Cardinal Arinze

[qfnol31]

I was wondering if anyone knows how he feels about sacred music?

I was talking to someone today about how my choir sang for him last year and she said that afterwards someone asked him about the music and he responded that he doesn't think that music should allow all to participate.

I was wondering if anyone knew more about this or was I misled?

[Era Might]

Just guessing, but he probably meant that he prefers for the whole congregation to sing, rather than just a choir, because it makes it into a sort of "performance".

[qfnol31]

Ahh, that makes sense.























We sing polyphony and Gregorian chant because I forgot to specify.

[Era Might]

I found this with a quick google search, and it seems to suggest what I said:

[quote]The primary direction of liturgical worship is vertical. We want to adore God, praise Him and thank Him. We want to celebrate the mysteries of Christ our Savior. All participants in the liturgy should watch out for, and avoid temptations to draw attention to oneself. The priest who preaches, the choir that leads the singing and the reader who proclaims a lesson, should not attract attention to themselves.

[url="http://www.adoremus.org/0603Arinze.html"]http://www.adoremus.org/0603Arinze.html[/url][/quote]

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

in the traditional Mass are women allowed to sing in the schola?

[qfnol31]

[quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Dec 2 2005, 06:36 PM']in the traditional Mass are women allowed to sing in the schola?
[right][snapback]808833[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Often, sadly, yes.

I say sadly because they're the ones off-key.

[qfnol31]

[quote name='Era Might' date='Dec 2 2005, 06:35 PM']I found this with a quick google search, and it seems to suggest what I said:
[right][snapback]808832[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Ahh, okay.

[philothea]

[quote name='qfnol31' date='Dec 2 2005, 06:36 PM']Often, sadly, yes. 

I say sadly because they're the ones off-key. 
[right][snapback]808834[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

[qfnol31]

: Just saying! :

Actually, I do kid about that because in my choir it's the men who need help (and I'm not talking the pseudo-men tenors).

[phatcatholic]

[quote]The primary direction of liturgical worship is vertical. We want to adore God, praise Him and thank Him. We want to celebrate the mysteries of Christ our Savior. All participants in the liturgy should watch out for, and avoid temptations to draw attention to oneself. The priest who preaches, the choir that leads the singing and the reader who proclaims a lesson, should not attract attention to themselves.

[url="http://www.adoremus.org/0603Arinze.html"]http://www.adoremus.org/0603Arinze.html[/url][/quote]
having the choir in a choir loft behind the congregation could just as easily serve this purpose.

[Aloysius]

yeah that really is the best, the choir being behind the congregation. it's an invisible voice coming out, draws in the sense of the invisible angelic participants in the mass.

[phatcatholic]

yes, it is perfectly conducive to prayer (the vertical relationship that arinze stresses), in my opinion

[qfnol31]

That's what we do.

[Cam42]

The Mass Isn't Entertainment, Says Cardinal Arinze

VATICAN CITY, NOV. 16, 2005 (Zenit.org).-

[quote]The Mass is a moment of reflection and encounter with God, rather than a form of entertainment, says Cardinal Francis Arinze.

In an interview with Inside the Vatican magazine, the prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments made a comprehensive assessment of the recent Synod of Bishops on the Eucharist and of developments in liturgical practice 40 years after the Second Vatican Council.

[b]Regarding "music in the liturgy, we should start by saying that Gregorian music is the Church's precious heritage," he said. "It should stay. It should not be banished. If therefore in a particular diocese or country, no one hears Gregorian music anymore, then somebody has made a mistake somewhere."

However, "the Church is not saying that everything should be Gregorian music," the cardinal clarified. "There is room for music which respects that language, that culture, that people. There is room for that too, and the present books say that is a matter for the bishops' conference, because it generally goes beyond the boundaries of one diocese.

"The ideal thing is that the bishops would have a liturgical music commission which looks at the wording and the music of the hymns. And when the commission is satisfied, judgment is brought to the bishops for approval, in the name of the rest of the conference."

What should not be the case, insists the Nigerian cardinal, is "individuals just composing anything and singing it in church. This is not right at all -- no matter how talented the individual is. That brings us to the question of the instruments to be used.

