Praise and Worship Music and Hymns

[benedictgal]

Forgive me for getting upset with some of you. This is a sensitive topic. I will stay away from music topics on this forum in the future.

I did not intend for my comment to apply to the Pope, but to the interpretations of the Pope’s writings.

I play piano, and I play what the priests and liturgical ministers tell me to play at Mass. I have no interest in reforming Catholic Church music, so those of you who are worried can relax.

I would like to have more clarification from the Magisterium about music. I think many of us would like that. At the moment, I think that many of the writings are open to many interpretations, and I think that’s what’s causing confusion and hostility about music in the Mass. I understand that the Church doesn’t want to spell it out, dot the i’s and cross the t’s, but I think that’s probably what’s needed, especially in the United States because of our diverse mix of cultures and backgrounds.

Kind of like the election–there was just enough vagueness in the comments from many bishops that many Catholics were confused about who to vote for and who not to vote for. It’s too bad, but I think we need specifics here in the U.S., otherwise we will all arrive at our own conclusions about the voiced and written generalities, and these conclusions will conflict.

Actually, the specifics will come some time early next year. Archbishop Malcolm Rajith, the Secretary to the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments delivered the keynote address at the Saturday session of the Gateway Liturgical Conference in St. Louis, MO, last month. I was privileged to be in the audience. He talked about the need for beauty in the Mass and he talked about Ars Celebrandi, the art of celebrating the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

In his address, he noted the following:

It entered liturgical vocabulary as something that expresses the necessary human action in Liturgy. In a socio-cultural context that tends to reduce the importance given to the role of the divine in human life and which gives pride of place to that which is essentially human and “this worldly”, the danger in positing a so called art of celebrating, to liturgy, in a purely humanistic sense is not minimal. Indeed, if Ars Celebrandi is to be understood as something based on human skills only, then, we have missed the point altogether. Whatever serves as the foundation for creative human art and skills, cannot be ipso facto transferred to Liturgy. But in some circles any acceptance of the term ars celebrandi is interpreted to mean a glorification of a sense of horizontalism.

…Participatio itself is, I
would say, in this sense, an ars where we ourselves are not the artists; neither do we
follow an ars taught or handed down to us by others but allow the Lord to be the artists through us, becoming part of what he does. As far as we are concerned, it is Participatio in the order of “esse”. All what we do in Liturgy makes us achieve that union with the eternal High priest, Christ and his sanctifying offering. The more we become part of the Oratio of Christ, His eternal self offering to God as the expiatory Sacrificial Lamb [Apoc. 14: 1-5], so much more would it be able to transforms us into the Logos and make us experience the redeeming effects of such transformation. Without that as Cardinal Ratzinger wrote we would radically misunderstand the ‘theo-drama’ of the Liturgy,
lapsing into mere parody [cfr. ibid p. 175].

After his address, I was able to privately ask him how the issue of music fit into what he said. I explained to him that a lot of the music that we use at Mass has a lot of the horizontal element that he referred to in his remarks. He told me that he understood my perspective. He said that the Holy See will be releasing a document early next year “that should address” the concerns that I raised. I am anxious to see this document, although I am concerned that the retirement of Francis Cardinal Arinze will affect its release. Needless to say, according to what Archbishop Rajith told me (and, I realize that there will be some who will consider it hearsay), change is coming.

 

[kurtmasur]

BTW - You don’t happen to be a Kurt Masur fan are you? He’s a wonderful conductor.

Yes indeed, I am a fan of Kurt Masur

 

[Sarabande]

Forgive me for getting upset with some of you. This is a sensitive topic. I will stay away from music topics on this forum in the future.

No need to stay away from music topics especially since music is important to you. Personally, I know it’s difficult not to be emotionally involved with something so close to me, but with practice when discussing these things on-line, one learns to be calm and clear-headed while explaining one’s beliefs and opinions no matter how much others disagree with you, and you just learn to appreciate the different opinions posed without gettign too upset with them.

I would like to have more clarification from the Magisterium about music. I think many of us would like that. At the moment, I think that many of the writings are open to many interpretations, and I think that’s what’s causing confusion and hostility about music in the Mass… It’s too bad, but I think we need specifics here in the U.S., otherwise we will all arrive at our own conclusions about the voiced and written generalities, and these conclusions will conflict.

