Usccb Allows Guitars At Mass

[PhuturePriest]

[quote name='USAirwaysIHS' timestamp='1345004397' post='2467787']
All of these are played on the same organ:
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NuLPhrO2oYM&feature=plcp[/media]
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KyCZ2vTftwE&feature=plcp[/media]


(Second half of post forthcoming)
[/quote]

That's really sweet.

[Vincent Vega]

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3kz7ynBfkA&feature=plcp[/media]

Does the sound in that first some seem familiar? That's the same thing that was used in both of the previous videos we were talking about.

The organ that this was recorded on,
[spoiler][img]http://www.milandigitalaudio.com/images/ndm-cc-01-sm.jpg[/img][/spoiler]
is in this space,
[spoiler][img]http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8162/7656850850_8f9529dfb4_k.jpg[/img][/spoiler]
The Church of Notre Dame de Metz.

Little sounds can come from big organs.

[Lil Red]

off topic posts are being moved. please stay on topic.

[Jaime]

[quote name='missionseeker' timestamp='1345001660' post='2467756']
I cannot find the encyclical itself, but in the encyclica, [i]Anus Qui[/i] Pope Benedict XIV wrote (and you can find it quoted in the more modern writings)




I will grant you that that it's an... interesting mix of instruments mentioned, but it does indeed exclude guitars from the Mass.



De Musica Sacra (1958) says [size=4]"[color=#000000]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.[/color][/size]
[size=4][color=#000000]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,[b] such as string instruments which are played with a bow[/b], 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.[/color]
[color=#000000]c) Finally, only instruments which are personally played by a performer are to be used in the sacred liturgy, not those which are played mechanically or automatically[/color][/size]"

As I'm sure you recognize, when the Church makes a decision, she chooses her words very deliberately. The fact that the Church has qualified the string instruments which are easily adaptable to the liturgy is important. Guitar and harp (which was also expressly banned) are both plucked or strummed which is in contrast to the ones that are played with a bow. To play the harpiscord (plucked strings) in a Schubert or Bach Mass, my university has to have written permission from the bishop. In fact, to do any of the Masses where we brought in orchestral musicians, we had to have permission (which is not always granted).

Also, just so you know, as a person who spent her adolescence studying music (specifically sacred music) under some of the most prominent and well know sacred musicians in the world,it is discouraging, disheartening, and comes off as condescending when people say things like "I've done this for longer than you've been alive, (implied) so don't tell me I'm wrong" I've spent more than half of my life studying this and even if I am young, it's still wrong of people to discount my posts for it. I do my best to not post conceited sounding posts. If I mention that I 1)have studied under really famous musicians or 2) actually have a sacred music degree I'm not trying to boast, I'm trying to say that I DO know what I'm talking about, despite being young. Not only that, but I worked my ass off to get that degree (and since you have a minor degree I'm sure you understand the rigors of studying music and working full time).

I don't pretend to understand all of why the Church says what she says on Sacred music, but I do know WHAT she says. I have been witness to genuinely well played guitar music that was edifying, but the Church says it's not the instrument that should be allowed. I'm not all that fond of chant, honestly. There are a few pieces that I love, but the majority of the time, I'm kind of ambivalent towards it. But this is what the Church directs us to learn and sing and promote.

Speaking of which, you are wrong about young organists. They are not as rare as you think. I went to a small school and there were 20 organ majors. All of them were teens. Besides that, why are we not encouraging young people to learn the organ? Especially in light of the directives to have diocesan schools for sacred music?
[/quote]

Let's take things in order.

