A conference has been held in Rome on sacred music to which even Pope Francis gave a supportive address. The whole report, and over 200 signatories, many well-known, some known to me personally, can be found at this link to the New Liturgical Movement.
Pardon my cynicism and the declaration to the signors that it is all for nought; but we've heard it all before.
I well remember St. John Paul II's "Chirograph on Sacred Music" to celebrate the great Tra le sollecitudini of St. Pius X.
This conference was held on the same date to mark Musicam Sacram of March 5, 1967. It is like getting together to remember the sinking of the Titanic because that is what that terrible document was, liturgically speaking.
The "graduated solemnity" and the permission to substitute dubious hymns and "songs" for the Proper antiphons which did not even need to be recited after 1967, is the most singular occurrence in the destruction of the liturgy. This was 1967 and we were dealing with the "Tridentine" Mass in its vernacular form with simplified rubrics, and for the most part, facing the people. The Novus Ordo Missae was still nearly three years away. I was a young boy and that document allowed, or at least was interpreted to allow, Let it Be, Bridge Over Troubled Water and Hey Jude to be used at Mass. I know. I was there.
The disaster of Musicam Sacram can only be fixed by its complete abrogation and replacement.
I have no hope that this will happen. It did not happen under John Paul II notwithstanding his Chirograph, it did not happen under Pope Benedict XVI from whom we expected it with his "Reform of the Reform" vision, notwithstanding his "full, complete and universal jurisdiction," to do it. Notwithstanding the words of Pope Francis to the conference can we expect that he will actually bring about the change?
No, it will not happen because no Pope has the desire to make it happen because they know that it won't be carried out.
The dictatorship of the music publishers and guitarists and incompetent, ignorant, ill-trained church musician throughout the world will prevent it. There is too much money tied up in bad church music. Too many pastors don't want the headache and confrontation with the liturgical fascists. I know of one pastor who wanted to make changes at the parish who was told, "Don't expect me to be one of Benedict's men." Another who was threatened with serious collection plate problems if he did not remove the Reform of the Reform Director of Music. Ergo, the problem. There are many more examples.
No, it will not change. The Novus Ordo is irredeemable and there is only one future for the Holy Mass and it is back to It. It is the Missal of 1962 at a minimum and 1949, pre Bugnini if ever possible, but at least for 1962, the music and chant was not effected. And yet, that in itself is not enough. We need to read again Tra le Sollecitudini, Mediator Dei and Sacra Musicae and De Musica Sacra Et Sacra Liturgia and consider possible adaptations from there. Everything that came after was, and remains a disaster.
The Church in the not too distant future will abrogate the Missal of Paul VI. It will repent for it to God. It is a liturgy that is "banal" and "on the spot manufactured product," as Cardinal Ratzinger wrote.
I've been told by more than one priest that the modernist Rite "will not convict the sinner" and "it will not covert souls."
It's time we got back to that.
http://www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2017/03/international-declaration-on-sacred.html
“CANTATE DOMINO CANTICUM NOVUM”
A Statement on the Current Situation of Sacred Music
We, the undersigned — musicians, pastors, teachers,
scholars, and lovers of sacred music — humbly offer this statement to the
Catholic community around the world, expressing our great love for the Church’s
treasury of sacred music and our deep concerns about its current plight.
Introduction
Cantate Domino canticum novum, cantate Domino omnis terra
(Psalm 96): this singing to God’s glory has resonated for the whole history of
Christianity, from the very beginning to the present day. Sacred Scripture and
Sacred Tradition alike bear witness to a great love for the beauty and power of
music in the worship of Almighty God. The treasury of sacred music has always
been cherished in the Catholic Church by her saints, theologians, popes, and
laypeople.
Such love and practice of music is witnessed to throughout
Christian literature and in the many documents that the Popes have devoted to
sacred music, from John XXII’s Docta Sanctorum Patrum (1324) and Benedict XIV’s
Annus Qui (1749) down to Saint Pius X’s Motu Proprio Tra le Sollecitudini
(1903), Pius XII’s Musicae Sacrae Disciplina (1955), Saint John Paul II’s
Chirograph on Sacred Music (2003), and so on. This vast amount of documentation
impels us to take with utter seriousness the importance and the role of music
in the liturgy. This importance is related to the deep connection between the
liturgy and its music, a connection that goes two ways: a good liturgy allows
for splendid music, but a low standard of liturgical music also tremendously
affects the liturgy. Nor can the ecumenical importance of music be forgotten,
when we know that other Christian traditions — such as Anglicans, Lutherans,
and the Eastern Orthodox — have high esteem for the importance and dignity of
sacred music, as witnessed by their own jealously-guarded “treasuries.”
