The Chant Café

Interview with Fr. Guy Nicholls - highly recommended

2013-05-24T18:46:00.000-07:00

And Now the Work Begins

2013-05-24T13:54:00.002-07:00

For those of us interested in Roman Rite liturgy -- and the even smaller sector focused on music -- the election of Pope Francis was a rather harrowing experience. Here we were losing our beloved Pope Benedict XVI. His replacement had no prior history with liturgical concerns, and his first weeks out indicated that he had other issues in mind.

I’ll admit that my friends and I really sweated this one out for a while. Were we going to see efforts to reverse the progress? Would we fall back into the default mode of the rupture that characterized the previous decades? Would everything unravel?

Those fears some of us had in the those days after the election seem seriously misplaced at this point. And this has reminded those of us who live and breathe liturgy that there are other issues that the Pope must concern himself with. News flash: It’s a pretty big job overall. There is curial reform. Evangelism. Scandals suppression. Doctrinal controversies. Religious orders. Politics. Really, it’s endless. And every Pope has a focus based on the needs of the time.

A story to reflect on here. Back in the middle of the 19th century, we saw the formation of what was later called the Liturgical Movement. They began a new effort to focus on the liturgy as a neglected feature of Catholic life. As part of this, the monks of Solesmes began a focus on repairing the chant from centuries of neglect. It took decades but then they were ready for real influence. They hoped and prayed for reform toward a more authenticate liturgical experience.

But they had to wait. Pius IX had to deal with the loss of the Papal states, the decline of the temporal power, the end of monarchy in Europe, the rise of the socialist menace, the push of democracy in the U.S. and abroad -- all of which meant gigantic changes in the way the Church relates to the world. He called a Church council and that led to more upheaval.

The liturgy people had to wait it out.

Then Leo XIII came along and had to deal with global economic upheaval, the rise of communism, the demands of labor, dramatic technological changes, extended lifespans and the demographic craziness that implied, the rise of prosperity and the moral issues thereby, the appearance of atheism and modernism, and the crying need for an expansion of Catholic moral teaching to the social sphere. This is a gigantic number of responsibilities.

The liturgy people had to wait.

A full half century went by from the beginnings of the liturgical movement before election of Pius X in 1903. Finally the moment had arrived. There was peace and many of the above questions had already been addressed. Now there could be focus. Like Benedict XVI, Pius X was a musician who had an intense interest in the liturgy and chant. He issued a Moto Proprio on music -- one that generations had waited for. He approved the new chant books. He was the culmination of so much work and for those who cared about this issue, his pontificate was a dream come true.

But he died in 1914. Now there was a world, a ghastly murderous war that consumed the whole of Europe in flames and bloodshed. Benedict XV was there as a proclaimer of peace. He taught and worked toward this. He condemned war against civilians and the new age of industrial murder -- a historical first. He was a serious man and did mighty and wonderful things to bring the teachings of the Church to bear on modern life. What had not figured into his outlook: liturgy. It was not part of what he did.

What did the musicians do? How did the liturgists respond? I can imagine that they were initially rather down in the dumps. Their issues were suddenly out of the spotlight. People stopped focussing on them. Probably many people stopped caring anymore. They probably felt a bit like orphans. Where are the controversies? Where is the momentum for change? Where is the life, the action, the energy, the productivity?

At this point, they might have just thrown in the towel and said: well, clearly we aren’t that important to the life of the Church. But that is not what happened. What they did was get to work. They built schools. They started organizations. They published books. They started new conferences. They trained others. They weren’t going to let this moment pass. They took the flame that Pius X had given them and turned it into a raging fire. The pontificate of Pius X turned out to be just the beginning.

So it is in our time. Benedict XVI and his papacy were epic for liturgy and music and for those who care so intensely. But these are not the only issues. We had our Pope and we had our time. But we must not depend on that. The idea here was to give us the push we needed and then send us out to do our work. If we do not do this work, we might as well be rejecting the gift and turning away from our responsibilities. Any cause that is right and true must continue to live and grow. It cannot depend on leadership. It must become self-sustaining.

That is where we are today. We are at the beginning of a long process. Where are nowhere near where we need to be. If you doubt it, drive about 60 miles from your home and attend a liturgy at the closest Catholic Church. See what happens. Observe the decor. Listen to the music. See how people respond. Check the skills and talents of the musicians. See the rubrics. What you will find is that this parish is probably only 10% of where it needs to be.

Consider your own role in this process. Are there things you can do in your own parish? Is there time you can commit? Is there a conference you can attend? Are there financial resources you can donate to the cause? Can you assist as a parent or teacher? If you feel that calling and you care, this is for a reason. You are probably being asked to play a bigger role. Now is the time to do it.

Benedict XVI gave us something spectacular. But there are other concerns in the world too and the Papacy must attend to those. It is up to us to make a difference and carry that Benedictan legacy forward into the future. There is work to be done. We must be the ones to do it. The change toward a brilliant future has just begun.

Cancel your Subscription Missal and Save your Parish Thousands

2013-05-24T11:27:00.003-07:00

Parishes are sometimes cautious about switching from a disposable subscription missal program to a permanent one because they are confronted with an up-front price that is higher than what has been budgeted for in the current year. Additionally, pastors are sometimes concerned about saddling a parish with something for years, fearing that once the permanent resource has been purchased, it must be used for a decade or more to be worth the investment.

The truth, though, is that the Lumen Christi Missal – a complete, permanent replacement for your disposable missal program – will pay for itself in under three years!

