Vidimus Dominum

(via Chiesa)

Valentino Miserachs Grau, the dean of the Pontifical Institute of Sacred Music, blows a clarion call to the leadership of the Church. Will they listen to him?

by Sandro Magister

ROMA - Valentino Miserachs Grau, 60, from Cataluña, has been for eight years the dean of the Pontifical Institute of Sacred Music, the liturgical-musical "conservatory" of the Holy See, the body charged with forming Church musicians from all over the world.

But - as he explains in the conference shown below - neither he nor PIMS has normative authority in regard to liturgical music. Neither has the Vatican any office so commissioned.

Do you want evidence of this absence of authority? While PIMS bases its formation on the three columns of Gregorian chant, polyphony, and organ music - in fidelity to the instructions of the Second Vatican Council - almost the entire Church, including its leadership, is going in a completely different direction.

Miserachs sees the effects of this as nothing short of disastrous, even to the point of musical and liturgical illiteracy. "Never," he says, "has there been a degeneration like the present one."

But the dean of PIMS does not despair. Just as on the other occasions in the past when the Church has responded to crisis situations in sacred music with energetic reforms, just so can it do today.

His proposal for a new reform is explained in the text that follows. It is a conference that Miserachs gave last October in Barcelona. Ample selections from the introduction and from the final chapter are presented here:


The Church and Sacred Music: Past, Present, and Future

by Valentino Miserachs Grau


Beginning in 1995, when I was named dean of the Pontifical Institute of Sacred Music, PIMS, in Rome, little by little my life has gone down a different path. From the time of my priestly ordination in 1966, I have alternated my ministry with musical activities. [É] In 1973, I began working as the choir director at the Basilica of St. Mary Major, a post I still occupy. [É] So for thirty years of my life I have dedicated myself to composition, to the direction of the basilica choir and of other choral and orchestral groups, to teaching, and to performance.

From 1995 all of these activities have been curtailed, for better or for worse, due to my responsibilities and obligations for directing the institute. [É] A sort of moral responsibility relative to the general situation of sacred music in the Catholic Church has fallen upon my shoulders. Many approach the institute as if it were a normative body in regard to liturgical music. [É]

But when I considered the matter, it struck me that there is no specific pontifical body that oversees liturgical music. [É] This has led to a scarcity of Church documents on the question. Apart from the fourth chapter of the constitution ´Sacrosanctum Concilium´ (1963) of the Second Vatican Council, which is dedicated to sacred music, and the subsequent instruction ´Musicam Sacram´ (March 5, 1967) from the Congregation for Rites, very little else has been said on the subject. There have been noble efforts to follow the right path, but this silence has permitted an anarchical proliferation of the most disparate experiments - conducted, perhaps, in good faith. These experiments, in many cases, have introduced into liturgical music a bundle of banalities adapted from pop music or other extravagantly exotic sources, in disregard of what Paul VI himself said in 1968, speaking to the participants at a national congress of AISC, the Italian Association of St. Cecilia: "Not everything outside of the temple is worthy of crossing its threshold". [É]

On the occasion of the imminent centenary of St. Pius X´s motu proprio ´Inter Sollicitudines´ (November 22, 1903), which represented an historic turning point in the reform of a Church music contaminated by the excesses of the most decadent theatrical style, I believe that a new reform should be set in motion. This reform should better diffuse and coordinate the positive efforts, both past and present, of the local churches. While taking account of the different situations and possibilities, it should also aim to recover Gregorian chant, polyphony, and organ music, the triad extolled by the Second Vatican Council and recently re-proposed forcefully by John Paul II in a speech he gave during an audience granted to PIMS on January 19, 2001, the 90th anniversary of its foundation. In so doing the reform must watch carefully and resolutely for anything in the words or music that is unworthy of or inconvenient to worship, or that does not have the characteristics of true art.

In this regard I recently went to the highest representatives of the Catholic Church to ask them to consider the possibility of creating a pontifical body with the task of overseeing sacred music and, more specifically, liturgical music.

The thesis I would like to illustrate [É] is the following. It has become almost an historic constant that a good praxis will end in abuse, and that the way marked out as being good will not be followed as it should. This provokes, or should provoke, a corrective reaction - or, put in a simple and comprehensive way, a reform.

Has the time perhaps come to undertake a reform? What must be done? We will try to answer these questions in the fourth and final part of my address, after examining in the first three parts [1. The Middle Ages, 2. The Council of Trent, 3. St. Pius X] the lesson we may gather from what has come forth from some of the moments in the history of liturgical music. [...]

