The Symbolic Progression of Music in Christianity

My final project consists of observing music of Christianity and the symbolic role it plays in the Christian faith. This project will begin with the role of Gregorian Chant in early Europe and proceed to modern day Christianity. Be sure to keep in mind that this religous musical journey will obviously not hit every century that had religous music incorporated into Christianity (we would be here forever, trust me :-), but rather looks at a general progression of Christian music and the moods and motivations behind particular progressions.

Gregorian Chant- The video above is an example of Gregorian Chant. Chants were the most important part of Christian masses for they made up almost the entire mass. Gregorian Chants were composed in such a way that the focus was strictly on what was being sung. The chants were composed so that every person of the congregation could sing comfortably. You might also notice the amount of repetition in the chant. By repeating the same notes and much of the same text over and over again, the message or verse of the Bible (usually Psalms!!!) would be embedded into their minds. Also, keep in mind that monks who chanted usually sang for 8 hours a day. The Gregorian Chant was one of the most important symbols of Christianity for its time.

Chants (cont.) with Hildegard von Bingen- Because of the ultimately male domination of the Catholic Church enstilled by the Pope, women played little to no role in the church, and relevantly, the music of the church. Hildegard von Bingen was a member of a Catholic convent since the age of 8. She began composing in response to her visions of the Virgin Mary that she claimed to have. She composed chants for the women of her convent in which they performed them secretly. The one melodic line that accompanies Gregorian chants are composed so that the human voice is the only thing being heard. The early Christian ideals viewed the human voice as being made from God and therefore perfect and was a perfect symbol to represent God and praise him. Hildegard composed for women because she believed that a woman's voice was by far more heavenly and God-worthy for singing. Hildegard's music changed the way people viewed who was worthy enough to perform in a church setting. In conclusion, the chants composed in the early Christian era were used as an ultimate symbol for God's greatness.

Polyphony, Organum and Ockeghem- The clip above is a composition by the composer Ockeghem. This composition explores the use of polyphony (many voice parts) rather than monophony (one voice part) that was present in early Gregorian Chant. Ockeghem's composition showed how many different voice parts performing sacred text could also be used as a symbol for Christianity and the Catholic church. When first composed, this polyphonic style of music was considered very radical because it was vastly different and contained many intricate voice parts rather than one voice part. Leaders of the church were afraid that by adding many voice parts, different rhythms, and different harmonies, the "pureness" of the human sound would be lost and therefore the message would be lost. However, this new polyphonic style became more popular in sacred compositions. Composers of polyphony argued that by adding more human voices and more intricacies, the praise for God would be even greater.

Martin Luther and the Reformation- So now we're going to skip ahead to the 1500s. I'll fill you in on what you've missed. Secular music was beginning to gain popularity throughout Europe, especially in France. Madrigals, chansons, and other types of secular compositions were banned by the church. Also, the use of instruments were banned in the Catholic Church as well. The Catholic officials viewed instruments as a symbol of the devil. They thought this because instruments were made from human hands and did not come directly from God (like the voice) and therefore was corrupt. Martin Luther, who was famous for posting his '95 thesis', disagreed with this ideal. He wanted to harness the power of music for good. Martin Luther composed music that focused strictly on the community aspect of religious services and therefore created "Lutheranism". Luther's music borrowed music from secular sources (aka Madrigals) and fused them with sacred text. This combination was extremely controversial, but people were able to relate more to this "popular", secular style, but still be able to gain spiritual guidance. Of course the Catholic officials were furious, but it shows how influential music is on the Christian community. Luther also translated the sacred texts from Latin to German in order for the lower class people could gain spirituality from music and not just people who could read Latin. Martin Luther stated in one of his writings "Why does the Devil get all the good music?" Just to let you know the clip above incorporates instruments, not quite sure if instruments would have been used in Luther's services.

