The fact that Gregorian chant is in Latin is enough for me to call it "Western." "Eastern" ritual traditions adopted other liturgical languages. Whether or not GC was influenced by musical sources outside of the West does not diminish the fact that it grew up as part of Latin liturgy.

Yes, there was cultural interchange. The word "Western" doesn't negate that.

I'm baaaaaaaaaaack! Lost a day in the fray of life here. You will all have to listen once again to my rantings, one who is "fundamentally Catholic" to the core. I am not worthy of that compliment, but nonetheless, I will speak in defense of Holy Mother Church if God so chooses me to do so.

First, thank you, Mia, who so beautifully and humbly expresses so poignantly what it means to be Catholic. She hits this one on the head squarely and is a much more perfect example than I could possibly be.

This discussion got severely sidetracked. I say this because GC is not about 'Western' or 'Eastern' or 'Northern' or even Southwinderly, people. The fact is, Jesus commanded us to go into all parts of the world and teach them. The faith isn't just bible verses (found in the heresy of sola scriptura), and it is not just a 'rite' that can be excoriated like skin from an animal and worn outside the body (as schismatics do). That is what wolves in sheep's clothing are all about.

No, the Catholic faith is One, whole, complete, with nothing lacking. It is the Word of God inseparably linked to our traditions, bound and intricately woven with the magisterium. This is what the Holy Family means. It is our devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary, who is the presence of the Church on earth. She is the dispenser of graces, and no grace comes to anyone unless it comes through her. All of her children created the traditions, the vestments, the music, the buildings, everything down to the spoons that put incense on the coal... and ALL of those things are inseparably bound to the Church, her tradition and her practices.

THIS is why the Church is the Church, and what she teaches is Supranational - She is above all nations because God ordained it so. No sociological teaching or geographical influence is going to change the universality of The Faith. The Church exists irrespective of culture, language, skin color, geographical location, time or space. It is immune from fancy or novelty. It assumes to herself the things that her children bring and she disowns those who do anything to destroy her. She treasures the talents, creations and wishes of Her children, those who are fully immersed in her interests and her pleasures.

Those who don't understand this truth and argue against it are those who refuse to participate in her undertakings, promote her doctrine and try to tear the fabric off of the Christ which she herself has made for Him, just as the brigands did on Calvary. To be Catholic requires conversion of one's heart, mind and one's entire will must be fully submitted to it, without reserve.

The debate here was about the universality of one aspect of Mother Church. Her music. However, it is clear that some do not understand the spiritual mystery of the seamless garment of the Christ of which I am explaining. It cannot be divided without spoiling it. Neither can the things of the Church be divided thus either.

I now also here will express my rebuttal and total rejection of Adam's casting doubt on my qualifications. If anyone is qualified to speak about the universality of the Church and her traditions, it is first given to her children who are devoted entirely to her. Those are her elect, and those who are consecrated to her sole purpose of spreading the Gospel of her Son Jesus Christ, in every aspect.

In order to do this I give you the words of the Saint of whose order I am a member, and then following that those of Jesus to His Church on how they are to bring the world under His sovereignty.

"Finally, God in these times wishes his Blessed Mother to be more known, loved and honoured than she has ever been. This will certainly come about if the elect, by the grace and light of the Holy Spirit, adopt the interior and perfect practice of the devotion which I shall later unfold. Then they will clearly see that beautiful Star of the Sea, as much as faith allows. Under her guidance they will perceive the splendours of this Queen and will consecrate themselves entirely to her service as subjects and slaves of love. They will experience her motherly kindness and affection for her children. They will love her tenderly and will appreciate how full of compassion she is and how much they stand in need of her help. In all circumstances they will have recourse to her as their advocate and mediatrix with Jesus Christ. They will see clearly that she is the safest, easiest, shortest and most perfect way of approaching Jesus and will surrender themselves to her, body and soul, without reserve in order to belong entirely to Jesus.

