Chapter 21 of “The History and Future of the Roman Liturgy”--Posted with the permission of the author, Denis Crouan. This book was recently translated for Ignatius Press by Michael Miller.

Sacred Music: the place and role of Gregorian chant

When it is celebrated according to the Roman rite, the liturgy ought to be sung in its entirety: this is the “normal” form. All parts of the Mass or of the Divine Office, from the simplest prayer to the most complicated readings, including of course the recitation of the psalms, are in fact meant to be declaimed according to principles that obey the laws of music.

That is why the Second Vatican Council devotes considerable space to the question of chant, recalling that the initiatives of Saint Gregory the Great led to the creation of a repertoire of liturgical chants that constitutes the musical tradition of the Church as well as an invaluable treasure.1

Sacred chant combined with the words of the liturgy, then, is an necessary or integral part of the solemn form that the liturgy should assume whenever possible.2

The function of chant and the role of musicians in the liturgy

The conciliar document begins [the section on “Sacred Music”] by referring to Scripture and the Church Fathers, as well as to the studies conducted at the request of Saint Pius X in the modern period,3 to recall the fact that sacred song in and of itself exercises a ministerial function in the liturgy.4

But what is sacred music? Does every song that is performed during a liturgical celebration deserve to be designated as “sacred”?

The Council replies to this twofold question by specifying that sacred music must be closely connected with the liturgical action that is being carried out, and that it must enhance the solemnity of the rites by making prayer more “pleasing”.5

In order for chant to fulfill its purpose, it must be cultivated, taught at a very young age, and handed down by carefully trained choirmasters. The treasure of sacred chant should be preserved principally in the seminaries and in religious houses, by musicians who have had serious liturgical formation.6

Gregorian chant: sacred song par excellence7

If there is one kind of singing that possesses all the qualities of liturgical song, if there is one sort of music that has developed in close contact with the liturgy itself, it is certainly Gregorian chant.
The Council states again forcefully: the Gregorian repertoire constitutes the chant proper to the Roman liturgy. Consequently it deserves to have pride of place in the sacred actions that are carried out in the name of the Church.8

Other sorts of music, certainly, can be introduced into the Roman rite, provided, on the one hand, that it is not to the detriment of Gregorian chant, and provided, on the other hand, that these others types of music have qualities suited to the liturgy. This is tantamount to saying that not all kinds of music are suited to liturgical actions, however pleasant they may be to our contemporary ears or however insistently they may appeal to our emotions.

Without saying so explicitly, the Council recalls here that the encounter with God which takes place during a liturgy is not limited to the simple psychological feelings that could be aroused by a sort of music that aimed to please the faithful.9

The qualities of Gregorian chant

With respect to the liturgy, Gregorian chant must not be considered as one musical form that is more interesting than another, or, more simply, as singing that is added to the liturgy “to make it beautiful”. It is more than that; it is more than a type of “religious” music: it is sung prayer, the most perfect rendition of the Roman liturgy on the musical plane. It is itself, in a way, this liturgy, but as though expanded, as though raised to its highest degree of expression. It follows that Gregorian chant is capable of spreading among the faithful a message that is more universal, more complete, more capable of being “interiorized” than would be the message of a liturgy that had simply been embellished with ordinary hymns.10

The Church recognizes the didactic value of Gregorian chant; this is because she sees that, when it is added to the rites of a celebration, it fosters that openness of heart and soul which enables the faithful to receive the means of living the doctrine that is conveyed by the liturgy. Gregorian chant sets into motion a process of knowing divine realities that passes more through the channel of the senses and experience than along the single path of conceptual thought. The richness of this chant is derived, then, from the fact that it does not open the way solely to a theological (and biblical) content that is accessible to reason alone, but carries the listeners toward a perfect expression of the faith that is to be lived and transmitted.

