Post intelligent and civil comments. Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the NLM
"American Catholics should be deeply embarrassed..."
True. You know, I've been a church musician for not quite a decade, and I have to admit that I've always been embarrassed to tell my colleagues that I work in a Catholic church. In doing so one is often risking others assuming that you're not a very good musician, or at least one with not very good taste.
This is all in addition to the fact that it can be utterly demoralizing, especially if you have good taste but your boss does not.
By foisting this crap on His Holiness the "Catholic" Church in America is basically telling the Supreme Pontiff, "Up yours Pope"
I'm moving to Malta.
The Liturgical-Industrial Complex(TM) strikes again.
The Holy Father is simply reiterating the Church's teaching on the Sacred Liturgy, as laid down in her primary source documents on it - not the often obfuscatory USCCB/Liturgical Training Publications version of the Church's teaching.
It's funny — in a way, we're already engaged in this liturgy even before it takes place. Not so funny is the way in which many commenters will be engaged in this liturgy, which won't the way the Church intends.
This is certainly regrettable, and I feel sorry for Roman Catholics every time I'm forced to "experience" this Mass setting, but could it not have an (unintended) salutary result?
Perhaps if the Pope hears this unfortunate music, he will get just how grave the situation is in the United States with regard to sacred music and take the bishops to task for it?
Is this just wishful thinking?
Is there an e-mail address where we can voice our concerns to Thomas Stehle?
This abomination needs to be stopped in its tracks.
"the most important thing to me is that everyone present is fully engaged"
How ordinary and trite this sounds to me not to mention a little arrogant-as if the musician had the power to "engage" everyone-kinda like jack kerowack at a hippe coffee house.
'the music is amed at allowing the assembly to take up its role and not just be spectators but full participants in the celebration, no matter where they are sitting."
is that one weve all heard before or what...Where exactly does worship of God enter in to this. Truly this is representing us worshipping ourselves-a liturgical narcicism that just doesnt fly anymore. The good news is that tired old mantra really doesnt work anymore..at last people are waking up to the lie that statement represents.
One of Jeff's passages reminded me of a passage from From Pope St. Pius X's motu proprio on sacred music from 1903:
..[S]ince modern music has risen mainly to serve profane uses, greater care must be taken with regard to it, in order that the musical compositions of modern style which are admitted in the Church may contain nothing profane, be free from reminiscences of motifs adopted in the theaters, and be not fashioned even in their external forms after the manner of profane pieces.Seems many places still haven't gotten that memo - rather ironic in this age of instant information access.
Among the different kinds of modern music, that which appears less suitable for accompanying the functions of public worship is the theatrical style, which was in the greatest vogue, especially in Italy, during the last century. This of its very nature is diametrically opposed to Gregorian Chant and classic polyphony, and therefore to the most important law of all good sacred music. Besides the intrinsic structure, the rhythm and what is known as the conventionalism of this style adapt themselves but badly to the requirements of true liturgical music.
Mr Stehles e-mail address at Our Lady of Mercy church is:
tstehle@olom.org
Please send him some sense!
*Sigh* Try bringing this up at your normal US Parish and they all say the same thing "But we've always done it this way." Why is it, that those who laud the reforms of the concilium get stuck in the sixties and don;t seem to care what the concilium actually said, not do they care what the Vatican currently says about liturgy? They call those who want to draw upon the church's treasury of chant, polyphony, and other sacred music "nostalgic", while they use old, old, music that's obviously dated. The music you hear in most parishes these days old, outdated, and simply in bad taste. We don'nt use the mass of creation at my parish, or even most modern mass settings. We use two parts of David Isele's holy cross mass three times a year, but mostly we use adaptations of Healy Willan's masses in the English mass. The other Sunday mass is chant and polyphony only, and people like it. We have more to offer as americans. Why not try some of Oreste Ravanello or Nicolo Montani's music? Both of them wrote a missa brevis that;s short and beautiful.
I have e-mailed this piece to His Holiness.
To Archbishop Wuerl
and to Mr Stehle.
I encourage every on else to do the same.
That I may serve Christ.
Dan
"The most important thing to me is that everyone present is fully engaged," he said. "The music is aimed at allowing the assembly to take up its role and not just be spectators, but full participants in the celebration, no matter where they are sitting."
May Almighty God deliver us from the Active Participation crowd.
You are absolutely correct! You have no idea the knock on effect for other English speaking countries. Don't you realise that for English speakers most of the liturgical and sacred music abuses are ones we copy from you Americans. Your behaviour is our Coca Cola and Big Mac making us spiritually sick and rotting our spiritual teach. What is happening to your bodies is an emblem for what is happening to your souls and ours too!!!
Well said, Mr. Tucker. Very well said.
If I had the Catholic pop-hipster's sense of self-importance and drama I'd organize a 'chant-in', singing the Gregorian Ordinary and Propers at the Cathedral doorstep at appropriate parts of the Mass. Alas, I'd feel embarassed and I don't have the time or money for the trip.
I am hoping that in fact, if this is true, as many as possible email, not only Mr Stehle, but the USCCB, your Bishop, and anyone else you chose. But please, be respectful, reasonable, and especially not insulting, even if you would like to. Surely, reason and good will dictates again serving this left-over to the Holy Father.
"What signal would the organizers be sending to the Pope by scheduling the Mass of Creation by Marty Haugen?"
They're not sending the Pope anything. They'd need a clue to do that. They're playing to the crowd. Expressing a desire to "engage" them is the big hint.
