New Dawn for Latin Chant

Peace, Paul.

I thought the article was a bit snooty at times. OCP has always included a limited number of chants in pretty much all of its mainstream resources. I see them suggested frequently in the planning guides. GIA's early music series dates back to the 1980's. Some contemporary composers have dabbled in chant as far back as 1987 (Marty Haugen) and 1978 (Ray Repp).

The annual OCP surveys ask subscribers to communicate the frequency of use of hymns and songs. Ms. Oost-Zinner and Mr. Tucker comment on that, yet you post the big publishers tell "liturgical musicians what they want to hear." The truth is probably not so sinister. OCP does market well, and of all the liturgical publishers I've done business through the years, they have the strongest sense of devotion to their clients.

Sometimes when an unexpected good comes along, it's most gracious just to say thanks without any extras.

"the article was a bit snooty"

You seem very defensive. I notice in reading your posts that you quite rightly get on peoples' cases for broad brush use -- as long as it's used to paint the publishing establishment, liturgists, musicians, all of which you seem to be part of. But you don't seem to have the same such problem with broad brushes when they are used on bishops, Latin Mass afficionados, curia officials.

It's all in whose ox is being gored, hey?

"a limited number of chants"

"pretty much all"

"dabbled"

And the defense is pretty lukewarm, of necessity, I guess. Let's face it, they haven't lived up to their responsibilities, and now they see a buck to be made. If they could get away with the (infamous) Somewhere Over the Rainbow Mass, (very funny prank, IMO,) they'd be peddling that.

Peace, Marge.

Not defensive at all, my friend. I'm not part of the publishing establishment, except that I do browse and buy their products from time to time.

I can be more specific about this article, but it would be piling on. The resources have always been there. Good music directors have always made use of them. There's certainly enough chant in any major OCP or GIA hymnal or missal to get started.

You have a chicken-and-egg premise here: Do parish musicians not use chant because the publishers don't provide it? Or do publishers not provide it because the people don't use it? Option 1 is for conspiracy theorists. Number two would be how pure capitalists would approach it. The truth might be a little of each.

I'm not sure I would characterize OCP as "now they see a buck to be made." There's not anything particularly wrong with being a viable business (Heck, I'm talking like a Republican!) and I'm fairly convinced their excellence in dealing with employees and customers is also a value. I guess I don't see your problem. I've used and programmed plainsong (almost all in the vernacular) for years. I don't have to be a shill to be able to express simple gratitude to a publisher, then move on.

Todd, it's pretty hard to lay any such blame today, for decisions made decades ago. I'll leave it to Church historians to decide how much of it was well-meaning and how much conspiracy was involved. But you're right. OCP is a business, and they'd be foolish to do anything to undercut their profitability.

My point would be that, had the American bishops clearly laid out the parameters for liturgical music in the early days following the promulgation of the Novus Ordo, the music publishers would have stepped up to fill that defined need. Instead, because most bishops took a hands-off approach, we ended up following the path of least resistance, a do-whatever-you-feel-like-doing approach, with all the bumps and bruises that entails.

I agree there has been some much-needed settling in recent years, but many traditionalists, myself included, are not satisfied with what that liturgical settling looks like; nor that the image is what the Council Fathers intended. But you and I have been down that road before, and I don't intend to rehash it.

'I'll leave it to Church historians to decide how much of it was well-meaning and how much conspiracy was involved. But you're right. OCP is a business, and they'd be foolish to do anything to undercut their profitability."

But it doesn't have to be a "conspiracy," the profit motive taints it from the get-go. They'd be foolish to do anything to undercut their profitability, so they'd be foolish to promote that which they cannot copyright, and not promote that which is newest!, best!, latest! trendiest! will-need-to-be-replaced soonest!

Planned obsolesence is vital in some areas of endeavor. It is the bread and butter of a car manufacturer, a fashion designer or gangsta rapper record label -- it is unconscionable in liturgy.

Marge, I agree with you. I'm not saying I agree with the current state of affairs. But I am saying that is what should be expected, given the vacuum in leadership in the years following the reform of the liturgy.

