Chant in the "Domestic Church"

An article by J. Jacob Tawney posted at The New Liturgical Movement provides some good information and suggestions for “Introducing Chant into the Domestic Church”.  Be sure to read the whole thing. In the meantime, here are some excerpts:

The music proper to the Roman Rite is Gregorian Chant. This point has been repeated by numerous Popes, by the Second Vatican Council, and by liturgical scholars spanning the centuries. There are many reasons for this, of course, but the primary one is that Gregorian Chant grew alongside the liturgy, so much so that the two are intrinsically connected. Where there is liturgy, there is chant, and where chant is absent, the liturgy suffers greatly.

…

…it seems that (1) if the music proper to the Catholic Church is chant, and (2) if the domestic church is the first place that we encounter worship, then it follows that Gregorian Chant should find a place within the life of the family.

He mentions three ways to introduce chant to children. The first is, of course, to take them to Mass – a Mass where chant is sung regularly! That’s not happening anywhere in this diocese on a regular basis, so if you want to foster a love of chant and sacred music in your children, you’ll have to find other ways.

Second, the author mentions using quality recordings to bring chant into the “domestic church”. He recommends the following:

I'm sure this child is listening to
Gregorian chant!

When purchasing quality recordings, I would begin with the schola out of Oregon that calls themselves Cantores in Ecclesia and is directed by Dean Applegate. They have three albums available. The first is O Lux Beatissima, which is a collection of the Mass Ordinary and many other common Catholic chants. The second is Cantemus Domino, which contains examples of Mass Propers. The third is Inclina Domine which has more Mass parts from both the Ordinary and the Propers. (If you are looking for where to begin, my own personal opinion is with O Lux Beatissima.)

However, we live in an age where many people are posting quality recordings for free online. A quick Google search can usually lead to a plethora of high quality pieces.

The author goes on to add:

The third way in which to bring the chant of the Church into the family is by actually teaching young children these “Catholic classics.”

… For instance, in the season of Advent the chant is the Alma Redemptoris Mater. The others include Ave Regina Caelorum (Lent), Regina Caeli (Easter), and the Salve Regina (Ordinary Time). Over the years, my children have been picking up each of these (and the Ave Maria as well). This past Advent we added the last of the collection (Alma Redemptoris Mater), and nothing touched my heart more than when three of my children greeted me at the door about a week later excited to tell me that they had “learned it.” There they stood in front of the fireplace mantel, and they chanted in unison the most angelic melody I have ever heard.

Please read the entire article here!

Incense: Scents and Sensibility

Here’s a great resource site: Smells and Bells. It deals primarily with...uh...smells (incense) and bells (sanctus bells). Matthew D. Herrera, owner the site, introduces the resources by noting:

I have prepared a pair of short booklets which explore the history and current use of incense and sanctus bells as powerful devotional aids in the Catholic Church.  I have also included a copy of Sacred Signs, a wonderful little work by the late Msgr. Romano Guardini, that should be of great interest to anyone with a love for Catholic liturgy. 

The booklets are packed with good information on these topics, and are available to anyone who wants to download and print them. Mr. Herrera invites us to do so:

If you have a desire to (re)introduce incense and sanctus bells into your parish, I would suggest printing and forwarding copies of my booklets to your pastor or parish administrator.  Perhaps even your bishop might enjoy copies for his library.  Please send the booklet with a short cover letter similar to the one I have included.  While I retain the copyright to both monographs I hereby give permission for their downloading and dissemination so long as they are not altered in any way or sold.  Please free to contact me with any questions or comments.  Thanks for visiting and Godspeed in your efforts. 

Visit the site to view the booklets, the letter he mentions, and his contact information.

In the meantime, I’ll address the use of incense, using excerpts from Mr. Herrera’s booklet available on the site. The booklet covers the history of the use of incense, biblical references to its use, types of incense, the how-to’s and the when-to’s, and even charcoal! It’s very complete. 

But the section on objections to the use of incense caught my attention.

