Yay....the Vernacular

[Jaime]

Psssssst Nicole

It doesn't say bowed. It says stringed

[Cam42]

[quote name='hot stuff' date='Apr 13 2005, 12:46 PM'] Psssssst Nicole

It doesn't say bowed.  It says stringed [/quote]
[quote]Other instruments besides the organ, especially [b]the smaller bowed instruments,[/b] may be used during the liturgical functions, particularly on days of greater solemnity. These may be used together with the organ or without it, for instrumental numbers of for accompanying the singing. However, the following rules derived from [u]the principles stated above (no.60) are to strictly observed:[/u] (DMS no. 68)[/quote]

Pssssssttttt hot stuff, it says bowed. And strictly observed.

Cam

[Cam42]

[quote]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][u]such as string instruments which are played with a bow,[/u] 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.[/b] (DMS no. 60 (b))[/quote]

Just in case you forgot. Unless of course you are Jimmy Page, then I suppose the guitar would be ok.....whatever....

Cam

[Jaime]

I may forget to put my pants on before leaving the house but I have not forgotten about liturgical music.


(checking for pants)


OK

Nicole, The DMS is not the only source. You can check out the USCCB site as well as the GIRM.

Stringed instruments are allowed.

Also Nicole,

If you have the opportunity, go check out pictures from the Youth Day masses. They're very pretty.

Oh and it will drive Camster crazy!

[Nicole8223]

[quote name='hot stuff' date='Apr 13 2005, 01:03 PM'] I may forget to put my pants on before leaving the house but I have not forgotten about liturgical music.


(checking for pants)


OK

Nicole, The DMS is not the only source. You can check out the USCCB site as well as the GIRM.

Stringed instruments are allowed.

Also Nicole,

If you have the opportunity, go check out pictures from the Youth Day masses. They're very pretty.

Oh and it will drive Camster crazy! [/quote]
Ah, I will definitely check those out. I am really intereted in learning what is true and real, and what is just my personal opinion. But I do need clarity, and it is hard sometimes because the Church is not perfectly explicit in its teachings. I will look at those sources you mentioned...

and hey...thanks for caring, hot stuff!!

[Cam42]

[quote]Nicole, The DMS is not the only source.[/quote]

If Gregorian chant and organ are to be the common instruments, why is this statement in Sacrosanctum Concilium ignored?

[quote]“Therefore no other person, even if he be a priest, may add, remove, or change anything in the Liturgy on his own authority.” (SC 22 §3)[/quote]

[quote]But other instruments also may be admitted for use in divine worship, with the knowledge and consent of the competent territorial authority, as laid down in Art. 22, 52, 37, and 40. This may be done, however, only on condition that the instruments are suitable, or can be made suitable, for sacred use, accord with the dignity of the temple, and truly contribute to the edification of the faithful.(SC 120)[/quote]

I would assert that use of (I will assume Gregorian, for brevity’s sake) chant and organ are the normative actions of the music of the Liturgy. The Code of Canon Law says of Liturgical law, of which we speak;
[quote]“For the most part the Code does not determine the rites to be observed in the celebration of liturgical actions. Accordingly, liturgical laws which have been in effect hitherto retain their force, except those which may be contrary to the canons of the Code.” (CIC 2)[/quote]

Look to Pascendi Dominici Gregis:
[quote]“Tradition, as understood by the Modernists, is a communication with others of an original experience, through preaching by means of the intellectual formula. To this formula, in addition to its representative value they attribute a species of suggestive efficacy which acts firstly in the believer by stimulating the religious sense, should it happen to have grown sluggish, and by renewing the experience once acquired, and secondly, in those who do not yet believe by awakening in them for the first time the religious sense and producing the experience. In this way is religious experience spread abroad among the nations; and not merely among contemporaries by preaching, but among future generations both by books and by oral transmission from one to another. Sometimes this communication of religious experience takes root and thrives, at other times it withers at once and dies. For the Modernists, to live is a proof of truth, since for them life and truth are one and the same thing. Thus we are once more led to infer that all existing religions are equally true, for otherwise they would not survive.” (PDG 15)[/quote]

Apply this to modern music and we can start to see the connection from a liturgical standpoint. What is the Church’s triple authority? 1. Dogmatic 2. Disciplinary 3. Liturgical.

