MERGED: Music in Mass/Sacred Music

[Newbie2]

I guess the bagpipes are out

There is no instrument that is better for “Amazing Grace” than the great Highland pipes!

 

[ProVobis]

There is no instrument that is better for “Amazing Grace” than the great Highland pipes!

“Amazing Grace” has been discussed here

and here.

 

[ProVobis]

The pastor asked me to help out for two Saturdays. We did it accapella, singing traditional hymns and the Mass settings by Richard Proulx. Everyone sang. Even at Communion, quite a few people kept up the hymn long enough to give me a chance to receive Holy Communion.

Richard Proulx used to orchestrate the choir and play the organ at Holy Name Cathedral for a long time. It was hard not to sing there.

 

[benedictgal]

Richard Proulx used to orchestrate the choir and play the organ at Holy Name Cathedral for a long time. It was hard not to sing there.

It’s a shame that he died. At least he got to rewrite his settings to accomodate the new translations! His Community Mass is, in my opinion, one of the best, if not the best, setting!

 

[ProVobis]

It’s a shame that he died.

I wasn’t aware of that. After googling him, I see he died back in March. Glad he had a chance to provide some (name removed by moderator)ut into the music of the newly translated Mass. I think the entire Christian church will miss him.

 

[Phemie]

I’d like to go on record to say that I oppose the playing of the piano in the Church. I love the instrument, I learned to play when I was young, and I gave two school recitals, but I just don’t think it’s appropriate in Church. Maybe concert halls and bars but not church. I’d take a lousy organist over a highly skilled piano player anytime. Sorry.

Sorry, a bad organist is just excruciatingly painful.

Most of the “modern” stuff we sing at Mass was written for piano. I’ve experienced the difference when we had a good organist and a good pianist who played the same stuff for us to hear. The modern stuff just wasn’t as easy to sing accompanied by organ and the traditional stuff was awful to sing to a piano accompaniment.

Good classical guitar will do for a small space; strumming, OTOH, should be banned.

 

[Sarabande]

The pipe organ is used at hockey games in some indoor and outdoor concerts as well. And it may even be playing hymns at those concerts. That’s not the point. **It’s not just the pipe organ but how ** it’s played and its context that dictates whether it’s suitable for actual worship or not.

I think you’ve made a very good point here. Yes, many, if not all instruments (including the voice) can and have been used for secular uses. How these instruments are “rendered” is what helps determines the appropriateness of the instrument. An organ, if mastered by someone who knows what he/she is doing will sound much different in the way it is played at a mass to how it would be played at a hockey game, for instance. A master of the voice can do the same in terms of knowing how to sing Gregorian chant, early music or other hymns and sacred songs to singing in a musical, opera, country, rock, etc. The type of music will dictate how the music should be played on the instrument or the voice. For instance, if someone tries to chant or sing a Tallis piece in a choir, keeping his/her pop-sounding voice, it would sound totally off-kilter. It would sound just as off-kilter if someone sings these works with an operatic voice. Even those who aren’t trained or well-versed in music can hear the difference. I remember being able to tell the difference immediately as a child before I knew anything about singing and I believe most people would know the difference as well.

If an instrument can’t be rendered, adapted or refined properly to distinguish itself from secular works, then that would definitely give cause to rethink the appropriateness of the instrument at mass. Again, one of the questions I ask myself is if the instrument or the piece would sound like a typical secular song if I took the words out or if the way it is played causes it to sound like a song I’d hear on the radio, in a musical, etc.

At the same time, I think it would have saved people much headache if the Church just came out and said what was and was not permitted. It just makes people, namely the musicians and composers, work harder to make the instruments and music truly suitable for mass. Instead, we’re left to our own devices. I’m usually not about banning things, but look how well banning polyphony by three popes helped composers and musicians work at refining it to be appropriate for mass. I personally think the Church probably would have done well to do the same today.

 

[Sarabande]

Good classical guitar will do for a small space; strumming, OTOH, should be banned.

haha! Yes, strumming is just darn awful. I cantored for a Latin OF wedding mass once with a classical guitarist and violinist. I can’t remember if there was a problem with the organ or not. All of the Latin mass parts were chanted a capella by myself and the guests (many of whom chanted along) and then the other works were accompanied by the instruments. It was well done, spiritually beautiful, extremely reverent, thus the musicians were successful at rendering it appropriate for mass.