I've been involved in organizing parish music over the years. The people who predominate this field live in a little world all their own, one that is held hostage to the progressive intelligentsia, and barely steps outside the looking glass. Most of these musicians really are caught up in the Broadway-show-tunes mentality. They get downright giddy over it, so they assume everyone else will. Thus they could not imagine large masses of people being capable of following a simple line of Gregorian chant.
I understand this director was picked by Archbishop Wuerl himself, as they have some sort of prior association. I don't think His Grace gave it a thought beyond that. Someone may say something to the Archbishop in passing, but I really doubt it will occur to him that he missed an opportunity to do think this through.
Sacred music in the USA will change for the better, when the people refuse to be "engaged" by the forces of "insipid pedagogic rationalism." It won't happen before then.
Wuerl knew exactly what he was doing in picking Stelhes--Pittsburgh's St Paul Cathedral sadly had a great choir that sang chant and polyphony until Wuerl destroyed it in the 1990's when he ousted the music director and made James Chepponis Music Director
Isn't it true that Mons. Marini was sent to the US weeks ago to intervene and oversee the preparations so as to ensure that the Mass would be in accordance with the Vatican's directives?
What a way to welcome the Holy Father, when he has spoken so very clearly of ideal liturgical music!
How to contact Mons. Marini? He perhaps could influence Archbp. Wuerl. NLM's Vatican contacts have any suggestions?
I desperately pray that it is true about Mons Marini intervening. Though I am a Sydney native, and will therefore be here between now and WYD, I can't help but wonder how deflated the Holy Father would feel at offering the Supreme Sacrifice with such a wretched side-dish of the profane.
And to think I was complaining that the Sanctus from Schubert's "German Mass" was too underwhelming for a papal liturgy!
I really don't think the organizers have any idea how offensive this is - to know that, they would have to be residing outside of Haugen-Land. As it is, they are evidently unaware of the Holy Father's liturgical ethos and are simply following what has become standard precedent for Cecil B. DeMille cast-of-thousands liturgies, using the music in which they are immersed and thinking, as the publishers' catalogs have taught them, that the M of C represents the apex of liturgical music in North America.
What surprises me is that those in Rome who arrange the Holy Father's journeys do not first have to approve the music to be sung/played at Mass. Certainly in light of the Holy Father's commentaries on the horrid state of Catholic sacred music, one would think such things would not be left to those who have abused it so terribly and for so many years.
WOW! I just did an internet search on this guy (Thomas V. Stehle) and this guy is WAY out in left field when it comes to theology and most especially liturgy. Besides being a pastoral musican, this guy is also a "liturgical consultant" and is a practioner of the wreckovation method of 'designing' churches. He is also a donor to The National Catholic Reporter! (amazing what can be found on the net!) From reading what this guy has written on liturgy, music and 'environment'...I will not be surprised that the "Mass of Cremation" will be peformed for the Holy Father. (sigh!)
Mass of Recreation.
Jeffrey,
When you've been drinking purple Kool-Aid for 20 years, it's hard to convince someone they would like a nice Chianti better.
I'm sure Benedict will be impressed with our American musical artistry. It blows the centuries of traditional chant and polyphony away (sigh).
When, O Lord, when will we be free of the plague of 70's/80's pop-liturgy?
The lovely truth about the Tridentine Mass is that it leaves so little to personal interpretation. In our community, the priest and choirmaster meet to discuss the necessary musical accompaniment for the prayers of the Mass. The choir director's biggest decision is usually which Latin motet to use for the Offertory or the Communion.
The musical accompaniment of the Tridentine Mass does not entertain; its purpose is to chant the prayers of the Mass.
There is no question of the "participation" of the faithful. They are fully engaged in prayer following along intently in their missals.
The purpose of the music of the Tridentine Mass is not to evoke emotional response; its beauty is enhanced by the reverent and sacred nature of the chanted responses that lift the minds, hearts, and souls of the congregation to God.
Are we choosing to entertain our Holy Father when he attends Mass or should we ask him to join us in prayer?
I know how this is going to sound, but why would we use music (?) composed by a former Lutheran anyway? His best-known works are two Lutheran liturgies and the Catholic (?) Mass of Creation. He is now the composer in residence at a UCC church in Minneapolis!! Why is the Pope being disrespected this way? Why is our faith being disrespected this way?
D. Tallerico: I think you have articulated one of the most important points that can ever be made on this blog, at least with regard to church music. Thank you.
Naz ausgraben said,
'What surprises me is that those in Rome who arrange the Holy Father's journeys do not first have to approve the music to be sung/played at Mass. Certainly in light of the Holy Father's commentaries on the horrid state of Catholic sacred music, one would think such things would not be left to those who have abused it so terribly and for so many years.'
Has me scratching my head also. Why shouldn't the Celebrant get a say in this, especially considering he's POPE?!?!
Before I knew about the glories of chant, I had overdosed on Haugen's Mass of Creation and composed my own ordinary to avoid the choir singing that at my wedding. I didn't have the advantage of CMAA then, but even I couldn't stomach the MOC any longer.
Another thing:
If you think about it, it's like having a friend who's allergic to nuts, doesn't eat ham, and is lactose intolerant, inviting him over for dinner, an serving him green beans and almonds, roast ham and strawberry milk. It's totally inconsiderate, and very rude to pander to the supposed (And I will say false) Desires of yourself and a few others, while your guest must suffer in silence.
Welcome to America! I guess.
On the other hand, maybe it'll be good for the Holy Father to experience first-hand an average American parish repoirtoire in all its horrendous mediocrity...it might cause him to redouble his efforts to reform the reform.
I guess we can thank The Donald for appointing this guy..
It sends a very bad message to American parishes working to reform, and it will utterly demoralize young priests and good Catholic musicians in this country. this is a disaster.