"The local church should be conscious that church worship is not really the same as what we sing in a bar, or what we sing in a convention for youth. Therefore it should influence the type of instrument used, the type of music used."[/b]

Suitability

"I will not now pronounce and say never guitar; that would be rather severe," Cardinal Arinze added. "But much of guitar music may not be suitable at all for the Mass. Yet, it is possible to think of some guitar music that would be suitable, not as the ordinary one we get every time, [but with] the visit of a special group, etc."

"The judgment would be left to the bishops of the area. It is wiser that way," he pointed out. "Also, because there are other instruments in many countries which are not used in Italy or in Ireland, for instance.

"People don't come to Mass in order to be entertained. They come to Mass to adore God, to thank him, to ask pardon for sins, and to ask for other things that they need."

"When they want entertainment, they know where to go -- parish hall, theater, presuming that their entertainment is acceptable from a moral theological point of view," added the cardinal, 73, who this year celebrated the 40th anniversary of his episcopal ordination.

The synod

In the course of the interview, Cardinal Arinze, who in the recent Synod of Bishops on the Eucharist was one of the delegate presidents, subsequently made a summary of this ecclesial event which gathered 252 bishops.

Speaking of the positive points of the synod, the cardinal said there were many: "Strengthening our faith in the holy Eucharist. No new doctrine, but freshness of _expression of our Eucharistic faith. Encouragement in the celebration in the sense of good attention; a celebration which shows faith."

"The synod thanked priests for their ministry and also deacons and others who assist at the celebration of Mass, and underlined the importance of Eucharistic adoration outside Mass which has its fruits in the Mass itself because the Mass is the supreme act of adoration," he continued.

"But the sacrament does not finish after Mass," the cardinal observed. "Christ is in the tabernacle to be brought to the sick, to receive our visits of adoration, praise, love, supplication. The synod fathers did not only talk about adoration -- they did adoration, every day. Christ exposed in the monstrance in the chapel near the Synod Hall, one hour in the morning, one hour in the afternoon."

"The synod also stressed the importance of good preparation for the holy Eucharist; to receive Communion," he noted. "Therefore, confession of sins, for those who are in mortal sin and in any case encouraging the sacrament of penance as a way of growing in fidelity to Christ. And also that not everybody is fit to receive holy Communion, so those who are not fit should not receive."

Protestant view

Referring to a negative tendency in the Western world, the cardinal revealed that an increasing number of Catholics have "a more Protestant concept of the Eucharist, seeing it mainly as a symbol."

The "synod fathers recognize that many Catholics don't have correct faith in the real presence of Christ in the holy Eucharist," he said. "This was mentioned in one of the propositions as well.

"It was recognized so much that many of the synod fathers suggested that there be themes suggested for homilies on Sundays. Seeing that for many Catholics the Sunday homily is about the only religious instruction they get in a week, the synod fathers suggested that the four major areas of Catholic faith should be covered by the homily in a three-year cycle."

The four areas correspond to the parts of the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

"First part, what we believe," Cardinal Arinze said. "Second part, how we worship, i.e., sacraments. Third part, what we live, life in Christ, so the moral law, the Ten Commandments, the Christian life lived; and the fourth part, prayer."

Therefore, "although the homily should be on the Scripture readings and the other liturgical texts, some way has to be found to cover the whole area of Catholic faith in a period of three years because many Catholics are really ignorant of fundamental matters. That is a fact nobody can deny."

Showmanship

"Vatican II brought many good things but everything has not been positive, and the synod recognized that there have been shadows," Cardinal Arinze acknowledged.

"There has been a bit of neglect of the holy Eucharist outside Mass," he said. "A lot of ignorance. A lot of temptations to showmanship for the priest who celebrates facing the people.

"If he is not very disciplined he will soon become a performer. He may not realize it, but he will be projecting himself rather than projecting Christ. Indeed it is very demanding, the altar facing the people. Then even those who read the First and Second Reading can engage in little tactics that make them draw attention to themselves and distract the people.

