H
h1478971
Guest
what about the violin?
- Status
J
Jimsdun
Guest
My parish has a violinist. She certainly doesn’t steal the show. I don’t have a problem with violins (course I may be a little biased here because I play the violin). I don’t have a problem with ANY instrument, as long as the musician doesn’t steal the show and turn the mass into :clapping:
opcorn:entertainment.That may be why so many object to guitars at mass. It’s not the instrument itself, but the attitude of many that the guitar player is the “entertainer” and the people in the pews are the “audience.”
G
Guitar
Guest
Good on you for making the distinction.
I would not argue for a minute that what you say isn’t true … the same applies, however, to choirs, cantors and organists for whom music doesn’t serve God, it is God. They’re out there. I’ve picked up “business” often enough that would have been theirs except for the fact that people can’t cope with their attitude, no matter how brilliant they are as musicians.
By all means, rid the world of guitarists with this attitude - I’ll be in it! But we should hold everyone to the same standard. Incompetence and rock star mentality are not issues confined to guitarists, even if we do notice them (or invent them) more readily in guitar players.
C
Cat
Guest
But how can you possibly discern this?My parish has a violinist. She certainly doesn’t steal the show. I don’t have a problem with violins (course I may be a little biased here because I play the violin). I don’t have a problem with ANY instrument, as long as the musician doesn’t steal the show and turn the mass into :clapping:
That may be why so many object to guitars at mass. It’s not the instrument itself, but the attitude of many that the guitar player is the “entertainer” and the people in the pews are the “audience.”
How can you KNOW which instrumentalists have these attitudes unless they stand up and take a bow, or gesture for the audience to applaud, or wear outfits that light up?**Unless you know a musician personally, you cannot make this judgement based on the way they play. **
There’s no such thing as “haughty” or “self-centered” piano-playing. And what you consider “flashy” or “showing off” is probably just the piano and the hymns being played CORRECTLY. A piano is meant to vary in dynamics. Hymns are meant to be played at different tempos; some hymns really ARE fast. And because a piano does not sustain the notes, most good pianists improvise to “fill in” their accompaniment when they play hymns or popular songs. (We don’t do this for classical pieces where the composer intends for the accompaniment to sound like it does in the written music.)
I play LOUD during Mass, because I have a huge cavernous, clam shell-shaped nave filled with over 500 people, and no amplification on the piano. If you are sitting close to the piano, you will hear the loudness. BUT…if you are sitting in the very back corner of the clamshell, you will hear a dainty music box because the volume doesn’t carry all the way back to that corner.
Also, I play loud because much of the music demands it. A hymn like “Holy God We Praise Thy Name” shouldn’t be played softly–it’s a magnificent hymn, a grand, mighty hymn that should be sung with a full-voice and played the same way.
I do make much use of dynamics during Mass; a hymn like “Beautiful Savior” is not loud and exciting, but it is very strong, and I play it with passion in order to convey the beauty of the Lord Jesus. People have told me after Mass that they cried when I played the hymn–from happiness and love for Jesus.
I play many of the comtemporary hymns softly during the words that are “soft,” and loudly during the words that are mighty. E.g., I play the verses of Be Not Afraid softly (mainly because most people don’t sing them due to the irregular rhythm, they just listen to the cantor or choir, and I want people to be able to HEAR the cantor or choir), but when we get to the chorus, I bring up the volume–BE NOT AFRAID! I always think of Pope John Paul II during this chorus.
Most of the time, our parish uses the Mass of Creation by Haugen. What I do is follow Haugen’s dynamics. A piano is a good instrument for dynamics, as it’s easy to make music louder, softer, crescendo, decrescendo, etc. This makes those Mass parts a little more “alive” for the people in the pews, and helps them not to just sing the words without thinking about them.
Again, how can you possibly judge a musician’s motives unless they are literally standing up in the front of the nave (or in the back, in the older buildings) dressed like Lady Gaga and flashing their body parts at the congregation–in other words taking the attention away from Jesus and the Altar of Sacrifice?
A
agapewolf
Guest
Cat, normally I agree with you, but this part I don’t.But how can you possibly discern this?
**Unless you know a musician personally, you cannot make this judgement based on the way they play. **
There’s no such thing as “haughty” or “self-centered” piano-playing. ?
