Yay....the Vernacular

[Oik]

Cat Stevens is a Muslim Imam that doesn't play music any more...
not cool

[aloha918]

[quote name='Oik' date='Apr 14 2005, 11:09 AM'] Cat Stevens is a Muslim Imam that doesn't play music any more...
not cool [/quote]
why is this "not cool"......becasuse he doesnt play much music anymore.....i would agree.....

if it is becasue he is now islam i would strongly disagree.

[Cam42]

[quote name='hot stuff' date='Apr 14 2005, 09:27 AM']
Argent

That's simply not possible.  There are churches in the US that, if they had a pipe organ, it would literally blow all the windows out.  The architecture simply doesn't allow it.  (Again its about acoustics folks)

Also what about impoverished communities here and around the world?  I've played in churches in Central America that had 1000 families that barely had the means to keep to keep their children alive and healthy.

Part of tradition is the ability for musicians to compose liturgical music.  They still need instrumentation[/quote]
Or acceptable facsimile of a pipe organ, such as a reed organ. If a church isn't large enough, the Church allows for that particular issue, Himester.

As far as the churches in Central America go: why can't donors give money to get them an organ? What is so tough about that?

One of the arguments that is often made about music is that of “native influence.” Since Guatemala can’t afford an organ, they can use marimba or some other “native” instrumentation.

Pope St. Pius X speaks directly to this in Tra le sollecitudini. He says, [quote]....still these forms must be subordinated in such a manner to the general characteristics of sacred music that nobody of any nation may receive an impression other than good [here meaning, sacred in nature] on hearing them (Tra le Sollecitudini 2).[/quote]

Remember what Ms. Carroll says?
[quote]But if a mariachi band sounds exactly as it does at a fiesta where the guests are swigging margaritas, or a rock band sounds as it does at a local teen dance, then they are not suitable for Mass. Whether they can be made suitable or sacred in nature as the Church requires is highly questionable.....Music that is entertaining is, by its nature and style, appealing and popular; but it is not sacred music. Mariachi bands, kazoo groups, rock bands, and the like are definitely not “suited to the grandeur of the act being celebrated.[/quote]


[quote]They still need instrumentation[/quote]

In lieu of not being able to teach the congregation to sing Gregorian Chant. Why can't we teach the faithful Gregorian Chant? Is that unreasonable? No. We are commanded by the Church to know the responses in Latin, therefore learning Gregorian Chant would help facilitate that. Instrumentation, including the organ, plays second fiddle to the human voice. Why can't we teach them Gregorian Chant?

I would assert this; by eschewing formality, solemnity and complexity, we expect the simplistic to be used. By it’s very nature a guitar is simple. It cannot generate the complexity that any organ, pipe, reed, or otherwise can. By moving to this simplistic stylization, we are abandoning the heritage that is the Catholic tradition in favor of a “sterilized” and simplistic Liturgy.

How often is it said, “We’ll use the guitar, piano, etc...for the regular Sunday Liturgies, but we’ll use the organ for “Special Masses?” What is wrong with that statement? The error is that all Liturgy is to be special. So, why not make use of the most appropriate sacred instrument for the Liturgies that use music?


Cam

[Jaime]

[quote]As far as the churches in Central America go: why can't donors give money to get them an organ? What is so tough about that?[/quote]

Oh c'mon Cam... you are not serious.

You know how much it cost to get the pipe organ in the chapel at UST. How much more exponentially would it be to put that organ in Venezuala?

Hey thanks for the million dollar organ. Got any corn we can grind? No?

And let's lighten up abit on Ms Carroll shall we? She offers an educated opinion yes. But it is only opinion (and you know that)

She is not an authority within matters of Church.

Edited April 15, 2005 by jaime

[Cam42]

[quote]You know how much it cost to get the pipe organ in the chapel at UST. How much more exponentially would it be to put that organ in Venezuala?[/quote]

Yeah, but I am not expecting them to put in a $1.5 millon organ, but there is nothing preventing them to donate and get a $5,000 reed organ. I don't think that is unreasonable at all.

