The Main Objection to Sacred Music

The case for sacred music in Catholic liturgy has always struck me as overwhelmingly obvious on aesthetic and theological grounds. We are, after all, speaking of liturgy, the communicative work between eternity and time that permits enclaves of holiness and perfect beauty in this vale of tears. Of course the music must be distinct. It must have certain features. It should be tied to the ritual, draw on traditions that take us out of our own time, and give us a bridge to the broadness of whole of human experience and the whole of the history of our faith. Above all, it should have a beauty that strives to make audible the beauty of eternal things.
...
What we are most likely to hear today are arguments in favor of diversity of style. It runs as follows. We need a wide variety of music at Mass because there is a wide variety of personalities and groups in the world. People have different ways of worshipping God. There is not one kind of sound peculiar to Heaven and so there is not one sound peculiar to God's people on earth. There are many ways to be lifted up and there is no way to say with certainty what kind of music will accomplish that end. It could be chant. For many it is. For others, it is rock or calypso or pounding drums or electronic beats or maybe it is serial composition or traditional hymns or folk music or country and western. The options are as wide as the radio band. If we deny it, we are questioning the immensity of God's love. We can discover Christ in many ways, through many paths.

That's a long paragraph but not nearly as long as it might be had I kept multiplying the bromides as far as I'm able. I'm sure you can contribute your own here. Diversity rooted in relativism is the faith of our age, and it is not difficult to catch the spirit. It is integral to a consumerist cultural mentality that says that we are all entitled to get what we want no matter what and no one is permitted to stand in our way, no matter what the context. The best producers, it is believed, are those that throw principle to the wind and cater to our every need. Indeed, it is not surprising that those most likely to make these points as regards liturgy are publishing companies who want to fill every conceivable marketing niche.

It seems so reasonable, so inclusive, so tolerant, so open minded. What's not to like? Well, let us first observe that you can scour the writings of all Popes from the beginning of the life of the Church to the current day and not find a single statement arguing that a wide diversity of music should be made available at liturgy according to the preferences of the people.

That fact alone should raise some alarm bells. If diversity and personal preference were really the central principles of Catholic liturgical life, we might expect extended elaboration on that theme emanating from the chair of St. Peter. Instead what we find is the opposite. From the earliest centuries, the goal of all writing on sacred music centers on the issue of what constitutes suitable music for liturgical life of the faith.

The concern here begins deep in the history of the faith. It was entirely possible that the early Christians could have drawn from pagan culture in their choice of music at Mass. They could have used dance rhythms, metered poetry, and rhymes. But they did not. Instead, the Psalms served as the first music for liturgy. The Psalms are prose. They were traditional in the sense that they were rooted in a long history. Instruments were not part of worship at all. There is no mistaking the idea here. They saw that liturgical music had special marks that were suitable for sacred events. Other music was excluded.
...
The music of liturgy is not all-together different from the text of liturgy: it is there to instruct, teach, lead, help us mature in the faith, and assist in the salvation of our souls. Not just any text will do. Not just any music will do.

Read the entire article, by Jeffery Tucker, here