I think this day (June 24 this year) deserves its own post, both because it rarely occurs on a Sunday, and because I have picked fabulous music for it, AND because it will *hopefully* be the first Sunday with my new choir at my new job! (If anyone comes!)
(And, the last time June 24 fell on a Sunday, I was at the CMAA Colloquium in D.C.!)
Blessed Feasts of Blessed Martyrs (tune: In Babilone)
Mass: (our parish's own setting)
Psalm 139: Click here for a preview, and scroll down to hear the sample. (I think that it is one of the most beautiful responsorial psalm settings that I have ever heard, and I'm lucky to be able to use it this year.)
R&A Alleluia
Canticle of Zachary (I'm using the one by Michael Joncas b/c it is longer and I like the tune a bit more than the "Forest Green" arr. by RVW.)
Behold the Lamb- John's words and appropriate for Communion!
For all the Saints (speaking of RVW...)
Wednesday, June 13, 2012
Father's Day
How convenient! I was already going to program "Faith of Our Fathers" for Fathers Day, and then I look at the readings and "We walk by faith, not by sight" is one of them! (I guess that will be the other song I'm looking for...)
(Except, it will be annoying that the numbers on the board will therefore be (thanks to the hymnal sorting things by theme,) 423, 422, 424
Does that drive any one else as crazy as it does me?
(Except, it will be annoying that the numbers on the board will therefore be (thanks to the hymnal sorting things by theme,) 423, 422, 424
Does that drive any one else as crazy as it does me?
Sunday, June 10, 2012
Corpus Christi Fail and Win
So, I figured that today was as good a day as any to refresh my memory on the Extraordinary Form of the Mass. (Has it really been almost a year since I've attended one?!)
I had reason to believe that there would be a Corpus Christi procession, and since we weren't doing one at my Ordinary Form Mass, (and Corpus Christi is my FAVORITE Feast,) I figured this would be my best chance.
So, I get to Mass, and I'm following along in my missal, and I'm trying to listen to the choir sing the Introit, but it doesn't quite sound like what's in my missal...and then I realize. Oh. The missal says something about Corpus Christi Thursday. And then I look up and realize.... the priest is wearing green.
Had I not been celebrating Corpus Christi immediately after with the Ordinary Form, that would have been quite a sad and jolting ending to this string of some of my favorite feasts, and the beginning of the long and boring Ordinary Time of summer.
And I'm sad to realize that I missed a very cool liturgy and procession on Thursday. :-(
Oh well. The good news is... I really like my job, and my boss.
Yesterday, he was like, "Oh, tomorrow let's do the Sequence."
And I was like, "Oh, but it's optional."
"Yes?"
"You want it?!" Sweetness!
I'm still not sure exactly where the translation is from, but I was delighted to find that the translation in our OCP missalettes was almost the same as the English setting by Fr. Samuel Weber! Yay!
The only changes were that OCP used "thee" instead of "you" and things like "knowest" instead of know. Which is interesting, b/c the "older english" words actually perfectly coincided with the Latin melody and syllables, so whoever wrote that made sure it would fit with the original chant melody, but whoever just willy-nilly decided to get rid of "showest" and the like, simply didn't care that they were altering the metrical structure.
So, I chanted it, with organ accompaniment, and fast. :-) (Like Father wants!)
A colleague of mine at another church told me that his music director mentioned, "oh, don't do the sequence tomorrow."
What is happening? Is it the new translation? Never in my lifetime has ANY church that I've known of even considered doing this 7 minute long piece!
(Is it because for the first time ever it's in all the missalettes? If so, why? The new translation? Um, people...it's ALWAYS been an option in the Novus Ordo...)
I had reason to believe that there would be a Corpus Christi procession, and since we weren't doing one at my Ordinary Form Mass, (and Corpus Christi is my FAVORITE Feast,) I figured this would be my best chance.
So, I get to Mass, and I'm following along in my missal, and I'm trying to listen to the choir sing the Introit, but it doesn't quite sound like what's in my missal...and then I realize. Oh. The missal says something about Corpus Christi Thursday. And then I look up and realize.... the priest is wearing green.
Had I not been celebrating Corpus Christi immediately after with the Ordinary Form, that would have been quite a sad and jolting ending to this string of some of my favorite feasts, and the beginning of the long and boring Ordinary Time of summer.
And I'm sad to realize that I missed a very cool liturgy and procession on Thursday. :-(
Oh well. The good news is... I really like my job, and my boss.
Yesterday, he was like, "Oh, tomorrow let's do the Sequence."
And I was like, "Oh, but it's optional."
"Yes?"
"You want it?!" Sweetness!
I'm still not sure exactly where the translation is from, but I was delighted to find that the translation in our OCP missalettes was almost the same as the English setting by Fr. Samuel Weber! Yay!
The only changes were that OCP used "thee" instead of "you" and things like "knowest" instead of know. Which is interesting, b/c the "older english" words actually perfectly coincided with the Latin melody and syllables, so whoever wrote that made sure it would fit with the original chant melody, but whoever just willy-nilly decided to get rid of "showest" and the like, simply didn't care that they were altering the metrical structure.