Lastly, we know they will be true disciples of Jesus Christ, imitating his poverty, his humility, his contempt of the world and his love. They will point out the narrow way to God in pure truth according to the holy Gospel, and not according to the maxims of the world. Their hearts will not be troubled, nor will they show favour to anyone; they will not spare or heed or fear any man, however powerful he may be. They will have the two-edged sword of the word of God in their mouths and the blood-stained standard of the Cross on their shoulders. They will carry the crucifix in their right hand and the rosary in their left, and the holy names of Jesus and Mary on their heart. The simplicity and self-sacrifice of Jesus will be reflected in their whole behaviour."

St. Louis de Montfort

"And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth. Going therefore, teach ye all nations: baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you. And behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world." Matthew 28:19-20

(and that includes her music! ;-) )

It is difficult to maintain fruitful dialogue when one partner believes that he is infallible.

Francis,

You haven't challenged anything I said, and that's why I have a problem with your self-righteous implication that my understanding of the faith is flawed. My position is based on historical fact. Your position is based on interpretation of doctrine (however dubious or not it may be). The two are not incompatible, but you seem to think they are. It's as simple as that.

Gregorian chant can be "Western" and "universal" at the same time, though I would argue that its "universality" is not, as you argued earlier, because it is part of some "Ur-church" ("the tree") as you put it, because there is no "Ur-church," only the people comprising it.

If we want to look for Jesus as a way of thinking about the Church's relationship to culture, consider that Jesus was a Jew, born into human history, culture, language, skin color, geographical location, time, and space. It doesn't seem beyond the scope of "logic" (another culturally embedded construct that you present as somehow unquestionable) to suggest that the Church might also be integrated seamlessly with human history.

Doug:

I have challenged you to the core. Otherwise, your core wouldn't be shuddering at me like it is.

I am not being self righteous any more than you are. I believe what I believe, and so do you. I do not engage in attacks on character or persons here. But that seems to be the recourse at times on this forum when the discussions get heated. I never said your understanding was flawed. That was your own conclusion. Your position is based on historical knowledge. OK... I grant you that. Mine is based on historical knowledge, study and research, AND personal experience actively living the Catholic Faith for 56 years. But its not that simple.

Gregorian chant had SOME western roots. But that is indifferent to the point. It has become the universal language and music of the RC Faith, and that is an unchanging fact.

I am not familiar with the Ur-church concept, but as far as the lineage goes, its called the Tree of Jesse. When Jesus came along, it became a supernatural tree unlike any other, and it will become the central tree in the garden of paradise when we revisit that location at some point in time (or beyond).

I totally agree with you on the last point. The Church is completely integrated seamlessly with with human history. That is the beauty of God being made man.

Francis,

"Gregorian chant had SOME western roots. But that is indifferent to the point."

For me that was the only point. I guess we were just talking about two different things.

The original title of the topic is, "GC not European, but universal." As the discussion continued, we collectively worked out that "European" was a poor label, but that "Western" might be a little more comprehensive, though still imperfect. None of this takes away from universal. It seems that we both agree that the dichotomy is false.

And I recanted as soon as Ian questioned me, because I hadn't read the passage very well. I thought he was talking about the music, irrespective of its liturgical elements.

BTW, I would still stand by my original thought--seen in a different context--that claiming any music, qua music, is "universal" is akin to idol worship. My Beethoven example illustrates the kind of idol worship that I am referring to.

You have stretched my understanding, too, Francis, and I appreciate that. I can do without the finger wagging tone, however, and I don't mean that as an assault on your character.

Finger wagging... not sure what you mean... I am just overboard about what I believe. A fundamentalist... I guess that is what you mean... sorry... my passion for what I believe is hard to contain.

Doug said:

The original title of the topic is, "GC not European, but universal." As the discussion continued, we collectively worked out that "European" was a poor label, but that "Western" might be a little more comprehensive, though still imperfect. None of this takes away from universal. It seems that we both agree that the dichotomy is false.

