As we all began our celebrations of Holy Week with yesterday's Masses for Palm Sunday, I considered how very different these liturgies likely were this year from just a few years ago, and how very different they will be at this time next year. In many parishes across the country, Catholics might have heard the actual Entrance Antiphon for Palm Sunday - Hosanna Filio David - either the Latin version from the Gradual or perhaps one of the excellent English versions now available, such as Adam Bartlett's "Simple English Propers", rather than a substitute. The ready availability of these resources and their ease of use means that for the first time in many years, it was possible to celebrate the liturgy of Palm Sunday as it was intended rather than making it an occasion for creativity or an exercise in attempting to extract participation from the assembly at a time when the assembly's participation is neither envisioned nor required by the liturgical structure.
I always find the Procession for Palm Sunday fascinating, as it is one of the very few places in the Missal where there is both an Antiphon (Hosanna Filio David) AND a Hymn (Gloria, laus et honor) given for a specific liturgy. This is important because it makes clear the exceptional nature of THIS procession....a procession that is different from the processions of other Masses on other Sundays. Sadly, this high point has been diminished by the use of hymns for the procession on EVERY Sunday throughout the year, making this "Triumphant entrance" of Jesus into Jerusalem just like every other Sunday in the vast majority of parishes. How wonderful would it be if our celebration of Jesus's entrance into the Holy City were something exceptional, something out of the ordinary? Such is the genius of the actual liturgical structure of the Roman Rite, if only we could set our own vanity and personal preferences aside and celebrate it as it has been given to us!
Perhaps it will take some time...and a change of heart...before we are once again ready accept and follow the wisdom of 2000 years of tradition and liturgical development over our own desire to put our personal signature on our worship. It's a difficult step that will require a great deal of humility, and that's a rare commodity these days! But there is hope in the knowledge that there are more and more instances of faithful celebrations of the liturgy today than there were even a few years ago, and there will be more such celebrations this week than there were last year during Holy Week. And there will be an even greater number next year for the simple reason that when the liturgy is faithfully celebrated, it ALWAYS WORKS. Without fail...
And so as we enter Holy Week, we can perhaps approach our own celebrations with a renewed sense of humility. Are we celebrating what we are given, or do we still want to sign our own giant JOHN HANCOCK to all that we do? In years past there were so many excuses, but as we are given better texts, better musical settings and a greater awareness of our liturgical past, those excuses are withering and becoming tired.
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Throughout the next year, and until the implementation of the New Translation of the Roman Missal, The Authentic Update will focus on issues surrounding the New Translation and developments in Sacred Music arising from it. I hope you will visit here frequently and join in the conversation as the Church enters into this remarkable period of liturgical transformation.
Why "Authentic Update"?
The inspiration comes from Benedict XVI's speech following a concert of Sacred Music at the Sistine Chapel. The complete quote is ... "“All of the selections we have listened to – and especially in their entirety, where the 16th and 20th centuries stand parallel – agree in confirming the conviction that sacred polyphony, in particular that of what is called the ‘Roman school’, constitutes a heritage that should be preserved with care, kept alive, and made better known, for the benefit not only of the scholars and specialists, but of the ecclesial community as a whole. [...] An authentic updating of sacred music can take place only in the lineage of the great tradition of the past, of Gregorian chant and sacred polyphony.”
After reading this passage, and a great deal of writing from Benedict regarding Sacred Music, I have come to the conclusion that he has already made up his mind on this question. He clearly believes that an "authentic update" is necessary, and he has clearly said it can "take place only in the lineage of the great tradition of the past, of Gregorian chant and sacred polyphony." This past year, we were again reminded of his vision for Sacred Music in Sacramentum Caritatis in which he stated unequivocally...
"In the course of her two-thousand-year history, the Church has created, and still creates, music and songs which represent a rich patrimony of faith and love. This heritage must not be lost. Certainly as far as the liturgy is concerned, we cannot say that one song is as good as another. Generic improvisation or the introduction of musical genres which fail to respect the meaning of the liturgy should be avoided. As an element of the liturgy, song should be well integrated into the overall celebration. Consequently everything – texts, music, execution – ought to correspond to the meaning of the mystery being celebrated, the structure of the rite and the liturgical seasons .
Finally, while respecting various styles and different and highly praiseworthy traditions, I desire, in accordance with the request advanced by the Synod Fathers, that Gregorian chant be suitably esteemed and employed as the chant proper to the Roman liturgy."
This, of course is just the latest move in a long process of reform of Sacred Music that is to come from Pope Benedict. Do I know this for sure... of course not! But, I have put together a lot of little dots that together begin to form a picture of large-scale reform. See below for some of the parts of this conspiracy theory of mine!
1. The Theological Problems of Church Music
The definitive treatise on why we need to reform Catholic Sacred Music, written by the definitive author, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger in 1977. This was a mere 10 years after the council, and Cardinal Ratzinger had already recognized the error of our ways! I doubt that he has changed his mind very much on this topic!
2. Letter from Pope Benedict to Cardinal Arinze on the occasion of the "Study Day on Sacred Music"
This brief letter is simply a formal welcome from the Pope to the participants of the study day on Sacred Music in December 2005. Note how he says, in reference to Pope John Paul's Chirograph on Sacred Music, "In making my beloved Predecessor's request my own, I would like to encourage lovers of sacred music to continue along these lines". This would seem to mean that it is his intention that the Bishops present at this Study Day continue along the course laid out by JPII in the Chirograph. Although JPII is widely percieved as a friend of the progressive... this document would seem to dispute that image! (see below)
3. John Paul II's Chirograph on Sacred Music
Any leftover Folk-Mass musicians who still see John Paul II as the "voice of the people" and a supporter of contemporary Folk-Mass music should take a good strong drink before reading the "Chirograph". This strongly worded document borders on a denunciation of contemporary liturgical music and without ever saying so (as was typical of JPII) reached the conclusion that perhaps Pius X was right.
