Music at Mass, Again

  • Thread starter Thread starter Brownginger
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Brownginger

Guest
We have a new Music Director. The old one chose mostly the Protestant classics, and I was hopeful that the new one would have a Catholic format. Not so, entirely. We did have some hymns written by Catholics, but none that would be called familiar (Haugen). There was one that was pretty from Taize – “Eat This Bread.” That seems to be heretical, because we do not eat “bread,” but the Body of Christ. Then there was one called “The Servant Song,” by Gillard. Guess we are taking a giant step backward music-wise and showing signs of the Teen Masses.:eek:

Can anyone do a quick rundown on the latter two songs for me? I did a search, but it turned up far too many to deal with!🤷

Thanks.
 
Another rant about liturgical music. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: When will it ever end?

Maybe St. Luke also was an heretic:
23 For I received from the Lord what I also handed on to you, that the Lord Jesus, on the night he was handed over, took bread, 24 and, after he had given thanks, broke it and said, “This is my body that is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” 25 In the same way also the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.” 26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the death of the Lord until he comes.
1 Cor. 11​
Click to expand...
And I guess St. Paul was an heretic too:
42 They devoted themselves to the teaching of the apostles and to the communal life, to the breaking of the bread and to the prayers. 43 Awe came upon everyone, and many wonders and signs were done through the apostles. 44 All who believed were together and had all things in common; 45 they would sell their property and possessions and divide them among all according to each one’s need. 46 Every day they devoted themselves to meeting together in the temple area and to breaking bread in their homes. They ate their meals with exultation and sincerity of heart, 47 praising God and enjoying favor with all the people. And every day the Lord added to their number those who were being saved.
Acts 2​
Click to expand...
 
Let’s play a game… I’m going to post a quote… tell me where you’ve heard this:
In memory of his death and resurrection, we offer you, Father, this life-giving bread, this saving cup.
Click to expand...
 
Brownginger said:
We have a new Music Director. The old one chose mostly the Protestant classics, and I was hopeful that the new one would have a Catholic format. Not so, entirely. We did have some hymns written by Catholics, but none that would be called familiar (Haugen). There was one that was pretty from Taize – “Eat This Bread.” That seems to be heretical, because we do not eat “bread,” but the Body of Christ. Then there was one called “The Servant Song,” by Gillard. Guess we are taking a giant step backward music-wise and showing signs of the Teen Masses.:eek:

Can anyone do a quick rundown on the latter two songs for me? I did a search, but it turned up far too many to deal with!🤷

Thanks.
Click to expand...
And then there’s Panis Angelicus, written by that notorious heretic Thomas Aquinas…which translates, if my high school Latin doesn’t fail me, as Bread of Angels…You might want to do a little more checking around before tying that “heretical” Music Director to a stake in the parking lot.
 
Okay, I get it!😊 Still sounds wrong to me.😉 I have heard the same criticism of Panis Angelicus. The “Servant Song” is much more problematic, because it is one of the feel-good Evangelical songs that belongs on the radio and not at Mass!:eek:

When will the Bishops make the Liturgy a liturgy and not a concert? It is supposed to be a sung entrance antiphon, sung prayers, and a sung recessional antiphon, not the latest on the Praise and Worship network! (or is it Worship and Praise? I don’t listen to it, but only hear it at Mass!) – and not even the latest from Haugen or St. Patrick or St. Therese! Those songs were intended to voice worship outside of Mass, not AT Mass!
 
Now that we’ve cleared up the question of “bread” (and I don’t have a problem with it either), ask your new music director how the parish what his/her plans are for showing Gregorian chant the pride of place that Vatican II calls for. That’s more important than deciding which hymns/songs to sing at Mass.
 
It STILL sounds wrong to you? One of the actual memorial acclamations is :

when we eat this bread and drink this cup we proclaim your death…,

And the song says “eat this bread, drink this cup…”

and it still sounds wrong.

geesh.

And please don’t equivocate “concert” with “praise and worship music”. Many p/w music are actually leading people in prayer, it isn’t meant to be performed at a concert.
 
agapewolf said:
. . .
And please don’t equivocate “concert” with “praise and worship music”. Many p/w music are actually leading people in prayer, it isn’t meant to be performed at a concert.
Click to expand...
Amen!