There absolutely is haughty and self-centered piano playing (and other instruments). There are unnecessary flourishes, glissandos, busy-ness, solos, etc. Instrumentalists that overpower the singing instead of supporting it. There is a particular style necessary for being a church instrumentalist…
On top of the playing itself, one can gauge a person’s attitude by just dealing with them… their ability to take direction, change plans, get their verse cut if singing, prayerfulness, etc
C
Cat
Guest
The classical pipe organists that I hear playing in the liturgical churches do all of these things (except for glissandos). It’s part of the style of playing for traditional hymns. E.g., the intro is essentially a “solo” of the entire piece, which segues, rather dramatically, IMO, into the accompaniment for the congregational singing. And often, during the hymn, the organist will play an interlude and then modulate into a “brighter” key.
I love this kind of organ work and feel that it is sadly needed in many Catholic churches where the organist literally sounds like they don’t know how to play.
There is absolutely no reason why the pianist cannot add fullness to the rather sparse accompaniment that is provided in most Accompanist Copies of the hymnal. Thankfully the Gather Hymnal has decent accompaniments, but most others are just the four parts and that’s it. Please remember that the organ sustains the held-out notes at the same volume, but a piano note starts to die the instant the key is struck. So then the congregation is left singing with nothing to support them–no wonder they cut off their notes too soon and often don’t sing at all!
Haughtiness is an attitude of the heart, not a “style” of playing.
And I agree that you can gauge a person’s attitude by “dealing” with them–and that means more than watching them play or saying “hello, nice job” to them out in the lobby. That means actually working with them in a musical setting. If you were to work with me, you would discover that in spite of my “big” playing, I am the most humble and agreeable of people, and I will play ONLY what YOU want me to play and nothing else.
For goodness’ sake, now I have something else to worry about while playing at Mass–maybe someone will conclude from my playing that I am “haughty.”
No wonder no one wants to play in Catholic Churches.
Maybe we should just go to a cappella singing in all Masses. But then, inevitably, someone would criticize the people in back of them for singing too loud, or through the nose, or from the chest, or swaying when they sing, or tapping their foot, or not singing loud enough, or being off-key, or singing a different part (is it liturgically correct not to sing the melody? So few people in Catholic congregations sing alto, tenor, or bass that sometimes I wonder. Every once in while, our family of four will sing the four parts during a congregational hymn, and you would think that we had stripped naked, the stares we get. That’s SAD. People shouldn’t stare when other people sing correctly and with joy.)
This is ridiculous. My conclusion from this thread is that the ONLY way for Mass musicians to play “correctly according to the rubrics and the preferences of the Pope” would be to open a school and require ALL Catholic musicians to be trained in that school, NO EXCEPTIONS!!!
In the meantime, I suggest that everyone try very hard to take each musician as an individual and enjoy their unique styles, appreciate their strengths, and tolerate their weaknesses. And if you don’t like it, make something different happen. Learn to play, or finance a student that plays the instrument and the style that YOU like.
L
Layman
Guest
AFAIK, chant, by men, unaccompanied, is the norm. Accompanied by an organ, the connotation is ecclesiastic, and moving.
I’m afraid a solo female singer with flute/violin/guitar accompaniment would have me grinding my teeth and thinking about going to the Saturday vigil. The connotations are wrong. Coupled with a Mass in the vernacular and other innovations and you have less and less of sense of a sacrificial rite of propitiation occuring and more of a performance for the public.
And then, the applause at the end.
Starting with a mighty transformation in the 60’s and then, little by little, our rite has been changed to suit the tastes of the times. I, personally, don’t want to be experimented on any more.
I don’t expect Latin Mass Scholas and organ maestros to appear magically, alas, after the wreckage of traditional catechesis in the schools that might have made them, but I’m happy to support any signs of such, in my locality.
One bright spot: I don’t think there’s anywhere left for the innovators to go and the Pope seems to be steering the barque of Peter into more familiar waters.
I’m afraid a solo female singer with flute/violin/guitar accompaniment would have me grinding my teeth and thinking about going to the Saturday vigil. The connotations are wrong. Coupled with a Mass in the vernacular and other innovations and you have less and less of sense of a sacrificial rite of propitiation occuring and more of a performance for the public.
And then, the applause at the end.
Starting with a mighty transformation in the 60’s and then, little by little, our rite has been changed to suit the tastes of the times. I, personally, don’t want to be experimented on any more.
