Music that does not divide

[benedictgal]

buc_fan33;3587985:

But why? Why not a business suit? Why not a jogging outfit? Why not a hawaiian shirt and cutoffs? What’s wrong with these outfits? Answer that and you’ll be on the path to understanding why their musical equivalents are equally out of place in the liturgy.

Concrete passages from Church documents have been posted in this forum about a thousand times, and yet people keep saying that we’re just arguing our personal preferences. Almost makes a person think people aren’t interested in hearing what the documents say after all . Gregorian chant is singled out as the “supreme model” and “permanent standard” for the Roman rite. Sacred polyphony is also mentioned as being especially suitable. After that, “A composition for Church is sacred and liturgical insofar as it approaches Gregorian melody in flow, in inspiration, and in flavor, and so much less is it worthy of the temple insomuch as it is recognized as departing from that supreme model. Evidently, this does not mean copying Gregorian chant, but rather seeing to it that new compositions be pervaded by the same spirit that gave rise to and so molded that chant. Only an artist profoundly immersed in the sensus Ecclesiae may try to perceive and translate into melody the truth of the Mystery that is celebrated in the Liturgy.”

So, how many contemporary compositions are pervaded

by the same spirit that gave rise to and so molded the chant? How many contemporary composers are profoundly immersed in the sensus Ecclesiae regarding liturgy and sacred music?

You make some very valid points out there, VociMike. I have been criticized by not a few people on this forum for my over-abundance in posting documents. However, in this age of the internet, I find it highly suspect that people choose not to read the official Church documents and allow themsleves to be blindly led by what the publishing houses are pushing down our throats. Incidentally, these publishers hold no authority in the Church. They are not part of the hierarchy, so, what they are releasing to the unsuspecting masses is their spin on what they consider Sacred Music, and, not necessarily the Church’s.

To my young seminarian friend, I offer you these documents for you to read. Please don’t be put-off by the fact that they come from the Adoremus website. They have a very organized system and it’s certainly fairly easy to navigate.

They are as follows:

adoremus.org/SacramentumCaritatis.html
vatican.va/roman_curia/synod/documents/rc_synod_doc_20050707_instrlabor-xi-assembly_en.html
You probably have this already, but, a good re-reading doesn’t hurt anybody. Pay close attention to #42. You should read this document side-by-side with the Lineamata, the working document to the Synod on the Eucharist. You wrote about LifeTeen (not necessarily by name). You will find that one of the shadows indicated in this document involves music used for Masses with youth.

adoremus.org/Chirograph-SacredMusic.html
This document, written by Pope John Paul II and released in 2003 should give you a good indication why many of us were upset about what transpired in DC and why a lot of what passes for music at Mass really shouldn’t be fit for use. It also handles the issue of inculturaton.

This should be read hand in hand with this next document:

adoremus.org/MotuProprio.html
This document, now 105 years old, still speaks to us, as Pope John Paul pointed out in 2003. It is still very relevent and accurately describes today’s situation because it is similar to what Pope St. Pius X was facing when he wrote this Motu Propio.

adoremus.org/MusicamSacram.html
This is the closest thing, as far as I can tell, to a General Instruction on Music. This was written the year I was born, so now its roughly 41 years old eek: hate to remind myself I’m getting old).

adoremus.org/0408SacredMusic.html
adoremus.org/10-12-96-Ratzi.html
adoremus.org/1101musicliturgy.html
The first two documents come from the Holy Father’s second book, A New Song for the Lord. The third one comes from the Holy Father’s book, “Spirit of the Liturgy.”

I think if you read these documents carefully, they will help you gain a better understanding on why many of us rally around the cause of genuine sacred music in the Church.

 

[buc_fan33]

buc_fan33;3587985:

But why? Why not a business suit? Why not a jogging outfit? Why not a hawaiian shirt and cutoffs? What’s wrong with these outfits? Answer that and you’ll be on the path to understanding why their musical equivalents are equally out of place in the liturgy.