"So there are problems. However, some of the problems were not caused by Vatican II, but they were caused by children of the Church after Vatican II. Some of them talking of Vatican II push their own agenda. We have to watch that. People pushing their own agenda, justifying it as the 'spirit of Vatican II.'"

The Vatican prefect continued: "So, if only people would be more faithful to what has been laid down, not by people who just like to make laws for other people, but what follows from what we believe. 'Lex orandi, Lex credendi.' It is our faith that directs our prayer life, and if we genuflect in front of the tabernacle it is because we believe that Jesus is there, and is God."

Abuses not new

Contrary to what many think, he said, "even when there was the Tridentine Mass there were abuses. Many Catholics did not know, because they did not know Latin! So when the priest garbled the words, they were not aware of this.

"Therefore, the most important area is faith and fidelity to that faith, and a faithful reading of the original texts, and their faithful translations, so that people celebrate knowing that the liturgy is the public prayer of the Church."

Cardinal Arinze concluded that the liturgy "is not the property of one individual, therefore an individual does not tinker with it, but makes the effort to celebrate it as Holy Mother Church wants. When that happens, the people are happy, they feel nourished. Their faith grows, their faith is strengthened. They go home happy and willing to come back next Sunday." [/quote]


The bolded speaks to your question, but I would also say that this is an important view of the Liturgical Action.

[qfnol31]

It was more that he didn't like it at all, according to this conversation.

The choir does chant and polyphony...Oh well.

I think Pope Benedict addressed this in an earlier book about how listening to the music is participation.

Edited December 3, 2005 by qfnol31

[Cam42]

Zach,

Here is what my mentor had to say on Liturgical music.

[quote name='Mons. Richard J. Schuler']The question, "What is sacred music," put to the average Catholic, will no doubt elicit the answer that "sacred music is hymns." And in the lived experience of most Catholics today, that is the extent of what they know to be sacred music. On Sunday, they sing four hymns at Mass. In most parishes, is there anything else?

For those people who attend symphony orchestra concerts, and those who have an interest in recorded music, there is the possibility of developing a knowledge of and an appreciation for the vast repertory of sacred music, the inheritance of centuries and a veritable treasure house of beauty, because many of these compositions, written originally for the Church, have become standard repertory in most concert series and record catalogs. Some may have sung one or the other great choral masterpiece of religious music in college choral ensembles, and even some high school groups have performed a few challenging selections.

The II Vatican Council clearly ordered the preservation and fostering of the great treasury of church music, beginning with the Gregorian chant up to the most modern compositions. This is to be done within the setting of liturgical worship, not merely in concert form. Most of this vast repertory that spreads across centuries of human achievement demands trained groups of singers and instrumentalists to perform. It is art and demands skill and training in the musicians needed to perform it. It is the highest form of human artistic endeavor, worthy of God and His worship.

The Vatican Council did, indeed, order the singing of the congregation in all those parts of the liturgy that truly belong to the competency of all the people. This order is not in contradiction to the other decree of the conciliar fathers demanding the fostering of choral music. The same body cannot be in opposition to itself in its decrees. Both the singing of the choir and the singing of the congregation have their proper places in solemn liturgy.

It is a strange spirit (perhaps the "spirit of Vatican II"?) that has led to the dismissal of choirs, the abandoning of polyphonic music, especially in the Latin language. In order to justify such a position, some (Rev. Frederick McManus, for example) have announced that the treasury of church music is to be fostered "in concerts." Others (Fr. Joseph Gelineau, for example) have simply stated that polyphonic choral music is not intended for use in the liturgy, nor should church music even attempt to reach the perfection one might well expect in concert performances.

Thus the hymn has replaced the settings of the Mass texts; the congregation has been substituted for the choir; the vernacular has superceded the Latin language; the guitar and piano have pushed aside the pipe organ and the orchestra. What is left of the treasury of sacred music for the parish liturgy? Four hymns!

Sadly, this is the present state of church music, its study and its performance, not only in the parishes, but in the schools, especially those for the training of future priests. Again, a direct violation of the conciliar decrees on sacred music by seminary authorities, done knowingly and willingly, has deprived the Catholic people and their future priests of their rightful inheritance.

