This Saturday, September 5th at 10:30AM will be my first "Introduction Session" for all of our choirs and cantors to learn the Mass XVIII Chants. I've put together a brief introductory packet that presents relevant quotes from Paul VI, John Paul II, Pope Benedict XVI and the USCCB Document Sing To The Lord concerning the use of chant in the liturgy.
Part of me says "Mass XVIII is so simple that there's no way that this could be a problem".... and part of me says that the perception of chant as being "foreign" or "difficult" may be so ingrained during the past 40 years that there could be difficulty where there shouldn't be.
This is a separate issue from the ideological objections... those I expect.
Wednesday, September 2, 2009
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
The Music That Never Was
The following has been prepared for a presentation to be given at our Diocesan Music Retreat in September. The presentation is on The ICEL Chant project and its development alongside the new Missal translation.
The Vision of Vatican II: The Music that never was…
As the new translation of the Roman Missal has come into being over the past several years, a related project has been underway that has not garnered as much attention but which is of considerable importance to church musicians. It is, in a sense, the fulfillment of the vision set forth in the documents of Vatican II for musical settings of the Mass texts, particularly the Dialogues and the Ordinary of Mass. To understand this new initiative, we have to look back more than 40 years to when this vision was articulated in Musicam Sacram:
54. In preparing popular versions of those parts which will be set to melodies, and especially of the Psalter, experts should take care that fidelity to the Latin text is suitably harmonized with applicability of the vernacular text to musical settings. The nature and laws of each language must be respected, and the features and special characteristics of each people must be taken into consideration: all this, together with the laws of sacred music, should be carefully considered by musicians in the preparation of the new melodies.
The competent territorial authority will therefore ensure that in the commission entrusted with the composition of versions for the people, there are experts in the subjects already mentioned as well as in Latin and the vernacular; from the outset of the work, they must combine their efforts.
55. It will be for the competent territorial authority to decide whether certain vernacular texts set to music which have been handed down from former times, can in fact be used, even though they may not conform in all details with the legitimately approved versions of the liturgical texts.
56. Among the melodies to be composed for the people's texts, those which belong to the priest and ministers are particularly important, whether they sing them alone, or whether they sing them together with the people, or whether they sing them in "dialogue" with the people. In composing these, musicians will consider whether the traditional melodies of the Latin Liturgy, which are used for this purpose, can inspire the melody to be used for the same texts in the vernacular.
57. New melodies to be used by the priests and ministers must be approved by the competent territorial authority.
58. Those Episcopal Conferences whom it may concern will ensure that for one and the same language, used in different regions, there will be a single translation. It is also desirable that as far as possible, there should be one or more common melodies for the parts which concern the priest and ministers, and for the responses and acclamations of the people, so that the common participation of those who use the same language may be encouraged.
Unfortunately, these directives were not given top priority following the initial translation of the Novus Ordo Missae in 1972, and unapproved and oftentimes amateur vernacular settings filled in the void created by the lack of an approved body of settings of the Mass texts during these critical few years. By the time Pope Paul VI issued Jubilate Deo, the official “minimum repertoire” of Gregorian Chants for use in the new liturgy in 1974, the cat was out of the bag and popular-tune settings of the Ordinary had supplanted the traditional melodies that were envisioned as being the primary music of the liturgy only seven years earlier. It would be another 30 years before the vision set forth by the council would be revisited and a major effort to restore the traditional melodies of the Roman Rite would be initiated.
The ICEL Chants
With the new translation of the Roman Missal well underway, the Bishops saw the coming implementation as an opportunity to revisit the council’s vision for liturgical music, and in 2006 began an initiative to create vernacular settings of the texts of the Mass based on the traditional Gregorian melodies…something like an English Language version of the Jubilate Deo of Pope Paul VI. Officially known as Music for the English Language Roman Missal, this project has come to be called The ICEL Chants after the committee responsible for the new translation. This project has been an integrated part of the translation project since 2007, and in the Spring of 2009, the Introduction material was released to the public on the USCCB website.
What is known about the ICEL Chants at this time comes entirely from the Introduction and from several letters issued by the USCCB to publishers of liturgical music. The Introduction begins with a straight-forward description of what the project entails:
For the forthcoming English language Roman Missal (sometimes called the Sacramentary), the International Commission on English in the Liturgy will offer to the Conferences of Bishops of the English‐speaking world chants for everything that is set to music in the Missale Romanum, editio typica tertia (2002):
•The dialogues between the celebrant (or in the case of the Dismissal, the deacon) and the assembly such as the Sign of the Cross (“In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit”) and the Dismissal (“Go forth, the Mass is ended”);
• Tones for singing the presidential prayers (Collect, Prayer over the Offerings, Prayer after Communion) with all prayer texts pointed for singing;
• The chants before and after the readings such as “A reading from the book of…” and “The Gospel of the Lord”;
• Separate tones for singing the First Reading, Second Reading, and Gospel;
• The Universal Prayer or Prayer of the Faithful;
• The Preface Dialogue and Prefaces, including a musical setting of every Preface;
• Full musical settings of Eucharistic Prayers I, II, III and IV, and the concluding Doxology;
• The Kyrie, Gloria, Creed, Sanctus, Agnus Dei, and Lord’s Prayer;
• Chants for particular days and feasts such as “Hosanna to the Son of David” on Palm Sunday, the Universal Prayer and “Behold the wood of the Cross” on Good Friday, the Exsultet (Paschal Proclamation) at the Easter Vigil, antiphons for the Feast of the Presentation of the Lord on February 2nd, and the Proclamation of Easter and Moveable Feasts for Epiphany.
• Some of the Latin chants will also be provided, including the Sanctus, Pater noster, Agnus Dei, and intonations for the Gloria and Credo. A chant setting of the Greek Kyrie from Mass XVI will also be provided.
This initial description of the ICEL Chant project is followed by a set of principles to be followed in their composition:
• To preserve and recover the tradition of unaccompanied singing in the Roman Rite, since the liturgy “is given a more noble form when . . . celebrated solemnly in song” (Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy Sacrosanctum Concilium, 1963 [hereafter SC] 113);
• To facilitate “full and active participation by all the people,” which is “the aim to be considered before all else” (SC 14);
• To take full account of the accentuation of the English language, since “the nature and laws of each language must be respected” in the adaptation of traditional melodies (Sacred Congregation for Rites, Instruction on Music in the Liturgy Musicam Sacram, 1967, 54);
• To retain vernacular chants now in use where possible, since “there must be no innovations unless the good of the Church genuinely and certainly requires them” (SC 23).
These principles are, in fact, the foundation of the vision of liturgical music articulated in Sacrosanctum Concilium and Musicam Sacram. This return to the original directives of the council in composing the musical settings for the new Missal is significant: It signals a new commitment by both ICEL and the USCCB to restore the traditional musical forms of the Roman Rite for at least the Dialogues and the Ordinary of the Mass.
Examples of the Chants
The Introduction also presents examples of the actual chants and some specifics of how the English texts are being adapted to the Gregorian melodies. A good example of this is the setting of the new “Gloria” text, using the Gregorian melody from Mass XV (Dominator Deus).
The decision was made to use the melody from Mediator Deus rather than the much more familiar Mass VIII (Missa de Angelus) so that the more familiar setting will remain a uniquely Latin setting and gain wider use as such.
In the original version of the Introduction, it was said that a setting of the Creed would likely be proposed based on the Credo I rather than the more familiar Credo III, because “while it is true that the melody of Credo III is better known, it seems preferable to leave that familiar melody for use with the Latin text in the hope that it will remain in use or come to be used more widely in Latin.” In the latest update to the Introduction on the USCCB website, the setting based on Credo I has been completed and a setting based on Credo III is still being considered as an additional setting to be included.
In the case of both the Gloria and the Creed, there is an expressed assumption that there will be a greater use of the Latin settings alongside the proposed English settings in the future.