Palestrina and the Counter-Reformation- During the Reformation many church officials and devout Catholics were upset with the forming of Lutheranism, and more specifically the music that was being used to represent God. The Counter-Reformation when the Council of Trent was formed in order to restore "purity" back to the Catholic church. Music was one of their objectives that they discussed. They did not agree with the intrusion of secular music into sacred music and the use of complicated polyphony. The Council of Trent believed that these new musical practices distracted listeners from the meaning that sacred music was supposed to portray. The Council of Trent and the Pope hired Palestrina in order to restore music's "purity" by writing Gregorian Chants. However, as you can here from the clip above Palestrina did not exactly do what the Pope told him too. Rather he combined some of the compositional techniques from secular sources (madrigals) and combined them with certain harmonies and sonorities that sounded pure and holy, much like early polyphony. Palestrina was able to successfully combine sacred and secular music in order for it to be accepted as a symbol of Christianity. It both stayed true to early Christian ideals, but also showed the progression and adaptivity of the changing times. Nice job Palestrina!

Instruments in Church??!!- The clip above shows Lawrence University's performance of George Friedrich Handel's Hallelujah Chorus of his master work "The Messiah". After listening, what are your thoughts? I remembered when I first heard "The Messiah" I was blown away by the power the orchestra and chorus had. The use of instruments in sacred music started to become popular around the 1600 and 1700s. Composers such as Vivaldi, Bach, and Handel all used heavy orchestration in their sacred works. It is interesting how much sacred music in the Christian faith has grown from one voice singing a solo line to a full-blown orchestra playing a two hour piece. Handel's "Hallelujah Chorus" is praising God and that he will reign forever. The message is still heard; however, the use of instruments in sacred music is used to enhance the text. This shows how music is able to adapt to changing times in order to still represent Christianity as a whole. Not to mention the profound community effect (an important aesthetic of religion)this kind of music has on both performers and audience members.

Up until this point, I've described Christian music as a part of the church service. It's interesting how nowadays, much of the music you here on the radio is not geared toward religion at all. How is it that music is still stands as a large symbol for Christianity when a majority of the population does not listen to "Christian music". Sure, music is still incorporated into many christian services, but Christian music is still present outside of the church. Below are a few examples, of modern day Christian music. You might find yourself very surprised at how many different genres Christian music has explored. Another interesting aspect of contemporary Christian music is that it has moved out of the church. Christian music is no longer limited or confined to just a church. Take a look at these examples...

Grace Like Rain by Todd Agnew- This example takes a more contemporary approach. As you can tell this example uses more contemporary instruments than say what Bach would have used. This music is still considered sacred, even though the text is not taken from any specific Bible verse. This type of music caters possibly to a younger, more contemporary Christian based audience. "Grace Like Rain" is yet another example of how music of the Christian faith adapts in order to stay a symbol for the current day followers.

Jesus Music by Lecrae- So this might take you off guard at first...it did for me. Again, just as Agnew's "Grace Like Rain", "Jesus Music" by Lecrae is able to convey a Christian message through the popular genre of hip-hop. This is yet another example of how music of Christian faith has evolved and adapted in order to maintain a symbol for Christianity.

The One Thing I Have Left by Hawk Nelson- Yes, it seems that Hawk Nelson has found a way to turn a rock show atmosphere into a place of worship. This shows how again how music in the Christian faith has branched out to many different genres in order to reach a wider population of followers. Although, the argument could be made that the followers of bands such as Hawk Nelson and Lecrae could only like their music because of the style and how it "sounds good" without really focusing on the message. Although this is a valid argument, I believe that it depends on the individual. Some may only like the music because of it's style and others may enjoy the more contemporary christian music because of the positive message it portrays.

This last clip is taken from an interview with Lacey Mosler, lead singer of the heavy metal Christian band Flyleaf. She describes why she writes and performs music and the purpose it's supposed to have in todays world. She also goes to describe the type of audience Flyleaf aims toward in order to renew, revive, and replenish people's (especially younger people's) faith. The interview also addresses the issue of just listening for the sake of listening and not focusing on the message as well.

