Difficulty Breathing Feel Tired

Zeitgeist gegen Kirchenmusik - Ein Beispiel

On 26 September, Professor Markus Eham a lecture at the opening of "daily of new church music" of the Bavarian (arch) dioceses that HERE and HERE have already been discussed in this blog. From an attentive fellow readers, I was pointed to this speech, and I have downloaded and thoroughly read the text: PDF DOCUMENT .

Overall, this text is very interesting and contains many aspects that would be worth a look their own. Unfortunately, my time is too limited to afford it. So I would like to take comment on a few notable points from this lecture,.

Already on the first page goes Professor Eham beifallheischend heavy guns on

The liturgical tones 2007 Rome were heard here, not exactly sound for the future, but more steps to extraordinary cadenza on the 19th Back to the 16th century Century. Church Music was this ritual flashback but not specifically spelled out, the Motu proprio Summorum Pontificum and the papal accompanying letter contained not a word about the musical form of the extraordinary Meßritus - actually revealing consistently as singing and music in the pre-Vatican II view just does not contribute significantly to Liturgy belong.

Professor Markus Eham, who teaches at the University of Eichstätt including liturgy shows here from a strange Limited View, even from a long-vanquished "Los von Rom" setting, which may even be raising questions about his suitability as a university professor for this subject at a Catholic (!) University. First, the mere polemic against the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite (Missa Tridentina) no longer seems appropriate. Pope John Paul II In 1986 a commission of nine cardinals following two questions:

• Pope Paul VI. prohibited or any other key authority in a legal way the wide celebration of the Tridentine Mass in the present?

The answer, of the nine cardinals was given was, "No, the Mass of Sts. Pius V has never been banned. "

• Can any bishop any priest in good conscience forbid the celebration of the Tridentine Rite?

The nine cardinals joined in the fact that no bishop may forbid a Catholic priest to read the Tridentine mass.

in December died in 2007, Cardinal Stickler, a member of this Commission was reported, furthermore, that eight cardinals, and only one against it was to make it through a papal decree in public that every priest freely between the new and the old rite could choose. For the nine-member commission included Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, Paul Augustin Cardinal Mayer, Silvio Cardinal Oddi, Alfons Maria Cardinal Stickler, Agostino Cardinal Casaroli, Bernardin Cardinal Gantin, Antonio Cardinal Innocenti, Pietro Cardinal Palazzini and Jozef Cardinal Tomko. ¹

since the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum the Tridentine Mass is now the Extraordinary Form of the Roman rite, and as such, for all priests (with minor limitations) enabled. Eham polemic misappropriates that the letter of Benedict XVI. 2007 represents only a reaction to the behavior of the bishops, the letter "Quattuor abhinc annos" from the pontificate of John Paul II completely ignored (see report by Thomas Kovacs HERE ).

One wonders what liturgy understanding the professor taught his students well - and how he can justify it, "multipliers" with such a limited Verständis may be released into the church service. The "flashback" in the 16th Century, which he suspects this is propaganda of the past. The "Old Mass" has long been another form of measurement has become.

The critical remark that the relation between church music in the Ordinary and the Extraordinary form is not clear (I have which yesterday touched in THIS ARTICLE ), but to take completely. It can not be that one and the same composition in both forms of a rite is assessed differently. In addition to the completely unresolved question of the calendar, I think this is one of the most pressing problems to address after the deadline specified in Summorum Pontificum three-year period and would discuss.

writes in a new paragraph Eham however, very beautiful for the role of church music after the Second Vatican Council:

"[The constitution has liturgy] in Article 121 of the church musicians a double mission in the root directory der liturgischen Erneuerung geschrieben: Sie sollen den Schatz der kirchenmusikalischen Überlieferung bewahren und das Repertoire durch Kompositionen nach den Erfordernissen für die erneuerte Liturgie weiterschreiben. Die Kirche will also auch musikalisch Zeitgenossenschaft; erfährt sie sich doch, wie es in der Pastoralkonstitution heißt 'mit der Menschheit und ihrer Geschichte wirklich engstens verbunden.' Der Glaube wurzelt zwar in einem Ereignis von damals, aber er ist nicht von gestern."

Dem ist prinzipiell zuzustimmen. Zu klären wäre freilich die Frage, was denn genau unter "Zeitgenossenschaft" zu verstehen ist: Jazz? Messiaen? ACDC? Hertel und Mross? Philip Glass? John Rutter? Bemerkenswert Hermeneutics is the break after the Council, the Eham postulated here in the next sentence the first time. The nebulous "requirements for the renewed liturgy" to be brought into play here. An often used phrase. But what exactly does a song is different to the offertory before the Council of a song for the offertory, after the Council? What is the difference between a pre-Vatican Conciliar the Agnus Dei?

