Use of David Haas's music/the new Gather edition
  • Bicinium
    Posts: 2
    I have a few questions about the new Gather edition. Was it created mainly to exclude all of Haas's music? Because the Gather edition before it is only a few years old.

    Also, my opinion is that although the man may be a disgrace, his music is appealing to many including myself. Although some Catholic publishers will not print his music, other denominations aren't so quick to come out with new editions. His music will be around for a while. BTW, are we going to remove "Pescador De Hombres" from any new editions? Because Father Cesario Gabarain was credibly accused of sexual abuse.

    The whole thing feels creepy to me. Should we remove George Washington from our currency because he was a slaveowner? Play no more Wagner because he was an anti-semite?

    I'm sure this has been discussed before in these forums. I'm new, and apologize if I'm rehashing old material. I'm genuinely upset about this issue. I would appreciate other opinions.
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,675
    We have discussed this at great length. I would think a search would find some of those posts. Just guessing since I don't do much searching. Hymnal publishers do what publishers do and we pew folks (retired musician in my case) have very little control over it. I suspect the composer who shall not be named will have works performed for many years to come. Even if his works are removed from new hymnals, the old hymnals can easily be in use for another 20 years. Given the quality of "Gather" binding, maybe not.
  • Should we remove George Washington from our currency because he was a slaveowner? Play no more Wagner because he was an anti-semite?


    Bicinium,

    Charles is right about the at-length previous discussions.
    I want to add only one thing: Washington's estate and Wagner's estate can't continue to profit from our use of their likenesses or music, but the modern, still-living composers can.
  • CGM
    Posts: 560
    In 1971 the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments actually forbid the use of Wagner's "Bridal Chorus" in Catholic weddings, in part because Wagner was a notorious anti-Semite, and in part because in Wagner's Lohengrin (whence cometh the famous march) the bride dies immediately after her wedding. Neither sentiment is great for a couple just starting their life together...
  • Schönbergian
    Posts: 1,032
    All that I will say is that there is a difference between someone living an imperfect life outside of the Church and someone taking advantage of the Church and its opportunities to sin while Church-adjacent authorities looked the other way.
  • Caleferink
    Posts: 397
    The IntoAccount report suggests that Haas used his music to abuse; he'd record and re-record all sorts of things to lure his victims into the studio, among other things. Other issues of the actual music aside, that's the big sticking point to me as to why I don't think I can ever use his music again if I wanted to.
  • MarkB
    Posts: 844
    Exactly.

    GIA had the 4th edition of Gather ready to go in 2020 but then the scandal broke just before the intended launch. They revised the hymnal for a 2021 launch instead by deleting all of David Haas' songs and replacing them with songs composed by friends and relatives of the hymnal's editorial committee.
    Thanked by 1Bicinium
  • I have a few questions about the new Gather edition. Was it created mainly to exclude all of Haas's music? Because the Gather edition before it is only a few years old.

    Also, my opinion is that although the man may be a disgrace, his music is appealing to many including myself. Although some Catholic publishers will not print his music, other denominations aren't so quick to come out with new editions. His music will be around for a while. BTW, are we going to remove "Pescador De Hombres" from any new editions? Because Father Cesario Gabarain was credibly accused of sexual abuse.

    The whole thing feels creepy to me. Should we remove George Washington from our currency because he was a slaveowner? Play no more Wagner because he was an anti-semite?

    I'm sure this has been discussed before in these forums. I'm new, and apologize if I'm rehashing old material. I'm genuinely upset about this issue. I would appreciate other opinions.


    Hi Bicinium. Are you David Haas, or one of his close friends? It's interesting that your first post on this forum is on this topic. There has been much discussion about it before.