4. Cardinal Arinze on Sacred Music
Of course, no reform of Sacred Music would be possible without the cooperation of the CDW. Would Cardinal Arinze be "on board" for a large-scale reform of Sacred Music? Read this interview, then decide!
5. Letter from Cardinal Arinze to Bishops regarding translations as directed by Liturgiam Authenticam.
What does this have to do with Music reform? Everything...follow me on this one, then read the letter. The only REAL document we have so far in terms of proposing reform is the Bishop's "Directory for Music and the Liturgy" which was sent to Rome in November of 2006 for recognitio. So far none has been given. The Directory comes as a result of the requirement set out in Liturgiam Authenticam that "Within five years from the publication of this Instruction, the Conferences of Bishops, necessarily in collaboration with the national and diocesan Commissions and with other experts, shall provide for the publication of a directory or repertory of texts intended for liturgical singing. This document shall be transmitted for the necessary recognitio to the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments." The document clearly calls for a directory or repertory (list) of texts. What the Bishops proposed was a procedure for evaluating songs. It is not a bold statemewnt to say that the Bishop's proposed Directory is nothing at all like what is required by Liturgiam Authenticam. And so they sent it to Rome for approval anyway... now read the letter above.
After reading this passage, and a great deal of writing from Benedict regarding Sacred Music, I have come to the conclusion that he has already made up his mind on this question. He clearly believes that an "authentic update" is necessary, and he has clearly said it can "take place only in the lineage of the great tradition of the past, of Gregorian chant and sacred polyphony." This past year, we were again reminded of his vision for Sacred Music in Sacramentum Caritatis in which he stated unequivocally...
"In the course of her two-thousand-year history, the Church has created, and still creates, music and songs which represent a rich patrimony of faith and love. This heritage must not be lost. Certainly as far as the liturgy is concerned, we cannot say that one song is as good as another. Generic improvisation or the introduction of musical genres which fail to respect the meaning of the liturgy should be avoided. As an element of the liturgy, song should be well integrated into the overall celebration. Consequently everything – texts, music, execution – ought to correspond to the meaning of the mystery being celebrated, the structure of the rite and the liturgical seasons .
Finally, while respecting various styles and different and highly praiseworthy traditions, I desire, in accordance with the request advanced by the Synod Fathers, that Gregorian chant be suitably esteemed and employed as the chant proper to the Roman liturgy."
This, of course is just the latest move in a long process of reform of Sacred Music that is to come from Pope Benedict. Do I know this for sure... of course not! But, I have put together a lot of little dots that together begin to form a picture of large-scale reform. See below for some of the parts of this conspiracy theory of mine!
1. The Theological Problems of Church Music
The definitive treatise on why we need to reform Catholic Sacred Music, written by the definitive author, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger in 1977. This was a mere 10 years after the council, and Cardinal Ratzinger had already recognized the error of our ways! I doubt that he has changed his mind very much on this topic!
2. Letter from Pope Benedict to Cardinal Arinze on the occasion of the "Study Day on Sacred Music"
This brief letter is simply a formal welcome from the Pope to the participants of the study day on Sacred Music in December 2005. Note how he says, in reference to Pope John Paul's Chirograph on Sacred Music, "In making my beloved Predecessor's request my own, I would like to encourage lovers of sacred music to continue along these lines". This would seem to mean that it is his intention that the Bishops present at this Study Day continue along the course laid out by JPII in the Chirograph. Although JPII is widely percieved as a friend of the progressive... this document would seem to dispute that image! (see below)
3. John Paul II's Chirograph on Sacred Music
Any leftover Folk-Mass musicians who still see John Paul II as the "voice of the people" and a supporter of contemporary Folk-Mass music should take a good strong drink before reading the "Chirograph". This strongly worded document borders on a denunciation of contemporary liturgical music and without ever saying so (as was typical of JPII) reached the conclusion that perhaps Pius X was right.
4. Cardinal Arinze on Sacred Music
Of course, no reform of Sacred Music would be possible without the cooperation of the CDW. Would Cardinal Arinze be "on board" for a large-scale reform of Sacred Music? Read this interview, then decide!
5. Letter from Cardinal Arinze to Bishops regarding translations as directed by Liturgiam Authenticam.
What does this have to do with Music reform? Everything...follow me on this one, then read the letter. The only REAL document we have so far in terms of proposing reform is the Bishop's "Directory for Music and the Liturgy" which was sent to Rome in November of 2006 for recognitio. So far none has been given. The Directory comes as a result of the requirement set out in Liturgiam Authenticam that "Within five years from the publication of this Instruction, the Conferences of Bishops, necessarily in collaboration with the national and diocesan Commissions and with other experts, shall provide for the publication of a directory or repertory of texts intended for liturgical singing. This document shall be transmitted for the necessary recognitio to the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments." The document clearly calls for a directory or repertory (list) of texts. What the Bishops proposed was a procedure for evaluating songs. It is not a bold statemewnt to say that the Bishop's proposed Directory is nothing at all like what is required by Liturgiam Authenticam. And so they sent it to Rome for approval anyway... now read the letter above.
1 comment:
Very nice blog you have herre
Post a Comment