tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31741135227372447712024-03-04T22:55:36.990-08:00Chironomo's PodiumChironomohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13024533507945352862noreply@blogger.comBlogger125125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3174113522737244771.post-70732065338472472302010-04-09T13:59:00.000-07:002010-04-09T14:09:14.233-07:00Theological Problems of Church Music<em>"But at least this much is clear: the problem of church music is not merely a problem for music, but a vital question for the Church herself"</em><br /><br />This central quote neatly sums up the complete argument put forth by Joseph Ratzinger in his 1977 essay "The Theological Problems of Church Music". Though from a time immediately after the Second Vatican Council....in the midst of the very worst experiments in liturgical music....this essay still holds great relevance today, not only because of the status of its author but due to the timelessness of its claims. <br /><br />I would recommend a thorough reading <a href="http://musicasacra.com/pdf/theoproblems.pdf">of this essay </a> as it is only 9pages in length, including footnotes. Every time I come back to this essay, as well as a later essay on the same subject <em><a href="http://musicasacra.com/publications/sacredmusic/pdf/liturgy&music.pdf">Liturgy and Church Music</a></em>, I find something new and find those parts that are familiar have become more relevant to the current situation of liturgical music in the Catholic Church today. <br /><br />More on this tomorrow...Chironomohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13024533507945352862noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3174113522737244771.post-81596224154694957382010-02-15T10:38:00.001-08:002010-02-15T10:38:51.047-08:00Florida Chant ConferenceThe Florida Chapter of the Church Music Association of America is pleased to announce:<br />2nd Annual Musica Sacra Florida Gregorian Chant Conference<br />Sponsored by the Florida Chapter of the Church Music Association of America in conjunction with the Department of Music, Ave Maria University, Ave Maria, Florida.<br /><br />Friday & Saturday, March 19-20, 2010<br /><br />This two-day workshop will present both beginning and advanced musicians with lectures, breakout sessions, and rehearsals that will enrich their knowledge of Gregorian chant and its use in the Roman Catholic liturgy.<br /><br />Led by a faculty of chant specialists from around the state, attendees will learn more about the history of Gregorian chant and its role in the liturgy as well as experience the chant in the context of both the Divine Office and the Mass. Beginning chanters will be introduced to the basics of notation and rhythm according to the classic Solesmes method. Experienced chanters will learn new repertoire and advance their understanding of rhythmic and interpretive nuance. Resources and practical methods for the cultivation of Gregorian chant in the life of the parish will also be discussed. A special breakout session will be devoted to helping priests and deacons with their liturgical chants.<br /><br />This workshop is ideal for choir members, parish music directors, music students, teachers, parents, seminarians, deacons, priests, and anyone who is interested in learning about the heritage of sacred music within the Roman Catholic Church.<br /><br />Registration fees are $40 or $15 for students (with I.D.) and include the price of instructional materials and instruction. Overnight accommodations will be available at AMU’s Xavier Conference Center. Participants can choose among various options for room and board. For prices and options, go to http://www.musicasacra.com/florida <br /><br />Pre-registration is required. Deadline: Friday, March 5th, 2010<br />To register, visit: http://www.musicasacra.com/florida <br />Contact Information: Susan Treacy (239) 280-1668 or susan [dot] treacy [at] avemaria.edu <br /><br />Faculty:<br />Keynote Speaker: Jeffrey Tucker – Managing Editor, Sacred Music<br />Mary Jane Ballou – Director of the Schola Cantorae, St Augustine, FL<br />Jennifer Donelson – Nova Southeastern University, Fort Lauderdale, FL<br />Timothy McDonnell - Ave Maria University, Ave Maria, FL<br />Michael O’Connor – Palm Beach Atlantic University, West Palm Beach, FL<br />Susan Treacy – Ave Maria University, Ave Maria, FL<br />Jamie Younkin - Florida Institute of Technology, Melbourne, FL<br /><br />Registration:<br />Registration fees are $40 and include the price of instructional materials and instruction. Students (with I.D.) are $15. Payment is accepted online or due upon arrival at the conference. Pre-registration is required. Deadline: Friday, March 5th, 2010. Registration is available at: www.musicasacra.com/florida<br /><br />Room & Board Options:<br />Overnight accommodations will be available at AMU’s Xavier Conference Center.<br />Participants may choose from among the following options for room and board.<br />Xavier Conference Center — Single occupancy $45<br />Xavier Conference Center — Double occupancy ($30 per person) $60<br />Saturday Breakfast $5<br />Saturday Lunch $7<br /><br />Location:<br />Ave Maria University, 5050 Ave Maria Boulevard, Ave Maria, FL 34142<br />A campus map can be accessed at: http://www.avemaria.edu/uploads/pagesfiles/352.pdf<br />All events except the closing Mass are located in the Bob Thomas Student Union, labeled 05 on the campus map.Chironomohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13024533507945352862noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3174113522737244771.post-20635088529112173592010-01-29T07:09:00.000-08:002010-01-29T07:24:25.803-08:00The Gregorian Institute on Gregorian ChantThe website of GIA (The <em>Gregorian Institute of America</em>) has a page on Gregorian Chant resources for parish use. It is fascinating in many ways….first that a company named the “Gregorian Institute” would only devote two or three pages of a several hundred page website to...well…Gregorian music. But more fascinating, and a bit disappointing, is how they treat the whole subject of Gregorian chant.<br /><br />The information given is really not of much use, but then again I suspect it is not supposed to be very useful. The goal seems to be to actually discourage the use of chant while showing that they are at least abiding by the letter of the law in their publications.<br /><br />>>>>><br />From the GIA website….<br />(My <strong>emphasis </strong>and <span style="color:#ff0000;">comments</span>)<br /><br /><br /><strong>Gregorian Chant for the Congregation<br /></strong>The Second Vatican Council stated that the faithful should be able to sing the <strong>ordinary parts</strong> of the Mass in Latin (see Sacrosanctum Concilium, the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, no. 54<span style="color:#ff0000;">).(It actually says that “steps should be taken so that the faithful may also be able to <em>say or to sing</em> together in Latin those parts of the Ordinary of the Mass which pertain to them. This is important because it makes clear that the Latin language is the important issue, not the chant settings. What steps have been taken by GIA to achieve this?)</span> Catholic congregations in most parts of the world sing <strong>at least a few chants in Latin</strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">.( “Look! It’s being done elsewhere so we don’t have to worry about it!)</span> But in the U.S., for the most part <strong>we have a ways to go in fulfilling SC 54</strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">.(Perhaps the understatement of the century…)</span><strong> One need not look far</strong> to find resources for basic congregational Latin chant—<strong>every major Catholic hymnal or worship aid</strong> includes basic congregational Latin chants. <span style="color:#ff0000;">(OK..so they’re really token inclusions, but so what?)</span> The easiest places to start are with the <em>Kyrie</em> (which in fact is in Greek) and the Agnus Dei. Then <strong>one might </strong>advance to the Sanctus and perhaps the Pater Noster. <span style="color:#ff0000;">(Take note of the language here…”<em>one </em>need not look far”…”<em>one </em>might advance”…rather than “<em>you</em> can find”…or “<em>you </em>can then advance”. In other words, “<em>one</em> could do this if <em>one</em> were so inclined, but not <em>YOU</em>.)</span> The Gloria and Credo are more difficult because of their length. <span style="color:#ff0000;">(so…don’t ever attempt to sing them in Latin? We should never try anything difficult?)</span> In any event,<strong> slow progress and pastoral sensitivity</strong> are advised. <span style="color:#ff0000;">(Good Lord!…why would <em>slow progress</em> be advised? I don’t see any descriptions of works in their choral anthem catalogues claiming “One might sing this for the Sunday after Easter, but only after careful pastoral consideration. If one’s choir is successful in introducing this work, one might then advance to the more difficult selections, but do so slowly.”)<br /></span><br />There are several collections with more extensive congregational repertoire: <em>Iubilate Deo, Liber Cantualis, </em>and<em> Kyriale Simplex</em>. <span style="color:#ff0000;">(But since we just told you that it should take a long, long, long time to introduce even the basic congregational chants included in our fine hymnals, why would you ever need a more extensive congregational repertoire?)<br /><br /></span>GIA publishes an edition of an earlier version of <em>Iubilate Deo</em> in modern notation: <em>Jubilate Deo</em>.<br /><span style="color:#ff0000;">(We’re not going to tell you what this is or why it might be useful….just that we do publish it. Notice that we replaced the difficult Latin "Iubilate" with the much more accessible "Jubilate")<br /></span><br /><strong>Easier Gregorian Chant for the Choir</strong><br />Many choirs will be looking for easier chant than is found in the <em>Graduale Romanum</em> and the <em>Graduale Triplex<strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">(?)</span>,</strong></em> especially at first. <span style="color:#ff0000;">(Well...if you were encouraging them to look for chant at all they might be doing this, but you just told them to make slow progress and be pastoral) </span>A good place to start is with any of the <strong>major congregational hymnals</strong>. <span style="color:#ff0000;">(But…don’t look in the <em>Parish Book of Chant</em>…stick with the major hymnals!)</span> The Latin chants found there are intended for congregations, <strong>but it is likely that congregations are not (yet) able to sing them</strong>. <span style="color:#ff0000;">(Way to be encouraging GIA, way to be encouraging! I especially like the parenthetical “yet”.)</span> The choir might <span style="color:#ff0000;">(why not say “can”?)</span> sing easier Latin antiphons, Latin chant hymns, or <strong>chant hymns in English</strong>. Hymns are an easy place to start because the same melody is repeated for each stanza of text. Because the melody of a strophic hymn is formulaic and <strong>not intrinsically tied to the Latin text</strong>, hymns are the one part of the <strong>Latin chant repertoire that can be sung in any language.</strong> <span style="color:#ff0000;">(Well…they wouldn’t really be Latin chant repertoire then, would they? If we sing “O Come All Ye Faithful” in English, we’re not singing a Latin chant hymn simply because it was <em>originally</em> in Latin, are we? This is essentially trying to say that singing vernacular hymnody is a great way to fulfill the call to sing Latin chant. What absolute nonsense.)<br /></span><br />Other easier collections for choir are <em>Graduale Simplex</em> and <em>Cantus Selecti</em>.<br /><span style="color:#ff0000;">(We’re not going to tell you what these are either, but they <em>are easier</em>)<br /></span><br /><strong>Gregorian Chant for the Choir</strong> <span style="color:#ff0000;">(but not the easier stuff like above)</span><br />Much of the Latin chant repertoire was <strong>written for a trained choir</strong>.<span style="color:#ff0000;">(So...my choir isn't "trained"?)</span> <strong>Being more difficult</strong>, it was sung primarily in monasteries <span style="color:#ff0000;">(not like your parish)</span><span style="color:#000000;">, </span>cathedrals <span style="color:#ff0000;">(not like your parish either)</span><span style="color:#000000;">, </span>colleges <span style="color:#ff0000;">(not a parish, so not like you either)</span><span style="color:#000000;">, </span>and parishes with more extensive resources <span style="color:#ff0000;">(more extensive resources than your parish, that is!)</span> In the <strong>right circumstances</strong> <span style="color:#ff0000;">(not gonna tell you what these might be, but they aren't circumstances that apply to your parish)</span> , parish choirs can still sing <strong>some of this chant</strong>.<br /><br /><em>Graduale Romanum, Gregorian Missal for Sundays, Graduale Triplex.<br /></em><span style="color:#ff0000;">(We’re not even going to tell you why we have these books listed here…but they contain some of the chant that you might be able to sing in the right circumstances at a monastery, cathedral, college or extensively resourced parish.)