Friday, June 26, 2009
Pieces of music
Last weekend in Dayton, the archdiocesan Worship Office and Office of Youth and Young Adult Ministry held its annual Laudate conference. According to one of the conference sponsors, “Students at Laudate hone skills and learn more about the liturgy and what it means to be a pastoral musician in the Catholic Church.” The current edition of the Catholic Telegraph of Cincinnati has the details, along with this revealing quote: “There are certain pieces of music when drums wouldn’t be appropriate.” On the same weekend in Chicago, the Church Music Association of America held its annual Summer Chant Intensive; it's my understanding that drums were not discussed.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
33 comments:
It's my understanding that only percussion instruments (metallic ones at that) are allowed to accompany the ancient chants of the Coptic Orthodox Church.
I was at the chant intensive...wow it was amazing...it is preferable that chant not be accompanied (even by organ)... drums are right out.
btw About 1/3 of the 50 participants were my age or younger (I'm 29) but of course we consider ourselves sacred not pastoral musicians
“There are certain pieces of music when drums wouldn’t be appropriate.”
Correct, all of them.
Eric beat me to it. I was going to say, "Like any music when there is a Mass going on."
But there are pieces of music suited for drums: slave-galley music for one. Another would be rock bands in sleezy bars in which case you don't want the drums to stop because then there would be a bass solo.
Laudate = bell-bottom jeans, tie-dye t-shirts, and questionable personal hygiene.
Chant Intensive = tuxedos, Dom Perrignon, and Tiffany's.
Anything not eternal is eternally out of date. Even in matters of style.
As a former parish music director and as the priest-chaplain for LAUDATE since it began five years ago, I can assure you that the conference is thoroughly orthodox and appropriately eclectic.
Was a variety of musical instruments used? Yes, organ, piano, brass, reeds, strings, and percussion. Were prayers and texts in a variety of languages? Yes, Latin, Greek, Spanish, and English. Were various musical styles programmed? Yes, everything from chant tones to strophic hymns to Taize ostinatos to contemporary liturgical songs, everything from Handel chorus to a beautiful, moving Marian composition written in the wake of the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami which claimed over 300,000 lives. Perhaps everyone ought to pray Psalm 150 more often or read #393 in the GIRM.
We need to support our youth in any and all ways they choose to be more active and effective members of the Church. After all, in this case, their musical talents are gifts to them from God... Is there a better way for them to use their God-given talents than in giving thanks and praise to Him?
In any case, I find it rather interesting how anyone could accurately critique any conference – LAUDATE or the Summer Chant Intensive – when you did not actually experience it firsthand.
Father,
The Church has a form of music "built in" to her liturgy, and it doesn't involve drums or most of the other instruments you mention.
As to the "firsthand experience" objection, one need not drink the whole gallon to determine whether the milk is spoiled.
The Church does have a form of music "built in" to her liturgy... but there are a myriad of ways that form has been authentically expressed in our two-thousand year history in various global cultures. This is very evident whenever the Pope celebrates Mass when he travels. I doubt if the Holy Father or his liturgical planners are "surprised" when various musical instruments and styles and movement are used at papal liturgies again and again and again. This is part of the beauty of our Church which transcends time and cultures yet at the same time embraces time and cultures.
As far as this form not involving drums or other instruments, I again refer you to the Vatican-approved US GIRM #393. Am I misreading something?
And finally, you don't have to "drink the whole gallon to determine whether the milk is spoiled." But you do have to take at least a sip of the milk and not just look at the carton sitting on the shelf in the grocery's refrigerated section.
Father,
I'm not sure how to put this other than plainly: what you are saying simply is not true.
Read Sacramentum Caritatis, or Sacrosanctum Concilium, or Musica Sacra, or Tra le sollecitudini ... or scores of other documents from the Holy See on what constitutes sacred music.
The music that is built in to the liturgy is Chant; it is the "supreme model" upon which all liturgical music is to be based.
When the Holy Father travels, he defers to local ordinaries for their choice of music during papal Masses; that is a function of subsidiarity, not papal preference.
cricket: actually, we used to use some "metallic percussion" when we chanted at St. Peter in Chains, and I bet they still do. Kudos to the first to guess what I mean.
And Fr. Geoff: to torture this allegory a little further: would that we were able to say we had merely espied carton on the shelf, but virtually every massgoer in the US has at one time or another gotten a mouthful of rotten "Glory and Praise" curd.
"We need to support our youth in any and all ways they choose to be more active and effective members of the Church."
Really? Any? And all?
Hmmmmmn.
