Here are some poignant paragraphs from the Introduction; if indeed true, very disheartening and concerning. However, WE have seen the fallout. Yes?

"While the Council was still in session the Consilium for Implementing the
Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy was established. Along with other post-
conciliar commissions it has the task given it by the Council "to put its (the
Council's) decrees into effect as soon as possible." A German canonist, Hans
Barion, surveying the situation in the entire Church, has discussed the Consilium
and its method of organization, its objective and structural peculiarity.
He has noted that the post-conciliar complex of new administrative bodies in
a certain sense is anti-curial.2 Thus the Consilium for Implementing the
Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy appears to be a body opposed to the Sacred
Congregation of Rites, even though the two are connected by a common
leadership...

...Undoubtedly, professional competence has not always been the clear basis
of their selection, and anyone who compares the opinions expressed by the
bishops in the Basilica of St. Peter with the directives issued by the members
of the Consilium cannot escape the impression that a certain selectivity has
been at work in their pronouncements. This sufficiently explains the one-
sided liturgical practices evident since the Council...

...Church musicians, of course, are interested in what factual presentation
was made of sacred music, its schools and associations in the Consilium by
those who are professionally competent. It should come as no surprise that
among the episcopal members of the Consilium not a single authentic professional
musician is to be found, even though in the Basilica of St. Peter during
the Council professionally competent voices on the subject of sacred
music were to be heard among the Fathers themselves. The consultors of the
Consilium were named for the very purpose of providing professional knowledge
to the Consilium, which was then sub-divided into committees with
specific tasks. However, the president of the Pontifical Institute of Sacred
Music in Rome, the president of CIMS, and the president of the International
Federation of Pueri Cantores, all of whom were named consultors by
the Holy Father, are not in fact numbered among the working committees
entrusted with the various musical problems before the Consilium. These officers
of these international church music organizations did not learn the
smallest detail concerning the preparation of the first instruction of September
26, 1964, until the very day of its publication, not to mention the preparation
of the Graduate simplex. Further, they were not once invited to attend
the meeting of the "small group of liturgists and musicians" who, as the secretary,
Reverend Annibale Bugnini, wrote on October 20, 1965, were entrusted
with preparation of the final redaction of the Instruction on Sacred
Music.3 Thus there arose from the obligations of their positions as officers of
international church music organizations the duty to convoke in a study congress
internationally prominent musicologists and composers and their schools
to consider the problems of church music inherited from the liturgical reforms.
In particular, such a congress would have to consider the matter of
professionally representative, constructive proposals to aid an organic development
in liturgical music. These proposals would then be presented directly
to the Holy Father himself. Without the study days in Chicago, the leading Catholic university professors, musicologists, composers and conductors
would not have been heard from at all in the current questions of liturgical
reform and church music. This is especially true since the competent representatives
of professional musicians were excluded from working on certain
projects in the Consilium. The question is why did not the Consilium make
use of these international church music organizations in order to clarify and
solve the problems that faced it. An even more interesting question is why
the Consilium did not make use of the many professional resources, both clerical
and lay, to be found in CIMS, which was established during the Council...

...Quite often in the course of this address the Holy Father alluded to the necessity
of cooperation between the liturgists and the musicians in order that
the historical forces present within the development of the liturgy be recognized
and above all in order that an organic liturgical reform might be made
possible. Unfortunately, one cannot resist the impression that in the present
reform of the liturgy all too often the contribution of musical scholarship is
regarded as annoying, and then even it is often pushed aside altogether. Indeed
this has been carried to the extent that attempts have been made to depreciate
the very place of music in the liturgy. Theories have been advanced
with the help of false historical notions; other theories have been based on
the exclusive consideration of the "ministerial" role of music which reduces
it in practice to a mere marginal position and totally ignores the pars integralis
that music is in the liturgy.6

A word must be said concerning the interpretation of the texts of the Constitution
on the Sacred Liturgy and the other conciliar documents.7 The
connection between the text to be explained and the prevailing intention of
the particular law-giver before the law was issued must remain the authoritative
principle for interpretation. This must be done in accordance with the
canon law.8 In a word, it is the intention of the Fathers of the Council that
must be considered in any interpretation. Further, one is not entitled to pass
over the various clashes of opinion to be found in the documents drafted by
the competent commissions working during the Council, nor can one fail to
note the disputations conducted in the Basilica of St. Peter before the voting
took place on each of the texts that was under consideration.

