"Why Catholics . . . Won't, Don't, Can't" How About Why Catholics SHOULD
  • Abbot Jonathan CoelAbbot Jonathan Coel
    Posts: 167
    (deleted)
    Thanked by 3ContraBombarde CHGiffen Ruth Lapeyre
  • MaryAnn Carr WilsonMaryAnn Carr Wilson
    Posts: 1,738
    Yes! I absolutely delight in this topic. I agree with your statement above, Abbot.

    I would also add a complementary idea. Namely, that God is so magnificent and wonderful, He is deserving of a higher form of communication than we give our fellow man. He is deserving of elevated, ornamented praise, otherwise known as singing.

    And I think you are right, that we creatures of His have a deep, inherent longing to praise the Blessed Trinity. We have a need to express this love, greater so when the spiritual life is tended carefully.

    While I love thinking of this, I have to credit Dom Saulnier for crystallizing for me the idea of why the liturgy is sung. He also asserted we Christians inherited this idea from Jewish temple worship.

    This has been a greatly edifying and beautiful thought to me as a sacred musician. When I have down days and times, I remember the answer of WHY I am doing this at all.

    And all this effort will bear fruit- I truly believe that. I pray I may sing to God with all the saints in heaven for eternity!
    Thanked by 3CHGiffen Ruth Lapeyre gregp
  • Charles in CenCA
    Posts: 2,416
    I type this while listening to the late Robin Gibb's falsetto whines "Stayin' Alive" during the interminable parade of nations in London. What could this mean? I digress.
    Oh Abbot (not doing my best Costello imitation), how I would like to sympathize with your paean in its innocent swaddling.
    But to some extent, in each of our hearts, we have to trust that we Catholics do sing, have sung since day one, and will continue to sing until earth and heaven are one.
    But we need to realize that the LOVE you mention is now at the cusp of a 1Cor13 moment where our voices are no longer those of children or adolescents, and it is time to forget trying to cajole a sentiment sold to our naivete ala "I'd like to teach the world to sing in perfect har-mo-ny....it's the Real Thing!"
    The co-opting and marketing of SINGING AT MASS is what I think our friend Liam calls a shibboleth. I rarely frequent dictionaries so I've taken that to mean some sort of "straw man" ideal that cannot bear the scrutiny of truth, dunno.
    Your monks, the Carthusians and Cistercians faraway in mountain ranges and canyons, are now being joined in the Church's chant by the laity in cathedrals and churches amid urban canyons, even in the office chants and hymns. The very notion of 250+ Roman Catholics of all musical abilities bringing the finest harvests of song born of our birthright traditions in the "odd" manicured deseret desert of Mormon Zion proved a truly momentous witness to the succession of our musical apostolate. Whatever "we" are singing at NPM Pittsburgh 2012 still proves we sing.
    But we cannot worry about whether the garment of our song in our own vineyards is influenced by our arguing here or elsewhere, or will be somehow improved by edicts mandated by the left or right wings of our musical philosophies. We ought not to misappropriate "katholicos" as a rationale for wielding an autocratic, stern, inflexible and unyielding ideological vision of who, what, why, how and when Catholics are to sing at worship. I fear that if we don't just follow the little way in our own houses first, and see our labor bring many harvests over many years, that we risk idolizing music and thus elevate it above its beautiful status and calling as handmaiden to worship.
    Tucker's SING LIKE A CATHOLIC provides the rationale. Mahrt's MUSICAL SHAPE OF THE LITURGY provides the maps. The psalms are the songs, and they will be sung.
    Thanked by 2Ruth Lapeyre teachermom24
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 8,414
    This is good. And touches upon a basic flaw, a lamentable deficit in our culture in general, and in Catholic liturgical culture in particular. You are spot on in your understanding of why Catholics should be singing. No one should sing, of course, because he 'should' sing: he would sing because he is filled with love and joy that knows no other fit expression than God's gift to human nature: song. There is something perverse in a situation in which people actually have to be goaded into singing, cheered up for singing by silly cantors and announcers. How low we have fallen when we have reared generations of people who don't have music within them and need a reason to sing! Not so long ago (relatively speaking) singing was literally put into all by their elders from the moment of their birth: song was what one heard from the cradle up. Nearly all people sang as children, they sang at school, they sang at church, they sang at social functions, they sang as families in their homes in the evening, they just... sang. Not singing might be considered a form of spiritual atrophy. Certainly willfully refusing to sing is. There are inevitably some few who don't sing because they are in quiet prayer, because they are one of those Very Very Rare persons who is genuinely tone deaf, because they are so sad that they cannot; there have been a (thankfully) few times in which I was so sad about something that I just could not sing... but, Oh! How I really did Want to sing all the more.