Let's take a look at the numbers and compare:

500 Copies of the Lumen Christi Missal: $10,475 + $800 (shipping) = $11,275

500 subscriptions to the leading Subscription Missal: $3,775/year + $800/year (shipping) =

Year 1 - $4,575

Year 2 - $9,150

Year 3 - $13,725

Year 4 - $18,300

Year 5 - $22,875

Year 6 - $27,450

Year 7 - $32,025

Year 8 - $36,600

Year 9 - $41,175

Year 10 - $45,750

The savings are staggering. The Lumen Christi Missal pays for itself in less than three years.

If a parish keeps the LCM in their pews for 2.5 years, it will have broken completely even. If, for whatever reason, the parish had a desire to move back to a subscription missal after this time, they could do so without having lost a cent.

However, when a parish keeps the LCM in their pews for 10 years (or longer!), they will save upwards of $34,000, if not more!

In a time of constant economic insecurity, the Lumen Christi Missal is a way be a good steward of your parish's limited resources.

Our own Jeffrey Tucker reviewed the LCM here. You can place an order here.

Or if you'd like to contact us directly about bringing the Lumen Christi Missal to your parish, you can reach us by email at info@illuminarepublications.com, or by phone at 602-910-4180.

Sacra Liturgia, one month away

2013-05-24T09:20:00.001-07:00

Sacra Liturgia 2013 is only one month away. Already people from 30 countries are registered to attend. You can join them in Rome. Register

Notes about Polyphony at the Colloquium

2013-05-24T08:31:00.001-07:00

Here's is some -- just some -- of the polyphony you will sing at the Sacred Music Colloquium.

Francisco Guerrero (Sevilla, 1528-1599) enjoyed enormous fame in his time, having taken a prominent post as maestro de capilla (singing master, i.e. music director) at Jaén Cathedral in Spain. More than any composer of his generation, he spent his life in Spain and thoroughly reflects the distinctiveness of the Spanish polyphonic tradition, which has distinctive traits as compared with Italian or English polyphony of the period. His rising prominence in our time is most likely due to these traits which include distinct structural roles for each voice and a firm underlying pulse that is inaudible but always present. His Requiem Mass is one of his many masterpieces, and a lesser known Requiem setting. The conductors are Wilko Brouwers and Horst Buchholz.

Orlando Di Lasso (1530-1594) was a Flemish composer of astonishing skill who left us a huge library of music in many styles. His Missa Osculetur Me is written for eight voices and features surprising drama and a rich texture that explores the most advanced polyphonic techniques of his time. Recordings of this piece sometimes feature instruments as a substitute for voices but in the Collequium presentation we will use all voices, to realize an idealization of this masterpiece.It is conducted by Wilko Brouwers and Gregory Glenn.

Sergei Rachmaninoff’s “Ave Maria” was written for his Russian Vespers service but the Colloquium will sing a version in Latin. It is surely one of the most emotionally affecting and powerful settings of this glorious text to be found in the treasury of sacred music. It is also something that can be sung by a parish schola. It is conducted by Horst Buchholz.

Josquin de Prez (1450-1521) is a case of a composer who only seems to grow more popular over time. He had a huge influence on nearly every important polyphony composer of the 16th century but his influence continued onward. This “Ave Maria” has never been sung at the Colloquium but is popular among professional polyphonic choirs because of its creative use of shifting ranges and antiphonal repetitions that suggest ethereal joy and celebration. It is conducted by Gregory Glenn.

Interview with Fr. Guy Nicholls

2013-05-24T07:49:00.002-07:00

Colloquium Scholarships apparently still available

2013-05-23T16:36:00.000-07:00

The deadline is June 1. Write to Arlene Oost-Zinner at programs@musicasacra.com
I understand you have to convince her that you are worth the money.

I won't be able to attend, but I really like getting picked for things, so I decided to save time and combine my application with my letter of decline:

If I attend colloquium
how fortunate would be
the many traddie chanters there
who got to talk to me.

I'd wow them with my discourse
and astound them with my smile.
They'll giggle at my funny jokes,
succumbing to my wile.

I'll even have an impact
on the quality of sound-
my perfect elocution
will inspire vowels round.

And did I mention prayerfulness?
Why, some call me a saint!
My thoughts have so much altitude
it makes a sinner faint.

I'm probably the smartest person
I have ever known.
My mom thinks I'm a winner, and
she's likely not alone.

So you should let me come to your
colloquium of chant.
But even if you picked me, well-
I'm sorry but I can't.

I'm soon to have a baby,
and I think the baby's mom
would object to my departure,
so to keep domestic calm

I will have to stay in Texas
where the cattle horns are long,
while my friends at the colloqu'um
raise their voice in solemn song.

Sacrosanctum concilium - what we have done, what we have failed to do

2013-05-23T12:38:00.003-07:00

Sacrosanctum concilium - what we have done, what we have failed to do

An address by Mgr Andrew Wadsworth to a study session of priests of Westminster Diocese.

May 22, 2013.

As we keep the fiftieth anniversary of the opening of the Second Vatican Council and progress through the Year of Faith, it would seem to be a good moment for an examination of conscience based on the teachings of the Council and their implementation. As you will know, the first utterance of the Council in the form of a major document was the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, Sacrosanctum concilium. Taking some of its major themes and observations, I would like to briefly offer something of a liturgical ‘state of the nation’. You will appreciate, I hope, that this is necessarily a highly personal view and that other commentators may quite legitimately see things very differently.

