GIRM 32 and the Roman Canon: The Power of Silence?

Robert Cardinal Sarah, in his recent book The Power of Silence, raises once again the question of a silent Canon in the Ordinary Form:

I am familiar with the regrets expressed by many young priests who would like the Canon of the Mass to be recited in complete silence. The unity of the whole assembly, communing with the words pronounced in a sacred murmur, was a splendid sign of a contemplative Church gathered around the sacrifice of her Savior. [...]

Nevertheless, the intention of the liturgical reform was commendable: the Council Fathers wanted to rediscover the original function of the Eucharistic Prayer as a great public prayer in the presence of God. But we notice also a strong temptation to look for variety by introducing improvisations into the Canon. The liturgy now runs the risk of trivializing the words of the Eucharistic Prayer... [Cardinal Ratzinger] had proposed practical solutions and forcefully declared that the audible recitation of the Eucharistic Prayer in its entirety was not the only means of getting everyone to participate in this act. We must work for a more balanced solution and offer the possibility of intervals of silence in this area. [1]

However, one of the obvious obstacles to the Cardinal’s “more balanced solution” is paragraph 32 of the current General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM), which reads as follows (my emphasis):

32. The nature of the “presidential” parts requires that they be spoken in a loud and clear voice and that everyone listen to them attentively. Therefore, while the Priest is pronouncing them, there should be no other prayers or singing, and the organ or other musical instruments should be silent. [2]

What precisely is it about the “nature” of the presidential parts that requires them to be spoken out loud? This is a question that has puzzled me for some time, and that I was reminded of upon reading Cardinal Sarah’s book. So, as the GIRM has a footnote in this paragraph, I thought I would take a look at the reference to see if that provides any answer to this question.

Footnote no. 44 directs us to paragraph 14 of Musicam sacram (English, Latin), the Instruction on sacred music issued by the Sacred Congregation of Rites on 5 March 1967, which reads as follows (my emphasis):

14. The priest, acting in the person of Christ, presides over the gathered assembly. Since the prayers which are said or sung by him aloud are proclaimed in the name of the entire holy people and of all present, they should be devoutly listened to by all.

Sadly, this says nothing about the “nature” of the presidential parts; it only says that those prayers proclaimed aloud by the priest should be devoutly listened to by the assembly - and, at this point, this stipulation would not have included the Canon. Two months later, Tres abhinc annos (4 May 1967) would give permission for the Canon to be said aloud, but this remained optional (pro opportunitate) until the promulgation of the new Ordo Missae. [3] 

Musicam sacram does, however, reference Sacrosanctum Concilium 33 in a footnote in this paragraph - so, does the Constitution on the Liturgy shed any light on the question? Unfortunately, the answer is no. In fact, we move even further away from GIRM 32 (my emphasis):

33. Although the sacred liturgy is above all things the worship of the divine Majesty, it likewise contains much instruction for the faithful. For in the liturgy God speaks to His people and Christ is still proclaiming His gospel. And the people reply to God both by song and prayer.

Moreover, the prayers addressed to God by the priest who presides over the assembly in the person of Christ are said in the name of the entire holy people and of all present. And the visible signs used by the liturgy to signify invisible divine things have been chosen by Christ or the Church. Thus not only when things are read “which were written for our instruction” (Rom. 15:4), but also when the Church prays or sings or acts, the faith of those taking part is nourished and their minds are raised to God, so that they may offer Him their rational service and more abundantly receive His grace. 

The underlined section of SC 33 is used in GIRM 30 to define the “presidential prayers” of the Mass. But there is no indication in SC itself that it pertains somehow to the “nature” of these presidential prayers that they be proclaimed aloud. This is a later, rationalistic assumption which has been superimposed onto the text of both SC and Musicam sacram, and is seemingly just asserted to be true. It is also inconsistently applied in the OF Missal itself: the Benedictus es, Domine prayers at the Preparation of the Gifts are normally prayed submissa voce, but if the Offertory Chant is not sung, they may be prayed elata voce. Are they, then, defined as public prayers or private prayers?

GIRM 32 also raises serious questions about continuity and rupture. If, as a presidential prayer, the very nature of the Canon demands (exigit) that it be spoken aloud, then what does that say about the organically-developed, centuries-long tradition of the Western Church?

In proposing this particular instance of mutual enrichment of the two forms, Cardinal Sarah is channeling Cardinal Ratzinger’s well-known thoughts on the reintroduction of the silent Canon into the Pauline Missal. [4] However, it would seem that GIRM 32, and the assumptions underlying it, [5] urgently need revision in any future “liturgical reconciliation.”

Notes

[1] Robert Cardinal Sarah, The Power of Silence: Against the Dictatorship of Noise (Ignatius Press, 2017), pp. 129-130.

