Jeff, I definitely disagree good sir. While I love everything that CCWatershed, Musica Sacra, the Chant Cafe, and the like have been doing in renewing the heart of liturgical worship in the Church, I find myself always seeking out a "Both-and" approach to the question of music. So, here we go:

Ok, for one, you say the piano is "too sentimental" - can you elaborate?

Second, the examples you give are examples of musical pieces of a specific genre, played in a specific way that I would agree would not be suitable for the liturgy. Basically I have issue with your examples since I would advocate for the use of piano via the genre of "worship music" (which I know is another topic that has many times been put down by these forums on the basis of "musical form" that somehow objectively is "emotive" and "profane" - which I disagree about)

Further, in my own opinion, I believe the Organ is equally an emotive and sentimental instrument. Music, by its nature, is emotive - it's what man does to express himself when words are not enough, so while I will agree that an extreme and frenzied emotion ought not be triggered via music at mass - I would argue that the liturgy itself is full of "emotion" and ought to give rise to a degree of emotion by its very nature. I often am moved by a beautiful choirs expression of worship or a skilled organists gift at the liturgy. CCWatershed musical pieces often leave a great impression on me because of its beauty.

I guess my point is, this idea of "sentimentality" regarding the piano (and worship music for that matter) does not give justice to the potential the instrument has to offer the liturgy. The organ - if played incorrectly can be equally distracting, offensive, and emotive as any other instrument. I absolutely agree with the Pope's and the Church Councils that give it pride of place when executed well, however I do not wish to stand by and see other instruments like the piano tossed aside either. I'm looking for the Catholic "both-and" - can't we all just get along ;-) Thanks Jeff!

Despite rumors and behaviors to the contrary, He is indeed risen, Alleluia. (Don't ask.)

To your point, dear Jeff, I believe it's a non-starter. Needlessly provocative, particularly at this time of the year.

No nasty emails. Just simple disagreement.

Pius X's prohibition no longer binds. (And his prohibition re women was a dead letter almost as soon as the ink was dry, as indults were quickly and widely given that functionally erased it.)

And, I have certainly encountered showmen/showwomen organists in liturgy.

Moreover, there is modern sacred music that is composed that specifically contemplates piano instead of organ accompaniment, and it's not all "contempo" in style.

To me, this kind of question in the abstract is just a non-starter.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5T7WujWrn7c&feature=related

The church organ is not associated with popular music, so when an organ appears in popular music and is played in a style close to that of church organist, it adds reverence to popular music, but it still remains as popular music.

The piano, harmonica and other instruments can be played by a master and made to sound religious. However, people who lack imagination....and those who have too much...will think bar when those instruments are played.

Much as Paul Ford's posting yesterday of a well arranged setting which sounds Irish Folk. Many people would enjoy it. But it is a popular folk style. It would get attention by many people and it would be requested next year.

The restriction placed upon the choice of music for the EF eliminate this problem.

Popular music styles add pop culture and all that go with it to the liturgy, church is a place to get away from all of that and try to be better than what many of us are.

Surrounding yourself in liturgy....

Jeffrey, I haven't heard anyone in the above discussion suggesting that you don't like the piano. That's totally beside the point. Dr. Mahrt gives reasons, most importantly that the church is not a concert hall. There's a time and a place for each thing. It's a compelling point.

Where are your compelling points?!

I played piano for all my life and still teach it . I love Beethoven, Chopin , Mozart...Jazz on the piano. What would you play on the piano in the liturgy?

I don't use the piano in liturgy (as a rule), but this is out of my own lack of skill at the instrument. I would have no more ethical problem, given the ability, with a Chopin Prelude at liturgy than with the same form written by Bach. (Not to mention Well-Tempered Clavier...) Or perhaps the music of Debussy, which has at times a modality and "savor" reminiscent of Gregorian chant.

The argument that the organ is a "religious" instrument doesn't help much. I recall from last summer studying improvisation with one of the Dutch masters, a student of both Cor Kee and Jean Langlais, who criticized a student's attempts with, "That was too ecclesiastical! It says nothing! If you play like that, your church will rightfully replace you with a fool holding a guitar!" There is indeed a religious style of organ playing - and it sucks.

Last month I had a widow say to me prior to her husband's funeral that he loved the music of J.S. Bach, "but I don't know that I want his wish fulfilled. Bach's organ music is all so dirge-like and depressing!" I told her that she is patently wrong and only an inferior organist makes Bach sound like a dirge, and then played the C Minor Fantasy and a Clavierubung chorale at the funeral - to her great delight!


I propose that both the piano and organ should be played in such a manner that neither sounds inappropriate alongside the other at liturgy. But that is NOT to say that piano ballads are a suitable form for music at liturgy, and I would strongly dispute the piano's suitability for leading congregational song altogether.

I have to admit that I love going to baseball games that where they play organ music. I don't think of the organ as uniquely sacred. I also like to attend organ recitals, so I don't think of the piano as more of a performance instrument than the organ. True, I've never heard an organ played at a cocktail bar, but I don't associate the piano with lounge singers and tip jars.

I tend to agree that I'd prefer not to have piano played at mass. Even played softly, it is too percussive for my taste. The big problem for me is what happens when a choir or congregation is not keeping rhythm or gettting off key and the player ups the volume. A piano played fortissimo (sorry for the oxymoron) is unendurable during mass, and it seems to me that a piano is always played fortissimo either for the reason just mentioned or because its sound can't carry in a big church otherwise. When an organ is played more loudly, the sound isn't so percussive, jarring, and distracting.

