Y
YoungTradCath
Guest
I see.
- Status
M
MarkThompson
Guest
I am reminded of how Thomas Day described those times in Why Catholics Can’t Sing. On one occasion when the priest announced that an expected low Mass would actually be celebrated as a high Mass:
All the members of my family looked at one another in terror. You would have thought the pastor had just announced that there was a bomb hidden somewhere in the church. My family did not need any discussion. We all got up at once and headed for the exits, as did three-fourths of the congregation… I can remember the relief we all felt when we stepped into the sunshine. It was like escaping from a dangerous coal mine, just before the roof collapsed.
As to YTC’s query about whether having Masses in different styles would “create” divisions, I think it better to say, rather, that it recognizes existing divisions, inasmuch as different people have different tastes, want to participate in different ways, and are spiritually edified by different things.
Y
YoungTradCath
Guest
I find that quote fantastically funny. Really, I do! It’s wonderful, in a way.
P
pnewton
Guest
I have never heard of such a directive and we do not currently have such a thing. If it happens, I guess that will put me to the test on how to implement such an order, not that I relish the challenge. I would have to sell it, somehow, as if it were the best thing since sliced bread, and make it palatable to the parishioners.
If we ever go that route in this diocese, I will let you know how it turns out. People are very opinionated when it comes to music.
S
Sarabande
Guest
Well, in our diocese, it didn’t go over too well. A few music directors and pastors supporting their music directors in the suburbs, especially, fought it. Most basically ignored the directive. My former parish was the cathedral for the diocese, so we absolutely had to follow it. So, once it didn’t go over too well, they had to rethink what to do. The musical settings in “By Flowing Waters” is just so boring and overly repetitive that it really isn’t any wonder that it didn’t go over well. I would rather hear/sing the real chants, but it was considered too difficult for most congregations to sing so they tried the easier route, which seemed to fail. Having freelanced in a huge number of parishes in that diocese, I don’t know of any who use it, although the parishes with better choirs, etc. will sometimes incorporate the more “difficult” chants for the propers for certain masses. They aren’t in the majority though.
I now work at two parishes in the city of that diocese and one in a town in another diocese (which didn’t have that directive). The pastors in the city pretty much ignored it as well. To them, it wasn’t practical for their parishes and I think they were afraid of losing parishioners.
P
pnewton
Guest
That’s a possibility. Some people have rather shallow roots.
C
countertenor
Guest
I think that losing parishioners does become a real issue, for pastors. If the parish is small, or is losing members, and then more people get upset, at musical changes, the pastor is obviously going to be nervous about whether more people will leave.
I think singing the propers is great, because then people are singing the mass, rather than simply singing at mass, but many people do find them “boring.” I think the “boring” aspect is something that needs to be addressed, because it shows that people are far to used to wanting to be entertained at mass, rather than actually contemplating the text of the propers and how the simple and elaborate chant settings reflect the text.
I think singing the propers is great, because then people are singing the mass, rather than simply singing at mass, but many people do find them “boring.” I think the “boring” aspect is something that needs to be addressed, because it shows that people are far to used to wanting to be entertained at mass, rather than actually contemplating the text of the propers and how the simple and elaborate chant settings reflect the text.
F
FrancisB
Guest
There are so many complains about the music because people keep repeating the same ridiculous half-truths over and over again: chant is too hard, we should sing music people enjoy, we can’t get rid of a 40 year-old tradition. Then when the facts are presented–from the authoritative documents of the church–others clamour that they are “opinions” and this also is allowed to become the worst half-truth of all.
The whole tradition of plainsong includes multiple versions of the same texts, not just one or two, but many. Some Gregorian Chant is very, very difficult, and requires trained singers with some time to rehearse. I’ve sung things like this, but I’m a trained musician, singing with other trained musicians, with rehearsal time. There are entire bodies of plainsong that are simple. The “toni simplex” (“simple tones”) and psalm tones are quite easy to learn, and between the two all of the music of the mass can be accommodated. In fact, the ordinary of the mass is included in tonus simplex in every missal that includes the new translation. It’s very easy, and it’s in English, so you cannot even complain about the Latin. The psalm tones are simple enough that they can carry all of the texts of the propers without any problem, although it would take about half an hour to prepare them every week. Then again, there are websites that provide that for free, so you could just download them.
Plainsong was not originally accompanied. This is true. On the other hand, the organ was introduced into the Western Church at a point when plainsong was the only music we had. That is to say that the organ has accompanied chant for as long as the organ has been used in the Catholic Church. There are numerous accompaniments available for free, and the simple tones do not require many chord changes; you could easily improvise your own accompaniment just based on three or four chords.
