As Rome goes, so goes the Church or something like that. We can only hope. Vaticanista Sandro Magister writes about a shift in Rome with regard to liturgical music. The scene is set with the appointment of maestro Domenico Bartolucci (such a nice name!) as “perpetual” director, i.e. for life, of the Sistine Chapel choir by Pius XII in 1959. The choir has been the official musical accompaniment for pontifical liturgies for centuries. Bartolucci was famed as an expert in Gregorian chant and sacred polyphony.
However, that lifetime appointment was cut short in 1997 when he was dismissed by Archbishop Piero Marini, master of ceremonies for pontifical liturgies, and replaced by a choirmaster more amenable to the “popular” music supposedly favored by Pope John Paul II. (Is this an example of how some took advantage of the fading strength of the aging pontiff in his declining years?) At the time, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger was the only one to object—not surprising given his musical and liturgical genius. So now, as Pope Benedict he’s restoring some things.
In the areas of liturgy and music, Benedict XVI knows that decrees from the authorities are not enough. His intention is that of reeducating more than issuing orders. The concert by maestro Bartolucci in the Sistine Chapel is one of these teaching moments that the pope wants to leave a mark.
In the concert, Bartolucci masterfully executed an offertory, two motets, and a “Credo” by Giovanni Pierluigi da Palestrina, the prince of sacred Roman polyphonic music and maestro of the Sistine Chapel until the end of the 1500’s.
But he also executed some of his own compositions: three motets, an antiphon, a hymn, and an “Oremus pro Pontifice nostro Benedicto,” composed in 2005 after Ratzinger’s election as pope.
The juxtaposition of ancient and modern polyphony was not a casual one. Speaking at the end of the concert, Benedict XVI noted: “All of the selections we have listened to – and especially in their entirety, where the 16th and 20th centuries stand parallel – agree in confirming the conviction that sacred polyphony, in particular that of what is called the ‘Roman school’, constitutes a heritage that should be preserved with care, kept alive, and made better known, for the benefit not only of the scholars and specialists, but of the ecclesial community as a whole. [...] An authentic updating of sacred music can take place only in the lineage of the great tradition of the past, of Gregorian chant and sacred polyphony.”
We can only hope that more and more people heed the teaching example provided by the Holy Father. At our own parish last weekend, we had the quadrifecta of bad hymns: “Gather,” “Here I am, Lord,” “On Eagle’s Wings,” and “Sing to the Mountains.” I call the latter “the Catholic drinking song,” because when I hear it I imagine a bunch of guys in lederhosen swinging steins full of beer while they sing it: “Sing to the mountains, sing to the sea, raise your glasses, lift them high…”
Technorati Tags:Catholic, liturgical music, pope benedict xvi, Vatican
bk_keywords:Gregorian chant, sacred polyphony.
Sing! Sing! Sing!
To Jahweh Who’s Bright, and Who Rules o’er the shining sea…
Sing! Sing! Sing!
To Jesus, Who Lives, and suffered and rose just for me…
Here’s to …etc., etc.
Student Prince, amended
Because the sum total of my parish life is not the music. It is my parish, in that I live within its bounds; the pastor is top-notch and a friend, and I am close to many of the people of the parish.
In the hierarchy of priorities, music is not the top, even if it’s a frequent subject of kvetch and conversation.
Pastors rarely get to be autocratic dictators. They are limited by their resources. In this case, the parish doesn’t have tons of money and what money it does have goes to take care of more basic needs.
Hiring a better music director would take more money than we have and it would alienate some people. This is what is meant by “pastoral situation.”
The Holy Father’s example will not change the Church overnight, just like the problem did not crop up overnight.
It’s discussions like these that remind me to thank God for Leo Abbott.
“Sing to the mountains, swing through the trees . . .”
I see complaints like this all the time, and wonder why the complainers don’t get out of these toxic parishes.
Because the alternative is much worse. So we take a deep breath and join the litury or music planning committees and change by slow erosion.
Our music director, God bless him, is willing to read the documents on music. Slowly, we’re adding chant and bringing back old Catholic hymns. But then, when I’m away on a particular planning session, that Sunday’s music is back to schlocky.
Already, there are some things that we’ve been able to do, like get rid of choir mics. our MD is playing more on the organ and has actually listened to the suggestion that he leave behind Barroom Bob style in, well, the barroom.
