Music at Mass

[pnewton]

I can’t for the life of me understand why any Catholic, even the most conservative or traditional Catholic, could possibly object to Twila Paris’ “How Beautiful” in the Mass.



When we were Evangelical Protestant, we felt uncomfortable singing “How Beautiful” because it was "too Catholic."

Just in case some Catholics haven’t actually read the words, here they are:​

How beautiful the hands that served
The wine and the bread and the sons of the earth
How beautiful the feet that walked
The long dusty roads and the hill to the cross

How beautiful, how beautiful
How beautiful is the body of Christ

How beautiful the heart that bled
That took all my sin and bore it instead
How beautiful the tender eyes
That chose to forgive and never despise

How beautiful, how beautiful
How beautiful is the body of Christ

And as He laid down His life
We offer this sacrifice
That we will live just as he died
Willing to pay the price
Willing to pay the price

How beautiful the radiant bride
Who waits for her groom with His light in her eyes
How beautiful when humble hearts give
The fruit of pure lives so that others may live

How beautiful, how beautiful
How beautiful is the body of Christ

How beautiful the feet that bring
The sound of good news and the love of the King
How beautiful the hands that serve
The wine and the bread and the sons of the earth

How beautiful, how beautiful
How beautiful is the body of Christ

“How Beautiful” is very appropriate for Mass, and even more appropriate for Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament. I often recite these words in adoration.

Wow! I have to agree, at least as far as the words go. I may have to listen to this sometime.

 

[Cat]

There are a growning number of young people who want Chant and Antiphons to be in the Mass, and not “blessed be your name”, “how beautiful”, name any other praise and worship song you can think of lol. I wouldn’t be surprised if we see a continued renewal of good Catholic Music at Mass in the near future, I mean more parishes singing chant, more parishes chanting the Mass parts instead of some of the things we here these days at Mass . I fully suspect that if you were to have a life teen parish and a very traditional parish, both celebrating the OF that teens would be more attracted to the very traditional parish than the life teen parish. Introduce teens to good Catholic Music and they will love it. I think the only people who would be hesitant or restraint to change in the Mass are the adults who are use to the same thing over and over again.

Well, I realize that we are just one city among thousands in the U.S., and so this isn’t a very scientific experiement.

But in our city, we HAVE both traditional Latin Mass with the chant, polyphony, and organ accompaniment (or acapella), and the contemporary Mass with guitars, piano, and sometimes drums available every weekend. The two churches are easy to drive to, only a mile or so apart. (We used to have Life Teen, but it was discontinued in favor of a different approach to youth ministry used by the Director of Youth Ministries in our parish.)

Again, maybe our city is just weird or off the chart. But the teenagers are not attracted to the traditional Latin Mass. The contemporary Masses definitely attract the teenagers and many other people as well.

Yes, there are teenagers in the traditional Latin Mass parish, and I know many of them and love them dearly. They are super kids, intelligent, friendly, and devoted to Jesus, the Church, and their families.

And I know a lot of the teenagers who attend the contemporary Mass (because I play piano for it), and they are also super kids, intelligent, friendly, and devoted to Jesus, the Church, and their families.

I have never been aware of a conflict in our city between the Catholics who prefer traditional Mass and the Catholics who prefer a more contemporary Mass setting. The traditional Latin Mass devotees that I know (both adults and teenagers) have no objection to the OF Mass, and in fact, occasionally attend when they have to meet their obligation and are not able to attend the Latin Mass. And same for the contemporary-leaning adults and teenagers; in fact, I know plenty of contemporary-minded Catholics who attend the Latin Mass once in a while just to keep up the traditions that they either grew up with or learned about from their elderly relatives.

 

[catholictiger]

Well, I realize that we are just one city among thousands in the U.S., and so this isn’t a very scientific experiement.

But in our city, we HAVE both traditional Latin Mass with the chant, polyphony, and organ accompaniment (or acapella), and the contemporary Mass with guitars, piano, and sometimes drums available every weekend. The two churches are easy to drive to, only a mile or so apart. (We used to have Life Teen, but it was discontinued in favor of a different approach to youth ministry used by the Director of Youth Ministries in our parish.)

