Rome, Italy, Mar 10, 2017 / 02:50 am (CNA/EWTN News).- Hundreds of musicians and pastors from around the world have signed a document urging parishes and publishers should take care to develop the Church’s rich musical traditions, not discard them.
They did so after outlining trends within the Church’s musical traditions in the past five decades that they deem harmful to the Church’s liturgical life and musical heritage.
The statement’s authors write that they “cannot avoid being concerned about the current situation of sacred music, which is nothing short of desperate, with abuses in the area of sacred music now almost the norm rather than the exception.”
The letter, entitled “Cantate Domino Canticum Novum”, or “Sing a New Song Unto the Lord”, was signed by over 200 musicians, pastors, and musical scholars from around the globe, and published in six languages.
Its publication commemorates the 50th anniversary of the March 5, 1967 promulgation of Musicam sacram, a Vatican instruction on music in the liturgy. In their reflection on the “via dolorosa” of liturgical music in the past five decades, the musicians lay out the challenges facing liturgical music today – before offering some possible solutions.
They highlight advice from Vatican II’s constitution on the liturgy, Sacrosanctum Concilium, which points to the Church’s musical tradition as a “treasure of inestimable value, greater even than that of any other art.”
“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,” the document continues, noting the link between a music’s holiness and its connection to the liturgy.
The document outlines several areas in which the preservation of the Church’s musical traditions has been ignored, or even, the authors state, opposed.
This break with the past makes any attempt to connect the Church to the future meaningless – because the context the tradition provides has been taken away. The letter’s authors liken this break to a “sort of spiritual Alzheimer’s,” that takes away not only musical and artistic memories, but theological and cultural ones, too.
In this regard, traditional elements of the liturgy such as the Mass propers and the Liturgy of the Hours have been overlooked. Meanwhile, secular music styles have had undue influence on the liturgy, and the commercial music industry has now reinforced these secular styles as the primary kind of music sold to parishes.
The letter warns that not only does the secularization damage the Church’s connection with the past and ability to grapple with the future, but it also “destabilizes the sense of adoration that is at the heart of the Christian faith” by effectively selling out to secular trends. By molding Church music to different secular trends, recent practices also endanger the Church’s ability to truly exalt and praise good cultural traditions, they note.
“The secularism of popular musical styles has contributed to a desacralization of the liturgy, while the secularism of profit-based commercialism has reinforced the imposition of mediocre collections of music upon parishes,” the declaration states.
Instead of making culture, the “lack of commitment to tradition has put the Church and her liturgy on an uncertain and meandering path.”
The letter also pushed back against groups in the Church that have lobbied against repertoires that respect tradition and the guidelines set out by Vatican II, instead leaving “repertoires of new liturgical music of very low standards as regards both the text and the music.”
“If we desire that people look for Jesus, we need to prepare the house with the best that the Church can offer,” the letter said of this trend of deliberately sidelining chant and other traditional forms of liturgical music. “We will not invite people to our house, the Church, to give them a by-product of music and art, when they can find a much better pop music style outside the Church.”
Another contributing factor to the struggles facing liturgical music, they said, is clericalism, and some clerics’ decisions to supersede the expert opinion of musicians and scholars of liturgical music in order to impose their own opinions.
Lastly, the authors of the letter pointed out that liturgical musicians and composers are undervalued, and often undercompensated for their efforts – which require education, expert skill, and years of training. “If we pay florists and cooks who help at parishes, why does it seem so strange that those performing musical activities for the Church would have a right to fair compensation,” they ask.
The writers of the document point towards numerous ways of addressing these challenges. Their first suggestion is the reaffirmation of Vatican II’s support for Gregorian chant, other traditional chant forms, and modern sacred compositions that are inspired by the chant tradition, along with the reaffirmation of the pipe organ as the instrument of choice in the Church.
They also advocate for strong music education that focuses on traditional music for children, as well as for adult laity. They also ask that “the Church will continue to work against obvious and subtle forms of clericalism, so that laity can make their full contribution in areas where ordination is not a requirement.”
