Music at Mass, Again

[brotherhrolf]

I can’t resist. For far too many years in the 80s my cathedral choir was required to sing the Pange Lingua, the Victimae Paschalli Laudes (Easter Sequence) and all the remaining Great Sequences during Paschaltide from the 1940 Episcopalian hymnal because they were in the vernacular.

“Sing my tongue the Savior’s glory” has a third grade reading level and is about as awkward as you can get yet it is an accurate translation of Pange lingua gloriosi.

Or “Christians to the Paschal Victim offer your thankful praises” for Victimae Paschali laudes. My 1962 St. Joseph’s Missal translates it as “O Christians, to the Paschal Victim bring”.

How about the Veni Sancte Spiritus for Pentecost. “Come, O Holy Spirit, come! From thy bright celestial Home”. My 1962 Missal translates it as “Come, O Holy Spirit, come! From Your bright and blissful Home”.

The 1940 Episcopalian hymnal tended to lend itself to Shakespearean English while our 1962 hymnal was more, er…utlilitarian.

But in Latin these Sequences soar and both choir AND congregation were glad to hear them sung as they had been sung for centuries. My two sons learned to understand Latin the same way I learned it…at my mother’s side with her finger pointing to the English in the Missal.

Hey, I’ve even learned to sing in French and German and I speak neither language. Vietnamese too for the ordination of a Vietnamese priest. Perhaps I am graced but learning languages does not scare me. Nor does sitting down and watching a play by Shakespeare or reading the Canterbury Tales in Middle English - daunting tasks for most high schoolers today but common when I went to high school in the 60s. We shoot ourselves in the foot by demanding less rather than more. Just my :twocents:

 

[GemmaRose]

…
The problem I see is that the music is designed as entertainment at Mass and that is NOT what it should be.

And exactly what music has been designed as “entertainment”?

While you’re at it, I’d like to hear your thoughts on “what it should be.”

 

[GemmaRose]

If you can show me in the Bible where the liturgy of the Mass is, then maybe YOUR view could be right.

You go girl!

 

[GemmaRose]

Just a few comments…

The institution of the Eucharist is covered in reasonable detail, but perhaps you missed that bit in your RCIA classes.
The institution of the Eucharist is not in question here, plus there is no reason to be rude to Cat.

It also says in the Bible “And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hell will not overcome it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.” Now I’m really hoping that you covered that bit in RCIA, it’s a fairly important difference between Protestant churches and the Roman Catholic Church.
This is also off-topic, since this quote refers to Confession. (I’m quite sure Cat did hear about Confession in RCIA.)

When Peter, or one of his successors i.e. the Pope, make decisions they are to be followed.
And when he does, we will follow them, I’m sure Cat included. However, following a papal decision or an infallible statement is not what we’re talking about here. The Pope has made no infallible statements regarding music in the liturgy. He has stated his opinions, which are just that, opinions, and as opinions are subjective.

So when the Pope issues/signs off on a document which restricts the choice of music in the liturgy he is to be obeyed, because of the authority which Christ has bestowed on Peter and his successors.
Again, “when.” He has not done so. He has not “restricted” anything.

I hope you understand that now.
Cat understood before, and daresay, she understands quite well, and better than some other posters.

I find it interesting that yet again the substance of the post goes unanswered, but I suppose that’s par for the course with you. Perhaps you can reply to some of the more substantive points this time.

To begin with, going back to your post where you said “Which is more important, the “documents,” or “the Holy Scriptures?””, perhaps you could tell us the scriptural references you had in mind where it has the effect of saying ‘sing whatever you like at Mass, I really don’t care’ and ‘when I said to Peter that whole bind and loose thing I was joking’. Perhaps if you have the time you could also tell us where Cat classifying a piece as ‘good’ rendered it suitable for use in the Liturgy and where Cat’s opinion counts more than anyone else who might be in the congregation. After all when you claim more authority than that which Our Lord bestowed on Peter it would be nice if you backed it up with some scriptural references.
You are the one making the claims, therefore you should be backing up your claims. Produce evidence that Jesus ever said anything about liturgical music. You know you can’t, because He never did.

