“Amazing Grace” – Can You Sing It?

I agree with everything you say here, especially the part which indicates, “We may not like them all equally, but we must be willing to participate fully (offering it up, as needed) regardless of our personal preferences.”

However, it is quite worth observing that the discontent expressed by Wonderer seems to fall into the realm almost of passive frustration. Let me explain. In his Chirograph of the Supreme Pontiff John Paul II for the Centenary of the Motu Proprio “Tra Le Sollecitudini’ on Sacred Music, John Paul makes several observations, many with reference to Sacrosanctum Concilium ( http://tinyurl.com/apxk9 ):

o “[I]t is necessary to refer to those principles of conciliar inspiration to encourage a development in conformity with the requirements of liturgical reform and which will measure up to the liturgical and musical tradition of the Church” (No. 2).

o “[M]usic destined for sacred rites must have holiness as its reference point” (No. 4).

o “Today, moreover, the meaning of the category “sacred music” has been broadened to include repertoires that cannot be part of the celebration without violating the spirit and norms of the Liturgy itself” (No. 4).

o “Indeed, liturgical music must meet the specific prerequisites of the Liturgy: full adherence to the text it presents, synchronization with the time and moment in the Liturgy for which it is intended, appropriately reflecting the gestures proposed by the rite” (No. 5).

o Quoting “Tra Le Sollecitudini,” John Paul asserts the view of St. Pius X: “…while every nation”, he noted, “is permitted to admit into its ecclesiastical compositions those special forms which may be said to constitute its native music, still these forms must be subordinate in such a manner to the general character of sacred music, that nobody of any nation may receive an impression other than good on hearing them” (No. 6).

o The biggest point, perhaps, is this, taken from No. 10 (and reiterated in No. 12): “Since the Church has always recognized and fostered progress in the arts, it should not come as a surprise that in addition to Gregorian chant and polyphony she admits into celebrations even the most modern music, as long as it respects both the liturgical spirit and the true values of this art form.”

The real problem isn’t the admission to the liturgy of genuinely songs like “Amazing Grace.” It’s not even the problem of the collective trash heap that sometimes passes for liturgical music in a modern American Mass. All those songs – even the trash heap – could actually be admitted without creating much difficulty if it weren’t for the true problem.

And the true problem is this: increasingly the Church does not, for all practical purposes, admit Gregorian chant or traditional polyphony into her liturgical celebration. The point of departure from which the admission of songs like Amazing Grace is supposed to grow, has been all but abandoned. There is no longer a rock sitting underneath song choice for the liturgy which, when it was present, acted as a sound basis from which decisions about appropriateness for the liturgy could be made.

Put another way, it would be safe to say, I think, that the admission of Amazing Grace and songs like it would be quite acceptable even when judged against Gregorian chant and polyphony. Against such a back drop, the trash heap would never for survive very long. But Gregorian chant and polyphony are, in fact, excluded from the liturgy as a practical matter, with only a few exceptions here and there. Thus, we no longer have ready access to an objective basis of comparison when judging music from other traditions.

And the most often-cited reason for the exclusion of Gregorian chant and polyphony, in my experience, amounts personal preference. People don’t like it. But people don’t know it, and I have never in my life come face-to-face with even a “Reform of the Reform” group that actively promotes it. I know such groups exist; I read their web sites extensively. But their actual penetration into parish life is very small.

That is what is sad.

Hello Heidi, to start with I’ll apologize if you find it disrespectful to equate “Protestant” to “shallowness” but then I would ask if that is not why you are in the Catholic Church in the first place, precisely because of its deeper completeness. It may sound disrespectful to the protestant but that doesn’t make it any less true.

There is an essence that I am trying to reach here and it doesn’t really have anything to do with whether “Amazing Grace” is protestant in origin or not. It has more to do with whether the words and the tune of music are appropriate in a particular event. For instance, it wouldn’t be appropriate to, in the middle of Good Friday celebrations when the passion is at the centre of the liturgy to start singing ‘Alleluia’ or have songs that are of some dancing nature or joyous rhythm. Both the words and tune would be hopelessly out of place, i am sure you would agree. While these things have their places they may not be appropriate. To now say ‘what is wrong with a song of praise like “alleluia”?’ because we are talking about the Mass or something liturgical would certainly be out of place in certain contexts as shown.

This phenomenon does not affect only songs from protestantism, they affect songs from Catholic culture and these days innovations that come from confusions brought about by the influence of christian traditions outside the Catholic faith through the media or popular understanding. I live in Africa and I can tell you that the issue local genre of music is not so much the problem as it is its use as explained above. There are wonderful local ‘liturgical’ music here which are culturally very rich and good but when used inappropriately become detraction.

This has a lot to do with understanding the phrase “so long as they harmonize with its true and authentic spirit.” There are songs that are always inappropriate in the Mass, though they may be of some spiritual nature. I personally enjoy “Amazing Grace” in folk terms but in terms of the liturgy wouldn’t fit nicely somewhere. Certainly the church will not impose on the faithful to sing this or that song in this or that Mass but the songs and music we use could be likened to the liturgy in itself where innovation is hardly ever relevant during Mass. For instance, there is a common practice here where during the eucharist celebration the faithful are asked to recount the mystery of faith… Christ has died, Christ is risen, Christ will come again! or variants. What do some priests do? They start singing ‘he’s alive, amen, he’s alive, amen, Jesus is alive forever, he’s alive, amen. Now, is that the mystery of faith? Even though song and music are left open doesn’t mean that anything we sing goes. We should always remember that the praise and glory of God is not in the songs themselves, or in our enjoyment of them, not even in the elation that we may feel but rather in the degree of conversion that we attain. That is the very purpose of the Mass, the very purpose of the songs and music we use at Mass and so must as much as possible be aligned to the direction of the Mass. The liturgy in full. All these are means and not ends in themselves.

I would encourage you to go through your Sunday missal, read through the introduction to the Mass of the day to get its focus, go through the prayers, antiphons and readings carrying the focus in mind, of course, and then go to Mass, maybe one after the Easter Sunday, listen to the music and song used during the Mass and you will find the tension between where the Mass is going and where the music is taking one to. What you will find, I assure you, will most likely be heart-breaking.

I hope I am not doing injustice to the ‘essence’ I am fishing at here. Wishing you a solemn and deep Easter celebration.