We are observing an important milestone, the fiftieth
anniversary of the promulgation of the Instruction on Music in the Liturgy,
Musicam Sacram, on March 5, 1967, under the pontificate of Blessed Paul VI.
Re-reading the document today, we cannot avoid thinking of the via dolorosa of
sacred music in the decades following Sacrosanctum Concilium. Indeed, what was
happening in some factions of the Church at that time (1967) was not at all in
line with Sacrosantum Concilium or with Musicam Sacram. Certain ideas that were
never present in the Council’s documents were forced into practice, sometimes
with a lack of vigilance from clergy and ecclesiastical hierarchy. In some
countries the treasury of sacred music that the Council asked to be preserved
was not only not preserved, but even opposed. And this quite against the
Council, which clearly stated:
The musical tradition of the universal Church is a treasure
of inestimable value, greater even than that of any other art. The main reason
for this pre-eminence is that, as sacred song united to the words, it forms a
necessary or integral part of the solemn liturgy. Holy Scripture, indeed, has
bestowed praise upon sacred song, and the same may be said of the fathers of
the Church and of the Roman pontiffs who in recent times, led by St. Pius X,
have explained more precisely the ministerial function supplied by sacred music
in the service of the Lord. Therefore sacred music is to be considered the more
holy in proportion as it is more closely connected with the liturgical action,
whether it adds delight to prayer, fosters unity of minds, or confers greater
solemnity upon the sacred rites. But the Church approves of all forms of true
art having the needed qualities, and admits them into divine worship. (SC 112)
The Current Situation
In light of the mind of the Church so frequently expressed,
we cannot avoid being concerned about the current situation of sacred music,
which is nothing short of desperate, with abuses in the area of sacred music
now almost the norm rather than the exception. We shall summarize here some of
the elements that contribute to the present deplorable situation of sacred
music and of the liturgy.
1. There has been a loss of understanding of the “musical
shape of the liturgy,” that is, that music is an inherent part of the very
essence of liturgy as public, formal, solemn worship of God. We are not merely
to sing at Mass, but to sing the Mass. Hence, as Musicam Sacram itself reminded
us, the priest’s parts should be chanted to the tones given in the Missal, with
the people making the responses; the singing of the Ordinary of the Mass in
Gregorian chant or music inspired by it should be encouraged; and the Propers
of the Mass, too, should be given the pride of place that befits their
historical prominence, their liturgical function, and their theological depth.
Similar points apply to the singing of the Divine Office. It is an exhibition
of the vice of “liturgical sloth” to refuse to sing the liturgy, to use
“utility music” rather than sacred music, to refuse to educate oneself or
others about the Church’s tradition and wishes, and to put little or no effort
and resources into the building up of a sacred music program.
2. This loss of liturgical and theological understanding
goes hand-in-hand with an embrace of secularism. The secularism of popular
musical styles has contributed to a desacralization of the liturgy, while the
secularism of profit-based commercialism has reinforced the imposition of
mediocre collections of music upon parishes. It has encouraged an anthropocentrism
in the liturgy that undermines its very nature. In vast sectors of the Church
nowadays there is an incorrect relationship with culture, which can be seen as
a “web of connections.” With the actual situation of our liturgical music (and
of the liturgy itself, because the two are intertwined), we have broken this
web of connection with our past and tried to connect with a future that has no
meaning without its past. Today, the Church is not actively using her cultural
riches to evangelize, but is mostly used by a prevalent secular culture, born
in opposition to Christianity, which destabilizes the sense of adoration that
is at the heart of the Christian faith.
In his homily for the feast of Corpus Christi on June 4,
2015, Pope Francis has spoken of “the Church’s amazement at this reality [of
the Most Holy Eucharist]. . . An astonishment which always feeds contemplation,
adoration, and memory.” In many of our Churches around the world, where is this
sense of contemplation, this adoration, this astonishment for the mystery of
the Eucharist? It is lost because we are living a sort of spiritual
Alzheimer’s, a disease that is taking our spiritual, theological, artistic,
musical and cultural memories away from us. It has been said that we need to
bring the culture of every people into the liturgy. This may be right if
correctly understood, but not in the sense that the liturgy (and the music)
becomes the place where we have to exalt a secular culture. It is the place
where the culture, every culture, is brought to another level and purified.