"If it's good enough for the Pope..." -- we will hear this constantly.
From a blog comment elsewhere:
[It's possible that] Benedict, no matter what musical infamies are wrought, and no matter how revolted he may feel inside, will endure whatever he is subjected to with good humour, grace and gentility. That's how classy he is. It makes me want to weep.
I hope that this is not true, or the Pope just intones everything for the Mass himself, thus cutting the rug under this Mass of (De)Creation.
I beg to differ. Contributors here are so fired up with their own indignation, and the usual gleeful opportunity to insult those in a different faction within the Church from your own, that the discussion has departed from the musical facts. There's nothing 'Broadway' about the Mass of Creation: the melody itself is simple and dignified, even chant-like in character (try imagining the Sanctus sung a cappella in free rhythm by a monastic choir).
Above all it offers the gathered assembly the opportunity to fulfill the role foreseen for them in Sacrosanctum Concilium and in GIRM. Jeffrey's argument disintegrates when he advocates one of the 18 chant settings (only three or four of which are truly the preserve of the singing assembly) or a polyphonic choral setting. Be honest, Jeffrey: you believe that the song of the assembly is unworthy of the sacred liturgy. Isn't that right?
Anyone here who really believes this nonsense: "There is no question of the "participation" of the faithful. They are fully engaged in prayer following along intently in their missals" has truly failed to understand the significance of the term actuosa particpatio.
Thank God for Thomas Stehle, and deepest shame on anyone who thinks the appropriate response now is to spam him with abusive e-mails.
Questions for Copernicus...
If one of the prerequistes for sacred music is "universality," why do we have "factions within the church" or why do we Americans feel that an English Mass would be the appropriate "universal" setting for a gathering of people of all nationalities?
For ages, when sacrifice has been offered to God, man has presented his finest gifts. Since the music of the Mass accompanies our own sacrifice, (if, in fact, you still believe that this gathering is a sacrifice,) why would you question that the song of the assembly come from the finest voices among us?
Not all people are comfortable singing; those without voices cannot. Would you then say that they are not participating?
Even our beloved Pope John Paul II spoke of the importance of silence within the sacrifice of the Mass. Silence allows one to listen to the Word of God and contemplate its meaning. Silence is the internal act of participation; it is preparation for the external manifestation of God's Spirit within us.
This being said, would you consider silent Communion meditation less an act of "actuosa participatio" than singing "All are Welcome"?
I understand this director was picked by Archbishop Wuerl himself, as they have some sort of prior association.
I doubted it when I first heard a rumor that Archbishop Wuerl was organizing opposition to Summorum Pontificum among U.S. bishops. Surely not. But if someone wanted to give Pope Benedict a national backhand, what better way than with such a musical program as this at the Washington Mass.
Does anyone know Archbishop Wuerls e-mail address?
God bless you.
Copernicus writes: "Be honest, Jeffrey: you believe that the song of the assembly is unworthy of the sacred liturgy. Isn't that right?"
If I believed that I would say that. I don't.
Jeffrey,
You are forgetting one of life's fundamental truths.
That is that the big problem with ignorant people is that they are usually too ignorant to realize that there is such a thing as having knowledge.
In other words, these people think - really think - that this is GOOD MUSIC.
copernicus
I have disagreed with much of what you have written in the past but your latest is just simply ridiculious. you are the one who doesnt understand the term actuosa participatio and interior participation is just as important-id say more important then outward gestures and responces.(you might want to expand your outlook and read something written by somebody other than gabe hauk)
mass of creation chant like? please!
I for one dont share the total disdain for the piece-im sick of it and no one can argue that its not overdone. Nevertheless judged on its own merits id give haugan a b in melody a d on harmony and a c minus overall- not bad, certainly not the best and most certainly not worthy of its place in mainstream catholic worship.
your knee jerk defence of the mediocre is disconcertingly typical.
All of us on this forum are willing to talk and debate, explain and educate, even when it is with someone who comes from a completely different perspective. This kind of civil exchange is healthy for all involved.
But let us remember that the creation of an intelligent society of civil debaters is not an end in itself: there can be only one Sanctus for the Pope's Mass in Washington.
The people who have somehow gotten hold of the liturgical agenda there have decided that Mary Haugen's dead horse is worthy and fitting for the Pope -- despite his lifetime of arguing against the suitability of such music for liturgy. In times like this, one must stand for truth and beauty and the faith, or against all three.
I just got Archbishop Wuerls e-mail address from the DC chancery.
It is: archbishop@adw.org
As Mr Tucker so eloquently put it let us all "stand for truth and beauty and faith" and e-mail His Excellency to inform him that the Mass of Creation is completely inapropriate for any Mass, not to mention for His Holiness.
Kyrie Eleison.
Come, Holy Spirit, fill the hearts of your faithful and kindle in them the fire of Your Divine Love...
I suggest that everyone cool off a bit and think. I worked in the ADW's chancery for years, and before we bombard anyone with emails, please know that aside from making your discontent known, that your correspondence will change nothing else. This (Archdiocese of Washington) is not the worst archdiocese in the country, but it's also not the best - it's moderate (which in my opinion is worse that liberal- at least liberals know where they stand). The chancery is moderate, the curia is moderate, the archbishop is MODERATE, and it is absolutely true that he was and is hostile to the Motu Propio, he is just very very quiet about it. The archbishop was in the Curia long enough to know how to play his cards right, and I hope that doesn't sound too disrespectful. The few tradition-minded priests in the diocese (that is those who don't first go to Arlington across the river when entering seminary) - know how to stay quiet enough here so as to not upset the liberals and moderates in the chancery. This is DC, and the red tape extends also to the local church here, and big time. Our Lady of Mercy Parish in Potomac is fairly liberal, without being too over the top, because in this diocese, you have to be "moderate." Cardinal Hickey, and men like him, are sorely missed here.