Again, maybe our city is just weird or off the chart. But the teenagers are not attracted to the traditional Latin Mass. The contemporary Masses definitely attract the teenagers and many other people as well.

Yes, there are teenagers in the traditional Latin Mass parish, and I know many of them and love them dearly. They are super kids, intelligent, friendly, and devoted to Jesus, the Church, and their families.

And I know a lot of the teenagers who attend the contemporary Mass (because I play piano for it), and they are also super kids, intelligent, friendly, and devoted to Jesus, the Church, and their families.

I have never been aware of a conflict in our city between the Catholics who prefer traditional Mass and the Catholics who prefer a more contemporary Mass setting. The traditional Latin Mass devotees that I know (both adults and teenagers) have no objection to the OF Mass, and in fact, occasionally attend when they have to meet their obligation and are not able to attend the Latin Mass. And same for the contemporary-leaning adults and teenagers; in fact, I know plenty of contemporary-minded Catholics who attend the Latin Mass once in a while just to keep up the traditions that they either grew up with or learned about from their elderly relatives.

I’m glad to hear this and I may be wrong.

 

[AbideWithMe]

I can’t for the life of me understand why any Catholic, even the most conservative or traditional Catholic, could possibly object to Twila Paris’ “How Beautiful” in the Mass.



When we were Evangelical Protestant, we felt uncomfortable singing “How Beautiful” because it was "too Catholic."

Just in case some Catholics haven’t actually read the words, here they are:​

How beautiful the hands that served
The wine and the bread and the sons of the earth
How beautiful the feet that walked
The long dusty roads and the hill to the cross

How beautiful, how beautiful
How beautiful is the body of Christ

How beautiful the heart that bled
That took all my sin and bore it instead
How beautiful the tender eyes
That chose to forgive and never despise

How beautiful, how beautiful
How beautiful is the body of Christ

And as He laid down His life
We offer this sacrifice
That we will live just as he died
Willing to pay the price
Willing to pay the price

How beautiful the radiant bride
Who waits for her groom with His light in her eyes
How beautiful when humble hearts give
The fruit of pure lives so that others may live

How beautiful, how beautiful
How beautiful is the body of Christ

How beautiful the feet that bring
The sound of good news and the love of the King
How beautiful the hands that serve
The wine and the bread and the sons of the earth

How beautiful, how beautiful
How beautiful is the body of Christ

---

Can you all see why this song would be very uncomfortable for Protestants? There are so many aspects of these lyrics that are actually opposed to Evangelical Protestant theology and thinking. For example, most Evangelical Protestants never separate “the heart of Jesus” from the rest of Jesus–to us ,the idea of a “Sacred Heart of Jesus” made no sense and we were suspicious of separating out His Body parts. It seemed wrong to us.

Also, the idea of us being “willing to pay the price” was opposed to our theology. WE didn’t have to pay any price, because Jesus paid it all! So it’s no wonder that many Evangelical Protestant churches would not use this song in any setting, and found it dubious.

Most of us reconciled singing the song by asserting that the words were about us (the body of Christ, i.e., the Church), not Jesus’ actual Body. The idea of glorifying the actual Body of Jesus was not part of our culture or theology.

Poor Twila–she wrote a song that’s too Catholic for Protestants, and too Protestant for Catholics!

Gosh, Cat, as an Evangelical I haven’t ever come across any Evangelical Christian who had any problem at all with Twila’s “How Beautiful”. It’s a well-loved song, and it is obviously (and in Twila’s own words in concerts) about firstly the actual body of Christ and then our response and sacrifice as the Body of Christ following in His steps. It’s about both Him and us as a reflection of His beauty.

I love this song, and yes, it’s very singable. It’s my favorite song from Twila, and has been since I was a teenager. On a somewhat funny note, I got a Smooth Collie puppy a few weeks ago and named her after Twila.

 

[Cat]

Gosh, Cat, as an Evangelical I haven’t ever come across any Evangelical Christian who had any problem at all with Twila’s “How Beautiful”. It’s a well-loved song, and it is obviously (and in Twila’s own words in concerts) about firstly the actual body of Christ and then our response and sacrifice as the Body of Christ following in His steps. It’s about both Him and us as a reflection of His beauty.