(Yes, I’m Catholic - always was, always will be.)
 
quoting: And please don’t equivocate “concert” with “praise and worship music”. Many p/w music are actually leading people in prayer, it isn’t meant to be performed at a concert.

I believe that you meantn “equate.” In any event, no matter how prayerful, they do not belong at Mass! Mass is a unique and strictly defined sacrifice; the words and music should be drawn around each day and should not include some pap that springs from the mind of some guitarist who happens to have been “born again.”

As a last note, I receive the Body of Christ, not bread, no matter what the translation says! It no longer is bread, and that comes from the mouth of Christ!
 
Jesus did call Himself the “Bread of Life”. I don’t think He was wrong.
 
It used to be bread before it was consecrated. Jesus was using a metaphor. We must go beyond the bread to find His Body. There is no way Jesus’ Body is bread!
 
Mass has had a “concert” aspect to it since long before Palestrina. “Concert” music is none other than the finest of fine music. I would venture that a lot of people would be greatly relieved if their parish music indeed met “concert” standards.

The OP might have the best luck by seeing if there is an interest in a “traditional” Mass, in which the music is more of the variety (s)he has in mind…that is, not “popular” or “contemporary-style” favorites, but standard Catholic hymns of an older vintage, with a more solemn meter and tune, and so on. Many parishes do this, and even have “contemporary” and “traditional” choirs to lead the different Masses.

I know, I know, you want all the Masses to meet the standards you believe the Mass deserves, and right away…but if you’re going to eat an elephant, you have to do it one bite at a time.
 
Praise and Worship anthems have no place in the liturgy. Stylistically and liturgically, it is not appropriate for the Mass. You can defend it and claim that it’s Catholic, but, at the end of the day, it’s still based on Protestant P & W stuff, the kind that Time/Life hawks on its late night ads.

It’s like the old saying down here in Texas: You can put red lipstick and pearls on a sow, and she’ll still be a sow.

Why would we want to use stuff that the Protestants use? Protestants only have the Word, music and a sermon and nothing else. Of course they have to make their service “interesting” if that is all they have.

We have the Word and the Sacrifice. The P&W stuff has nothing about the Sacrifice and is very “Me/I” centered. It’s as though those who choose these songs for the Mass have forgotten what the Holy Father has said:
Liturgical song
Click to expand...
  1. 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).
Click to expand...
Lest we forget that this was in response to a serious concern that the Fathers of the 2005 Synod on the Eucharist raised regarding music, especially what is used for Youth Masses:
In other responses some lamented the poor quality of translations of liturgical texts and many musical texts in current languages, maintaining that they lacked beauty and were sometimes theologically unclear, thereby contributing to a weakening of Church teaching and to a misunderstanding of prayer. A few responses made particular mention of music and singing at Youth Masses. In this regard, it is important to avoid musical forms which, because of their profane use, are not conducive to prayer. Some responses note a certain eagerness in composing new songs, to the point of almost yielding to a consumer mentality, showing little concern for the quality of the music and text, and easily overlooking the artistic patrimony which has been theologically and musically effective in the Church’s liturgy.
Click to expand...
To that end, I have not heard the proponents of this kind of music make a defense based on authoritative Church documents from the Holy See.

I suspect that the problem that the OP is facing may stem from the fact that his parish has fallen victim to the aggressive marketing ploys of certain publishing houses that will continue to pitch their stuff, regardless of whatever the Holy See has written.

It is painfully apparent that this particular publishing house seems to not have read any of the recent documents released by the Holy See, including Liturgicam Authenticam and has decided to go its own way.
 
Brownginger said:
It used to be bread before it was consecrated. Jesus was using a metaphor. We must go beyond the bread to find His Body. There is no way Jesus’ Body is bread!
Click to expand...
Since the liturgy itself is free to include the wording “when we eat this bread and drink this cup*”–after consecration!–*and takes that wording from Scriptures which pointedly refer to the Blessed Sacrament, you have no chance whatsoever of successfully arguing that this kind of language is inappropriate at Mass.

You cannot win this one.
benedictgal said:
Praise and Worship anthems have no place in the liturgy. Stylistically and liturgically, it is not appropriate for the Mass. You can defend it and claim that it’s Catholic, but, at the end of the day, it’s still based on Protestant P & W stuff, the kind that Time/Life hawks on its late night ads.