Because the rubrics are quite clear on what a priest is to wear. As I have read the documents, they do not appear to be quite so clear on what types and styles of music are and are not permitted.

Perhaps I am wrong about this. I am certainly open to that possibility. Ultimately, I simply want to be obedient to the Church, not ahead of her, not behind her, but with her. I will read the documents you recommend, and as in all things, submit my mind and my will to the authority of the Church.

Also, I have absoltuely NO problem whatsoever with the Adoremus hymnal, which I assume is related to the websites recommended above. In fact, it is by far my favorite hymnal, and, God willing, I hope to use it frequently as a priest one day.

 

[buc_fan33]

It’s close to 1:00 in the morning here, so my apologies that I’m half asleep as I read and type this. Anyway, my preliminary thoughts on some of the documents. I have not read them all, and I don’t have the time or energy right now to quote them.

Anyway, JPII seems to reiterate that Gregorian chant holds pride of place in the Roman liturgy and that polyphony is to be held in high regard. I do not dispute either of these points. However, he also seems to say that new forms of music are to be held in esteem as well, unless they profane the temple. The question then becomes, “What profanes the temple?” His Holiness seems to suggest that the further something gets from Gregorian chant, the less suitable it is for the liturgy. So, obviously, something by AC/DC or Guns 'N Roses would be unsuitable, just to name a couple off the top of my head, while something like All Glory, Laud, and Honor or Crown Him with Many Crowns would be suitable. The question then centers on something like “Your Grace is Enough” by Matt Maher, which I just happen to be listening to as I type this. I honestly don’t know the answer to that. As I read the documents, they don’t spell out how close a song must be to traditional Gregorian chant for use. Again, I have not read them all.

The same thing seems to apply to instruments. The documents single out the pipe organ, but stop there, saying that instruments used for secular music are not suitable for the liturgy. However, they don’t specify as far as I can tell. So, as a drummer, I have to wonder, would a trap set played with sticks be OK? How about brushes? Could a set of tympanis be OK? Electric guitars seem to be out, but how about acoustic? What constitutes secular music? Obviously alternative music is secular, but how about classical? Some classical was especially written for use at Mass, but not all. How about jazz? To someone for appreciates jazz music, it is a true and beautiful art form.

To summarize, I am still confused. I never want to speak against the Church, but sometimes, I wish the Church would simply publish a document that is so clear and concise that there is no room for personal interpretation, like for example, Ordinatio Sacerdotalis. It was short, sweet, to the point, and was perfectly clear. I wish they would just come right out and say that songs A, B, and C are approved, while D, E, and F are not and here is why so the same logic can be applied to any songs written in the future. With all due respect to His Holiness JPII, who I love as my father, the documents that I have read thus far are not clear and only leave more questions in my mind.

Just for clarification, I am speaking simply of music for the hymns of Mass. The opening hymn, offertory, Communion, and closing hymns. Obviously, the rubrics are much clearer for music used in the various Mass parts, be they the Commons or the Propers.

 

[VociMike]

VociMike;3588468:

Because the rubrics are quite clear on what a priest is to wear. As I have read the documents, they do not appear to be quite so clear on what types and styles of music are and are not permitted.

That’s because the Church does not want to strangle her composers and musicians with excessive guidance. She gives them much latitude but asks that they think with the sensus Ecclesiae. The problem arises when they take the latitude but do not think with the mind of the Church.

Perhaps I am wrong about this. I am certainly open to that possibility. Ultimately, I simply want to be obedient to the Church, not ahead of her, not behind her, but with her. I will read the documents you recommend, and as in all things, submit my mind and my will to the authority of the Church.

A truly humble and laudable attitude!

 

[VociMike]

To summarize, I am still confused. I never want to speak against the Church, but sometimes, I wish the Church would simply publish a document that is so clear and concise that there is no room for personal interpretation, like for example, Ordinatio Sacerdotalis. It was short, sweet, to the point, and was perfectly clear. I wish they would just come right out and say that songs A, B, and C are approved, while D, E, and F are not and here is why so the same logic can be applied to any songs written in the future. With all due respect to His Holiness JPII, who I love as my father, the documents that I have read thus far are not clear and only leave more questions in my mind.

