Intra-parish music diversity; to coexist or not to...?
  • melofluentmelofluent
    Posts: 4,160
    In the "City of God" discussion, hopefully now running out of steam, a larger issue that I don't recall ever thoroughly being addressed here or at the cafe seemed to emerge from one of Adam Wood's observations:
    My (Episcopal) parish has a sizable contingent of people who like "praise music," which (sometimes) means 70s-era Catholic folk, and I don't mind programming it (in theory) when the text fits (and you all know I like a lot of the genre). But I have to agree with Gavin about the quality. And, from first-hand experience- it's difficult to sing and feels strangely stressful from the congregation.

    I tend to think our discussions here are naturally focused upon the premises of our personal affection (and affectation) for and of the principles CMAA/Musica Sacra. So we often argue points, even if they're related to what is happening in our own domains, from a principled point of view- Jeff Tucker put it succinctly in describing a certain monk's refusal to acknowledge the concept or reality that there is such an animal as "sacred music." But, when Adam describes his experiences as a millenial growing up in fear and loathing of the banality of music in his bailywick, his POV is much closer in years to the formative adolescent period where a lot of "prejudices" as as well as principles are solidified. I'm not saying he's wrong, or that Flowerday is right. I'm saying that it would be interesting to see if there are stories and experiences where the reforms coexist without contention from Mass to Mass in a weekend schedule. Are they're places of collaboration, of invention, of integration or eclecticism that don't cause people to wince, kvetch or flee in disgust? And if so, how is that accomplished?
    Yes, were it up to me, I'd work day and night to effect turning our four parishes into a Cantius. But, in abject reality, I don't have a cadre of FSSP who'd crank up a mission statement, work to meet with the bishop and sell the idea of "building a new city" upon the Mahrt paradigm. And, believe it or not, there are young as well as mid-aged and senior parishioners who have deeper relationships with music that we belittle and disdain, and for good reasons in their own eyes. They're intelligent and reasonable people.
    The so-called "Big Tent" of our institutional church calls forth an image of "The Greatest Show on Earth." And we use that (sometimes rightly) to illustrate where worship has gone off the tracks. But, we never hear accounts of dignified programs that integrate varied styles at varied Masses with FACP and in full accord with the GIRM, MS, CSL and even TLS. Is this impossible, or are places like that a mirage? Do tell.
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,471
    Seen it, loved it, attempting to implement it in my own parish work.

    The problem with discussing it here is the ridicule that I think would immediately follow a discussion that includes mentioning repertoire that many find objectionable. For goodness sakes: the crowd here complains about high-quality metrical hymnody from the Protestant tradition; I'm certainly not going to bring up the fact that I programmed "We Are Called" as a recessional.
    Thanked by 1ContraBombarde
  • I want to make that perfectly clear. Even if they do say Jehovah.
  • "But, we never hear accounts of dignified programs that integrate varied styles at varied Masses. . . are places like that a mirage?"


    I'm probably older than you, Charles, but I've yet to experience such a harmonious abode. It's not a matter of thinking one's musical preference is innately superior, but rather an unavoidable inability to integrate styles without losing those qualities that fuel the lure of each style. A particular music approach can't be sustained if it's watered down to such a degree that everyone who enters the door feels comfortable with it.

    Of more pressing concern to me is the problem of ethnic diversity. For the past few years I've led a chant ensemble in a large parish populated by immigrant Latinos, Ugandans, and born-in-the-USA Anglos. Each has it's own liturgical personality and everyone seems happy to go their own way. No one objects to the Ugandans; their music is mesmerizing and my chant ensemble on occasion has happily shared a Mass with them. I see no point in trying to convert them to the Gregorian model. The Hispanic contingent on the other hand, although they are perhaps among the friendliest people I've ever met, offers a much greater challenge. The abyss between their music culture and my crowd just seems unbridgeable. It's not that we haven't tried. I'm still waiting for a CMAA member in a similar situation to relay a success story.
    Thanked by 1francis
  • melofluentmelofluent
    Posts: 4,160
    Thanks, Randolph, but you certainly look much younger than I. Regarding the latter scenario, I cannot but concur in my experience as well here in the San Joaquin Valley, of all places.
    I have heard anecdotally that there's some sort of synchronicity upon in Oakland at various places and at diocesan events. But even there, not without territoriality and contention.
  • francis
    Posts: 10,799
    i play it all. guitar, anglo, spanish, protestant praise, progressive puke, and GC, polyphony and organ. We are the only Catholic church within 100 miles so we have to be all things to all human cultural and stylistic persons. Multiculturalism is a total farce; a PC agenda spun by those who try to 'think' up alternatives in a vacuum and propose it while trying to downplay and ignore the church's REAL solution and the true expression of universality. Traditional and Progressives can only at BEST tolerate each other, and most of both sides would rather not even do that.
  • melofluentmelofluent
    Posts: 4,160
    But how do you REALLY feel, Francis?
  • francis
    Posts: 10,799
    charles