When the term 'European' is used to describe GC, it is an assault to minimalize or pigeonhole the universality of GC... so to exchange the term' Western' is the same assault, just spelled differently. Where the flower was origanlly planted (The Jesse Tree) and where its seed is carried after it blooms (The Supranational Roman Catholic Faith) are two completely different ends of the same plant. The root was hidden in the earth for a long period of time, was less known and came to light once the seed had gone global. Actually, Came to be THE LIGHT would be more accurate, or finger wagging, perhaps?

Gotta go serve the liturgy in music and sing a little GC (western style... wyoming, that is!)... will return!

Having asked a question I’ve been lurking here, scratching my head at the heat generated by this issue. It seems pretty straight-forward to me. Yes, Gregorian chant (as opposed to some of its more ancient antecedents, perhaps) is European in origin, as a matter of fact. Equally, its central place in our liturgical tradition transcends its culture of origin, which is as distant from modern Europeans as it is from modern Americans. I don’t see a problem with this. Or does the discussion actually reflect the wider debate in a relatively young country, populated by people from all over the world, about the nature of culture?

Another thing occurs to me. Doug (correct me if I am wrong) looks at these things for most part, through the eyes of a historian. Hence the dissection and reduction to facts. For those of us who treat these things as sacred objects of our faith it is an entirely different matter. The GC tradition is not unlike the sacred vessels we use in the Mass.

You are right, Francis. Maybe if I read the article it would occur to me that there are some who do use the words "Western" and "European" as an assault on the Church. I am not one of those people, and I don't appreciate the insinuation that I am.

Second, I don't see historical objects and sacred objects of faith as being two separate categories that never overlap--take Jesus, for example. We are able to ask different questions about these things. The nature of the things themselves, the nature of the questions, and our own perspectives as individuals will shape our answers. As an individual and though I am Catholic, I don't purport to speak for the Church; I can only point to evidence, sometimes offered by history and sometimes offered by the Church, and hope that this evidence offers clues to help me (or us) answer questions we are asking.

Third, I agree with Ian on all his points. The liturgy transcends culture, but I would add that as a human endeavor it simultaneously lives within culture. How we want to "deal" with that is a big question. Some, usually progressives, evidently believe that liturgy should "reflect" the culture of those participating in it. Others, usually hard-line traditionalists, evidently believe that culture should play no role in liturgy, as if there is no room for culture to give anything to the Church. I don't feel strongly one way or the other, because I am sympathetic to aspects of both sides. The Church, throughout its history, has been sympathetic to both sides as well.

Lastly, I do not understand why some would ever deny the value or the existence of "culture," which gives the world, and the Church, a wonderful richness.

Ian, I think you bring up why GC is not universally accepted by members of the Church. It is foreign to everyone. My experience today certainly bears that out. The Mass I attended was packed with contemporary Christian songs and 2 short chant tones during the Eucharistic prayers. I'll write more on this later, but I came away with a new appreciation for chant today. Not a musical appreciation. I always had that. Rather, as I looked around a packed church and saw virtually no one singing, I thought that here is the opening finally. You see, we complain about the OCPs and GIAs of the world, but more and more churches are adopting Protestant practices of "worship leaders" singing CC songs straight off the radio. Today was the Baptism of Our Lord and every "hymn" was performed by a group (a very good one I should admit). At first I thought, OK, this is quite competent and God-directed, unlike the usual fare, but it was incredibly shallow from a Catholic perspective and I saw no reason to replace the festal Propers with 4 songs around the theme of "God is awesome". Watch the Cafe for more on this. Anyway, this is fertile ground my friends.

Mary Ann, I agree with your conclusions.

If GC transcends its culture of origin, however, it isn't due to the creators' intentions. It has as much if not more to do with the processes of transmission and reception--created for, given to, and used by Christians in union with Rome during sacred liturgy. A minor quibble, but that was the whole point of my Beethoven example.

I can intend for everything I do to transcend time and place, but that doesn't make it so. Who would believe me if I told them, anyway?