I don’t expect Latin Mass Scholas and organ maestros to appear magically, alas, after the wreckage of traditional catechesis in the schools that might have made them, but I’m happy to support any signs of such, in my locality.
One bright spot: I don’t think there’s anywhere left for the innovators to go and the Pope seems to be steering the barque of Peter into more familiar waters.
J
JReducation
Guest
I recently heard a talk by Fr. Benedict G. and he made a comment that made me think of CAF, but especially of this thread. I can’t quote him word for word, but I’ll try to paraphrase as closely as possible.
He was speaking about people who go to mass and leave complaining about every fault that they find at mass. He said that there were some things that were so glaring that you can’t ignore. Then he said that there were other things that you actually have to sit there and look for them. And if you’re sitting there looking for faults and weaknesses, then you should really be at the mall and not at mass, because you’re not doing anything there.
I thought it was a rather good way to put it. There are people who go to mass looking for distractions, banalities, innovations, and whatever else there is. Then there are people who go to mass and are so focussed that they notice none of the above.
Father was using the Friars of the Renewal as an example. He was explaining how they train their friars, from the aspirancy to final profession to enter into a state of contemplation when they go to mass. But this state of contemplation is not just for friars. It’s for everyone. Everyone should seek to master it.
I found it very helpful advice.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
He was speaking about people who go to mass and leave complaining about every fault that they find at mass. He said that there were some things that were so glaring that you can’t ignore. Then he said that there were other things that you actually have to sit there and look for them. And if you’re sitting there looking for faults and weaknesses, then you should really be at the mall and not at mass, because you’re not doing anything there.
I thought it was a rather good way to put it. There are people who go to mass looking for distractions, banalities, innovations, and whatever else there is. Then there are people who go to mass and are so focussed that they notice none of the above.
Father was using the Friars of the Renewal as an example. He was explaining how they train their friars, from the aspirancy to final profession to enter into a state of contemplation when they go to mass. But this state of contemplation is not just for friars. It’s for everyone. Everyone should seek to master it.
I found it very helpful advice.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
P
pnewton
Guest
Where do you get this “norm”? By men? I really do not think the Holy Mass is a proper place for a performance concert and I am fairly certain I can find a citation that puts the singing by the faithful (that would be men* and women*) as preferred over a performance. If you find a citation for what you said, I will look.
L
Layman
Guest
Here you go.
Bit of a free-for-all now, of course. I don’t think that’s working well. Even looks and sounds silly, in some Masses I’ve been to.
**The thing about iconoclasm is that, after a while, there are no icons left to smash. **
B
Bluegoat
Guest
Interesting, although choirs of women have been long used among communities of religious. THere is a very interesting CD that came out recently which features such music, which I gather was very difficult to find written records of. I heard it on the CBC, I will have to see if I can find the name.
C
Cat
Guest
Men sing in the United States?
That’s a good one.
Sorry, Layman, I’m not laughing at you. I’m only thinking of all the choirs I’ve played for over the last 30 years that have only a few men. Right now our Messiah choir of about 130people has approx. 30 men and all the rest are women. Several women sing tenor, or we wouldn’t have a tenor section. (Guys don’t like to admit that they have a “high” voice.)
I know lots of theatrical boys and men who sing, but they sing in the theater and most of them stopped going to church when they were born.
Men singing in church in front of people? I just don’t see it happening in the U.S. unless the Pope declares that men MUST sing or they will not go to heaven. And even then, I think most men would find a way to argue their way out of it.
L
Layman
Guest
If you want men involved:
Also, in the TLM, personalities are excluded. You don’t need to perform. Even the priest can turn his back to the congregation and towards the Sacred Matter and get on with his job; a real relief to all involved, including him; he doesn’t need to be a showman. That’s good for shy men or men who seek humility.
Also, the choir should be at the back and out of sight; less distracting for the congregation and less embarassing for the men.
**
See, those old-timers knew what they were doing!**
- Have the Traditional Latin Mass.
- Exclude women.
Also, in the TLM, personalities are excluded. You don’t need to perform. Even the priest can turn his back to the congregation and towards the Sacred Matter and get on with his job; a real relief to all involved, including him; he doesn’t need to be a showman. That’s good for shy men or men who seek humility.
Also, the choir should be at the back and out of sight; less distracting for the congregation and less embarassing for the men.