Diluting 10th week stress

So I was reading a blog about how a student was able to use meditation as a form of relaxation from her 9th week stress. I really enjoyed this idea because diverting your mind to a place of peace and tranquility is something that could be very useful in the final push towards the end of the year. With finals, my voice qualifying exam, finding plane tickets, and organizing my job this summer all piling up, I think finding a peaceful state of mind would be ridiculously helpful. Being able to recognize that everything will be alright if you just keep your head on straight will ultimately keep me more sane in this coming week. So my goal for 10th week is to work hard, stay sane, and enjoy being at Lawrence for spring term. I would advice others to do so as well. It's been great blogging!

What it takes to make a new religion

When reading the the chapters on the Bahai, I realized that "creating" a new religion goes beyond believing in a higher power. The chapter outlines a number of aesthetics that are essential in organizing and maintaining a religious sect.

One of these aspects involves history. In order for a religion to hold legitimacy, the origin of the religion must be present. For example, the reading describes the story of Baha'ulla and his journey over present day Iran, Iraq, and other middle eastern countries and the influence of Islam on the Bahai people.

The community aspect is another large component of creating a religion. The "chosen" people of a faith also play to the legitimacy of the religion. Having followers of a faith from the culture is essential in influencing other to possibly join and follow the newly created faith.

These are only two of the many aesthetics needed to create a religion. When reading the Bahai text I was very interested in the story of Baha'ullah and the branching off from Islam. When I say branching off, I mean taking most of the Islamic tendencies and traditions, but using them in different ways. Throughout religious studies I have begun to notice a particular trends when it comes to different relgions. Most religions are based off of the same historical figures and facts that have happened. It is people's own interpretations which have caused the "differences" in seperate faiths. Some examples include the Shiites and Sunnis in Islam, not to mention all the different sects of Christianity...point proven.

Community

So this blog is a little late coming, sorry about this. But anyway over the course of the term I've been very intrigued by the meaning of religion and the general populations definition of religion. It's very hard to classify religion as one individual thing. My own personal view on religion has changed. My spiritual life is very personal and does not involve a community type aspect. I would much rather focus on my own personal relationship with God before I am able to focus on others' spiritual relationships. However, I had no idea how powerful the community aspect of religion is like. That being said I think it's very interesting that people find strength in others in regards to a higher power. In many of the faiths we have focused on, people find a connection within a community in the physical realm in order to connect with the spiritual realm. This is ultimately a fascinating phenomenon.

Don't worry, 'bout a thing

There are many symbols that we discussed in class that were evidently present in the video. The one main group of symbols were the colors. Red, Green, Black, and Yellow were all visually present in the Bobo camp. Rastafarian followers decorated their homes with these colors. It was quite a stunning image when I watched this video. Also the clothing that the Rastafarian people wore also bared these symbolic colors. Both men and women represented with this religion by the articles of clothing they wore. For example, I noticed men wearing a lot of red head raps, especially the designated "tribe leaders".
After watching the video I was very surprised by the amount of insight and research every member that was interviewed had on their culture. Every Rastafarian in the video really seemed to internalize their faith and believe whole heartedly in their ideals. After watching and listening to Bob Marley's music I was surprised at how relevant Bob Marley's music was to the Rastafarian culture.

Here's a link to the rastafarian website!!! pretty cool stuff

http://www.rastafarian.net/

I wish Bob Marley taught at the Con...

So this week, I've been practicing extensively for my sophomore qualifying voice examination for my vocal performance degree in the Conservatory. As I was practicing, I became very tired of the pieces I was singing. It seemed like I had no motivation to sing the pieces, nor was I truly thinking about what I was trying to portray both musically and affectually. I then thought about Bob Marley and the Rastafarian ideals. Bob Marley was such a huge influence for Rastafari. His music and what he was singing about as well as the ideals he stood for (freedom, etc.) is able to move an entire body of people. The Bob Marley craze and the community of followers of his music is very religion-esque. This both inspired me to practice in a different way, but also motivate me to move an audience through the musical ideas expressed in the music I sing and perform.

