In Praise of (the Right Kind) of Change

“The Lord be with you.”

“And with your spirit.”

We hear this exchange between the celebrant and the congregation at every Mass now. It happens as a matter of course. Hardly anyone thinks a thing about it. It’s just what Catholics do. Fading into the memory of only those who were intensely interested at the time is the odd fact that these words in Catholic Mass have only been spoken by people in the pews for about 18 months.

Before that time, there were grave warnings that these changes would never stick. They would drive people away. Years of debate and discussion preceded the change. There were warnings that this change would end badly. And yet, the change happened, and, today, hardly anyone thinks a thing about it. I would venture a guess that there is no one in my parish who sits and seethes, thinking “we should bring back the old words ‘and also with you’.”

Why is this? Why were the changes that followed the Second Vatican Council accompanied by grave upheaval, factions, drops in Mass attendance, and widespread frenzy wheres the changes adopted just last year have been generally met with widespread acceptance? The experience of the 1960s and 1970s made Catholics generally fearful of changing anything at all. It drove the Catholic world into a paradoxical state of rigid conservatism. But the recent experience of the new Missal illustrates something very important: change can be wonderful provided it is change in the right direction.

It is true that the new Mass was a much more dramatic change. The liturgical traditions of many centuries were thrown out for something radically unfamiliar. Even so, the changes enacted by the new Missal were not trivial. They changed the whole tenor and linguistic/cultural framework of the liturgical language, taking us away from the “dressed down” feel of 1969 to a much more formal and poetic mode of expression, one that departs from the cultural sensibility of our time.

My own theory is this: if the change is directed toward making the liturgy more true to itself, it will be accepted and even embraced. If it goes the opposite direction of making the liturgy less authentic and more decidedly “with the times” it will be met with opposition and rancor.

This principle has governed the changes we’ve made in our own liturgical experience with music at my parish — and our experience parallels that of hundreds of other parishes.

Just like week, our choir sang the entrance antiphon from the Simple English Propers plus one verse. We repeated the antiphon, and, by that time, the procession was over and Mass began. We sang Vidi Aquam for the sprinkling rite. We sang the Gloria in Latin (from Mass XV). The Psalm came from the Parish Book of Psalms. The Offertory antiphon came from a chanted English version from Fr. Samuel Weber. The Sanctus and Agnus were in Latin. The Communion antiphon was the authentic Gregorian, and we sang 4 verses of Psalms with it. We also sang a Latin motet by Victoria and an English motet by Tallis. The recessional hymn was in English and the only hymn that day.

We do some version of this lineup every week in my parish. The resources we are using are mostly newly available. There were no readily accessible and comprehensive book of antiphons and Psalms even available five years ago. Ten years ago, hardly any ordinary form parish sang the authentic communion chant from the Gregorian books. Now this is common all over the English-speaking world and the world generally.

What we did last week and what we will do this week seems completely normal and even predictable. It is something people expect as part of their Mass experience. No one is “against” what we are doing. Neither are people jumping up and down with celebration. It is just something natural and normal, the way the liturgy expresses itself in song. The sheer normalcy of it all is something that completely thrills me.

You see, if we had dropped this program on people ten years ago, it would have been a radical undertaking. In fact, we would have been reluctant to do it. Actually, we wouldn’t have been able to do it. The resources were available. The awareness of Mass propers was in its infancy, or maybe it didn’t exist at all outside a small circle. English versions were nowhere in sight. They certainly weren’t accessible. Instead, we spent all our time digging around second-rate hymnbook trying to find material that seemed vaguely acceptable.

A vast experiential chasm separate 10 years ago from what is common today. In fact, there is no comparing the two. What we did 10 years ago was fine and inoffensive but we were not singing the actual liturgy, and that made us uncomfortable, and created the nagging feeling that something just wasn’t right. We worked and worked endless hours to make it right but we ultimately lacked in that crucial thing: a vision for what could and should be.

Once the ideal clicked, we had a plan which we implemented slowly, piece by piece. The final result is really something spectacular. The way we do the propers changes each week. Sometimes we sing them in a choral style. Sometimes we do pure Gregorian. Sometimes we do English, variously choosing to add Psalms or not depending on what other motets we have prepared. There is a glorious stability about the whole thing. Mostly, we can feel like we are making a contribution to the liturgy because our role as singers is beautiful integrated into the liturgy itself.

When you back away and look at it, the swift from ten years ago today is absolutely revolutionary. It amounts to a radical change. But no one feels it. It just seems like the liturgy is doing what it is supposed to do: invite the whole community in a meeting with eternity.

Why did it succeed? The reason it worked is the same reason that the new translation has worked out really well. The liturgy is now permitted to be truer to what it wants to be. This is the kind of change we need — not change for its own sake but change toward truth and beauty. That’s what the the “sense of the faith” emerges from the experience of the people at Mass. It goes with the grain rather than against it. Everyone is happier for it.

Nearly every day, I hear of new projects from major Catholic music publishers for chanted propers or new settings of the actual text of the Mass. This is a great thing. It is happening after nearly 50 years of wandering in the desert but it is still a much-welcome thing. I would expect that as these new editions hit the market, they will proliferate more and more, because choirs and priests will discover what we discovered. If we just stop trying to substitute our own judgement for the judgement of the Church, and instead let the words of the Mass become our liturgical song, wonderful things start happening.

A Teaching Council

Last night I attended a wonderful lecture by the Archbishop Emeritus of Philadelphia, Justin Cardinal Rigali. He spoke about the Second Vatican Council in a very engaging way, from the point of view of someone who was there to assist the bishops.

