Permission from the Ordinary for Instruments in the Extraordinary (EF)?

shawnk

Is the permission of the Ordinary (typically, the bishop) required for the use of instruments other than organ and voice at a 1962 (EF) liturgy?

A friend recently suggested to me that it was, and my research has uncovered the following:

* "Tra Le Sollecitudini" (1903) says, "[O]ther instruments may be allowed, but never without the special permission of the Ordinary, according to prescriptions of the Caeremoniale Episcoporum."

* Documents between "Tra Le" and "De Musica Sacra..." seem to be silent on this point.

* "De Musica Sacra" (1958) merely sets forth other rules and states, "The local Ordinary...should see to it that these rules on the use of instruments during the sacred liturgy are faithfully observed."

* "Musicam Sacram" (1967), which was not in force in 1962, seems to be in harmony with "Tra Le" on this point: "The use of other instruments may also be admitted in divine worship, given the decision and consent of the competent territorial authority, provided that the instruments are suitable for sacred use." This would suggest that "De Musica Sacra" simply assumed that point without stating it.

Your thoughts would be appreciated.

Cheers.

dad29

Did you look at the 1955 document from Rome?

IIRC, somewhere along the line, Rome approved "other instruments...suitable..." (along with women choir singers).

tomjaw

I think the rule should be don't ask the Ordinary questions he will not understand.

In the EF there are quite a few occasions where the Ordinary needs to give permission, but some of these permissions are not now in the Ordinary's power to permit. Other questions do not require any permission in the NO.

Adam Wood

Dear the Bishop:
Remember that Mass you don't like, don't understand, and wish we weren't doing?
Would you mind if we did it slightly differently, but still followed rules you don't care about?
Sincerely,
The People You Try to Ignore

Ben

Sadly, Adam, that's how it'd come off with many bishops....

tomjaw

Yes, our Archbishop, has said on many occasions that he does not care what we do.

He would like to get rid of us, his problem is at least 10% of his priests say the E.F. on a regular basis, and his seminary is full of Traditionally minded young men.

Adam Wood

his problem is at least 10% of his priests say the E.F. on a regular basis, and his seminary is full of Traditionally minded young men.

We should all have such problems.

Chris Garton-Zavesky

Tomjaw-

Is his chancery full of Traditionally minded young men?

Sigh....

I have a suggestion. Why don't those of us who love the Church's constant teaching make ourselves the reserve corps of the bishops: every time they teach strongly what Holy Mother Church teaches, we should thank them, publicly, regardless of how much flak there is over the issue? At these times, and at all other times, we should pray for our bishops.

tomjaw

cgz

I would not say the chancery is full of those friendly to Tradition... but there are a few who are more than happy for us to have E.F. in the Cathedral a few times a year.

The director of Music runs chant workshops, and Latin is regularly heard being sung even during the N.O.

melofluent

I don't believe there's much disagreement with, as Garry Wills would say, getting "What Pius X Meant." And we must remember that TLS wasn't the only document, he, like B16, wrote his brother bishops encyclicals making it clear how far the intrusion of performance Masses had infiltrated the ritual culture. I think, though, that as in all pontifical mandates, the measure of compliance could hardly be considered thorough and widespread.
As is regularly cited in lots of threads, the local ordinary is a huge filter through which practice is determined. Our bishop has a thing about the Penitential Rite and the deacon's role therein. So, while we firmly have ensconsed the Confession/Kyrie/Gloria form, when he shows up (like last Sunday) we have a deacon (quite unaccustomed) reciting the intentional trope, followed by the bishop himself chanting an unknown Kyrie melody. Not really a problem, but it seems so arbitrary and disconnected from parish practice. Then added to that more filters by pastors who want to interpret their own or the bishop's personal preferences about the use of chant in either the vernacular or Latin. Can be a bother. I digress.
I can't see, other than the Schuler model for the EF, a real reason to seek out the ordinary's approval.
However, wouldn't it be quite something if a gifted and knowledgeable composer like LaRocca, Quick or Allen (or Culbreth, I guess) were to compose an entirely new chanted EF Latin setting that integrated instrumental obligati or isons or such?

jpal

I presume that is a reference to Msgr. Richard Schuler, but what exactly does

the Schuler model for the EF

mean?