The following paragraph is "Intermezzo: Bringing faith be heard" overwritten. Here the professor is initially in broad terms the position of the church 'as the dominant cultural medium, and even cultural pioneer past. I have to contradict him on two points. He writes:

1. The performers of music in worship were mostly professionals, not musical amateurs.
2. And the role that fell to the music in the liturgy, changed: It was always not so much in the setting of the biblical word give the common celebration of the liturgy itself aural expression, but one for personal worship-provoking, representative sound area to create for the ordinance, by the full-liturgical staff was fully drawn.

mistaken on both points Eham: never before, the training of church musicians stood on a higher level than in the academic teaching of our day - At least in the German and Anglo-American regions. As a vocal soloist or instrumental musicians at least have cantors major cities rely on excellent staff: enthusiastic amateurs, music schools, music students, professional musicians of all stripes. This argument can therefore contribute little to explain the change in church music after the Council. The second point I have already promoted again in other posts here complained of shortening the term activity to the physical action. Then I need hardly enter into any more detail.

In the next paragraph, entitled "Orientation to the past," the polemical attacks again violently around. I quote:

"To preserve in the care, the self, conceived of the church and its liturgy, then more and more as a special and alternative world for their presence for." Sacredness of the liturgical act of religious "expression," A corresponding "was required; Cecilian of the movement marked, this will be computed as a defining style for Ideal Standard, for the want of the Gregorian chant and polyphony Palestrina brand sponsor.

[...]

This attempt at a musical identity has to have the issue discussed later prepared for: Is there really the "music the church" as a stylistic repertoire determinable, oder müssten wir nicht richtiger von "Musik für den Gottesdienst der Kirche" sprechen, die der jeweiligen Zeit und Kultur entspricht?"

Hier wird nicht klar, wann "später" ist, oder wer überhaupt wann mit wem diskutiert haben soll. Da Professor Eham kein Zitat kennzeichnet, nehme ich an, er stellt diese rhetorische Frage dem anwesenden Festpublikum. Hier greift er allerdings erneut zu kurz: keineswegs hat sich die Kirche durch eine Bunkermentalität das "Eigene" bewahren wollen, sondern die intellektuellen Strömungen "der Gegenwart" wendeten sich bewusst und eindeutig von der Kirche ab oder gar gegen sie. Inwiefern der Cäcilianismus römische Lehraussagen zum Thema Kirchenmusik beeinflusste, to be seen. Giuseppe Cardinal Sarto, who later became Pope Pius X., has not met for the first time in 1903 in Tra le sollecitudini concrete conclusions about church music, but much earlier as the patriarch of Venice, in pastoral letters to the termination of abuses, such as invasion of secular opera music in the worship urged. The remainder of this section Eham stresses again the need to create modern church music before he comes to the following statement:

"The theological and legal basis of this opening to the church music contemporaries can be summed up in a few guiding principles: it is' no kind of quality full religious to promote music of the liturgical celebrations 'excluded, which is capable of' prayer and to express the mystery of Christ: 'holder of the liturgy is' the whole community, with Christ the head, united body. " This calls for music that allows the active, full, conscious participation of all in the singing or hearing Mitvollziehen. "

This statement, based on the " third party based instruction for the proper implementation of Konsitution on the Sacred Liturgy " is in principle completely correct. It is interesting to note on the church law that is perceived here again but only selectively. Eham suppresses plain and simple die klaren Aussagen der Kirche ( HIER von mir thematisiert) über den Wert der Gregorianik und der Vokalpolyphonie als Qualitätskriterium für die perfekte Verbindung von Wort und Klang, Zeit und Raum in der Liturgie, die er oben noch als liturgischen Rückschritt ins 16. Jahrhundert ("Marke Palestrina") abqualifiziert. Ferner liegt auch diesen Aussagen wieder die Verkürzung des Begriffs der participatio actuosa vor. Ein Begriff, der von Pius X. eben im Zusammenhang mit der Erneuerung der Gregrianik und der ausdrücklichen Förderung der Polyphonie geprägt wurde.

Lesenswert ist der vierte Absatz, "Zunehmend getrennte Klangwelten" , der auch in The following sections will continue to run. I can not for reasons of time, unfortunately, not much positive or respond to questioning. A statement from page 9 of the presentation, I would like to quote yet:

"I see two dangers in our worship area. The dullness of routine and the tendency to aesthetic mummification of the liturgy I suspect both strike or are related to a rampant Jesus oblivion in church and theology in favor of the ruling Christ in love. modern sacred music could, however, in its sensuous immediacy of an important voice expect to be revelation [...]"

I agree with Professor Eham in his assessment of the two Gefahren für die Liturgie vollkommen zu, schon die folgenden Sätze lassen mich aber einigermaßen ratlos zurück. Wie kann man Jesus gegen den Christus ausspielen? Oder anders gefragt: welche liturgischen Auswirkungen sollte eine Fokussierung auf Jesus im Gegensatz zum Christus mit sich bringen? Ich hege hier den Verdacht der theologisierenden Wortklauberei ganz in der Schule Karl Rahners, der so gelehrt klingt, weil ihn niemand versteht, und in dessen monströsen Satzungeheuern oft erstaunlich wenig Substanz übrigbleibt, wenn man sich die Mühe macht, sie aus den Phrasen herauszuklopfen.