I understand the feeling. I also suspect it could be a disaster. Some people who are determined to do what they want to do will find excuses no matter what. For example, look at all the Catholics who reject the Church’s extremely clear teachings on abortion!

Even though our two most recent popes have spoken of the fact that not every song is suitable for the liturgy, and that the music must be reformed of unworthy styles, texts and compositions, some people simply refuse to examine their own choices to see if anything they are doing falls under these cautions.

Just for clarification, I am speaking simply of music for the hymns of Mass. The opening hymn, offertory, Communion, and closing hymns. Obviously, the rubrics are much clearer for music used in the various Mass parts, be they the Commons or the Propers.

And hymns are already a removal from the ideal, which is to sing the texts of the Mass (all the texts), not sing at Mass.

 

[crm114]

As in so many other areas, in music we should do as the Council taught, not as “the Spirit of the Council” is said to have endorsed:

"The treasure of sacred music is to be preserved and fostered with great care. … Great importance is to be attached to the teaching and practice of music … To impart this instruction, teachers are to be carefully trained and put in charge of the teaching of sacred music… Composers and singers, especially boys, must also be given a genuine liturgical training… The Church acknowledges Gregorian chant as specially suited to the Roman liturgy: therefore, other things being equal, it should be given pride of place in liturgical services… Religious singing by the people is to be intelligently fostered so that in devotions and sacred exercises, as also during liturgical services, the voices of the faithful may ring out according to the norms and requirements of the rubrics…In the Latin Church the pipe organ is to be held in high esteem, for it is the traditional musical instrument which adds a wonderful splendor to the Church’s ceremonies and powerfully lifts up man’s mind to God and to higher things. "

SC 113 et seq.

 

[TheGhost]

Unfotunately, this is the definition of a reaction to a performance.

Joysong, I agree with you on pretty much everything, around here. So please don’t take this personally. I know too, that someone should able to “nail it”.
But our awe shouldn’t be on the performer. I’m not saying that you are wrong for feeling that way. I, too, was very impressed with his performance of it. But I think that is the point.

Yep, that is the point. Here and there on this thread folks have asked “what’s the harm?”-- I think this is a great example. The focus should be on the altar, not on the “performance.” Too often the music “ministry” (sic) bullies the priest and the parish into accepting completely irreligious music. Please listen to Catholic Answers Live podcast of 03/26 on “Manhood and the Liturgy.” They (music people) are well intentioned, I do believe, but wrong nonetheless.
It’s sort of like the youth program and Medjugorje-- emotion overtakes reason and if you disagree or speak out you are branded as a prude, hard-hearted, old fogey, etc. It’s simply cafeteria-Catholicism run amok, insofar as the interpretation and leeway offered by the Church is taken advantage of; ultimately, as others have pointed out, parishioners are divded (the topic here) and leave, or worst of all have their understanding of the faith shaken by a combination of misbehaving laiety and weakened clergy.
In my parish, the musicians cannot stand a nanosecond of sacred silence without desperately filling it with noise (sometimes talented & pleasant sounding, to be sure), or worse idle piano key stroking. In my most uncharitable moments, I imagine each motion of the priest to have playful accompaniment, like Mister Rogers received as he jauntily changed shoes or sweaters or welcomed the trolley into the living room…

 

[TheGhost]

Oh yeah, and several folks have tried to claim that the controversy of music type at Mass is somehow driven by a tiny fraction of bloggers, are simply deluding themselves. This is a big deal that has divided many a parish and weakened many a pastor.