Lastly, they strongly encourage musical training of clergy and strong liturgical formation for liturgists. “Just as musicians need to understand the essentials of liturgical history and theology, so too must liturgists be educated in Gregorian chant, polyphony, and the entire musical tradition of the Church, so that they may discern between what is good and what is bad,” they write.
In addition, the authors encourage cathedrals and basilicas to hold at least one Mass a week in Latin in order to preserve the area’s link with the Church’s tradition, and for every parish to hold at least one fully-sung Mass a week.
Finally, the musical experts point out that many “Catholics think that what mainstream publishers offer is in line with the doctrine of the Catholic Church regarding liturgy and music, when it is frequently not so.”
They ask that publishers put aside profits and commercial incentives in order to emphasize and educate the Catholics in liturgical practices and doctrine.
Among the signers of the declaration are Bishop Rene Gracida, Emeritus Bishop of Corpus Christi; Bishop Athanasius Schneider, Auxiliary Bishop of Maria Santissima in Astana; Aurelio Porfiri, PhD cand., organist of Santa Maria dell’Orto in Rome; Abbot Philip Anderson of Clear Creek Abbey; and James MacMillan, composer.
[…]
Since female “deacons” in the early Church were historically and now are decidedly not equivalent to male deacons (International Theological Commission in 2002, plus the sidelined Gerhard Cardinal Muller’s book: “The Priesthood and the Diaconate”, German 2000/English 2002), it seems the Pope Francis has four options.
He can either (1) invent a contradiction and throw the three-tiered sacrament of Holy Orders into complete chaos, or perhaps,(2) create a “deaconess” subcategory of deacon-like ministry that is no not-quite-an-ordination, or (3) simply reject any misguided advice (the term “inadmissible” comes to mind), or he can (3) remain silent.
Option Two seems to have been unwittingly pre-empted in recent years by the creation Lay Ecclesial Ministers. These ministers, as it was clarified in writing only at the last minute, serve by virtue of their sacramental Baptism and Confirmation, and not by any unspoken, grey-area-sort-of sacrament-ish Holy Orders.
How now to foster a category of service specifically for women and that does not look (speaking theologically) a hell of a lot like clericalism?
Other than Lay Ecclesial Ministers, another unmentioned and long-existing path for the laity is that of the “religious life”–very much in decline for reasons not mentioned. A new insignia and non-sacramental bucket list probably won’t reverse the post-Christian threats now eating away at the perennial Church.
Under the DOA Option One, would we now be tutored to look forward to a new set of amendments to the still-recent Catechism of 1994/97 (for which the same Cardinal Schonborn was the lead editor), that is, paragraphs 886, 896, 1256, 1538, 1554, 1570, 1569-74,1588, 1596?
And what are we to say of the implied marginalization of other ministries: Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion (sic Eucharistic Ministers), the ministry of welcoming, the ministry of teaching, the ministry of visitation, the ministry of (fill in the blank). Ministry inflation (like secular grade inflation) cannot be resolved by incrementally dissolving the Sacrament of Holy Orders, nor the Second Vatican Council’s “universal call to holiness.”
I wish someone could explain to me how this “conservative” mind , behind large chunks of the CCC, got to the place where he endorses nonsense after for so long being regarded as solidly reliable.
Probably for the same reason as Cardinal Oullet after he endorsed Amoris Laetitia. He either gave up after realizing that nobody would listen to his orthodox advise, or he is fearful of being put on a bus.
While Female Deacons are not explicitly prohibited, I think they should not be allowed given that in the minds of some it will open the door to women priests.
@Joe M – This Cardinal, for years, has vacillated between orthodoxy and heterodoxy. He has participated or allowed quite a lot of crazy or stupid things in his diocese. He is quite the contradiction and I have never been able to figure him out. He seems content to be blown about whichever way the wind blows.
Schönborn should be drug tested.