As far as I know, OCP Publications is still a non-profit arm of the Archdiocese of Portland. In that they publish the archdiocesan newspaper, I can say from experience that there really is no profit motive in that area! (Apparently diocesan media are not interesting to lawsuit plaintiffs. They are not declared in the archdiocesan profile in the Chapter 11 filing; in fact, there is no reference whatsoever to chancery activities there. Hmm. "Priceless." ...?) That said, if there is truly is no profit motive at all, it is perhaps even sadder that their marketing resembles mass media in their personality cult and the general business market in its practices (check its description of the company and jobs at the Web site) because, well, what else is there?

I wonder how much thought goes into what is constitutive of a company's Catholic character. It is my impression that even prestigious Catholic business schools just brush off the question with an "ethics" class.

Besides the obvious societal ones, there are a couple of intraecclesial forces working against the liturgical success of OCP Publications, GIA, etc. First, at the parish/performance level, pastors are more likely to invest in missalettes than musicians. I remember being amazed a dozen or so years ago by my residential parish's annual budget of $50,000 for music. (The then pastor, Msgr. Gulczynski, was laid to rest after a requiem Mass this morning; r.i.p.) But why should that have been amazing? If anything, it should have seemed low in a upwards middle-class parish (in fact, I suspect it now to be well above that although the program is not half so excellent). Now if parish music is commonly underfunded, who is there to learn, choose, and teach good music? And it is a vicious cycle: competent volunteers often stay away when they do not hear any worthwhile music sung or played.

Secondly, there is no impetus for a publishing company to be formative because, at the diocesan/composition level, outside drive-by participation in the limited ICEL project, apparently "completed" some twenty-odd years ago and published in sections by GIA, American bishops have rarely if ever commissioned new liturgical music. Now, there is something here to learn from secular industry: If a studio cannot find an appropriate song for a movie, or if it wants to make even more money through a transmedia promotion of a new hit, it will pay whatever it takes for a song that will communicate X message (or, more likely, XXX message), the one message (and yes, one text) marketing has determined. When did your diocesan music commission ever sit down and say, "We really need an attractive, singable, and inspired introit for XV Sunday. Who can set it for us? Let us ask the bishop. No, his million dollars for liturgical development this year is tapped out. I know; let us make a metropolitan agreement and share the costs!"

I have met a number of musicians at the Basilica of Our Lady of Guadalupe who would be happy to supplement playing the Casavants and singing at every-hour on-the-hour seven-day-a-week Masses to compose anything one asks -- at Mexican wages. And, gee, I bet that, besides Latin, they can set Spanish texts, too! I somehow guess they will not be giving up their day "jobs" anytime soon, though.

I suppose I can summarize this by saying that, given that vernacular Liturgy -- Holy Mass and the Divine Office -- is in its infancy, given that it is quite popular, it needs new music, but even allowing that one or two publishers are highly influential, there is a real lack of general commitment to fund real performance of real compositions, whether old or new.

[Deep breath.]

What is significant about OCP Publications bringing these chant publications to a wider market is that (1) they are quasi-official, Solesmes having pretty much been ceded leadership in chant editions by Rome (with the exception of the cisalpine Graduale Simplex), (2) they are real melismatic chant, including the propers of the Mass, not just la-la-la syl-la-bic hymns and antiphons (mode V is always a hot hit for those; it harmonizes in major keys, dontcha know), and (3) the texts of Catholic hymns, including many ancient texts restored after Vatican II, are here in the Catholic hymnal.

Here in the United States, (1) unless one counts the ICEL project products, there is no official shared music, (2) ancient chant melodies are not available in the vernacular (St. Peter's in the Loop an arguable exception), and there is no English gradual with approved Catholic texts (the only choice is old [Coverdale] Protestant, as in our parish, or new [NRSV] Protestant), and (3) the vernacular hymns and songs injected into the Mass are generally not Scriptural, written by saints, or hallowed by centuries upon centuries of tradition.

Corrigendum:

There were, as I recall, some modern propers from Paluch and some sort-of-modern (late 1960's -- before my time!) ones by Andrews from GIA, but they were musically uninteresting -- I only remember texts pointed for simplified psalm tones -- and now all POP, I believe. Which brings us full circle.

Peace, all.