</span><br /><br />>>>>>><br /><br />So….that is, in a nutshell, what GIA wants to tell you about the music for which their company is named. If you were a truly inquiring Director of Music trying to live up to the Church’s call to sing the music of the Roman liturgy, would this encourage you to do so?Chironomohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13024533507945352862noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3174113522737244771.post-85390780956229307702010-01-13T08:01:00.001-08:002010-01-13T08:01:57.283-08:00Some Thoughts About "Turning Back the Clock"I've done a lot of reading (mostly blog discussions) about liturgical reform lately. This is <em>the</em> big topic right now. I mean, it's always been something of a hot topic, but it is now in the forefront in a way that it hasn't been before. Beginning with <em>Summorum Pontificum</em> and continuing with changes to the Papal Liturgies including ad orientem celebrations, Gregorian chant, communion kneeling and on the tongue exclusively...now many Bishops following suit...and then the new translation of the Roman Missal coming to us soon, it has become apparent that the "reform of the reform" is no longer a hypothetical thing, but is now a reality.<br /><br />Just last week, the Pontical Master of Liturgical Ceremonies, Msgr. Guido Marini addressed the Priests of the International Conference of Clergy in Rome. The topic was the "reform of the reform"... a well organized presentation on 5 points central to liturgical reform:<br /><br /><em>The Sacred Liturgy, God’s great gift to the Church<br /><br />The orientation of liturgical prayer<br /><br />Adoration and union with God<br /><br />Active Participation<br /><br />Sacred or liturgical music</em><br /><em></em><br />However, the presentation was less an academic examination than an instruction, laying out an interpretation of the post-conciliar liturgy that is decidedly orthodox, drawing together many of the issues that have been addressed seperately up to now and creating a coherent foundation for liturgical development going forwards.<br /><br />And that is what I see as the most important point: This is a <em>forward looking</em> vision for the liturgy, an interpretive foundation for the Missal of Paul VI which brings it out of the morass of inculturating adaptations, innovations and experiments and seeks instead to set it within the liturgical traditions of the Church. This has been the point of Pope Benedicts reforms up to this point...to set the Missal of Paul VI within the context of the Church's liturgical tradition.<br /><br />And yet, the reactions to Msgr. Marini's address and to Pope Benedict's initiatives all too often appeal to the well-worn cliche: "Let's not turn back the clock".<br /><br />This is usually followed by noting that things were far from perfect "back in the day" - and the criticism is most often that Priests rushed through Mass and that the people in the pews just sat and watched, oblivious to what was going on until it was time to receive communion, after which they left. And that may have been true in many instances "back in the day".<br /><br />But I know a great many Catholics who consider themselves Traditionalists, and I attend Mass in the EF on Sundays (8:30AM Low Mass) and have yet to find a single person who wants to return to <em>that way</em> of celebrating the EF Mass. And I have yet to attend an EF Mass in which the Priest desires to rush through as quickly as possible. The Mass this past Sunday was a Low Mass and it took about 55 minutes, including an excellent homily. The faithful followed carefully in their Latin-English Missals (including the children who make up perhaps 1/4 of the assembly), very much engaged in the liturgy. This is the state of the Extraordinary Form in 2010. It has nothing to do with "turning back the clock" and everything to do with moving forwards. There are new churches, new religious orders, new Priests and new faithful, young and old celebrating in the Extraordinary Form.<br /><br />And so, if the current celebration of the EF isn't "turning back the clock", then how could celebrating the Ordinary Form liturgy, even in the most orthodox of settings, be "turning back the clock"? I have seen Masses celebrated in the Ordinary Form where one gets the impression that the Priest is trying to "move things along", and the now ubiquitous use of an army of EMC's at most Masses can only be explained by a desire to finish communion as quickly as possible- despite all of the rhetoric that it is the "center of our faith journey". There is the frequent ommission of the Gloria and Creed, homilies without substance or relevance and arbitrary limitations on the number of verses in the hymns...all in order to "get out on time". If there is anything today that is similar to "turning back the clock", it would be this.<br /><br />This is what Msgr. Marini and certainly Pope Benedict are urging us to move <em>away from...</em>that is, celebrations in the Ordinary Form ought to move <em>forward</em> towards a more reverent and orthodox norm as has been done in the Extraordinary Form celebrations. This is what Pope Benedict meant by <em>mutual enrichment - </em>taking those things from each liturgical form that lead towards a <em>greater reverence</em> and <em>sanctification of the faithful </em>and applying them to both forms.<br /><br />Such progress could be described in a variety of ways, but I fail to see how it is "turning back the clock". May I suggest that it is actually a case of "winding up a clock" that was long ago allowed to run out, hurriedly replaced by a new improved LED timpepiece whose red-against-black square numbers are beginning to look rather dated themselves.Chironomohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13024533507945352862noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3174113522737244771.post-19081269101246441632010-01-09T05:20:00.000-08:002010-01-09T05:23:38.692-08:00Warm Enough To Snow?Right now, according to the NWS, Florida is the only place in the country <em>warm enough</em> to snow.<br /><br /><br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgR27jgXtwsnn8qRT02kiwCT_rD47KnxlPuKtErciph2-P4x_3vyPcck6uQ-5wjdKrD54_f2tqEVJe-qxq4eTgRmRiq2voRR1rI3l2WJAWfY4qYCMolZJdixyRxTHApNpOvMV8kkbIabwPq/s1600-h/Snowing+in+FL+1910.gif"><img style="WIDTH: 400px; HEIGHT: 298px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5424729748766676258" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgR27jgXtwsnn8qRT02kiwCT_rD47KnxlPuKtErciph2-P4x_3vyPcck6uQ-5wjdKrD54_f2tqEVJe-qxq4eTgRmRiq2voRR1rI3l2WJAWfY4qYCMolZJdixyRxTHApNpOvMV8kkbIabwPq/s200/Snowing+in+FL+1910.gif" /></a><br />Bizarre.....Chironomohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13024533507945352862noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3174113522737244771.post-22182158792510303632010-01-07T12:59:00.001-08:002010-01-07T13:26:06.701-08:00A Connection?<span style="color:#000000;">As I read the January 6th address of Msgr. Guido Marini to priets, I kept coming back to this posting by Andrea Tornielli last August:</span><br /><span style="color:#000099;"></span><br /><span style="color:#000099;">The newspaper [<em>Il Giornale</em>] today published a paper devoted to "propositions" voted on last March by the plenary meeting of the Congregation for Divine Worship, presented to Benedict XVI by Cardinal Antonio Canizares Llovera on April 4th. It contains <strong>a first outline of the "reform the reform" liturgy that Ratzinger would see implemented</strong>, underlining the importance of <span style="color:#ff0000;"><strong>reverent</strong></span> <strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">worship</span>,</strong> putting a <strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">stop to creativity</span></strong> and abuse, <strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">giving more presence to the Latin language</span></strong> in the new rite, publishing bilingual missals (with the Latin text opposite), <strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">reconsidering the matter of the "versus orientem</span></strong>" [ad orientem] orientation at least during the consecration [i.e. during the Eucharistic prayer], reiterating that the use of distributing Communion in the hand is an indult, an extraordinary fact, but that <span style="color:#ff0000;"><strong>the [normative] custom of the law must remain to receive the host on the tongue</strong></span>.<br /><br />All this, however, will be prepared and presented in the Ratzingerian style: not any short-term document, no sudden imposition destined to go unheeded. <strong>Rather, a long and patient work from the grass roots ["from below"], that involves the episcopate</strong>. The point of departure and arrival is the conciliar Constitution on the Liturgy, <strong>Sacrosanctum Concilium.</strong></span><br /><strong><span style="color:#000099;"></span></strong><br /><span style="color:#000000;">What kept getting to me were the main points supposedly in this "reform of the reform" document <strong>(Bold in <span style="color:#ff0000;">red</span> above),</strong> and how they echo the main points in Msgr. Marini's address: </span><br /><br />The Sacred Liturgy, God’s great gift to the Church <em>(reverent worship/ stopping creativity)</em><br /><br />The orientation of liturgical prayer <em>(ad orientem worship)</em><br /><br />Adoration and union with God <em>(communion on the tongue)</em><br /><br />Active Participation<br /><br />Sacred or liturgical music <em>(greater presence of Latin language)</em><br /><em></em><br />I wonder if this isn't the beginning of that "long and patient work from the grass roots"... the points that Tornielli claimed were in the "reform of the reform" document and the points that Msgr. Marini made in his address are identical. Note also that Tornielli said that the departure and return point is <em>Sacrosanctum Concilium... </em>while Msgr. Marini's address largely concerns an interpretation of the Vatican II reforms in continuity with tradition, quoting frequently from <em>Sacrosanctum Concilium</em>.<br /><br />I can't help thinking that there is something here that has been carefully thought out.Chironomohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13024533507945352862noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3174113522737244771.post-22509030109627868692010-01-07T07:32:00.000-08:002010-01-07T08:01:40.498-08:00Sacred or Liturgical Music: from Msgr. Marini's address to Priests<div align="justify">On January 6th, 2010 at the International Clergy Conference in Rome, the Pontifical Master of Liturgical Ceremonies, Msgr. Guido Marini, gave an extensive address to Priests…not just those in attendance at the conference, but to Priests throughout the world. The topic was the Liturgy, specifically an understanding of the foundations of liturgy from a perspective, a hermeneutic, of continuity with the Church’s liturgical tradition. This perspective has developed rapidly since 2003 when Pope Benedict first introduced the term <em>hermeneutic of continuity </em>to the Catholic world. Since the promulgation of <em>Summorum Pontificum </em>(2007) it has become clear that any future development in the liturgy must occur within tradition, not outside of it.<br /><br />In his address to Priests, Msgr. Marini discusses 5 distinct topics of current importance:<br /><br /><em>The Sacred Liturgy, God’s great gift to the Church<br /><br />The orientation of liturgical prayer<br /><br />Adoration and union with God<br /><br />Active Participation<br /><br />Sacred or liturgical music</em><br /><br />It is significant that these very topics are also the same as those addressed in Pope Benedict’s Apostolic Exhortation <em>Sacramentum Caritatis</em>, a document referred to by Msgr. Marini’s a number of times.<br /><br />This address will, no doubt, be examined and studied over the next several weeks…it is a significant text coming as it does from the primary liturgist for the Catholic Church (I apologize if that term if it implies any offense!). Of particular interest to me is the section on Sacred Music…the last topic he examines.<br /><br /><br />(My <strong>emphasis</strong> and <span style="color:#ff0000;">comments</span>)<br /><br /><strong>Sacred or Liturgical Music. (From <em>Introduction to the Spirit of the Liturgy</em>)<br /></strong>Msgr. Guido Marini – Pontifical Master of Liturgical Ceremonies<br /><br />There is no doubt that a discussion, in order to introduce itself authentically into the spirit of the liturgy, <strong>cannot pass over sacred or liturgical music and silence</strong>. <span style="color:#ff0000;">(Pope Benedict has expressed similar sentiments in his essay Liturgy and Church Music – that Sacred Music, Gregorian Chant and Polyphony, are an integral part of the Roman Liturgy and therefore inseperable from it) </span><br /><br />I will limit myself to a brief reflection in way of <strong>orienting the discussion</strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">.(This is a big topic…better to just give the main points and begin a meaningful discussion of this going forward!)