 

[benedictgal]

Yep, that is the point. Here and there on this thread folks have asked “what’s the harm?”-- I think this is a great example. The focus should be on the altar, not on the “performance.” Too often the music “ministry” (sic) bullies the priest and the parish into accepting completely irreligious music. Please listen to Catholic Answers Live podcast of 03/26 on “Manhood and the Liturgy.” They (music people) are well intentioned, I do believe, but wrong nonetheless.
It’s sort of like the youth program and Medjugorje-- emotion overtakes reason and if you disagree or speak out you are branded as a prude, hard-hearted, old fogey, etc. It’s simply cafeteria-Catholicism run amok, insofar as the interpretation and leeway offered by the Church is taken advantage of; ultimately, as others have pointed out, parishioners are divded (the topic here) and leave, or worst of all have their understanding of the faith shaken by a combination of misbehaving laiety and weakened clergy.
In my parish, the musicians cannot stand a nanosecond of sacred silence without desperately filling it with noise (sometimes talented & pleasant sounding, to be sure), or worse idle piano key stroking. In my most uncharitable moments, I imagine each motion of the priest to have playful accompaniment, like Mister Rogers received as he jauntily changed shoes or sweaters or welcomed the trolley into the living room…

Very well said!

Unfortunately, many parishes are pretty much under the thumb of publishing houses like OCP that manage to snare unsuspecting pastors by offering package deals combining missalettes and hymnals. Unfortunately, cheap hymnals means cheap music, songs that are certainly not worthy for use in the Mass. The end result is the Mister Rogers-type stuff that is insipid, banal and insulting to the intergrity of the Mass.

 

[GemmaRose]

My local geographic church does. I drive 25 miles and have since 83 to attend the cathedral parish. Yep, some of those early Gothic era pieces are really hard on the ears and are every bit as dissonant as the Responsorial Psalm yesterday. But in most parishes centuries ago all you would have heard was Chant. In cathedral parishes you would have heard sacred polyphony and chant composed by some really excellent composers. I rather doubt that some of the stuff written today will survive. They are as transitory as the #1 pop hit in 1962.

Here is a listing of 10 of the “transitory” pop hits of 1962:

“Johnny Angel” by Shelley Fabares
“I Can’t Stop Loving You” by Ray Charles
“Big Girls Don’t Cry” by The Four Seasons
“Sherry” by The Four Seasons
“Duke of Earl” by Gene Chandler
“The Loco-Motion” by Little Eva
“Peppermint Twist (Part I)” by Joey Dee and the Starliters
“The Monster Mash” by Bobby “Boris” Pickett and the Crypt-Kickers
“Roses are Red (My Love)” by Bobby Vinton
“Breaking Up is Hard to Do” by Neil Sedaka

Which is not to say there is not good music being written today. My choir sings Taize chants, John Rutter anthems, etc. But we don’t use Glory and Praise, Gather, or anything published by OCP. Robert LeBlanc, OSB is a Benedictine priest at an abbey 45 minutes away from us. His “Spirit of God” was used at the Mass yesterday sung by the children’s choir. Plainsong in English. We use a xeroxed copy of his original manuscript and have for years. It is entirely possible to write music which is faithful to our Catholic heritage.

Yes it is. And some of those composers have had their music published in OCP.

---

*“Dear God, do You know the greatest grief one of Your creatures can bear? It is the thought that she can never love You enough. ” *- St. Gemma Galgani

 

[GemmaRose]

I belive this is my first time posting in this forum, so for those of you who don’t know a thing about me, a little background because I think it’s relevant as it relates to my response. I was in the seminary for four years. During those four years, I spent three years at a college seminary, one year at a theologate, both of which I would regard as very orthodox seminaries.

Latin was regularly incorporated in the liturgies at both seminaries. Devotion to our Lady was highly encouraged. We had a required holy hour in front of the exposed Blessed Sacrament every day. The Liturgy of the Hours was prayed regularly at each seminary. In other words, I have had a solidly Catholic formation.

OK. Now that that’s out of the way, on to the question of music. it seems to me that people have different tastes. Some like traditional Baroque hymns. Some like Gregorian chant, some like Taize, some like modern praise and worship. Personally, I like all of the above and more. As a priest one day, God willing, I could see incorporating all of these forms of music into my Masses, though not at the same time obviously, because there is something to be said for pieces flowing together well.

