Aargh, it happened again.
Logging on to a video published by one of the “good guys,” one of the leaders of the New Evangelization, there it was.
Terrible music.
For some reason, surely with all good intentions, the best videos published by the best evangelists and apologists for the Catholic faith are prefaced with intro music that is sort of contemporary, sort of electronic, sort of upbeat–and not of very high quality.
Now, a good argument could be made for providing a kind of “vestibule” experience for those logging on to your preaching and teaching video, a kind of entryway that is in this world, moving people forward into a listening space.
If that’s the case, please consider chant and polyphony as alternatives to synthesizers.
In movies and tv, the aural signal for “church service” is the organ. The aural signal for “Catholic Mass” is chant or polyphony. The aural signal did not change after the Council. There has been no timeless music published after the Council.
Gregorian chant is still the music that says, “Something Catholic is going on here.” We haven’t lost this, and it is something to celebrate.
Hello Kathleen:
You write, "There has been no timeless music published after the Council." Do you really mean to suggest that Morten Lauridsen's *O Magnum Mysterium* – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9y9yM53TowA – isn't timeless, or am I just missing some implicit qualification?
Do evangelization always have to be with liturgical music? There are other kinds of catholic music I think we can use outside the liturgy. Maybe finding the right place and use them in the right context is the key.
"the best videos published by the best evangelists and apologists for the Catholic faith are prefaced with intro music that is sort of contemporary, sort of electronic, sort of upbeat–and not of very high quality."
Bullseye.
I have long found it puzzling that videos with good, insightful, orthodox Catholic teaching feature music that is banal and captive to cultural fashions. It speaks to a kind of megachurch mentality. Does this mean the people involved do not recognize the evangelizing power of the arts, most especially music? The worst offenders, in my opinion, are those who superimpose "electronica" beats over Chant. God save us from hipster chant. This is like drowning Beef Wellington in ketchup.
You are most welcome — your remark was the trigger for my listening to the Lauridsen twice this morning, which I wouldn't have done otherwise — definitely a net plus fro my point of view!
If your referencing the intro music to Fr. Baron's video commentaries, I couldn't disagree more. It's a video commentary, not the liturgy. Different situations merit different types of music. Fr. Barron's videos encourage discussion and reflection on a wide range of topics. If it was a video to facilitate prayer and meditation, then the selected intro music would not be ideal.
Every time I hear the Word on Fire intro music, I imagine myself sitting in a room or bar, with a nice craft brew, discussing interesting topics with Fr. Barron. Mission accomplished, from my perspective.
I would be willing to contact these evangelists and suggest more authentically Catholic music – sometimes messages from "young people" (I am 26) might be more well received?
Circumstances alter cases. Some new-evangelization efforts are about seeing and interpreting the secular world from the viewpoint of the Faith. Here I don't mean "secular" as 'anti-religious' , but as non-sacred: in short, everyday lay life: the world of work, family, and culture. For this sort of media work, music that comes from the liturgy is evoking a different sphere of life, the sacred world of worship and prayer. So I'd agree with an appeal for music of high artistic quality in these productions, but not always for music that is identifiably religious and Catholic.
If we HAD liturgical music at the LITURGY, we wouldn't NEED to have liturgical music in our VIDEOS. We wouldn't need VIDEOS to evangelize, because the beauty of the Mass in all its regalia does just that.
Hello Kathleen,
Are you saying that Bernadette Farrell's 'Restless is the heart'; John Bell's 'Lord our God receive your servant'; Bob Hurd's 'Ubi Caritas'; Marty Haugen's 'Shepherd me, O God'; Mike Joncas' 'Eagles wings'; Fr. Gelineau's 'Out of the depths'; Fr. John Schiavone's 'Agnus dei'; Chris Walker's 'Send us as your spirit'; Bob Chilcott's 'God so loved the world'; ..
— are not timeless?
Are you being serious? Do you know the repertoire of great liturgical music that has emerged since the time of V2?
Please reply.
Are you saying that the gregorian-inspired propers of Fr.Alan Rees (Belmont Abbey) are not timeless?
Are you saying that the psalm tones of Richard Proulx & Lawrence Bevenot are not timeless?