The range of the simple tones is not very wide; in fact anything larger than an octave was considered unusual for the entirety of the chant repertoire, and the simple tones often only use a range of a sixth. Since this music has no fixed pitch and can be moved to any key, it becomes very unproblematic to sing it. Perhaps not all liturgical musicians are sufficiently trained to transpose music, but it is not difficult to do, and it could easily be made available if there were enough cry for it. I have seen pop music sites include the ability to transpose the music to any key; there is no reason why a site full of chant and chant accompaniment could not be created to do the same. The fact that it does not presently exist is not really relevant; it is not a large undertaking to do that, if the church were interested in making it happen.
As for people not liking chant or the fact that reintroducing it confuses people because they haven’t heard it in 40 years, it’s completely irrelevant. The church has been clear and consistent for more than 100 years that chant is the proper music of the church. This is clear in all of the Vatican documents: adoremus.org/Actionsofholysee.html. It is also clear in the new version of the GIRM: usccb.org/prayer-and-worship/roman-missal/general-instruction-of-the-roman-missal/
The desire to use chant is not my opinion or the opinions of the other posters on this site that have said it should be used. It is the Opinion of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.
The whole tradition of plainsong includes multiple versions of the same texts, not just one or two, but many. Some Gregorian Chant is very, very difficult, and requires trained singers with some time to rehearse. I’ve sung things like this, but I’m a trained musician, singing with other trained musicians, with rehearsal time. There are entire bodies of plainsong that are simple. The “toni simplex” (“simple tones”) and psalm tones are quite easy to learn, and between the two all of the music of the mass can be accommodated. In fact, the ordinary of the mass is included in tonus simplex in every missal that includes the new translation. It’s very easy, and it’s in English, so you cannot even complain about the Latin. The psalm tones are simple enough that they can carry all of the texts of the propers without any problem, although it would take about half an hour to prepare them every week. Then again, there are websites that provide that for free, so you could just download them.
Plainsong was not originally accompanied. This is true. On the other hand, the organ was introduced into the Western Church at a point when plainsong was the only music we had. That is to say that the organ has accompanied chant for as long as the organ has been used in the Catholic Church. There are numerous accompaniments available for free, and the simple tones do not require many chord changes; you could easily improvise your own accompaniment just based on three or four chords.
The range of the simple tones is not very wide; in fact anything larger than an octave was considered unusual for the entirety of the chant repertoire, and the simple tones often only use a range of a sixth. Since this music has no fixed pitch and can be moved to any key, it becomes very unproblematic to sing it. Perhaps not all liturgical musicians are sufficiently trained to transpose music, but it is not difficult to do, and it could easily be made available if there were enough cry for it. I have seen pop music sites include the ability to transpose the music to any key; there is no reason why a site full of chant and chant accompaniment could not be created to do the same. The fact that it does not presently exist is not really relevant; it is not a large undertaking to do that, if the church were interested in making it happen.
As for people not liking chant or the fact that reintroducing it confuses people because they haven’t heard it in 40 years, it’s completely irrelevant. The church has been clear and consistent for more than 100 years that chant is the proper music of the church. This is clear in all of the Vatican documents: adoremus.org/Actionsofholysee.html. It is also clear in the new version of the GIRM: usccb.org/prayer-and-worship/roman-missal/general-instruction-of-the-roman-missal/
The desire to use chant is not my opinion or the opinions of the other posters on this site that have said it should be used. It is the Opinion of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.
I
iloveangels
Guest
Catholics are hilarious as a group, like watching 100 episodes of Jackie Gleason all at once, in stereo. With beer. Their behavior is sooooo not Christian at times.
T
TheMc
Guest
:clapping::clapping::clapping:
S
Sarabande
Guest
I second this. 
I was able to teach a bunch of kids how to do simple chants, after I was told that it would be too difficult. Fortunately, even though the pastor didn’t believe it could be done, he told me I could give it a try. Within two years, I was able to get 6-year-olds to 14-year-olds know it by heart.
Now, I’m not saying it’s “easy” and for some congregations it will take time maybe a long time. I think one of the problems is that people are so used to having music which “speaks to them” (of course, not a new concept… it has been happening for centuries.) and that people today have been programmed to have instant gratification. If they don’t have something within a very short period of time, it’s not worth working towards it. That is within all aspects of life and it’s no different with music either. If they can’t pick up music within one try, it’s too hard. If they have to rememorize parts of the mass and it takes them too long, it’s too hard. etc. etc. etc. It’s unfortunately part of our “culture”. I laugh at myself how if my computer doesn’t react within a second, I get upset when 5-10 years ago, waiting 40-60 seconds wasn’t a big deal.
