Sacred Liturgical Music and Contemporary Music

[future_deacon]

In a discussion about music in Mass, I stumbled upon something I would like the answer to.

Is there an official catholic teaching which allows *contemporary music in mass? If so, please cite a document and an explanation.

• What I mean by contemporary music is music played with piano/keyboard, guitar, drums, etc. Also includes original music written for mass.

 

[jackiecarty]

I know that I checked the songbook at a contemporary mass at our church because I was in question and it had been approved by a Catholic Bishop, if I remember correctly in Chicago. I often listen carefully to the words, however as some of the songs have been written by non-Catholics

 

[L_Marshall]

I don’t believe there’s any distinction in any rubrics.

However, I do know that the GIRM and other documents state that only “approved” instruments can be used. The only other document which deals with this that I’ve ever seen approves the organ, and string instruments (with the permission of the Ordinary). Percussion instruments (including the piano) are forbidden in several documents, as well as what the document described as “noisy and rambunctious instruments.”

 

[SaintFrancis333]

I pray for the day when the Tridentine is once more offered at every Parish. What’s wrong with chant? Everything has to be “contemporary” to try and attract our protestant brethren. We shouldn’t take away from our Mass (even though it is still licit), simply to appease non Catholics. Keep all the attraction of the EF. It will draw people close, if properly exposed to them.

 

[Cat]

I don’t believe there’s any distinction in any rubrics.

However, I do know that the GIRM and other documents state that only “approved” instruments can be used. The only other document which deals with this that I’ve ever seen approves the organ, and string instruments (with the permission of the Ordinary). Percussion instruments (including the piano) are forbidden in several documents, as well as what the document described as “noisy and rambunctious instruments.”

This is not correct.

Please quote the exact documents and provide documentation which documents that quotes are from. Or please provide links to the documents. Thank you.

For the OP:

Sacrosanctum Concilium, Vatican II’s Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, states thusly in Article 116:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Second Vatican Council
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. But other kinds of sacred music, especially polyphony, are by no means excluded from liturgical celebrations, so long as they accord with the spirit of the liturgical action, as laid down in Art. 30.

Article 120:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Second Vatican Council
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. But other instruments also may be admitted for use in divine worship, with the knowledge and consent of the competent territorial authority, as laid down in Art. 22, 52, 37, and 40. This may be done, however, only on condition that the instruments are suitable, or can be made suitable, for sacred use, accord with the dignity of the temple, and truly contribute to the edification of the faithful.

There is another article that talks about the “music of the culture” being allowed, but I’m at work (break) and don’t want to take the time to look it up. It’s in the same section of the Sancro. Concil. of Vat. II if you want to read through that section.

OP, the Bishop (territorial authority) has the authority to approve or disapprove of instruments like the piano, guitar, etc. in the Masses in his diocese. Unless the Bishop has lost control of a parish, you can be assured that if a piano, guitar, etc. is being used during Mass, it is approved by your Bishop.

 

[landon13]

I pray for the day when the Tridentine is once more offered at every Parish. What’s wrong with chant? Everything has to be “contemporary” to try and attract our protestant brethren. We shouldn’t take away from our Mass (even though it is still licit), simply to appease non Catholics. Keep all the attraction of the EF. It will draw people close, if properly exposed to them.

So true. I have never been to a Tridentine mass before but I so want to because I know Latin and I want to put it to use in the mass. So beautiful. I don’t like the modernization. Everything in life doesn’t need to be modern especially something so old and so venerated like the Eucharist.

Blessings!

 

[Cavaille-Coll]

I know that I checked the songbook at a contemporary mass at our church because I was in question and it had been approved by a Catholic Bishop, if I remember correctly in Chicago. I often listen carefully to the words, however as some of the songs have been written by non-Catholics

I don’t know which book your parish uses, but I’ve often heard the statement that OCP hymnals have an imprimatur. This is not true. They have a “concordat cum originali” (agrees with the original document) which states that the Scripture readings and text of the Mass are printed correctly. That does not cover the texts of the hymns, many of which contain serious theological errors.

 

[L_Marshall]

Please quote the exact documents and provide documentation which documents that quotes are from. Or please provide links to the documents. Thank you.

I apologize, but I was on my way out the door when I posted this. After some poking around, I found an online copy of the text. The title of the document is De Musica Sacra et Sacra Liturgia (Instruction on Sacred Music and Sacred Liturgy)

Regarding the bits I paraphrased from it, the exact text is as follows (Paragraph 60, list item ‘C’, with my emphasis):

The difference between sacred, and secular music must be taken into consideration. Some musical instruments, such as the classic organ, are naturally appropriate for sacred music; others, such as string instruments which are played with a bow, are easily adapted to liturgical use. But there are some instruments which, by common estimation, are so associated with secular music that they are not at all adaptable for sacred use.

Furthermore, It is stated in the Motu Proprio Tra le Sollecitudini (Instruction on Sacred Music):

1. The employment of the piano is forbidden in church, as is also that of noisy or frivolous instruments such as drums, cymbals, bells and the like.

1. It is strictly forbidden to have bands play in church, and only in special cases with the consent of the Ordinary will it be permissible to admit wind instruments, limited in number, judiciously used, and proportioned to the size of the placeprovided the composition and accompaniment be written in grave and suitable style, and conform in all respects to that proper to the organ.