</span> One might wonder why the Church by means of its documents, more or less recent, insists in indicating a <strong>certain type of music and singing</strong> <span style="color:#ff0000;">(Gregorian Chant/ Polyphony)</span> as <strong>particularly consonant with the liturgical celebration</strong>. <span style="color:#ff0000;">(The liturgical documents at times say “eminently suited”, at other times “integral”)</span> Already at the time of the Council of Trent <strong>the Church intervened in the cultural conflict developing at that time</strong>, reestablishing the norm whereby music conforming to the sacred text was of primary importance, limiting the use of instruments and pointing to a clear distinction between profane and sacred music<span style="color:#ff0000;">.(This was the not the first reaction to secular music in the liturgy, but was the most notable up to that time…the focus was vernacular hymnody and instrumental music)</span> Sacred music, moreover, must never be understood as a purely <strong>subjective expression</strong>. It is anchored to the biblical or traditional texts which are to be sung during the course of the celebration. <span style="color:#ff0000;">(Liturgical music is not about what WE want to say…it is about proclaiming sacred texts as part of the liturgical ritual. This is why the issue of the Propers has come to the forefront in these past few years)</span> More recently, Pope Saint Pius X <strong>intervened in an analogous way</strong> <span style="color:#ff0000;">(analogous to what was done at Trent, and more importantly, analogous to the situation today)</span>, seeking to remove operatic singing from the liturgy and <strong>selecting Gregorian chant and polyphony from the time of the Catholic reformation as the standard for liturgical music, to be distinguished from religious music in general</strong>. <span style="color:#ff0000;">(This is an important distinction. There is a place for religious music in the life of the church…but that place is not at Mass)</span> The Second Vatican Council did naught but <strong>reaffirm the same standard, so too the more recent magisterial documents.</strong> <span style="color:#ff0000;">(A reality check: the documents of Vatican II re-affirm, <em>rather strongly</em>, that Chant and Sacred Polyphony have been and still are the primary music of the liturgy, and every document since has only further emphasized its importance…shamefully, most parishes are in conflict with this.)</span><br /><br />Why does the Church insist on proposing <strong>certain forms as characteristic of sacred and liturgical music</strong> which make them distinct from all other forms of music? Why, also, do Gregorian chant and the classical sacred polyphony <strong>turn out to be the forms to be imitated, in light of which liturgical and even popular music should continue to be produced today</strong>? <span style="color:#ff0000;">(The liturgical documents of Vatican II emphasize the development of contemporary liturgical music…and proscribe that it be modeled after Gregorian chant and Sacred Polyphony. There are excellent contemporary composers that do this very thing, and there are other not-so-excellent composers that have rejected this proscription and turn instead to popular and theater music for their models)</span><br /><br />The answer to these questions lies precisely in what we have sought to assert with regard to the spirit of the liturgy. <strong>It is properly those forms of music, in their holiness, their goodness, and their universality, which translate in notes, melodies and singing the authentic liturgical spirit</strong> <span style="color:#ff0000;">(As was said above – this music, <em>Gregorian chant</em>, expresses <em>to us</em> the very spirit of the liturgy by means of its integral form and interior holiness, as opposed to music in which <em>we express to others</em> our feelings or sentiments by means of exterior secular forms that have <em>more to do with us than with the liturgy</em>. This is the fundamental flaw of most contemporary religious music as used in the liturgy)</span>: by leading to adoration of the mystery celebrated, <strong>by favouring an authentic and integral participation</strong> <span style="color:#ff0000;">(people will sing chant)</span>, by helping the listener to capture the sacred and thereby the essential primacy of God acting in Christ, and finally <strong>by permitting a musical development that is anchored in the life of the Church and the contemplation of its mystery</strong>. <span style="color:#ff0000;">(Given the importance of this issue to liturgical development, I don’t think that it is out of the question that there will eventually be something like a second <em>Tra le sollecitudini</em> coming our way. Msgr. Marini’s foreshadow of Pius X making an “analogous” reform for the very same reasons as are needed today should cause one to think seriously about this possibility)</span>.<br /><br />Allow me to quote the then Cardinal Ratzinger one last time: “Gandhi highlights three vital spaces in the cosmos, and demonstrates how each one of them communicates even its own mode of being. Fish live in the sea and are silent. Terrestrial animals cry out, but the birds, whose vital space is the heavens, sing. Silence is proper to the sea, crying out to the earth, and singing to the heavens. Man, however, participates in all three: he bares within him the depth of the sea, the weight of the earth, and the height of the heavens; this is why all three modes of being belong to him: silence, crying out, and song. Today...we see that, devoid of transcendence, all that is left to man is to cry out, because he wishes to be only earth and seeks to turn into earth even the heavens and the depth of the sea. The true liturgy, the liturgy of the communion of saints, restores to him the fullness of his being. It teaches him anew how to be silent and how to sing, opening to him the profundity of the sea and teaching him how to fly, the nature of an angel; elevating his heart, it makes that song resonate in him once again which had in a way fallen asleep. In fact, we can even say that the true liturgy is recognizable especially when it frees us from the common way of living, and restores to us depth and height, silence and song. <strong>The true liturgy is recognizable by the fact that it is cosmic, not custom made for a group. It sings with the angels. It remains silent with the profound depth of the universe in waiting. And in this way it redeems the world.”</strong> <span style="color:#ff0000;">(This final quote recaps three of Pope Benedict's points about liturgy and reform: True liturgy is divinely formed, not manufactured for our purposes. We have now a liturgy which is more manufactured for our purposes. Only true liturgy can redeem the world. And so we can conclude what…?)</span> </div><div align="justify"> </div><div align="justify"><strong>(END)</strong></div><div align="justify"><strong></strong> </div><div align="justify"><br /><br />What strikes me the most about this address (this is only one of 5 sections....and the shortest section at that!) is the narrowness of the scope (liturgical <em>practice</em> at Mass) and the very specific issues presented. These are the cornerstone issues of liturgical reform...the main points at which the actual texts of the liturgical documents of Vatican II and liturgical practice since Vatican II have differed most notably. In other words, these are the most prominent aspects of the liturgy where we are not following the liturgical documents: <em>Sacredness and Solemnity in the liturgy - Liturgical Orientation (ad orientem) - Active Participation - Sacred Music.</em> These issues are now being presented <em>to priests </em>as "front-burner" issues. They are also those same issues as were addressed by Pope Benedict in <em>Sacramentum Caritatis. </em></div><div align="justify"> </div><div align="justify">But far from being philosophical reflection on theological points, this address is more of an exposition of a policy position. It outlines the actual policies (Vatican II documents), their justifications (tradition/ magisterium/ continuity) and even some specific suggestions for action. My strong feeling is that this is both a re-emphasizing of <em>Sacramentum Caritatis</em>, and perhaps a preparation for some kind of document yet to come. </div><div align="justify"> </div><div align="justify"><br /><br />I can't help but recall the "rumor" last Summer that Pope Benedict had been presented with a document outlining the main points of the "reform of the reform". Perhaps we are seeing them now....</div><div align="justify"> </div>Chironomohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13024533507945352862noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3174113522737244771.post-30947171277842403532010-01-05T12:06:00.000-08:002010-01-05T12:27:18.669-08:00Fact Check....<div align="justify">Every so often I take time to “review” articles from Today’s Liturgy, GIA Quarterly and AIM Resources. More often than not these are publications which promote a more progressive viewpoint – and more often than not I am in a position of disagreeing with their opinions. That’s fine…opinions have a place so long as they are not put forward as fact, and so long as the facts are acknowledged and one’s opposition or agreement with them is made clear. (<a href="http://chironomo.blogspot.com/2009/07/where-im-coming-from.html">You can read about my views on this</a>).<br /><br />And so I began reading an article in the latest edition of <em>Today’s Liturgy</em> with an eye to just such a review. And I may still do so when I have sufficient time. ..but first I have to address a specific part of this article that left me shaking my head. I hope that my comments may find legs and get back to the individual who wrote them: Rodica Stoicoiu. I haven’t read anything by this writer previously and so I can at least hope that some of the more glaring problems were just oversight.<br /><br />The article begins:<br /><br /><span style="color:#000099;">Change is upon us. If not by the time you read this then certainly in the near future there will be numerous changes in the celebration of the liturgy. How we deal with these reforms in our role as pastoral musicians will directly affect our communities and how they receive the changes. We can be obstreperous or we can have a positive attitude. Change is always difficult, and these changes will not be easy; but the more we understand them, the better we can enact them to the benefit of our people.<br /></span><br />First, I have to wonder if she ran this copy by Bp. Trautman… <em>obstreperous</em>??? And he though <em>ineffable</em> was obscure! Secondly, I have to wonder what she’s talking about here. What are these numerous changes that will be sweeping the liturgy by the time this article reaches the press? This is a total mystery… she just keeps talking about “these changes” and how sweeping they are and how we have to work to accept them. About ¾ of the way through the article, she brings up the new translation and cites elements from this issue as "just a few examples of possible changes that liturgical ministers will face”. So she clearly isn’t talking about the new translation specifically. By the end of the first page, the article begins to take on a sense of foreboding, as though something big and terrible is coming. But what??<br /><br />Anybody who writes professionally (as it seems Ms. Stoicoiu does) knows that you present the “focal point” about 1/3 of the way into the text in a brief article (as I am doing right now!). And what does the author discuss at this point in her article? POPE BENEDICT ON THE REFORM. And so I assume that this is the point of her article…to inform the reader about Pope Benedict’s position on reform. The several paragraphs prior to this section concern criticism of the reforms of Vatican II, and she cites two prominent authors – Fr. John Baldovin and Reiner Kaczynski, to build her argument that there is a growing movement towards re-examing the reforms of that council. But as she begins her discussion of Pope Benedict’s position, she shows her hand:<br /><br /><span style="color:#000099;"><em>One critique of the reform that has many nervous today comes from the pope himself. Some wonder if this does not presage a frontal attack on the reforms of Vatican II.<br /></em></span><br />And a little further on…<br /><br /><em><span style="color:#000099;">Certainly the recent declarations he has made as Pope Benedict XVI regarding the use of the preconciliar liturgy (Summorum Pontificum, 2007) have led some to express deep concerns about the direction the Church is taking.</span></em><br /><br />OK…now we can see what this article is about! As an aside, I find the anonymous “some” she keeps using to be disingenuous. Can’t she just say “<strong><em>I</em></strong> wonder if this does not presage a frontal attack on the reforms of Vatican II” or “…have led <strong><em>me</em></strong> to express deep concerns about the direction the Church is taking”? But I can get by that…as well as the constant barrage of progressive buzzwords. My criticism is with her presentation of Pope Benedict’s position on reform, both in general and as relates to the reforms of Vatican II in particular. It is well known that the Holy Father has expressed his views on the <em>hermeneutic of continuity</em>, and that he has on many occasions noted that the current interpretations of the reforms of Vatican II have tended towards a “<em>hermeneutic of rupture</em>” with tradition. I thought that this was fairly well known.