But when, on the contrary, those in high places in the Consilium established
as a principle for implementing the Constitution that "it is not the letter
but rather the spirit of the Constitution that is important," then more and
more in the liturgical practices of the post-conciliar period deviations from
the true intentions of the Fathers of the Council have understandably appeared.
The shimmering words of that slogan remind the church musician
of much new music that was said to have been written "in the spirit of Gregorian
chant," when in reality most of it could not even be called music.9

Here are some poignant paragraphs from the Introduction; if indeed true, very disheartening and concerning. However, WE have seen the fallout. Yes?

The introduction to this text gives a very clear and contemporary (1968-ish) exposition of the historical roots of the liturgical confusion that permeates the 21st century Roman Catholic Church. This alone makes the Introduction worth studying.

The first three chapters describe the transcendental nature (one, beautiful, good, true) of liturgical music and conclude that these transcendental forces at work in the hearts of Catholic artists/musicians is what will bring back what was lost in the faulty implementation of conciliar directives.

This gives me great hope!

More good stuff...

The art which chooses deliberately to serve the Church is, of course, espe-
cially called to witness for Christ. It must, therefore, participate somehow in
the substance of the Church, i.e., in its immutability in matters of principle
and its flexibility in matters of form. It must always remain a traditional art,
in spite of the complete freedom of its outer form. It must be bound in prin-
ciple by the inevitable requirement of all church art. It must be what we
commonly call "sacred." This sacredness does not consist in fixed formulae
but in the work's general character which represents a certain inner attitude
of its creator. This attitude is grounded in the conviction that the Church is
ruled mystically by Christ Himself, and that the Church is holy in spite of all
her human weaknesses and failings and sins. A work of art is sacred if it is a
revelation of this sublime reign of God and of this intrinsic holiness of the
Church. It is sacred when the ever-present action of God in this world shines
through it, and when it is a reflection of God's holiness, His majesty and
might, His perfection and beauty. A sacred work of art is a Christian work
of art risen to awe — not bathos! It is a work that reveals Christ who as the
"art of the Father" became man and now in His human nature sits at the
right hand of the Father, and who will come again in power and glory to
judge and transform and glorify the world. He ceaselessly celebrates the
heavenly liturgy which can only palely be reflected in any liturgy on earth.
Thus, sacred art is a sensitive, prophetic anticipation of that glory which will
one day outshine and overwhelm all art and make it superfluous.

Eric Werner of the Hebrew Union College, New York wrote this telling and prophetic piece. Here is a Jewish man with great insight! Some of his words are downright scary to read forty years after they are spoken.

III. A Theological Thesis And Its Consequences Conditio necessaria orationis idealis sit concordia sensus, vocis, necnon in- tellectus vel rationis. Sit, ubi autem ista conditio valde rara possit inveniri, nisi in arte musica, non invenitur in cantu vulgari. (Let a necessary condi- tion of ideal prayer be a harmony of feeling, voice, and intellect as well as reason. However, where that condition could be found extremely rarely in musical art, it is not found in the song of the people.)

Since it is stated in Holy Scripture that God desires the heart, we cannot assume that prayer is precluded for the deaf, dumb, paralyzed, etc. Now if their prayer is just as valuable as that of the shouting masses, and if the quiet prayer of women is esteemed just as highly, then our thesis has a special meaning for church music. It certainly is evident that what counts is not the quantity or the volume but the intention and the intensity of the one pray- ing. Now it is precisely in artistic music that this is at its highest. Is there not in the clamor for song by the masses a falsely understood anthropocentricity, which takes cognizance only of the goal hovering before the mind of the one praying, but does not take into account the praise of God, loud or silent, as the highest type of prayer ? After all, the individual supplicatio is on the low- est rung in the scale of values of the various types of prayer; but it happens to be this one which is best understood by the masses.