So, I chanted it, with organ accompaniment, and fast. :-) (Like Father wants!)
A colleague of mine at another church told me that his music director mentioned, "oh, don't do the sequence tomorrow."
What is happening? Is it the new translation? Never in my lifetime has ANY church that I've known of even considered doing this 7 minute long piece!
(Is it because for the first time ever it's in all the missalettes? If so, why? The new translation? Um, people...it's ALWAYS been an option in the Novus Ordo...)
Sunday, June 03, 2012
Got my incense fix for the week!
This morning I was able to attend Matins and the Divine Liturgy at the Byzantine Catholic Cathedral of the Eparchy of Parma, right here near where I live, (whose territory apparently extends from Ohio all the way to Kansas and North Dakota!)
(** Parma is an incredibly interesting city from a liturgical viewpoint. All I can guess is that it is or was chock-filled with immigrants; As far as I can tell, they have no less than FOUR "ethnic" Cathedrals- Byzantine Catholic, Ukranian Catholic, Russian Orthodox, Ukranian Orthodox!)
I've been to probably 4-5 Byzantine liturgies, and I am always struck by how different they are from Roman Catholic, and yet how we are in communion with them! How they managed to not lose their liturgical identity with Vatican II!
After having been to several of their liturgies, but none for the past couple years, it is enjoyable to hear/remember many of the responses that are so essential to this liturgy- "Wisdom!" "Let us be attentive!" "Lord have mercy," "Let us who mystically represent the Cherubim..." and of course my favorite, "The doors! The doors!"
So here I was, at a cathedral, and the amazing thing is how everything is sung, with no instruments! There did appear to be an organ in the choir loft, but no one used it; it was just an old man cantoring with a young man with a beautiful voice singing a harmony of 3rds, 6ths, and 5ths. I never know how to describe Byzantine singing. It's not chant, and it's not metrical. It's just... singing. I mean, like 95% of the service was sung, by the cantor (sort of with the people), or priest/deacon. The church wasn't very full, maybe 100 people, but it does make me sad that not many people made much effort to sing. Especially, since most of them probably go there every Sunday, and most of the music is the SAME - how hard can it be? So, I'm not sure that the answer to "how to get Catholics to sing," is necessarily, "sing everything, the same, every week." I think there needs to be something more, I'm just not sure what. Perhaps a choir, of at least a couple people singing the melody, in octaves, would help? (No one wants to feel like they are singing along with a soloist, which is what I felt like this morning... See "Why Catholics Can't Sing.")
A few other things to note:
The deacon and priest really like walking around the church ringing bells.
There were kneelers, but they were not used at all. Grr... Orthodox influences... :-(
I don't really know if this would be considered a "liberal" church, or what the spectrum of that is in the Byzantine Church, but I do know that the Mass intentions in the bulletin for the deceased were apparently "in celebration of the life of ..." Um, I'm pretty sure that offering a Mass for the "celebration of life" of someone is not by any stretch of the imagination a prayer, which is the definition of what a Mass is able to be offered for!
I have probably observed this before, but it's interesting that the Byzantines get their own translation of things, like for example the Creed. If I remember correctly, for example they said "of one essence," instead of the old Roman translation, "one in being," or the new translation, "consubstantial." They also definitely said "who proceeds from the Father" (with no mention of the Son.) Hey, Greek Orthodox, you can still be in communion with Rome and not have to add "Son" there!
Anyhow. Where should I go to church next month? Perhaps I could try the local SSPX chapel? Or one of the other ethnic cathedrals I mentioned above? They might have some fascinating singing and/or harmonies.
(** Parma is an incredibly interesting city from a liturgical viewpoint. All I can guess is that it is or was chock-filled with immigrants; As far as I can tell, they have no less than FOUR "ethnic" Cathedrals- Byzantine Catholic, Ukranian Catholic, Russian Orthodox, Ukranian Orthodox!)
I've been to probably 4-5 Byzantine liturgies, and I am always struck by how different they are from Roman Catholic, and yet how we are in communion with them! How they managed to not lose their liturgical identity with Vatican II!
After having been to several of their liturgies, but none for the past couple years, it is enjoyable to hear/remember many of the responses that are so essential to this liturgy- "Wisdom!" "Let us be attentive!" "Lord have mercy," "Let us who mystically represent the Cherubim..." and of course my favorite, "The doors! The doors!"
So here I was, at a cathedral, and the amazing thing is how everything is sung, with no instruments! There did appear to be an organ in the choir loft, but no one used it; it was just an old man cantoring with a young man with a beautiful voice singing a harmony of 3rds, 6ths, and 5ths. I never know how to describe Byzantine singing. It's not chant, and it's not metrical. It's just... singing. I mean, like 95% of the service was sung, by the cantor (sort of with the people), or priest/deacon. The church wasn't very full, maybe 100 people, but it does make me sad that not many people made much effort to sing. Especially, since most of them probably go there every Sunday, and most of the music is the SAME - how hard can it be? So, I'm not sure that the answer to "how to get Catholics to sing," is necessarily, "sing everything, the same, every week." I think there needs to be something more, I'm just not sure what. Perhaps a choir, of at least a couple people singing the melody, in octaves, would help? (No one wants to feel like they are singing along with a soloist, which is what I felt like this morning... See "Why Catholics Can't Sing.")