**
See, those old-timers knew what they were doing!**
B
benedictgal
Guest
P
pnewton
Guest
Well, you gave one more reason to prefer the current Mass to the extraordinary form. If I want to just listen to music, I’ll plug in a CD. Your document is dated and that particular discipline has been changed in preference to congregational singing (everyone). Just because something was the norm does not mean it is the norm.
(a) It should first of all include acclamations, responses to the greetings of the priest and ministers and to the prayers of litany form, and also antiphons and psalms, refrains or repeated responses, hymns and canticles.16
(b) Through suitable instruction and practices, the people should be gradually led to a fuller – indeed, to a complete – participation in those parts of the singing which pertain to them.
(c) Some of the people’s song, however, especially if the faithful have not yet been sufficiently instructed, or if musical settings for several voices are used, can be handed over to the choir alone, provided that the people are not excluded from those parts that concern them. But the usage of entrusting to the choir alone the entire singing of the whole Proper and of the whole Ordinary, to the complete exclusion of the people’s participation in the singing, is to be deprecated.
(1967)
adoremus.org/MusicamSacram.html
Yes, a male choir can perform, but it is not preferable over the full participation of all in song.
“He who sings prays twice.” This opporunity by no means should be limited to women or even just to men who are capable of being in a choir.
C
Cat
Guest
Unless I’m dense here, I assume that the Papal Mass takes place in Italy?
I’m talking about the U.S.A, home sweet home. American men.
C
Cat
Guest
As you know by now, Layman, we’ve had TLM in our city since the mid-80s. The choir is mainly female because that’s who shows up to practice.If you want men involved:
My opinion: If women are involved, men tend not to be, on the basis I think that “All’s well here, no problems to solve, oh cripes it’s all getting a bit fluffy and sentimental and Mrs. Goodlady is taking over, right, I think I’ll give it a miss, tonight. To the pub!”
- Have the Traditional Latin Mass.
- Exclude women.
Also, in the TLM, personalities are excluded. You don’t need to perform. Even the priest can turn his back to the congregation and towards the Sacred Matter and get on with his job; a real relief to all involved, including him; he doesn’t need to be a showman. That’s good for shy men or men who seek humility.
Also, the choir should be at the back and out of sight; less distracting for the congregation and less embarassing for the men.
**
See, those old-timers knew what they were doing!**
So sorry, I don’t buy that plan.
I do agree that putting the choir at the back would be sensible. So should all the churches built in the 70s, 80s, and 90s be razed to the ground, or re-modelled? I don’t think there’s enough money for that sort of thing.
Everyone, I know I sound grouchy here, but what I’m trying to get across is that we have to be practical and we have to remember that we live in the United States (thank God).
The rubrics do not forbid women from singing or cantoring, or instruments other than the pipe organ, or musical styles other than chant. The Church allows much in the way of music for Mass, and the Church gives the authority for regulating Mass music to the local authorities (the bishop, who usually depends on a hired staff to do the actual research and work of regulating the music). Although all of us are entitled to cherish their personal preference, none of us can say that someone else’s preference is not acceptable, because that’s not true.
B
benedictgal
Guest
Technically, the Vatican is not Italy; it is its own country. And a Papal Mass takes place wherever the Holy Father is celebrating the Sacrifice.
There are Gregorian scholas in the United States. I believe that there is one in St. Louis, for example. If memory serves, the Diocese of Austin may have one.
Now, Musicam Sacram also makes a strong case for choirs of both genders:
But, it stresses the need to preserve the Church’s heritage of sacred music. This should not be ignored.
Now, the Constitution on Sacred Liturgy makes this interesting note:
While, like MS, it references both genders, the last line is most interesting because it specifically mentions “boys.”
L
Layman
Guest
A friend told me about the ‘men only’ rule in choirs. I had to do a little search to find the document. A small surprise that it was historically so recent (1903). I’m sure the current rubrics allow women. By ‘norm’ in this case I meant tradition up until recently.
You can do it, or don’t. See what lasts. After the 1940’s a great wind of change blew through the Church. It didn’t come out of nothing, but it surprised the laity in 1970, I’d say.
It’s a pity the TLM was forbidden, as it might have saved a few more souls. Makes no sense putting something as glorious as that in the cupboard, but I can see how it happened; a mania for change, revolution and populism.
