Music at Mass, Again

[Cat]

Cat, you can’t seriously think they are choosing according to the religion of the writers rather than the quality of their music???

Of course not. I’m sorry if that’s the implication I gave.

BSHoops96, I have read posts on CAF stating that songs by written by Protestants should never be used in Mass.

I disagree strongly with this. The Catechism states that Protestants are our separated brethren. Separated does not mean “non-Christian.” A song should not be ousted from Mass because of the non-Catholicism of the composer, but rather, the song should be examined and included or excluded based on the theology of the song and the ease of singing/playing it in a corporate setting.

Although benedictgal and others find problems with the theology of various “modern” songs, I think that a lot of these songs are using poetic license, and that the theology is just fine for Catholics.

 

[Cat]

benedictgal, I agree that the Pange Lingua (whatever that means) is a beautiful poem and should be used in Mass.

But surely, surely you can see that to many people in the U.S., this song is pure gobbledygook? They don’t understand it because of the level of writing and the vocabulary used in the song. If it is done in Latin, it is understood even less.

Doesn’t that matter to you and others? Do you honestly think that it is good to do songs that so few understand? Isn’t this elitism?

e.g., “then He closed in solemn order wondrously His Life of woe.”

Say what?! (I kind of know what it means, but I would venture to say that many Americans would have no clue.)

We can bewail the state of education of Americans forever, but that doesn’t change anything. The average American reads at a 6th grade level–a “modern” 6th grade level, not the level of the 6th grade McGuffey Readers.

Our newpapers are written for a 6th grade reading level.

And one of the reasons why Harry Potter books are so popular is that they are written at a 6th grade reading level. Perfect.

I believe that Dan Brown’s books are the same.

I’m NOT saying that we should exclude all “high” poetry from Mass because people in the U.S. are not very literate. We need to stretch ourselves a little.

I think these kinds of songs and hymns would be much more effective if someone would explain them to the people.

But a regular menu of songs like this is going to discourage people. I would not attend a lecture series that was above my head. I don’t go to jazz concerts because I don’t understand jazz. I drive by three art galleries every day and don’t plan to visit them unless they do a showing of Norman Rockwell.

I happen to LIKE songs in the vernacular–not just in English, my heart language, but that say things that I understand, that relate to my life here and now in the 21st century. People criticize Mullins’ “Awesome God” all the time on this board. I disagree with the criticisms. The song speaks in the language that I speak.

God does NOT disdain our speaking language and our everyday idioms! When Jesus came to earth, He spoke in the language that everyone spoke. There is a prayer that says “He did not despise the flesh.” The Bible says that people from every language, tribe, and nation will bow before Him.

I know that there are people who love the classical language and poetry, and that’s fine. But I’m asking you to please put yourself in the mind of a person who cannot understand any of the fine language.

 

[snhs]

I’m not quite sure why my post responding to this was deleted by the Moderators, so I am going to reply again. I do hope the Moderators will allow this post to stand. I really don’t appreciate being made fun of by a teenager.

snhs, I was at work on break when I responded to you with a short response/question. I don’t have time to respond in detail while I am at work. That’s not what they pay me for.

And I find the phrase “par for the course with you” extremely hurtful. I’m a 51 year-old woman. Would you talk to your mother like you talk to me? I certainly hope not. It’s a pretty sharp jab and not true at all. I always try to answer questions on this forum if I can, even though I don’t know as much as many do.

I have never made a claim that Cat’s opinion counts for more than other members of the congregation. On the contrary, I am one of the people on this forum urging people, including myself, to submit to the authority of the clergy when it comes to liturgy and to be docile when it comes to liturgy that they find “inferior.”

Probably because you broke one of the rules in your answer.

Perhaps you could try responding to the main points yourself before you start launching your own questions. It is considered courteous when you are having a discussion with someone, the old ‘I asked you first’ principal.

I believe I’ve engaged in 2 or 3 discussions with you on here, the same thing has happened each time. You are not my mother, thank goodness. And given that this is an online forum I’m not going to make concessions for your age. If you don’t wish to be said to have such a background on such things then don’t create a pattern which makes it a legitimate point to make.