I read the piece from the NCRegister, including the alleged music lineup from FreeRepublic. This conversation has been limited to a small portion of the selections, so I decided to post the rest of them here:
Plenty Good Room -- Spiritual
Come, O Spirit of God -- Manolo
Sing Aloud Unto God our Strength -- Nelson
Go Up To The Altar Of God -- Chepponis
Ave Verum Corpus -- Mozart
Spirit of God -- LeBlanc
Concertato On Grosser Gott
Holy God, We Praise Thy Name
O Spirit All-Embracing -- Holst/Proulx
Ave Maria - Dett
O Holy Spirit By Whose Breath -- Latona
Kyrie - Roberts
Gloria – Mass of the Angels -- Proulx
Lord, Send Out Your Spirit -- Peloquin
Easter Gospel Acclamation -- Luckner
Trilingual Intercessions -- Hay
Let All the World in every Corner Sing -- Argento
Ven Espiritu Sancto
Sanctus - Mass of Creation -- Haugen
Memorial Acclamation – Mass of Creation -- Haugen
Fraction Rite -- Honoré
The Lord’s Prayer
Psalm 100 – All the Earth -- Deiss/Proulx
Jesus Is Here Right Now -- Roberts
Ubi Caritas -- Hurd
Pange Lingua -- Manolo
My God and My All -- Zaragoza
Love’s Redeeming Work Is Done -- Ogden
What are we to make of the lineup overall? Discuss.
The first piece is on a video here
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/37...enty_good_room/
And in fairness also Bishops Corrada and Lori, boy are they missed!
I would be willing to chant "Ave Verum Corpus" in Gregorian Chant.
I do not think I am familiar with the Mozart version.
Also, would "Veni Creator Spiritus" be apropriate for the Holy Fathers Mass?
Wuerl is not moderate. There is no such thing as "moderate." "Moderate" in the church is best defined as "being slighty more tolerant of reactionary ultra-conservatives who can't accept the fact the Vatican II and its consequences were written by God's own finger." It is true that writing to Wuerl won't help. Hundreds of the faithful, especially from ethnic churches wrote to him in the 90's while he systematically closed church after church in Pittsburgh. People wrote, people sued, ultimately, people just left.
Dan
I would bet you do know the mozart ave verum and would recognize it if you heard it. It truly is a must for any decent catholic choir but arguably not a real good choice as THE representative of the churches polyphony sung for any pope but particularly THIS pope.
You can hear the funky jazz ballad "Jesus is Here Right Now," scheduled during communion, at this link
http://www.hymnprint.net/index.c...yTitle&
search=J
You can't see the music without paying GIA.
Personnel is policy. Who appointed Wuerl?
I'll be at the Mass in DC. I understand there's a lifeteen-style wuss-rock fest scheduled before the Mass. It's gonna be great! Our God is an awesome God! Who apparently still isn't done punishing me for all those bad things I did in college.
Contact the Pope's SecretarY NOW and let him know before this happens.
Copernicus, I was going to write a comment condemning this sort of foolish banter as well as the attempted harassment of those involved with the music, but why bother? It won't change anything and no one realizes how bad such a post makes those of us who work for sacred music look.
Don't waste your time, just look the other way.
David L.,
You got to it first. What no one else has commented on is the mish-mash of musical styles.
Are there no complete Mass settings by American composers worthy of a Papal Mass? And Haugen doesn't count.
"There's nothing 'Broadway' about the Mass of Creation: the melody itself is simple and dignified, even chant-like in character..."
This attempt to defend the MOC is worthy of Orwell's 1984. Don't believe your lying ears: what you hear is not an insipid pop melody but Gregorian Chant.
copernicus' second point is equally silly. There is no conflict between singing the Gregorian Ordinary and 'participatio actuosa' in any sense of this phrase. There is nothing preventing a congregation from learning several seasonal settings of the ordinary, and I have met numerous people who did precisely that, as children in pre-VII days. Of course, you can use the De Angelis as the default setting, as many parishes did, and you would still be improving on the MOC.
The problem is not Jeffrey's alleged disdain for active participation but copernicus' obvious disdain for the letter and spirit of the church documents that ask us to give Gregorian Chant pride of place.
copernicus may want us to shut up and pay, pray and obey, but he/she has given no explanation of why a politely worded appeal for a respect for the liturgical traditions and standards of the church might be problematic.
My own church did an execrable version of Hail this Festival Day at one of the Masses yesterday. Palm Sunday is not Easter and while I could have yelled and complained to the Monsignor who isn't "musical" as he puts it, instead I just gritted my teeth. I am pondering not going to the Papal Mass so one of our parish youth might go. When I attended the Sacred Music Colloquium last year I was plotting with my Pastor to bring in more Latin. But he died suddenly and I am left perusing the 1962 Roman Missal in the Sacristy mourning him, Cardinal Hickey whom I loved to chat with and Bishop Corrada, exiled to Texas.
My Deacon is building the Papal furniture. Not what I would have picked either but the Archdiocese had its own ideas.
I agree that sending an e-mail to the music director is pointless. He got where he is by doing what he's been doing, and nothing succeeds like success, including the pale imitations. What might matter is to write to his superior, or to present the evidence (while scrupulously avoiding any editorial remarks) to the Papal MC in Rome, assuming you have his e-mail address. (Don't look at me.) That said, not all the selections are bad, but the idea of a "hodge-podge" of musical genre to demonstrate diversity is difficult to pull off.