A few other things to note:
The deacon and priest really like walking around the church ringing bells.
There were kneelers, but they were not used at all. Grr... Orthodox influences... :-(
I don't really know if this would be considered a "liberal" church, or what the spectrum of that is in the Byzantine Church, but I do know that the Mass intentions in the bulletin for the deceased were apparently "in celebration of the life of ..." Um, I'm pretty sure that offering a Mass for the "celebration of life" of someone is not by any stretch of the imagination a prayer, which is the definition of what a Mass is able to be offered for!
I have probably observed this before, but it's interesting that the Byzantines get their own translation of things, like for example the Creed. If I remember correctly, for example they said "of one essence," instead of the old Roman translation, "one in being," or the new translation, "consubstantial." They also definitely said "who proceeds from the Father" (with no mention of the Son.) Hey, Greek Orthodox, you can still be in communion with Rome and not have to add "Son" there!
Anyhow. Where should I go to church next month? Perhaps I could try the local SSPX chapel? Or one of the other ethnic cathedrals I mentioned above? They might have some fascinating singing and/or harmonies.
Saturday, June 02, 2012
Church hopping
Since my once-a-month free Sunday is quickly approaching again, I figure that I had better write a review on my church experience from last month!
I had the privilege of going to Mary Queen of Peace, which is a lovely church with a great pastor and an excellent music director (and organist who played a fabulous prelude and postlude) who really understands some of the sacred music concepts. They are lucky to have a part-professional choir, which of course allows them to do some very difficult choral pieces with relative ease.
Luckily, they print all of the music in the bulletin, so I am able to refresh my memory with that. Unlike some people who think that chant/Latin are the SOLE ideals, there was a very pleasant mixture of chant, Latin, hymns, English antiphons, and choral pieces.
I will start off with my single complaint-
The Introit was the proper (English translated) text set to "Duke Street" with four verses. My opinion about the Introit is that if anything is chanted, it should be, since the way something is begun sets the pace for the entire thing, and it should not require the congregation to sing the majority of it, so that they are able to look up and watch the procession, which is a very cool thing if done with all the smells, bells, and whistles. So, singing a new text to a familiar tune in a "marching" style is not ideal for that, I think. There was a cool instrumental interlude between some of the verses, so that was nice.
Oh, then my other sort-of complaint was just that silly "O Mary we crown thee..." song that is far too high for any congregation to sing, and is so schmaltzy that it sounds like it's straight out of a black and white movie. (Nothing against black and white movies; I just don't think most of their music is suitable for Mass!)
However, pretty much every Catholic thinks, "But we've always sung this song at May Crowning!" {eyeroll}
The choir sang a neat piece for offertory, and then I was thrilled to look in the bulletin and see that the choral Agnus Dei was the one written by my buddy Dan Knaggs, "Missa Sancti Ioannis Apostoli!"
Then, (while I don't explicitly remember this, although the bulletin tells me it occurred,) the proper Communion chant was sung, followed by the Communion antiphon in the style which has been very encouraged by the bishop in this diocese (and I approve,) with singable antiphon, short enough to easily memorize and sing without looking at the page, alternating with psalm verses and/or instrumental pieces.
Then the closing was the suitable "Regina Caeli."
A very enjoyable and reverent liturgy; if I didn't have other Sunday morning occupations, I would certainly consider making this parish my home!
I had the privilege of going to Mary Queen of Peace, which is a lovely church with a great pastor and an excellent music director (and organist who played a fabulous prelude and postlude) who really understands some of the sacred music concepts. They are lucky to have a part-professional choir, which of course allows them to do some very difficult choral pieces with relative ease.
Luckily, they print all of the music in the bulletin, so I am able to refresh my memory with that. Unlike some people who think that chant/Latin are the SOLE ideals, there was a very pleasant mixture of chant, Latin, hymns, English antiphons, and choral pieces.
I will start off with my single complaint-
The Introit was the proper (English translated) text set to "Duke Street" with four verses. My opinion about the Introit is that if anything is chanted, it should be, since the way something is begun sets the pace for the entire thing, and it should not require the congregation to sing the majority of it, so that they are able to look up and watch the procession, which is a very cool thing if done with all the smells, bells, and whistles. So, singing a new text to a familiar tune in a "marching" style is not ideal for that, I think. There was a cool instrumental interlude between some of the verses, so that was nice.
Oh, then my other sort-of complaint was just that silly "O Mary we crown thee..." song that is far too high for any congregation to sing, and is so schmaltzy that it sounds like it's straight out of a black and white movie. (Nothing against black and white movies; I just don't think most of their music is suitable for Mass!)
