Thursday, February 1, 2007
Gregorian: Impossible?
(By: Francis Nyan)
“GREGORIAN CHANTS DURING MASS? No choir in Singapore will be able to get everyone to sing like that. In fact, not even every choir can sing like that...”
A careful reading of church documents on the use of music will reveal that Gregorian chant has a special place in church liturgy. Yet we find in Singapore, our church choirs seem to offer everything but this form of music deemed “foundational” by the Church herself. It is unfortunate that most parish musicians are not aware of where and how to use Gregorian chants and instead routinely reach for some other “suitable song”. More often than not, the text of the “suitable song” is not even one that has been approved by the Bishops’ Conference.
A musical supermodel
Gregorian chant (or plainchant) is the only musical style that receives unqualified support in the Catholic Church’s documents on the liturgy.
In 1903, Pope St. Pius X wrote the Motu Proprio1 “Tra Le Sollecitudini” on Sacred Music which established the primacy of Gregorian Chant. Exactly 100 years later in 2003, Pope John Paul II brought this document to the forefront with his Chirograph for the Centenary of the Motu Proprio “Tra Le Sollecitudini” on Sacred Music (November 22, 2003), in which he wrote:
Pastoral reasons. It is argued that Latin is incomprehensible. But translations are available. In fact, using an alien language can refresh palates jaded from the over-familiarity with the English texts. Moreover, there is such a thing as plainchant in English (more on that later).
Sound. It is true the chant modes sound strange to modern ears accustomed to the Western harmonic scale. But consider also the musical variety and richness in the countries of our ancestry and the countries of South-east Asia, built on their own musical scales. Again, a different modality will introduce a freshness to our liturgical celebrations.
Ignorance. Unfortunately, the sole experience people have of plainchant tends to be the ethereal perfection of a monastic choir immortalised on a CD. Inspiring as it may be, it is also discouraging because no realistic person could ever imagine his or her parish congregation singing like that. In fact, it was to address the unattainability of that standard by parishes that the Second Vatican Council urged the publication of simpler chants which has since come into being.
The “charismaticisation” of the liturgy of the Singapore church. The charismatic movement is part of the mainstream of church life in Singapore. Its influence is now felt in the Eucharistic liturgy as a charismatic “praise and worship” style has set the pace for public worship. That style is uptempo, accessible, immediate, emotive, absorbing. It is a potent mix. There is much to recommend the charismatic movement, yet the dominance of a charismatic style threatens to push out other aspects of the Eucharist, notably its contemplative dimension, which plainchant conveys par excellence.
Plainchant is the paradigm of “noble simplicity”. The words are unadorned so as to speak to the heart, without artifice. An analogy best describes the contrast. Consider a heart patient. After years of rich high-fat, high-salt food, the unseasoned taste of simple food prescribed by the cardiologist seems at first impossible to bear. But when the taste buds become accustomed, the patient rediscovers the straightforward, honest taste of his food.
A gradual approach
In the General Instruction on the Roman Missal2, which sets out the rules for our celebration of the liturgy, music for the entrance of the celebrant, the preparation of the gifts (offertory), and the communion are to be antiphons and psalms taken from two approved song books, the Roman Gradual and the Simple Gradual, or another suitable song the text of which has been approved by the Bishops’ Conference.
The chants of the Graduals are firstly scriptural, drawn mainly from the Psalms. Hymns are not scripture! In the Roman tradition, hymns are found chiefly in the Liturgy of the Hours, not the Eucharist. That is why one of the key aspects of recent liturgical reform is to highlight the importance of scripture.
Part of developing a warm and living love for Scripture will come from singing it. It is therefore incumbent on those who select music for their communities to put on the lips of their communities the meaty words of scripture itself and not the saccharine confections of fertile imaginations.
It may be objected that some hymns are adaptations inspired by scripture. But they are not scripture itself. Nobody would claim that a child’s abridged Macbeth is the actual work of Shakespeare – with time, we expect the child to graduate to the real thing. With scripture, the distinction between scripture itself and various adaptations thereof is even more critical, for it is Christ who speaks to us through the scripture in the Liturgy. We should therefore try to adhere as much as possible to the words of scripture itself.
Furthermore, we should ask ourselves why such adaptation is deemed necessary in the first place. Some composers edit out “difficult” passages and change words to fit a particular melody or metre. Does the tail wag the dog? It is often difficult for musicians to take a step back and remember that music is the servant (even if a pre-eminent servant!) of the liturgy and not its master. Music must allow the words and the rites to speak and not call attention to itself.
Developing a penchant for plainchant
It is true that some of the chants of the Roman Gradual can be difficult. How can “active participation” be achieved? Pope Paul VI advised:
Certainly, a major benefit of singing songs that emulate Gregorian chant is that it helps us to become more discerning about the non-chant music we sing.
I propose the formation of a schola cantorum of between one to two dozen singers to work with a sympathetic priest so that at least on one Sunday a month, somewhere in our archdiocese, a Mass may be celebrated using only the Roman Gradual and the Simple Gradual (including its English translation). I have already formed a small one, and hope others will join me!