I know from experience that many people – or at least a few who are very vocal – dislike incense at Mass, and do what they can to discourage its use.  Here are some excerpts on this subject from Mr. Herrera’s booklet (my emphases):

All too often the knee-jerk responses to complaints about the liturgical use of incense is to completely remove it from the celebration of the Mass. While the rubrics for the Ordinary Form of the Mass don’t require incense to be used, choosing to banish it altogether is an action that strips solemnity and historical continuity away from the Mass. There are far more positive ways of dealing with sensitivities to incense smoke.

The first step should be to catechize the faithful on the importance of incense and why incense has historically been part of the Mass. Most Catholics’ understanding of incense seems to stop at the ability of incense to mask unpleasant odors. All too often people complain about the use of incense simply because they don’t like the smell or because using it extends the Mass for a few minutes. A little education will often sooth their discomfort.

Catechesis on the subject may or may not change the most recalcitrant minds, but it would most likely help some to overcome their own objections or be less swayed by the unreasonable stance of others. Mr. Herrera’s booklet offers much in the way of this catechesis; I’ll touch on it below, but it’s well worth reading the entire booklet to get this information.

Next is to choose a type of incense that will be the least irritating to sensitive individuals. One must be certain to choose an all-natural, pure resin or oleoresin incense. White Copal is one example of a mild, all-natural pure resin incense that is very reasonably priced. The stronger frankincense and myrrh incenses are also good choice. One must however be careful to choose a brand that uses hypoallergenic essential oils in the blending process.

….

There must also be sensitivity to the fact that some blends – even those of high quality incense simply do not smell good to some people. This sensitivity seems particularly true in the Western World. Courteous feedback outside of the Mass should be encouraged and records kept of which blends are favored by the congregation and not simply a few individual.

(p. 18-19)

In an earlier section of the booklet, Mr. Herrera addresses the question “Why Do We Use Incense?” He makes the following points:

In the Old Testament God commanded His people to burn incense (Exodus 30:7, 40:27, etc.). Incense is a sacramental used to venerate, bless, and sanctify. Its smoke conveys a sense of mystery and awe. It is a reminder of the sweet smelling presence of our Lord. Its use adds a feeling of solemnity to the Mass. The visual imagery of the smoke and the smell reinforce the transcendence of the Mass linking Heaven with Earth, allowing us to enter into the presence of God. It symbolizes the burning zeal of faith which should consume all Christians while the fragrance symbolizes Christian virtue.

[He quotes Msgr. Romano Guardini here.] “The offering of an incense is a generous and beautiful rite. The bright grains of incense are laid upon the red-hot charcoal, the censer is swung, and the fragrant smoke rises in clouds. In the rhythm and the sweetness there is a musical quality; and like music also is the entire lack of practical utility: it is a prodigal waste of precious material. It is a pouring out of unwithholding love.”

Incense and the smoke of burning incense have been offered as gifts to God and to others since ancient times. In a more practical visual sense as the fragrant smoke ascends it also symbolizes our prayers rising to Heaven…

[Guardini again]: “The offering of incense is like Mary’s anointing (of Jesus) at Bethany. It is as free and objectless as beauty. It burns and is consumed like love that lasts through death. And the arid soul still takes his stand and asks the same question: What is the good of it?

It is the offering of a sweet savour which Scripture itself tells us is the prayers of the Satins. Incense is the symbol of prayer. Like pure prayer it has in view no object of its own; it asks nothing for itself. It rises like the Gloria at the end of a psalm in adoration and thanksgiving to God for his great glory.”

(p. 6)

Incense just makes sense! 

Bishop Olmsted on Sacred Music: Part III

Bishop Thomas J. Olmsted, Bishop of Phoenix, has released part three of his four-part series on “Singing the Mass”.  This one has the subtitle, "Sacred music's role in evangelization", and appears in the Catholic Sun; the first two parts are accessible from links in that article, and were mentioned on this blog here and here.