I must admit that I was confused on one count. It is wind instruments, not string instruments, which require permission.

The General Instructions of the Roman Missal state:

1. The organ and other lawfully approved musical instruments are to be placed in an appropriate place so that they can sustain the singing of both the choir and the congregation and be heard with ease by all if they are played alone. It is appropriate that, before being put into liturgical use, the organ be blessed according to the rite described in the Roman Ritual.

 

[Cat]

I apologize, but I was on my way out the door when I posted this. After some poking around, I found an online copy of the text. The title of the document is De Musica Sacra et Sacra Liturgia (Instruction on Sacred Music and Sacred Liturgy)

Regarding the bits I paraphrased from it, the exact text is as follows (Paragraph 60, list item ‘C’, with my emphasis):

Furthermore, It is stated in the Motu Proprio Tra le Sollecitudini (Instruction on Sacred Music):

I must admit that I was confused on one count. It is wind instruments, not string instruments, which require permission.

The General Instructions of the Roman Missal state:

How do you explain the fact that many Catholics churches, including those in some of the most orthodox and conservative dioceses in the U.S., use the piano in their Mass? Do you think that all these churches are doing something wrong? Do you think that all their Bishops are allowing something that is wrong?

Just this Thursday, on the Feast Day of St. Anthony, I assisted at a Mass presided over by Bishop Thomas Doran (retired), one of the most orthodox and conservative bishops in our country. The piano was used. Bishop Doran did not object.

Has it occurred to you that other documents have been written since that document, and those new documents negate what was written previously?

I would appreciate hearing your point of view and your thoughts about my questions. Thanks.

 

[L_Marshall]

How do you explain the fact that many Catholics churches, including those in some of the most orthodox and conservative dioceses in the U.S., use the piano in their Mass? Do you think that all these churches are doing something wrong? Do you think that all their Bishops are allowing something that is wrong?

Just this Thursday, on the Feast Day of St. Anthony, I assisted at a Mass presided over by Bishop Thomas Doran (retired), one of the most orthodox and conservative bishops in our country. The piano was used. Bishop Doran did not object.

Has it occurred to you that other documents have been written since that document, and those new documents negate what was written previously?

I would appreciate hearing your point of view and your thoughts about my questions. Thanks.

I have searched for documents which have negated the Motu Proprio, but the GIRM is fairly recent. If anyone knows of any Papal Bulls or Motu Proprio which set a new standard, please let me know.

Personally, I take the middle ground. I think the piano can have its place in the liturgy, I think guitars can have their place (when played a certain style–I’ve been to several Masses where the guitarists sounded too much like Johnny Cash). Albeit, my personal favorite is organ, vocal, and strings.

I personally oppose the use of drums in most cases (I understand certain cultures use them differently), because I find them distracting. Sacred music isn’t supposed to have the same definitive beat as secular music.

I think the problem we have now is that these texts have not be updated. I do not disagree with the use of certain instruments because of the musical stylings, I disagree with them out of obedience to the Church.

Since the information I presented comes from a collection of Motu Proprio, it can easily be amended by Pope Francis, or any subsequent pope (and, in my opinion, they ought to be).

Ideally, His Holiness which issue a new Motu Proprio which would clarify this for the post-modern world. The big problem seems to be that music has evolved, and the styles we have today don’t quite match up with what was going on when the current documents were written. Allow the piano and the guitar (so long as they’re used reverently, and to produce music that sounds sacred). Problem solved.

Did that help?

 

[Phemie]

I have searched for documents which have negated the Motu Proprio, but the GIRM is fairly recent. If anyone knows of any Papal Bulls or Motu Proprio which set a new standard, please let me know.

Personally, I take the middle ground. I think the piano can have its place in the liturgy, I think guitars can have their place (when played a certain style–I’ve been to several Masses where the guitarists sounded too much like Johnny Cash). Albeit, my personal favorite is organ, vocal, and strings.

Your favourite would be my choice too. But if piano isn’t allowed, we’re in trouble. Almost every popular hymn/song written for the church in the last 20-25 years has been written for piano and eventually adapted for guitar.

 

[OraLabora]

I pray for the day when the Tridentine is once more offered at every Parish. What’s wrong with chant? Everything has to be “contemporary” to try and attract our protestant brethren. We shouldn’t take away from our Mass (even though it is still licit), simply to appease non Catholics. Keep all the attraction of the EF. It will draw people close, if properly exposed to them.

You don’t need the Tridentine Mass to have chant. It’s the proper music for the Ordinary Form as well, and the chant repertory has been adapted to the post-conciliar Mass, in the form of the 1974 Graduale Romanum, and the Graduale Simplex with simpler chants for less experienced choirs (editio typica 1975).

That said, chant wasn’t exclusively used pre-Vatican II either. There were other forms of sacred music (polyphony) and even popular vernacular hymns.

 

[Elizabeth779]

I don’t know which book your parish uses, but I’ve often heard the statement that OCP hymnals have an imprimatur. This is not true. They have a “concordat cum originali” (agrees with the original document) which states that the Scripture readings and text of the Mass are printed correctly. That does not cover the texts of the hymns, many of which contain serious theological errors.

SERIOUS theological errors…some of them make my teeth grind…,