This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
A Thesis Presented to Dr. Michael Sirilla Franciscan University of Steubenville
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Bachelor of Arts in Theology
by John Paul Dominic Brodeur February 2012
TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. 2. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . THE ROLE OF GREGORIAN CHANT IN SACRED MUSIC . . . . . . . . A Practical Ideal Pride of Place The Supreme Model A Permanent Form 3. QUALITIES OF GREGORIAN CHANT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Unison Singing Free Rhythm Primacy of the Word Regard for Silence Adaptation to Liturgical Action Timelessness 4. 5. COMPARISON WITH OTHER MUSICAL GENRES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A PROPER APPROACH TO LITURGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Humility Commonality between Forms Unity in Christ Transcendence Divine Sonship Thought Precedes Emotion Christ‘s Countenance 17 20 6 1 3
THE IMPORTANCE OF SINGING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Recent Legislation Bugnini‘s Paradigm Differences in the Novus Ordo Dual Role of the Schola Cantorum
CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
GREGORIAN CHANT, THE ROMAN LITURGY, AND THE UNIVERSAL IDENTITY OF THE FAITHFUL INTRODUCTION Half a century has passed since John XXIII convened the Second Vatican Council, and in the span of fifty years, many things have changed. In the wake of Sacrosanctum Concilium, the novus ordo of the Mass is now predominantly – and in most cases, exclusively – vernacular. A new three-year cycle of readings has been firmly established, and the Mass features new prayers and practices which have not been employed in the liturgy since long before the Council of Trent. These changes stand in stark contrast with the recently promulgated ―Extraordinary Form‖ of the Mass, the same Missal which Pope Paul VI issued in 1962. Many Catholics who have recently attended this Extraordinary Form of the Mass for the first time have come away confused and despondent because of how unfamiliar the Mass seemed to them. Many such individuals are quick to dismiss the Extraordinary Form of the Mass as something irrelevant both to the contemporary church and to their own spiritual lives. Some have even deemed it as something innately harmful: a practice which impedes the Church from fully embracing the "Spirit of the Council," and a threat to the liturgical innovations which allow the participation of the lay faithful. On the other extreme, there are some Catholics who have begun exclusively attending the Extraordinary Form of the Mass and continue to distance themselves from the novus ordo as far as it can be considered morally acceptable. Many such individuals often assert that the creation of the novus ordo was a grievous error on the part of the council, and their vehement denouncement of the new form of the Mass stops just short of questioning its validity as a sacramental practice.
2 These attitudes are particularly striking because of their mutual identification with ―the Church.‖ Indeed, both groups support their view with what they perceive to be a truly Catholic way of living and worshipping. In a profound irony, universal "Catholic" identity has become dichotomized. For both of these groups, the Second Vatican Council resulted in discontinuity, and the two forms of the Mass seem to testify to this, either as a fortunate or unfortunate reality. The common juxtaposition of each form is significant. When relating the character of the two forms, their differences are almost universally stressed. The axiom Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi has perhaps never been more clearly illustrated than in the current situation: significant differences in the practice of each form result in differing patterns of belief, and most fundamentally, those beliefs which answer the question, ―What does it mean to be Catholic?‖ Any effort to resolve this disparity in Catholic identity will naturally require the Church to review its liturgical practices. First and foremost, it will require clarification and proper catechesis as to what liturgy actually is. Second, it will require a faithful practice of the liturgy in both forms of the Roman rite so that both conform to those principles which constitute the essential character of the Mass itself. This paper will seek to illustrate the pivotal role which music plays in expressing that essential character and fostering a truly universal ―Catholic‖ identity. Because of the mutual influence which exists between music, liturgy, and ecclesiology,1 the author deems it a matter of the greatest urgency and importance to posit the following thesis: a genuine Catholic identity is naturally formed when Christians regularly sing Gregorian Chant in the liturgy. Likewise, Catholic identity is impoverished and diversified whenever Gregorian Chant is either abandoned in the liturgy or exclusively relegated to the choir.
M. Francis Mannion, "The 'Musification' of the Word: Cardinal Ratzinger's Theology of Liturgical Music," in Masterworks of God: Essays in Liturgical Theory and Practice (Mundelein, Illinois: Hillenbrand Books, 2004), 177.
3 THE ROLE OF GREGORIAN CHANT IN SACRED MUSIC There are four primary ways in which Gregorian Chant relates to Sacred Music (in both forms of the Roman Rite) as established in the various church documents written since Tra le sollecitudini, Pope Pius X‘s seminal work which was promulgated in 1903: (1) as a practical ideal, (2) as having pride of place, (3) as a permanent form, and (4) as the supreme model. A Practical Ideal In Tra le sollecitudini, Pope Pius X enumerates three qualities which all Sacred Music must share: (1) holiness, excluding all profanity in itself and in the manner it is executed; (2) fitness of form, requiring that it be true art and thereby efficacious; and (3) universality, which is spontaneously produced by adherence to the first two qualities.2 ―These qualities,‖ he continues, ―are to be found, in the highest degree, in Gregorian Chant, which is, consequently the Chant proper to the Roman Church, the only chant she has inherited from the ancient fathers, which she has jealously guarded for centuries in her liturgical codices, which she directly proposes to the faithful as her own.‖3 Thus, the chant is rightly understood as an ideal form of Sacred Music. Furthermore, this ideal is not an abstraction of qualities; it is a living repertoire which can be experienced and performed without lessening its value. Indeed, its continual performance down through the ages is an integral part of what makes it ideal since its performance is invariably tied to the practice of the liturgy throughout history.
Pope St. Pius X, Tra Le Sollecitudini: Instruction on Sacred Music (November 22, 1903), http://adoremus.org/MotuProprio.html (accessed November 11, 2011), no. 2; P. Gregory Hügle, Catechism of Gregorian Chant (New York, NY: J. Fischer & Bro, 1928), 30-31.
St. Pius X, Tra Le Sollecitudini, no. 3.
4 Pride of Place As an ideal form belonging specifically to the Roman Church, Gregorian Chant is to be given ―pride of place in liturgical services‖ which means that it should be especially fostered and frequently employed alongside other kinds of sacred music which have been deemed worthy of liturgical celebration. This directive is once again very practical because it requires the chants to be sung often and frequently. Gregorian Chant cannot be given pride of place if it is never employed, nor does a vocalized acknowledgment suffice. This primacy is pronounced both in the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy4 and in the General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM).5 It is worth noting that these citations are not merely the aspirations of a given Pontiff, but an expression of the entire Church‘s liturgical law. The Supreme Model Because of its relation to Sacred Music as an ideal, Gregorian Chant ―has always been regarded as the supreme model for sacred music, so that it is fully legitimate to lay down the following rule: the more closely a composition for church approaches in its movement, inspiration and savor the Gregorian form, the more sacred and liturgical it becomes; and the more out of harmony it is with that supreme model, the less worthy it is of the temple.‖6 This conception of Gregorian Chant as a supreme model is not exclusive to Pope St. Pius X. It is an instruction which has been reaffirmed particularly intensely
Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, Sacrosanctum Concilium (December 4, 1963), http://adoremus.org/SacrosanctumConcilium.html (accessed November 11, 2011), no. 116. United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, General Instruction of the Roman Missal, Rev. 3rd ed., trans. International Committee on English in the Liturgy (Washington, DC: United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, 2011), 19.
St. Pius X, Tra Le Sollecitudini, no. 3.
5 over the last decade by no less than Bl. John Paul II7 and the current Roman Pontiff, Benedict XVI.8 In its Instruction on Music in the Liturgy, the Sacred Congregation for Rites also acknowledged this principle: ―above all, the study and practice of Gregorian chant is to be promoted, because, with its special characteristics, it is a basis of great importance for the development of sacred music.‖9 Thus, every composer of Sacred Music ought to have a receptivity to tradition. Because he takes the chants as his model, he is not primarily a fabricator but an inspired recipient, which clearly illustrates the vision that great works of Church music cannot be achieved by man alone, but only by a transcendence of self.10 As Cardinal Ratzinger points out, it is precisely those compositions which have successfully drawn upon Gregorian Chant as a model that constitute what Vatican II has termed the ―treasure of sacred music.‖11
―With regard to compositions of liturgical music, I make my own the ‗general rule‘ that St Pius X formulated… It is not, of course, a question of imitating Gregorian chant but rather of ensuring that new compositions are imbued with the same spirit that inspired and little by little came to shape it. Only an artist who is profoundly steeped in the sensus Ecclesiae can attempt to perceive and express in melody the truth of the Mystery that is celebrated in the Liturgy.‖ Pope John Paul II, Chirograph of the Supreme Pontiff John Paul II for the Centenary of the Motu Proprio Tra le sollecitudini, On Sacred Music (November 22, 2003), http://adoremus.org/Chirograph-SacredMusic.html (accessed November 11, 2011), no. 112.
―Popes Paul VI and John Paul II particularly wished to reaffirm the aim of sacred music in the light of the conciliar constitution, Sacrosanctum Concilium, namely, ―the glory of God and the sanctification of the faithful‖ (§112) , as well as the fundamental criteria of tradition…: the sense of prayer, of dignity and beauty, full adherence to the texts and the liturgical gestures, the involvement of the assembly, and thus a legitimate adaptation to the local culture while also preserving the universality of the language; the primacy of Gregorian chant as a supreme model of sacred music…‖ Pope Benedict XVI, The Patrimony of Sacred Music: Continuity and Natural Development: Pope Benedict XVI's Address for the 100th Anniversary of the Pontifical Institute of Sacred Music (August 2011), Vol. XVII, No. 5, http://adoremus.org/0811BenedictXVI.html (accessed November 11, 2011).
Sacred Congregation for Rites, Musicam Sacram: Instruction On Music In The Liturgy (March 5, 1967), http://adoremus.org/MusicamSacram.html (accessed November 11, 2011), no. 52.