Well to begin with you seem happy to ignore what the Church has to say on liturgical music. Your last post for example where you wrote “the song should be examined and included or excluded based on the theology of the song and the ease of singing/playing it in a corporate setting”, the theology is only one of the criteria of the Church, you disregard the other criterion which are specifically highlighted by St Pius X and which were reiterated by Pope JPII. Then we have this from earlier: “The answer is, because it’s GOOD! Here is a “Protestant” song. It was sung in a Mass that my daughter attended a few weeks ago, and she burst into tears. You don’t like the song? …Tough.” So for anyone who might think it’s inappropriate it’s tough, apparently because you think “it’s GOOD”. Try submitting to the Pope and his predecessors’ writings on what music is suitable for the liturgy, but I forgot you don’t like people ““proving from the documents” why all the hymns that Catholics like are “inappropriate” or “irreverent,””.

Now could you please stop attacking me on the basis of age or moaning about minor phraseology you don’t like and start responding to something substantive and providing some evidence for your views? You might like to start by going back to the first post I made, I did answer your points in order to make it easier.

 

[snhs]

benedictgal, I agree that the Pange Lingua (whatever that means) is a beautiful poem and should be used in Mass.

But surely, surely you can see that to many people in the U.S., this song is pure gobbledygook? They don’t understand it because of the level of writing and the vocabulary used in the song. If it is done in Latin, it is understood even less.

Doesn’t that matter to you and others? Do you honestly think that it is good to do songs that so few understand? Isn’t this elitism?

e.g., “then He closed in solemn order wondrously His Life of woe.”

Say what?! (I kind of know what it means, but I would venture to say that many Americans would have no clue.)

We can bewail the state of education of Americans forever, but that doesn’t change anything. The average American reads at a 6th grade level–a “modern” 6th grade level, not the level of the 6th grade McGuffey Readers.

…

God does NOT disdain our speaking language and our everyday idioms! When Jesus came to earth, He spoke in the language that everyone spoke. There is a prayer that says “He did not despise the flesh.” The Bible says that people from every language, tribe, and nation will bow before Him.

I know that there are people who love the classical language and poetry, and that’s fine. But I’m asking you to please put yourself in the mind of a person who cannot understand any of the fine language.

This is the same argument some Bishops use, apparently people are too thick to know what words such as gibbet and ineffable mean.

If you spoon feed people they’re going to really bored of it fairly soon, when they then want to find some substance and find none of it in the music of the liturgy what do you think is going to happen?

Contrary to popular opinion Catholics born prior to the 1960s didn’t pop out of the womb fluent in liturgical Latin, most of the time they got off their rear ends and learnt it, or used hand Missals with the Latin-English versions side by side.

Are you seriously trying to tell us that Americans today are less educated than the Irish immigrants who came to America in the 19th Century?

Wonderful, does this mean we can look forward to the Virgin Mary rapping out her next prophecy ‘in da hood’? There are different types of language, that we speak to our friends in, that we speak to babies in, that we speak to our co-workers in, that we speak to our boss in, doesn’t it make sense to you that when it comes to addressing God we should have a proper way of doing so which is different to these other forms?

Anyone with a average or even below average IQ should have the capacity to understand the ‘fine language’, as you put it, of the Mass and its traditional hymns. Whether they bother themselves to do so is a different matter. I think it is worth the effort, although perhaps you don’t consider it worthwhile?

 

[Fitswimmer]

This is the same argument some Bishops use, apparently people are too thick to know what words such as gibbet and ineffable mean.

If you spoon feed people they’re going to really bored of it fairly soon, when they then want to find some substance and find none of it in the music of the liturgy what do you think is going to happen?

Contrary to popular opinion Catholics born prior to the 1960s didn’t pop out of the womb fluent in liturgical Latin, most of the time they got off their rear ends and learnt it, or used hand Missals with the Latin-English versions side by side.

Are you seriously trying to tell us that Americans today are less educated than the Irish immigrants who came to America in the 19th Century?

