A Page for Sacrosanctum Concilium

Sacrosanctum Concilium has joined the list of pages in the header and on the sidebar. I will be cleaning up the individual posts over the next few days, editing out some extraneous remarks and standardizing the format.

Feel free to restart any of our discussions from six-and-a-half years ago. (Has it really been that long?)

Eventually I’ll also add links to other SC discussions, particularly the one Michael Joncas is conducting on PrayTell these days.

The eventual goal will be to have all sixteen Vatican II documents tidily organized on pages with links to each post. Each link will be marked with the section number plus a very brief summary of the content. For each document I’ll preserve the outline as we find it on the Vatican web site. For the next two weeks or so, I’ll be cleaning up individual posts from LG and SC. Then we’ll have Dei Verbum and Gaudium et Spes up by the end of June with edited posts. By summer’s end, I hope to have it much better organized with some revisions.

If anyone has additional suggestions, feel free to comment below, or use the comboxes on the pages as they become available.

 

Sacrosanctum Concilium Appendix

This question is far less in vogue among world organizers these days, but it was a significant step in 1963:

The Second Ecumenical Sacred Council of the Vatican, recognizing the importance of the wishes expressed by many concerning the assignment of the feast of Easter to a fixed Sunday and concerning an unchanging calendar, having carefully considered the effects which could result from the introduction of a new calendar, declares as follows:

1. The Sacred Council would not object if the feast of Easter were assigned to a particular Sunday of the Gregorian Calendar, provided that those whom it may concern, especially the brethren who are not in communion with the Apostolic See, give their assent.
2. The sacred Council likewise declares that it does not oppose efforts designed to introduce a perpetual calendar into civil society.

But among the various systems which are being suggested to stabilize a perpetual calendar and to introduce it into civil life, the Church has no objection only in the case of those systems which retain and safeguard a seven-day week with Sunday, without the introduction of any days outside the week, so that the succession of weeks may be left intact, unless there is question of the most serious reasons. Concerning these the Apostolic See shall judge.

I’m not aware of any perpetual calendar plans that didn’t adopt days outside of the week as part of the plan. I’m not sure that the Sabbath notion of rest isn’t more important than a literal string of seven-day weeks. At any rate, I don’t think a perpetual calendar is coming soon. The world has far more contentious issues at hand.

Christian agreement on the date of Easter would seem to be more of a priority. I wonder how far away we are from that.

 

Sacrosanctum Concilium 130

It is fitting that the use of pontificals be reserved to those ecclesiastical persons who have episcopal rank or some particular jurisdiction.

Okay.

Liam may be able to provide some background of substance on this one. This small section also brings us to the end of Sacrosanctum Concilium, save an appendix which I’ll post later today.  Consider this an open thread for general commentary on the constitution. In the new year (or perhaps sooner) we’ll look to the East.

 

Sacrosanctum Concilium 129

It’s been a tough enough road to get music education into seminaries. How many have a single course in sacred art history?

During their philosophical and theological studies, clerics are to be taught about the history and development of sacred art, and about the sound principles governing the production of its works. In consequence they will be able to appreciate and preserve the Church’s venerable monuments, and be in a position to aid, by good advice, artists who are engaged in producing works of art.

 

Sacrosanctum Concilium 128

And we get to the issue of reform:

Along with the revision of the liturgical books, as laid down in Art. 25, there is to be an early revision of the canons and ecclesiastical statutes which govern the provision of material things involved in sacred worship. These laws refer especially to the worthy and well planned construction of sacred buildings, the shape and construction of altars, the nobility, placing, and safety of the eucharistic tabernacle, the dignity and suitability of the baptistery, the proper ordering of sacred images, embellishments, and vestments. Laws which seem less suited to the reformed liturgy are to be brought into harmony with it, or else abolished; and any which are helpful are to be retained if already in use, or introduced where they are lacking.

Interesting that the placement of the tabernacle is judged to be a question. Also note that not everything need come from Rome:

According to the norm of Art. 22 of this Constitution, the territorial bodies of bishops are empowered to adapt such things to the needs and customs of their different regions; this applies especially to the materials and form of sacred furnishings and vestments.

Comments?

 

Sacrosanctum Concilium 127

There is a certain parallel with music, namely a “special” relationship with artists, and the cultivation of the “spirit” of art and of liturgy.

Bishops should have a special concern for artists, so as to imbue them with the spirit of sacred art and of the sacred liturgy. This they may do in person or through suitable priests who are gifted with a knowledge and love of art.

And like musicians, schools for the training of artists are urged. These might possibly be rarer than music programs dedicated to liturgy.