Mannion, ―The 'Musification' of the Word,‖ 187. Ibid., 193.; Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, Sacrosanctum Concilium, no. 114.
6 A Permanent Form Gregorian Chant is a fixed and permanent form of music. The claim which the Church has made upon it is unconditional and timeless; it shuns the progressive mentality that music, like human history, is ―inexorably moving forward.‖12 In the formality of its declarations, the Church has disallowed any possibility of exchanging its heritage, and has simultaneously resisted a paradigm of musical evolution and repudiated the notion that the practices of the past are necessarily inferior to those of the present generation. This is why in the concluding remarks of his little work, A Catechism of Gregorian Chant, Gregory Hügle, O.S.B. quotes a fellow Benedictine who wrote: ―Plain Chant is a finished product of art, not a tentative beginning of some musical development. It is classical music; it borrowed from antiquity beauty of form; into this form the early Christians breathed the vigor of spirituality.‖13 Indeed, because of its absolute reliance upon liturgical texts, the only revisions the Gregorian repertoire has undergone since St. Gregory the Great first compiled the chants into an authoritative volume has been at the demands of the liturgy itself. QUALITIES OF GREGORIAN CHANT Especially because the Gregorian repertoire is designated as an ideal and supreme model of all sacred music, the most prominent musical attributes of Gregorian Chant deserve specific mention in a proper analysis of their theological significance in liturgy.
T. David, Gordon, Why Johnny Can't Sing Hymns (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, P. Gregory Hügle, Catechism of Gregorian Chant (New York, NY: J. Fischer & Bro, 1928),
7 The Latin Language The first and most obvious characteristic of Gregorian Chant is its exclusive use of the Latin Language (with a handful of exceptions: e.g., the Greek Kyrie Eleison, the Greek Trisagion prescribed for Good Friday, and the Hebrew Alleluia). Unlike other musical genres, Gregorian Chant cannot simply be sung in another language and remain part of the genre. The language is essential. Thus, to ―sing Gregorian Chant in the vernacular‖ is to cease singing Gregorian Chant, despite the use of a Gregorian melody. Jeffrey Tucker, a prominent member of the Church Music Association of America and author of Sing Like a Catholic provides an important insight as to why the Latin language is so essential: ―the very act of singing the Latin increases our sense of being part of something larger than our own time and place.‖14 Indeed, the repertoire is a consistent, worldwide expression which remains unaltered by the language of the local community or even the predominant vernacular of a given time period. Therefore, the chant transcends the expression of a local community and testifies to a much larger community than those who are gathered in the local parish church: it recalls that the entire community of believers, those living and those who have gone before. The use of Latin does, however, present the lay faithful with a serious difficulty which ought not to be dismissed out of hand. Especially in a liturgical setting which overwhelmingly employs the vernacular, much of the assembly will be unable to comprehend the meaning of the words being sung. Thus, one can readily observe an unfortunate tension between universality and comprehension in every liturgical expression. Although this dichotomy was not present at the institution of the sacrament when Christ spoke words which were native and comprehensible to all the participants, it
14 Jeffrey A. Tucker, Sing Like a Catholic (Richmond, VA: Church Music Association of America, 2009), 122.
8 is a difficulty which has persisted since the development of the Early Church.15 In claiming Gregorian Chant as an ideal, the Church has seen fit to give priority to the universality of expression over the need for comprehension, while at the same time constantly laboring to make the liturgy more intelligible on the part of the lay faithful. Unison Singing Another striking mark of Gregorian Chant is how it employs a melodic line without the harmonic embellishments found in most other forms of music. Because the modern sensibility of music gives more priority to harmony than to the melody, this characteristic is commonly—and understandably—seen as an impoverishment. Rev. Hügle, however, suggests that this peculiarity of the chant is actually a ―great gain.‖16 He provides five reasons in particular: (1) without the need to accommodate or cooperate with other parts, it enjoys untrammeled movement; (2) its lively rhythm creates its own harmony, especially in spaces which accommodate acoustics properly (e.g., Cathedrals, churches without carpets); (3) it enables the participation of many singers; (4) it avoids the necessity of repeating text unnecessarily; and (5) most importantly, it serves as the ―vivid embodiment of the all-around unity in Christ's Eucharistic Sacrifice, where out of many grains arises one bread, out of many berries, one measure of wine, and out of many voices, one unified chorus.—‗One God, one Mediator, one Church, one Faith, one voice.‘‖17 Hence, the unadorned melody exhibits unity in the same way the Latin language exhibits universality, especially in relation to the sacrament of the Eucharist.
―The Pope has written in his book The Spirit of the Liturgy that the issue of multiculturalism was confronted and dealt with early in the Christian history, as the Roman Rite developed to deal with intense diversity of early converts from many regions and language groups. The result was the Latin language in liturgy, and Gregorian chant and its timeless and universal sound, together with the text of the Psalms that speak to universal impulses in the human person. True multiculturalism is achieved in the Roman Rite itself, a point which is still emphasized in Church teaching.‖ Ibid., 164.
Hügle, Catechism of Gregorian Chant, 32. Ibid.
9 Free Rhythm A third characteristic of Gregorian Chant is its rhythmic independence from any kind of fixed meter. This is why it is impossible to tap your foot to a Gregorian melody. Indeed, the rhythm of Gregorian Chant is more like the dignified steps of a person walking than the marching or dancing incited by most musical compositions.18 Its rhythm is not derived from the almost ubiquitous use of duple or triple meters, but rather from the word accents themselves, which are formed by the appropriate use of duple and triple motions. Because the chant texts are predominantly prose rather than verses of poetry, the music rests on the indivisible beat of the spoken syllable rather than on the measured, divisible beat taught in modern-day music theory (e.g. one half note = two quarter notes = four eighth notes).19 Because the indivisible beat cannot be likewise reduced, the motion of the chant relies upon the succession of notes rather than their division, which in practice is as natural as speaking. The end result is that the rhythm must rely on the text rather than the text being subjected to the requirements of a metrical rhythm. The significance of this difference cannot be overstated. Rev. Hügle recalls that Plato‘s definition of rhythm is the ―order in movement.‖20 This order can either be achieved in a physical way or in a rational way. It is achieved physically by the use of a fixed meter, which is highly characteristic of the temporal order (e.g., the regularity of the clock or the pulsation of a heartbeat); whereby the accent recurs in a regular pattern. Alternatively, this order can be rationally achieved by deriving the musical accent from the words themselves. Rev. Hügle describes a word accent as ―an energy which proceeds from man‘s intellect. It marshals into order a number of syllables, which otherwise would
Ibid., 25. Ibid. Ibid., 22.
10 be an array of dead material. By means of the accent the soul becomes audible as an intelligent power that delivers a message.—‗Accentus est anima vocis.‘—‗The accent is the soul of the word‘ (Cicero).‖21 Thus, the movement of Gregorian Chant is ordered by the words themselves; the rhythm is completely subordinated to the inflection of the words being pronounced. Because rhythm is considered ―the quickening and shaping element, the spiritualizing power,‖22 the freer the rhythm, the greater the spiritual value of the music. This is why Gregorian Chant, whose rhythm is completely independent of the music and utterly docile to the word accent, may be considered ―eminently spiritual.‖23 Primacy of the Word This important philosophical implication of free rhythm illustrates the peculiar regard Gregorian Chant has for the words it proclaims. The chants are unmistakably words set to music rather than music containing words—and these are not just any words; they are predominantly Scriptural texts. Because of this, the purpose of Chant differs from that of secular music ―just as much as the architecture of a cathedral differs from that of a concert-hall.‖24 In the case of Gregorian Chant, the sacred texts are clothed with suitable melody in order to increase devotion and dispose hearts to receive grace more fully while remaining most essentially an oratorical activity.25 This is further illustrated by the GIRM‘s legislation for the Psalmist whose place it is to sing the psalm or biblical canticle found between the readings. The instruction stresses that ―to carry out this function correctly, it is necessary for the psalmist to be accomplished in the art of singing
Ibid., 23. Ibid., 47. Ibid. Ibid., 46-47. Ibid.
11 Psalms and have a facility in public speaking and elocution.‖26 Cardinal Ratzinger speaks with exceptional eloquence on this matter, which he discusses in the context of liturgical music as a whole: In liturgical music, based as it is on biblical faith, there is, therefore, a clear dominance of the Word; this music is a higher form of proclamation. Ultimately, it rises up out of the love that responds to God's love made flesh in Christ, the love that for us went unto death. After the Resurrection, the Cross is by no means a thing of the past, and so this love is always marked by pain at the hiddenness of God, by the cry that rises up from the depths of anguish, Kyrie eleison, by hope and by supplication. But it also has the privilege, by anticipation, of experiencing the reality of the Resurrection, and so it brings with it the joy of being loved, that gladness of heart that Haydn said came upon him when he set liturgical texts to music. Thus the relation of liturgical music to logos means, first of all, simply its relation to words.‖27 As Cardinal Ratzinger points out, there is a very good reason for the prominence which Gregorian Chant bestows upon the words it proclaims. These very words, inspired by the Holy Spirit, bear the presence of the Logos himself—Jesus Christ, the Word Incarnate. This is the same reason why Ratzinger can speak of liturgical music as a kind of musical incarnation in which the Word of God takes flesh in music by uniting Himself with an audible, sensible reality, bestowing upon liturgical music—and Gregorian Chant in particular—a ―sacramental, revelatory, holy character.‖28 It can be considered sacramental precisely because of this unique interplay between the corporeal and the spiritual worlds: ―As the ‗spiritualization of the flesh‘ occurs, ‗…the unconscious and the unreleased become ordered and meaningful sound. A corporealization takes place which
USCCB, GIRM, Rev. 3rd ed., 43.
Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, The Spirit of the Liturgy, trans. John Saward (San Francisco, CA: Ignatius Press, 2000), 149. Mannion, ―The ‗Musification‘ of the Word,‖ 187; ―The Word in the church is not merely verbal, of course; it is effected in the sacraments, which are the central modalities in which the Incarnation is elongated historically. The whole sacramental and liturgical system forms an expansion of the Word into the realms of the bodily and that of all the human senses. The Word of God finds expression in a process the cardinal calls the ‗musification‘ of the Word, itself a feature of the incarnational process by which 'the flesh itself is ‗logocized.‘‖ Ibid., 190.
12 is a spiritualization, and a spiritualization which is a corporealization.‘ The Word takes form in music; music is assumed into the Word.‖29 Sacrosanctum Concilium asserts that it is precisely this relationship which liturgical music has with words of the liturgy— namely Christ, the Logos—which grants it pre-eminence above all other art.30 Regard for Silence An essential component of good oratory is the effective use of silence and cooperation with its demands. In metrical music, pauses are designated with similarly metrical values, generating a sort of superficial silence in which the meter persists like a muffled drum beat with mathematical accuracy. In chant, the pauses are notated by bar lines which correspond with various forms of punctuation in a sentence (i.e., the comma, semi-colon, colon, and period). Thus, the pauses in chant are as free and natural as they are in reading or speaking. Rev. Hügle stresses the importance of employing this technique in Gregorian repertoire: A careful attention to the different pauses is of the utmost importance for acquiring the true style of Gregorian music. Each sentence is thus brought into the proper oratorical balance.—The short pauses preserve the speed and enliven the phrasing; the longer pauses ensure the reverent ending of the clauses and sentences.—The singer is protected against gabbling as well as drawling. By this means monotony is avoided, and a lively rhythm secured.31 Phrasing is inextricably linked to silence. It tempers the vocalization and structures it, allowing the spoken words to be transformed into something comprehensive, meaningful, and ultimately interiorized. Thus, the words create a lasting impression upon the spirit which will outlast their corporeal manifestation. The singer understands this
―The musical tradition of the universal Church is a treasure of inestimable value, greater even than that of any other art. The main reason for this pre-eminence is that, as sacred song united to the words, it forms a necessary or integral part of the solemn Liturgy.‖ Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, Sacrosanctum Concilium, no. 112.
Hügle, Catechism of Gregorian Chant, 20.
13 phenomenon as a ―give and take;‖32 he gives by reverently and audibly pronouncing the sacred words for the edification of the assembly, and he takes by silently receiving the word of God back into his soul as a ―mental echo‖33 in the pauses. This receptivity, on the part of both singers and listeners, is a crucial aspect of Gregorian Chant. As an embellishment of Scriptural prose, it is the actual communication of Divine Revelation, which is something primarily received rather than expressed given that the primary author is God and not the assembled worshipping community. Therefore, chant cooperates with silence in a free and natural way in order to mediate a divine mystery which is beyond what words can describe, a mystery which has been at work throughout the whole of human history, and to which all of the created order aspires: ―music more directly, perhaps, than the other arts has been able to express this dynamic of reality, its openness, its movement towards the Unutterable. For this reason music has become so naturally, in the soul's highest states, the expression the source, the sacrament of silence.‖34 Thus, Gregorian Chant may be aptly described as a sacrament of the silent Word.35 Adaptation to Liturgical Action It would be inaccurate to claim simply that Gregorian Chant is the ideal expression of its text. This is immediately evident to those who have observed multiple
Ibid., 21. Ibid.
Maurice Zundel, The Splendour of the Liturgy (New York, NY: Sheed & Ward, 1944), 40; ―Do we understand at last that action must be born of silence, and abide in silence, and that its power must be the emanation and the radiation of silence, since its sole aim is to make men capable of hearing the Word that silently reverberates in their souls?‖ Ibid., 127. ―That is why psalmody listens more than it sings. The body moreover has its share in this work of praise. It is a part which elevates without exciting it, occupies it without distracting it, and rests it without relaxing it. But while the voice follows the words it sings, the soul surrenders herself to the Spirit.‖ Ibid., 285.
14 settings of the same text within the breadth of the Gregorian Repertoire. Instead, ―each Gregorian chant is an ideal adaptation of its text to its specific liturgical purpose [emphasis added].‖ 36 The variety in the text setting is largely the result of syllabic density—or how many notes occur per syllable.37 Syllabic density is typically distinguished by four categories: (1) recitative—several syllables being sung on a single pitch, as in a psalm tone; (2) syllabic—each syllable receiving a single distinct note; (3) neumatic—several syllables receiving a group of two or three notes, sometimes a few more; and (4) melismatic—some individual syllables embellished with a long series of notes known as a melisma. These differences in text setting correspond with the different ways the music is important to the delivery of the text. For example, recitative is used when texts ought to be delivered for their own sake,38 such as the Old Testament reading, the Epistle, the Gospel, or the Preface. On the other hand, the melismatic style is employed when the text is presented for the effect of reflection and meditation, such as the Gradual and Alleluia chants.39 Mahrt calls the alleluia the ―quintessential melismatic chant‖ and goes on to describe the relationship between the melisma, musical ―jubilation,‖ and meditation: With this melisma, it becomes very clear that the point of the music is not simply to set forth the text, but, as patristic commentators on the alleluia called it, ‗jubilare sine verbis,‘ to jubilate, or to sing a melisma, without words, to depart momentarily from the word in purely musical jubilation. There is never any question about the presence of the text; it is always there in its syllable, but I suspect that the composer has pushed the envelope to just before the breaking point—the melisma is long enough that the listener is almost ready to have
William Mahrt, "Gregorian Chant as a Paradigm of Sacred Music," Sacred Music 133, no. 1 (Spring 2006): 7.
Ibid. Ibid. Ibid.
15 forgotten what the word was. ...[T]he alleluia is a meditation chant, whose melismatic style elicits an attentive repose that provides an effective, purposeful reflection on the lesson that has just been heard and a preparation for the hearing of the gospel which follows. Moreover, the progression from gradual to alleluia creates an increase of intensity that effectively underlines the sense of climax of which the singing of the gospel is the peak.‖40 While the Gradual has been almost completely replaced by the Responsorial Psalm in the novus ordo and the character of the Alleluia entirely altered, it is interesting to note that the GIRM makes a special effort to retain a sense of repose and contemplation during the Liturgy of the Word which is so naturally fostered by Gregorian Chant: ―The Liturgy of the Word is to be celebrated in such a way as to favor meditation, and so any kind of haste such as hinders recollection is clearly to be avoided...‖41 As the examples suggest, these musical adaptations apply primarily to the propers of the Mass—the Introit, Gradual, Alleluia, Offertory, and Communion—that is, to the texts of the Mass which change with each liturgy. However, this same principle also applies to the ordinary chants of the Mass—the Kyrie, Gloria, Credo, Sanctus, and Agnus Dei—to the texts which remain unaltered at every liturgy. In the case of the Mass Ordinary, a total of eighteen different Gregorian settings (and four settings of the Credo) are provided in order to distinguish the various liturgical seasons and events. This is why Mass XVII, the Requiem Mass of the Extraordinary Form is a syllabic setting, but the Missa Cum Jubilo (Mass IX), sung on feasts of the Blessed Virgin Mary is highly neumatic and even melismatic at certain points. Thus, Gregorian Chant not only perfectly reflects the primacy of the word, but also the significance of the liturgical action. This, in turn makes the chants not only utterly sacred by virtue of their relationship to the Word, but supremely liturgical by virtue of their relationship with the Liturgy and its specific actions. Just as the rhythm
Ibid., 12, 13. USCCB, GIRM, Rev. 3rd ed., 25.
16 flows naturally from the words, the musical setting flows from the liturgical action. Hence, the chants may also be considered a perfect synthesis of Scripture and Tradition, the two pillars of the Church‘s Magisterium, a music which is equally docile to both the biblical texts and to their use in Divine Worship. Furthermore, because of its sacramental character, Gregorian Chant helps reveal the hidden significance of the rites, and provides an auditory introduction to the supernatural meaning of the liturgical action and the truths about the Divine mystery being enacted in physical forms.42 Timelessness Considered altogether, these six attributes result in a seventh characteristic of Gregorian Chant which is slightly more subtle but nonetheless important: Gregorian Chant exhibits timelessness. This is not simply to say that Gregorian Chant is a timeless form of music. As a permanent ideal, it certainly is timeless in this respect, transcending the relevance of a particular location or time period, but more to the point, Gregorian Chant exhibits timelessness; it communicates the eternal rather than the temporal. It makes use of a fixed, timeless language; it symbolizes a supernatural unity; it defies consistent metrical rhythms; it aligns itself to the Eternal Word of God; it cooperates with a pre-existing silence; and it extends the liturgical action without regard for efficiency or forethought. In all these ways, it proposes the eternal rather than the temporal, the transcendent rather than the immanent. As Dr. Mahrt points out, the musical setting (as determined by the concurrent liturgical action) serves as a means of suspending our sense of time and fostering contemplation:
Maurice Zundel illustrates this in a breathtaking description of the introit and the offertory: ―[T]he Introit greets us at the entrance of the Mass. It is like a triumphal arch at the head of a Roman road, a porch through which we approach the Mystery, a hand outstretched to a crying child, a beloved companion in the sorrow of exile. The Liturgy is not a formula. It is One who comes to meet us. ...[The solemn rhythm and melody of the Offertory Chants], profound as a song welling up from the heart of reality, continue to accompany the invisible procession of souls bringing their offerings in silence to the altar of God's Heart.‖ Zundel, The Splendour of the Liturgy, 44, 136.
