Why do we call G chant "singing" instead of cantillation?

Dear Charles - can you sum that up in a sentence or two? I got a bit lost as to why you are objecting. I'm not sure I read that deep into what Jeffrey was saying and I think it would be helpful if you could pare that down a little for everyone.

I have long thought, though, and would make an educated suggestion that the delivery of sacred text, 'expressing the text as it should be done', as described above in Muslim worship, is not far (if any) removed from what our chant resembled in those distant days of oral transmission. Since early mediaeval times we have had an increasing fascination not only with metre, but with exactness of pitch and 'musical line' that may well have been as strange to our own forebears as it remains to modern Muslims; not to mention a musical aesthetic which most likely was non existent in the ancient and early mediaeval eras. Chant scholars are wont to refer to chant as 'sung speech', and they are correct in doing so. But further, it is likely that in it's very early days it was more a stylised, cantillated, speech than it was what we would call music, chant or otherwise. Many are the historic authors who tell us such as that 'from the beginning nothing was said in the spoken voice but everything was sung'. This is music to our ears on this forum, but I suspect that were we to hear such authors 'sing' we wouldn't call it 'music' or 'singing' even though it was definitely not mere 'speech'.

And, thanks, Jeffrey, for writing your (cogent) thoughts.
Too, there was a time when the Church's cantors were as rigourously trained, respected, and culturally essential as the Muslim cantors who greeted your day. That was long ago, and, in comparison, what we call 'cantors' nowadays rarely are deserving of the name. Having such in our worship today would be considered decidedly undemocratic; plus, the way we educate people now, most would not consider themselves edified by hearing one, and would resent someone singing an old chant that they couldn't whistle and sing along with. Then, there is your observation about the language: is it fair, really, that Muslims cherish and can understand an heiratic Arabic that is roughly 1500 years old while Catholics would revolt at a liturgical English that was even 500 years old?

Many posts came up before I sent mine. Charles, I think you and Jeffrey agree more than you disagree on this, but I could be wrong.

Having come to know much more about Islam over the past few years, I found Jeffrey's article intriguing and refreshing. Do I agree with Islam across the board? Certainly not. However, given that the traditions of Islam evolved from a similar place (while meandering off on a very strange branch), I don't think it's so reprehensible to consider that we as Catholics might be able to learn from non-Catholics...even Muslims.

In my opinion, Islam is a very black and white religion with little tolerance for gray. This rigidity has allowed them to maintain some beautiful traditions (chant/sung prayer), but has also rendered them incapable to really evolve and adapt. Meanwhile, the Church has allowed herself the ability to change and adapt with the times as needed while still staying true to her cause. In the area of music, this ability to evolve has allowed music to grow beyond simple chant into the beauty of polyphony, counterpoint and all of the soul-altering beauty of more modern forms of sacred music. As someone who trained extensively on an orchestral instrument, you can tear my Messiaen and Part out of my cold dead hands :)

(However, my "approval umbrella" of new music does NOT extend to contemporary christian wannabe pop music.... That music may have a place, but in my opinion, it does not have enough integrity to be worthy of the Mass.)

However, I do think that we can learn a bit from Islam in that even as the Church encourages and fosters these newer ideas about worship and sacred music, it doesn't have to be at the cost of throwing out the old. Seemingly Islam will be slow to figure out how to adapt to the "new"--if it ever does, but I look forward to the Church, in her wisdom, being able to find a balance that respects both our beautiful heritage while still nurturing and supporting new ways to praise and worship our Creator.

Reading Charles's comment above, I now see that he has strong and passionate views about Islam in general and seems to object to anything kind being said about the Islamic tradition of worship, under the conviction that doing so amounts to an intolerable compromise. I don't happen to agree but at least I'm clearer on what set him off.

It must have been interesting to hear the calls to prayer. I have often heard others say that the origins of Christian chant are Semitic, so perhaps that is also true for Islamic chant. However, I would agree with the Byzantine emperor who declared that there is little that is good about Islam.

"Melofluent?" What's with the nom de plume? Seems to be a lot of that going on at the forum lately. Is this like a witness protection program? I had just gotten used to infamous Charles in cenCA.

My debt of gratitude to Jeffrey

What I pray that everyone can take away from this minor blip on the cosmic radar screen is that "this" was never about our personal relationship, Jeffrey, for my part. For the record, my friend had many times made known to me his disinclination to publicly aerate disagreements of various natures. So, despite the projection that there was personal animosity over "the subject" by colleagues personally known and unknown to us, that was never the case for me. There is no love that was lost for CMAA and JT. And I will continue to learn and listen as best I can from my friends, colleagues and peers here and elsewhere about our mutual vocations. But I really need to retire from displaying my impetuosity (is that a word, Liam?) here and elsewhere to a much greater extent than ever before. And when I feel a need to "open it up" I will do that under my own aegis. "At the Name of Jesus, every knee should bow...'
SDG

i just hastely read all this and am frankly appalled. to define one of the worlds great religions so superficially on the bases of iran etc is like judging christianity soly by studying westborough baptist church.. The comments about the evil religion but nice chanting reminds me of the nazi museum featuring jewish religious art. the museum was called a museum of an extinct race or something along those lines. islam is a complex religion with a complex history and culture. it saved western civilization. to judge it without taking the time to really underastand it is something i wouldnt expect from charles. if this chant cafe is just for fundamentalist catholics then count me out. i thought this blog was on chant not on the superiority of the catholic religion.

