I am so excited!
A wedding couple (the groom being a former seminarian) has requested a Mass with "as much Latin as possible". At first, he wanted the responsorial psalm chanted in English (using the Gelineau tones. I convinced him that there were better psalm tones available, and he trusts my judgment). Then, he asked for the Ordinary (Kyrie, Sanctus, Mysterium fidei and Agnus Dei) in Latin. But wait, there's more! (It's like an infomercial, ain't it?) When we were talking about the Offertory, I decided to "pitch" the idea of chanting the Proper. Then we decided to do the Communion chant as well. Then I thought, "Why not? Go ahead and suggest that the Men's Schola come and do the chants!" So I did! And, he's all for it. AND, AND . . . the Men's Schola wants to do it! They want to come together on a Saturday afternoon and sing for a Nuptial Mass!
Additionally, he wants a piece by Dandrieu (a composer from the "Old French" or "French Classic" period) for the remainder of the Communion procession. He said, "it sounds more traditional and fitting for the liturgy."
OORAH!
Brick by brick in Wyandotte, Michigan!
Did I mention how lucky I am to be where I am?
Tuesday, May 8, 2012
Friday, May 4, 2012
Keep Your Eyes on Bp. Sample
It is fun, but rare, to be made privy to really exciting information.
I'm pledged to secrecy on the specifics, but what I can tell you is this: keep your eyes on His Excellency Most Reverend Alex Sample, Bishop of Marquette Michigan. He is making his mark as a courageous promoter of the "reform of the reform" and the restoration (indeed, the reclamation) of our unique Catholic identity in the way we worship.
Over at one of my favorite blogs, "What Does The Prayer Really Say", Fr. Z has posted the audio file of an interview with H.E. on the subject of liturgical reform and Summorum pontificum, among other things.
Based on the additional information I've received of late, Bp. Sample "gets it", and is a willing accomplice in the "liturgical spring" that so many of us have been waiting for with near-heroic and virtuous patience.
Stay tuned!
I'm pledged to secrecy on the specifics, but what I can tell you is this: keep your eyes on His Excellency Most Reverend Alex Sample, Bishop of Marquette Michigan. He is making his mark as a courageous promoter of the "reform of the reform" and the restoration (indeed, the reclamation) of our unique Catholic identity in the way we worship.
Over at one of my favorite blogs, "What Does The Prayer Really Say", Fr. Z has posted the audio file of an interview with H.E. on the subject of liturgical reform and Summorum pontificum, among other things.
Based on the additional information I've received of late, Bp. Sample "gets it", and is a willing accomplice in the "liturgical spring" that so many of us have been waiting for with near-heroic and virtuous patience.
Stay tuned!
Thursday, May 3, 2012
Liturgical Spring
Over the last several weeks I've had some pretty arresting encounters with supposed "liturgical experts" (mostly officials who hold diocesan positions in several different dioceses) who just don't get what's happening.
For them, and for all who take these matters seriously, I would like to state the following:
There is an ever-growing number of serious-minded Catholic Bishops, musicians, liturgical scholars and "people in the pews" who have become confused and often scandalized over what has happened to the Church and Her liturgy over the last 40 years. Benedict XVI has often referred to what he calls a "hermeneutic of rupture" - the result of decisive action on the part of liturgical elitists who exerted undue influence upon unsuspecting Bishops which led to and promoted a complete break with the received traditions of the Church in favor of an entirely re-invented ecclesiology and Christology that impacted the trajectory of liturgical and musical development in the Church coming out of the Second Vatican Council. The "spirit" of the Council has trumped the clearly stated intentions, and "pastoral reasons" have been given greater weight than binding authority.
Because of the sense of confusion, more and more ordinary people are taking it upon themselves to read and study the documents of the Church as well as the writings of the Holy Fathers (like Benedict XVI) and the commentary of keen and learned observers and scholars (like Jefferey Tucker and Dr. William Mahrt), and they have been shocked, scandalized and angered to learn that, well-intentioned or otherwise, the self-proclaimed "experts", many of whom hold positions of great influence in the chanceries and even within the USCCB, have deprived them of their heritage and unique Catholic identity embodied in the rich and vast treasury of sacred music (Gregorian chant and polyphony) for over 40 years.
