Just read the Gia Quarterly...ouch.

ghmus7

I'm sure most of you don't have much to do with GIA these days. But having heard several comments about the recent article on Chant, and since I get the quarterly without asking, I read through the mag... My how GIA has changed. There has always been a large "popular " music aspect to what GIA promotes, but not having read one of these quarterly mags for years, I was shocked and resentful.
The fact is...GIA, it's composers and editors truly dislike and are opposed to what we do in reviving the Tradition of Catholic music, and are not above misinterpreting, ommitting and ignoring church teaching to further their goal.

The Inwood article certainly is a watershed. He attempts to dismiss the 1200 year history of chant in a few paragraphs. One ridiculous point is that the Latin word "chant" does not mean "Gregorian Chant", but really means "any kind of music you sing".. Ummm how can this be, as when this instruction was originially given, there was no other music avaliable than chant and polyphony? The best quote from the article is " I want to note that I am not an enemy of chant". I don't think even 5 years ago an article like this would appear in a GIA publication.

I also notice a tendency. The writers in the quarterly are all amateur musicians, with no degrees in music, with one or two exceptions, but they do have whoopy whoop "degrees in ministry". One writer has a job for a diocese called " Diocesan specialist in parish vitality". WHAT is that? Actual musical skills, and the hard work needed to aquire such are considered well... useless.

Also, EVERY article is a push push for diversity...the ideal liturgy would have songs in 8 languages. The Mass is treated as a kind of salad upon which we sprinkle our own wishes, cultures, preferences and languages. Of COURSE mother churches' advice on how to accommodate diversity:..."It is good that the people know responses in Latin"...is ignored...it actually makes a lot of sense!

The company is exclusively involved in promoting their contemporary composers. The music in increasingly vapid, shallow and not distiguishable from OCP.

For years, my personal policy has been to ignore all this...like all of you, am so busy just keeping up with the musical work at my post...but I wonder if the time has come to be more evangelical about Chant and the incredible value it can offer to faith.

Comments please!

MarkB

I have concluded, and I'm not above telling people I work with in my diocese, that OCP and GIA have pulled a giant con on parishes and parish music directors, and it's time for it to stop.

Why is contemporary OCP and GIA music considered appropriate for Mass? Because those companies say so and put their music in hymnals that they convince parishes to purchase?

That's no good reason, but in fact that is THE reason that has been given for the past four decades. And since it's no good reason, that's why those companies have pulled a giant con on parishes for four decades: they have convinced parishes to buy their music for no other reason than they say parishes should be using it at Mass and they make it convenient for parishes to use their music.

Let's stop it. Now.

I have sharply reduced my usage of OCP and GIA music, and I hardly buy anything new from them anymore.

Any chance I get, I try to persuade my colleagues to replace OCP and GIA repertoire with better alternatives. Most of them don't know anything else, though, and they are addicted to the convenience and the emotional satisfaction and nostalgia of OCP and GIA music. AND... those brave directors who attempt to break free from OCP and GIA music often suffer complaints. Average Catholics in the pews think OCP and GIA music simply is what Catholic Mass music is, and that's part of the con that those companies have succeeded in pulling.

hilluminar

Yes. Talk about conning people! OCP has pulled another fast one. O My People by Dan Schutte is a very poor and distasteful word play on the original O My People (the Reproaches of Good Friday), which is still contained thankfully in the priest's Missal, but most people never get to see and seldom know about it. The real O My People (Reproaches) is exquisitely beautiful and moving, and Dan Schutte's O My People is vague mush. There is really no comparison. I am really infuriated when OCP and others take it upon themselves to give us new and inferior chants instead of the older, more edifying, more beautiful, theologically deeper and sounder, chants.

francis

Stop the NO and in one day all three companies would disappear.

Liam

I am not a GIA fan nor am I a subscriber. I am likewise no fan of Paul Inwood's writing at all (I have heard that he can be a skilled accompanist to chant on organ), which is by nature full of cherry-picked assumptions and half-arguments. That said, not having read his piece in the quarterly, I am not sure what the context of his discussion of "cantus/chant" is; *if* it is narrowly* about the use of the term in the GIRM of the current US typical edition of the English-language Missal, as well covered here over a decade ago the decision to translate "cantus" as "chant" was not restrictive in nature but covered all the sung musical forms permitted in the relevant parts of the GIRM. (This was clarified by the USCCB staff.)

* I willingly grant that Mr Inwood has often appeared incapable of tight argument.

lmassery

In following Mr Inwoods articles, posts on Facebook, and engaging with him directly many times, I can only conclude that he is willfully deceptive, intentionally misleading, and firmly against an honest interpretation of Church teaching on sacred music. He must not be given the benefit of the doubt. I feel as though we have come to a point where we must not only avoid OCP and GIA as much as possible, but we must actively contribute to their competitor. I’m talking about Source & Summit. They have made it onto the radar of many priests. If source & Summit folds, it will put us back decades. If they succeed, it could be the end for companies that have not promoted authentic Catholic music.

ghmus7

Well said Mark B.
It seems that this is not only about Liturgical integrity but also ethical. Why would you support a company
that us activley at odds with what the church historically wishes for her music?

I would like to write an article about this...and possible have is published in a mainstream Catholic publication. Any suggestions?