There are groups within Islam who actually practice tolerance and peace toward other religions. Then there are those larger groups who do anything but. The Druze, for example, have been an example of muslims persecuted by other muslims. Islam is often so tied to tribal mentalities and governments that separation between church and state is a completely foreign concept. We are still involved in two wars and are hideously in debt because of "peaceful" muslims. Holy places and shrines have been desecrated and turned into mosques in numerous places in the east. What would you think if St. Peter's was a mosque. Tolerance is good, but it is wise to keep one's eyes open to political realities.

I don't want to put words into don roy's mouth. He's a splendid fellow and can speak for himself. I think what he means is that the Islamic civilization preserved the works of the great Greek writers of antiquity. True, they did. But on the other hand, had they not taken those writings when they destroyed the remainder of the Eastern Roman Empire, the Byzantines might have preserved them, as well. Many holy relics are preserved today only because the Crusaders took them before the Muslims had a chance to.

WBC denies it is Christian? Didn't know that. They certainly don't act as if they are.

Hear, hear! Charles W -
It somehow gets overlooked, doesn't it, that Islam ravenously destroyed eastern and African Christian civilisation and then gets credit for 'saving' the literary heritage which would have remained intact had Christianity been left in peace. The emperor whom our Holy Father quoted to such disquietude several years ago had ample reason for not seeing anything but destruction in Islam as he experienced it. These are bald historical realities. Truth be known, the crusades accomplished as much, if not more, bad as they did good; but, the rise of Islam cannot be characterised as anything other than its own bloody and all-devouring crusade. A sword is a sword, whether it be a broad sword or a scimitar.

Having said that, I will go on record for all of us, in the world of today, to have a genuine and sober respect for the devout and peaceful belief and practice of all religions other than ours. A wise man will respect what is holy to others, and will respect them in their faith. To do otherwise is not, in itself, to be of a Christian or virtuous temperament.

wow...first, you guys really show me truly what wonderful people you are. we can have disagreements but the level of mutual respect is something i treasure here. may that always be the case and for rthat reason PLEASE CHARLES RECONSAIDER YOUR DECISION TO LEAVE THIS FORUM!!!!!!. i need to tell you that my wonderful niece fell in love and married a muslum and herself converted. i have come to know a religion, like christianity , whos followers are among the best and worst. there were tolerent muslums there were horrible ones. in spain the jews entered a golden age protected by guarenteed tolerence by the capeph. non muslums were required to pay a fine but allowed to practice their religion. muslum spain became a world center of learning that dissapated only when the christians reconqured spain.
charles is right. ancient greek books were protected and translated into arabic. in fact, when this knowlege was rediscovered by the west, they discovered that there were no greek speakers anywhere in westewrn europe so who did they get to translate into latin?
yesa there were atrocities and i do scratch my head at the contemporary muslum view on woman ETC but to dismiss an entire religion because its followeres do evil things doesnt take into account our horrible history..the history of all religions. we are humans after all and people are jerks.
just in case you think there have been no christian atrocities comproble to what we see in pakistan etc let me remind you of this:
during wwII in modern day rumania there was an orthodox christian village next to a catholic one. the franciscans in the area whipped up such hatred of the orthodox that one night the catholics attacked. captured the orthodox priest and made him recite prayers for the dead as they shot the entire village...men women and children. they saved the priests own family for last and made him witness horrible torture on his wife and children. finally they proceeded to skin the priest alive. this guys was christian violence done JUST OVER 60 YEARS AGO. this episode was in a biography of pius xii i recently read.
my point is this. evil knows no religion it is merely an opportunist who uses religion to promote hatred. the way it does this is to try and convince you blame the religion for the stupidity and hatreds of its members. if i can hate islam then i can denigrate muslums, make fun of their beliefs, call them savages or less then or whatever and pretty soon, i dont mind if they kill each other and when one of mine gets killed or whgatever i can cheerily say "nuke em till they glow"...sound familiar?

MaryAnn,

I hear you, and completely agree with your posts here.

To back up your point further, think of the mayans and all of the human sacrifice. Does anyone say there's evil in religion there? Of course there is.