Now, we’re working on the singing style for cantors, especially our coloratura sopranos (*rolls eyes*).
It’s a lot of work because members are all very strong-willed. I get over-ruled at times so I just bite my tongue and go on to the next battle…which is the mass setting…here HaugenHaasSchutteFoley are monolithic. I look forward to the translations, then, the Haugen stuff won’t fit.
Meanwhile, we’re debating on what “active participation” means. I’ve found that this little phrase can be quite a cudgel.
I see complaints like this all the time, and wonder why the complainers don’t get out of these toxic parishes.
Uh…bad music does not a poisonous parish make.
I appreciate the fact that my parish offers good, solid, Catholic music.
So what. We also do really wacky things sometimes.
It doesn’t make us “toxic.” It makes us human and in need of help, not desertion.
LOL!!!!!! FR Jim Clark! I almost spit out my coffee on the keyboard!!!!
My personal favorite that I often mention in these quite funny posts is the “yoo-hooo song”:
“Yoo-hooo dwell in the shelter of the Lord…”
The other song that always makes my siblings and I giggle is “We are the young, our lives are a MYS’try”
And has anyone noticed HOW some of the songs are written? No one can sing them correctly as written, what with all the dotted eigths and rests and such.
Our choir seems to save their show stopper for right after communion. In itself, the music is usually very nice, respectful and sacred, though this peformance seems to right for this time of reflection. I can’t help but find it a distraction at a time I (okay, hust my personal preference) would appreciate some silence.
Often once the piece is completed, most of my fellow parishoners break out into applause. Wait? Didn’t we just receive the Eucharist and now we are applauding the choir. Nice and dedicated people indeed but…
“At our own parish last weekend, we had the quadrifecta of bad hymns: ‘Gather,’ ‘Here I am, Lord,’ ‘On Eagle’s Wings,’ and ‘Sing to the Mountains.’ … the pastor is top-notch …”
As someone who has been singing Catholic hymns since the mid-1950s (first as a parishioner, then as a choir member, then as an organist), I can assure you that the above quotation contains two major errors:
(1) Not all four of the listed hymns is “bad.” For about a year now, I have noted, in blogs and discussion forums, how very many orthodox Catholics have been brainwashed into thinking falsely that all (or almost all) post-conciliar-written hymns are cruddy. It breaks my heart when I see otherwise intelligent Catholics mindlessly marching in lockstep with the original group of loud-mouthed trashers of all post-conciliar music.
While it is true that “Gather Us In” and “Sing to the Mountains” are sub-standard (at best), that is not true of the other two hymns.
“On Eagle’s Wings” has a beautiful refrain. Its problem is the extreme difficulty of singing the high-pitched verses, which need to be left to a very talented soprano or tenor cantor.
“Here I am, Lord” is just simply excellent all-around—a good message and a lovely melody. Remember that I am speaking as someone who has heard and played the bad and the good of pre- and post-conciliar days, and I can still speak objectively about these things.
There are actually “anti-fan” clubs who ridiculously condemn all the works of individual composers/lyricists of hymns, such as Haas or Hurd or Haugen. The simple truth, which no sane and objective person can deny, is that some hymns by each of the above-named guys are not good (being unpleasant in sound or even heretical in doctrine), while other hymns by the same guys are very beautiful (to the ear and to the Catholic soul).
(2) The other error in what I quoted above was for the writer to say that “the pastor is top-notch” at a parish where sub-standard music is used at Mass. If a pastor is top-notch, he will take the necessary actions to prevent poor hymns from being used.
I know of a pastor who spoke to an organist, after someone had complained about two hymns, and he required her to remove the hymns from her repertoire. Every “top-notch” pastor will carefully read all the lyrics of all the hymns in the parish’s hymnal (if any) and missallette (if any) and will give the organist(s) a list of acceptable hymns from which they must choose—or a list of unacceptable hymns that they must avoid—as the weeks go by.
God be with you all.
You’re disputing my opinion as if there was an objective criterion. My opinion is that those are the four worst hymns I know either in theology or artistic form. You may have a different opinion. That’s your right.
Again, that’s your opinion. Since you do not know the pastoral situation of my parish, nor the pastoral priorities and resources available, you do not have the means by which to make an objective judgment.
