Somewhere it says that when music that is more appropriate and more sacred is admitted to the liturgy, then the level of the liturgy is also exalted. I guess you could say that there are 'levels of exalted' liturgy. By admitting 'lesser' music, the liturgy is not able to express the more exalted state. Why would we want less?

No one wants less, and the same can be said of other moral choices. In the spiritual life, first we avoid sin. Next, we have to choose the greatest good over lesser goods. We are given clear guidelines on sins to avoid--commandments, catechesis, examinations of conscience. But nobody can tell us what to have for breakfast. There's no law against having a Snickers bar for breakfast. It's fast, it's easy, it's relatively nutritious, and it's not gluttonous if you have just one. Perhaps that's all you have in the house. Circumstances of weakness never justify sin, but they often impel us to choose objectively lesser goods.

Another common example is the choice between marriage and celibacy for the kingdom of God. Marriage is a lesser state, but it can be chosen without sin. Being married prevents an individual from becoming a consecrated religious. Nonetheless, we are told that following "our vocation in life" may be the most important decision we make, and if someone chooses the religious life over marriage for the wrong reason, it could be very perilous for him.

As for music, there are many other considerations besides the objective superiority of one selection over another. There is the ability of the musicians, the desire to elicit singing from an otherwise stubbornly quiet crowd, the fatigue of reusing particular music over and over again (for example, if you need to sing 8 Marian hymns at Masses and Offices every weekday in May). There are also pressures - a pastor's orders, the demands of influential faithful. If we have to choose the best music always regardless of other considerations, why program a hymn at all at the end of Mass? Why not a polyphonic motet?

25. Alma Redemptoris Mater, Solemn Tone ................... 119

This is a perfect example of a far superior antiphon to chant at Mass than any vernacular hymn, but I can't imagine giving it to the people to sing without a very strong choir and a lot of practice with the simpler tones. There's a feeling at the Latin Mass that 45-75 minutes of Latin are nicely ended with simple vernacular devotions - this is what the Leonine Prayers "feel" like.

This particular piece was used for devotions in the past, not for liturgy.

Being in the St. Basil's, I think it was used extensively at Low Masses or as an opening or closing hymn at High Masses.

I also think that if a piece is excluded from the liturgy, it does not fall into the category of "condemned".

OK, I accept that point. But if something is truly "unsuitable" for liturgy and thus excluded by the liturgical law, I would think that a music director is obliged in conscience to resign rather than program it once if asked by a pastor. I don't think "On This Day" falls into that category.

Here's an edition from 1880:


The tune is attributed to Fr. Lambillotte, and according to hymnary.org, the first English version was printed in 1854 in Rohr's Favorite Catholic Melodies. Can anyone find a counterpart in French?

The song is a waltz with syncopations and with chromatic decorations in the manner of sentimental pop songs of that era; the melody also contains a difficult-to-sing tritone (on the word "guiding"). (Good Heavens: the notorious diabolus in musica, associated with words about our Lady's guidance!)

Here's an mp3 file.

Just looking at the pitches physically disgusts me.

I am of the mind that the people don't need to sing the more difficult chants, they can be sung by the choir or cantors.

There are some times when you have neither good choir nor good cantor. But even if you have them you can still program the difficult music throughout Mass and make the last hymn something pious and popular. This is really the point of the custom of having a hymn at the end of Mass, instead of a motet or postlude. "Grosser Gott" is inferior to the Te Deum it attempts to translate, but we sing the former far more frequently than the latter.

It is also good to get the people who can sing in the habit of singing at Mass--especially with new EF congregations there's a certain amount of coaxing required. If they sing "On This Day" one week, perhaps they'll attempt the Gloria de Angelis the next. (And getting people to sing is the reason we are singing the De Angelis instead of the Orbis Factor.)

As regards the last paragraph, I'm not sure what is confusing. Liturgical law obliges.

While I don't have strong feelings one way or another about this song, I have heard both better and worse. I follow the Gavin method. If I don't like it, or don't think it fits, I don't use it.

Beautiful Mother (two verses) is available for download on Onelicense.net and the text has been somewhat modified to avoid children with speech impediments. It's also in GIA's Catholic Community Hymnal. We sing it every Mother's Day Weekend. I didn't mind doing this as much when I noticed that "Bring Flowers of the Rarest" is in the London Oratory Hymnal, so even great hymnals have the occasional lapse in taste.

Hymns mawkish in both text and tune are precisely the kind of treacle the Church does not need at this moment in history. We as Catholics, our identity, our freedom to practice in our lives what we believe, are all being challenged in the most insidious and wicked ways. Our very consciences are being attacked. To argue the validity of this or any hymn of its ilk is to ignore the greater crisis the Church is facing, and to make a mockery of the writings of serious-minded, sensible critics of our age (and previous, for that matter) who warn us against reducing the music of our public prayer, be it the Mass, the Offices or even at devotions to the merely sentimental, at our spiritual peril.

From the standpoint of beauty and true art (criteria that the Church has repeatedly called for in her official documents on music), can we say with intellectual honesty that the poetry of the instant example is true art? In terms of the crafting of the melody and its harmonization does the exaggerated holding of "mother" and "hover" (contrary to what is printed in the music) truly deserve pride of place as a noble and reverent example of devotional poetry and devotional music? I'm not so sure.

