The Recovering Choir Director

Peace, all.

I think the ongoing drone against “voice of God” texts is getting boring. Most telling was Pinkard’s condemnation of verses “especially.” Well, sure. Many of the songs listed by name were composed as dialogues between the cantor or choir and assembly. The St Louis Jesuits, in particular, are notable for their intent to have the assembly sing refrains and leaving the verses for the music leaders, cantor or choir. If you listen to thge recordings of most of the criticized pieces, the intent is clear.

By not acknowledging the “voice of God” in psalmody or alleluia verses of the Lectionary, any critic opens herself or himself up to a question of bias, if not perhaps a bit of jealousy. One of the strongest critiques of the new vernacular hymnody of the 60’s was a lack of Scriptural and liturgical grounding. Repp, Wise and others have noted that their early songs were not mostly written with liturgy in mind, but they began to be used there. Foley, Schutte, Dufford, and others began to write specifically for the liturgy. Today they’re criticized for Voice of God because their lyrics are based on Scripture?

Not only is the Cantica Nova piece off target. It’s not even original.

Admittedly, there is much to criticize in liturgical music. But critics do themselves little good by unresearched pieces that lack perspective. Naming names and taking no prisoners might sell copy, but it comes off as shallow and pretentious more often than not.

Peace, Hurt feelings.

The answers to your first two questions are: no and no.

I don’t find “We Remember” the best in the Haugen catalogue either, but I think the discussion is somewhat more forwarded by music directors programming what they believe is good music. I wouldn’t say I’ve been a choir boy about not ever criticizing other people’s music. Sometimes it has even gotten into print. But I think Penkala’s main point about “Voice of God” was very weak. And what’s worse, it’s a rehash of the same old Adoremus argument that’s been making the rounds for about five years now.

My rebuttal is hardly bogus. Good church music often happens in dialogue between parts of an assembly: antiphonal and responsorial psalmody, canon or other forms of imitation in choral music, litanies of all kinds. Good music can be butchered just as easily (and perhaps more tragically) by a warbling over-amplified singer as poor music can be. But let’s be sure to get our argument straight, shall we? I think we can all agree that poorly done music of any ilk is bad, bad, bad. So what else is new?

You asked, “And where is the brief for the cantor to sing in the voice of God?” It’s in the Lectionary. Psalm 2. Psalm 91. Psalm 110. Just about every other alleluia verse. You find it in the OT prophets. You might be shocked to learn that it occurs as often in the Psalter as it does in Gather Comprehensive.

Believe me, if some critics of contemporary music think they can do a better job composing, God knows we need more good music. But don’t expect me to be impressed with tired old arguments about text and style. And if I’m looking to improve the music ministry in my own parish, I’m far more likely to be edified by somebody’s recommendation rather than somebody’s ax to grind.

Peace, Sam.

It’s not that the argument’s old; it’s just that it’s already been addressed. The use of Voice of God in Scripture and the Lectionary has been pointed out before I did it. Penkala needs to address thesepoints and move from there.

Peace, Nick.

I honestly see where you’re coming from on your point. My sense is that “Voice of God” gets sung far less often than people think it does. An interesting thing about Communion is that the Communion antiphon is almost always from a psalm, and the Roman Missal recommends singing a psalm as an alternative to a Eucharistic song at that time.

I guess it goes without saying for me that Catholics aren’t into some self-divinization kick on modern music. A poet reading Dickinson or Whitman isn’t delusional about being Emily or Walt, even if they’re wearing a period costume. In a similar vein, people singing the “words of God” isn’t about imitation, but hopefully gaining an understanding beneficial to the spiritual life. Or at worst, it’s just people singing what they believe to be a good song. But I think a steady diet of it at a particular Mass might be a problem. Personally, I think the composer’s solution is to address God generally in the second person. Taking things literally, it seemed silly to me to sing of God in third person (He, Him, etc.) when we all know darn well God’s eavesdropping on every word.