MERGED: Music in Mass/Sacred Music

[Canto]

Much of the music that is complained about is not profane. It is not secular.

Take away the lyrics of many modern hymns and they sound like pop or contemporay folk tunes, the lyrics just happen to mention Jesus.

One Catholic has not right to hold others to standards greater than what the Church holds them.

And the standard is Gregorian Chant, which is to be given first place in liturgical services - but is it?

Compare the melodies to the following two popualr hymns (not to mention the lyrics, the English one , the Latin one :heaven and it seems to me that the Latin one has an easier to sing melody. Simpler melodies make it easier to participate. Now yes, some chant can be very complex, which is why the Popes have given us Jubilate Deo and the Graduale Simplex and there are other books of simple chant.

Before we start singing the ‘pop’ hymns shouldn’t we all pick up Jubilate Deo and start singing the Mass, as per Vatican IIs decrees.

 

[ProVobis]

I don’t see how some of you ever get any joy out of Mass. You sound absolutely miserable. I pity you, I truly do. I love the Masses that I attend. After almost every Mass, my husband and I say, “It’s great to be Catholic! Wasn’t that wonderful? Wasn’t it great to be in the Presence of the Lord again!”

The Presence of Jesus can make ANYTHING beautiful.

Not to sound difficult but I really don’t understand this theology. For one thing, I thought God was omnipresent.

 

[ProVobis]

I don’t see how some of you ever get any joy out of Mass. You sound absolutely miserable. I pity you, I truly do. I love the Masses that I attend. After almost every Mass, my husband and I say, “It’s great to be Catholic! Wasn’t that wonderful? Wasn’t it great to be in the Presence of the Lord again!”

The Presence of Jesus can make ANYTHING beautiful.

Maybe a little off topic here but I really don’t understand this theology. For one thing, I thought God was omnipresent. For another, so what if we don’t get joy out of Mass? It’d be nice but is the fact we get joy out of it necessary to obtain graces and fulfill our obligation? Are we there to please God or the pianist who seeks applause for his work? But then maybe I got it all wrong.

 

[MarkThompson]

Before we start singing the ‘pop’ hymns shouldn’t we all pick up Jubilate Deo and start singing the Mass, as per Vatican IIs decrees.

Veni Creator Spiritus is not a part of the Mass, but I give you credit for trying!

 

[Canto]

Veni Creator Spiritus is not a part of the Mass, but I give you credit for trying!

Never said it was - though it is in the Graduale Simplex as an invocation to the Holy Spirit.

My points where that

1. before we start singing pop hymns we should sing the Mass
2. many modern hymns sans lyrics are pop tunes
3. many modern hymns have more complex melodies and some have dodgy lyrics
4. simpler melodies with better lyrics make participation easier

To illustrate points 3 and 4 I included two examples of popular hymns

Now as an aside, if we are going to invoke the Holy Spirit, why note VCSpiritus? It’d be a step in giving chant the first place the council demanded. If one reads the Latin, the language of the council is very strong.

Another aside, found this funny from another site, Here I am Lord, it is I Lord, who was brining up three very lovely girls…

 

[Cat]

Actually, those are separate words, though they’re often confused:

Tortuous: twisted, winding, circuitous, etc.
Torturous: like torture

Now you know!

Thanks. I knew something sounded strange about it.

It still seems that neither word is appropriate to describe music at Mass. Why don’t people just say, “I personally don’t like it,” rather than trying to put an adjective to it? Everyone has a right to a personal opinion.

 

[Cat]

Maybe a little off topic here but I really don’t understand this theology. For one thing, I thought God was omnipresent. For another, so what if we don’t get joy out of Mass? It’d be nice but is the fact we get joy out of it necessary to obtain graces and fulfill our obligation? Are we there to please God or the pianist who seeks applause for his work? But then maybe I got it all wrong.

It is so very unfair of you to assume that a pianist seeks applause for his or her work while playing at Mass.

I’m sure some do. I’m sure some pipe organists seek applause. I’m sure some Latin cantors seek applause. It is a danger of being a musician in church. Most of us are aware of this danger and we strive to avoid seeking the glory of man.