In part three, Bishop Olmsted discusses the “double movement” of evangelization and enculturation: the Church proclaims the Gospel to people of different cultures, and at the same time pulls those people into Her own culture. He notes that:

Like Christ and in Him, the Church engages authentic human culture wherever she finds it. She proclaims the good news of Jesus Christ to a specific culture; and then whatever is good in the culture she purifies and transforms, drawing it into her own communal life in her various ecclesial "rites" (in our case, the Roman Rite).

What is the role of music, then, in this enculturation process? To answer this question, Bishop Olmsted addresses the difference between “religious” and “liturgical” music (emphases added).

The distinction between religious music and liturgical music (cf. part one of this series) embodies this double movement: religious music is, we might say, the earthly expression of a given culture’s faith in Christ; liturgical music is the sacramental expression of Christ and the true nature of the Church. The former tends to be particular, individual, temporal and profane; the latter tends to be universal, communal, eternal and sacred. Religious music comes from human hearts yearning for God; liturgical music comes from Christ’s heart, the heart of the Church, longing for us.

Many people have favorite “contemporary Christian” songs, and it seems always a temptation to include these in the Mass; often it is argued that using contemporary music will pull young people into the Church in a way that the “old-fashioned” hymns or Gregorian chant cannot. However, as Bishop Olmsted points out, even though the music may come from “hearts yearning for God”, it is best to leave that music outside the liturgy and offer the music “from Christ’s heart, the heart of the Church” to the faithful at Mass. (And, by the way, this music “from Christ’s heart” generally does not include the majority of the tunes from JourneySongs or Breaking Bread!)

Bishop Olmsted points out a good use of that “contemporary Christian” music, though:

Because religious music is marked by the particular and profane, it is especially useful for evangelization. Like St. Francis Xavier donning the silk garments of Japanese nobility in his missionary work in Japan, religious music "wears the clothes" of those it seeks to evangelize; it becomes familiar, taking in much of the cultural forms, and where possible doing this with minimal alteration. In religious music, the Church learns to sing, in many voices, through the familiar melodies and rhythms of various cultures.

He then turns the analogy around to bring us back to the importance of sacred music in the liturgy:

But in the sacred liturgy, we enter the precincts not of man's culture but the heavenly courts of Christ, the culture of the Church, the wedding feast of the Lamb: and new festive garments are required for this feast (cf. Mt 22:1-14). In liturgical music, the peoples drawn into the sacred liturgy learn to sing, in one voice, through the often unfamiliar melody and rhythm of the Church's sacred music. This oneness is exemplified (for us Roman Rite Catholics) primarily in Gregorian Chant and Polyphony, the musical "garments" of the texts of the sacred liturgy.

There’s more to the article than this - Bishop Olmsted has many good insights to share. Be sure to read the entire article, as well as parts one and two.

Latin Lesson III

Before we get into the rest of the consonants in Church Latin, we will talk about two other matters. One is the fact that some of the readers of this column may have had some Latin in school. If so, then you will have to relearn some of the sounds. Classical Latin, that is, what Caesar supposedly spoke, has different rules than Church Latin. For example, a “v” in classical Latin is pronounced like a “w,” while it retains the “v” sound in Church pronunciation.

A more common source of confusion, though, is that there are approximately four major ways Church Latin is pronounced around the world. The differences between them are few, but our next consonant is likely the most problematic.

If we use the Italian Church method, then the “h” is silent. However, some orders, such as the Franciscans, that may have a heavy presence in Northern Europe, will pronounce the “h.” We will not pronounce it, for the purposes of this instruction. Thus, “hoc” is pronounced “ohk.” If you remember that one rule, you will have the letter “h” covered for the future.

“J” (or as some would insist, an “I” used as a consonant) is pronounced as if it were the consonant “y” in English. So the word “jam” – or “iam” (meaning “now”) is said as if it were spelled phonetically “yahm.”

As previously mentioned, there is no “k” in Latin. The letters, m, n, and p sound as they do in English, and “ph” is pronounced like “f,” as English does. The letter “q” is always followed by “u” and sounds like “kw,” just as in English.