[2] Note that, with the exception of the numbering and the footnote (added for the editio typica in 1969), this paragraph of the GIRM has not been changed in any of its versions (draft or otherwise) from 1968 through to 2002. See the Synopsis of the various versions of the Latin IGMR in Maurizio Barba, Institutio Generalis Missalis Romani. Textus - Synopsis - Variationes (MSIL 45; Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 2006), pp. 389-667 (specifically pp. 422-423).

[3] Cf. Tres abhinc annos, 10 (English, Latin). For a very interesting examination of how a trace of this paragraph of Tres abhinc annos persisted in the rubrics of the U.S.A. vernacular OF Missal until 2011, see Matthew S. C. Olver, “A Note on the Silent Canon in the Missal of Paul VI and Cardinal Ratzinger”, Antiphon 20.1 (2016), pp. 40-51.

[4] For example: “it is not essential for the entire canon of the Mass to be recited aloud on every occasion. The idea that it must rests on a misunderstanding of its nature as proclamation.” (The Feast of Faith: Approaches to a Theology of the Liturgy [Ignatius Press, 1986], p. 72).

[5] Notwithstanding this attempt by Fr Ryan Erlenbush to read the GIRM as excluding the Canon from the “presidential parts”, which I ultimately find unconvincing.

Why the Communal Mass Should Be Sung

This article concerns the singing of the Ordinary Form of the Mass, but its main point pertains also to the desirability of sung Masses in the Extraordinary Form.

As is well known to historians of the liturgy, the normal practice for the first thousand years of undivided Christianity was to sing the Mass (i.e., High Mass). This practice remained and still remains the norm for Byzantine Christians, both Catholic and Orthodox, who are required to sing the Divine Liturgy. The development of a recited or ‘Low’ Mass in the West as a devotional exercise for individual priests had a trickle-down effect into many parishes, so that by the era of St. Pius X, the Low Mass was the manner in which most Catholics encountered the liturgy most of the time. Pope Pius X launched a movement to recover not only Gregorian chant and polyphony in general, but the High Mass in particular. To this pope is attributed the advice: “Don’t pray at Holy Mass, but pray the Holy Mass.” In 1969, the Vatican journal Notitiae adapted this advice: “[Liturgical] singing means singing the Mass, not just singing during Mass.”[1]

The Second Vatican Council expressly linked its teaching to that of St. Pius X when it taught: “Liturgical worship is given a more noble form when the divine offices are celebrated solemnly in song, with the assistance of sacred ministers and the active participation of the people” (SC 113). The implication is that Catholics should aspire to give worship a more noble form by celebrating it in song — in other words, that the sung Mass should once more attain prominence. This implication was drawn out clearly by the Sacred Congregation of Rites just a few years later, in the Instruction Musicam Sacram (March 5, 1967), which had its 50th anniversary last week:

Liturgical worship is given a more noble form when it is celebrated in song, with the ministers of each degree fulfilling their ministry and the people participating in it. Indeed, through this form, prayer is expressed in a more attractive way, the mystery of the liturgy, with its hierarchical and community nature, is more openly shown, the unity of hearts is more profoundly achieved by the union of voices, minds are more easily raised to heavenly things by the beauty of the sacred rites, and the whole celebration more clearly prefigures that heavenly liturgy which is enacted in the holy city of Jerusalem. Pastors of souls will therefore do all they can to achieve this form of celebration. (MS 5)

In other words, the chanted celebration of Mass should be a rule, not an exception. The same document, which is still the most authoritative Vatican document on music since the time of the Council, states: “For the celebration of the Eucharist with the people, especially on Sundays and feast days, a form of sung Mass (Missa in cantu) is to be preferred as much as possible, even several times on the same day” (MS 27).

As if to underline that singing is not an add-on but part of the inherent structure of the Mass, the Instruction Musicam Sacram goes on to establish, perhaps surprisingly, three degrees of musical participation for Mass (see nn. 28-31), such that one should begin by singing what pertains to the first degree, then add that which pertains to the second, and finally, move on to the third, according to the capabilities of the congregation and choir.

• The first degree includes the entrance rite (including the Collect), the Gospel acclamation, the oratio super oblata, the preface dialogue and preface, the Sanctus, the doxology of the Canon, the Lord’s Prayer with its introduction and embolism, the Pax, the Post-Communion, and the dismissal. 
• The second degree adds the Kyrie, Gloria, Creed, Agnus Dei, and the Prayer of the Faithful.
• The third degree adds the Introit, Offertory, and Communion antiphons, the Gradual, Alleluia, or Tract (if chanted in full), and the Epistle and Gospel.