 

[Cat]

Thanks for the kind words on my behalf, GemmaRose.

 

[GemmaRose]

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

Somebody correct me if I’m wrong.

But in answer to your question, Cat, it’s because the music produced by Bach and Mendelssohn is astronomically superior to the music produced by both Haugen and Twila Paris. Bach died in 1750, Mendelssohn in 1847, and their music is still heard around the world.

100 years from now, mention Twila Paris or Marty Haugen, and people will say, “Who?”

Wolseley, I don’t think anyone here would disagree that the music of the likes of Bach and Mendelssohn is “astronomically superior” to A LOT of other music.

However, I don’t think the superiority of the music is the only thing to be considered -

What should liturgical music do? First, of course, it should praise God. Music does not have to be grandiose to do so. A song as simple as “More Precious Than Silver” praises God.

I believe liturgical music should also lift the minds and hearts of the congregation to God. Again, grandiose music can do so, but does not always, and certainly not for all people. I am sure there are some to whom it would be a distraction.

If a person has tears in his or her eyes after “Be Not Afraid” (as an example) has been sung, that person’s heart has been moved to remember the Lord’s promise to always be with us. Such remembrance leads to gratitude. Such gratitude leads to love, worship and praise. And thus “Be Not Afraid” has fulfilled its function as good liturgical music.

If a person has tears in his or her eyes after any one of many songs containing the words “bread” or “wine” has been sung, that person’s heart has been moved to remember that the Lord sacrificed Himself for us and has left us His Body and Blood. Such rememberance leads to gratitude. Such gratitude leads to love, worship and praise, and thus such song has fulfilled its function as good liturgical music.

And just because a song does not do that to you (you general, not personal), does not mean it does not have that effect on the person next to you.

Remember that God does not “need” our music. He does not “need” our worship or our liturgies. He doesn’t “need” anything. But He does want our hearts. Thus, something that aids a person to lift their hearts to love and worship God is good, whether the next person thinks so or not. That is why I have always stated (in many different threads) that there should be one Mass which uses predominantly the more traditional music, chant, etc., and another which uses more contemporary selections.

Is every single new composition good? No. But I’m sure Bach wrote a clunker or two also.

Is every single new composition theologically accurate? No. But as Catholics, we should understand Church teaching and be vigilant about songs which do no represent Catholic teaching.

Is every song “vertical”? No. But realistically, one needs the “horizontal” before they understand the “vertical.” After all, most of our congregations are not composed of learned, faith-filled theologians, but of many who are barely churched. They need to come to an understanding of the love God has for us before they can even begin to come to a place of true interior worship.

And, BTW, unless you can predict the future, you have no way of knowing who will be remembered 100 years from now.

 

[Mintaka]

In Heaven, they sing a song that can only be learned by the 144,000. Boy, that’s elitist!

(Revelation 14)

 

[benedictgal]

You go girl!

Unfortunately, this is another case of sola scriptura. Catholics hold that both Scipture and Tradition are the pillars of the Church.

Recall the reading from today’s Mass from St. Paul’s Second Letter to the Thesolonians:

15 So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter.

Sacred music is part of our tradition as Catholics. In fact, it is a centuries-old tradition. Furthermore, the writings of the Supreme Pontiffs testify to this. The name of one such Pontiff, Pope St. Gregory the Great, is even ascribed to the form of music that takes pride of place in the Church: Gregorian Chant.

Music is not relative. It is either fit for the Holy Sacrifice or it is not. Pope St. Pius X makes this perfectly clear:

1. The Church has always recognized and favored the progress of the arts, admitting to the service of religion everything good and beautiful discovered by genius in the course of ages – always, however, with due regard to the liturgical laws. Consequently modern music is also admitted to the Church, since it, too, furnishes compositions of such excellence, sobriety and gravity, that they are in no way unworthy of the liturgical functions.

Still, since modern music has risen mainly to serve profane uses, greater care must be taken with regard to it, in order that the musical compositions of modern style which are admitted in the Church may contain nothing profane, be free from reminiscences of motifs adopted in the theaters, and be not fashioned even in their external forms after the manner of profane pieces.