<br /><br />Similarly, in the letter accompanying <em>Summorum Pontificum</em>, and in numerous statements from Prefect of the CDW and even from the Pope himself since, it has been made clear that the Missal of 1962 is a gift to the Universal Church which he (the Pope) desires to gain wider use and which he intends to influence the Novus Ordo Mass. Nonetheless, Ms. Stoicoiu cites a quote from <em>Sacramentum Caritatis</em>:<br /><br /><em>"From the varied forms of the early centuries… up to the spread of the Roman rite; from the clear indications of the Council of Trent and the Missal of Saint Pius V to the liturgical renewal called for by the Second Vatican Council: in every age of the Church's history the eucharistic celebration, as the source and summit of her life and mission, shines forth in the liturgical rite in all its richness and variety". (SC 3).<br /></em><br />I’m always suspicious about quotes, particularly quotes that use the “….” to expunge text. In this case, the opening of this quote actually reads:<br /><br /><em>From the varied forms of the early centuries, still resplendent in the rites of the Ancient Churches of the East, up to the spread of the Roman rite.<br /></em><br />For some reason, it was not in keeping with her point for Benedict to note that the liturgical forms of the early centuries are “<em>still resplendent in the rites of the Ancient Churches of the East</em>”. This would make it seem that he actually finds these ancient rites to be acceptable if not preferable. She also obscures the context of <em>Sacramentum Caritatis 3</em> in that the quote she pulled would seem to be a glowing endorsement of liturgical change coming from the Pope, particularly the changes of the Second Vatican Council. But the actual message of SC#3 is that the changes intended by the Council have not yet been realized, stated more eloquently in the passage following the quote pulled by Ms. Stoicoiu:<br /><br /><em>“The Synod of Bishops was able to evaluate the reception of the renewal in the years following the Council. There were many expressions of appreciation. The difficulties and even the occasional abuses which were noted, it was affirmed, cannot overshadow the benefits and the validity of the liturgical renewal, whose riches are yet to be fully explored. Concretely, the changes which the Council called for need to be understood within the overall unity of the historical development of the rite itself, without the introduction of artificial discontinuities. “ (SC 3)<br /></em><br />And so, Pope Benedict is actually saying that we need to understand the reforms called for by the Council as a continuation of liturgical tradition without introducing “artificial discontinuities”. And what does Ms. Stoicoiu claim that Pope Benedict is saying here? Well, she concludes that the Pope has made a definitive response to traditionalists as she concludes this section of her article:<br /><br /><em><span style="color:#000099;">“The response to those who wish to bring back the past is clear. The cultural context that supported the pre-conciliar rite has changed. Some may return to it because it is comforting to them, some may go out of curiosity, but the world that gave rise to and supported that rite has passed.”<br /></span></em><br />That she would claim that this is Pope Benedict’s view is irresponsible and perhaps even scandalous. Pope Benedict….saying that the 1962 Missal might be useful for those who are nostalgic or curious but that it’s time has passed? <em>Really</em>? Of course, her premise is flawed to begin with, introducing a straw-man of sorts in the form of “<em>those who wish to bring back the past</em>”. I don’t know that Pope Benedict has made any kind of response to "<em>those who wish to bring back the past</em>”. I think the Pope takes traditionalists more seriously than that. Certainly the Pope has acknowledged that a <em>wholesale</em> return to the pre-conciliar church is neither possible nor desirable. But Ms. Stoicoiu wants the reader to then jump to the conclusion that Pope Benedict endorses the "<em>hermeneutic of rupture</em>" for those who want it while proposing a "<em>hermeneutic of continuity</em>" to keep traditionalists quiet. This is a gross mischaracterization of the Holy Father’s view.<br /><br />After this part of her article, she returns to the mysterious “changes that are coming”. At one point she seems to imply that there is a new <em>Missale Romanum</em> coming with “changes to the Order of Mass”. I had no idea… I thought it was just a new translation. It might be fun after all to take a look at this whole article, but for now I’ve said what I need to say. </div>Chironomohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13024533507945352862noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3174113522737244771.post-76997708823897585132010-01-04T11:13:00.000-08:002010-01-04T11:23:39.932-08:00A Happy New YearAs the New year begins, a welcome re-arrangement of my schedule will now allow me to attend the 8:30AM Extraordinary Form Mass on Sundays at the Christ The King Chapel in Sarasota. We are fortunate in the Diocese of Venice to have 20 (yes, twenty!) Extraordinary Form Masses each week throughout the Diocese (to be fair, 17 of those are at either Ave Maria University Chapel or Christ the King, both of which have daily EF Masses), but up to now I have been unable to attend Sunday Mass due to my obligations at my own parish and at another parish in the evening where I play a 6:00 Mass. <br /><br />I will now have a space of time from 8:00AM- 10:00AM on Sunday Morning free - and there just happens to be an 8:30AM Mass at CTK only a few blocks away. I'm hoping that my family will be able to join me there, even if only occasionally. <br /><br />I would have really liked to be able to make the 10:30AM Sung Mass, but I have to make a living after all.....Chironomohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13024533507945352862noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3174113522737244771.post-37676558942422409342009-12-30T08:40:00.000-08:002009-12-30T08:44:15.746-08:00The Vatican Liturgical CalendarAn interesting find while browsing the Vatican website...the <a href="http://www.vatican.va/liturgical_year/liturgico_en/liturgico_en.html">Liturgical Year Calendar</a>.<br /><br />Other than being easy to use and full of useful information, it has a rather striking feature...musical selections for each season! No Haas-Haugen here...this is an all Chant-Polyphony program, complete with MP3's for the selections from the Sistine Choir and Pontifical Institute of Sacred Music and, get this, recordings of the Formularies for each Sunday for use by Priests. Wow! <br /><br />Give it a look...Chironomohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13024533507945352862noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3174113522737244771.post-37680771746613336222009-12-30T05:50:00.000-08:002009-12-30T05:55:27.418-08:00Benedictine Arrangement Sighting.....Bishop Frank Dewane incenses the altar at the Cathedral of the Epihpany in Venice Florida...note the very prominent Benedictine Arrangement of the altar...<br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgksC5XJtm8gzwPatsJnipF_RvOkW59J1EbDQy5CUSlKrCZ8vSfWgXgUt1QTu7BQbP9D98SoGQH7s_oqniYZ4hpmOhU-zBwrCRNUHg8NELL0Bc7pi0CELK8iWykO9ztdA48PmZohB-JA041/s1600-h/christmasepiphany09_400.jpg"><img style="cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 300px; height: 261px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgksC5XJtm8gzwPatsJnipF_RvOkW59J1EbDQy5CUSlKrCZ8vSfWgXgUt1QTu7BQbP9D98SoGQH7s_oqniYZ4hpmOhU-zBwrCRNUHg8NELL0Bc7pi0CELK8iWykO9ztdA48PmZohB-JA041/s200/christmasepiphany09_400.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5421026667242847570" /></a><br /><br /><br />Truly beautiful....Chironomohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13024533507945352862noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3174113522737244771.post-70969743800940418622009-12-29T11:20:00.000-08:002009-12-29T11:22:43.102-08:00And Now...A Word from the Prophets"At various times and in various different ways, God spoke through the prophets, saying <em>I know the plans I have in mind for you: plans for peace, not disaster</em>."<br /><br />As we head into this new year, may all things tend towards peace!Chironomohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13024533507945352862noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3174113522737244771.post-13856940621881653122009-12-15T09:33:00.001-08:002009-12-15T09:33:49.377-08:00Wondering...WonderingLooking at some new information about an issue of great interest to me. It is causing me to question everything I'm hearing from conventional sources on this issue. I'm excited because it (at least partially) re-affirms my views on this issue, but then I'm suspicious because even though this information is literally, "from the source", it is a bit contrary to what I've <em>heard </em>this same source say in the past on this very same issue.<br /><br />Making phone calls, sending e-mails and asking questions right now trying to figure it out.<br /><br />The issue is a proposed "catechetical program" for Pastoral Musicians and Priests that could be part of the implementation program for the new translation of the Missal. If you have any information...heard any rumors...or know anything about this program (or perhaps another program out there?) and would like to share what you know, please feel free to comment.Chironomohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13024533507945352862noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3174113522737244771.post-51543242135582477762009-12-11T13:09:00.000-08:002009-12-11T13:23:37.656-08:00A Simple SolutionThis appeared today in the Catholic World News summary:<br /><br /><em>The Catholic bishops of England and Wales have warned members of Parliament that a pending “equality bill” could create a crisis for the Catholic Church, because the legislation appears to demand equal opportunity for women and homosexuals to become priests. The legislation would exempt the Church if priests could be shown to spend most of their time either leading acts of worship or teaching Catholic doctrine. Otherwise, priests would be considered “employees,” and covered by the terms of the act, which prohibits discrimination against women, homosexuals, and others. The bishops, in a briefing, said that the bill could make it “unlawful to require a Catholic priest to be male, unmarried, or not in a civil partnership.”</em><br /><br />And so it says...<em>The legislation would exempt the Church if priests could be shown to spend most of their time either leading acts of worship or teaching Catholic doctrine</em>...so the solution would be what?Chironomohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13024533507945352862noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3174113522737244771.post-63807028060640573402009-12-08T05:22:00.001-08:002009-12-08T05:22:24.808-08:00The Ultimate Parish CouncilThis on Catholic World News...<br /><br /><em>In a newly published book, Cardinal Godfried Danneels of Brussels advances a proposal for a “<strong>papal council</strong>”—a group of senior prelates who would advise the Pope on key issues. This council would not hold any juridical power, the cardinal proposes, but would have “great moral authority.” <br /><br />Cardinal Danneels—<strong>who has long a favorite of liberal Catholics</strong>—makes the proposal in a book based on a series of interviews, in which he recalls his 30 years as the leading Catholic figure in Belgium. Cardinal Danneels released the book as he prepares to leave his post. Now 76 years old, he has submitted his resignation, and told reporters that he expects to be replaced early next year. <br /><br />The cardinal’s book, Confidences d’un cardinal, carries a preface by Herman Van Rompuy, the former Belgian prime minister who took office this week as the first president of the European Union.</em> <br /><br />OK... is there anybody who thinks this would be a good idea? Does the term "Council of Elders" come to mind? Would we have to re-name all Catholic Churches worldwide something like "St. Mary's Catho-Methodist Episcopal Church"?Chironomohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13024533507945352862noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3174113522737244771.post-86733858571433694982009-12-05T13:01:00.000-08:002009-12-05T18:32:28.449-08:00Why Contemporary Liturgical Music will PrevailAs we move forward as Church into the future, a future that will bring us a new translation of the Mass texts and all of the problems that will, no doubt be associated with having to accept new words to express our faith, a faith that has been eloquently expressed for the past 40 years in the cherished and beloved translation that has been used by an entire generation of Catholic faithful…as we move forward as Church into that future, no question is more important than what music will be used to express these new words of our faith, difficult and less eloquent though they be. Will there be a lurch back towards forcing the faithful to rehash the music of the past, in a language that they can’t understand without the accompaniments and instruments that they have come to expect and love? Or will there be a bold move to “<em>sing a new Church into being</em>” with a new music that expresses our aspirations as Church?