A fragment from the new setting of the Sanctus is also given, based on the Mass XVIII setting:
As with the Gloria and the Creed, an interesting insight into the future of liturgical music is revealed in the reason given for adapting the English text to the Gregorian melody in a way that maintains the two-note figure on the second syllable of the word “holy”. In this instance however, the language used is much more definite:
This setting follows the Latin melody closely. There would have been good reasons, based on natural English accentuation, for placing a single note A on the second syllable of “Holy,” as in the current setting:
But it was decided to imitate the Latin with its displaced accent more closely here, in part because the Latin setting is likely to be sung with great frequency by congregations in the future, which argues for similarity between the Latin and English settings.
One has to wonder why, given that the Latin settings have been nearly completely disregarded for the last 40 years, the Bishops and those working on this project would now predict that “the Latin setting is likely to be sung with great frequency by congregations in the future”. Such statements give added weight and impetus to the place of the ICEL Chants in the future liturgical landscape.
A Letter from the USCCB to Catholic Music Publishers
In July of 2009, the newsletter for the Bishops Committee on Divine Worship (formerly the Bishop’s Committee on the Liturgy) made known the following portion of a letter that was sent to publishers of Catholic music.
"With the exception of the popular setting of the Lord's Prayer by Robert J. Snow, the Committee is open to the inclusion of the new chants that have been approved by ICEL. It will also request that publishers make those chant settings in the Missal the first option provided in participation aids. Other settings could be used as well, but this approach is meant to encourage use of the chants."
An individual who is very familiar with this issue has said that this means the ICEL Chant settings will be published in all approved worship materials (hymnals, missalettes) as the Primary Setting for the Gloria, Creed, Sanctus, Memorial Acclamations and Agnus Dei. It has also been indicated that these will be the settings presented in the catechetical sessions for clergy and musicians leading up to the implementation of the new translation.
Going Forward
At this time, this is all that is known about the ICEL Chants and their place in the implementation of the new translation. There is, of course, speculation surrounding other new settings of these texts and how they will be related to the proposed settings, but at this time there has been no definitive position from the USCCB, ICEL or the music publishers on other settings. What is known is that there is a strong desire that the ICEL Chants become the “Common setting for all English speaking Catholics” that has been sought since the Second Vatican Council, and that this common setting will “preserve and recover the tradition of unaccompanied singing in the Roman Rite”.
The Vision of Vatican II: The Music that never was…
As the new translation of the Roman Missal has come into being over the past several years, a related project has been underway that has not garnered as much attention but which is of considerable importance to church musicians. It is, in a sense, the fulfillment of the vision set forth in the documents of Vatican II for musical settings of the Mass texts, particularly the Dialogues and the Ordinary of Mass. To understand this new initiative, we have to look back more than 40 years to when this vision was articulated in Musicam Sacram:
54. In preparing popular versions of those parts which will be set to melodies, and especially of the Psalter, experts should take care that fidelity to the Latin text is suitably harmonized with applicability of the vernacular text to musical settings. The nature and laws of each language must be respected, and the features and special characteristics of each people must be taken into consideration: all this, together with the laws of sacred music, should be carefully considered by musicians in the preparation of the new melodies.
The competent territorial authority will therefore ensure that in the commission entrusted with the composition of versions for the people, there are experts in the subjects already mentioned as well as in Latin and the vernacular; from the outset of the work, they must combine their efforts.
55. It will be for the competent territorial authority to decide whether certain vernacular texts set to music which have been handed down from former times, can in fact be used, even though they may not conform in all details with the legitimately approved versions of the liturgical texts.
56. Among the melodies to be composed for the people's texts, those which belong to the priest and ministers are particularly important, whether they sing them alone, or whether they sing them together with the people, or whether they sing them in "dialogue" with the people. In composing these, musicians will consider whether the traditional melodies of the Latin Liturgy, which are used for this purpose, can inspire the melody to be used for the same texts in the vernacular.
57. New melodies to be used by the priests and ministers must be approved by the competent territorial authority.
58. Those Episcopal Conferences whom it may concern will ensure that for one and the same language, used in different regions, there will be a single translation. It is also desirable that as far as possible, there should be one or more common melodies for the parts which concern the priest and ministers, and for the responses and acclamations of the people, so that the common participation of those who use the same language may be encouraged.
Unfortunately, these directives were not given top priority following the initial translation of the Novus Ordo Missae in 1972, and unapproved and oftentimes amateur vernacular settings filled in the void created by the lack of an approved body of settings of the Mass texts during these critical few years. By the time Pope Paul VI issued Jubilate Deo, the official “minimum repertoire” of Gregorian Chants for use in the new liturgy in 1974, the cat was out of the bag and popular-tune settings of the Ordinary had supplanted the traditional melodies that were envisioned as being the primary music of the liturgy only seven years earlier. It would be another 30 years before the vision set forth by the council would be revisited and a major effort to restore the traditional melodies of the Roman Rite would be initiated.
The ICEL Chants
With the new translation of the Roman Missal well underway, the Bishops saw the coming implementation as an opportunity to revisit the council’s vision for liturgical music, and in 2006 began an initiative to create vernacular settings of the texts of the Mass based on the traditional Gregorian melodies…something like an English Language version of the Jubilate Deo of Pope Paul VI. Officially known as Music for the English Language Roman Missal, this project has come to be called The ICEL Chants after the committee responsible for the new translation. This project has been an integrated part of the translation project since 2007, and in the Spring of 2009, the Introduction material was released to the public on the USCCB website.
What is known about the ICEL Chants at this time comes entirely from the Introduction and from several letters issued by the USCCB to publishers of liturgical music. The Introduction begins with a straight-forward description of what the project entails:
For the forthcoming English language Roman Missal (sometimes called the Sacramentary), the International Commission on English in the Liturgy will offer to the Conferences of Bishops of the English‐speaking world chants for everything that is set to music in the Missale Romanum, editio typica tertia (2002):
•The dialogues between the celebrant (or in the case of the Dismissal, the deacon) and the assembly such as the Sign of the Cross (“In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit”) and the Dismissal (“Go forth, the Mass is ended”);
• Tones for singing the presidential prayers (Collect, Prayer over the Offerings, Prayer after Communion) with all prayer texts pointed for singing;
• The chants before and after the readings such as “A reading from the book of…” and “The Gospel of the Lord”;
• Separate tones for singing the First Reading, Second Reading, and Gospel;
• The Universal Prayer or Prayer of the Faithful;
• The Preface Dialogue and Prefaces, including a musical setting of every Preface;
• Full musical settings of Eucharistic Prayers I, II, III and IV, and the concluding Doxology;
• The Kyrie, Gloria, Creed, Sanctus, Agnus Dei, and Lord’s Prayer;
• Chants for particular days and feasts such as “Hosanna to the Son of David” on Palm Sunday, the Universal Prayer and “Behold the wood of the Cross” on Good Friday, the Exsultet (Paschal Proclamation) at the Easter Vigil, antiphons for the Feast of the Presentation of the Lord on February 2nd, and the Proclamation of Easter and Moveable Feasts for Epiphany.
• Some of the Latin chants will also be provided, including the Sanctus, Pater noster, Agnus Dei, and intonations for the Gloria and Credo. A chant setting of the Greek Kyrie from Mass XVI will also be provided.
This initial description of the ICEL Chant project is followed by a set of principles to be followed in their composition:
• To preserve and recover the tradition of unaccompanied singing in the Roman Rite, since the liturgy “is given a more noble form when . . . celebrated solemnly in song” (Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy Sacrosanctum Concilium, 1963 [hereafter SC] 113);
• To facilitate “full and active participation by all the people,” which is “the aim to be considered before all else” (SC 14);
• To take full account of the accentuation of the English language, since “the nature and laws of each language must be respected” in the adaptation of traditional melodies (Sacred Congregation for Rites, Instruction on Music in the Liturgy Musicam Sacram, 1967, 54);
• To retain vernacular chants now in use where possible, since “there must be no innovations unless the good of the Church genuinely and certainly requires them” (SC 23).
