A 2002 article (“The Sad State of Liturgical Music in the Catholic Church”) was brought to our attention by an acquaintance of Thomas G. McFaul. Many readers will sympathize with some of his statements. Below, we reproduce excerpts of McFaul’s article. In certain localities, things have deteriorated since 2002. On the other hand, a powerful movement has arisen since Thomas wrote—one which restores dignity and reverence to the Holy Mass. The annual Sacred Music Symposium continues to be at the forefront of that movement.
HE AWFUL STUFF that has passed for liturgical music in the Catholic Church for the past thirty-five years is a continuing disgrace and embarrassment. The insipid “hymns” and utterly trite musical settings of parts of the Ordinary of the Mass suddenly appeared from nowhere sometime shortly after Vatican II. Overnight, fifteen hundred years of some of the most beautiful, inspired music in all of Western culture was thrown out and replaced by what sounds like bad 1960’s folk-pop-elevator music. In fact, it’s worse than that. Nothing in pop music ever sounded quite as loathsome as what is played and sung in the church today.
Whence Comes This Filth? • The magnificent and austere Gregorian chant—as well as Masses and other liturgical music written by a succession of history’s greatest composers—has largely disappeared from the Catholic Church. As Richard Morris has pointed out, the great tradition of Liturgical music flourishes today in concerts, on CDs, everywhere but in the church. How did this great art get replaced by the repugnant drivel we hear today? What happened? Who commissioned this awful stuff? Why has this been tolerated all this time? Who writes this trash? If there’s to be new music, why isn’t it better? This rubbish is not heard just in regional parishes in the United States—it’s worldwide. To my horror, I heard this same shameful music performed at the Basilica of Saint Peter in Rome!
Imagine This • Try to imagine what it would be like if the rest of the Church’s art were dumbed-down to this degree. Paint-on-velvet say, replacing the Sistine Chapel ceiling.1 Or an upturned bathtub with a plastic Virgin spray-painted neon blue replacing Bernini’s. Would the clergy and faithful sit by silently and endure such an insult? Is music a less important art form in the eyes of the modern church? It would seem so.
Congregation Singing? No. • Part of the reason for the sweeping changes of Vatican II was to make the service more accessible (or so we were told). It was thought that vernacular “folk Masses” and other such misguided secular notions would somehow bring the parishioners closer to the service. It has not done so. How could it? Bad music is just bad music. Some of these ideas might have worked—to some degree—if the job of writing the music had been given to anyone capable. But that didn’t happen. The congregation does not participate in singing any more than they ever did. Why would they? Who would want to sing this music?
A Grave Misunderstanding • The choir had always handled the bulk of the singing in past generations … and did so quite adequately. Even in my small parish, the choir was good enough to sing some Palestrina, Vittoria, and other great composers, as well as the chant. This magnificent music was a vital part of the uplifting experience of going to church. The chant worked for illiterate mediæval peasants. Are we somehow less sophisticated today than they were?
Dumbing Down Everything • Did Vatican II really think that the average church parishioner could no longer appreciate the music of Josquin? Did they think that the congregation could no longer relate to the music of Ockegham and Byrd? This is clearly not true. There are more recordings of this music today than ever before, eagerly listened to by people all over the world. Is there something out of line with this music and the interpretation of church doctrine according to Vatican II?
Universality Eliminated • In the 1950’s, when I was growing up Catholic, we were taught that one of the distinguishing characteristics of the Catholic Mass was that it was the same everywhere, unchanging. We were taught that the Mass never changed (at least not much since the Council of Trent in the mid-sixteenth century). That’s why it was said in Latin, so that it would be the same in any service, in any country throughout the world. […] One could expect to hear the beautiful chant sung in Latin wherever one went. One also looked forward to the almost endless supply of magnificent contrapuntal music performed at High Mass and special occasions throughout the church year. (Maybe even Gesualdo on Good Friday, if the choir was up to it.) Then suddenly, it all went away. Suddenly, there were bad folk guitar players in church, bongos. The choir disappeared. Why is all of the new music in the church totally uninspired and pedestrian? Doesn’t anyone care?
A Sorrowful Springtime • A grave error in judgment has been made and seems to go unnoticed. The Church has willfully reduced the music of the Mass to a numbingly-dumb, excruciatingly-bad set of fake-folk melodies. The musical part of the service is no longer uplifting, no longer a positive experience. It’s an embarrassment of bad taste. […] The old music is now so distant that priests (and church choirs) no longer even remember the traditions. Therefore, all that beautiful chant, all that magnificent art music is completely lost on younger generations of Catholics. What a shame for a young person to grow up thinking that Marty Haugen is the traditional music of the Catholic church. […] The church has concentrated on secularizing its traditions and with that, diminishing (or eliminating) much art that contributed to the glory of God—as well as profoundly enhancing the joy and uplifting experience of celebrating the sacrifice of the Mass.
Excerpts from a 2002 article by Thomas G. McFaul.
1 EDITOR’S NOTE: Sadly, in recent years certain cathedrals and basilicas in Germany have dared to construct such things—seemingly with impunity.