    i feel fine. you?
  • melofluentmelofluent
    Posts: 4,160
    Si, muy bueno!
  • DougS
    Posts: 793
    I have not attended Mass at this church myself, but St. Augustine in Washington, DC has a 10 AM Mass that features classical choral literature and a 12:30 Mass that features a gospel choir. The church is, I believe, the oldest (and maybe the largest) predominantly African American parish in the U.S. I imagine the two "regular attendees" at each Mass have no problem with those who attend the other.
  • francis
    Posts: 10,799
    doug

    that' s how we do it here with spanish mass. different time, entirely in spanish, all spanish music 99% spanish attendees.
  • francis
    Posts: 10,799
    .
  • That made me chuckle Francis. I've always tried to take the ecclectic approach myself. However no matter how balanced I think my program to be, it's inevitably too far one way or the other for somebody. I don't think it's possible to be all things to all people, at least as far as music is concerned. Sometimes I even question the ecclectic approach, and wonder if it wouldn't be better/easier to just go all out GP revival at one Mass and all chant at the other. Problem with that model is that it wouldn't be possible to offer enough Masses to satisfy everyone's niche genre preferences. And it saddens me to think that another generation of Catholics will grow up never hearing musica sacra. And so the ecclectic model stands despite the inevitable complaints of not playing enough such-and-such and too much of the other.
    Thanked by 1francis
  • GavinGavin
    Posts: 2,799
    I've found it common among protestant churches here in Texas to have two (or more!) services of vastly different format at the same time. For example: traditional service in the sanctuary, contemporary service in the parish hall, Spanish service in the chapel, etc.

    I'm not sure how these work out in practice. As far as I can tell, the different groups seem to mostly pretend the other doesn't exist.
    Thanked by 1francis
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,973
    We have something similar, although not at the same time. The Hispanics have a Saturday evening mass, the EF group a Sunday mass at 1:30 p.m., and I have 4 NO masses Sunday morning. All the groups pretend the others don't exist, and seem to want little to do with each other. I suppose I should be grateful they are not fighting.
  • Ally
    Posts: 227
    That's what I was wondering about. Is it better to have one time always super-contemporary, only chant at the early Mass, something else another time?

    I guess I would rather play We Are Called (Adam Wood I think I have a very similar situation to you) at all 3 Masses, but also chant the SEP communion at all 3. Then they're all exposed to it. Now people are asking for that at funerals. Some of those are 10:30-ers... wouldn't have happened if I didn't plan it for all of them.
  • common among protestant churches here in Texas to have two (or more!) services of vastly different format at the same time. For example: traditional service in the sanctuary, contemporary service in the parish hall, Spanish service in the chapel, etc.

    I'm not sure how these work out in practice. As far as I can tell, the different groups seem to mostly pretend the other doesn't exist.


    All the groups pretend the others don't exist, and seem to want little to do with each other. I suppose I should be grateful they are not fighting.


    The 'separate-by language-but-equal Masses with big-3 music model' reigns supreme in many places, and it appears that parishes are split between 'pretend the other doesn't exist' and 'each group tries to run the parish'.
  • If the propers were being sung as well as dialogues at all the Masses in a weekend, I suppose it would still be possible to offer some variation in the choice of prelude, postlude and any added hymns, devotional songs and choral or instrumental filler.