… otherwise known as the two chief aspects of the reform2 approach to liturgy. Today, Darwin asks about the call to “Abandon Ship!” I’ve already commented twice on his blog today, but Liam’s response to Neil crystallized my thinking on how and why the NLM has never been much more than a liturgical backwater, despite the fine layout and polite things people say (mostly) to the contributors in the comboxes.
The real work involved in liturgical reform (in real life there is no “of the reform”) is exemplified by this post. Why? Because it does something constructive. It builds on tradition. It builds on what is possible in a parish. And unlike the commentariat at NLM and other places, it does not presume to build liturgy by abstraction or subtraction.
The internet, and especially the blogging format, magnifies these two qualities to a fault. If not a sin. People can talk (for example) about the fine points of various chant methods without ever having to teach or form a schola in the real world. And those less academically trained can give an Idol-style thumbs down to songs, concepts, and people who don’t fit their personal taste.
The real challenges to Catholic musical reform include:
- Bishops who masquerade as traditional-leaning, but who prefer to build schools rather than churches.
- Pastors who bend to every whim of their own or their congregation as an excuse to marginalize the arts.
- Musicians content with their own level of training. Though I should also mention that amateur parish singers and musicians generally have a great hunger for improvement. Guitarists, in particular, I’ve found to have a openness for learning. How many times do you hear of organists getting together to play tunes, share techniques, and talk musical shop? It happens, but not as often as other musical groups.
- Parish leaders (including pastors) who think the solution is to maximize income at the expense of just preaching the gospel and celebrating liturgy and letting good music and preaching attract the masses.
NLM posts nothing on these issues. In fact, when a sympathetic reader challenges them, look where the thread runs, a concession that abandon ship! is indeed the operative motto:
(T)he new Mass likely cannot be reformed. … I see little in the average Catholic parish that offers much of a window into substantial liturgical reform. I think it’s easy for us to develop unrealistic expectations when we spend most of our liturgical chatting time with those who agree with us.
Michael Lawrence sees the truth of blogging among dittoheads, but he may be out of his depth if he also realizes the forces gathered against good liturgy and music are largely political and cultural–things they don’t deign to discuss in the conservatory. I think if he paddled his yellow inflatable back to the ship, he might find something constructive to do, but likely not among the denizens of the ditto deck.
1 October 2007 at 9:03 pm
Todd,
First of all, there are no musician contributors to the NLM who have not formed their own schola. Jeffrey has formed his, and I have formed mine. My name tag in this comment links to our website.
Secondly, were you ever in a conservatory? How would you know what is discussed and what is not discussed? I can assure that in the musical conservatory I attended, political and cultural issues were in the forefront of everyone else’s mind.
Next time, check your facts before you attack me.
1 October 2007 at 9:25 pm
Thanks for posting, Michael. I do know that you have a schola, though it doesn’t seem connected with a parish. I wish you the very best with it. Yet we all know the landscape can be far different in a parish with weekly or daily liturgical needs. It’s one thing to form a musical group to do music as one is free to do, and another thing to have a responsibility in ministry.
No, I never attended a conservatory, but my undergraduate alma mater included the Eastman School, so I’ve known many students and faculty there and in other locations.
My criticism is with musicians who lack any depth in ministry considerations and attempt to apply their art or knowledge in a vacuum apart from the realities of parish life. That’s not to say that some music students don’t discuss the politics and culture of their parishes and churches. I’ve no doubt that happens. But many of the posts and most of the comments on NLM betray a naivete about either parish life or ministry or both.
No attack was intended, but like Darwin, I think there’s much to criticize at NLM. By and large, I think your approach is misguided and far too narrow to have a hope of success. As for your work in the trenches, that’s where the real excitement is.
1 October 2007 at 9:38 pm
I’ve been trying to think of why this had me worked up, and I think your post made me realize why.
I’ll admit, I like old stuff just for the sake of age. While getting the parish set to do the current Liturgy of the Hours, in my own time I’ve been studying a 1908 Breviary that I found scanned online — from before St. Pius X revised the order of psalms. I like that sort of thing when I’m only dealing with me and my private devotion.
So in that sense, I can even enjoy reading NLM when it’s only talking about things my parish will never do in the vaguely forseeable future. But, at that point it’s pretty much a historical rather than a practical interest. When you’re talking about the mass, you’re talking about communal liturgy — and in the community to which I’m currently pretty committed, the extraordinary form probably wouldn’t be helpful right now even if it was welcome.
Now, the stuff they talk about in regards to the ordinary form is well out of our current reach as well, but it at least has that element of being in the same ballpark, where we can look for a thing here or a thing there that we can apply. But when it comes to reading about the extraordinary form, it may be interesting, but it’s not very applicable.
I get the sense that for a small number of folks, they were in a situation where they were as traditional as they could get without violating the GIRM for the current missal. Maybe for them the EF is the next logical step.
Where I am, though, getting people to participate fully in a liturgy in their own language still takes some work — and having the music groups pick hymns that are appropriate to the time in mass (like maybe something to do with the Eucharist for the communion hymn) takes a bit of prodding.
2 October 2007 at 9:56 am
Todd,
I’m quite familiar with the difficulties of parish life. I’ve worked in parishes and I know how it goes. That’s exactly why I made this schola independent of any parish. It gets rid of a lot of political considerations that would slow us down, and now we can more easily be an example of excellence in sacred music to others. That’s our goal: to show people this treasure.
Still, I don’t think that being independent of a parish will rid us of every difficulty. I fully anticipate situations in which a pastor will bring us in, but the music director might not appreciate us, or vice-versa. Then there will be the people who think that chant and polyphony is not allowed, etc, and I wouldn’t be surprised to be confronted by some of them. On it goes.
What I’m trying to say is that I’ve likely exchanged one set of difficulties for another. Such is life here on earth, post-Eden.
2 October 2007 at 9:57 am
If we follow two premises as being true, that is that the reform was valid and the reform of the reform is valid, then we can move forward.
Todd is well aware of my loathing of some of the more egregious liturgical abuses that are documented at parishes around the country. However, the self-ghettoization I’ve seen in the comment boxes at NLM is not helping make the ordinary form of the liturgy any better, reverent or prayerful.
My dream is to see the liturgical abuses end in the OF, and see organic stepwise reform of the EF until they approach closer and closer and merge into one Latin Rite form.
What I find really disturbing is that between reading NLM and Catholic Sensibility, I find myself leaning more toward Todd’s point of view. Sorry Todd. :)
But for those with passion to continue to hide in the EF without using their gifts, knowledge and strength to help reform the OF, does the Catholic Church in the United States a grave disservice.