You are right about some of this. It’s not just in the US, but in the entire Catholic world. Ever since the documents in Vatican II regarding sacred and religious music came out, there has been a lot of confusion, in-fighting and argument. The main criticism was because of how ambiguous the music documents were. Prior to this, there has always been moments where inappropriate sacred music crept into the mass and the Church has been able to nip it in the bud. At some points it was outright banning certain genres and even certain chords and progressions until either the music was refined to be acceptable in mass (ex. polyphonic music) or when they grew to learn that things like the “devil’s chord” had nothing to do with evil and was acceptable. Later in history documents were added to clarify the Church’s stance in music, such as the writings in the early 20th century in order to clean out music that was permeating the mass in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

Additional writings have been made to make more clarification of the Vatican II documents on music, which I think have helped. But in some ways, because Pandora’s box was opened, I believe it has been harder to reign things in.

I, like you, would rather just have the Church spell out what is currently acceptable such as how they did it in the past. I think once that is done more people will be satisfied with the outcome and I hope would be willing to obey and follow. There will always be fringes on different ends trying to fight it because on one side their “freedom” of doing anything they want will be severely curtailed and on the other side not enough curtailing was done. I have every faith in our current Holy Father that he will do the wisest and best thing for the Church concerning sacred music, especially if it will be addressed as Benedictgal mentioned. We just have to wait and see.

 

[Sarabande]

Yes indeed, I am a fan of Kurt Masur

So cool!

 

[Tigg]

I wrote a lot of songs while I was Protestant (over 40 years).

Now that I’ve converted (in 2004)), frankly, I’m really scared to write Catholic praise and worship songs or any kind of Catholic songs. I don’t like being attacked. I should have tougher skin, but I don’t. Catholics are mean when it comes to music that they don’t like.

There are many Catholics who seem to believe that Praise and Worship music is never appropriate for Mass, not just because of the words, but because the music itself is not “good enough”. I disagree, but I prefer to stay alive and not be eaten alive by my fellow Catholics!

I so love good P&W music, I just think your post is funny!

What would help composers is to carefully study the documents of the Church, including Musicam Sacram and even the Chirograph that Pope John Paul II wrote to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the letter that Pope St. Pius X wrote.

Oh, I hope this thread is still active and will be responded to. I am in a quandary. Sunday at Mass after Communion, all I wanted to do was praise the Lord in thanksgiving for the gift of His Body and Blood, but the communion song (I cannot call it a hymn) was so loud and so off-key, it was an absolute distraction to prayer.

In the October issue of NOR, there was an article by Lucy E. Carroll, a professional musician. The name of the article was "Why the Music is So Bad (and why it is likely to stay that way.)

I cannot post a link, so please forgive this long quote which are just excerpts from her article, but I would love to have some discussion on this. Is the USCCB being faithful to papal directives regarding music? Anyone, please respond!

• Contrary to popular belief, the Second Vatican Council re-affirmed the use of Latin as the official language of the Roman rite, stated that chant was to be given “pride of place” and that musicians be well trained in seminaries and parishes.

• On 1967 Pope Paul VI approved a document called “Musicam Sacram” that explained the place of music in the “Novus Ordo” (Order of the New Mass.)

• The document of the Council Fathers, entitled “Sacrosanctum Concilium” stated that the “treasury of sacred music is to be preserved and cultivated with great care.” This document also stated that in “mission lands” a suitable place should be given to the musical tradition of the native land and it should be held in proper esteem. (After all one would hardly expect to find a pipe organ in a village that had no plumbing or electricity.) This was not a wholesale license to use anything and everything in secular style and instrumentation; rather the intent was quite the contrary.

• In 1972 the American bishops issued a document entitled “Music in Catholic Worship” which completely ignores Musicam Sacram. It states that music, far from having a universality, should have a home town flavor. It states that music ought to be in the hands of non-musicians, chosen by committee and it should be different for different ethnic and age groups, in direct contradiction to Vatican pronouncements.

• In November 2007, the USCCB voted on a revised form of “Music in Catholic Worship.” This revision, entitled “Sing to the Lord” states that Catholics must celebrate their faith in the songs and musical styles of their cultural, ethnic and racial roots. So music publishers must offer multilingual options and thus we are encouraged to be a veritable Tower of Babel, where some understand some and no one understands all. Singling out a couple of cultures over others seems rather inconsiderate to the many ethnic representatives present. It is also quite futile. Can anyone address my ethnic heritage? This is why traditional chant and hymn forms, accompanied by the Latin language are to be preferred: They are accessible to everyone. Common ground is called for, not ethnic divisions.

• Although “Sing to the Lord” was voted into being by the American bishops, it was not given the force of law; it is only a guide.