    If are you David Haas, or are the kind of friend that David Haas might listen to, I want to encourage you to do the following:
    1. God loves you. What you did can't change that. God wants to forgive you and give you grace to transform your life and overcome your habits of sin. Jesus yearns to meet you in the Sacrament of confession, if you have not yet chosen to do this.
    2. Give a real and genuine apology to the women you hurt. Not a form letter that you've been circulating since the 1980s that carefully avoids liability. Not a carefully worded statement that multiple lawyers have poured over. Really apologize for what you did, and accept whatever legal ramifications may come.
    3. Accept the consequences for your actions. Based on what you did, many people will never be able to play your music again. As you know, many dioceses have banned your music, and publishers are removing your works from their hymnals and websites. As Catholics we believe in justice, and this is at least a small amount of justice for the sins that were committed. Personally, I can't imagine playing any of your songs knowing the life you were living while you were writing those words. It brings me great sorrow to know that you were ordering your life to sexually abusing women at the same time you wrote those beautiful words about God. To me, and to many others, I just can't play the music anymore knowing that. That the women you abused are unanimous in requesting that we not play your music anymore also is a major factor for me, it's very important as Catholics that we show solidarity with them and do whatever we can to help bring them healing.
    4. Reform your life. Into Account believes that you are still trying to get in contact with young women. You need to get whatever professional assistance you need to that you can overcome your habits of sexually pursuing and abusing women you are not married to. I imagine your wife might appreciate you being faithful to her. You can do this. God's grace is sufficient for you in your weakness.

    I chose to write this because it seems likely to me that this post is written by David Haas. My reasons for this are that there are several inconsistencies in the OP that I found to be very interesting:
    I have a few questions about the new Gather edition. Was it created mainly to exclude all of Haas's music? Because the Gather edition before it is only a few years old.


    The OP knows about the new Gather edition, but doesn't know about the purpose of the new Gather edition, despite GIA being very up front about what their purpose was. GIA was very clear that making a Haas free hymnal was an important part of this project.

    BTW, are we going to remove "Pescador De Hombres" from any new editions? Because Father Cesario Gabarain was credibly accused of sexual abuse.


    Only people who are very much insiders to the liturgical music community are aware of the accusations against Father Cesario Gabarain. Yet, the OP doesn't seem to be aware that OCP and GIA have decided to no longer publish his music.

    Finally, it's really interesting to me that the OP decided to have their first post on this message board on this topic. A quick search would have found multiple other prominent threads to contribute to.

    Bicinium, if I've misinterpreted your identity or intentions, I am deeply sorry. I'm doing my best. If you are not David Haas, you are welcome here. If you are David Haas, please go and get the help you need. You've hurt too many people for you to be able to productively be a member of the liturgical music community.
  • Liam
    Posts: 4,605
    And these details helped inform the decisions of many diocesan offices of worship to ban the use of Mr Haas' music.

    https://intoaccount.org/davidhaas/

    What hasn't happened - yet - is a transparent accounting of the colleagues and people who helped promote and publish his music while being aware of matters such as these. I would encourage David Haas to encourage those people to account for such transparently.
  • What hasn't happened - yet - is a transparent accounting of the colleagues and people who helped promote and publish his music while being aware of matters such as these. I would encourage David Haas to encourage those people to account for such transparently.


    Yes. Yes. Yes.

    Marty Haugen and Fr. Michael Joncas toured the country with DH for multiple decades. Stayed at the same hotels. Performed at the same conferences. Were at the LA Religious Education Congress each year, where much of Haas' abuse occurred. It strikes me as highly implausible that those two new nothing until the news broke. Their response has been near radio silence.

    GIA has done some public accounting, but I would appreciate more. So far they've admitted to having received 1 report of an "indiscretion" in the mid 2000s. Into Account's report suggests that President Alec Harris knew of at least one more incident a year or two before the news broke, because DH abused a high ranking employee. See:
    http://www.ourstoriesuntold.com/i-am-mine-undoing-the-19-year-hold-that-david-haas-had-on-my-life-part-1-of-3/
    http://www.ourstoriesuntold.com/i-am-mine-part-2/
    http://www.ourstoriesuntold.com/i-am-mine-undoing-the-19-year-hold-that-david-haas-had-on-my-life-part-3-of-3/

    The Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis appears to know much more than they've publicly admitted to, according to Into Account. Into Account uncovered a report of statutory rape of a minor, which the diocese claims to not have in their records. Same for the Archdiocese of Los Angeles, who is alleged to have systematically ignored the reports about what DH was doing at the LA Congresses.