It’s like the old saying down here in Texas: You can put red lipstick and pearls on a sow, and she’ll still be a sow.

Why would we want to use stuff that the Protestants use? Protestants only have the Word, music and a sermon and nothing else. Of course they have to make their service “interesting” if that is all they have…
Click to expand...
Very often, the “sow” you’re speaking of is the Holy Scriptures, lifted out of our stables, given to us for our nourishment, thank you very much! The Protestants may be trying to live sola Scriptura, but that doesn’t mean we ceded the whole of Scriptures to them!! The Psalms, upon which the Liturgy of the Hours is based, is the source of a great many of this “me/I” stuff that so many don’t like. Ask God why He inspired so much of it. Ask Holy Mother Church why she insists that all the ordained are obliged and consecrated religious hang around in the Psalms during their daily prayer.

If you start arguing against hymns written by anyone at all that clearly have Scripture as their immediate source and that are within the singing range of the average Catholic, you’re waging a losing battle. Music ministers like music that parishioners will actually sing.

This is just my opinion, but I think the way to make the changes you’d like to see is not to put down the songs you don’t like, but to make the case in favor of the really top-notch, musically-accessible and theologically-dense hymns that are being neglected in favor of less-singable and more theologically-vapid fare. You’ll get much better reception for “We would like to hear much, much more of this” than “We can’t stand that.”
 
Brownginger said:
It used to be bread before it was consecrated. Jesus was using a metaphor. We must go beyond the bread to find His Body. There is no way Jesus’ Body is bread!
Click to expand...
"Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me will never hunger, and whoever believes in me will never thirst.” - John 6:35 (NAB)

“I am the bread of life. Your ancestors ate the manna in the desert, but they died; this is the bread that comes down from heaven so that one may eat it and not die. I am the living bread that came down from heaven; whoever eats this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world.” -John 6:48-51 (NAB)

“This is the bread that came down from heaven. Unlike your ancestors who ate and still died, whoever eats this bread will live forever.” -Johb 6:58 (NAB)

I really don’t know how much clearer Jesus could have made it.
 
Benedictgal, A very musical AMEN! to everything you wrote! And if I never see that red Worship Hymnal again, I will be ecstatic! Even the missalette has its own dirty little secrets that the MD has discovered!😃
 
I’ve come to the conclusion that almost no one who posts at CAF and complains about liturgical music has even the slightest clue of its purpose, its effect on the liturgy itself and on the congregation, and on a myriad other things (especially those who love to post lengthy quotes from Church documents as if they were doctrine and dogma).
 
benedictgal said:
Praise and Worship anthems have no place in the liturgy. Stylistically and liturgically, it is not appropriate for the Mass. You can defend it and claim that it’s Catholic, but, at the end of the day, it’s still based on Protestant P & W stuff, the kind that Time/Life hawks on its late night ads.

It’s like the old saying down here in Texas: You can put red lipstick and pearls on a sow, and she’ll still be a sow.

Why would we want to use stuff that the Protestants use? Protestants only have the Word, music and a sermon and nothing else. Of course they have to make their service “interesting” if that is all they have.

We have the Word and the Sacrifice. The P&W stuff has nothing about the Sacrifice and is very “Me/I” centered. It’s as though those who choose these songs for the Mass have forgotten what the Holy Father has said:

Lest we forget that this was in response to a serious concern that the Fathers of the 2005 Synod on the Eucharist raised regarding music, especially what is used for Youth Masses:

To that end, I have not heard the proponents of this kind of music make a defense based on authoritative Church documents from the Holy See.

I suspect that the problem that the OP is facing may stem from the fact that his parish has fallen victim to the aggressive marketing ploys of certain publishing houses that will continue to pitch their stuff, regardless of whatever the Holy See has written.

It is painfully apparent that this particular publishing house seems to not have read any of the recent documents released by the Holy See, including Liturgicam Authenticam and has decided to go its own way.
Click to expand...
Sheesh, there you go again BG…the publishing houses have certainly read these documents, and have put several projects on hold waiting for final translations, etc.

They have a much more complete understanding of the documents than you can hope to.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top