As Cardinal Daneels has emphasized, “the liturgy cannot become the expression of ourselves.” Thus, if there is always a danger of celebrating only so as to “master the rituals” and, in that way, to make the liturgy a means to an end, there is also another danger: that of singing solely for one’s own enjoyment. To be sure, the liturgy and chant appeal to our senses, but in that capacity they are not supposed to cajole them. There can be a great sensible joy in singing a beautiful polyphonic work or a simple popular hymn; but this joy, legitimate in itself, must in the first place be – within the specific framework of the liturgy – at the service of our interior dispositions, which make use of the sensible elements of the sacred rites to lead us toward the contemplation of the Invisible. Now Gregorian chant has understood this perfectly: it does not caress our feelings but channels them, purifies them, so as to put them at the disposal of our capacity to apprehend the mystery being celebrated.

Just like all true liturgy, all liturgical music must be first and foremost a gift, a gratuitous praise that the Church directs to God through Christ’s sacrifice of thanksgiving; it should not be merely an intellectual construct aimed at expressing or intensifying personal feelings that are more or less orderly, more or less appropriate. And for this reason, because it is at the same time a gift and praise, liturgical music, like the liturgy, must be “fitting and just”.

A type of music that was only beautiful but not “fitting” or “just”, would run the risk of being perceived as nothing more than entertainment, as a means of satisfying a desire for estheticism, as an object of amusement and enjoyment – as is the case with musical numbers performed in concert. Now the liturgy and liturgical song absolutely must watch out and steer clear of this dangerous reef, so as to remain “icons”, that is to say, sense-images inhabited by a presence, and not by emanations of some human feeling that is part and parcel of a superficial religiosity guided by the subjectivism that characterizes our post-Christian societies.11

Now Gregorian chant avoids the dangers that we have just enumerated: prior to being a cause of esthetic pleasure, it is a language that brings about that which it enunciates,12 a language that allows the listeners to grasp more fully the liturgy as a whole instead of understanding individual rituals in a fragmented way.13 It is also the sort of singing that best promotes “active participation” in the liturgy.14

By revealing to us the God who, through the liturgy, acts at the very heart of the created world, Gregorian chant leads us to discover and to revere the mystery of the Divine Presence. It teaches us about what is sacred, places us in a sort of “preserve” where the most delicate and most endangered dimensions of human life are protected.15

Gregorian chant is a sensitive master who takes his time in teaching us: although he loves to cover the words that we sing with a veil, with a shadow, it is not in order to disguise the meaning of what we are proclaiming, but rather to make sure that this meaning is only gradually revealed to us, so that we might never be tempted to celebrate ourselves, but rather might remain turned toward Him who acts at the heart of the liturgy.16, 17, 18