I love this song, and yes, it’s very singable. It’s my favorite song from Twila, and has been since I was a teenager. On a somewhat funny note, I got a Smooth Collie puppy a few weeks ago and named her after Twila.

Depends on whether your denomination was/is separatist.

We were in the Christian and MIssionary Alliance (C & MA) in the 1980s. This denomination, at least back then, tended to be separatist, especially from Catholics. In fact, for most of the years that we were in our C & MA church, they refused to get involved with any of the pro-life activities in the city because they didn’t want to get mixed up with Catholics and give the impression that they supported Catholicism. Eventually, we were able to persuade our pastor to join a pro-life rally downtown, and once he took the stand, many other members of the congregation joined in–they needed his approval before they would get involved.

 

[ccmcmg]

… wow. So now im not properly Catholic because im a convert? … just wow.

My friend, I missed that while skimming the thread, but I can assure you that you are just as much Catholic as I am, and as the next person.

 

[Cat]

I’m glad to hear this and I may be wrong.

And it’s entirely possible that our city is somewhat unique, and that what happens here would not happen in other cities.

We have had a lot of problems with our public schools (a deseg lawsuit that resulted in local control of our public schools being taken away from us and given to a “master”). Our music education is virtually non-existent, which means that many people in our city have grown up with nothing other than what’s on the radio. I attended a meeting about music in the public schools, and was frankly horrified when I heard the teachers bragging about their wonderful “Hip Hop music education program.”

Yes, a lot of Catholic children attend Catholic schools, but from what I understand, there are only a few full-time music teachers in the diocesan schools–shocking, IMO.

Meanwhile the Protestant schools have wonderful music programs with amazing teachers, and a lot of Catholic kids end up attending these schools.

Also, we are within an easy drive of Willowcreek, which means that many of our churches have the best role model for Praise and Worship music, and so the contemporary music in many of the Protestant churches is really excellent. We have a radio station in our city that plays several hours each day of the latest in CCM, and this means that lots of children and teenagers have grown up with CCM and learned to appreciate it.

So there are a lot of factors to consider. As I said, perhaps in your city, the results would be entirely different if the teenagers had the choice of Mass types.

 

[ProVobis]

Just noticed from the quoted lyrics:

And as He laid down His life
We offer this sacrifice
That we will live just as he died
Willing to pay the price
Willing to pay the price

I’m not saying that this is wrong but maybe a borderline theological problem here? Didn’t we just go into a new translation that distinguishes our sacrifice from that of the priest? I notice the song was copyrighted in 2009.

It seems if Peter Jones’ Glory to God has been RIPed, shouldn’t we be doing the same for all songs that were based on the old translation?

 

[Cat]

Just noticed from the quoted lyrics:

I’m not saying that this is wrong but maybe a borderline theological problem here? Didn’t we just go into a new translation that distinguishes our sacrifice from that of the priest’s? I notice the song was copyrighted in 2009.

For an Evangelical Protestant (the target audience for this song), our “sacrifice” would be giving up comfortable life in the U.S. for the mission field, or living a more simple life so we can tithe 20% instead of 10%, or perhaps giving up a lot of weekend time to be a youth group sponsor. And of course, the ultimate sacrifice for any Christian would be to give our life for Jesus.

There is no concept of a “sacrifice” of Jesus Christ on an altar–for Evangelical Protestants, this happened ONCE. The idea of a re-presentation of this sacrifice is not part of the Evangelical Protestant theology.

But when I read the Paris lyrics, I see the Mass sacrifice, the sacrifice of Jesus Christ for us, not our sacrifices for Him.

 

[pnewton]

It seems if Peter Jones’ Glory to God has been RIPed, shouldn’t we be doing the same for all songs that were based on the old translation?

The change in translation only applies to the liturgical text of the Mass and the Lectionary. Music is not bound by any such rigidity.

 

[ProVobis]

For an Evangelical Protestant (the target audience for this song), our “sacrifice” would be giving up comfortable life in the U.S. for the mission field, or living a more simple life so we can tithe 20% instead of 10%, or perhaps giving up a lot of weekend time to be a youth group sponsor. And of course, the ultimate sacrifice for any Christian would be to give our life for Jesus.

