What musical instruments are permitted at Mass?

[rondirect]

When have I condemned praising the Lord? You don’t need electric guitars, drum-kits, clapping and hands to the sky to praise the Lord. The Lord is praised at every Mass I attend through hymns from the hymnal, accompanied by a choir and usually an organ. Our Lord is our Lord and Master and ought to be praised with the reverence owed to him.

Brendan, I (and some others) are happy for you that your praise to God is loved only by choir and organ for the most part. However, with all due respect to you, it sounds to me that people who raise their hands (which must make you uncomfortable) and play electric guitars and drums are not reverencing God the way it is owed to Him. That’s judging the reverence in which they play and their spirituality. Just because you say that we don’t need these instruments, others enjoy them at mass. It doesn’t make either you or them right or wrong. The bottom line is that we are all praising God and pleasing him.

 

[Elizium23]

"Elizium23:

banal pop hymns, weak theology and profane instruments exist

We can go around and around, but the above statement is still circular (that it, begging the question) and extra laps do not give it more weight.

You seem to know your logical fallacies, so you are going to have to explain to us in simple terms why I have made a circular argument or any kind of logical fallacy with my statement (it’s not even a set of arguments, it’s simply an assertion). Certainly it has shades of subjective, value judgement. One person’s banal pop hymn is another’s blockbuster megahit. One religion’s weak theology is another’s profound social justice statement. One culture’s profane instrument is another’s sacred instrument. But in many ways, there are concrete terms upon which we can judge music, and the Church has given us metrics and examples. Certainly, in the field of musical instruments, the Church has offered lists of both preferred and prohibited instruments throughout the years, so we can clearly point to some instruments, within a given a time period, and say “suitable” or “profane”. That is, if you are obedient to the Church and you take her knowledge into consideration when making judgements. If there is one assertion we can make about musical instruments today, it is the fact that all the parishes which have a pipe organ, or a reasonable facsimile thereof, which gathers dust in a corner while all the year round the band plays all kinds of other instruments, there is a parish that has not accorded “pride of place” to the organ which is not a passé discipline but an active exhortation from Vatican II and the USCCB.

It also occurred to me that there is another force to be reckoned with that tightly controls musical choices, and that is mammon. The Church has always been the patron of liturgical art, and when it comes to music, the business model has changed, but not the paradigm. In the past the balance was probably more on the side of wealthy donors funding individual composers, orchestras and choirs. Now we have parish budgets which are given over to music purchases and licensing, directors who are paid, directors who are not, and singers who are paid, and singers who are not. Catholic liturgical music is big business! The large publishing houses are well-funded with glossy catalogs, free giveaways, demo CDs, and an army of salespeople. Not to mention the lawyers who keep tabs on their copyrighted works and make sure everyone is up-to-date on licensing agreements. It wasn’t always that way, these big businesses rake in bucks over music which was cheap or free when we first heard it in parishes. Organs are expensive beasts and that hasn’t changed, although synthesizers sure have, so organs can be simulated easily now. But no bishop who comparison shops is going to declare a guitar or tambourine profane.

We live in a changing musical culture where the last big thing was the monolithic record industry and the next big thing is electronic distribution. It is becoming harder and harder for the industry to create superstars because media consumption is so fragmented now. Everyone is more easily gravitating to listening to exactly what they like with no interference or noise being thrown in their way. And that is why it is harder to dictate choices from the top down. Yet the Catholic Church still has a vision of liturgy, sacred art, and musical forms which transcend culture and time and speak to the whole world. Vatican II was a meteor hitting the ocean which sent ripples out that still affect us 50 years later. Yet those of us who are interested in a hermeneutic of continuity have the vision to look beyond that 50 years and hear an entire treasury of sacred music that will not be lost unless we keep ignoring it. A rupture with the past, a desire to buy into the worldly treats that tantalize us from pop culture, is nothing but societal bankruptcy and philistinism.

Some of you know that I am leading a Bible study on Psalms: The School of Prayer. For that class I have compiled a treasury of psalmody in diverse styles such as Old Roman Chant, Byzantine Chant, choir with organ, Monteverdi and Mozart. Personally I would be honored and challenged to be singing some of these works in my choir, but we’re too busy figuring out whether “Be Not Afraid” is sung with the old rhythm or the new rhythm.

