Liturgical Music

[Fulton Sheen Warrior]

+JMJ+

I personally loathe all forms of contemporary music in Mass.

Strictly Gregorian Chant/Sacred Polyphany for me.

What about you?

[goldenchild17]

Either the first or last options for me.

[homeschoolmom]

I'm more concerned about the lyrics than the style.

[prose]

I can't really answer because none of those are what I would say.

I think that any music is appropriate as long as it is respectful and the lyrics are appropriate.



I do have a question though. Why do you feel one form is better than another?

[Kosh]

if its in the gather hymnal its 3vil.

(huge generalization, but you get what I mean)

[Fulton Sheen Warrior]

+JMJ+


[quote]I do have a question though. Why do you feel one form is better than another[/quote]

[i]116. The Church acknowledges Gregorian chant as [b]specially suited to the Roman Liturgy: therefore, other things being equal, it should be given pride of place in liturgical services[/b]
But other kinds of sacred music, [b]especially polyphony[/b], are by no means excluded from liturgical celebrations, so long as they accord with the spirit of the liturgical action, as laid down in Art. 30


-Sacrosanctum Concilium [/i]

[Cam42]

Everyone and I mean EVERYONE knows how I feel on this issue.

[Fulton Sheen Warrior]

+JMJ+

At the risk of sounding clueless.....How do you feel about this issue?

PS. I was born in Cedar Rapids, Iowa...Go Hawkeyes.

[Cam42]

[quote name='Fulton Sheen Warrior' post='1126714' date='Nov 23 2006, 12:35 PM']
+JMJ+

At the risk of sounding clueless.....How do you feel about this issue?

PS. I was born in Cedar Rapids, Iowa...Go Hawkeyes.
[/quote]


I am originally from Humboldt......however.......

If you do a search with Litugical Music as the keyword and my handle (Cam42) as the member name, you'll see my view. It is clear and it will take some time, but it is worth the read....all I have ever called for is ACCURATE, FAITHFUL AND COMPLETE adherence to the precepts of Vatican Council II, in regard to Sacred Music.

[Fulton Sheen Warrior]

+JMJ+

Wow......Your'e the man Cam. I found the thread on Chant to be very enlightening.

Thank you sir.

Edited November 23, 2006 by Fulton Sheen Warrior

[Tindomiel]

I love Gregorian Chant and Sacred Polyphany. Some fairly contemporary music would be ok IMO, but when I say that, I'm only thinking of a few specific hymns written in the 1800s and early 1900s. Not exactly contemporary by the common definition of the word. Even some of the not so dreadful '70s, '80s and '90s songs would be bearable if used only occasionally. It's the constant repetition each Sunday that makes them [i]really[/i] irritating.

[Balthazor]

I like a lot of different kinds of music. But I think that some is just more suited than others to be in a mass. It is a delicae balance to find songs that are motivating enough that people like them and participate in them, while still retating respect and sacredness in this holy time and space. This is after a mass, not a pep rally

[Cam42]

[quote name='Fulton Sheen Warrior' post='1126725' date='Nov 23 2006, 01:38 PM']
+JMJ+

Wow......Your'e the man Cam. I found the thread on Chant to be very enlightening.

Thank you sir.
[/quote]


You are welcome. Again, there is nothing that called for the elimination of Sacred Music. For the most part, it was simply abandoned.

This is an ongoing quesion that I have been posing for many, many years: I would like for someone to show me where Vatican Council II authorized, condoned, supported, required, etc., the elimination of Traditional Sacred Music?

AND......

If that answer is negative: What is the point of the phrase, "Spirit of Vatican II," when it is taken in the context of Sacred Music; if Vatican Council II is not the reasoning of new music in the Church.

If that answer is positive: Can one use the documents of the Church to support his position? If one cannot, then is it in keeping with the "Spirit of Vatican II?"

[prose]

But is there documents stating [i]only[/i] traditional music be used in Mass?

If the music is reverant and lyrically sound, why is it a problem? even if it was written yesterday.

[Lil Red]

[quote name='homeschoolmom' post='1126479' date='Nov 22 2006, 07:48 PM']I'm more concerned about the lyrics than the style.[/quote]agreed
[quote name='Cam42' post='1126712' date='Nov 23 2006, 10:20 AM']Everyone and I mean EVERYONE knows how I feel on this issue.[/quote]so much so you had to say it twice! :

[Cam42]

[quote name='prose' post='1126765' date='Nov 23 2006, 03:35 PM']
But is there documents stating [i]only[/i] traditional music be used in Mass?