17 If the normal pace of the delivery of the text is that of the chanting of a psalm to a psalm tone, then the somewhat slower pace of the Mass propers represents a slowing down of the time of the psalm. ...this slowing down of the sacred text approaches at times a kind of stasis, and this stasis is as close as we may come to a sense of the suspension of the passage of time. In turn, this sense of the suspension of the passage of time is an intimation of the experience of eternity. In the contemplative state, things are viewed sub specie æternitatis, outside the passage of time; the liturgy provides this glimpse of eternity as a context for the hearing of the words of the sacred scripture.43 Hence, Gregorian Chant ought to be associated with eternity and especially the activity of contemplation which is an exercise of paramount importance in the Catholic tradition. COMPARISON WITH OTHER MUSIC If the primary concern of Gregorian Chant is the eternal, unchanging Logos, then the primary concern of secular music stands in direct contrast. Rev. Hügle writes that ―the dance, the march, and the glee song [all] imply measured tones and poetic substructure; these music-forms are influenced by the ever-changing whims and views, fashions and passions of the succeeding ages.‖44 Secular music is undeniably temporal because its primary concern is the expression of popular, contemporary ideas and sentiments. The fact that a metrical rhythm is employed to express these ideas should not be the least bit surprising. Music with metrical rhythm is a much different kind of music than music with free rhythm, and it will consequently have different ends. More Metrical (PHYSICAL) (SPIRITUAL) Less Metrical
Mahrt, ―Gregorian Chant as a Paradigm of Sacred Music,‖ 13. Ibid.
18 Figure 1 illustrates these rhythmic differences in context of the wider musical spectrum. Music, as something unique to man, necessarily involves both the sensible, physical world as well as intelligible, spiritual realities. Correspondingly, music can be conceptualized as a continuum of manifestation between the physical and the spiritual orders, respectively characterized by metrical and non-metrical rhythms. In the mean, music is considered ―incarnational‖ because it reflects the union of the physical, temporal order with the spiritual, eternal order in a way which is analogous to the entirety of man, both his body and soul. At the extremes on either end, this integration is broken down and the physical and spiritual are placed at odds with one another, each attempting to influence music to the exclusion of the other. Rationalistic music (a modern, academic trend in music) results when mathematical abstractions become the sole means of determining musical qualities. Like chant, the rhythm does not rely upon a consistent meter, only it is ordered by the system, not by word accents. It is so intellectually organized that the very sounds become negligible; the cohesion of a system or pattern is what matters most. Gregorian Chant, on the other hand, integrates both the physical and spiritual components, yet in a way which gives precedence to the spiritual. Its rhythm is determined not by consistent meter nor by an abstracted system, but by the intelligible power of the word accent and thus requires that the words be uttered. Popular music of all kinds gives precedence to the physical component of music; because its popularity is contingent upon its accessibility to the masses.45 Metrical rhythm is what predominantly affords popular music that accessibility and appeal. While it accentuates the temporal and physical qualities of music, popular music may yet fit an
Ratzinger, The Spirit of the Liturgy, 147.
19 incarnational mold, so long as it also appeals to the mind,46 fostering and encouraging reflection upon what is good, beautiful, and true—and thus maintaining an integration of both body and soul. However, because it is a commercial phenomenon, and because the culture is so steeped in immorality and falsehood, it all too often degenerates into a ―cult of the banal.‖47 In the extreme, the physical components of music squelch all the characteristics of the spiritual order and as a consequence, the music becomes sensual. The lyrical content of such music often encourages immorality, and the metrical rhythms are amplified and given such an exaggerated prominence that participants are physically affected by them. Ratzinger epitomizes ―rock‖ as being part of this sensual extreme, an ―expression of elemental passions.‖ Furthermore, he observes: [A]t rock festivals it assumes a cultic character, a form of worship, in fact, in opposition to Christian worship. People are, so to speak, released from themselves by the experience of being part of a crowd and by the emotional shock of rhythm, noise, and special lighting effects. However, in the ecstasy of having all their defenses torn down, the participants sink, as it were, beneath the elemental force of the universe…self has become a prison, the mind is a shackle, and breaking out from both appears as a true promise of redemption that can be tasted at least for a few moments.48 In this passage, the cardinal wonderfully illustrates the disintegration of body and soul taking place. The reality of the soul and the power of the mind become a kind of threat from which participants seek refuge in amassed sensuality whereby fleeting pleasures are, in a real sense, worshipped because of their ability to overwhelm and intoxicate man‘s rationality: ―Such music lowers the barriers of individuality and of personality. Man frees
―Some music has qualities that evoke emotional responses cheaply and quickly, without engaging the entire person, and especially without engaging the mind.‖ Gordon, Why Johnny Can't Sing Hymns, 134.
46 47 Ibid., 148; ―the sensibilities promoted by pop/mass culture are immanent, monogenerational, banal, individualistic, accessible. ...It is immanent in the sense that it celebrates the present moment and situation, divorced from past and future, and lives viscerally in that moment. ...Pop culture is self-consciously and intentionally mono-generational; it intends to sound novel, and views itself as artistically pioneering.‖ Gordon, Why Johnny Can't Sing Hymns, 88. 48
20 himself in it from the burden of consciousness. Music becomes ecstasy, liberation from the ego, and unification with the universe. …the pleasure of destruction, the abolition of everyday barriers, and the illusion of liberation from the ego in the wild ecstasy of noise and masses.‖49 Not only does this music result in the disintegration of true personality (e.g. the cooperation of will with the intellect; pleasure enjoyed with an appropriate rationality), it simultaneously immerses its participants in a worldview of anarchical freedom, a worldview which is ―thoroughly opposed to the Christian notion of redemption and of freedom as its exact contradiction.‖50 It is little wonder then why Ratzinger concludes quite forcefully that, ―because of its very nature music this type must be excluded from the Church.‖51 A PROPER APPROACH TO LITURGY The trouble is, of course, that music which aspires to popular style—even with the best of intentions—is an observable trend in many parishes today. Many would claim that the use of this style is a faithful response to the aspirations of the Second Vatican Council. If congregational singing is now the measure of full, active, conscious participation in the novus ordo, is it not entirely practical—perhaps even necessary—to adopt a popular style which is immediately accessible to the majority of the assembly? Certainly, this is not an argument which ought to be undervalued or overlooked. The Instruction put out by the Sacred Congregation of the Rites seems to support the notion that congregational singing should be the highest priority, ―One cannot find anything more religious and more joyful in sacred celebrations than a whole congregation
Ratzinger in Mannion, ―The ‗Musification‘ of the Word,‖ 191. Ibid. Ibid., 192.
21 expressing its faith and devotion in song.‖52 Does the Sacred Congregation actually mean to posit that congregational singing is more ―religious‖ than the liturgical action itself— or should this be considered a kind of pious hyperbole? A look back at Tra le sollecitudini helps to answer this question in definitive terms: ―In general it must be considered a very grave abuse when the liturgy in ecclesiastical functions is made to appear secondary to and in a manner at the service of the music, for the music is merely a part of the liturgy and its humble handmaid.‖53 This articulation of music as a humble handmaid at once debunks the argument that congregational singing is the highest priority of the liturgical rite. It also necessitates a proper approach to liturgy before discussing the question of singing any further. Humility Romano Guardini, perhaps the most important liturgical theologian of recent history asserted: ―The requirements of the liturgy can be summed up in one word, humility. Humility by renunciation; that is to say, by the abdication of self-rule and selfsufficiency. And humility by positive action; that is to say, by the acceptance of the spiritual principles which the liturgy offers and which far transcend the little world of individual spiritual existence.‖54 To give such high regard to the virtue of humility while speaking of the liturgy should be particularly striking for the modern sensibility. It means that the liturgy is more than a means of religious expression of an individual, but rather something which has the ability to impose obligation and responsibility from outside the individual‘s sphere of influence. Indeed, to approach the liturgy with humility is to ascribe authority to it on its own terms, and to surrender even one‘s religious preference:
Sacred Congregation of Rites, Musicam Sacram, no. 16. St. Pius X, Tra Le Sollecitudini, no. 23.
54 Romano Guardini, The Spirit of the Liturgy, Milestones in Catholic Theology, trans. Ada Lane (New York, NY: Herder & Herder, 1998), 39.
22 The individual has to renounce his own ideas and his own way. He is obliged to subscribe to the ideas and to follow the lead of the liturgy. To it he must surrender his independence; pray with others, and not alone; obey, instead of freely disposing of himself; and stand in the ranks, instead of moving about at his own will and pleasure. It is, furthermore, the task of the individual to apprehend clearly the ideal world of the liturgy. He must shake off the narrow trammels of his own thought, and make his own a far more comprehensive world of ideas: he must go beyond his little personal aims and adopt the educative purpose of the great fellowship of the liturgy. … [Modern man] wants to find in prayer …the direct expression of his spiritual condition. Yet in the liturgy he is expected to accept, as the mouthpiece of his inner life, a system of ideas, prayer and action, which is too highly generalized, and, as it were, unsuited to him. It strikes him as being formal and almost meaningless. He is especially sensible of this when he compares the liturgy with the natural outpourings of spontaneous prayer. Liturgical formulas, unlike the language of a person who is spiritually congenial, are not to be grasped straightway without any further mental exertion on the listener's part; liturgical actions have not the same direct appeal as, say, the involuntary movement of understanding on the part of someone who is sympathetic by reason of circumstances and disposition; the emotional impulses of the liturgy do not so readily find an echo as does the spontaneous utterance of the soul. These clear-cut formulas are liable to grate more particularly upon the modern man, so intensely sensitive in everything which affects his scheme of life, who looks for a touch of nature everywhere and listens so attentively for the personal note. He easily tends to consider the idiom of the liturgy as artificial, and its ritual as purely formal.55 Commonality between Forms After reflecting on Guardini‘s insight, the modern liturgical landscape begins to look somewhat more ambiguous. The reader may rightly exclaim, ―That‘s not what I experience when I go to Mass.‖ This is because Guardini is speaking about what is currently known and experienced as the Extraordinary Form of the liturgy in a time when it was the exclusive form of the Roman Rite. But are his insights transferable? Are they valid in a vernacular liturgical form which is deliberately more open-ended, with a wide range of permissions and indults which have not been experienced in the Church‘s liturgy for at least a millennium? The answer, of course, must be a resounding ―Yes.‖ Despite
Ibid., 39, 47-48.