One keeps asking "why?" The first and most charitable answer is always that those who are implementing the conciliar decrees in this country are ignorant of the treasury of sacred music, a terrible indictment of professional educators. There is no question that many seminaries functioning before the council had inadequate music programs of study and performance, headed by incompetent instructors, but at least the norms were acknowledged even though the efforts to fulfill them were inadequate.

But another reason for the attack on sacred music as we have known it for fifteen hundred years is an anti-Roman position that wants to eliminate the ancient Roman liturgy and all it has professed and taught, especially what was transmitted through the medium of sacred music. The liturgy is the greatest teacher of the faith. Those who wished to change that faith understood that the changing of the liturgy (and its music) would result in the "protestantizing" of the Church. If one admits that the results of the liturgical reforms of the past twenty-five years can to some extent be laid to the ignorance of those in this country who made the rules following the council, it cannot be denied either that there was also a degree of hostility toward sacred music involved in the process.

The attack on the "sacred" was aimed directly at sacred music. Many denied the existence of anything that could be called sacred, despite the opening words of the 1967 instruction, "Musicam sacram." We have become used to secular tunes, secular instruments (piano, guitar, drums), secular performance practices as musical combos and performing soloists and dancers; all found their way into the liturgy, not enhancing its holiness but directly destroying the sacred quality that only truly sacred art can contribute to liturgical action.

The major question, "What makes music sacred?" has been answered in these pages a number of times (e.g., Vol. 107, No. 3 (Fall 1980); Vol. 112, No. 2 (Summer 1985). Last summer's symposium at Christendom College faced the very same question which is basic to all church music. But just as basic is the other major question, "What makes music art?" Involved in that is the vast area of musical training and education. Only the trained musician can answer what makes a given piece of music art. But many of the reformers have stumbled into this area without the proper knowledge or experience. A whole generation of poorly trained (or not trained at all) composers has appeared, producing words and notes that many publishers continue to hawk as sacred church music, even when most of it fails by both criteria: it is not sacred and it is not art. But it makes money! Some of it even parades as hymns on Sundays in our parishes and more often in the seminaries.

To give an answer to the question, "What is sacred music?," we must answer that it is the great treasury of music, written over the ages by the greatest composers for use in the sung liturgy of the Roman Catholic Church, beginning with the Gregorian melodies and continuing on through the polyphonic pieces of the middle ages and the renaissance, up to the orchestral settings of the last three centuries and into our own time; it is simple for the singing congregation and more elaborate as the degree of musicianship increases. Pope Pius XII in his encyclical, "Musicae sacrae disciplina," beautifully summarized the role of sacred music.

"Thus, at the instance and under the sponsorship of the Church, sacred music, through the course of centuries, has traversed a long road by which, though sometimes slowly and laboriously, it has finally reached the heights: from the simple and natural Gregorian modes, which are, moreover, quite perfect in their kind, to great and even magnificent works of art which not only human voices, but also the organ and other musical instruments embellish, adorn and amplify almost endlessly. Just as this progress in the art of music shows clearly how dear to the heart of the Church it was to make divine worship more resplendent and appealing to Christian peoples, so too it made clear why the Church also must, from time to time, impose a check lest its proper purposes be exceeded and lest, along with the true progress, an element profane and alien to divine worship creep into sacred music and corrupt it."
Would that we might put into practice what Pope Pius XII called for and what the fathers of the II Vatican Council decreed, basing so much of their document on the great encyclical of Christmas 1955.[/quote]

To the point.

[qfnol31]

My schola master gave a great homily on what good Vatican II really did for music. His credentials are phenomenal. He's the one who spent 15 years at the Köln Cathedral (had to retire) and got a degree in Gregorian Chant from the Holy Father. He mentioned how Vatican II made song an actual prayer of the Mass that mattered.

Now as to that article, I attend a Mass once a month (I go more often, but this happens on First Fridays) where only one of the sung parts of the Mass is where the people sing too (well, there's also the Pater Noster). It's actually a very heavily attended Mass, second only to the Requiem Mass.