When confronted by ordinary people, or those outside the sphere of the accepted "authorities" with this idea, the "experts" become indignant and defensive. So sure and certain of their authority are they, that when it is pointed out to them that, for instance, the USCCB does not have the authority to change or alter liturgical practice or norms, nor to re-interpret or distort what is clearly expressed in the documents and supported by the various writings (the washing of women's feet on Holy Thursday is a good example), they take great offense at being accused of being "unfaithful", and challenge the assertion that they are violating Church law.
Unfortunately, if by their actions or omissions they cause scandal or confusion among the Faithful, they are guilty of a grave act. To persist, obstinately, in that error is an act of infidelity, and they are violating Church law.
The good news is we are in a "Liturgical Spring." I am increasingly amazed and buoyed by the realization that more and more people, of all ages and backgrounds, are taking a direct and informed interest in the future of sacred music and the liturgy of the Church. The days of the "liturgical experts" who have so cleverly duped unsuspecting Bishops, priests, sacred musicians and the laity for so long are numbered. They can no longer lord their elitist expertise over the heads of those who now know what the documents say, and what the "mind of the Church" is in these matters.
The challenge is mitigating our just anger, and to realize that the liberal elitists who have been responsible for so much anger, confusion and scandal need our prayers and our compassion. The more that their stranglehold on the liturgical and musical traditions of the Church is weakened, the more resentful they will become. We must do what we can to treat them with compassion, while making it crystal clear that their obstinate persistent dissident behavior cannot, for the sake of their immortal souls, the souls of those they confuse or influence, and indeed for the sake of the Universal Church, be tolerated or permitted to continue.
Brick by brick, we will rebuild the Church, with or without their cooperation.
For them, and for all who take these matters seriously, I would like to state the following:
There is an ever-growing number of serious-minded Catholic Bishops, musicians, liturgical scholars and "people in the pews" who have become confused and often scandalized over what has happened to the Church and Her liturgy over the last 40 years. Benedict XVI has often referred to what he calls a "hermeneutic of rupture" - the result of decisive action on the part of liturgical elitists who exerted undue influence upon unsuspecting Bishops which led to and promoted a complete break with the received traditions of the Church in favor of an entirely re-invented ecclesiology and Christology that impacted the trajectory of liturgical and musical development in the Church coming out of the Second Vatican Council. The "spirit" of the Council has trumped the clearly stated intentions, and "pastoral reasons" have been given greater weight than binding authority.
Because of the sense of confusion, more and more ordinary people are taking it upon themselves to read and study the documents of the Church as well as the writings of the Holy Fathers (like Benedict XVI) and the commentary of keen and learned observers and scholars (like Jefferey Tucker and Dr. William Mahrt), and they have been shocked, scandalized and angered to learn that, well-intentioned or otherwise, the self-proclaimed "experts", many of whom hold positions of great influence in the chanceries and even within the USCCB, have deprived them of their heritage and unique Catholic identity embodied in the rich and vast treasury of sacred music (Gregorian chant and polyphony) for over 40 years.
When confronted by ordinary people, or those outside the sphere of the accepted "authorities" with this idea, the "experts" become indignant and defensive. So sure and certain of their authority are they, that when it is pointed out to them that, for instance, the USCCB does not have the authority to change or alter liturgical practice or norms, nor to re-interpret or distort what is clearly expressed in the documents and supported by the various writings (the washing of women's feet on Holy Thursday is a good example), they take great offense at being accused of being "unfaithful", and challenge the assertion that they are violating Church law.
Unfortunately, if by their actions or omissions they cause scandal or confusion among the Faithful, they are guilty of a grave act. To persist, obstinately, in that error is an act of infidelity, and they are violating Church law.
The good news is we are in a "Liturgical Spring." I am increasingly amazed and buoyed by the realization that more and more people, of all ages and backgrounds, are taking a direct and informed interest in the future of sacred music and the liturgy of the Church. The days of the "liturgical experts" who have so cleverly duped unsuspecting Bishops, priests, sacred musicians and the laity for so long are numbered. They can no longer lord their elitist expertise over the heads of those who now know what the documents say, and what the "mind of the Church" is in these matters.