4. THE SECOND VATICAN COUNCIL AND ITS AFTERMATH

[É] On December 4, 1963, the Second Vatican Council unanimously approved the constitution ´Sacrosanctum Concilium´ on the sacred liturgy, whose splendid fourth chapter is dedicated to sacred music. It contains the following excellent working declarations:

1. The Church approves and admits to divine worship all forms of true art endowed with the proper qualities. The aim of sacred music is the glory of God and the sanctification of the faithful.

2. The patrimony of sacred music must be preserved and augmented with the greatest care, and a commitment must be made to promote the ´scholae cantorum,´ without disregarding the active participation of the faithful.

3. Musical formation and practice must be cultivated carefully in the seminaries, in both men´s and women´s novitiates, and in other Catholic institutes and schools. We also recommend, if it be opportune, the erection of higher institutes of sacred music.

4. The Church recognizes Gregorian chant as proper to the Roman liturgy: thus, in liturgical celebrations, as conditions allow, it should be given pride of place.

5. Other forms of sacred music, and especially polyphony, should by no means be excluded from the divine offices.

6. The pipe organ is greatly honored as a traditional instrument in the Latin Church. Its sound is able to add marvelous splendor to the ceremonies of the Church, and to elevate souls powerfully to God and to the supreme realities. Other instruments may be admitted to divine worship, provided that they be adapted to sacred use or may be adapted to it, that they be fitting to the dignity of the temple and truly favor the edification of the faithful.

7. Musicians, animated by the Christian spirit, should feel themselves encouraged to cultivate sacred music and increase its patrimony. They should compose melodies that can be sung, not only by the greater scholae cantorum, but also by lesser ones, and that favor the active participation of the faithful.

The instruction ´De Musica in Sacra Liturgia,´ published by the Sacred Congregation for Rites on March 5, 1967, delves much more deeply into particulars, but without detaching itself in the least from what was deliberated by the Council.

What a marvelous panorama opens up before the eyes of one reading these texts! But what a desolate landscape have we instead been given to inhabit, after the Council´s prescriptions have been ignored, and a contrary course frequently followed, for forty years!

The Council has been betrayed by the reckless daring of some and by the cowardly passivity of others. Do you want a recent example? A person who occupies a place of high responsibility in the field of sacred music, in an interview given to an Italian daily, responded to the question of what should happen to the music of Bach, Mozart, and Palestrina with these enlightening words: "These remain pages from the past, to be studied attentively and performed in concert. But in many cases they are not at all suitable for the liturgy."

How does one reconcile such a judgment with the thoughts of Vatican II mentioned above? How does one reconcile it with what John Paul II, on February 2, 1994, wrote to Monsignor Domenico Bartolucci, the permanent director of the Pontifical Musical Chapel, on the occasion of the fourth centenary of the death of Palestrina? The pope, after extolling Palestrina as a musician, as a Christian, and even as a "liturgist," continued by saying:

"He let himself be guided by the liturgical spirit in the search for a language which, without renouncing emotion and originality, would not fall into outworn and banal subjectivism. These qualities, always present in his vast musical opera, have contributed to the creation of a style that has become classic, universally recognized as an exemplar in the field of composition destined for the Church."

Continuing, the pope put his finger on what I believe is the real wound:

"Today, like before, musicians, composers, the cantors of liturgical groups, Church organists and instrumentalists must realize the necessity for a serious and rigorous professional formation. Above all, they must be attentive not to exempt any of their compositions or interpretations from the obligation of being inspired, correct, and attentive to esthetic dignity so as to become effective prayer." [É]

During the 1970´s in Rome, we witnessed the phenomenon of the so-called "beat mass" . [É] It had the effect of a nuclear meltdown, with the fatal consequence of recognizing the "right to liturgical citizenship" of a practice as dangerous as it was reckless. That is to say, liturgical music now could be - or even must be? - a simple transposition of the profane music then in style. Mass-market music - inconsistent, insipid, and ephemeral - was then erroneously and unjustly dubbed "popular," just as its disconcerting, clamorous, noisy, twisted manifestations that so delighted huge, undiscerning crowds were erroneously called "concerts." It is precisely this false "popular" genre, imposed by the overwhelming force of the means of communication at the service of unscrupulous vendors, that has dried up the pure springs of Gregorian chant and of cultured popular music that constitute the most beautiful decoration of our churches and celebrations. [É]

We were greatly comforted by what the Holy Father said during the audience granted to PIMS on January 19, 2001, on the occasion of the 90th anniversary of the institute´s foundation:

" [É] The study and practice of music using the forms and instruments that the Second Vatican Council designated as privileged - Gregorian chant, sacred polyphony, and the organ - should be preserved and promoted. Only thus can liturgical music fulfill its duty worthily in the context of the of the celebration of the sacraments, and in a special way, of the Holy Mass."

