That was then, this is now

mmeladirectress

Another thread gave a link to a 1934 issue of The Caecelia and I couldn't help browsing through it. I was interested to see this:

"In her Motu Proprio, therefore, the Church mentions and recommends by name no other styles than the monodic and polyphonic which are both entirely melodic. She is willing to admit a modern style if it is artistic and conforms to her liturgical laws (Motu Proprio par. 5). But she will regard it as true church music only when it approaches the melodic "Gregorian form in its movement, inspiration and savor". (Motu Proprio, par. 3). Apparently the Church aims at raising the taste of the community of the faithful to the best that art has to offer and not lowering the technique of her artistic treasures to fit the uneducated mentality of the man in the street. She knows, indeed, that the mind of man is receptive when placed in the proper educative environment. "

Incardination

Thank you for this quotation. Perhaps influenced by a background in education, I very much see the mission of the Church as a whole and of a parish choir in particular to have an educational focus. I tell my choir that we have two goals that define our mission - increasing the honor and glory of God through our participation in the Liturgy, and drawing souls to Christ / the Church. (Ad Magnam Dei Gloriam and Da Mihi Animas, Cetera Tolle respectively.)

Our secondary goal revolves around education... internally so that we more efficiently and more ably sing the music that provides the setting for the Liturgy, drawing both from internal and external resources (as in collaboration with other parish choirs); externally to other musicians - the above collaboration should work in both directions; and externally to members of the congregation (Catholic or not) to illustrate truths of the Faith while elevating awareness of the highest caliber of liturgical music that we are able to do with reasonable success.

Apparently the Church aims at raising the taste of the community of the faithful to the best that art has to offer and not lowering the technique of her artistic treasures to fit the uneducated mentality of the man in the street. Often the battle that we face...

bhcordova

Ah, the old adage is true - 'The more things change, the more they stay the same.'

M. Jackson Osborn

Relevant to the principles laid out in Mme's welcome quote is the matter of origins and associations. Is it enough that genuine church music will adhere to the forms implicit in the Motu proprio, or do we not expect melodic sources and associations to have their origins in sacred chant or the spiritually intelligent mind? With our sensitivity and just aversion to the secular forms and styles which have been brought by many into our churches in the present era, how would we have reacted to masses and motets that were unabashedly based on secular lays in the age of polyphony? We know that this was commonplace and, people being people, was very likely welcomed by them as 'sacred entertainment' (if I may coin a term), perhaps even relieving them of the tediousness of keeping their focus on the ineffable act of sacrifice. We, with our anti-secular sensitivities, had we lived then, would have frowned upon the very masses and motets which we today welcome into sacred repertory because of the beauty of the musical creation and the fact that its original secular associations do not register on us. Had we lived then, we being who we are, would not have approved. Indeed, our attitude would likely have been that expressed in the famous rant against the corruption of sacred chant, disguising it in frivolous new-fangled musical procedures, of Pope John XXII, which seems to have been a dead letter before its ink was dry. In short, if our principles are true (and, they are true), then we would be as put out over a mass based on a mediaeval or renaissance secular ditty such as l'homme arme as we would some clever fellow's wonderfully crafted polyphonic mass based on a song of the Beatles. Further, I would suggest that people being people, a secularly inspired music at mass was then, as it is now, a welcome diversion for an otherwise inattentive and perhaps otherwise disinterested mind.

Incardination

Personally, I think there is a balance that I'm not picking up on in your post. The Church has frequently adapted things that have had secular (or even pagan) origins to illustrate the Faith more fully. If the "original secular association" no longer registers, it is hard to argue against using a particular Mass or motet that does not - apart from that association - contravene boundaries of sacred liturgical music. I understand the point you are making, and to an extent agree, at least in-so-far as that the fundamental principles are true and should be observed consistently.

M. Jackson Osborn

Well and indisputably stated, Incardination. Which leaves us rather speechless, doesn't it, when it comes to discouraging betrothed couples from wanting Lohengrin on the basis of its pagan operatic origins (of which most are blithely ignorant), and Mendelssohn on the basis of it's being fairy music for a stage play, to which many modern couples might well say 'we don't know about that, we just like it'. There must be more to this than the lack of 'association'. Perhaps, in another generation or two when the Beatles are no longer a household fascination we can have masses based on their music because its original associations have become a lost currency? But then, after all, when des Pres' l'homme arme mass was fresh its secular references were also quite fresh - otherwise, what would have been the point? Indeed, its secularity was the point! - just as it is now with secular genres in our modern masses. The very point in sacro-this-that-and-the-other genres in our masses is the avoidance of genuinely ecclesiatical music. The secular 'associations' are fresh, conscious, and preferred.