Ethiopia steals...

So after reading the "history" of Ethiopian religion, I was very interested on the outlook that I have on the Ethiopian culture. I really found the story of the sun very interesting. When the text described how the sun of Israel left and permenantly found its true home in Ethiopia. It's peculiar that Ethiopia somewhat "claimed" the original spiritual force as their own when it "left" Israel. The story also goes onto describe how a second sun descends upon Israel. The Israelites cast out this sun until it rises to illuminate the world (aka....HUGE JESUS METAPHORE!) I don't know what to think about Ethiopians. To me it sounds like they jacked a story from another religion and also claimed the Queen of Sheba as their own. It's great that they consider themselves the royal blood line of Soloman, but the way the culture comes to that conclusion is a little skewed and/or questionable.

Metaphorically speaking...

Hooray for metaphors! I think the article that was read for the assignment does relate to what we have been discussing for most of the term thus far. Let's take a look at what we've read thus far. In regards to the mounds of the native americans, is it possible that these people looked at these symbols to depict, metaphorically and physically, what they believe? Do the Psalms depict literally what we should do in our lives to reach God, or do they depict metaphores that aren't to be taken literally? These are the questions we need to be asking ourselves when we study the works of religion. The metaphorical ideas expressed in all the works we studied could be interpreted an infinite number of ways (well....some of them at least). The video we watched of the atheist stated that "many passages in the Bible can't be interpreted any other way and there is no room for interpretation". I don't really believe that to be true. Whether you would like to admit it or not, everything could be looked at as a metaphor. I am not saying, however, that everything should be looked at as a metaphor, but simply to understand that many people could interpret religious writings differently.

The "Good Word"?

On Christian Teaching

On Christian Teaching does give some insight on how to read the Psalms. I believe St. Augustine would be upset with how we have been interpreting the Psalms. St. Augustine suggests that in order to fully understand the true meaning of Christianity, one must look at Christian history from beginning to end. In other words, we cannot read the Psalms and only the Psalms and expect to gain any truth from God's words. One must look at the Psalms in context of the entire Bible in order to fully understand the meaning of the Bible.
In a way St. Augustine is right. It's really hard to micro manage one part of the Bible without considering the context. However, asking people to memorize the Bible is pretty ridiculous. I'm way to busy to even consider that task. I don't think people need to memorize the Bible in order to gain it's worth, but I do agree, however, that while reading people should consider the context in which it was written. Also, one should be aware that interpretation of one person may be different than another persons.

Just remember...

So I know this blog is a little late coming, but I think it's still worth taking a look at. While reflecting on the psalms I am beginning to understand the origin of the psalms and the historical events in which they were derived from. It's so interesting that these stories are told through the eyes of one man's interpretation. Again, i'm going to talk about interpretation. I don't have a lot to say about this topic that I haven't already emphasized, but one thing to take away from this blog is to remember that just because it's interpreted differently doesn't mean that the various interpretations are wrong. But one should remember the historical context in which it was written.

God...armor and battle helmet included?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gfZnWVoqZ8