Wonderful, does this mean we can look forward to the Virgin Mary rapping out her next prophecy ‘in da hood’? There are different types of language, that we speak to our friends in, that we speak to babies in, that we speak to our co-workers in, that we speak to our boss in, doesn’t it make sense to you that when it comes to addressing God we should have a proper way of doing so which is different to these other forms?

Anyone with a average or even below average IQ should have the capacity to understand the ‘fine language’, as you put it, of the Mass and its traditional hymns. Whether they bother themselves to do so is a different matter. I think it is worth the effort, although perhaps you don’t consider it worthwhile?

Good Grief, we learned Latin chant in First Grade. By the time we reached 6th grade we were singing Mozart-and that was in the 70’s!

We allow people to be lazy and to do as little as possible. Why don’t we try setting high goals for people and giving them the confidence that we believe they can achieve them?

 

[VociMike]

benedictgal, I agree that the Pange Lingua (whatever that means) is a beautiful poem and should be used in Mass.

But surely, surely you can see that to many people in the U.S., this song is pure gobbledygook? They don’t understand it because of the level of writing and the vocabulary used in the song. If it is done in Latin, it is understood even less.

Doesn’t that matter to you and others? Do you honestly think that it is good to do songs that so few understand? Isn’t this elitism?

e.g., “then He closed in solemn order wondrously His Life of woe.”

Say what?! (I kind of know what it means, but I would venture to say that many Americans would have no clue.)
…
I know that there are people who love the classical language and poetry, and that’s fine. But I’m asking you to please put yourself in the mind of a person who cannot understand any of the fine language.

I’m sure you don’t realize how elitist your own comments are. You (kind of) understand it, but many others would have no clue. We must dumb down the music (and the liturgy?), and then when people get even dumber we must dumb it down again, and again, and again. Your attitude would eventually drive all true art out of the Church, because “many people” don’t have a clue about the techniques, the mechanics, the “words” behind true art. But what they do know is that it’s beautiful and moving and somehow true.

Mixed in with this attitude is another, perhaps from your Protestant background. That is the attitude that music is primarily about communicating ideas with words. In fact, Vatican II states that the purpose of sacred music is to glorify God (and he understands even the hard words ) and to sanctify the faithful. This is so much more than just educating the faithful with a bit of musical theology. The Church understands this, which is why she has no problem declaring that Gregorian chant, in Latin, is the proper song for the Roman liturgy, and that sacred polyphony (most of it also in Latin) is also especially suitable for the liturgy.

 

[Sarabande]

If I recall correctly, Felix Mendelssohn’s father converted the family to Lutheranism.

This is correct. Felix and his sister, Fanny, (another wonderful composer who sadly did not get as much noterity) were little children when their father converted the family to Lutheranism.

We also have to remember that not everything that Bach composed can be used during a Catholic liturgy. One of my favorite masses is the “Mass in b-minor”, but I’ve never heard it done during an actual liturgy, nor do I think it really should be done. His chorales are reverent and are beautiful as well, though, and our parish have done a few of them for mass. For Mendelssohn, although he composed religious oratorios, I’m not aware of any masses he set or other sacred music for liturgy. But I have heard a couple of his melodies used for hymns.

And Wolseley is right, any trained musician will agree that their compositional ability was far more superior than some of the song writers today. But that is not the main reason why certain music should be or should not be used. For me, 1) is it appropriate for liturgy and 2) is it the highest quality that can be given? Number 1 is always a must for me. Number 2, ideally, should be the highest quality, but I also realize that not every parish has the ability to do certain music so they must do the best that they are able to offer. What I’m against is that when a parish does have the talent and the ability to do the superior music and yet, they decide against it and those willing to use their talents.

 

[pnewton]

Anyone with a average or even below average IQ should have the capacity to understand the ‘fine language’, as you put it, of the Mass and its traditional hymns. Whether they bother themselves to do so is a different matter. I think it is worth the effort, although perhaps you don’t consider it worthwhile?