That "only thus" is as good as gold, but who will listen to the voice of the pope? Now that adherence to those principles, consolidated by a centuries-old tradition, has been diminished, we have fallen so far as to see the liturgy (even in the more or less prestigious cathedrals) turned into so many festivals of pop music. [É] The teachings of the Church have been distorted with the pretext of a necessary modernization, of a rightful updating, of an inculturation that will render the Christian message and the celebration of its mysteries more comprehensible to the people. [É]

I don´t know whether the competent authorities truly appreciate the scope of the malignant musical praxis that has in some measure spread everywhere, and its negative repercussions on the ´lex orandi,´ and thus also on the ´lex credendi´. [É] An unequivocal sign of the current abasement of the incorrect understanding of the function of singing within the liturgy are the expressions unfortunately now in use, such as "the liturgical celebration was performed, accompanied, gladdened by the such-and-such choir of so-and-so." It is in fact evident that those who express themselves in this way consider liturgical singing nothing other than a more or less pleasing pastime.

Doesn´t it seem to you that the current situation, at least in its most strident forms, [É] presents many analogies with the three historical moments previously outlined, and in particular with the situation that brought about the reform of St. Pius X?

But we must note an important difference: the reforms of the past had to deal with forms of music that were, perhaps, "excessive," but formally correct. But much of the "music" that is written today ignores, I will not say the grammar, but even the ABC´s of musical art. In the more or less critical situations that we have considered, there was never a degeneration like the present one. [É]

It seems evident to me that a reform is necessary that will inspire a commitment of faithfulness to the council. This question must be taken seriously, beginning with formation. Priests of a certain age will recall how much importance was accorded to musical formation in the seminaries. In the current ´Ratio Studiorum´ music is not even mentioned; this is certainly not what the council desired. What is needed, therefore, is a change in mentality, to consider liturgical celebrations - including music - as requiring our foremost attention.

What is the use of having beautiful churches, precious vestments, excellent translations of the liturgical texts, if the music is frightful? We must take into account the good proposals made by the diocesan or inter-diocesan musical commissions, and find a way to provide the churches with organs (we have lost so many), primarily with pipe organs. If many are not installed, it is also because the electronic ones have been greatly perfected. We must get used to the idea that it is necessary to set aside funds for musical expenses; volunteerism is very praiseworthy, but we must ensure that those who work in this field be well-prepared, musically and liturgically. If this is hard to accomplish, we must turn to expert professionals, guaranteeing them at least a decent remuneration. We must accelerate the creation of ´scholae cantorum,´ large or small as conditions permit. [É]

We must insist in every way possible that schools of sacred music be created. [É] Or, at the very least, we must create courses in sacred music at the music schools and conservatories that already exist, as is already beginning in Italy. There are many organists who know how to play concert pieces, but don´t ask them to accompany the choir, to improvise, to invent an accompaniment, to make musical selections for a well-structured celebration - all things a Church organist should know how to do - because no one has ever taught them this.

Let´s put aside all of the objections against Gregorian chant and Latin: let´s take our example from the Nordic countries and even from the mission territories. Should we be the most recalcitrant ones - we, who are Latins by language, culture, and music?

We are awaiting assistance from Rome that will aim to coordinate these things in a manner worthy of the Catholic Church.

In essence, I believe the time is right to initiate a reform in the sense I have tried to illustrate, a reform adapted to the historical moment in which we are living, a reform that will aim not to conquer, but to convince.

Let us make all possible efforts to restore or establish good music in our churches, taking our inspiration from the motto that illuminated the pontificate of St. Pius X, and which constitutes the program that should stimulate us to an untiring renewal: "Instaurare omnia in Christo," to renew all things in Christ.

Valentino Miserachs Grau, president of the Pontifical Institute of Sacred Music, is calling for its revival. Pope Joseph Ratzinger wants it, too. But the path is full of obstacles

by Sandro Magister

ROMA, December 7, 2005 – As on other occasions in the past, this year on December 5 the Vatican Congregation for Worship dedicated one day to the study of sacred music, on the anniversary of the Second Vatican Council’s constitution on the liturgy, “Sacrosanctum Concilium.” The previous days have never produced any significant results.