JulieColl

My guess is that the Schuler model for the EF is a reference to Msgr. Schuler's paradigm of the Mass with grand orchestral/choral masses, combined with propers sung acapella with a male schola. I have several recordings of his Masses at St. Agnes in St. Paul, MN, and that seems to be the pattern. Very splendid and quite a revelation to those who were paying attention back in the 1980's and early 90's. (From what I remember, though this was not the TLM, but the Novus Ordo in Latin, celebrated ad orientem.)

Jahaza

I don't understand the problem.

De Musica Sacra seems to be pretty clear that the "special permission" of Tra Le Solicitundine no longer applies (by the canonical principle of the "total reordering" of the issue.)

C. Sacred instrumental music.

68. Other instruments besides the organ, especially the smaller bowed instruments, may be used during the liturgical functions, particularly on days of greater solemnity. These may be used together with the organ or without it, for instrumental numbers of for accompanying the singing. However, the following rules derived from the principles stated above (no.60) are to strictly observed:

a) the instruments are truly suitable for sacred use;

b) they are to be played with such seriousness, and religious devotion that every suggestion of raucous secular music is avoided, and the devotion of the faithful is fostered;

c) the director, organist, and other instrumentalists should be well trained in instrumental techniques, and the laws of sacred music.

69. The local Ordinary, with the aid of his diocesan commission on sacred music, should see to it that these rules on the use of instruments during the sacred liturgy are faithfully observed. If need be, they should not hesitate to issue special instructions in this regard as required by local conditions, and approved customs.

D. Musical instruments, and mechanical devices.

70. Musical instruments which by common acception, and use are suitable only for secular music must be entirely excluded from all liturgical functions, and private devotions.

71. The use of automatic instruments and machines, such as the automatic organ, phonograph, radio, tape or wire recorders, and other similar machines, is absolutely forbidden in liturgical functions and private devotions, whether they are held inside or outside the church, even if these machines be used only to transmit sermons or sacred music, or to substitute for the singing of the choir or faithful, or even just to support it.

So except for things like accordians, grind organs, samplers, and electronic tape loops you're probably OK.

matthewj

Your Excellency,

We'd like to begin introducing the banjo into our Extraordinary Form Masses that are held on the Third Tuesday of every other month at either 9am or 3pm, we don't tell anyone ahead of time and they just have to show up to see if it is happening or not. Would it be okay for the banjo choir to play at these pop-quiz style Masses?

Sincerely,
Priest who got a petition for a TLM and didn't want to host it

CharlesW

Ask the chancery for permission to use serpents, and they will think you have become charismatics.

dad29

More:

55. So it is that in the basilicas, cathedrals and churches of religious communities these magnificent works of the old masters and the polyphonic compositions of more recent musicians can be performed, contributing greatly to the beauty of the sacred rite. Likewise We know that simpler but genuinely artistic polyphonic compositions are often sung even in smaller churches.

56. The Church favors all these enterprises. As Our predecessor of immortal memory, Saint Pius X, says, the Church "unceasingly encourages and favors the progress of the arts, admitting for religious use all the good and the beautiful that the mind of man has discovered over the course of the centuries, but always respecting the liturgical laws."[23]

57. These laws warn that great prudence and care should be used in this serious matter in order to keep out of churches polyphonic music which, because of its heavy and bombastic style, might obscure the sacred words of the liturgy by a kind of exaggeration, interfere with the conduct of the liturgical service or, finally, lower the skill and competence of the singers to the disadvantage of sacred worship.

58. These norms must be applied to the use of the organ or other musical instruments. Among the musical instruments that have a place in church the organ rightly holds the principal position, since it is especially fitted for the sacred chants and sacred rites. It adds a wonderful splendor and a special magnificence to the ceremonies of the Church. It moves the souls of the faithful by the grandeur and sweetness of its tones. It gives minds an almost heavenly joy and it lifts them up powerfully to God and to higher things.