<br /><br />I am convinced that it will be the latter, and for strong and demonstrable reasons. Two reasons actually: <em>superior texts and superior music</em>. It’s as simple as that. Because the reason for considering this question at all is the upcoming translation that we will soon be made to accept into our worship, the question of musical texts should be considered as primary.<br /><br />Although the music that had been used in Catholic worship for nearly 2000 years may seem to have at least some attachment to the liturgy (recall though, that this music was actually Contemporary music in the early Church!), there are some very obvious shortcomings that make it inappropriate for praising God today! Although the authors of many of these texts, even those drawn directly from scripture, are unknown to us, those texts for which there are attributions are most often known to have been composed by one of the so-called “Doctors of the Church” or other “Church Fathers”… men like Thomas Aquinas, Francis of Assisi and Cyprian of Carthage… certainly great men in their own regard, but men with little experience in living the faith as we do. Their Latin words may have a deep meaning for those who were <em>in the Church</em> throughout history, but what about for those who <em>are Church</em> now? For such people as we are today, we need texts that speak to us from our own experiences.<br /><br />The music of our time, on the other hand, brings a refreshed spirituality and new sense of meaning to our common prayer. As the Fathers of Vatican II removed the barrier of Latin completely from the liturgy<span style="color:#ff0000;">*</span> a wealth of new texts were composed and continue to be composed, not by some Church Fathers from long ago who spent their days isolated from real life in a Monastery, but by real people who live the faith daily within our own experience. Text-writers who, like you and I, work for large commercial publishing companies and who experience the aspirations of the faithful in their travels around the country as they host workshops and attend sales conventions which bring this music within our reach.<br /><br />Many of these text-writers have the added experience of having been Priests or religious Brothers and Sisters at one time, but who have gained the additional experience of living the life of the lay faithful by renouncing their vocations and going on to live lives of humble example, some as owners of their own Catholic publishing companies, others expressing their diversity through collaboration with their life-partners on new texts and music that bring their experiences into our prayer life. The difference that the sum of these experiences makes in the worthiness of texts can be clearly seen by comparison of two texts for the Vigil of Christmas, one an old worship text, the other a new worship text:<br /><br /><strong>Old Worship Text:</strong><br /><br /><em>Today you will know<br />that the Lord is coming to save us;<br />and tomorrow you will see his glory.<br /><br />O Shepherd of Israel, hear us;<br />you who lead Joseph like a flock,<br />and who are enthroned upon the Cherubim;<br />we beseech you to appear<br />before Ephraim, Benjamin and Manasseh.<br /><br />Tomorrow the sin of the land will be destroyed,<br />and the Savior of the world<br />will establish over us his kingdom.<br /><br />O Princes! Lift up your gates;<br />be lifted high, O eternal gates,<br />and the King of Glory shall make his entry! </em><br /><br /><strong>New Worship Text:</strong><br /><br /><em>Who would think that what was needed<br />to transform and save the earth<br />might not be a plan or army,<br />proud in purpose, proved in worth?<br />Who would think, despite derision<br />that a child should lead the way?<br />God surprises earth with heaven,<br />coming here on Christmas day.<br /><br />Centuries of skill and science<br />span the past from which we move,<br />yet experience questions whether,<br />with such progress we improve.<br />While the human lot we ponder<br />lest our hopes and humor fray<br />coming here on Christmas day. </em><br /><br /><em>Text: John L. Bell, b.1949<br />Tune: SCARLET RIBBONS, 8.7 8.7 English traditional arr. John H Bell b. 1949<br />©1987, Iona Community, GIA Publications Inc. sole agent</em><br /><br />The relevance of the new worship text to elements of our lived experience – armies, derision, skill, science, self-doubt, surprise – these speak to us of the coming of Christ in ways that the older text cannot possibly hope to with its older, Latinate images. This is an excellent example of how a contemporary text can enrich our prayer lives and allow us to go forth from our community and “bring the word to all nations” as we are called to by the Spirit of Vatican II.<span style="color:#ff0000;">**<br /></span><br />But while texts are perhaps primary, it is the musical settings themselves which give voice to Word and make the texts our own. The bold proclamation of the Second Vatican Council to move past the musical constraints of Gregorian Chant have allowed the development of music particularly suited to the depth of contemporary texts.<span style="color:#ff0000;">***</span> So unique and precious are these settings that an elaborate system of legal protections have been developed to avoid any detractions or modifications of them by less experienced but perhaps well meaning parish musicians, and to allow them to serve the additional purpose of recordings, concerts and other entertainment uses.<br /><br />The old chant settings, of course, had no need for such protection as they were generally confined to Catholic worship and had no entertainment value. This duality of purpose highlights the greater suitability of contemporary music for worship.<br />A simple comparison of two examples, one of the old fashioned liturgical style and one of a more contemporarily relevant setting can easily demonstrate to the listener which sounds more like a meaningful clothing of God’s Word, or other words as is the case in the second more relevant example.<br /><br /><strong>Old Fashioned Example:<br /></strong><br /><a href="http://www.christusrex.org/www2/cantgreg/cantus/hy_christe_redemptor.mp3"><em>Christe Redemptor</em><br /></a><br /><strong>Contemporary Example:<br /></strong><br /><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mXi5iq1zAl4"><em>Trading My Sorrows</em><br /></a><br /><br />It’s difficult to imagine how the contemporary ear would even be able to connect the first example to something sacred, let alone worship! The enthusiastic response of the audience that can be heard in the recording of the contemporary example also gives further credence to the argument that this is obviously the music more suited to prayer and reflection.<br /><br />And so, as I asked at the beginning of this examination; which music is the more likely to remain with our faith into the future? As we approach with some hesitation, and perhaps some mild dread, the abrupt and unprecedented changing of our beloved worship texts, we can at least feel comforted that the musical style that will give voice to our aspirations, that will build our collective spirit as Church, will be contemporary. With demonstrably superior text-writing and clearly audible musical dominance, the contemporary “genre” will prevail…of that we can be sure!<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><span style="color:#ff0000;"><em>*Many have made the claim that Sacrosanctum Concilium 36.1 – “Particular law remaining in force, the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites” can be somehow interpreted to mean that the Latin language is to be preserved in our worship services. This can be easily shown to be false since no Latin is used in our worship, and as such it is wrong to claim that we celebrate a “Latin Rite”.<br /><br />** Zeal for this particular mandate of the Council has been so great that many faithful, filled with the Spirit, now fight to get out to the parking lot first so that they may immediately begin living their faith, energized by the powerful message of contemporary texts such as that given in the above example.<br /><br />***Again, many have made the claim that Sacrosanctum Concilium #116 – “The Church acknowledges Gregorian chant as specially suited to the Roman liturgy: therefore, other things being equal, it should be given pride of place in liturgical services” as meaning that Chant should be given pride of place in the Mass. This is obviously a misleading directive since there is no chant in the Mass, and so it apparently applies to other liturgical services such as the Sung Divine Office like you might hear at a monastery or other non-church location.</em></span>Chironomohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13024533507945352862noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3174113522737244771.post-7209785948970155642009-11-23T07:09:00.000-08:002009-11-23T07:35:10.674-08:00Watch for it...The forces that want to stop the now-unstoppable forward motion of liturgical reform are in a panic. They have resorted to a <a href="http://chironomo.blogspot.com/2009/11/and-survey-says.html">hearsay "populism</a>" (most people think...nobody wants...etc...etc..) to try and stop the movement now that the new translation is assuredly on its way and at least a tentative date has been given for the day when all parishes will begin using it.<br /><br />The efforts have been targeted at the Bishops for the last several years. Now that has failed, and the final front in this lost war is with the Catholic faithful themselves...convincing them that they don't want a new translation which they know nothing about except what the opponents tell them. We will see polls about the lack of support for it. We will see polls about people's satisfaction with the current translation (who wouldn't be "satisfied" with a translation they've used for 40 years?). The effort will be made to appeal to the same principle as was demonstrated in <em>Summorum Pontificum</em>, where those who prefer the 1962 Missal are allowed to freely use the Extraordinary Form of the Mass. The cry will go out to allow the use of the old translation for those who are "attached" to it. Mark my words.<br /><br />Our love of democracy runs deep in the United States, and one of the conflicts increasingly presented to American Catholics is the necessary realization that democracy has no place in faith, at least not in this way. We cannot "vote" on what is right, and it is not our "right as Catholics" to have a voice in forming Church doctrine. The Bishop, or Pastor or Priest that continues to appeal to "what the people want", whether it's about the new translation or any other facet of reform for that matter, will eventually find themselves trapped in a hole from which there is no escape... a hole that leads them, and their faithful, further and further away.Chironomohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13024533507945352862noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3174113522737244771.post-10540934149648798452009-11-20T09:26:00.000-08:002009-11-20T09:33:42.114-08:00And the Survey Says....<div align="justify">This week saw the final passage of the last section of the new translation of the Missale Romanum by the USCCB at their Synod in Baltimore. There was some drama surrounding the final vote (<a href="http://chironomo.blogspot.com/2009/11/bishop-antiphons-and-new-translation.html">see HERE</a>), but in the end it was passed nearly unanimously and now proceeds to Rome for any final changes to be made by the Holy See, and for final recognitio. After that, it will be on its way to publishing houses and then on to Catholic parishes across the English speaking world. A “leaked” memo tells us also that the implementation date may have been moved up from November 2011 to April 2011.<br /><br />In the words of Jerry Galipeau (WLP)…” So, folks, this is going to happen. No more ‘what ifs’ at this point.”.<br /><br />But now begins the hard work – <em>Implementation</em>. Essentially, the drama we saw this week at the USCCB, Bp. Trautman vs. Cardinal George, will now be repeated in every parish across the country. The loud, whining voices of opposition will be raised to every Pastor and priest. “<em>If we make these changes</em>”…I can hear them already…”<em>I’ll just have to LEAVE THE CHURCH!!”</em><br /><br />I’m making light of this, but it’s really no laughing matter. <em>This will happen</em>. Once again, some people will think that they have a say in whether or not the Pastor implements the new translation, and they’ll use every tactic in the “Spirit of Vatican II” playbook to strong-arm the poor man into going against Church teaching and instead adopting a sort of tyranny of the whiny.