But now there is a pope, Benedict XVI, who is highly competent in the area of sacred music, is severely critical of the degradation of music following the council, and has written on a number of occasions what he thinks and what he wants: to restore to the Catholic liturgy the great music that “from Gregorian chant passes through the music of the cathedrals and polyphony, the music of the Renaissance and the Baroque, to Bruckner and beyond.”

Benedict XVI sent a message to the participants at the congress, gathered in the New Synod Hall, encouraging them “to reflect upon and evaluate the relationship between music and the liturgy, always keeping close watch over practice and experimentation.”

The pope’s encouragement was addressed to an assembly composed of musicians and liturgists from many nations, some of whom were in disagreement with him over the matters at hand.

At the end of the work, cardinal Francis Arinze, prefect of the Congregation for Worship, and the former secretary of that same congregation, Domenico Sorrentino, recently promoted as bishop of Assisi, avoided drawing any conclusions. Arinze criticized the musical fashions found in many churches, which he characterized as “chaotic, excessively simplistic, and unsuitable for the liturgy.” But the musical opening to the day of study was entrusted to a proponent of one of the styles most susceptible to criticism, a supporter of the very sentimental, vaguely “new age” style: Maestro Marco Frisina, choir director of the cathedral of Rome.

But the day of study did demonstrate a reversal in the trend, back in the direction preferred by pope Joseph Ratzinger.

Musicians and liturgists of the postconciliar “new direction” found themselves constrained to justify themselves before an audience mostly oriented toward reviving traditional liturgical music, and Gregorian chant in the first place.

One could gather this from the strong and confident applause that greeted the addresses delivered by Dom Philippe Dupont, abbot of Solesmes and a great cultivator of Gregorian chant, by Martin Baker, choirmaster of the cathedral of Westminster, and by Jean-Marie Bodo, from Cameroon, “where we sing Gregorian chant every Sunday at Mass, because it is the song of the Church.”

But one could gather this above all from the applause that punctuated and concluded the address by monsignor Valentino Miserachs Grau, president of the Pontifical Institute of Sacred Music in Rome, the liturgical-musical “conservatory” of the Holy See, which has the task of training Church musicians from all over the world.

With concise and concentrated arguments, Miserachs argued forcefully on behalf of the revival of Gregorian chant, beginning with the cathedrals and monasteries, which ought to take the lead in this rebirth.

And he called upon the Church of Rome finally to act “with authority” in the area of liturgical music, not simply with documents and exhortations, but by establishing an office with competency in this regard, as it did for example with the pontifical commission dedicated to the Church’s cultural heritage.

“This is the opportune moment, and there is no time to waste,” Miserachs concluded, clearly referring to the reigning pope.

Here follows the address by the president of the Pontifical Institute of Sacred Music:


Gregorian Chant: The Possibilities and Conditions for a Revival

by Valentino Miserachs Grau


That the assembly of the faithful, during the celebration of the sacred rites and especially during the Holy Mass, should participate by singing the parts of the Gregorian chant that belong to them, is not only possible – it is ideal.

This is not my opinion, but the thought of the Church. See, in this regard, the documentation from the motu proprio “Inter Sollicitudines” of Saint Pius X until our own time, passing through Pius XII (“Musicae Sacrae Disciplina”), chapter VI of the Second Vatican Council’s constitution on the liturgy, the subsequent instruction issued by the Congregation for Rites in 1967, and the recent chirograph of John Paul II in commemoration of the hundredth anniversary of “Inter Sollicitudines,” which was released in 1903. Another example is the statement from the conclusion of the synod of bishops that met last October: “Beginning with their seminary training, priests should be prepared to understand and celebrate the Mass in Latin. They should also […] appreciate the value of Gregorian chant. […] The faithful themselves should be educated in this regard.”

The motivation for this desire is widely demonstrable, if not self-evident. In fact, the almost outright ban on Latin and Gregorian chant seen over the past forty years is incomprehensible, especially in the Latin countries. It is incomprehensible, and deplorable.

Latin and Gregorian chant, which are deeply linked to the biblical, patristic, and liturgical sources, are part of that “lex orandi” which has been forged over a span of almost twenty centuries. Why should such an amputation take place, and so lightheartedly? It is like cutting off roots – now that there is so much talk of roots.

The obscuring of an entire tradition of prayer formed over two millennia has led to conditions favorable to a heterogeneous and anarchic proliferation of new musical products which, in the majority of cases, have not been able to root themselves in the essential tradition of the Church, bringing about not only a general impoverishment, but also damage that would be difficult to repair, assuming the desire to remedy it were present.

