Utterly, unreservedly and totally abominable

[Bluegoat]

Yes I am saying that. Roll your eyes all you like. Pop is a genre. Certainly it was contemporary, but it wasn’t considered “pop”. It was music commissioned for the sacred liturgy precisely because it reflected the sacred and mystical elements of the Mass.

Well, that is not entirely true. There have been times in the past where church music has been in popular forms (not what we’d call pop music of course.)

Polyphony offended many people when it was first used in church music because it came from a secular tradition first, and people thought it was inappropriate for that reason. Ultimately however the Church found a way to incorporate it in a spiritual and sacred way, and we got Palestrina.

If I recall corectly, organ music had a similar development arc, though I could be misremembering that.

 

[NewsTheMan]

Well, that is not entirely true. There have been times in the past where church music has been in popular forms (not what we’d call pop music of course.)

Polyphony offended many people when it was first used in church music because it came from a secular tradition first, and people thought it was inappropriate for that reason. Ultimately however the Church found a way to incorporate it in a spiritual and sacred way, and we got Palestrina.

If I recall corectly, organ music had a similar development arc, though I could be misremembering that.

You are conflating an established genre with contemporary and popular.

If Gregorian Chant was popular now it wouldn’t be any less appropriate. In fact, it is popular in Catholic circles who listen to it as worship music. I listen to it when reading the Bible as it lifts my other senses up to Heaven.

The point is: certain kinds of music are appropriate. Secular [and that has a wide range] music is not appropriate, and certainly not “pop” music. Music commission at the time to be written for the Mass was never “pop” or considered secular.

If the Vatican ever commissions Britney Spears to write sacred music for the Mass we might have something to talk about here.

 

[Matthew_Holford]

I agree with the OP. The Mass as described seemed to have a number liturgical abuses. While not one of us is perfect, we do have a right to correctly celebrated liturgy.

I am surpised by people who accuse such posters of being distracted from the Mass. If one is not distracted and paying attention to the Mass then you will notice abuses. Those who are actually distracted would probably not notice abuses, not the other way around.

I never quite understand why people are quick to forgive priests who commit liturgical abuses. Surely we can expect them to get it right. I wonder how many people would be equally forgiving if their doctor got things wrong.

 

[James2bailey]

I was given the gift of Faith 20 years ago. I had come from a protestant backround to the Church. And like so many other converts I speak with it was the Eucharist which called me to the true Church. My faith is strongly centered in the Eucharist and I believe it to be the actual Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of the ressurected Christ. Some years later we recieved instructions asking us to no longer genuflect when passing the lit tabernacle or remain kneeling while the body of Christ was exposed. I have and still refuse to obey these instuctions as these expressions are the root of my faith. When the priest elevates the consecrated body of Christ I recall St. Thomas in the upper room “My Lord my God” and pray “Mercy” at the elevation of the chalice. Since the Pontificate of Benedict XVI I have noticed a slow reversal of these clearly pagan practices. Thank you God for Benedict XVI “Reformer of the Reformers”! I am truly excited for the release of the new Missal this Advent restoring the mia culpa and the meaningful language of “and with your spirit”

 

[Bluegoat]

You are conflating an established genre with contemporary and popular.

If Gregorian Chant was popular now it wouldn’t be any less appropriate. In fact, it is popular in Catholic circles who listen to it as worship music. I listen to it when reading the Bible as it lifts my other senses up to Heaven.

The point is: certain kinds of music are appropriate. Secular [and that has a wide range] music is not appropriate, and certainly not “pop” music. Music commission at the time to be written for the Mass was never “pop” or considered secular.

If the Vatican ever commissions Britney Spears to write sacred music for the Mass we might have something to talk about here.

No, I’m not. Perhaps I wasn’t clear.

Polyphony was used secularly before it was used in sacred music. When it first appeared in sacred music, people objected to it on account of it being a secular form and inappropriate for the liturgy. Popularity wasn’t the issue at all, it was about usage and what was understood to be appropriate and spiritually beneficial.

The idea that what is only a secular form cannot be brought into use for religious music is shown to be untrue by even a cursory look at the history of church music, as it has happened many times.

Whether pop, or folk, or other modern forms will ultimately find a way to be appropriately used is so far unknown. But to dismiss it on grounds that it originated as secular music and has secular connotations doesn’t make sense in light of the history of sacred music.

