Jeffrey (and all the people on your blog; you may publish this if you wish),
I am writing for two reasons:
1) to assure individuals (who spend too much time on the internet) that my previous and only contribution to a blog (supporting Tom Stehle for using the eucharistic acclamations from Mass of Creation) on April 1st was genuine, and to say that
2) I pray for us all, (especially) for those who think my prayers might not be heard as well as theirs. Don’t we all want God’s Reign to come? My music is not at the heart of what we seek and do as Christians. What we sing is not as important as how we live.
If you need a reason to verify this, or if you (or anyone who reads your blog) would like to communicate with me for any reason, my e-mail is
Quietbreezemusic@aol.com
Blessings to you in this wonderful season of Pentecost (when all voices and cultures were understood and heard by the grace of the Holy Spirit).
I have no illusions about the qualiity or the longevity of my music but, as i said, earlier, I trust God’s Spirit to “hold our faith together” into the future.
As you will probably appreciate, I won’t respond to any blogs again. It is hard to engage with people who dislike you so much.
What I would ask is that, if you want to put this on your blog, please give me the gift of publishing it in its entirety, without any additional italics or boldface.
God’s peace (that passes all understanding),
Marty Haugen
This email is a reference to a previous post of mine when Marty Haugen posted at Catholic Sensibility.
Well that was interesting, if rather strange such as the assertion that those who don’t think his music is appropriate for Mass think that his prayers prayers might not be heard as well as ours. While he has certainly been a lightning rod I certainly can’t remember anybody making such an assertion. I really can’t blame him for starting out a little snarky with “who spend too much time on the internet” considering how much snark has been aimed in his direction. But he seems a bit thin skinned since in his original email he had said that God’s people had suffered because the Catholic Church won’t ordain women. I guess it is okay to attack our faith, but wrong if we question the appropriateness of his music during the Mass. I really don’t hate his music and think it is fine as far as Praise and Worship music goes outside of Mass, though I might quibble about the lyrics at time.
As a side note I was going to post on Jimmy Akin’s Why is Christian Art so bad, but I don’t want to get any emails from Thomas “Painter of Blight” Kinkade.
27 comments
Funny that Haugen didn’t write to Catholic Sensibility since that’s where he posted his initial comment. I’m not surprised he didn’t write to me because even though I was the first to blog on it, I illustrated my entry with a picture of Haugen with angry eyebrows, steam coming out of his ears, and “I’m mad!” scrawled on the bottom!
What worries me is that he’s been thinking about this for six weeks. Obviously, he feels hurt, and I think I ought to examine my conscience and see how I have contributed to that. But Marty, if you really believe that the longevity of your music doesn’t matter, what does it matter what a cafon like me says?
I think a lot of the anger that gets directed toward Marty Haugen is misdirected… it’s really anger at the abuse of power by liturgists, and the abdication of authority by the clergy. The fact is that parishioners have little or no say in what music is used for worship in the congregation… and if the priest has delegated responsibility for liturgical music to a mere functionary who feels no sense of obligation to the larger Church and tradition (other than what their personal taste might dictate), you can imagine, I think, why many would be frustrated. Lex orandi, lex credendi…Music is part of the prayer of the liturgy… so it has an impact on the faith of the community.
I know there are apparently many out there, but my experience is that liturgists aren’t evil dissenters, but that they limit themselves to the OCP hymnals because they actually like the 80s pieces more than they like the ones which the Church has used for centuries, or even newer (less than 20 years old) music. Like that guy in the office who plays REO Speedwagon all the time.
While some of the lyrics are clearly wrong theologically, most of the 80s tunes are just plain hard to sing and hard to remember the words to.
In any case, Marty Haugen’s letter is a good reminder that there are people behind the art, ideas, etc, that we criticize. People who have just as much claim to the love of God as we do.
Public people will be criticized publicly, but they are right in expecting Christian bloggers to exercise charity, even in their criticisms. Mea culpa. Really.
No matter how much good effect MH’s music has or hasn’t had (I think many love God via the sound and lyrics he has written), the mirror he holds up to us may have great spiritual effect–how many people will receive the Sacrament of Reconciliation as a result? Mysterious ways, indeed!
I know, for instance, that there are two Catholic “characters” I have repeatedly, publicly criticized unkindly. These are not people I know, but people whose teachings/writings drive my crazy. Blessedly, I haven’t had the urge to bash” them since I gave it up last Lent…
Blessed are they who pierce our conscience?
“Blessed are they who pierce our conscience?”
Amen to your whole comment, Joanne. People can life/dislike/disagree/dissemble/deconstruct his music and debate liturgy till the end of the age, but without charity, it’s a gong clanging, if I recall Paul correctly. I don’t remember where I have seen all critiques of Haugen online, but I think they have gone over the line in many places.
