New Song Rules by US Bishops

  • Thread starter Thread starter DWPC
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

DWPC

Guest
A big lost opportunity as this very bland and ambiguous document, once adopted, won’t be revisited for a very long time. Nothing very encouraging here for those hoping for more traditional liturgical music, though it should tighten up on adoption of “Humanist” stuff.

If anything, I think it hurts the cause for traditional hymns by ignoring any difference between historically Catholic liturgical music and modern stuff. I hope the fact that it covers changing “archaic” language in “venerable” liturgical songs doesn’t mean that there will be open season on lyrics in the old hymns.
usccb.org/comm/archives/2006/06-201.shtml
 
We still have hope…they still have to get the Vatican to approve whatever document they come up with. We might get lucky…Pope Benedict might just send it back with a note that says “add Chant or else…” 😃
 
I hear that it is going to be more strict then you seem to think. I only hope that what I hear will in fact happen.
 
Isidore_AK said:
We still have hope…they still have to get the Vatican to approve whatever document they come up with. We might get lucky…Pope Benedict might just send it back with a note that says “add Chant or else…” 😃
Click to expand...
Pax tecum!

Oh, that would be great, wouldn’t it? 👍

In Christ,
Rand
 
Did anybody else read this article???

Well, these norms seem wide enough to drive the proveribal truck through. The norms may be strong enough to keep out Rap Masses, Heavy Metal Masses and Punk Masses, but that is about it.

I don’t see anything about hymns being say ummmmmm reverent, sacred, holy, and at least mention God or our Lord once (e.g. Gather Us In). Oh yeah and the article only says hymns once, otherwise just “liturgical songs!” Barney the dinosaur sings songs. We as Catholics should be singing hymns and even (gasp) the propers sometimes (psst… maybe even in Latin).

Sheesh!!! Doesn’t anybody in the USCCB read the Holy Father’s writings about liturgical music? Or follow his lead? And they are submitting this to the Vatican for “recognitio”? I only hope that it gets rejected like that awful translation was in the late 90’s that sparked Liturgicam Authenticam.
 
I don’t see anything about hymns being say ummmmmm reverent, sacred, holy, and at least mention God or our Lord once (e.g. Gather Us In). Oh yeah and the article only says hymns once, otherwise just “liturgical songs!” Barney the dinosaur sings songs. We as Catholics should be singing hymns and even (gasp) the propers sometimes (psst… maybe even in Latin).
Click to expand...
This is just a news release, not the full on document.
Sheesh!!! Doesn’t anybody in the USCCB read the Holy Father’s writings about liturgical music? Or follow his lead? And they are submitting this to the Vatican for “recognitio”? I only hope that it gets rejected like that awful translation was in the late 90’s that sparked Liturgicam Authenticam.
Click to expand...
Did anybody else read this article???
Click to expand...
I must ask if you’ve read the article.
The new norms, which will require a two-thirds vote by the bishops and subsequent recognitio by the Holy See, are to ensure that liturgical songs will be doctrinally correct, based in the scriptural and liturgical texts and relatively fixed.
Click to expand...
 
The article looks great to me. I have too many songs used at Mass with questionable doctrinal lyrics. This document is clearly meant to correct that. It does not, and should not, give preferrence to any particular style of music. Let’s not try to force everyone to look and sound alike.
 
At least there is some sort of following of the Instruction Liturgiam Authenticam published 25 April 2001:

“108. Sung texts and liturgical hymns have a particular importance and efficacy. Especially on Sunday, the “Day of the Lord”, the singing of the faithful gathered for the celebration of Holy Mass, no less than the prayers, the readings and the homily, express in an authentic way the message of the Liturgy while fostering a sense of common faith and communion in charity.[78] If they are used widely by the faithful, they should remain relatively fixed so that confusion among the people may be avoided. Within five years from the publication of this Instruction, the Conferences of Bishops, necessarily in collaboration with the national and diocesan Commissions and with other experts, shall provide for the publication of a directory or repertory of texts intended for liturgical singing. This document shall be transmitted for the necessary recognitio to the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments.”

(The full document is at vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccdds/documents/rc_con_ccdds_doc_20010507_liturgiam-authenticam_en.html ).

From the Media Release, the difference seems to be that insteading of having a “repertory of texts intended for liturgical singing” this list seems to have no force:
“Within three years, the Committee on the Liturgy will formulate a Common Repertoire of Liturgical Songs for use in all places where the Roman liturgy is celebrated in the United States of America. While songs outside the core repertoire may also be used in the Liturgy, this core repertoire will be included in all worship aids used in the dioceses of the United States of America.” (Media release at usccb.org/comm/archives/2006/06-201.shtml ,emphasis added.)
Another quote from Media Release: “The directory is to serve not so much as a list of approved and unapproved songs as a process by which bishops might regulate the quality of the text of songs composed for use in the liturgy.”

Another question is “why delay?”. The Vatican wanted a list of hymns by 25 April 2006. Why vote on norms? Why do the norms “require a two-thirds vote by the bishops”? Why prepare the list within three years, instead of three months or three days?

But at least the USCCB now seems to have a process for following a challenging Instruction from the Vatican.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top