The challenge is mitigating our just anger, and to realize that the liberal elitists who have been responsible for so much anger, confusion and scandal need our prayers and our compassion. The more that their stranglehold on the liturgical and musical traditions of the Church is weakened, the more resentful they will become. We must do what we can to treat them with compassion, while making it crystal clear that their obstinate persistent dissident behavior cannot, for the sake of their immortal souls, the souls of those they confuse or influence, and indeed for the sake of the Universal Church, be tolerated or permitted to continue.
Brick by brick, we will rebuild the Church, with or without their cooperation.
Wednesday, April 18, 2012
Close Encounters of the Heretical Kind - a request for prayers
I'm vacationing in sunny south Florida, visiting my snowbird parents. They rent a comfy bungalow just outside Sarasota. (Imagine "Del Boca Vista" from Seinfeld and you get the idea.) My mother and I were continuing a conversation from the previous night about Catholic Teachings on "Limbo of Infants", infant baptism and the order in which the rites of initiation are confirred upon adults when there came a knock at the door.
It was a Jehovah's Witness, pamphlets and their unique translation of the bible in hand. I told him right out of the gate that I was a devout, faithful Catholic and that we would disagree about pretty much everything he had to say. He suggested that we would both agree that there is a God, and I said "yes, but our understanding of the nature of God and how human kind relates to Him will be vastly different."
I'll spare you the remaining transcript and tell you that this man was raised Catholic in England, had an abusive father, lost his faith, didn't like what a priest told him when he began questioning who God is, and abandoned his faith in favor of "studying the history of the Church" which led him to the typical revisionist misinformation: the Catholic Church was founded in the 300's by Constantine (misinterpreting the Edict of Milan), that the Inquisition was responsible for the slaughter of millions, that the Church was complicit in its involvement with Hitler, and that Catholics own guns and kill innocent Christians all the time.
I tried to correct him in his errors, and then asked him to leave. I missed a very important opportunity to warn him that his immortal soul was in grave danger and to encourage him to seek a priest for confession and reconciliation, a sin of ommission on my part. Rather, I got caught up in the argument, a favored tool of the Devil.
Of your charity, please pray for this man's "reversion" and the welfare of his soul, and pray for me as well, that I might better recognize when the opportunity to save a soul presents itself and to act with charity rather than being distracted by Satan's trickery.
It was a Jehovah's Witness, pamphlets and their unique translation of the bible in hand. I told him right out of the gate that I was a devout, faithful Catholic and that we would disagree about pretty much everything he had to say. He suggested that we would both agree that there is a God, and I said "yes, but our understanding of the nature of God and how human kind relates to Him will be vastly different."
I'll spare you the remaining transcript and tell you that this man was raised Catholic in England, had an abusive father, lost his faith, didn't like what a priest told him when he began questioning who God is, and abandoned his faith in favor of "studying the history of the Church" which led him to the typical revisionist misinformation: the Catholic Church was founded in the 300's by Constantine (misinterpreting the Edict of Milan), that the Inquisition was responsible for the slaughter of millions, that the Church was complicit in its involvement with Hitler, and that Catholics own guns and kill innocent Christians all the time.
I tried to correct him in his errors, and then asked him to leave. I missed a very important opportunity to warn him that his immortal soul was in grave danger and to encourage him to seek a priest for confession and reconciliation, a sin of ommission on my part. Rather, I got caught up in the argument, a favored tool of the Devil.
Of your charity, please pray for this man's "reversion" and the welfare of his soul, and pray for me as well, that I might better recognize when the opportunity to save a soul presents itself and to act with charity rather than being distracted by Satan's trickery.
Thursday, April 5, 2012
A Retreat I'd Probably Retreat From . . .
I received a flyer from a retreat center run by a religious order, offering a "Day of Renewal for Music Ministers".