"Father, I play totally bitchin' Christian power ballads on my classic Fender Stratocaster through a stack of Marshalls. Put me on the rotation for the Praise Band at Mass and let me know when I should be there. K?"
Mustn't be judgmental, now. Wouldn't want to turn the youth away from "authentic expressions" of their spirituality.
I usually skip the threads on music, but decided to dive in on this one.
Father, I'm not sure how to put this other than plainly: what you are saying simply is not true.
Rich, you never answered Fr. Geoff's question: I again refer you to the Vatican-approved US GIRM #393. Am I misreading something?
GIRM 393: While the organ is to be accorded pride of place, other wind, stringed, or percussion instruments may be used in liturgical services in the dioceses of the United States of America, according to longstanding local usage, provided they are truly apt for sacred use or can be rendered apt.
(Having not looked at GIRM for ages, I lent it to someone and suddenly I'v needed it twice in the past two days. Thankfully, there are search engines.)
Rich,
I also was at the Chant Intensive in Chicago, I was one of the older people at the intensive at 47, but I think Aquinas comment sums it up.
"Laudate = bell-bottom jeans, tie-dye t-shirts, and questionable personal hygiene.
Chant Intensive = tuxedos, Dom Perrignon, and Tiffany's.
Anything not eternal is eternally out of date. Even in matters of style."
I was encourage buy the spirit of the people at the Chant Intensive, young people who know the road to recovery of the sacred music is long and we are just beginning, but are Joyful about the change.
Once you hear the music/chant in the context of the Holy Mass you know this is "proper" music for the Liturgy, and there is no going back to the dated period pieces we experience now.
ddeavy
I don't want to pile on and I know nothing of LAUDATE, I haven't even read the carton, but I have seen what works in youth ministry and was doesn't.
Youth, like everyone else, crave authenticity. They want to be taught what it means to be an adult.
When an "old guy" (someone over 30) tries to "meet them where they're at" they flee like rats from a sinking ship. Unfortunately the old guy many times is so caught up in youthful enthusiasm that he doesn't realize it.
If one communicates with adolescents the way one would communicate with an adult the adolescents will learn how to communicate as an adult. If one teaches authentically beautiful music suited for the liturgy to adolescents they will learn to appreciate authentically beautiful music suited for the liturgy.
Unfortunately most middle aged Catholics wouldn't know decent liturgical music if it slapped them in the face.
NO DRUMS, NO GUITARS, AND NO STUPID BELLS IN MY CHURCH. GO AWAY AND WORSHIP IN AFRICA IF YOU WANT AFRICAN MUSIC.
Anon 10:09, get up on the wrong side of bed today?
I came back to clarify my first post, although not much more time with this one.
Liturgical music is more than chant or even just organ. I like chant and there are times when I wish there was more. Chant or even organ only would've precluded all of the wonderful Mass settings of Mozart, Schubert, Vivaldi, and others.
I'm sure something's omitted that I'll have to clarify later, but need to run.
Hi Rich!
If you'll allow a brief comment from a geezer (I was a classroom teacher when Fr. Geoff was in the glee club)...
Here is something for everyone: "Laudate Dominum" by Christopher Walker. Check it out. It's on the net!
Google: ocp.org/songs/17101
Fantastic! Modern. Sacred. In Latin! PS: It' even better with timpani! That's how Tony DiCello does it at St. Peter in Chains Cathedral.
Fr. Dale at Jewish
Thanks for citing some important documents, Rich. I would have responded sooner but it is our parish festival weekend and I also have to leave momentarily for a wedding of friends outside the parish.
From Pius X’s TRA LE SOLLECITUDINI #5: “The Church has always recognized and favored the progress of the arts, admitting to the service of religion everything good and beautiful discovered by genius in the course of ages -- always, however, with due regard to the liturgical laws. Consequently modern music is also admitted to the Church, since it, too, furnishes compositions of such excellence, sobriety and gravity, that they are in no way unworthy of the liturgical functions.” Shortly after this quote, document does state that “other instruments (i.e. other than organ) may be allowed, but never without the special permission of the Ordinary,” but also forbids piano and “bands” from playing in church. Of course, the Council of Nicaea forbade kneeling on Sundays. Both are moot points in light of subsequent documents and teachings.
