When the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline
of the Sacraments released the revised Ordinary of the Mass to the
English-speaking bishops conferences, it admonished composers to respect the
sacredness of these words when setting them to music. Composers like Scotsman James MacMillan took this wise
counsel to heart when he set the text to music. ICEL certainly upped the ante by including a chant setting for
the revised Ordinary in the Third Typical Edition of the Roman Missal.
Lamentably, however, the CDWDS’s words were lost on the two largest liturgical publishing houses, GIA and Oregon Catholic Press (OCP). In the case of OCP, the publishing house’s much hyped “Misa Santa Cecilia”, which the company promotes as a vibrant bilingual setting with the correct words and approved by the USCCB, the setting, in my opinion, fails to live up to the directive from the CDWDS.
The setting seems to be faithful to the text. This is certainly good, given OCP’s previous track record of taking liberties with both the English and Spanish texts of the Ordinary of the Mass. However, when it comes to the musicality, something seems to be amiss.
Here is what Sacramentum Caritatis urges musicians to do
when composing music for liturgical use:
Certainly as far as the liturgy is concerned, we
cannot say that one song is as good as another. Generic improvisation or the
introduction of musical genres which fail to respect the meaning of
the liturgy should be avoided. As an element of the liturgy, song
should be well integrated into the overall celebration (128). Consequently
everything -- texts, music, execution -- ought to correspond to the meaning of
the mystery being celebrated, the structure of the rite and the liturgical
seasons (129).
OCP implies that this bilingual setting celebrates
Hispanic culture, calling the piece vibrant. In fact, when reading through the description, I failed to
find any usage of the word sacred.
OCP spent more time focusing on the culture that it failed to take into
account the sacred nature of the text, completely ignoring Sacramentum
Caritatis 42.
When I listened to the setting, all I could think
about was Latin night on Dancing with the Stars. At any moment, I was expecting Mark Ballas and Cheryl Burke
to come out and do a Bolero dance during the Penitential setting and the Agnus
Dei, or a Salsa number to the Gloria and the Sanctus. The settings for the
Memorial Acclamation could either be a Paso Doble or a Rumba.
Now, in fairness, I have also heard the setting in
three different real-world experiences during Mass. OCP tends to over-stylize its presentations using
instruments that one would not normally encounter during Mass (drums, electric
guitars, bass guitars and the like).
In my actual experience with the piece, I heard it on three separate
occasions wherein the piano and the guitar were used and then with the
organ. I tried to be objective;
however, even if the organist from St. Peter’s Basilica were playing the
pieces, it would not change a thing: the composition is just bad.
Even the way the setting treats the wording is
somewhat suspect. When Pope St.
Pius X wrote his Motu Propio on Sacred Music, Tra le Sollecitudini, he noted
that:
(S)ince modern music has risen mainly
to serve profane uses, greater care must be taken with regard to it, in order
that the musical compositions of modern style which are admitted in the Church
may contain nothing profane, be free from reminiscences of motifs adopted in
the theaters, and be not fashioned even in their external forms after the manner
of profane pieces.
6. Among the different kinds of modern
music, that which appears less suitable for accompanying the functions of
public worship is the theatrical style, which was in the greatest vogue,
especially in Italy, during the last century. This of its very nature is
diametrically opposed to Gregorian Chant and classic polyphony, and therefore
to the most important law of all good sacred music. Besides the intrinsic
structure, the rhythm and what is known as the conventionalism of this style adapt
themselves but badly to the requirements of true liturgical music.
Inasmuch as some may
argue that Pope St. Pius X wrote this admonition back in 1903, the problems
that plagued the music used in the Church’s liturgy 110 years ago persist
today. Even Blessed John Paul II
recognized this issue in 2003, when he wrote his Chirograph on Sacred Music:
12. With regard to compositions of liturgical music, I make my own the
"general rule" that St Pius X formulated in these words:
"The more closely a composition for church approaches in its movement,
inspiration and savour the Gregorian melodic form, the more sacred and
liturgical it becomes; and the more out of harmony it is with that supreme
model, the less worthy it is of the temple"[33]. It is not, of course, a
question of imitating Gregorian chant but rather of ensuring that new
compositions are imbued with the same spirit that inspired and little by little
came to shape it. Only an artist who is profoundly steeped in the sensus
Ecclesiae can attempt to perceive and express in melody the truth of the
Mystery that is celebrated in the Liturgy[34].
OCP devotes so much time to promoting
cultural diversity that it forgets the one aspect that sets liturgical music
apart from the rest: it is to be
used in the service of the liturgy and not the other way around. We are not here to celebrate one
particular culture, or a mish-mash of cultures, as the late Fr. Richard John
Neuhaus passionately lamented when going over the substandard musical
selections that Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI was subjected to during the Mass at
Nationals Stadium in April 2008. Before
we are anything else, we identify ourselves as Catholic. Catholic means universal. We do not splinter off into some
cultural Tower of Babel when it comes to our liturgies. We are supposed to be united as one in
prayer.
This is why bilingual Mass settings
ultimately fail. There is no unity
when we split up the Ordinary of the Mass into two different languages. In fact, Liturgicam Authenticam takes
that point into strong consideration:
88. In the case of the Order of Mass and those parts of the Sacred
Liturgy that call for the direct participation of the people, a single
translation should exist in a given language,67 unless a different provision is
made in individual cases.
What is the point, then, of having bilingual
settings? Why not promote the
language that unifies all of us as children of the Church: Latin? Yet, OCP has never offered anything new
in Latin. The publishing house is
so busy promoting culture that it fails to realize that Latin is our liturgical
heritage.
Then there is the issue of the responsorial
Gloria. This is a recent
phenomenon, one that I have not even seen in Latin. The problems with this type of a setting are that the piece
chops up the Gloria, interrupting the flow of the prayer and it also unduly
prolongs the introductory rite, turning the music into a performance. Misa Santa Cecilia is also uses the
same repetitive mechanism for the Sanctus and the Agnus Dei. The latter seems to go into
infinity. It’s a double whammy of
a bad piece that never seems to end.
If Spanish language congregations are in need
of a setting of the Ordinary that fulfills Sacramentum Caritatis 42 and the
prescriptions set forth by Pope St. Pius X, Blessed John Paul II and Liturgicam
Authenticam, one need only look at the magnificent composition set forth by Fr.
Matthew Spencer. Fr. Spencer set
the Spanish language Ordinary of the Mass using Jubilate Deo, the simple Latin
Mass setting promulgated by Pope Paul VI.
One can find it here: http://marello.org/simplex/collections/ordinary-i/
OCP had the chance to promote the sacred and
the majestic with its Misa Santa Cecilia.
Unfortunately, it does neither and fails to live up to the dignity of
its namesake.
