grace, which is a heretical song.
Not necessarily. The Bishops conference would approve the liturgical text and translations, but it is usually an independent for profit company that compiles the missalette that is found in many parishes. And the choices of who to go to are limited. They sometimes do a poor job in some areas. For instance, one year they forgot to mention Divine Mercy Sunday.
In the area of music, many missalettes contain Amazing Grace, which is a heretical song.
J
JimR-OCDS
Guest
Well I just came from Mass and checked out our missalette and hymnal. Both are produced by Oregon Catholic Press, which is a nonprofit company, which serves the Catholic Church in its publications. Also, inside the cover it states, that the texts and hymns are approved by the United States Council of Catholic Bishops.
That being said, anyone who wants to say the music from this hymnal is inappropriate, is misleading and even harmful.
People reading this forum, are going to Mass and scrutinizing everything that goes on, based on what they’ve read here. I can only imagine how they’re being distracted away from prayer the real purpose of the Mass? The fact that I took the time to look up what was actually in the missalette, told me that my mind was on the complaints of this forum, rather than on prayer.
I think it would spiritually conducive, to take a break from this forum.
Jim
J
JMJ_coder
Guest
Hello,
Also, just because the Bishops have said it is appropriate, doesn’t mean we have to agree. We can personally feel that certain selections of hymns and songs have no place in a Mass. Note, I am not saying we can doubt what the Bishops teach as a matter of faith, when they are in union with the Magisterium, nor can we claim that using hymns or songs that have been duly approved by the Bishops as illicit. But, we can have our own personal views. Just like we can hold contrary views on such social issues as immigration, capitol punishment, etc. These things deal with discipline and not doctrine. Bishops are not perfect and can and do make mistakes (that is when not protected by the Holy Spirit in defining infallible teaching via the Magisterium) - and we can disagree with them in this regards. It would be harmful to tell people to just shut up and nod and blindly accept every word that comes out of a Bishops mouth.
In my parish - and a number of other parishes that I know of in my dioceses - the missalette is produced by World Library Publications. They mention that the liturgical texts are approved by the USCCB and Rome, but don’t mention the same for the hymns (only that they hold the copyright or will mention who owns it if they don’t). I can’t find anything from World Library Publications that indicates that they are non-profit.
I have no qualms saying that the hymn “Amazing Grace” is heretical and is inappropriate for a Catholic Mass.
Also, just because the Bishops have said it is appropriate, doesn’t mean we have to agree. We can personally feel that certain selections of hymns and songs have no place in a Mass. Note, I am not saying we can doubt what the Bishops teach as a matter of faith, when they are in union with the Magisterium, nor can we claim that using hymns or songs that have been duly approved by the Bishops as illicit. But, we can have our own personal views. Just like we can hold contrary views on such social issues as immigration, capitol punishment, etc. These things deal with discipline and not doctrine. Bishops are not perfect and can and do make mistakes (that is when not protected by the Holy Spirit in defining infallible teaching via the Magisterium) - and we can disagree with them in this regards. It would be harmful to tell people to just shut up and nod and blindly accept every word that comes out of a Bishops mouth.
Try this next time: when you bless yourself with the holy water, say to yourself - forum, what forum?
J
JimR-OCDS
Guest
A point of correction to my post.
The OCP Missalette and Hymnal are approved by the Liturgical Commission" of the United States Catholic Bishops Conference. In other words, the liturgical experts which make up the committee and approved the text, get their authority from the Bishops Conference. I think their understanding of the liturgy, is far superior to my own. I’ll give them due respect on this issue.
Jim
The OCP Missalette and Hymnal are approved by the Liturgical Commission" of the United States Catholic Bishops Conference. In other words, the liturgical experts which make up the committee and approved the text, get their authority from the Bishops Conference. I think their understanding of the liturgy, is far superior to my own. I’ll give them due respect on this issue.
Jim
W
Wolseley
Guest
I absolutely agree.
Again I agree. However, my standard argument with “inclusive language” is that we never seem to hear of Satan being couched in feminine terms. Doesn’t anyone stop to think about how offensive it is to males to always hear of Evil Personified as always being male? If God has a feminine side and must be referred to as “she”, then so must Satan.
After all, she is the Princess of Darkness, she is the Old Dragonness seeking whom she may devour, and she has all those demonesses at her command.