These principles are, in fact, the foundation of the vision of liturgical music articulated in Sacrosanctum Concilium and Musicam Sacram. This return to the original directives of the council in composing the musical settings for the new Missal is significant: It signals a new commitment by both ICEL and the USCCB to restore the traditional musical forms of the Roman Rite for at least the Dialogues and the Ordinary of the Mass.
Examples of the Chants
The Introduction also presents examples of the actual chants and some specifics of how the English texts are being adapted to the Gregorian melodies. A good example of this is the setting of the new “Gloria” text, using the Gregorian melody from Mass XV (Dominator Deus).
The decision was made to use the melody from Mediator Deus rather than the much more familiar Mass VIII (Missa de Angelus) so that the more familiar setting will remain a uniquely Latin setting and gain wider use as such.
In the original version of the Introduction, it was said that a setting of the Creed would likely be proposed based on the Credo I rather than the more familiar Credo III, because “while it is true that the melody of Credo III is better known, it seems preferable to leave that familiar melody for use with the Latin text in the hope that it will remain in use or come to be used more widely in Latin.” In the latest update to the Introduction on the USCCB website, the setting based on Credo I has been completed and a setting based on Credo III is still being considered as an additional setting to be included.
In the case of both the Gloria and the Creed, there is an expressed assumption that there will be a greater use of the Latin settings alongside the proposed English settings in the future.
A fragment from the new setting of the Sanctus is also given, based on the Mass XVIII setting:
As with the Gloria and the Creed, an interesting insight into the future of liturgical music is revealed in the reason given for adapting the English text to the Gregorian melody in a way that maintains the two-note figure on the second syllable of the word “holy”. In this instance however, the language used is much more definite:
This setting follows the Latin melody closely. There would have been good reasons, based on natural English accentuation, for placing a single note A on the second syllable of “Holy,” as in the current setting:
But it was decided to imitate the Latin with its displaced accent more closely here, in part because the Latin setting is likely to be sung with great frequency by congregations in the future, which argues for similarity between the Latin and English settings.
One has to wonder why, given that the Latin settings have been nearly completely disregarded for the last 40 years, the Bishops and those working on this project would now predict that “the Latin setting is likely to be sung with great frequency by congregations in the future”. Such statements give added weight and impetus to the place of the ICEL Chants in the future liturgical landscape.
A Letter from the USCCB to Catholic Music Publishers
In July of 2009, the newsletter for the Bishops Committee on Divine Worship (formerly the Bishop’s Committee on the Liturgy) made known the following portion of a letter that was sent to publishers of Catholic music.
"With the exception of the popular setting of the Lord's Prayer by Robert J. Snow, the Committee is open to the inclusion of the new chants that have been approved by ICEL. It will also request that publishers make those chant settings in the Missal the first option provided in participation aids. Other settings could be used as well, but this approach is meant to encourage use of the chants."
An individual who is very familiar with this issue has said that this means the ICEL Chant settings will be published in all approved worship materials (hymnals, missalettes) as the Primary Setting for the Gloria, Creed, Sanctus, Memorial Acclamations and Agnus Dei. It has also been indicated that these will be the settings presented in the catechetical sessions for clergy and musicians leading up to the implementation of the new translation.
Going Forward
At this time, this is all that is known about the ICEL Chants and their place in the implementation of the new translation. There is, of course, speculation surrounding other new settings of these texts and how they will be related to the proposed settings, but at this time there has been no definitive position from the USCCB, ICEL or the music publishers on other settings. What is known is that there is a strong desire that the ICEL Chants become the “Common setting for all English speaking Catholics” that has been sought since the Second Vatican Council, and that this common setting will “preserve and recover the tradition of unaccompanied singing in the Roman Rite”.
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
And a Time For Every Purpose Under Heaven
For the last few days I’ve been pondering the issue of musical styles for the liturgy…. OK, not exactly a new subject for me, but one that I’ve had to really think about lately. At some point, I think it was while pacing back and forth in my front yard enjoying a very nice Havana Reserva, I was reminded of a quote that appears in various forms in Church documents regarding sacred music:
“The musical tradition of the Universal Church is a treasure of inestimable value, greater even than that of any other art. The main reason for this pre-eminence is that as a combination of sacred music and words, it forms a necessary or integral part of the solemn liturgy.”
What stuck out for me here was the phrase necessary or integral part of the solemn liturgy. What does it mean for music to be an integral part of the liturgy? This quote (from Sacrosanctum Concilium) seems to be saying, correctly I think, that the Church’s traditional music, Gregorian Chant, is pre-eminent because it integrates with the form and substance of the Roman liturgy as it is intended to be. It is a musical expression of the ideal liturgy that we should be striving for. You don’t “add” this music to such a liturgy… the music and the liturgy are one. They belong to each other. They are integral.
And so I kept thinking… if this is true, then what sort of liturgy would other styles of music be integral to? If they are to ever claim to be a necessary or integral part of the solemn liturgy, they have to be integral to some style of liturgy other than that which chant and traditional sacred music are integral to. In other words, if Chant, and perhaps polyphony are “one” with that ideal liturgy envisioned by the Church, and I don’t think it is going out on a limb to claim this (after all, the Church’s documents say as much), then these other styles of so-called liturgical music must be “one” with other styles of liturgy.
A number of years ago, I attended a Life Teen conference in Mesa, Arizona (I know… I will undoubtedly spend time in Purgatory for this, although I should get time served for several parishes I’ve worked at since then…). The music for the Mass was, well, Life Teen music. A Band (2 Electric Guitars, Bass, Keyboard, Drums and Lead Singer) cranked out the “Gathering Song” at a rock-concert appropriate volume while the Priest jogged up the aisle, stopping to shake hands and share “high-fives” with some of the assembly along the way… finally running up the steps and standing at the top as the band finished the opening number. “GOOD EVENING PEOPLE OF GOD!!” he yelled out to the audience. The audience broke out in applause and whistles. Perfect integration… Rock-Concert music for a Rock-Concert liturgy.
I also recall, though not as clearly, a Mass at my childhood parish of St. Anne’s in Prairie Village Kansas. It could have been 1971 or perhaps ’72…. they had begun offering a “Folk-Mass” in the parish hall and we, for whatever reason, went on this particular weekend (I’m sure it was most likely a Saturday evening). There was a single guitar player strumming chords softly as we came in. There were perhaps a dozen or so people there, already gathering in a circle around the card-table altar with their eyes closed, some holding hands. The priest came in, dressed in jeans and a T-shirt with a stole around his neck. I think we sang “Kumbaya” for the opening, although I also recall “Blowing in the Wind” somewhere during Mass. Again… perfect integration. This music belonged at that Mass.
Fast-forward 30 or so years to a Mass at a newly renovated Church in Brockton Massachusetts… the new “sanctuary” is a raised platform in the middle of a completely circular seating arrangement. It’s a bit awkward because no matter what direction the lectors or the Priest face, they can only face a small wedge of the assembly at any one time. And so the Priest and the readers engage in an ongoing dog-chasing-its-tail motion to be able to address the faithful. The Mass is reduced to a laborious conversation between the people in the middle of the circle and the people forming the circle, with God totally shut out in the confusion. We sing “Gather Us In” as we begin… a song with 30 iterations of “we” and “us” but not one mention of God. This music belongs at this Mass. Perfect integration.
Slick,loud,commercially produced music for a slick,loud,commercially produced Mass.
Shallow, improvised, and casual music for a shallow, improvised and casual Mass.
Self-glorifying, God excluding music for a self-glorifying, God excluding Mass.
Each style of music is integral to some style of liturgy. And so the question we have to ask isn’t whether these styles of music are appropriate for the liturgy, but do we really want the style of liturgy that they’re appropriate for?
“The musical tradition of the Universal Church is a treasure of inestimable value, greater even than that of any other art. The main reason for this pre-eminence is that as a combination of sacred music and words, it forms a necessary or integral part of the solemn liturgy.”