 

[rondirect]

You seem to know your logical fallacies, so you are going to have to explain to us in simple terms why I have made a circular argument or any kind of logical fallacy with my statement (it’s not even a set of arguments, it’s simply an assertion). Certainly it has shades of subjective, value judgement. One person’s banal pop hymn is another’s blockbuster megahit. One religion’s weak theology is another’s profound social justice statement. One culture’s profane instrument is another’s sacred instrument. But in many ways, there are concrete terms upon which we can judge music, and the Church has given us metrics and examples. Certainly, in the field of musical instruments, the Church has offered lists of both preferred and prohibited instruments throughout the years, so we can clearly point to some instruments, within a given a time period, and say “suitable” or “profane”. That is, if you are obedient to the Church and you take her knowledge into consideration when making judgements. If there is one assertion we can make about musical instruments today, it is the fact that all the parishes which have a pipe organ, or a reasonable facsimile thereof, which gathers dust in a corner while all the year round the band plays all kinds of other instruments, there is a parish that has not accorded “pride of place” to the organ which is not a passé discipline but an active exhortation from Vatican II and the USCCB.

It also occurred to me that there is another force to be reckoned with that tightly controls musical choices, and that is mammon. The Church has always been the patron of liturgical art, and when it comes to music, the business model has changed, but not the paradigm. In the past the balance was probably more on the side of wealthy donors funding individual composers, orchestras and choirs. Now we have parish budgets which are given over to music purchases and licensing, directors who are paid, directors who are not, and singers who are paid, and singers who are not. Catholic liturgical music is big business! The large publishing houses are well-funded with glossy catalogs, free giveaways, demo CDs, and an army of salespeople. Not to mention the lawyers who keep tabs on their copyrighted works and make sure everyone is up-to-date on licensing agreements. It wasn’t always that way, these big businesses rake in bucks over music which was cheap or free when we first heard it in parishes. Organs are expensive beasts and that hasn’t changed, although synthesizers sure have, so organs can be simulated easily now. But no bishop who comparison shops is going to declare a guitar or tambourine profane.

We live in a changing musical culture where the last big thing was the monolithic record industry and the next big thing is electronic distribution. It is becoming harder and harder for the industry to create superstars because media consumption is so fragmented now. Everyone is more easily gravitating to listening to exactly what they like with no interference or noise being thrown in their way. And that is why it is harder to dictate choices from the top down. Yet the Catholic Church still has a vision of liturgy, sacred art, and musical forms which transcend culture and time and speak to the whole world. Vatican II was a meteor hitting the ocean which sent ripples out that still affect us 50 years later. Yet those of us who are interested in a hermeneutic of continuity have the vision to look beyond that 50 years and hear an entire treasury of sacred music that will not be lost unless we keep ignoring it. A rupture with the past, a desire to buy into the worldly treats that tantalize us from pop culture, is nothing but societal bankruptcy and philistinism.

Some of you know that I am leading a Bible study on Psalms: The School of Prayer. For that class I have compiled a treasury of psalmody in diverse styles such as Old Roman Chant, Byzantine Chant, choir with organ, Monteverdi and Mozart. Personally I would be honored and challenged to be singing some of these works in my choir, but we’re too busy figuring out whether “Be Not Afraid” is sung with the old rhythm or the new rhythm.

I love your post. It applies to us all, both organ only and those who choose to use guitars and drum kits. However, I have asked many times over, about the infamous list of prohibited and profane instruments without answer. I want to see that list.