Mit einem großen Sprung komme ich an das Ende des Vortrages, Punkt VI.: Finale . Hier formuliert Markus Eham sechs Folgerungen für die Musik in der Liturgie heute. Der ersten beiden Punkte lauten:

• Alle Formen und Stile qualitätvoller Musik sind zugelassen (SC 121). Das Geistliche in der Musik zeigt sich nicht in speziellen katholischen Akkordverbindungen, sondern in einem geistlichen Auffassen von Musik, gleich welchen Stils. Wir sollten den ganzen Reichtum der musikalischen Überlieferung in ihren qualitätvollen Stücken in das gottesdienstliche Leben einbringen. Dabei auch die tradierte Musik so interpretieren, dass sie uns immer neu zum Klingen kommt. Das am meisten Reformbedürftige sind die Gewohnheiten der Menschen, sagt Mark Twain; das gilt auch für die Hörgewohnheiten.
• Der Bekennerruf "Mut zur neuen Music in the Church is not a plea bargain for pandering to the contemporary taste with the motto: ". We can also syncope and Major Chord" After what has been said that confusion would be really impossible [...] Then, as now it is So to work out that people of different backgrounds have a chance to come up with the message of faith in their own languages in contact. go really to the people of today, without performing the secularism of today [...]

work on the other conclusions is one thing to say, but I take an example, on those statements. First, we come here again to a striking contradiction within this lecture. Above nor a retreat of the church on the "My" complains is required here, not to be working in the secular world of today. This is of course the same thing in other words, apparently noticed Eham not. The basic skepticism before the pre-Vatican II period (after all, some 1900 years of church history ...), runs through the entire lecture, he adjusted the recognizable look.

It is true the statement that no style is excluded per se from the liturgical availability. But this is not a license for experiments of any kind in worship: both Sacrosantum Concilium and Musicam Sacram (and numerous other post-conciliar Schreiben) fordern unmissverständlich die Föderung und Pflege der Gregorianik, und erheben eben nicht die Form, sondern die einzigartige Wort-Ton-Verbindung und Zitattreue zum kirchenmusikalischen Idealbild. In einer Antwort auf einen Offenen Brief an Professor Olivier Bauer schreibt der damalige Kardinal Joseph Ratzinger:

"Sie haben unter 2c sehr sorgsam und genau meine wesentlichen Aussagen zur sakralen Musik wiedergegeben und dann am Schluss kritische Bemerkungen angeknüpft. Ich gestehe, dass ich Mühe habe, diese Fragen zu verstehen, denn weder habe ich einfach einen retour zur Gregorianik gefordert, noch habe ich bestritten, dass der Geist auch heute Komponisten und Musiker inspirieren kann. Ganz im Gegenteil sage I [...]: 'Who is watching closely is probably assume that it is precisely in our time from the inspiration of faith out important works of art both in the area of \u200b\u200bthe image as in the field of music (and in the literature) are Created and . arise Even today, the joy in God and the contact with his presence in the liturgy an inexhaustible power of inspiration. The artists, who submit to this order need not be true as a rear guard of the culture to understand [...]'. Not return to the past, I call it taking measurements show the great principles of the basic shape of liturgical art [...]"

This quote, the basic problem of the statements Professor Ehams sehr gut: die Angst davor, sich demütig in eine Tradition zu stellen - und die eigenen Werke an den Vorbildern der Vergangenheit messen zu lassen. Werke, die gemeinhin Sacro-Pop, Neues Geistliches Lied oder ähnlich genannt werden, auch die Gesänge aus Taizé, wären auf diesem Hintergrund gar nicht denkbar. Leider gerät Eham auch mit seiner Aussage im sechsten Punkt "Im Gottesdienst geht es um das, was wir nicht erwarten, sondern nur hoffen können" aufs Glatteis: dank der Verheißung Christi wissen wir sehr genau, was uns im Gottesdienst erwartet, und worauf wir für die Zukunft hoffen. Genau dieses Moment wird ja im Gesang des Sanctus ganz deutlich!

Insgesamt ein eher schwacher Vortrag, of mainly typical of the post-conciliar theology Herumgeeiere suffers the tradition. It becomes clear over here laid down a fraction, the theological - has long since healed, and endure only to improve and fill - not yet practical. Propagated by Professor Eham theological thinking is no longer sustainable and is caught in the order-to-Self groups one come across the boundaries of modernism. We must not let occasional concessions to conservative listeners of this paper deceived about the true state of mind.
_____
¹) Alfons Maria Cardinal Stickler, 20 May 1995, Fidelis Christ conference in Fort Lee, New Jersey, a detailed Report in Catholic Family News, July 1995, Fatima Crusader, June / July 1989