First things first. Pope Benedict XIV does not ever mention guitars in Annus Qui Hunc. It is a mistranslation that people have quoted often. But just because it's said more than once doesn't make it true. Now granted, you can't find an english translation online anywhere of the actual document but there are other means of finding the truth. For example you can go to www.papalencyclicals.net find Annus Qui Hunc in the original Italian. The italian word for guitar is chitarra. NOWHERE will you find the word chitarra in this papal encyclical. The paragraph that you are trying to quote reads as follows

[quote]Noi non abbiamo omesso di richiedere il consiglio di uomini prudenti e di insigni Maestri di musica. In conformità del loro parere, Ella, venerabile Fratello procurerà che nelle sue Chiese, se in esse vi è l’uso di suonare gli strumenti musicali, con l’organo, siano ammessi soltanto quegli strumenti che hanno il compito di rafforzare e sostenere la voce dei cantori, come sono la cetra, il tetracordo maggiore e minore, il fagotto, la viola, il violino. Escluderà invece i timpani, i corni da caccia, le trombe, gli oboe, i flauti, i flautini, le arpe, i mandolini e simili strumenti, che rendono la musica teatrale.[/quote]

Now I'm not fluent in italian. But the word chitarra is not in that paragraph. And using online translation we get this

[quote]
We have not omitted to request the Council of wise men and distinguished Masters of music. According to their opinion, Ella, venerable Brother get that in its churches, if in them there is the use of playing musical instruments, organ, are allowed only those tools that are designed to strengthen and support the voices of singers, as are the cetra, the major and minor tetrachord, bassoon, viola, violin. Exclude the timpani, hunting horns, trumpets, Oboes, flutes, flautini, harps, [b]Mandolins [/b]and similar instruments, which make the theatrical music.
[/quote]

Mandolins not guitars. We could talk about context and whether or not he's providing information in this paragraph or actually making a declarative statement. But it doesn't matter. He said mandolins.

Secondly, I'd like to clear something up because apparently you read it differently than was intended. I was stating the fact that I minored in guitar and that i studied under some of the best guitarists in the world to underscore the point that I was trying to make. [b]I'm a trained musician and most guitarists that give a bad rep for guitar are not[/b]. You've read that as me trying to be a know it all or condescending. Whether I could have written it more clearly or you could have read it better is an argument for another day. Clearly it pissed you off and that was not the intention. If I only heard guitarists that can't play their way through Stairway to Heaven trying to fumble through mass, I would be completely against guitars at mass as well. I get a little snarky when people (not you per se) insinuate that it's impossible for the guitar to be reverent and prayerful. (which has been done ad nauseum in this thread)

Third I'm not wrong about young organists. Mainly because I haven't said anything about young organists in this thread or anywhere in my life. That is a debate you have with someone else in this thread. Not me.

It wasn't my intention to piss you off. I know you've studied your ass off and I respect that. I've been in this debate with more than a few people on this board for quite a few years. I stand by my statement that there is no church document that expressly names guitars.

I'm not against guitars at mass. I'm against bad musicians playing at mass.

[missionseeker]

That was groo. Sorry


I didn't misunderstand anything you said (I understood it how you explained it. ) my main contention with what you've been saying is things like "noses so high in the air" and wealthy educated westerners and stuffy. I'm not wealthy. Never have been. Most likely never will be. I'm not sticking my nose in the air and I would discourage stuffy liturgies. I am educated and I am a westerner. But the roman rite IS the foundation of western culture. So I don't understand why you say that like its a bad thing.

You didn't piss me off. I generally agree with you (but I know you've been debating this since before I joined and I remember your debates with cam so I wasn't surprised to see you in this thread. ) I genuinely respect you but was just disappointed to read the accusations you've made on this thread. That's all.


Just because there is no official English translation online doesn't mean there is not one. At home I have a buttload of books with a buttload of documents of the Church. Since I'm somewhere around 2000 miles from it it's not handy, but it's how I knew which encyclical it was. I'm pretty certain that it uses the Vaticans translation and it says guitar. At any rate all of the documents divide the strings between those that are plucked or strummed and those that are bowed. I can't really understate the important acne of that.