StimsonInRehab

Another thread gave a link to a 1934 issue of The Caecelia and I couldn't help browsing through it.

I was doing just the same thing. Great stuff. Other items caught my interest as well:

-Fr. Finn's article on the recent death of Edward Elgar, and his opinions towards church music. "I know that SIr Edward was unhappy in the knowledge that though the King knighted him and raised him to a baronetcy, the Church took no cognizance of him." Yet, he later mentions: "Sir Edward did not identify himself with the movement undertaken by Pope Pius X to make Church music a real asset to religion. At least I have never noted any significant undertaking on his part in this field. I know, from personal experience, that it was difficu}t to interest him, from this side of the water, In Catholic music." Oh, Sir Eddie, you grumpy old lapsed Papist!

-Some great articles on Boellman, and on the use of Ave Maria as a polyphonic motet. In particular, I'm digging the argument for Victoria's authenticity by the author from the argument that "it could only have been written by a master of the first rank of polyphony." At the same time, he finds "Jesu Dulcis" by the same author spurious. The foibles of attribution, I tells ya.

-Prof. Mahrt, what would need to happen for future issues of Sacred Music to include full musical selections?

Incardination

Excellent points, all. Very helpful, MJO, to have you identify particular examples. I have likely been seen as being on both sides... I remember one situation where an organist argued earnestly against using the Mozart Ave Verum - felt that the "chromaticism was too modern an element" for sacred music. On the other hand, I've had people not understand why I won't use "Away in a Manger" (or more correctly, in this conversation, why I won't use Pie Iesu by A. L. Webber).

You are quite right - the association for most people regarding the wedding marches is something that frequently needs to be explained rather than a connection that is more automatic.

Jeffrey Quick

The Caecilia at that point was being published by McLaughlin & Reilly, who were basically using it as a house organ to advertise their wares. There is no current publisher of equivalent size who would print anything acceptable to the CMAA. I'm not saying that advertising deals couldn't be struck with the likes of CanticaNova, ccwatershed or indie composers, but it would be a way different matter.

Re Elgar: his career as a liturgical composer ended before Tra le sollecitudini. Perhaps he would have been too busy with big works even if TLS hadn't discouraged him.

One of the beauties of Caecilia were the new reposts from hither and yon (though not so much Yon). That's more of a Net thing now.

dad29

"chromaticism was too modern an element"

Well, perhaps Mozart chromaticism was too modern--so how about going back another ~100 years and using Bach's??

CharlesW

Forget Bach - LOL. Not even remotely Catholic.

I wonder, really, how much of a link exists in the minds of non-musicians, between selections such as the Wagner wedding march and the pagan settings of his operas in general. All those things were written a long time ago and they are now just pieces of music.

Unfortunately, while the Baroque-ophiles were waxing poetic about the glories of Bach and company, the public lost interest in anything "classical" whether Bach or Elgar. I have used an Elgar piece or two with my choir, and they were far superior to the Haugen/Haas drivel all too common today.

M. Jackson Osborn

Charles' argument as to operatic borrowings and such being 'just pieces of music' to most people nowadays is disappointing. While much of what is requested for church use by musically unlettered individuals is indeed 'just a piece of music' which they happen to like, this music most certainly is not (and certainly should not be) 'just another piece' to us, who are the guardians of the Church's musical treasury and responsible for the sensibility of what music is performed within the Church's rites. By Charles' argument one could happily oblige a couple who wanted Die Fahne hoch as a wedding processional because they just happened to think it was just the thing they were shopping for for a wedding. After all, by now, Die Fahne hoch is hardly heard of by any of the populace, is rather smart sounding, has a catching gait, and can be (for certain sorts of folk) even thrilling. It just so happens that Die Fahne hoch ('The High Banner') was the anthem of the Nazi party. But, no matter, by now it is, in Charles' words, 'just a piece of music' and... why burden folks with explanations.

Dear friends, it doesn't matter what 'people' do or don't know, the associations they fail to make do not matter. What matters is that we know, that we have a conscience about what we play or direct, and we are responsible before God for what music graces his worship, glorifies his temple; and, further, that we teach people what they don't know! I suppose that for those who do church music as a 'gig' (oh, how I ~~detest~~ loathe that word!) can absolve whatever excuse they have for a conscience and simply play what is requested because it is 'just a piece of music' devoid of any but a self-referential connotation. But!, those of us who do church music as a sacred vocation have a duty to be more circumspect, more respectful of ourselves, our people, and of God's house. It is our sacred business to 'know' that very little of music is 'just a piece of music'.