One more point should be mentioned. One cannot but deplore the thou- sand sources of the misunderstandings which the vernacular tongues will bring into theology and dogma. During the Protestant Revolt when Luther coined the grim prediction, that over the iota relating to 6/xoowtos (homo- ousios) and bpoiovcnos (homoi-ousios) in the Credo, such blood would still have to flow, he was not just prattling. The disorders of the ensuing 150 years with the religious wars in mid-Europe proved Luther right, and they favored the Protestant Revolt, but they tragically broke the unity of the Catholic Church. Why then should we now set out anew with similar dangers? Just who stands behind the forces which are so hotly requesting liturgical singing in the vernacular? Here we arrive finally at the historical kernel of the whole problem.

1. What is the introduction of liturgical song in the vernacular tongues to accomplish ? Allegedly it is a better understanding of the liturgical texts. But in reality it is only an ILLUSION of better understanding. We say this because in their original language most of the texts (with the exception of the read- ings in the Gospel) are highly symbolic and they demand of the reader of the Latin texts a very considerable theological and philosophical background. When these texts are translated into the vernacular, they represent only an impoverished, cold facade, which hardly permits an intimation of the mar- vels which lie behind it.

2. Singing in the vernacular satisfies two groups, which, even though at first sight they seem to be worlds apart, have nevertheless much in common: they are "nationalists" and the protagonists of the so-called "underdeveloped" na- tions, and their missionaries. Now the common denominator of both of these is fundamentally an infantilism which applauds the liturgical use of the ver- nacular as a victory for nationalism and is thereby much flattered. This in- fantile national pride has today reached the point of a sort of substitute or ersatz-rtligion and it ought to be kept in check very cautiously by the Church, which after 2000 years has surely profited by experience. It is to be taken for granted that the Church has experienced — and to her own detriment — that she never gains when the bishops of belligerent nations bless their respective weapons. This nationalism is a product of the nine- teenth century, of the industrial revolution, and of the imperialism to which it gave birth. The dangers of indifference, on the other side of nationalism, are well known today, and every man of Western culture who thinks seri- ously is especially conscious of this. But behind the Iron Curtain, national Bolshevism holds sway, which was very adept at uniting the dogma of Communism with nationalism and has manufactured for itself so dangerous an instrument of propaganda. Now really, is the Church to go along with such a bloody nonsense ? And finally in all this nationalistic mischief there is ques- tion of the aftermath of the liberal stupidities of the nineteenth century, especially of the Risorgimento, which in Italy unfortunately also infected the Church.

I had heard of this book and even happier to find it online. Thanks for the quotes. I hope at some point someone will start piecing together a history of these years into one volume. At this point, there are just bits and pieces available. Am reading Lauren Pristas' book on the collects. A mind-blowing read, in my opinion.

No, only the hardbook.

a bit by Joseph Lenards.

"For the moment we are confronted with an overload of songs which qua
text and melody are far below the mark. These are products from second-
rate poets and composers, which like an onslaught of locusts darkens the sky,
and are forced upon the people by dilettante leaders without ever having
asked the advice of an expert. The Church, which had always been the
guardian of what is beautiful, has now rather become a mishmash garret for
all kinds of mediocrities, as a Netherlandic composer remarked the other
day.
This has grieved church musicians. They are not against liturgical partici-
pation by the people in the vernacular, as we were assured.13 On the con-
trary, they are prepared to make a positive contribution by way of loyal im-
plementation of the Constitution, provided that this does not take place in a
one-sided manner. But they do regret the musical inexperience of many of
the proponents of the renewal, who obstinately go their own way without
any respect for tradition, as if we now had to begin anew from a musical
zero-point.14 "

and continues...