    Lori True was an integral part of enabling DH's abuse, and is still employed in ministry with the Sisters of St. Joseph of Carondelet
    https://www.ncronline.org/news/accountability/st-catherines-report-sparks-calls-accountability-survivors-alleged-abuse-david

    The former president of St. Catherine's university refused to cooperate with their internet investigation.

    A long list of people need to face consequences that they have so far managed to avoid. It makes me sick.

    Thanked by 2Liam Bicinium
  • I think the current nature of this case, and the fact that the victims are still around is an important distinguishing factor to this situation vs. historical ones. It's one thing to argue someone's legacy reputation; no one currently living has direct personal experience with that person, what we know is pieced together through historical evidence and conjecture. It's a whole other situation to try and deal with tangible, living pain; the victims today have potential to hear and see this music being performed and promoted in what is largely held to be a universally safe place, the church. Although I'm generally wary of "cancel culture" there's definitely nuance to each scenario, and comparing this situation to questions of historical figures can become a bit apples to oranges in nature I think.
    Thanked by 2Liam Bicinium
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 8,921
    Are you David Haas, or one of his close friends?

    Please, @contemporaryworship92, do not get personal with people like this. You're making a wild speculation, just because someone happens to like Haas' music.

    He actually had an account on this site under his own name and used it a few times in 2010 and 2011 to post comments.
  • Jeffrey Quick
    Posts: 1,867
    In 1971 the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments actually forbid the use of Wagner's "Bridal Chorus" in Catholic weddings


    I did not know that. Of course, there had been a de facto ban since Pius X, on the basis of the music being literally operatic, and our organizational forbears constantly inveighed against it. Nice to know that it's de jure now.
    Thanked by 1RedPop4
  • Jeffrey,

    Does "de jure" status make an abuse go away more quickly?
  • ServiamScores
    Posts: 1,777
    It certainly makes it easier to shut certain people down when pressed.
    Thanked by 1RedPop4
  • RedPop4
    Posts: 43
    Indeed it does!
    Thanked by 1tomjaw
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,675
    And then the pastor tells you to play what the bride wants.
    Thanked by 1StimsonInRehab
  • Jeffrey Quick
    Posts: 1,867
    Does "de jure" status make an abuse go away more quickly?

    No. But it might make would-be abusers go away more quickly.
    Thanked by 1ServiamScores
  • MarkB
    Posts: 844
    I had never heard that the CDW forbade the use of the Bridal Chorus, and I was skeptical of that claim. I couldn't find the relevant document, but I found this article transcription from the New York Times about it:
    https://www.nytimes.com/1971/04/15/archives/vatican-word-on-music-may-rule-out-here-comes-the-bride.html

    Notitiae, the monthly newsletter of the Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship, the Vatican's liturgical department, suggested yesterday that more “sacred” music replace such widely used selections as the wedding marches by Mendelssohn and Wagner, the Ave Marias of Schubert and Gounod, Handel's Largo and Stradella's Church Aria.

    ...

    The Congregation did not issue a formal ban on the “undesirable” music, but rather urged national conferences of bishops around the world to establish the music that should be sung or played at weddings and other functions. The statement on music was, it explained, part of a continuing implementation of the reforms of Roman Catholic liturgy enacted by the Ecumenical Council Vatican II, 1962‐1965.

    ...

