MERGED: Singing the Mass by Bishop Olmsted

  • Thread starter Thread starter christofirst
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Cat said:
Our problem, IMO, is that we are a stone’s throw from Willowcreek and the excellent professional contemporary and traditional praise music presented there. Many Protestant churches model their music after this program.
Click to expand...
I see.
Cat said:
Although I realize that there are exceptions like YTC, most of the young people that I know greatly prefer contemporary music in their worship, and thus migrate to churches modeled like Willowcreek.
Click to expand...
The problem, however, is that ultimately, Catholic doctrine is incompatible with most contemporary music. I am sick and tired of people saying, “Oh, music at mass is just a personal choice.” No, it isn’t. It is much more than that. There are certain specific styles of music that vastly outperform in conveying the Church’s Tradition: traditional music.

You’ll notice that, doctrinally, most Protestant denominations are in decay. They are all mixed up. There used to be a time (circa 1975ish and before) when a Methodist was a Methodist, a Baptist was a Baptist, a Lutheran was a Lutheran, and a Pentacostal guy was a Pentacostal guy. This isn’t so anymore. We are such a pick and choose selfish society that there is very little separating the Protestant denominations anymore. It seems like every other month a church in the town where I live removes the denominational sign out front and replaces it with some generic name like “God’s House” or something.

The problem with Catholicism is that we call devotional music church music, which is so deluded. You wanna sing pop music? Fine, but not at mass. Do it after mass in the parish hall. Nothing wrong with that. The doctrine of the Church is gold, but the outside, the liturgy, is in a state of rotten and stinking decay for the most part.

This is my prediction: the Catholic Church will shrink massively. The resulting product will be a smaller, more compact, thoroughly orthodox and liturgically sound religion. Are we getting better liturgically? Yes. The parishes that have orthodox liturgy are also the parishes that have the best catechized parishioners, for the most part. But those parishes aren’t exactly common. Oh well. I really don’t know if I can become a priest, because I cannot in good conscience celebrate horrible liturgy, and I would be in a very precarious situation if I was assigned to a liturgically horrible parish.
 
YoungTradCath said:
This is my prediction: the Catholic Church will shrink massively. The resulting product will be a smaller, more compact, thoroughly orthodox and liturgically sound religion.
Click to expand...
Pope Benedict also spoke about this. He’s spoken of the creative minority that will be needed. People will leave. But you know what? Those are the ones who were hanging on by a thread anyways. Those are the ones who could already care less. I hate to sound flippant, but them leaving is simply an external manifestation of their deep seated manifestation of their interior attitude. If you’re going to get your rear in the pew, but then not care about anything that happens, that’s not much different than not even being there.
 
YoungTradCath said:
I see.

The problem, however, is that ultimately, Catholic doctrine is incompatible with most contemporary music. I am sick and tired of people saying, “Oh, music at mass is just a personal choice.” No, it isn’t. It is much more than that. There are certain specific styles of music that vastly outperform in conveying the Church’s Tradition: traditional music.

You’ll notice that, doctrinally, most Protestant denominations are in decay. They are all mixed up. There used to be a time (circa 1975ish and before) when a Methodist was a Methodist, a Baptist was a Baptist, a Lutheran was a Lutheran, and a Pentacostal guy was a Pentacostal guy. This isn’t so anymore. We are such a pick and choose selfish society that there is very little separating the Protestant denominations anymore. It seems like every other month a church in the town where I live removes the denominational sign out front and replaces it with some generic name like “God’s House” or something.

The problem with Catholicism is that we call devotional music church music, which is so deluded. You wanna sing pop music? Fine, but not at mass. Do it after mass in the parish hall. Nothing wrong with that. The doctrine of the Church is gold, but the outside, the liturgy, is in a state of rotten and stinking decay for the most part.

This is my prediction: the Catholic Church will shrink massively. The resulting product will be a smaller, more compact, thoroughly orthodox and liturgically sound religion. Are we getting better liturgically? Yes. The parishes that have orthodox liturgy are also the parishes that have the best catechized parishioners, for the most part. But those parishes aren’t exactly common. Oh well. I really don’t know if I can become a priest, because I cannot in good conscience celebrate horrible liturgy, and I would be in a very precarious situation if I was assigned to a liturgically horrible parish.
Click to expand...
But it IS possible to compose contemporary-style music that IS compatible with Catholic dogma. We’ve seen it, and we like it.

