What do you think about guitars during mass?

[Cat]

I would encourage those of you that play the piano at church to move over to the organ. If you ignore the pedal keyboard, it’s not that big a jump at first, and you can make the transition slowly, starting at first with only the manuals and a few stops, and adding to your repertoire as you learn. I would also encourage you to re-discover chant. It is the proper music, and the reason behind the church condemning the use of other instruments in mass. Chant. Some of it is fiercely hard, so that there is always a challenge, but much of it is completely accessible, especially in this day of internet videos. There are instructional videos on youtube; it’s not that hard to learn.

First of all, the instrumentalist (me) doesn’t have the authority in the church to pronounce what music will be played and what will not. If I learn all about chant (I’m not a singer, BTW), what exactly will that accomplish? I’m not the Music Director of the parish. I’m just a piano player. I know the music director, and I know that he does not have the knowledge to deal with chant. I can’t and I won’t usurp his authority.

Secondly, I know that you are musician, but your comment about moving on over to the organ tells me that you don’t know much about keyboard music. The organ is an entirely different instrument than the piano. The ONLY similiarity is the keyboard. But everything else is different. The technique for playing the organ is completely different than piano technique.

To me, telling a pianist to play the organ is like telling a violinist to play the trombone. It’s NOT the same.

I’ve heard a lot of the pianists who moved over to organ–yech! It’s painfully obvious in most cases. The person who played at our parish last weekend (a sub) is a pianist who tries to play the organ. It’s dreadful. He had no concept of which stops to use, and the whole thing sounded like some Grade B horror movie–very dark and horrific. It was not reverent just because it was on an organ.

I think it’s possible for pianists to LEARN to play the organ by engaging a reputable teacher and by practicing a few hours a day. There is no shortcut to learning to play an instrument. A person can’t “pick up” the pipe organ and noodle around until they get good. Playing an instrument well takes a lot of work (and incidentally, a lot of money–organ instructors don’t come cheap). Many adults like me truly don’t have the time (or money) to devote to learning an entirely new instrument. I wish I did. (In my case, my feet and ankles won’t allow me to play the organ–I can’t even climb onto the bench.)

Have YOU volunteered to pay the price of lessons for a pianist who is willing to learn how to play the pipe organ? I would say that anyone in the Catholic or Protestant churches who wants the organ played more often should put their money where their mouth is.

There are a lot of children taking piano lessons because that’s what kids do–learn to play the piano. Most quit. But some don’t. Why not offer to pay all the expenses (including lessons, books, and rental of the church so that the child can practice) so that a young musician can learn to play the pipe organ?

Frankly, if the Catholic Church is serious about eliminating all instruments except the pipe organ, this is what they’re going to have to do.

FrancisB, I will not play anything that I can’t play well. Playing the keyboard and ignoring the pedals is not playing the organ–it’s playing a piano that sustains. And it’s certainly not playing music. I think many good pianists would agree with me.

 

[mariyka]

That would be an interesting idea if more people knew how to sing on key. I think properly tuned instruments are a good refence point for what notes to sing.

All it takes is one confident singer taking the melody. If there are enough voices, I think a few off key just provide some “vibrational interest”. Although when I did sing in the choir, sometimes our director would very quietly use a pitch pipe at the beginning of Divine Liturgy to give us our bearings.

 

[Bluegoat]

That would be an interesting idea if more people knew how to sing on key. I think properly tuned instruments are a good refence point for what notes to sing.

I have found this also. But on the other hand, will we let those EO people show us up as bad singers?! Surely if they can do it so can we! Even if we need to start off with a pitch pipe! (Does that count as a sacred instrument?)