1. Among the different kinds of modern music, that which appears less suitable for accompanying the functions of public worship is the theatrical style, which was in the greatest vogue, especially in Italy, during the last century. This of its very nature is diametrically opposed to Gregorian Chant and classic polyphony, and therefore to the most important law of all good sacred music. Besides the intrinsic structure, the rhythm and what is known as the conventionalism of this style adapt themselves but badly to the requirements of true liturgical music.

These words, written 105 years ago, still ring very true today. The serious problem with the sixties/seventies Joan Baez/Caren Carpenter dribble that is still used today (Be Not Afraid, You are Near and other songs) is that the genre is not fitting for use in the Holy Sacrifice.

To totally disregard the norms and reduce it to “God wants our hearts” is to perhaps not understand why we have norms and standards for our worship. God didn’t spend several lengthy paragraphs dictating to Moses just how He was to be worshipped, when and where. He spent significant amounts of time going into the minutest detail, right down to the right hue for the sacred vestments. Certainly, if this was important to God, it was supposed to be important to ancient Israel.

The Church is the New Israel. St. Paul exhorts the people of Thessalonica to hold fast to the traditions they were taught. Remember, too, that the written form of scripture did not come into full being until the time of Constantinople. Yes, there were written texts, but, the volume wasn’t fully compiled until that time. So, what we had were, in essence, the teachings of the Apostles and some of the written accounts of the Gospels, as well as Oral Tradition.

Therefore, to claim that if it’s not in the Bible, it doesn’t matter, is completely wrong. We are not sola scriptura. That’s for the Protestant ecclesial communities, not for the Church founded on the Rock of St. Peter. Peter has effectively spoken regarding the importance of sacred music. Unfortunately, there are those who are just tone deaf to his words.

 

[benedictgal]

Just a few comments…You are the one making the claims, therefore you should be backing up your claims. Produce evidence that Jesus ever said anything about liturgical music. You know you can’t, because He never did.

Actually, he didn’t have to do so. Read what was proclaimed in Last Sunday’s Gospel:

18 And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it.
19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven

Jesus effectively established the Petrine ministry, giving Peter the authority to act in His Name and establish whatever needed to be established for the Church. This also includes setting criteria for the Liturgy. Liturgy includes sacred music.

 

[GemmaRose]

To put a finer point on it: music used at Mass should be a) theologically correct and b) artistically superior. Both - not one or the other. Haugen fails on both counts for being artistically ordinary and for taking liberties with the wording. I am not familiar with the other person referenced.

These debates always leads to a who-can-bash-Marty-Haugen-more fest.

Would someone please tell me what’s wrong with:

• “Shepherd Me, O God” (based on the 23rd Psalm)
• “Canticle of the Sun” (based on the Prayer of St. Francis)
• “Eye Has Not Seen” (based on 1 Cor. 2:9)
• “Taste and See” (Psalm 34)
• “We Remember” - quote from a Catholic website:

Sometimes, the effect of the sensory experience is so profound, I am stopped in my tracks, brought to tears. Through this sensory experience, I encounter the person and event central to that memory.

Memory, of course, is vital to our faith. The Eucharist is celebrated at Jesus’ command to “do this in memory of me.” While we were not present at the Last Supper, we relive it through the experience of listening to the “family stories” of our faith, through song, eating, drinking, sharing life.

The lyrics of one of my favorite hymns are “We remember how you loved us, to your death, and still we celebrate for you are with us here.” (We Remember by Marty Haugen) We know that Jesus is present to us in this celebration and by “doing this in memory” we encounter Him still.

While we approach the Eucharist with unique perspectives, unique histories, unique memories, this central mystery — this memory — unites us as one family in Christ.

• And you’ve never heard “Silent Night” until you’ve heard Marty Haugen’s “Night of Silence/Silent Night” rendition.