It is also desirable that schools or academies of sacred art should be founded in those parts of the world where they would be useful, so that artists may be trained.

All artists who, prompted by their talents, desire to serve God’s glory in holy Church, should ever bear in mind that they are engaged in a kind of sacred imitation of God the Creator, and are concerned with works destined to be used in Catholic worship, to edify the faithful, and to foster their piety and their religious formation.

Artists themselves are given a commission by the council. Every word may well apply to musicians, I’d think. What about your thoughts?

 

Sacrosanctum Concilium 126

Bishops are to consult experts in art, so Vatican II says:

When passing judgment on works of art, local ordinaries shall give a hearing to the diocesan commission on sacred art and, if needed, also to others who are especially expert, and to the commissions referred to in Art. 44, 45, and 46.

Bishops are ultimately responsible for altars, pulpits, and other major aspects of churches in their diocese:

Ordinaries must be very careful to see that sacred furnishings and works of value are not disposed of or dispersed; for they are the ornaments of the house of God.

Any comments?

 

Sacrosanctum Concilium 125

This is a bit that has gotten some accused of iconoclasm:

The practice of placing sacred images in churches so that they may be venerated by the faithful is to be maintained. Nevertheless their number should be moderate and their relative positions should reflect right order. For otherwise they may create confusion among the Christian people and foster devotion of doubtful orthodoxy.

Moderation is preached, but what would that mean if taken in discernment? One rule of thumb is no multiple images of particular saints. In my parish’s church, we have five: Thomas More recently moved from a nave alcove to the narthex for more visibility, the Infant of Prague moved from the narthex to a rear wall in the nave, St Anthony of Padua for our Italian parishioners, and naturally Mary and Joseph.

Recently, I heard grumblings from someone of a traditional bent who disagreed with the Infant’s move. She liked the figure better as she entered the church. Can anyone fill me in if there’s something I’ve missed here? And don’t worry about hurting my feelings; it was our third-last associate pastor who moved the Infant from his post above the drinking fountains.

 

Sacrosanctum Concilium 124

Ordinaries, by the encouragement and favor they show to art which is truly sacred, should strive after noble beauty rather than mere sumptuous display. This principle is to apply also in the matter of sacred vestments and ornaments.

Nobility versus sumptuousness in art and vestments: does this judgment apply in parishes? By the way, what I see in the pope’s vestments seems to lie closer to nobility. That old pictures of Tridentine servers in pastel capes: that seems a bit over the top.

Let bishops carefully remove from the house of God and from other sacred places those works of artists which are repugnant to faith, morals, and Christian piety, and which offend true religious sense either by depraved forms or by lack of artistic worth, mediocrity and pretense.

This is another tough call. Mediocrity and pretense might not be what they seem. If you have plaster cast to look like a stone sculpture, that would seem to be pretending of a serious sort.

And when churches are to be built, let great care be taken that they be suitable for the celebration of liturgical services and for the active participation of the faithful.

Architects taking “great care” for participatio. That’s a thumbs up, wouldn’t you say?

 

Sacrosanctum Concilium 123

There is no equivalent of Gregorian chant in the realm of art:

The Church has not adopted any particular style of art as her very own; she has admitted styles from every period according to the natural talents and circumstances of peoples, and the needs of the various rites. Thus, in the course of the centuries, she has brought into being a treasury of art which must be very carefully preserved. The art of our own days, coming from every race and region, shall also be given free scope in the Church, provided that it adorns the sacred buildings and holy rites with due reverence and honor; thereby it is enabled to contribute its own voice to that wonderful chorus of praise in honor of the Catholic faith sung by great (persons) in times gone by.

Nevertheless the development of sacred art from the various cultures of Europe and the world are all determined to be “treasures.” Even modern art is “given free scope,” provided it satisfies a basic positive contribution to architecture and liturgy.

 

Sacrosanctum Concilium 122

As we head into the stretch run of Sacrosanctum Concilium, let’s start the seventh chapter “SACRED ART AND SACRED FURNISHINGS”

Very rightly the fine arts are considered to rank among the noblest activities of (human) genius, and this applies especially to religious art and to its highest achievement, which is sacred art. These arts, by their very nature, are oriented toward the infinite beauty of God which they attempt in some way to portray by the work of human hands; they achieve their purpose of redounding to God’s praise and glory in proportion as they are directed the more exclusively to the single aim of turning (human) minds devoutly toward God.

Note the differentiation between “religious” and “sacred” art.