Many traditionalists do not like praise and worship music and think that it has no place at Mass. Why? Is it doctrinally incorrect? Does it discourage prayer? Is it focused on something secular? If not, then what is wrong with it? Perhaps, it doesn’t lead you to prayer. That’s fine. But it does lead some, myself included, to prayer. Among the literally hundreds of priests and seminarians I have come to know, countless numbers of them will tell you that they first heard the call to religious life at a Steubenville youth conference or something to that effect. The Masses at these conferences incorporate praise and worship music. How dare we try to hinder young souls from coming to God on the simple point that the music they tend to enjoy doesn’t suit our tastes for what is “appropriate.”

On the flip side of that coin are the ultra modernists that don’t like any traditional hymns or any Latin chant. Again, personally, I love Latin chant. Whenever I would lead music at Mass in seminary, I would almost always use Latin Mass parts, such as the Sanctus, Mortem Tuam, and Agnus Dei. All Glory, Laud, and Honor is one of my favorite hymns. I don’t see how using these hymns in any way brings us back to some antiquated view of the Church. Far from it, in fact, they remind us that we are a part of a living Church, which is still very much alive today and is still very much connected with our past.

As far as I’m concerned, if a hymn praises the Creator and not the creature, if it aids in bringing the mind and heart deeper into worship, and, most importantly, if it is doctrinally correct, then its use should be permitted and moreover encouraged.

Dear future Fr. Buc-fan, if only I could give you kiss, a hug, a high five!

You have said it more eloquently than I could imagine! I hope you ignore anyone who is impolite enough to suggest you should study Church documents, as though you would never do that in a seminary!!!

You are totally correct that many different types of music can & should be used since different types of music affect different people in different ways.

The continual attacks of contemporary praise & worship music by traditionalists tells me that they have never learned to worship in the first place.

Worship is not wallowing in Latin (although it could be for some).
Worship is not joining in chanting (although it could be for some).
Worship is not sitting there listening to the choir sing a classical piece or to Placido Domingo sing “Panis Angelicus” (athough it could be for some).

Worship is having your mind & heart moved to God, & that is what worship music should be doing.

As an example, a recent post which condemned the contemporary song “Our God is an Awesome God.” Do you know why people like that song?? Not because it “makes them ‘feel’ good.” People like it because WE DO HAVE AN AWESOME GOD & those who worship Him like to sing His praises.

Another criticism was made of the contemporary song “Shout to the Lord.” Do any who bash it know what it says?

My Jesus! My Savior! Lord there is none like You!
All of my days, I want to praise the wonders of Your mighty love.
My Comfort! my Shelter! Tower of refuge and strength!
Let every breath, all that I am, never cease to worship You!

Refrain: Shout to the Lord, all the earth, let us sing:
Power and majesty, praise to the King!
Mountains bow down and the seas will roar
At the sound of Your Name.

I sing for joy at the work of Your Hands.
Forever I’ll love You. Forever I’ll stand.
Nothing compares to the glory I have in You.

Wow, I’ll bet the Lord is really offended when we sing such beautiful words of love and praise to Him. Or is it that we can sing such songs of love & praise, only not at Mass?

I read the following comment online:

Having attended morning Mass every Sunday at [place] for the past 3 months, I can say without a doubt that every hymn is from the Adoremus hymnal and Mass is so reverant as to be funeral-like.

There are about a dozen uses of the word “joy” in the Gospels. Is that how our Mass should be??? Funeral-like???

(BTW, not commenting on the Adoremus Hymnal, but here’s a couple of cheery numbers:“Day of wrath! Day of mourning!” & “O Day of mourning!”)

If Jesus wanted us to be miserable, He wouldn’t have redeemed us in the first place!

---

*“Dear God, do You know the greatest grief one of Your creatures can bear? It is the thought that she can never love You enough. ” *- St. Gemma Galgani

 

[VociMike]

The continual attacks of contemporary praise & worship music by traditionalists tells me that they have never learned to worship in the first place.

