It seems that Catholicism reached its liturgical heights in the late 18th century; we ceased to be relevant to wider society when the last Habsburg went into exile. But what if Catholicism could be normal again? That’s the vision Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone of San Francisco had when he founded the Benedict XVI Institute. “We’re trying to revive that integral approach,” he tells me. “The Church has always been the great patron of the arts, and we need to continue to be.”
Last year, Archbishop Cordileone saw an opportunity to express the small “c” catholicity by commissioning a new Mass. Every year, the Archdiocese of San Francisco holds a communal celebration of the feast of Our Lady of Guadalupe (patron of Mexico and the Americas) the Saturday before. This year, that Saturday happened to be December 8: the feast of Our Lady of the Immaculate Conception, patron of the United States.
To mark the day, the archbishop celebrated a Mass with a brand new musical setting, the “Mass of the Americas”. It was written by the Benedict XVI Institute’s composer-in-residence, Frank La Rocca. It’s an extraordinarily ambitious work, mixing Latin polyphony and chant with traditional South and Central American music.
The Mass incorporates a 16-voice mixed chorus, the organ, a string quartet, bells and marimba. There are parts for Spanish, Latin and English, as well as Nahuatl – the Aztec language Our Lady of Guadalupe spoke to St Juan Diego. A press release from the Institute calls the Mass of the Americas the “musical equivalent of mission architecture”. But what does that mean? Archbishop Cordileone explains: “I’m trying to model how the Church has always appropriately enculturated the Gospel by adapting aspects of the local culture, but within the sacred tradition. So, I use that as an example – the Franciscan missionaries in California.”
But the Archbishop – known as one of America’s more theologically and liturgically conservative prelates – is only too aware of the dangers of blending secular forms into the Mass. This has been a problem in California, where mariachi music is sometimes haphazardly incorporated into the liturgy. “It’s beautiful but profane music,” says Archbishop Cordileone.
“It can’t be transferred wholesale into the Mass but there’s a way to take elements of it and sacralise it within the sacred tradition.”
Was he pleased with the Mass of the Americas? “I was ecstatic,” he says. “It took everything within me at times to keep from breaking down weeping. You get the sense that something truly holy was happening there.”
That there’s such a thing as a new Mass setting (as opposed to priests occasionally introducing gender-neutral language, sprinkling in a bit of liturgical dance, etc) is a sign of hope: a reminder that tradition is something vital, even dynamic, to use a much abused word.
Archbishop Cordileone might paraphrase Edmund Burke: a Church without the means of some change is without the means of its conservation.
Full story at Catholic Herald.
Earlier CalCatholic story on Mass of the Americas here.
Mass of the Americas full video:
A few parts of the setting are nice, but it’s more of a performance piece than a practical mass setting. If you watch the video, people in the pews and priests have bored, blank expressions on their faces while the choir sings the parts. Case in point, the Sanctus, which took almost 2.5 minutes to sing. The priest to the left of AB Cordileone was shifting his garments during the music, and the priests looked bored, like “When will this end?” There is no good reason for the Sanctus to take so long to sing. The Gloria lasted 6 minutes. No good reason for that either. Don’t like some of the instrumentation in the setting. What’s wrong with using a nice Gregorian mass setting? I don’t agree with the article at all.
Bah, Humbug?
Robert, obviously you can’t wait for Mass to be over. Sorry, but you’ll be SUPER bored with heaven, if you’re eligible. The most glorious of Masses I’ve attended are in orchestral settings where the LONGER you praise God and worship Him with grand music the BETTER. You’re suppose to be praying, not timing. You sound like a Young Earth Creationists…”why would God take 6 billion years to create the world. He could and should do it in 144 hours…I’ve got a golf game to get to.”
That music wasn’t conducive to prayer. It had some very few nice parts, but mostly it was boring and unnecessarily long. Boring music does not encourage prayer. Look at people’s faces in the crowd. They weren’t praying, they weren’t inspired, they weren’t captivated, they were waiting for the music to end because it was an interruption in the flow of the Mass. That’s what poor music does. Poor music at worship kills worship. Presenting this Mass with its new music as a model of what Mass ought to be is bad judgment.
Would you be able to recommend a new-ish Mass setting you know of that is not boring?
Why the stopwatch? This liturgy is not like the old half hour Latin Low Mass. More like the Christmas Eve Midnight High Mass — over two hours with the carols beforehand. Bored and blank expressions are by no means unique to this Mass.
When people get bored, they start looking at their watches and counting things on the walls and ceilings. I suppose millennials would take out their phones and start texting. This Mass was not a good example of liturgical revitalization, which is what it was touted as.
You’re absolutely right. The mindset of “a good Mass is a short Mass” is just simply wrong. It was born out of the Mass being celebrated in a language few understood. People bored out of their skulls (and starving from not having eaten since the night before) either prayed the Rosary or daydreamed — usually about shorter Masses.
If the Mass is well done, 2 hours is fine with me.
Yes, “if the Mass is well done.” This one wasn’t.