The other part of that problem is that people aren’t used to having anyone “dictate” to them what is expected. We have a harder time just accepting things as they are and I hear it all the time in real life with regards to the Church. In terms of music, there is a lot of music I would love to have at mass. It’s gorgeous and very spiritual to me, but because of what I know of the documents and how I was mentored by my older colleagues who steeped themselves in this, I have to be honest with myself and realize that I can’t necessarily have something like Verdi’s “Requiem” mass sung at my funeral with full orchestra and opera singers. It’s not really a work which could be modified for liturgical use, especially in terms of the voices. I always sing to myself with the Rolling Stones song, “You can’t always get what you want. But if you try sometimes, you just might find you get what you need”
whenever I get sad about not being able to have certain music or even when I think that God isn’t being “fair” or not listening. (And it’s true. I always find I do eventually get what I need from God. ) 
That said I am practical and know that congregations, especially those who are not used to anything remotely “traditional” will require more of a transition. You can’t just throw it all at them at once. I also am not one who believes in throwing out all of the other sacred music used for centuries. A good approach is always taking time to transition. I think part of the reason why introducing the propers failed, besides just the poor musical settings (I personally think they should have just tried it with the better chants) was because they did it all at once, even though they explained the reason why. You can’t do it that way with most congregations today.
P
pilots13
Guest
I haven’t read through all the documents that first site linked to, but I read the first and last one. Yes, the both encourage the use of chant in the Mass, as it is the historic and traditional music of the Mass. But they also don’t say it is the ONLY music that should be used.
From Tra le Sollecitudini, Pope Pius X
Aka, it’s OK to use modern compositions, so long as you are careful how they are written.
From Letter to the Bishops on the Minimum Repertoire of Plain Chant “Voluntati Obsequens”
Note it says Sacred Music AND Chant. Two separate things. It also, through the use of the local vernacular, opens the door for “vernacular music” to make up a term (meaning music specific to the culture)
Chant may be the “proper” music for the Church, but it isn’t the only music allowed.
W
whipp711
Guest
You know those songs that get into your head, that get installed on a continuous loop, and you cannot get them out? Like “634-5309” or the “Heh Mickey you’re so fine.” The first time you heard it, okay. The second time…eh, okay. By the third or fourth time you’re head is about to explode
One of those hymns used in our Parish is “On Eagles Wings.”
Wikipedia:
“On Eagles’ Wings is a devotional song composed by Michael Joncas, a minister, in 1979 after Vatican Council II, when the Catholic Church began using vernacular hymns at Mass.”
One other hymn that was fine one time, but our music director has used it four weeks in a row. “Show Me The Way.” I believe it’s origin is from a Black gospel song, but we do it with electric guitars, flutes, and Kazoos, over and over and over again.
God bless the folks that work hard on the music. This forum correctly points out that it is sometimes up to a person’s taste in music. Me, I like “A Mighty Fortress Is Our God” that I was raised with as a Presbyterian in the 50’s. Converted after Vatican II. Two months ago, I slapped our music director on the bank, shook his hand, and thanked him for selecting that hymn for a Mass. Smiles.
Next week, “Show Me The Way” and other show tunes were repeated. Oh well, I let my thoughts drift off to saying Hail Marys in my head.
One of those hymns used in our Parish is “On Eagles Wings.”
Wikipedia:
“On Eagles’ Wings is a devotional song composed by Michael Joncas, a minister, in 1979 after Vatican Council II, when the Catholic Church began using vernacular hymns at Mass.”
One other hymn that was fine one time, but our music director has used it four weeks in a row. “Show Me The Way.” I believe it’s origin is from a Black gospel song, but we do it with electric guitars, flutes, and Kazoos, over and over and over again.
God bless the folks that work hard on the music. This forum correctly points out that it is sometimes up to a person’s taste in music. Me, I like “A Mighty Fortress Is Our God” that I was raised with as a Presbyterian in the 50’s. Converted after Vatican II. Two months ago, I slapped our music director on the bank, shook his hand, and thanked him for selecting that hymn for a Mass. Smiles.
Next week, “Show Me The Way” and other show tunes were repeated. Oh well, I let my thoughts drift off to saying Hail Marys in my head.
R
RCIA4
Guest
Some die hard Evangelicals would disagree with you… A friend took me to one of those churches… The musicians were tattooed and shirtless and had electric guitars… It was pretty fun…
Too bad you have no taste in music!
P
pnewton
Guest
These are not irrelevant issues. Bishops and priests maked pastoral decisions and balance these and other issues, like culture, demographics, etc… This is precisely why the Church operates on a principle of subsidiarity. Guidelines and principles can be set for the Church at large, but it takes feet on the ground to know what is best. This is also the probelm with posting here. It is irrelevant what someone at a distance thinks is best at a specific parish a world away. The guidelines of the Church are worded deliberately to allow for this flexibility. While these instructions must not be ignored, implementation may involve other considerations.