Since we’re talking of frequently bashed composers, what about David Haas’ nearly universal favorite, “You Are Mine” - what pray tell is wrong with this?

or

• “Deep Within” Oh, that’s right… we’re singing the Lord’s words for Him. Maybe the Celebrant shouldn’t read the Gospel either.
• “All the Ends of the Earth” - Psalm 98
• “Lord, Send Out Your Spirit” - Psalm 104
• “The Lord is My Light and My Salvation” - Psalm 27
• “Alleluia Sing” - eminently singable since each line is repeated; a contemporary joyful song celebrating the Trinity
• “We Have Been Told” - straight from John’s Gospel
• “If Today You Hear God’s Voice” - Psalm 95
• “Deep Within” - cf. Ezekiel 36
• "Send Us Your Spirit - And asking for the Lord to send us His Spirit surely is a no-no.

Surely, every composer has composed some awful stuff along with much finer works, Haugen and Haas included. But no one is saying that every single one of their songs should be used.

Use the good stuff. Don’t use the bad. It’s as simple as that.

Besides, has anyone here thought of the fact that (a) insisting that only your way is best is a tad pride-filled, and (b) bashing posters, composers, and publishing companies, is uncharitable and not Christian?

 

[Fitswimmer]

And exactly what music has been designed as “entertainment”?

While you’re at it, I’d like to hear your thoughts on “what it should be.”

I was a part of music ministry in my parish for over 20 years. We did all the “Gather” and “Glory and Praise” stuff and added the occasional folk or pop song if we liked it and could rationalize it. People came to the Mass we sang because they liked the music. We were well known in the parish, invited to all the right parties. (provided we brought our guitars and played of course) The time after Communion which is properly reserved for contemplation was the time for our “solo number” and people looked forward to it. Not satisfied with that, we added another solo number before mass. Our “performances” were routinely greeted with applause-led by the Priests!

It took a new music minister entering our parish to show us what had happened. We weren’t about leading people in song, we were about being parish rock stars. It wasn’t easy admitting that we had not only allowed this to happen, but we reveled in it. She instituted a change, with the support of the new Pastor, to a more God focused ministry. Some couldn’t handle it at all and left. It wasn’t a pretty time and things got VERY ugly, but it was necessary.

Music ministry isn’t about the ministers-it’s about God. The moment it becomes about the ministers, it’s time to step back and take a hard look at the motivations of those that are participating in it.

 

[ibkc]

These debates always leads to a who-can-bash-Marty-Haugen-more fest.

On the contrary; I specifically said that I think Haugen to be a very talented pop/folk songwriter, and that his hymns should be taken on a case-by-case basis. It’s really only his “Mass of Creation” that I singled out.

 

[VociMike]

These debates always leads to a who-can-bash-Marty-Haugen-more fest.

Would someone please tell me what’s wrong with:

• “Shepherd Me, O God” (based on the 23rd Psalm)
• “Canticle of the Sun” (based on the Prayer of St. Francis)
• “Eye Has Not Seen” (based on 1 Cor. 2:9)
• “Taste and See” (Psalm 34)
• “We Remember” - quote from a Catholic website:
• And you’ve never heard “Silent Night” until you’ve heard Marty Haugen’s “Night of Silence/Silent Night” rendition.
• “Deep Within” Oh, that’s right… we’re singing the Lord’s words for Him. Maybe the Celebrant shouldn’t read the Gospel either.
• “All the Ends of the Earth” - Psalm 98
• “Lord, Send Out Your Spirit” - Psalm 104
• “The Lord is My Light and My Salvation” - Psalm 27
• “Alleluia Sing” - eminently singable since each line is repeated; a contemporary joyful song celebrating the Trinity
• “We Have Been Told” - straight from John’s Gospel
• “If Today You Hear God’s Voice” - Psalm 95
• “Deep Within” - cf. Ezekiel 36
• "Send Us Your Spirit - And asking for the Lord to send us His Spirit surely is a no-no.

The fact that you’re focused on songs shows that you still don’t really get it. The 4-hymn Mass is the lowest, least ideal form of sung Mass, since it is only singing AT Mass rather than the ideal of singing THE Mass. A Mass sung with the four best hymns in all Christendom is still less ideal than singing the actual texts of the Mass.