[url="http://www.thepianoworld.com/mannborg_german.htm"]$5000 Reed Organ[/url]

And it is a bit disingenious don't you think to make the "corn" statement? It is a bit like comparing apples and oranges.

Cam (the finder of reasonably priced organs)

[Jaime]

Annual income per family in Venezuela $2800

Find me a reed organ that doesn't need to be imported or the realistic price triples

Corn statement still makes sense

[jmjtina]

how about a keyboard that you program to sound like an organ?

cam and jam, I always love reading your posts.

[Cam42]

[quote name='jmjtina' date='Apr 15 2005, 10:59 PM'] how about a keyboard that you program to sound like an organ?

cam and jam, I always love reading your posts. [/quote]
Nope, the sound has to be authentic...synthesizers don't work....

Sorry. It is in the documentation that I provided earlier.

Cam

[Cam42]

[quote]Annual income per family in Venezuela $2800[/quote]

So....I am talking about a D-O-N-A-T-I-O-N. Last time I checked many Americans will donate more than $5000 to a pet show.....so why not use that to get an organ into a church?

Incidentally, in 2002, the average income in the US was about $37,000 according to Bereau of Labor Statistics....yet we can figure out a way to put millions into our churches....why can't they? Are they somehow less capable? And if they are, doesn't that mean that our charity (see above about donations) would mean even more?

So, how about we start finding ways to empower them and show the dignity that they are capable of.....buying (or accepting) a reed organ for $5000, is not irresponsible. No more so than a person making $37,000 buying a $500,000 home. Gee...corresponding isn't it.

Cam

N.B. I am sure St. Whoever's parish who raises the 5 grand can come up with another 5 hundo to get the shipping and tariff paid for, don'tcha think? I do.

[argent_paladin]

Well, as Cam said before, small chapels and churches don't need organs. And the last time I checked, the human voice is the cheapest, most versitile instrument known. Any church that is too large for an a cappella choir is likely large enough to buy an organ.
And the undercurrent of your response is related to one of the most common criticisms of the Catholic Church: Why doesn't it sell all its stuff and give it to the poor? The Vatican, when asked about this concerning the Vatican Museum replied that the art belonged to all of humanity and thus couldn't be sold. I always respond that the poor deserve beauty as much as the rich. Churches should be beautiful and that beauty is accessable to all. It also reflects the intentions of the donors. They want to give the gift of beauty to their community. From my experience, wealth doesn't necessarily correlate with beauty. There are many churches in poor districts in Mexico that have beautiful churches, with statues, icons and beautiful altars and organs. And there are wealthy American parishes in unadorned buildings, with million-dollar soundsystems, wall-to-wall carpeting and air conditioning but no beauty.
Organs were common in many cultures and times that compared to today are poverty-stricken. The people who helped build Notre Dame or Rhiems Cathedrals lived short, brutal, hard lives. Even the wealthy, by our standards, were poor. Yet they contributed out of their poverty to something lasting and beautiful.

[Cam42]

