Back to the Future: Working towards the education and empowerment of emerging liturgical music ministers in light of Instrumentum Laboris
While I always live in hope, the more I walk the journey of being a musical minister, the more I feel as though I am stuck between a rock and a hard place.
On the one hand, if I listen and take to heart the writings of many people on the internet via Blogs, Discussion Boards, eGroups etc – I could be mistaken in sometimes feeling as though my post-Vatican II lived experience with all its Liturgical Musical influences i.e.: St Louis Jesuits, Marty Haugen, David Haas etc [which have been instrumental to my faith development and growth] is somehow ‘not correct’, and such music should be avoided at all cost [so they say].
I am constantly surprised and concerned at the anger and loathing that some people have towards this kind of music and those who compose, play and pray it for use in Liturgy. I often feel when reading such scathing positions with such a staunch longing for a return to ‘the old ways’ that I am somehow ‘less than’ those who demand a return to Gregorian chant and polyphony.
On the other hand, I often feel like the [not so old] stooge to the younger liturgical musicians I encounter at a parish and school level. To some of these teenagers and young adults – I am sure that I come across as an unbending, opinionated old-school-fool who ‘has no idea’. My position on not using ‘relevant’ secular Top 40 or ‘meaningful rock’ music in Liturgy, my steering right away from Hillsong music is seen as out of touch and just plain lunacy. How do I know this? Because, even after all my workshops or seminars about the importance of interlocking music that fits the structure of the Liturgy has been blurted out for all to hear…it [Hillsong, Top 40] still gets played and old habits, long held - refuse to die.
Why not replace that rendition of U2’s ‘All I Want Is You’ as a Communion Hymn [!] with a spirited playing of David Haas’ ‘Glory Day’?
The young people’s response will probably fall along the lines of; ‘none of that Liturgical Music please…that’s so boring and lame. Can’t we do something good?’
Those others who long for a return to more traditional forms of Liturgical Music would probably also scoff at such a suggestion but would say something such as…this ‘dreck fills me with monotonous languor and the ennui of despair’.
While I feel no need to align myself to either camp of thinking, this is the tension that exists.
So what of the emerging ‘next generation’ of Liturgical Music Ministers? What can be done to form them in their ministry?
Reflecting on my personal experience may shed some light on possible answers.
I remember in the early 1990’s, our then Parish Priest being totally supportive of the young people taking an active role in parish music ministry and fiercely protective of us against any ill spoken words by unhappy parishioners (we had a few detractors). I remember vividly him saying: ‘If anyone has a bad thing to say about our young musos – they can come and talk to me’.
While he was Parish Priest – no one said a word. Clerical power has its good points I guess.
And while a great sense of community formed amongst those other musicians (with many of those friendships still alive and well today)…and while this period instilled in all of us a keen sense of commitment, week in week out – our Liturgical formation and the knowledge of what music to apply to Liturgy, in hindsight, was poor and wanting attention.
That didn’t stop us trying.
We chose some pretty liturgically inappropriate selections and the kind of songs that I now ironically suggest to my students and those who I workshop to avoid are precisely the kind of songs I often played. I remember on many occasions singing ‘Annie’s Song’ by John Denver (!?). On another occasion, I remember playing Midnight Oil’s ‘Put Down That Weapon’ to commemorate Hiroshima Day.
I do remember us needing to expand our repertoire as we felt we were playing the same songs over and over…but not knowing where to look or who to ask. The Parish Priest was a great admirer of our work and input to parish life, but wasn’t a Liturgist – or a musician, so in this regard, little help was found here.
There was the then-Parish Liturgy Committee, but they were a very demanding and non-compromising group which was a real turn off for the young people at the time. The life lines that were thrown to us were sheet music with forceful written demands that such a piece be played on such a particular Sunday. Once, we were even handed a piece of music literally five minutes before Mass was to begin – of which we had never even heard of before – and told that it had to be played as the song of Gathering! The Liturgy Committee members were not musicians – which on a practical level, didn’t help us at all. All they offered were commands and expectations. This was really off putting to the musicians and a tension developed that sadly became quite destructive.