MarkB · Screenshot 2024-03-15 125150.png

This was posted today on the Facebook page of OCP's current top composer, judging by popularity among middle-aged and elderly white women, which is the largest block of Catholics in parish ministry and Mass attendance in the US. Notice that she calls funerals "Celebrations of Life". Many of the composers whose songs appear in OCP hymnals and are sung in Catholic parishes have hardly any understanding of Catholic faith, theology, or liturgy. The composers are largely ignorant about Catholic liturgy, yet their songs are sung at Catholic liturgy. To sing their music is to distort the Church's liturgy and to malform Catholics in faith. OCP doesn't care.

Link to the song, which does not belong at all in a Catholic funeral:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VinHOQFkUig&list=OLAK5uy_nOBSJjf8j9629G1ZLmOldzFHCD0SwCYHQ&index=1

Link to the octavo, where you can read the lyrics. Liturgical and spiritual poison:
https://dh8zy5a1i9xe5.cloudfront.net/shared/pdf/preview/30151224.pdf

MatthewRoth

I don’t want us to be locked into any one publisher again however — and I don’t have much for new music in English.

Part of the problem of course is that everyone is going to have their own ideas on the right hymns, both music and texts (collecting texts and harmonizations ~~legally~~ is a lot of work!), adaptations of the propers, and so on and so forth. So locking into Source and Summit is great, but it shouldn’t be the only player in town other than GIA and OCP.

MarkB

I would be more inclined to use Source and Summit if I could pick and choose from its catalogue instead of having to subscribe to the entire service.

I also prefer to be able to select from a variety of publishers and resources. I don't want to be locked in to one company's musical ecosystem.

OMagnumMysterium

I really don't see the need to buy music. 99% of the stuff I'd want to use anyway is free.

Chant is to be given pride of place in the liturgy, and that's free. Renaissance polyphony is basically number two, and anything composed in the Renaissance is not under copyright. There are thousands of great free pieces on CPDL. There are dozens of motet and hymn books which are out of copyright. If I really wanted something oddly specific that nobody had written yet I could write it myself.

Now as far as formatting these musical treasures of tradition, I suppose if someone made an excellent book at a good price, I might buy it for convenience and efficiency. I suppose my money would just go to whoever made the nicest book at the lowest price (assuming it's the same music I would have printed out for myself anyway).

MarkB

I'm not there yet, but moving in that direction.

I use Fr. Samuel Weber's English antiphons, occasionally a Gregorian chant proper, traditional public domain hymns, and an ever-decreasing selection of OCP or GIA contemporary songs.

I finally weaned my parish off of OCP Mass settings. I even ditched "Heritage Mass", which was the last one to be retired.

irishtenor

Which Mass settings are you using, @MarkB ?

MarkB

Mass of St. Philip Neri (Jernberg)
Missa Simplex (Proulx)
Jubilate Deo Latin chant
ICEL chant

Those are enough for the time being. The parish isn't ready for Missa de Angelis.

davido

I love researching and building a program out of free music. But I have advanced degrees, have spent years researching the options. Nobody who replaces me is going to do that. They won’t even pick the decent hymns out of a GIA hymnal.

However, if I could leave my successor with source and summit, no matter who they are, I could still stand to attend mass there. And that’s why we need Source and Summit to break OCP’s market share.

Jeffrey Quick

I sometimes wonder whether music education is a bigger profit center for GIA now than church music. Certainly their contributions in that field are of higher quality and usefulness (and I'm almost as cynical about music ed as the NO), I wonder sometimes if they'd like to get out of their original business.

lmassery

I haven’t subscribed to Source & Summit yet, but my understanding is that you can upload whatever you want to their platform. Or why not have the Saint Michael hymnal, with the Source and Summit Missalette for the readings and propers, for example. The great thing with Source & Summit is they can beat OCP at its own game. What David O says it’s correct: sure I can, and do, pull together music from a variety of free sources to make decent sacred music. But this is not user-friendly, it’s more of an obsession of mine. Source & Summit makes sacred music accessible for people who don’t even know what sacred music is, in the same way OCP made sappy secular music accessible for people who don’t know what sacred music is.

kevinf

The market share with S and S is improving weekly. And for many places, it is the perfect replacement for OCP and anything GIA runs. Knowing the creator personally, I appreciate his efforts. Its a case of follow the template,etc. However, I am doing my third from scratch sacred music program. My current parish has no history of anything, just a four hymn sandwich. So, I use the Weber antiphons, St. Michael (they had it but it was not in the pews)and everything else is free. Motets, anything from the GR, hymns that are not in the SM (as I print a tri-fold worship pamphlet) are there.

Finally I can say what is GIA and OCP? Just letters on a page that have nothing to do with authentic Catholic music.So it shall be......

davido

GIA and OCP do have some lines of choral octavos that are worth pursuing.
GIA does a Pueri Cantores series, also stuff edited by Richard Proulx. And they publish some good modern compositions ( like the Latona Mandatum).
OCP’s Trinitas series of choral anthems has some nice stuff.

ghmus7

Gia does have all that Proulx repertoire, which i hear much of is not in print. But how many customers are even interested.

We also do mostly free choral stuff and have the St..Michael.

davido

There is value in published choral music, composed or edited by leading musicians. It’s professional. CPDL stuff is sometimes good, but frequently quirky and unprofessional. Part of building the institutional longevity of a parish is building its choral library.

CharlesW

That GIA Quarterly is music porn.

Welcome to the MusicaSacra Forum!

Categories