Interesting discussion, as usual. Not mentioned in the post-conciliar blame game (on this thread, at least) would be the American indifference to the arts. Why would we expect bishops to lead in music when the society at large did not and does not cultivate music? Others complain about the mantle getting inherited by progressive hijackers, money-grubbing publishers, etc., but those were the people working in music ministry. The only other alternative was the pre-Vatican II one: wither and die on the vine for lack of leadership.

Far more interesting to me would be the expression of common ground possible with musicians of varied sensibilities. There are some givens: the vernacular is not going away, nor are the creative impulses of modern church musicians, Americans, culturally present unique problems, and who's going to pay the really good composers to do really good work? These issues seem more fascinating and more constructive than the very old dialogue "It's your fault! No, it's yours!"

Todd, taking the high road, as you did here, is certainly the most charitable, and possibly most constructive, thing to do in light of this discussion. However, I would like to point out a few things.

Yes, American culture has become more utilitarian, and largely tone-deaf to the arts, but I would disagree with your statement that music is not cultivated. There are pockets of families and communities where good music is high on the priority list, even if it is off the radar of the local education authority. Just look in the Yellow Pages under Youth Orchestra or Junior Symphony in any city. There you will find classical music alive, well and thriving. There is hope for the future of the arts.

The fact that the vernacular is here to stay is not a problem. The Council willed that some parts of the liturgy be in the vernacular, and later Vatican Instructions further pressed that that ought to include music as well. Fine.

However, the presence of "really good composers" does not necessarily lead to "really good work". Again, I don't want to dredge up past discussions on what constitutes music that is sacred, but that certainly does enter the mix. And I'll tell you why.

In my many years of experience with different pastors and different parish communities, I have come to a conclusion. When what is sought, promoted and supported by the pastor is right, there is never any shortage of funds to do all that is required to mobilize that vision. However, when the parishioners sense compromise on essentials, lack of leadership, or no substantive vision, wallets clam up. And I think the same principle applies here.

In regard to your point about paying for the good work, I would suggest that when the Church leadership supports and encourages what needs to be done, good composers will come forward and the money will be there. Take for example The Cantus Project, which is making excellent progress at setting Mass Propers that can be chanted both in Latin and English. I think there is great hope here for those who are genuinely interested in the "common ground" of which you speak.

You seem to have no concept of how many faithful Catholics there are out there, who are sitting on piles of money, waiting to pour it into initiatives that promote authentic renewal. Lest you think I am a wishful thinker, take for example Tom Monaghan, founder of Ave Maria University.

The dearth of funds for initiatives such as you mentioned could be remedied at the drop of a hat, once Church leadership realizes what needs to be done, and finds the courage to implement it.

Peace, Paul.

I also appreciate your approach in this discussion. I think all of your points are well worth thinking about. With a caveat.

The top-down institution of support, though viable in many places, when taken to an extreme is counter-productive to the gospel. I've known of many parishes who benefitted from the charismatic leadership of a pastor (or a music director) only to see things fall apart with a regime change.

Good leadership is necessary, yes. And I think parishes and leaders with proven track records engender trust on the part of those with money to give. I'm not so sure Monaghan is the best example given what I've heard from the Ave Marias lately. One thing I see lacking is the imitation of Christ. The imitation of carefully preparing leaders to take over. This is needful, for I don't think Americans are particularly trusting of top-down leadership, especially in the Church these days. But I think there is ample common ground to get things into the air. The trick is to bring both sides together to get it done. My parish, for example, has great needs. But we're going to take our time moving people and getting things done: take enough time to build trust and support across the whole spectrum.

>drive-by participation in the limited
>ICEL project, apparently "completed" some
>twenty-odd years ago and published in
>sections by GIA

What is this? I know GIA had a loose-leaf (for ease of xeroxing,) collection of ICEL public domain hymns, which I saw on offer on eBay.
Were there propers or mass settings included in this as well?
For that matter, perhaps it is still avaible new from GIA, I should look.

Peace, Bennet,

"What is this? I know GIA had a loose-leaf (for ease of xeroxing,) collection of ICEL public domain hymns, which I saw on offer on eBay."

