Sing to the Lord: Music in Divine Worship

  • Thread starter Thread starter Monkey1976
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thank you my simian friend for posting this. I have wondered when the Bishops will release this document.
I read, for the most part, the part that talks about the use of Latin in the Liturgy in regards to seminarian training and to implement more Latin in the Liturgy. I feel that even though this section is small, it will have a tremendous impact on American worship. I am concerned that the Bishops may be slow in enacting this document, more of a, "We'll publish this to appease the traditionalists, but won't do much about it" mentality. I got this sense after I realized the document, as with most of the documents from Vat. II, gave no clear cut directives. When should the choir learn the Latin pronunciations, for example? In any case, I 'm gald to see the Bishops taking some direction.
 
Well, I’m happy that the USCCB was true to its word. I had received a call back from the Committee on Divine Worship about two weeks ago and I was told that the document was going to be up on their website. Let’s see what happens now.

I am printing the 87-page document and will be emailing a link to my pastor. Let’s all review the document and then comment.

Incidentally, it came out the same day as Spe Salvi, the Holy Father’s new encyclical on Hope.
 
There’s at least (and that’s putting it lightly) one problematic part in the document. Paragraph 188. This should hit close to home for those of us following the “Missa Emmanuel” thread:The Fraction Rite and the Agnus Dei
188. The supplicatory chant Agnus Dei accompanies the Fraction Rite. It is, “as a rule, sung by the choir or cantor with the congregation responding; or it is, at least, recited aloud. This invocation accompanies the fraction and, for this reason, may be repeated as many times as necessary until the rite has reached its conclusion, the last time ending with the words dona nobis pacem (grant us peace).” When the Agnus Dei is sung repeatedly as a litany, Christological invocations with other texts may be used. In this case, the first and final invocations are always Agnus Dei (Lamb of God).I’ve sent an email to the CDW to ask for clarification. It’s ambiguous: is it saying that when the Agnus Dei is used as a litany outside of the Fraction Rite, it can be given various tropes, or is it saying that it can be modified when used during the Fraction Rite?

I think it is ambiguous and lends itself towards altering the texts of the Ordinary of the Mass.
 
Well from what I’ve read, it hasn’t changed much of anything, but in many ways confirms the liturgical music we use.

Pay attention to;

Bold is my emphasis.
  1. So that the holy people may sing with one voice, the music must be within its members’ capability. Some congregations are able to learn more quickly and will desire more variety. Others will be more comfortable with a stable number of songs, so that they can be at ease when singing. Familiarity with a stable repertoire of liturgical songs rich in theological content can deepen the faith of the community through repetition and memorization. A pastoral judgment must be made in all cases.
Click to expand...
Also;
28: The Second Vatican Council stated emphatically that choirs must be diligently promoted while ensuring that "the whole body of the faithful may be able to contribute that active participation which is rightly theirs… The choir must not minimize the musical participation of the faithful. **The congregation commonly sings unison melodies, which are more suitable for general unrehearsed community singing. **
Click to expand...
So if you visit a parish and they’re singing the St. Louis Jesuits instead of some more complex hymns that you prefer, don’t get upset and please don’t come in here and open a new thread to complain about it.

Jim
 
“Within the member’s capability”???

I defy the devil himself to come up with a congregation that can perform “Sing to the Mountains”, “One Bread, One Body”, or even “Be Not Afraid” and do it the way it’s written.
 
japhy said:
There’s at least (and that’s putting it lightly) one problematic part in the document. Paragraph 188. This should hit close to home for those of us following the “Missa Emmanuel” thread:The Fraction Rite and the Agnus Dei

188. The supplicatory chant Agnus Dei accompanies the Fraction Rite. It is, “as a rule, sung by the choir or cantor with the congregation responding; or it is, at least, recited aloud. This invocation accompanies the fraction and, for this reason, may be repeated as many times as necessary until the rite has reached its conclusion, the last time ending with the words dona nobis pacem (grant us peace).” When the Agnus Dei is sung repeatedly as a litany, Christological invocations with other texts may be used. In this case, the first and final invocations are always Agnus Dei (Lamb of God).I’ve sent an email to the CDW to ask for clarification. It’s ambiguous: is it saying that when the Agnus Dei is used as a litany outside of the Fraction Rite, it can be given various tropes, or is it saying that it can be modified when used during the Fraction Rite?

