Whenever we look at the history of the Mass, we realize that it is complex and evolved over 2,000 years. I don’t intend on writing a treatise that encompasses all of the facts and nuances of how the liturgy has changed over time. But I will try to help us understand some of the changes in the liturgy brought about by the Second Vatican Council. Last time I spoke about adding music and singing to the Mass after the Council. A United States Bishops’ document from 1972, Music in Catholic Worship, gave liturgy preparers more insight for composing and choosing music.
The document speaks about the place of music in the liturgy. It is densely written but give it a try: “As sacred song united to the words [music] forms an integral part of solemn liturgy. Yet the function of music is ministerial; it must serve and never dominate. Music should assist the assembled believers to express and share the gift of faith that is within them and to nourish and strengthen their interior commitment of faith. It should heighten the texts so that they speak more fully and more effectively. The quality of joy and enthusiasm which music adds to community worship cannot be gained in any other way. It imparts a sense of unity to the congregation and sets the appropriate tone for a particular celebration. Music, in addition to expressing texts, can also unveil a dimension of meaning and feeling, a communication of ideas and intuitions which words alone cannot yield.” (MCW #23-24)
Okay, now read it again, slowly, one phrase at a time and consider the words in bold from above: integral; ministerial; serve; assist; gift of faith from within; nourish; strengthen; heighten texts; joy; enthusiasm; unity; tone (meaning atmosphere); meaning and feeling; ideas and intuitions.
MCW tells us that there are three judgments that should guide us when choosing music. In other words, a song may not be appropriate just because I like it, or even I agree with it. There may be differences of opinion, but we must struggle to find a balance between feelings and sound judgments.
The musical judgment asks if the music is “technically, aesthetically, and expressively good?” We need to bow to knowledgeable musicians here, knowing that they may not always agree. What are the best practices by most people in the music field? This sentence is telling: “To admit the cheap, the trite, the musical cliché often found in popular songs on the grounds of instant liturgy is to cheapen the liturgy, to expose it to ridicule, and to invite failure.” (MCW #26) There can be many styles of music in the liturgy, but our choices should strive for the best musicality (best quality) we can find.
The second judgment is liturgical. Does the music fit the nature of the part of the Mass for which it is being used? Does the text fit the function of that part of Mass? A song that sends us out in to the world is not a good gathering song; it is a good concluding song. You can’t substitute a thanksgiving hymn for the Lord’s Prayer. People who prepare the liturgy start with the Scripture of the day and the time in the Liturgical Year when choosing texts and music. Of course, the text also has to be theologically correct.
The last judgment is pastoral. “Does music in the celebration enable these people to express their faith, in this place, in this age, in this culture?” (MCW #39) What will help this specific community in this time and place to pray and grow closer to God? Different parishes can choose different music on any given Sunday because of this judgment.
Next up: changes in the way churches looked inside.