3. There are groups in the Church that push for a “renewal”
that does not reflect Church teaching but rather serves their own agenda,
worldview, and interests. These groups have members in key leadership positions
from which they put into practice their plans, their idea of culture, and the
way we have to deal with contemporary issues. In some countries powerful
lobbies have contributed to the de facto replacement of liturgical repertoires
faithful to the directives of Vatican II with low-quality repertoires. Thus, we
end up with repertoires of new liturgical music of very low standards as
regards both the text and the music. This is understandable when we reflect
that nothing of lasting worth can come from a lack of training and expertise,
especially when people neglect the wise precepts of Church tradition:
On these grounds Gregorian Chant has always been regarded as
the supreme model for sacred music, so that it is fully legitimate to lay down
the following rule: the more closely a composition for church approaches in its
movement, inspiration and savor the Gregorian form, the more sacred and
liturgical it becomes; and the more out of harmony it is with that supreme
model, the less worthy it is of the temple. (St. Pius X, Motu Proprio Tra le
Sollecitudini)
Today this “supreme model” is often discarded, if not
despised. The entire Magisterium of the Church has reminded us of the
importance of adhering to this important model, not as way of limiting
creativity but as a foundation on which inspiration can flourish. If we desire
that people look for Jesus, we need to prepare the house with the best that the
Church can offer. We will not invite people to our house, the Church, to give
them a by-product of music and art, when they can find a much better pop music
style outside the Church. Liturgy is a limen, a threshold that allows us to
step from our daily existence to the worship of the angels: Et ídeo cum Angelis
et Archángelis, cum Thronis et Dominatiónibus, cumque omni milítia cæléstis
exércitus, hymnum glóriæ tuæ cánimus, sine fine dicéntes...
4. This disdain for Gregorian chant and traditional
repertoires is one sign of a much bigger problem, that of disdain for
Tradition. Sacrosanctum Concilium teaches that the musical and artistic
heritage of the Church should be respected and cherished, because it is the
embodiment of centuries of worship and prayer, and an expression of the highest
peak of human creativity and spirituality. There was a time when the Church did
not run after the latest fashion, but was the maker and arbiter of culture. The
lack of commitment to tradition has put the Church and her liturgy on an
uncertain and meandering path. The attempted separation of the teaching of
Vatican II from previous Church teachings is a dead end, and the only way
forward is the hermeneutic of continuity endorsed by Pope Benedict XVI.
Recovering the unity, integrity, and harmony of Catholic teaching is the
condition for restoring both the liturgy and its music to a noble condition. As
Pope Francis taught us in his first encyclical: “Self-knowledge is only
possible when we share in a greater memory” (Lumen Fidei 38).
5. Another cause of the decadence of sacred music is
clericalism, the abuse of clerical position and status. Clergy who are often
poorly educated in the great tradition of sacred music continue to make
decisions about personnel and policies that contravene the authentic spirit of
the liturgy and the renewal of sacred music repeatedly called for in our times.
Often they contradict Vatican II teachings in the name of a supposed “spirit of
the Council.” Moreover, especially in countries of ancient Christian heritage,
members of the clergy have access to positions that are not available to laity,
when there are lay musicians fully capable of offering an equal or superior
professional service to the Church.
6. We also see the problem of inadequate (at times, unjust)
remuneration of lay musicians. The importance of sacred music in the Catholic
liturgy requires that at least some members of the Church in every place be
well-educated, well-equipped, and dedicated to serve the People of God in this
capacity. Is it not true that we should give to God our best? No one would be
surprised or disturbed knowing that doctors need a salary to survive, no one
would accept medical treatment from untrained volunteers; priests have their
salaries, because they cannot live if they do not eat, and if they do not eat,
they will not be able to prepare themselves in theological sciences or to say
the Mass with dignity. If we pay florists and cooks who help at parishes, why
does it seem so strange that those performing musical activities for the Church
would have a right to fair compensation (see Code of Canon Law, can. 231)?
Positive Proposals
It may seem that what we have said is pessimistic, but we
maintain the hope that there is a way out of this winter. The following
proposals are offered in spiritu humilitatis, with the intention of restoring
the dignity of the liturgy and of its music in the Church.
1. As musicians, pastors, scholars, and Catholics who love
Gregorian chant and sacred polyphony, so frequently praised and recommended by
the Magisterium, we ask for a re-affirmation of this heritage alongside modern
sacred compositions in Latin or vernacular languages that take their
inspiration from this great tradition; and we ask for concrete steps to promote
it everywhere, in every church across the globe, so that all Catholics can sing
the praises of God with one voice, one mind and heart, one common culture that
transcends all their differences. We also ask for a re-affirmation of the
unique importance of the pipe organ for the sacred liturgy, because of its
singular capacity to elevate hearts to the Lord and its perfect suitability for
supporting the singing of choirs and congregations.