CharlesW

I have concluded that life would be simpler if all the wedding participants would just go away and live in sin, but that's another matter. I haven't heard anyone ask for the Wagner Wedding March in nearly 20 years. It seems to have fallen out of favor, perhaps because of the parodies attached to it. For example, the kids sing "Here comes the bride, big fat and wide..."

Now for the practical side of things, I detest weddings. Most of the folks getting married don't know the difference between one piece of music or another, much less styles of sacred or secular. This is the world as it is. This is also the church as it is.

Besides, we all know that the only Nazis are Republicans.

M. Jackson Osborn

This is the world as it is. This is also the church as it is.

It isn't, Charles, that your analyses are anything but generally correct. It's that you seem to think it appropriate not to correct, teach, to redeem what is amiss just because it 'is the world as it is'. This was not God's answer. It wasn't Jesus' answer. And it isn't supposed to be our answer. Ignorance is to be taught. It is never to be suffered to teach or to dominate - whether it is 'the world as it is' or 'the church as it is', God's initiative and our response is to do all in our power to conform it as how we may to God's vision.

CharlesW

I do what I can, Jackson. You are fortunate to be in something of a rarefied atmosphere where you don't have to deal with what musicians in NO parishes endure. Makes being opinionated that much easier, I would think. I fully understand the church as it is and the unwillingness of American church leaders to do much of anything to fix it.

francis

...musicians in NO parishes endure.

and the rest of us too

M. Jackson Osborn

Lest you think otherwise, Charles, my life has not been without some musical pain. I have played my share of abject trash which I could not escape. I must say, though, that the good has far and away outweighed the bad, and is what I choose to define my career by. I choose not to become cynical. Whether good or bad, though, I have never just chalked it up to it being 'the world as it is' and doing nothing to counter it by whatever means were at my disposal. With patience and respect I have changed many wedding and funeral musics from bad to good - and been thanked for it. Attitude is everything, and cultivating a positive one takes love and respect for self and others, and for what one is doing. It requires a conscious and constant, indeflectable focus on the positive. I am a Platonist. I am and always have been an unabashed idealist who sees things the way they are supposed to be and doesn't surrender to any of this 'just the way it is' stuff. I mean to encourage others along the road, to give them good examples to emulate as how they may.

Walsingham is what it is because it is a Catholic incarnation of all the very best in Anglicandom. This is its and the Ordinariate's raison d'etre. And, it goes beyond liturgy. It is just a way of doing things, liturgy, prayer life, education, thorough catechesis, a state of mind, and much more. Our people expect the best of this patrimony, they love it, our clergy would have it no other way, and our bishop is firmly behind it - or should I say 'is leading the way in front of it'. Getting to where we are today has not been a totally painless progress. Don't think that there haven't been bumps and pot-holes in our road. Our very existence was not always guaranteed. Nor is everything just as it should be: why, we even have to celebrate Epiphany on the nearest Sunday instead of on Epiphany itself. This callous bit of odium seems to be a requirement in lock-step conformity to that warped, nasty, and cruel mentality in Catholic circles that is responsible for such liturgical grotesques - you know who I mean: those grinches in the hierarchy who love to rob people of their heritage. Our people are very displeased at this and are working to change it. This may be 'the Church as it is', but it is not 'the Church as it should be'.

Ted

Does anyone know the number of the 1934 issue of The Caecelia it is taken from? (There are 12 per year.)

ghmus7

MJO, in response to your post regarding the Ordinatiate liturgy: I always got the sense the there were some aspects of the liturgy that were a compromise...for example the insertion of the "Memorial Acclamation", surely a somewhat foreign addition to the Latin liturgy but even stranger in the Anglican one.

M. Jackson Osborn

Quite right, Greg.
Of course, that 'acclamation' is some sort of imposition on the Roman rite as well!
It really interrupts the flow of the eucharistic prayer, and is compounded in its foreigness by the syruppy melodies that it is normally sung to.
An 'acclamation' is by definition a positive and confident affirmation, not the maudlin and saccharine digressions that are sung in most of our churches.
By contrast, the modal melody used in the ordinariate is really quite good.

Welcome to the MusicaSacra Forum!

Categories