MERGED: Music in the Mass/Not typical thread about Music

[benedictgal]

I have had several concerns about the dearth of music down here in the South Texas hinterland. It is rather disconcerting to be in the season of Lent and not hear any music that reflects this holy time of the year.

Here are my thoughts on the subject:

benedictgal-lexorandilexcredendi.blogspot.com/2011/03/why-sacred-music-matters.html

benedictgal-lexorandilexcredendi.blogspot.com/2011/02/possible-shape-of-things-to-come.html

Since both of these are too long to condense into a post, I figured it would be best to just post them as links.

 

[Canto]

How many* parishes*? You are giving an opinion about what is meant by this.

Am I?

It says in liturgical services it should be given first place?
It is speaking on sacred music, and does not specifiy only fancy Cathedrals.
Parishes must adhere to the decrees of Vat II and Vat II says G-chant should be given first place?
So parishes should give chant first place, but how many do?
Other docs pre and post Vat II speak of the laity, even school kids, learning the chants of the Church.

Our Cathedral has active Gregorian chant, making Gregorian chant principiem in our diocese, from a certain point of view.

In the Cathedral. But individual parishes? The Masses of the Bishop are a guide for the parishes of a diocese are they not? And the Pope’s Masses too.

question every bishop an almost every priest.

That Gregorian Chant has not been give first place is not necessarily the fault of Priests and Bishops.

 

[pnewton]

Am I?

It says in liturgical services it should be given first place?
It is speaking on sacred music, and does not specifiy only fancy Cathedrals.
Parishes must adhere to the decrees of Vat II and Vat II says G-chant should be given first place?
So parishes should give chant first place, but how many do?
Other docs pre and post Vat II speak of the laity, even school kids, learning the chants of the Church.

I obviously did not make myself clear or you would not repeat yourself. Your opinion is understandable and may well be right, although the fact that no diocesean bishop takes this understanding gives me pause. The words of Church documents are very precise. Your syllogism substitues “parishes” for “liturgical services”, when the two are not equivalent.

 

[stephraim]

I obviously did not make myself clear or you would not repeat yourself. Your opinion is understandable and may well be right, although the fact that no diocesean bishop takes this understanding gives me pause. The words of Church documents are very precise. Your syllogism substitues “parishes” for “liturgical services”, when the two are not equivalent.

I wouldn’t say “no diocesan bishop” because I do know of a few that actively promote chant.

 

[pnewton]

I wouldn’t say “no diocesan bishop” because I do know of a few that actively promote chant.

As does ours, but he does not require it to be used more than any other music in each of his parishes. This is the interpretation Canto was suggesting. So does any bishop go this far? If not, then we are face with two possibilities. Either every bishop is disobedient, or this rigid interpretation is simply not what the document says. There may be a third possibility I can not see.

 

[Canto]

although the fact that no diocesean bishop takes this understanding gives me pause. The words of Church documents are very precise.

There were councils that called for reforms pre Trent. Some of these reforms were not implemented.

Aren’t Pope Benedict and other Bishops and lay people talking about a reform of the reform. Haven’t some noted that Vat II has yet to be fully realised. When it is, maybe then chant will have first place.

Your syllogism substitues “parishes” for “liturgical services”, when the two are not equivalent.

Where are liturgical services most commonly held? In parishes?
First place implies that other music has a secondary place to chant

Folk (folk/pop) music has pride of place in my parish
Is this what the council wanted? Or did the council want chant?

 

[TheMc]

So does any bishop go this far?

Our holy father has gone this far with his Masses. Again another example of proposing how we should celebrate the Mass, rather than imposing. Leading the way with vestments, central altar cross, kneeler for communion, and now chanted Masses.

I would like to point out the same tactic is being used by my bishop (propose, not impose). Here’s our Sunday’s musical lineup at the cathedral.

Directly before the hymn: the chanted introit of the day
Hymn (might be based on the introit or the readings. Didn’t check.)
Sung/chanted Psalm
Chanted Prayers of the faithful
Chant and Choral music during the offertory (Sometimes based on the propers)
Chanted Sanctus (jubilate deo)
Chanted Memorial Acc. (Sacamentary)
a polyphonic Agnus Dei
Another responsorial psalm sung during communion
Possibly a choral piece (often based on the propers, or uses them verbatim)
Recessional Hymn
Also, Bishop Chanted 95% of the celebrant’s prayers, besides the canon (maybe at easter…)

Now this is giving the pride of place to chant as the church wants. Did I also mention he recently had a chant workshop for the diocese, and celebrated a chanted OF Mass in latin, with all the chants?

No offence, but the liturgy at the cathedral is supposed to be the model for the diocese, so saying that it has pride of place if it’s used at the cathedral (and only at the cathedral) seems to not be correct.

 

[pnewton]

Our holy father has gone this far with his Masses. Again another example of proposing how we should celebrate the Mass, rather than imposing. Leading the way with vestments, central altar cross, kneeler for communion, and now chanted Masses.

I would like to point out the same tactic is being used by my bishop (propose, not impose). Here’s our Sunday’s musical lineup at the cathedral.

Our bishop does the same thing. This is not the issue in question though, nor what I asked. In fact it supports exactly what I was saying. The Holy Father, the Cathedral, is surely a place of honor. The question is whether any bishop has requested or required that* each parish* do the same.

 

[Canto]

The Holy Father, the Cathedral, is surely a place of honor.

The doc however speakis of liturgical services not places of honour
It does not specificy only liturgical services in the dioscean cathedral.
Parishes hold liturgical services 1-7 days a week. Should they be exempt from giving chant first place?

The question is whether any bishop has requested or required that* each parish* do the same.

To my knowedge, no. However, isn’t the way the Pope celebrates Mass supposed to be a guide for the Latin rite.

At his Masses in Rome the Pope gives chant first place. The Masses also are in Latin with the readings and Prayer of the faithful in vernacular.

Vat II allowed the afore mentioned in the vernacular but said that steps should be taken so that the faithful can say/sing Mass in Latin.

The Holy Father has also even as Pope spoken on these issues. In an apostolic exhortation (Sacramentum Caritas) he wrote “I ask that future priests, from their time in the seminary, receive the preparation needed to understand and to celebrate Mass in Latin, and also to use Latin texts and execute Gregorian chant; nor should we forget that the faithful can be taught to recite the more common prayers in Latin, and also to sing parts of the liturgy to Gregorian chant.”