There is no concept of a “sacrifice” of Jesus Christ on an altar–for Evangelical Protestants, this happened ONCE. The idea of a re-presentation of this sacrifice is not part of the Evangelical Protestant theology.

But when I read the Paris lyrics, I see the Mass sacrifice, the sacrifice of Jesus Christ for us, not our sacrifices for Him.

Okay, but you did say something to the effect that you couldn’t see where a Catholic would possibly object to the song being played at Mass. I’m just saying “maybe it should be in synch with the new translation.” I do understand your points. If Twila offered a concert nearby, I’d go listen to her (too).

The change in translation only applies to the liturgical text of the Mass and the Lectionary. Music is not bound by any such rigidity.

pn, this is not my understanding. Much of Richard Proulx’s music, though quite beautiful, has been obsoleted.

 

[Cat]

I think that there are many cradle Catholics, especially in America, and some Protestant converts who don’t get it. They don’t understand Catholic identity and they don’t realize what it is to be culturally Catholics, to be separate and distinct from Protestant or pagan or Islamic or Hindu culture. Some don’t see the Catholic Church as unique and exalted, but rather view her as one choice among many, just another Megachurch, to which they happen to belong and owe allegiance, but that allegiance is so weak that many would be better off if they simply defected to some Evangelical sect rather than banging their heads against the wall trying to change the Church from within into something she is not.

It’s the pernicious lie of the “Spirit of Vatican II”. It’s the wrongheaded belief that the Church is more multiculti than ever before in history, therefore she should be molded into a paragon of “inclusivity and diversity” which means bulldozing all sense of identity and uniqueness and buying into secularism at the expense of Truth and Beauty.

The Catholic Church is not one choice among many, she is the only choice! She is not just slightly better than the Megachurch down the road, she is the true path to salvation! We don’t simply have more doctrines than the Baptists, we have all the doctrines! We might look and live like Mormons on the surface, but we have the secret of Eternal Life, and they don’t! Sure, there are similarities in all religions, all have elements of light in them, but non-Catholic religions have elements of Satan in them as well, the demonic, leading people away from Truth and Beauty, away from salvation. Therefore we need to be scrupulously aware of what is and what isn’t Catholic, and strive not to admit those demonic elements which homogenize and pasteurize the Faith, watering it down into something unrecognizable, something that doesn’t lead people to glorify God and into personal holiness.

I am not saying that simply admitting a song such as “How Beautiful” is suitable for worship would be letting in the Smoke of Satan. I am not saying that we should reject all contemporary music out-of-hand because it is fundamentally awful. I am saying that we need to recover hard-identity Catholicism, the hard-identity which Father Z blogs so often about. The kind of Catholicism that leads priests to erect confessionals next to their business offices, the kind of Catholicism that leads women back to covering their heads. The kind of Catholicism which calls us all to stricter disciplines of prayer, fasting and almsgiving during Lent, not just the bare minimum required in Canon Law. The kind of Catholicism which those who attend the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite strive to recover from the ashes of “Spirit of Vatican II”. I am not saying we should all be Traditionalists. I think this is one calling, one spirituality out of many possible in the Latin Church. In fact I welcome “contemporary” style services for those parishes and groups which feel they need them. I welcome them, of course on the condition that the rubrics are faithfully observed, and this is the key problem in “contemporary” and “progressive” celebrations, is that they are always tempted to veer away from what the liturgical books say, from what competent authority has legislated, and from the spirit of liturgy which gives right worship to God and treats the Eucharist with utmost reverence and respect. If a contemporary service can accomplish its goal of reaching people where they are while still observing the law, and the spirit of the law, then so be it.

When my husband and I converted from Evangelical Protestantism to Catholicism, we joined a church, THE Church that Jesus Christ Himself established on this earth. We recognized the Authority of Jesus Christ, and recognized that He gave men on this earth the authority to shepherd His Church, and that as we, the “sheep,” submit to that authority, we submit to Jesus Himself.

We joined the Catholic Church because we believed in John 14:21.

We did not join a “culture.” In fact, had I read what you have written in this post, I would have backed away.

We are not interested in becoming part of a “culture of Catholicism.” We find many of the traditions interesting. We respect the tradition and have no wish to see it obliterated or forgotten or denigrated.

