psalm singing

[pnewton]

SOOOOO many times I’ve seen people here blaming the music director for something when I’ve been in the same place instructed and sometimes demanded by a priest to do something and its out of my control.

It needed to be said. I’m tired of the judgemental and sarcastic comments here made about specific roles or people that have no control over some decisions.

In such a case, the priest would bear the guilt, again, if he were deliberately disobeying the Church. The singer would need to submit to his authority, or at least that would be one option. I try to never use sarcasm. I consider it to be the lowest for of conversation and the epitome of uncharitable writing. As I said, I should not have used the pronoun that laid the judgement where it did.

I have been blessed with a priest that wants nothing to do with the music, so I appreciate what you are saying, even though I have never had to deal with it.

 

[benedictgal]

I know exactly what you are saying, but the way you said it is repeating what often happens here, is completely judgmental of an actual specific person laying blame in a specific place which is not necessarily where the blame lies…often even unlikely

SOOOOO many times I’ve seen people here blaming the music director for something when I’ve been in the same place instructed and sometimes demanded by a priest to do something and its out of my control.

It needed to be said. I’m tired of the judgemental and sarcastic comments here made about specific roles or people that have no control over some decisions.

However, I am sure that if folks were to show the pastor why these texts are problematic using the authoritative documents of the Church (and not merely issuing an opinion), this approach may very well work. I have had to do this on some occasions with the priest under whom I served (and even my pastor on some occasions). One should not simply roll over and play did and raise one’s hands in surrender. That is why we have the documents of the Church to back us up.

 

[benedictgal]

I wasn’t commenting on OCP, I was replying to the poster who said “joining the singer in their sin”

It amazes me how you look at every opportunity, and something that has absolutely no connection and use it to defame a publisher… This had absolutely NOTHING to do with what i was commenting on.

It’s not defamation, agapewolf, when the publisher is blatantly wrong, as is the composer under its stable. One can be blindly loyal to a publisher and fail to see the wrong that it is promoting.

My comments do have everything to do with what you wrote. You just do not want to see it because, as I see it, you seem to have some sort of allegiance to OCP and refuse to find any fault with them even though they are blatantly wrong and have contributed a great deal to the problems indicated by the OP. Brand loyalty is one thing, but, when the company in question is wrong, they are wrong. The publishing house bears the brunt of this “sin” because it chooses to go against the mandates of the Church in favor of following trends. The singer, having blind trust and thinking that the company knows what it is doing, sings what is in front of him. The pastor and those selecting this drek fall into the same trap because they assume that OCP knows what it is doing. Well, it does not.

 

[agapewolf]

However, I am sure that if folks were to show the pastor why these texts are problematic using the authoritative documents of the Church (and not merely issuing an opinion), this approach may very well work. I have had to do this on some occasions with the priest under whom I served (and even my pastor on some occasions). One should not simply roll over and play did and raise one’s hands in surrender. That is why we have the documents of the Church to back us up.

You apparently have no idea how the day to day workings of a musician/priest relationship work.

You’re “sureness” is unfounded. One does not have to “roll over and play dead” and still is defeated by the boss. This isn’t surrender, this is simply surviving in the job.

 

[agapewolf]

It’s not defamation, agapewolf, when the publisher is blatantly wrong, as is the composer under its stable. One can be blindly loyal to a publisher and fail to see the wrong that it is promoting.

My comments do have everything to do with what you wrote. You just do not want to see it because, as I see it, you seem to have some sort of allegiance to OCP and refuse to find any fault with them even though they are blatantly wrong and have contributed a great deal to the problems indicated by the OP. Brand loyalty is one thing, but, when the company in question is wrong, they are wrong. The publishing house bears the brunt of this “sin” because it chooses to go against the mandates of the Church in favor of following trends. The singer, having blind trust and thinking that the company knows what it is doing, sings what is in front of him. The pastor and those selecting this drek fall into the same trap because they assume that OCP knows what it is doing. Well, it does not.