I began reading the offerings and became suspicious, beginning with the use of the word "ministers" to refer to those lay people charged with preparing and executing the music of the liturgy. Recently the Holy See and many serious-minded clergy have begun openly suggesting that the use of the term "minister", which in the past always either implied or included the term "sacred" before it, should really only be applied to those in holy orders, or those in formation for holy orders. Overuse of the term in referring to lay people assigned various duties in assisting at Mass and other liturgical functions who are just that, assistants, is problematic. They have not been specifically consecrated to perform particular tasks, rather they have been "deputized" at the discretion of the canonically ordered minister, i.e., a priest, to perform certain tasks that can be but don't necessarily need to be assigned to the laity. The distinction between those in consecrated holy orders and lay "ministers" has become more and more blurred an blunted over the last 40 years, causing confusion and, in my opinion, leading people to believe that the function of the sacerdotal priesthood isn't really all that important, with the exception of confecting the sacraments. The confusion has also led to a significant increase in the number of people who, failing to understand the important role of the sacerdotal priesthood, actively promote and agitate for the ordination of women, since so many women already perform "ministry" roles in the Church. But, I digress.
Here is how the purpose of the retreat in question is expressed:
I had no idea. I've read most of the relevant documents of the Church that define my role, and never read any of this. As a sacred musician, I'm obliged to provide the music required by the liturgy (which if done right, and according to the Mind of the Church, would involve opening the Graduale Romanum or the Gregorian Missal to the correct page and singing the appointed texts for that particular day set to the appointed chant melodies). I cannot be responsible for the congregation's "spiritual connection" any more than the priest can be responsible for the congregation's proper disposition as individuals to worthily receive the Body and Blood of Our Lord. He can only admonish, exhort and teach the Faith in these matters. It is only by the individual's cooperation with Divine Grace that a state of grace can be established, and one can properly receive communion. And, if we were opening the proper books to the proper page and singing the appointed texts, they would support the "message" of the readings by themselves, in exactly the way the Church intended. The entire concept expressed in this one paragraph is one rooted in the notion that the Mass is a didactic exercise, or that the "meaning" or "message" (or, as they used to love to say back in the '70's and '80's, the "theme" of the Mass) is something that we can (or must) control and influence by our own efforts.
Here are just a few of the "conferences" that will be offered during the retreat. Their titles are telling:
What the congregation wants is irrelevant. As a sacred musician, I am obliged (in conscience, by the way) to follow the binding legislation of the Church in these matters. I can't give the congregation what it "wants" any more than a faithful and obedient priest can give the congregation what it "wants" if it is contrary to Church Teaching or ultimately the welfare of their immortal souls.
What music "does" to the congregation is an interesting topic, and one that many, from lay scholars all the way up to the Holy Father, have discussed at great length. Emotional response isn't one of the characteristics they discuss, at least not in a positive way, or one that suggests it is an important measure. Trust me on that one.
How important I am is unimportant. If I do what I am required to do, to the best of my abilities, with humility but with an earnest desire to provide the very best, the "first fruits" if you will, in service to the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, then appreciation and influence become inconsequential. It is always nice to hear when people enjoy your music, but music is not a part of the Mass for its own sake. If someone tells me that something was beautifully done, that tells me that I'm executing things well, which is always nice to hear, but it's not the goal. Service to the liturgy, worship of God as the Church intends, and the welfare of souls are the goals.
There. You just went on a mini-retreat for sacred musicians. Right there in your comfy chair, and you didn't have to pay a penny!
Your Obedient Servant wishes all readers of this blog (regular or lurking) a most blessed Holy Week and a joyous Easter!
I began reading the offerings and became suspicious, beginning with the use of the word "ministers" to refer to those lay people charged with preparing and executing the music of the liturgy. Recently the Holy See and many serious-minded clergy have begun openly suggesting that the use of the term "minister", which in the past always either implied or included the term "sacred" before it, should really only be applied to those in holy orders, or those in formation for holy orders. Overuse of the term in referring to lay people assigned various duties in assisting at Mass and other liturgical functions who are just that, assistants, is problematic. They have not been specifically consecrated to perform particular tasks, rather they have been "deputized" at the discretion of the canonically ordered minister, i.e., a priest, to perform certain tasks that can be but don't necessarily need to be assigned to the laity. The distinction between those in consecrated holy orders and lay "ministers" has become more and more blurred an blunted over the last 40 years, causing confusion and, in my opinion, leading people to believe that the function of the sacerdotal priesthood isn't really all that important, with the exception of confecting the sacraments. The confusion has also led to a significant increase in the number of people who, failing to understand the important role of the sacerdotal priesthood, actively promote and agitate for the ordination of women, since so many women already perform "ministry" roles in the Church. But, I digress.