 

[Cat]

Take away the lyrics of many modern hymns and they sound like pop or contemporay folk tunes, the lyrics just happen to mention Jesus.

And the standard is Gregorian Chant, which is to be given first place in liturgical services - but is it?

Compare the melodies to the following two popualr hymns (not to mention the lyrics, the English one , the Latin one :heaven and it seems to me that the Latin one has an easier to sing melody. Simpler melodies make it easier to participate. Now yes, some chant can be very complex, which is why the Popes have given us Jubilate Deo and the Graduale Simplex and there are other books of simple chant.

Before we start singing the ‘pop’ hymns shouldn’t we all pick up Jubilate Deo and start singing the Mass, as per Vatican IIs decrees.

You have to be kidding. I’m truly amazed that you have this opinion. Do you actually work with people in a musical setting somewhere?

Ashes has a beautiful, flowing, highly-singable melody. It has a definite progression that is predictable for the ears. The tiny little children in our Catholic school choir sing this song beautifully and with no difficulty. The highest note in the song is a C above middle C, so it’s not unduly high.

The Latin song that you posted goes all over the place, has no time signature, and is in Latin. It is not a song that is “comfortable” for Western ears. It meanders, as do many of the Latin songs.

Why, why WHY is it considered somehow wrong or sinful for a song/hymn to have a melody? Is there something about church history/tradition that I am missing here? Were melodies used to make fun of the Catholic church or the Lord at some point in history, and so they were declared sinful and heathen? I just don’t get this at all. I must be ignorant of something in the history of the Catholic church that turned certain Catholics against pretty music.

I’m NOT saying, BTW, that we should never sing the Latin song(s). But I think a lot of you are kidding yourselves when you say that people will love this stuff and sing it easily. You are really kidding yourselves. Thanks to an abysmal music education program in the United States, people nowadays have neither the music reading ability or the musical listening ability to be able to pick it up and sing it well.

I think if it is offered in Mass on a regular basis, that the Catholic schools need to have in place a well-planned musical education program across the country that will train children how to read music and listen to music lines.

 

[pnewton]

Besides the text, compositional style is the ONLY thing they could be referring to.

It is not the only thing left. There is also usage. The use of the the sacred as defined by usage has a deep traditional root. For example, the altar an the santuary are sacred, not because of the shape of the altar or the architecture of the building, but because of its dedicated usage.

You insist that what we speak of is not secular. I’m still waiting for your proof.

I have none. What you experience and refer to specifically may be secular. In any case, if I have said nothing else is that there is not list. As always, it is not logical to try an prove a negative. No. If one is going to insist that something is “wrong” then they bear the onus of proof. I do not want the burden of putting my understanding on others.

I am sure you are a tremendous resource to your parish, as is Cat. I applaud all who take on a position of service and strive to learn the mind of the Church, even if we do not always agree.

 

[pnewton]

Take away the lyrics of many modern hymns and they sound like pop or contemporay folk tunes, the lyrics just happen to mention Jesus.

None of the hymns I am familiar with sound like anything I would hear on a country, rock or pop station, lyrics notwithstanding.

And the standard is Gregorian Chant, which is to be given first place in liturgical services - but is it?

Before we start singing the ‘pop’ hymns shouldn’t we all pick up Jubilate Deo and start singing the Mass, as per Vatican IIs decrees.

I have linked the Adoremus site that has resources multiple times here. This has been an area of lack in many parishes. For those who enter into such a parish, it may be a long road to institute this, but it is a laudable and doable goal.

 

[Canto]

You have to be kidding. I’m truly amazed that you have this opinion. Do you actually work with people in a musical setting somewhere?

Ashes has a beautiful, flowing, highly-singable melody. It has a definite progression that is predictable for the ears. The tiny little children in our Catholic school choir sing this song beautifully and with no difficulty. The highest note in the song is a C above middle C, so it’s not unduly high.

It has quavers and dotted notes all over the shop. My parish sings it not so beautifully.

““We rise again from ashes to create ourselves anew.” No, we don’t. Christ creates us anew. (Unless Augustine was wrong and Pelagius right).” - George Weigel catholiceducation.org/articles/arts/al0288.htm

The Latin song that you posted goes all over the place, has no time signature, and is in Latin. It is not a song that is “comfortable” for Western ears. It meanders, as do many of the Latin songs.