You see wrong.

I don’t have any loyalty to OCP. I am objective about it. You on the other hand, have lost all objectivity. Your comments had NOTHING to do with my comment regarding the topic I was commenting on…which is was about judging a SINGER. It had NOTHING to do with a publisher. Nothing at all.
Your comments are extremely judgmental as to my loyalties or my bias or something. I wasn’t even referring to anything else but a comment on the singer’s soul.

A publishing house has every right to publish anything they want. They don’t state that everything in the book is appropriate for mass. It’s up to the priest, or whoever makes the decisions to decide what to use or not. These books can be used for more events than mass.

But agian, I don’t care. I don’t want to get into it. Can you leave it at that? I really don’t. I don’t care. I was speaking up on behalf of the person whose motive is somehow automatically known by people here even though they often have nothing to do with a decision. That is all. Please let it go.

 

[benedictgal]

You apparently have no idea how the day to day workings of a musician/priest relationship work.

You’re “sureness” is unfounded. One does not have to “roll over and play dead” and still is defeated by the boss. This isn’t surrender, this is simply surviving in the job.

Oh but, I do, agapewolf, having done this for several years at the Cathedral and at my former parish, as well as planning diocesan liturgies. Just because I did not receive a paycheck to validate my work that does not mean that I do not know what I am doing.

I selected music for all of the Masses and went through a lot of quality control. I was also not afraid to stand up to things that I knew were wrong. I was blessed with a rector who wanted to follow the GIRM and the norms of the Church right down to the letter. In fact, I am still called upon to give advice and plan liturgies even though my day job has prevented me from being involved as much as I would like.

One does not have to be a musician to know that there are problems with the music. I call it like I experience it and, as I see it, the publishing house and the composer bear a significant chunk of the blame here, whether you want to admit that or not.

 

[agapewolf]

Having done what exactly? What is “this” that you have done?

 

[benedictgal]

You see wrong.

I don’t have any loyalty to OCP. I am objective about it. You on the other hand, have lost all objectivity. Your comments had NOTHING to do with my comment regarding the topic I was commenting on…which is was about judging a SINGER. It had NOTHING to do with a publisher. Nothing at all.
Your comments are extremely judgmental as to my loyalties or my bias or something. I wasn’t even referring to anything else but a comment on the singer’s soul.

A publishing house has every right to publish anything they want. They don’t state that everything in the book is appropriate for mass. It’s up to the priest, or whoever makes the decisions to decide what to use or not. These books can be used for more events than mass.

But agian, I don’t care. I don’t want to get into it. Can you leave it at that? I really don’t. I don’t care. I was speaking up on behalf of the person whose motive is somehow automatically known by people here even though they often have nothing to do with a decision. That is all. Please let it go.

Actually, my comments do have everything to do with the singer’s involvement. The singer/cantor will sing what is handed to him. The parish and the pastor assume that everything checks out because the publisher claimis to be “Catholic”. Unfortunately, a lot of them do not realize that the material in the OCP arsenal is not necessarily up to snuff with the guidelines. OCP does an incredible marketing job and folks just do not want to do their homework to make sure that what is in front of them is up to snuff. They blindly use the stuff. Thus, the sin is not necessarily on the cantor for singing this stuff; it is on the publisher for masquerading this drek as suitable for the Mass.

You say that a publisher has the right to publish anything it wants. However, it if want to make the claim that its’ stuff is suitable for the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, then, the publisher better live up to its advertisement. Unfortunately, OCP does not live up to it, not at all, especially in Spirit and Song. Not a few of the Mass settings and a few Spanish psalm settings are questionable for use in the Mass.

The fact that you are defending them, even though you say that you are objective, leads me to conclude that you are still refusing to see the point.

 

[agapewolf]

goodness, I’m not defending them.

They don’t claim that everything is appropriate for mass.

