Personally I really didn’t “feel” the words of this song until I was a Catholic.

God’s grace is amazing.

Of secondary importance is aesthetics – but this is still important! “Salve Regina” walks through an entire song with a melody that fits within a single octave. This is also true of “Amazing Grace,” by the way. Not all the chants I mentioned previously do this. The version of “Panis Angelicus” played at the assault on Paris in the TV mini-series, Joan of Arc has a melody that jumps up and down the scale, well beyond the range of a single octave. This is a critical aesthetic. Chant is technically simpler – often by far – than much of what passes for modern liturgical music. This is not a knock on complex music. My son is about to embarck upon learning a modern piece for piano by Aram Khachaturian, called “Toccata.” It is quite complex – and beautiful. Listen for yourself: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bfo4-CnJZQQ . However, even if it had orthodox words, its aesthetics alone should probably exclude it from liturgy because, well, the liturgy is meant to be sung by both the priest and the people. The priest can, of course, dedicate time to learning complex music, if such were called for. Mass and the sacraments are (or should be) the most important thing for him. But the people in the pews have to work 60-hour weeks or chase after a bunch of kids – or both. Developing a sense for complex music might be an unreasonable request. This is where the aesthetics of polyphony come in because with traditional polyphony, at least, there is always a singable note for a given person to land on, regardless of range.

There is more, of course. The pipe organ is a preferred instrument at least in part because its wind-fired pipes closely simulate human vocal chords. The same is true, in large part, of many – perhaps most – of the instruments used in a Mass sung with an orchestra (which, by the way, is one of Pope Benedict’s favorite traditions from the German liturgy).

Still, I hope this discussion offers an idea of what is possible and, it is to be hoped, reasonable.

I thought HomeschoolDad’s remarks were most constructive in terms of identifying the underlying problem.

The only remaining point I would want to make to you is that there is a difference between “shallowness” and “simplicity.” This hymn — and others like it — were the “milk” that introduced me to the faith, and sustained me until I began to hunger for something more substantive … which I found in the Catholic Church.

Every parish is a family, representing people at every stage of development. We must never lose focus on the “source and summit” (as Homeschool Dad pointed out) that feeds us all. Yet we must also recognize that some are further along the path than others, and meet their needs as well.

After seventeen years in the pew and several years at seminary, I have matured enough that I am capable of contemplating the mysteries of the liturgy (and participaing in the music traditionally used to express them). And yet the attachment to the earlier times remain, reminding me of how far I’ve come — and of the brothers and sisters who are still on their way across the river and up the mountain.

In that moment, I am grateful for the loving embrace of Mother Church, who makes room for all her children.

The challenge, then, is finding a way to introduce this form into parishes where it has disappeared. But how?

First, the music ministers — they cannot lead if they are not taught. GIA quarterly recently had an article on Gregorian chant that was an invaluable introduction. But there must be other opportunities for professional development as well.

Another obvious place would be with our children, whose preferences and tastes are often more readily influenced than those of their parents. Imagine, however, how that could change if we get the children singing … “and a child shall lead them.”

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.

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.

In Sacrosanctum Concilium (#37), we read:
“Even in the liturgy, the Church has no wish to impose a rigid uniformity in matters which do not implicate the faith or the good of the whole community; rather does she respect and foster the genius and talents of the various races and peoples. Anything in these peoples’ way of life which is not indissolubly bound up with superstition and error she studies with sympathy and, if possible, preserves intact. Sometimes in fact she admits such things into the liturgy itself, so long as they harmonize with its true and authentic spirit.”

Is a hymn of praise to God for his “amazing grace” an example of something “indissolubly bound up with superstition and error”? Not at all. Rather — especially for those of us who converted from other Christian traditions — the Church in her wisdom acknowledges that the music (especially the hymns) of our tradition may be incorporated into the liturgy: par 119:

In certain parts of the world, especially mission lands, there are peoples who have their own musical traditions, and these play a great part in their religious and social life. For this reason due importance is to be attached to their music, and a suitable place is to be given to it, not only in forming their attitude toward religion, but also in adapting worship to their native genius …(Art. 39 and 40).

To equate “Protestant” with “shallowness” is disrespectful. To contend that the song is not “liturgically appropriate” based solely on one’s personal opinion and preference is not constructive.

The Catechism (#1157) offers three criteria o assess the suitability of liturgical music:
– “beauty expressive of prayer”
– “unanimous participation of the assembly at the designated moments”
– “solemn character of the celebration.”

In other words, there is quite a bit of latitude here for a variety of musical compositions. 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.

Well said! I completely agree, the argument about spiritual pride tilts both ways, blinding and dividing us. I also agree that there are many hymns within the Catholic tradition that are both beautiful and shamefully neglected. As much as I love “Amazing Grace,” I wouldn’t want to hear it every week.

On the other hand, to the extent that this song reflects authentic Christian faith (revealed to the apostles and preserved through the Catholic Church), it can serve as a “bridge” between Catholics and other Christians. This is no small consideration, especially for those of us who still have friends and family on the far side of the Tiber.

As Catholics, we believe salvation is an ongoing process in the life of a believer. It was accomplished by Christ at a particular point in history (on Calvary, “amazing grace… that saved a wretch like me.”)

God’s grace is also applied in the present when we avail ourselves of sanctifying grace through the sacraments (“I once was lost but now am found, blind but now I see.”)

Finally, that grace is our sole hope for the future (“’tis grace that’s brought me safe thus far and grace will lead me home.”)

Although others have already addressed the “wretch” issue, I have to say that it surprised me that this was an issue for some people. Two prayers associated with the Rosary convey this sense of wretchedness:

Hail, Holy Queen: “To thee do we cry, poor banished children of Eve; to thee do we send up our sorrows, mourning and weeping in this valley of tears…”

Fatima prayer: “O my Jesus, forgive us our sins, save us from the fires of hell. Lead all souls to heaven, especially those most in need of Thy mercy.”

It is only by looking our own wretchedness squarely that we catch a glimpse of the boundless mercy of God. Especially this week, that would seem to be an appropriate meditation.

God bless! Heidi Saxton

An important element is knowing what makes music liturgical and what makes music outside use. Personally ‘Amazing Grace’ is not for liturgical purposes and should be recognized and left as so. I don’t also find it particularly deep in mystery and reflects a lot of the shallowness of protestantism. It’s okay if one uses it for some personal enjoyment but then that’s it.

In Christ,
Michael