The letter “r” when used in Church Latin of the Italian school – as we are doing here – is rolled. Before some letters, such as most vowels, this is easy to do; when it occurs before others, such as “t” or “n,” it is more difficult to roll the “r”. Generally, just do what you can where it occurs and you will eventually find it automatic.

The consonant “s” is what phonics terminology  calls “voiceless” – i.e., it always sounds like the “s” in “sing,” never like the “s” in “raise.” Combining “s” with other consonants is more complex: e.g., “sc” before “a,” “o,” “u” or a consonant always sounds like the “sc” in the English word “scope”. Before an “e” or an “i,” “sc” is pronounced like “sh” in “shall.”

The letter “t” has some variations as well.  When followed by “h,” the sound is as a hard “t,” as in “ten.”  When the combination “ti” is followed by a vowel or preceded by any letter EXCEPT “s”, “t”, or “x”, the “t” sounds like “tsee.” This is one of the hardest sounds to remember, but we will give some practice with the combination in Latin words in the next lesson.

The consonant “x” sounds like “ks” in most cases, but in words beginning with “ex” and followed by a vowel, an “h”, or an “s,” the “x” sounds like “gs.”

That has taken us through the alphabet for Latin sounds. Next week we will use common vocabulary words in the prayer of the Church to illustrate the pronunciation given in the first three lessons. 

Latin lessons I and II are on the "Latin" page.

Why Latin?

On February 22, 1962, the apostolic constitution Veterum Sapientia (“ancient wisdom”) was promulgated by Pope John XXIII. This document focused on the study and use of Latin, and authorized the establishment of a “Latin academy”; and Pope Paul VI did in fact accomplish this end with the founding of the Academicum Latinitatis Institutum in 1964. On February 23^rd of this year, marking the 50^th anniversary of the document, the Academy will host a conference entitled "Veterum Sapientia: History, Culture and Timeliness."

Veterum Sapientia is a short document which outlines the reasons why Latin is the language of the Church, and why it is worth learning, preserving, and using. For one thing, we are told:

Of its very nature Latin is most suitable for promoting every culture among diverse peoples, for it gives no rise to jealousies, it does not favor any one group, but presents itself with equal impartiality, gracious and friendly to all.

Aha! The next time someone insists on the necessity of a “bi-lingual” Mass, you might explain how beneficial Latin would be to this end! Hmm…The fact that you are laughing at that thought (or cringing in fear at what the other person might do or say) shows that this document did not receive much attention or respect in this neck of the woods.

A bilingual Mass: Latin and English

In fact, in an interview with Zenit, Father Roberto Spataro, a teacher at the Institute, characterized VS as a document that was “unfortunately quickly, unjustly forgotten”. Indeed! These days, you’d think Latin had been outlawed 50 years ago, rather than promoted and defended.

In the same Zenit interview, Fr. Spataro said of the upcoming conference:

We intend to re-visit that document and to show how it is still very timely in proposing the need that in the Church, especially among priests, that the great ethical, spiritual and religious values be known that the ancient world developed and that Christianity perfected, thus constructing the foundations of contemporary civilization.

Asked whether he believes Latin is a “dead language” Fr. Spataro made this comment:

How can one hold as "dead" a language that is studied today by so many persons, and nourishes lofty and noble thoughts? Not forgetting that it is the language of the Holy See and that the liturgy in Latin attracts in ever increasing numbers the faithful, many of them young people.

And let us not forget that Canon Law dictates that Latin is to be taught in seminaries! Of course, it’s pretty obvious that that requirement has fallen by the wayside in many places. Just try to find a priest in this diocese who is willing and able to say the Mass in Latin! They are few and far between – and mostly due to a lack of knowledge of Latin.

Returning to the document itself, we can find valuable insights into the reasons why Latin remains the official language of the Church. VS states:

The Church should make use of a language that is not only universal, but also immutable… Latin, in fact, is already safe from various ambiguities associated with the meaning of words arising from popular usage, for it is understood to be set and unchanging…

For instance, the Latin word for “gay” still means “happy”! It does NOT mean homosexual!