First, the Catholic Church ministers to all, even those with below average IQ. Second, even those with a year of two of Latin understand their native tongue better than this second language they learned. Almost everyone still thinks in their native tongue, even if they can understand another language and speak another language.

I am not anti-Latin by any means, but we should not ignore the difficulties and the down side and act like it doesn’t exist.

 

[Sarabande]

I don’t understand why these people don’t campaign to become “Minister of Music of the Vatican,” since they know so much. I’m very serious about this.

Actually, a friend of mine is good friends with a very talented, young man who did get a musical position at the Vatican and was there for a couple of years. Some of the things that you criticized a few of the people here for believing are what they actually promote at the Vatican. This young man has since returned to our area and the music that he uses for mass, including the propers were right prior to working over in Italy and the same coming back.

Our new Director of Worship for the Diocese also spent many years in Rome and his mission here is to make our liturgies, including the music, more in line with Rome. We are to start using the propers for every mass - even funerals and weddings. hymns and motets can be used after the propers are chanted. We will be using the more simple chants so that congregations can follow. The Mass of Creation will apparently be “gone” in our diocese. It’s already gone for our parish and has never been used all the years I’ve been there.

Our parish (which is the Cathedral parish) will be the starting point and then move to the rest of the diocese. I recently spoke with friend/musical director of our parish and he is a bit stressed trying to get this all in order for the fall, but is very excited. He has been doing his homework, studying, reading, learning. He thankfully took lessons on chant and the propers years before so had better understanding of it, but this is really new and he is doing it. Again, doing his homework, like all the other music ministers will have to do, whether that will be through classes given by the diocese and on their own.

I know some people will say, “I"ll believe it when I see it.” but it’s happening here. It won’t be overnight, but our DW and our music director is working hard to make our diocese more in line with Rome in terms of liturgy.

 

[ibkc]

What I don’t understand about the position of those who are anti-ANY Latin at any time, or poetic English: do you guys really not understand that (as an example) Agnus Dei = Lamb of God? I am using that as an example because of its importance in the Mass, but it can extend to other things as well. In our parish we sometimes sing the Agnus Dei in English, and sometimes we say it in Latin. Either way, everyone knows what we’re saying even if no one speaks Latin outside of the occasional mass.

The argument that Cat seems to be making is that any use of Latin - or even beautiful, poetic English - will cause people’s brains to shut down so they won’t know what’s going on no matter how familiar the Mass might be to them. That is an argument that I simply cannot buy.

I mean, I suppose that if you consistently expect people to be incapable of understanding anything beyond the most base level, they’ll start to believe it, but I don’t see why that should be a road that anyone should want to go down.

 

[Sarabande]

The argument that Cat seems to be making is that any use of Latin - or even beautiful, poetic English - will cause people’s brains to shut down so they won’t know what’s going on no matter how familiar the Mass might be to them. That is an argument that I simply cannot buy.

I agree. I’ve attended masses in other languages here in the States and abroad. Although I couldn’t understand the homily due to my elementary understanding the languages, I knew exactly what was happening during the mass. And I know that not everyone travels so it won’t count for them, but I have to say when I would attend a Latin NO mass in those other countries, I was able to vocally “participate” since I knew all the Latin responses and prayers. That was very helpful.

I mean, I suppose that if you consistently expect people to be incapable of understanding anything beyond the most base level, they’ll start to believe it, but I don’t see why that should be a road that anyone should want to go down.

I also agree with this. My mother is the epitome of optimism and her favorite (and sometimes annoying when we were kids) phrase, “Never say never.” She instilled it into us, even into me who was a bit dark and “romantic” (Romantic in the sense of the Romantic period of writing and music) as a kid. My siblings and I all had speech impediments due to my brother and I almost losing our hearing as tots and our little sister picking up our bad habits. (I now have pretty much perfect hearing. My brother not as much.) Both of my siblings also had learning disabilities.) Some teachers wanted to give up on them and tried to just say they were incapable of learning more. My mother knew they had the capabilities for more, just a different way of learning it and she worked at it with tutors, speech therapists, etc. If she listened to the naysayers and those with negative attitudes, who knows where my siblings would be now.

