ARTICLES

Nothing Profane

Gregorian Chant Is Still the Standard

BY CHRISTOPHER ZEHNDER

What is Catholic liturgy about?

Well, what it's not or "never about," according to Diana Macalintal, is "recreating the past." Instead, said Macalintal, in an article, "Year of the Eucharist: Reconciling musical styles" in the San Jose diocese's September 20, 2005 Valley Catholic newspaper, "our liturgy is about re-creating and renewing the present."

Macalintal, who is the associate for liturgy for the diocese of San Jose, was not, as the title of her article suggests, addressing liturgy as a whole. But she did make some comments apropos liturgy as such. According to Macalintal, Vatican II in its Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy "did not begin with rubrics, musical styles, or upholding a particular era over another." Rather, "it began with theology rooted in the action of the liturgy, particularly the Eucharistic celebration, as it is enacted and experienced by the assembly." The council, said Macalintal, "believed that the liturgy is first about the work of Christ manifested through that particular assembly gathered in that unique time and place to give genuine praise to God."

Macalintal supported her claim with a single line from the liturgy constitution: "pastors must therefore realize that when the liturgy is celebrated something more is required than the mere observance of the laws governing valid and lawful celebration; it is also their duty to ensure that the faithful take part fully aware of what they are doing, actively engaged in the rite, and enriched by its effects." What this passage is saying seems clear enough. Mere observance of liturgical laws is not enough; doing what is prescribed is not enough; pastors must -- while observing what is prescribed -- help the faithful to understand the meaning of what is prescribed. Catechesis would seem to be the obvious means of doing this, as well as a reverent and devout engagement by the priest in what the Church prescribes. But Macalintal it seems thinks the conciliar passage calls for more than this.

Those who at Mass have endured not only the vapid songs (to strumming guitar accompaniment), but music with bongo, tambourine, and snare drum percussion, jazz pieces (complete with saxophone and clarinet), New Age chimes, and ditties more reminiscent of a cocktail lounge than the sanctuary, might feel some mild surprise at Macalintal's assertion that in "no other place" has the council's "call to aware engagement been more embraced than in liturgical music." Yet, Macalintal admitted, this triumph of active engagement has not been an easy victory. Liturgical music, she wrote, "has also been the battleground for differing musical styles." Not everyone has, it seems, fully embraced the musical richness of the post-conciliar age.

For Macalintal the failure of some to enter into the post-conciliar musical renewal derives from missing the "appropriate starting point" of liturgical music. This starting point is found in what Macalintal called "another post-Vatican II document," Music in Catholic Worship, which says, "the planning team must consider the general makeup of the total community. Each Christian must keep in mind that to live and worship in community often demands a personal sacrifice. All must be willing to share likes and dislikes with others whose ideas and experiences may be quite unlike their own." According to Macalintal, this "appropriate starting point" indicates that music, as well as whatever else is done in the liturgy, "is about the community at prayer to and in praise of God." And since the community is a 21st century community, its music must reflect the 21st century.

And what is the character of the 21st century? For Macalintal, it seems, it is a cultural variety store. Thus, she wrote, "music that facilitates the genuine prayer of a 21st century assembly doesn't ignore our history of chant, hymnody, organ accompaniment or choral anthems," but neither does it "treat the liturgy as a museum for the treasures of our past." Rather, it "weds the influences of our tradition with the best of our current gifts to create something that is neither contemporary nor traditional but is true worship for that gathered assembly. As faithful assemblies in a multi-lingual, multi-cultural, multi-generational Church living in a multi-media world, we must learn both chant and syncopation." For Macalintal, liturgical music, as well as the entire structure of liturgy, must be new in every moment; it must not be contemporary, but re-newed; it must not be traditional but, perhaps, tradition-ish.

But is Diana Macalintal's vision that of the Church? In her article she cited two post-conciliar documents -- Music in Catholic Worship and Liturgical Music Today, though she did not say who or what issued them or what authority they have. According to Helen Hitchcock, with the St. Louis-based Adoremus Society for the Renewal of the Liturgy, "the documents, Music In Catholic Worship (1972) and Liturgical Music Today (1982), are both merely statements of the United States bishops' committee on the liturgy, and were not even voted on by the full body of bishops. They have no real authority at all." The documents, however, "have been accorded authority by the 'usual suspects' (liturgical 'experts' of the past 30 plus years.) Both documents formed the theoretical basis and direction of the hugely influential [liturgical] music-publishing industry as well as programs of formation of Church music people."