 

[Sarabande]

You seem to know your logical fallacies, so you are going to have to explain to us in simple terms why I have made a circular argument or any kind of logical fallacy with my statement (it’s not even a set of arguments, it’s simply an assertion). Certainly it has shades of subjective, value judgement. One person’s banal pop hymn is another’s blockbuster megahit. One religion’s weak theology is another’s profound social justice statement. One culture’s profane instrument is another’s sacred instrument. But in many ways, there are concrete terms upon which we can judge music, and the Church has given us metrics and examples. Certainly, in the field of musical instruments, the Church has offered lists of both preferred and prohibited instruments throughout the years, so we can clearly point to some instruments, within a given a time period, and say “suitable” or “profane”. That is, if you are obedient to the Church and you take her knowledge into consideration when making judgements. If there is one assertion we can make about musical instruments today, it is the fact that all the parishes which have a pipe organ, or a reasonable facsimile thereof, which gathers dust in a corner while all the year round the band plays all kinds of other instruments, there is a parish that has not accorded “pride of place” to the organ which is not a passé discipline but an active exhortation from Vatican II and the USCCB.

It also occurred to me that there is another force to be reckoned with that tightly controls musical choices, and that is mammon. The Church has always been the patron of liturgical art, and when it comes to music, the business model has changed, but not the paradigm. In the past the balance was probably more on the side of wealthy donors funding individual composers, orchestras and choirs. Now we have parish budgets which are given over to music purchases and licensing, directors who are paid, directors who are not, and singers who are paid, and singers who are not. Catholic liturgical music is big business! The large publishing houses are well-funded with glossy catalogs, free giveaways, demo CDs, and an army of salespeople. Not to mention the lawyers who keep tabs on their copyrighted works and make sure everyone is up-to-date on licensing agreements. It wasn’t always that way, these big businesses rake in bucks over music which was cheap or free when we first heard it in parishes. Organs are expensive beasts and that hasn’t changed, although synthesizers sure have, so organs can be simulated easily now. But no bishop who comparison shops is going to declare a guitar or tambourine profane.

We live in a changing musical culture where the last big thing was the monolithic record industry and the next big thing is electronic distribution. It is becoming harder and harder for the industry to create superstars because media consumption is so fragmented now. Everyone is more easily gravitating to listening to exactly what they like with no interference or noise being thrown in their way. And that is why it is harder to dictate choices from the top down. Yet the Catholic Church still has a vision of liturgy, sacred art, and musical forms which transcend culture and time and speak to the whole world. Vatican II was a meteor hitting the ocean which sent ripples out that still affect us 50 years later. Yet those of us who are interested in a hermeneutic of continuity have the vision to look beyond that 50 years and hear an entire treasury of sacred music that will not be lost unless we keep ignoring it. A rupture with the past, a desire to buy into the worldly treats that tantalize us from pop culture, is nothing but societal bankruptcy and philistinism.

Some of you know that I am leading a Bible study on Psalms: The School of Prayer. For that class I have compiled a treasury of psalmody in diverse styles such as Old Roman Chant, Byzantine Chant, choir with organ, Monteverdi and Mozart. Personally I would be honored and challenged to be singing some of these works in my choir, but we’re too busy figuring out whether “Be Not Afraid” is sung with the old rhythm or the new rhythm.

 

[Sarabande]

I love your post. It applies to us all, both organ only and those who choose to use guitars and drum kits. However, I have asked many times over, about the infamous list of prohibited and profane instruments without answer. I want to see that list.

I’d like to see the list as well. I know through the centuries there have been declarations by the Church on various instruments or styles of music, but I never actually saw a list for instruments.

There was an infamous “blacklist” made up of “disapproved” music back in the 1920s. It wasn’t by the Church, but some society trying to keep in line with the Moto Proprio put out in 1903. It pretty much blacklisted many of the popular hymns from the time and A LOT of classical compositions and composers as they felt they were not liturgical in nature. I understand how how that happened. When the Moto Proprio came out, there were a lot of musical “abuses” in the liturgy. People were performing secular pieces from operas (popular music of the day - especially in Italy) and using concert masses, many of which were never intended for actual use in liturgy. Some of the famous composers of the 19th century even said that much of their sacred concert works shouldn’t be used for liturgy, yet they still were. Why? Because they were popular and loved and “inspired” the congregations. A lot of classical compositions, such as ones by Mozart (with the exception of his “Ave Verum Corpus” and a couple other pieces) were also blacklisted even though at the time they were composed various bishops wanted and permitted his music done at mass. If I have time to look for that blacklist, I’ll post it.