 

[Sarabande]

I bet 200 years ago when Mozart was creating his Sacred Music (that I am sure is considered very Mass appropriate today by many people) there were detractors that though his music was too modern. Will we attract more teens and young adults to the Mass with modern music or with the ‘old standards’? Or do we tell them to sit down and be quiet? What would Jesus do? He seemed to be fond of braking away from tradition if it made it easier to love God and neighbor.

Actually, there was debate amongst the clergy regarding Mozart’s liturgical music during his time. But it wasn’t because it was “too modern”. The debate fell more in terms of it being “too secular” for liturgy. While the Archbishop of Vienna felt Mozart’s music was beautiful and appropriate for liturgy - thus much of it was used there, the Archbishop of Salzburg (Mozart’s birthplace) felt it was inappropriate.

That all said, the Archbishop of Salzburg and Mozart did not like each other very well, which is one of the reasons why he did not approve of the music. He used to be under the Archbishop’s employment and they butted heads A LOT - I think both were at fault from all my readings of the acrimony between them. Also Mozart had a high standard of musicianship and he felt that the musicians under the employment of the archbishop were lazy and not good musicians. The Archbishop did permit Mozart to have the Great Mass in C done at the Cathedral there in Salzburg, though, years later, in which Mozart’s wife, Constanze, was one of the soloists.

 

[Sarabande]

Well, that is not entirely true. There have been times in the past where church music has been in popular forms (not what we’d call pop music of course.)

Polyphony offended many people when it was first used in church music because it came from a secular tradition first, and people thought it was inappropriate for that reason. Ultimately however the Church found a way to incorporate it in a spiritual and sacred way, and we got Palestrina.

If I recall corectly, organ music had a similar development arc, though I could be misremembering that.

Yes, what happened with polyphony was that initially, the music did sound very secular. I’ve had to sing some early secular polyphony and there is definitely a difference in performing styles. Polyphony was banned by three popes, although there were certainly places within Europe that went against the bans. During Elinor of Aquitaine’s reign and within her realm, polyphony was used often for secular reasons and liturgy, but not much was done to differentiate to the two at that point. Many contemporaries of that time wrote about the music in the liturgies and parties in her realm as “liscivious” among other choice words. I’d have to get my biography on her out again to remember the quote. I think I might have quoted it a couple of years ago here, but I can’t remember which thread.

Guillame de Machaut was the one who finally refined polyphony enough so that it would be acceptable for liturgy. He made it sound less secular, more “reverent sounding”, thus the ban was lifted.

I’ve said this many times before, but I think with the newer styles of music that are being used for liturgy, we musicians need to take an honest look at the music and see if and how it can be refined for the liturgy, such as how polyphony was. It doesn’t need to sound like chant, of course, but it shouldn’t be sounding like secular music either. I mean this with all styles. Even as a classical musician, and as much as I love classical music in general, I also believe that just because it’s classical, doesn’t mean that it’s appropriate for mass. Some of Mozart’s music is appropriate. Others, not so much. I love his Great Mass in C (the mass I mentioned in my previous post) and find it very spiritually uplifting. If I was the music director, would I do the whole thing for liturgy such as the “Laudamus te”? No, I wouldn’t, as much as I love singing it and hearing it and am spiritually edified by it. When I’m honest with myself, it really is a bit too secular in sound because of sooooo much coloratura in the piece. One can tone down the orchestration if you just use an organ or piano (which would be a pretty tough transcription though), but the coloratura you couldn’t tone down on it.

youtube.com/watch?v=REnR-tBg21I&feature=related

To me, if we can’t refine the music enough so that it isn’t easily recognizable as secular music, then maybe we shouldn’t use it … yet.

 

[Sarabande]

No, I’m not. Perhaps I wasn’t clear.

Polyphony was used secularly before it was used in sacred music. When it first appeared in sacred music, people objected to it on account of it being a secular form and inappropriate for the liturgy. ** Popularity wasn’t the issue at all, it was about usage and what was understood to be appropriate and spiritually beneficial.**

The idea that what is only a secular form cannot be brought into use for religious music is shown to be untrue by even a cursory look at the history of church music, as it has happened many times.

Whether pop, or folk, or other modern forms will ultimately find a way to be appropriately used is so far unknown. ** But to dismiss it on grounds that it originated as secular music and has secular connotations doesn’t make sense in light of the history of sacred music.**

I didn’t see this follow-up post of yours initially. What you say here is all very true.