I wonder, too, if we don't do a disservice to the cause of music that is true art by either making or blurring the distinction between music for liturgy, music for spiritual edification and music which evokes an emotional state. I'm reminded of the writings of Aristotle and Plotinus (as quoted in Schaefer's book). Aristotle in particular points to the various uses of music: to edify, purify, provide intellectual enjoyment, or to entertain. The point clearly is that not all music is suited to each of these purposes. In our day and age, music that entertains or taps into an emotional state or harkens back to nostalgic or sentimental feelings is confused with music that transforms, edifies and draws one to a more profound spiritual understanding of true joy or that which leads us to the Absolute Beauty of God.

It seems to me that an overly-sentimental attachment to the kind of music reflected in hymns like OTDOBM could easily lead to a profound confusion over that which transforms and edifies, and that which merely promotes or evokes a particular emotional state. It is more than an argument over tastes or even evolving cultural preferences, it is a question of advancing that which will nourish over that which will merely satisfy.

Too much over-analysis of a simple hymn. It's such complications that would make me want to leave church music, were it not for the fame, money, groupies, etc. ;-)

Francis, something truly unsuitable like "Let It Be"--yes. Unsuitable music at liturgy is a sacrilege. Something against my taste, below my standards, something people like to rail against on the Internet--no.

In the post-World War II days and well into the 1960s, On This Day O Beautiful Mother enjoyed such a degree of popularity that it, along with Mother at Your Feet is Kneeling (wedding version) were often requested at weddings, since secular music was not allowed. Of course, both hymns were very well known to graduates of Catholic schools prior to about 1965. One organist (now deceased) in a very large metropolitan church told me that she asked a nun from the large parish school to compose a wedding version of the hymn that would parallel Mother at Your Feet is Kneeling. Here it is:

On this day, O beautiful Mother,
We place our hearts in Thy tender care,
In joys and sorrows, keep us together,
All through our lives, Mary most fair.

Chorus--
Bless us on our Wedding Day,
Bless us as our vows we say,
Keep us close to Jesus and Thee
Then this joy will lasting be.

On this day, O beautiful Mother,
Kneeling to you, we pledge our love,
Guide us and keep us, true to each other,
Watch o'er our lives from heaven above.

Chrism:

I think resigning is throwing in the towel. I was asked to play For Every Season by the Byrds at a funeral once, and I simply said, "I cannot in good conscience, play that piece... you will have to have your own musicians play it", and left it at that. I am still around to guide the people into what is good and right.

I've said it a thousand times and never got an answer: Why is it that "popular piety" is good enough for this, but not good enough for "On Eagle's Wings"?

And among whom (under 80) is "On This Day" popular?

The whole point of the renaissance in sacred music that this forum advocates, is to raise the musical standard above those of popular culture.

That might be the mission of many, but it's not the purpose of the organization.

The CMAA’s purpose is the advancement of musica sacra in keeping with the norms established by competent ecclesiastical authority.

And this is what the competent ecclesiastical authority writes about "popular" song:

The last century, with the renewal introduced by the Second Vatican Council, witnessed a special development in popular religious song, about which Sacrosanctum Concilium says: "Religious singing by the faithful is to be intelligently fostered so that in devotions and sacred exercises as well as in liturgical services, the voices of the faithful may be heard...". This singing is particularly suited to the participation of the faithful, not only for devotional practices "in conformity with the norms and requirements of the rubrics", but also with the Liturgy itself. Popular singing, in fact, constitutes "a bond of unity and a joyful expression of the community at prayer, fosters the proclamation of the one faith and imparts to large liturgical assemblies an incomparable and recollected solemnity

So the above is an ideal: the people singing.

Gavin...for what it's worth I don't think On Eagles Wings is appropriate for Mass either. Devotions yes...Mass...no.

However, there seem to be members of this forum whose only criteria for suitability is whether or not a song is "popular". That being the case, I highly doubt that there will ever be an agreement on which songs are appropriate for Mass and which are not.

Of course the mindset that there are no objective standards is what led to clown Masses and liturgical dancing. But hey let's not make people feel bad by telling them that some songs aren't suited to the liturgical action taking place during the holy sacrifice of the Mass...we wouldn't want to hurt anyone's feelings or anything. That would be mean...

As for myself however, I will continue to do my best to Intelligently foster religious singing by the faithful. Which does not include programming into Mass or devotions songs such as the ones mentioned above.

Post number one hundred thirty one of this thread.
Should we laugh, cry, spout awry 'til we're dead?
What's been advanced, what swept away?
"Lisps" has been banished, PC wins the day.
Meanwhile in Rome, the princes are covered.
Leaks now contained, the Spirit yet hovers.
Tick tock tick tock, the metre is turning.
But in the third world, more mothers start mourning.

Can we be done, this argument folly
or this madness is how we stay jolly.
Rue we will all the chances to sway
Hearts so embittered, yet we chose to "Play."

Thanks, Chrism, for your comments--a beautiful testament to your faith.