It steps up and down with a longer note at the end of each phrase. It is simple and flows naturally with no large leaps. With chant CDs selling well (just ask OCP) it does not seem uncomfortable to western ears. Has a Catholic CD with Ashes type songs ever made the pop charts? I found multiple VCS’s on itunes but not 1 recording of Ashes.

Why, why WHY is it considered somehow wrong or sinful for a song/hymn to have a melody?

It’s not, but… modern hymns that I hear sung are too syncopated and some have bizzare rhythms, for example they’ll throw in a quaver rest, so the singer takes a breather for a quater of a beat. As such the participation of the faithful decreases.

Is there something about church history/tradition that I am missing here? Were melodies used to make fun of the Catholic church or the Lord at some point in history, and so they were declared sinful and heathen?

When in our history have we ever sung secular melodies? Didn’t the Church have to beat opera music out of the doors at one stage.

Sing the lyrics of Blowin’ in the wind to Ashes. Then sing them to VCSpiritus. Do they both sound sacred?

I just don’t get this at all. I must be ignorant of something in the history of the Catholic church that turned certain Catholics against pretty music.

Pretty? That is subjective, like when I say the simpler Father Lambiotte setting is more pretty than the famous Franck version of Panis Angelicus.

I’m NOT saying, BTW, that we should never sing the Latin song(s). But I think a lot of you are kidding yourselves when you say that people will love this stuff and sing it easily.

When do we sing the Latin songs? There was a chant CD by a group of monks that was a huge hit on the UK pop charts. Beth Nielsen Chapman’s hymns CD of chant and polyphony made Billboard, and then there’s the Priests CDs featuring much Sacred Polyphony that sold very well.

In Australia the Priests first CD made the 2008 year end top 100 ahead of artists such as Usher, Justin Timberlake, Maroon 5, Colbie Caillat and Miley Cyrus.

You are really kidding yourselves. Thanks to an abysmal music education program in the United States, people nowadays have neither the music reading ability or the musical listening ability to be able to pick it up and sing it well.

Then why syncopated complex modern hymns?

The Bishop visiting my Parish, all be it in English, started chanting the the Mass the other week and we seemed to manage, even though we haven’t chanted the Mass in decades!

 

[ProVobis]

None of the hymns I am familiar with sound like anything I would hear on a country, rock or pop station, lyrics notwithstanding.

Depends on how you look at it. In my opinion, some of those country, rock or pop tunes would be an improvement over the tunes being heard in churches today, copyrights notwithstanding.

 

[Prometheum_x]

Another aside, found this funny from another site, Here I am Lord, it is I Lord, who was brining up three very lovely girls…

This seems to be the most common example used to demonstrate a supposed borrowing from secular music – in fact, I can’t call to mind any others that get cited as evidence of this. I can, however, find a list of hundreds of “parody” Masses from the Renaissance period.

It is unsurprising to find a short melodic fragment in one song that has the same contour as that from another song, especially when both songs are solidly diatonic. There’s only 7 diatonic pitches that you can draw from, and it is unremarkable that a composer would use such devices as ascending/descending 4ths and 5ths, as well as a step-wise melodic progression. Additionally, it isn’t usually mentioned that the rhythm, harmony, and tempo are different. Unless someone has testimony from the composer that this was intentional, it is most likely coincidental. Charity would suggest that we give the benefit of the doubt.

 

[Prometheum_x]

Besides the text, compositional style is the ONLY thing they could be referring to. When they speak of improper texts, this is very obvious. The only thing left is the style, be it one of the many sacred styles or one of the many secular styles.

You insist that what we speak of is not secular. I’m still waiting for your proof.

(The above words in gray, starting w/ “and when did the…” are part of my response.I don’t know how to do this quote technique.)

There is also the manner in which the composition is played, and some of the documents do refer to this aspect.

Some compositions that have been let into the Liturgy are secular in style. Some are not. I cannot tell how you jump to the conclusion that every song that has has any syncopation or extended tertian harmonies is automatically secular. Perhaps we should just say that any piece that uses common practice period harmonic structures is a product of the enlightenment rationalism and is unsuited to the liturgy. Most secular music uses V-I cadences, whereas Gregorian chant is modal; therefore, we should prohibit such devices, because they are secular in nature.