 

[Bluegoat]

First of all, the instrumentalist (me) doesn’t have the authority in the church to pronounce what music will be played and what will not. If I learn all about chant (I’m not a singer, BTW), what exactly will that accomplish? I’m not the Music Director of the parish. I’m just a piano player. I know the music director, and I know that he does not have the knowledge to deal with chant. I can’t and I won’t usurp his authority
/QUOTE]

Cat, if a person can read music, he can learn simple chant. (Not that it would make your music director interested if he was against the idea.) I can’t read music and have no voice training, but I managed to learn how to chant the Epistle (alone, in front of everyone) when I was the sub-deacon at my university. At a basic level it’s just a matter of learning a few endings which change depending on the punctuation - you go through and mark the text so you know when to begin the ending. (I’m sure there is a proper way to describe this, I have no idea.) And ready-marked texts are available. A person with a real tin ear would have trouble, but if you can sing "Baa baa black sheep recognizably you can manage it.

Keep in mind that monastics have been singing psalms, prayers, and the mass for centuries, even before written music was easily available, and most had little or no musical training. With a bit of practice, many people can sing even a new text this way by site.

 

[benedictgal]

Instruments appropriate only for secular music varies from culture to culture, all over the world. American pop-culture is not the only culture on Earth.

Oh, and there is no such thing as “secular instrument.” That is so ridiculous I can’t put it into words.

Really, then, by your line of reasoning, you would then call Musicam Sacram and all of the other authoritative documents of the Holy See ridiculous.

Mark, believe it or not, rock music is actually universal. Unless you are living deep within the Amazon rainforest or in some cave unknown to man, chances are, you will hear it around the world. The Italians, the Mexicans, the French and the Japanese all have their own form of pop culture. I have listened to radio stations from Italy, France and Mexico. The only difference is the language.

The bottom line is that the Holy See established some serious parameters. If you choose to ignore them and call them ridiculous, then there is a problem. We are called to receive and obey, not ridicule.

 

[CWBetts]

Really, then, by your line of reasoning, you would then call Musicam Sacram and all of the other authoritative documents of the Holy See ridiculous.

Mark, believe it or not, rock music is actually universal. Unless you are living deep within the Amazon rainforest or in some cave unknown to man, chances are, you will hear it around the world. The Italians, the Mexicans, the French and the Japanese all have their own form of pop culture. I have listened to radio stations from Italy, France and Mexico. The only difference is the language.

The bottom line is that the Holy See established some serious parameters. If you choose to ignore them and call them ridiculous, then there is a problem. We are called to receive and obey, not ridicule.

I am really tired of your attitude, that attitude that says “If you don’t agree with me, then you aren’t a faithful Catholic”

I would hate to hear what you think about the Charismatic Renewal.

 

[Sword_Brethren]

They suck!

 

[CWBetts]

They suck!

Wow. What a thoughtful, reasoned addition to the discussion!!

 

[benedictgal]

Cat;5668769:

First of all, the instrumentalist (me) doesn’t have the authority in the church to pronounce what music will be played and what will not. If I learn all about chant (I’m not a singer, BTW), what exactly will that accomplish? I’m not the Music Director of the parish. I’m just a piano player. I know the music director, and I know that he does not have the knowledge to deal with chant. I can’t and I won’t usurp his authority
/QUOTE]

Cat, if a person can read music, he can learn simple chant. (Not that it would make your music director interested if he was against the idea.) I can’t read music and have no voice training, but I managed to learn how to chant the Epistle (alone, in front of everyone) when I was the sub-deacon at my university. At a basic level it’s just a matter of learning a few endings which change depending on the punctuation - you go through and mark the text so you know when to begin the ending. (I’m sure there is a proper way to describe this, I have no idea.) And ready-marked texts are available. A person with a real tin ear would have trouble, but if you can sing "Baa baa black sheep recognizably you can manage it.

Keep in mind that monastics have been singing psalms, prayers, and the mass for centuries, even before written music was easily available, and most had little or no musical training. With a bit of practice, many people can sing even a new text this way by site.

That is quite true. Even the Cathedral children’s choir, many members of whom did not read music, were able to master chant because the melody is fairly easy.

Let me give you an example of another case. I had the blessing of being able to sneak out to attend the Gateway Liturgical Conference in St. Louis last year. The first item on the Agenda was Morning Prayer with Archbishop Malcolm Ranjinth, then Secretary to the CDWDS. Fr. Weber, the priest who arranged the settings, led us in a very quick rehearsal before the service began. The chant was very simple and we were able to get it fairly quickly (I don’t read music, by the way). When the liturgy began, we were able to sing rather well.