 

[Elizium23]

Music at Mass: What the Church Teaches About Liturgical Music

I posted this link earlier. It gives a great overview of all Church documents issued pertaining to music, and gives details on the instruments mentioned in each.

It is also interesting to note that Musicam Sacram, the 1967 post-concilar instruction on sacred music (that means it is still in force today and not a passé discipline) includes two instances of the word “profana” in its original Latin text.

1. Quaedam autem Sacramentorum et Sacramentalium cele- 775
   brationes, quae in vita totius communitatis paroecialis pe*
   culiare habent momentum, veluti Confirmatio, Ordinationes
   sacrae, Matrimonium, Consecratio ecc1esiae vel altaris, Exse*
   quiae, etc., quantum fieri potest, in cantu peragantur, ita ut
   etiam sollemnitas ritus ad maiorem efficacitatem pastoralem
   conferat. Sedulo tamen caveatur ne, sub sollemnitatis specie,
   quicquam in cel~brationem introducatur mere profanum aut
   cultui divino minus conveniens; quod pertinet praesertim ad
   celebranda matrinlonia.

1. Certain celebrations of the Sacraments and Sacramentals, which have a special importance in the life of the whole parish community, such as confirmation, sacred ordinations, matrimony, the consecration of a church or altar funerals, etc., should be performed in sung form as far as possible, so that even the solemnity of the rite will contribute to its greater pastoral effectiveness. Nevertheless, the introduction into the celebration of anything which is merely secular, or which is hardly compatible with divine worship, under the guise of solemnity should be carefully avoided: this applies particularly to the celebration of marriages.

1. In admittendis et adhibendis musicis instrumentis ratio 795
   habenda est ingenii et traditionis singulorum populorum. Atta*
   men ea quae, ex communi iudicio et usu, profanae tantum
   musicae conveniunt, ab omni actione liturgica et· a piis sa*
   crisque exercitiis omnino arceantur. 44 Omnia autem musica
   instrumenta, quae in cultum divinum admittuntur, ita adhi*
   beantur, ut cum postulatis actionis sacrae congruant in de*
   corem divini cultus et in aedificationem fidelium cedant

1. In permitting and using musical instruments, the culture and traditions of individual peoples must be taken into account. However, those instruments which are, by common opinion and use, suitable for secular music only, are to be altogether prohibited from every liturgical celebration and from popular devotions.[44]

 

[rondirect]

Music at Mass: What the Church Teaches About Liturgical Music

I posted this link earlier. It gives a great overview of all Church documents issued pertaining to music, and gives details on the instruments mentioned in each.

It is also interesting to note that Musicam Sacram, the 1967 post-concilar instruction on sacred music (that means it is still in force today and not a passé discipline) includes two instances of the word “profana” in its original Latin text.

OK, I get no. 43 and the music chosen for the sacraments. However, no. 63 is vague IMO and says absolutely nothing regarding profane instruments not to be used at mass. The operative words here are “culture and traditions,” and “common opinion.” So if by “common opinion” that the instruments we use are NOT suitable for secular music ONLY, and the “tradition” in my church is to use these instruments, it is fine that we use electric guitars and a drum kit, bass guitar, piano and organ, and all is well. Were is the list?

 

[YoungTradCath]

Yes, it is an excellent post.

 

[Elizium23]

There are multiple lists, provided in the first link I gave. That document is a compendium of all relevant documents, with references.

The points I made about Musicam Sacram were directed at some other people who say that old documents have been abrogated and were merely disciplinary in nature, and that the word “profane” was not used any more.

While some of the more specific points of the old documents have been abrogated (there is no master list of permitted or prohibited instruments today) many of their enduring ideas have been repeated and amplified in subsequent writings. It is especially edifying to read Sing to the Lord, a modern document by the USCCB, though it does not have the force of law or recognitio and see how much of it reflects those documents.

Something to remember about Vatican documents is that they are universal, and achieved by consensus of the commissions who wrote them, so sometimes they are intentionally vague, and sometimes they are necessarily vague. Intentionally vague so as to allow leeway for interpretation in various situations, and necessarily because they would never see the light of day if they were always specific.