FOOTNOTES
1. John Paul II, “Allocution aux Pueri Cantores” [Address to the choirboys], le 31 décembre 1999 (Osservatore Romano [édition française] no. 3, janvier 2000).
2. Sacrosanctum Concilium 112.
3. See page “59” [beginning of chapter 6].
4. SC 112.
5. Ibid.
6. SC 114-15.
7. See Appendix III.
8. SC 116.
9. Giacomo Biffi, Musica sacra e liturgia (Edizioni Piemme, Casale Monferrato, 1992).
10. The common hymn, inasmuch as it is an adaptation of a popular devotion, must be purified, as it were, by the liturgy (cf. John Paul II, Vicesimus quintus annus). Gregorian chant is already purified because it is the expression of the liturgy: it emanates from the liturgy and owes its development to it.
11. Cf. Luigi Giussani, La conscience religieuse de l’homme moderne [The religious awareness of modern man] (Éditions du Cerf, Paris 1999).
12. “The British linguist Austin deserves the credit for having pointed out the fact that certain linguistic acts are not only constative but actually bring about, themselves, the action that they enunciate; he calls this type of language performative or illocutionary, terms that were immediately adopted by liturgists and applied to the sacraments. In them, the language act is an operative expression. Austin’s terminology allows us to distinguish in liturgical language between the simply locutionary dimension (the information or the meaning), the perlocutionary dimension (that is, the effect produced upon the hearers), and lastly the illocutionary dimension that is present in the sacrament but also in the profession of faith and, finally, in a general way, in the liturgical action as a whole inasmuch as it is an expression of the Christian identity.” (Marie-Laure Bourgueuil, quoted by Denis Crouan, Le chant grégorien redécouvert [Gregorian chant rediscovered], Éditions C.L.D., Tours 1997.)
13. The verb saisir in French [“to grasp”, “to seize”] has the advantage of being a synonym of “understand”, while being capable of expressing also, in the passive form, the fact that one is “seized” or “caught up” by the action that is being carried out. Now, strictly speaking, the liturgy is not primarily something that must be understood; it is presented to us as a source of understanding and hence is meant to make us enter into the Mystery of the Covenant. Therefore we are not the ones who in the first place must understand the liturgy; rather, the liturgy must make us comprehend, that is to say, must enable us to establish a relationship with the divine. This is the same perspective in which we should re-frame the question about Gregorian chant after the liturgical renewal of Vatican II.
14. The “active participation” in the liturgy called for by the Church is not an “activist” participation whereby everyone seeks to busy himself or to put himself forward. Quite on the contrary: true “participation in the liturgy” is a participation of the heart, consisting of the intention to carry out as well as possible – with genuine sincerity – what the Church asks us to accomplish in her liturgy.
15. Cardinal Godfried Danneels, op. cit.
16. Cf. the contributions of various authors to Le chant grégorien redécouvert (Éditions C.L.D., Tours 1997).
17. Cf. Appendix IV.
18. Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, A New Song for the Lord: Faith in Christ and Liturgy Today, trsl. Martha M. Matesich (Crossroad Publishing Company, New York 1996). Bernadette Lecureux, Le latin, langue de l’Église [Latin, the language of the Church] (Éditions Spes, Paris 1964 – There is a new edition of this work, with a preface by Dom Philippe Dupont, Abbot of Solesmes). Dom Jacques Hourlier, Entretiens sur la spiritualité du chant grégorien [Talks on the spirituality of Gregorian chant] (Éditions de l’Abbaye, Solesmes 1985).

There is a funeral scheduled at my church for Saturday. The deceased was 102 and leaves behind a gaggle of grandchildren and a google of great-grandchildren. One of her grandchildren came to the parish office this week, bringing with her a clipboard, several books, and requests for the music. (I should mention that we can seldom honor these requests, as we sing the proper chants at every Requiem Mass and have room for little else).

The parish secretary gave me the lady's requests. There were the usual "Be Not Afraid," the Semipelagian "Amazing Grace," and "The Ave Maria" (Herr Schubert having written, of course, the one and only setting thereof). And then:

Evil's Wings.

The obvious humor aside, one wonders quite seriously what this lady thinks every time she hears this ubiquitous song. Perhaps a trope of the Dies Irae? ("Evil's wings this day are flapping, / Worlds dissolve in ashes snapping: / Thus David and Sibyll rapping.")

A course of instruction for Parents and Teachers, Musicians and Non-Musicians


The Ward Center of San Antonio, in collaboration with the International Center for Ward Method Studies at The Catholic University of America, is pleased to offer on three weekends in Houston, Texas, a basic workshop study course in music pedagogy for elementary schools or home schooling according to the Ward Method.

The course will be offered at Cardinal Newman School in Houston, TX on three weekends throughout the year beginning October 21/22, 2005. The final class will be taught on June 19/20, 2006 at the Ward Center in The B.T. Rome School of Music the Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C. in conjunction with the Sacred Music Colloquium co-sponsored by the Church Music Association of America and the Ward Center. For those unable to attend in DC, this final session can also be taken in Houston on June 9/10, 2006.No previous musical training is necessary, although students must possess the ability to sing on pitch.

The Ward Method of Music Instruction is a progressive method of teaching elementary school children - through vocal instruction - music theory, composition, and conducting. The method was developed to teach American Catholic school children the fundamentals of music so that they would be able to sing the vast repertoire of sacred music which is a part of the Roman Catholic Church’s tradition. The Method is unique in that it has a basis in Gregorian chant.