However, pretty much every Catholic thinks, "But we've always sung this song at May Crowning!" {eyeroll}
The choir sang a neat piece for offertory, and then I was thrilled to look in the bulletin and see that the choral Agnus Dei was the one written by my buddy Dan Knaggs, "Missa Sancti Ioannis Apostoli!"
Then, (while I don't explicitly remember this, although the bulletin tells me it occurred,) the proper Communion chant was sung, followed by the Communion antiphon in the style which has been very encouraged by the bishop in this diocese (and I approve,) with singable antiphon, short enough to easily memorize and sing without looking at the page, alternating with psalm verses and/or instrumental pieces.
Then the closing was the suitable "Regina Caeli."
A very enjoyable and reverent liturgy; if I didn't have other Sunday morning occupations, I would certainly consider making this parish my home!
Sunday, May 20, 2012
"all the verses..."
Along with debates about the proper "range" for congregants to sing in, over at my favorite sacred music forum, there is often discussion about "singing all the verses" for the hymn.
I am of the opinion that since hymns aren't even "proper" to the Mass- they are already just "fillers"- it doesn't really matter if the time suggests that you ought to leave out some verses. Others think that it is horrible if you don't sing every single printed verse. Now, some of those people acknowledge that the verses that are in most of our hymnals aren't even all the verses to begin with! (This alone seems to be a good enough argument to me, that it doesn't matter how many verses we sing, since it's out of our control as it stands now...)
This point has been more acutely experienced by me lately, as I have switched from GIA to OCP. Especially as I have been programming music for these upcoming 4 great Feasts which all have soooo many wonderful, traditional, loved hymns that are ideal to use, I have been noticing that in contrast to GIA (which has 3-5 verses per hymn, for example, 5 for "Crown Him with Many Crowns," but 3 for "To Jesus Christ the Sovereign King," but 4 for just about everything else,) OCP pretty much always has just 3 verses for all of the standard hymns.
Now, I have found that 4 verses is annoying for a recessional or processional, b/c you want 3 for a very short hymn like "I know that My Redeemer Lives," (Duke Street,) but maybe even just 2 for some of the longer hymns (like Come Holy Ghost, or Alleluia, Sing to Jesus {Hyfrydol.}) HOWEVER... 3 verses is faaaaar too short for offertory and certainly communion.
At least with GIA's variation in verses, I could program a hymn with more verses for offertory, and either sing all the verses that were printed OR simply announce which verses we were doing for entrance or recessional.
But for now... I am slightly frustrated with the lack of flexibility with only given the option of 3 verses. Thank you, OCP... I personally don't think the benefits outweigh the cons. I'm sure they were just trying to save space, thinking that people rarely sing the "traditional hymns" anymore. And, this is feeding into the belief that the entrance and recessional - the places where 3 verses are nice - ought to be the only places where energetic hymns are used. (Why would you ever want to use "Crown Him with Many Crowns" at offertory? eyeroll...)
I am of the opinion that since hymns aren't even "proper" to the Mass- they are already just "fillers"- it doesn't really matter if the time suggests that you ought to leave out some verses. Others think that it is horrible if you don't sing every single printed verse. Now, some of those people acknowledge that the verses that are in most of our hymnals aren't even all the verses to begin with! (This alone seems to be a good enough argument to me, that it doesn't matter how many verses we sing, since it's out of our control as it stands now...)
This point has been more acutely experienced by me lately, as I have switched from GIA to OCP. Especially as I have been programming music for these upcoming 4 great Feasts which all have soooo many wonderful, traditional, loved hymns that are ideal to use, I have been noticing that in contrast to GIA (which has 3-5 verses per hymn, for example, 5 for "Crown Him with Many Crowns," but 3 for "To Jesus Christ the Sovereign King," but 4 for just about everything else,) OCP pretty much always has just 3 verses for all of the standard hymns.
Now, I have found that 4 verses is annoying for a recessional or processional, b/c you want 3 for a very short hymn like "I know that My Redeemer Lives," (Duke Street,) but maybe even just 2 for some of the longer hymns (like Come Holy Ghost, or Alleluia, Sing to Jesus {Hyfrydol.}) HOWEVER... 3 verses is faaaaar too short for offertory and certainly communion.
At least with GIA's variation in verses, I could program a hymn with more verses for offertory, and either sing all the verses that were printed OR simply announce which verses we were doing for entrance or recessional.
But for now... I am slightly frustrated with the lack of flexibility with only given the option of 3 verses. Thank you, OCP... I personally don't think the benefits outweigh the cons. I'm sure they were just trying to save space, thinking that people rarely sing the "traditional hymns" anymore. And, this is feeding into the belief that the entrance and recessional - the places where 3 verses are nice - ought to be the only places where energetic hymns are used. (Why would you ever want to use "Crown Him with Many Crowns" at offertory? eyeroll...)
Wednesday, May 16, 2012
Hymn-tune-range rant
I've probably written about this before, but let me just say... I am soooo glad to have (for the first time ever,) an organ with a "transpose" button on it. I have been using it for just about everything! It is delightful!