In its introduction, the Constitution links the primary motives of the Council to the function and significance of the Liturgy: it states that the goal of the Council is to intensify the Christian growth of Catholics, to foster unity and to draw all people into the Church. It notes that the liturgy should contribute to this.This is a very auspicious and important beginning, for it makes the essential link between the mission of the Church as a community of salvation and the liturgy which both proclaims that salvation and brings us into an experience of it even in this life. For this reason, it is always something of a surprise to me that the liturgy is not immediately identified as a primary instrument of the New Evangelization and that programmes do not tend to recognize the fundamental importance of the liturgy in the endeavour of evangelization. The Constitution makes it clear at its outset that the liturgy, and especially the Eucharist, is the chief manifestation of the Church and it is both the cause and sign of unity.

So often the Council is presented solely as innovation, as development and as renewal and yet it occurs to me that it principally needs to make sense to us as organic progression and continuity before we are able to grasp and digest the challenge of changing what needs to be changed. For me personally, the hermeneutical key of the whole document is to be found in paragraph 2. Here is the Council's definition of the nature and purpose of the Liturgy – it is our participation in the Mystery of Christ, which is the Church. Reading through this single paragraph, we see that three tremendously important themes emerge:

Firstly:

… the liturgy, "through which the work of our redemption is accomplished," most of all in the divine sacrifice of the Eucharist, is the outstanding means whereby the faithful may express in their lives, and manifest to others, the mystery of Christ and the real nature of the true Church.

Here Sacrosanctum concilium reminds us of the truth that the Liturgy is ultimately about redemption and is in fact the manner in which redemption is applied to us and it is the supreme way in which the true nature of the Church is made manifest. I think in the minds of many of our people, the true salvific mission of the Church and the uniqueness of her supernatural aims are not yet comprehended as a result of a way that we celebrate the Liturgy. Put more simply, perhaps we might wish to say that the Liturgy is the most obvious way in which we as Catholics answer the question: what is the Church? We would want to answer with Sacrosanctum concilium that the liturgy of the Eucharist, more than anything else, expresses the nature and mystery of the Church.

Secondly:

It is of the essence of the Church that she be both human and divine, visible and yet invisibly equipped, eager to act and yet intent on contemplation, present in this world and yet not at home in it; and she is all these things in such wise that in her the human is directed and subordinated to the divine, the visible likewise to the invisible, action to contemplation, and this present world to that city yet to come, which we seek.

Here we find contrasting characteristics which are carefully held in balance: human/divine; visible/invisible; active/contemplative... It is my impression that too often, rather than experiencing both of these characteristicssimultaneously (which is the true genius of the liturgy), we only seem to experience one of them. The overwhelming character of many Masses is still hopelessly horizontal and assembly-oriented – somewhere along the journey from the Council, we seem to have accepted a protestant model in our worship and the true ecclesial dynamic of what happens in the Liturgy is still obscured to many of our people. This is particularly the case when we consider the character of the liturgy in its function of making accessible to us the life of heaven. In the earthly liturgy we share in the heavenly liturgy by way of foretaste, as we await its accomplishment.

The manner of the celebration of the liturgy must always carefully take into consideration these important qualities which consequently determine the appropriateness of certain modes of celebration, not least of all in the manner of the priest in celebrating and preaching, the preparation of the readings and those who exercise liturgical ministries and the judicious selection and use of appropriate liturgical music which is integral to the liturgy and the most powerful conveyor of liturgical culture. The considerable challenge which all of this presents is not to be underestimated and requires the offering of the very best that we have in each of these important areas. Too often, the liturgy can seem to be hopelessly earth-bound and pedestrian rather than stimulating in us a thirst for God and all that he longs to give us and do in us and through us. Keeping the challenge before us is an essential part of responding positively to it: Sacrosanctum concilium outlines an immense vision for the liturgy - it is always easier to settle for less.

Thirdly:

While the liturgy daily builds up those who are within into a holy temple of the Lord, into a dwelling place for God in the Spirit, to the mature measure of the fullness of Christ, at the same time it marvelously strengthens their power to preach Christ, and thus shows forth the Church to those who are outside as a sign lifted up among the nations under which the scattered children of God may be gathered together, until there is one sheepfold and one shepherd.

The Constitution is marvelously unambiguous in proclaiming that the liturgy should strengthen us for mission, so that the Gospel can be preached (and believed) in a more powerful way among the people of our time. The Church is missionary by nature and this essential character of the Church is displayed in her liturgy, not least in the fact that the liturgy is potentially a powerful proclamation of the truth that the message of salvation is for all people, this is the real sense of the universality which lies at the heart of the meaning of Catholicism. We are reminded that the task of the Church is also to call people to conversion and faith, to prepare them for the sacraments and to win them to the works of love and to the apostolate.

These are truths which are often obscured.False ecumenism has had a catastrophic effect in this sense – many Catholics now tend to see themselves (both individually and collectively) as just one subjective response to the human dilemma, whereas Sacrosanctum Concilium is telling us quite emphatically that the Church is God's most effective response to the highly human dilemma of our continual need of his mercy and grace, while reliably pointing us continually towards our truest home in him.Approaches in the liturgy which obfuscate this fundamental truth have a highly detrimental effect on the ecclesial sense of our people. It is for this reason that the Church most frequently places the words of Sacred Scripture on our lips in the liturgy. Scripture is, after all,the largest single source of the liturgy. I cannot help but think that singing more scripturally based texts at Mass would certainly be an improvement from some of the music which currently fills many collections of liturgical songs which are distinguished only by their notable lack of a true liturgical voice.

Any discussion of the liturgy since Vatican II must certainly contend with the important injunction relating to participatio actuosa. If we can allow ourselves the luxury of a generalization, I think that it is in this area that the most considerable progress has been made. It is now a well established expectation on the part of our people that they will participate actively in the celebration of the liturgy. At times this can lead to the danger of activism which is counter-productive but in general, the passivity of the greater number of those present at the celebration of the liturgy is now thankfully a thing of the past.