I'm not saying that this is my last post in this thread but I see no point in saying the same things over and over. As you said this thread and many before has gone over and over ad nauseam. There is no point in talking to people who either set in their ways or trying justify doing things they shouldn't. (which is not necessarily happening here but that's the usual mo in these debates)

[missionseeker]

Important acne? Stupid phone. Importance.

[Jaime]

[quote]I didn't misunderstand anything you said (I understood it how you explained it. ) my main contention with what you've been saying is things like "noses so high in the air" and wealthy educated westerners and stuffy. I'm not wealthy. Never have been. Most likely never will be. I'm not sticking my nose in the air and I would discourage stuffy liturgies. I am educated and I am a westerner. But the roman rite IS the foundation of western culture. So I don't understand why you say that like its a bad thing.[/quote]

Well i was clear that I never accused anyone of being wealthy. I said "not exactly poor" which is correct. By the fact that you live in where you have internet on your phone, you are not poor. But the roman rite isn't the foundation of western culture. It's the foundation of South American, Central American, African, etc. cultures as well. It is universal. THAT'S my point. People who debate the context of the mass will do so primarily from the mindset of "how does it impact my culture" and that is not appropriate. Because the Church was not designed just for our culture. We should have a global understanding of Church teachings. If we don't, we lose out.

[quote]Just because there is no official English translation online doesn't mean there is not one. At home I have a buttload of books with a buttload of documents of the Church. Since I'm somewhere around 2000 miles from it it's not handy, but it's how I knew which encyclical it was. I'm pretty certain that it uses the Vaticans translation and it says guitar. At any rate all of the documents divide the strings between those that are plucked or strummed and those that are bowed. I can't really understate the important acne of that.[/quote]

I'm not sure why you are not conceding this point. You quoted people who were quoting Pope Benedict (and were doing so poorly). Third party documentation can be wrong and in this case is wrong. You can go directly to the source at www.papalencyclicals.net. They have been reproducing with permission all documents from the Vatican Publishing House. The encyclical has not been changed in any way. The word guitar (chitarra) does not appear anywhere in the encyclical.

I asked you to provide a binding document that explicitly bans the guitar by name. Why? Because you said this

[quote]There was a lot of debate for the first 300 years about the organ, yes. But there was no decision until a yes was given.
[/quote]

You were saying since nothing precluded the organ, it was allowable. (I would still argue that point) But let's agree on this, the organ was played for three hundred years while there were very holy and learned people who were for the organ and who were very much against it. This is actually talked about in the encyclical you had the wrong quote for.

I'm glad I didn't piss you off. And for the record (and I've said this a few times) I don't have a problem with people who prefer the organ, chant, or polyphony. That is their right. I get riled up when people try to suggest that organ chant or polyphony make for a more sacred or reverent mass just because. It's not objectively true. The organ and chant have pride of place in the Mass. But so does latin. Just as some tried to argue that latin made mass more reverent and sacred. The Church has spoken very clearly that this is not the case.

The guitar is accepted at mass in Central and South America. The total population of Catholics there is six times the population in the US.

The bishops have the right to allow particular instruments in their diocese. Mine obviously gives permission for guitar in the archdiocese of Minneapolis and Saint Paul.

In light of these facts. It's clear the Church has not authoritatively banned the use of guitar.

[Tab'le De'Bah-Rye]

JC "it is not what goes into the mouth that makes one un-holy, it is that which comes out of it."
It is you whom makes the mass un-holy, neither the liturgy or the choice of musical instruments. The un-holyness is in you. Deal with it.

But i do agree with the person that said the musicians should be well practised musicians. As should a organist be so. And when it comes to the choir also. Though when we sing certain parts of the holy mass as a congregation we don't all have to be practised singers, we gain that through participating in the holy mass.

:edit: and i'm not saying happy birthday should be sung half way through the holy mass, but knit pick and you will undo the wooly jumper, as you possibly have already done, hence the decline in people becoming less willing to attend holy mass. JC "you weigh your prostulants down with so many little things and make them twice as fit for hell as yourselves."