That's one of the projects. There was another that was exclusively music for the Lectionary: psalms and gospel acclamations. The former gathered public domain hymns, some chant, and various ritual music for baptisms, funerals, etc. into a single resource people could use free of charge with unlimited copying. ICEL commissioned some composers (Kreutz, Verdi, Hughes, etc.) to write a number of pieces for it. I think it's a worthy resource, but it has a wide range of quality and usefulness.

"Were there propers or mass settings included in this as well?"

No. The focus was on ritual music that had been pretty much left untouched after Vatican II.

"The top-down institution of support, though viable in many places, when taken to an extreme is counter-productive to the gospel."

Todd, I don't understand how you can hold this view. Our Lord set up a hierarchical Church. Was He counter-productive to His own Gospel message?

I can appreciate how, currently in the American Church, there is a climate of mistrust of the hierarchy, but without holy priests and bishops as effective community leaders, it is hard to imagine any gospel initiatives of enduring success.

If there are such initiatives, they would be powered on human strength alone, not God's. Since it is the priests and bishops who, by the Lord's command, are established as mediators of sacramental grace, they are thus a necessary component in carrying out the Gospel mandate.

Even so, trying to relegate priests and bishops to the functional role of dispensers of sacramental grace, while they then get out of the way so the laity can do the real Gospel work, I believe is overly optimistic. Real people need real leadership in coming to practical terms with how to transform the world in which they live. Otherwise, the challenges of the Gospel will remain an unattainable abstraction for most.

What is this? I know GIA had a loose-leaf (for ease of xeroxing,) collection of ICEL public domain hymns, which I saw on offer on eBay.
Were there propers or mass settings included in this as well?
For that matter, perhaps it is still avaible new from GIA, I should look.

Yes, this Resource Collection, about one-half public domain and one-half licensed for non-commercial use in the hymn section, is the large congregational summary of the project. (E.g., No verses for psalm responses or gospel acclamations.) Yes, there were a few propers in the project, such as the (common) responsorial psalms, certain proper responsorial psalms, all the gospel acclamations from the Lectionary, and parts of the requiem Mass. No, there were no Mass settings (although there were canticles for the Liturgy of the Hours); I imagine that the ICEL Mass setting would be the universally-ignored (except for the Holy) one in the Sacramentary. Yes, the Resource Collection is still available; however, the other publications which complete it are as rare as hen's teeth. You might check your diocesan music office or some other large library.

Here is, again, a list of the ICEL music publications that I know of:

Music for Rite [sic] of Funerals and Rite of Baptism for Children [1977]

Music for the Rites: Baptism, Eucharist, and Ordinations [1978]

ICEL Resource Collection: Resource Collection of Hymns and Service Music for the Liturgy [1981] G.I.A. Publications, Inc. G-2514 $10.50 - $11.50 depending on binding

Music for the Lectionary for Mass [1981]

Peace, Paul.

"Todd, I don't understand how you can hold this view."

I was thinking practically on the parish level. Pastor gets reassigned, all the priorities shift in places where they wait for "Father's permission" or some such thing. I've known too many places (and experienced them) in which long-standing good practices get lost because the people don't bother (or have never been encouraged) to take the mantle of responsibility to see things get done.

"Our Lord set up a hierarchical Church."

And this might be a disputed point, depending on the degree to which it is held.

" ... without holy priests and bishops as effective community leaders, it is hard to imagine any gospel initiatives of enduring success."

Marriage Encounter, the Catholic Worker Movement, Cursillo and its spin-offs, Birthright, plus numerous local activities that press on without clergy support or recognition.

"If there are such initiatives, they would be powered on human strength alone, not God's."

Really? The Holy Spirit doesn't bother with lay people? What about uncounted orders of women religious? They don't have priests and bishops. What about families? Clergy don't pass on gospel values to the young; parents do (or don't, as the case may be).

"Since it is the priests and bishops who, by the Lord's command, are established as mediators of sacramental grace, they are thus a necessary component in carrying out the Gospel mandate."

Okay: you're talking "S"acramental grace. I'm talking about basic Christian activities: running a choir, feeding the hungry, helping engaged or married couples, things like that.

I think we're just talking at cross levels on this one, Paul. I might not have made my meaning as clear as I could have done.