The Constitution underlines, however, that for the liturgy to achieve its fullest effect, the faithful must take part with knowledge, actively and so fruitfully. I think it is fair to say that the requirement of knowledge implies a catechesis that in many ways is yet to be undertaken. It also highlights the fact that the rightful full, conscious and active participation of the Christian people in the liturgy can only be achieved by adequate instruction, above all, of the clergy. This, we would also want to admit is a work in progress and some of the strangest notions concerning the liturgy are the province not of the laity but the clergy.

In moving on to a consideration of the reforms which followed the Council and find their mandate in this Constitution, one of the principal considerations must be the realization of the desire that the paramount importance of Scripture be evident in our liturgy. The revision of the lectionary to facilitate the reading of a far greater part of the Scriptures has been widely recognized as one of the great fruits of the liturgical reform and our lectionary has been adopted or adapted for use by many Christian communities beyond the full communion of the Catholic Church. The benefits of this are evident and our people have a far greater awareness of the central importance of the Word of God in our lives and the privileged place it occupies in the liturgy as there is now no element of the celebration of the liturgy, however brief or private, which does not envisage the reading of the Scriptures. I think we can confidently say that a warm and living love of Scripture has been fostered.

We cannot be equally sanguine, however, about the Council’s injunction that Latin must be

preserved, whilst the use of vernacular languages in the celebration of the Mass and sacraments is encouraged and regulated by competent authority. Clearly the question of language loomed largely at the Council and it seems that the adoption of the vernacular was considered inevitable and desirable but it seems equally clear that the total exclusion of Latin was neither desired nor envisaged. Certainly there is nothing to account for the visceral hatred of Latin that has characterized the liturgical approach of some who claim their authority from mandate of the Council.

Whilst Latin has made something of a modest return evidenced by Latin chants which now can be heard more frequently at Mass, the truth is that most parishes have had fifty years of the studious avoidance of anything Latin, lest there be a sense of the continuation of anything that was formerly found in the liturgy. The hermeneutic of rupture is most dramatic in this exclusion of Latin. Not only do we now have several generations of Catholics who cannot sing Credo III or theSalve Regina, more seriously, we have several generations of priests whose Latin is insufficient to cope with any element of Latin in the liturgy, let alone the celebration of the Mass in Latin in either form of the Roman Rite.

The place and importance of Latin is not determined by the choice of liturgical language. It is vitally important that we grasp this. Even in the case of an entirely vernacular liturgy, we still need Latin to be able to interpret so many of the sources of the liturgy,to say nothing of fundamental sources for both theology and philosophy. We shall have to recover a greater enthusiasm and competence in the teaching and learning of Latin if future generations of Catholics are going to be equipped with the necessary skills to explore the treasures of the Church’s ancient patrimony. In seminaries, the mandatory one year of Latin provides little more than the briefest introduction to the language. In places where there is a greater requirement for the study of Latin, the students benefit across the board in their studies and the Church has a future generation of priests who will be more skilled in this respect.

It is worth noting that Sacrosanctum concilium envisages that every community of Catholics will know the basic chants in Latin.The new English translation of the Missal, which contains more music than any of its predecessors, provides many of these chants which may be sung in either Latin or English, thereby reinforcing the notion of a common musical repertoire among Catholics of the Roman Rite and for the first time a shared body of chants common to all Catholics who worship in English.

It is certainly true to say that the Liturgy of the Hours, previously largely limited to the clergy, has become more genuinely the Prayer of the Church in the experience of not only priests and religious but also lay people. The injunction that pastors should ensure that the chief hours, especially Vespers, are celebrated in common in church on Sundays and solemn feasts seems to be observed rather more in the breach, in fact in parishes, Sundays and Solemnities are the days when one is least likely to encounter celebrations of the Liturgy of Hours. More widespread attempts at the solemn celebration of the office with appropriate music and liturgical action are still beyond the liturgical experience of most Catholics and something of a rarity outside religious communities.

In relation to the celebration of the sacraments, I think it is generally the case that the reintroduction of the catechumenate for adults through RCIA has revolutionized our understanding of the process whereby we welcome new members into the Church as well as restoring the Sacraments of Initiation to our celebration of the Easter Vigil. In this way, we also have a deeper understanding of baptism as the fundamental fact of our Christian identity and the true nature of the seasons of Lent and Easter in relation to the celebration of the Paschal mystery. It goes without saying that the liturgies of the Sacred Triduum, largely unknown to a previous generation, have happily now become the liturgical heart of the year for most Catholics.

The true significance of the Anointing of the sick and its place in our pastoral care of those who suffer or who are frail is certainly more widely understood. Similar progress is evident in relation to Marriage as a consequence of the revision of the marriage rite in a way which expresses more clearly the grace of the sacrament and the duties of the spouses. This is particularly important as society at large moves away from any understanding of the objective meaning of marriage.

The theological consequences of the revision of the Rite of Christian Burial do not seem to be so universally positive. Whilst it is true that the revision of the rite shows rather more clearly the paschal character of Christian death, the general character of many funeral liturgies has tended away from the notion of praying for the dead and those who mourn towards rather more secular notions of the celebration of the life of the deceased and the multiplication of tributes expressed in a liturgy that might seem more appropriate for a canonization. This is perhaps a clear indication that the liturgical text is not the sole purveyor of liturgical culture.