So when I read Psalm 18, the overall theme of sinners who do not repent eventually being punished is clearly present in this psalm. It is very interesting when the psalm describes God as "letting loose His arrows and scattered them, lightning bolts shot, and He panicked them (Psalms 55)." In reference to the question being asked....yes, this is terrifying. This psalm is describing the power that God has, however, there is another underlying message that I think may be a bit more pressing. Along with the Sparticus-esque God being portrayed, the psalm also describes the speaker as having God be a foundation in order to "battle" evildoers. The psalm states "and who the Rock except our God? The God who girds me with might and keeps my way blameless, makes my legs like gazelle's, and stands me on the heights, and trains my hands for comba, makes my arms bend a bow of bronze. You gave me your shield of rescue (Psalms 57)." I'm sure people during the time that the Psalms were written most likely interpreted the physical fighting for what they believed was just. However, if you asked someone today how they would interpret the psalm, the answer may be a bit different. In order for religion to be applicable to today's society, one may approach this psalm more metaphorically. For example, maybe the God that throughs lightning bolts and makes the Earth shake is merely a representation of power. Maybe having the earth shake and God battling is a representation of how a person may feel without God. These are not my view points, I'm merely looking at this from as many view points as possible. And referring back to God being someone's "Rock" in battle, could be viewed as having God as a foundation in order to make decisions in life that will lead a person to Heaven (again not necessarily my opinion, just another way to look at things).

Interpretation Part II

So in my last post, my main talking point was primarily focused on interpretation. Going throughout the week, I kept asking myself how many different people interpreted the events that occured throughout history and interpreted and made them relevant to their own personal beliefs. I mean think about it...depending on what people are/were looking for in terms of divinity they could've have interpreted anything as being divine. I think it's so interesting that so many religions spawned off some of the same historical events. How can one person or a group of peoples' depiction of religious events or figures create relgions that appear to be unrelatable.

Although I may be taken a negative approach thus far to this topic, I'm actually in favor of interpretation. Isn't spirituality used as a guide to interpret a person's world and events in order to make their world a more predictable safe place? Many religious figures interpreted what was going on around them and applied religion to in order to explain things. People who were confused found comfort in believing in a higher power and felt safe by doing so. I guess the point I'm trying to make is that spirituality should be personally relevant to your own world and own personal situations in order to make sense of it all. However, that being said I believe it is ignorant to respond negatively to other's personal interpretation of faith.

The Power of Interpretation

"Interpretation"...what an interesting word. Interesting especially when discussing Psalm II (both new and old versions). To early Americans reading about "heathens" and how God's people will take land they see on the coast from the heathens. The early Americans could have viewed the "heathens" as the Native Americans. Someone in class today brought up an interesting point of interpreting the Book of Psalms in a way that plays in the advantage of a situation. This could very well be relevant to the early Americans. Think about it...you arrive in a brand new place, and in order to explain your surroundings and world more clearly (aka. purpose of religion) you revert to a passage from Psalms that seems to depict an "exact" explanation of your situation.
This exemplifies that power of interpretation. Because religion is something that has been present since the Paleolithic age, religion has to be able to adapt and be applicable to the current world. I am not suggesting that this is a bad thing to do or that adaptation is wrong, in fact, I feel it is necessary to constantly reexamine the historical clues and scriptural evidence that has been given to us in order to try and explain our current world. But one cannot deny that different interpretations can lead to skew what historically happen and possibly, in a biblical context, lead to misconceptions about what God wants and what God's people are supposed to do. Hence, this shows the power of interpretation by man on the supernatural.

Personal Faith

My faith as a Christian has transitioned over the years. By transitioned, I mean that I used to be Catholic than became simply a non-denominational Christian. This is mostly because I felt disconnected with God when I went to church...as odd as that sounds. I don't know if it was the structure of the church (which is a discussion for a different day) or other things, but I truly feel my relationship with God is personal. I know that religion is meant to bring communities together like we have discussed in class. I do not disagree with this statement, however, by distancing myself from the Catholic church, I feel a greater connection with my spiritual life now than ever.
Along with the my own personal connection with God, I often times do not feel the need to express my opinions on Christianity or feel the need to "prove" that God exists. I know that spiritual guidance has helped me stay strong in situations and helped me make the right decisions. And that's good enough for me.