VS also touches on the splendor and majesty of the Church:

… inasmuch as the Catholic Church is founded by Christ the Lord, and it far surpasses in dignity all other human associations, it is clearly therefore fitting that she should use a non-vernacular language full of nobility and majesty.

Pope John XXIII clearly believed that Latin is important, and that it is to be used by the Church. What could be more to-the-point than these paragraphs?

Bishops and superiors-general of religious orders shall take pains to ensure that in their seminaries and in their schools where adolescents are trained for the priesthood, all shall studiously observe the Apostolic See's decision in this matter and obey these Our prescriptions most carefully.

In the exercise of their paternal care they shall be on their guard lest anyone under their jurisdiction, eager for revolutionary changes, writes against the use of Latin in the teaching of the higher sacred studies or in the Liturgy, or through prejudice makes light of the Holy See's will in this regard or interprets it falsely.

As is laid down in Canon Law or commanded by Our Predecessors, before Church students begin their ecclesiastical studies proper they shall be given a sufficiently lengthy course of instruction in Latin by highly competent masters, following a method designed to teach them the language with the utmost accuracy.

And yet…when I read documents like this, I wonder what went wrong. Nowhere in Church documents is anything written or prescribed that contravenes VS – not even in the documents of Vatican II, contrary to popular opinion!  In fact, Blessed John Paul II reiterated the message of VS in an address he gave to the Institute on the occasion of the fortieth anniversary of the document in 2002.  He said that the use of Latin "is an indispensable condition for a proper relationship between modernity and antiquity, for dialogue among different cultures, and for reaffirming the identity of the Catholic priesthood."

Latin should never have been “abolished” as it seems to have been in the US, and never should it have been forced to take a back seat to the vernacular in the liturgy.

This final interchange with Fr. Spataro in the Zenit interview may give us some hope:

ZENIT: In recent times, instead, it seemed that Latin was dying out: Seminarians did not study it any longer and it was not used in the liturgy. What is your Institute doing about this situation?

Father Spataro: In recent years, tentative beginnings have taken place within the Catholic Church in terms of renewed interest in the study of Latin. Among these are the birth of new religious communities and lay movements that have understood well how a most precious patrimony belongs to the Tradition, to the life itself of the Church, of liturgical, canonical, magisterial, theological expressions whose content is comprehensible only in its linguistic form, namely, Latin. Hence, our Institute wishes to teach a greater number of clerics and lay people to be able to appreciate this patrimony, so that every Church is able to have access to people who love the way in which truth, beauty and harmony are united in this language.

Saving the World through The Liturgy

The purpose of this blog is mainly to serve the mission of the Society of St. Gregory the Great - that is, "to promote divine worship in accordance with the Supreme Magisterium of the Church."


Why do we promote divine worship? The bottom line is this: 

Now, it is also important to know just what it is we are saving the world from.


To that end, may I suggest you take a few minutes to consider the state of our nation at the present moment? 


Here is a list of posts from ThePulp.It. For more - and there are lots more right now! - go directly to ThePulp.It and see what you find.

. . .Obama Compromise is No Compromise. . .

Published February 10, 2012 Anno Domini

Obama’s Latest Fig Leaf is Not Acceptable – The American Catholic
On Compromise & the Church’s Role in Civil Society – Fr. R. J. Araujo SJ, Mirror of Justice
Compromise or Accommodation, It’s Still Unacceptable – Tom Crowe, Catholic Vote
This Story is Still Breaking, Scroll Down for Updates – Micah Murphy, Truth & Charity
WaPo Writer: Founders Wrong on Free Exercise of Religion – A. McCarthy, The Corner
Obama Tells Reporters on Controversy: Come On, Guys – Noel Sheppard, NewsBusters
USCCB: Hawaii Bill ‘Not Much of a Compromise’ – Joan Frawley Desmond, Daily Register

Cultural Obstacles to Sacred Music

If you’re serious about sacred music in your parish, there’s a great article entitle “The Blueprint: Sacred Music in Your Parish”,  by Arlene Oost-Zinner and Jeffrey Tucker which is a must-read (thanks to Wendi for pointing it out).