I’m not saying a silent Mass would be preferable. I’m saying that unnecessarily protracted musical Mass parts that aren’t that good to begin with kill the spirit and flow of the Mass. Besides, the Mass ordinary should be sung by all, not just by the choir. That new Mass setting is not singable by a congregation. It’s a performance piece, not good liturgical music. Bad model of liturgy.
Beautifully and reverently done with some exquisite talent. Archbishop Cordileone has also done a Pontifical High Mass, which is online. I highly recommend it.
Glad I don’t have to go to Mass there, the pretentious Cathedral is enough to turn me off.
We can worship God equally well in humble surroundings and beautiful temples if our hearts are in the right place. Why build mansions and state capitols and White Houses for our politicians and only a tent for the Lord. Mother Angelica thought differently. After living in rat infested environments much of her life, she helped build a beautiful temple to the Lord and a television network. I think she got it right. I can hear the words echo,
“My soul do magnify the Lord, for He that is mighty has done great things for me.”
May she, through the mercy of God, rest in peace.
Correction: “My soul doth magnify the Lord, and I rejoice in God my Savior for He that is mighty hath done great things for me.
“I think what Cardinal Cordileone is expressing here is that some music is strictly written for the sanctuary and worship, and some is written for the profane — meaning for dancing and having a good time, which is fine in its place and without excess. In other words, save the sacred for the sanctuary and entertainment for entertainment outside the sanctuary. This was a special Mass, and special Masses are longer, hopefully for people who enjoy them and get something out of them.
Cordileone is not a cardinal and those were not originally Mother Angelica’s words.
Having said that, I agree with the rest of your post Anne TE. The commentary on this post proves that there is no pleasing some people.
That was a typo as I wrote “Archbishop Cordileone” in my very first post, and I was paraphrasing what I heard Mother Angelica say several times on EWTN and videos of EWTN, not quoting her exact words. She made the comparison after some people said she was wrong for building such a large church.
And I agree that we do get too negative on here at times about some things that are not really all that important, but just different preferences that are neither right nor wrong.
The negative comments are fine, but I wouldn’t be negative on Archbishop Cordileone for doing this. This type of experimentation on a limited basis is a good thing. Most experimentation is bound to fail, but something very positive could come from it.
This is not really experimentation. It’s a musical composition. I only counter your post because so much of modern liturgy is seen (falsely) as experimentation, when it is actually just doing what we’ve been doing for 20 centuries. I applaud Archbishop Cordileone and the Institute for their efforts to bring the Holy Mass into the 21st century.
YFC,
I’m fairly ignorant of music and so truly can’t offer an opinion. My original reading of the piece made me think that they were doing something experimental with music. Nevertheless, I think you’re right. It was basically just a new composition.
Is this the same archbishop who allowed the Gay Men’s Chorus to perform in a local Catholic church?
Avant garde music does not appeal to Mass going Catholics. This reflects Archbishop Cordeleone’s special interests. I wonder how much the show cost?
I think that’s why the Mass is being trumpeted as a triumph. The diocese spent thousands of dollars on the commission to compose the music and more thousands on hiring the musicians. Can’t admit that was a waste of money, can they?
The big test will be: will the Mass music ever be used again in another celebration? I bet not. So then what was the point?
Besides, when did you ever read a story in a diocesan newspaper that admitted something didn’t go as well as hoped? Never. Everything is a triumph, a success, a wonder, inspiring, dynamic, faith-filled. Oh, but they have lots of criticism for government and politicians. You have to take diocesan news with a grain of salt. If we all pretend that everything’s great, who’s going to…
Do you get your jollies by seeing just how cynical you can be?
These people are trying to do a good thing. Let’s applaud them and their efforts instead of tearing them down. Good grief!
I can’t imagine why one would complain about a 2.5 minute Sanctus. For fifteen years I’ve served as music director, and sung every chant Sanctus as well as dozens of polyphonic ones. If you know anything about sacred music, 2.5 minutes is just fine and well within the norm.
I was fortunate enough to attend the mass and must say that the Sanctus in particular helped me to pray. Furthermore, the composer who crafted this text is an accomplished musician and a very deep and faithful Catholic.
How troubling to hear people evaluate the beauty of sacred music based on the facial expressions of those in attendance. How should people look when they pray? Elated? Huge grins? Should they float? This is ridiculous. When many people pray, their face…
A professional musician will always think longer is better. Because they want to protect their jobs. No diss to the qualifications of the musician. Just agree that it’s not good music for a Mass.
JLS, if you still visit this website, I just want to wish you a Merry Christmas.
Yes, have a Merry Christmas to all those who used to post if they are still alive and are reading this. I have often thought about them and prayed for them, even those with whom I disagreed.
I have always wondered if JLS is still alive and if I should be offering Masses for him to get out of purgatory.
“Archbishop Cordileone had requested the Mass, desiring a Mass setting that would reflect the multicultural diversity of the Church in the Americas.”
Why not just come clean and call it the “Mass of Central and South America en Estados Unidos?” Aztlan Mass for short.
Misusing the Mass to make a political statement.