 

[benedictgal]

Having done what exactly? What is “this” that you have done?

Having read my posts for the last couple of years, you know good and well what I have done, agapewolf. Planning liturgies includes selecting the music and telling the cantor and organist (and choir) what will be used for the Masses, Sunday after Sunday, feast after feast. And yes, this also included getting rid of most of the OCP drek in favor of traditional, solid sacred music that was fitting for use in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and ensuring that the children’s choir was taught to sing real hymns and not the watered down versions that are found in youth Masses. So, I know what I am talking about when it comes to quality control for the music.

One does not necessarily have to be musician to be able to do that. All one needs is a good ear for music, an understanding of what constitutes genuine sacred music and, above all else, fidelity to what the Church requests for the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

 

[agapewolf]

Having read my posts for the last couple of years, you know good and well what I have done, agapewolf. Planning liturgies includes selecting the music and telling the cantor and organist (and choir) what will be used for the Masses, Sunday after Sunday, feast after feast. And yes, this also included getting rid of most of the OCP drek in favor of traditional, solid sacred music that was fitting for use in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and ensuring that the children’s choir was taught to sing real hymns and not the watered down versions that are found in youth Masses. So, I know what I am talking about when it comes to quality control for the music.

One does not necessarily have to be musician to be able to do that. All one needs is a good ear for music, an understanding of what constitutes genuine sacred music and, above all else, fidelity to what the Church requests for the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

Not the same thing as the musician. really, its not.

 

[benedictgal]

goodness, I’m not defending them.

They don’t claim that everything is appropriate for mass.

Actually, they do. Read the introductions to Spirit and Song and Flor y Canto. Look at the Mass settings. One does not put together a song book, market it to the parishes and not think that this stuff is not going to be used for liturgy, agapewolf, If that were the case, why bother compiling a song book in the first place? Why bother marketing it to the parishes?

The upshot to all of this is that now that the Grail Psalter has been approved, new settnigs will have to be written to accommodate the incoming texts. At least, that will remove the questionable substitutions and force OCP and, GIA, for that matter, to be in compliance with the mandates of Liturgiam Authenticam and not subject us to the fallacy of political correctness and their other silly novelties.

 

[bpbasilphx]

\
Quote:
Originally Posted by pnewton View Post
I have done that Psalm enough to know those are the wrong words. Like it was said earlier, changing the wording is forbidden. What the singer did was illicit. If I were responding, I would have stuck with the correct words rather than join the singer in their sin.

[Another Peron]Holy cow. Wow…you can read hearts?

Let’s not judge ok? You have no idea whose decision it was, or even if it was a decision to use those words. It could be the music directors, or the priest’s.

As a music director, many times I am told by the priest to do a certain song or psalm, and that is the last word. When I have the freedom to direct, I make the decisions to use the correct texts. My singers follow my lead.

To state “join the singer in their sin” is a outright judgement of a person’s soul.\

**I would not go so far as to accuse whoever is singing of the non-existent “sin” of changing the official liturgical text. It might not be licit to change the text, but you have no idea what book the text was actually taken from, or what it said to start with.

It’s possible that the book the composer used to set the words MIGHT have had the questionable text in it already. Believe it or not, there have always been some inconsistencies in different editions of liturgical books, even BEFORE Vatican II. (Examples: there were a few times when the text of the Missale Romanum was NOT that given in the Graduale Romanum.)

To singularize yourself by singing something different because you think you know better than everyone else is YOUR sin against charity, as well as YOUR sin of pride.**

 

[agapewolf]

\
Quote:
Originally Posted by pnewton View Post
I have done that Psalm enough to know those are the wrong words. Like it was said earlier, changing the wording is forbidden. What the singer did was illicit. If I were responding, I would have stuck with the correct words rather than join the singer in their sin.

[Another Peron]Holy cow. Wow…you can read hearts?