You do realize that although there are plenty of Church documents that advocate ancient music, there are also plenty of Church documents that make it very clear that other styles of music are welcome, provided that they are in keeping with the sacred nature of the Mass and compatible with Catholic teachings. It is NOT a requirement of the Catholic Church that the only music is chant and polyphony. There is nothing in the rubrics forbidding contemporary Christian music. What’s needed is CATHOLIC contemporary music.

FInally, you must realize that you are mistaken to say that most Protestant denominations are in decay. Many of the evangelical denominations, especially the non-denominational fellowships like Willowcreek, are growing exponentially. Over 20,000 (twenty thousand) “seekers” visit Willowcreek every Sunday. The megachurch in our city (a satellite of Willowcreek) has almost one-tenth of our city’s population in attendance every weekend–that’s over 10,000 people. And many of those are Catholics, and many of them attend because they like the music.

I realize that many Catholics love ancient and traditional music. But we have to be willing to think in reality, and to admit that many many Catholics do NOT like ancient and traditional, and instead, prefer contemporary music. In our parish, even though we have a great pipe organ and a great organist, most people prefer those “banal” contemporary songs that so many of you despise.

I personally prefer the “banal” contemporary songs. Probably because of my Protestant background, I have a very difficult time “feeling” worshipful when chant or classical-style music is done in Mass. Songs like Eagle’s Wings really help me to focus on God, not the music.

I’m NOT saying that music should be based on personal preference. It should be chosen according to what the rubrics of the Church allow. And like it or not, the rubrics allow contemporary-styles of music in the Mass. It’s probably better to try to find a way to accept this. I don’t think it will change.

And I don’t agree that the Church will “shrink.” Bluntly speaking, we need the money that many members provide. Spiritually speaking, the Church is much better at welcoming people who are not entirely committed to Jesus than many of us are. Holy Mother Church understands that everyone is at a different place in their journey to heaven, and she is much more tolerant of these people than many of us are.
 
Cat said:
But it IS possible to compose contemporary-style music that IS compatible with Catholic dogma. We’ve seen it, and we like it. There is nothing in the rubrics forbidding contemporary Christian music. What’s needed is CATHOLIC contemporary music.

FInally, you must realize that you are mistaken to say that most Protestant denominations are in decay.

I realize that many Catholics love ancient and traditional music. But we have to be willing to think in reality, and to admit that many many Catholics do NOT like ancient and traditional, and instead, prefer contemporary music. In our parish, even though we have a great pipe organ and a great organist, most people prefer those “banal” contemporary songs that so many of you despise.

And I don’t agree that the Church will “shrink.” Bluntly speaking, we need the money that many members provide. Spiritually speaking, the Church is much better at welcoming people who are not entirely committed to Jesus than many of us are. Holy Mother Church understands that everyone is at a different place in their journey to heaven, and she is much more tolerant of these people than many of us are.
Click to expand...
Part 1

That’s not what I mean. I did not say that it is impossible to compose contemporary Catholic music. It is just very hard. Either that, or composers are just very stubborn. Then again, perhaps their patrons (churches) are…

I think you and I have a different interpretation of the concept of “contemporary music.” Where most people think of American Idol and pop ditties when they hear the phrase “contemporary music,” when it comes to Catholic mass music, I think of music that is in perfect harmony with the music of the past, yet perhaps does it in a different way. For example, using classical instruments (and perhaps even adding some newer ones), but obviously composing in a different way that builds upon the past. That is the line I will not cross. Either it builds upon the past, or it does not. I’m not saying composers should be composing Baroque masterpieces. I am saying that they should be composing their own masterpieces, masterpieces that naturally flow from the artist’s hand that aren’t contrived to fit some preconceived “fit in with the times” expectation. This is just like literature. Are modern writing styles and subjects palpably different than those of the past? Absolutely. But the works considered literature of the past century or so are just as fantastically high quality as the works considered literature 1,000 years older than that. Crime and Punishment by Dostoevsky is amazing writing, and so is the Aeneid, even though they are much separated in history.