Thanks for posting this, Jeff.
Marty says: What we sing is not as important as what we live
Dear Marty, if you are reading….
Lex orandi, lex credendi – we pray as we believe.
Music in the Mass is prayer and when the words of the music are not fully compatible with Catholic teaching, then what happens?
I often wonder what would have happened had folk music never taken a turn into a heretical, or even a watered down path. I don’t think there would be the kind of backlash there is today.
I once played and sang in a folk group all the while secretly longing for a full blown choir, in which I now belong at my current parish where centuries old music is valued.
I know that in my heart, when I played guitar and other instruments during the Mass, that I meant no disrespect, nor did I mean any with the songs I sung, with lyrics totally in appropriate for a Catholic Mass. Hence, I know there is a certain level of innocence on the part of many who do this today.
However, musicians should be humble enough to learn the catechism very well, and to make an act of faith in adhering to those teachings with which they can’t full accept while seeking understanding. The problem is that some want to change what they don’t understand when it does not fit with their lifestyle and these things make their way into the music in ways often too subtle for the average person to pick up at first.
This is where it gets irritating. The Church has documents on sacred music which should be studied, understood, and respected. The Mass does not belong to any individual musician, but to the Church and the Church has been ignored with regards to sacred music.
Peace!
Problem these days is that we cannot separate legitimate criticism from personality. Most people these days take criticisms as “you are saying I’m a bad person”, rather than correctly seeing it simply as “you just didn’t do a good job.” The sooner we separate personality from criticism the better we will be.
BTW the Akin post comments are way too long, but one commenter posted about Sufjan Stevens, who is probably the best thing out there these days. Music that is great but infused with Christian themes, just amazing. Check out his album Illinoise if you like, you will be amazed.
What does this mean:
“Pentecost…when all voices and cultures were understood and heard by the grace of the Holy Spirit” ?
The hearing and understanding was done by the cultures – not the other way round ….
Problem these days is that we cannot separate legitimate criticism from personality. Most people these days take criticisms as “you are saying I’m a bad person”, rather than correctly seeing it simply as “you just didn’t do a good job.”
Perhaps because many of the critics who offer otherwise legitimate criticisms often cross the line and get too personal.
It’s sometimes a fine line, but how many times have we seen someone make the leap from “X’s composition has components that could be deemed heretical.” to “X is a heretic!”?
Also, we should EXPECT someone to be sensitive to criticisms of their life’s work. That is exactly why we should be ESPECIALLY sensitive and charitable in offering criticisms of said work.
As a musician and composer of liturgical music myself I know how it feels to have people say that they love the music or that they hate the music. Sometimes the music is like your child and no one wants to hear their child slagged.
Finding liturgical music that pleases everyone, including of course God is like finding a nice suit that will fit both David and Goliath.
The criteria shouldn’t be “what we like” but what is sacred — set apart — meaning that it wouldn’t show up in a selection of showtunes, etc. It is clearly set apart for the worship of God.
http://www.doxaweb.com/blog/2004/04/what-music-is-fitting-for-liturgy.htm
Finding liturgical music that pleases everyone, including of course God is like finding a nice suit that will fit both David and Goliath.
It isn’t the task of liturgical musicians (or anyone else for that matter) to find music that pleases everyone but to play the music that is suitable for Mass, e.g., Chant, Polyphony, and hymns which approach in their “movement, inspiration and savor the Gregorian form.”
“Perhaps because many of the critics who offer otherwise legitimate criticisms often cross the line and get too personal.”
Well put…which is why we should focus on the garbage that Haugen-Haas-Joncas-Duffner, et al, have so often composed and not upon the garbagemen. On the other hand, none of their garbage would have spilled out were it not for tone-deaf pastors and sadistic music directors.
I want to echo Boots’ comment about separating criticism of the art to criticism of the artist.
Critics should be allowed to voice their opinions using no uncertain terms. I should be able to say Marty’s newest jingle less musically interesting as a dressed up version of “Mary Had A Little Lamb” without having to worry if poor Marty is going to think about it for six weeks and write a teary eyed response. Frankly, I’m sick of the “You’ve hurt my feelings boo hoo” tactic. Let’s be adults instead of middle schoolers.
If you can’t separate criticism of art from criticism of your person don’t be an artist.
If you can’t separate criticism of art from criticism of the artist don’t be a critic.
those who think my prayers might not be heard as well as theirs.
Well, actually, when we willfully try to pray with Scripture (cf. the Graduale Romanum, the official texts) rather than alongside or even against it …
Don’t we all want God’s Reign [sic] to come?
Um, no. I pray His Kingdom come. See above.
I have no illusions about the quality or the longevity of my music
Unsolicited advice: Holy Scripture (and Tradition as embodied in official Mass translations) would improve it one hundred percent.