Yes, always start by assuming the worst about the other side.

The “traditionalists” will probably claim another motivation, such as trying to follow the actual documents of the Church and writings of recent popes, and rectifying the actual problems which have been decried by those recent popes.

That is the key - there really are problems in the Church today regarding sacred music. Certainly as far as the liturgy is concerned we cannot say that one song is as good as another. The Christian community must make an examination of conscience so that the beauty of music and song will return increasingly to the liturgy. It is necessary to purify worship of deformations, of careless forms of expression, of ill-prepared music and texts, which are not very suited to the grandeur of the act being celebrated. Not all that which stands outside the temple (profanum) is fit to cross the threshold. If it does not at once possess the sense of prayer, of dignity and beauty, music – instrumental and vocal – by this fact is precluded from admission into the sacred and religious realm. The category of “sacred music” today has undergone such a broadening of meaning as to include repertoire that cannot enter into the celebration without violating the spirit and the norms of the Liturgy itself. Not all expressions of the figurative arts and of music are capable of adequately expressing the Mystery worshipped in the fullness of the Church’s faith. As a consequence, not all musical forms can be considered suitable for liturgical celebrations. There can be no music destined for the celebration of the sacred rites that be not first true art. A composition for Church is sacred and liturgical insofar as it approaches Gregorian melody in flow, in inspiration, and in flavor, and so much less is it worthy of the temple insomuch as it is recognized as departing from that supreme model. Only an artist profoundly immersed in the sensus Ecclesiae may try to perceive and translate into melody the truth of the Mystery that is celebrated in the Liturgy.

The words above are not my words. They are direct citations from our two most recent popes. So I guess you will conclude that they never learned to worship either.

 

[japhy]

The continual attacks of contemporary praise & worship music by traditionalists tells me that they have never learned to worship in the first place.

That’s quite the scathing indictment of people who worship God in the same manner as numerous saints of the past few centuries.

Worship is not wallowing in Latin (although it could be for some).
Worship is not joining in chanting (although it could be for some).
Worship is not sitting there listening to the choir sing a classical piece or to Placido Domingo sing “Panis Angelicus” (athough it could be for some).

Well, when you call it “wallowing”, I don’t want to “wallow” in English either.

However, as the Church has written, singing the ordinary of Mass in Latin should be expected of the faithful, Gregorian chant is the model for sacred music (and should have pride of place), and there are some parts of Mass where it is perfectly acceptable for the choir to sing and not the congregation. I’m not making this stuff up.

Also, you are making “worship” subjective by saying “worship is not X (but it could be for some people)”… then worship could simultaneously be “X” and “not X” at the same time! Perhaps you meant “For me, worship is not wallowing in Latin”.

Worship is having your mind & heart moved to God, & that is what worship music should be doing.

I would add that it’s not just having our minds and hearts moved to God, but lifted out of this world as well. That’s why Gregorian chant is different from secular music, because it isn’t like secular music. The song you mentioned below, “Our God is an Awesome God”, has this line: “When He rolls up His sleeves, He ain’t just puttin’ on the Ritz”. Sorry, but that’s just not appropriate language for the Mass (although the way some priests celebrate Mass these days, perhaps that distinction has been lost). As for “Shout to the Lord”, I think the style of the music is more the issue here. Christian Contemporary Music is, by and large, religious texts sung to secular tunes.

Or is it that we can sing such songs of love & praise, only not at Mass? I read the following comment online: Having attended morning Mass every Sunday at [place] for the past 3 months, I can say without a doubt that every hymn is from the Adoremus hymnal and Mass is so reverant as to be funeral-like.There are about a dozen uses of the word “joy” in the Gospels. Is that how our Mass should be??? Funeral-like???

I can think of numerous traditional hymns of love and praise. I’m also quite confident that most of the Ordinary and Propers of the Mass deal with love and praise. (But when’s the last time you heard the Propers of the Mass sung?) The quote is from here. A funeral is reverent out of respect for God and the deceased. Mass should be reverent out of respect for God and the death and resurrection of His Son Jesus Christ. Would we pay more respect and show more solemnity for a mere human than for the God-Man who saves us?