The last Council called for the preservation of the Church’s treasury of sacred music. Parents and teachers, as well as church musicians, can help pass on to future generations this wonderful music through the Ward Method of Music Instruction. In the music lesson information is presented in a manner which conforms to the child’s developmental stages. Subject matter is broken down into fundamental principles and each lesson includes the process of relating the known to the unknown. The child is stimulated to use these new truths through personal experience. Musical elements are studied separately.Children discover vocal and intonation exercises, count meter and experience rhythm as movement. They creatively use each musical element through exercises, games and their owncompositions. At the end of each lesson the children are able to sing a new song, hymn or chant.

For more information and to register, contact:

Amy Zuberbueler, Director
Ward Center of San Antonio
14500 Blanco Rd. #324
San Antonio, TX 78216

or

skeris@cua.edu

The EROI festival and symposium this year, extending from October 6 through 16, feature a newly-restored XVIII century Italian organ. There will be several presentations on "The Italian Organ in the Liturgy" on Saturday, October 15.

Readers of this blog may be interested to know that CanticaNova Publications, in their Liturgical Planning section, has begun to include not only the Introits and Communions for each Sunday as they appear in the Sacramentary, but also all five Propers as they appear in both the Graduale Romanum and Liber Usualis, complete with page references. Needless to say, this is of great benefit when trying to determine at a glance whether the chants of the Solesmes books for any given Sunday correspond with the texts in the Sacramentary -- which, it should be borne in mind, are presented in the Sacramentary with no music whatsoever.

For reference, the relevant legislation is paragraph 32 of Musicam Sacram:

The custom legitimately in use in certain places and widely confirmed by indults, of substituting other songs for the songs given in the Graduale for the Entrance, Offertory and Communion, can be retained according to the judgment of the competent territorial authority, as long as songs of this sort are in keeping with the parts of the Mass, with the feast or with the liturgical season. It is for the same territorial authority to approve the texts of these songs.

Given the lack of integrity between text and music for Propers in the Sacramentary, and considering the careful development over centuries by which most of the chants represented in the Solesmes books proceeded, one would do well to make ample use of this provision.

With the start of the choral season upon us, now seems like a good time to pause and reflect upon the vocation of the chorister. With this in mind, reproduced below is the schedule for a choral retreat which will take place at my church this Saturday:

9:00 Mass (usual daily parish Mass)
9:30 Choirmaster: Why Sing? - the theology of sacred song
10:15 Break (coffee)
10:30 Learning and reflecting on the chant Repleatur os meum laude tua
11:00 Pastor: The Divine Office - its structure, the rhythm of the day, communal singing
11:45 Silent prayer (in church)
12:00 Sung "Midday Prayer" (a.k.a. Sext)
12:30 Lunch
1:15 Choirmaster: Why Sing Chant? - its rôle in the sacred liturgy and Western musical culture
1:45 Remarks on chant interpretation (choir instruction)
2:15 Pastor: concluding thoughts, prayer, hymn
2:30 Omnes exeunt

May the above serve as a modest suggestion for those wishing to plan a similar choral outing. It goes without saying that to remind one's choir frequently of the interrelation of song and prayer is most beneficial. Of course, many of the themes to be explored over the course of the day are inspired in no small part by the scholarly and pastoral writings of authors in the various CMAA publications.

Readers of the recent CMAA publication "The Bugnini-Liturgy and the Reform of the Reform" will be interested to see what others think of the volume, for instance the Liturgy Office of the UK episcopal conference:
www.catholic-ew.org.uk/liturgy/Newsletter/Reviews/BR-Sep04.html.
Don Capisco does not wish to withhold from his friends the response to this "review" by the doughty author, who wrote:

