Sacred Music Vs. Secular Music In The Mass

[Cam42]

To add a little credence to my position, regarding how we have been catechized over the last two generations, listen to how Bishop Alex Sample described our generations of Catholics:

[quote][b]Describing himself as a member of “the first lost generation of poor catechesis,”Bishop Alexander K. Sample of Marquette,Mich.,said his generation of post-Vatican II Catholics had “raised up another generation that is equally uncatechized.”[/b][/quote]

The view that I have been supporting for many years now is gaining steam with a group of bishops, including Archbishop Carlson and Theodore Card.McCarrick. While they are speaking about homilies specifically, the application can be easily and directly applied to the liturgy, since the homily has been included as part of the liturgy since Vatican Council II.

[url="http://www.courageouspriest.com/usccb-planning-release-document-homilies"]source[/url]

[MithLuin]

Hehe, yes, I know the whole thing was written by St. Thomas Aquinas. It's just that they're typically broken up into separate hymns, and the ones I linked had different musical settings.

Honestly, it was probably a sanctus bell, not a handbell. It sounded right (I couldn't see it, so I'm not sure). I know they are different, but didn't know the name of the 'real' ones and just call them handbells because they are bells you ring with your hands. My church's were stolen before I became an altar server, so I never got to use them.

No, I wasn't being sarcastic about having no complaints. I really don't get bent out of shape about music at mass. That doesn't mean I don't think we can do better, but I'm *NEVER* going to have anything to do with what music is played or how it is chosen for *ANY* mass. EVER. So I see no reason to complain about how other people do their jobs. If the instructions from 'on high' change and people are more brought to task and we see a shift...fine. But I'm not going to sit in the pews and *grumble, grumble* every week because 'they're not doing it right!!!!!!' Musicians are a notoriously difficult group to rein in. It honestly doesn't bother me.

My main desire for music at mass is that it be LOUD. The louder it is, the more it will drown out my voice, so that I can sing my heart out without bothering anyone. Organ, full choir, various instruments, whatever. I am someone who CAN'T sing do-re-mi-fa-so-lah-te-do - at one point I could sight read music to play it on the piano, but chanting unaccompanied in a small group tends to end very badly if I am there. I have tried. Many times. I'm just tone deaf to voices, apparently. I think the Office sounds beautiful when chanted, but more beautiful if I keep my mouth shut. I can tell I'm 'doing it wrong' when I sing, but I can't hear what the errors are, so...I can't fix them.

Needless to say, I've never been involved in any way in any sort of music ministry. Nor will I be.

[Cam42]

[quote name='MithLuin' timestamp='1308577640' post='2256296']
Hehe, yes, I know the whole thing was written by St. Thomas Aquinas. It's just that they're typically broken up into separate hymns, and the ones I linked had different musical settings.

Honestly, it was probably a sanctus bell, not a handbell. It sounded right (I couldn't see it, so I'm not sure). I know they are different, but didn't know the name of the 'real' ones and just call them handbells because they are bells you ring with your hands. My church's were stolen before I became an altar server, so I never got to use them.

No, I wasn't being sarcastic about having no complaints. I really don't get bent out of shape about music at mass. That doesn't mean I don't think we can do better, but I'm *NEVER* going to have anything to do with what music is played or how it is chosen for *ANY* mass. EVER. So I see no reason to complain about how other people do their jobs. If the instructions from 'on high' change and people are more brought to task and we see a shift...fine. But I'm not going to sit in the pews and *grumble, grumble* every week because 'they're not doing it right!!!!!!' Musicians are a notoriously difficult group to rein in. It honestly doesn't bother me.

My main desire for music at mass is that it be LOUD. The louder it is, the more it will drown out my voice, so that I can sing my heart out without bothering anyone. Organ, full choir, various instruments, whatever. I am someone who CAN'T sing do-re-mi-fa-so-lah-te-do - at one point I could sight read music to play it on the piano, but chanting unaccompanied in a small group tends to end very badly if I am there. I have tried. Many times. I'm just tone deaf to voices, apparently. I think the Office sounds beautiful when chanted, but more beautiful if I keep my mouth shut. I can tell I'm 'doing it wrong' when I sing, but I can't hear what the errors are, so...I can't fix them.