What stuck out for me here was the phrase necessary or integral part of the solemn liturgy. What does it mean for music to be an integral part of the liturgy? This quote (from Sacrosanctum Concilium) seems to be saying, correctly I think, that the Church’s traditional music, Gregorian Chant, is pre-eminent because it integrates with the form and substance of the Roman liturgy as it is intended to be. It is a musical expression of the ideal liturgy that we should be striving for. You don’t “add” this music to such a liturgy… the music and the liturgy are one. They belong to each other. They are integral.
And so I kept thinking… if this is true, then what sort of liturgy would other styles of music be integral to? If they are to ever claim to be a necessary or integral part of the solemn liturgy, they have to be integral to some style of liturgy other than that which chant and traditional sacred music are integral to. In other words, if Chant, and perhaps polyphony are “one” with that ideal liturgy envisioned by the Church, and I don’t think it is going out on a limb to claim this (after all, the Church’s documents say as much), then these other styles of so-called liturgical music must be “one” with other styles of liturgy.
A number of years ago, I attended a Life Teen conference in Mesa, Arizona (I know… I will undoubtedly spend time in Purgatory for this, although I should get time served for several parishes I’ve worked at since then…). The music for the Mass was, well, Life Teen music. A Band (2 Electric Guitars, Bass, Keyboard, Drums and Lead Singer) cranked out the “Gathering Song” at a rock-concert appropriate volume while the Priest jogged up the aisle, stopping to shake hands and share “high-fives” with some of the assembly along the way… finally running up the steps and standing at the top as the band finished the opening number. “GOOD EVENING PEOPLE OF GOD!!” he yelled out to the audience. The audience broke out in applause and whistles. Perfect integration… Rock-Concert music for a Rock-Concert liturgy.
I also recall, though not as clearly, a Mass at my childhood parish of St. Anne’s in Prairie Village Kansas. It could have been 1971 or perhaps ’72…. they had begun offering a “Folk-Mass” in the parish hall and we, for whatever reason, went on this particular weekend (I’m sure it was most likely a Saturday evening). There was a single guitar player strumming chords softly as we came in. There were perhaps a dozen or so people there, already gathering in a circle around the card-table altar with their eyes closed, some holding hands. The priest came in, dressed in jeans and a T-shirt with a stole around his neck. I think we sang “Kumbaya” for the opening, although I also recall “Blowing in the Wind” somewhere during Mass. Again… perfect integration. This music belonged at that Mass.
Fast-forward 30 or so years to a Mass at a newly renovated Church in Brockton Massachusetts… the new “sanctuary” is a raised platform in the middle of a completely circular seating arrangement. It’s a bit awkward because no matter what direction the lectors or the Priest face, they can only face a small wedge of the assembly at any one time. And so the Priest and the readers engage in an ongoing dog-chasing-its-tail motion to be able to address the faithful. The Mass is reduced to a laborious conversation between the people in the middle of the circle and the people forming the circle, with God totally shut out in the confusion. We sing “Gather Us In” as we begin… a song with 30 iterations of “we” and “us” but not one mention of God. This music belongs at this Mass. Perfect integration.
Slick,loud,commercially produced music for a slick,loud,commercially produced Mass.
Shallow, improvised, and casual music for a shallow, improvised and casual Mass.
Self-glorifying, God excluding music for a self-glorifying, God excluding Mass.
Each style of music is integral to some style of liturgy. And so the question we have to ask isn’t whether these styles of music are appropriate for the liturgy, but do we really want the style of liturgy that they’re appropriate for?
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
Taking the Big Step
It may surprise some of you to know that the music program at my parish is what would be considered "mainstream" by most standards. Sure, you won't find such standards as "Gather Us In", "All Are Welcome" or "Sing A New Church", and instead will find solid hymns and Psalms set to psalm-tones....even an occasional Antiphon from the Simple Choral Gradual. Things were quite different when I arrived here nearly three years ago, and they will be quite different still three years from now.
This week, after discussions with the Pastor and meeting with the two choir directors, the decision has been made to take the BIG step...we will begin using the Gregorian settings for the Ordinary at the principal Choir Mass in October, and extend that to all other Masses in November. This is a moment that I was unsure would ever happen here, and now that it has there is a lot of PR work to do.
I don't know of any other parishes in our Diocese that make regular use of Gregorian Ordinary settings, other than the token "Agnus Dei" during Lent or a chanted setting of the Kyrie from time to time. There may be another, but at the very least this is new territory around here.
I'm going to post from time to time on how this "project" progresses. We had the meeting yesterday to let everyone know the plan... it might be disingenuous to say everyone is as enthusiastic as I am, but I didn't expect that. The next step is to work with the two choirs well ahead of time to open up this "whole new world" of Catholic Sacred Music to them. I am planning two sessions for all parish musicians in September, and am even considering inviting any parishioners who would like to learn more to attend, as well as our parish Priests. The Pastor has also asked me to put together several brief articles for the bulletins in September to introduce the idea to the parishioners.
On one hand, it's shameful that it is such a major production to sing chant at the Mass... it really shouldn't be. On the other hand, that is the reality and I'm grateful that I at least have this opportunity that so many other parish musicians can still only hope for.
I was there once...have faith! And stay tuned....
This week, after discussions with the Pastor and meeting with the two choir directors, the decision has been made to take the BIG step...we will begin using the Gregorian settings for the Ordinary at the principal Choir Mass in October, and extend that to all other Masses in November. This is a moment that I was unsure would ever happen here, and now that it has there is a lot of PR work to do.
I don't know of any other parishes in our Diocese that make regular use of Gregorian Ordinary settings, other than the token "Agnus Dei" during Lent or a chanted setting of the Kyrie from time to time. There may be another, but at the very least this is new territory around here.
I'm going to post from time to time on how this "project" progresses. We had the meeting yesterday to let everyone know the plan... it might be disingenuous to say everyone is as enthusiastic as I am, but I didn't expect that. The next step is to work with the two choirs well ahead of time to open up this "whole new world" of Catholic Sacred Music to them. I am planning two sessions for all parish musicians in September, and am even considering inviting any parishioners who would like to learn more to attend, as well as our parish Priests. The Pastor has also asked me to put together several brief articles for the bulletins in September to introduce the idea to the parishioners.
On one hand, it's shameful that it is such a major production to sing chant at the Mass... it really shouldn't be. On the other hand, that is the reality and I'm grateful that I at least have this opportunity that so many other parish musicians can still only hope for.
I was there once...have faith! And stay tuned....
Friday, July 31, 2009
Dom Jacques Hourlier's "Reflections"
For those with relatively little time to catch up on reading but with a keen interest in Gregorian Chant, both its formal and spiritual aspects, there might be no better book to pick up than Dom Jacques Hourlier’s Reflections on the Spirituality of Gregorian Chant.It’s more of a “booklet” than a book…75 pages in a 7’x5’ format… a collection of 5 lectures given by the author during a Youth Seminar at Solesmes in the Summer of 1976. These were published as a collection in 1984 after his tragic death in an automobile accident.
Despite the diminutive size, this book covers a great deal of ground….melody, language, form, liturgical function, symbolism, aesthetics… and of course, as the title suggests, the Spirituality of Gregorian Chant. Although there is an assumption by the author that the reader has at least some knowledge about the Chant, the language is simple and accessible and the most recent edition has been edited and footnoted for a wider readership.
He speaks about the beauty of Gregorian Chant…
Beauty is without doubt the most commonly perceived quality of Gregorian Chant, even though some listeners, probably the majority, could not explain why they find it beautiful. Men and women from every walk of life, including the simplest, hear in the chant something which differs from what they call cheap music. As witness, recall the wide success of Gregorian Chant Masses, or of Gregorian chant records and cassettes, even though all of them do not achieve the same level of perfection. It is useless to try and explain away this success as some kind of passing fad or as the manifestation of a partisan spirit among Christians with conservative leanings. These factors have little or nothing to do with the matter. The simple truth is that when people are exposed to Gregorian chant, they react to a beauty which is capable of affecting even children.