That’s the same with the negative attitude and belief that most people are essentially “too dumb” or “not sharp enough” to pick up anything. I don’t believe it. We’re already setting ourselves up for failure when we do that. I’m not advocating all-Latin or chant masses, although I do like them, but come on. Most people aren’t these helpless, vulnerable, stupid creatures who needs everything spoonfed to them. Many like to have their minds challenged. They like deep things. The society today works very hard to make us believe the opposite. Let’s not fall prey to that.

 

[snhs]

First, the Catholic Church ministers to all, even those with below average IQ. Second, even those with a year of two of Latin understand their native tongue better than this second language they learned. Almost everyone still thinks in their native tongue, even if they can understand another language and speak another language.

I am not anti-Latin by any means, but we should not ignore the difficulties and the down side and act like it doesn’t exist.

I think that was in my point, anyone of average or even most of those with below average intelligence should be able to follow along with a text in their own language, would you dispute that? If they are completely illiterate then you may have a point, but in the West that isn’t exactly a major problem, and even if it is parents/teachers/Priests should be teaching them what happens in the Mass anyway. Somehow or other people managed to learn the responses and hymns in Latin, often despite being illiterate and having little if any formal education to speak of.

It isn’t exactly rocket science to teach children, or indeed anyone, that this word (in Latin)=this/these word(s) (in English).

I don’t see any particular difficulties, put in a bit of effort and there’s no problem. It also gives children a head start if they start to learn other languages which have their roots in/similarities to Latin.

 

[BSHoop96]

BSHoops96, I have read posts on CAF stating that songs by written by Protestants should never be used in Mass.

I disagree strongly with this.

As do I.

 

[ibkc]

Very few people argue that no music by Protestants should ever be used under any circumstances, so IMO that’s kind of a non-issue. The issue as I see it is that all music, no matter the religion of its composer, should follow Catholic standards - standards of correct theology and standards of quality.

 

[benedictgal]

Very few people argue that no music by Protestants should ever be used under any circumstances, so IMO that’s kind of a non-issue. The issue as I see it is that all music, no matter the religion of its composer, should follow Catholic standards - standards of correct theology and standards of quality.

They also should be liturgically appropriate. Botom line is that the Church has her standards, as reiterated by Pope Benedict XVI in Sacramentum Caritatis:

Liturgical song

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).

The reason a lot fo the Protestant songs are problematic is that they don’t see worship in the same manner as we do. Protestant ecclesial communities only have a service of the Word and nothing else. The Church has the Sacrifice.

Pope John Paul II, in his Chirograph on Sacred Music, also made this observation regarding music as did Pope Benedict:

1. On various occasions I too have recalled the precious role and great importance of music and song for a more active and intense participation in liturgical celebrations[9]. I have also stressed the need to “purify worship from ugliness of style, from distasteful forms of expression, from uninspired musical texts which are not worthy of the great act that is being celebrated”[10], to guarantee dignity and excellence to liturgical compositions.

In this perspective, in the light of the Magisterium of St Pius X and my other Predecessors and taking into account in particular the pronouncements of the Second Vatican Council, I would like to re-propose several fundamental principles for this important sector of the life of the Church, with the intention of ensuring that liturgical music corresponds ever more closely to its specific function.

1. In continuity with the teachings of St Pius X and the Second Vatican Council, it is necessary first of all to emphasize that music destined for sacred rites must have holiness as its reference point: indeed, “sacred music increases in holiness to the degree that it is intimately linked with liturgical action”[11]. For this very reason, “not all without distinction that is outside the temple (profanum) is fit to cross its threshold”, my venerable Predecessor Paul VI wisely said, commenting on a Decree of the Council of Trent[12]. And he explained that “if music - instrumental and vocal - does not possess at the same time the sense of prayer, dignity and beauty, it precludes the entry into the sphere of the sacred and the religious”[13]. Today, moreover, the meaning of the category “sacred music” has been broadened to include repertoires that cannot be part of the celebration without violating the spirit and norms of the Liturgy itself.