“Reverent” and “solemn” don’t mean joy-less, by the way.

(BTW, not commenting on the Adoremus Hymnal, but here’s a couple of cheery numbers:“Day of wrath! Day of mourning!” & “O Day of mourning!”)

Mighty fine selection there, Gemma. Here’s the FULL index of hymns. “Day of Wrath! Day of Mourning!” is an English translation of Dies irae, dies illa, a 13th century Latin hymn used at funeral (requiem) Masses. I would guess “O Day of Mourning” is another translation and setting of the hymn.

Here are some pleasant titles from the “Breaking Bread” hymnal… “Ashes”, “Funeral Litany”, “Song of Farewell”, “We Feel the Weight of Sadness Lord”. Of course, if you take these titles out of context, and you take the hymns out of their context, you don’t get the right picture.

If Jesus wanted us to be miserable, He wouldn’t have redeemed us in the first place!

I don’t think people sang that music to feel miserable, I think they sang it because it was born out of their misery and elevated their minds to the mercy of God, which they prayed would reign over His justice.

 

[GemmaRose]

Because 95% of the people who tune into blogs and message boards probably count themselves as ‘traditionalists’

Not to mention…the numbers who watched the vesper service paled in comparison to the numbers who watched the mass.

The music at the mass ‘divides’ us because folks like you are saying it ‘divides’ us.

The same 15 people are making the same statements over and over in all corners of the internet…that’s not being divided…that’s 15 people with a narrow dogmatic view of music.

:clapping: :clapping:

---

*“Dear God, do You know the greatest grief one of Your creatures can bear? It is the thought that she can never love You enough. ” *- St. Gemma Galgani

 

[japhy]

My other remark (remembered it too late to edit the previous post) is that we all have a tendency to make worship what we want it to be, rather than what the Church wants it to be. Letting the Church guide our worship is an act of humility.

 

[GemmaRose]

Placido Domingo in a performance? Did you note that he knelt to kiss the HF’s ring? That is the action of a life long Catholic. Look how many performances are in St. Peter’s. When they are clearly identified as performances no one kisses Peter’s Ring.

No one is judging Placido Domingo’s interior dispositions.

If the congregation wasn’t singing with him, or if the congregation is not singing along with the choir (any choir) – it is a performance.

---

*“Dear God, do You know the greatest grief one of Your creatures can bear? It is the thought that she can never love You enough. ” *- St. Gemma Galgani

 

[GemmaRose]

The argument against such music is the same argument that says priests shouldn’t celebrate Mass in a business suit. Contemporary pop-sounding music imitates the secular music world in style, instrumentation and presentation, if not in lyrics. This much is undeniable - it is exactly the reason so many people want to use it, and think that young people will be drawn to it. But the stronger the secular associations of the music, the weaker the sacred associations will be. If you hear a song without the lyrics, or with lyrics in a different language, and you can’t tell if that song should be on a pop radio station or on a Christian radio station, then that’s a problem as far as using that song in the liturgy.

My analogy is that of attending the theatre. Before the production begins, the house lights must go down and the stage lights must go up. This moves our focus from “here” to “there”, just as in the liturgy our focus must be moved from the secular world to the sacred world. But pop-style music keeps the house lights up full, and our focus is at best divided, with one foot in the secular world and one in the sacred world (yes, seriously mixed metaphors ). This is damaging to the liturgy and to our participation in it. We are constantly being pulled in different and conflicting directions.

VociMike, you are REALLY scraping the bottom of the barrel with this ridiculous argument. You are wrong on so many counts, I don’t even know where to begin! (But, of course, you know I’ll try! )

Contemporary pop-sounding music imitates the secular music world in style, instrumentation and presentation, if not in lyrics.