Dear Domenico,
You are mistaken again … twice.
You quoted me twice. After the first quotation, you replied:
“You’re disputing my opinion as if there was an objective criterion. My opinion is that those are the four worst hymns I know either in theology or artistic form. You may have a different opinion. That’s your right.”
Only NOW do you use the words, “My opinion is that …” But you did not use those words originally—even though such language was needed. I would not have contradicted you if you had used those or similar words in your original post. Instead, you erred by stating, point-blank, as though it were an objective fact (rather than an opinion), “We had a quadrifecta of bad hymns.”
You should have written something like, “I hated all four of the hymns that were sung at Mass this weekend” … or … “My opinion is that the melodies and the theology are very poor in all four hymns I heard at Mass this weekend.” In other words, you should not flat-out make an objective statement, to other Catholics, that a certain four hymns are “bad hymns.”
After your second quotation from my previous message (concerning top-notch pastors), you replied:
“Again, that’s your opinion. Since you do not know the pastoral situation of my parish, nor the pastoral priorities and resources available, you do not have the means by which to make an objective judgment.”
No, sir! It is not my “opinion.” In this case, it is an objective FACT. Only a lax pastor (not a “top-notch” one) will allow organists to play music that is not beautiful or to sing lyrics that contradict Catholic doctrine. If you cannot see this, I feel very sorry for you indeed.
Dom, I strongly recommend that you try hard, each and every day, to say to yourself, “I am not omniscient. I am not infallible. I am not a dictator. I am a human being who falls into error. I need to learn from people who correct me on my blog. I need to thank them when I get something wrong. I need to be humble.”
God be with you.
Dear Romulus:
You are mistaken. The Church does not prohibit singing, in alternation, between a cantor and a choir or between a cantor and a congregation. Nor does the Church prohibit an entire hymn being sung as a solo (e.g., one of the famous “Ave Maria” melodies, “Panis Angelicus,” etc.). You very wrongly assumed that everyone present must sing every word of a hymn. Thus, “On Eagle’s Wings” is not “disqualif[ied from the] liturgy.
Dear Father Franklyn McAfee,
I’m sorry, but you and Mr. Day are mistaken. (In fact, Day is one of the original gang who unjustifiably poisoned the minds of many good, orthodox Catholics against all post-conciliar hymns.)
It would take a very confused or prejudiced mind to conclude that the melody [not “tune”] of “Here I am, Lord” is “the theme from the ‘Brady Bunch’ (http://www.seethedonkey.com/tvthemesongs/The Brady Bunch.wav). Preposterous!
You said, “Give me, ‘Bring Flowers of the Fairest,’ any day.” And I say, “Amen,” to that! I love that hymn and countless other beautiful pre-conciliar hymns. I ask, in return, that you divest yourself of your Day-inflicted prejudices, so that you can see the beauty in many pre- and post-conciliar hymns.
Orthodox Catholics have to start realizing and admitting to themselves that God didn’t stop giving composers and lyricists talent in 1965. He has given it, in equal measure, to these professionals before and after the Council.
I am trying not to be too hard on you, Fr. McAfee, because I have admired you for more than twenty years. I loved the articles you used to write the “Herald” and the homilies you used to deliver at St. Lawrence parish (where you marvelously renovated the sanctuary, etc.). I was especially moved by your homily at Barbara Olson’s funeral Mass, after her death at the Pentagon on “9/11” (2001). I encourage others to read the text here: http://www.catholicherald.com/articles/01articles/mcafee-olson.htm
God be with you.
Okay, now you’re just being tediously picky. I think you’re still angry that I disagreed with you whether Mitt Romney is pro-life.
I am so glad that you feel free to pass judgment on me on my own blog. May I humbly suggest that you re-read the Complete Blog Commenting Guidelines, especially Principle #1: “Understand the classical view of tolerance” and Principle #2: “No ‘ad hominem’ attacks.”
Just because I disagree with you and don’t immediately accept your assertions as valid just because you say them does not mean that I think myself infallible. Your screed against me could be turned against you: “AnUnSi, I strongly recommend that you try hard, each and every day, to say to yourself, “I am not omniscient. I am not infallible. I am not a dictator. I am a human being who falls into error. I need to learn from people who correct me … I need to thank them when I get something wrong. I need to be humble.”