If you want to revert, you have obstacles: ignorance, modern churches, modern schools and bad or no catechesis. Sometimes even clerical opposition.
I don’t expect an overnight reversion to tradition. I think TLM choirs currently have a problem; if the schools aren’t teaching Latin and Latin hymns there’s not the same pool of talent to draw upon. It’s not insurmountable, but it needs a) General knowledge that such a thing exists and b) The will to do it.
In the interim, you may have to travel and struggle to get to or sing at a Missa Cantata.
It’ll be interesting to see what happens over the next three decades. Some are saying demographics is going to kill off liberalism in our worship. Others on this board are saying that their modern Masses are very well attended and supported.
I am a cynical man. If I ever get ‘round to writing a will, I will stipulate a TLM Requiem with all the trimmings. Just in case someone decides to get the ol’ guitar out or my friends or relatives (shudder) try to deliver a eulogy from the pulpit.
You can do it, or don’t. See what lasts. After the 1940’s a great wind of change blew through the Church. It didn’t come out of nothing, but it surprised the laity in 1970, I’d say.
It’s a pity the TLM was forbidden, as it might have saved a few more souls. Makes no sense putting something as glorious as that in the cupboard, but I can see how it happened; a mania for change, revolution and populism.
If you want to revert, you have obstacles: ignorance, modern churches, modern schools and bad or no catechesis. Sometimes even clerical opposition.
I don’t expect an overnight reversion to tradition. I think TLM choirs currently have a problem; if the schools aren’t teaching Latin and Latin hymns there’s not the same pool of talent to draw upon. It’s not insurmountable, but it needs a) General knowledge that such a thing exists and b) The will to do it.
In the interim, you may have to travel and struggle to get to or sing at a Missa Cantata.
It’ll be interesting to see what happens over the next three decades. Some are saying demographics is going to kill off liberalism in our worship. Others on this board are saying that their modern Masses are very well attended and supported.
I am a cynical man. If I ever get ‘round to writing a will, I will stipulate a TLM Requiem with all the trimmings. Just in case someone decides to get the ol’ guitar out or my friends or relatives (shudder) try to deliver a eulogy from the pulpit.
S
Sarabande
Guest
I agree with you Cat. I believe in most instances one cannot determine if a musician is being self-serving and haughty by how they play or sing. Having the fortune of working and studying with so many musicians here in the US and in Europe either from the church musician to the world class musician, I’ve come to the conclusion and belief that you really can’t tell what that musician is truly like just by his/her way of playing. A musician’s ability or just the choices he/she makes with style, etc. might leave you cold or feeling like the stylistic choices are in poor taste. It may also uplift you and feeling one with God and brought to a higher plane of spirituality, but one still cannot know for sure the actual musician’s personality and outlook on self and life.
I have found that the real way of knowing what’s in a musician’s heart (or anyone’s heart for that matter) is just by working with them, how they say things, and seeing how they interact with you or with others. The self-centeredness and huge egos can sometimes correspond with how they play or sing especially with well-trained musicians, but it also occurs with poorly trained musicians who couldn’t play or sing worth anything, or with a decent or excellent musician who does everything “right” in terms of what to do for mass, although those people had the ego and delusions to match the size of St. Peter’s. You wouldn’t know it by how they portrayed themselves to the congregation.
My advice for you, Cat, is to continue what you are doing and don’t worry yourself what others will think. If you know and believe in your heart that you are playing with the utmost reverence and humility, love and prayer to God, it doesn’t matter how those types of people may judge you. That’s their problem - NOT yours.
You (I mean “You” in general) will always have people who may think you’re egotistical and full of yourself because you play too well or sing too well, are giving too much talent or too little talent, preparing too much “high art” sacred music, preparing too much “contemporary” religious music or “low art” sacred music, etc. God knows who you are and what your intentions are. The people who know you also know what kind of person you are. If those others think they can make the assumption that you are being self-centered and egotistical just based on what they hear in the music, that’s really sad for them. They have the right to dislike what they hear and criticise it if they want to, from not believing it’s reverent enough due to the instrument or the style. Those kinds of criticisms can either be taken to deeper thought by the musician, himself/herself, and even more reading on what the Church wants for liturgical music. But to assume something negative of your character and heart is a whole other level - and I don’t believe that is right at all.- Status