Most amazing is that the words are as relevant today as they were in 1976…perhaps even more so. Any church musician today committed to the “cause” of Sacred Music restoration can take heart from Dom Hourlier’s words about the “authority” of the Chant:
The true authority of Gregorian chant rests not on rubrics or legislative decrees, but rather on the concensus populi (the common assent of the people of God) and the sensus ecclesiae(the supernatural sense of discernment of the church). Led by their Priests and Bishops, the faithful everywhere have always sung Gregorian chant. It draws its authority from a vast number of enthusiastic Catholic Christians. Throughout the ages, it has been the musical language in the Western Church. The authority of Gregorian chant is based on tradition.
Amen.
The book can be purchased online at a number of sites.
Despite the diminutive size, this book covers a great deal of ground….melody, language, form, liturgical function, symbolism, aesthetics… and of course, as the title suggests, the Spirituality of Gregorian Chant. Although there is an assumption by the author that the reader has at least some knowledge about the Chant, the language is simple and accessible and the most recent edition has been edited and footnoted for a wider readership.
He speaks about the beauty of Gregorian Chant…
Beauty is without doubt the most commonly perceived quality of Gregorian Chant, even though some listeners, probably the majority, could not explain why they find it beautiful. Men and women from every walk of life, including the simplest, hear in the chant something which differs from what they call cheap music. As witness, recall the wide success of Gregorian Chant Masses, or of Gregorian chant records and cassettes, even though all of them do not achieve the same level of perfection. It is useless to try and explain away this success as some kind of passing fad or as the manifestation of a partisan spirit among Christians with conservative leanings. These factors have little or nothing to do with the matter. The simple truth is that when people are exposed to Gregorian chant, they react to a beauty which is capable of affecting even children.
Most amazing is that the words are as relevant today as they were in 1976…perhaps even more so. Any church musician today committed to the “cause” of Sacred Music restoration can take heart from Dom Hourlier’s words about the “authority” of the Chant:
The true authority of Gregorian chant rests not on rubrics or legislative decrees, but rather on the concensus populi (the common assent of the people of God) and the sensus ecclesiae(the supernatural sense of discernment of the church). Led by their Priests and Bishops, the faithful everywhere have always sung Gregorian chant. It draws its authority from a vast number of enthusiastic Catholic Christians. Throughout the ages, it has been the musical language in the Western Church. The authority of Gregorian chant is based on tradition.
Amen.
The book can be purchased online at a number of sites.
Saturday, July 25, 2009
Mail-Order Misinformation- Liturgical Planning Guides
They arrive in the mail several times a year. They are given as “extras” in every package you receive from Catholic publishing companies. They are given out in gift bags at conferences and are posted online at company websites….they are liturgical planning guides and they are an ubiquitous fixture in parish music ministry. They promise to make easier the weekly task of selecting music for the liturgy with bullet-pointed lists of appropriate and exciting musical selections. For the more ambitious choirs, some suggest appropriate choral anthems or separately available Octavo versions of the songs found in the disposable music books. For those who are overwhelmed by the never-ending cycle of the liturgical year and the sheer volume of music in the ever increasing body of resources created by commercial publishers, these planning guides are impossible to resist.
For me, it would be easy enough to disregard these publications if they didn’t have real consequences for the sacred and liturgical music which they methodically expunge from the liturgies in every Catholic parish which makes use of them. And since these guides arrive in the mailboxes of nearly every parish in the U.S, that has to be a considerable number of parishes!
To begin, let’s consider what these publications aren’t, and what they actually are. They aren’t objective guides for preparing and selecting the most appropriate music for the liturgy – that is done rather handily in a very concise book called the Graduale Romanum. Admittedly, the selections in the Graduale Romanum are not always accessible to every parish, but the Graduale does provide us with the most appropriate selections and the selections therein should at least point us in the right direction in terms of what texts are part of the Mass. If the planning guides were actually an objective guide, they might at least suggest the selections given as the first option in the liturgical documents. Consider the instruction in the GIRM regarding the Entrance:
In the dioceses of the United States of America there are four options for the Entrance Chant: (1) the antiphon from the Roman Missal or the Psalm from the Roman Gradual as set to music there or in another musical setting; (2) the seasonal antiphon and Psalm of the Simple Gradual; (3) a song from another collection of psalms and antiphons, approved by the Conference of Bishops or the Diocesan Bishop, including psalms arranged in responsorial or metrical forms; (4) a suitable liturgical song similarly approved by the Conference of Bishops or the Diocesan Bishop.
However, a planning guide might present us with something like the following (this particular example is for the 17th Sunday of Ordinary Time from Today’s Liturgy, Summer/Fall 2009)
Table of Plenty (Schutte) BB/MI 310 CP2 475 GP2 530 H 467 J 744
J2 793 NTY 75 SS1 163 UC 527 VOZ 786 OCP 9846TL
I Am the Bread of Life/Yo Soy el Pan de Vida (Toolan) BB/MI 338
CM 104 CP2 478 H 482 R2 196 UC 561
Alleluia! Give the Glory (Canedo/Hurd) BB/MI 902 CP2 164 GP2 70
H 24 J 520 NTY 3 SS1 5 UC 104 VOZ 113 OCP 9788TL
Now As We Gather (Castillo) BB/MI 309 J 700 OCP 9547TL
Ven al Banquete/Come to the Feast (Hurd) BB/MI 307 CP2 477 H 465
J2 795 NTY 80 R2 204 SS1 164 UC 512 VOZ 779 OCP 10336TL
In This Place (Thomson/Thomson) BB/MI 308 J 999 NTY 18 R2 302
SS1 122
For the Beauty of the Earth DIX BB/MI 624 CM 162 CP2 383 GP2 704
H 382 J 464 J2 642 NTY 139 R 24 R2 293 UC 741 VOZ 602
Praise to the Lord LOBE DEN HERREN BB 203 CM 156 CP2 356 GP2 686
H 360 J 338 J2 597 R 25 R2 253 TM 27 UC 726 VOZ 588
Gather Your People (Hurd) BB/MI 315 CP2 474 GP2 529 H 470 J 681
J2 798 NTY 10 SS1 111 UC 518 VOZ 782 OCP 9699TL
No mention of the Antiphon from the Roman Missal, or of the Psalm from the Roman Gradual, or of the seasonal antiphon from the Simple Gradual, or even of a song from another collection of Psalms and Antiphons approved by the conference of Bishops or the Diocesan Bishop. What we get instead is a list of selections from the 4th and last category, the “other suitable liturgical song” option. And in addition, all of the selections they propose are, not coincidentally, from their own publications (that’s what all of those abbreviations and numbers are) without even a pretense of objectivity. So what these publications actually are is rather obvious. They are lists of songs by the corresponding publisher that can be substituted for the actual texts and music of the liturgy by exclusively exercising the 4th and last option given for the Antiphons and Gradual of the Mass in the Church’s liturgical books.
Of course, I wouldn’t expect that a publisher would recommend selections from another publisher’s product… that would be bad business! But the Graduale Romanum, not to mention the vast body of settings of the Antiphons in Latin and in the vernacular that are in the public domain, are not competition. If a publisher sees them as such, then there needs to be an honest evaluation of whether music resource publishing companies are really serving the Church. Publishing companies most often claim that they are committed to serving the liturgy and providing parishes with the very best resources, or some variation on that theme. And yet there is no mention in the above list of a setting of God is in His Holy Dwelling (the Antiphon from the Missal) or of a setting of Psalm 68 (the Psalm from the Roman Gradual). None of the selections suggested on the list are connected in any way to the actual texts for that Sunday, and this is pretty much the norm across the spectrum.
Instead, the list we are given seems to support the contention that the options which the Church considers to be the least desirable are, in fact, the most desirable to exercise in every instance possible. From there, it isn’t that much of a stretch to conclude that the publisher’s intention is to expunge the actual Mass texts and musical settings in favor of less appropriate selections drawn from their own products.
