Liturgical Music

[CrossCuT]

[size=1]HAS ANYONE EVER BEEN TO A POLKA MASS??

-dies-
[/size]

[Fulton Sheen Warrior]

+JMJ+

*gagging*

[bonoducchi]

The quiz is inherently flawed because it does not provide option for BOTH. It is not an either/or decision. Take a look at WLP. They are publishing great ritual music that has wonderful text and well crafted music. Be open to all possibilities. The only constant in the liturgical life of the Church is change. Remember, the Tridentine rite was only 500 years old when it was replaced. We celebrated much differently before that.

[N/A Gone]

[quote name='CrossCuT' post='1129202' date='Nov 27 2006, 07:38 PM']
[size=1]HAS ANYONE EVER BEEN TO A POLKA MASS??

-dies-
[/size]
[/quote]



yes, still traumatized

[CrossCuT]

[quote name='Revprodeji' post='1129307' date='Nov 27 2006, 09:04 PM']
yes, still traumatized
[/quote]
[size=1]Yep, same here.
I nearly died.
[/size]

[Aloysius]

[quote name='VaticanIILiturgist' post='1129239' date='Nov 27 2006, 09:08 PM']
The quiz is inherently flawed because it does not provide option for BOTH. It is not an either/or decision. Take a look at WLP. They are publishing great ritual music that has wonderful text and well crafted music. Be open to all possibilities. The only constant in the liturgical life of the Church is change. Remember, the Tridentine rite was only 500 years old when it was replaced. [b]We celebrated much differently before that.[/b]
[/quote]
That is absolutely untrue. prior to trent, the rites were relatively the same as after trent. with minor local variations that had begun to introduce themselves. not very many of these variations had lasted over 200 years at the time of Trent.

the Tridentine Liturgy is one and the same with the liturgy dating back till at least the 6th century, most evidence points it back even further; as long as the liturgy was prayed in Latin it was pretty much the same as the Tridentine liturgy and I defy you to offer any proof to the contrary. even the greek liturgy of the earliest church was just translated into latin.

Church music should primarily be the God-made instrument: chant alone. Organs should be allowed to help keep tones et cetera; but introducing modern types of music, or even classical secular music for that matter, is completely inappropriate. the only real point of instrumentals in sacred music should be to help keep the tone.

all the rites of the Church attest cross-culturally that Catholic sacred music is primarily some type of vocal chant.

this is the proper understanding offered by Vatican II, which gives Gregorian Chant pride of place, continues the Church's tradition with the organ as permittable, and then suggests other instruments may be included if they can be made suitable. most modern attempts at liturgical music are really not suitable in the same way the organ was.

[angelusdomini]

[quote name='Once Was Lost' post='1126872' date='Nov 23 2006, 09:03 PM']
I think that it is more important to look at the pillars of our mass then to look at the music that we sing.[/quote]
-------------------

I think that music during the Sacred Liturgy is "ONE SUCH PILLAR". I recall- I believe in his speech during the dedication of the pipe organ while he was in Germany this year, Pope benedict makes the point that sacred music is not to be looked upon as some adornment or accessory that one may easily do away with. He also makes an amazing comparison between the pipe organ and the state of the life of the church. Here are some of the relevant portions:

[i]In the constitution on sacred liturgy of the Second Vatican Council ("Sacrosanctum Concilium"), it is emphasized that the "combination of sacred music and words … forms a necessary or integral part of the solemn liturgy" (No. 112). This means that music and song are more than an embellishment of worship; they are themselves part of the liturgical action.

Solemn sacred music, with choir, organ, orchestra and the singing of the people, is not an addition of sorts that frames the liturgy and makes it more pleasing, but an important means of active participation in worship. The organ has always been considered, and rightly so, the king of musical instruments, because it takes up all the sounds of creation and gives resonance to the fullness of human sentiments. By transcending the merely human sphere, as all music of quality does, it evokes the divine.

The organ's great range of timbre, from "piano" through to a thundering "fortissimo," makes it an instrument superior to all others. It is capable of echoing and expressing all the experiences of human life. The manifold possibilities of the organ in some way remind us of the immensity and the magnificence of God.

Psalm 150 speaks of trumpets and flutes, of harps and zithers, cymbals and drums; all these musical instruments are called to contribute to the praise of the triune God. In an organ, the many pipes and voices must form a unity. If here or there something becomes blocked, if one pipe is out of tune, this may at first be perceptible only to a trained ear. But if more pipes are out of tune, dissonance ensues and the result is unbearable.[/i]


[Translation issued by the Holy See; adapted]

© Copyright 2006 -- Libreria Editrice Vaticana

REGENSBURG, Germany, SEPT. 13, 2006 (Zenit.org). Basilica of Our Lady of the Old Chapel ("Alte Kapelle")

Courtesy of The New Liturgical Movement blog.[url="http://thenewliturgicalmovement.blogspot.com/2006_09_01_thenewliturgicalmovement_archive.html"]Pope blessed new organ at the Basilica of Our Lady of the Old Chapel ("Alte Kapelle")[/url]- scroll down to near the bottom of the page under the heading "Even better than reported "

Edited November 28, 2006 by Lil Red

[Cam42]

[quote name='JeffCR07' post='1126985' date='Nov 24 2006, 08:56 AM']
I have a friend who is a Brother with the Dominicans in the Eastern Province, and he just finished writing a new polyphony Mass for three voices, so there is new chant being written, just few people know about it...
[/quote]

Chant by defintion has no duality of voices. So, you are correct in saying that he is writing polyphony, but polyphony can never be chant.

[bonoducchi]

God only made the voice? He didn't make our minds which created the organ, piano, violin, or trumpet? What about Psalm 150? God didn't write the notes for chant - is it then rendered invalid? Are we only to sing what God has directly created (and that is even a dubious distinction, given the Catholic perspective on creation)?