Then again, maybe the Holy Father NEEDS to hear what the faithful have to deal with on any given Sunday. We might be doing him a favor if we kept mum about it.
In the long run, that is.
(Haugen's music is "chant-like." I've just GOT to read the rationale behind that one.)
if the holy father pope benedict wants chant to be restored to the use of the church everywhere then he should have someone insist that a chant sanctus from the graduale be used instead and that people be taught to sing it everywhere and to cherish it like they have been taught to cherish the mass of creation. how could anyone even know that they should like it unless they had been told they should like it.
Jeffrey,
I think you did the right thing by speaking up. Your post is quite reasonable, and perhaps it's tempting to get confused between what you actually said and some of the more unreasonable comments from others. In any case, as the pope told the Austrian bishops a few years ago, it's time to "look reality in the face." You know, it's been a long time since I've seen the list from the pope's visit to Baltimore in 1995, but this DC list might even be worse than that.
Finally, we should all be most grateful that the music being planned for the Vespers at the National Shrine is going to be quite good with a most fruitful collaboration between Peter Latona and Fr. Samuel Weber.
Marini does not have a public e-mail address. The best option is to FAX a well-written, documented, signed letter to him. 06.69.88.54.12
The modern music, by the way, should not be a surprise. Nor should it be a surprise when hosts are sold on E*Bay moments after the papal novus ordo.
But it does give pause to see what the D.C. musical director has to work with -- a 250'ish voice choir of the best interested singers in the region with a 40'ish piece orchestra. Could you imagine what we could do with that free talent?
It is amazing that the Vatican doesn't give guidelines as to the Pope's wishes in regard to the music. Certainly the Pope knows about all the disobedience and so forth going on in the U.S. Come on now, lets get real!
;
Elizabeth:
There is every indication that the Holy Father is more than aware of what goes on in North America. It is likely that Marini was sent here to address the major liturgical details, including music. A passive-aggressive response by a prelate who is accustomed to operating a certain way (if not out of malice so much as habit) would also be likely. All the more reason to take "Ken" up on his suggestion.
Remember, just the facts.
I don't think that cranky e-mails to Archbishop Wuerl will help one bit. What's done is done - too late to change the music now. If anything, it might make it more difficult to improve the state of music in the ADW.
I agree that the musical choices, as I said in another combox, are most unfortunate and I am very disappointed that we couldn't (or more likely wouldnt) have had a mass like that in New York. On the other hand, I don't agree with those whose cure for our ills is to reimpose the St. Pius X program on the Church. To be blunt, it is my observation that the reimposition of St. Pius X's agenda is a form of reverse-philistinism, and that is something the Church does not need, IMO.
It's not too late to change the music. There hasn't even been an announcement that is IS the music. We are so far commenting on uncorroborated reports.
Wow. Ready, fire, aim!
I am *no* fan of the MoC and look forward to its eventual retirement when the new Missal translations are implemented.
That said, it's exactly not rocket science why it might be chosen:
1. It's probably the most widely sung in Catholic parishes in the US
2. It's also amply orchestrated - it was the first such "contemporary" setting to be that orchestrated and that's what contributed to it spreading from cathedrals to parishes in the late 1980s. It's designed for large gatherings of the faithful.
Sadly, much remains to be done to have the faithful know some chant settings as an alternative, but that's not a fact on the ground yet and it there would be a rather thin sound from that congregation given that state of affairs. While I personally don't begrude anyone an occasional polyphonic Sanctus (especially for "special" occasions), the fact is that the current ritual books make congregational participation in at least part of the Sanctus normative so it's hard to *fault* someone for hewing to that guideline for a papal Mass in a nation where there is no widespread cultural custom (unlike, let's say, Austria) of polyphonic Sanctuses.
Fair enough, jeffrey. I hope we all end up looking just a bit silly, if you know what I mean.
Those of you contacting the organizers of this music should probably have a different suggestion for the Sanctus, Memorial Acclamation, and Great Amen.
Bear in mind that, for at least two of these three, congregational singing is mandated. If you had to pick something that American Catholics will sing well, why not choose the one setting that the probably all know so well?
The Pope, as is well-known, has no problem with a choral Sanctus. He’ll probably be ok with a congregational one, though.
Haugen isn’t the only non-Catholic composer represented on that list.
Liam,
Your comment seems to imply, unless I'm reading it wrong, that you believe that Jeffrey's criticism of the MoC Holy is that it's congregational. I don't think Jeffrey intends to say that the Sanctus should not be congregational; rather, he was approaching the overly-simplistic notions of congregational participation that were being spelled out by others. That was the only bit that had to do with the congregation.
The rest of it has to do with the fact that so many of us wish we never heard this Mass setting again.
Now to everyone, let me take this opportunity to say something I already should have: Don't waste your time writing people about this. It is neither productive nor astute.
Well, another thought came to me as I was reflecting on this comment above:
What if the Holy Father opted to do something that the powers-that-be had no control over whatsoever? Like chanting the Eucharistic Prayer?
Such and action isn't without precedent: at the World Youth Day 2005 Papal Mass, the programs were printed with Eucharistic Prayer II. However, Benedict went 'off-script' and prayed the Roman Canon in German instead.
Michael
Not quite: I understood the criticism as not understanding (because the alternatives most commonly offered in the comments were either relatively unknown chant settings or polyphonic settings that by definition exclude congregational participation) that the very reason this selection was made was probably because it is so widely known. I wish the reality were otherwise, but I think the most constructive thing in terms of the event itself would be to suggest congregationally-inclusive alternatives that (1) are widely known and (2) offer the option of festive orchestration.