With the USCCB document on music, Sing To The Lord: Music In Divine Worship, the Bishops have urged a restoration of the actual Mass texts found in the Proper Antiphons for each Sunday:
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.”96 The Christian faithful are to be led to an ever deeper appreciation of the psalms as the voice of Christ and the voice of his Church at prayer.
And yet, more than two years after this document was promulgated, there has been no real effort to incorporate settings of the Proper Psalms into any of the major disposable missals, and no effort to even mention them as options for the Entrance, Offertory or Communion in the planning guides. Why not? Even the Bishops have come out and said “We need to be singing the Propers, not substituting other songs”, and yet the publishers have made no effort to respond to this call.
Of course, it’s easy enough to find settings for these Antiphons that can be sung by just about any choir. The Simple Choral Gradual is available online at no charge, and there are very good settings of the Antiphons in psalm-tone settings in the Anglican Use Gradual, also available online for free. Every day, there are more and more settings of these texts made available online, most all of them at no charge, and there are even some published sets appearing from major publishers (although these are not yet showing up in their worship aids). The question then is why are none of these suggested by any of the planning guides? Most of these settings are either copyright free or are published under creative commons and can be used and re-printed with nothing more than a request for permission and acknowledgment. Doing so would give at least some credibility to these guides insofar as they would at least appear to be making an effort to instruct the reader that there are actual designated selections for these parts of the liturgy.
As it is right now, those who would prefer to follow the instruction of the Church, whether that might come from Tra le Solecitudini, Musicae Sacrae Disciplinae, Sacrosanctum Concilium, Musicam Sacram, The General Instruction of the Roman Missal or Sing To The Lord – are going to have to turn to the actual texts of those documents for guidance and keep a copy of the Graduale Romanum (or the Gregorian Missal if their Latin is a little rusty!) on their desk. Such ambitious persons will essentially have to make their own planning guides from resources that they have determined are appropriate for the liturgy. This isn’t really as difficult as it might first seem.
At times, it might be possible to use the actual Gregorian Propers given in these books, maybe in place of an Opening Hymn or Communion Song, or even in addition to these songs. If this might be a bit ambitious for your abilities, these books will at least give you the texts and psalm citations for each Sunday’s Mass. From there, settings can be found from among the options that are available for free or perhaps it might even be possible to find a setting in one of those disposable resources, although If that’s possible, I can assure you that it will not have been given as a suggestion in their planning guide!
It would be an understatement to say that Catholic liturgical music is in transition at this time. There are obvious changes taking place and current liturgical reforms such as the new translation of the Roman Missal and recent liturgical documents such as Sacramentum Caritatis and Summorum Pontificum, even if not exclusively addressing the issue of liturgical music are encouraging a new way of looking at the issue in light of the Church’s musical traditions. These changes are inevitable, and are obvious to everyone it seems except the publishers of these planning guides, where the same handful of popular selections appear over and over again in place of those which might express the actual texts from the liturgy.
It’s my understanding that the Pope’s latest encyclical encourages industry to take seriously the call for environmental sensitivity, conserving valuable resources and avoiding wasteful practices that use them foolishly. Among these resources, I would include paper. Might we propose an excellent initiative by Catholic publishing companies to discontinue the printing and distributing of these Planning Guides? Such an initiative would go a long way towards helping the environment… and Catholic liturgical music!
For me, it would be easy enough to disregard these publications if they didn’t have real consequences for the sacred and liturgical music which they methodically expunge from the liturgies in every Catholic parish which makes use of them. And since these guides arrive in the mailboxes of nearly every parish in the U.S, that has to be a considerable number of parishes!
To begin, let’s consider what these publications aren’t, and what they actually are. They aren’t objective guides for preparing and selecting the most appropriate music for the liturgy – that is done rather handily in a very concise book called the Graduale Romanum. Admittedly, the selections in the Graduale Romanum are not always accessible to every parish, but the Graduale does provide us with the most appropriate selections and the selections therein should at least point us in the right direction in terms of what texts are part of the Mass. If the planning guides were actually an objective guide, they might at least suggest the selections given as the first option in the liturgical documents. Consider the instruction in the GIRM regarding the Entrance:
In the dioceses of the United States of America there are four options for the Entrance Chant: (1) the antiphon from the Roman Missal or the Psalm from the Roman Gradual as set to music there or in another musical setting; (2) the seasonal antiphon and Psalm of the Simple Gradual; (3) a song from another collection of psalms and antiphons, approved by the Conference of Bishops or the Diocesan Bishop, including psalms arranged in responsorial or metrical forms; (4) a suitable liturgical song similarly approved by the Conference of Bishops or the Diocesan Bishop.
However, a planning guide might present us with something like the following (this particular example is for the 17th Sunday of Ordinary Time from Today’s Liturgy, Summer/Fall 2009)
Table of Plenty (Schutte) BB/MI 310 CP2 475 GP2 530 H 467 J 744
J2 793 NTY 75 SS1 163 UC 527 VOZ 786 OCP 9846TL
I Am the Bread of Life/Yo Soy el Pan de Vida (Toolan) BB/MI 338
CM 104 CP2 478 H 482 R2 196 UC 561
Alleluia! Give the Glory (Canedo/Hurd) BB/MI 902 CP2 164 GP2 70
H 24 J 520 NTY 3 SS1 5 UC 104 VOZ 113 OCP 9788TL
Now As We Gather (Castillo) BB/MI 309 J 700 OCP 9547TL
Ven al Banquete/Come to the Feast (Hurd) BB/MI 307 CP2 477 H 465
J2 795 NTY 80 R2 204 SS1 164 UC 512 VOZ 779 OCP 10336TL
In This Place (Thomson/Thomson) BB/MI 308 J 999 NTY 18 R2 302
SS1 122
For the Beauty of the Earth DIX BB/MI 624 CM 162 CP2 383 GP2 704
H 382 J 464 J2 642 NTY 139 R 24 R2 293 UC 741 VOZ 602
Praise to the Lord LOBE DEN HERREN BB 203 CM 156 CP2 356 GP2 686
H 360 J 338 J2 597 R 25 R2 253 TM 27 UC 726 VOZ 588
Gather Your People (Hurd) BB/MI 315 CP2 474 GP2 529 H 470 J 681
J2 798 NTY 10 SS1 111 UC 518 VOZ 782 OCP 9699TL
No mention of the Antiphon from the Roman Missal, or of the Psalm from the Roman Gradual, or of the seasonal antiphon from the Simple Gradual, or even of a song from another collection of Psalms and Antiphons approved by the conference of Bishops or the Diocesan Bishop. What we get instead is a list of selections from the 4th and last category, the “other suitable liturgical song” option. And in addition, all of the selections they propose are, not coincidentally, from their own publications (that’s what all of those abbreviations and numbers are) without even a pretense of objectivity. So what these publications actually are is rather obvious. They are lists of songs by the corresponding publisher that can be substituted for the actual texts and music of the liturgy by exclusively exercising the 4th and last option given for the Antiphons and Gradual of the Mass in the Church’s liturgical books.
Of course, I wouldn’t expect that a publisher would recommend selections from another publisher’s product… that would be bad business! But the Graduale Romanum, not to mention the vast body of settings of the Antiphons in Latin and in the vernacular that are in the public domain, are not competition. If a publisher sees them as such, then there needs to be an honest evaluation of whether music resource publishing companies are really serving the Church. Publishing companies most often claim that they are committed to serving the liturgy and providing parishes with the very best resources, or some variation on that theme. And yet there is no mention in the above list of a setting of God is in His Holy Dwelling (the Antiphon from the Missal) or of a setting of Psalm 68 (the Psalm from the Roman Gradual). None of the selections suggested on the list are connected in any way to the actual texts for that Sunday, and this is pretty much the norm across the spectrum.
Instead, the list we are given seems to support the contention that the options which the Church considers to be the least desirable are, in fact, the most desirable to exercise in every instance possible. From there, it isn’t that much of a stretch to conclude that the publisher’s intention is to expunge the actual Mass texts and musical settings in favor of less appropriate selections drawn from their own products.