 

[snowlake]

This seems to be the most common example used to demonstrate a supposed borrowing from secular music – in fact, I can’t call to mind any others that get cited as evidence of this. I can, however, find a list of hundreds of “parody” Masses from the Renaissance period.

These humorous connections are only “asides”, and only part of a much larger picture,
which they serve to underscore in a funny way. I found it quite hilarious. And I hadn’t heard this one yet, but have heard many others. Sometimes they are referring to other things than direct melodic quotes which, as you said, could be found anywhere. This brings to mind a post I recently read about “Gather Us In” and the writer’s impression that it is similar to “The Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald”.

I think that these points are brought up just as an addition to the apprehension of the WHOLE piece being a non-sacred style. This is different than the use in the late-medieval
and early Renaissance use of a borrowed cantus firmus, which was used as a compositional device to create a whole new composition in a sacred style.

Your post has finally helped me to put my finger on what bothered me about your response
to the Eagles’ Wings analysis. More later…

 

[snowlake]

. I cannot tell how you jump to the conclusion that every song that has has any syncopation or extended tertian harmonies is automatically secular. Perhaps we should just say that any piece that uses common practice period harmonic structures is a product of the enlightenment rationalism and is unsuited to the liturgy. Most secular music uses V-I cadences, whereas Gregorian chant is modal; therefore, we should prohibit such devices, because they are secular in nature.

Perfect. This will be of great help in the response.

 

[snowlake]

It is not the only thing left. There is also usage. The use of the the sacred as defined by usage has a deep traditional root. For example, the altar an the santuary are sacred, not because of the shape of the altar or the architecture of the building, but because of its dedicated usage.] end quote.

“usage” implies that it it not used for anything else. Which is the meaning of sacred, at least in the Catholic sense. It is something “set aside” for sacred use only. The style of music that I am referring to (not a SPECIFIC song, but a style) has its origin and current
use in the secular world. And I’m not referring to simple folk music. I’m referring to the world of Broadway, rock music, and commercial music.

If you played a “regular” homophonic hymn or a selection of sacred chant at a restaurant
people would wonder what the heck you were doing. That is because it is recognized as a style that is “set aside” for sacred use.

If you played any number of the “songs” (hymn is not even the word to use)that we’ve been speaking of, it might not even be noticed. Especially if it is played on piano w/o
a singer, and most especially if the people have not yet heard it. They would have no idea
that the piece was part of the sacred repertory. It would not seem out of place at all.

By the way, besides dedicated use, there are regulations that affect sacred art and architecture. There are certain materials that an altar may or may not be made of. There are certain designs that are not acceptable for church buildings.There are rules governing
what the sacred vessels can be made out of, and what a priest’s vestments consist of.

Sacred music is a vessel for the text. There are certain things it should not be made out of.

 

[MarkThompson]

I think that these points are brought up just as an addition to the apprehension of the WHOLE piece being a non-sacred style. This is different than the use in the late-medieval and early Renaissance use of a borrowed cantus firmus, which was used as a compositional device to create a whole new composition in a sacred style.

And yet you know that if a modern composer borrowed the melody of, say, “Oops . . . I Did It Again” and used it as a cantus firmus for Missa Oops I Did It Again, we’d never hear the end of how disrespectful a thing that was. And yet, how exactly is that different from Missa L’Homme Armé?

By the way, if you’re curious how Missa Oops I Did It Again might sound, this could give you some idea. )

 

[snowlake]

. Perhaps we should just say that any piece that uses common practice period harmonic structures is a product of the enlightenment rationalism and is unsuited to the liturgy.

The enlightenment began well into the 1700s. The common practice period began 100
years earlier. But I get your point, and will be addressing it soon.

 

[ProVobis]

So can non-vocal music such as “We Thank Thee, God, We Thank Thee” ever be appropriate? And not just as a prelude or a postlude. Why or why not?

youtube.com/watch?v=_E7f00J0hDw&feature=related

This is not a trick question. Need an honest response as the conversation here seems to have turned to all vocal music.