Gregorian chant sung by the assembly not only can be restored – it must be restored, together with the chanting of the “schola” and the celebrants, if a return is desired to the liturgical seriousness, sound form, and universality that should characterize any sort of liturgical music worthy of the name, as Saint Pius X taught and John Paul II repeated, without altering so much as a comma. How could a bunch of insipid tunes stamped out according to the models of the most trivial popular music ever replace the nobility and robustness of the Gregorian melodies, even the most simple ones, which are capable of lifting the hearts of the people up to heaven?

We have undervalued the Christian people’s ability to learn; we have almost forced them to forget the Gregorian melodies that they knew, instead of expanding and deepening their knowledge, including through proper instruction on the meaning of the texts. And instead, we have stuffed them full of banalities.

By cutting the umbilical cord of tradition in this manner, we have deprived the new composers of liturgical music in the living languages – assuming, without conceding, that they have sufficient technical preparation – of the indispensable “humus” for composing in harmony with the spirit of the Church.

We have undervalued – I insist – the people’s ability to learn. It is obvious that not all of the repertoire is suitable for the people: this is a distortion of the rightful participation that is asked of the assembly, as if, in the matter of liturgical chant, the people should be the only protagonist on the stage. We must respect the proper order of things: the people should chant their part, but equal respect should be shown for the role of the “schola,” the cantor, the psalmist, and, naturally, the celebrant and the various ministers, who often prefer not to sing. As John Paul II emphasized in his recent chirograph: “From the good coordination of all – the celebrating priest and the deacon, the acolytes, ministers, lectors, psalmist, ‘schola cantorum’, musicians, cantor, and assembly – emerges the right spiritual atmosphere that makes the moment of the liturgy intense, participatory, and fruitful.”

Do we want a revival of Gregorian chant for the assembly? It should begin with the acclamations, the Pater Noster, the ordinary chants of the Mass, especially the Kyrie, Sanctus, and Agnus Dei. In many countries, the people were very familiar with the Credo III, and the entire ordinary of the Mass VIII “de Angelis,” and not only that! They knew the Pange Lingua, the Salve Regina, and other antiphons. Experience teaches that the people, following a simple invitation, will also sing the Missa Brevis and other easy Gregorian melodies that they know by ear, even if it’s the first time they have sung them. There is a minimal repertoire that must be learned, contained within the “Jubilate Deo” of Paul VI, or in the “Liber Cantualis.” If the people grow accustomed to singing the Gregorian repertoire suitable for them, they will be in good shape to learn new songs in the living languages – those songs, one understands, worthy of standing beside the Gregorian repertoire, which should always retain its primacy.

A persevering educational effort is called for. This is the first condition for an appropriate and necessary recovery: something we priests often forget, since we are quick to choose the solutions that involve the least effort. Or do we prefer, in the place of substantial spiritual nourishment, to pepper the ear with “pleasant” melodies or the jarring jangling of guitars, forgetting that, as the future pope Pius X incisively pointed out to the clergy of Venice, pleasure has never been the correct criterion for judging in holy things?

A work of formation is necessary. And how can we form the people, if we are not first formed ourselves? The general congress of the “Consociatio Internationalis Musicae Sacrae” was recently held at the Pontifical Institute of Sacred Music, addressing this very topic, the formation of the clergy in sacred music. For years now, seminarians and men and women religious have lacked a real formation in the musical tradition of the Church, or even the most elementary musical formation. Saint Pius X, and the entire magisterium of the Church after him, understood very well that no work of reform or recovery is possible without an adequate formation.

One of the most substantial fruits of the “motu proprio” of 1903, which has continued through time and is being renewed in our day, is the Pontifical Institute of Sacred Music in Rome, which has celebrated the hundredth anniversary of its foundation. How many masters of Gregorian chant, of polyphony, of the organ; how many practitioners of sacred music, scattered to every corner of the Catholic world, have been formed in its halls! Without mentioning the other higher schools of sacred music, and even the diocesan schools, and the various courses and seminars of liturgical-musical formation. But is Gregorian chant really taught there? And how is it taught? Has not the prejudice crept in that Gregorian chant is outdated, to be set aside definitively?

What a serious mistake! I would go so far as to say that without Gregorian chant, the Church is mutilated, and that there cannot be Church music without Gregorian chant.

The great masters of polyphony are even greater when they base themselves upon Gregorian chant, mining it for themes, modes, and rhythmic variations. This spirit imbuing their refined technique and this faithful adherence to the sacred text and the liturgical moment made Palestrina, Lasso, Victoria, Guerrero, Morales, and others great.