Now, surprisingly enough (since this seems so obvious to me,) this is actually a very controversial topic in the organist/musician community. Many people argue that the congregation needs to just learn how to sing properly, then they wouldn't have any problems with the high notes.
Actually, no. First, the congregation needs to learn to have a hymnal in front of them with all four parts (soprano, alto, tenor, bass,) and then they need to learn how to sightread their own voice part; the voice part which is most comfortable to their natural range. Well, let me tell you... since that is that most definitely NOT happening any time soon, I think it's safe to say that not everyone is a soprano, and therefore should not be singing the soprano line as written. "Well perhaps," you might say, "we should just teach them how to sing properly." Ok. Have you ever organized an outside-of-Mass musical event that required any participation from Catholics? Ok, well then, you first! (If you can get more than 5 people to come, I'll be amazed; and if you can get them to actually do anything, well... you'll find me buying a lottery ticket on that day!)
So, the solution seems obvious to me. There is a large group of untrained singers, no chance to "teach" them how support their singing properly and breath correctly (etc, etc...) so that they can really sing high, I would estimate that more than 50% of them are not even true sopranos or tenors...so why pretend that they are?
In my experience, people start to complain around high D. C-C is ok. B-B is even better. So, yeah... I've been transposing everything down 2-3 half steps. It's soooo fun. :-)
(With the occasional "ooops! I forgot to transpose that next song back up and am now groveling on a low Ab for this entire song...!")
Now, surprisingly enough (since this seems so obvious to me,) this is actually a very controversial topic in the organist/musician community. Many people argue that the congregation needs to just learn how to sing properly, then they wouldn't have any problems with the high notes.
Actually, no. First, the congregation needs to learn to have a hymnal in front of them with all four parts (soprano, alto, tenor, bass,) and then they need to learn how to sightread their own voice part; the voice part which is most comfortable to their natural range. Well, let me tell you... since that is that most definitely NOT happening any time soon, I think it's safe to say that not everyone is a soprano, and therefore should not be singing the soprano line as written. "Well perhaps," you might say, "we should just teach them how to sing properly." Ok. Have you ever organized an outside-of-Mass musical event that required any participation from Catholics? Ok, well then, you first! (If you can get more than 5 people to come, I'll be amazed; and if you can get them to actually do anything, well... you'll find me buying a lottery ticket on that day!)
So, the solution seems obvious to me. There is a large group of untrained singers, no chance to "teach" them how support their singing properly and breath correctly (etc, etc...) so that they can really sing high, I would estimate that more than 50% of them are not even true sopranos or tenors...so why pretend that they are?
In my experience, people start to complain around high D. C-C is ok. B-B is even better. So, yeah... I've been transposing everything down 2-3 half steps. It's soooo fun. :-)
(With the occasional "ooops! I forgot to transpose that next song back up and am now groveling on a low Ab for this entire song...!")
Thursday, April 26, 2012
Watered-down religion
I recently subbed for a funeral at a nearby church, and found myself not just getting annoyed, but also just very depressed. I was depressed at the watering-down of not only the liturgy, but also how that relates to the whole Gospel message--of not only salvation, but also repentance.
For example, at most funerals (assuming many people are guests and either un-churched or non-Catholic,) the priest says something like, "please kneel or be seated," or better yet, "please kneel," right before the Consecration. It shouldn't matter whether the people actually believe in what is happening; they should still show respect to what we consider extremely sacred, as they are in our church building. Even when the priest announces, "please kneel," I still see many people sitting instead of kneeling, which I suppose is their right, since perhaps if they really thought about it (and weren't just lazy as I imagine most of them are,) then they would realize that it could be idolotrous for them to kneel before something they don't believe in, but my point is that I do believe it's the responsibility of the priest to remind people that something sacred is happening, and their bodies should show as much respect as they are willing to. However, at this funeral, the priest asked everyone to remain standing. I do not know if that is the Sunday tradition at this parish (several of the choir members knelt still along with me,) but I wonder why the priest would say that? Nowhere in any Church documents is it given as an allowance for people to stand during the Consecration! Our bodies should reflect the attitude of our hearts- and I suspect the theology for wanting people to stand at this point would be a very warped idea that the focus at the moment would be on the people, standing united, and focusing on the Resurrection. No. It should be on WORSHIP and ADORATION.
Anyhow, the more theological but less liturgical thing that really bothered me (and this is by no means unusual at funerals!) was the "canonization" of the deceased. While he may have been a very holy person, and a good and kind person, it makes me so sad when priest and people completely forget two things. First of all, Christ said "the Way is narrow, and few will enter it." How dare you assume that you know better than God where this person's soul is? Secondly, if we assume that someone is in heaven, then as Catholics we are completely ignoring the possibility of Purgatory, and that has dangerous and sad consequences for the deceased. If we assume they are in Heaven, and do not consider the possibility of them being in Purgatory, then we will not pray for their soul. And our prayers on earth can decrease the time spent in Purgatory and lessen their suffering. Isn't that what we should want for our deceased loved ones? To tell living family members that their loved one is in Heaven might make them feel good for awhile, but how does that help the suffering deceased soul?