Mounds as Symbols

When reading the "Indian Mounds of Wisconsin", and more specifically, the EFFIGY mounds, I began to notice how the mounds played an integral part of the Native Americans lives. The mounds themselves are an actual physical symbols that possibly represent the Native Americans belief in higher spiritual power and/or afterlife. One important thing to note in regards to the effigy mounds creating conceptions of a general of existence is that the mounds were built in order to bring the community together. While reading I noticed that activities such as hunting, gathering, etc. were necessary to for group survival. The text also states that the mounds (or ceremonies that took place in/around/near the mounds) also involved the community aspect. By having the mounds be an intricate part of the community aspect of the tribes, this suggests that the thought of afterlife and a higher power would also be an intricate part. These symbols that could possibly represent things of higher realms by Native Paleolithic people suggest that the entire community respected theses mounds. Although researchers are fairly certain that the mounds are of ceremonial purposes, there is always room for speculation. As I am beginning to realize in this course, the evidence found for the paleolithic people is always up for debate. Rarely is there solid evidence. However, that being said, a lot of the evidence in "Indian Mounds of Wisconsin" have strong suggestions that these facts are indeed facts. It is always good to examine what we have been given as people of present to hypothesize what occured in our past.

Religious or Spiritual? Same or Different?

When thinking about religion, many times automatically think of church and/or establishment. People often ask me if I'm "religious". Most of the time I respond with "no, but I do consider myself very spiritual." I guess I always tended to view religion as going to church, reading the bible, having communion, things like that. I was brought up Catholic, however, I consider myself a non-denominational Christian. I think this is partly due because I maybe didn't agree with some aspects the church/establishment entailed in my eyes. This is not a rip on the Catholic Church by any means, I just didn't feel comfortable and found it hard to make a spiritual connection with God. Although we're discussing in class the community aspect of faith and religion, I find my own personal connection with God to be a greater asset than the community aspect. Again, I want to reiterate that this is my own personal experience and do not hold judgements or criticisms of those who are of different faith or of different view points. I guess, it's difficult sometimes to find people to discuss religion with in a non-threatening, judgemental setting. Maybe that's a reason why I took this course...to understand other people's view points and to have an open discussion where people are free to express there thoughts and opinions. I understand that this course is meant to observe the effect of religion on many societies, but hopefully I will gain perspective on my own personal view on spirituality and/or religion.

Palaeolithic Art and Religion/Sweet Cave Tour

When first enrolling for this course I came in not knowing what to expect. I have my own personal views and roles that religion play in my life, however, I am interested in the role religion has played in other cultures and communities. While reading "Paleolithic Religion and Art", I noticed that the article did not focus on the the specifics of the "religious influence" on prehistoric civilition. The article tended to focus on the mere fact that some sort of religion or supernatural influence was a possible intricate part of prehistoric societies. I view religion as a type of glue that holds a community together. People are always looking for something bigger, and many times, an overarching, supernatural force can be just that.

In "Paleolithic Religion", I found one statement to be really entriguing. When describing the wall paintings the text states "Upper Paleolithic Art was not intended to give an accurate account of the world outside the caves. Rather, in concerned beliefs entertained by the author." This idea is also seen in the Cave of Lascaux as well. This suggests that religion was viewed possibly as a way to merely answer questions or interpret thier surroundings. Isn't that true of religion today? Isn't one of the main functions of religion is to find guidance for the world and peoples' lives? Being spiritual in my own life, I can relate to this idea of using my faith as a road map for my life. Although the article points out the "evidence" of religion in Paleolithic Neanderthal community is up for debate, I highly doubt one can deny the impact of religion on our current society. Regardless of what a person believes or thinks, the force that religion has on a community is quite remarkable. How can a person deny religion has an influence on life when there are atheists and Christians who hold public debates on whether or not God exists? How is it that a child born into poverty is able to be happy because they have "faith"? Or how can two nations go to war over land that is considered "holy"? And how can people devote hours of their day to prayer? These are prime examples of how religion affects our lives, regardless of what we believe.