Unfortunately, there are some who may have preconceived ideas and prejudices, even against the music that the Church holds in highest regard, and will not even venture to try it, hiding behind a wide array of excuses. I know because I have personally experienced it down here. It is really sad because they are cheating themselves of something beautiful.

 

[benedictgal]

I am really tired of your attitude, that attitude that says “If you don’t agree with me, then you aren’t a faithful Catholic”

I would hate to hear what you think about the Charismatic Renewal.

Perhaps if you were to take the time to read the authoritative documents of the Holy See, you might actually learn something.

You are the one making the inflammatory statements. As I read your posts, I see a strong disconnect between what the Church teaches and how She regulates the Sacred Liturgy and your attitude.

What I am quoting from the authoritative documents of the Holy See. You can disagree with me all you want, but, when you start making derogatory statements about what the Holy See, what Peter, has said, then therer are serious problems.

 

[Cat]

Bluegoat;5669178:

That is quite true. Even the Cathedral children’s choir, many members of whom did not read music, were able to master chant because the melody is fairly easy.

Let me give you an example of another case. I had the blessing of being able to sneak out to attend the Gateway Liturgical Conference in St. Louis last year. The first item on the Agenda was Morning Prayer with Archbishop Malcolm Ranjinth, then Secretary to the CDWDS. Fr. Weber, the priest who arranged the settings, led us in a very quick rehearsal before the service began. The chant was very simple and we were able to get it fairly quickly (I don’t read music, by the way). When the liturgy began, we were able to sing rather well.

Unfortunately, there are some who may have preconceived ideas and prejudices, even against the music that the Church holds in highest regard, and will not even venture to try it, hiding behind a wide array of excuses. I know because I have personally experienced it down here. It is really sad because they are cheating themselves of something beautiful.

benedictgal, whether or not we “try it” is not up to us. It’s up to the Music (or Liturgy) Director of the parish and ultimately, up to the priest. We can make suggestions, but that’s it. It’s not our game to call. We cannot do someone else’s job. (I tried to explain that in an earlier post.)

So unless the Music Director brings in the chant and says, “OK, everyone, let’s give this is try,” no one will be trying anything.

I suppose that one person can “try it” through some computer app, but honestly, why? What good does that do the Church? So someone tries chant and loves it and suggests it to the Music Director. More than likely, the Music Director won’t (or can’t) take the suggestion and use it. Where does this leave the suggester?

I don’t understand exactly what you are proposing we all do. If we are not in a position to make changes, all we can do is make the suggestion to the proper authority. Then we rest. There’s nothing else to do. Is there?

That’s NOT hiding behind an array of excuses. If there’s nothing that an individual can do, then that’s an end of it. Why keep beating your head against the wall? Nestle, don’t wrestle.

I honestly don’t get what you are trying to tell everyone to do. Make appointments with the proper person(s) at the diocescan headquarters? Start liturgical watch committees in the parish? Keep writing letters to the diocese? Keep making the suggestions over and over again? All of these things sound a little obnoxious to me, and I don’t know that they would accomplish any good thing at all. Maybe they would.

I just don’t see it, though. I think we should let the proper people do their jobs, even if they do them poorly, and I think we should pray for them and support them, not constantly besiege them.

 

[Bluegoat]

Really, then, by your line of reasoning, you would then call Musicam Sacram and all of the other authoritative documents of the Holy See ridiculous.

Mark, believe it or not, rock music is actually universal. Unless you are living deep within the Amazon rainforest or in some cave unknown to man, chances are, you will hear it around the world. The Italians, the Mexicans, the French and the Japanese all have their own form of pop culture. I have listened to radio stations from Italy, France and Mexico. The only difference is the language.

The bottom line is that the Holy See established some serious parameters. If you choose to ignore them and call them ridiculous, then there is a problem. We are called to receive and obey, not ridicule.