The rest is polyphony and Gregorian chant. These Masses (before I sang) were some of the most spiritually fulfilling.

Long story short, I don't think that people being able to sing all the parts of the Mass is really as important as most people make it out (not saying it shouldn't exist, but if you experience these Masses it's like Heaven).

It seems like, if what I heard is correct, Cardinal Arinze disagrees with this.

[phatcatholic]

cam.............do you have a link to the words from your mentor?

[missionseeker]

umm... while you all are talking about sacred music, I was wondering if anyone knew any (good, hardcore,Catholic)colleges/universities where Sacred/Liturgical music is a major. I have only found St. Gregory's University in OK (don't know much about it htough) and Ave in FL.

[Cam42]

[quote name='qfnol31' date='Dec 3 2005, 12:32 AM']My schola master gave a great homily on what good Vatican II really did for music.  His credentials are phenomenal.    He's the one who spent 15 years at the Köln Cathedral (had to retire) and got a degree in Gregorian Chant from the Holy Father.    He mentioned how Vatican II made song an actual prayer of the Mass that mattered.

Now as to that article, I attend a Mass once a month (I go more often, but this happens on First Fridays) where only one of the sung parts of the Mass is where the people sing too (well, there's also the Pater Noster).  It's actually a very heavily attended Mass, second only to the Requiem Mass. 

The rest is polyphony and Gregorian chant.  These Masses (before I sang) were some of the most spiritually fulfilling.

Long story short, I don't think that people being able to sing all the parts of the Mass is really as important as most people make it out (not saying it shouldn't exist, but if you experience these Masses it's like Heaven).

It seems like, if what I heard is correct, Cardinal Arinze disagrees with this. 
[right][snapback]809121[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Zach, the quote that I gave you from Cardinal Arinze does not support that "thought" that you heard.

[quote name='Francis Card. Arinze (2005)']Regarding "music in the liturgy, we should start by saying that Gregorian music is the Church's precious heritage," he said. "It should stay. It should not be banished. If therefore in a particular diocese or country, no one hears Gregorian music anymore, then somebody has made a mistake somewhere."

However, "the Church is not saying that everything should be Gregorian music," the cardinal clarified. "There is room for music which respects that language, that culture, that people. There is room for that too, and the present books say that is a matter for the bishops' conference, because it generally goes beyond the boundaries of one diocese.

"The ideal thing is that the bishops would have a liturgical music commission which looks at the wording and the music of the hymns. And when the commission is satisfied, judgment is brought to the bishops for approval, in the name of the rest of the conference."

What should not be the case, insists the Nigerian cardinal, is "individuals just composing anything and singing it in church. This is not right at all -- no matter how talented the individual is. That brings us to the question of the instruments to be used.

"The local church should be conscious that church worship is not really the same as what we sing in a bar, or what we sing in a convention for youth. Therefore it should influence the type of instrument used, the type of music used."[/quote]

[quote name='Mons. Richard Schuler (1991)']The II Vatican Council clearly ordered the preservation and fostering of the great treasury of church music, beginning with the Gregorian chant up to the most modern compositions. This is to be done within the setting of liturgical worship, not merely in concert form. Most of this vast repertory that spreads across centuries of human achievement demands trained groups of singers and instrumentalists to perform. It is art and demands skill and training in the musicians needed to perform it. It is the highest form of human artistic endeavor, worthy of God and His worship.

The Vatican Council did, indeed, order the singing of the congregation in all those parts of the liturgy that truly belong to the competency of all the people. This order is not in contradiction to the other decree of the conciliar fathers demanding the fostering of choral music. The same body cannot be in opposition to itself in its decrees. Both the singing of the choir and the singing of the congregation have their proper places in solemn liturgy. [/quote]

I don't believe that the good Cardinal is opposed to polyphony or to orchestral Masses. I believe quite the contrary. I think that his view of sacred music is quite traditional. But I also think that he understands that traditional sacred music is not the only type of music that can be prayed at the Mass.

I also believe that Mons. Schuler is about 15 years ahead of his time. What vision.