23 their superficial differences, both ―forms‖ remain at heart an authentic Roman liturgy because they both re-present Christ‘s paschal sacrifice in the essential Eucharistic offering. Consequently, there is a need to begin approaching both forms of the liturgy with the same spirit, and with a consciousness that both forms share an indispensable commonality by the particular grace of the sacrament which they celebrate. Accordingly, both forms of the liturgy ought to resist the ―cult of selfexpression,‖56 which ultimately leads to narcissism whereby the individual ―believes himself to be the measure of both reality and moral principle.‖57 Indeed, authentic liturgy radically refutes this mentality by immersing the faithful in a formal, corporate prayer, where over the course of a lifetime, it reiterates the eternal rewards of a life lived for God (and consequently, for others) at the expense of oneself: ―From beginning to end it presupposes the sacrifice of our individual preferences, even the most legitimate. We are present for the sake of our brethren, even more than our own, that we may form together with them one single person in Jesus, praying a single prayer which is Jesus' prayer in the Church.‖58 Unity in Christ It is precisely this union of the faithful in the person of Christ, the High Priest, which constitutes their participation in the liturgy. The unity required to participate in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass cannot be properly understood in any other way. The liturgy is not celebrated by the individual nor by the assembled congregation59—as is particularly evidenced by the inability of any non-baptized member to receive Holy Communion.
Gordon, Why Johnny Can't Sing Hymns, 88. Ibid. Zundel, The Splendour of the Liturgy, 241. Guardini, The Spirit of the Liturgy, 36.
24 Participation in the liturgy is a supernatural reality requiring the Divine Life of Christ. This is why the Mass itself necessarily transcends both the individual and the congregation to include those of all times and places who have been grafted into Christ: The faithful are actively united by a vital and fundamental principle common to them all. That principle is Christ Himself; His life is ours; we are incorporated in Him; we are His Body, ―Corpus Christi mysticum.‖ The active force which governs this living unity, grafting the individual on to it, granting him a share in its fellowship and preserving this right for him, is the Holy Ghost. Every individual Catholic is a cell of this living organism or a member of this Body. The individual is made aware of the unity which comprehends him on many and various occasions, but chiefly in the liturgy. In it he sees himself face to face with God, not as an entity, but as a member of this unity. It is the unity which addresses God; the individual merely speaks in it, and it requires of him that he should know and acknowledge that he is a member of it.60 This profound unity which the faithful share in Christ is a hidden and supernatural reality, but it is far more central than the periphery61 of external display where many vainly attempt to establish a people-centered unity. According to Pope Benedict XVI, this attempt to create liturgical unity in anything other than the pre-existing, supernatural reality of the mystici corporis distorts the true purpose of Catholic liturgy, ―the primary aim of which is not to foster a people-centered sense of unity. It is instead to lead a procession out of time and assist the prayerful encounter with the sacred. It is Christ who unites us.‖62
―[The Liturgy] therefore awakens us to that true, ultimate consciousness of communion, that ultimate, victorious union in love which is the very opposite of all human relationships of boisterous good-fellowship. It is the very opposite also of all easy familiarity, of the smug society spirit which is nothing else but a falling into the periphery together (which means isolation in the depths).‖ Dietrich Von Hildebrand, Liturgy and Personality: the Healing Power of Formal Prayer (Manchester, NH: Sophia Institute Press, 1943), 38.
Tucker, Sing Like a Catholic, 159-160; ―And the prayer in common, the self-constituted We which is uttered when God is to be praised, thanked, or implored... is a fulfillment of the Mystical Body of Christ, an actualization of the deepest, uttermost bond of love and of the common destiny of guilt, atonement, and sonship in Christ. One faith, one hope, one love, one longing, one expectation of the day of the Lord! Everything is drawn into the ultimate unity in God.‖ Von Hildebrand, Liturgy and Personality, 42.
25 Transcendence This is why congregationalism—―the process by which rite and/or ordained ministry are relativized to the operationality of the worshiping community‖63—is never an appropriate way of approaching the liturgy. The rite derives its significance from a reality much more central and powerful than the predominant spirituality of a particular assembly.64 Furthermore, there is a great unforeseen danger in this approach because it begins regarding the codified program as a negative image of bondage restricting creativity as the true source of liturgy. 65 This effectively inverts and destroys the true sense of liturgy: the faithful now create the means by which they are re-created. The music becomes that of a utilitarian meal instead of a splendid feast.66 The tradition of the universal Church is regarded with hostility and suspicion.67 Naturally, this approach is ultimately dysfunctional because in peripheral matters, there is no such thing as a consensus, only a majority. Jeffrey Tucker puts it very succinctly when he writes: If the community has a point of unity, it concerns the faith itself and the tradition; otherwise, in terms of issues of taste and preference, there is no such thing as a community: there are only individuals with a multiplicity of conflicting desires.
M. Francis Mannion, ―Catholic Worship and the Dynamics of Congregationalism,‖ in Masterworks of God: Essays in Liturgical Theory and Practice (Mundelein, Illinois: Hillenbrand Books, 2004), 67.
―Congregationalist attitudes are exhibited in parishes and communities in processes of liturgical planning and celebration wherein the given rites are modified or even rejected in favor of local creativity. The operative conviction is that, to be authentic and effective, liturgical events must emerge from the spirituality and creativity of the group rather than be received from tradition or hierarchy.‖ Ibid., 68.
Mannion, ―The 'Musification' of the Word,‖ 181-182. Ibid., 183. Ibid., 182.
26 A method of liturgical planning that exalts the ―desires of the community‖ over the demands of the universal Church yields a divided parish, with egos clashing against other egos.68 Consequently, the affirmation of liturgy as opus Dei69 cannot be overemphasized. The liturgy is not primarily a human activity, but rather God’s action ―in, with, and through the church and all its particular manifestations.‖70 The local community in isolation from this mystery will never suffice. Divine Sonship Also worth discussing is the apparent ―purposelessness‖ which this approach to liturgy seems to exhibit. Ultimately, the liturgy serves no earthly purpose; it exists principally for the worship of God because of who God is.71 In the liturgy, man‘s gaze is no longer fixated upon his own life or upon his own desire for edification. It places the soul in God‘s presence where, in an intense union with Christ, it lives most fully the Divine Life imparted at Baptism. Through, with, and in Christ we ―play before the Father‖72 as children of God: ―It is the delight of the Eternal Father that Wisdom (the Son, the perfect Fullness of Truth) should pour out Its eternal essence before Him in all Its ineffable splendor, without any ‗purpose‘--for what purpose should It have?--but full of decisive meaning, in pure and vocal happiness.‖73 A child does not play for any other purpose than to play. He is not trying to grow strong, mature, or develop a unique set of skills. He plays precisely because he is a child and because his parents delight in him when he plays. Analogously, the liturgy offers us the same opportunity: to glory in God
Tucker, Sing Like a Catholic, 65. Mannion, ―The ‗Musification‘ of the Word,‖ 184. Ibid. Guardini, The Spirit of the Liturgy, 66-67. Ibid, 67. Ibid.
27 as Father and to engage the liturgy with a playfulness which befits the children of God, without the need to make it serve any other purpose: In [the liturgy] man, with the aid of grace, is given the opportunity of realizing his fundamental essence, of really becoming that which according to his divine destiny he should be and longs to be, a child of God. In the liturgy he is to go ‗unto God, Who giveth joy to his youth.‘ ...It is in the highest sense the life of a child, in which everything is picture, melody and song. ...The fact that the liturgy gives a thousand strict and careful directions on the quality of the language, gestures, colors, garments and instruments which it employs, can only be understood by those who are able to take art and play seriously.74 Serious play necessarily involves rules and regulations, and as Guardini points out, these are both good and important. By structuring the play and giving it order, its various actions take on significance. Likewise, a proper approach to liturgical norms ought to be patterned off the delight and excitement in a child‘s eyes while the rules of a new game are being explained to him. In this way, liturgical laws (e.g. those prohibiting priests and lay people from changing anything in the liturgy,75 requiring the organ to ―merely sustain‖76 the singing, or requiring that Mass settings be submitted for approval prior to publication77) are embraced not for what they keep us from doing, but precisely for their usefulness in helping us pray the liturgy more effectively. Thought Precedes Emotion Another defining characteristic in an authentic approach to liturgy is the priority of Logos over will. When this order is manifest, the liturgy exhibits a wonderful power of relaxation and a deep reposefulness resulting from a ―consummation entirely in
Guardini, The Spirit of the Liturgy, 69-70.
―Therefore no other person, even if he be a priest, may add, remove, or change anything in the Liturgy on his own authority.‖ Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, Sacrosanctum Concilium , no. 22.
Pius X, Tra Le Sollecitudini, no. 16. USCCB, GIRM, Rev. 3rd ed., 120.