 

[Bob_Aliano]

Douay-Rheims Bible

---

2 Samuel 6:5

But David and all Israel played before the Lord on all manner of instruments made of wood, on harps and lutes and timbrels and cornets and cymbals.

Nothing serene or particularly sacred about these instruments!

 

[ProVobis]

Most of the “modern” stuff we sing at Mass was written for piano.

Yep, that’s the problem with the “modern” liturgical stuff. Not exactly what Vatican II called for.

 

[ProVobis]

Most of the “modern” stuff we sing at Mass was written for piano.

Not to derail the thread but I suspect the “modern” stuff has also influenced the new church and liturgical architecture as well. Generally positioned toward the front by the altar, the piano has the potential of distracting from the full participation needed for Mass. Contrast that with the spiritual uplifting of the cathedral ceilings, the console at the back, and reverberations needed for the pipe organ to work most efficiently. Most people don’t even see the church organist (I’m talking real pipe organs) so that at least focuses on the music and not the piano or Casio keyboard or guitar player. The less applause in church, the better.

 

[benedictgal]

Douay-Rheims Bible

---

2 Samuel 6:5

But David and all Israel played before the Lord on all manner of instruments made of wood, on harps and lutes and timbrels and cornets and cymbals.

Nothing serene or particularly sacred about these instruments!

That was not within the context of the cultic sacrificial worship of ancient Israel, though. Just because David did something, that does not necessarily justify it as proper for the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

 

[Jennifer_J]

Again, as Pope Paul VI stated (and, this is the very Pontiff under which the OF of the Mass was brought about), not everything is fit to cross the threshold insofar as music is concerned.

What you do not seem to understand is that the organ is the only instrument specifically mentioned in the authoritative documents of the Church. It is actually the only instrument that has been extolled by the Supreme Pontiffs. It’s almost as though Pope Benedict’s own words on the organ are lost on not a few people.

Not lost on me at all. I agree with the Popes. The organ, played properly is a magnificent instrument. However, there’s no getting around it being a secular instrument. I just wish they would outline what they mean by “secular instrument”! Name names, set it out for people…no electric guitars, no drum kits (some drums are ethnic and okay for use in some liturgies), no whatever. Just tell the people what’s okay and what’s not besides just the organ. Not every Church has the luxury of an organ or an organist.

I stand by what I have written. Furthermore, the particular secular genres that employ the use of electric guitars, drums, bass guitars and the like have no place in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Again, according to Pope Benedict XVI:

Again, I agree rock and roll and jazz and blues are not suitable styles for Mass. However, that still leaves many instruments that ARE suited for Mass besides just the organ.

The problem is that, unfortunately, statements made by the Pope tend to get ignored by the publishing houses. They are the ones who publish the songs that use these instruments, trying to pass them off as something legitimate when they really are not.

Then the Bishops need to step up to the plate and stop the nonsense.

 

[Sarabande]

That was not within the context of the cultic sacrificial worship of ancient Israel, though. Just because David did something, that does not necessarily justify it as proper for the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

I agree with you. Much of Church music history do not include those instruments for liturgical purposes. My formal voice teacher who is also trained in Jewish chant (studied with one of the leading masters of Hebrew chant) told me that their formal worship consisted of mostly the voice - not of the instruments used by David. Those instruments were not used for their formal worship.

As a side note - the harp and lute are rather serene, quite beautiful and incredibly ethereal and lovely with a voice or a few voices, although not conducive at all for accompanying and supporting an entire congregation for mass.

 

[Sarabande]

Not lost on me at all. I agree with the Popes. The organ, played properly is a magnificent instrument. However, there’s no getting around it being a secular instrument.** I just wish they would outline what they mean by “secular instrument”! Name names, set it out for people…no electric guitars, no drum kits (some drums are ethnic and okay for use in some liturgies), no whatever. Just tell the people what’s okay and what’s not besides just the organ. Not every Church has the luxury of an organ or an organist.**

Again, I agree rock and roll and jazz and blues are not suitable styles for Mass. However, that still leaves many instruments that ARE suited for Mass besides just the organ.