Cardinal Rigali pointed several times to a speech by Pope John XXIII that is worth reading in its entirety, and he especially emphasized this paragraph:

What is needed at the present time is a new enthusiasm, a new joy and serenity of mind in the unreserved acceptance by all of the entire Christian faith, without forfeiting that accuracy and precision in its presentation which characterized the proceedings of the Council of Trent and the First Vatican Council. What is needed, and what everyone imbued with a truly Christian, Catholic and apostolic spirit craves today, is that this doctrine shall be more widely known, more deeply understood, and more penetrating in its effects on men’s moral lives. What is needed is that this certain and immutable doctrine, to which the faithful owe obedience, be studied afresh and reformulated in contemporary terms…

 The paragraph goes on to speak of the Church’s pastoral approach to the teaching.

The lecture was part of a series for the Year of Faith at the National Shrine in Washington DC.

I think it’s especially helpful to hear about the Council from those who were there, particularly when, as Cardinal Rigali did, they constantly point to the documents as the perpetual record of the Council. The reminiscences help this aspect of our fascinating history come alive, and the documents are the teaching.

You Can’t Post Those Words from the Bible

The proprietary status of the Scripture is becoming a problem for parishes that are wanting to broadcast text during liturgy rather than have everyone hold missalettes (which are expensive).

Here is a story about a parish that had to shut it down — forced by the publisher.

By the way, I know this practice of putting words on a screen seems goofy and untraditional but I’m not entirely unsympathetic. There is nothing necessary traditional about people burying their heads in a book. Some 1,800 years of Christian worship transpired without hand-held resources in every pew. The desire to get rid of them makes sense — even if overhead projectors are not the best way.

Chant as part of “free culture”

I’m very pleased that the Catholic New Agency picked up this story about chant as part of free culture. The ChantCafe gets a shout out.

Denver, Colo., May 9, 2013 / 04:03 am (CNA/EWTN News).- Gregorian chant is freely available and a music of the people – not the domain of a stuffy, Catholic elite as it is often perceived, says a music scholar from Alabama.

“You can listen to it, download perfect editions, you can make your own editions, it’s freely shared with the world,” said Jeffrey Tucker, managing editor of “Sacred Music” and founder of “The Chant Café” blog.

Chant is “distributed on an open source platform” and “available to everybody – just like the Gospel, and just like the graces of God,” he said in a May 8 interview with CNA.

The “free culture” aspect of chant is the subject of a paper Tucker will discuss at the Sacra Liturgia 2013 conference in Rome this June. His topic, “The Liturgical Aposto late and the Internet,” will survey how chant suffered in the early 20th century when it was copyrighted, and how it has experienced a resurgence in recent years thanks to entering the commons.

“You went through essentially 1900 years of Christianity with the chant being an open source framework, an open source form of music that flourished in the first millennium through the oral tradition of copying, imitation, and free use,” Tucker explained.

Chant was then was built upon during the second millennium with organum, polyphony, the great works of the Renaissance, and then further inspired the Classical composers, he said.

By the 20th century, however, chant had fallen into dis-use in most parishes. In 1903 Pius X, who sought “to restore all things in Christ,” issued a document by which “he wanted a big push for chant to become truly universalized throughout the Catholic world.”

Tucker’s recent research, which he will highlight at Sacra Liturgia conference in Rome, shows that Pius X wanted Gregorian chant to be “a free gift to the whole Church, and that any publisher should be free to publish it.”

Yet when a new edition of the Graduale Romanum was published in 1908, it was copyrighted. This was a “catastrophic change” in chant’s status, Tucker said.

For next 50 years, it became “a kind of proprietary product, held by one institution” with an elite controlling it. “It was all kind of stifling, really,” and by the mid-60s Catholic musicians were “fed up.”

By the 1960s chant was perceived as “owned,” and “a kind of corporate product.” Churchgoer’s wanted something “more free and authentic…and that’s a big part of why the folk tradition appealed to that generation.”

Yet today, the situations have reversed, Tucker remarked. In the present-day liturgical environment, “you have exactly the opposite having happened.”

“All the successor music to the folk music that came of age in the 60s, is heavily corporate-controlled, heavily copyrighted, and under proprietary distribution.”

“You have to sign up and be a member, and your parish has to pay ghastly fees for the right to sing the music, and on and on and on,” he said.

“It’s more or less in the same position that chant was in in the 1950s, whereas the chant is now completely open source.”

Five years ago, Tucker was responsible for putting the first big edition of Gregorian chant online, noting that the internet has greatly contributed to the dissemination of chant and its open source status.

“In the course of a year, we saw the usual pattern take place: derivative works were created, new software platforms emerged, new fonts came to be created, and it seems incredible that that was only five years ago, because now you can download an app for your digital device.”

The development of apps, such as Liber Pro, are demonstrative of the “free culture” and “folk” nature of chant, and “how the open source Liber (Usualis) is being used,” Tucker said.

“All these derivative works came about – recordings were newly posted, now all the chant books are online, you can go to YouTube and listen to any chant, multiple recordings and multiple interpretations, and new chant books came to be written, thanks to the fonts that were written, again on an open source basis.”

“So this thing that used to seem remote, snooty, unfamiliar, spooky, and weird, is now super familiar and available in many different formats, for all people in the world.”

Tucker said that having chant at parishes “changes people’s liturgical experience dramatically.”

“When you show up at Mass, would you rather hear a chanted version of a scriptural antiphon that speaks directly to the liturgical year and season and day – all the way down to the precise reason you’re there that day – or do you want to hear ‘Gather us in’ again?”

“The changes make a big difference in the way people experience the faith, week to week.”