I kind of disagree about the timing issue. Except for Good Friday, which I was able to program, there was piano at every service during Holy Week. The pounding away on the piano all week definitely compromised the experience for me, at least. I think that everyone on the site realizes that you can please all of the people some of the time OR some of the people all of the time. It shouldn't be news that some people don't like piano in church, and the reasons, whatever they are, aren't ad hominem. Clearly, people have should be accorded the time to be proud of their work (yes, even those who used piano), but one's pride in work shouldn't rest on the persupposition that everyone in the congregation liked everything that was done.

Charles,

I thank you for your thoughts.

In general, I try to stay away from issues like these.

However, in this case, I merely shared my heartfelt belief, and personal experiences.

May I please ask you (in all sincerity): what is so wrong with doing this?

I shall change the title of the post.

So, based on the instruction Pius X, I would assume you would agree that any use of the timpani would also be excluded from liturgy, including, for instance, music from the Viennese Mass tradition.

JMO, I thank you for the post. It's a good time for me to review and think about how we can improve next year without feeling being criticized. (He is risen, we have hope.) We now have lots of options after Vatican II, it's good to remember the intrinsic nature of the sacred music and what the Church Fathers say about the liturgical music and try to understand the mind of the Church.
Happy Easter!

The organ IS the most fitting instrument for Christian liturgy, and the Council said so (not that papal or conciliar 'say sos' ever carry much weight with those who don't wish to be bothered with them.
I agree totally with Jeff. Also with Gavin's first succinct entry above.
We all know that the organ was banned for centuries and forgotten in the west because it was associated with the Roman circus spectacles.
Times change - in XIX. century Italy organs commonly were fitted with drums and cymbals and played what amounted to circus musica all through mass.
Yes, Gavin, there is an ecclesiastical style, though certain rather chic types would disparage it. If one attended certain events of the AGO one would wonder why what one is hearing was being played in a church - even if it were only a recital.
Pianos are by their nature concert and drawing room instruments whose wondrous literature is not appropriate (nor conceived to be) for the sacred rites of the Christian religion. (That also goes for bongo drums, thumping double basses, combos, and all those laughable 'instruments' that can't make their fake sounds unless they are plugged in to an electrical outlet - while we stumble over yards of ugly cords. (And the just noticed pun is intended.)
Jeff has nothing for which to apologise.
And, for Charles in CenCA --- Surrexit Christus! Alleluia!

It was my understanding that your reasoning for not using piano in the liturgy was because it was percussive and overly emotive. I don't understand by your logic how you can say the piano would be inappropriate, whereas a timpani would. I have to agree with Charles... why even raise this... it's not an issue, but a moot point. The Church clearly admits the piano. When used appropriately ("Lead Me, Lord" by Will Todd immediately comes to mind) the piano is perfectly suited to the liturgy.

(sigh)
Mia, for the record "I" never uttered the word "purists."
"Battle." A contest of wills of certain duration. You want to chant, I want to chant, CMAA wants to chant. Tom Lelyo wants to attract others to chant who use guitars as accompanimental instruments. Do you want to engage Tom in battle over the issue of the suitability of guitars, or engage him as a companion in order to enter into dialogue which will persuade him towards the wiser path?
"Boat" The Barque of Peter, that boat.
Maybe you can't see it, Mia, but I am not doing the labeling in these here parts. Sorry 'bout that.

Charles, I didn't say who said what. As I said, we are all in the same boat, not my boat and your boat, and it's not about what you want and I want. Also I don't believe it's up to us when a church musician makes certain choices. As a pianist who played lots of contemporary music in the past, I would not have learned about sacred music if there weren't post like this about the Church's documents and the Church Father's writings. I had to search and still searching. If we don't discuss them here, I don't know where else. I found most of other blogs don't mention about the Church's teachings, but mostly their opinions and tastes.

It's a very helpful thing to point to an ideal, to say it's the ideal, to say WHY it's the ideal. It's also helpful to say how certain things are (currently) legislated for the liturgy.

I just feel we've had far too many years of liturgists saying "you can't do this or that." You can't chant, you can't adore the Blessed Sacrament at Mass--people are always forbidding things because of their own preferences and ideals.

How about this amazing thing? The Roland does five harpsichords, two organs, a fortepiano, and a celeste! All sound very beautiful.

I would far prefer this to the digital Clavinova that is so common in churches today. With all those gazillion sounds, they seem to be an occasion of sin for the keyboardist who sits down in front of them.

It is very beautiful and humbling. Thank you so much for sharing it, Jeffrey.

.

.

I've often played the piano-based hymns on the piano (in the basement) of the church and then made medleys of them with other pieces. My latest masterpiece was some funeral hymn (can't remember what it was, but it was sappy) and Georgy Girl. They fit together perfectly!

Every time I play one of those it's another reminder of why I don't like the piano for liturgical use.

.

The piano does not belong in liturgy. For centuries only wealthy churches had pipe organs and others had to use reed organs or nothing at all.

No Pontiff has ever said, "If there is no organ, a piano is acceptable." Including our present piano=playing Pontiff.

The invention of the modern pipeless organs brings organ music to all churches. Pipe organ...snobbery....does not serve the organ well. Anyone on this list who has never ever played anything but a pipe organ, please chime in here. Now....never ever played a Hammond, Rodgers, Baldwin, Allen....speak up.

I'm ready to hear from all of you.


Bueller? Bueller? Ferris Bueller?

Noel, we have been quite happy with our digital Rodgers for over a decade. We will enjoy its contribution to our presentation of the Mozart REQUIEM with complete orchestra this Thursday. Pray that the conductor may do all involved justice and with respect and verve.

Piano... I love the piano... is it appropriate for liturgy? No! Keep them out of the church.

Organ... always perfect and appropriate.

Voice, even better... a cappella can't be beat. Period.