<br /><br />But just what is the Pastor thinking when he makes decisions based on complaints from what is, essentially, a very small but vocal minority of the faithful in a parish? There are many reasons, among them the desire to avoid confrontation and a sense of guilt over the rather authoritarian history of the Church that makes Pastors feel that they have to listen to what “the people” think on every issue, even if those thoughts are most often dissenting and rarely in support of church teachings. But whereas the “voice of the people” may have a legitimate role in some decisions at a parish…whether to take on a major capital campaign or perhaps to buy a new organ or not…there are other decisions for which “the people” have no legitimate claim to having a role. Among these are matters that have already been decided by the Church hierarchy, such as the implementation of the new translation. In such cases, even the Pastor’s decision is limited to how to implement these changes, not whether or not to implement them. The people out in the pews may have an opinion but they have no choice, and Pastors need to understand this distinction as we approach the day when they will have to face their parishioners and let them know this in no uncertain terms.<br /><br />It will be interesting to see how this plays out. During the past several years, we’ve seen a sort of “trial-run” of this with the movement towards re-introducing Latin and re-establishing chant and sacred music in the liturgy. Both of these are decisions that have already been made “higher up”, and which have been clearly and eloquently articulated in Sacramentum Caritatis at the very highest level, and in the USCCB document Sing to the Lord: Music in Divine Worship at the local level. And yet most parishes have been slow to adopt these “recommendations” regardless of how strong they are because of a few very loud complaints – “<em>Oh Father, PLEEEZE… I’ll just have to leave the Church if we go back to using Latin</em>!!” or worse yet the completely unfounded claim …”<em>If we sing chant, then the people won't be able to participate</em>” even though every study yet made as well as an overwhelming compilation of anecdotal evidence strongly supports the fact that people participate MORE in the singing of chant at Mass than in the singing of songs and hymns (try chanting the <em>Our Father </em>at Mass and see what happens…). Perhaps the Pastors of such parishes would rather wait until it becomes a “no-choice” mandate, thereby taking it out of their hands, but if this trial-run is any indication, we are in for a very rough road ahead in a year or two.<br /><br />The solution, of course, is to have just such a strong, forceful and unequivocal mandate from the top…a sort of “offer you can’t refuse” from the Godfather himself. No option to continue using the old translation… for whatever reason. Recall all old books. Mandate that all publications of worship resources by all publishers use the new translation as of the date of implementation. Leave no choice for the Pastor, and they can offer no choice to the parishioners. The same solution would work equally well for the Latin and chant issues. Take the decision away in its entirety and leave only the desired option as the single possibility. If the <em>Sanctus</em> is supposed to be chanted in Latin, then prohibit the composition of vernacular settings and prohibit their publication. There will, of course be the die-hard dissenters (such as those parishes that allow liturgical dance, female homilists and the such) but by and large, the church will follow where the head leads us, even if it is kicking and screaming.<br /><br />Will some people actually leave the Church? You bet. There are those who just don’t like to be told what to do, particularly if it’s something they disagree with. But that’s the price to be paid for espousing the truth with authority…it can’t be determined by survey and there will always be those who won’t accept it. Those who remain and completely submit to that authority are, and always have been, part of its domain. Those who resist it and leave never were.<br /><br />So as we enter into this time of transition, we need to keep an open mind…so open in fact that we can understand clearly that "ours is not to question, but to submit".<br /><br />Jesus asked his disciples “will you also leave?” and they responded “Lord, to whom shall we go?”<br /><br />The church doesn’t need our opinion. Get over it. </div>Chironomohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13024533507945352862noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3174113522737244771.post-50045163623285995182009-11-19T13:45:00.001-08:002009-11-19T13:45:47.111-08:00The Bishop, The Antiphons, and the New TranslationThis past week many Catholic bloggers and journalists have been following the drama of the USCCB Bishops Synod in Baltimore. Although there are a number of important and interesting issues being discussed and voted on, most of the attention has been on the final vote on the new translation of the Missal. This particular issue became even more dramatic with a last minute effort by Bp. Donald Trautman (Erie PA) to derail the final vote by bringing up an issue that had heretofore gone unnoticed. It seems that the Antiphons had been left out of the translation project, or rather, it had been removed and appropriated by the Holy See and the CDW.<br /><br />Bp. Trautmann argued that the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy (<em>Sacrosanctum Concillium</em>) specifically delegated to the Bishops conferences the responsibility for translations of texts that are to be used in the liturgy, and as such the Antiphons would have to be translated, amended and overseen by the USCCB before they could be submitted to the Holy See for <em>recognitio</em>. Cardinal George, the Chair of the USCCB, informed Bp. Trautman that the translation of the Antiphons had been appropriated by the CDW, and that they would be included in the final version of the Missal even though the Bishops would not have the opportunity to vote on them. Cardinal George noted that this was a legitimate action and well within the rights of the Holy See as outlined in <em>Sacrosanctum Concilium</em>.<br /><br />In a bold and perhaps admirable move, Bp. Trautmann made a motion to have the translation of the Antiphons re-delegated to the Bishops conference, a move that would delay the implementation of the new translation for at least a year, possibly two. Many observers suggested that this was the actual motive, rather than any desire to be involved in the translation of the Antiphons… texts which are not currently used in most US parishes. The motion was defeated…roundly…193-20 against adoption. And so, the last stand to stop the implementation of the new translation apparently failed, and the final draft of the translation of the Propers for the Saints was voted on and passed, and the whole Missal project now goes to Rome to receive final changes and the recognitio by the Holy See. In a rather indicative moment, Cardinal George reminded all of the Bishops that this was the last opportunity for the Bishops Conference to have any input on the translation. And with that, the drama surrounding the new translation appeared to be concluded.<br /><br />The media coverage of this particular issue focused on the efforts by Bp. Trautman to scuttle or at least stall the translation project, and most of the analysis looked forward to what would happen now and the timeline from here on in. But with the focus on Bp. Trautman’s attempts to stall the project, something important may have been overlooked. A very important piece of news (although it was not necessarily being kept secret) came to the forefront in a context that I hadn’t considered it in up to now. By Cardinal George’s own admission, the translation of the Antiphons had been appropriated by the CDW and the Holy See and would be included in the new translation of the <em>Missale Romanum</em>. Perhaps this was just a situation that Bp. Trautman was seeking to exploit as a way of stalling the project long enough to allow for more negative public commentary as he has been doing for a few years now. Or perhaps there is more to this news that could shed some light on what impact the new translation will have on liturgical music.<br /><br />Turn back the clock to 2001 and the promulgation of <em>Liturgiam Authenticam </em>(LA), a document that is often cited in connection with the new translation, as well as a document that was strongly objected to by Bp. Trautman from the day it was issued. Although LA is a universally applicable document for the translation of liturgical texts, it is generally thought that it was specifically intended for the English translation, and even more specifically for the Church in the United States. There are a few passages in LA that seem out of place and give some credence to the suggestion that the document is even more specifically intended as parameters for this specific translation into English .<br /><br />One such passage is LA 108:<br /><br /><span style="color:#000099;"><em>108. Sung texts and liturgical hymns have a particular importance and efficacy. Especially on Sunday, the “Day of the Lord”, the singing of the faithful gathered for the celebration of Holy Mass, no less than the prayers, the readings and the homily, express in an authentic way the message of the Liturgy while fostering a sense of common faith and communion in charity. [78] If they are used widely by the faithful, they should remain relatively fixed so that confusion among the people may be avoided. <strong>Within five years from the publication of this Instruction, the Conferences of Bishops, necessarily in collaboration with the national and diocesan Commissions and with other experts, shall provide for the publication of a directory or repertory of texts intended for liturgical singing.</strong> This document shall be transmitted for the necessary recognitio to the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments.</em><br /></span><br />The bolded passage is significant. If LA is a general application document on translation, why is there a directive to complete this very specific task within 5 years from the publication of the instruction? That would be 2006. Such a mandate would be meaningless outside of the context of the proposed English translation. LA then further mandates that this <em>repertoire of texts for liturgical singing </em>shall be transmitted to the CDW for recognitio. Keep that in mind as we continue.<br /><br />When LA was first promulgated, a few commentators asked a question that may have seemed obscure and maybe slightly laughable at the time. Why require the Bishops to compile a <em>repertoire of texts for liturgical singing </em>to be approved by Rome? Nobody then took seriously the idea that such a thing would even be possible given the stranglehold that commercial publishing has on the creation of ever new texts and tunes for church. And if such a repertoire of texts was a mere formality, then there was already a complete repertoire of such sung liturgical texts in existence. They are called the Antiphons.<br /><br />But the Antiphons that were translated into English and included in the 1972 Missal were intended to be <em>spoken</em>, not <em>sung</em>…an omission that is thought to have contributed significantly to their sudden and thorough disappearance from the liturgy after Vatican II as they were quickly replaced with vernacular hymns or songs. What would have been needed then was a translation of the Antiphons from the <em>Graduale Romanum </em>set to either traditional melodies or perhaps Psalm-Tones so that they could be easily sung. Interestingly, that is exactly what was done with the Ordinary Texts that are now to be included in the new translation when published. Keep that in mind as well as we continue.<br /><br />Move forward from 2001 to 2006…the deadline for submission of the <em>repertoire of texts for liturgical singing</em>. In November of 2006, the Bishops Committee on the Liturgy (now the Committee on Divine Worship) voted on and submitted a document called the <em>Directory for Music and the Liturgy </em>(DML), supposedly in fulfillment of the requirements of LA #108. Even on the surface, it was obvious to most observers that this document, a set of guidelines for approval of individual songs to be included in hymnals and worship resources, was not even close to what was called for in LA #108. The Directory was submitted to the Holy See for recognitio, but was never approved or acted upon in any way. The Bishops Committee on the Liturgy did not seem to be the least bit concerned. It began to look as though the DML was a stalling tactic to put off the mandated creation of a list of approved texts that would effectively restrict much of the commercially published music currently used at Mass. Keep that in mind as we continue.<br /><br />And who was the Chair of the Bishop’s Committee on the Liturgy that proposed the <em>Directory for Music and the Liturgy </em>instead of an actual list of approved texts? That would be <strong>Bishop Donald Trautman</strong>. Definitely keep that in mind as we continue.<br /><br />In early 2007, the USCCB rather unexpectedly undertook a complete re-write of <em>Music in Catholic Worship</em> at the behest of the CDW. Their stated reason for requesting this overhaul was to bring <em>Music in Catholic Worship </em>into conformity with the actual documents of Vatican II and their specific directives for liturgical music. From the beginning it was clear that MCW was so heavily flawed that a completely new document would be needed. The new document, <em>Sing to the Lord-Music in Divine Worship </em>(SttL) was far more comprehensive and detailed (110 pages vs. 10 pages) and contained some rather startling passages.