 

[snhs]

Just a few comments…

I think I have asked you previously to stop responding in this way as it makes it very difficult to respond.

On your ‘comments’:

1. I was asked “show me in the Bible where the liturgy of the Mass is”, I did so. You may not realise this but the Eucharist forms an integral part of the Mass, the liturgy of the Catholic Church. You can check here where it has the phrase “The Mass of Pope Paul VI is the liturgy of the Catholic Mass of the Roman Rite promulgated by Paul VI in 1969, after the Second Vatican Council (1962–1965).”
2. If I may be permitted to suggest that you should stop making such ignorant comments. The authority given to Peter to “bind and loose” is not as you say “off-topic, since this quote refers to Confession.”, it refers, as benedictgal has already informed you, to the establishment of the Petrine Ministry.
3. You really are going all out to show how ill informed you are. When the Pope issues a Moto Proprio they are to be followed, leaving aside the studious attempts of some clergy and lay people to ignore Summorum Pontificum. Such a Moto Proprio was written by Pope Pius X, his words have since been reiterated by Pope John Paul II.
4. Pope Pius X did so, Pope John Paul II in his chirograph reiterated it and went so far as to say “I make my own the “general rule” that St Pius X formulated”. It remains in effect.
5. In case you haven’t noticed Cat had posted to this thread prior to me making a post to it. She had already made statements and assertions which she posted no evidence for then and has yet to post any for.

Perhaps in future before you get carried away in a 60s-esque sisterly love in you should review a thread in full. And if it’s not too much trouble before you start writing your own norms for what standards should be used to determine what music is suitable for the Liturgy of the Catholic Church, as you appear to do in your post replying to Wolseley, could you possibly provide us some evidence of your authority to do so? Or at least back it up from the teachings of the Church rather than the usual unproven assertions you and Cat seem so fond of.

 

[snhs]

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?!!

…

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. *

To begin with they inform people of what the music at Mass should be like, what the Church has said the music should be like.

Sometimes change takes more than an lifetime. If it weren’t for Our Lord going around Jerusalem 2000 years ago or so there’d be no Church today. It didn’t change to an appreciable degree in his lifetime, or the lifetime of the Apostles. It took hundreds of years for the Church to be accepted and to stop the large scale persecutions against Christians. That would probably never have happened if ordinary people hadn’t been willing to work towards it, if they hadn’t done what they could to achieve change which none of them could have done alone if thousands of other people hadn’t worked to achieve the same.

The music at Mass will never be as good as it should be, surely the least we can do is make it as good as it could be?

We guard against Satan by ensuring only the best and most suitable of forms are admitted to Mass. If we admit the kind of things which you propose then it is far easier for him to erode the sanctity and holiness which should prevail at any Mass. We shouldn’t give him an inch, yes, but if we allow ignorance of the Church’s standards and teachings to persist then we give him miles in which to flourish.

We often do not know what can be achieved until we try. The Lord asks that we try our best, if we just accept the status quo and make no effort to improve what are obvious problems then are we really doing our best for him?

 

[Cat]

To begin with they inform people of what the music at Mass should be like, what the Church has said the music should be like.

Sometimes change takes more than an lifetime. If it weren’t for Our Lord going around Jerusalem 2000 years ago or so there’d be no Church today. It didn’t change to an appreciable degree in his lifetime, or the lifetime of the Apostles. It took hundreds of years for the Church to be accepted and to stop the large scale persecutions against Christians. That would probably never have happened if ordinary people hadn’t been willing to work towards it, if they hadn’t done what they could to achieve change which none of them could have done alone if thousands of other people hadn’t worked to achieve the same.

The music at Mass will never be as good as it should be, surely the least we can do is make it as good as it could be?

We guard against Satan by ensuring only the best and most suitable of forms are admitted to Mass. If we admit the kind of things which you propose then it is far easier for him to erode the sanctity and holiness which should prevail at any Mass. We shouldn’t give him an inch, yes, but if we allow ignorance of the Church’s standards and teachings to persist then we give him miles in which to flourish.