Here is how the purpose of the retreat in question is expressed:
In the demanding role of the Music Minister you are called week after week to lift the Liturgy through song, to help the congregation make a deeper spiritual connection, to support the message in the readings and the homily.
I had no idea. I've read most of the relevant documents of the Church that define my role, and never read any of this. As a sacred musician, I'm obliged to provide the music required by the liturgy (which if done right, and according to the Mind of the Church, would involve opening the Graduale Romanum or the Gregorian Missal to the correct page and singing the appointed texts for that particular day set to the appointed chant melodies). I cannot be responsible for the congregation's "spiritual connection" any more than the priest can be responsible for the congregation's proper disposition as individuals to worthily receive the Body and Blood of Our Lord. He can only admonish, exhort and teach the Faith in these matters. It is only by the individual's cooperation with Divine Grace that a state of grace can be established, and one can properly receive communion. And, if we were opening the proper books to the proper page and singing the appointed texts, they would support the "message" of the readings by themselves, in exactly the way the Church intended. The entire concept expressed in this one paragraph is one rooted in the notion that the Mass is a didactic exercise, or that the "meaning" or "message" (or, as they used to love to say back in the '70's and '80's, the "theme" of the Mass) is something that we can (or must) control and influence by our own efforts.
"The role of the Music Minister is a calling to bring people into a deeper experience with God."Again, I have to ask, where do they get this idea? Time and again the Church speaks of the importance of the music of the Church, and the requisite skills, talents and knowledge of those charged with the task of leading it in the liturgy. It says nothing about the musician's role as a spiritual leader. The role of the sacred musician is to provide the required music of the Mass, which of itself is a Holy Sacrifice to which we cannot add nor must we take away anything of our own. It is not our responsibility, as sacred musicians, to make the Mass "relevant", since it is not our work, but rather our cooperation with Christ who offers Himself to the Father in a bloodless sacrifice through the actions of the priest at the altar.
Here are just a few of the "conferences" that will be offered during the retreat. Their titles are telling:
Appreciating Your Vocation and How Important You Really Are; How You Positively Influence the Congregation.I'll reply to these questions in reverse order: by singing the Proper texts appointed for the Mass, using the chant melodies created for their specific use, according to the norms and directives of the Church. It is the height of pride to believe that anything I can personally do to the liturgy of the Universal Church can make it more "meaningful".
What Music Does for the Congregation - Emotionally and Spiritually; How Can We Best Accomplish This?
What Does a Congregation Really Want?
What Do You Do To Make Your Liturgies More Meaningful?
What the congregation wants is irrelevant. As a sacred musician, I am obliged (in conscience, by the way) to follow the binding legislation of the Church in these matters. I can't give the congregation what it "wants" any more than a faithful and obedient priest can give the congregation what it "wants" if it is contrary to Church Teaching or ultimately the welfare of their immortal souls.
What music "does" to the congregation is an interesting topic, and one that many, from lay scholars all the way up to the Holy Father, have discussed at great length. Emotional response isn't one of the characteristics they discuss, at least not in a positive way, or one that suggests it is an important measure. Trust me on that one.
How important I am is unimportant. If I do what I am required to do, to the best of my abilities, with humility but with an earnest desire to provide the very best, the "first fruits" if you will, in service to the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, then appreciation and influence become inconsequential. It is always nice to hear when people enjoy your music, but music is not a part of the Mass for its own sake. If someone tells me that something was beautifully done, that tells me that I'm executing things well, which is always nice to hear, but it's not the goal. Service to the liturgy, worship of God as the Church intends, and the welfare of souls are the goals.
There. You just went on a mini-retreat for sacred musicians. Right there in your comfy chair, and you didn't have to pay a penny!
Your Obedient Servant wishes all readers of this blog (regular or lurking) a most blessed Holy Week and a joyous Easter!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)