When GP da Palestrina was composing amazing masses in the middle of the Renaissance, it wasn’t like that was the only music that existed. That era had its own version of junky pop music. We tend to have this silly image in our minds that everybody in 1580 listened to fine compositions by the best masters who had the richest patrons. That isn’t so. My point is that every era has its good music and every era has its junk music. It just seems that in our era, we Catholics are either too ignorant or too (dare I say it?) selfish or too stubborn to have some demarcation between the two in the realm of mass music. The term “contemporary Christian music” as it relates to the Catholic mass is a misnomer. Of course I do not mean to say that it is impossible to compose great Catholic music for use in the mass. Take Dr. James MacMillan, for example. I just mean to say that only a very, very small sliver of what is currently being put out is worthy of the mass and most people seem to have no sense of determination thereof. I therefore posit a new, more precise term: contemporary sacred music. That middle word makes all the difference. I hate using the word “modern” because that has a very specific meaning. I also don’t care for using “contemporary” because the root word generally does indicate something of temporariness caused by low quality. But I can’t really think of anything else. So there, contemporary sacred music.
 
Cat said:
But it IS possible to compose contemporary-style music that IS compatible with Catholic dogma. We’ve seen it, and we like it. There is nothing in the rubrics forbidding contemporary Christian music. What’s needed is CATHOLIC contemporary music.

FInally, you must realize that you are mistaken to say that most Protestant denominations are in decay.

I realize that many Catholics love ancient and traditional music. But we have to be willing to think in reality, and to admit that many many Catholics do NOT like ancient and traditional, and instead, prefer contemporary music. In our parish, even though we have a great pipe organ and a great organist, most people prefer those “banal” contemporary songs that so many of you despise.

And I don’t agree that the Church will “shrink.” Bluntly speaking, we need the money that many members provide. Spiritually speaking, the Church is much better at welcoming people who are not entirely committed to Jesus than many of us are. Holy Mother Church understands that everyone is at a different place in their journey to heaven, and she is much more tolerant of these people than many of us are.
Click to expand...
Part 1

That’s not what I mean. I did not say that it is impossible to compose contemporary Catholic music. It is just very hard. Either that, or composers are just very stubborn. Then again, perhaps their patrons (churches) are…

I think you and I have a different interpretation of the concept of “contemporary music.” Where most people think of American Idol and pop ditties when they hear the phrase “contemporary music,” when it comes to Catholic mass music, I think of music that is in perfect harmony with the music of the past, yet perhaps does it in a different way. For example, using classical instruments (and perhaps even adding some newer ones), but obviously composing in a different way that builds upon the past. That is the line I will not cross. Either it builds upon the past, or it does not. I’m not saying composers should be composing Baroque masterpieces. I am saying that they should be composing their own masterpieces, masterpieces that naturally flow from the artist’s hand that aren’t contrived to fit some preconceived “fit in with the times” expectation. This is just like literature. Are modern writing styles and subjects palpably different than those of the past? Absolutely. But the works considered literature of the past century or so are just as fantastically high quality as the works considered literature 1,000 years older than that. Crime and Punishment by Dostoevsky is amazing writing, and so is the Aeneid, even though they are much separated in history.

When GP da Palestrina was composing amazing masses in the middle of the Renaissance, it wasn’t like that was the only music that existed. That era had its own version of junky pop music. We tend to have this silly image in our minds that everybody in 1580 listened to fine compositions by the best masters who had the richest patrons. That isn’t so. My point is that every era has its good music and every era has its junk music. It just seems that in our era, we Catholics are either too ignorant or too (dare I say it?) selfish or too stubborn to have some demarcation between the two in the realm of mass music. The term “contemporary Christian music” as it relates to the Catholic mass is a misnomer. Of course I do not mean to say that it is impossible to compose great Catholic music for use in the mass. Take Dr. James MacMillan, for example. I just mean to say that only a very, very small sliver of what is currently being put out is worthy of the mass and most people seem to have no sense of determination thereof. I therefore posit a new, more precise term: contemporary sacred music. That middle word makes all the difference. I hate using the word “modern” because that has a very specific meaning. I also don’t care for using “contemporary” because the root word generally does indicate something of temporariness caused by low quality. But I can’t really think of anything else. So there, contemporary sacred music.