59. Besides the organ, other instruments can be called upon to give great help in attaining the lofty purpose of sacred music, so long as they play nothing profane nothing clamorous or strident and nothing at variance with the sacred services or the dignity of the place. Among these the violin and other musical instruments that use the bow are outstanding because, when they are played by themselves or with other stringed instruments or with the organ, they express the joyous and sad sentiments of the soul with an indescribable power. Moreover, in the encyclical Mediator Dei, We Ourselves gave detailed and clear regulations concerning the musical modes that are to be admitted into the worship of the Catholic religion.
- See more at: http://www.adoremus.org/MusicaeSacrae1955.html#sthash.Q1rWSUlz.dpuf

Seems clear enough. No different in principle than any other question about music for worship.

hartleymartin

If I asked the chancery for permission to use Hautbois, Sackbutts, Serpents and Ophecleides they will probably refer me to the diocesan exorcist.

shawnk

Thanks for the suggestions (and humor), everyone; these give me some food for thought.

Jeffrey Quick

Melofluent, if your concern is with "performance masses", you'd best keep me away from the instruments. Even organs are dangerous in my hands. Though perhaps a sackbut or serpent...or an accordion....

melofluent

Jeffrey, you know I've gotten too old for concerns. I've traded my shawm for a shawl.

noel jones, aago

every time they teach strongly what Holy Mother Church teaches, we should thank them, publicly, regardless of how much flak there is over the issue? At these times, and at all other times, we should pray for our bishops.

Actually, there is a better way to do this. Thank them, publicly, for teaching strongly what Holy Mother Church teaches when they don't.

You'll drive them crazy. Not a bad goal, eh? There are, without doubt, many idiot bishops, let's confuse them into oblivion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82-xbhfNR2g

Adam Wood

let's confuse them into oblivion.

If oblivion was a possible result of confusion, I daresay many of them would have blinked out of existence a long time ago...

chonak

I do like the idea of praising people for the virtues they aren't exercising!

Chris_McAvoy

Gradually all dioceses will have "such problems" as more and more young seminarians celebrating beautiful traditionally oriented masses (whatever form). Gradually such problems will no longer be problems,but recognized as salvific joyful praise with theangelic choirs of heaven that it is. ;-)

Chrism

Accordions are generally considered suitable in a pinch.

Chris Garton-Zavesky

Oops. You mistook me for be facetious. I was, in fact, being serious.

1) Let us pray for our bishops: private rosaries, public Masses. Who knows, but that we might even revive the Corpus Christi procession?
2) Let us publicly (i.e., in a newspaper) or privately (i.e., in a letter to the chancery) thank them for standing up for Catholic teaching.
3) Sure, it's not going to involve many thank you letters in some dioceses, but that merely illustrates why there was/is a blog called "Episcopal Spine Alert".
4) False praise -- thanking them for something they haven't done -- leads to Columbine. Just imagine a chancery office stocked with AR-15s.

God bless,

Chris

shawnk

Here is an answer to my question regarding instruments in the 1962 EF:

"At liturgical functions--especially on greater days--instruments, particularly bowed stringed instruments, may now, without special permission, be used, with or without the organ, separately or to accompany the singing."

(Excptd from "The Celebration of Mass: A Study of the Rubrics of the Roman Liturgy", Rev. J. B. O'Connell, 1962)

Adam Wood

especially on greater days...particularly bowed stringed instruments

IF you want to play a tuba on a Tuesday, you're allowed. You're just not really really super allowed.

CHGiffen

... just not really really super allowed.

Nor super loud.

ryand

"At liturgical functions--especially on greater days--instruments, particularly bowed stringed instruments, may now, without special permission, be used, with or without the organ, separately or to accompany the singing."

When the authority ambiguously asserts asinine arrangements allowing anything amongst abounding attainability, courting continuous commas
(blah blah blah)

Welcome to the MusicaSacra Forum!

Categories