Humility is a two-way street.
Humility? Yeah. Pot, kettle, black.
The bishops are, in fact, doing just that. However, let’s hope that the people drawing up the list are not the same as those providing the treacly music to the parishes in the first place.
You’re disputing my opinion as if there was an objective criterion. My opinion is that those are the four worst hymns I know either in theology or artistic form. You may have a different opinion. That’s your right.
Dom,
I must say I disagree strongly with your pandering to musical subjectivism. In fact we do have an objective criterion to judge music by: Gregorian Chant. And this is true not because its pre-VII or from the 19th – 8th centuries, but because we believe that the notation first written in the middle ages records a type of song which has as its origins in the Jewish chant of the psalms. That is to say Gregorian chant is the heir of the style of music that Jesus himself, and his disciples, would have sung. All true liturgical music uses Gregorian as its benchmark, that doesn’t mean that everything post VII is out, but it does mean that most of the stuff after Vatican II based on folk music with charming little tunes is less than desirable.
At the same time I think your point is that while we can tolerate hymns like “Gather,” “Here I am, Lord,” “On Eagle’s Wings,” and “Sing to the Mountains,” the reform of the reform suggests that it is time to move away from this type of music so that we never have a “quadrifecta” as you so aptly put it.
My point is that I was not making a point about the objective appropriateness of any particular type of liturgical music, but that hearing those four hymns at one Mass sets my teeth on edge.
I might challenge in the same way: With all the war, poverty, heartbreak, disease, broken marriages, and broken hearts that abound in the world, I’m amazed you have so much time not only to pontificate about others wasting their time on blogs (or to even read those blogs), never mind climbing “sacred” mountains in Wyoming.
We’re not all one-dimensional people here. Just because you don’t read it in this thread doesn’t mean that no one here cares about other issues. You shouldn’t even judge people by what’s on a blog in toto, since I know I don’t write about every single thing in my life.
Nevertheless, I don’t think that discussing the proper worship we owe to the Lord is less important than any of those other things. Certainly it’s not less important than climbing a “sacred” mountain.
But you missed my point (and setting aside for the moment whether a site dedicated to pagan worship could ever be appropriate for Catholic spirituality).
Yes, you do other things in a life dedicated to the poor. Bravo. So why did you assume that the people here don’t have lives dedicated to similarly
praiseworthy things?
And I accept your apology. You’re forgiven.
Calvary is a holy mountain. Horeb is a holy mountain. Jerusalem sits upon a holy mountain. What makes them holy is that the authentic worship of God took place on them. But that wasn’t my main point.
What’s funny is that you show up here out of nowhere, accusing everyone on this thread of lack of charity and judgmentalism and lack of focus on the important things and descend into namecalling and judgmentalism. Funny how that works.
By the by, you were the one offering the apology. I merely accepted it. Or was the apology insincere?
I would add that I find it interesting that you’ve apparently read more than 8,000 blog entries in the past couple of hours in order to come to your conclusions. More likely, what you did was read a couple of the most recent entries and found—in your mind—exactly what you were looking for in order to make a rash judgment based on too few facts.
What if I made a judgment about you based solely on the fact that you are an accountant, commercial pilot, and member of the Wymong Dept of Transportation Aeronatics Commission who volunuteers in Catholic hospices and in prison ministry, and apparently considers large hunks of rock to be holy because pagan religions worship there? Do you I have adequate information to know you and your motivations?
Of course not. I don’t know you based on these and other facts I found online through a quick Google search of your name, email address, and the supposition that you live in Wyoming. Thus I won’t presume to judge you or the state of your soul or whether you have a good heart for charity.
I just wish you’d extended the same courtesy to me.
I’m still trying to figure out why parishes need “music directors” and “liturgists.”
Will somebody explain to me what the heck they do, besides harrass the rest of us??
AnUnSi,
When you talk about the hymn, “Here I Am, Lord,” you mean the Brady Bunch hymn???
Same tune. I kid you not.
Michigan,
Read the whole thread before posting. It will prevent redundancies.
Sorry, Domenico. But one not need read the book cited above to hear the tune as being the same one. The “city of God” tune one is new to me, but I hummed it, and yup it’s “On top of old Smokey,” all right.
Heh. Did they try to get us to sing by trying to ping our memories??