There really is very few “styles” of music that has sacred roots. Since chant (I’m not talking just about Gregorian chant) is so ancient, it’s hard to say what the actual roots are, but many old and ancient faiths have used a form of chant for their worship, spiritual meditation, etc. I think that says something. (Please note, I am NOT a chant-only person. I love much of the vast repertoire our Church has accumulated through the centuries.)

 

[Bluegoat]

I didn’t see this follow-up post of yours initially. What you say here is all very true.

There really is very few “styles” of music that has sacred roots. Since chant (I’m not talking just about Gregorian chant) is so ancient, it’s hard to say what the actual roots are, but many old and ancient faiths have used a form of chant for their worship, spiritual meditation, etc. I think that says something. (Please note, I am NOT a chant-only person. I love much of the vast repertoire our Church has accumulated through the centuries.)

It seems to me that chant is like a kind of sing-talking that is not so much about being beautiful exactly, but it lets us remember a long and complicated text more easily. I once heard a recording of a fellow reciting the Iliad by memory, and it was done in a kind of chant.

I think that has a lot of practical application in a non-literate culture’s religious worship, and actually I think it still does today. But I doubt it was just about religion - I expect it was used for literature as well, as we see with the Iliad.

 

[TheMc]

It seems to me that chant is like a kind of sing-talking that is not so much about being beautiful exactly, but it lets us remember a long and complicated text more easily. I once heard a recording of a fellow reciting the Iliad by memory, and it was done in a kind of chant.

I think that has a lot of practical application in a non-literate culture’s religious worship, and actually I think it still does today. But I doubt it was just about religion - I expect it was used for literature as well, as we see with the Iliad.

The main thing about chant is that the chant itself is sacred. Obviously, the text is sacred, but the mystery is, the music itself is also sacred. That’s why it’s so suitable for use at Mass, because the music itself is sacred.

 

[Bluegoat]

The main thing about chant is that the chant itself is sacred. Obviously, the text is sacred, but the mystery is, the music itself is also sacred. That’s why it’s so suitable for use at Mass, because the music itself is sacred.

In what way do you mean that? There is such a thing as non-sacred chant.

 

[TheMc]

In what way do you mean that? There is such a thing as non-sacred chant.

I meant gregorian chant.

 

[Bluegoat]

I meant gregorian chant.

Ok, but could you expand? Do you just mean that it was used for religious purposes? Or that in some way the musical theory is in itself sacred? Or something else?

 

[TheMc]

Ok, but could you expand? Do you just mean that it was used for religious purposes? Or that in some way the musical theory is in itself sacred? Or something else?

I wish I could. This is just what my bishop said. In the end, it’s a mystery exactly why and how, but somehow, the music, the melody that is sung, is sacred. I wish I understood it more, but it’s difficult for me to grasp.

Does this help at all?

 

[Sarabande]

It seems to me that chant is like a kind of sing-talking that is not so much about being beautiful exactly, but it lets us remember a long and complicated text more easily. I once heard a recording of a fellow reciting the Iliad by memory, and it was done in a kind of chant.

I think that has a lot of practical application in a non-literate culture’s religious worship, and actually I think it still does today. But I doubt it was just about religion - I expect it was used for literature as well, as we see with the Iliad.

True. I think that is a very good point. How many things do we remember as children because they are set to simple melodies… one being the alphabet? I know for myself, it is much easier for me to remember something when it is set to music. I think chant might make it easier to remember because it is repetitive in a way, it can get you into a trancelike state which, for me, helps me feel and think more deeply with what I am singing/saying. (sing-talking) That said, if a person has no real exposure to it, that probably wouldn’t be what they experience.

I think today it also depends on an individual’s personality if they have no experience with it. I’ve always been serious and introverted and always searched for something more, so I gravitate to things like this much more easily and openly. Chant was always mysterious to me and as I got older I learned a little bit about other kinds of chant, even taking some instruction in the Jewish form of chanting from a former voice teacher. None of this makes me better or more special, but I realize that I have an easier time getting into it because of my personality.

 

[veilofveronica]

I don’t see how this is liturgical abuse according to Canon Law.

If you are truly concerned, take up the matter with the Bishop of your Diocese, and they can determine if abuse took place.

I tend to prefer more traditional music myself, but a lot of the approved music for worship is more laid-back or modern, especially at youth-oriented Masses. If you look in the “Gather” book, you will see that much of the music is that way.

As for the lay Ministers of the Eucharist, they are authorized to handle the Consecrated Hosts. Check through Canon Law for more details.

Again, if you truly saw something that you think constitutes abuse, I would go first to the priest that performed the Mass and talk to him., and if that is not satisfactory, go to the Bishop…but I think it’s important to have an open dialogue before going over his head.