Then the Bishops need to step up to the plate and stop the nonsense.

I totally agree with the bolded. Many of my music colleagues, including myself, have always agreed that the Church really needed to be much more definitive and concrete with what they wanted and did not want. The ambiguity has caused the problems and debates we are seeing today. And as I said previously, if the Church did that, it would inspire musicians and composers to work hard at adapting newer music to make it suitable for mass. It might also give Bishops a better handle of how to put their foot down when needed.

I also agree that if an instrument can be rendered appropriately for mass, especially if there is no organist or organ around, it can be done quite reverently and beautifully.

 

[pnewton]

1. Will there be a restriction on the instruments and music played in Mass in teh future?
2. How long has the Catholic church sung “Amazing Grace” in Mass?
3. Is there a list of “approved” songs for Mass, or on the flip-side certain Protestant songs that can’t be sung?

1. No one know the future.
2. Whether a specific Church should sing “Amazing Grace” here or there is a local decision. The Church has never spoken.
3. No list of approved songs. No list of proscribed songs.

There are one billion Catholics and one billlion opinions. The bishop is the one who sets local rules and the priest determines how liturgy is implemented. I think with opening this can of worms, you are probably now aware of that.

I would recommend reading the documents and forming your own opinion, if this is an issue. If this is not something that is of an issue for you, just let your priest hash it out using his judgement. What we post here on this topic is not relevant, as pretty much anything we say specifically will extend beyond what the Catholic Church has said.

 

[Canto]

Douay-Rheims Bible

---

2 Samuel 6:5

But David and all Israel played before the Lord on all manner of instruments made of wood, on harps and lutes and timbrels and cornets and cymbals.

Nothing serene or particularly sacred about these instruments!

Let’s not forget our swords

Ps. 149 - Let the faithful rejoice in their glory, cry out for joy at their banquet, With the praise of God in their mouths, and a two-edged sword in their hands…

 

[Canto]

I went to the USCCB instruction regarding the Institution Generalis Missalis Romani and found this under the musical instrument section:

“While the organ is to be accorded pride of place, other wind, stringed, or percussion instruments may be used in liturgical services in the dioceses of the United States of America, according to longstanding local usage, provided they are truly apt for sacred use or can be rendered apt.”.

1. Does 40 years consitute long standing usage?
2. Are drums and electric guitars for example truly apt for Mass?
3. Where can such a tradtion be found in Catholic, that’s Catholic, worship, to have guitars and drums and how far back does the traditon go?
4. Do parishes, even those with drums and guitars, accord the organ pride of place?

The GIRM #40 says first preferennce should go to singing the dialogue

For the Entrace Chant, Offertory Chant and Communion Chant, yes Chant, the GIRM #48 says the texts sung MUST be approved by the conference of Bishops. Here I Am Lord (to note one example) is not approved

 

[jc-servant]

Please re-read what I posted. Electric guitars, drum kits and the like are primarily associated with secular music, not sacred. Just because it does not specifically name an instrument, that does not mean that there is carte blanche out there to use it.

I can read just fine thanks. I’ve had a fine legal career for years which requires an ability to analyze documents at a level that most people could not understand. I never said “carte blanche” or indicated any position on the instruments. I asked you for a a source for your the unsupported list that you appended to a quote of an official document as if to bootstrap some authority to what appears to be a list that you personally made for unknown reasons. If you had some official source for your list I assume that you would have posted that instead of going on the offensive against me in a knee jerk reaction to a request for some official support for your assertion.

I have lawyers appearing before me all of the time who read laws through the lens of what they would like to see versus reading it in a purely logical manner with an eye toward the legislative intent (intent of those who wrote the law). I’ll tell you what I tell them, “what you think it should be or how you see it is not legal support for your position.” Persuading a judge to rule in your client’s favor requires more than your opinion or argument and persuading fellow posters that something is the Church’s position and not merely your personal preference also requires authoritative support.

 

[ProVobis]

1. Does 40 years consitute long standing usage?

I would say that “according to longstanding local usage” applied retroactively. Otherwise anyone could find the kind of loophole posed in your question. And looking for loopholes generally defies the spirit of the intentions of the document.