The renewal unleashed by “Inter Sollicitudines” will be all the more valid as it takes its inspiration from Gregorian chant. At their best, Perosi, Refice, and Bartolucci in our own day made Gregorian chant the essence of their music. And this is not only true in terms of their complex or choral compositions, but also in terms of creating new melodies, in Latin or the vernacular, both for the liturgy and for devotional acts.

True sacred popular singing will be more valid and substantial as it takes its inspiration from Gregorian chant. John Paul II took as his own the principle asserted by Saint Pius X: “A composition for the Church is all the more sacred and liturgical the more its development, inspiration, and flavor approaches the Gregorian melody, and the less worthy it is the more it distinguishes itself from that supreme model.”

But how can one address the creation of a high-quality repertoire for the liturgy, including in the living languages, if the composers refuse to acknowledge Gregorian chant?

Of course, the best school for mastering a repertoire, for penetrating its secrets, is the real-life practice of that repertoire: something that we, the bridge generation between the old and the new, had the fortune to experience.

But unfortunately, after us the curtain fell. Why this resistance to restoring, either completely or partially depending on circumstances, the Mass in Gregorian chant and Latin? Are the generations of today, perhaps, more ignorant than those of the past?

The new missal proposes the Latin texts of the ordinary in addition to the modern language version. The Church wants this. Why should we lack the courage of conversion?

Gregorian chant must not remain in the preserve of academia, or the concert hall, or recordings; it must not be mummified like a museum exhibit, but must return as living song, sung also by the assembly, which will find that it satisfies their most profound spiritual tensions, and will feel itself to be truly the people of God.

It’s time to break through the inertia, and the shining example must come from the cathedral churches, the major churches, the monasteries, the convents, the seminaries, and the houses of religious formation. And so the humble parishes, too, will end up being “contaminated” by the supreme beauty of the chant of the Church.

And the persuasive power of Gregorian chant will reverberate, and will consolidate the people in the true sense of Catholicism.

And the spirit of Gregorian chant will inform a new breed of compositions, and will guide with the true “sensus Ecclesiae” the efforts for a proper enculturation.

I would even say that the melodies of the various local traditions, including those of faraway countries with cultures much different from that of Europe, are near relatives of Gregorian chant, and in this sense, too, Gregorian chant is truly universal, capable of being proposed to all and of acting as an amalgam in regard to unity and plurality.

Besides, it is precisely these faraway countries, these cultures which have recently appeared on the horizon of the Catholic Church, that are teaching us to love the traditional chant of the Church. These young Churches of Africa and Asia, together with the ministerial help they are already giving to our tired European Churches, will give us the pride of recognizing, even within chant, the stone that we were carved from. And not a moment too soon!

Two other factors that I maintain are indispensable for the renewal of Gregorian chant and good sacred music are the following:

1. – Above all, the musical formation of priests, religious, and the faithful requires seriousness, and the avoidance of the halfhearted amateurishness seen in some volunteers. Those who have gone through great pains to prepare themselves for this service must be hired, and proper remuneration for them secured. In a word, we must know how to spend money on music. It is unthinkable that we should spend money on everything from flowers to banners, but not on music. What sense would it make to encourage young people to study, and then keep them unemployed, if not indeed humiliated or tormented by our whims and our lack of seriousness?

2. – The second necessary factor is harmony in action. John Paul II recalled: “The musical aspect of liturgical celebrations cannot be left to improvisation or the decision of individuals, but must be entrusted to well-coordinated leadership, in respect for the norms and competent authorities, as the substantial outcome of an adequate liturgical formation.” So, then, respect for the norms – which is already a widespread desire. We are waiting for authoritative directives, imparted with authority. And the coordination of all the local initiatives and practices is a service that rightfully belongs to the Church of Rome, to the Holy See. This is the opportune moment, and there is no time to waste.

Mass with plainchant
(English/Latin)
Feast of the Chair of Peter

22 February, Thursday
8.00 pm
Chapel,
Church of St Teresa (Note the change in location)

This mass will be sung largely in English. The use of chant is not limited to the Latin language. In fact, a worthy and reverent celebration of the Mass can be conducted in English. We will be using chants set to English translations of scripture. These chants are simple, accessible, yet befitting the solemnity that the Mass deserves. We hope that you can join us in this Encounter with the Lord. Please note the change in location, we will be using the chapel used for weekday Masses, and not the main church.

Liturgy of the Hours
Vespers and Compline
(sung in Latin, translations provided)
25 February, Sunday
8.00 pm
Adoration Chapel,
Church of Sts Peter and Paul

An excerpt from the General Instruction of the Liturgy of the Hours:

27. Lay groups gathering for prayer, apostolic work, or any other reason are encouraged to fulfill the Church's duty, by celebrating part of the liturgy of the hours. The laity must learn above all how in the liturgy they are adoring God the Father in spirit and in truth; they should bear in mind that through public worship and prayer they reach all humanity and can contribute significantly to the salvation of the whole world.

