Definition of Sacred Music
  • noel jones, aagonoel jones, aago
    Posts: 6,611
    A novel I've been reading includes the statement that popular writing is to entertain while literature is self-centered.
  • Donnaswan
    Posts: 585
    I think that's silly- is Shakespeare self- centered or entertaining? What about Jane Austen? Or the Brontes. Why can't it be both. Many many other examples. Tolstoy, Dostoeyevsky

    Donna
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,508
    Donna, I was with you up to Dostoevesky. Entertaining? That's like saying Wagner is entertaining.

    (Ducks and runs for cover)

    How's this: Sacred music fosters Christian recollection.
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,978
    Sacred music is like the definition of pornography - you know it when you see/hear it. I think most of us could listen to any work and immediately determine whether or not it was sacred.
  • Donnaswan
    Posts: 585
    Kathy- What was I thinking?I spent the past weekend chauffeuring a visiting Russian pianist- that must have been it- we were discussing Russian lit. HAHA- And just to prove your point- he said nobody in Russian has ever finished War and Peace :)

    Donna
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,978
    Some of my middle school students wanted to read "War and Peace" because it is worth over 100 points in the Accelerated Reader program. Reading that one book would exceed their reading point goals for the semester. I told them not to bother. I couldn't even finish that book.
  • Donnaswan
    Posts: 585
    I have, however finished most of Dostoevsky. Do I get points for that? And I did it to be well-read, not for a grade. But I was young and foolish. :)

    Donna
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,508
    I got through War and Peace, but on the other hand I didn't. War and Peace struck me as two things wound together: a philosophy of history, and a love story. We were supposed to read it in college, but I skipped through one of those two strands. Can't remember which one I skipped, actually.

    I can see reading the Brothers K. But Crime and Punishment?

    When did we get the idea that great art had to be depressing?
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,215
    That's Romanticism!
  • incantuincantu
    Posts: 989
    Sacred music is difficult to define, but "liturgical" music is not. In the most strict sense, liturgical music is that which form part of the liturgy. Singing something during a liturgy does not make the music liturgical. It can therefore be said that all liturgical music is sacred music, but not all sacred music (or religious music, or devotional music) is liturgical.
  • Charles in CenCA
    Posts: 2,416
    CtB,
    How could you even type "Sacred music is like the definition of pornography - you know it when you see/hear it."?
    Nevermind that is the "off the cuff" cliche by a Supreme Court justice, it doesn't hold water on its own merits. You could have gone with the "eye of the beholder" maxim and been on safer philosophical ground. But your citation is distasteful due to the unfortunate association.
    As easy as it would be to defend the Kyrie from "Missae Papa Marcelli," citing Persichetti's "Kyrie" would not be easily adjudicated by any panel of "experts" as to whether it meets "your" criteria.
    If we were talking a Kyrie by Crumb, Glass, Bielewa, Dallipiccola, or Cage (as if) you'd stand on firmer ground. But that ain't their raisen duhtruh.
    Take that notion over to "Sex, Cosmos and Liturgy," see what they make of it.
    CtL
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,215
    It might be worthwhile to look at Tra le sollecitudini, for its description of the characteristics of sacred music.
  • Ken of Sarum
    Posts: 406
    WHAT IS SACRED MUSIC TO ME
    1) It always focuses on the Divine and NEVER on the performer.
    2) It has an absolute sense of seeking after the Divine.
    3) It strives for the ultimation of beauty in form, function, organization and structure.
    4) It either suspends time and measurement or strives to, and even though the music itself may be metered – there are degrees to this - plainsong chant does this supremely, followed by higher art forms of sacred music based on plainsong chant and its principles.
    5) It is born out of the absolute silence of reflection on God.
    6) It is divinely inspired and sacrificial - thus it creates, edifies, and uplifts.
    7) It is infused with the Holy Spirit (Inspiration) and becomes a transcendent creation, thus it lives eternally and becomes a part of Divine truth and beauty.
    8) It is the clothing of GOD – His Light and Glory.
    9) It is the love of the heart towards God and God’s response to that love.
    10) As Jesus is the incarnated Word Made Flesh, and God is the absolute essence of all organization and order, so Sacred Music is God’s feelings, thoughts and emotions set in harmonious tone.
    11) It is the very utterances of prayer, praise, thanksgiving, adoration and love of Holiness to Holiness.
    12) It is the tonal / sonic expression between a Holy Triune God, and within the Spirit of God and to and from all creation.
  • vigilate
    Posts: 12
    @Ken of Sarum

    Thank you. That will fuel my meditations this week.
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,978
    More accurately, what is not sacred music is like pornography. You do know it when you hear it. It isn't difficult to hear a piece of genuine sacred music and know exactly what it is - at least for CMAA musicians. Chant is like that, in that it sounds like church music and can't be mistaken for anything else. Granted, some of the congregation may not know the difference. I suspect many do, but they have had their ears assaulted with garbage for so long, they may not be able to make the distinction.

    "Sex, Cosmos and Liturgy?" Never heard of that one. Must be a California thing. ;-)
  • francis
    Posts: 10,819
    I don't know how many of you saw this, but this is the Vaticans letter about concerts which has a general description:

    "The definition of sacred or religious music depends explicitly on the original intended use of the musical pieces or songs, and likewise on their content. It is not legitimate to provide for the execution in the church of music which is not of religious inspiration and which was composed with a view to performance in a certain precise secular context, irrespective of whether the music would be judged classical or contemporary, of high quality or of a popular nature."

    I think the intended venue is a very interesting point. In other words, even if the text is religious or liturgical but the work was composed originally for the concert hall, then the music is not necessarily sacred. It was constructed for entertainment, not for liturgy. It also must be made clear that Sacred Music within the confines of the RC tradition are going to be more exclusive than other Christian denominations. My friends down the street held a concert on Halloween and had an organist perform Phantom of the opera... in the sanctuary. In the RC church that is unacceptable.

    Here's another exclusive issue which I as a composer of sacred music uphold: if the music one composes is for the liturgy of the RC church then it should be set aside and consecrated for that use only. This is my own personal conviction. You wouldn't take an altar cloth or a thurible and use them for secular reasons. Well, the same holds for music that is sacred and set aside and reserved for the Holy Sacrifice. This is why I license my comps and do not sell them. Some I have given away on this forum as gesture of good will. But they are all consecrated to God so please respect their intended use as sacred or religious in nature.
  • miacoyne
    Posts: 1,805
    Ken of Sarum, thank you.
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,978
    Francis, good description. I am in agreement with you.
  • Ken of Sarum
    Posts: 406
    Francis - I agree with you and will add that one to my personal list.

    13) It should be set aside in its intented usage and by its content.
Add a Comment