With the USCCB document on music, Sing To The Lord: Music In Divine Worship, the Bishops have urged a restoration of the actual Mass texts found in the Proper Antiphons for each Sunday:
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.”96 The Christian faithful are to be led to an ever deeper appreciation of the psalms as the voice of Christ and the voice of his Church at prayer.
And yet, more than two years after this document was promulgated, there has been no real effort to incorporate settings of the Proper Psalms into any of the major disposable missals, and no effort to even mention them as options for the Entrance, Offertory or Communion in the planning guides. Why not? Even the Bishops have come out and said “We need to be singing the Propers, not substituting other songs”, and yet the publishers have made no effort to respond to this call.
Of course, it’s easy enough to find settings for these Antiphons that can be sung by just about any choir. The Simple Choral Gradual is available online at no charge, and there are very good settings of the Antiphons in psalm-tone settings in the Anglican Use Gradual, also available online for free. Every day, there are more and more settings of these texts made available online, most all of them at no charge, and there are even some published sets appearing from major publishers (although these are not yet showing up in their worship aids). The question then is why are none of these suggested by any of the planning guides? Most of these settings are either copyright free or are published under creative commons and can be used and re-printed with nothing more than a request for permission and acknowledgment. Doing so would give at least some credibility to these guides insofar as they would at least appear to be making an effort to instruct the reader that there are actual designated selections for these parts of the liturgy.
As it is right now, those who would prefer to follow the instruction of the Church, whether that might come from Tra le Solecitudini, Musicae Sacrae Disciplinae, Sacrosanctum Concilium, Musicam Sacram, The General Instruction of the Roman Missal or Sing To The Lord – are going to have to turn to the actual texts of those documents for guidance and keep a copy of the Graduale Romanum (or the Gregorian Missal if their Latin is a little rusty!) on their desk. Such ambitious persons will essentially have to make their own planning guides from resources that they have determined are appropriate for the liturgy. This isn’t really as difficult as it might first seem.
At times, it might be possible to use the actual Gregorian Propers given in these books, maybe in place of an Opening Hymn or Communion Song, or even in addition to these songs. If this might be a bit ambitious for your abilities, these books will at least give you the texts and psalm citations for each Sunday’s Mass. From there, settings can be found from among the options that are available for free or perhaps it might even be possible to find a setting in one of those disposable resources, although If that’s possible, I can assure you that it will not have been given as a suggestion in their planning guide!
It would be an understatement to say that Catholic liturgical music is in transition at this time. There are obvious changes taking place and current liturgical reforms such as the new translation of the Roman Missal and recent liturgical documents such as Sacramentum Caritatis and Summorum Pontificum, even if not exclusively addressing the issue of liturgical music are encouraging a new way of looking at the issue in light of the Church’s musical traditions. These changes are inevitable, and are obvious to everyone it seems except the publishers of these planning guides, where the same handful of popular selections appear over and over again in place of those which might express the actual texts from the liturgy.
It’s my understanding that the Pope’s latest encyclical encourages industry to take seriously the call for environmental sensitivity, conserving valuable resources and avoiding wasteful practices that use them foolishly. Among these resources, I would include paper. Might we propose an excellent initiative by Catholic publishing companies to discontinue the printing and distributing of these Planning Guides? Such an initiative would go a long way towards helping the environment… and Catholic liturgical music!
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
Where I'm Coming From
I thought it might be a good idea given the often complicated issues discussed here and on other sites to take a few moments and lay out the “baseline” that I’m working from in any discussion/ argument/ article about music in the Catholic Church. There are some things that I simply accept as fact that are obviously not as widely accepted by some in terms of issues about Catholic music. So in short, this is where I’m coming from when I talk about Catholic music.
1. Official Documents of the Church are the primary source for what the Church says about Sacred and Liturgical music. The documents express the preferences and restrictions put upon music that is to be used in Catholic liturgy, often in simple language, but often in very concise legal wording. Some documents make references, often in footnotes and end-notes, to previous documents that may seem obscure or outdated. They are not… they are the foundation for the liturgical law of the Catholic Church. This is what Pope Benedict is speaking of when he speaks of the Hermeneutic of Continuity…interpreting in light of the past and of tradition. A strong familiarity with the major music documents of the 20th and 21st centuries is really critical when delving into a discussion on Catholic sacred and liturgical music.
2.Terminology
Be aware that there are specific meanings for some terms that are too often used as “generic” concepts. Among the most often misused in discussions about Catholic music are:
“Gregorian Chant has always been regarded as the supreme model for sacred music, so that it is fully legitimate to lay down the following rule: the more closely a composition for church approaches in its movement, inspiration and savor the Gregorian form, the more sacred and liturgical it becomes.” (TLS II – par.3)
The need for a strict attention to the traditional meaning of this term was argued most recently in the 2003 Chirograph on Sacred Music of Pope John Paul II where he noted:
“Today, moreover, the meaning of the category "sacred music" has been broadened to include repertoires that cannot be part of the celebration without violating the spirit and norms of the Liturgy itself”. (Chirograph on Sacred Music- par.4)
Some interpretations of Vatican II documents allow for the substitution of other selections for some of the above (the Entrance, Offertory and Communion Antiphons), however such selections must still be sacred music.
Hymn – Hymns are settings of metrical religious texts in strophic form (the same music used for all verses). There are some hymns (chant hymns) which are in the category of Sacred Music (Adoro te devote, Tantum Ergo, Veni Sancte Spiritus, Salve Regina), but not all hymns are sacred music, at least in the stricter definition.
Religious Music – Settings of metrical or prose religious texts in either song-form (verse/ refrain) ,through-composed or free-form. Such music is neither Sacred Music (by virtue of its form) nor is it liturgical music (by virtue of its texts). A considerable portion of the contemporary religious repertoire falls into this category. Musicae Sacrae Disciplinae clearly notes that this type of music is not to be used in the liturgy:
D. Religious music.
54. The type of music which inspires its hearers with religious sentiments, and even devotion, and yet, because of its special character (form) cannot be used in liturgical functions, is nevertheless worthy of high esteem, and ought to be cultivated in its proper time. This music justly merits, therefore, the title "religious music".
55. The proper places for the performance of such music are concert halls, theaters, or auditoriums, but not the church, which is consecrated to the worship of God. (MSD #54-55)
3. Fact vs. Opinion.
Discussions and arguments present a variety of facts and opinions. However, it’s critical to keep straight which statements are points of fact and which are matters of opinion. Heated arguments too often devolve into statements such as “well…that’s your opinion!”
Perhaps that’s true, and perhaps not. If the issue being discussed is a matter of opinion, such a statement could be perfectly valid. An example:
“Awesome God is an excellent song… I think it rocks!”
“Really? The melody sounds like something out of a Barry White ballad.”
“Well…that’s your opinion!”
OK… here we’re talking about something that really is a matter of opinion. People like some songs and don’t like others. That’s a matter of opinion. However this is very different from the following example.
“I like using a really lively song like Awesome God for the Responsorial to get people excited about the Liturgy of the Word.”
“Awesome God? That’s really not appropriate for the Responsorial you know.”
“Well…that’s your opinion! I think it works just fine.”
It might be opinion that Awesome God is a good song. But it is a point of fact that the Responsorial must be a setting of the Psalm from either the Graduale or the Lectionary, and that another song or hymn cannot be substituted. That isn’t a matter of opinion. In this example, the speaker is simply wrong regardless of how he (or she) feels about the suitability of the song.