Edited August 15, 2012 by Tab'le Du'Bah-Rye

[Tab'le De'Bah-Rye]

i think jesus' point is that if we weigh each other up to much with the little things than we can't succesfully address the bigger issues because where not super human, we are just plain old human. And to make myself very clear i'm not into priests and bishops adding or taking away from the words and symbols that make up the liturgy of the holy mass.

Edited August 15, 2012 by Tab'le Du'Bah-Rye

[franciscanheart]

[quote name='missionseeker' timestamp='1345001660' post='2467756']
Speaking of which, you are wrong about young organists. They are not as rare as you think. I went to a small school and there were 20 organ majors. All of them were teens. Besides that, why are we not encouraging young people to learn the organ? Especially in light of the directives to have diocesan schools for sacred music?
[/quote]
Nodding! We have a program here where youngsters go and explore the organ -- usually piano students, but some not. They learn about all the parts and how they work together to make sounds. They get to go in the casing and see the inside, and then they get to play it! It's fabulous.

We learned about how the organ worked growing up, and were allowed to blow on a (removed) pipe to make it sound. Certainly we were encouraged to learn if we wanted.

Our Director of Music has been playing the organ since he was quite young as he is a fourth-generation Catholic organist. In 2010, he celebrated his twentieth anniversary of directing Catholic music ministry programs. (He's in his mid-30s.)

eta: We also have a young man singing in our choir right now who is an organ major at a local university. Our DoM is working on his doctorate, our last DoM has a masters (also played since he was young), and we frequently have guest organists who are quite well known to anyone even remotely familiar with organ performance. Each of them has brought a great amount of beauty into our worship space, inspiring so many faithful to higher thought and devotion.

[quote name='FuturePriest387' timestamp='1345002617' post='2467762']
I'm a little picky when it comes to organs. I like pipe organs that you see in the huge traditional cathedrals.
[/quote]
What you like is the casing, it seems. I doubt you would know much of a difference between a quality electric and what you think you like. (Not intended to be offensive, so don't be defensive!)

[PhuturePriest]

[quote name='franciscanheart' timestamp='1345042743' post='2467974']
Nodding! We have a program here where youngsters go and explore the organ -- usually piano students, but some not. They learn about all the parts and how they work together to make sounds. They get to go in the casing and see the inside, and then they get to play it! It's fabulous.

We learned about how the organ worked growing up, and were allowed to blow on a (removed) pipe to make it sound. Certainly we were encouraged to learn if we wanted.

Our Director of Music has been playing the organ since he was quite young as he is a fourth-generation Catholic organist. In 2010, he celebrated his twentieth anniversary of directing Catholic music ministry programs. (He's in his mid-30s.)

eta: We also have a young man singing in our choir right now who is an organ major at a local university. Our DoM is working on his doctorate, our last DoM has a masters (also played since he was young), and we frequently have guest organists who are quite well known to anyone even remotely familiar with organ performance. Each of them has brought a great amount of beauty into our worship space, inspiring so many faithful to higher thought and devotion.


What you like is the casing, it seems. I doubt you would know much of a difference between a quality electric and what you think you like. (Not intended to be offensive, so don't be defensive!)
[/quote]

Oh, don't worry about offending me. I admittedly don't know much about organs, if that hasn't been prevalent enough in my posts.

[franciscanheart]

[quote name='USAirwaysIHS' timestamp='1345004397' post='2467787']
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NuLPhrO2oYM&feature=plcp[/media]
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KyCZ2vTftwE&feature=plcp[/media]
[/quote]
Be still my heart.