28 the contemplation, adoration and glorification of Divine Truth.‖78 This receptive disposition is like a spiritual emancipation: ―‗the truth shall make you free.‘ The soul needs that spiritual relaxation in which the convulsions of the will are stilled, the restlessness of struggle quieted, and the shrieking of desire silenced; and that is fundamentally and primarily the act of intention by which thought perceives truth, and the spirit is silent before its splendid majesty.‖79 Unlike in the Congregationalist model, willfulness in the authentic practice of the liturgy conforms itself to the supernatural reality of what is taking place and the Divine Person at work. The individual will need have only one concern: to dispose itself to the singular truth of Revelation which saturates the liturgical environment: the person of Christ—whose will is perfectly united with that of his heavenly Father. In this ―treasure-house of the thought of Revelation,‖80 the prayer of the corporate body is most effectively sustained by thought, by which the congregation stands consciously and objectively in truth.81 Undoubtedly, prayer is a raising of the heart and not only the mind, ―but the heart must be guided, supported, and purified by the mind. ...prayer is beneficial only when it rests on the bedrock of truth.‖82 In this regard, only thought is ―universally current and consistent. …It is only when prayer is sustained by and steeped in clear and fruitful religious thought, that it can be of service to a corporate body, composed of distinct elements, all actuated by varying emotions.‖83 Nevertheless, these varying emotions most certainly have a place in the liturgy. Indeed,
Guardini, The Spirit of the Liturgy, 94. Ibid., 93. Ibid., 21-22. Von Hildebrand, Liturgy and Personality, 91. Guardini, The Spirit of the Liturgy, 22. Ibid.
29 the liturgy is capable of inciting a great depth of feeling, but it requires that they not overwhelm thoughtfulness. Guardini points out how very necessary this discipline is: if an uncontrolled or unbalanced emotion becomes the foundation of corporate prayer, individuals in the congregation will either degrade their religious feeling by forcing themselves to comply with that emotion, or they will grow indifferent, and the words be will become depreciated.84 Thus, when truth is the bedrock of prayer, emotion can be most naturally experienced by all, and the entire liturgy is permeated by the sober inebriation85 of the Holy Spirit. Christ’s Countenance All these characteristics of a proper approach to liturgy culminate in a most important realization: ―the liturgy possesses a divinely constituted autonomy, a pre-given character, and an objectivity that may not be compromised.‖86 Truly, the Liturgy is a divinely bestowed gift possessing a character all its own which transcends both time and space. Because this pre-given character is so completely formed by Christ‘s saving action,87 the ethos which results from an authentic approach to liturgy immerses the faithful in the very personality of Christ. Von Hildebrand puts it this way: ―The atmosphere of the Liturgy is saturated with Christ, with the hidden God revealed in Christ.‖88 This liturgical ethos communicates truths which far surpass the ability of words: Words are charged with an atmosphere which reveals what they do not say, what they cannot say, what no one can say, and what is perhaps the essential
Ibid., 26. Laeti bibamus sobriam / Ebrietatem Spiritus, the Benedictine Breviary, Lauds of Tuesday Mannion, ―The ‗Musification‘ of the Word,‖ 186-187. ―The Liturgy is Christ praying.‖ Von Hildebrand, Liturgy and Personality, 8. Von Hildebrand, Liturgy and Personality, 37.
30 matter. Words are as much conductors of a psychological current, as a vehicle of ideas. They introduce us to a particular aspect of the world and tend to modify our attitude to the world. Very often what endures of a conversation is not so much what we can repeat of it, as the changes it has produced in us.89 Thus it is with the Liturgy. It aspires not only to the words of Christ but to Christ‘s own countenance. ―For this very reason, the sacred texts invite the musical development which will make all that is unutterable in them an audible undertone... music [naturally] sought to render the Divine atmosphere with which the words are invested.‖90 Thus, music in the liturgy has an incredible responsibility: it must take care to accurately represent the countenance of Christ and not to depreciate or obscure it. If the music is unfaithful to the regulations of the liturgy or ultimately to the Spirit of the Liturgy itself, then falsehoods will be transmitted in place of truth, and no amount of words will be able to expunge their influence upon the soul. This is exactly what Jeffrey Tucker is addressing when he writes: ―music has a massive influence on the shape and character of the liturgy. ...This is not merely a matter of ornamentation. The music of the Mass is integral to what people experience about the Mass. It is the major contributor to the aesthetic and it affects what people believe and how they live.‖ Guardini reflects this notion by asserting that the liturgy is primarily occupied in ―forming the fundamental Christian temper‖91—a ―transformation in Christ‖92 as Von Hildebrand would say: ―As we pray and sacrifice liturgically—and this means through Christ, with Christ, and in Christ—glorifying God, we ‗put on Christ‘
Zundel, The Splendour of the Liturgy, 281. Ibid., 284-285. Guardini, The Spirit of the Liturgy, 86.
―But one of the basic factors leading to transformation in Christ is participation in His uttered glorification of the Father, which takes place especially in the Liturgy. It leads us into the secrets of the love of the God-man for the Father, His glorification of the heavenly Father, and the love of the heavenly Father for man. The conscious, fully-awakened act of performing the liturgy imprints upon the soul the Face of Christ. In taking part in the Liturgy, we make our own the fundamental attitudes embodied in it.‖ Von Hildebrand, Liturgy and Personality, 16.
31 (induere Christum) as the liturgy boldly expresses it.‖93 Consequently, ―…the man who is entirely formed by the spirit is most like unto Christ.‖94 In light of all these considerations, a proper approach to liturgy must be considered entirely Christocentric, and beholden to the supernatural reality of His Mystical Body, the Church. THE IMPORTANCE OF SINGING With a proper approach to liturgy adequately discussed, it is now time to return to the matter of congregational singing. Recent Legislation In Musicam Sacram, the first instruction on liturgical music to be promulgated after Vatican II, the Sacred Congregation of Rites placed an enormous emphasis on singing in the liturgy from the very outset of the General Norms: Liturgical worship is given a more noble form when it is celebrated in song, with the ministers of each degree fulfilling their ministry and the people participating in it. Indeed, through this form, prayer is expressed in a more attractive way, the mystery of the Liturgy, with its hierarchical and community nature, is more openly shown, the unity of hearts is more profoundly achieved by the union of voices, minds are more easily raised to heavenly things by the beauty of the sacred rites, and the whole celebration more clearly prefigures that heavenly Liturgy which is enacted in the holy city of Jerusalem. Pastors of souls will therefore do all they can to achieve this form of celebration.95 Congregational singing, then, can be said to have a sacramental quality of its own; it represents and helps effect the unity which it symbolizes. The claim which the Sacred Congregation makes here is that external participation in singing intensifies the internal
Ibid., 7-8. Ibid., 8. Sacred Congregation of Rites, Musicam Sacram, no. 5.
32 union of hearts and more readily disposes the mind to reflect upon the truths of Revelation being enacted. This is nothing more than an application of the incarnational principle governing all music: that what is performed externally in the physical realm has ramifications in the soul—in the internal reality of man. For this reason, congregational singing ought to be promoted, because it testifies to and helps advance the supernatural unity of the lay faithful: ―Through suitable instruction and practices, the people should be gradually led to a fuller—indeed, to a complete—participation in those parts of the singing which pertain to them.‖96 Especially during the distribution of communion, the GIRM‘s current legislation is particularly concerned with an adequate expression of the supernatural unification taking place between all the faithful who receive the Holy Eucharist: ―While the Priest is receiving the Sacrament, the Communion Chant is begun, its purpose being to express the spiritual union of the communicants by means of the unity of their voices, to show gladness of heart, and to bring out more clearly the ‗communitarian‘ character of the procession to receive the Eucharist. The singing is prolonged for as long as the Sacrament is being administered to the faithful. ...When the distribution of Communion is over, if appropriate, the Priest and faithful pray quietly for some time. If desired, a Psalm or other canticle of praise or a hymn may also be sung by the whole congregation.‖97 This desire to express the spiritual reality in physical signs is entirely consistent with a proper approach to liturgy because it advocates the supernatural and eternal rather than the mere external display. However, it is important to point out that, while the sign value of congregational singing is deeply profound, the limited abilities and musicality of the congregation may not be enough to fulfill the musical demands of the liturgy in every case: this is especially true of the Mass propers which change from week to week. This
Ibid., no. 16b. USCCB, GIRM, Rev. 3rd ed., 37, 38.
33 very discrepancy between liturgical demand and the value of congregational singing was a core issue in the development of Sacrosanctum Concilium. Thus, a brief overview of that discussion may prove useful. Bugnini’s Paradigm In the The Reform of the Liturgy 1948-1975, Annibale Bugnini, a Roman Catholic prelate and secretary for the liturgical commission, describes the problem of song as ―one of the most sensitive, important, and troubling of the entire reform‖ after which he adds, ―Without singing there can be no adequate expression of the people's participation, of their joyous entering into the paschal mystery of Christ, or of their sense of communion with one another.‖98 This statement is highly characteristic of Bugnini who ascribes an unprecedented importance to congregational singing in the process of liturgical reform. He shamelessly allies himself with an effort to re-form liturgical music altogether and contrasts all the promoters of the traditional choral repertoire as being antithetical to this vision. In his record, Bugnini characterizes this type of musician as the advocate of an artistic and musical approach to liturgical music which is ―primarily the task of specialists.‖99 The favored opposition—liturgists, pastors, musicians ―more conscious of pastoral needs,‖100 and Bugnini himself—―saw song as having a structural role and serving to give better expression to the mystery being celebrated; they saw it, therefore, as related to the character of the celebration, its several phases, and the requirements of its various parts‖101 and ―while acknowledging the indispensible role of
Annibale Bugnini, The Reform of the Liturgy 1948-1975, trans. Matthew J. O'Connell (Collegeville, Minnesota: The Liturgical Press, 1990), 885.
Ibid. Ibid. Ibid.
34 the schola cantorum, thought it wrong to take away from the congregation the possibility of expressing itself in communal singing.‖102 Although Bugnini insists that ―the real reason for rebellion against the reform was a refusal to allow that the people could sing,‖103 his record itself seems to suggest otherwise. The opposition which came from the musicians did not demand that the people refrain from singing—indeed, their language is very obliging toward congregational participation; it merely demanded that the schola cantorum be allowed to preserve the Church‘s musical repertory which had grown up alongside the liturgy over the span of many decades.104 Thus, it was not a refusal to allow congregational singing which divided both sides, but rather a theology of liturgical participation. Bugnini and the liturgists insisted that the people must sing in order to participate actively according to the designs of the liturgical constitution. Together they opposed the view of musicians that ―listening to good, devout, and edifying music... promotes ‗active‘ participation.‖105 According to Bugnini‘s view, the congregation could not fully participate unless it was given every opportunity to sing. Yet, as Cardinal Ratzinger points out, the strongly contemplative and receptive element of liturgical music should not be discredited. Mannion claims that
Ibid. Ibid., 886.
