S
Sarika
Guest
QUOTE=Cat;7979304
If indeed Latin and chant were strictly sacred, with no secular uses at all, I might go along with what you are saying. But there are plenty of 'secular" Latin pieces. Latin is not, as some insist, “the language of God.”
I mentioned in another post that there are plenty of secular “chants” being written today–see Harry Potter. Many people do not see chant as “sacred” music. Who knows what non-European, non-white people would think of it? Perhaps it would be “devil music” to them, and they would not be able to change their mindset and accept it as “sacred.” I know I have a hard time thinking of Gregorian chant as “church music.”
Just because these things are used outside of the Liturgy doesn’t make them non-sacred. No one has control over what other people with free will do. If it is actual liturgical Chant music that is being used in a profane/secular manner, that does constitute sacrilege.
To follow your line of thought, someone could say that, since sacred vessels are used in some forms of devil worship (or even the Eucharist in certain desecrations/ black masses), it is understandable that we shouldn’t use them ourselves or that the priest should not confect the Eucharist.
Anyway, why should the rest of the Church have to suffer and lack certain parts of our musical patrimony because someone has “issues”? The issues will have to be dealt with compassionately , but let’s not make our Masses into a therapy session for this or that individual.
If indeed Latin and chant were strictly sacred, with no secular uses at all, I might go along with what you are saying. But there are plenty of 'secular" Latin pieces. Latin is not, as some insist, “the language of God.”
I mentioned in another post that there are plenty of secular “chants” being written today–see Harry Potter. Many people do not see chant as “sacred” music. Who knows what non-European, non-white people would think of it? Perhaps it would be “devil music” to them, and they would not be able to change their mindset and accept it as “sacred.” I know I have a hard time thinking of Gregorian chant as “church music.”
Just because these things are used outside of the Liturgy doesn’t make them non-sacred. No one has control over what other people with free will do. If it is actual liturgical Chant music that is being used in a profane/secular manner, that does constitute sacrilege.
To follow your line of thought, someone could say that, since sacred vessels are used in some forms of devil worship (or even the Eucharist in certain desecrations/ black masses), it is understandable that we shouldn’t use them ourselves or that the priest should not confect the Eucharist.
Anyway, why should the rest of the Church have to suffer and lack certain parts of our musical patrimony because someone has “issues”? The issues will have to be dealt with compassionately , but let’s not make our Masses into a therapy session for this or that individual.