<br /><br />Among the more striking :<br /><br /><span style="color:#000099;">•Participation in the Sacred Liturgy must be “internal, in the sense that by it the<br />faithful join their mind to what they pronounce or hear, and cooperate with heavenly grace.” <strong>Even when listening to the various prayers and readings of the Liturgy or to the singing of the choir, the assembly continues to participate actively </strong>as they “unite themselves interiorly to what the ministers or choir sing, so that by listening to them they may raise their minds to God.” (SttL 12)</span><br /><br /><span style="color:#000099;">•The importance of the priest’s participation in the Liturgy, especially by singing, cannot be overemphasized. (SttL 19)</span><br /><br /><span style="color:#000099;">•Programs of diaconal preparation should include major and compulsory courses in the chant and song of the Liturgy. (SttL 23)</span><br /><br /><span style="color:#000099;">•Familiarity with a <strong>stable repertoire of liturgical songs </strong>rich in theological content can deepen the faith of the community through repetition and memorization.(SttL 27)<br /><br />•The Second Vatican Council directed that the faithful be able to sing parts of the<br />Ordinary of the Mass together in Latin. In many worshiping communities in the United States, fulfilling this directive will mean introducing Latin chant to worshipers who perhaps have not sung it before. (SttL 74)<br /><br />• Each worshiping community in the United States, including all age groups and all<br />ethnic groups, should, at a minimum, learn Kyrie XVI, Sanctus XVIII, and Agnus Dei XVIII, all of which are typically included in congregational worship aids. More difficult chants, such as Gloria VIII and settings of the Credo and Pater Noster, might be learned after the easier chants have been mastered. (SttL 75)</span><br /><br />And then, there were these three passages that raised more than a few eyebrows:<br /><br /><span style="color:#000099;">• “The assembly of the faithful should <strong>participate in singing the Propers of the Mass as much as possible</strong>, especially through simple responses and other suitable settings.”When the congregation does not sing an antiphon or hymn, proper chants from the <em>Graduale Romanum </em>might be sung by a choir that is able to render these challenging pieces well. As an easier alternative, chants of the Graduale Simplex are recommended. Whenever a choir sings in Latin, it is helpful to provide the congregation with a vernacular translation so that they are able to “unite themselves interiorly” to what the choir sings. (SttL 76)<br /><br />• The Entrance and Communion antiphons are found in their proper place in the Roman Missal. Composers seeking to create vernacular translations of the appointed antiphons and psalms may also draw from the Graduale Romanum, either in their entirety or in shortened refrains for the congregation or choir. (SttL 77)<br /><br />• Proper antiphons from the liturgical books are to be esteemed and used especially because they are the very voice of God speaking to us in the Scriptures. Here, “the Father who is in heaven comes lovingly to meet his children, and talks with them. And such is the force and power of the Word of God that it can serve the Church as her support and vigor, and the children of the Church as strength for their faith, food for the soul, and a pure and lasting fount of spiritual life.” (SttL 117)</span><br /><br />For many Catholic musicians, this was the first time they had ever heard of the Sung Propers or of Antiphons in general. To suggest that the Propers be sung by the assembly would be unheard of. The reaction was most often one of puzzlement: How can the Propers (particularly the Entrance and Communion Antiphons) be sung in English when there is no English translation of the Antiphons from the <em>Graduale Romanum</em>, and there are no vernacular settings? SttL does give the option of singing the Latin chants from the <em>Graduale</em>, but it clearly envisions the assembly singing the Antiphons in English at some point in the future. And these are directives coming from the USCCB at the behest of the CDW. Keep this in mind as we continue on…<br /><br />And so we can make a brief summary:<br /><br />1. LA mandated the creation of a <em>repertoire of texts for liturgical singing </em>within 5 years. The inclusion of this mandate in a document guiding the translation of the Missal would lead to the conclusion that this repertoire of texts was to be included in the proposed new Missal translation.<br /><br />2. In 2006, the BCL under the leadership of Bishop Donald Trautman proposes a document, the <em>Directory for Music and the Liturgy</em>, ostensibly to fulfill this mandate, but more likely as a tactic to delay the creation of a restrictive list of texts for use at Mass. The DML was submitted but never approved or responded to, leaving it to the Holy See to either request a new document <strong>or to appropriate to themselves the creation of such a document</strong>.<br /><br />3. In 2007, the CDW requests the rewriting of the music guidelines for Diocese of the United States to include instructions to begin the organized introduction of Latin chant at Mass, as well as <em>directions for the use of Sung Propers and Antiphons in English</em>, neither of which exists yet.<br /><br />And this brings us to November of 2009…this past week. We learned that the Holy See and the CDW had appropriated the translation of the Antiphons to themselves, to be included in the new Missal. But it was clear from the discussion that the Bishops had never seen the Antiphons as part of the project, meaning that the CDW and Holy See had most likely appropriated them from the beginning of the project.<br /><br />Remember that LA mandates that a <em>repertoire of texts for liturgical singing </em>be included as part of the approved texts of the Missal. The Bishops Committee on the Liturgy was charged with submitting this repertoire but instead submitted mere guidelines which were rejected. About this same time, the Holy See and the CDW apparently began work on translating the Antiphons, and soon after ordered the rewriting of the music guidelines for the United States to include the singing of the Proper Antiphons as a priority going forwards.<br /><br />And now that the final actions are being taken on the new translation, word comes out that the Holy See and CDW have been in charge of translating the Antiphons all along, and that they will be included as approved texts. Since the Antiphons have to be translated, we might well suppose that these are the Antiphons from the <em>Graduale</em>, or perhaps they are new translations of the Missal Antiphons intended to be sung.<br /><br />But the big question is this: Will this collection of Antiphons being worked on by the Holy See and the CDW be the <em>repertoire of texts for liturgical singing </em>required by Liturgiam Authenticam? Perhaps the answer to this question can be discerned by considering just who reacted most strongly to the news that the Holy See and CDW had approprited them: the same Bishop Donald Trautman who had sidestepped work on an approved repertoire just three years earlier.<br /><br />Of course, we will have to wait to find out the answer to that very important question. At stake is whether we will have the status quo of vernacular hymns and songs based on unapproved texts, or setting of the actual Antiphons sung in the future. There may be some clues at the upcoming meeting of Artists and Musicians with Pope Benedict on November 21st. At that time, he is expected to discuss the need for a greater continuity with the past traditions of the Church in liturgical art and music. I for one will be listening closely to what he has to say on this topic. Stay tuned…Chironomohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13024533507945352862noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3174113522737244771.post-58825957999148073952009-11-05T08:51:00.000-08:002009-11-05T09:04:09.746-08:00Makes You Say "Hmmm..." - Part IIThe Pope has been speaking a lot lately about historical instances of theological discussion within the Church and their consequences. He seems to be emphasizing that, historically, such discussions arise when things are unclear, or when there is no definitive teaching from the Magisterium on the issues being discussed. In such cases the point of theological debate is always to strike a balance between Revelation and reason (Tradition handed down and interpretation). Most interesting in the following example is Benedicts assertion that when such a balance fails or falls into error “ it is then up to the Magisterium to exercise that necessary service to truth which is its task".<br /><br />Now what exactly might he be talking about?<br /><br />My <strong>emphasis</strong> and <span style="color:#ff0000;">comments</span><br /><br />VATICAN CITY, 4 NOV 2009 (VIS) - Benedict XVI dedicated his catechesis during this morning's general audience to the twelfth-century debate between St. Bernard of Clairvaux and Abelard, proponents, respectively, of the <strong>monastic and scholastic approaches to theology</strong>.<span style="color:#ff0000;"> [faith vs. reason]</span><br /><br />The Pope began by recalling that theology "is the search for a rational understanding (in as much as that is possible) of the mysteries of Christian revelation, which are believed by faith, the faith that seeks intelligibility". Yet, "<strong>while St. Bernard places the emphasis on faith</strong> Abelard insists on <strong>understanding by reason</strong>. [<span style="color:#ff0000;">notice that Benedict is building an example that becomes relevant to reflection on the issue of continuity (faith/tradition) vs. rupture (reason/modernism) but resists making the analogy….yet)<br /></span><br />"For Bernard", the Holy Father added, "faith itself is endowed with an intimate certainty, founded on the <strong>testimony of Scripture and on the teaching of the Fathers of the Church</strong> <span style="color:#ff0000;">[the definition of Tradition as the foundation of Faith].</span> <strong>In cases of doubt or ambiguity</strong> <span style="color:#ff0000;">[here comes the setup]</span> faith is protected and illuminated by the <strong>exercise of ecclesial Magisterium</strong>". <span style="color:#ff0000;">[So…Benedict is saying that in instances of doubt or ambiguity, it is the role of the Magisterium to step in and clarify Church teaching so as to protect the Faith from error]</span> Thus, for the abbot of Clairvaux, "theology has a single goal, that of promoting the living and intimate experience of God".<br /><br />"Abelard, who among other things introduced the term 'theology' as we understand it today, originally studied philosophy then applied the results achieved in this discipline to theology"[<span style="color:#ff0000;">so Abelard applied philosophic principles…reason…to theology and this led to problems]</span> He had a "religious spirit but a restless personality, and his life was rich in dramatic events: he <strong>challenged his teachers</strong> <span style="color:#ff0000;">(dissent)</span> and had a child by a cultured and intelligent woman, Eloise. ... He also suffered ecclesiastical condemnations, although he <strong>died in full communion with the Church to whose authority he submitted with a spirit of faith</strong>". <span style="color:#ff0000;">[Abelard submitted…to the authority of the Church…and so achieved full communion, unity, with her]<br /><br /></span>"An excessive use of philosophy rendered Abelard's Trinitarian doctrine dangerously fragile", said the Pope. "Likewise, in the field of morals his teaching was not without ambiguity as he insisted on considering the intention of the subject as the only source for describing the goodness or malice of moral acts, ignoring the objective moral significance and value of actions.<br /><br /><span style="color:#ff0000;">[Benedict now makes the analogy that he resisted making at the beginning]<br /></span><br />"This aspect", Benedict XVI went on, "is <strong>highly relevant for our own age</strong>, in which culture often seems marked by a growing tendency to <strong>ethical relativism</strong>. Nonetheless, we must not forget the great merits of Abelard, who made a <strong>decisive contribution to the development of scholastic theology</strong>. Nor must we undervalue some of his insights such as, for example, his <strong>affirmation that non-Christian religious traditions already contain some form of preparation to welcome Christ, the Divine Word</strong>. <span style="color:#ff0000;">[Abelard sounds quite a bit like Vatican II….while Bernard seems to represent Tradition…Hmmm?]<br /></span><br />"What can we learn from the <strong>confrontation between Bernard[Tradition?] and Abelard [Vatican II?]</strong> and, more generally, between the monastic and scholastic approaches to theology?" the Holy Father asked. "Firstly", he went on, "I believe it shows the usefulness and need for <strong>healthy theological discussion within the Church</strong> <span style="color:#ff0000;">[like some discussions that began in October?]