Needless to say, I've never been involved in any way in any sort of music ministry. Nor will I be.
[/quote]

And you don't need to be. Also, you don't need to sing either. If you feel that participating by not singing is acceptable, then by all means don't sing. I support that wholeheartedly. Like I said above singing has become relegated to participatio activa and the participatio actuosa has been lost on this generation, because of the lack of catechesis about the Mass. You can assist at Mass, by kneeling through the whole thing and being 100% silent with your head down just as effectively as if you were fulfilling multiple extraordinary ministries...actually, you'd most likely be participating more....but since I can't read souls, I can't say for certain.

Understanding the difference between participatio activa and participatio actuosa is a key element for EVERY SINGLE Catholic, regardless of stature or position in the Church. How we worship is just as important as why we worship. But that has been lost on the last two generations...

[TeresaBenedicta]

[quote name='Cam42' timestamp='1308591454' post='2256355']
And you don't need to be. Also, you don't need to sing either. If you feel that participating by not singing is acceptable, then by all means don't sing. I support that wholeheartedly. Like I said above singing has become relegated to participatio activa and the participatio actuosa has been lost on this generation, because of the lack of catechesis about the Mass. You can assist at Mass, by kneeling through the whole thing and being 100% silent with your head down just as effectively as if you were fulfilling multiple extraordinary ministries...actually, you'd most likely be participating more....but since I can't read souls, I can't say for certain.

[b]Understanding the difference between participatio activa and participatio actuosa is a key element for EVERY SINGLE Catholic, regardless of stature or position in the Church. How we worship is just as important as why we worship. But that has been lost on the last two generations...[/b]
[/quote]

This is very true. Unfortunately.

[MithLuin]

Well, I do love singing at mass. God gave me my voice, so I don't have many qualms about giving it back to Him. I do, however, feel bad for the person sitting in front of me, so will sing much more quietly so as not to disturb others. But, if there's no one in front of me and the music is loud....I will sing at normal volume. I don't generally sing the songs at communion, but I sing the rest of the songs with the congregation/choir. Singing the words in addition to listening to them does draw me more deeply into the mass. I will stay silent if I don't know the song or can't sing in the language of that particular song (ie, a Polish hymn), but an inability to stay in tune doesn't prevent me from singing...or else I could [i]never[/i] sing.

Please do not consider my remarks above an argument that [i]no one[/i] should have strong opinions about music at mass. I understand why some do. It's just that...I don't. There's little that's going to bother me so much about the musical selection as to draw me out of celebrating the mass. Not even this:

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bJx7Ag2fN1I[/media]

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUirGgSa_EY[/media]

What can I say, there's no accounting for taste .

[Cam42]

[quote name='TeresaBenedicta' timestamp='1308596142' post='2256382']
This is very true. Unfortunately.
[/quote]

My theological group and I have been hammering and hammering on that specific point of almost 20 years now....it is finally starting to sink in a little...but the misunderstanding and misapplication is so widespread that it is hard to get it completely across to the Church....the Holy Father really needs to catechize more on that point....

It is also a cause of the hermeneutic of rupture....

1. Sacred Music
2. liturgical action
3. participatio activa v. participatio actuosa
4. catechesis (on the Catholic life)

Correct that, and you've eliminated 90% of the rupture. The rest will fall into place.

[MithLuin]

To what theological group are you referring?

[Cam42]

[quote name='MithLuin' timestamp='1308604423' post='2256456']
To what theological group are you referring?
[/quote]

There are a bunch of guys I was in seminary with and some youngish priests we associate with, who are like minded. Some went on to be ordained, some didn't, but we all promised to promote the authentic reform of the reform (as it was commonly known as at the time)....two are Canon Lawyers, some are very well known priests, and three are now bishops (one being a cardinal), but I won't name drop. But this idea of the reform of the reform, as first postulated by James Hitchcock, champioined by my mentor Monsignor Richard Schuler, Monsignor James Lavin, Monsignor Robert Probst, Monsignor Henri duLac, and his era really set the tone for my group to fight the way we do....we all have our own methods, but we all lean on each other for support, when needed. It isn't easy, as you can see, we are often misunderstood and maligned, but eventually and every so slowly our group is making headway.