[quote name='argent_paladin' date='Apr 16 2005, 03:27 AM'] Well, as Cam said before, small chapels and churches don't need organs. And the last time I checked, the human voice is the cheapest, most versitile instrument known. Any church that is too large for an a cappella choir is likely large enough to buy an organ.
And the undercurrent of your response is related to one of the most common criticisms of the Catholic Church: Why doesn't it sell all its stuff and give it to the poor? The Vatican, when asked about this concerning the Vatican Museum replied that the art belonged to all of humanity and thus couldn't be sold. I always respond that the poor deserve beauty as much as the rich. Churches should be beautiful and that beauty is accessable to all. It also reflects the intentions of the donors. They want to give the gift of beauty to their community. From my experience, wealth doesn't necessarily correlate with beauty. There are many churches in poor districts in Mexico that have beautiful churches, with statues, icons and beautiful altars and organs. And there are wealthy American parishes in unadorned buildings, with million-dollar soundsystems, wall-to-wall carpeting and air conditioning but no beauty.
Organs were common in many cultures and times that compared to today are poverty-stricken. The people who helped build Notre Dame or Rhiems Cathedrals lived short, brutal, hard lives. Even the wealthy, by our standards, were poor. Yet they contributed out of their poverty to something lasting and beautiful. [/quote]
I agree with you, argent. I said as much earlier when I said:
[quote]In lieu of not being able to teach the congregation to sing Gregorian Chant. Why can't we teach the faithful Gregorian Chant? Is that unreasonable? No. We are commanded by the Church to know the responses in Latin, therefore learning Gregorian Chant would help facilitate that. Instrumentation, including the organ, plays second fiddle to the human voice. Why can't we teach them Gregorian Chant?[/quote]

However, hot stuff and others won't answer that question.

[quote]I always respond that the poor deserve beauty as much as the rich. Churches should be beautiful and that beauty is accessable to all.[/quote]

Abso-friggin-loutely. Hence my statement:
[quote]Yeah, but I am not expecting them to put in a $1.5 millon organ, but there is nothing preventing them to donate and get a $5,000 reed organ. I don't think that is unreasonable at all.[/quote]

Here in the US, as you know, we are willing to spend billions on aid to Russia and China, but as soon as I say something like, "Hey Catholics...let's donate to help third world countries have a liturgy that is beautiful and in keeping with Roman Tradition...."

I get..."oh that's great, "Got any corn, no?" I am not talking about humanitarian aid, I am talking about dontating to the Church. They will get the humanitarian aid, I don't doubt that....I am talking about something totally different.

How many charities does the average American give to? More than one....So, why can't Catholics give to humanitarian aid AND to help outfit the churches that need things to make the Liturgy more beautiful....?

I think that they can.

Cam

[Jaime]

You want the Gregorian chant back? That's a different debate and that debate would be latin. We're talking about the guitar here . That's why you don't get a response.

$500 bucks for shipping an organ to a developing country? pulllleeaaaase

[Cam42]

[quote name='hot stuff' date='Apr 16 2005, 09:59 AM'] You want the Gregorian chant back? That's a different debate and that debate would be latin. We're talking about the guitar here . That's why you don't get a response.

$500 bucks for shipping an organ to a developing country? pulllleeaaaase [/quote]
Gregorian Chant has always been part of this conversation....also....the point is that if one can raise $5000 which ain't all that hard, then coming up with a couple extra $$ to ship it ain't hard either.

Cam

[Cam42]

[quote]That's a different debate and that debate would be latin. We're talking about the guitar here . That's why you don't get a response.[/quote]

What is the title of this thread again? Oh yeah.....what was the first quote of this thread....per hot stuff:
[quote](Cam's going to love this) Littleless this will probably confound you but the truth is. The Mass is rarely celebrated today in the venacular. The venacular of the Mass is Latin. It was the unifying language of the Church and it is sad that we do not use any of the language in our celebrations. ( Hey I used to be pretty obstinate against this one myself)[/quote]

Latin.....vernacular....YAY!!!!! It has come full circle. However, Latin and Gregorian Chant are closely related to the erradication of the secular instrumentation used in the Mass.

Gloria in excelsis Deo....

Cam

N.B. Considering Gregorian Chant should have never left, yes.....I want it back.

[Jaime]

[quote]N.B. Considering Gregorian Chant should have never left, yes.....I want it back.[/quote]

Then give up your bitter hatred for the guitar at mass! No harm will come to your precious chants my friend. Just slooooowwwly back away.


You've got agreement with me on latin. Hammer it into the ground if you want. You get latin back and you have your chants.

I have effectively hijacked this thread to the guitar! You've even brought your girlfriend Ms Carroll into the conversation. So stop jumping around!! This isn't House of Pain.