:
These words were written in 2003 to mark the 100th anniversary of the Motu Propio on Sacred Music that Pope St. Pius X (whose feast we celebrated last week) wrote back in 2003. The problems that the saintly pontiff faced in 1903 are no different than what we are experiencing some 105 years later.

 

[pnewton]

:
These words were written in 2003 to mark the 100th anniversary of the Motu Propio on Sacred Music that Pope St. Pius X (whose feast we celebrated last week) wrote back in 2003. The problems that the saintly pontiff faced in 1903 are no different than what we are experiencing some 105 years later.

It is always good to maintain a little historical perspective lest we always re-invent the wheel. Nice quote.

 

[Cat]

benedictgal, I agree that the Pange Lingua (whatever that means) is a beautiful poem and should be used in Mass.

But surely, surely you can see that to many people in the U.S., this song is pure gobbledygook? They don’t understand it because of the level of writing and the vocabulary used in the song. If it is done in Latin, it is understood even less.

Doesn’t that matter to you and others? Do you honestly think that it is good to do songs that so few understand? Isn’t this elitism?

e.g., “then He closed in solemn order wondrously His Life of woe.”

Say what?! (I kind of know what it means, but I would venture to say that many Americans would have no clue.)

We can bewail the state of education of Americans forever, but that doesn’t change anything. The average American reads at a 6th grade level–a “modern” 6th grade level, not the level of the 6th grade McGuffey Readers.

Our newpapers are written for a 6th grade reading level.

And one of the reasons why Harry Potter books are so popular is that they are written at a 6th grade reading level. Perfect.

I believe that Dan Brown’s books are the same.

**I’m NOT saying that we should exclude all “high” poetry from Mass because people in the U.S. are not very literate. We need to stretch ourselves a little. **
I think these kinds of songs and hymns would be much more effective if someone would explain them to the people.

But a regular menu of songs like this is going to discourage people. I would not attend a lecture series that was above my head. I don’t go to jazz concerts because I don’t understand jazz. I drive by three art galleries every day and don’t plan to visit them unless they do a showing of Norman Rockwell.

I happen to LIKE songs in the vernacular–not just in English, my heart language, but that say things that I understand, that relate to my life here and now in the 21st century. People criticize Mullins’ “Awesome God” all the time on this board. I disagree with the criticisms. The song speaks in the language that I speak.

God does NOT disdain our speaking language and our everyday idioms! When Jesus came to earth, He spoke in the language that everyone spoke. There is a prayer that says “He did not despise the flesh.” The Bible says that people from every language, tribe, and nation will bow before Him.

I know that there are people who love the classical language and poetry, and that’s fine. But I’m asking you to please put yourself in the mind of a person who cannot understand any of the fine language.

Please read the bolded part of my earlier post, quoted above.

It does not help your case when you who claim to be intelligent people apparently cannot read a simple post in its entirety.

In case you missed it again in the above post quoted, I am NOT advocating that we “dumb down” the Mass. I am not advocating that we exclude high poetry, chant, classical music, etc. from the Mass. I am not even suggesting that all the Mass music be replaced by rockabilly music.

**I would like to request that people stop putting words into my mouth and accusing me of being a rabble-rouser who wants to overturn all the traditions of the Church and replace them with my personal choices. I most certainly do NOT wish to do this. **

I will say it again–whatever the Holy Mother Church does with the liturgy and the music, I will submit. And snhs, I do not mean “submit” in the sense of a slave gritting their teeth and groveling in front of “massa.” I mean submit in the sense of submitting to Jesus Christ and His Lordship with joy and peace.

It is NOT up to me, it is up to the Catholic Church. OK? Are we all cool now?

I am a piano player. I have never been, nor will I ever be, a “leader” of music. That’s not my calling. If it’s yours, God be with you as you write letters, make phone calls, and petition your bishops to make the music of the Holy Mass “perfect.”

Frankly, I don’t see the point of this thread or any of the music threads on CAF. What good do they do? The people who are in a position to actually petition their dioceses to make changes should do so (some of you?). The rest of us ought to be content and quit belly-achin’ about something that WE CAN’T CHANGE!