So, actually, when I provide documents that say that something has pride of place, we are bound by her authority to give it that. The Church does not overtly condemn many things, such as the guitar. However, common sense will say that those things which are inappropriate should not be used. Hence the statement made in DMS no. 60.

Cam

[God Conquers]

Someone should email Ratzinger...

[Cam42]

Somehow, I already think that he knows.

Cam

[Jaime]

Nice Camster, trying to shut down Nicole before she even starts looking at the resources.


Could you wait to refute until a point has been made?


Hey Nicole

Go get some pics of the Youth Day Mass (they're on the web)

They are verrrrrrry telling


Cam

Don't jump ahead

[AngelofJesus]

Cam,

What is the purpose of music in mass?

[argent_paladin]

Although I actually agree with Cam, I will play Devil's Advocate and try to defend the use of acoustic guitar in liturgy. The way that the clause in 60 is worded implies that the chosing of proper instruments is to be done in a particular cultural context, one that is constantly changing. Different people in different places and times will decide that different instruments are appropriate. 30 years ago, the guitar was only a secular instrument. But in the last 30 years, thousand of Catholic songs have been written for the liturgy that are specifically for guitar. They are use every sunday in virtually every parish in every diocese in the US. And I use 30 years specifically because that is the time period that the Church uses to decide if some custom has standing in the Church. I would argue that since acoustic guitar has been used so prominently, for so long, in so many places, it has the status of a customary liturgical instrument. I would say the same about the piano. I would say that guitar masses are more common than organ masses. If you were to ask 1000 Catholics what instruments are used regularly in their parish, 900 would say guitar and perhaps 200 would say organ. With this state of affairs, it is clear that the "common estimation" doesn't deem guitars inappropriate. The people have spoken and they don't mind the guitars.

[argent_paladin]

On a practical level, we need to have:
1. Education for all Catholics so that they can appreciate the amazing tradition of liturgical music, especially organ music and Gregorian chant.
2. Donors should make sure that every church has a usable, working organ
3. We should encourage and train good organists. I have known many people who say that they don't like organ music but then they hear a true virtuoso and they are enthralled. Most organists are barely adequate, but the organ can truly sing.
It won't work if it is only from the top-down, citing Church liturgical laws. It will only work if it is both top-down and bottom-up. We need people to demand beauty and dignity in the liturgy.

[Jaime]

[quote]
2. Donors should make sure that every church has a usable, working organ[/quote]

Argent

That's simply not possible. There are churches in the US that, if they had a pipe organ, it would literally blow all the windows out. The architecture simply doesn't allow it. (Again its about acoustics folks)

Also what about impoverished communities here and around the world? I've played in churches in Central America that had 1000 families that barely had the means to keep to keep their children alive and healthy.

Part of tradition is the ability for musicians to compose liturgical music. They still need instrumentation

[cmotherofpirl]

Remove the monpoly of Oregon Bad Music Press Company.

[aloha918]

[quote name='Cam42' date='Apr 13 2005, 09:55 AM']




I find it interesting that during the 60s and 70s Dion and Cat Stevens were sung at Mass.....disturbing isn't it? And how is it that it is ok to play Faith Hill and Josh Groban during wedding Masses?



[/quote]
if you are refering to "mourning has broken"....by cat stevens.....yeah he COVERED that becasue he saw it in a hymnal and liked it so much.......it was a church song way before he covered it........shows you how cool cat stevens is......

[Oik]

Cat Stevens is a Muslim Imam that doesn't play music any more...
not cool

[aloha918]

[quote name='Oik' date='Apr 14 2005, 11:09 AM'] Cat Stevens is a Muslim Imam that doesn't play music any more...
not cool [/quote]
why is this "not cool"......becasuse he doesnt play much music anymore.....i would agree.....

if it is becasue he is now islam i would strongly disagree.