If we are to consider the more negative impact of some aspects of our liturgical experience since Vatican II, we obviously need to think about our celebration of the Eucharist. The Constitution offers us a definition of the significance of the Eucharist and its relationship to our celebration and experience of the saving mysteries. The text stresses that at the Last Supper Christ instituted the Eucharistic Sacrifice as a memorial of his death and resurrection, in which Christ is consumed, the mind is filled with grace and a pledge of future glory is given to us. I continually wonder whether this understanding of the meaning of the Mass is as present to our people as the Church would seem to be suggesting it should be? Perhaps the clue to thinking about this is to be found in the eminently practical injunction which follows this theological definition in the document? It is the suggestion that Christ’s faithful should not be strangers or silent spectators at this mystery, but with the priest should offer Christ and so learn to offer themselves.

Whilst progress has been made avoiding attitudes and behaviour demonstrative of passivity, I would suggest that the idea that everyone present at the celebration of the Eucharist is in fact making the offering of their lives which is in turn taken up into the unique offering of Christ which is his sacrifice, is a notion that is not particularly present to many of our people. This true expression of the offering made by the priesthood of the baptized and its intrinsic link to the offering made by the ministerial priest celebrating the Mass is essential not only for an understanding of what is happening at Mass but also for the living of a truly Eucharistic life which beyond the bounds of our liturgical celebration expresses itself in the consecration of the material world by our living as witnesses to God’s love and truth.

And so my whistle-stop consideration of a breadth of liturgical experience since Vatican II must necessarily draw to a close. Having travelled the English-speaking world very widely in preparation for the implementation of the English translation of the third typical edition of the Missale Romanum, and having experienced the liturgy in a wide variety of circumstances and styles, I would conclude that I have generally encountered a very great desire for change, although not always among those who are directly responsible for the liturgy. I think we are currently well placed to respond to this desire and this is evidenced by the fact that many things which were indicated fifty years ago, such as the singing of the Mass, and more particularly the singing of the proper texts rather than the endless substitution of songs and hymns, are only now being seriously considered and implemented. It is earnestly to be desired that such developments continue to flourish and that an improved liturgical culture is accessible to everyone in the Church. Time will tell whether the musical resources necessary to the success of such a development flourish in our midst. If they do not, then I fear that many of the less desirable features of post-conciliar liturgical music may be here to stay.

For all of us who use the Roman Missal in English, our liturgy has changed over the past eighteen months. The change of text is indicative of the possibility of doing things differently which will hopefully bring us nearer to a more faithful realization of the liturgy willed by the Church as expressed in Sacrosanctum concilium. It is true to say that considerable improvements in the liturgy have been in evidence in most recent years. Crucial to this peaceful revolution has been the leadership and example of Pope Benedict who consistently studied and wrote about the liturgy in a long life of scholarship which also informed his governance of the Church’s liturgical life. Much that he commends was already evident in aspects of liturgical scholarship from the early twentieth century onwards. In our own time, however, perhaps it is finally starting to be received with the joy and enthusiasm that it merits. A new generation of Catholics eagerly awaits a greater experience of the basic truth that the liturgy is always a gift which we receive from the Church rather than make for ourselves. As those most intimately concerned with the liturgy, you all have a highly significant contribution to make to this leitourgia, this great work in which there are only participants and beneficiaries and no spectators. May God bless us all as we share in his work.

The Renewal of Sacred Music and the Liturgy in the Catholic Church: Movements Old and New - Saint Paul, Minn., October 2013

2013-05-22T20:25:00.000-07:00

October 13-15, 2013

The CMAA is thrilled to announce a conference honoring the legacy of Msgr. Schuler at Saint Agnes Church in Saint Paul, Minnesota.

www.musicasacra.com/st-agnes

The registration page is now up and running!

Registration deadline is September 13.

If you're looking for an immersion experience in beautiful liturgies and sacred music, thought-provoking and inspiring presentations on historical and current issues in sacred music and liturgy, and a chance to meet others working in sacred music and the liturgy from around the country, we hope you'll come!

Our line up of keynote speakers includes well-known figures:
     - Dom Alcuin Reid – “The New Liturgical Movement after the Pontificate of Benedict XVI”
     - Dr. William Mahrt – “The Treasury of Sacred Music at Saint Agnes: From Chant to Mozart”
     - Jeffrey Tucker -“Chant as Free Culture: The Legacy of Msgr. Schuler’s Revolutionary
                                   Resistance”


Other topics covered by scholars include:
     - Austrian orchestral Masses
     - Rubrics and liturgical documents
     - The 20th-century Liturgical Movement
     - Louis Bouyer and Annibale Bugnini
     - Liturgical architecture
     - Gregorian chant and Solesmes
     - Spanish Renaissance music
     - Bl. John Henry Cardinal Newman
     - Evelyn Waugh and Flannery O'Connor's
             views on liturgical changes
     - The role of silence in the liturgy
     and, of course,
     - The role of Saint Agnes Church in the preservation of the sacred music tradition

The conference will include the celebration of vespers (featuring Mozart’s Vesperae Solennes de Confessore) and Missae Cantatae at the Cathedral of Saint Paul and Church of Saint Agnes, featuring an orchestral Mass (Paukenmesse by Franz Joseph Haydn), classical works for organ, chanted Gregorian propers, and a modern polyphonic setting of the Mass ordinary (Messe Salve Regina by Yves Castagnet).

The entire conference schedule is available by clicking here.