The authors begin with this statement:

Every parish can be the home for chant and sacred music. No situation is desperate or hopeless. Musicians who care need only do the necessary work and take the necessary steps.

In other words, put your excuses away, and look for paths that will lead to the successful introduction of sacred music in your parish!

Of particular importance for us in the Diocese of Baker, I think, is this comment the authors make on “cultural obstacles”.

In seeking to introduce sacred Catholic music into parishes, one must first deal with the stark reality that our heritage in music and Latin language has evaporated in practice.  Three generations have been raised in the faith without the sounds of chant, and very few people under a certain age can conjure up the first notes of any popular chant from the past. In many parishes, thirty plus Pentecosts have come and gone without the “Veni Creator,” and thirty plus Lents without a single “Parce Domine.” The “Ubi Caritas” is unfamiliar, unknown to most. The Marian plainsongs of “Ave Maria,” “Regina Caeli,” and “Salve Regina” have no meaning, musically or textually. Not even the “Tantum Ergo” has made it into the hymnbooks in most common use.

Now, if the chants listed in that paragraph are unfamiliar to you, you will definitely have a long row to hoe! I know that in the Cathedral parish, at least a couple of them would be vaguely familiar to parishioners, but they are being used less and less as the years go by. In another parish, the choir has been resistant to Latin for decades, it seems, and so these chants are not at all familiar. But, regardless, the authors insist that this obstacle can be overcome, and they provide some practical advice later in the article.

It is important, though, to have some understanding of the history of sacred music in our parishes and in our diocese in general. I think that especially in the eastern part of the Diocese of Baker, the impoverished musical state is due to the fact that we’re a long way from anywhere, and it’s unlikely that there were ever too many musicians available to sing and train others in singing chant. The title of a book by Monsignor William S. Stone published in 1993 is quite telling: The Cross in the Middle of Nowhere: A History of the Catholic Church in Eastern Oregon.

Oost-Zinner and Tucker continue:

When the St. Anthony Messenger surveyed its readers in 1996 on their favorite Catholic hymns, the top three answers were startling: 1. “Be Not Afraid” (contemporary song and the bane of all who seek traditional music);  2. “Amazing Grace” (protestant traditional); 3. and “How Great Thou Art” (protestant traditional). Of the top twelve picks among readers, only two were traditional Catholic (“Holy God, We Praise Thy Name” and “Panis Angelicus”). It is not that the survey takers were rejecting traditional Catholic music; most likely, it is just not known to them.

I suspect this is especially true for our Diocese. The Diocese of Baker is one of the largest geographically in the US, but with one of the smallest populations of Catholics. It’s not too surprising that we’ve been susceptible to the influx of Protestant hymns in our liturgies.

The authors go on to point out that:

Not having exposure to solemn music at Mass, a common reaction among people is to regard it as depressing and exclusivist. This is, once again, a reflection of the reigning pattern of liturgical socialization that has taken place for so many decades. The purpose of most Catholic music written since about 1970 has not been to draw from the chant tradition but to break from it with the goal of bringing people together in a spirit of community praise. Under the right conditions, chant can accomplish the same, but that is not its primary purpose, and so long as people are looking for community uplift as versus holiness, chant will not win out. It takes time to attract people into a new sense of what it means to worship and what Catholicism can and should sound like. (my emphasis)

This article was written in 2003. Now we have had the “new translation” of the Roman Missal introduced at Mass, so at least people are starting to get a taste of that “new sense of what it means to worship”. However, without a change in the music, the more accurate translation will eventually fade into the background. The time is ripe to sing the chants indicated in the Missal itself.

There’s a lot more in this article. Please read it here!