Not to digress too much, but it was actually very weird what the priest said about being "Saints." I think at some point he may have actually said that the deceased was not a "Saint," but then he said something like, "We aren't Saints, but we are all saints!" I was like WTF?!?! I cannot believe that this man is a pastor. (Actually, I am not sure if this priest was the pastor, but ... I cannot believe that this man is ordained! You are trying to telling me that he spent how many years in seminary? and is now the guardian and shepherd of a flock?!) THEOLOGY 101, DUDE! IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO BE A SAINT UNTIL YOU ARE DEAD AND IN HEAVEN! And given that there were quite a few people in the church, I would bet my life savings on the fact that at least some of the people in that church building live very UNSAINTLY lives! How dare that priest think he knows the lives and everyone there, and even more how dare he assume that he knows we are all going to Heaven? The worst part of it is, by saying something like that, you are in no way calling people on to continue to seek out the Truth and to live better and holier lives; you are saying that they are doing just fine where they are at. We should NEVER be done striving for holiness. By saying otherwise, you are allowing people to become complacent- spiritual sloth = one of the seven deadly sins!
Now for the summary of my thoughts. Who would ever want to belong to such a religion? A religion that pats you on the back and tells you are doing a great job? A religion that tells you that you don't have to worship anything, that just coming to church and being a nice person is all that matters?
Until you find something worth dying for, you're not really living!
I don't know about you, but I would never die for such a religion.
And this priest thinks he can fill his church with trendy music and making people feel good about themselves. The scary part is, it somewhat works. At least for awhile. After a couple generations, the children and grandchildren stop coming, b/c they lose the sense of community in the parish, and the things I mentioned a couple paragraphs up certainly aren't reasons to keep coming to church.
And so who gains from this watered-down religion? Does the priest? Certainly not. "And whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a millstone fastened around his neck and be drowned in the depths of the sea." (Matthew 18:6.) Isn't that what a priest is doing by not only encouraging people to not show due respect for the Eucharist, but also encouraging everyone to come up and receive Communion? (as this priest did...I think it is safe to say that in any typical funeral congregation, there are non-Catholics and Catholics who have committed sins such as missing Mass...) And do any of the people gain by being patted on the back, instead of reminded of the suffering aspect of salvation; both of Christ's as well as the necessity of our own suffering and repentance? Certainly not. And I am so glad that's not what Catholicism is about, but that would be one darn boring and pointless religion!
For example, at most funerals (assuming many people are guests and either un-churched or non-Catholic,) the priest says something like, "please kneel or be seated," or better yet, "please kneel," right before the Consecration. It shouldn't matter whether the people actually believe in what is happening; they should still show respect to what we consider extremely sacred, as they are in our church building. Even when the priest announces, "please kneel," I still see many people sitting instead of kneeling, which I suppose is their right, since perhaps if they really thought about it (and weren't just lazy as I imagine most of them are,) then they would realize that it could be idolotrous for them to kneel before something they don't believe in, but my point is that I do believe it's the responsibility of the priest to remind people that something sacred is happening, and their bodies should show as much respect as they are willing to. However, at this funeral, the priest asked everyone to remain standing. I do not know if that is the Sunday tradition at this parish (several of the choir members knelt still along with me,) but I wonder why the priest would say that? Nowhere in any Church documents is it given as an allowance for people to stand during the Consecration! Our bodies should reflect the attitude of our hearts- and I suspect the theology for wanting people to stand at this point would be a very warped idea that the focus at the moment would be on the people, standing united, and focusing on the Resurrection. No. It should be on WORSHIP and ADORATION.
Anyhow, the more theological but less liturgical thing that really bothered me (and this is by no means unusual at funerals!) was the "canonization" of the deceased. While he may have been a very holy person, and a good and kind person, it makes me so sad when priest and people completely forget two things. First of all, Christ said "the Way is narrow, and few will enter it." How dare you assume that you know better than God where this person's soul is? Secondly, if we assume that someone is in heaven, then as Catholics we are completely ignoring the possibility of Purgatory, and that has dangerous and sad consequences for the deceased. If we assume they are in Heaven, and do not consider the possibility of them being in Purgatory, then we will not pray for their soul. And our prayers on earth can decrease the time spent in Purgatory and lessen their suffering. Isn't that what we should want for our deceased loved ones? To tell living family members that their loved one is in Heaven might make them feel good for awhile, but how does that help the suffering deceased soul?