• In the present day, many potential directors of music are not of our faith tradition. Oh, and why is this? Perhaps it is because classically trained musicians ran from the dread parish situations where folks with little or no musical training selected the music and where the music selection was so mediocre. It does not take a professional to play the guitar or amateurish music of today and organists and music directors have fled to places where those skills were needed and respected.

• The nasty question of economics arises as well. Today there are few parishes with a director of music who is actually a classically, professionally trained musician. A quick look at the parish bulletin shows the listing of parish business manager, nurse, social worker, etc. Are parish nurses and secretaries, grief counselors and business managers so much more important than the people who provide “the most important of the arts that serve the liturgy” as the Council defined music?

It need not be this way. Our bishops were enjoined by the Council Fathers to see that the very highest quality sacred music be provided for the liturgy. In 1974 they were instructed to distribute “Jubilate Deo”, a booklet of Latin chants that all Catholics should be able to sing; they were instructed to provide quality musical training for Catholic musicians; they were told that even the smallest church should have a choir.

 

[benedictgal]

I so love good P&W music, I just think your post is funny!

Oh, I hope this thread is still active and will be responded to. I am in a quandary. Sunday at Mass after Communion, all I wanted to do was praise the Lord in thanksgiving for the gift of His Body and Blood, but the communion song (I cannot call it a hymn) was so loud and so off-key, it was an absolute distraction to prayer.

In the October issue of NOR, there was an article by Lucy E. Carroll, a professional musician. The name of the article was "Why the Music is So Bad (and why it is likely to stay that way.)

I cannot post a link, so please forgive this long quote which are just excerpts from her article, but I would love to have some discussion on this. Is the USCCB being faithful to papal directives regarding music? Anyone, please respond!

Actually, the USCCB had the golden opportunity to come into comformity with Liturgiam Authenticam, by adopting the original version of Sing to the Lord, the powierpoint of which was posted in their website. However, an intense lobbying effort from the FDLC and the NPM pretty much derailed the original document and this is what we have. The document failed to pass by the needed votes to get recogitio from Rome, rendering Sing to the Lord to a non-binding status.

The original powerpoint presentation had some solid observations and appeared to have some teeth to it. It even treated the problems with some of the new translations of venerable hymns like “Let All Mortal Flesh Keep Silence” and two other songs.

I managed to save the power point to my hard drive. This is what it said regarding the point I made in the previous paragraph:

The Day of Pentecost Arrives
Verse 3: Our inhibitions make us die to you and to our friends.
Aren’t some inhibitions actually good, enabling us to live for God and our friends?

Let all Mortal Flesh
The first and third verses of this hymn have been altered to eliminate apparently archaic language and in inclusive the text. The original text said: Christ our God to earth decsendeth and As the Light of light descendeth—present tenses. These, however, have been changed to past tenses[descended] to eliminate the archaic language, causing the loss of the critically important notion of Christ’s continuous coming among us, especially in the Holy Eucharist.

Sing Praise to Our Creator
The original text spoke of being “baptized into his grace,” but was changed for the sake of vertical inclusively to: “baptized in living grace.” What does this mean?

Furthermore, it was supposed to call for a directory of music that had the following:

Introduction
The Gift of Liturgical Songs
Challenges
Liturgiam Authenticam
Three Characteristics of Liturgical Songs
Must Be Doctrinally Correct
Chiefly Based in Liturgy and Scripture
Relatively Fixed in Number
Conclusion

When I went to St. Louis for a job-related conference, I was blessed enough to steal away some time to attend the Gateway Liturtical Conference. I got to ask one of the keynote speakers, Archbishop Malsolm Rajith, after his presentation and off-stage), about the problems that we are having with the state of music in the Church today (specifically here in the US). He told me that the Holy See will be issuing a document early next year (2009) that will address many of the concerns that I voiced.

 

[Tigg]

When I went to St. Louis for a job-related conference, I was blessed enough to steal away some time to attend the Gateway Liturtical Conference. I got to ask one of the keynote speakers, Archbishop Malsolm Rajith, after his presentation and off-stage), about the problems that we are having with the state of music in the Church today (specifically here in the US). He told me that the Holy See will be issuing a document early next year (2009) that will address many of the concerns that I voiced.

This is great news; however, as we well know, the American bishops are not always responsive or obedient to Rome. There’s no hope for me - we live in a very liberal area - there’s not even a TLM available within 60 miles. Honestly, the music more times than not, is an absolute hindrance to entering into the “sacred.” Is it within liturgical guidelines to just have instrumental music, or does it have to be sung? I don’t mean to be uncharitable, but I’d much prefer that than the screechy notes we have to endure.

Thank you for being pro-active on this issue…please keep voicing those concerns to anyone who will listen!