Are you saying that the music of James MacMillan is not timeless?
'Eagles wings' is a version or 'Orbis factor'. Are you saying that 'Orbis factor' is not timeless?
'In movies and tv, the aural signal for "church service" is the organ. '
Possibly this is true. But should we take our cue from movies & TV — when the church excludes no stlye or instrumentation?
Would you disagree that Marty Haugen's 'Go in peace' is one of the most beautiful liturgical pieces ever written?
What is srong with synthesizers?
Polyphony is fine — but it is 'not excluded' rather that required,
The liturgical music truly shines when it is used in the liturgy, and we want to think about whether the liturgy is used for evangelization.
I found the following from Fr. Z is very informative.
"….As Catholics, formed according to the mind of the Church, we then go out from Mass to shape our world around us. It is the work of Christ’s Body to bring the content of these prayers (Christ Himself!) to every corner and nook we influence. Holy Church shapes us and we – especially lay people – shape the world around us.We then bring gifts – the very best we can conceive – back to Holy Church who makes them her own. This is dynamic exchange is called inculturation….."
from http://wdtprs.com/blog/2013/08/wdtprs-18th-ordina…
Would you like to name these passe works Kathleen?
I am not particularly looking for any of them to be around in the distant future, but all these items haveand are been used as prayer. 'Eagles wings', for example, never fails to raise the roof, and I'm not sure if parishioners are intersted if this is going to be around in 50 or 100 years time. (I suspect it will be).
Okay Kathleen.
Which of the above works are no longer current? — What have they been replaced with?
I cannot imagin that a masterpiece like Haugen's 'Shepher me, O God will not be around
in 500 years time.
I'll reply.
I take the following as my rule of thumb:
All musical works composed between 1965 and 2007, written in English for putatively Catholic liturgical use, are presumptively intrinsically unworthy of any liturgical use whatsoever, because:
As for the compositions you mentioned, well, please ask the composers to send the papers back to Hartz Mountain Pet Products, because they want their birdcage liners returned to them.
Then why not let us have "Orbis factor" instead of its bastardization?
Any Music Product by that composer is going directly back to Hartz Mountain Pet Products, to meet with with its well deserved fate, as an aid to parakeet sanitation.
Should we make our liturgical musical decisions on what "raises the roof"?
Who decided decibels=devotion?
Aristotle, I see a future for your Stadium Mass after all!
That said, the scores for movies/videos/documentaries, no matter how holy the subject, need not be liturgically apt. Different laws for different cases, shorter pants need longer braces.
(Save the Liturgy, Save the World)
O don't see your point. 'Eagles wings' is not a hybrid work — it is thoroughly imbued with 'Orbis factor', and comes from very ancient texts.
HV — Can you really say the above about, for example, Bob Hurd's version of 'Vidi aquam'?
(I saw water flowing).
What's attractive to the listener is probably to a large extent "in the ear of the one listening." While chant and polyphony may be attractive markers of Catholic music to many, others may perceive them as dull and droning. At the same time, I do get tired of the synth-pop of anything that shows up as intro or bumper music just because it's royalty-free.
Absolutely.
I think the Terms 'Religious music' and 'Sacred Music' have gotten a little confused here. Perhaps It would be nice if those terms could be qualified, or is that even possible anymore?
For my own self, I have a hard time being 'evangelized' when I see intros to catholic programing that have the look and feel of the secular media. Very well known catholic Television stations, who do great things for souls, has some of this going on. Their programming for the most part is excellent and solid. I don't know the answer – perhaps it is in my perception of things. We could take this further. When I see the sets that are designed for the speakers I even wince a bit because they could easily have been a set for a secular late night talk show. It might be my artistic aesthetic coming into play here. The Catholic 'design aesthetic' seems to be all over the place. Maybe that is what is needed in this vast world of varying opinions, I don't know. I struggle with this often and pray that I be not judging the others way of thinking as I see a great deal of devotion and fire for Christ from both sides.
The greatest writer of sacred liturgical music today is James MacMillan. Although mostly he sets the Latin text, his Westminster Mass (2000, now revised for the new translation) is in English, and must be an exception to HV Observer's rule. Check out his Miserere, Tenebrae responsories, Strathclyde motets, and much more. The conductor of The Sixteen, Harry Christophers, puts him on a level with Tomas Luis de Victoria.