Who are you and what have you done with our Charles?! That was a suspiciously pithy comment... and yet an intersting vein to pursue. :)

I'm familiar with the chain of thirds (pointing to pentatonic) from Dr. Mahrt, but wasn't blessed enough to be with y'all at the intensive. When life settles, I'd love to see the schema. (And yes, I know I still owe you notes from Solesmes, I'm the crummiest correspondent ever.)

MaryAnn, if I remember correctly, Dom Saulnier touched on the pentatonic very briefly on our final day at Solesmes. His book also talks of the pentatonic.

In August 2009 I attempted to put this into exercise format (see attached) — no clue if I reinvented the wheel.

For those of you interested in hearing the modes and examine how they relate to our major and minor scales, go to this treatise which I created a couple of years ago or so:

http://romancatholicsacredmusic.com/modes.html

Doug:

It's not on it, it will be +69 cents sharp, closer to a Bb but not quite, therefore hovering between the two. I think the science is pointing to the fact that these primary tones (VERY close to the pentatonic scale, though not exact) is in fact, a universal phenomenon. It is interesting that Eastern music is based on the same scales.

It would also be interesting to read Musica Universalis! (although I am in the middle of Gradus ad Parnassum at the moment)

(Gosh, I am sorry to say the running away from tonality and its science reminds me of why I left the Peabody Conservatory in the 80's when all the composers had 'moved beyond' the staff and into the realm of experimentation. It included things like prepared piano, atonality, 12 tone rows, soundscapes, prepared tape, waveforms, etc. They used graph paper instead of staff paper.)

(Adam... I do remember my Music History book was called "A History of Western Music" by Grout. Still have it! Do they still call it that, or is the title changed to reflect the global view?)

Adam:

I think the point that we are moving toward is that Western is not particularly universal as much as it really comes down to the harmonic series, upon which both Western and Eastern systems are devised.

The harmonic series also points us back to previous tunings that were utilized before the tempered scale, where the sonorities of the modes were truly unleashed. We really lost this element when all the keys became the same homogenous harmonic texture. What this might then point to is that the earlier tunings were more in line with the actual harmonic series, in particular some of the geometric tunings. Of course then, it becomes really evident that the modes were really not that concerned with intervalic relationships between notes as much as the individual spread of each interval in the specific mode. Is anyone aware of any recordings of this kind of treatment?

Doug:

There are two samples of Takemitsu on Wiki, and they are both highly chromatic and atonal. Perhaps they are not representational of his entire output. Although interesting, probably not a good example or representation of historical Eastern tonalities. Especially considering when he lived. In fact, for me, this draws more on the global phenomenon that was at its height in the 80's (see my note above about my attending the Peabody Conservatory as a student of composition) Sounds almost EXACTLY like some of the work of the students when I was there.

What would be your list of top three historical eastern composers of all time?

OK... looked up Chinese and this is what Wiki had to say:

Chinese musicology
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Music of China

Chinese musicology is the academic study of traditional Chinese music. This discipline has a very long history.

1 Music scales
2 Scale and tonality
3 Source
4 External links

Main article: Guqin
The first musical scales were derived from the harmonic series. On the Guqin all of the dotted positions are equal string length divisions related to the open string like 1/2, 1/3, 2/3, 1/4, 3/4, etc. and are quite easy to recognize on this instrument. The Guqin has a scale of 13 positions all representing a natural harmonic position related to the open string. All musical tunings all over the world are based on this primary system. Afterwards different cultures moved to alternate variations of this harmonic system.

Nope, still the same system. In fact this entry actually confirms my suspicion that the pentatonic scale is built on the harmonic series.

I will have to listen to those.

Yes, the harmonic species are not the same notes we have in the tempered scale. They (the pure harmonics) are the real thing. Hence what I am saying about earlier tunings such as the Pythagorean.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pythagorean_tuning

Very interesting stuff indeed.

I love this! It's all so fascinating to be able to have these kinds of exchanges on this forum from your living room!