―‗In the case of a dialogue Mass, no one objects to the people singing their own songs, even to the exclusion of a choir (assuming that music is to be used). In like manner, there should be no objection if the schola or choir continues to keep the musical heritage of the Church alive and unchanged in sung Masses; this is to the advantage of the people. The latter will always have ways of participating actively through their responses to the celebrant, the formulas that are theirs in the dialogues, the acclamations, and so on; a way can also be found of having them sing something at the offertory and communion; they can also end the rite with a suitable song. But the traditional repertory of the choir cannot and must not be touched. ...This is not to say that there may not be special cases in which the entire congregation takes a fuller and even totally active part in the solemn liturgy by their singing... or that the mass of the faithful may not raise their mighty and ringing voice in the songs of the liturgy. ...But these can only be exceptions and must not alter the principle that in the solemn liturgy the choir always keeps alive and preserves its traditional repertory.‘‖ Ibid., 887.
35 ―While the Second Vatican Council emphasized active participation, it did not intend to do so in such a way as to suggest that congregational singing is the only proper mode of musical participation. If music embodies the mystery of God in the liturgy, this requires the worshiper a correspondingly deep and attentive musical receptivity.‖106 In their defense, the musicians also invoked the authority of St. Thomas Aquinas who wrote that, ―Although some may not understand what is being sung, they understand why it is being sung, that is for the praise of God, and this is enough, even if the faithful do not strictly speaking sing in order to rouse their devotion.‖107 Bugnini smugly remarks that the Pope placed a large question mark alongside this argument.108 Amazingly, even the resulting Instruction on Liturgical Music supports the musicians‘ claims: The faithful fulfill their liturgical role by making that full, conscious and active participation which is demanded by the nature of the Liturgy itself and which is, by reason of baptism, the right and duty of the Christian people. This participation (a) Should be above all internal, in the sense that by it the faithful join their mind to what they pronounce or hear, and cooperate with heavenly grace, (b) Must be, on the other hand, external also, that is, such as to show the internal participation by gestures and bodily attitudes, by the acclamations, responses and singing. The faithful should also be taught to unite themselves interiorly to what the ministers or choir sing, so that by listening to them they may raise their minds to God.109 This theory of participation as something primarily internal, and yet not to the exclusion of the external, is utterly consistent with a proper approach to liturgy as outlined above. It maintains the centrality and importance of supernatural unification with Christ‘s action
Mannion, ―The ‗Musification‘ of the Word,‖ 888. Bugnini, The Reform of the Liturgy 1948-1975, 904. Ibid. Sacred Congregation of Rites, Musicam Sacram, no. 15.
36 while acknowledging the sacramental practices which both signify and aid man in this regard. It also acknowledges that listening to a song can be a legitimate form of active participation, just as listening to the Holy Gospel is also considered active participation. Although Bugnini insists that the liturgical Constitution ―has not the slightest intention of making a clean sweep of the traditional musical genres,‖110 Ratzinger points out that commentators such as Rahner and Vorgimler did not feel that the Council, in recommending that the treasury of sacred music be preserved and cultivated, desired this to be done within the framework of the liturgy.111 Rather, they believed that the spirit of the reform necessarily excluded them from liturgical use. Whether or not Bugnini also intended this is unclear, but one thing is most definitely certain: Bugnini absolutely believed that the change from Latin to the vernacular meant the abandonment of forms held dear in the past.‖112 Differences in the Novus Ordo As a result, there are a handful of major differences that exist between the musical legislation of the novus ordo and the Extraordinary Form of the Mass. First and foremost are new requirements for congregational singing at various parts of the Mass. This is especially true of the Kyrie,113 the ―Responsorial Psalm,‖114 the Alleluia,115 and the Sanctus.116 Because of this requirement, the Responsorial Psalm and Alleluia could be considered the most altered forms in the novus ordo. In the case of the Responsorial
Bugnini, The Reform of the Liturgy 1948-1975, 888. Mannion, ―The ‗Musification‘ of the Word,‖ 178. Bugnini, The Reform of the Liturgy 1948-1975, 885. USCCB, GIRM, Rev. 3rd ed., 23. Ibid., 27. Ibid., 27-28. Ibid., 34.
37 Psalm, a secondary option still remains to use the Gregorian Gradual117 but seemingly no such permission has been granted for the Gregorian Alleluia, creating an outstanding legal discrepancy between the GIRM‘s current legislation on the matter and the clear, conciliar affirmation of Gregorian Chant as the ideal of liturgical music. Additionally, Bugnini records that the entrance and communion antiphons of the reformed Missal were intended to be recited rather than sung in order to inspire the creation of suitable vernacular songs.118 Thus, Musicam Sacram pronounces, ―It is desirable that the assembly of the faithful should participate in the songs of the Proper as much as possible, especially through simple responses and other suitable settings.‖119 However, the resultant legislation still reserves the first option of the Entrance, Offertory, and Communion antiphons for the Gregorian Proper120 while introducing three other options, the fourth being almost ubiquitously employed: ―another liturgical chant that is suited to the sacred action, the day, or the time of year, similarly approved by the Conference of Bishops or the Diocesan Bishop‖121 (Formerly, ―a suitable liturgical song similarly approved by the Conference of Bishops or the Diocesan Bishop‖122). Jeffrey Tucker wisely points out that the option for ―other appropriate songs‖123 introduces an unwelcome aspect of fallen human nature: the desire to express himself on his own terms. Naturally, with the relaxation of musical requirements, church
Ibid., 27. Bugnini, The Reform of the Liturgy 1948-1975, 891. Sacred Congregation of Rites, Musicam Sacram, no. 33. USCCB, GIRM, Rev. 3rd ed., 22, 32, 37. Ibid., 22.
United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, General Instruction of the Roman Missal, 3rd ed., Liturgy Documentary Series 2, trans. International Committee on English in the Liturgy (Washington, DC: United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, 2003), 28.
Tucker, Sing Like a Catholic, 117.
38 musicians have begun to rely more and more on their own tastes and experiences than on the Church‘s wisdom, each molding the musical atmosphere of the novus ordo according to his own personality, rather than the person of Christ as revealed in the Church. Dual Role of the Schola Cantorum As a result of this emphasis on congregational singing, the role of the schola cantorum has likewise been further clarified and enlarged: ―Its role has become something of yet greater importance and weight by reason of the norms of the Council concerning the liturgical renewal. Its duty is, in effect, to ensure the proper performance of the parts which belong to it, according to the different kinds of music sung, and to encourage the active participation of the faithful in the singing.‖124 Not only does it still retain its own liturgical function125 but now must consciously ―foster the active participation of the faithful by means of singing.‖126 In fact, the entrusting of the choir with the entire Proper and Ordinary to the exclusion of congregational singing has been deprecated by Musicam Sacram.127 Thus, when it is guided by a proper approach to liturgy, the schola cantorum has the dual responsibility to proclaim the liturgical texts in an artistic and worthy manner while at the same time preserving the sign value of congregational singing at every liturgy.
Sacred Congregation of Rites, Musicam Sacram, no. 19.
―Among the faithful, the schola cantorum or choir exercises its own liturgical function, its place being to take care that the parts proper to it, in keeping with the different genres of chant, are properly carried out and to foster the active participation of the faithful by means of the singing.‖ USCCB, GIRM, Rev. 3rd ed., 43.
Ibid. Sacred Congregation of Rites, Musicam Sacram, no. 16c.
39 CONCLUSION As this paper has attempted to illustrate, Gregorian Chant is not a musical phenomenon which is exclusive to the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite. Jeffrey Tucker puts it well when he writes: ―It is not the case that the Tridentine Mass uses chant whereas the Novus Ordo does not, though one can easily gain that impression. The music, in fact, provides a strong linkage between the two forms. They both have the Graduale Romanum as the normative form of music as that is woven into the liturgical fabric itself. The introits, the communions, the ordinary chants—these are all the same in both forms.‖128 Thus, Gregorian Chant remains very much an integral component of the novus ordo. Furthermore, Gregorian Chant—as an ideal of sacred music—legally requires it to have pride of place and serve as a supreme model for all other liturgical compositions. This cannot be achieved without the frequent use of Gregorian Chant in the novus ordo—now considered the ―Ordinary Form‖ of the Roman Rite. For this reason, dismissing even the most minimal Gregorian repertoire and hindering its use in the most widely attended form of the Roman liturgy could be considered a direct violation of liturgical law. Jeffrey Tucker again says it best: ―Vatican II contained the most explicit and canonically binding recognition in the history of Christianity that Gregorian chant is the music of the Roman Rite.‖129 Moreover, the qualities of Gregorian Chant naturally lend themselves to an authentic practice of liturgy wherein Christ‘s countenance is most precisely experienced. Unison singing is of the utmost value in illustrating that most necessary doctrine of sanctifying grace and the union which it bestows upon all the faithful who become engrafted into Christ‘s Divine Life. The use of Latin balances out the vernacular by
Tucker, Sing Like a Catholic, 6. Ibid., 16.