    Though many words can be offered as commentary on what Abbot Jonathan Coel has written, none could improve upon his fundamental observation that the soul joyous in the love of God cannot but sing. I believe that in heaven there is no speach... only song sublime beyond our capacity here to comprehend. It is not for nothing that the Second Vatican Council singled out our musical heritage as chiefest of the Church's cultural treasures. Thankful people sing! Love sings!
    Thanked by 2CHGiffen veromary
  • GavinGavin
    Posts: 2,799
    (deleted by author)
  • E_A_FulhorstE_A_Fulhorst
    Posts: 381
    What Catholics Should is perhaps more timely.
  • Abbot Jonathan CoelAbbot Jonathan Coel
    Posts: 167
    (deleted)
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,978
    I think all this is poetic, beautiful and wondrous. However, some people don't sing for a variety of reasons, often known only to them. They have that right, and we as musicians have no right to dictate to them, whether with goofy cantor antics or by browbeating them. Also, as musicians, we likely value singing far more than many folks in the pews. I make a part, granted small part, of my living through music, as do many of us. That makes me a bit biased on the whole subject. I do what I can to encourage singing, but whether the congregation sings is a decision that's up to them.
    Thanked by 3CHGiffen noel jones, aago Chris Allen
  • Ruth Lapeyre
    Posts: 341
    "Nearly all people sang as children, they sang at school, they sang at church, they sang at social functions, they sang as families in their homes in the evening, they just... sang. Not singing might be considered a form of spiritual atrophy. " Well stated M. Jackson I like this discussion Abbot, thanks for starting it!
  • Ruth Lapeyre
    Posts: 341
    Charles you are correct, we should not brow beat people who do not sing, all we can do is encourage them.
    Thanked by 1E_A_Fulhorst
  • RobertRobert
    Posts: 343
    Paul Ford, who posts on this forum, wrote an excellent article that addresses this topic in an issue of Pastoral Music devoted to responding to Thomas Day's book around the time it was published ("Seven steps forward...and a plea"). The opening paragraph puts the "Why" question front and centre.

    While others seem to have responded to Day's critique by going into denial mode, Ford seemed to "get it" and offered constructive solutions in line with Day's own suggestions. After all these years, Ford's article is still relevant and rings true.

    http://www.npm.org/pastoral_music/issues/PM Vol 15-6.pdf
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • GavinGavin
    Posts: 2,799
    I made a rather intemperate comment last night, but I'm just so excited by this post. And I get angry, rather angry, reading excuse after excuse for people not singing. Spiritual atrophy is right. I have a few more choice words: laziness. Apathy. Disinterest.

    I don't know if anyone here really watches people who don't sing. Try it next time you're in the pews. These people aren't rapt in such ardent active interior participation (whatever that means) that they cannot summon the energy to move their lips. They aren't even engaged in private devotion. They simply sit there. Motionless. Unengaged.

    Shame on them.

    There are those who, for legitimate reasons, cannot sing. It happens. Just last week, I attended with family, and found my relatives with children too occupied with controlling them to grab a hymnal. That's ok. Sometimes you're sick. That's ok. Sometimes you are just in such spiritual dryness that you just don't have music in you. That's not ok, but it's understandable to refrain.

    What's not ok is to make a habit out of being an unengaged bump on a log at Mass. For a century now, the Church leadership has emphasized active participation in the Mass. Sometimes, in the circumstances above, this means simply joining your heart to the liturgical action around you. But regularly, it means moving your lips.

    I'm sick of excuses. The sulking teen is not actively participating. The husband dressed for golf, ready to run to the course as soon as he gets communion is not actively participating. Shame. The time for "should" has come. New Missal, new opportunities.