Bishops improvised the EU until the year 850-90 AD. I can provide the citation later, if you wish.

What scares you so much about change? Is the Missal of Paul VI even valid?

PS. I am a trained organist with a MM. Don't think I don't love the organ.

Edited November 28, 2006 by VaticanIILiturgist

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='Cam42' post='1126911' date='Nov 23 2006, 10:54 PM']
We are not wretches and grace does not relieve fears and grace does not deliver us safely from anything......There are many theological issues with the song.


The argument of what did the Church do before, holds no weight, because we have clear direction on what to do now, based upon 2000 years of developing history. Should we simply brush that under the rug?

And the Church disagrees with your opinion about it only being about lyrics. I have provided citation after citation to support the opposite of your statement. If you'd like to paruse them, you may....simply go to the search function and type "Liturgical Music" in the keyword and my handle "Cam42" in the member name, then read on.

Would those songs be less reverent if accompanied by electric guitar or a drum beat? Yes, firstly, because neither instrument is apt. Secondly, the drum has been specifically proscribed from use in the Liturgy. Thirdly, there is no provable recourse to state that the guitar (electric or otherwise) can be rendered apt for usage in the Liturgy.
[/quote]

Funny thing is... guitar is about the only instrument my parish has, except for a little organ/piano thing which they use when the guy is there to play it. And we sing Amazing Grace probably once a month (there isn't a great variety to the songs, except for a few specific to each season). So singing Amazing Grace to guitar music is about as bad as it gets, isn't it?

I'll admit the music wasn't the reason I chose this parish... well, maybe it was, since it was obvious that people weren't there just to feel holy. Another nearby parish has Latin Mass every Sunday, chant, big ol' million dollar organ, choir, incense and all that stuff, but for me it feels like more of a hassle that just stresses me out. Plus, something about the whole attitude of "all the real Catholics go to St. Martins or St. Louis Bertrand" felt suffocating. I want to be myself instead of dropping into some mold of what other people think I should be. So I found a parish with regular people who obviously weren't there for the music, the smells and bells, or whatever. Forget a million dollar organ... we're just trying to pay the heat bill.

However, I definitely don't think we should brush Gregorian chant under the rug. it is very beautiful, in addition to all the reasons the Church holds for promoting its use. But, I'm curious, are there any infallible statements regarding liturgical music? I hold the Church's opinion in high regard, but there's a difference between what some bishops or cardinals wrote about it and the pope issuing a solemn statement on the topic.

One of things about Catholicism that's always attracted me is the "both/and" attitude. When other Christians are debating faith versus works, Catholics embrace faith and works together. God isn't spirit or flesh, he came in both spirit and flesh. So why should we debate whether to use either Gregorian chant or modern instruments? With a little creativity, I think both can work together.

Edited November 28, 2006 by LouisvilleFan

[bonoducchi]

AMEN, Lousieville. That's Vatican II spirit! Past and future meeting in the present!

And btw, doesn't grace deliver us to Heaven, our final home? And should not grace relieve my fears, since I know I have a heavenly Father who is my protector and a Brother who is my advocate before the Father?

[Fulton Sheen Warrior]

+JMJ+

V3L,

Do you accept the full authority of the Church?

[Didymus]

[quote name='Aloysius' post='1129572' date='Nov 28 2006, 12:15 AM']Church music should primarily be the God-made instrument: chant alone. Organs should be allowed to help keep tones et cetera; but introducing modern types of music, or even classical secular music for that matter, is completely inappropriate. the only real point of instrumentals in sacred music should be to help keep the tone.[/quote]


clown masses are completely inappropriate; priests driving motorcycles in the procession are completely innappropriate; "liturgical" dancing is completely innappropriate.

but reverently singing praise and worship (which I'm assuming you refer to when you say "modern types") is not completely innappropriate. You can say all you want about not following the norm or whatever, but c'mon, don't make it sound like it's scandalous...

[bonoducchi]

[quote name='Didymus' post='1130125' date='Nov 28 2006, 05:25 PM']
clown masses are completely inappropriate; priests driving motorcycles in the procession are completely innappropriate; "liturgical" dancing is completely innappropriate.

but reverently singing praise and worship (which I'm assuming you refer to when you say "modern types") is not completely innappropriate. You can say all you want about not following the norm or whatever, but c'mon, don't make it sound like it's scandalous...
[/quote]

P. 118 of SC encourages the song of the people. Not chant, which is an important distinction in the liturgical douments. Also, refer to p. 39-40 for info on cultural adaptation. Vatican II did not mean to imply rigid formalism (in terms of form, not degree of solemnity). If you accept the full authority of the Church, then SC is part of the package. It should convey the solemnity, dignity and joy and the Eucharistic celebration. But that has very different definitions for different cultures.

All things being equal, chant is best. Unfortunatelty, we live in an unequal world. What about Psalm 150? No organ there!

And BTW, polyphony was banned by John XXII. It was revived by Clement VI. All great truths begin as heresy.

Edited November 28, 2006 by VaticanIILiturgist

[Norseman82]

[quote name='VaticanIILiturgist' post='1130167' date='Nov 28 2006, 06:16 PM']
What about Psalm 150? [/quote]

You know, I found a Google link to that Tra Le Sollecitudini (aka TLS) that is constantly quoted, and I'm scratching my head. How did we manage to go from "Praise Him with sounding cymbals, praise Him with clanging cymbals" in Psalm 150 to cymbals being declared "noisy or frivolous" in TLS VI.19?

Also, how about we add these official liturgical documents to the Defense Directory or reference links so that we can all be on the same page in refering to them?