2. It is necessary that the education to good taste in music
and liturgy start with children. Often educators without musical training
believe that children cannot appreciate the beauty of true art. This is far
from the truth. Using a pedagogy that will help them approach the beauty of the
liturgy, children will be formed in a way that will fortify their strength,
because they will be offered nourishing spiritual bread and not the apparently
tasty but unhealthy food of industrial origin (as when “Masses for children”
feature pop-inspired music). We notice through personal experience that when
children are exposed to these repertoires they come to appreciate them and
develop a deeper connection with the Church.
3. If children are to appreciate the beauty of music and
art, if they are to understand the importance of the liturgy as fons et culmen
[source and apex] of the life of the Church, we must have a strong laity who
will follow the Magisterium. We need to give space to well-trained laity in
areas that have to do with art and with music.
To be able to serve as a competent liturgical musician or educator
requires years of study. This “professional” status must be recognized,
respected, and promoted in practical ways. In connection with this point, we
sincerely hope that the Church will continue to work against obvious and subtle
forms of clericalism, so that laity can make their full contribution in areas
where ordination is not a requirement.
4. Higher standards for musical repertoire and skill should
be insisted on for cathedrals and basilicas. Bishops in every diocese should
hire at least a professional music director and/or an organist who would follow
clear directions on how to foster excellent liturgical music in that cathedral
or basilica and who would offer a shining example of combining works of the
great tradition with appropriate new compositions. We think that a sound
principle for this is contained in Sacrosanctum Concilium 23: “There must be no
innovations unless the good of the Church genuinely and certainly requires
them; and care must be taken that any new forms adopted should in some way grow
organically from forms already existing.”
5. We suggest that in every basilica and cathedral there be
the encouragement of a weekly Mass celebrated in Latin (in either Form of the
Roman Rite) so as to maintain the link we have with our liturgical, cultural,
artistic, and theological heritage. The fact that many young people today are
rediscovering the beauty of Latin in the liturgy is surely a sign of the times,
and prompts us to bury the battles of the past and seek a more “catholic”
approach that draws upon all the centuries of Catholic worship. With the easy
availability of books, booklets, and online resources, it will not be difficult
to facilitate the active participation of those who wish to attend liturgies in
Latin. Moreover, each parish should be encouraged to have one fully-sung Mass
each Sunday.
6. Liturgical and musical training of clergy should be a
priority for the Bishops. Clergy have a responsibility to learn and practice
their liturgical melodies, since, according to Musicam Sacram and other
documents, they should be able to chant the prayers of the liturgy, not merely
say the words. In seminaries and at the university, they should come to be
familiar with and appreciate the great tradition of sacred music in the Church,
in harmony with the Magisterium, and following the sound principle of Matthew
13:52: “Every scribe who has been instructed in the kingdom of heaven is like
the head of a household who brings from his storeroom both the new and the
old.”
7. In the past, Catholic publishers played a great role in
spreading good examples of sacred music, old and new. Today, the same
publishers, even if they belong to dioceses or religious institutions, often
spread music that is not right for the liturgy, following only commercial
considerations. Many faithful Catholics think that what mainstream publishers
offer is in line with the doctrine of the Catholic Church regarding liturgy and
music, when it is frequently not so. Catholic publishers should have as their
first aim that of educating the faithful in sane Catholic doctrine and good liturgical
practices, not that of making money.
8. The formation of liturgists is also fundamental. Just as
musicians need to understand the essentials of liturgical history and theology,
so too must liturgists be educated in Gregorian chant, polyphony, and the
entire musical tradition of the Church, so that they may discern between what
is good and what is bad.
Conclusion
In his encyclical Lumen Fidei, Pope Francis reminded us of
the way faith binds together past and future:
As a response to a word which preceded it, Abraham’s faith
would always be an act of remembrance. Yet this remembrance is not fixed on
past events but, as the memory of a promise, it becomes capable of opening up
the future, shedding light on the path to be taken. We see how faith, as
remembrance of the future, memoria futuri, is thus closely bound up with hope.
(LF 9)
This remembrance, this memory, this treasure that is our
Catholic tradition is not something of the past alone. It is still a vital
force in the present, and will always be a gift of beauty to future
generations. “Sing praises to the Lord,
for he has done gloriously; let this be known in all the earth. Shout, and sing
for joy, O inhabitant of Zion, for great in your midst is the Holy One of
Israel” (Is 12:5–6).
