For Cam - aucostic guitars

[Brother Adam]

I got into a debate about using various instruments at mass, especially the guitar. I think it was you that said guitars are absolutey not permissible. I'm wondering if you could post the specific documents that show that we are not to use them so I can pass that information along. Thanks. Adam

[Cam42]

[quote name='Brother Adam' date='Apr 7 2006, 10:51 PM']I got into a debate about using various instruments at mass, especially the guitar. I think it was you that said guitars are absolutey not permissible. I'm wondering if you could post the specific documents that show that we are not to use them so I can pass that information along. Thanks. Adam
[right][snapback]939642[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

The musician must subjegate himself to the divine law when composing or praying the music of the Mass.

The use of the organ does not need to be theologically proven, by the way. The Church is a Church of tradition as well. I have given many examples of the organ; pipe or otherwise as being the preferred instrument through sacred tradition. How can I say sacred? Through all of the enycylicals, exhortations and conciliar documentation.

The only other instruments mentioned are bowed instruments. Last I checked, the guitar is not a bowed instrument (unless of course you are a drugged out wack-o named Jimmy Paige).

As far as culture goes, read the encyclicals. The Catholic culture still supercedes. Just as in the proper use of language, the proper use of music is to be followed. To do otherwise is to stand in direct opposition to both Pope St. Pius X and Pope Pius XII.

I still assert that guitars are instruments of secular music and not worthy of sacred music, based on the articles and comments by the authortitative figures named. Especially, Pope St. Pius X, Pope Pius XII, and Pope Paul VI, as well Susan Benofey, Lucy Carroll and the USCCB.

The thought that there is a subjective understanding of music is a flawed one. There is no action of the sacred Liturgy that is subjective. There is no action of the sacred Liturgy that is at the discretion of the minister. This has been made clear time and time again. This also applies to the musician. The formula’s that are to be adhered to are often not. They are passed over for innovation and subjectivism. What do I mean by this? When there is an organ in the church, it sits silent as a guitar is played. Traditional hymns such as the Salve Regina, Sing of Mary, Schubert’s Ave Maria are passed over in favor of a guitar group or a piano/synthesizer.

Referring back to Ms. Carroll, when is this proper? The congregation should rightly sing a capella if the organ is not possible. She asks a question that has been glossed over, so I will ask it. “So why do we have electric keyboards, jazz and rock groups and an abundance of guitars instead of the pipe organ or a good pipe organ facsimile?”

My answer...."music ministry” has become more important than the participatio actuosa of the faithful. “Music ministry” would rather hold court in the front of the church than allow for the congregation to sing.

What can an organ do that a guitar can’t? Ms. Carroll rightly asserts, “The pipe organ is not only powerful and authoritative because of its depth and volume, but because it mimics the human voice, a fact alluded to by Pope Saint Pius X. That is, air is pumped through pipes (organ pipe/human windpipe) via a wind chest (lungs and diaphragm) and follows a nice straight path out the round opening (pipe opening/human mouth). This means that, like a singer, a pipe organ can actually breathe.”

“A well-trained organist will lift his or her hands at the end of each phrase, resulting in an obvious silence and a clear indication to the congregation that they can all breathe together at that spot. Strummed guitars, drums, and other percussive instruments cannot do that. And again, the organ can provide several lines of music simultaneously: melody, harmony, descant, etc. While playing, an organist is a whirl of hand and foot activity.”

There are several reasons that organs are more appropriate than guitars.

[quote name='Sacrosanctum Concilium #120']"In the Latin Church the pipe organ is to be held in high esteem, for it is the traditional musical instrument which adds a wonderful splendor to the Church’s ceremonies and powerfully lifts up man’s mind to God and to higher things.

But other instruments also may be admitted for use in divine worship, with the knowledge and consent of the competent territorial authority, as laid down in Art. 22, 52, 37, and 40. This may be done, however, only on condition that the instruments are suitable, or can be made suitable, for sacred use, accord with the dignity of the temple, and truly contribute to the edification of the faithful.”[/quote]

This may be done, however, only on condition that the instruments are suitable, or can be made suitable, for sacred use, accord with the dignity of the temple, and truly contribute to the edification of the faithful.

I can show in several ways that the guitar is not suitable. It is a profane instrument.

Liturgical laws are not arbitrary constructions but are intended to protect important truths and realities of the faith according to the principle lex orandi lex credendi (the law of praying is the law of believing). For this reason the authority in the Church which has the charism of protecting the faith is uniquely responsible for safeguarding the integrity of the Mass and other sacraments. This includes music and the proper implementation of it.

The thought that there is a subjective understanding of music is a flawed one. There is no action of the sacred Liturgy that is subjective. There is no action of the sacred Liturgy that is at the discretion of the minister. This has been made clear time and time again. This also applies to the musician. The formula’s that are to be adhered to are often not. They are passed over for innovation and subjectivism. What do I mean by this? When there is an organ in the church, it sits silent as a guitar is played. Traditional hymns such as the Salve Regina, Sing of Mary, Schubert’s Ave Maria are passed over in favor of a guitar group or a piano/synthesizer.

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]

It is quite clear; "....others, such as string instruments which are playes with a bow, are easliy adapted to liturgical use. But there are some instruments which.....are so associated with secular music that they are not at all adaptable for sacred use."

What instrumentation is Pope Pius XII speaking of in that statement? Do you use a bow exclusively with a bass? Or a cello? Are they not stringed instruments?

It is clear....and when coupled; Musica Sacra Disciplina 59 and De Musica Sacra 60 are extremely clear....clearer than me, on my own.

[quote]The following principles for the use of musical instruments in the sacred liturgy are to be recalled:

a) Because of the nature, sanctity, and dignity of the sacred liturgy, the playing of any musical instrument should be as perfect as possible. It would be preferable to omit the use of instruments entirely (whether it be the organ only, or any other instrument), than to play them in a manner unbecoming their purpose. As a general rule it is better to do something well, however modest, than to attempt something more elaborate without the proper means.

b) The difference between sacred, and secular music must be taken into consideration. Some musical instruments, such as the classic organ, are naturally appropriate for sacred music; others, such as string instruments which are played with a bow, are easily adapted to liturgical use. But there are some instruments which, by common estimation, are so associated with secular music that they are not at all adaptable for sacred use. (DMS 60)[/quote]

The Church teaches clearly in all of these documents about Sacred music and the instruments that are suitable and truly apt. They talk about the organ being the most apt, it then goes on to talk about those instruments that are also suitable. It says specifically that smaller stringed instruments that can be played with a bow may also be used. This is supported later on, in later documents. The implication is that the stringed instruments will be played with a bow. It is obvious when one reads the documents in context. Look at the organic movement in the above quotes. There is no implication anywhre that the guitar is suitable or apt.

It does however say that those types of music that are raucous and suggests secularism should be avoided. Guitar music does this. Praise and worship music is not in harmony with the solemnity due Liturgy. A gathering or a praise and worship session, yep. In my car or room, yep....in the Mass, nope. The Church says as much.

There is no disharmony between the GIRM and the previous documentation. The implication is that the stringed instruments will be played with a bow. How do I say this? Because there is nothing to say anything to the contrary. There is all sorts of evidence to support that position.

The Church teaches about the organ, the human voice, smaller bowed abd stringed instruments...it mentions the violin, but not the guitar. It talks about the use of winds and brass in a limited use.

And all things being equal, the organ should be used. The Church is clear. Crystal clear. I see it, so do most musicologists that are authentically looking at the documentation.