So, we still talk via email, phone, text, facebook, whatever....and we all have been promoting the idea of what Pope Benedict is calling the hermeneutic of continuity or the reform of the reform.

If you go back and read a lot of what I've written, you'll see the theme is the same and it is consistent throughout. I have not moved one iota on my stances since that time and I won't until such time as the hermeneutic of continuity (reform of the reform) is realized.

BTW, if you think I'm blowing smoke, ask jaime (the artist formerly known as hot stuff). He knows. Also, you can look back, I do reference most of them at some point during my time at phatmass.

[mortify]

Secular music has absolutely no role in Mass.

Nuff said...

As a civilization we have clearly lost the meaning of Sacred.

[Cam42]

[quote name='mortify' timestamp='1308611077' post='2256540']
Secular music has absolutely no role in Mass.

Nuff said...

As a civilization we have clearly lost the meaning of Sacred.
[/quote]


I agree completely. Now how do we get the meaning of the Sacred back?

[mortify]

[quote name='Cam42' timestamp='1308615837' post='2256578']
I agree completely. Now how do we get the meaning of the Sacred back?
[/quote]

That is a tremendous task, but it involves at least two key things. Restoring Catholic Liturgy and spirituality is certainly the first step. If we don't worship with the concept of Sacredness, how can we expect it to believed? For this, I believe the traditional Latin mass should be restored as the ordinary form, albeit not identical to the so called Tridentine rite. I think the original aims of the liturgical movement in the late 19th and early 20th centuries were headed in the right direction before they spun out of control. Some prudent changes guided by sound theology and development may be called for.

Secondly, it involves an interior transformation. The average person is wholly unaware that we live in a system with its own dogmas and ideologies. A system governed by what has been occasionally called Organized Naturalism. Those of us living in the contemporary West possess a modern mindset that needs to be transformed into a Catholic one. It entails much learning, meditation, prayer, and a solid interior life. We really have to pray that we will even understand a concept such as "Spirit," let alone Sacredness.

Perhaps I should add a third thing, and this is really the most important. It will require oceans of graces from God, and alot of intercesion on our behalf from the Virgin Mary and countless Saints.

But God knows best.

Edited June 21, 2011 by mortify

[Cam42]

[quote name='mortify' timestamp='1308617271' post='2256593']
That is a tremendous task, but it involves at least two key things. Restoring Catholic Liturgy and spirituality is certainly the first step. If we don't worship with the concept of Sacredness, how can we expect it to believed? For this, I believe the traditional Latin mass should be restored as the ordinary form, albeit not identical to the so called Tridentine rite. I think the original aims of the liturgical movement in the late 19th and early 20th centuries were headed in the right direction before they spun out of control. Some prudent changes guided by sound theology and development may be called for.

Secondly, it involves an interior transformation. The average person is wholly unaware that we live in a system with its own dogmas and ideologies. A system governed by what has been occasionally called Organized Naturalism. Those of us living in the contemporary West possess a modern mindset that needs to be transformed into a Catholic one. It entails much learning, meditation, prayer, and a solid interior life. We really have to pray that we will even understand a concept such as "Spirit," let alone Sacredness.

Perhaps I should add a third thing, and this is really the most important. It will require oceans of graces from God, and alot of intercesion on our behalf from the Virgin Mary and countless Saints.

But God knows best.
[/quote]

The Church has done it before...I'm sure she'll do it again....but I agree with you more or less....

I think that the only changes that are warranted in the Traditional Latin Mass is an adjustment of the calendar to include those saints who have been canonized since the calendar change in the 1960s. We have a lot more saints and that has always been a practice.

While I agree with a lot of the changes that came from the liturgical movement of the 19th and early 20th centuries, there was an underlying sense of liberal sensibilities when it came to the Mass. I'm not saying that it is the exact same thing as the political liberals that we have today, but it is a concern, as the Church is not liberal in her views toward the Sacraments. She never has been. Development has always been done in a conservative manner, by that I mean that she relies on tradition, not innovation to illuminate the development of the Mass. At no time has any adjustment of the Traditional Latin Mass since the time of Pius V been an innovative process. The same should apply in the here and now.

[Chrysophylax]

[size="3"]I agree that we need to add in our new saints to the calendar! [/size]