I think it is ambiguous and lends itself towards altering the texts of the Ordinary of the Mass.
Click to expand...
Isn’t this document a guideline only anyway? Given that it was not sent to Rome for recognitio suggests to me it has no juridical authority.
 
Wolseley said:
“Within the member’s capability”???

I defy the devil himself to come up with a congregation that can perform “Sing to the Mountains”, “One Bread, One Body”, or even “Be Not Afraid” and do it the way it’s written.
Click to expand...
My congregation did.

If you’re looking for the exact sound as on the album, thats impossible for any piece of music played and sung between two different groups.

At any rate. As I predicted, the Bishops would change nothing other than ask for artist and composers to bring us liturgical music that is uplifting and proper for the people to celebrate together in the Mass.

Jim
 
Joannm said:
It is being sent to Rome.
Click to expand...
It was not sent to Rome. Had it been sent to Rome, it would not have been printed right away. The bishops did not get the necessary 2/3 vote to send the document to Rome for recognition.

Some parts of the document are very good, especially when it defines what should be sung during Daily Mass (a big problem in my area), and, the type of music to be used for the Sacrament of Marriage.

However, if the document were a person, it would be characterized as speaking from “both sides of the mouth.” It seems to pay lip service to Latin, to the point of quoting Sacramentum Caritatis. But, then it indicates that if the pieces are hard, then don’t sing them. In my experience with our Cathedral’s former children’s choir, the kids (and these were elementary) showed a pretty good mastery of Latin in the simple Sanctus and Agnus Dei chants. Perhaps it is because they are also Spanish speakers, but, nonetheless, it was pretty good.

Given that I am barely recovering from a small bout with something, as I become more aware and awake, I’ll post the sections I feel are questionable. I did send a copy of the document to my pastor and PV. I also sent it to the Western Province of the Salesian Sisters because my alma mater is having some serious problems with apporpriate Church music. The document does state that Catholic elementary and high schools need to teach their charges Sacred Music from the Church’s 2,000-year history.
 
It wasn’t sent to Rome because what the Bishops outlined in the doccument, is in accord with the GIRM. The reference the GIRM throughout the document.

Jim
 
Do they have the option of sending it to Rome, do they have to? Can they just issue any document even if it doesn’t have a majority vote or if it does do they have to send it on?
(should I start a new thread on this, because I don’t know too much about the authority these documents hold)

What weight does it carry if it is never approved by Rome? Is it then just a guideline and therefore could be completely contradicted?

God Bless
Scylla
 
Scylly, the original intent of this document was to bring Sacred Music up to speed with Liturgicam Authenticam, as was outlined in the power point that the USCCB posted prior to the meeting. This document, had it passed by the required 2/3 vote, was supposed to have gone to Rome for recognitio.

As groups such as the National Patoral Musicians got wind of it, the Federation of Diocesan Liturgical Commissions passed a resolution (at the NPM’s urging) that, in effect, requested that the USCCB maintain the status quo.

There were some 300+ amendments to this document. Having worked in the Texas Legislature, I can tell you that often, the original legislation bears no resemblance to what finally passes. I suspect that this was the case with the document.

Regarding the very simplistic notion that because it quotes the GIRM, it’s okay, that doesn’t make it necessarily make it the greatest document in the world. After all, when Jesus was tempted in the desert, even Satan quoted Scripture. Now, obviously, as disappointed as I am with the USCCB for not taking a definitive stand on things, I am not casting this body in the role of the devil. However, the right thing to do would have been to pass this document by the 2/3 and send it to Rome in order to get the necessary recognitio. Under Rome’s authority, the document would carry significant weight and it would be binding. This document, although slightly better than the one the BCL released many years ago, is still far from where we should be regarding Sacred Music.