    “The new rites of marriage, introduced in March, 1970, reiterated and reaffirmed that the whole marriage rite should be a congregational effort,” he said. “The liturgical ideal would be to have the congregation singing all the parts of the mass and all accompanying parts of song, except the particular parts designed for choirs. In reality, it can't always be done at marriage services.”
    Thanked by 2chonak Jeffrey Quick
  • a_f_hawkins
    Posts: 3,063
    Notitiae number 62 p110. It's in the preamble paragraph. My non-existent Italian does not allow me to judge how strong the sentiment is. The urging of bishops continues on the next page.
  • ServiamScores
    Posts: 1,777
    Interesting that it mentions Handel’s largo, Gounod Ave and Schubert Ave too…

    If I never have to do the Schubert again I won’t be the slightest bit perturbed.
  • As Shakespeare said, a ban "more honored in the breach than in the observance" (in every sense that the term has been used).
    Thanked by 1ServiamScores
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 8,921
    Here's a quick translation:

    After the Ordo celebrandi Matrimonium entered into force, which restored a straightforwardly liturgical setting to the celebration of marriage by various parts of the world, regions, and peoples, the Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship has been asked what to think, within the framework of the liturgical renewal, of several musical selections still much used as quasi-"typical" elements in the wedding ceremony. These were listed in particular: the Mendelssohn "Wedding March", the Wagner "Wedding March", the "Largo" of Handel, the Gounod "Ave Maria", the Schubert "Ave Maria", and the "Church Aria" of Stradella.

    The Sacred Congregation asked 13 experts, 9 musicians and 4 liturgists, of international reputation, about the topic.

    From their answers, several indications emerged, which we consider useful to make known in summary form, for a general orientation on this problem.

    1. In general, those asked expressed a negative opinion, not about the intrinsic artistic value of the selections, but because they were considered not suited for liturgical use. To accept these musical works without reserve would signify the continuance of an anachronistic past.
  • Hello all, Bicinium here.

    I deeply appreciate the compassion with which you answered my question. Yes, I'm sure there are multiple threads and posts on the issue. I even read some. I just wanted to share a very pointed opinion, and thank you to each and every one of you who took the time to answer.

    I'm probably going to keep playing some of his works.

    Contemporaryworship92, no, I am not David Haas or even a friend of his. I've never met the man. I am a church musician with an advanced degree in music who just happens to like some of his work. I do find your assumption a bit odd, although the advice to David Haas was sound -- too bad I am not DH. However, it's unlikely an abuser like DH would be able to receive your advice in a way that would help him.

    I do agree, however, with the comment you posted that his enablers should be accountable.

    And thank you, chonak, for your comment. I agree.

    Thank you, MarkB. I agree that the publishing world is quite insular.

  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,675
    I have wondered how many bishops have actually banned music by Haas. The ones I have encountered seemed to consider him a fly in the works not worthy of their attention.
  • Liam
    Posts: 4,605
    Usually done through the diocesan office of divine worship, not the bishop in the first person, as it were. By the late fall of 2020, 84 U.S. dioceses had done so, and I would imagine more have done so in the intervening time. And anyone programming his music in dioceses that haven't done so needs to be prepared to be confronted by an upset person in the pews for whom encountering Haas' music is, shall we say, triggering. None of the people I know in music ministries feel Haas' music is of such irreplaceable value as to make continuing programming it worth that. There are many other fish in the composer sea.
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,675
    Thanks, Liam. One regional bishop has said he thinks some parishes do that music. He doesn't seem too bothered by it.
  • LauraKaz
    Posts: 15
    Unfortunately, my diocese seems not to have gotten the memo...I've heard songs of his in at least three parishes in the past few months. Sigh.
  • tomjaw
    Posts: 2,355
    @LauraKaz You should complain as a victim of abuse (of the eardrums) that you find hearing his music hurtful (to your ears). end purple text.
    Thanked by 2CHGiffen LauraKaz
  • ronkrisman
    Posts: 1,367
    I have a few questions about the new Gather edition. Was it created mainly to exclude all of Haas's music? Because the Gather edition before it is only a few years old.

    In response to the OP's query, I'm of the opinion that the publication dates of the Gather series of hymnals was the principal driving force for the Gather, 4th edition:

    Gather Comprehensive - 1994
    Gather Comprehensive II - 2004
    Gather, 3rd edition - 2011
    Gather, 4th edition - 2021

    So, roughly a decade between editions.