From Benedict XVI’s SACRAMENTUM CARITATIS #42: “Finally, while respecting various styles and different and highly praiseworthy traditions, I desire, in accordance with the request advanced by the Synod Fathers, that Gregorian chant be suitably esteemed and employed as the chant proper to the Roman liturgy.” From Vatican II’s 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. But other kinds of sacred music, especially polyphony, are by no means excluded from liturgical celebrations, so long as they accord with the spirit of the liturgical action…” The primacy of chant does not exclude other styles and traditions of music as is clarified by the GIRM…
From the Vatican–approved US GIRM #48: “The singing at this time [i.e. the entrance, the following norms also apply for the offertory (#74) and communion (#87) is done either alternately by the choir and the people or in a similar way by the cantor and the people, or entirely by the people, or by the choir alone. 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.”
And #393 (which Mary Kay noticed that you have yet to comment on, Rich) “While the organ is to be accorded pride of place, other wind, stringed, or percussion instruments may be used in liturgical services in the dioceses of the United States of America, according to longstanding local usage, provided they are truly apt for sacred use or can be rendered apt.”
And Anonymous, if I had a young member of my church who "played totally bitchin' Christian power ballads on his classic Fender Stratocaster through a stack of Marshalls," I would tell him that not all types of Christian music are appropriate during the liturgy. But I would also find an appropriate venue for him to use his God-given talents in the service of the Church.
it jsut kills me when people quote church documents about music-- the documents ALWAYS say chant should be given pride of place BUT all things being equal...yadda yadda yadda....CHANT HAS NOT BEEN GIVEN PRIDE OF PLACE!!!!! so all things are not equal.
as much as i love mozart and vivaldi those masses were as out of place back then as stratocasters and bongos are today.
NO ORGAN WITH CHANT! Yuck! Chant is without accompaniment.
Father,
You've obviously learned which option-granting passages in the GIRM give priests a pretext to ignore other, binding passages in the Church's documents governing the liturgy.
What, specifically, are you doing to ensure that Chant is given "pride of place" in liturgical celebrations in your parish per Sacrosanctum Concilium 116? Does Chant indeed occupy such a place in your liturgical celebrations? Do your parishioners sing the Chant for the Ordinary? the propers?
What, specifically, are you doing to ensure that the faithful in your parish are able to recite the basic prayers of the Mass in Latin per Sacramentum Caritatis 62?
In paragraph 42 of Sacramentum Caritatis, Pope Benedict implores priests to ensure that the 2,000 year patrimony of sacred liturgical music not be lost, and cautions them as follows: "Certainly as far as the liturgy is concerned, we cannot say that one song is as good as another. Generic improvisation or the introduction of musical genres which fail to respect the meaning of the liturgy should be avoided." How, specifically, are you ensuring that this teaching is observed in your parishes?
NO DRUMS, NO GUITARS, AND NO STUPID BELLS IN MY CHURCH. GO AWAY AND WORSHIP IN AFRICA IF YOU WANT AFRICAN MUSIC.
Don't sugar-coat it anon, tell us how you really feel. :) Also, I think people in favor of crap throw out the African card too freely and it warrants suspicion--to whit: Africa is conveniently remote enough that we can't check up to see if they really implement lousy music to the degree that the purveyors of lousy music think they do.
My test: Remove the lyrics of the song proposed for liturgy and listen to just the music. Does it sound like it belongs in--
A. A new-agey massage parlor
B. A pop or rock concert
C. A campfire circle
D. A Merry-go-round or with an organ grinder and monkey.
E. Church
If the answer is anything other than E, throw it out.
I think that the churches documents are pretty clear that Gregorian chant should be given "first place". but I would like to point out the nature of sacred music. Gregorian chant developed within the liturgy it is uniquely liturgical and an organic part of the liturgy, it has no secular counterpart. Sacred polyphony is beautiful and apropreate for the liturgy because it developed from chant. However it is less appropriate than chant because it has a secular counterpart. The 'concert masses' (Mozart ect.) are even less appropriate (in my opinion they shouldn’t be used in the liturgy at all) because they are essentially entertainment music adapted to sacred texts. This is also why folk masses, polka masses, the Broadway style music foisted on us by OCP and GIA Hass and Haugen ect. aught to be banned.
The liturgy is sacred it aught not sound like everyday secular life. Chant may sound foreign but at mass we are foreigners in the heavenly.
Solid post, Ben. Anyone interested in the importance of sacred music should take a look at the Church Music Association of America's very useful FAQ document:
http://www.musicasacra.com/pdf/smfaq.pdf
Ben is my hero of the day. I'll also add that Marty Haugen is on record as saying he did not intend his music for liturgy. And here is a little anectdote about uniqueness of chant. When my oldest was four years old the radio scanned past a chant performance and he said, "That sounds like church." The stunning thing is is that up to that point he had never heard chant in the context of church.