“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:

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:

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 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:

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.

(via Spartanburg Herald-Journal)

KIM KIMZEY, Staff Writer

Searching for reverence and their spiritual roots, some younger Catholics might feel drawn to the Latin Mass.

Priests say it is the solemnity of the centuries-old rite, known as the Tridentine Mass, that appeals in part to worshippers who grew up celebrating the Novus Ordo Mass.

"The real energy and enthusiasm around this Mass is with the younger people," said Father Lawrence McInerny, pastor of the Stella Maris parish on Sullivan's Island.

The church has offered the Latin Mass in addition to the Novus Ordo Mass for the past five years.

Between 180 and 200 people attend the weekly Latin Mass at Stella Maris. Many are visitors who are drawn to the service for various reasons.

"I don't want to disparage the Novus Ordo Mass, but (the Latin Mass is) more mystical and contemplative," McInerny said.

He believes it is the Latin Mass' symbolism, mystery and order that partly account for its rising popularity.

"People need symbols and ritual," McInerny said. "You don't change the traditional Mass around. It changes you."

The Latin Mass is not currently offered at Catholic parishes in Spartanburg.

Father Michael Polewczak said worshippers at the Catholic Church of Jesus Our Risen Savior have not approached him about offering the Latin Mass.

"Why has it grown in popularity? That's an interesting question I don't have the answer to," he said.

Polewczak, a self-labeled "cradle Catholic," remembers the Latin Masses of his youth well. He said many people interested in the traditional rite did not grow up celebrating it.

Father Michael McCafferty believes young people are searching for their roots.

He said priests at St. Paul the Apostle parish in Spartanburg have not received requests for the Latin Mass.

"A whole generation has grown up with that not a part of their heritage, and they're curious about it," McCafferty said. "There's such a thirst among young people, they're looking for things that are timeless and ancient and beautiful."

He said there is something majestic and awe-inspiring in the Latin Mass.

He believes some of those awe-inspiring aspects, including portions of liturgy and Gregorian chants, can be incorporated into today's Novus Ordo Mass.

Regardless of which mass is celebrated, McCafferty said the service "is something that's supposed to be beautiful and dignified and bring us into an experience with the sacred."

This is what the Second Vatican Council had to say about Gregorian Chant:

116. The Church acknowledges Gregorian chant as specially suited to the Roman liturgy: therefore, other things being equal, it should be given pride of place in liturgical services.

Hence, here are the events for January 2007.

Mass with Gregorian Chant

Feast of the Conversion of St Paul

25 January, Thursday

8.00 pm

Church of St Teresa

Liturgy of the Hours

Vespers and Compline

(sung in Latin, translations provided)

28 January, Sunday8 pm

Adoration Chapel, Church of Sts Peter and Paul

Excerpt from Keynote Address

Gateway Liturgical Conference
St Louis, Missouri

November 11, 2006

by Francis Cardinal Arinze, Prefect for the Congregation of Divine Worship

4. Gregorian Chant

"Liturgical action is given a more noble form when sacred rites are solemnized in song" (Sacrosanctum Concilium, 113). There is an ancient saying: bis orat qui bene cantat, that is, "the person who sings well prays twice". This is so because the intensity that prayer acquires from being sung, increases its ardor and multiplies its efficacy (cf Paul VI: Address to Italian Schola Cantorum on 25 Sept, 1977, in Notitiae 136 (Nov 1977) p. 475).

Good music helps to promote prayer, to raise the minds of people to God and to give people a taste of the goodness of God.

In the Latin Rite what has come to be known as the Gregorian Chant has been traditional. A distinctive liturgical chant existed indeed in Rome before Saint Gregory the Great (+ 604). But it was this great Pontiff who gave it the greatest prominence. After Saint Gregory this tradition of chant continued to develop and be enriched until the upheavals that brought an end to the Middle Ages. The monasteries, especially those of the Benedictine Order, have done much to preserve this heritage.

Gregorian Chant is marked by a moving meditative cadence. It touches the depths of the soul. It shows joy, sorrow, repentance, petition, hope, praise or thanksgiving, as the particular feast, part of the Mass or other prayer may indicate. It makes the Psalms come alive. It has a universal appeal which makes it suitable for all cultures and peoples. It is appreciated in Rome, Solesmes, Lagos, Toronto and Caracas. Cathedrals, monasteries, seminaries, sanctuaries, pilgrimage centers and traditional parishes resound with it.