Every era has its junky pop music, and that’s fine; so does the current one. Every era has its sacred music, and that’s fine. So does the current one, but we have very little of it proportionally compared to past ages. Personally, I think this stems from a cultural problem of selfishness, that “I have to like the music.” It should be the case that 500 years from now, people will be able to point out “2000sish” music that is sacred, and people will be able to point out “200sish” music that is pop junk. Every era has pop junk and sacred music. I don’t think contemporary mass music has to sound like common rock/rap/pop/whatever. It can be very contemporary and still not pop junk. As I said, we confuse “contemporary” with “pop.” I mentioned Dr. MacMillan earlier. His music is very good, and was even used at the Papal Mass at Westminster Cathedral when Benedict visited England and Wales. But his music is also very contemporary in the sense that, while using a traditional and modern instruments, it was still very different in style from Renaissance and Baroque music that used the same instruments. We can have high quality contemporary music without it being low quality pop music. I make a difference there. It just seems our culture, including Catholic culture, stubbornly cannot, at least not commonly.
 
Cat said:
But it IS possible to compose contemporary-style music that IS compatible with Catholic dogma. We’ve seen it, and we like it. There is nothing in the rubrics forbidding contemporary Christian music. What’s needed is CATHOLIC contemporary music.

FInally, you must realize that you are mistaken to say that most Protestant denominations are in decay.

I realize that many Catholics love ancient and traditional music. But we have to be willing to think in reality, and to admit that many many Catholics do NOT like ancient and traditional, and instead, prefer contemporary music. In our parish, even though we have a great pipe organ and a great organist, most people prefer those “banal” contemporary songs that so many of you despise.

And I don’t agree that the Church will “shrink.” Bluntly speaking, we need the money that many members provide. Spiritually speaking, the Church is much better at welcoming people who are not entirely committed to Jesus than many of us are. Holy Mother Church understands that everyone is at a different place in their journey to heaven, and she is much more tolerant of these people than many of us are.
Click to expand...
Part 2

Now, what I meant about the Protestant denominations is this: where in the past they had basis and doctrinal differences that separated them, they do not have these now. It used to be that a Lutheran was a Lutheran and a Methodist was a Methodist, etc., and all denominations had very different doctrinal positions which were set in stone. That isn’t the case anymore. There really is a decay in denominationalism, at least in the sense of doctrinal justification thereof. That is what I meant. There is no real denominational difference anymore. There is just generic Protestantism which really has no diversity anymore. Sure, you’ve got mainlines and evangelicals and whatnot, but the differences are rapidly shirnking. That is what I meant by decay. Not that they are getting smaller overall.

And I do really think that the Church will drastically shrink in the future. Pope Benedict, as Cardinal Ratzinger, wrote as much. But hopefully I will be proven wrong.
 
Cat said:
I personally prefer the “banal” contemporary songs. Probably because of my Protestant background, I have a very difficult time “feeling” worshipful when chant or classical-style music is done in Mass. Songs like Eagle’s Wings really help me to focus on God, not the music.
Click to expand...
But there is a difference between inspirational Christian music, and music that is appropriate for use during Mass / Liturgy. Even being the traditionalist that I am, I too enjoy and appreciate tasteful, inspiring Christian music, and believe it to be a very good thing for enhancement of ones faith. However, I would not consider any of it appropriate for use during the Mass.

Sacred doesn’t necessarily mean ancient. Indeed, there are many works which we would now consider sacred that were very contemporary and somewhat controversial it their day. The difference is that the Masses, Requiems, Vespers, etc. composed by some of the Baroque masters (and those of subsequent Classical periods) were written specifically to conform to the structure of the Mass (or other services) and were intended for use in the Mass from the onset.

That is not true of our contemporary Christian work, although I do believe there could be contemporary music composed that could be worked into liturgical use if commissioned by the Church and composed according to some norms and standards as may be promulgated by the Church. Simply taking a secularly popular rock song that has a lyric or two with a religious connotation would likely not meet such standards.
 
ByzCathCantor said:
But there is a difference between inspirational Christian music, and music that is appropriate for use during Mass / Liturgy. Even being the traditionalist that I am, I too enjoy and appreciate tasteful, inspiring Christian music, and believe it to be a very good thing for enhancement of ones faith. However, I would not consider any of it appropriate for use during the Mass.