T
TheMc
Guest
But then again, we are the true church, they aren’t.Some die hard Evangelicals would disagree with you… A friend took me to one of those churches… The musicians were tattooed and shirtless and had electric guitars… It was pretty fun…
Too bad you have no taste in music!
F
FrancisB
Guest
Of course it is allowed to use modern compositions so long as you are careful how they are written. I’ve composed music for liturgical use and used other living composers’ works in the mass. If you understand how these things are supposed to be written (which is to say, drawing upon the tradition of chant and polyphony) then you will understand that “modern compositions” are not in any way opposed to chant. In fact, what this is encouraging is the creation of new chant, organum, and sacred polyphony. Look up “stile antico” and you will see exactly how these directives have traditionally been understood. Listen to some of Durufle’s works, or Brucker’s motets. You’ll hear it. It was “modern” for their day, but still also sounds instantly like Catholic music because it is rooted in chant and sacred polyphony. Let us not pretend that this is carte blanch permission to use any modern musical style in the mass.
“Vernacular singing” is properly understood as “singing in the vernacular”, not “music proper to the local culture”. This is a matter of English Grammar (and Latin Grammar in the original)! I understand that sometimes the archaic constructions used in church translations are difficult to understand, but let us not create new understandings of phrases that had clear definitions. I didn’t suggest that we should never sing in the vernacular. That was not the case even when the liturgy was entirely in Latin. Just because we can sing in English doesn’t mean we should sing folk music. The one is not dependant upon the other.
Also the distinction between “sacred music” and “chant” is a valid one. Chant is monophonic: everyone sings the same thing. Sacred music can be polyphonic or homophonic: it has harmony. That is not to say that “sacred music” means “any other music that happens to have words about God”. It does not mean that. Often in the documents they refer to this music as “sacred polyphony”, but this is not an entirely accurate terminology, since some of this music (what is called “stile antico”) is actually homophonic, not polyphonic in texture. Hence it might be more appropriate to call it “sacred polyphony and homophony”.
None of this music is essentially monodic: that is the idea of there being a main melody line with instrumental chordal accompaniment is not part of the original performance practice of any of this music. While it certainly crept in later, and the use of chant with organ accompaniment is never condemned (nor do I expect it to be), there is a certain secular sound to the use of monody, especially when coupled with fixed metres and nearly constant syncopations. That was exactly what all of those documents were trying to guard against: that is to say, folk music or any other secular-sounding idiom (opera, rock, rap, &c.)
F
FrancisB
Guest
It is strange that these were not considerations made when all of the traditional music was tossed out in favour of folk tunes, isn’t it?
C
Cindyr9
Guest
As a returing Catholic, I left shortly after Vatican II. I love singing the traditional hymns and chants. Prior to my return I spent 20 years in an orthodox Anglo-Catholic parish where we were blessed to have a very talented choirmaster. With the proper guidance, it is not difficult at all to sing most hymns accompanied by the organ, or to sing acapella the responsorial psalms, Kyrie, Sanctus and Agnus Dei in plainsong. It seems the Roman Catholic Church is slowly rediscovering the rich heritage of music that evokes reverence and awe during the liturgy. How did the Anglicans surpass us on this point? I am guessing they did not succumb to the post-Vatican II pablum that was fed to the RC Church by the OCP. The music needs to enhance the liturgy. I have heard that the Holy Father wishes to promote more traditional music as well. I just hope it doesn’t take years for it to trickle down into the US churches.
One more point, while the piano is a beautiful instrument, I much prefer the organ or the plainsong sung acapella. As for guitars or drums at Mass, no, no no thank you.
One more point, while the piano is a beautiful instrument, I much prefer the organ or the plainsong sung acapella. As for guitars or drums at Mass, no, no no thank you.
B
Bonnie
Guest
Some of the most beautiful congregational singing I have heard in the past 20-30 years was at a Calvinist function my husband & I attended. There were around 150 people there - ordinary lay people, not musicians. They sang mostly from the Psalms, so beautifully, in harmony, that I was very much touched.
Not touched enough to leave the Catholic Church, but I did talk with the music director to ask how they did it. He told me that 1, they’ve been singing together for quite a few years, and 2, he works with the people. They have regular sings that people come to, just to learn to sing beautifully together, and 3, they sing mostly the Psalms, so have a limited repertoire. Though not near as limited as the selections at our parish. Too often the only musical offerings at our parish are by Haugen, Haas, Schutte, & Landry.
Not touched enough to leave the Catholic Church, but I did talk with the music director to ask how they did it. He told me that 1, they’ve been singing together for quite a few years, and 2, he works with the people. They have regular sings that people come to, just to learn to sing beautifully together, and 3, they sing mostly the Psalms, so have a limited repertoire. Though not near as limited as the selections at our parish. Too often the only musical offerings at our parish are by Haugen, Haas, Schutte, & Landry.
- Status