I don’t think he suggested rock music is ever appropriate for the Mass however. I think he was simply stating that music has a strong cultural component. Pop music in different cultures uses some different instruments for example - around here it is not uncommon to hear bagpipes. Does this make them a pop instrument at heart? Probably not.

It seems to me that you are looking at the parameters as much more unchanging and with less room for cultural differences than almost everyone else in the thread who has looked at the same documents, and what is more important, more than the Holy See, which does, in practice, allow for a certain amount of latitude in different settings and cultures, and which freely admits that there have been changes in practice over time.

If they interpreted these documents as strictly as you seem to want to, in 1000 years there would be no guitars or pianos at mass, and the organ would still be the #1 instrument. Now, there would be nothing wrong with this if it just happened this way, but I don’t think it really reflects the intent of the Holy See.

 

[CWBetts]

Perhaps if you were to take the time to read the authoritative documents of the Holy See, you might actually learn something.

You are the one making the inflammatory statements. As I read your posts, I see a strong disconnect between what the Church teaches and how She regulates the Sacred Liturgy and your attitude.

What I am quoting from the authoritative documents of the Holy See. You can disagree with me all you want, but, when you start making derogatory statements about what the Holy See, what Peter, has said, then therer are serious problems.

And where is the authoritative list of banned instruments? Hmmm? I am loyal to the Holy See. I tire of your pride. You “quote from authoritative Church documents”, or so you say. It is funny how you quote small snippets from what I presume are the documents of which you speak, yet you fail to provide any documentation as yo your source. Forgive me from being skeptical, but I don’t automatically trust faceless posters on internet forums, especially those who give no clues to their actual identity or credentials. And as for “inflammatory comments” What, pray tell do you speak of? I have merely stated that specific instruments are morally neutral, and it is in the use that is sinful. A statement you have not yet been able to refute. You seem more interested in causing division by looking down your nose at anyone who disagrees with you.

 

[Bluegoat]

benedictgal;5669253:

benedictgal, whether or not we “try it” is not up to us. It’s up to the Music (or Liturgy) Director of the parish and ultimately, up to the priest. We can make suggestions, but that’s it. It’s not our game to call. We cannot do someone else’s job. (I tried to explain that in an earlier post.)

So unless the Music Director brings in the chant and says, “OK, everyone, let’s give this is try,” no one will be trying anything.

I suppose that one person can “try it” through some computer app, but honestly, why? What good does that do the Church? So someone tries chant and loves it and suggests it to the Music Director. More than likely, the Music Director won’t (or can’t) take the suggestion and use it. Where does this leave the suggester?

I don’t understand exactly what you are proposing we all do. If we are not in a position to make changes, all we can do is make the suggestion to the proper authority. Then we rest. There’s nothing else to do. Is there?

That’s NOT hiding behind an array of excuses. If there’s nothing that an individual can do, then that’s an end of it. Why keep beating your head against the wall? Nestle, don’t wrestle.

I honestly don’t get what you are trying to tell everyone to do. Make appointments with the proper person(s) at the diocescan headquarters? Start liturgical watch committees in the parish? Keep writing letters to the diocese? Keep making the suggestions over and over again? All of these things sound a little obnoxious to me, and I don’t know that they would accomplish any good thing at all. Maybe they would.

I just don’t see it, though. I think we should let the proper people do their jobs, even if they do them poorly, and I think we should pray for them and support them, not constantly besiege them.

If you thought it would be nice to try some chant (or whatever) in your church, I would first think about what might be the best way to accomplish the practical aspects. Not because it would be your project, but because it is always a good idea to have some practical suggestions for ideas we propose.

I would consider who else might likely be an ally in this. The music director? The priest? Are there some parishioners who might be especially keen? Who might be opposed, and why? If it is the director or the priest, you might want to mention the idea to a few members of the congregation or choir first, to have some moral support.

If you think that the MD or priest might have practical reservations (I don’t know how to do this, can we afford new music) have some solutions ready. If you think they might need help, if you can be prepared to offer to do some of the legwork.