One can see that the first degree depends on the priest’s chanting his parts given in the Missal, which, in the Church’s tradition, have always been in a simple form of chant, involving a few notes of melody, and may even be sung recto tono in a case of necessity. These prayers and dialogues are the most fundamental elements of the liturgy to be chanted. The second degree adds beauty and solemnity by giving the choir and faithful more scope for singing the Ordinary of the Mass, which brings out the full richness of the prayers themselves. The third degree completes the musical elevation of the liturgy by ensuring that its meditative texts (antiphons and lessons) are sung.

The singing of the Mass is not something rare, only to be done on feasts, but something normal, flowing from the very nature of liturgy. We can see this in the fact that the Church’s tradition provides chants for every day of the year, every occasion. As Dom Mark Kirby explains:

It is too obvious to be denied that a celebration sung in the Gregorian manner is more solemn than a celebration which is merely recited; but this statement is especially true in the modern perspective of a celebration which is habitually recited. The ancients had provided melodies for the most modest celebrations of the liturgical year, and these melodies were no less carefully worked out than those of the great feasts. For them the chant was, before all else, a means of giving to liturgical prayer a fullness of religious and contemplative value, whatever might be the solemnity of the day. Such should also be our sole preoccupation in singing. As long as people look upon the Gregorian chant solely as a means of solemnising the celebration, there will be the danger of making it deviate from its true path, which is more interior.

Dr. Jennifer Donelson begins her classes on liturgical chant with “Top Ten Reasons to Sing the Mass”:

1. Intensifies the sense of sacrality
2. Encourages active participation
3. Respects the dignity of the text of the liturgy and Scripture
4. Centers singing on the Mass itself, not on paraliturgical songs
5. You disappear; Christ appears
6. Singing is often an aid for understanding (diction, audibility)
7. Gives a better sense of the grammar of prayers
8. Gives a better sense of the structure of the Mass
9. Strengthens the sense of community rather than isolation
10. Sensus ecclesiæ, not sensus individualis 

These points are borne out in the section of the General Instruction of the Roman Missal (2nd ed., 2011) devoted to “The Importance of Singing”:

       39. The Christian faithful who come together as one in expectation of the Lord’s coming are instructed by the Apostle Paul to sing together psalms, hymns, and spiritual canticles (cf. Col 3:16). Singing is the sign of the heart’s joy (cf. Acts 2:46). Thus St. Augustine says rightly, “Singing is for one who loves,” and there is also an ancient proverb: “Whoever sings well prays twice over.”
       40. Great importance should therefore be attached to the use of singing in the celebration of the Mass, with due consideration for the culture of peoples and abilities of each liturgical assembly. Although it is not always necessary (e.g., in weekday Masses) to sing all the texts that are in principle meant to be sung, every care should be taken that singing by the ministers and the people not be absent in celebrations that occur on Sundays and on Holydays of Obligation.
       However, in the choosing of the parts actually to be sung, preference is to be given to those that are of greater importance and especially to those which are to be sung by the Priest or the Deacon or a reader, with the people replying, or by the Priest and people together.[2]
       41. The main place should be given, all things being equal, to Gregorian chant, as being proper to the Roman Liturgy. Other kinds of sacred music, in particular polyphony, are in no way excluded, provided that they correspond to the spirit of the liturgical action and that they foster the participation of all the faithful. Since the faithful from different countries come together ever more frequently, it is desirable that they know how to sing together at least some parts of the Ordinary of the Mass in Latin, especially the Profession of Faith and the Lord’s Prayer, according to the simpler settings.

It is noteworthy that numerous magisterial documents, following the directive of Vatican II, specify that the people should be able to chant in Latin the parts of the Mass that pertain to them. We have always joyfully implemented that policy at Wyoming Catholic College. This has included the chanting of the Creed, as is provided for by GIRM 55, 68, and 137.

These are some of the reasons why we ought to sing the Mass — not merely sing at Mass. The beauty of doing this on a regular basis is something that I have experienced at Wyoming Catholic College, where the following has often taken place since 2007:

• the Schola sings the Introit, Offertory, and Communion antiphons, and on occasion, the Gradual and Alleluia;
• the congregation sings the Kyrie, Gloria, Gospel acclamation, Creed, Sanctus, Pater Noster, and Agnus Dei;
• the celebrant sings the entrance rite, the oratio super oblata, the preface dialogue and preface, the doxology of the Canon, the introduction to the Lord’s Prayer and its embolism, the Pax, the Post-Communion, and the dismissal;
• the celebrant introduces the Prayer of the Faithful, which is sung by a cantor, with the people making the response.