Btw, I should confess I cannot myself think of any that would qualify. The criteria are not so much mine personally as what I suspect were the goals of those doing the programming, mind you.
At the Spanish Mass in my parish the kyrie is sung to the melody of 'Hey Jude.' The melody is widely known and open to some very colorful orchestration. I wish that they had thrown that into the mix. We ought to give the Holy Father a taste of a variety of American pop music Masses.
To choose something because it is widely known seems to miss the point of music's role in the Mass entirely. The point should not be to try to impress the Holy Father with the level of participation at the Liturgy. Falls back to the problem of a people-centered rather than a Christ-centered liturgy.
We don't know if that is why the MoC was chosen. But if it is why, the sad irony will not be lost on the Pope. The music at the Mass will say more than anyone on either side of the fence ever can.
Could be worse. Could be that Spanish "santo, santo, santo" that makes you want to shout "Conga!"
I went to a spanish Mass for Ash Wed a few years ago in a Novus Ordo parish, I don't speak spanish and that is why I went there. I assumed that since I would have no idea what was being said that I could not be offended by what I heard. I was wrong of course, as the processional hymn begin in a very familiar tune. "The world is a vampire" by the smashing pumpkins. I have no clue what words they were singing to the melody, but the little band was really jammin. That was the last Novus Ordo Mass I have ever been or shall ever go to again.
Fortunately, the Smashing Pumkins is atypical. But, then again, you have a Marian hymn set to the Lincolnshire Poacher, or early Renaissance masses set to the tune of some awful madrigal. There truly is nothing new under the sun.
"the fact is that the current ritual books make congregational participation in at least part of the Sanctus normative"
"for at least two of these three, congregational singing is mandated"
May I ask to what this refers? This is the first time I hear something like this. Is this some American particular legislation?
I can at least be thankful to that smashing pumkins ditty, as it is what finally broke me on the Novus Ordo. I will not go to it ever again. The music that is used in most of them makes me think of the Holy Fathers words, while still a cardinal, about the new liturgy. It is a "banal on the spot product, fabricated by a commitee", lets hope that the death blow will be given to the NO asap.
Congregational participation? I've been to Masses in the Shrine and there's little evidence of participation. Why do you think the choir is so big? It's to cover the fact that no one in the pews is singing. THAT is the American Church in a nutshell. Using the MoC for that reason is kidding oneself.
Gregor,
There is some debate about the liturgical permissibility of a Sanctus setting that is sung entirely by the choir.
See Duane Galles’s article from a Sacred Music issue about 6 years back. Fr. Anthony Ruff as also written on this topic (can’t provide a citation, unfortunately).
The basic problem is that GIRM envisions the Sanctus sung by the entire congregation, while Musicam sacram permits the entire Ordinary (Ky/Gl/Cr/Sn/Ag) to be sung by the choir. The debate centers largely around the weight given to these two documents.
Adding to this is that at least one well-publicized Papal Mass under B16 has used an entire choral Ordinary.
eeeeeewwwwww...puke!
I have to use one of the parts from the Mass of Creation for my first Mass, because it is the only setting the parish knows for this particular Mass part. This is all they have sung for God-knows-how-long. Pity.
At the Spanish Mass in my parish the kyrie is sung to the melody of 'Hey Jude.' The melody is widely known and open to some very colorful orchestration. I wish that they had thrown that into the mix. We ought to give the Holy Father a taste of a variety of American pop music Masses.
I have also heard the gloria sung to the tune of the Battle Hymn of the Republic... without all the proper words (as is VERY common with the hispanic Mass settings...). "Gloria, gloria hallelujah....!!!!!"
Perhaps having a silent low Mass would get the message to the American Catholic Church better than a letter of complaint.
There is not a Sunday goes by that I do not pray for blessed silence as I make my way toward the phalanx of Eucharistic Ministers guarding Our Lord from excessive reverence.
Sigh :(, If I can get kids to chant the Agnus Dei, I hope the Pope just scraps the MoC at the last min. If the MoC is going to be used.
Cantor,
thanks for the clarification. I don't think I have ever heard the suggestion that an entirely choral Ordinary is not permitted anymore in Europe. In Germany at least, it is absolute standard in cathedrals and larger churches to have an entirely choral Ordinary on major feasts.
I sing a song of myself.
Cantor says:
'The basic problem is that GIRM envisions the Sanctus sung by the entire congregation...'
The basic problem is that the GIRM is used very selectively by advocates of the pop music settings of the ordinary.
Why, for example, do they ignore paragraph 41?:
'41. All other things being equal, Gregorian chant holds pride of place because it is proper to the Roman Liturgy. Other types of sacred music, in particular polyphony, are in no way excluded, provided that they correspond to the spirit of the liturgical action and that they foster the participation of all the faithful. Since faithful from different countries come together ever more frequently, it is fitting that they know how to sing together at least some parts of the Ordinary of the Mass in Latin, especially the Creed and the Lord's Prayer, set to the simpler melodies.'
How does the MOC give pride of place to Gregorian Chant? How does it teach congregations to sing the ordinary in Latin?
Then there are the GIRM passages giving ptiority to the Graduale Romanum for the propers.
The MOC apologists ignore the spirit and letter of the GIRM and, more generally, VII.
Anonymous,
I guess "all other things are not equal"*
*Loophole alert.
I was at Mass under Saint Peter's Basilica a year ago with many Masses being celebrated at nearby altars when I heard a familiar tune (in Spanish, in think) "Blowin' in the Wind" being sung by the neighboring group. If they only know. . .
Oh who cares? Gregorian Chant or Mass of Creation. It just seems a matter of opinion.