Then suggest it to the MD or priest, in a non-threatening way. Say you saw it or heard it, and that it wasn’t hard, and wondered about trying it out. Have answers for their objections. A good tool for talking to the priest would be official documents saying that it is important to support chanting - it might even be a way to bring the subject up.

As I said above - I think the easiest way to get started in chant is to begin chanting the psalm. It’s very easy to find the text, even marked, it’s do-able even for a mediocre choir, you can see recordings on U-Tube, and it is only a small part of the service, so it doesn’t seem like a massive change to people.

If they really oppose you, well, you can’t do much. But they might actually be interested.

 

[benedictgal]

And where is the authoritative list of banned instruments? Hmmm? I am loyal to the Holy See. I tire of your pride. You “quote from authoritative Church documents”, or so you say. It is funny how you quote small snippets from what I presume are the documents of which you speak, yet you fail to provide any documentation as yo your source. Forgive me from being skeptical, but I don’t automatically trust faceless posters on internet forums, especially those who give no clues to their actual identity or credentials. And as for “inflammatory comments” What, pray tell do you speak of? I have merely stated that specific instruments are morally neutral, and it is in the use that is sinful. A statement you have not yet been able to refute. You seem more interested in causing division by looking down your nose at anyone who disagrees with you.

First of all, please refrain from making personal insults. It seems that when people cannot refute a strong argument, the modus operendi is to level insults without even bothering to read the documents even when these have been properly shown.

I have already cited Musicam Sacram, which, from what I can tell from your posts, you choose to ignore. I have also cited from what Pope St. Pius X wrote in his MP (which has not been disregarded nor discarded by his successors) and what Pope John Paul II wrote to mark the 100th anniversary of the document.

The authority of the Holy See, which the Holy Father, as the successor to St. Peter exercises, is found within the Gospel of St. Matthew:

16 Simon Peter answered and said: Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God. 17 And Jesus answering, said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven. 18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 19 And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven. 20 Then he commanded his disciples, that they should tell no one that he was Jesus the Christ.

Thus, when the Holy See issues authoritative documents, these should not be dismissed or ridiculed, nor called arrogant. The arrogance lies on those who refuse to acknowledge them.

 

[EvelynEVF]

If the pianists had hi-tech keyboards (the ones that look like pianos and have “sampled” sound", and switched them to the organ voice, we might have a nice compromise. Our pianist often does this, to very good effect. There are also MIDI guitars that can sound like organs, which are also excellent.

But still, in little churches with little budgets, it’s almost a cappella or nothing if you can’t use a guitar.

One way to graciously initiate change might be at daily Mass, where there might be less of someone “in charge” and just a need to clear it with the priest.

 

[benedictgal]

Cat;5669358:

If

you thought it would be nice to try some chant (or whatever) in your church, I would first think about what might be the best way to accomplish the practical aspects. Not because it would be your project, but because it is always a good idea to have some practical suggestions for ideas we propose.

I would consider who else might likely be an ally in this. The music director? The priest? Are there some parishioners who might be especially keen? Who might be opposed, and why? If it is the director or the priest, you might want to mention the idea to a few members of the congregation or choir first, to have some moral support.

If you think that the MD or priest might have practical reservations (I don’t know how to do this, can we afford new music) have some solutions ready. If you think they might need help, if you can be prepared to offer to do some of the legwork.

Then suggest it to the MD or priest, in a non-threatening way. Say you saw it or heard it, and that it wasn’t hard, and wondered about trying it out. Have answers for their objections. A good tool for talking to the priest would be official documents saying that it is important to support chanting - it might even be a way to bring the subject up.

As I said above - I think the easiest way to get started in chant is to begin chanting the psalm. It’s very easy to find the text, even marked, it’s do-able even for a mediocre choir, you can see recordings on U-Tube, and it is only a small part of the service, so it doesn’t seem like a massive change to people.

If they really oppose you, well, you can’t do much. But they might actually be interested.