What GOOD does it do to go to every Mass and find something wrong with the music, or sigh that the music isn’t as good as it COULD be?!!

I don’t see the value of that attitude at all. It just makes people mean-spirited and bitter in their souls, and bitterness is a root that eventually grows up and destroys your soul.

Is the OP better off now that he/she knows that the song done at his/her Mass was not really all that good for Mass? What GOOD does it do for him/her to now know that? Will knowing that his/her Mass music isn’t all that great make him/her grow closer to Jesus Christ and become more like Jesus? I don’t think so. I think it just give the OP (and others who are reading) something more to criticize about their local Mass. And this opens the door for Satan to sneak in and really do a number on this Christian, convincing him/her that if the “music” is bad, then other parts of the Mass are bad, too, and maybe the whole Mass is bad, and maybe the Catholic Church is bad…we shouldn’t give Satan one little inch, and a complaining heart gives him not just an inch, but a whole yardstick.

Here’s a good prayer for this thread: *God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, courage to change those things I can, and wisdom to know the difference. *

 

[Sarabande]

t:
These words were written in 2003 to mark the 100th anniversary of the Motu Propio on Sacred Music that Pope St. Pius X (whose feast we celebrated last week) wrote back in 2003. The problems that the saintly pontiff faced in 1903 are no different than what we are experiencing some 105 years later.

Very true. The Church throughout the centuries have gone through times where they always had to reign in the music being produced for mass. Sometimes they even outright banned it either for good or when a composer was able to refine and adapt it enough to be appropriate for Liturgy - perfect example polyphony. In 1903 they had experienced about 50 years of almost everything going on for the music liturgy. Much of the music was beautiful and well-composed by some of the most talented and brilliant composers of the time, but some of it was not appropriate for mass. Then they also had a period of very saccharine, corny hymns which have also gone away as the generation who wanted this music died out.

A little too much freedom was allowed this time around - not only with brilliant composers, but also with the anything goes attitude of the late 60s, 70s and 80s when mediocrity in composition AND musicianship as well as bad taste ruled, like in the early 20th century and late 19th century (in terms of bad taste). And now the Church is working at reigning it in again and getting rid of the dreck, as one can see in these recent documents from the Vatican.

 

[EasterJoy]

Please read the bolded part of my earlier post, quoted above.

It does not help your case when you who claim to be intelligent people apparently cannot read a simple post in its entirety.

In case you missed it again in the above post quoted, I am NOT advocating that we “dumb down” the Mass. I am not advocating that we exclude high poetry, chant, classical music, etc. from the Mass. I am not even suggesting that all the Mass music be replaced by rockabilly music.

**I would like to request that people stop putting words into my mouth and accusing me of being a rabble-rouser who wants to overturn all the traditions of the Church and replace them with my personal choices. I most certainly do NOT wish to do this. **

I will say it again–whatever the Holy Mother Church does with the liturgy and the music, I will submit. And snhs, I do not mean “submit” in the sense of a slave gritting their teeth and groveling in front of “massa.” I mean submit in the sense of submitting to Jesus Christ and His Lordship with joy and peace.

It is NOT up to me, it is up to the Catholic Church. OK? Are we all cool now?

I am a piano player. I have never been, nor will I ever be, a “leader” of music. That’s not my calling. If it’s yours, God be with you as you write letters, make phone calls, and petition your bishops to make the music of the Holy Mass “perfect.”

Frankly, I don’t see the point of this thread or any of the music threads on CAF. What good do they do? The people who are in a position to actually petition their dioceses to make changes should do so (some of you?). The rest of us ought to be content and quit belly-achin’ about something that WE CAN’T CHANGE!

What GOOD does it do to go to every Mass and find something wrong with the music, or sigh that the music isn’t as good as it COULD be?!!

I don’t see the value of that attitude at all. It just makes people mean-spirited and bitter in their souls, and bitterness is a root that eventually grows up and destroys your soul.