Don’t you think that a piece of liturgical music written 200 years ago imitated the secular music of the time in style, instrumentation and presentation?? Of course it did!

If you hear a song without the lyrics, or with lyrics in a different language, and you can’t tell if that song should be on a pop radio station or on a Christian radio station, then that’s a problem as far as using that song in the liturgy.

Are you even vaguely familiar with any contemporary Christian or liturgical songs? Can you tell me the lyrics of even one (without using Google)? It’s funny… all I need to hear is the opening first measure of a contemporary song, and my heart is already moved to worship - any I don’t even need to be in Church!

This moves our focus from “here” to “there”…

Common sense, intent and purpose moves us from “here” to “there.” If I go to the theater, I go with the intent and purpose to watch the performance. Common sense tells me the performance will take place on stage, so that is where my attention should be.

My intent and purpose of going to Mass is to render praise to the Father through the sacrificial death of the Son, therefore common sense tells me to focus on what is going on in the sanctuary, and that everything which is part of the Mass, music included, is for that purpose. No matter what music is being played, I’ve never been inspired to put on a tango dress and dancing shoes!

---

*“Dear God, do You know the greatest grief one of Your creatures can bear? It is the thought that she can never love You enough. ” *- St. Gemma Galgani

 

[GemmaRose]

… [addressed to buc_fan] I think if you read these documents carefully, they will help you gain a better understanding on why many of us rally around the cause of genuine sacred music in the Church.

One thing I have to credit you with, benedictgal, is chutzpah.

Buc_fan has a better understanding of liturgical music than you will ever have, no matter how many documents you can quote.

---

*“Dear God, do You know the greatest grief one of Your creatures can bear? It is the thought that she can never love You enough. ” *- St. Gemma Galgani

 

[GemmaRose]

Unfortunately, many parishes are pretty much under the thumb of publishing houses like OCP that manage to snare unsuspecting pastors by offering package deals combining missalettes and hymnals. Unfortunately, cheap hymnals means cheap music, songs that are certainly not worthy for use in the Mass. The end result is the Mister Rogers-type stuff that is insipid, banal and insulting to the intergrity of the Mass.

What did OCP ever do to you for you to badmouth them so ?

… not worthy for use in the Mass.

In your opinion. Anyone else’s opinion doesn’t seem to count, or is wrong in your overexalted estimation.

P.S. Is “banal” your favorite word?

---

*“Dear God, do You know the greatest grief one of Your creatures can bear? It is the thought that she can never love You enough. ” *- St. Gemma Galgani

 

[MrS]

VociMike, you are REALLY scraping the bottom of the barrel with this ridiculous argument. You are wrong on so many counts, I don’t even know where to begin! (But, of course, you know I’ll try! )

• From your posts, I would agree. You seem to have a stong preference for the horizontal in the liturgy. That makes little or no sense at all, yet many Catholics and most Protestants will agree with you.
  Common sense, intent and purpose moves us from “here” to “there.” If I go to the theater, I go with the intent and purpose to watch the performance. Common sense tells me the performance will take place on stage, so that is where my attention should be.
• Same with a baseball game, or a kids soccer match. However, at these events distractions and ongoing “interaction” with those around you is part of the event. The purpose of the event is, at best, only equal to the “active participation” of the audience,
  My intent and purpose of going to Mass is to render praise to the Father through the sacrificial death of the Son, therefore common sense tells me to focus on what is going on in the sanctuary, and that everything which is part of the Mass, music included, is for that purpose. No matter what music is being played, I’ve never been inspired to put on a tango dress and dancing shoes!
• ***The concern of the posters here who disagree with you is that focus on the sanctuary and the Mass should not be “tested” with distractions that we ourselves innitiate. ***
• If we could agree that it is more about Him, and less about us, we could probably agree on a liturgy full of reverence, and not subjected to our desires for the horizontal… at the sacrifice of the vertical liturgy due to the Lord.

---

*“Dear God, do You know the greatest grief one of Your creatures can bear? It is the thought that she can never love You enough. ” *- St. Gemma Galgani