Liturgical Music


#1

Friends, this link:

npm.org/Articles/stl.htm

will take you to a nice, one-location collection of links to Vatican,
USCCB and NPM documents about Music in Catholic Liturgy.

One document with a broken link is a biggie: the US Bishops' document
Sing To The Lord from 2007

Luckily, my choir director downloaded a PDF when it was still available on the USCCB
website.

This is information only, not meant to generate comments or discussion.

Reb Levi


#2

[quote="drafdog, post:1, topic:319510"]
Friends, this link:

npm.org/Articles/stl.htm

will take you to a nice, one-location collection of links to Vatican,
USCCB and NPM documents about Music in Catholic Liturgy.

One document with a broken link is a biggie: the US Bishops' document
Sing To The Lord from 2007

Luckily, my choir director downloaded a PDF when it was still available on the USCCB
website.

This is information only, not meant to generate comments or discussion.

Reb Levi

[/quote]

Just something to be aware of: Sing to the Lord has no authority, particularly where it departs from Roman documents. Not enough bishops voted for it to be sent to Rome for approval.


#3

[quote="Phemie, post:2, topic:319510"]
Just something to be aware of: Sing to the Lord has no authority, particularly where it departs from Roman documents. Not enough bishops voted for it to be sent to Rome for approval.

[/quote]

There's many so called Catholic Liturgical Musical Arrangements sung in parishes and cathedrals that don't have Vatican approval.

Almost all Canadian Catholic Music Liturgy today comes from Saint Paul's University in Ottawa.

Good Gosh. Even our choir director and organist, with one with a PhD in Music and the other her Master's from other bigger renown Catholic Universities don't like the new so called Catholic music their being forced to play.

Any wonder nobody in the congregation wants to sing. Nothing familiar anymore.
Music is too protestant for my liking. No edification towards the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

In Fraternal Peace
Chris


#4

[quote="centurionguard, post:3, topic:319510"]
There's many so called Catholic Liturgical Musical Arrangements sung in parishes and cathedrals that don't have Vatican approval.

Almost all Canadian Catholic Music Liturgy today comes from Saint Paul's University in Ottawa.

Good Gosh. Even our choir director and organist, with one with a PhD in Music and the other her Master's from other bigger renown Catholic Universities don't like the new so called Catholic music their being forced to play.

Any wonder nobody in the congregation wants to sing. Nothing familiar anymore.
Music is too protestant for my liking. No edification towards the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

In Fraternal Peace
Chris

[/quote]

The situation is not quite so unregulated in the UK - and elsewhere in Europe - but there is plenty of dire music - and its written by Catholics for Catholics. Since our parish appointed an Anglican music director the music has got so much better, mainly through reintroduction of traditional hymnody (from a number of traditions) and some great choral motets.


#5

[quote="Phemie, post:2, topic:319510"]
Just something to be aware of: Sing to the Lord has no authority, particularly where it departs from Roman documents. Not enough bishops voted for it to be sent to Rome for approval.

[/quote]

That is not correct. Sing to the Lord was approved by 88% of the U.S. bishops.


#6

So can we get a summary of this 88-page document? :p


#7

[quote="MarkThompson, post:5, topic:319510"]
That is not correct. Sing to the Lord was approved by 88% of the U.S. bishops.

[/quote]

Whatever the reason, it was not sent to Rome for approval, and thus has no binding force.

I have to wonder why they would write it, and then not submit it.

[28.] All liturgical norms that a Conference of Bishops will have established for its territory in accordance with the law are to be submitted to the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments for the recognitio, without which they lack any binding force.

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccdds/documents/rc_con_ccdds_doc_20040423_redemptionis-sacramentum_en.html


#8

[quote="Phemie, post:2, topic:319510"]
Just something to be aware of: Sing to the Lord has no authority, particularly where it departs from Roman documents. Not enough bishops voted for it to be sent to Rome for approval.

[/quote]

This is very true to an extent, but neither do many of the links there. I believe they are meant as a resource for instruction and guidelines, as well as history of differing rules the Church has had on Church music. I thank the OP for his link.

I say true to an extent because if one's bishop signed it and holds it out as a guideline, it should be heeded in that diocese.


#9

Can we be really honest about all this froo-froo about "authority" of documentation?
"Sing to the Lord" has the authority of a mealy-mouthed candidate for sheriff.
The "GIRM, CSL and MS" have badges, but like all federal marshalls, are widely ignored and not backed up by judicial authorities. "They" need to uniformly reform those three documents into consistency and coherency, and then try to federally re-introduce them into the universal worship culture.


#10

[quote="TCCOV, post:9, topic:319510"]
Can we be really honest about all this froo-froo about "authority" of documentation?
"Sing to the Lord" has the authority of a mealy-mouthed candidate for sheriff.
The "GIRM, CSL and MS" have badges, but like all federal marshalls, are widely ignored and not backed up by judicial authorities. "They" need to uniformly reform those three documents into consistency and coherency, and then try to federally re-introduce them into the universal worship culture.

[/quote]

If the bishop says to use it, it has all the authority of the Church behind him, as the bishop is the sole authority of the liturgy in his diocese. The "meally mouth candidates" are those who serve as self-apointed interpreters of the GIRM and all other Church documents. The Catholic Church has an authority structure. We are no more sola GIRM than we are sola scriptura.


#11

[quote="pnewton, post:10, topic:319510"]
If the bishop says to use it, it has all the authority of the Church behind him, as the bishop is the sole authority of the liturgy in his diocese.

[/quote]

Surely things are not that simple. If a bishop invents a new Eucharistic Prayer and tells his priests to use it, does he have the authority to do so?


#12

@PNewton. I'm not sure if your comment was a retort, but if so, I believe we are both essentially saying the same thing from opposite perspectives, if you re-examine my "rhetoric."


#13

[quote="snarflemike, post:11, topic:319510"]
Surely things are not that simple. If a bishop invents a new Eucharistic Prayer and tells his priests to use it, does he have the authority to do so?

[/quote]

No, but that is not the topic here, nor do I know of that happening. We are speaking of music and areas that are not black and white.

In extreme hypotheticals, if they ever occur, there are steps one can take, even as a lay person.


#14

[quote="CharlesinCenCA, post:12, topic:319510"]
@PNewton. I'm not sure if your comment was a retort, but if so, I believe we are both essentially saying the same thing from opposite perspectives, if you re-examine my "rhetoric."

[/quote]

To what are you referring?


#15

This is why I originally said my post was not for comment or discussion. It leads to a lot of nonsense.
The first comment characterized the document as being without authority. The poster is evidently innocent of knowledge of rhetorical style. The document is an exhortation and is not meant to be an authoritative document.
Another decried the fact that it was not sent to Rome for approval. No one needs approval to exhort Christians to greater faith and practice. If you are interested in an authoritative document from the US bishops on the subject of music for liturgies, I suggest you actually read the document "Sing to the Lord" as it includes in its footnotes reference to the DIRECTIVE they sent to Rome for approval the year before publishing this exhortation. Apparently the Romans had not a year later sent the document back to the bishops approved or annotated for revision.
Many responders seem to think that bishops have no authority within their dioceses. Nothing could be further from the truth. If they had as little authority as some on these fora seem to think, we would not have local bishops at all, their existence being superfluous. Thankfully, this is not the case in fact. Local bishops do have authority.
As for the remark that it is a mealy mouthed ,document: since it quotes liberally from Church council documents and the GIRM, I don't understand on what basis the comment was made.
Please, leave off commenting on the original post.

Reb Levi


closed #16

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.