Sacred doesn’t necessarily mean ancient. Indeed, there are many works which we would now consider sacred that were very contemporary and somewhat controversial it their day. The difference is that the Masses, Requiems, Vespers, etc. composed by some of the Baroque masters (and those of subsequent Classical periods) were written specifically to conform to the structure of the Mass (or other services) and were intended for use in the Mass from the onset.

That is not true of our contemporary Christian work, although I do believe there could be contemporary music composed that could be worked into liturgical use if commissioned by the Church and composed according to some norms and standards as may be promulgated by the Church. Simply taking a secularly popular rock song that has a lyric or two with a religious connotation would likely not meet such standards.
Click to expand...
👍👍👍👍👍
 
Cat said:
But it IS possible to compose contemporary-style music that IS compatible with Catholic dogma. We’ve seen it, and we like it.

You do realize that although there are plenty of Church documents that advocate ancient music, there are also plenty of Church documents that make it very clear that other styles of music are welcome, provided that they are in keeping with the sacred nature of the Mass and compatible with Catholic teachings. It is NOT a requirement of the Catholic Church that the only music is chant and polyphony. There is nothing in the rubrics forbidding contemporary Christian music. What’s needed is CATHOLIC contemporary music.
Click to expand...
The few Spanish Mass communities that I’ve seen around here have basically amplified guitar music. If they don’t know the words, they clap along, and everyone feels he/she participates that way. Is there anything wrong with this?
 
ProVobis said:
The few Spanish Mass communities that I’ve seen around here have basically amplified guitar music. If they don’t know the words, they clap along, and everyone feels he/she participates that way. Is there anything wrong with this?
Click to expand...
They feel they are “participating” in what? Participating in the performance? Participating in the percussion section? Or participating in the Mass?

Respectfully, I ask if you and Cat have read the articles that this thread is about. They are VERY enlightening.
 
opus101 said:
Click to expand...
They feel they are “participating” in what? Participating in the performance? Participating in the percussion section? Or participating in the Mass?

Respectfully, I ask if you and Cat have read the articles that this thread is about. They are VERY enlightening.

ProVobis was being sarcastic to make a point. 🙂
 
superamazingman said:
As YTC said, it’s not just those things that need to happen. It needs to be a complete paradigme shift.

Parents: If at all possible, get the kids in a good catholic school or homeschool. Sorry, the public schools are simply just going down the drain.

Pastors: Learn the EF, and celebrate the OF accordingly: with reverence and continuity with the EF, not as a break from it. Start singing the Mass. ANY congregation that has ever sung can handle 2 amens and a kyrie. Sing the introductory rites. Start there. Then keep adding more. The sung liturgy is the highest form of worship. Then keep singing more. Make radical changes. One pastor I know begun celebrating all his daily Masses at the high altar. Still OF, still in English, but facing in the same direction as the people. And the people love it. The freestanding altar is frequently removed for weddings and other special Masses which people request to be celebrated in that way (for normal Masses, the freestanding altar isn’t moved, since it needs 6 men to move it) He’s dying to do it on Sundays, but he fears the congregation isn’t ready yet. They will be soon though…

Bishops: Do the same! Support the orthodox Catholic schools. Fix the ones that aren’t. Support the homeschoolers, they’ll always have your back. Encourage pastors who want to act with the mind of the church. One of the biggest deterrents of pastors making positive changes is fear of the bishop. In my diocese, no one fears the bishop getting mad at them for doing the right thing, ergo…

A complete shift is needed. You can’t just do one thing or another here and there.
c o m p l e t e - s h i f t - o f - a t t i t u d e

Think about it this way, if the thing/practice/attitude in question began in the last 40 years, chances are, it’s probably not helping the cause. Note that I didn’t say *everything *from the last 40 have been bad, but 90% of it is.
Click to expand...
I did type out a response a few days ago, but it got lost and when you have a 2 year old running around and being very pregnant trying to chase her, there is little time to type something again. lol!

I agree with you and with so many of the other comments made on this thread. Everything needed that you, YTC, Cat and others have made are important, but I think the “complete shift of attitude” is so right. Change won’t happen until this occurs. It took 40+ years (even more) for this current attitude that I grew up with to become part of our reality. If you have the right leaders at all levels, it will probably take another 40+ years to shift the attitudes of everyone again. Unfortunately, we live in a world today in which change has to happen immediately, otherwise, it’s a “failure” and people move on. For instance, you can’t re-introduce chant, polyphony, or any other style of sacred music and expect it to take hold and be “accepted” in six months, a year, two years, etc. at any given parish. It may take a few years to really take hold.