More information on the conference, including the registration page are available here: www.musicasacra.com/st-agnes

A Transparent Process? Questioning the Survey

2013-05-21T19:43:00.001-07:00

I spent a year or so working for the influential Dr. Dean Hoge at the Catholic University of America's Life Cycle Institute. We were working on a major project for 5 Protestant denominations on why pastors leave local church ministry. (The project became this book; they thanked me in it somewhere.) I learned a lot, but not being a credentialed sociologist, my contributions would always be at the level of Research Assistant, and I was lucky to get that. It was fun. I learned a lot about ecclesiology, which has always been an interest. But there was no way that I would have been allowed to implement a survey, or analyze the data, or evaluate and publish its results. Everything I did was tightly scrutinized. The project was directed by a professor of sociology, considered an expert, with many published books indicating his research qualifications, and co-directed by a graduate student who was in the writing phase of her doctorate in sociology. The rest of us just did what we were told.

So imagine my surprise when a study purporting to be major is undertaken by students in the Liturgy Department of the College of St. Benedict/ St. John's University, with a Social Psychologist from the CSB/SJU faculty as their Professional Consultant, and the hardly-disinterested Rev. Anthony Ruff, OSB, as their advisor.

Here are the credentials of the Project Manager, according to the PrayTell website:

Chase M. Becker is a Nebraska native and current editorial assistant for Pray Tell. Chase holds a B.A. in Philosophy from Saint Gregory the Great Seminary in Seward, Nebraska and is currently pursuing an M.A. in Liturgical Studies from Saint John's School of Theology•Seminary in Collegeville, Minnesota. Chase currently serves as a Liturgical Designer and Consultant and has earned awards in historic preservation from Heritage Nebraska and Preservation North Dakota.

The sympathetic-leaning PrayTell commentariat have already weighed in on the likelihood of sampling errors, particularly considering the enormous amount of self-selection that occurred. Self-selecting dioceses participated. Self-selecting clergy from these dioceses participated. And as Jeffrey mentions below, we are given very little of the data.

Before we take this survey with any seriousness, why don't we stop and ask for a little transparency.
What did the surveys look like? Did they indicate Collegeville as their source or destination, thus influencing participation? Which dioceses were involved and why? Were there any outside scientists involved in the process? Was any outside social scientist consulted for independent evaluation of the procedures?

What degree of professionally credible skill was involved in producing this survey? How involved was the in-house scientific consultant? Did she design the survey? Did she evaluate the results or train the liturgy students to a high level of analytical skill before they processed the results? What corrections were made to the raw data?

Survey on the New Missal

2013-05-21T09:30:00.000-07:00

A new survey on the new Missal translation is making a splash because it shows overwhelming opposition. I'm quoted on the PrayTell blog as suspecting a demographic split here. Older priests who were accustomed to the previous translation don't like the new formality. Younger priests are different: they are thrilled with it (speaking from what I gather from conversations. However, the survey didn't include demographic data, though that would have been easy to elicit and compile. So we'll never know.

Here is the PrayTell release.

Full survey results are here.

My own comments are listed in the comment page.

I'm reprinting them below. They were initially 600 words, and I had to cut to 250.

These survey results initially surprised me. But I'll admit my bias: I'm far happier with the new translation. I'm frequently moved by the new language. I'm friends with many young priests who fully agree.

Why would some priests disagree with this assessment? The survey lacks demographic data, but I suspect a generational split is at work here. It shouldn't really be surprising that some priests of an older generation are annoyed. They came terms with one way, received vast amounts of catechesis along these lines, and developed a more casual liturgical style to go with it, and now they are told to do it another way. This creates a real tension: am I supposed to speak in the language of the people or not?

What is the purpose of liturgy? Is it primarily a community gathering centered on the needs of the people or is it a formalized prayer that strives to reach out of time and into eternity? The existing resources for liturgy do not fully agree on this crucial matter. The answer to this instability is to get to work on the remaining options and bring them into line with the new understanding and ethos.

One point that emerges here should serve as a warning sign. We find in this survey an intense suspicion about the process of translation itself, all stemming from excessive and pointless centralization and secrecy. Every process of revision could benefit from a more open approach.

A Way to Get the Basics of Gregorian Chant

2013-05-21T06:53:00.001-07:00

CMAA and NLM

2013-05-20T14:33:00.000-07:00

Shawn has announced already at the New Liturgical Movement blog that the Church Music Association of America will be the new sponsor of the NLM. I'll be published and editor and Gregory DiPippo will be the managing editor. Others will be involved to expand this wonderful blog into a full-blown liturgical space. NLM will only be adding in the future and not take away any content. Of course everyone will miss Shawn tremendously but we hope to build on what he has created and sustained.

What does this mean for the ChantCafe? Nothing really. We'll continue on as before. There are enough writers and bloggers and subjects to cover to sustain both sites.

We are very excited for the future!

On Changing Hymn Texts

2013-05-20T05:37:00.002-07:00

As mentioned in a comment by Drew Royals below, Liturgicam Authenticam legislates a kind of conservatism regarding hymn texts in #108.

Sung texts and liturgical hymns have a particular importance and efficacy. Especially on Sunday, the “Day of the Lord”, the singing of the faithful gathered for the celebration of Holy Mass, no less than the prayers, the readings and the homily, express in an authentic way the message of the Liturgy while fostering a sense of common faith and communion in charity. If they are used widely by the faithful, they should remain relatively fixed so that confusion among the people may be avoided...

This point seems carefully worded. The legislation does not say that the texts must be absolutely fixed, but relatively fixed. There might be compelling reasons to change the wording of a hymn. Generally speaking, however, it is pastorally more sensitive to keep the wording of hymns steady over time.