By contrast, the music on John Quinn's list is ephemeral ear-candy.
And yet, contemporary music is not going away. It remains the dominant form one finds in the Roman Rite as celebrated in the vernacular. Sometimes the pieces are less skilled in composition. Sometimes better composed, but lacking in execution. It is wishful thinking to project that some musical styles will disappear.
Todd
If, Todd, by contemporary music you mean Haugen, Haas, Inwood, Schutte, Farrell et alia, it only remains the dominant form because people like you (who arguably should know better) insist on promoting it. MacMillan is contemporary, and his music will endure long after the vapid and meretricious effusions of the above-named have been forgotten.
Contemporary music is a necessary media for a living faith. Contemporary music, while it is contemporary cannot be timeless yet it could become timeless. Since "timeless" does not mean that a piece is either popular or ubiquitous or even known at all we cannot resist looking to the past for the criteria of the timeless. I have hope that this generation has produced some timeless music, though my wish list is different than Quinn's “Have you ever seen a fellow fail at the high jump because he had not gone far enough back for his run? That is Modern Thought. It is so confident of where it is going to that it does not know where it comes from.” Chesterton (ILN, July 11, 1914)
"…contemporary music is not going away… It is wishful thinking to project that some musical styles will disappear."
TODD: I think most of us are quite aware that it's not going away, regardless of what we think of it. We just want to be able to find sacred music at some Mass near us, somewhere. That's what has "gone away," and what others have successfully "wished away," despite the express wishes of the Church, Vatican II, etc.
JP, unless you've been a parishioner, you have no idea what music I promote, what new music I schedule, or how much plainsong I use.
James MacMillan is an interesting composer, but he doesn't write for the liturgical assembly. He's not quite up to the standard of Ted Marier, Richard Proulx, or Alex Peloquin.
Todd
Well, that's MacMillan put in his place, then! You've made it clear on this forum and others what your views on liturgy and music are, and even given examples of your scheduling. Fair enough, it's a model which has gained widespread acceptance since V2, but it isn't the only model, and some of its assumptions have been challenged in recent years, particularly by serious liturgical scholars (as opposed to parish 'liturgists') and by those who are too young to have been caught up in the heady days of the 1960s and 1970s.
"Well, that's MacMillan put in his place, then!"
Darn tootin'
😉
Todd
I don't agree.
For example for,Sunday's RP 'Lord, come to my aid' my parish sang a setting based on gregorian and ambrosian chant (Gelineau).
This is incredibly beautiful with stunning word-setting.
The response was a beatiful modal melody (I think by Bob Batsiani), with harmonies by Richard Proulx.
Did anyone else use this?
What do people think of the gregorian-based psalm tones of Michel Guimont? (Recently composed).
Wow, what a discussion! This weekend, I sang both a Tridentine Gregorian chant and polyphony Mass AND a Novus Ordo English Mass from the contemporary "pop music" repertoire. A Priest friend of mine told me: it's both/ and/ and more.
SO: These days, yeah, its Both / And / And more.
Fr. Baron's series is replete with wonderful visual images from the whole history of Catholic art and architecture. When it comes to the accompanying music, it is a very few recognizable Gregorian chants played by an orchestra in a quasi nineteenth-century style. There is as much great Catholic music, liturgical and non-iturgical that could have been used. A missed opportunity.
One of the most misguided things on Catholic radio is the use of electronic background music for prayers, especially the rosary, or for the reading of scripture. To the extend that this music is characterless it is an annoyance, to the extent that it has character it is a distraction. Prayers and the Gospel ought to be able to stand by themselves.
'By contrast, the music on John Quinn's list is ephemeral ear-candy'.
JP — Are you seriously saying that, for example, John Bell's 'Lord our God receive your servant' is ephemeral ear-candy?
Bob Hurd's 'Vidi aquam' contains a direct quote from gregorian chant in the verse.
Are you saying that gregorian chant is ephemeral ear-candy?
Are you saying that the music of Arvo Part is the above?