We must never forget that while there is some truth in many religions (protestantisim is a great example! We agree more that we disagree in most cases there), the Catholic faith is the one true faith above all others.

i love and respect charles dearly but i agree with kathy. and about sharia law....i can only remind us of our common heritage which is equally brutal..an eye for an eye and all that but deuteronamy etc is as descriptive of christianity as sharia law defines islam....it doesnt.

my 2 cents on the issue at hand: I know we are supposed to appreciate what is true good and beautiful about other religions and that this shouldn't compromise our faith in Christ. For that reason I appreciated JT's article. However, I also believe that satan mixes some beauty and half-truths in with his lies in order to deceive. So it follows that if satan is using Islamic prayer and chant to attract men away from the light of Christ then I feel very uncomfortable extolling it. My mixed feelings on this remain unresolved.

charles

it was just a parallel. not espousing islam. come back.

francis, i'm still here.

I totally disagree:

Let's all face it: Charles overreacted. And then he handled the whole thing badly and self-destructively, in a way that has damaged our common cause. And no, Charles, you're not the great American hero John Adams when you flame out in righteous indignation, hand out ultimata, and resign things. Adams stayed the course.

Kathy, only a great American hero has the right to determine who is a hero and you're no JFK or John Adams. Attacking a loved and respected group member is a shocking act.

Assuming that we all have a common cause waters down everything down into, "It's ok to sing hymns instead of propers." and "We have to be culturally-sensitive and do music the people like and come from their culture.", this the criticisms I have heard more and more about Musica Sacra...that the bulk of the members are willing to let things go on as they have instead of working towards a goal, the goal of restoring the liturgy.

And, as Charles, known as Melofluent, the melo coming from CA Wines, I am sure, abandoned the ship known as Chant Cafe, not MS. Seeing recently that JT is once again on the masthead at the Liturgical site he once left, leaves hope that the artist formerly known as Charles in Cen Ca, will once again go on deck at Chant Cafe.

I feel strongly about this, though if Melo's not on Chant Cafe, there's a chance his posting numbers will quickly exceed mine....except, I just realize that changing your name JMO and CinCenCa, also resets your posting numbers back to 0! Heck. Well, I feel that this post is not a waste, though it does add to my total while desperately trying to cut back.

Wow it is soooo tempting to jump into to discuss politics and religion, and point out, for example.... Ok, I'm resisting.

Anyway, back to the point: the chant has a played a high role in sustaining Islam even in a secular country, and its preservation and practice is a given part of the faith, and this has served that faith well. We have a deeper and even more beautiful chant tradition that marks the day and season and yet it is largely unheard even by those who are practicing the faith. It's funny to me, for example, that many Christians think Muslims are just bizarre and weird for thinking that their day ought to be marked by chanted prayer.

by the way, this is the video I originally linked. Note the sheer athleticism of the exercise. Short phrase, long phrase, short phrase longer phrase, short phrase exceedingly long phrase, and so on. You can hear the singer gather his breath between the phrases. By the way, some very serious Gregorian chant scholars have looked to the Islamic tradition as an interpretative device for understanding what might be some of our own lost stylings.
http://youtu.be/mUHDYlJHaOQ

When it comes to resistance towards discussing religion, Jeffrey, I see no need to here. Again, I wish folks would acknowledge, by perhaps reading carefully, I've not advanced one iota of thought regarding the intersection of religion and politics, tolerance or intolerance, oppression or freedom, pristine or pernicious histories in my "protests." Others have seen fit to ascribe that I've done so. Whatever "political" aspects that have erupted appear to my being impolitic about not wanting to maintain my association with being a blog contributor when my convictions about the association were severely challenged. This right of free speech is still extended to all of us here, last I checked. The right to associate freely also implies a right to disassociate freely. And, by and large, I regard all of the reactions, mostly negative as serious impetus to scour my conscience about my convictions.
I'm glad to see you re-engage with the core tenets of your observations. I'm personally more attracted to the work of Sven Michael Olbash in SF in this area, but good on you.
Noel, I wouldn't worry about my post count going up. W and I are now having the grandsons over for two nights at a time quite a bit, and these boys are getting more interesting day by day.
Best to all...especially JT and all the folks at the Cafe.

A few years ago I helped proofread a dissertation on the difference between the politics of Turkey and Egypt. The student began with the premise that Turkey had grown intentionally pluralistic during the time when Egypt became extremist and radical, and then tried to discover what decisions had been made that made this happen.

I don't think chant entered into that particular dissertation, fwiw.

Jeffrey used to tell the story of going to Rome and everyone knew the Regina Caeli (or some chant) except for the Americans. Wouldn't it be great if every Catholic knew the whole PBC? I certainly don't see the downside.

Hmmmm, well, Richard, it's probably one of those "you had to be there" kind of things.

I remember, while still the day after colloqium at Loyola, checking into the Westin on the Miracle Mile and noticing that the Reformed Jewish version of NPM was having their annual convention in ChiTown, Matthew. I, the consummate goy, just glided through the registrations lines to the exhibits, and outside of the trinket stuff, it was all about getting the FACP through "personal engagement" in songs with just enough salt to be kosher, and guitars agog. What a bender in juxtaposition!
I think, upon reflection, that we ought to call the 21st century the Century of Death by Sincerity. YMMV (the new tetragrammaton.)