Holy Mother Church has therefore always been the friend of the fine arts and has ever sought their noble help, with the special aim that all things set apart for use in divine worship should be truly worthy, becoming, and beautiful, signs and symbols of the supernatural world, and for this purpose she has trained artists. In fact, the Church has, with good reason, always reserved to herself the right to pass judgment upon the arts, deciding which of the works of artists are in accordance with faith, piety, and cherished traditional laws, and thereby fitted for sacred use.

Not any different from sacred music, really.

The Church has been particularly careful to see that sacred furnishings should worthily and beautifully serve the dignity of worship, and has admitted changes in materials, style, or ornamentation prompted by the progress of the technical arts with he passage of time.

These would be the altars, ambo, chair, font, tabernacles, etc.

Wherefore it has pleased the Fathers to issue the following decrees on these matters.

And we’ll get to these decrees in the next posts …

 

Sacrosanctum Concilium 121

Finishing up Vatican II’s ten-section look at sacred music, we turn to one of the most maligned groups, composers:

Composers, filled with the Christian spirit, should feel that their vocation is to cultivate sacred music and increase its store of treasures.

A two-fold purpose, rather than blank stares as to why anyone could think to build upon chant and polyphony.

Let them produce compositions which have the qualities proper to genuine sacred music, not confining themselves to works which can be sung only by large choirs, but providing also for the needs of small choirs and for the active participation of the entire assembly of the faithful.

Composers producing for the “active” participation of the “entire” faithful. I suppose some traditionalists would still see that as liturgical muzak to be enjoyed in an interior way. Even after about a dozen mentions in this document which would seem to point otherwise.

The texts intended to be sung must always be in conformity with Catholic doctrine; indeed they should be drawn chiefly from holy scripture and from liturgical sources.

Texts drawn from the Bible are no guarantee in today’s climate of criticism. The problem publishers and composers often have in a literal setting of Scripture is the loss of royalties to the USCCB. As one publisher put it to me once, change a few words here and there, so then you can call the text your own. The alteration of Scripture for liturgical music can be more of an economic decision than an ideological one.

Any last thoughts on music before we turn to the visual arts?

 

Sacrosanctum Concilium 120

In the Latin Church the pipe organ is to be held in high esteem, for it is the traditional musical instrument which adds a wonderful splendor to the Church’s ceremonies and powerfully lifts up (the human) mind to God and to higher things.

Note that SC praises the pipe organ. I’ve not always been so lucky to have one in the parish. In one assignment, the priest did have an organ find from the church-building campaign, but when he saw he could get away without one, he shuttled the money elsewhere.

But other instruments also may be admitted for use in divine worship, with the knowledge and consent of the competent territorial authority, as laid down in Art. 22, 52, 37, and 40. This may be done, however, only on condition that the instruments are suitable, or can be made suitable, for sacred use, accord with the dignity of the temple, and truly contribute to the edification of the faithful.

Other instruments, taken in an ensemble, can duplicate the properties of the organ. There are some significant advantages, communally and spiritually, in having an ensemble of instruments lead the singing. There are technical demands that must be met for a group to match the songleading skill of a good organist. But I’ve always found it to be worth the effort.

 

Sacrosanctum Concilium 119

Look out: another wiggle-room section:

In certain parts of the world, especially mission lands, there are peoples who have their own musical traditions, and these play a great part in their religious and social life. For this reason due importance is to be attached to their music, and a suitable place is to be given to it, not only in forming their attitude toward religion, but also in adapting worship to their native genius, as indicated in Art. 39 and 40.

This consideration applies not just to mission lands, but to places that enjoy religious musical traditions. Note the adaptation of worship is also not confined to mission lands, but where such adaptation will provide a spiritual benefit.

Therefore, when missionaries are being given training in music, every effort should be made to see that they become competent in promoting the traditional music of these peoples, both in schools and in sacred services, as far as may be practicable.

Musical training of missionaries?

Other comments?

 

Sacrosanctum Concilium 118

More vocal, external, active participation, it seems to me: 

Religious singing by the people is to be intelligently fostered so that in devotions and sacred exercises, as also during liturgical services, the voices of the faithful may ring out according to the norms and requirements of the rubrics.

I’m struck by the “intelligent” fostering of song. That implies planning, setting goals, working in stages, and actually catechizing people through music. This section also underscores the importance of the people participating as the rubrics indicate. In the Roman Missal, the rubrics are clear when the people sing, when they may sing, when the choir may sing alone. At no time in the Roman Rite is there a prescription in the liturgical text for the people to never sing or always listen. A music director unable to come to terms with this might find a happier home in the conservatory.

This isn’t to say the choir can never offer music exclusive of participation from the pew. But Vatican II’s direction from SC 28 was that people stick to their own role in the liturgy. There is time for musical performance and attendant listening at Mass–just when the rubrics say so.