This whole experience lead me to eventually fine tune my musical skills while at the same time learning about the Liturgy and how to best serve it with music. Ten years on, I feel I am now at a point that enables me to offer both an understanding and insight of Liturgy to others while at the same time being able to practically demonstrate with confidence the music that is being suggested. It’s taken me ten long years of honing a craft of playing and gaining a knowledge base – that continues to grow and develop.
Surely, this is the way to proceed when forming emerging music ministers?! To hold the knowledge, theory and tradition of Liturgy up on the one hand and on the other, actually play and sing its practical possibilities for people to take a look at and see for themselves how things could be when celebrating. (??)
The issuing of a recent preparatory document for the Bishop’s Synod, scheduled to be held for 2-23 October 2005 in Rome, has dampened this happy insight and joyful optimism. The document in question, Instrumentum Laboris, published on July 7 2005, is rather critical of certain types of music played at Eucharist. The document specifically mentions Youth Masses as a place where questionable selections have been reported. Section 62 reads ‘A few responses made particular mention of music and singing at Youth Masses. In this regard, it is important to avoid musical forms which, because of their profane use, are not conducive to prayer.’
This section of the document I find to be very unhelpful. By my own admission in this article, I have myself in the past contributed to selecting liturgically inappropriate music at Eucharist and am keenly aware that such poorly chosen selections of music for Liturgy continue today by various young people (and others).
While I can understand the gist of this statement, there are too many gaps in what is being implied that I find to be unsatisfactory and pastorally irresponsible.
The language is ambiguous and is not specific in solutions to issues it sees as a threat to the integrity of Liturgy. What is the issue here? The music? What does that actually mean? Does this mean secular music is being used? Does this mean post Vatican II music is being used and that is deemed as inappropriate? And what of singing? Does this mean the singing is not tasteful or tuneful? Does it mean perhaps the singing isn’t done enough in Latin?
And why does the document relegate abuses in Liturgical Music only to ‘Youth Masses’? While I am ideologically opposed to the idea of a ‘Youth’ Mass [Eucharist/ Mass is for everyone and should not be ghettoed to various interest or demographic groups!] – I see it as an injustice to highlight that Youth Masses are the cesspit of all that is bad and wayward in Liturgical Music. Equally poor and inappropriate music selections also happen elsewhere by ‘Demographically Challenged Masses’ too. Why are these not mentioned? Who exactly has made mention of and ‘reported’ the Youth Masses in the first place?
These questions must be asked. And even though the answers may not initially come [they may not come at all!], it is not at all helpful to just say such things without being more specific and offering solutions.
The Synod of Bishops will hopefully move towards such practicalities, but these practical steps are most certainly required so that written words, as expressed in Instrumentum Laboris that may be seen to condemn, are simultaneously held up with actions that address the issue.
These kind of blunt statements and demands like we read in Instrumentum Laboris remind me of the manner our old Liturgy Committee used to like to employ when communicating to the younger musicians. It never worked. It still doesn’t. This heavy handed and patronizing approach is actually counter productive in addressing the need of playing and singing great Liturgical music. A grounded, but gentle approach is called for with practical modeling to best address the issue of mediocrity of Liturgical Music across the whole spectrum of the Church. Mere words in the form of an ecclesiastical telling off are just not enough – or appropriate. Instrumentum Laboris’ section on Liturgical Song only seems to scapegoat and inflame an already tender issue in a sensational manner that various media outlets are able to latch on to [and have] quite easily to further perpetuate the often negative spin on Youth, whether the publishers are sympathetic to young people or not.
It would seem the Synod of Bishops have a lot of work to do in October.
Our emerging Liturgical Music Ministers need to be inspired. They need to have role models who not only inform them with words, but also form them with action and practical empowerment. They should be encouraged to look at scripture and watch Jesus closely as their greatest role model. They should be exposed to avenues of Liturgy like Evening and Morning Prayer so that when they come to Eucharist they are enriched in prayer – and sung prayer at that! Let music that reflects the person of Jesus who we meet through scripture be our song and cause for our hope.
‘Awake from your slumber; arise from your sleep,
A new day is dawning, for all those who weep.
A people in darkness have seen a great light,
The Lord of our longing has conquered the night’.