The shift of attitude takes time. It then gets passed down to the younger generations which tend to take less time to be accepted, especially if you start them very young in the Catholic schools. The music teachers (if there are any) should be giving them background on our rich history of sacred music and even teaching them some of it. As a twenty-something teaching music at a Catholic school a few years back, I did that, but I knew it was not going to be this easy transition. The first pastor was open to me teaching it. The second pastor was not at all and he put the kibosh on the chants I was teaching the children ever to be used at mass. I continued to teach it during the choir rehearsals and in our after school music club I started, I also gave them a history of our Catholic sacred music heritage from ancient to today, doing so in a fun way for kids. So, even though it was basically taboo for me to ever have this music done at mass, they at least were being exposed to it.

For older generations, especially those of my parents (50s-60s) and older, who came of age or were already of age when these changes and current attitudes were made, the shift needs to come from the very top and through their pastors. If you don’t have the pastors backing it, it will be much harder to change the attitudes of this particular demographic. People need more patience and they also need to change their attitudes about it pleasing them. I know that can be done. I think of a particular parish in my diocese which went from the typical hymn mass to a pastor and a music director who brought in new music usually used for charismatic masses. One of the older musicians (excellent pianist and organist) who did mostly the funerals and weddings and some early Sunday masses told me that the congregation originally hated the music, but they were basically forced to “like” it and have now accepted it. She didn’t like it either and still doesn’t (which is why she only does the early masses) but it’s her lifelong parish. The same could happen the other way. It might be “hated” at first, but if every parish is required to do it, like how we are required to make the translation changes, etc. it will eventually become accepted.

I can go on, but I have to get ready for mass. Happy Sunday, everyone!!! 🙂 Loving the discussion!!!
 
YoungTradCath said:
Part 1

That’s not what I mean. I did not say that it is impossible to compose contemporary Catholic music. It is just very hard. Either that, or composers are just very stubborn. Then again, perhaps their patrons (churches) are…

I think you and I have a different interpretation of the concept of “contemporary music.” Where most people think of American Idol and pop ditties when they hear the phrase “contemporary music,” when it comes to Catholic mass music, I think of music that is in perfect harmony with the music of the past, yet perhaps does it in a different way. For example, using classical instruments (and perhaps even adding some newer ones), but obviously composing in a different way that builds upon the past. That is the line I will not cross. Either it builds upon the past, or it does not. I’m not saying composers should be composing Baroque masterpieces. I am saying that they should be composing their own masterpieces, masterpieces that naturally flow from the artist’s hand that aren’t contrived to fit some preconceived “fit in with the times” expectation. This is just like literature. Are modern writing styles and subjects palpably different than those of the past? Absolutely. But the works considered literature of the past century or so are just as fantastically high quality as the works considered literature 1,000 years older than that. Crime and Punishment by Dostoevsky is amazing writing, and so is the Aeneid, even though they are much separated in history.

When GP da Palestrina was composing amazing masses in the middle of the Renaissance, it wasn’t like that was the only music that existed. That era had its own version of junky pop music. We tend to have this silly image in our minds that everybody in 1580 listened to fine compositions by the best masters who had the richest patrons. That isn’t so. My point is that every era has its good music and every era has its junk music. It just seems that in our era, we Catholics are either too ignorant or too (dare I say it?) selfish or too stubborn to have some demarcation between the two in the realm of mass music. The term “contemporary Christian music” as it relates to the Catholic mass is a misnomer. Of course I do not mean to say that it is impossible to compose great Catholic music for use in the mass. Take Dr. James MacMillan, for example. I just mean to say that only a very, very small sliver of what is currently being put out is worthy of the mass and most people seem to have no sense of determination thereof. I therefore posit a new, more precise term: contemporary sacred music. That middle word makes all the difference. I hate using the word “modern” because that has a very specific meaning. I also don’t care for using “contemporary” because the root word generally does indicate something of temporariness caused by low quality. But I can’t really think of anything else. So there, contemporary sacred music.