Hitchcock likened the state of Church music to that of Church architecture, saying that it is "at least as chaotic" as the latter, but "arguably with even greater ill effect, since every Mass has music, even if the church building is traditional and is not a candidate for 'renovation.'" Not much is being done about Church music, said Hitchcock -- at least in the United States. "After the revised missal and the new General Instruction appeared [in 2003], the bishops' committee on the liturgy actually appointed a music subcommittee to look into all this stuff," she said. "The music subcommittee has been utterly silent. So far as we know, they haven't made any statements; we don't even know if they've met as the music committee, and probably they don't even know where to begin to deal with the mess we've got."

But has the Church been utterly silent on music? No, said Hitchcock, and she directed me to several documents (all of which can be found on the Adore mus website at www.adoremus.org/ChurchDocs.html). The 20th century, in particular, witnessed a renewed attention to liturgical music, starting with Pope St. Pius X's 1903 instruction, Tra le Sollecitudini. Pope Pius took the matter of sacred music most seriously. In his instruction, he bemoaned "one of the most common abuses" of his day, "one of the most difficult to eradicate ... the abuse affecting sacred chant music." And Pius did not intend Tra le Sollecitudini as a mere pious exhortation to good taste but published it with much solemnity. "We do therefore publish motu proprio," he wrote, "and with certain knowledge, Our present Instruction to which, as to a juridical code of sacred music, We will with the fullness of Our Apostolic Authority that the force of law be given, and We do by Our present handwriting impose its scrupulous observance by all."

What is the character of sacred music? First, said Pope Pius, it "participates in the general scope of the liturgy, which is the glory of God and the sanctification and edification of the faithful." Contributing to "the decorum and the splendor of the ecclesiastical ceremonies," the "principal office" of sacred music "is to clothe with suitable melody the liturgical text proposed for the understanding of the faithful, its proper aim is to add greater efficacy to the text, in order that through it the faithful may be the more easily moved to devotion and better disposed for the reception of the fruits of grace belonging to the celebration of the most holy mysteries."

So it is, said Pius, that sacred music must have "sanctity and goodness of form, which will spontaneously produce the final quality of universality." Being holy, sacred music, he said, "must, therefore, exclude all profanity not only in itself, but in the manner in which it is presented by those who execute it." Sacred music, he continued, "must be true art," and it must be "universal, in the sense that while every nation is permitted to admit into its ecclesiastical compositions those special forms which may be said to constitute its native music, still these forms must be subordinated in such a manner to the general characteristics of sacred music that nobody of any nation may receive an impression other than good on hearing them."

Pope Pius, however, did not stop with generalities but proposed a concrete model for Church music -- Gregorian chant, which, he said, "has always been regarded as the supreme model for sacred music." And he laid down this 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."

Pope Pius' rule, of course, admits other forms of music besides chant. He himself in the instruction singled out "Classic Polyphony, especially of the Roman School" (such as the works of Pierluigi da Palestrina) as agreeing "admirably with Gregorian Chant." Pius approved the admission of "modern music" to the Church, "since it, too, furnishes compositions of such excellence, sobriety and gravity, that they are in no way unworthy of the liturgical functions." However, Pius warned, "since modern music has risen mainly to serve profane uses, greater care must be taken with regard to it, in order that the musical compositions of modern style which are admitted to the Church may contain nothing profane, be free from reminiscences of motifs adopted in the theatres, and be not fashioned even in their external forms after the manner of profane pieces." (Presumably, the pope would not have approved "faithful assemblies" learning both "chant and syncopation.")

Subsequent popes have reiterated what Pope Pius X said in Tra le Solleci tudini. In his 1955 encyclical, Musicae Sacrae, Pope Pius XII said he hoped "that what Saint Pius X rightly decreed in the document which is called the 'legal code of sacred music' may be confirmed and inculcated anew, shown in a new light and strengthened by new proofs." It is thus not surprising that Pius XII reiterated his predecessor's praise of Gregorian Chant, calling it "gloriously outstanding" for holiness. The pope wanted the chant to resound "without corruption or diminution" in "Catholic churches throughout the entire world." He wanted "local Ordinaries and the other pastors" to "take great care that the faithful from their earliest years should learn at least the easier and more frequently used Gregorian melodies, and should know how to employ them in the sacred liturgical rites, so that in this way also the unity and the universality of the church may shine forth more powerfully every day."

Like his predecessor, Pius XII admitted other forms of music into the liturgy, including "popular religious hymns which derive their origin from the liturgical chant itself." These hymns, he said, "written in the language of the people," and "closely related to the mentality and temperament of individual national groups," must not only "be in full conformity with the doctrine of the Catholic faith," but "should manifest a religious dignity and seriousness."