God Bless.

 

[Bluegoat]

I wish I could. This is just what my bishop said. In the end, it’s a mystery exactly why and how, but somehow, the music, the melody that is sung, is sacred. I wish I understood it more, but it’s difficult for me to grasp.

Does this help at all?

Maybe? I can think of a few things he might mean, so it’s hard to say if I agree.

But thanks for trying to explain!

 

[benedictgal]

I don’t see how this is liturgical abuse according to Canon Law.

If you are truly concerned, take up the matter with the Bishop of your Diocese, and they can determine if abuse took place.

I tend to prefer more traditional music myself, but a lot of the approved music for worship is more laid-back or modern, especially at youth-oriented Masses. If you look in the “Gather” book, you will see that much of the music is that way.

As for the lay Ministers of the Eucharist, they are authorized to handle the Consecrated Hosts. Check through Canon Law for more details.

Again, if you truly saw something that you think constitutes abuse, I would go first to the priest that performed the Mass and talk to him., and if that is not satisfactory, go to the Bishop…but I think it’s important to have an open dialogue before going over his head.

God Bless.

However, we do not know for certain that some of the music used at these “youth Masses” is even approved. The Fathers of the 2005 Synod on the Eucharist found this particular kind of music problematic and they called it a “shadow”. Furthermore, OCP’s Spirit and Song includes the R&B hit “Lean on Me” as part of its repertoire. It is the last song in the book. Seeing that, I lost all respect for OCP.

Regarding the EMHCs, if I read the OP correctly, they were assisting during the Fraction Rite. This is certainly an abuse.

[73.] **In the celebration of Holy Mass the breaking of the Eucharistic Bread - done only by the Priest celebrant, if necessary with the help of a Deacon or of a concelebrant - begins after the exchange of peace, while the Agnus Dei is being recited. **For the gesture of breaking bread “carried out by Christ at the Last Supper, which in apostolic times gave the whole Eucharistic action its name, signifies that the faithful, though they are many, are made one Body in the communion of the one Bread of Life who is Christ, who died and rose for the world’s salvation” (cf. I Cor 10:17).153 For this reason the rite must be carried out with great reverence.154 Even so, it should be brief. The abuse that has prevailed in some places, by which this rite is unnecessarily prolonged and given undue emphasis, with laypersons also helping in contradiction to the norms, should be corrected with all haste.155

Thus, the OP has every reason to be concerned.

 

[Bluegoat]

However, we do not know for certain that some of the music used at these “youth Masses” is even approved. The Fathers of the 2005 Synod on the Eucharist found this particular kind of music problematic and they called it a “shadow”. Furthermore, OCP’s Spirit and Song includes the R&B hit “Lean on Me” as part of its repertoire. It is the last song in the book. Seeing that, I lost all respect for OCP.

I’d take “Lean on Me” over “Gather Us In” any day of the week.

 

[TheMc]

I tend to prefer more traditional music myself, but a lot of the approved music for worship is more laid-back or modern, especially at youth-oriented Masses. If you look in the “Gather” book, you will see that much of the music is that way.

I hope you are aware that the “Gather” hymnal is not approved. Many of the “hymns” are very banal, or theologically odd (to say the least), including:

• As a Fire Is Meant for Burning (Line 5-6 is in direct contradiction of Matthew 28:19-20)
• Lord of the Dance (A ridiculous, banal piece of music)
• Go Make a Difference (How does this relates to the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass?)
• Let There Be Peace on Earth (See above)
• Gather us In (Give us the courage to enter the song… WHAT is that supposed to mean? Also see the trash in the first two lines of verse 4)
• City of God
• “Halle, Halle, Halle” (WHAT PART OF De Musica Sacra # 68 DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND?)
• Sing a New Church (Two things (at least): 1- How can you sing a new church into being? 2- There is one true church, why would you want to sing a new one into being?)

This list is just off the top of my head. It’s also filled with numerous illicit Mass settings (Such as the Mass of Creation and* St. Louis Jesuits Mass*).

The official music book for the Roman Rite is the Graduale Romanum, not that trash from GIA or OCP, and don’t let anyone tell you any different. Don’t get me wrong, there’s some good stuff from GIA, (and maybe 1 or 2 good songs from OCP), but not all of it is good simply because it comes from a “catholic” publisher. You really have to watch out.

BTW, veilofveronica, I’m not aiming this at you, just pointing it out to everyone.