Really...Marty Haugen didn't compose the MASS of Creation for use in the liturgy? I'd like to see that quote...
A more careful quotation of #116 of the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy might include the qualifying phrase, "other things being equal..."
One of those other things may be the "aim to be considered before all else" in #14 of the same document. Chant should be an important part of the liturgy of the Roman Rite, even in the United States. HOWEVER...since the Church in her magisterial teaching allows for a diversity of musical styles, the argument for a chant-only repertoire seems uninformed.
JH, what exactally do you mean?
yes the church allows for other kinds of music, but does this mean that for example a jazz setting of the mass should be permited or given preferance over the form belonging to the liturgy?
#14 CSL ... active participation?....#54 "steps should be taken so that the faithful may say or sing together in Latin the parts that pertain to them" ... the parts that pertain to the ordinary pewsitter are the Ordinary of the Mass that is the Kyrie , Gloria, Anus Dei, Sanctus, Credo , Pater Noster.
Their is also the question of what does 'other things being equal' and 'active participation' mean I think that VatII should be interpeted in the broader contex of what the church has said in the past. Our religion wasn't born in the 1960s
BTW, If anyone is near the Corning NY area and interested; on the first Sunday of each month
(7:30 am St. Mary's Church corner of 1st and state st.)there is a 'chant mass' (introit, offertory and communion propers from the Roman Gradual as well as chanted ordinary settings, translations are provided and singing of the ordinary by all very much encouraged)
I think its clear from all the different documents quoted that as far as music is concerned -
1. Gregorian Chant has pride of place in the Liturgy
2. Other music is permitted
I think, starting with #2, most would agree that this doesn't mean that all musical styles or instruments are appropriate. The real work here is determining what is appropriate.
I think #1 would look like having chant in all parishes, at most Sunday Masses, much of the time.
I also think that pride of place’ means FIRST or most important. A way to tell if a musical conference is faithfully following the idea of Pride of Place is that Chant would always be at the conference. And not just one small class to ‘check the box’ but a majority!
Now - to be clear - I don't know if this conference had sessions on chant. (I looked for the list of classes and didn't find it.) If it did not, I'm not saying that the folks that organized it are evil or heretics.
What I am saying is that if there was no chant offered - in fact I would think 50% of the offerings, I don't know how this event is following what has been proclaimed by Vatican II – that Chant has pride of place and that all efforts – certainly ones sponsored by the Archdiocese should be working in that direction.
That might be seen as promoting an agenda not consistent with Church teaching – simply through omission.
Re: Coptic percussion
That's the _sistrum_. It's one of the oldest Egyptian instruments, and was always used in connection with religious ceremonies. It was hieratic in character from the beginning, so no surprise that it still is.
Re: Vatican II mandates
Vatican II mandated that all parishes teach all Catholics how to make the basic Latin responses which belong to the people, and to teach them how to sing them.
So it would be logical if every parish music program began with these basics. It would be logical if a diocesan music workshop for young people included such things as remedial education for anybody who hadn't happened to learn the basics.
But usually, Catholic post-Vatican II music programs don't, just as a whole honking lot of pre-Vatican II music programs didn't. The reform has been blithely ignored in the main. Sometimes these things are included as extra enrichment, as I got some of it, but not as the standard hamburger basics.
You can say similar things about the mandate that chant be used, the strong encouragement of polyphony, and sadly, even the strong encouragement of organ as the most suitable instrument when instruments are used.
Shrug. But of course, we live in a society where basics of math and reading are routinely turned into extras or too much trouble. So it doesn't surprise me that other basics are likewise neglected. So much easier to chase the buzzwords of the moment....
Ben,
I'm not implying that we shouldn't see VatII as part of a hermeneutic of continuity - we should. To see it otherwise is to be ignorant of history. Did we "throw the baby out with the bathwater" in some cases, particularly liturgically, in the post-conciliar reform? Yes.
However, my point about "other things being equal" was to say that when quoting that article of the CSL, it would have been helpful to include that qualifying phrase. The qualifying phrase seems to go to the intent of the Church in offering options to enhance the participation of the faithful, named in #14 as primary.
I agree that #54 directs that people should be prepared to participate in their "proper" parts of the liturgy in Latin. However, this sentence is a "disclaimer" to the first sentence of article #54, which establishes that the "mother tongue" may be used in Masses with the people.
JH, the word "may" sticks out like a sore thumb in the last sentence of your last post.
The permitted takes precedence over the clearly stated ideal.
David
Post a Comment