We may not always like the facts, but don’t claim that they are merely opinions when they are actually facts. If you disagree with what the actual documents say, then just say so and there will be no argument… except that you are admittedly disregarding the laws set forth by the Church. It’s intellectually dishonest to categorize liturgical laws or Church teachings as mere opinion which can be disregarded according to our personal likes and dislikes, even if it is a law or teaching which a great many people routinely disregard. This leads to the next point…
4. The views of the popular majority are useful in discussions about political issues where majority opinion forms law. The fact that an overwhelming majority of the people in a city approves of and desires the construction of a Toll Road is a compelling fact when discussing the wisdom of building such a road. That’s what Democracy is all about! Liturgy, however, is not Democratic, and majority opinion has very little place in a discussion about liturgical issues. “We are the Church” is a great slogan, but attributing to it the force of law leads to the same kind of confusion as the idea that we are “all baptized into the common priesthood”. All baptized persons are not Priests, nor are we all members of the hierarchy which is rightfully given the power to determine laws and doctrine for the Church.
Therefore, although a great many people enjoy this or that type of music, that fact does not lend it legitimacy unless it is already given legitimacy by the actual law of the Church. If a great many people enjoy the Chanted Introit, be assured that it is perfectly legitimate to use it…. not because the people like it, but rather because it’s already acknowledged as the primary choice for that role. If a great many people would rather hear a CD of Andre Boccelli singing “The Prayer” with Celine Dion as the Introit, you can be assured that is not allowed regardless of how many people would like to hear it. Majority opinion cannot legitimize something which contradicts the Church’s law (and that would contradict a number of them). Consensus does not create law in the Catholic Church. The above example only serves to demonstrate that a great many people are either unaware or unconcerned about what the Church teaches, and it’s absurd to suggest that such a group should dictate liturgical norms!
There are so many more points that could be included here, but this has already become longer than I had hoped! Perhaps I will add more to it at a later time…
1. Official Documents of the Church are the primary source for what the Church says about Sacred and Liturgical music. The documents express the preferences and restrictions put upon music that is to be used in Catholic liturgy, often in simple language, but often in very concise legal wording. Some documents make references, often in footnotes and end-notes, to previous documents that may seem obscure or outdated. They are not… they are the foundation for the liturgical law of the Catholic Church. This is what Pope Benedict is speaking of when he speaks of the Hermeneutic of Continuity…interpreting in light of the past and of tradition. A strong familiarity with the major music documents of the 20th and 21st centuries is really critical when delving into a discussion on Catholic sacred and liturgical music.
2.Terminology
Be aware that there are specific meanings for some terms that are too often used as “generic” concepts. Among the most often misused in discussions about Catholic music are:
Sacred Music- Catholic liturgical documents define this term more narrowly than the common meaning of “music composed for use in worship”. Pius X articulated the modern definition in his 1903 Motu Proprio, and that definition has been referred to in all later documents up to the present:
“Gregorian Chant has always been regarded as the supreme model for sacred music, so that it is fully legitimate to lay down the following rule: the more closely a composition for church approaches in its movement, inspiration and savor the Gregorian form, the more sacred and liturgical it becomes.” (TLS II – par.3)
The need for a strict attention to the traditional meaning of this term was argued most recently in the 2003 Chirograph on Sacred Music of Pope John Paul II where he noted:
“Today, moreover, the meaning of the category "sacred music" has been broadened to include repertoires that cannot be part of the celebration without violating the spirit and norms of the Liturgy itself”. (Chirograph on Sacred Music- par.4)
The Church’s liturgical documents, even those from Vatican II, assume that all music used in Catholic liturgy is Sacred Music as defined above.
Liturgical Music- Sacred music which is composed on liturgical texts (texts from the Ordinary or Propers of the Mass) is specifically referred to as “liturgical music”. This would include the Entrance Antiphon, Kyrie, Gloria, Psalm or Gradual, Offertory Antiphon, Sanctus, Our Father, Agnus Dei and Communion Antiphon, as well as the sung settings of the dialogues and prayers of the Priest.
Some interpretations of Vatican II documents allow for the substitution of other selections for some of the above (the Entrance, Offertory and Communion Antiphons), however such selections must still be sacred music.
Hymn – Hymns are settings of metrical religious texts in strophic form (the same music used for all verses). There are some hymns (chant hymns) which are in the category of Sacred Music (Adoro te devote, Tantum Ergo, Veni Sancte Spiritus, Salve Regina), but not all hymns are sacred music, at least in the stricter definition.
Religious Music – Settings of metrical or prose religious texts in either song-form (verse/ refrain) ,through-composed or free-form. Such music is neither Sacred Music (by virtue of its form) nor is it liturgical music (by virtue of its texts). A considerable portion of the contemporary religious repertoire falls into this category. Musicae Sacrae Disciplinae clearly notes that this type of music is not to be used in the liturgy:
D. Religious music.
54. The type of music which inspires its hearers with religious sentiments, and even devotion, and yet, because of its special character (form) cannot be used in liturgical functions, is nevertheless worthy of high esteem, and ought to be cultivated in its proper time. This music justly merits, therefore, the title "religious music".
55. The proper places for the performance of such music are concert halls, theaters, or auditoriums, but not the church, which is consecrated to the worship of God. (MSD #54-55)
3. Fact vs. Opinion.
Discussions and arguments present a variety of facts and opinions. However, it’s critical to keep straight which statements are points of fact and which are matters of opinion. Heated arguments too often devolve into statements such as “well…that’s your opinion!”
Perhaps that’s true, and perhaps not. If the issue being discussed is a matter of opinion, such a statement could be perfectly valid. An example:
“Awesome God is an excellent song… I think it rocks!”
“Really? The melody sounds like something out of a Barry White ballad.”
“Well…that’s your opinion!”
OK… here we’re talking about something that really is a matter of opinion. People like some songs and don’t like others. That’s a matter of opinion. However this is very different from the following example.
“I like using a really lively song like Awesome God for the Responsorial to get people excited about the Liturgy of the Word.”
“Awesome God? That’s really not appropriate for the Responsorial you know.”
“Well…that’s your opinion! I think it works just fine.”
It might be opinion that Awesome God is a good song. But it is a point of fact that the Responsorial must be a setting of the Psalm from either the Graduale or the Lectionary, and that another song or hymn cannot be substituted. That isn’t a matter of opinion. In this example, the speaker is simply wrong regardless of how he (or she) feels about the suitability of the song.
We may not always like the facts, but don’t claim that they are merely opinions when they are actually facts. If you disagree with what the actual documents say, then just say so and there will be no argument… except that you are admittedly disregarding the laws set forth by the Church. It’s intellectually dishonest to categorize liturgical laws or Church teachings as mere opinion which can be disregarded according to our personal likes and dislikes, even if it is a law or teaching which a great many people routinely disregard. This leads to the next point…
4. The views of the popular majority are useful in discussions about political issues where majority opinion forms law. The fact that an overwhelming majority of the people in a city approves of and desires the construction of a Toll Road is a compelling fact when discussing the wisdom of building such a road. That’s what Democracy is all about! Liturgy, however, is not Democratic, and majority opinion has very little place in a discussion about liturgical issues. “We are the Church” is a great slogan, but attributing to it the force of law leads to the same kind of confusion as the idea that we are “all baptized into the common priesthood”. All baptized persons are not Priests, nor are we all members of the hierarchy which is rightfully given the power to determine laws and doctrine for the Church.
Therefore, although a great many people enjoy this or that type of music, that fact does not lend it legitimacy unless it is already given legitimacy by the actual law of the Church. If a great many people enjoy the Chanted Introit, be assured that it is perfectly legitimate to use it…. not because the people like it, but rather because it’s already acknowledged as the primary choice for that role. If a great many people would rather hear a CD of Andre Boccelli singing “The Prayer” with Celine Dion as the Introit, you can be assured that is not allowed regardless of how many people would like to hear it. Majority opinion cannot legitimize something which contradicts the Church’s law (and that would contradict a number of them). Consensus does not create law in the Catholic Church. The above example only serves to demonstrate that a great many people are either unaware or unconcerned about what the Church teaches, and it’s absurd to suggest that such a group should dictate liturgical norms!
There are so many more points that could be included here, but this has already become longer than I had hoped! Perhaps I will add more to it at a later time…
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)