With a celebrant and congregation who know their chants from repeated experience, and provided there is a brief homily as recommended by the Church for daily Mass, it is possible to do most of these things within a 35-minute daily Mass, and all of them within an hour or a little more on Sundays and Holy Days. Moreover, there is no question that the congregation participates more fully when singing their parts than when merely reciting the spoken text. From the vantage of the pew-sitter, it is the difference between the uplifting unison of simple chant and a scattered muttering of words.

In conclusion: chanting the Mass is more in accord with Catholic tradition. It is in harmony with what anthropology, sociology, and psychology tell us about how ritual activity is best done if it is to be satisfying, renewing, and connecting. It is more in keeping with Vatican II and subsequent magisterial teaching. Lastly, it is crucial for the evangelization of modern and post-modern man through “the way of beauty.” This is the step we must take if we wish to get past the doldrums of excessive verbosity to the heights of prayerful engagement with the sacred mysteries.

NOTES
[1] See here for more.
[2] The GIRM cites here Musicam Sacram, nn. 7 and 16 — clear proof, if any were needed, that the 1967 Instruction is still considered to be pertinent to the Pauline missal, which appeared a couple of years later.

Third Issue of “Altare Dei” with Special Features for the 50th Anniversary of Musicam Sacram

Maestro Aurelio Porfiri is pleased to announce the publication of Issue 3 of Altare Dei. (The contents of Issue 1 and Issue 2 were published at NLM when they appeared.) Once again, there are many fine articles in this issue, not simply on music but extending to the other sacred arts and beyond, embracing speculative as well as practical matters, and including the characteristic insert of sheet music, this time comprising five pieces.

ALTARE DEI N. 3 -- MARCH 2017

EDITORIAL
Aurelio Porfiri

TOP STORY
Revisiting Musicam Sacram
David M. Friel

LITURGICAL THEOLOGY
Liturgy and Assembly
David W. Fagerberg

Priesthood and Liturgy in Rahner
Giovanni Cavalcoli

LITURGY
The Lectionary of the Extraordinary Form
Joseph Shaw

MUSICAL INSERT
ALMA REDEMPTORIS (Acclamation for the Rosary, SATB and Organ) Alberico Vitalini
LAUS TIBI DOMINE (SATB and Organ) Colin Mawby
COR, ARCA LEGEM CONTINENS (TTB AND ORGAN) Valentino Miserachs
AVE MARIA (Unison and Organ) Aurelio Porfiri
ADORO TE DEVOTE (SATB) Mauro Visconti

CATECHISM ON THE MASS
Part 3
Enrico Zoffoli

SACRED MUSIC
Ulisse Matthey Seventy Years After His Death
Fausto Caporali

Sacred Music as Occasion of Grace for Modern Man
Peter A. Kwasniewski

An Essential Guide to Church Music Job Offerings for Dummies
Aurelio Porfiri

The Gradual of the Passion
Fulvio Rampi

CATHOLIC CULTURE
Money money money: an Interview with Ettore Gotti Tedeschi
Aurelio Porfiri

SACRED ART
The True Purpose of Christian Art
Rodolfo Papa

BOOK REVIEWS
Belinda e il Mostro (Aurelio Porfiri)
Le cronache di Babele (Aurelio Porfiri)
Tempio, Icona e Musica Sacra (Aurelio Porfiri)

The issue may be purchased here for 6 Euros.

International Declaration on Sacred Music "Cantate Domino"

Today, March 5, in honor of the 50th anniversary of the Instruction Musicam Sacram (promulgated March 5, 1967), a Declaration on Sacred Music Cantate Domino, signed by over 200 musicians, pastors, and scholars from around the world, has been published in six languages (English, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, French, and German). This declaration argues for the continued relevance and importance of traditional sacred music and critiques the numerous serious deviations from it that have plagued the Catholic Church for the past half-century.

Readers of NLM are encouraged to read the text (reproduced below in full) and to disseminate it far and wide as a rallying-point for Catholics who love our great heritage, and for all men and women who value high culture and the fine arts as expressions of the spiritual nobility of the human person made in God's image.

“CANTATE DOMINO CANTICUM NOVUM”

A Statement on the Current Situation of Sacred Music

We, the undersigned — musicians, pastors, teachers, scholars, and lovers of sacred music — humbly offer this statement to the Catholic community around the world, expressing our great love for the Church’s treasury of sacred music and our deep concerns about its current plight.

Introduction

Cantate Domino canticum novum, cantate Domino omnis terra (Psalm 96): this singing to God’s glory has resonated for the whole history of Christianity, from the very beginning to the present day. Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition alike bear witness to a great love for the beauty and power of music in the worship of Almighty God. The treasury of sacred music has always been cherished in the Catholic Church by her saints, theologians, popes, and laypeople.