The Second Vatican Council presents no radical departures from what the two Popes Pius said about sacred music. Nevertheless, the council text is not without ambiguities. In Sancrosanctum Concilium, the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, the council "recognizes Gregorian chant as being specially suited to the Roman liturgy" and said that, "other things being equal, it should be given pride of place in liturgical services." The council, in addition, found it "desirable" that an edition of Gregorian chant "be prepared containing simpler melodies for use in smaller churches." As for other types of music, these, "especially polyphony, are by no means excluded from liturgical celebrations...."

Following up on the work of the council, the Sacred Congregation of Rites in 1967 drew up an instruction on liturgical music, Musicam Sacram. The instruction had to address a phenomenon the council itself did not necessarily foresee when it decreed that "the use of the Latin language ... is to be preserved in the Latin rites" -- the vernacular revolution in the liturgy. For "liturgical services celebrated in Latin," the instruction reiterated all the council said about Gregorian chant. But since the vernacular and chant do not always accord, the Sacred Congregation of Rites (and Pope Paul VI, who approved its instruction) allowed for the composition of new music for all parts of the Mass.

The instruction, however, does not abandon Gregorian chant as a standard, even for pieces in the vernacular. Seminaries, for instance, as well as "novitiates and houses of study of religious of both sexes" and "other Catholic institutions" are to promote the study of sacred music. But "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." The instruction states further that composers of sacred music, in order to accompany what the priest and ministers say either alone or in dialogue with the people, "will consider whether the traditional melodies of the Latin liturgy, which are used for this purpose, can inspire the melody to be used for the same texts in the vernacular." Further, musicians who compose new Mass settings "will enter on this new work with the desire to continue that tradition which has furnished the Church, in her divine worship, with a truly abundant heritage. Let them examine the works of the past, their types and characteristics, but let them also pay careful attention to the new laws and requirements of the liturgy, so that 'new forms may in some way grow organically from forms that already exist,' and the new work will form a new part in the musical heritage of the Church, not unworthy of the past."

Perhaps it was because the new post-conciliar forms of music did not "grow organically from forms that already exist," that Pope John Paul II thought it necessary to issue his Chirograph on Sacred Music in 2003, to commemorate the centenary of Pius X's instruction, Tra le Sollecitudini. In the Chirograph, Pope John Paul noted how his predecessors, beginning with Pope St. Pius X, "recalled the fundamental principles that must enliven the composition of sacred music, especially when it is destined for the Liturgy." And, as if to dispel the notion that Vatican II represented a break with the previous popes, John Paul wrote, "the Fathers of the Second Vatican Council did not fail to reassert the principles with a view to their application in the changed conditions of the times." Further on, the pope says in this connection, "it is important that the musical compositions used for liturgical celebrations correspond to the criteria appropriately set down by St. Pius X and wisely developed by both the Second Vatican Council and the subsequent Magisterium of the Church."

Not anything goes in liturgical music, according to Pope John Paul. Pope Paul VI, he said, "explained that 'if music -- instrumental and vocal -- does not possess at the same time the sense of prayer, dignity and beauty, it precludes the entry into the sphere of the sacred and the religious.' Today, moreover, the meaning of the category 'sacred music' has been broadened to include repertoires that cannot be part of the celebration without violating the spirit and norms of the Liturgy itself.... As I emphasized in the Encyclical Ecclesia de Eucharistia, careful thought should be given to the fact that not all the expressions of figurative art or of music are able 'to express adequately the mystery grasped in the fullness of the Church's faith.' Consequently, not all forms of music can be considered suitable for liturgical celebrations."

But what musical forms can be considered suitable for the liturgy? Pope John Paul, like his predecessors, did not descend into specifics; but he did establish, or re-establish, a standard. Gregorian chant. He wrote: "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 savor 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.'"

Pope John Paul, however, explained that this statement does not require "imitating Gregorian chant;" rather it seeks to ensure "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."

That Pope John Paul issued his Chirograph speaks to the continuing importance of liturgical music and suggests that, perhaps, it needs some correction in our day. That the Chirograph was issued on the centenary of Tra le Solleci tudini witnesses to the continuing relevance of that document. It, perhaps, implicitly reaffirms even the gravity of Pope St. Pius X, who said that "for the true Christian spirit [to] flourish in every respect and be preserved by all the faithful," it is "necessary to provide before anything else for the sanctity and dignity of the temple, in which the faithful assemble for no other object than that of acquiring this spirit from its foremost and indispensable font, which is the active participation in the most holy mysteries and in the public and solemn prayer of the Church."

And what of those who would not heed his direction? To them, Pope Pius X had this to say: "it is vain to hope that the blessing of heaven will descend abundantly upon us, when our homage to the Most High, instead of ascending in the odor of sweetness, puts into the hand of the Lord the scourges wherewith of old the Divine Redeemer drove the unworthy profaners from the Temple."

TOP