“Estrogen-Americans”,
V
VAC
Guest
I think you have a good point there. I’m giving it serious thought. If only it were that simple to avoid conflict.
I was encouraged by what you wrote, and hope to use the info to stop some of the criticism I’ve received… until I looked at my OCP accompniament books and hymnals. Upon reading this closely, it seems that the wording of the mass parts and the psalms from the lectionary are what have been approved by the US bishops,
not the hymns.Scrutinizing the critics, and listening to their plentiful opinions and the documented facts from the USSCB and The Vatican (much less plentiful) I had hoped to arm myself against future criticism and unharmonious happenings in church leadership and music ministry. Other than the statements of Gregorian chant holding pride of place but** NOT **being played to the exclusion of all else… it really doesn’t exist.
I have been told that music which in any way resembles the secular, in instrumentation or style, does not belong at mass. I have yet to see any documented proof of this. If anyone has it, I would pay money to read it, after which I would also have to put away my guitar, and most likely give up leading the music at mass, as I am not proficient in Gregorian chant.
J
JMJ_coder
Guest
Hello,
The most current official document on Liturgical Music (that I am aware of) is Musicam Sacram from 1967. I hope it answers any questions, and that you don’t read anything that leads you away from a ministry for the Church.I think you have a good point there. I’m giving it serious thought. If only it were that simple to avoid conflict.
I was encouraged by what you wrote, and hope to use the info to stop some of the criticism I’ve received… until I looked at my OCP accompniament books and hymnals. Upon reading this closely, it seems that the wording of the mass parts and the psalms from the lectionary are what have been approved by the US bishops,
Scrutinizing the critics, and listening to their plentiful opinions and the documented facts from the USSCB and The Vatican (much less plentiful) I had hoped to arm myself against future criticism and unharmonious happenings in church leadership and music ministry. Other than the statements of Gregorian chant holding pride of place but** NOT **being played to the exclusion of all else… it really doesn’t exist.
I have been told that music which in any way resembles the secular, in instrumentation or style, does not belong at mass. I have yet to see any documented proof of this. If anyone has it, I would pay money to read it, after which I would also have to put away my guitar, and most likely give up leading the music at mass, as I am not proficient in Gregorian chant.
V
VAC
Guest
I read through this, and once again, there are no black and white instructions for song selection.
As for instruments:
Once again, opinions are a factor
So as long as I’m not playing eardrum bursting shred metal with distortion sound effects, hopefully I won’t be asked to leave
If I ever quit leading music ministry it will be because of the politics. That’s a thread in itself.
R
rpp
Guest
Can you give us a quote, please?
J
JMJ_coder
Guest
Hello,
I guess that is why they eliminated any geographical jurisdictional requirements of parish membership - we all couldn’t agree on a soundtrack.
That is one of the realities of the current Catholic Church (at least in America). One can go to one Church and hear modern and contemporary worship and praise music done with guitars and then move to the next Church a couple blocks away and hear glorious Gregorian Chant done by full choir and organ.Once again, opinions are a factor
I guess that is why they eliminated any geographical jurisdictional requirements of parish membership - we all couldn’t agree on a soundtrack.
Yeah, but if you did you might get a multi-million dollar record deal.So as long as I’m not playing eardrum bursting shred metal with distortion sound effects, hopefully I won’t be asked to leave
J
JMJ_coder
Guest
Hello,
Liturgical song
- In the ars celebrandi, liturgical song has a pre-eminent place. (126) Saint Augustine rightly says in a famous sermon that “the new man sings a new song. Singing is an expression of joy and, if we consider the matter, an expression of love” (127). The People of God assembled for the liturgy sings the praises of God. In the course of her two-thousand-year history, the Church has created, and still creates, music and songs which represent a rich patrimony of faith and love. This heritage must not be lost. Certainly as far as the liturgy is concerned, we cannot say that one song is as good as another. Generic improvisation or the introduction of musical genres which fail to respect the meaning of the liturgy should be avoided. As an element of the liturgy, song should be well integrated into the overall celebration (128). Consequently everything – texts, music, execution – ought to correspond to the meaning of the mystery being celebrated, the structure of the rite and the liturgical seasons (129). Finally, while respecting various styles and different and highly praiseworthy traditions, I desire, in accordance with the request advanced by the Synod Fathers, that Gregorian chant be suitably esteemed and employed (130) as the chant proper to the Roman liturgy (131).
- Status