[Cam42]

[quote name='hot stuff' date='Apr 14 2005, 09:27 AM']
Argent

That's simply not possible.  There are churches in the US that, if they had a pipe organ, it would literally blow all the windows out.  The architecture simply doesn't allow it.  (Again its about acoustics folks)

Also what about impoverished communities here and around the world?  I've played in churches in Central America that had 1000 families that barely had the means to keep to keep their children alive and healthy.

Part of tradition is the ability for musicians to compose liturgical music.  They still need instrumentation[/quote]
Or acceptable facsimile of a pipe organ, such as a reed organ. If a church isn't large enough, the Church allows for that particular issue, Himester.

As far as the churches in Central America go: why can't donors give money to get them an organ? What is so tough about that?

One of the arguments that is often made about music is that of “native influence.” Since Guatemala can’t afford an organ, they can use marimba or some other “native” instrumentation.

Pope St. Pius X speaks directly to this in Tra le sollecitudini. He says, [quote]....still these forms must be subordinated in such a manner to the general characteristics of sacred music that nobody of any nation may receive an impression other than good [here meaning, sacred in nature] on hearing them (Tra le Sollecitudini 2).[/quote]

Remember what Ms. Carroll says?
[quote]But if a mariachi band sounds exactly as it does at a fiesta where the guests are swigging margaritas, or a rock band sounds as it does at a local teen dance, then they are not suitable for Mass. Whether they can be made suitable or sacred in nature as the Church requires is highly questionable.....Music that is entertaining is, by its nature and style, appealing and popular; but it is not sacred music. Mariachi bands, kazoo groups, rock bands, and the like are definitely not “suited to the grandeur of the act being celebrated.[/quote]


[quote]They still need instrumentation[/quote]

In lieu of not being able to teach the congregation to sing Gregorian Chant. Why can't we teach the faithful Gregorian Chant? Is that unreasonable? No. We are commanded by the Church to know the responses in Latin, therefore learning Gregorian Chant would help facilitate that. Instrumentation, including the organ, plays second fiddle to the human voice. Why can't we teach them Gregorian Chant?

I would assert this; by eschewing formality, solemnity and complexity, we expect the simplistic to be used. By it’s very nature a guitar is simple. It cannot generate the complexity that any organ, pipe, reed, or otherwise can. By moving to this simplistic stylization, we are abandoning the heritage that is the Catholic tradition in favor of a “sterilized” and simplistic Liturgy.

How often is it said, “We’ll use the guitar, piano, etc...for the regular Sunday Liturgies, but we’ll use the organ for “Special Masses?” What is wrong with that statement? The error is that all Liturgy is to be special. So, why not make use of the most appropriate sacred instrument for the Liturgies that use music?


Cam

[Jaime]

[quote]As far as the churches in Central America go: why can't donors give money to get them an organ? What is so tough about that?[/quote]

Oh c'mon Cam... you are not serious.

You know how much it cost to get the pipe organ in the chapel at UST. How much more exponentially would it be to put that organ in Venezuala?

Hey thanks for the million dollar organ. Got any corn we can grind? No?

And let's lighten up abit on Ms Carroll shall we? She offers an educated opinion yes. But it is only opinion (and you know that)

She is not an authority within matters of Church.

Edited April 15, 2005 by jaime

[Cam42]

[quote]You know how much it cost to get the pipe organ in the chapel at UST. How much more exponentially would it be to put that organ in Venezuala?[/quote]

Yeah, but I am not expecting them to put in a $1.5 millon organ, but there is nothing preventing them to donate and get a $5,000 reed organ. I don't think that is unreasonable at all.

[url="http://www.thepianoworld.com/mannborg_german.htm"]$5000 Reed Organ[/url]

And it is a bit disingenious don't you think to make the "corn" statement? It is a bit like comparing apples and oranges.

Cam (the finder of reasonably priced organs)