Such love and practice of music is witnessed to throughout Christian literature and in the many documents that the Popes have devoted to sacred music, from John XXII’s Docta Sanctorum Patrum (1324) and Benedict XIV’s Annus Qui (1749) down to Saint Pius X’s Motu Proprio Tra le Sollecitudini (1903), Pius XII’s Musicae Sacrae Disciplina (1955), Saint John Paul II’s Chirograph on Sacred Music (2003), and so on. This vast amount of documentation impels us to take with utter seriousness the importance and the role of music in the liturgy. This importance is related to the deep connection between the liturgy and its music, a connection that goes two ways: a good liturgy allows for splendid music, but a low standard of liturgical music also tremendously affects the liturgy. Nor can the ecumenical importance of music be forgotten, when we know that other Christian traditions — such as Anglicans, Lutherans, and the Eastern Orthodox — have high esteem for the importance and dignity of sacred music, as witnessed by their own jealously-guarded “treasuries.”

We are observing an important milestone, the fiftieth anniversary of the promulgation of the Instruction on Music in the Liturgy, Musicam Sacram, on March 5, 1967, under the pontificate of Blessed Paul VI. Re-reading the document today, we cannot avoid thinking of the via dolorosa of sacred music in the decades following Sacrosanctum Concilium. Indeed, what was happening in some factions of the Church at that time (1967) was not at all in line with Sacrosantum Concilium or with Musicam Sacram. Certain ideas that were never present in the Council’s documents were forced into practice, sometimes with a lack of vigilance from clergy and ecclesiastical hierarchy. In some countries the treasury of sacred music that the Council asked to be preserved was not only not preserved, but even opposed. And this quite against the Council, which clearly stated:

The musical tradition of the universal Church is a treasure of inestimable value, greater even than that of any other art. The main reason for this pre-eminence is that, as sacred song united to the words, it forms a necessary or integral part of the solemn liturgy. Holy Scripture, indeed, has bestowed praise upon sacred song, and the same may be said of the fathers of the Church and of the Roman pontiffs who in recent times, led by St. Pius X, have explained more precisely the ministerial function supplied by sacred music in the service of the Lord. Therefore sacred music is to be considered the more holy in proportion as it is more closely connected with the liturgical action, whether it adds delight to prayer, fosters unity of minds, or confers greater solemnity upon the sacred rites. But the Church approves of all forms of true art having the needed qualities, and admits them into divine worship. (SC 112)

The Current Situation

In light of the mind of the Church so frequently expressed, we cannot avoid being concerned about the current situation of sacred music, which is nothing short of desperate, with abuses in the area of sacred music now almost the norm rather than the exception. We shall summarize here some of the elements that contribute to the present deplorable situation of sacred music and of the liturgy.

1. There has been a loss of understanding of the “musical shape of the liturgy,” that is, that music is an inherent part of the very essence of liturgy as public, formal, solemn worship of God. We are not merely to sing at Mass, but to sing the Mass. Hence, as Musicam Sacram itself reminded us, the priest’s parts should be chanted to the tones given in the Missal, with the people making the responses; the singing of the Ordinary of the Mass in Gregorian chant or music inspired by it should be encouraged; and the Propers of the Mass, too, should be given the pride of place that befits their historical prominence, their liturgical function, and their theological depth. Similar points apply to the singing of the Divine Office. It is an exhibition of the vice of “liturgical sloth” to refuse to sing the liturgy, to use “utility music” rather than sacred music, to refuse to educate oneself or others about the Church’s tradition and wishes, and to put little or no effort and resources into the building up of a sacred music program.

2. This loss of liturgical and theological understanding goes hand-in-hand with an embrace of secularism. The secularism of popular musical styles has contributed to a desacralization of the liturgy, while the secularism of profit-based commercialism has reinforced the imposition of mediocre collections of music upon parishes. It has encouraged an anthropocentrism in the liturgy that undermines its very nature. In vast sectors of the Church nowadays there is an incorrect relationship with culture, which can be seen as a “web of connections.” With the actual situation of our liturgical music (and of the liturgy itself, because the two are intertwined), we have broken this web of connection with our past and tried to connect with a future that has no meaning without its past. Today, the Church is not actively using her cultural riches to evangelize, but is mostly used by a prevalent secular culture, born in opposition to Christianity, which destabilizes the sense of adoration that is at the heart of the Christian faith.