40 fostering a sense of the Church‘s universality because it naturally de-emphasizes the exaggerated importance which the assembly often acquires when the liturgy is performed exclusively in their mother tongue. Neither is chant opposed to congregational singing. Indeed, the restoration of Gregorian Chant to the lay faithful is the selfsame aspiration which inspired Pope Pius X to write his motu proprio in the first place.130 No words have ever more eloquently described this vision than those of Pope Pius XII in his encyclical Mediator Dei: ‗Let Gregorian chant be restored to popular use in the parts proper to the people. Indeed it is very necessary that the faithful attend the sacred ceremonies not as if they were outsiders or mute onlookers, but let them fully appreciate the beauty of the liturgy and take part in the sacred ceremonies, alternating their voices with the priest and the choir, according to the prescribed norms. If, please God, this is done, it will not happen that the congregation hardly ever or only in a low murmur answer the prayers in Latin or in the vernacular.‘ A congregation that is devoutly present at the sacrifice, in which our Savior together with His children redeemed with His sacred blood sings the nuptial hymn of His immense love, cannot keep silent, for ‗song befits the lover‘ and, as the ancient saying has it, ‗he who sings well prays twice.‘ Thus the Church militant, faithful as well as clergy, joins in the hymns of the Church triumphant and with the choirs of angels, and, all together, sing a wondrous and eternal hymn of praise to the most Holy Trinity in keeping with words of the preface, ‗with whom our voices, too, thou wouldst bid to be admitted.‘131 While it functions quite differently than popular song, much of the Ordinary is not that difficult for a congregation to learn, especially since much of it has been adapted to modern notation. In addition to helping the congregation sing the Gregorian Ordinaries, the schola cantorum—whose duty it is to preserve the heritage of sacred music—can sing the Gregorian propers of the Mass as well—especially on solemn feasts, so as to rightly
―Special efforts are to be made to restore the use of the Gregorian Chant by the people, so that the faithful may again take a more active part in the ecclesiastical offices, as was the case in ancient times.‖ St. Pius X, Tra Le Sollecitudini, no. 3.
130 131 Pope Pius XII, Mediator Dei: On the Sacred Liturgy (November 20, 1947), http://adoremus.org/MediatorDei.html (accessed November 11, 2011), no. 192.
41 associate Gregorian Chant with an ideal liturgical practice.132 Additionally, this gives the congregation a chance to actively participate by listening, while not depriving them of the opportunity to sing those parts of the liturgy which belong to them by supernatural birthright—most especially, the Ordinary of the Mass. This vision becomes easier as long as it is consistently practiced, week after week. Children, who have the opportunity to study simple Gregorian Chants in Catholic schools—and who have experienced it in their parish from before they could walk—will be able to sing the chants with ease. Moreover, they will naturally identify with it. What other type of music can provide such a direct identification with the Catholic Church? What other music could possibly claim to be more helpful in forming a young Catholic mind than the Church‘s own music? Indeed, ―There is no other music that is capable of engendering that type of total global unity.‖133 By helping to further unite both forms of the Roman Rite, the practice of Gregorian Chant has the ability to accomplish far more than an end to pointless debates over liturgical music: it plays a decisive role in the recovery of a universal, Catholic identity.
―The ancient traditional Gregorian Chant must, therefore, in a large measure be restored to the functions of public worship, and the fact must be accepted by all that an ecclesiastical function loses none of its solemnity when accompanied by this music alone.‖ Ibid.
Tucker, Sing Like a Catholic, 4-5.
Augustine, St. Confessions. Oxford's World Classics. Translated by Henry Chadwick. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1991. Aquinas, Thomas. "Whether God should be praised with song?" In Summa Theologiae, II—II, Q. 91, 2. http://www.newadvent.org/summa/3091.htm#article2 (accessed February 4, 2012). ———. "Whether there are various actions pertaining to the contemplative life?" In Summa Theologiae, II—II, Q. 180, 3. http://www.newadvent.org/summa/3180.htm#article3 (accessed February 4, 2012). Benedict XVI, Pope. The Patrimony of Sacred Music: Continuity and Natural Development: Pope Benedict XVI's Address for the 100th Anniversary of the Pontifical Institute of Sacred Music. August 2011. Vol. XVII, No. 5. http://adoremus.org/0811BenedictXVI.html (accessed November 11, 2011). Bugnini, Annibale. The Reform of the Liturgy 1948—1975. Translated by Matthew J. O'Connell. Collegeville, Minnesota: The Liturgical Press, 1990. Cole, Basil. Music and Morals: A Theological Appraisal of the Moral and Psychological Effects of Music. Staten Island, NY: Alba House, 1993. ———. "Music and Spirituality: To the Tune of St. Thomas Aquinas." Ignatius Insight. http://www.ignatiusinsight.com/features2008/bcole_musicspirit_oct08.asp (accessed November 16, 2010). Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy. Sacrosanctum Concilium. December 4, 1963. http://adoremus.org/SacrosanctumConcilium.html (accessed November 11, 2011). Eco, Umberto. The Aesthetics of Thomas Aquinas. Translated by Hugh Bredin. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1988. Guardini, Romano. The Spirit of the Liturgy. Milestones in Catholic Theology. Translated by Ada Lane. New York, NY: Herder & Herder, 1998. Guettler, Amy E. "Music as Prayer." In Sacred Music 122 (Fall 1995): 6—12. Gordon, T. David. Why Johnny Can't Sing Hymns. Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 2010. Hayburn, Robert F., ed. Papal Legislation on Sacred Music: 95 A.D. to 1977 A.D. Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press, 1979.
44 Hourlier, Dom Jacques. Reflections on the Spirituality of Gregorian Chant. Edited by Richard J. Pugsley. Translated by Dom Gregory Casprini and Robert Edmonson. Orleans, MA: Paraclete Press, 1995. Hügle, P. Gregory. Catechism of Gregorian Chant. New York, NY: J. Fischer & Bro, 1928. John Paul II, Pope. Chirograph of the Supreme Pontiff John Paul II for the Centenary of the Motu Proprio Tra le sollecitudini, On Sacred Music. November 22, 2003. http://adoremus.org/Chirograph—SacredMusic.html (accessed November 11, 2011). Lucarini, Dan. Why I Left the Contemporary Christian Music Movement: Confessions of a Former Worship Leader. Webster, NY: Evangelical Press, 2003. Mahrt, William. "Gregorian Chant as a Paradigm of Sacred Music." Sacred Music 133, no. 1 (Spring 2006): 5—14. Mannion, M. Francis. "Catholic Worship and the Dynamics of Congregationalism." In Masterworks of God: Essays in Liturgical Theory and Practice, 65—73. Mundelein, Illinois: Hillenbrand Books, 2004. ———. "The 'Musification' of the Word: Cardinal Ratzinger's Theology of Liturgical Music." In Masterworks of God: Essays in Liturgical Theory and Practice, 176— 200. Mundelein, Illinois: Hillenbrand Books, 2004. Overath, Johannes. "The Meaning of Musica Sacra and its Nobility." In Crux Et Cithara. Germany: Robert A. Skeris, 1983. Pierik, Marie. The Song of the Church. New York, NY: Longmans, Green and Co., 1947. Pius X, Pope. Tra Le Sollecitudini: Instruction on Sacred Music. November 22, 1903. http://adoremus.org/MotuProprio.html (accessed November 11, 2011). Pius XI, Pope. Divini Cultus: On Divine Worship. December 20, 1928. http://adoremus.org/DiviniCultus.html (accessed November 11, 2011). Pius XII, Pope. Mediator Dei: On the Sacred Liturgy. November 20, 1947. http://adoremus.org/MediatorDei.html (accessed November 11, 2011). ———. Musicae Sacrae: On Sacred Music. December 25, 1955. http://adoremus.org/musicaesacrae.html (accessed November 11, 2011). Quasten, Johannes. Music & Worship in Pagan & Christian Antiquity. NPM Studies in Church Music and Liturgy. Translated by Boniface Ramsey. Washington, DC: National Association of Pastoral Musicians, 1983. Ratzinger, Joseph Cardinal. The Feast of Faith. San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1986.
45 ———. The Spirit of the Liturgy. Translated by John Saward. San Francisco, CA: Ignatius Press, 2000. Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship. Letter to the Bishops on the Minimum Repertoire of Plain Chant: "Voluntati Obsequens". April 14, 1974. http://adoremus.org/VoluntatiObsequens.html (accessed November 11, 2011). Sacred Congregation for Rites. De Musica Sacra et Sacra Liturgia: Instruction on Sacred Music and Sacred Liturgy. September 3, 1958. http://adoremus.org/1958Intro— sac—mus.html (accessed November 11, 2011). ———. Musicam Sacram: Instruction On Music In The Liturgy. March 5, 1967. http://adoremus.org/MusicamSacram.html (accessed November 11, 2011). Saliers, Don & Emily. A Song to Sing, a Life to Live: Reflections on Music as Spiritual Practice. The Practice of Faith Series. San Francisco, CA: Jossey—Bass, 2005. Schuler. "The Sacred and the Secular in Music." In Sacred Music 112 (Summer 1985): 7—12. Stapert, Calvin R. A New Song for an Old World: Musical Thought in the Early Church. Calvin Institute of Christian Worship Liturgical Studies Series. Edited by John D. Witvliet. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2007. Tucker, Jeffrey A. Sing Like a Catholic. Richmond, VA: Church Music Association of America, 2009. United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. General Instruction of the Roman Missal. 3rd ed. Liturgy Documentary Series 2. Translated by the International Committee on English in the Liturgy. Washington, DC: United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, 2003. ———. General Instruction of the Roman Missal. Rev. 3rd ed. Liturgy Documentary Series 14. Translated by the International Committee on English in the Liturgy. Washington, DC: United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, 2011. ———. Sing to the Lord: Music in Divine Worship. Pastoral Liturgy Series 4. Washington, DC: United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. Viladesau, Richard. Theology and the Arts: Encountering God through Music, Art, and Rhetoric. Mahwah: Paulist Press, 2000. Von Hildebrand, Dietrich. Liturgy and Personality: the Healing Power of Formal Prayer. Manchester, NH: Sophia Institute Press, 1943. Zundel, Maurice. The Splendour of the Liturgy. New York, NY: Sheed & Ward, 1944.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue listening from where you left off, or restart the preview.