    And the biggest offense to me is that EVERYONE on this forum, without exception, from David Haas to Jeffrey Tucker, has gained unspeakable graces, joy, sanctification, and pleasure from singing. Each and every one of us. Then we come on here, and we make all sorts of reasons that people should avoid this great blessing of song? It's offensive. It's wrong.

    Catholics will gain from singing. Catholics need to sing. Catholics should sing.
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • noel jones, aagonoel jones, aago
    Posts: 6,611
    EVERYONE has not.

  • E_A_FulhorstE_A_Fulhorst
    Posts: 381
    Should there be active interior participation, it would be acceptable.
  • MaryAnn Carr WilsonMaryAnn Carr Wilson
    Posts: 1,738
    We cannot and should not try to control the faithful. What we can do is work hard to offer beautiful singing that inspires others to sing.

    I like the abbot's story of autistic children humming and swaying along with singing. It has been a particular blessing for me to sing with and for the dying.
    During his last weeks in hopice care, my dear friend and choir member Philip, dying with AIDS, would calm and focus a bit and hum along with me when I sang his favorite chant hymns. It was a time I'll never forget. And the strongest, most manly paterfamilias I have every encountered, my dear Grandad, squeezed my hand and teared up as I sang his favorite Ave Maria for him on his deathbed. And the doctors said he was in a coma...

    Singing to God is a result of the upsurge of the heart. It also graces the one singing with a heart that opens more to God. In our conversion, or return, to God, singing must make a great part of the via pulchritudinus.
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • Charles in CenCA
    Posts: 2,416
    Gavin, I pray my words didn't provoke your initial reaction.
    Both you AND FNJ are correct. How can that be?
    I refer our attention to the parable of the sower and the seed. Jesus, Author of Song, reminded us we are sowers of seed at the beginning of the season, and harvesters at the end of the season's cycle. But his parable reminds us that as we spread the seed that we should not expect every seed to take root and come to fruition. Yes, God has wanted pro omnis from the moment of Adam's creation, and He has again and again shown us mercy from the fall to the cross and to self-immolation. That said, this parable, all others and Mt. 25 are still consistent in warning us that pro multis awaits us. This is free will, given us before the fall, yes? Et in saecula saeculorum.
    Amen?
    Thanked by 4E_A_Fulhorst CHGiffen Jenny Chris Allen
  • CHGiffenCHGiffen
    Posts: 5,193
    Oh, wow. Sewer ... or sower? Are we sewing cloth or sowing seeds?

    A dressmaker may rip what (s)he sews, if there's a mistake ... the farmer reaps what (s)he sows.
  • Charles in CenCA
    Posts: 2,416
    Sorry
    Old and infirm and abstaining, thus impaired!
    Thanks, Chuck
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • ryandryand
    Posts: 1,640
    Alright, so....
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 8,414
    I had wondered which gospel the parable of the sewer and the seed appeared in. Perhaps this is where we find the tares?
    Thanked by 2DougS CHGiffen
  • ContraBombarde
    Posts: 471
    sewer and the seed? did someone call out the waste water management dept? lol
  • Charles in CenCA
    Posts: 2,416
    ryand
    Alright already! It's fixed!
    Thanked by 1ryand
  • Ruth Lapeyre
    Posts: 341
    Yes Gavin people, even the tone deaf, gain from singing. How do you propose to change the minds of those who do not sing? I have told my seminarians that when they become priests they need to sing. If the priest does not sing the people will probably not sing. I could be wrong. I would like to hear other strategies that might get people in the pews to sing.
    Thanked by 1Gavin
  • BenBen
    Posts: 3,114
    It's true in most cases that if the priest sings (eventually) the people will sing. It doesn't happen overnight, but the rector at our cathedral sings quite well (so well that he's sometimes the butt of friendly jokes because of it :), and the people sing well too.

    Funny story about that: Following the Easter Mass, bishop made a comment (in the narthex to those out there, not to everyone at the Mass) about how we were all singing "like a bunch of protestants." LOL!
    Thanked by 3E_A_Fulhorst Gavin Ruth Lapeyre
  • Abbot Jonathan CoelAbbot Jonathan Coel
    Posts: 167
    (deleted)
    Thanked by 2Ruth Lapeyre Charles in CenCA
Add a Comment