Spoken like a true relativist anon2. If the Mass is nothing more than a community gathering which we shape in accordance with our private and arbitrary preferences, then the choice between Gregorian Chant and MOC really is just a matter of opinion.
anon2, It is because the MOC is pure garbage at its very best. It is to the Liturgy, what pop rocks & twinkies would be to a balanced diet. That is why I am so adamant about the use of Catholic composers who know what they are writing music for. Otherwise we get insipid trash like the MOC, which has no redeeming qualities what so ever.
I think that Anon2 forgot to include the sarcasm tag.
As a Lutheran pastor and highly trained organist, I sympathize with my Roman Catholic brethren; the Lutheran Church has a great tradition of music. It is the church of J.S. Bach. But the average Lutheran in the pew and unfortunately many of our clergy don't want Bach-- they want Marty Haugen. As Franz Liszt put it, "People love garbage." If you haven't yet heard of it, there is the "Society for a Moratorium on the Music of Marty Haugen." I am a proud member. It's a very ecumenical endeavor since people with good taste in music from many different traditions are coming together to express their hatred for this man's banal and uninspired
(de)compositions.
There should be some prize for the 100th commentator.
To be kind - the proposed msuic is sad. How I wish it were different!
A friend of mine--a fellow lover of Sacred Music--introduced me to this website by sending me a link to this particular forum. Thank you to those who give us this opportunity to share our insights and, yes, our frustrations with the state of music for our most beautiful sacrifice of the Mass. It appears that, respectfully, we have different opinions and views about what Sacred Music should be and, in that, we are no different than those generations of American Catholics who came before us. The Holy Father, in Rome, and the Pontifical Institute of Sacred Music do give us proper guidelines to follow. I'm afraid that we American Catholics, in our arrogance and pride, however, translate and re-word their guidelines to our own "opinions" and "tastes" and, in some cases, "agendas." I have come to believe that only prayer to the Holy Spirit will clarify all this for us. His guidance may not come in time for the Pope's visit, but we can pray that it WILL come. In the meantime, this forum and others like it give us the opportunity to considerately express our views and share our knowledge. Thank you for those who labor to provide this outlet for all of us.
Pastor Jack, I agree with you all the way. There needs to be an edict from the vatican to ban haugen's music from the Mass, FOREVER. There is not one thing he wrote that is worth the paper it is printed on. All of his "music" is pure trash.
Not being a fan of much of Haugen's oeuvre, a declaration that all of his music is pure trash is not only not credible, its lack of credibility combined with biliousness provides ammo to those who promote his music.
I will repeat again that ALL of his music is pure trash. It reminds me of some really crummy "art" that you may in galleries for lots of $$$, but is nothing but junk. He would have been better off as a burger flipper at Mc D's. His music is aweful in every way, and all of it should be banned from the Liturgy under pain of Excommunication. Those who promote his "music" must have a warped sense of anything, so I could care less what "ammo" they want to use. Their opinion does not make it any less pathetic.
QED
Not all people who call themselves musicians can write decent music. After all, Britney Spears thinks herself a "musician". How ever sad it may be, I am sure that even she could probably come up with something better than the MOC if she were asked (paid) to do it. Music is an art form, and some of it is total trash. Many people may find it uncharitable to point that fact out, but I consider it an act of mercy, so that they may go out an find something they are actually good at, instead of embarassing themselves. Or, as in this case, embarrasing the Catholic faith.
Well, many people consider their unqualified intemperate remarks to be an act of mercy (it's one of the most common self-justifications - it may or may not be true).
Have you looked at each and every piece of Haugen's oeuvre?
That's not a mere rhetorical question. I've just learned that, while deep skepticism of a composer may be justified, it's usually wise to be open to the possibly that there are one or two decent pieces by them.
The reason I am mindful of that is that *most* hymn writers since the advent of penny presses 200 years ago appear to have a substantial percentage of their works that are mediocre at best, and that cullling the wheat from the chaff is work and takes time. Just because there's a lot of chaff doesn't mean there is NO wheat. (THere's even chaff in Gregorian chant, just what's been gathered to our time already reflects significant culling.)
Because the audience you seek to argue with will already be aware of this, failure to validate it will simply serve to render your argument as "see, those who oppose [Composer N]'s music are simply unthinking bores whose arguments we need not pay attention to."
So, it might feel good to get it off one's chest, but it subverts the goal....
The National Catholic Register is reporting that the "Mass of Creation", will not be used at the Papal Mass.
Deo Gratias!
Dan
That's fine by me, in case anyone is wondering.
I totally am with Liam on this one. I am no fan of haugan or the mass of creation but in no way can you call it pure junk. mass of creation is no masterpiece but has a decent melody and is a work that works in a variety of settings from guitar to organ-no easy task. haugan and haas have a undeniable gift for melody and some of their work is good-but not good enough to warrent the vast amount of fame and money that has come their way.nevertheless we reform types do shoot ourselves in the foot with justifiable anger.
Sorry, I still think it is pure trash and the fact I had it shoved down my throat for years does not help. It should be banned for the Mass outright. No matter what instruments are used, it is pathetic to the point of agony. We have suffered with it for too long, and it never should have been used in the first place.
BTW, the melody is only "decent" in the sense that you can call one of barney the dinosaur's little kid tunes "decent", it would be on the same level of mentality.
There are worse mass settings than Mass of Creation. I hate it that people love it so much, far more than I hate the music itself. And despite my best efforts, Gregorian chant masses got me nothing at my parish but that classic "deer in headlights" look from the parishioners. Those long luscious melodic lines were never meant for a church full of people to sing who, and this is important, weren't first raised--or like monks, gilded--to sing it.