Extract from ‘City of God’,
- St Louis Jesuits
On the one hand, if I listen and take to heart the writings of many people on the internet via Blogs, Discussion Boards, eGroups etc – I could be mistaken in sometimes feeling as though my post-Vatican II lived experience with all its Liturgical Musical influences i.e.: St Louis Jesuits, Marty Haugen, David Haas etc [which have been instrumental to my faith development and growth] is somehow ‘not correct’, and such music should be avoided at all cost [so they say].
I am constantly surprised and concerned at the anger and loathing that some people have towards this kind of music and those who compose, play and pray it for use in Liturgy. I often feel when reading such scathing positions with such a staunch longing for a return to ‘the old ways’ that I am somehow ‘less than’ those who demand a return to Gregorian chant and polyphony.
On the other hand, I often feel like the [not so old] stooge to the younger liturgical musicians I encounter at a parish and school level. To some of these teenagers and young adults – I am sure that I come across as an unbending, opinionated old-school-fool who ‘has no idea’. My position on not using ‘relevant’ secular Top 40 or ‘meaningful rock’ music in Liturgy, my steering right away from Hillsong music is seen as out of touch and just plain lunacy. How do I know this? Because, even after all my workshops or seminars about the importance of interlocking music that fits the structure of the Liturgy has been blurted out for all to hear…it [Hillsong, Top 40] still gets played and old habits, long held - refuse to die.
Why not replace that rendition of U2’s ‘All I Want Is You’ as a Communion Hymn [!] with a spirited playing of David Haas’ ‘Glory Day’?
The young people’s response will probably fall along the lines of; ‘none of that Liturgical Music please…that’s so boring and lame. Can’t we do something good?’
Those others who long for a return to more traditional forms of Liturgical Music would probably also scoff at such a suggestion but would say something such as…this ‘dreck fills me with monotonous languor and the ennui of despair’.
While I feel no need to align myself to either camp of thinking, this is the tension that exists.
So what of the emerging ‘next generation’ of Liturgical Music Ministers? What can be done to form them in their ministry?
Reflecting on my personal experience may shed some light on possible answers.
I remember in the early 1990’s, our then Parish Priest being totally supportive of the young people taking an active role in parish music ministry and fiercely protective of us against any ill spoken words by unhappy parishioners (we had a few detractors). I remember vividly him saying: ‘If anyone has a bad thing to say about our young musos – they can come and talk to me’.
While he was Parish Priest – no one said a word. Clerical power has its good points I guess.
And while a great sense of community formed amongst those other musicians (with many of those friendships still alive and well today)…and while this period instilled in all of us a keen sense of commitment, week in week out – our Liturgical formation and the knowledge of what music to apply to Liturgy, in hindsight, was poor and wanting attention.
That didn’t stop us trying.
We chose some pretty liturgically inappropriate selections and the kind of songs that I now ironically suggest to my students and those who I workshop to avoid are precisely the kind of songs I often played. I remember on many occasions singing ‘Annie’s Song’ by John Denver (!?). On another occasion, I remember playing Midnight Oil’s ‘Put Down That Weapon’ to commemorate Hiroshima Day.
I do remember us needing to expand our repertoire as we felt we were playing the same songs over and over…but not knowing where to look or who to ask. The Parish Priest was a great admirer of our work and input to parish life, but wasn’t a Liturgist – or a musician, so in this regard, little help was found here.
There was the then-Parish Liturgy Committee, but they were a very demanding and non-compromising group which was a real turn off for the young people at the time. The life lines that were thrown to us were sheet music with forceful written demands that such a piece be played on such a particular Sunday. Once, we were even handed a piece of music literally five minutes before Mass was to begin – of which we had never even heard of before – and told that it had to be played as the song of Gathering! The Liturgy Committee members were not musicians – which on a practical level, didn’t help us at all. All they offered were commands and expectations. This was really off putting to the musicians and a tension developed that sadly became quite destructive.
This whole experience lead me to eventually fine tune my musical skills while at the same time learning about the Liturgy and how to best serve it with music. Ten years on, I feel I am now at a point that enables me to offer both an understanding and insight of Liturgy to others while at the same time being able to practically demonstrate with confidence the music that is being suggested. It’s taken me ten long years of honing a craft of playing and gaining a knowledge base – that continues to grow and develop.