Saint Pope Pius X extolled the Gregorian chant in 1904 (Tra le Sollecitudini, 3). The Second Vatican Council praised it in 1963: "The Church acknowledges Gregorian chant as proper to the Roman liturgy: therefore, other things being equal, it should be given pride of place in liturgical services" (Sacrosanctum Concilium, 116). The Servant of God, Pope John Paul II, repeated this praise in 2003 (cf Chirograph for Centenary of Tra Le Sollecitudini; 4-7; in Cong. for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments: Spiritus et Sponsa, 2003, p. 130). Pope Benedict XVI encouraged the International Association of Pueri Cantores when they met in Rome at the end of 2005. They give a privileged place to the Gregorian chant. In Rome and throughout the world the Church is blessed with many fine choirs, both professional and amateur, that render the chant beautifully, and communicate their enthusiasm for it.

It is not true that the lay faithful do not want to sing the Gregorian chant. What they are asking for are priests and monks and nuns who will share this treasure with them. The CDs produced by the Benedictine monks of Silos, their mother house at Solesmes, and numerous other communities sell among young people. Monasteries are visited by people who want to sing Lauds and especially Vespers. In an ordination ceremony of eleven priests which I celebrated in Nigeria last July, about 150 priests sang the First Eucharistic Prayer in Latin. It was beautiful. The people, although no Latin scholars, loved it. It should be just normal that parish churches where there are four or five Masses on Sunday should have one of these Masses sung in Latin.

5. Did Vatican II discourage Latin?

Some people think, or have the perception, that the Second Vatican Council discouraged the use of Latin in the liturgy. This is not the case.

Just before he opened the Council, Blessed Pope John Paul XXIII in 1962 issued an Apostolic Constitution, to insist on the use of Latin in the Church. The Second Vatican Council, although it admitted some introduction of the vernacular, insisted on the place of Latin: "Particular law remaining in force, the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites" (Sacrosanctum Concilium, 36). The Council also required that seminarians "should acquire a command of Latin which will enable them to understand and use the source material of so many sciences and the documents of the Church as well" (Optatam Totius, 13). The Code of Canon Law published in 1983 enacts that "the eucharistic celebration: is to be carried out either in the Latin language or in another language, provided the liturgical texts have been lawfully approved" (Canon 928).

Those, therefore, who want to give the impression that the Church has put Latin away from her liturgy are mistaken. A manifestation of people's acceptance of Latin liturgy well celebrated was had at world level in April, 2005, when millions followed the burial rites of Pope John Paul II and then, two weeks later, the inauguration Mass of Pope Benedict XVI over the television....

8. What is expected of us?

As we seek to conclude these reflections, we can ask ourselves what is expected of us.

We should do our best to appreciate the language which the Church uses in her liturgy and to join our hearts and voices to them, according as each liturgical rite may indicate. All of us cannot be Latin speakers, but the lay faithful can at least learn the simpler responses in Latin. Priests should give more attention to Latin so that they celebrate Mass in Latin occasionally. In big churches where there are many Masses celebrated on a Sunday or Feast day, why can one of those Masses not be in Latin? In rural parishes a Latin Mass should be possible, say once a month. In international assemblies, Latin becomes even more urgent. It follows that seminaries should discharge carefully their role of preparing and forming priests also in the use of Latin (cf October 2005 Synod of Bishops, Prop. 36).

All those responsible for vernacular translations should strive to provide the very best, following the guidance of relevant Church documents, especially Liturgiam Authenticam. Experience shows that it is not superfluous to remark that priests, deacons and all others who proclaim liturgical texts, should read them out with clarity and due reverence.

Language is not everything. But it is one of most important elements that need attention for good and faith-filled liturgical celebrations.

It is an honor for us to be allowed to become part of the voice of the Church in her public prayer. May the Most Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of the Word made flesh whose mysteries we celebrate in the sacred liturgy, obtain for all of us the grace to do our part to join in singing the praises of the Lord both in Latin and in the vernacular.

Schola Cantorum Sancti Gregorii Magni

+J.M.J+

Dear Friends,

The schola will be singing at the following event this coming Saturday. We hope you can join us at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass as we give Gregorian Chant its pride of place in the Liturgy of the Roman Catholic Church.

Third Annual Diocesan Gathering of all Church Choirs.

Holy Mass in English with Gregorian Chant:

After the Mass we will present some chants (some will be familiar to you) at a concert of sacred music.