In fact, there are websites that offer free downloads of chant, such as the Office of Sacred Worship, Institute of Sacred Music for the Archdiocese of St. Louis:

archstl.org/worship/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=83&Itemid=229

Having heard and sung some of Fr. Weber’s compositions and arrangements, they are easy and beautiful.

 

[CWBetts]

I am done here. I refuse to discuss anything with someone who is more concerned about washing the outside of the cup than the inside, which really is all this boils down to. Some here are more concerned about outward appearance than inner attitudes. I stand by my belief that music other than chants and organs can be reverential.

 

[CTA1967]

If the pianists had hi-tech keyboards (the ones that look like pianos and have “sampled” sound", and switched them to the organ voice, we might have a nice compromise. Our pianist often does this, to very good effect. There are also MIDI guitars that can sound like organs, which are also excellent.

Benedictgal, I’m just curious what you think about other instruments that can make convincing pipe organ tones. Do you have an opinion on that?

Also, is it just me, or are the quotes showing up incorrectly today?

 

[benedictgal]

I don’t think he suggested rock music is ever appropriate for the Mass however. I think he was simply stating that music has a strong cultural component. Pop music in different cultures uses some different instruments for example - around here it is not uncommon to hear bagpipes. Does this make them a pop instrument at heart? Probably not.

It seems to me that you are looking at the parameters as much more unchanging and with less room for cultural differences than almost everyone else in the thread who has looked at the same documents, and what is more important, more than the Holy See, which does, in practice, allow for a certain amount of latitude in different settings and cultures, and which freely admits that there have been changes in practice over time.

If they interpreted these documents as strictly as you seem to want to, in 1000 years there would be no guitars or pianos at mass, and the organ would still be the #1 instrument. Now, there would be nothing wrong with this if it just happened this way, but I don’t think it really reflects the intent of the Holy See.

But, cultural differences are already factored into the documents. The only problem is that folks will stretch culture to mean something that is not necessarily defined in the documents. Please note what Pope John Paul II wrote in his Chirograph:

1. The music and song requested by the liturgical reform - it is right to stress this point - must comply with the legitimate demands of adaptation and inculturation. It is clear, however, that any innovation in this sensitive matter must respect specific criteria such as the search for musical expressions which respond to the necessary involvement of the entire assembly in the celebration and which, at the same time, avoid any concessions to frivolity or superficiality. Likewise, on the whole, those elitist forms of “inculturation” which introduce into the Liturgy ancient or contemporary compositions of possible artistic value, but that indulge in a language that is incomprehensible to the majority, should be avoided.

In this regard St Pius X pointed out - using the term universal - a further prerequisite of music destined for worship: “…while every nation”, he noted, “is permitted to admit into its ecclesiastical compositions those special forms which may be said to constitute its native music, still these forms must be subordinate in such a manner to the general character of sacred music, that nobody of any nation may receive an impression other than good on hearing them”[16]. In other words, the sacred context of the celebration must never become a laboratory for experimentation or permit forms of composition and performance to be introduced without careful review.

It is certainly not the case of opening wide the barnyard doors and letting everything into the barn. There are parameters that need to be followed.

Even as late as 2005, the Fathers of the 2005 Synod on the Eucharist found certain genres problematic:

In other responses some lamented the poor quality of translations of liturgical texts and many musical texts in current languages, maintaining that they lacked beauty and were sometimes theologically unclear, thereby contributing to a weakening of Church teaching and to a misunderstanding of prayer. A few responses made particular mention of music and singing at Youth Masses. In this regard, it is important to avoid musical forms which, because of their profane use, are not conducive to prayer. Some responses note a certain eagerness in composing new songs, to the point of almost yielding to a consumer mentality, showing little concern for the quality of the music and text, and easily overlooking the artistic patrimony which has been theologically and musically effective in the Church’s liturgy.

You can read the entire document for yourself:

vatican.va/roman_curia/synod/documents/rc_synod_doc_20050707_instrlabor-xi-assembly_en.html#PART III

Mind you, this was not just an “American” issue; rather, the music issue is a universal one.