At such a Mass, we will strive to create a prayerful and contemplative atmosphere in order to enable those who come to enter ever more deeply into the mysteries of our salvation, hear the gracious words of our liturgy in all their startling clarity and be profoundly changed by them. And from the smallest of such seeds, may a mustard tree grow.
Francis Nyan has been passionate about Gregorian chant for many years. He currently leads a small schola which sings plainchant Evening Prayer and Night Prayer every 4th Sunday of the month at 8pm in the Adoration Chapel of the Church of Sts Peter & Paul. It also aims to provide plainchant at a monthly Mass in the near future. For more information contact francisnyan@gmail.com.
In June, Francis will conduct a basic Gregorian chant course under the auspices of the Liturgical Music Committee of the Liturgy Commission. For further details and registration, contact Robert Loh at robertloh54@yahoo.com.
“GREGORIAN CHANTS DURING MASS? No choir in Singapore will be able to get everyone to sing like that. In fact, not even every choir can sing like that...”
A careful reading of church documents on the use of music will reveal that Gregorian chant has a special place in church liturgy. Yet we find in Singapore, our church choirs seem to offer everything but this form of music deemed “foundational” by the Church herself. It is unfortunate that most parish musicians are not aware of where and how to use Gregorian chants and instead routinely reach for some other “suitable song”. More often than not, the text of the “suitable song” is not even one that has been approved by the Bishops’ Conference.
A musical supermodel
Gregorian chant (or plainchant) is the only musical style that receives unqualified support in the Catholic Church’s documents on the liturgy.
In 1903, Pope St. Pius X wrote the Motu Proprio1 “Tra Le Sollecitudini” on Sacred Music which established the primacy of Gregorian Chant. Exactly 100 years later in 2003, Pope John Paul II brought this document to the forefront with his Chirograph for the Centenary of the Motu Proprio “Tra Le Sollecitudini” on Sacred Music (November 22, 2003), in which he wrote:
7. Among the musical expressions that correspond best with the qualities
demanded by the notion of sacred music, especially liturgical music, Gregorian
chant has a special place. The Second Vatican Council recognized that “being
specially suited to the Roman Liturgy” it should be given, other things being
equal, pride of place in liturgical services sung in Latin. St Pius X pointed
out that the Church had “inherited it from the Fathers of the Church”, that she
has “jealously guarded [it] for centuries in her liturgical codices” and still
“proposes it to the faithful” as her own, considering it “the supreme model of
sacred music”. Thus, Gregorian chant continues also today to be an element of
unity in the Roman Liturgy.
Like St Pius X, the Second Vatican Council also recognized that “other
kinds of sacred music, especially polyphony, are by no means excluded from
liturgical celebrations”. It is therefore necessary to pay special attention to
the new musical expressions to ascertain whether they too can express the
inexhaustible riches of the Mystery proposed in the Liturgy and thereby
encourage the active participation of the faithful in celebrations.
Therefore, there is qualified support for other styles and other instruments, but qualified nonetheless.
Strictly for monks?
Thus, plainchant is still the music of choice for Mass, and that’s why so many popes (Pope St Pius X, Pope Pius XII, Pope Paul VI and Pope John Paul II) repeatedly underlined its importance and significance. Surely, the issue cannot be so easily brushed off as a Roman lack of comprehension about our “modern situation” (If so, would that not then apply to all other missives from Rome?)
So why do our local choirs still avoid it?
Here are some possible reasons for our plainchant phobia:
Strictly for monks?
Thus, plainchant is still the music of choice for Mass, and that’s why so many popes (Pope St Pius X, Pope Pius XII, Pope Paul VI and Pope John Paul II) repeatedly underlined its importance and significance. Surely, the issue cannot be so easily brushed off as a Roman lack of comprehension about our “modern situation” (If so, would that not then apply to all other missives from Rome?)
So why do our local choirs still avoid it?
Here are some possible reasons for our plainchant phobia:
Pastoral reasons. It is argued that Latin is incomprehensible. But translations are available. In fact, using an alien language can refresh palates jaded from the over-familiarity with the English texts. Moreover, there is such a thing as plainchant in English (more on that later).
Sound. It is true the chant modes sound strange to modern ears accustomed to the Western harmonic scale. But consider also the musical variety and richness in the countries of our ancestry and the countries of South-east Asia, built on their own musical scales. Again, a different modality will introduce a freshness to our liturgical celebrations.
Ignorance. Unfortunately, the sole experience people have of plainchant tends to be the ethereal perfection of a monastic choir immortalised on a CD. Inspiring as it may be, it is also discouraging because no realistic person could ever imagine his or her parish congregation singing like that. In fact, it was to address the unattainability of that standard by parishes that the Second Vatican Council urged the publication of simpler chants which has since come into being.