We often do not know what can be achieved until we try. The Lord asks that we try our best, if we just accept the status quo and make no effort to improve what are obvious problems then are we really doing our best for him?

How?

Writing letters? You and others have already told me that I know nothing about the various documents, so why on earth would I dare to write to…who exactly do I write to, anyway? The bishop? That’s like an ant scratching a message to a human.

Refusing to play songs that the CAF Liturgy Police (people that I don’t know from Adam!) say are “wrong?” No way! I at least want to hear people that I know and trust and see their everyday lives say “these songs are bad” before I refuse to sit down and play what I am asked to play.

HOW?!!

snhs, how are YOU making these changes to the Mass? And how are you efforts being received by the priests and the people?

 

[benedictgal]

Originally Posted by GemmaRose
These debates always leads to a who-can-bash-Marty-Haugen-more fest.

Would someone please tell me what’s wrong with:

"We Remember"
"If Today You Hear God’s Voice" - Psalm 95

First of all, the ones that I have highlighted in bold are the most problematic.

“We Remember” is a gross misunderstanding of the Eucharistic Sacrifice. Of course, being non-Catholic, Haugen wouldn’t understand it. We don’t gather to simply “share a meal”, as he puts it. We gather to offer the Father the Sacrifice of the Son through the Holy Spirit. Second, we should never be the focus of the song. The Triune God should be. It is not our actions that are important. It is what the Lord has done for us.

Strike one against Marty Haugen. He needs to read what the Church teaches concerning the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

“If Today…” is supposed to be a responsorial psalm. According to Liturgicam Authenticam:

) In referring to almighty God or the individual persons of the Most Holy Trinity, the truth of tradition as well as the established gender usage of each respective language are to be maintained.

Strike two against Marty Haugen. He has no right to change, on his own initiative, the wording of any translation approved by the Holy See (in this case the respnsorial psalm).

A lot of his other works also use inclusive language, especially where the psalms are concerned. Again, he does not have the authority to change anything that the Church has approved. Strike three against Marty Haugen.

 

[DaveScott]

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.

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.

Well, Marty Haugen is now a Methodist - does that put you off? I met him in person 3 years ago at David Haas’ Music Ministry Alive camp where he did a presentation for us adults formally attending the camp.

The Servant Song - if it’s the one you mean - ‘will you let me be your servant, let me be as Christ to you…pray that I may have the grace to, let me be your, servant too…’

As an active musician in a ‘contemporary’ choir in our church I have observed over a couple of decades that, IMHO, the debate when honestly undertaken, is not about the liturgical correctness of the music, but about the music style. Some prefer the sedate pace of the organ filling the church, and some prefer the smooth, or some times almost exciting contemporary music that has been published in the last 10 years.

I attend both masses, and I make sure to listen to when the congregation is singing for isn’t that the point? There’s nothing worse than a melody line that’s both either half an octave higher than what most men can sing or wandering in it’s complexity so that those unfamiliar cannot follow it.

I believe in the Bible it says (paraphrased) make a joyful noise unto the Lord, singing in glad jamborie. I embrace our church’s decision to have both (and also spanish - though I have issues with how that’s applied in the US as a whole - not at church) so that all can feel comfortable singing in one voice at mass if at all possible. I still sing the old hymns with the organ choir, and love espcially the Christmas time ones - I’ll never lose my love for them no matter how interesting an contemporary version is - because that’s my history and preference too.

Can’t we all just get along…

 

[agapewolf]

. Second, we should never be the focus of the song. The Triune God should be. It is not our actions that are important. It is what the Lord has done for us.

Strike one against Marty Haugen. He needs to read what the Church teaches concerning the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

.

Maybe you need to read the psalms:

Then I guess all these psalms that are done by King David should be thrown out, too. THESE are what P/w songs are based on! These psalms right here are how p/w songs are worded, and you are saying how wrong it is! Sorry, that argument is wrong.