Dear Editor,
please publish the following short statement with reference to the review of my book "The Bugnini-Liturgy and the Reform of the Reform" written by John Ainslie. I am surprised that there exists another Laszlo Dobszay in the world who has also written a book with the title "The Bugnini-Liturgy and the Reform of the Reform." I think moreover that John Ainslie wrote a review in Liturgy Newsletter of this OTHER book by the OTHER Dobszay, since I don't recognise my ideas in his interpretation. The sentences cited from this book are in fact sometimes close to my sentences. But I don't know whence he has taken the ideas which are quite contrary to my own. Or, in the event he wanted to review MY book, either I cannot formulate my ideas clearly, or he cannot read carefully. Or, has he opened the book here and there and connected the points thus gleaned, by using his own train of thought ? (Just one example: I cannot even hazard a guess as to the basis for supposing that I wish to restore the liturgy in its 12th-century state.) I would be happy if the reader would instead simply take my book in hand and judge it in his own mind, rather than to bother its content with what is written about it in the review. Laszlo Dobszay

The CMAA is pleased to offer this classic statement on behalf of Gregorian Chant: The Reform of Church Music, by Justine Bayard Ward, originally appearing in the Atlantic Monthly, April 1906.

From the article:

Modern music has two scales, or Modes. Chant has eight. It is evident that eight modes give greater variety of expression than two,—an ad­vantage for which even our modern indiscriminate use of the chromatic does not fully compensate. A mode is a manner. As in speech the speaker’s manner shades the meaning of his words, sometimes even alters it, so in music the mode, or manner, determines the character of the composi­tion. The meaning of a triad, for instance, de­pends entirely upon whether its manner be major or minor: lower the third, and its manner is sad; raise the third, and its manner is gay. Our pres­ent musical system is limited, then, to two man­ners, the major and the minor; and so Chant has the advantage of greater scope and variety. But more than this: the character of these two modern scales compels us to choose between a gayety almost frivolous on the one hand, and, on the other, a sorrow savoring of despair; neither of which emotions has any place in the Christian soul at prayer. The eight modes of the ancients, on the contrary, were devised to meet the re­quirements of prayer in an age when art was ex­clusively the servant of religion. They enabled the composer of the period to seize the subtle prayer-spirit, that elusive characteristic of Christianity, the rainbow tints of joy in suffering. Chant is joyful, but with the joy of the Cross, as distinguished from the joy of the revel. Chant is fervent, but with the passion of asceticism, as distinguished from the passion of the world. Prayer-sorrow is never despair, nor is prayer-joy ever frivolous. Chant is the artistic embodiment of this spirit; the minor idea and the major idea are so interwoven, their relation is so intimate, that to disentangle them is impossible. We are never left in sorrow, yet our joy is never without a cloud. Even in those bursts of ecstatic joy of the Easter Alleluias lurks the memory that we are still a part of earth, still in the valley of tears. Light and shadow play tantalizingly in and out, like the sun shining through a forest; glimpses of heaven caught through rifts in the clouds of the world.

We do not find in the ancient modes the same violent contrasts of mood as in the modern. They combine a solemnity, a grandeur, with the most tender and fervent devotion. Their minor tendency gives not so much the impression of sad­ness as of great solemnity and awe; their major tendency, not so much the impression of merriment as of a tender and ardent devotion. Thus we have the combination that makes true prayer: reverence in love,—the prayer that, like David’s, rises as incense before the altar.

There is something obvious about the two scales of modern music. Christianity is not ob­vious. It is a philosophy of seeming contra­dictions: joy through renunciation: happiness through suffering, triumph through failure, victory through death. These emotions are not common-place, to be neatly pigeon-holed under the head­ings, “gay” or “sad,” “major” or “minor.” No, let us use artistic discrimination in this matter: the modern scales, the modern measure, our entire musical system as it at present exists, was devised for secular uses, and is perfectly adapted thereto. But when we try to adapt this modern music to the exigencies of liturgical prayer, we simply spoil two good things: we ruin not only our prayer, but our modern music as well, for we rob this music of its own character and give nothing in its place.

Two new articles from the achives now online:

Ideology and Liturgy by Rev. Robert A. Skeris

Critical Reflections on the Bugnini Liturgy: The Divine Office, by Laszló Dobszay