In his homily for the feast of Corpus Christi on June 4, 2015, Pope Francis has spoken of “the Church’s amazement at this reality [of the Most Holy Eucharist]. . . An astonishment which always feeds contemplation, adoration, and memory.” In many of our Churches around the world, where is this sense of contemplation, this adoration, this astonishment for the mystery of the Eucharist? It is lost because we are living a sort of spiritual Alzheimer’s, a disease that is taking our spiritual, theological, artistic, musical and cultural memories away from us. It has been said that we need to bring the culture of every people into the liturgy. This may be right if correctly understood, but not in the sense that the liturgy (and the music) becomes the place where we have to exalt a secular culture. It is the place where the culture, every culture, is brought to another level and purified.

3. There are groups in the Church that push for a “renewal” that does not reflect Church teaching but rather serves their own agenda, worldview, and interests. These groups have members in key leadership positions from which they put into practice their plans, their idea of culture, and the way we have to deal with contemporary issues. In some countries powerful lobbies have contributed to the de facto replacement of liturgical repertoires faithful to the directives of Vatican II with low-quality repertoires. Thus, we end up with repertoires of new liturgical music of very low standards as regards both the text and the music. This is understandable when we reflect that nothing of lasting worth can come from a lack of training and expertise, especially when people neglect the wise precepts of Church tradition:

On these grounds Gregorian Chant has always been regarded as the supreme model for sacred music, so that it is fully legitimate to lay down the following rule: the more closely a composition for church approaches in its movement, inspiration and savor the Gregorian form, the more sacred and liturgical it becomes; and the more out of harmony it is with that supreme model, the less worthy it is of the temple. (St. Pius X, Motu Proprio Tra le Sollecitudini)

Today this “supreme model” is often discarded, if not despised. The entire Magisterium of the Church has reminded us of the importance of adhering to this important model, not as way of limiting creativity but as a foundation on which inspiration can flourish. If we desire that people look for Jesus, we need to prepare the house with the best that the Church can offer. We will not invite people to our house, the Church, to give them a by-product of music and art, when they can find a much better pop music style outside the Church. Liturgy is a limen, a threshold that allows us to step from our daily existence to the worship of the angels: Et ídeo cum Angelis et Archángelis, cum Thronis et Dominatiónibus, cumque omni milítia cæléstis exércitus, hymnum glóriæ tuæ cánimus, sine fine dicéntes...

4. This disdain for Gregorian chant and traditional repertoires is one sign of a much bigger problem, that of disdain for Tradition. Sacrosanctum Concilium teaches that the musical and artistic heritage of the Church should be respected and cherished, because it is the embodiment of centuries of worship and prayer, and an expression of the highest peak of human creativity and spirituality. There was a time when the Church did not run after the latest fashion, but was the maker and arbiter of culture. The lack of commitment to tradition has put the Church and her liturgy on an uncertain and meandering path. The attempted separation of the teaching of Vatican II from previous Church teachings is a dead end, and the only way forward is the hermeneutic of continuity endorsed by Pope Benedict XVI. Recovering the unity, integrity, and harmony of Catholic teaching is the condition for restoring both the liturgy and its music to a noble condition. As Pope Francis taught us in his first encyclical: “Self-knowledge is only possible when we share in a greater memory” (Lumen Fidei 38).

5. Another cause of the decadence of sacred music is clericalism, the abuse of clerical position and status. Clergy who are often poorly educated in the great tradition of sacred music continue to make decisions about personnel and policies that contravene the authentic spirit of the liturgy and the renewal of sacred music repeatedly called for in our times. Often they contradict Vatican II teachings in the name of a supposed “spirit of the Council.” Moreover, especially in countries of ancient Christian heritage, members of the clergy have access to positions that are not available to laity, when there are lay musicians fully capable of offering an equal or superior professional service to the Church.

6. We also see the problem of inadequate (at times, unjust) remuneration of lay musicians. The importance of sacred music in the Catholic liturgy requires that at least some members of the Church in every place be well-educated, well-equipped, and dedicated to serve the People of God in this capacity. Is it not true that we should give to God our best? No one would be surprised or disturbed knowing that doctors need a salary to survive, no one would accept medical treatment from untrained volunteers; priests have their salaries, because they cannot live if they do not eat, and if they do not eat, they will not be able to prepare themselves in theological sciences or to say the Mass with dignity. If we pay florists and cooks who help at parishes, why does it seem so strange that those performing musical activities for the Church would have a right to fair compensation (see Code of Canon Law, can. 231)?

Positive Proposals

It may seem that what we have said is pessimistic, but we maintain the hope that there is a way out of this winter. The following proposals are offered in spiritu humilitatis, with the intention of restoring the dignity of the liturgy and of its music in the Church.