</span>, especially when the questions being debated have not been defined by the Magisterium <span style="color:#ff0000;">[like many of the issues arising from interpretations of Vatican II],</span> which, nonetheless, remains an ineluctable point of reference". <span style="color:#ff0000;">[IOW, the Magisterium will be the final word if and when it is exercised]<br /></span><br />"In the theological field there must be a balance between what we may call <strong>architectonic principles</strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">,[Tradition]</span> which are given to us by the Revelation and which, hence, <strong>always maintain their priority and importance</strong>, and <strong>interpretative principles suggested by philosophy </strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">[can you say “Spirit of Vatican II?]</span> (that is, by reason), which have an important function, but only an instrumental one. <strong>When this balance fails</strong>, theological reflection risks becoming marred by error and <strong>it is then up to the Magisterium to exercise that necessary service to truth which is its task</strong>". <span style="color:#ff0000;">[Ba Da Bing…there it is!]<br /></span><br />"The theological dispute between Bernard and Abelard <strong>concluded with a full reconciliation</strong>. ... What prevailed in both men was<strong> that which we must have to heart whenever a theological controversy arises</strong>: that is, <strong>defending the faith of the Church</strong> and ensuring <strong>the triumph of truth</strong> in charity".<br /><br />>>><br /><br />WOW! I have frequently commented on Pope Benedicts narratives, and it is often his method to use historical events to teach about the issues of today. I usually add a caveat though, and note that he seems to be talking about this or that, and that a particular story seems to be related to an issue being discussed today.<br /><br />I am making no such caveat today. This narrative is about the discussions between the Church and the SSPX which began in October. It is a clarification of what these talks are about, and it very clearly defines how these talks will conclude. But everything is not as it seems. The analogy is a <em>perfect one</em>, but not necessarily an <em>obvious one</em>, and it reveals something very striking about these discussions and how Pope Benedict sees them.<br /><br />Firstly, we have to ask <em>who is Bernard</em>, and <em>who is Abelard</em> in this analogy? We might first want to make the obvious and simple distinction…Bernard is “The Church” and Abelard is the “Dissenter” who reconciles and comes into full communion through submission. If we accept that, then Bernard is the Holy See, and Abelard is the SSPX in the recently begun discussions, the goal being to have the SSPX eventually submit to the Church teachings and return to full communion. It would be a neat analogy, but one which I believe to be wrong. I say that because I’m not entirely sure that the Holy See and the SSPX are really on opposite sides of the issues being discussed. There may be some nuanced distinctions in their positions, but it seems to me that <em>both are in opposition</em> to what Benedict refers to as the “Hermeneutic of Rupture”. I think the analogy is this:<br /><br /><em>Bernard is the SSPX</em> (the reference to Bp. Bernard Fellay is a bit eerie), the defender of Faith and Tradition. Abelard is not Vatican II, as we might want to immediately assume, but rather he is the so called <em>Spirit of Vatican II</em>… the result of philosophy and modernity being used as lenses of interpretation. Like the Spirit of Vatican II, his work has led to some good…. the development of scholastic theology and the affirmation that non-Christian religious traditions already contain some form of preparation to welcome Christ, the Divine Word, in other words ecumenism. But, the over application of reason left Abelard’s concept of the Trinity “dangerously fragile”, much like the “Spirit of Vatican II” has left core doctrines of the Church dangerously fragile.<br /><br />So, Bernard (The SSPX) and Abelard (The Spirit of Vatican II) engage in discussions, the point of which is to defend the faith of the Church and ensure the triumph of truth. And where is the Holy See in this analogy? It is (both figuratively and literally) the Magisterium…ready to exercise that necessary service to truth which is its task. And that is what the outcome of these talks will be. The truth will be discerned through the lens of Tradition, the Magisterium will clarify this truth, and Abelard (The Spirit of Vatican II) will give up his errors and wayward behavior and come into full communion with the Church through submission to the Magisterium.<br /><br />I know that this leaves up in the air the obvious loose end… namely that the SSPX is NOT in full communion with the Holy See, while the “Spirit of Vatican II” is. That is true, for now at least. But what happens once the Magisterium has clarified the issues of contention? Who will be in dissent then? Who will represent the actual faith of the Church, and who will be in opposition?Chironomohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13024533507945352862noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3174113522737244771.post-90255415714631991492009-11-03T12:01:00.001-08:002009-11-03T12:01:43.387-08:00A Convergence of "Things"Liturgiam Authenticam, <br />Chirograph on Sacred Music, <br />The New Translation of the Missal, <br />Cardinal Arinze’s Letter to the USCCB Bishops, <br />The Reformation of ICEL, <br />The Rejection of the Inclusive Language Proposals, <br />Pope Benedict XVI, <br />A New Master of Ceremonies, <br />Sacramentum Caritatis, <br />The Hermeneutic of Continuity, <br />The Rejection of The Directory for Music in the Liturgy, <br />Sing To The Lord: Music in Divine Worship, <br />Summorum Pontificum, <br />The Resurgence of Chant, <br />Critical Appointments to the Curia, <br />The Benedictine Altar Arrangement, <br />Ad Orientem Celebrations by Pope Benedict,<br />Ad Orientem Celebrations by Bishops around the World, <br />The Lifting of Excommunications of SSPX Bishops, <br />The Anglican Provision, <br />Formal Talks with the SSPX….<br /><br />And this is just some of what has happened in the last 8 years. <br /><br />What others can you come up with? <br /><br />Got the feeling that something is up?Chironomohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13024533507945352862noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3174113522737244771.post-45117141578709400502009-10-29T13:24:00.000-07:002009-10-30T07:20:40.654-07:00Benedictine Altar Update!I have a picture of the Ordinations on October 24th at the Cathedral of the Epihpany, Venice Florida. In it, you can see the Benedictine Altar arrangement on full display!<br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiJz3zOUd7MKA197Aop3bvPSzCOzMTHOyjDy-vaXZd5kAYmMrFfCmgjQS0o33vBu8H8zjLbYjtV_SKuEay3U7O-CmL0TEAWyJ_6BuyLS0xnOJRcOT9J6RjAx6onVqk7mQ6Ie8QlSaXNzESl/s1600-h/ordination091024_260.jpg"><img style="WIDTH: 266px; HEIGHT: 183px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5398121135555140354" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiJz3zOUd7MKA197Aop3bvPSzCOzMTHOyjDy-vaXZd5kAYmMrFfCmgjQS0o33vBu8H8zjLbYjtV_SKuEay3U7O-CmL0TEAWyJ_6BuyLS0xnOJRcOT9J6RjAx6onVqk7mQ6Ie8QlSaXNzESl/s200/ordination091024_260.jpg" /></a><br /><br />This was a "first" for the Diocese at a major event such as this.<br /><br />You can see the <a href="http://www.thefloridacatholic.org/ven/2009_ven/2009_venarticles/20091028_ven_ordination.php">complete slideshow here</a>.<br /><br />If things can change here in Venice Florida, they can change ANYWHERE!Chironomohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13024533507945352862noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3174113522737244771.post-6738356773353021052009-10-28T07:17:00.000-07:002009-10-28T07:36:45.203-07:00Makes You Say "Hmmm..."<div align="justify">It has been the case with Pope Benedict so far in his pontificate that he puts ideas "out there" in the form of history lessons...showing how where we are and what we are doing <em>now</em> can be guided by where we have been and what we have done <em>in the past</em>. I can't help but draw some interesting conclusions from today's General Audience. Why is he saying this right now...makes you say "Hmmm..." </div><div align="justify"> </div><div align="justify">(My <strong>emphasis</strong>)<br /><br /><span style="color:#000099;">LATIN THEOLOGY FLOURISHED IN THE 12TH CENTURY<br /><br />VATICAN CITY, 28 OCT 2009 (VIS) - During this Wednesday's General Audience celebrated in</span></div><div align="justify"><span style="color:#000099;">St. Peter's Square the Pope spoke about <strong>a series of events that, during the twelfth century,created a renaissance in Latin theology</strong>.<br /><br />"During this time," he explained, "a relative peace reigned in Western Europe, which ensured society's economic development, consolidated political structures, and favored vibrant cultural activity <strong>thanks also to contact with the East</strong>. The benefits of the vast movement known as the Gregorian Reform were felt in the Church, which led to "a greater evangelical purity in the Church, <strong>above all in the clergy</strong>" and <strong>an expansion of religious life</strong>. As fruits of this development,figures such as St. Thomas and St. Bonaventure would appear in the thirteen century.<br /><br />Benedict XVI affirmed that in this context two different models of theology arose: that of "<strong>monastic theology</strong>" and that of "scholastic theology". Regarding the first, the monks "were devoted to the Sacred Scriptures and one of their main activities consisted in lectio divina, that is, a meditative reading of the Bible". <strong>It was precisely the 2008 Synod of Bishops on "the Word of God in the Life and the Mission of the Church" that recalled the importance of this aspect</strong>.<br /><br />"As monastic theology is listening to the Word of God", he said, "it is necessary to purify one's heart to welcome it and, above all, one must be full of fervor to encounter the Lord. Theology therefore becomes meditation, prayer, a song of praise, and the impetus for sincere conversion".<br /><br />The Holy Father emphasized that "it is important to reserve a certain time each day for meditation on the Bible so that the Word of God will be the lamp that illuminates our daily path on earth".<br /><br />Continuously referring to the method of "scholastic theology", the Pope pointed out that "it is not easy for modern mentality to understand. <strong>The quaestio, which consisted of a theme for discussion," was essential to its process.</strong><br /><br />"<strong>The organization of the quaestiones led to the compilation of evermore extensive syntheses, the so-called summae that were vast dogmatic-theological treatises</strong>. Scholastic theology sought to present the unity and harmony of Christian Revelation with a method, called precisely scholastic', that grants faith in human reason".<br /><br />Benedict XVI concluded <strong>by emphasizing that "faith and reason, in reciprocal dialogue, tremble with joy when they are both animated by the search for intimate union with God</strong>. ... Truth is sought with humility, welcomed with wonder and gratitude: in a word, knowledge only grows if one loves the truth".</span></div><div align="justify"><span style="color:#000099;"></span> </div><div align="justify"><span style="color:#000000;">So...in today's news: Continuing discussions with the Eastern Churches...The Year for Priests...The 2008 Synod for Bishops...serious questions and discussions concerning theology with the SSPX<em>...</em></span></div><div align="justify"> </div><div align="justify">Why is he telling us this particular story <em>right now</em>...is he looking towards a second "Gregorian Reform"?</div>Chironomohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13024533507945352862noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3174113522737244771.post-91778257699605058762009-10-24T14:37:00.000-07:002009-10-24T14:42:11.799-07:00The Benedictine Arrangement Comes To Venice!Venice Florida, that is! The "Benedictine Arrangement" of the altar made it's first big debut here at the Ordination Mass on Saturday, October 24th at the Epiphany Cathedral in Venice. This date is also significant in that it is the 25th Anniversary of the Diocese of Venice. I will hopefully be able to post photos of the altar here as soon as they are available (I was in the choir, and so was unable to get any pictures).Chironomohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13024533507945352862noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3174113522737244771.post-19966202392758084992009-10-21T08:05:00.000-07:002009-10-21T08:10:02.630-07:00Diocesan Music CommitteeSitting at our Diocesan Music Committee meeting right now... reminded about how inefficient anything involving a committee can be. <br /><br />Confusion reigns regarding the workshops for the upcoming new translation...nobody seems to know what's going on.Chironomohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13024533507945352862noreply@blogger.com0