Actual abbey music more popular than Downton Abbey music

2013-05-20T02:32:00.001-07:00

As reported by the Catholic PR Wire:

ANGELS AND SAINTS AT EPHESUS from the Benedictines of Mary, Queen of Apostles, has debuted at No. 1 on Billboard magazine’s Classical Traditional Music Chart. The album also earned the No. 2 spot on Billboard’s new-artist “Heatseekers” chart, which encompasses all music genres. ANGELS AND SAINTS AT EPHESUS topped a group of classical albums that includes Fifty Shades of Grey: The Classical Album and Downton Abbey: The Essential Collection.

h/t Mark Shea, via Facebook

The Familar Chaos, But Still Taken By Surprise (rant warning)

2013-05-19T09:43:00.003-07:00

For some years, our schola at the parish has worked hard to get away from singing hymns in place of propers. This has been a huge relief, and an end to endless headaches over finding the right hymns and additions.

Now that we have Mass propers, we have clean editions, we know what to sing, everyone is on the right page, we are singing the right thing, and there is confidence and clarity all around.

And yet sometimes, we still need to sing hymns, as during recessional. You might think that this would be no big deal. Surely there are hymns in the hymnbook you can sing with a choir. Surely this can't be too confusing. And truly, most of the time, all is fine.

But then every once in a while -- and it happens when you least expect it -- there is chaos over editions, pitches, tempo, text, and much more.

For those who use OCP materials, you know about this problem. The various books don't match each other. The choir arrangements are completely un-singable in places. Even rhythms can be different between the pew books and the choir books.

This morning was one such case. We wanted to sing "Come Holy Ghost" for the recessional. How hard can that be? This is one of the most familiar hymns in Christendom.

Well, as is well known, the pew books don't have simple SATB parts. In fact, I don't think any OCP materials have that. I find that annoying but it is a well-known problem. Less well known is that the choir books -- if you are lucky enough to find the same hymn in there -- doesn't always have them either -- not even for this hymn standard.

The choir book offers fully three versions of "Come Holy Ghost" -- but not even one of them has a plain SATB arrangement. The first arrangement has piano, melody, and a soprano descant. The presumption is that surely every choir has one singer who wants to be a big star and sing above everyone else in a thrilling sort of way. Well, ours doesn't have such a person and it is not what we want to do. We sing without instruments and our main musical purpose with hymns is not the show off some one dazzling singer but to provide a rich environment for the people in the pews to feel confident about singing.

We could use this version and attempt to sing the piano parts but they are not voiced property for singers, and the words end up far from the notes. This is not a workable solution.

The second version is set up like some kind of canon or round or something. It is ridiculously complex and would require substantial rehearsal time and still probably not be a successful. It would completely confuse the congregation -- no question. Plus it is barely readable at all. In fact, it is actually preposterous.

So much for inspiring people to sing.

All this just for one simple hymn!

The third version is an SAB version of the same, as if this is any value added to an already incoherent and chaotic SATB version that I would guess has only been sing or one twice in human history, if ever. Why not a SAT and a ATB version too? </sarcasm>

Meanwhile, not a single plain-jane SATB hymn arrangement exists in a single OCP book in our parish's vast collection of OCP materials. To be sure, there is probably one that exists somewhere from this publisher, somewhere among the hundreds and thousands of things they publish. Someone will probably post in the comments something like "oh sure, it is right there on page 323 of JourneySongs or page 212 of MakingPraise," etc. We just don't happen to have it.

So, worried about this problem, I keep looking for something during liturgy, digging through other Catholic materials. I ended up finding three others hymnals, published by three other publishers, with three additional versions. What did I find? Three additional unison versions of this hymn, all with different words.

It is not rocket science to provide a SATB hymn. It is beyond me why Catholic publishers seem to have such a problem with this.

Singing propers is so much easier, so much clearer. I have no desire to put a permanent ban on hymns at Mass but events like today certainly make such a position tempting.

Pentecost Propers, St. Peters Rome

2013-05-19T09:00:00.001-07:00

The Songs of the Angels

2013-05-19T06:54:00.000-07:00

A beautiful little boy in my old parish died this week from a sudden accident. One moment he was playing, the next he was seriously injured, and the next, he died.

Death is not ok. It was never supposed to happen to us. Jesus changed it, and made it the door to eternal life, but it is still a bad thing. He cried to see the cup before His eyes, on the night He was betrayed.

I think of this wonderful, promising little boy, baptized and of tender age, standing at the choir Mass with his family in the front row, with their hymnals open. I hope we did right by him. I hope that our prayer together prepared him to sing today with the angels.

O the happiness of the heavenly alleluia, sung in security, in fear of no adversity! We shall have no enemies in heaven, we shall never lose a friend. God’s praises are sung both there and here, but here they are sung by those destined to die, there, by those destined to live for ever; here they are sung in hope, there, in hope’s fulfillment; here they are sung by wayfarers, there, by those living in their own country. -St. Augustine

How fast the chant?

2013-05-18T06:52:00.004-07:00

If you sing the chant too slowly, you lose the sense of the chant, you lose the meaning because the chant, the text, becomes less and less understandable. Yes, you have to understand what the text is saying. You don’t have to be a Latin scholar to know that (though that helps a lot). People in the pews have books they can follow, that is true. But singing the chant too slowly risks breaking the integrity of the text’s meaning. Try listening to an audio book at a really slow rate of reading. As you turn the pace down, it eventually becomes incomprehensible.

If you sing chant too quickly, you tend to retain the meaning of the text, but you put its sacral character at risk. The texts are sacred. They deserve respect and time. They must not be rushed. They must be savored. Chant that is rushed has a nervous, jittery quality to it. It lacks the essential quality: it isn’t prayerful. The pace of a Mass must not be lugubrious. Every Mass and every element of Mass must retain a sense of progress, of moving forward towards a goal. When you tear through a chant, you might be making progress, but you lose the essential sacral sense. Every word of the chants are the voice of the Church singing with Christ’s own voice. Christ is the true Actor during Mass. He borrows us, the baptized, and uses our gestures and song.