Chant, like all forms of music, has its simple and complex melodies. I've found that most congregations can be taught these simple pieces. A recent personal experience demonstrates this. I attend Mass daily and in different locations, depending on where I am at the time of the Mass. About a year and a half ago, I attended a Mass said by the relatively new parochial vicar of that church. Having no musical accompaniment at this Mass, he decided to attempt a very simple Sanctus. He struggled and it was obvious that it was as new to him as it was to the congregation. At the end of the Mass, he came to the microphone and explained, that in the seminary, he had not be taught Latin chant and that recently, because of the requests of our Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI, he was working with the music director to learn some basic chants. He thanked some of the older people in the pews for their help and suggested that while it may be difficult for everyone, together he knew they could do it. About two weeks ago, I attended Mass at that church and that same parochial vicar presided. There were a little over one hundred people (I would guess) at the Mass and at the Sanctus, they sang the chant together beautifully, a cappello and with the direction of the priest. Here is an example of how,little by little, chant can be restored.
Is it possible that the Lord, who lovingly humbled himself to be born of an unsophisticated country girl, cannot touch us in all styles of music? Doesn’t God reach us where we are, and communicate in whatever way we might understand? The Virgin appearing at La Sallette initially spoke to the shepherds in French, but reverted to the local dialect of their region when they couldn’t understand her.
What is the most charitable response to this list of music for the DC Papal Mass? It certainly does not appear to be contrary to the 'ex cathedra' teachings of the Church. If you believe it has shortcomings, then pray that God will lovingly speak through the music anyway. Isn’t Love the greatest thing? "If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal." Will we be accountable in the end for our taste in music, whether we performed Palestrina or Gounod at Mass, or for the love in our hearts?
Would that "love in our hearts" involve accepting and implementing the requests of our Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI?
Is the purpose of the music of the Mass to "touch us" or to reach the "ears" of God?
Are we singing to one another or is our prayer directed heavenward?
Is the singing of chant for the sacrifice of the Mass a person's personal "taste" or is it to give it the "pride of place" mentioned in every church document on sacred music since 1903?
Is a person less charitable because he/she disagrees with the list of music for the Papal Masses?
I'm glad they're using "Mass of Creation", "City of God" and "One Bread, One Body". The pope is visiting our country and these songs are as much a part of the fabric of US Catholic faith as many of the others. Get a grip, the table is large enough for all. Pull your heads out and realzie the Pope isn't planning the music her as he won't be in Sydney for World Youth Day. And I might say, you'll all really crinze when you hear what they have planned there. Very little from the 17th century but songs by Mat Maher and Tom Booth.
"Pull your heads out and realzie..."
...that some people in this forum need to learn what the Church has said, for the record, about sacred music. That means what's okay and what's not okay. In particular, the role of Gregorian Chant as having "pride of place" according to Vatican II. (Yeah, Vatican II. Some people read its documents as opposed to using its title as an excuse.) The former Cardinal Ratzinger has also written extensively over the years on this very subject. The concerns raised here have been consistent with the ones he himself has raised -- indeed, which the Church herself has raised.
Oh, and "get a grip" on your spelling.
An unfortunately poorly publicized Vatican follow-up to the sacred music guidelines after the Second Vatican Council, the booklet "Jubilate Deo" prefaces its contents with a reminder, or caution, if you prefer, to those who may be quick to dismiss our heritage of Gregorian Chant. Pope Paul VI, not considered the most conservative of our pontiffs, issued this booklet in 1974 (!) to all the bishops in the world to make available "some of the more simple melodies" "that the faithful can sing together." "In this way Gregorian Chant will remain a bond which, in the name of Christ, can gather many peoples together into a family united in heart, in mind, and in voice." These booklets are available through G.I.A publications.
I have a copy of the Jubilate Deo from my parish church in the 1970s AFTER the Novus Ordo had been introduced. People who say that V II got rid of Latin are just wrong. It can be found free on-line. Just google Jubilate Deo. The introduction by Paul VI will surprise you.
At my parish, we do chant now and then and there is at least as full participation by the congregation as we have with Haugen et al. In Lent, we do the Kyrie in chant every Sunday and the most of the people in the pews sing along. For the Holy Saturday and Easter Masses, our people sing along with the "Deo Gratias, Alleluia" done in chant. No sweat.
At first it was just the older folks who sang with us and gradually over the years almost everybody is now doing it. It isn't difficult. I learned about 5 Latin Masses and the Requiem Mass when I was in grade school. The more difficult ones for big feasts were choir Masses.
Our pastor now and then sings the Eucharistic Prayer. And I think he learned it on his own, like the young priest who posted here. Last year our choir director sang the Exultet on the eve of Easter. This year our pastor did it. Hooray.
Now when some of our parishioners see Masses at the Vatican on TV, they feel more a part of it - they can sing a lot of it themselves.
Even if we don't do Latin only, we need to make sure we don't lose our heritage. It's what has kept the universal church together. And you can do it with no musical instruments.
Even the Missa Luba is better than Haugen. For those who don't know it or remember it, it was a Mass by and for African Catholics in their indigenous style, but reverent and in Latin. It's probably on YouTube somewhere.
Hello everyone
I stumbled on to this whole thing while searching for music for my upcoming wedding. Our music director recomended the Mass of Creation and I thought, hmm, I never liked that stuff, what else is out there? and so now I am wondering, what else IS out there? Everything I internet search leads me back to Haagen/Haas. can anyone direct me on where to look for other mass choices? I saw an earlier post by "Maryann, singing Mum" saying she composed her own ordinary for her wedding, but that is beyond my ability. Suggestiins, please??
3 Visitors Online
Commenting by HaloScan
