...A century ago, Pope St. Pius X took on the reform of liturgical music in
a big way. Late nineteenth-century liturgical music had largely pushed
Gregorian chant aside, and the patrimony of the Roman Rite’s most
distinctive musical form was in danger of fading away....The long-term project was to rediscover
and reclaim the authentic root of chant, which had become covered in the
overgrowth of centuries of adaptation and neglect. Thankfully, this
pursuit was undertaken wholeheartedly by several key groups, and real
progress was being made in allowing the Roman Rite to, once again, rely
on its distinctive musical form in the twentieth-century liturgy.
However, this all-important step was
really only tenuously connected to another all-important question
related to liturgical music: How might the recovery of chant impact the
existing state of congregational singing at Mass?...
Well, then: the author makes a VERY important discovery:
...To my surprise, I’ve only recently come
to learn that the Roman Rite has had a bit of an on again/off again
relationship with the whole notion of liturgical singing done by anyone
other than the clergy (remember, pre-Vatican II “clergy” included those
in minor orders) or established choirs of the day. The people in the
pews were not at all central to the notion of “liturgical” music, any
more than they were at all central to providing the liturgical responses
at Low Mass or High Mass (“Sung” or “Solemn”).
Yet the twentieth-century Magisterium
did come down in favor of giving formation to the faithful such that
they could at least minimally learn and participate in the chant that
was being rediscovered. Granted, congregational singing of vernacular hymns was
happening, but this was seen as distinct from the ceremonial-liturgical
music that existed exclusively in Latin, not the vernacular....
...recited Low Masses were much more prevalent in the average parishes,
meaning that congregations were really focused not on the distinctive
music of the Roman Rite, but really on hymns in the vernacular, if they
did any singing at Mass at all. The patrimony of “real” liturgical
music—that is, chant and polyphony in Latin—still rested largely in the
hands and voices of the clergy, choirs, and servers....
Yup. Believe it or not, "hymn-singing" was more-or-less treated as one might treat a pet puppy. Nice to have, but not necessary by any means. But that was then, and this is now.
Then along came The Regulators (that is, Fr. Bugnini and his crowd) and The Publishers (there was a LOT of money in them-there-hills of parishes) and chaos emerged.
....the reform of the liturgy took a turn headlong in the direction of accessibility—despite the Council’s insistence, in its Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, that
“The use of Latin is to be preserved in the Latin rites” (36), and that
Gregorian Chant “should be given pride of place in liturgical services”
(116).
If any single thing could essentially
derail the century-long project of reclaiming the Roman Rite’s chant and
finally getting it into the pews, the unrestrained plunge into the
vernacular could, and did, in my view. It’s pretty simple. If priest and
assembly are no longer bound by a requirement to learn and use Latin in
liturgy, and if liberation from Latin takes the shape of a tsunami
throughout the Church, from priest to pewsitter, access to the patrimony
of Latin-text music—both chant and polyphony—becomes utterly
short-circuited.
Furthermore, that huge, whooshing,
sucking sound we all heard by the mid-1960s was the
immense vacuum created by the absence of any music in the vernacular
that could really fill the void created by severing the connection to
both the Church’s universal language and its universal music. It was
also, in my view, the death rattle for the ambitious decades-long effort
to restore and reconnect not only clergy and choirs
but congregations to Gregorian chant....
Indeed.
...Thus, the Church in the US was treated to the musical “M*A*S*H” unit
that was first to arrive on the scene, offering not “meatball surgery”
but offering “meatball liturgy.” And it wasn’t very life-saving—at all...
That was when Rembert Weakland's US Bishops' rump-committee on music authorized "meatball music" for the US Church. Surprise!
Upshot?
...Mass is not supposed to make me musically comfortable—it’s supposed to make me more holy....
The youts' know that, too, which tells you why they are voting with their feets.
2 comments:
I have been fed up withe Church for years.
Maybe so. But there's no other place to go, ya'know.
Post a Comment