But we do not consider our Catholic faith “lacking” because I don’t wear a head covering (at least in the OF Mass).

The Church teaches that this is a discipline, not a dogma or a doctrine, and that it is optional.

The impression I’m getting from your posts is that you find the Church “lacking” because it no longer requires the “cultural practices” that you consider true Catholicism. So yes, I would back away from you and your talk. It sounds like “protests” to me.

Yes, Catholics should have an “identity” that is unique from the world. I’ve been taught that the Catholic identity is the Beatitudes. We need to be holy, and holiness is not the wearing of a veil. Holiness is when we are “like Christ,” and when people no longer see us, but Jesus.

Oh, BTW, I have been through two (2) extremely hard-core Catholic Bible studies of the Book of Revelation, one lasting for a year (not over the summer) that was taught through our diocese, and one from David Currie’s excellent book called Rapture. I certainly learned the Catholic teachings about end times, and lots of fascinating history, and I learned all about apocalyptic language and why we shouldn’t take it literally.

I’ve also read and re-read Scott Hahn’s wonderful book about Revelation, *The Lamb’s Supper/I, and I’ve been through a study of it in our parish’s apologetics class.

But I never came away from any of these studies with a desire to become part of a “culture.” I just came away with more knowledge of and love for Jesus and His Church.*

 

[pnewton]

pn, this is not my understanding. Much of Richard Proulx’s music, though quite beautiful, has been obsoleted.

Where was this? I have not heard of any diocese that has set hymns, though that would be an option any bishop could use.

 

[ProVobis]

Where was this? I have not heard of any diocese that has set hymns, though that would be an option any bishop could use.

Perhaps but wouldn’t that be like restoring a translation (or meaning) to the Mass the Vatican wanted all English-speaking countries to discontinue? I specifically remember that the Suscipiat being split into more theologically correct terminology (my sacrifice and yours) to conform to the Latin.

 

[pnewton]

Perhaps but wouldn’t that be like restoring a translation (or meaning) to the Mass the Vatican wanted all English-speaking countries to discontinue? I specifically remember that the Suscipiat being split into more theologically correct terminology (my sacrifice and yours) to conform to the Latin.

I do not believe this to be true. The new translation was not about being more theologically correct, whatever that means, but about be a more literal translation. Everything in the old translation was 100% theologically correct. It was not literally true to the Latin. “My sacrifice and yours” is the same as “ours”, but one is more literal, the other more dynamic. Both are orthodox.

When the new translation came out, there was no hint that the previous translation was anything except orthodox. It simply wasn’t literal. Music, on the other hand, lends itself to a more dynamic translation. Consider this parallel. Even though the Mass has been re-translated, the New American Bible use in the Lectionary remains a more dynamic translation (less literal). This is not a conflict. The liturgy needed a more exact wording. We did not quit using the Lectionary to match the Liturgy.

 

[Elizium23]

The change in translation only applies to the liturgical text of the Mass and the Lectionary. Music is not bound by any such rigidity.

That is overly legalistic and misses the forest for the trees. Liturgiam Authenticam as a liturgical instruction only has authority directly over the Sacred Liturgy, but it merely codifies and explicates the elegant and well-developed principles of translation already used for centuries. It is a correction to the modernist practice of dynamic equivalence that crept into not only liturgical books, but all aspects of translation, including the Bible and Ecumenical Council documents and Papal encyclicals and the writings of the Early Church Fathers, etc. The translation techniques were deficient and they were not capturing the beauty and precision of the original language(s). Therefore I see the principles of LA to be eminently applicable in all endeavors to translate Christian documents from ancient languages into new ones and so forth.

“My sacrifice and yours” is the same as “ours”, but one is more literal, the other more dynamic. Both are orthodox.

Actually, I was led to believe that “our sacrifice” was an error because of the singular number. The priest offers one kind of sacrifice and the people offer another. Therefore, it would have been “these, our sacrifices” but that is not how it was done in the Obsolete ICEL English text.

 

[pnewton]

That is overly legalistic and misses the forest for the trees.

It doesn’t seem that I am the one being overly legalistic. I bet no one can produce either a Catholic music list or a directive in force that mandates words in music match those in the liturgy. It is not I that is trying to be legalistic. I just do not believe in enforcing canon law, liturgical instruction or anything else, that doesn’t, you know, actually exist.