Aug 24, 2008

R. (8bc) Lord, your love is eternal; do not forsake the work of your hands.
**I will give thanks **to you, O LORD, with all my heart,
for you have heard the words of my mouth;
in the presence of the angels **I will sing **your praise;
**I will worship **at your holy temple.
R. Lord, your love is eternal; do not forsake the work of your hands.
I will give thanks to your name,
because of your kindness and your truth:
When I called, you answered me;
you built up strength within me.

August 28, 2008

Responsorial Psalm
Ps 145:2-3, 4-5, 6-7

R. (1) **I will praise your name for ever, Lord.
Every day will I bless you,
and I will praise your name forever and ever.**Great is the LORD and highly to be praised;
his greatness is unsearchable.
R. I will praise your name for ever, Lord.

Aug 31, 2008
Responsorial Psalm
Ps 63:2, 3-4, 5-6, 8-9

R. (2b) **My soul is thirsting **for you, O Lord my God.
O God, you are my God whom I seek;
for you my flesh pines and my soul thirsts
like the earth, parched, lifeless and without water.
R. My soul is thirsting for you, O Lord my God.
**Thus have I gazed toward **you in the sanctuary
to see your power and your glory,
For your kindness is a greater good than life;
my lips shall glorify you.
R. My soul is thirsting for you, O Lord my God.
Thus will I bless you while I live;
lifting up my hands, I will call upon your name.
As with the riches of a banquet shall my soul be satisfied,
and with exultant lips my mouth shall praise you.
R. My soul is thirsting for you, O Lord my God.
You are my help,
and **in the shadow of your wings I shout for joy.**My soul clings fast to you;
your right hand upholds me.
R. My soul is thirsting for you, O Lord my God

Responsorial Psalm
Ps 119:97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102

R. (97) Lord, I love your commands.
How I love your law, O LORD!
It is my meditation all the day.
R. Lord, I love your commands.
Your command has made me wiser than my enemies,
for it is ever with me.
R. Lord, I love your commands.
I have more understanding than all my teachers
when your decrees are my meditation.
R. Lord, I love your commands.
I have more discernment than the elders,
because I observe your precepts.
R. Lord, I love your commands.
From every evil way I withhold my feet,
that I may keep your words.
R. Lord, I love your commands.
From your ordinances I turn not away,
for you have instructed me.
R. Lord, I love your commands.

Psalm 89: On Nativity Vigil
The promises of the LORD I will sing forever, proclaim your loyalty through all ages.

 

[Brendan]

]“Canticle of the Sun”* (based on the Prayer of St. Francis)

I’ll give you that the TITLE of the song is based on St. Francis’s great hymn, but after that, all similarity ends.

Here is the text of St. Francis

To you alone, Most High, do they belong, and no mortal lips are worthy to pronounce Your Name.

Praised be You my Lord with all Your creatures,
especially Sir Brother Sun,
Who is the day through whom You give us light.
And he is beautiful and radiant with great splendour,
Of You Most High, he bears the likeness.

Praised be You, my Lord, through Sister Moon and the stars,
In the heavens you have made them bright, precious and fair.

Praised be You, my Lord, through Brothers Wind and Air,
And fair and stormy, all weather’s moods,
by which You cherish all that You have made.

Praised be You my Lord through Sister Water,
So useful, humble, precious and pure.

Praised be You my Lord through Brother Fire,
through whom You light the night and he is beautiful and playful and robust and strong.

Praised be You my Lord through our Sister,
Mother Earth
who sustains and governs us,
producing varied fruits with colored flowers and herbs.
Praise be You my Lord through those who grant pardon for love of You and bear sickness and trial.

Blessed are those who endure in peace, By You Most High, they will be crowned.

Praised be You, my Lord through Sister Death,
from whom no-one living can escape. Woe to those who die in mortal sin! Blessed are they She finds doing Your Will.

No second death can do them harm. Praise and bless my Lord and give Him thanks,
And serve Him with great humility.

First of all, note to whom the hymn is addressed. To God.

The Haugen version is addressed to humans, specifically a call to dance in forests and play in fields and to sing.

Could you point out exactly where Mr. Haugen has written that it is woeful for those who die in mortal sin? Or bearing sickness and trial for the Love of Our Lord?
I seemed to have missed that part.