[missionseeker]

[size=4][font=arial, helvetica, sans-serif][quote name='jaime' timestamp='1344914584' post='2467315']From a personal standpoint Groo I would agree with you. And there is some music that makes it harder for me to be prayerful than others. We're all human so that makes sense. But I gotta say the people who take the staunch and stuffy approach are usually well educated and not exactly poor. I'm not suggesting that anyone who has a degree in sacred music is pulling six figures. But the argument being made here is supremely narrow minded and Western European. It doesn't take into account that most of the Catholics in the world are not. The Church however does recognize this[/font][/size]
[size=4][font=arial, helvetica, sans-serif][/quote][/font][/size][size=4][font=arial, helvetica, sans-serif]I think it's funny that you are saying not to include the guitar is " supremely narrow minded and Western European" because the guitar IS European. Europeans brought the guitar with them to other mission lands and for the most part, they are not really native to places such as South America, Africa, and Asia.[/font][/size]


[size=4][font=arial, helvetica, sans-serif][quote name='jaime' timestamp='1344924434' post='2467401']Mission what you've said is true but your prediction of the future is speculation. The Church is unchanging only in things that are dogma. Will the organ and chant always have pride of place? Very likely but it hasn't always. Nor has the Church ruled dogmatically on the usage of any other instrument including guitar. Nor will She.[/quote][/font][/size][size=4][font=arial, helvetica, sans-serif]Chant has always had pride of place.[/font][/size]

[size=4][font=arial, helvetica, sans-serif]The organ was chosen by the church while at the very same time the guitar (or its ancestors) were clearly rejected for various reason. Profane associations, the inability to carry, and the fact that it plays more to emotions than an organ. Only one of those has really changed, and like it's been said that is dependent on electricty.[/font][/size]


[size=4][font=arial, helvetica, sans-serif][quote name='jaime' timestamp='1344926400' post='2467410']Ok so you are suggesting that because the Church had no specific rules that said "No organ" that it was ok? ( i have a huge problem with that but let's worry about that later) What Church document specifically names the guitar?[/font][/size]
[size=4][font=arial, helvetica, sans-serif][/quote][/font][/size]
[size=4][font=arial, helvetica, sans-serif][quote name='missionseeker' timestamp='1344926812' post='2467413']I'm saying that there were no specific guidelines until the church said it was ok. There were people who said it shouldn't be used - including saints. But the church decided otherwise. I'm not saying it was ok or not ok, I'm just pointing it out.

As for documents are you referring to then or now?[/font][/size]
[size=4][font=arial, helvetica, sans-serif][/quote][/font][/size][size=4][font=arial, helvetica, sans-serif]How is you saying "until you've shown me documents where the Church expressly bans guitars, I will play guitar at Mass" any different than what you have a problem with? I really don't understand.[/font][/size]


[size=4][font=arial, helvetica, sans-serif][quote name='jaime' timestamp='1344967243' post='2467576']
The problem with that fillus is that with today's churches, you likely can't have a mass without electricity period. Regardless of what music is to be played.
[/quote][/font][/size][size=4][font=arial, helvetica, sans-serif]There are many places that are in the line of hurricanes that often have no power for weeks. Sometimes, there's barely a Church left. There's still Mass. [/font][/size]

[Jaime]

Mission if we're in a dialogue, wouldn't it make more sense to address my most recent response to you than some in the past that were addressed to others?

[missionseeker]

[size=4][font=arial, helvetica, sans-serif][quote name='jaime' timestamp='1345013571' post='2467827']
Let's take things in order.

First things first. Pope Benedict XIV does not ever mention guitars in Annus Qui Hunc. It is a mistranslation that people have quoted often. But just because it's said more than once doesn't make it true. Now granted, you can't find an english translation online anywhere of the actual document but there are other means of finding the truth. For example you can go to www.papalencyclicals.net find Annus Qui Hunc in the original Italian. The italian word for guitar is chitarra. NOWHERE will you find the word chitarra in this papal encyclical. The paragraph that you are trying to quote reads as follows

[/quote] [/font][/size]

[size=4][font=arial, helvetica, sans-serif]Wrong. He mentions cythara, which is the word you insist must be used. [/font][/size]