Ecclesia Institute Website: UPDATE

2013-05-17T17:45:00.003-07:00

For those interested in the Ecclesia Institute I posted about a few days ago, here's the corrected website with the up-to-date information: http://gotoecclesia.com/.

Words With Wings - Audio is Out

2013-05-17T11:46:00.000-07:00

Well, this is a moment we've dreamed about. Finally the audio CD of Words with Wings is out. For those who don't know, this is a series for teaching chant and music generally to children. It compresses the wisdom of a century into a small program for any parish, school, or home.

An essential component is a CD that has all the music so that the teacher and students can hear good singing, well modeled.

The CMAA put vast effort into this recording. It uses some of the country's best voices of children from the Cathedral Choir School of the Cathedral of the Madeleine in Salt Lake City. The quality is truly astonishing. I enjoyed just listening to the energy and enthusiasm of the singers even apart from the program itself.

The recording, editing, and production values are super professional - the best in the industry.

It is an essential complement to the books in the series. Together they make it possible to actually have a children's choir program -- a feature of Catholic life that fell into decline a half century ago and never recovered. This series makes that recovery possible for everyone.

If we are looking for long term change, this is the solution. Nothing else like it exists. If you know someone who is looking for music for kids in a Catholic context, please send them this link. It is an illustration of the kind of work we are doing at the CMAA, trying to find positive paths forward.

That He may bide with you forever

2013-05-17T11:23:00.002-07:00

Last Day to Book Room At Guaranteed Rate

2013-05-17T11:18:00.000-07:00

If you're coming to the Sacred Music Colloquium and you've been putting off booking your room, don't wait. Today (Friday, May 17) is the last day you will be able to receive the guaranteed low, CMAA rates. If you stayed at the Little America Hotel last year, you'll know that it is a spectacular place. Incredible quality and service. At $72, $97, or $117 a night, these rooms are a steal. Reserve your room directly with this link. Register for the Colloquium here.

How and why The Chant Café was in Wired

2013-05-17T09:21:00.001-07:00

At the risk of looking like I am trying too hard to cling desperately to whatever fame I have recently garnered (which I would totally do), I thought I should tell this story for at least three reasons not having to do with my own narcissism:

It's funny (well, I think so).
It demonstrates the value of modern technology for the spread of Sacred Music
The article does not mention any of the other people involved in this sort of work, which makes me look like a either a hero (if you don't know any better) or a publicity hog (if you do).

You probably know that about a month ago I wrote an article announcing that we have created a CMAA account at GitHub, and that I am hopeful it will become a useful tool for collaboration on larger projects (like an Open Sourced set of the Propers, or something...).

I had (and have) high hopes for this, but it's still just an idea- a first step. I have some plans, I hope some other people have some plans- but the whole thing is just an unrealized potential.

Then, last week, I got an email from Bob McMillan at Wired. Wired has something of a thing for GitHub (I know the feeling). Somehow or other, the people at GitHub (I am told) had read my article here at the cafe (they must Google themselves prodigiously) and thought it was a good explanation of how GitHub might be used in a non-software context. Also, I guess they thought it was cool. (Gregorian Chant is very cool, if you didn't know.)

So Bob gets in touch with me, asks me some questions about what we're trying to do. He thinks it's cool, but- there's really no story if there's no active project- which at that point there wasn't. Oh- and he's got a deadline.

I rush around trying to find something worthwhile to post to Github with just a few hours notice. The only thing I have access to and permission to use is a handful of Lilypond transcriptions from the Nova Organi Harmonia. Forum user "cantorconvert" (who I still haven't heard back from...) had posted these a couple weeks ago and had already given me permission to post them on GitHub.

I sent a quick email to Jeff Ostrowski, asking him to call me. I had no idea about the copyright status of the NOH, and I didn't want to make a major blunder here. His words: "You couldn't pay people to care about this stuff." Apparently back in 2008 when he and some others worked to get the set online, they tried without success to track down anyone who might have a copyright interest in it, or even anyone who might know who did. I gathered from our conversation that they found no one.

So I posted what I had, which wasn't much. I tried to explain to Bob the significance of the NOH and Gregorian Chant generally. ("Do you know anything about church music?" "Not really.") We talked about the general reception Open Source philosophy has had among the community around CMAA. We talked about the nature of text-based music engraving.

I sent him the only decent pictures I had of myself (the one he used is over six years old, and my wife thinks its ridiculous... but I like it), some links to the NOH and as much background info as I could muster together quickly.

And now there's this article over at Wired.

I'm particularly excited that we've managed to open our weird little church music echo chamber enough to get some outside attention. I really believe that the beauty and power of Sacred Music can change people's lives and be a source of grace for them.

The not-great part of this 15 nanoseconds of fame is that the article, by it's nature as a narrative profile, didn't address the fact that I just happen to be the current moment's loudest voice on the matter of Open Sourcing sacred music. I'm an evangelist, not a pioneer. People have been working on making this music ever more available and free for a good long while now- even a few who have already been using tools like GitHub.

Jeffrey Tucker has been beating this drum for awhile, and a growing number of composers, editors, and publishers have been contributing to the Open Culture movement, which itself is a continuation of the long history of social sharing at the heart of Gregorian Chant's history.

It's all very exciting, humbling, and not a little ridiculous. Ah well... back to work.

Cafe on Google Plus

2013-05-17T06:05:00.000-07:00

It seems that Google Plus is really taking shape as a serious player in the world of social media. If you haven't investigated it recently, you might take a look.

The ChantCafe has a community that anyone can join and you are free to post there. It would be nice to get more members and more activity.