The “charismaticisation” of the liturgy of the Singapore church. The charismatic movement is part of the mainstream of church life in Singapore. Its influence is now felt in the Eucharistic liturgy as a charismatic “praise and worship” style has set the pace for public worship. That style is uptempo, accessible, immediate, emotive, absorbing. It is a potent mix. There is much to recommend the charismatic movement, yet the dominance of a charismatic style threatens to push out other aspects of the Eucharist, notably its contemplative dimension, which plainchant conveys par excellence.
Plainchant is the paradigm of “noble simplicity”. The words are unadorned so as to speak to the heart, without artifice. An analogy best describes the contrast. Consider a heart patient. After years of rich high-fat, high-salt food, the unseasoned taste of simple food prescribed by the cardiologist seems at first impossible to bear. But when the taste buds become accustomed, the patient rediscovers the straightforward, honest taste of his food.
A gradual approach
In the General Instruction on the Roman Missal2, which sets out the rules for our celebration of the liturgy, music for the entrance of the celebrant, the preparation of the gifts (offertory), and the communion are to be antiphons and psalms taken from two approved song books, the Roman Gradual and the Simple Gradual, or another suitable song the text of which has been approved by the Bishops’ Conference.
The chants of the Graduals are firstly scriptural, drawn mainly from the Psalms. Hymns are not scripture! In the Roman tradition, hymns are found chiefly in the Liturgy of the Hours, not the Eucharist. That is why one of the key aspects of recent liturgical reform is to highlight the importance of scripture.
Part of developing a warm and living love for Scripture will come from singing it. It is therefore incumbent on those who select music for their communities to put on the lips of their communities the meaty words of scripture itself and not the saccharine confections of fertile imaginations.
It may be objected that some hymns are adaptations inspired by scripture. But they are not scripture itself. Nobody would claim that a child’s abridged Macbeth is the actual work of Shakespeare – with time, we expect the child to graduate to the real thing. With scripture, the distinction between scripture itself and various adaptations thereof is even more critical, for it is Christ who speaks to us through the scripture in the Liturgy. We should therefore try to adhere as much as possible to the words of scripture itself.
Furthermore, we should ask ourselves why such adaptation is deemed necessary in the first place. Some composers edit out “difficult” passages and change words to fit a particular melody or metre. Does the tail wag the dog? It is often difficult for musicians to take a step back and remember that music is the servant (even if a pre-eminent servant!) of the liturgy and not its master. Music must allow the words and the rites to speak and not call attention to itself.
Developing a penchant for plainchant
It is true that some of the chants of the Roman Gradual can be difficult. How can “active participation” be achieved? Pope Paul VI advised:
To promote active participation, the people should be encouraged to take part by
means of acclamations, responses, psalmody, antiphons, and songs, as well as by
actions, gestures, and bodily attitudes. And at the proper times all should
observe a reverent silence.
To make things easier for the common folk, an approved Simple Gradual was developed “containing simpler melodies, for use in small churches”. We also now have an English version of the Simple Gradual by Paul F. Ford called By Flowing Waters: Chant for the Liturgy.
Singapore parishes have to start somewhere, although (to continue my previous analogy) taste buds accustomed to modern music are very difficult to wean.
A good weaning approach would be to encourage and use compositions that try, as far as possible, to adhere to the musical formula of the Gregorian chant. This is based on advice given by Pope John Paul II, who said:
Singapore parishes have to start somewhere, although (to continue my previous analogy) taste buds accustomed to modern music are very difficult to wean.
A good weaning approach would be to encourage and use compositions that try, as far as possible, to adhere to the musical formula of the Gregorian chant. This is based on advice given by Pope John Paul II, who said:
With regard to compositions of liturgical music, I make my own the “general
rule” that St Pius X formulated in these words: “The more closely a composition
for church approaches in its movement, inspiration and savour the Gregorian
melodic 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”. 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.
Certainly, a major benefit of singing songs that emulate Gregorian chant is that it helps us to become more discerning about the non-chant music we sing.
I propose the formation of a schola cantorum of between one to two dozen singers to work with a sympathetic priest so that at least on one Sunday a month, somewhere in our archdiocese, a Mass may be celebrated using only the Roman Gradual and the Simple Gradual (including its English translation). I have already formed a small one, and hope others will join me!
At such a Mass, we will strive to create a prayerful and contemplative atmosphere in order to enable those who come to enter ever more deeply into the mysteries of our salvation, hear the gracious words of our liturgy in all their startling clarity and be profoundly changed by them. And from the smallest of such seeds, may a mustard tree grow.
Francis Nyan has been passionate about Gregorian chant for many years. He currently leads a small schola which sings plainchant Evening Prayer and Night Prayer every 4th Sunday of the month at 8pm in the Adoration Chapel of the Church of Sts Peter & Paul. It also aims to provide plainchant at a monthly Mass in the near future. For more information contact francisnyan@gmail.com.
In June, Francis will conduct a basic Gregorian chant course under the auspices of the Liturgical Music Committee of the Liturgy Commission. For further details and registration, contact Robert Loh at robertloh54@yahoo.com.
Labels: Gregorian Chant
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]