[quote][size=4][font=arial, helvetica, sans-serif][color=#000000]Noi non Ci impegneremo ad affermare che, al tempo di S. Tommaso d’Aquino, non vi fosse in qualche Chiesa l’uso del canto musicale accompagnato dai musicali strumenti. Si può però affermare che tale usanza non esisteva nelle Chiese conosciute dal Santo Dottore; e perciò sembra che egli non fosse favorevole a questo genere di canto. Trattando infatti la questione nella [/color][i]Somma teologica [/i][color=#000000](2, 2, quest. 91, art. 2) "[/color][i]se nelle lodi divine si debba usare il canto[/i][color=#000000]", risponde di sì. Ma alla quarta obiezione, da lui formulata, che la Chiesa non suole usare nelle lodi divine strumenti musicali, come la cetra e l’arpa, per non sembrare voler giudaizzare – in base a quanto si legge nel Salmo: "[/color][i]Confitemini Domino in cythara, in psalterio decem chordarum psallite illi; Celebrate il Signore sulla cetra, a lui salmeggiate con arpa da dieci corde[/i][color=#000000]" – egli risponde: "[/color][i]Questi strumenti musicali eccitano il piacere piuttosto che disporre interiormente alla pietà; nell’Antico Testamento sono stati adoperati perché il popolo era più grossolano e carnale, ed occorreva allettarlo per mezzo di questi strumenti, come con promesse terrene[/i][color=#000000]". Aggiunge inoltre che gli strumenti, nell’Antico Testamento, avevano valore di tipi o prefigurazioni di certe realtà: "[/color][i]Anche perché questi strumenti materiali raffiguravano altre cose[/i][color=#000000]".[/color][/font][/size]

[size=4][font=arial, helvetica, sans-serif][color=#000000]Which it translates to [/color][/font][/size]

[font=arial, helvetica, sans-serif][color=#000000][font=Times New Roman', serif][size=5]We We will not support that, at the time of S. Thomas Aquinas, there was in any Church the use of musical singing accompanied by musical instruments. It can be asserted that no such custom existed in the Churches known by the holy Doctor, and so it seems that he was not conducive to this kind of singing. In fact, treating the question in the [/size][/font][/color][i]Summa Theologica[/i][color=#000000][font=Times New Roman', serif][size=5] (2, 2, quest. 91, Art. 2) " [/size][/font][/color][i]if you must use the divine praises in the song[/i][color=#000000][font=Times New Roman', serif][size=5] ", says yes. But the fourth objection, which he formulated, that the Church does not usually use musical instruments in the divine praises, as the lyre and the harp, do not seem to want to Judaize - based on what we read in Psalm: " [/size][/font][/color][i]Confitemini Domino cythara, in psalterio decem chordarum Psallite unlimited, thanks to the Lord with the harp, he salmeggiate with harp of ten strings[/i][color=#000000][font=Times New Roman', serif][size=5] "- he replies:" [/size][/font][/color][i]These musical instruments excite pleasure rather than having the inner piety in the Old Testament were used because the people was more coarse and carnal, and it was necessary to lure using these tools, as with earthly promises[/i][color=#000000][font=Times New Roman', serif][size=5] . " He adds that the tools in the Old Testament, had values ​​of type or foreshadowing of some realities: " [/size][/font][/color][i]Also because these material instruments depict other things[/i][color=#000000][font=Times New Roman', serif][size=5] . [/size][/font][/color][/font][/quote]



[size=4][font=arial, helvetica, sans-serif]I would like to point out that [/font][/size]
[quote][i]These musical instruments excite pleasure rather than having the inner piety in the Old Testament were used because the people was more coarse and carnal, and it was necessary to lure using these tools, as with earthly promises[/i][color=#000000][font=Times New Roman', serif][size=5] . " He adds that the tools in the Old Testament, had values ​​of type or foreshadowing of some realities: " [/size][/font][/color][i]Also because these material instruments depict other things[/i][/quote]