GREGORIAN CHANT AND LITURGICAL SINGING IN THE VERNACULAR
currence of identical settings for sentences of identical structure, that is, of
melodic models and formulae. It is very much to the point to note in this
context that these melodies too will adapt themselves to the little peculiarities
of the individual text quite closely, so that they will seem to have been com-
posed for this very text. This holds true unqualifiedly, however, of the older
compositions only. In them, formulae and also centonization are utilized in a
masterly fashion. This mastery has been lost gradually in the course of the
Middle Ages. It is true, that modern musicology has discovered the basic
principles of the unity of word and tone which it can explain in theory, but
in practice it succeeds no more in creating an equivalent. Quite often me-
lodic elements have been juxtaposed too much in Beckmesser's manner,
when new texts were to be set to music. These attempts, however, have
failed to recover the whole organism.
Obviously, it would be rather difficult to adapt the Gregorian melodies, the
genesis of which we have been outlining, to vernacular texts or to imitate
them for that purpose. Accents and emphases of living languages are gov-
erned by different laws. Of course, they may be fixed and stylized too. But
today singing is no more the same as speechmaking, whereas in antiquity
every delivery of a speech was singing or something close to it. Therefore,
there were more possibilities of stylization at that time, because speech and
singing kept close together. The melody of our speech still has to be ex-
plored. Speech is disintegrating rather than conforming to a common de-
nominator, which would be generally accepted and sustained. In the age of
broadcasting, however, there is a tendency to simplify and to reduce the in-
flections of voiced speech, which thus is approaching gradually a formalized
intonation pattern susceptible of melodic classification. At present, melodists
should try to define this pattern, and in doing so they would be walking in
the footsteps of Gregorian chant without becoming its imitators.
b) Listening to the tonal tendencies and patterns of the living language,
however, is not enough. Discernment of the liturgical act to be served by the
sung word, that is, both of the characteristics of the individual liturgical situa-
tion and of the purpose of singing in this situation, belongs also to the style
to be discovered and developed under the prevailing circumstances. I do not
intend to treat here in detail the general qualities of liturgical singing,
namely, that it is both worship of God and worship by a congregation, wor-
ship which is to be, as it were, "prophetical" for both partners. Singing,
therefore, originates from the spirit of God and from the answering heart of
man, kerygma and prayer at the same time, charismatic in virtue of its ori-
gin, rational in virtue of its form, and in this respect apt to be understood
and participated in by everybody, listener and singer alike. I should like to
165
SACRED MUSIC AND LITURGY REFORM AFTER VATICAN I,
concentrate just on the stylizing effect of the "liturgical function." It has
played an essential part in shaping Gregorian chant and its genres and con-
tributed decisively to its usefulness, spanning time and space. Of course, if
the liturgical function is to play a part in determining the style of the new
singing in the vernacular, it has to be recognized as such at the outset. The
diversity of the duties and their performers is not just an historical value, but
it deserves to be maintained also under present-day conditions, even under
more modest ones.
The individual liturgical act will decide the questions: Who is to sing?
What, when, and where is he to sing ? Although the liturgy is a community
act, it is distinguished by degree and order. The fully developed liturgy of
the Mass calls for an officiating priest, a deacon, and a subdeacon as a first
group, for a precentor with a choir as a second, and for the people as a third
group of active participants. Each of these groups is called upon to sing: the
priest has to sing the prayers at the altar; the deacon and the subdeacon the
kerygmatic texts of the epistle and the gospel; the choir and the cantors
have to sing the accompanying or the meditative chants of the church year;
the people, the acclamations and, if possible, the invariable chants of the Ordi-
nary. Thus, High Mass proceeds in a continuous change. Not all participants
are always sharing in the same activity; for all groups, Mass is a complex of
listening and singing, receiving and acting. But the individual chant is al-
ways fully commensurate both to the group to whom its execution is entrusted
and to the function it has in the course of the Mass. The Roman liturgy has
succeeded in finding the adequate form for each genre of liturgical singing.
The antiphonal chants, for instance, which accompany an action, differ in
form from the responsorial ones, which serve a different purpose. Even cho-
ral psalmody at Mass differs from that of the Divine Office. The chant com-
posers had developed an exceedingly sure feel for such stylistic and formal
differences. A similar feel for style and form should be searched out in our
time too. I believe that we do not lack the talent altogether, since we will
sense any violation of this functional style.
Things are different, though, when the liturgy of the Mass cannot unfold
completely, but has to be accomplished under modest conditions without a
choir and even without a cantor, that is to say, when an unaided congrega-
tion has to assume responsibility for the chants not sung by the officiating
priest. In this case omissions will be a better answer to the problem than sty-
listic reduction of all chants to the same form and mode of execution.
It would be an impoverishment of the liturgy, if its vernacular garb would
imply in principle the loss of those differences. Plainer forms should always
be provided for the people, more elaborate ones for the cantors and the choir.
166

Can't bear to read any more at the moment. Too depressing.