As it stands, there are so many holes in this document that you could drive a semi through it. There are also many, many shades of gray. When I’m feeling better, I will post some comparisions and contrasts to this document and to what has been said in previous documents and papal writings. Right now, exhaustion has seemed to claim the better part of me. I can definitely write, but I would rather post something with a little more substance to it than merely my own opinion.
 
JimR-OCDS said:
It wasn’t sent to Rome because what the Bishops outlined in the doccument, is in accord with the GIRM. The reference the GIRM throughout the document.

Jim
Click to expand...
The FDLC sent a memo yesterday to members stating that it is being sent to Rome.
 
benedictgal said:
As groups such as the National Patoral Musicians got wind of it, the Federation of Diocesan Liturgical Commissions passed a resolution (at the NPM’s urging) that, in effect, requested that the USCCB maintain the status quo.
Click to expand...
Of course they did. If the bishops voted to change all the music in American parishes, outfits like OCP would stand to lose an enormous amount of mon-ey! And they don’t want to lose that mon-ey, so they asked their fellow travellers to influence the bishops if they could. Apparently, to their continued profit and our ongoing detriment, it worked.
benedictgal said:
There were some 300+ amendments to this document. Having worked in the Texas Legislature, I can tell you that often, the original legislation bears no resemblance to what finally passes. I suspect that this was the case with the document.
Click to expand...
There’s an old saying that a camel is a horse built by a committee, and I’m sure that’s true of both the Texas legislature as well as the USCCB.
 
So many pages to say “Whatever you’ve been doing, you can keep on doing. Whatever else you want to do, go ahead.”

My vote for most contemptible paragraph is 113: Solemnities and feasts invite more solemnity. Certain musical selections are more capable of expressing this solemnity, adding an extraordinary richness to these special celebrations. Such solemnity should never be allowed to devolve to an empty display of ceremony, however.

Now, does the document also warn against empty displays of emotion? Empty displays of diversity? Empty displays of community? Empty displays of active participation?

No, it’s only solemnity that gets their knickers in a twist.

This document is useless. It will accomplish nothing other than to validate everything that everybody already wants to believe.
 
benedictgal said:
As groups such as the National Patoral Musicians got wind of it, the Federation of Diocesan Liturgical Commissions passed a resolution (at the NPM’s urging) that, in effect, requested that the USCCB maintain the status quo.
Click to expand...
Wow. Why does the FDLC sound like a bad idea to me? Why do diocesan liturgical commissions need to federate?
 
japhy said:
There’s at least (and that’s putting it lightly) one problematic part in the document. Paragraph 188. This should hit close to home for those of us following the “Missa Emmanuel” thread:The Fraction Rite and the Agnus Dei
188. The supplicatory chant Agnus Dei accompanies the Fraction Rite. It is, “as a rule, sung by the choir or cantor with the congregation responding; or it is, at least, recited aloud. This invocation accompanies the fraction and, for this reason, may be repeated as many times as necessary until the rite has reached its conclusion, the last time ending with the words dona nobis pacem (grant us peace).” When the Agnus Dei is sung repeatedly as a litany, Christological invocations with other texts may be used. In this case, the first and final invocations are always Agnus Dei (Lamb of God).I’ve sent an email to the CDW to ask for clarification. It’s ambiguous: is it saying that when the Agnus Dei is used as a litany outside of the Fraction Rite, it can be given various tropes, or is it saying that it can be modified when used during the Fraction Rite?

I think it is ambiguous and lends itself towards altering the texts of the Ordinary of the Mass.
Click to expand...
I don’t think it’s ambiguous at all. It says that if you have to repeat the Agnus Dei more than the prescribed 3 times you can trope it. That flies in the face of the CSL and other documents. If ya can’t change it when you’re saying it, ya can’t change it when you’re singing it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top