Let’s not judge ok? You have no idea whose decision it was, or even if it was a decision to use those words. It could be the music directors, or the priest’s.

As a music director, many times I am told by the priest to do a certain song or psalm, and that is the last word. When I have the freedom to direct, I make the decisions to use the correct texts. My singers follow my lead.

To state “join the singer in their sin” is a outright judgement of a person’s soul.\

**I would not go so far as to accuse whoever is singing of the non-existent “sin” of changing the official liturgical text. It might not be licit to change the text, but you have no idea what book the text was actually taken from, or what it said to start with.

It’s possible that the book the composer used to set the words MIGHT have had the questionable text in it already. Believe it or not, there have always been some inconsistencies in different editions of liturgical books, even BEFORE Vatican II. (Examples: there were a few times when the text of the Missale Romanum was NOT that given in the Graduale Romanum.)

To singularize yourself by singing something different because you think you know better than everyone else is YOUR sin against charity, as well as YOUR sin of pride.**

Excuse me? I’m going to assume the best about this and just take it that you misunderstood.

I said that I would use the CORRECT texts. yes, I change the texts to the ones that match the lectionary. I don’t make up my own.

 

[benedictgal]

Not the same thing as the musician. really, its not.

Just because I don’t play, that does not discount the work that I have done. Do you really think that the only ones who work are the musicians? I put in about as many hours at the Cathedral (and for the diocese) as I did for my paying job, even more hours than the cantor and the organist and the choir. What I did was just as demanding. By the time the cantor, the organist and the choir got the music, it had already been haggled through and finalized. My rector and I were nearly always on the same page and he knew the work I did, as did the bishop.

At least we never used a questionable psalm setting for the Mass.

 

[agapewolf]

Just because I don’t play, that does not discount the work that I have done. Do you really think that the only ones who work are the musicians? I put in about as many hours at the Cathedral (and for the diocese) as I did for my paying job, even more hours than the cantor and the organist and the choir. What I did was just as demanding. By the time the cantor, the organist and the choir got the music, it had already been haggled through and finalized. My rector and I were nearly always on the same page and he knew the work I did, as did the bishop.

At least we never used a questionable psalm setting for the Mass.

I didn’t discount your work at all. Don’t put words in my mouth or project.

It is still not the same thing as the musician.

 

[zab]

Excuse me? I’m going to assume the best about this and just take it that you misunderstood.

I said that I would use the CORRECT texts. yes, I change the texts to the ones that match the lectionary. I don’t make up my own.

If I am not mistaken, I think he was agreeing with you. Hang in there agapewolf.

 

[benedictgal]

I didn’t discount your work at all. Don’t put words in my mouth or project.

It is still not the same thing as the musician.

I submit to you that it is. You may not realize it, but, it takes a lot of work to plan liturgies. You may not have said it outright, but, your tone certainly indicates it. Just becasue one is not a musician, that does not mean that he does not work just as hard. One does not have to be a musician to be able to select music, let alone discern whether or not the settings are suitable for the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

 

[agapewolf]

I submit to you that it is. You may not realize it, but, it takes a lot of work to plan liturgies. You may not have said it outright, but, your tone certainly indicates it. Just becasue one is not a musician, that does not mean that he does not work just as hard. One does not have to be a musician to be able to select music, let alone discern whether or not the settings are suitable for the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

Not the same thing.

No tone.

Just not the same thing. I plan liturgies. I talk with my priests. I work hard. I also am the musician.

There’s more to it. Not the same thing.

 

[pnewton]

To singularize yourself by singing something different because you think you know better than everyone else is YOUR sin against charity, as well as YOUR sin of pride.

And I am the judgemental one! Oh my goodness!

FYI - Obedience to the Church is not a sin against charity. It is not the sin of pride, but rather is a sign of humility. I also kneel when I am supposed to, even if others stand. Pick your own beams and consider your own sins against charity. I must do what my conscience tells me is right. This is not done out of pride, but rather conscience.