Wow, Francis, what’s left of my mind is reeling from that litany of posts and their contents.
•

It would be a mistake to give in to the temptation to discard it
now as not up-to-date and outmoded or as music fit for men of letters only.
This also would be against the express injunction of the Church. Any cen-
sure to the contrary would be tantamount to restraining and choking live po-
tentialities. It may be unpleasurable to have to face Gregorian chant as a
norm, but we should endure it. Imitations will not do. Genius and skill need
deeper roots, and a universally accepted voice culture requires the same pa-
tience and effort as agriculture — and God's blessing in due time.

This summation, which by its proximity to your statement of depression, sums up a sort of self-imposed state of dichotomies by its author’s own scaffold of premises. The “temptation” to resign and walk away isn’t really prompted by dating that is (great pun) “outmoded” nor fit for “men of letters” alone, though the sheer weight of the author’s rhetoric is literally prohibitive. No, the impulse towards resistance or abandonment is sewn into a corset of conditions that are unyielding. There is no quarter given to vernacularism employing chant. In fact, it is portrayed, if I understand the dialectic correctly, as just as vulgar (another pun) as any other musical forms in the Roman Rite, unworthy if not anathema. (Lord, to whom shall we go?)

I cannot imagine anyone here reading with positive purpose disagreeing that the censure of “Gregorian” chant is a welcome outcome of whatever processes that make its acquisition and realization “unpleasurable (sic).” But are we to join you in your depression (I’m personally overwhelmed as well) because the task is daunting if not impossible? The little edict “Imitations will not do” hamstring us and inevitably require a “genius and skill” that will be relegated to “men of letters only.”

Lastly, I wonder about the irony of the comparison of the cultivation of this “universally accepted voice culture” requiring patience and effort of agriculture. Maybe medieval agriculture, of the sort that still thrives in some monasteries as does Latin chant. But if the author wants to travel through California alone and all its myriad agricultural vistas, patience may remain a natural virtue, but effort is radically changed through mechanization, systematic efficiency, the application of scientifically generated advances in all aspects of ag, etc.

Where is the joy?

Yes, it is quite a read.

But I have been going through this depression... ironically, since the day I first showed up for the first CMAA colloquium in my life's very late year of 2005. I declared to them all (47 at that time, like Christians hiding in a catacomb) WHERE HAVE YOU BEEN ALL MY LIFE?! I have been wandering in the proverbial dessert all by myself taking on packs of marauding bandits on VII camels for decades!

When I learned about what I had actually been deprived of for all those years, I nearly cried. That is when the depression hit me that I had lost much of my life to confusion, ignorance and the GREAT THIEF and LIAR himself. I had been isolated (but not picked off.) I was then determined to steal the camel BACK from the bandits, get on the beast myself and rebrand MY brigade "Musica Sacrae".

The depression hits every once in a while when I get thrown from the camel by the crafty devils and I realize how little I truly know and have experienced about "those who worship in Spirit and in Truth." So when I read things like this and get ever so small a glimpse of 'musical heaven' and the rich patrimony that has come so far for so many centuries and to realize I have been utterly deprived to take part in its experience, the pain in my heart and soul is almost too much to bear.

Where is the joy? I know right where it is, and I am still riding through the dessert to get there.

scholista:

I saw that and thought, "I gotta read that book!" Let me know how it goes.

Coincidentally, one of my first posts on this forum was about how our hymnals (from the big three) were Trojan Horses bringing in error, heresey and confusion. Interesting analogy, and quite accurate.

BTW... I finished the "orange book" ... all I can say is, Bugnini and his cronies are in SERIOUS trouble with God.

The entire professional (musical) ecclesia was unanimously SHUT OUT of the whole mess. At the end of the book was one testimony and refutation after another about the hijacking... It was as OLOF predicted... wholesale abandonment of the Faith and the Liturgy. Wow. Unnnnnnnnbelievable!!!!

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2010/10/bugnini-i-am-the-liturgical-reform/

I'll just leave this here...

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2008/04/america-magazine-bp-trautman-reviews-a-challenging-reform-of-piero-marini/

Yes, Francis... Having recently read Marini's book, I can attest that it is indeed an interesting read, as also noted by Bishop Trautman in his review.

Fr. Jim:

We would be interested to see Bishop Trautman's review. Can you direct us to that?

Ah, yes. My mistake. Thanks irishtenor.