 

[ProVobis]

It doesn’t seem that I am the one being overly legalistic. I bet no one can produce either a Catholic music list or a directive in force that mandates words in music match those in the liturgy. It is not I that is trying to be legalistic. I just do not believe in enforcing canon law, liturgical instruction or anything else, that doesn’t, you know, actually exist.

The case in point is more about Catholic theology. According to Cardinal Arinze, Mass music should be “theologically deep, liturgically rooted, and musically acceptable,”

youtube.com/watch?v=9rJFdmmqj_s

 

[pnewton]

The case in point is more about Catholic theology. According to Cardinal Arinze, Mass music should be “theologically deep, liturgically rooted, and musically acceptable,”

youtube.com/watch?v=9rJFdmmqj_s

I do not think anyone questions the need for music to be meet these criteria. Songs to not have to mirror the words of the liturgy though to be all three things.

 

[Cat]

I can’t find the post above, so please excuse me for not directing this post specifically to that poster who referred to “How Beautiful” by Twila Paris as a Praise and Worship song.

“How Beautiful” is most definitely NOT a Praise and Worship song. It is usually classed as a “ballad.” I would consider it in the genre “contemporary praise,” which includes songs like “How Great Thou Art,”(Stuart Hines) and “O Lord Our God How Majestic Is Thy Name” (Sandy Patti), and "Easter Song (Annie Herring) and “There Is A Redeemer” (Keith Green), “Thy Word” (Amy Grant), etc…

Many contemporary praise hymns started out as contemporary Christian music “hits” on the radio (Christian radio) and were controversial among Christians at first, but because of their solid musicality and beauty, as well as their theology, became enduring classics and have even found their way into Protestant hymnody and have been arranged for choirs.

The similar genre would be “traditional praise,” which includes such songs as “Holy God, We Praise Thy Name” and “Praise Ye The Lord The Almighty,” etc. I don’t need to explain the endurance and beauty of these great hymns.

Perhaps this sounds picayune on my part, but I think that when Catholics discuss music, they need to be careful to use correct terms. Praise and Worship music is a separate genre, and is found in song books specifically written to be used in Praise and Worship times in Protestant worship services. P and W songs usually (but not always) involve repeating a simple Scriptural phrase over and over again, many dozens of times–this enables the Christian to concentrate on the Lord Jesus and worship Him. P and W songs don’t have much theology, but are simple in melody and in lyrics–again, this is deliberate so that the Christians can forget about all the “technical aspects” of music and just lose themselves in the adoration and praise of Jesus.

If you haven’t attended a Protestant worship service lately, many of the Evangelical Protestant worship services, and quite a few of the mainline (liturgical) church worship services include a “Praise and Worship” time, usually lasting about 20 minutes. I strongly suggest that if you are interested in music in the Church, that you consider attending a P and W time in a Protestant church so that you can learn the difference between these songs and the Catholic “modern” hymns in the Catholic hymnals, as well as the CCM songs like “How Beautiful” that are not P and W.

Yes, some of the contemporary praise songs/hymns and YES, even some of the traditional praise songs/hymns are used in Praise and Worship times! Usually the traditional hymns are sung at a dirge-tempo, so slowly that it’s hard to breathe, and this is done, once again, to make people actually THINK about the words that they are singing and worship God through them, and also, of course, to give the instruments the opportunity to improvise. (I find it physically difficult to sing traditional praise songs so slowly–I’m not just talking “andante,” I’m talking LENTO–one word at at time, very very slowly–dirge.)

In case you are wondering, Cat dislikes P and W times in Protestant worship services. She prefers traditional worship service singing–hymns and songs accompanied by full organ and/or piano, and other instruments played well (and percussion is fine with Cat), and sung with correct singing technique in four or more parts with strength and gusto by the entire lively congregation. Cat finds this more “worshipful” than P and W, but Cat recognizes that she feels this way because she grew up singing this way. Her background and upbringing influenced her preferences, as it does everyone else on CAF.

Cat does not like clapping during songs, but recognizes that certain styles, e.g., Southern gospel and Negro spirituals, are enhanced by clapping, swaying, and of course, big smiles!