1. As musicians, pastors, scholars, and Catholics who love Gregorian chant and sacred polyphony, so frequently praised and recommended by the Magisterium, we ask for a re-affirmation of this heritage alongside modern sacred compositions in Latin or vernacular languages that take their inspiration from this great tradition; and we ask for concrete steps to promote it everywhere, in every church across the globe, so that all Catholics can sing the praises of God with one voice, one mind and heart, one common culture that transcends all their differences. We also ask for a re-affirmation of the unique importance of the pipe organ for the sacred liturgy, because of its singular capacity to elevate hearts to the Lord and its perfect suitability for supporting the singing of choirs and congregations.

2. It is necessary that the education to good taste in music and liturgy start with children. Often educators without musical training believe that children cannot appreciate the beauty of true art. This is far from the truth. Using a pedagogy that will help them approach the beauty of the liturgy, children will be formed in a way that will fortify their strength, because they will be offered nourishing spiritual bread and not the apparently tasty but unhealthy food of industrial origin (as when “Masses for children” feature pop-inspired music). We notice through personal experience that when children are exposed to these repertoires they come to appreciate them and develop a deeper connection with the Church.

3. If children are to appreciate the beauty of music and art, if they are to understand the importance of the liturgy as fons et culmen [source and apex] of the life of the Church, we must have a strong laity who will follow the Magisterium. We need to give space to well-trained laity in areas that have to do with art and with music.  To be able to serve as a competent liturgical musician or educator requires years of study. This “professional” status must be recognized, respected, and promoted in practical ways. In connection with this point, we sincerely hope that the Church will continue to work against obvious and subtle forms of clericalism, so that laity can make their full contribution in areas where ordination is not a requirement.

4. Higher standards for musical repertoire and skill should be insisted on for cathedrals and basilicas. Bishops in every diocese should hire at least a professional music director and/or an organist who would follow clear directions on how to foster excellent liturgical music in that cathedral or basilica and who would offer a shining example of combining works of the great tradition with appropriate new compositions. We think that a sound principle for this is contained in Sacrosanctum Concilium 23: “There must be no innovations unless the good of the Church genuinely and certainly requires them; and care must be taken that any new forms adopted should in some way grow organically from forms already existing.”

5. We suggest that in every basilica and cathedral there be the encouragement of a weekly Mass celebrated in Latin (in either Form of the Roman Rite) so as to maintain the link we have with our liturgical, cultural, artistic, and theological heritage. The fact that many young people today are rediscovering the beauty of Latin in the liturgy is surely a sign of the times, and prompts us to bury the battles of the past and seek a more “catholic” approach that draws upon all the centuries of Catholic worship. With the easy availability of books, booklets, and online resources, it will not be difficult to facilitate the active participation of those who wish to attend liturgies in Latin. Moreover, each parish should be encouraged to have one fully-sung Mass each Sunday.

6. Liturgical and musical training of clergy should be a priority for the Bishops. Clergy have a responsibility to learn and practice their liturgical melodies, since, according to Musicam Sacram and other documents, they should be able to chant the prayers of the liturgy, not merely say the words. In seminaries and at the university, they should come to be familiar with and appreciate the great tradition of sacred music in the Church, in harmony with the Magisterium, and following the sound principle of Matthew 13:52: “Every scribe who has been instructed in the kingdom of heaven is like the head of a household who brings from his storeroom both the new and the old.”

7. In the past, Catholic publishers played a great role in spreading good examples of sacred music, old and new. Today, the same publishers, even if they belong to dioceses or religious institutions, often spread music that is not right for the liturgy, following only commercial considerations. Many faithful Catholics think that what mainstream publishers offer is in line with the doctrine of the Catholic Church regarding liturgy and music, when it is frequently not so. Catholic publishers should have as their first aim that of educating the faithful in sane Catholic doctrine and good liturgical practices, not that of making money.

8. The formation of liturgists is also fundamental. Just as musicians need to understand the essentials of liturgical history and theology, so too must liturgists be educated in Gregorian chant, polyphony, and the entire musical tradition of the Church, so that they may discern between what is good and what is bad.

Conclusion

In his encyclical Lumen Fidei, Pope Francis reminded us of the way faith binds together past and future:

As a response to a word which preceded it, Abraham’s faith would always be an act of remembrance. Yet this remembrance is not fixed on past events but, as the memory of a promise, it becomes capable of opening up the future, shedding light on the path to be taken. We see how faith, as remembrance of the future, memoria futuri, is thus closely bound up with hope. (LF 9)

This remembrance, this memory, this treasure that is our Catholic tradition is not something of the past alone. It is still a vital force in the present, and will always be a gift of beauty to future generations.  “Sing praises to the Lord, for he has done gloriously; let this be known in all the earth. Shout, and sing for joy, O inhabitant of Zion, for great in your midst is the Holy One of Israel” (Is 12:5–6).