 

[rondirect]

Thank you for all your explanations. My community is very happy with the reverent use of a drum kit, electric bass, electric and acoustic guitars, piano and organ at all 3 of the 4 choir masses plus LifeTeen. The 2 Spanish masses make beautiful music and would be lost without an electric guitar and percussion and piano (no organ).

 

[Cat]

I wish they would just bring back Latin Chant.

I love Ave Maria and other chants in Latin. They are so beautiful. But I also love Mozart, Bach, Strauss, Chopin, Brahams, etc.

I don’t like Guitar in Church. Organ only please.

Do you play the organ?

Do you plan to learn to play the organ?

Which would you say takes longer (and more money) to learn–the organ or the guitar?

 

[Cat]

I’m with you. Pipe organ all day long. Beautiful sacred music.

Those are my wishes. For whatever they are worth, which is just about zilch in the grand scheme of things. My wishes are always subordinate to God, the authority of his Church, and the wishes of others.

And what a wonderful way to be! Surely it should be our prayer and our goal as Christians to have our wishes always subordinate to God, the authority of His Church, and the wishes of others! He must increase, I must decrease.

Philippians 2: 3-9 Do nothing from selfishness or empty conceit, but with humility of mind let each of you regard one another as more important than himself. Do not merely look out for your own personal interests, but also for the interests of others. Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, who…emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant…humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.

I just finished reading Acts 9, in which the story of Tabitha (Dorcas) is recounted. She gave so much to others, and when she died, everyone was crying and mourning while they held the articles of clothing that she had made for them.

Think how wonderful it would be when we die if people are crying and mourning and holding (in their hearts) the music that we encouraged them to sing in the Mass, even though we personally would have rather sung other music.

 

[pnewton]

You seem to know your logical fallacies, so you are going to have to explain to us in simple terms why I have made a circular argument or any kind of logical fallacy with my statement

Fair enough. I would like to say that I did use the context to change what you said a little. If I was unfair, then I apologize. When you spoke of profane instruments and banal hymns. I assumed (correctly?) that you were not speaking in theory but that you believe such thing exist and are in use. Then if this is true, then we are still faced with the issue that what instruments are profane are not defined. Therefore, logically, one can not use one’s own opinion of what instruments are profane to support one’s opinion that these instruments should not be used because they are profane.

I believe “appropriate” is a much more practical consideration.

The Church has always been the patron of liturgical art, and when it comes to music, the business model has changed, but not the paradigm. In the past the balance was probably more on the side of wealthy donors funding individual composers, orchestras and choirs. Now we have parish budgets which are given over to music purchases and licensing, directors who are paid, directors who are not, and singers who are paid, and singers who are not. Catholic liturgical music is big business! The large publishing houses are well-funded with glossy catalogs, free giveaways, demo CDs, and an army of salespeople. Not to mention the lawyers who keep tabs on their copyrighted works and make sure everyone is up-to-date on licensing agreements.

A good issue. Not this issue, but a good one. The publishing houses may cater to one instrument or another more or less, but they do not determine the instruments used. But the reality exists, and we must be practical, money is a limited commodity. It is not worship of mammon for a parish to spend it wisely.

 

[pnewton]

It is especially edifying to read Sing to the Lord, a modern document by the USCCB, though it does not have the force of law or recognitio and see how much of it reflects those documents.

While it has no force of law, it is still a good document and one all should read. I read that article earlier. I am already aware of the documents listed and have read all the universal ones, even those that have since been superseded because the principles remain, even though today we are allowed other instruments. I usually do not respond much to linked blogs much because that “poster” is not here. These blogs can be a good resource, but they carry no weight or authority. But yes, I still hold that early prohibitions are irrelevant, for example, the prohibition on piano as a “frivolous” instrument.

 

[johnmann]

The Vatican probably left it vague intentionally. The US bishops reiterated more than they clarified, probably also intentionally. I actually think it’s a good idea to leave it to the individual parishes. If you’re concerned about bad liturgical music, the instruments are hardly the problem. Would you rather have this guitar Kyrie wlp.jspaluch.com/download/018094-001full.mp3 or Mass of Creation on the organ?

 

[Cricket2]

Kyrie any day.