Can't wait to read it in its entirety!

I reviewed the draft version of SttL for my bishop (who was one of the few who voted against it). The approved version is somewhat better than the draft version. The principal faults were retained, however: as Dr. Mahrt points out: a fussiness about minor details whilst avoiding fundamental questions such as what constitutes sacred music, and an enshrining of the status quo. It is, on the whole, a disappointingly spineless document.

On the up side, it nullifies MCW and replaces it with nothing binding, thus freeing us to follow Musicam Sacram, if I interpret the situation correctly.

Thank you so much, Jeffrey (and Dr Mahrt,) I'm glad I didn't have to wait for the Spring issue for this.

(Save the Liturgy, Save the World)

Is there a Canadian instruction on music? I'd be interested in reading what it had to say and comparing it to our situation in the states.

When I saw the powerpoint that the USCCB Committee on Divine Worship put together concerning liturgical music, I was hopeful that something would change. However, when the new document finally came out, it was, as Dr. Mahrt seems to indicate, a huge disappointment.

The USCCB had been given its marching orders to adopt a document that would put Liturgicam Authenticam into practice. In fact, that is what the powerpoint indicated Sing to the Lord would do. Unfortunately, members of the NPM and FDLC put up an intensive lobbying effort and derailed the whole thing. The document didn't get the necessary votes to send it to Rome for recognitio by the Holy See and now, we are stuck with Sing to the Lord.

There is a huge misintepretation, as rightly pointed out by Dr. Mahrt, regarding what the documents of the Second Vatican Council said regarding music. The Church does have a musical standard. Pope St. Pius X, in his encyclical on Sacred Music, notes that.
----------------------------------------------------
1. Sacred music, being a complementary part of the solemn liturgy, participates in the general scope of the liturgy, which is the glory of God and the sanctification and edification of the faithful. It contributes to the decorum and the splendor of the ecclesiastical ceremonies, and since its principal office is to clothe with suitable melody the liturgical text proposed for the understanding of the faithful, its proper aim is to add greater efficacy to the text, in order that through it the faithful may be the more easily moved to devotion and better disposed for the reception of the fruits of grace belonging to the celebration of the most holy mysteries.

2. Sacred music should consequently possess, in the highest degree, the qualities proper to the liturgy, and in particular sanctity and goodness of form, which will spontaneously produce the final quality of universality.

It must be holy, and must, therefore, exclude all profanity not only in itself, but in the manner in which it is presented by those who execute it.

It must be true art, for otherwise it will be impossible for it to exercise on the minds of those who listen to it that efficacy which the Church aims at obtaining in admitting into her liturgy the art of musical sounds.

But it must, at the same time, be universal in the sense that while every nation is permitted to admit into its ecclesiastical compositions those special forms which may be said to constitute its native music, still these forms must be subordinated in such a manner to the general characteristics of sacred music that nobody of any nation may receive an impression other than good on hearing them.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Servant of God, Pope John Paul II wrote 100 years later that:
------------------------------------------------
4. In continuity with the teachings of St Pius X and the Second Vatican Council, it is necessary first of all to emphasize that music destined for sacred rites must have holiness as its reference point: indeed, "sacred music increases in holiness to the degree that it is intimately linked with liturgical action"[11]. For this very reason, "not all without distinction that is outside the temple (profanum) is fit to cross its threshold", my venerable Predecessor Paul VI wisely said, commenting on a Decree of the Council of Trent[12]. And he explained that "if music - instrumental and vocal - does not possess at the same time the sense of prayer, dignity and beauty, it precludes the entry into the sphere of the sacred and the religious"[13]. Today, moreover, the meaning of the category "sacred music" has been broadened to include repertoires that cannot be part of the celebration without violating the spirit and norms of the Liturgy itself.

St Pius X's reform aimed specifically at purifying Church music from the contamination of profane theatrical music that in many countries had polluted the repertoire and musical praxis of the Liturgy. In our day too, careful thought, as I emphasized in the Encyclical Ecclesia de Eucharistia, should be given to the fact that not all the expressions of figurative art or of music are able "to express adequately the mystery grasped in the fullness of the Church's faith"[14]. Consequently, not all forms of music can be considered suitable for liturgical celebrations.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

The writings of both Pontiffs and the USCCB document don't jibe. While the document does give welcome advice for planning liturgies such as weddings, it doesn't offer any concrete guidance. In fact, it opens the door for paraphrasing and legitimizes things that were not necessarily good, like the extra tropes that Marty Haugen wrote for his version of the Agnus Dei.

Had the USCCB stuck to its original program and remained steadfast in adhering to Liturgicam Authenticam, I suspect that we would have seen a different and more far-reaching document.

Yes, that is very true. By the way, how do you make the quotes turn blue. I don't seem to have a good grip on how to do this.

I think she might be just a big fan our current pope! ; )

I'm not a Benedictine, unless an order pops up and allows the wearing of bright red lipstick. :)

Heretic!!! (Deep rose is the only color....;o) I actually approached the chalice of the Most Precious Blood once at Mass to see what I'm pretty sure was Cherries in the Snow on the rim....)
It never occurred to me when I spent time at St Meinrad's that lipstick was out of place, in all seriousness, oblates don't observe that kind of austerity, do they?
Sorry this is off topic.
(Save the Liturgy, Save the World)

(By the way, you've been to St. Meinrad?)

I celebrated my 10th wedding anniversary there :o)
My husband had picked me up more than once as a music seminar, or retreat or whatever was over, and admired the beauty of the place, so when our anniversary was rolling around I suggested we find a retreat house, or some such place, that offered "self-guided retreats" (read: you can sleep late, honey,) to spend two days.
He came up with St Meinrad's on the internet, and since I had recently met and become a great admirer of Fr Samuel Weber, (I don't think I'd met any other Benedictines since I was a kid,) I was game.
It was remarkable, just remarkable.
There was a moment walking in the darkness to.... Matins? I guess, where I was almost overwhelmed by how sheerly happy I was to be doing that, to be spending so much time in communal prayer and contemplation.
(I should also admit I'm the laziest person you'll ever encounter, so a large component of the rush of happiness was probably having no obligations to fulfill that day at ALL...)
Did you live near there? (As I recall, you're in Minnesota now, I'm geographically illiterate, but I'm pretty sure that's not commutable....)

Save the Liturgy, Save the World!