If the music is reverant and lyrically sound, why is it a problem? even if it was written yesterday.
[/quote]

That is not the point. And actually, yes, there are documents that state that the traditional music of the Church is most appropriate for the Liturgy. Look back to my previous posts on other threads.

[quote name='Ecclesia de Eucharista #52']It must be lamented that, especially in the years following the post-conciliar liturgical reform, as a result of a misguided sense of creativity and adaptation there have been a number of abuses which have been a source of suffering for many.....Liturgy is never anyone's private property, be it of the celebrant or of the community in which the mysteries are celebrated.[/quote]

[quote name='Chirograph on Tra le sollecitudini #2'][b]The Second Vatican Council followed up this approach in chapter VI of the Constitution Sacrosanctum Concilium on the Sacred Liturgy, in which the ecclesial role of sacred music is clearly defined: [u]"The musical tradition of the universal Church is a treasure of inestimable value, greater even than that of any other art.[/u][/b] The main reason for this pre-eminence is that, as sacred melody united to words, it forms a necessary or integral part of the solemn Liturgy."[/quote]

[quote name='Chirograph #2']The Fathers of the Second Vatican Council did not fail to reassert these principles with a view to their application in the changed conditions of the times. They did so specifically in chapter six of the Constitution Sacrosanctum Concilium. Pope Paul VI then saw that those principles were translated into concrete norms, in particular with the Instruction Musicam Sacram, promulgated on 5 March 1967 with his approval by the Congregation then known as the Sacred Congregation for Rites. [b]In this same context, it is necessary to refer to those principles of conciliar inspiration to encourage a development in conformity with [u]the requirements of liturgical reform and which will measure up to the liturgical and musical tradition of the Church.[/u][/b] The text of the Constitution Sacrosanctum Concilium in which it is declared that the Church "approves of all forms of true art which have the requisite qualities, and admits them into divine worship", finds satisfactory criteria for application in nn. 50-53 of the above-mentioned Instruction Musicam Sacram.[/quote]

[quote name='Chirograph #4']St Pius X's reform aimed specifically at purifying Church music from the contamination of profane theatrical music that in many countries had polluted the repertoire and musical praxis of the Liturgy. In our day too, careful thought, as I emphasized in the Encyclical Ecclesia de Eucharistia, should be given to the fact that not all the expressions of figurative art or of music are able "to express adequately the mystery grasped in the fullness of the Church's faith". [b]Consequently, not all forms of music can be considered suitable for liturgical celebrations.[/b][/quote]

I think that this speaks to the question that you raise.

[prose]

By teh way, I did read the previous posts. I gather that you said that the Church says nothing about specific instruments. I am not asking about that. I am asking about specific music. Could "new" gregorian chant be written now that would be appropriate? Or does it need to be from the past?

[puellapaschalis]

Greggors for me, thanks. And Palestrina. And Allegri for the Miserere.

Use all the different styles of music you like at gatherings, or conferences, or at sing songs round the campfire (I've been to all three and love them). But Mass is particular, and deserves and commands particular music. The Holy Sacrifice is like nothing else on earth, and the music should be like nothing else on earth either. We've had this particular music, used only for the liturgy, for hundred of years, and to think that we're special enough to go and change it is something akin to Really Big Ego Syndrome, imnsho. This is all aside from the Church's teaching (which is why we have people like Cam about, right?).

Love and prayers,

PP

[prose]

I know that not all forms of music are appropriate. I am just wondering about what specifically "measures up the the liturgical and musical tradition of the Church". If it was an english chant, would that count?

[Cam42]

[quote name='prose' post='1126780' date='Nov 23 2006, 04:03 PM']
By teh way, I did read the previous posts. I gather that you said that the Church says nothing about specific instruments. I am not asking about that. I am asking about specific music. Could "new" gregorian chant be written now that would be appropriate? Or does it need to be from the past?
[/quote]

I suppose that if someone could write new Gregorian Chant and it were deemed apt and suitable, then yes, it could be used.....however, there is no new Gregorian Chant modality that can be composed. So it would simply be a hypothetical.

Here is a novel idea, why don't we simply start using Gregorian Chant again, most young people have never heard it and it would be "new" all over again.