Every era has its junky pop music, and that’s fine; so does the current one. Every era has its sacred music, and that’s fine. So does the current one, but we have very little of it proportionally compared to past ages. Personally, I think this stems from a cultural problem of selfishness, that “I have to like the music.” It should be the case that 500 years from now, people will be able to point out “2000sish” music that is sacred, and people will be able to point out “200sish” music that is pop junk. Every era has pop junk and sacred music. I don’t think contemporary mass music has to sound like common rock/rap/pop/whatever. It can be very contemporary and still not pop junk. As I said, we confuse “contemporary” with “pop.” I mentioned Dr. MacMillan earlier. His music is very good, and was even used at the Papal Mass at Westminster Cathedral when Benedict visited England and Wales. But his music is also very contemporary in the sense that, while using a traditional and modern instruments, it was still very different in style from Renaissance and Baroque music that used the same instruments. We can have high quality contemporary music without it being low quality pop music. I make a difference there. It just seems our culture, including Catholic culture, stubbornly cannot, at least not commonly.
Click to expand...
I really like the term “contemporary sacred music.” Nails it.

But I think that the question is, “How do we define what is CSM?”

E.g., I think that the song, “How Beautiful,” originally sung by Twila Paris, is sublime, and highly-appropriate for the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. I often sing it in my mind during Holy Communion.

But others might think that the song is “low-quality pop music.”

Who decides and how do they decide? At the moment, I know that the answer to my question is that the parish priest makes the decision about which music shall be part of the Masses in his parish, and which music is inappropriate. He does this under the guidance of the bishop, of course. And it our duty as lay people to submit to the decisions of our parish priests, even if we personally don’t find the music in our Masses edifying, or even if we think that the priest is allowing “bad” music in the Masses.

But I’m asking in a more general sense. What is the mechanism by which songs will be deemed “CSM” or “LQPM?”
 
Cat said:
I really like the term “contemporary sacred music.” Nails it.

But I think that the question is, “How do we define what is CSM?”

E.g., I think that the song, “How Beautiful,” originally sung by Twila Paris, is sublime, and highly-appropriate for the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. I often sing it in my mind during Holy Communion.

But others might think that the song is “low-quality pop music.”

Who decides and how do they decide? At the moment, I know that the answer to my question is that the parish priest makes the decision about which music shall be part of the Masses in his parish, and which music is inappropriate. He does this under the guidance of the bishop, of course. And it our duty as lay people to submit to the decisions of our parish priests, even if we personally don’t find the music in our Masses edifying, or even if we think that the priest is allowing “bad” music in the Masses.

But I’m asking in a more general sense. What is the mechanism by which songs will be deemed “CSM” or “LQPM?”
Click to expand...
These documents outline various Popes’ opinions on what qualifies as true sacred music:
sanctamissa.org/en/music/church-documents-on-liturgical-music/tra-le-sollecitudini.pdf
vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/letters/2003/documents/hf_jp-ii_let_20031203_musica-sacra_en.html

The first is Pius X’s Tra le sollecitudine, written in 1903 and sort of meant as a re-invigoration of Gregorian Chant. The second is a document written on the centennial of Tra le sollecitudine by John Paul II, somewhat as a response, restatement and continuation of it. Those two are the best recent Papal documents on music.
 
YoungTradCath said:
These documents outline various Popes’ opinions on what qualifies as true sacred music:
sanctamissa.org/en/music/church-documents-on-liturgical-music/tra-le-sollecitudini.pdf
vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/letters/2003/documents/hf_jp-ii_let_20031203_musica-sacra_en.html

The first is Pius X’s Tra le sollecitudine, written in 1903 and sort of meant as a re-invigoration of Gregorian Chant. The second is a document written on the centennial of Tra le sollecitudine by John Paul II, somewhat as a response, restatement and continuation of it. Those two are the best recent Papal documents on music.
Click to expand...
I am much impressed by your passion and knowledge concerning our Sacred Liturgy (I haven’t yet read the documents)
 
christofirst said:
I am much impressed by your passion and knowledge concerning our Sacred Liturgy (I haven’t yet read the documents)
Click to expand...
Thank you. I am very passionate about helping, in whatever way I can, to restoring liturgical classiness and stamping out blatant slobbery.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top