Really, the publisher G.I.A. has much of the blame to share here. They actively promote personality cults with their catalogue divided into sections with singerauthorcomposer photos and personality albums. Just like pop music. Apparently, if you like Marty, just go to pages 41-44 (e.g.; I do not have the latest catalogue with me), and if you like Donna or need some of that “Hispanic music,” just go to another page. You say you need the propers for Holy Trinity in English? And you do not care who the composer is? Sorry, cannot help you. Chant in Spanish? No, just no.
Oy vey, Maria.
This whole string is more evidence of what I call Christian Love Abiding. I feel for Marty, but he should cheer up. No one (has yet) suggested in comments to this blog that his work, like mine, be burned or “For fun, tie it to a tiny stake in the ground and pretend that it is screaming “Nooooooooo!” as it burns.” [Posted by Rob email at October 11, 2006 08:04 AM] Needless to say, this was something that I, a convert from Judaism, found quite revolting — even with my fairly outrageous sense of humor.
You really ought to delete his email address.
You really ought to delete his email address.
Agreed, unless he intended it be published.
“For fun, tie it to a tiny stake in the ground and pretend that it is screaming “Nooooooooo!” as it burns.”
You find that “revolting”?
Yawn…
“Funny that Haugen didn’t write to Catholic Sensibility since that’s where he posted his initial comment.”
As if you would know.
If Marty had e-mailed me, I would not have shared the information unless I was particularly asked to do so. I do not adhere to the Welborn Protocol.
That said, it’s good to see that pop psychology is alive and well on the Right these days. Heaven forbid I would ever give any of you my e-mail.
Cheers, and peace.
Everyone knows here that Marty has never been Catholic, right? That’s why he’s not nearly as much to blame as the Catholic people who hired and paid him to write music. So you could say truthfully that he’s a heretic (at least in the context of Catholicism). But he’s more accurately a Protestant.
I can feel the love.
I am not a fan of Haugen’s oeuvre, though I’ve yet to be persuaded that each and every thing he has written is dreck.
That said, much of the complaint directed in his particular direction would be more accurately and appropriately directed at the marriage of (1) parochial monarchy (the pastor’s unilateral power to make many decisions for the parish) and (2) capitalism (which not only governs how music publishers ply their wares but also more generally acculturates everyone to expect their tastes to be catered to).
As is so often the case in human doings, it is often things we value for other reasons that get in the way of other things we also value, and we get frustrated.
Is he the author of that one song that tries to “sing a new church into being”?…..I would love to tell the author of that abomination that “NO! I will worship in the church Christ founded thank you!”
I would like to affirm the comments made by “Lets Not Forget”. As I teach my college students, authentic criticism clarifies content. Music criticism identifies areas of mastery and areas in need of improvement. May I suggest an acronym: F.A.C.T. Criticism should be: Fair, Accurate, Constructive and Thorough. Fair – communicated using respectful language. Accurate – on topic, objective. Constructive – helpful, meaningful. Thorough – necessary, organized, rational. It’s not surprising that composers of music conceived in this era of relativism (which emphasizes feeling over fact) tend to take things personally and lose sight of an obvious corollary: if one’s music possesses genuine artistic merit, merit meaning a high degree of artistry (skillful presentation of truth, goodness and beauty), the quality of that music speaks for itself. If people cannot appreciate a work, that may be due to: 1) their ignorance, in which case it may take some time to educate people as to the objective value of a work; or 2), the work does not possess artistic merit. Composers: do not fake humility, do not be proud – just be honest (- and get a thick skin if necessary). Mr. Haugen, like so many others, is struggling to accept the fact that his music is not well composed. Anyone trained in common practice harmony/counterpoint, poetry and rudimentary theology can confirm the veracity of that statement. One of my philosophy professors used to call works of low artistic merit �gart� because, clearly, there is no such thing as �bad art�, per se. Art is, by definition, something that possesses merit: skillful rendering or embodiment of truth, goodness and beauty. �Gart� is stuff masquerading as art.
Haugen may be a very, very, nice and gentle man, but when I visit a Catholic church and hear his music, my skin crawls. My mind begins to panic for an escape. And for me, that’s the simple truth about his oeuvre.
Nothing personal.
Haugen has a good number of very nice psalm settings. He also has written some good hymns.
A good chunk of Marty Haugen’s psalm settings are really good stuff, and when he writes a good hymn it’s really good. Thing is, his good stuff doesn’t stand out as “Marty Haugen”. It doesn’t attract attention, because it doesn’t cause tooth-grinding.
I would also say that many of his songs’ more unorthodox moments are not so much the product of erroneous beliefs as a lack of lyrics editors. (Not to mention the pathetic music publishers not catching it.)
Comments are closed.