Surely, this is the way to proceed when forming emerging music ministers?! To hold the knowledge, theory and tradition of Liturgy up on the one hand and on the other, actually play and sing its practical possibilities for people to take a look at and see for themselves how things could be when celebrating. (??)
The issuing of a recent preparatory document for the Bishop’s Synod, scheduled to be held for 2-23 October 2005 in Rome, has dampened this happy insight and joyful optimism. The document in question, Instrumentum Laboris, published on July 7 2005, is rather critical of certain types of music played at Eucharist. The document specifically mentions Youth Masses as a place where questionable selections have been reported. Section 62 reads ‘A few responses made particular mention of music and singing at Youth Masses. In this regard, it is important to avoid musical forms which, because of their profane use, are not conducive to prayer.’
This section of the document I find to be very unhelpful. By my own admission in this article, I have myself in the past contributed to selecting liturgically inappropriate music at Eucharist and am keenly aware that such poorly chosen selections of music for Liturgy continue today by various young people (and others).
While I can understand the gist of this statement, there are too many gaps in what is being implied that I find to be unsatisfactory and pastorally irresponsible.
The language is ambiguous and is not specific in solutions to issues it sees as a threat to the integrity of Liturgy. What is the issue here? The music? What does that actually mean? Does this mean secular music is being used? Does this mean post Vatican II music is being used and that is deemed as inappropriate? And what of singing? Does this mean the singing is not tasteful or tuneful? Does it mean perhaps the singing isn’t done enough in Latin?
And why does the document relegate abuses in Liturgical Music only to ‘Youth Masses’? While I am ideologically opposed to the idea of a ‘Youth’ Mass [Eucharist/ Mass is for everyone and should not be ghettoed to various interest or demographic groups!] – I see it as an injustice to highlight that Youth Masses are the cesspit of all that is bad and wayward in Liturgical Music. Equally poor and inappropriate music selections also happen elsewhere by ‘Demographically Challenged Masses’ too. Why are these not mentioned? Who exactly has made mention of and ‘reported’ the Youth Masses in the first place?
These questions must be asked. And even though the answers may not initially come [they may not come at all!], it is not at all helpful to just say such things without being more specific and offering solutions.
The Synod of Bishops will hopefully move towards such practicalities, but these practical steps are most certainly required so that written words, as expressed in Instrumentum Laboris that may be seen to condemn, are simultaneously held up with actions that address the issue.
These kind of blunt statements and demands like we read in Instrumentum Laboris remind me of the manner our old Liturgy Committee used to like to employ when communicating to the younger musicians. It never worked. It still doesn’t. This heavy handed and patronizing approach is actually counter productive in addressing the need of playing and singing great Liturgical music. A grounded, but gentle approach is called for with practical modeling to best address the issue of mediocrity of Liturgical Music across the whole spectrum of the Church. Mere words in the form of an ecclesiastical telling off are just not enough – or appropriate. Instrumentum Laboris’ section on Liturgical Song only seems to scapegoat and inflame an already tender issue in a sensational manner that various media outlets are able to latch on to [and have] quite easily to further perpetuate the often negative spin on Youth, whether the publishers are sympathetic to young people or not.
It would seem the Synod of Bishops have a lot of work to do in October.
Our emerging Liturgical Music Ministers need to be inspired. They need to have role models who not only inform them with words, but also form them with action and practical empowerment. They should be encouraged to look at scripture and watch Jesus closely as their greatest role model. They should be exposed to avenues of Liturgy like Evening and Morning Prayer so that when they come to Eucharist they are enriched in prayer – and sung prayer at that! Let music that reflects the person of Jesus who we meet through scripture be our song and cause for our hope.
‘Awake from your slumber; arise from your sleep,
A new day is dawning, for all those who weep.
A people in darkness have seen a great light,
The Lord of our longing has conquered the night’.
Extract from ‘City of God’,
- St Louis Jesuits
posted by malleebull at 10:34 am
1 Comments:
wiener..
Post a Comment
<< Home