Not to digress too much, but it was actually very weird what the priest said about being "Saints." I think at some point he may have actually said that the deceased was not a "Saint," but then he said something like, "We aren't Saints, but we are all saints!" I was like WTF?!?! I cannot believe that this man is a pastor. (Actually, I am not sure if this priest was the pastor, but ... I cannot believe that this man is ordained! You are trying to telling me that he spent how many years in seminary? and is now the guardian and shepherd of a flock?!) THEOLOGY 101, DUDE! IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO BE A SAINT UNTIL YOU ARE DEAD AND IN HEAVEN! And given that there were quite a few people in the church, I would bet my life savings on the fact that at least some of the people in that church building live very UNSAINTLY lives! How dare that priest think he knows the lives and everyone there, and even more how dare he assume that he knows we are all going to Heaven? The worst part of it is, by saying something like that, you are in no way calling people on to continue to seek out the Truth and to live better and holier lives; you are saying that they are doing just fine where they are at. We should NEVER be done striving for holiness. By saying otherwise, you are allowing people to become complacent- spiritual sloth = one of the seven deadly sins!
Now for the summary of my thoughts. Who would ever want to belong to such a religion? A religion that pats you on the back and tells you are doing a great job? A religion that tells you that you don't have to worship anything, that just coming to church and being a nice person is all that matters?
Until you find something worth dying for, you're not really living!
I don't know about you, but I would never die for such a religion.
And this priest thinks he can fill his church with trendy music and making people feel good about themselves. The scary part is, it somewhat works. At least for awhile. After a couple generations, the children and grandchildren stop coming, b/c they lose the sense of community in the parish, and the things I mentioned a couple paragraphs up certainly aren't reasons to keep coming to church.
And so who gains from this watered-down religion? Does the priest? Certainly not. "And whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a millstone fastened around his neck and be drowned in the depths of the sea." (Matthew 18:6.) Isn't that what a priest is doing by not only encouraging people to not show due respect for the Eucharist, but also encouraging everyone to come up and receive Communion? (as this priest did...I think it is safe to say that in any typical funeral congregation, there are non-Catholics and Catholics who have committed sins such as missing Mass...) And do any of the people gain by being patted on the back, instead of reminded of the suffering aspect of salvation; both of Christ's as well as the necessity of our own suffering and repentance? Certainly not. And I am so glad that's not what Catholicism is about, but that would be one darn boring and pointless religion!
Wednesday, April 25, 2012
"Bad Vestments"
BAHAHAHA!
I've just stumbled across this blog...the title says it all!
http://badvestments.blogspot.com/
Sunday, April 22, 2012
new job!
wow, what an exciting weekend! I mean, it wasn't terribly exciting, but I really am embarking on an adventure. First of all, I have NEVER been told that I was playing a hymn to slow in my life, occasionally people comment on how fast they are... but my new pastor apparently really really likes fast hymns (and I think he actually likes hymns, not just fast "contemporary" music,) and he even told me that one of my hymns was too slow. (I'm still not sure if it was "Alleluia Number 1," or "Ye Sons and Daughters." (He said "the second song you played," which would be the Alleluia No. 1; if I weren't brand new at this, and had had more of an opportunity to figure it out, I might have argued with him, "listen, dude, you know what city I'm from? well, that's where the composer of that song is from. I think I've heard it enough times and from close enough sources to the original, that I KNOW how fast it's supposed to go." So, I just sped it up a bit for the next Mass. However, he may have been referring to "Ye Sons and Daughters," which would make a LOT more sense, as that piece is able to be sung at a large range of tempos. I did it a touch slower than I would have normally done b/c it was for communion. So I sped that up for the next Mass also. )
Anyhow, my weekend was made absolutely delightful, when, upon entering the choir loft on Saturday afternoon, I realized that the organ was pretty much *completely* fixed and useable! (I had been prepared for it to be about 50%. blah.) It was wonderful! A bit out of tune, but it's got a nice, new console, and a LOT of ranks and pipes! I've never gotten to play an organ for a church before that even had more than 7 ranks, lol! Now, I am soooo excited to get more comfortable with the different registrations and starting to be creative. (I think that one of the things that has always held me back in my flexibility with registrations when using an organ like Hill, is that I simply have no experience and little opportunity to practice. It will of course be exciting as well, "Oh wow, that trumpet came out a little louder than I was expecting on that..." :-P
So, to be able to play this organ, in this gorgeous church? Well, hopefully the situation will be all rainbows and unicorns, but I'm mentally preparing myself to be able to "put up" with a LOT, and stick it out...
Tuesday, April 17, 2012
TLM and Adventures
Firstly, I am about to embark on an adventure. (A very low-paying, but exciting nonetheless, adventure.) Starting this weekend, I will be thrown into a church job that will require every bit of my musical creativity and energy. (The outgoing organist: "So the new Mass setting that I wrote and that we've been using is in 6 flats, but it's not very hard." and "Well, there aren't any accompaniment books b/c I just improvise and harmonize to the missalette, so hopefully you can do the same..." oh goody...My plan is to require after the first weekend - where I will use an old copy of Choral Praise for the hymns- that the parish either buy or find the accompaniment books that they should be receiving for free every 3 years with the music subscription.)