Signed (partial list)

Mº Aurelio Porfiri
Honorary Master and Organist for the Church of Santa Maria dell’Orto, Rome
Publisher of Choralife and Chorabooks, Editor of Altare Dei

Peter A. Kwasniewski, Ph.D.
Professor & Choirmaster
Wyoming Catholic College, WY, USA

Most Rev. Athanasius Schneider
Auxiliary Bishop of Astana
President of the Liturgical Commission of the Conference of the Catholic Bishops of Kazakhstan

The Most Reverend Rene Henry Gracida, D.D.
Bishop Emeritus of Corpus Christi

Abbot Philip Anderson 
Our Lady of Clear Creek Abbey
Hulbert, Oklahoma, USA

Rev. Prof. Nicola Bux
Priest, Archdiocese of Bari
Professor of Eastern Liturgy and Sacramental Theology

Sir James MacMillan C.B.E.
Composer and conductor

Peter Phillips
Founder and Director of the Tallis Scholars
Publisher of the Musical Times
Bodley Fellow, Merton College, Oxford
Chevalier de l’Ordre des Arts et des Lettres

Colin Mawby, K.S.G.    
Liturgical Composer and Master of Music at Westminster Cathedral 1961–1977

Kevin Allen
Composer
Chicago, IL, USA

Frank J. La Rocca, Ph.D.
Composer
Emeritus Professor of Music, Oakland, California, USA

M° Giorgio Carnini 
Organista, compositore e direttore d’orchestra
Presidente Associazione Camerata Italica
Direttore artistico del festival e progetto “Un organo per Roma”
Buenos Aires; Roma

Prof. Giancarlo Rostirolla
Musicologo, Ricercatore, Accademico
Presidente dell’Istituto di Bibliografia Musicale
Direttore Artistico della Fondazione Giovanni Pierluigi da Palestrina

William Peter Mahrt, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of Music, Stanford University, Stanford, California
President, Church Music Association of America

David W. Fagerberg
Professor, Department of Theology
University of Notre Dame

Dr. Joseph Shaw
Senior Research Fellow, St Benet’s Hall, Oxford University
President of the Latin Mass Society of England & Wales

Martin Mosebach
German novelist & essayist
Frankfurt am Main, Germany

Roberto Spataro
Docente ordinario Università Pontificia Salesiana
Segretario della Pontificia Academia Latinitatis

Dottor Ettore Gotti Tedeschi
Economista e banchiere

Prof. Dr. Massimo de Leonardis
Ordinario di Storia delle relazioni internazionali
Direttore del Dipartimento di Scienze Politiche
Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore
Milano – Italia

Rev. George William Rutler, M. St. (Oxon.), S.T.D., LL.D.
Pastor, Church of Saint Michael
New York City, New York

Rev. Brian W. Harrison, OS, MA, STD
Associate Professor of Theology (retired), Pontifical Catholic University of Puerto Rico
Chaplain, St. Mary of Victories Chapel,
St. Louis, Missouri, USA

Rev. Thomas M. Kocik
Parish Priest, Fall River, Mass., USA
Past Editor, Antiphon: A Journal for Liturgical Renewal

Rev. Richard G. Cipolla
Pastor, St. Mary’s Church
Norwalk, CT

Rev. James V. Schall, S.J.
Professor Emeritus
Georgetown University
Washington, DC, USA

Prof. Pier Paolo Donati
Direttore di “Informazione Organistica”
Già docente di Storia della Musica all’Università di Firenze

Rev. John Zuhlsdorf
Madison, WI, USA

Vytautas Miskinis
Composer, Conductor, Professor
Artistic Director of Boy’s and Male Choir AZUOLIUKAS
Professor of Lithuanian Academy of Music and Theatre
President of Lithuanian Choral Union

Wilko Brouwers
Utrecht Center for the Arts
Gregorian Circle Utrecht

Scott Turkington
Director of Sacred Music
Holy Family Church & Holy Family Academy
Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA

Jeffrey Morse
Schola Gregoriana of Cambridge

Rev. J. W. Hunwicke
Priest of the Ordinariate of Our Lady of Walsingham
sometime Head of Theology, Lancing College
formerly Senior Research Fellow, Pusey House, Oxford

Right Reverend Archimandrite John A. Mangels
St. Augustine Antiochian Orthodox Christian Church, Denver CO, USA
Founder of the Ambrosian Choristers

Christopher Mueller
Founder & President
Christopher Mueller Foundation for Polyphony & Chant

Massimo Lapponi O.S.B.
Monaco sacerdote professo dell’Abbazia Benedettina di Farfa
già docente di Etica e Filosofia della Religione presso il Pont. Ateneo di Sant’Anselmo

Patrick Banken
President of Una Voce France
Vice President of the International Federation Una Voce

(The full list of over 200 signatories is available here.)