Is the OP better off now that he/she knows that the song done at his/her Mass was not really all that good for Mass? What GOOD does it do for him/her to now know that? Will knowing that his/her Mass music isn’t all that great make him/her grow closer to Jesus Christ and become more like Jesus? I don’t think so. I think it just give the OP (and others who are reading) something more to criticize about their local Mass. And this opens the door for Satan to sneak in and really do a number on this Christian, convincing him/her that if the “music” is bad, then other parts of the Mass are bad, too, and maybe the whole Mass is bad, and maybe the Catholic Church is bad…we shouldn’t give Satan one little inch, and a complaining heart gives him not just an inch, but a whole yardstick.

Here’s a good prayer for this thread: *God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, courage to change those things I can, and wisdom to know the difference. *

OK, yes, accept what you cannot change. Absolutely. But if your music minister is choosing dreadful music that ranges from distracting to just plain penance, there is nothing wrong with suggesting that you’d rather hear something else. Sometimes, we don’t know the difference between what we change and what we can’t until we try.

Holy Mother Church has preserved a rich musical heritage for us. If we don’t put the music director on the defensive, the better music we convince him or her to try will sell itself. The best of Catholic music is theologically rich, it is emotionally inspiring, it supports an solemn atmosphere…and it *is *singable!

Now, there was some truly vapid music in the past, too. Every age has some. It has gone into the dustbin, though. (Let us hope that it is there to stay!) The best way to get today’s atrocities headed in that direction is to replace them with better fare, not to force the music director to defend her reasons for selecting inferior music in the first place.

 

[benedictgal]

I think the problem is that there are those who seem to dismiss what St. Thomas Aquinas wrote as poetry and leave it at that. It’s interesting that one night, the Lord appeared to St. Thomas and told the priest, “You have written well of me, Thomas.”

St. Thomas Aquinas put the doctrine of the Eucharist in very concrete terms. That is why he is called the Angelic Doctor of the Church. Furthermore, the lyrics to Pange Lingua are song by the Church every Holy Thursday night during the processino to the altar of repose.

Furthermore, his work, Laud Sion, is the sequence that is chanted every year on the Solemnity of the Body and Blood of Christ.

Lo! before our eyes and living
is the Sacred Bread life-giving,
theme of canticle and hymn.
We profess this Bread from heaven
to the Twelve by Christ was given,
for our faith rest firm in Him.

Let us form a joyful chorus,
may our lauds ascend sonorous,
bursting from each loving breast.
For we solemnly record
how the Table of the Lord
with the Lamb’s own gift was blest.

On this altar of the King
this new Paschal Offering
brings an end to ancient rite.
Shadows flee that truth may stay,
oldness to the new gives way,
and the night’s darkness to the light

What at Supper Christ completed
He ordained to be repeated,
in His memory Divine.
Wherefore now, with adoration,
we, the Host of our salvation,
consecrate from bread and wine.

This isn’t mere poetry. This is an encapsulation of the dogma on the Eucharist. Furthermore, Laud Sion, Pange Lingua and Tatem Ergo are the traditional Eucharitic hymns of the Church, which she uses for Benediction and the Mass.

These sacred hymns are rich in theology and liturgy, putting to music the very heart of what the Church believes. Yes, even children’s choirs are able to sing these hymns, both in their native tongue and in Latin.

There are those who, perhaps, are missing the big picture. The Church, in Musicam Sacram, has already set forth the norms and standards of the music to be used for the Mass. In 1903, when Pope St. Pius X wrote his Motu Propio on Sacred Music, there were serious problems. The Mass was being profaned by those who wanted to insert operatic and theatrical pieces of music into the liturgy. This is what prompted the saintly pope to purge and purify the music for the Mass.

About 100 years later, Pope John Paul II recognized that we were once again facing the same problem. Even Pope Paul VI noted as much when he said that not all was fit for use in the Mass. Pope Benedict, as Cardinal Ratzinger, was very clear regarding where he stood on the issue of sacred music. Sacramentum Caritatis, penned by Benedict’s own hand, shows consistency between the thought of Joseph Ratzinger 20 years ago and that of Pope Benedict XVI today…