Secondly, this same parish offers a TLM, which I was not asked to play for. I heard from one source that the current organist "wants" to keep playing it, from another that the current organist "hates" the traditional Mass/music, and from still another source that the current organist is sticking with it b/c he doesn't think he can find anyone competent to replace him! (Well, they definitely didn't even ask me if I've ever had any experience with it. I plan on at least waiting to tell them until I'm good and settled in and have figured out some of the politics a bit more at this parish, and possibly longer b/c I'm going to enjoy my late Sunday mornings while I can! Lol!)
Anyhow, this got me thinking about my feelings towards the TLM. I was thinking, "what if someone asked me why exactly I like the TLM?" I think my main answer would be that I like it b/c you are practically guaranteed a more reverent liturgy, and you don't have to worry about any goofy "innovations." However, I really don't like the fact that the whole thing is in Latin, and I would definitely over-all prefer a reverent Novus Ordo liturgy anyday. But one not-very-good reason that I do think I like the TLM as a musician who might do music for it, is that the people at it will appreciate the music more than the average Novus Ordo. The kinds of music that are done at it can be more choir-oriented, and more enjoyable for me to do. The reason I was thinking that this might not be the best attitude for me, is that this could start to lead to a more "performance" attitude. Ok, there is a whole lot of thoughts in this paragraph that I haven't quite begun to sort out, and it made more sense in my head than it is coming out on the screen, so I will stop here! :-)
Secondly, this same parish offers a TLM, which I was not asked to play for. I heard from one source that the current organist "wants" to keep playing it, from another that the current organist "hates" the traditional Mass/music, and from still another source that the current organist is sticking with it b/c he doesn't think he can find anyone competent to replace him! (Well, they definitely didn't even ask me if I've ever had any experience with it. I plan on at least waiting to tell them until I'm good and settled in and have figured out some of the politics a bit more at this parish, and possibly longer b/c I'm going to enjoy my late Sunday mornings while I can! Lol!)
Anyhow, this got me thinking about my feelings towards the TLM. I was thinking, "what if someone asked me why exactly I like the TLM?" I think my main answer would be that I like it b/c you are practically guaranteed a more reverent liturgy, and you don't have to worry about any goofy "innovations." However, I really don't like the fact that the whole thing is in Latin, and I would definitely over-all prefer a reverent Novus Ordo liturgy anyday. But one not-very-good reason that I do think I like the TLM as a musician who might do music for it, is that the people at it will appreciate the music more than the average Novus Ordo. The kinds of music that are done at it can be more choir-oriented, and more enjoyable for me to do. The reason I was thinking that this might not be the best attitude for me, is that this could start to lead to a more "performance" attitude. Ok, there is a whole lot of thoughts in this paragraph that I haven't quite begun to sort out, and it made more sense in my head than it is coming out on the screen, so I will stop here! :-)
Friday, April 06, 2012
A lovely Triduum!
A lovely Triduum so far. I am really glad to be at the parish at which I'm at this year! It's kind of bittersweet though, since it is bringing back memories of where I was last year (and the previous 4 years!) and where I will be next year. (Since I will only be at the current parish for the next week, and the future is rather fuzzy at the moment...)
I was very pleased that I only had to witness men having their feet washed, but was a little uncomfortable when I found out that the pastor would afterwards invite anyone who wanted forward to have their feet washed. ("awwwwwkward," thought I...)
I promise that I did not intend for it to work this way, but what ended up happening was there were 3 men left when the first piece of music was finished, so not knowing whether the priest was going to *say* anything when I was done to invite people up, I started the next piece. Looking in the mirror, I observed that he did indeed get in the middle aisle and (I assume,) invited people up, but this happened to be as the choir/congregation was singing the refrain of the new song. Either as a result of the congregation agreeing with me about the awkwardness of coming forward, or else they simply didn't get the message b/c the pastor was speaking over the music (that is the part that I promise wasn't intentional!) as far as I could tell from my limited vision, no one went forward! I almost laughed out loud when the 3 men left to wash others feet simply awkwardly stood there.
Note to self and priest-- try to avoid introducing innovations into the liturgy. they're just...awkward.
(awkward, awkward, awkward. There. Are you sick of that word yet?)
I was very pleased that I only had to witness men having their feet washed, but was a little uncomfortable when I found out that the pastor would afterwards invite anyone who wanted forward to have their feet washed. ("awwwwwkward," thought I...)
I promise that I did not intend for it to work this way, but what ended up happening was there were 3 men left when the first piece of music was finished, so not knowing whether the priest was going to *say* anything when I was done to invite people up, I started the next piece. Looking in the mirror, I observed that he did indeed get in the middle aisle and (I assume,) invited people up, but this happened to be as the choir/congregation was singing the refrain of the new song. Either as a result of the congregation agreeing with me about the awkwardness of coming forward, or else they simply didn't get the message b/c the pastor was speaking over the music (that is the part that I promise wasn't intentional!) as far as I could tell from my limited vision, no one went forward! I almost laughed out loud when the 3 men left to wash others feet simply awkwardly stood there.
Note to self and priest-- try to avoid introducing innovations into the liturgy. they're just...awkward.
(awkward, awkward, awkward. There. Are you sick of that word yet?)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)