By Mark Emerson Donnelly (Una Voce Canada Composer in Residence)
I would like to extend my sincerest gratitude to Una Voce Canada for promoting me and my work as a full-time composer of sacred music.
This is about my approach to liturgical composition. Others may disagree.
Those of you familiar with my name probably know that music has been a big part of my professional life. During the past forty years, I’ve not only sung in opera and on the concert stage, but earned the nickname “Mr. O Canada” for the way I sing the Canadian national anthem. Tripping on a carpet while singing the anthem AND skating garnered me over 3.3 million views on YouTube.
I have also conducted elementary, high school, and college choirs, and barbershop choruses, and have been a dramatic and music director for many stage productions, as well as a private voice instructor.
Despite all of this, the one musical constant in my life has been singing and conducting Gregorian Chant and sacred polyphony of the classical Roman School, mostly for the Catholic Church. I’ve also composed vocal music, off and on, for the same period of time, but more intensely for the last ten years. (That is, as intensely as I can, given that my wife Catherine and I have nine children.) I’ve written classical art songs, hymns, psalm settings, and LOTS of polyphony!
Recently, Catherine and I were talking about why I compose sacred music. It was a curious conversation; after thirty years of marriage she has a pretty good idea of why I do it. Yet, after the simple (but TRUE) response: For the greater glory of God and the sanctification of souls, the answer gets a little bit more complicated.
As time would have it, a couple of days later, Henry, a friend and mentor of mine, said, “Your music is NOT ONLY GOOD, BUT VITAL! You have to get it out there. People gotta hear it! And not just in your parish.” This echoed what a local pastor told me several years ago (after hearing my Missa Sicut cervus): “Your music doesn’t do anyone any good if nobody knows about it!”
As I said earlier, I’ve been doing this for decades, primarily as a parochial musician. All I’ve ever wanted to do was provide beautiful music for the Mass. I’ve written other stuff along the way, but church music has always been my focus and love.
To that end, let me try to answer the question which prompted Catherine’s and my discussion: Why do I write sacred music? To answer fully, I need to answer three more pointed questions:
- Why do I write sacred music THE WAY I DO?
- Is Henry correct: Is it VITAL?
- How do we determine if it’s GOOD or WORTHWHILE?
1. Pope Benedict XVI (then Cardinal Ratzinger) said in 2002 that “Christian art today is caught between two fires”: (1) the cult of the ugly, which rejects beauty as truth, and (2) the deceptive beauty, which does not bring human beings out of themselves toward the Divine, but only stirs up a desire for power and pleasure; a desire to possess things and others, rather than be possessed by Truth and Goodness.
In short, the Christian artist today must be vigilant in rejecting the ugly while embracing true beauty, not the deceptive beauty which cultivates inwardness, leading to narcissism and selfishness.
Taking the lead from St. Pius X (Tra le sollecitudini, 1903), the formula seemed easy: The more sacred music is like Gregorian Chant and classical Roman Polyphony, the better suited it is for Mass, and, thus, more likely to “bring human beings out of themselves toward the Divine.” So that’s what I did, and continue to do.
So, HOW do I do this? Traditional Functional Harmony!
Here’s a super simple way to understand Functional Harmony:
From the beginning of a piece of music, every note and chord leads the listener, in an unconscious way, to the end of the piece.
The degree of skill and inspiration of the composer determines how well he or she succeeds in producing something people want to listen to.
Here’s a slightly more involved way to understand Functional Harmony:
Pretty well every note and chord has its purpose; it has a function in the greater whole of a given work, as it proceeds from beginning to end.
This is how Palestrina and Mozart composed. It took centuries to refine.
However, after Beethoven (d. 1827), and all the way up to the present day, most composers write notes and harmonies in an increasingly non-functional way, creating music that is either (1) dissonance without resolution (an extreme example being atonal music) or (2) harmonies primarily intended to create an ambience, resulting in a dreamy, sentimental or melancholy disposition in the listener, as with Romantic (19th century), jazz and pop music.
The latter of these can be affecting or pretty, but it is not always conducive to bringing the listener out of himself (for example, As Time Goes By, Yesterday, Every Breath You Take; need I go on?!). It is music that fosters what St. Augustine refers to as an “incurvatus in se,” a turning inward upon oneself rather than outward towards God and others. This is Benedict XVI’s second fire, the “deceptive beauty”; it coddles and flatters the listener’s feelings and affections rather than edifying and elevating the person.
Sadly, when composers use these more modern compositional techniques in church music, they can rob their listeners of this truly edifying or elevating experience. To avoid this tragedy, I reject these techniques in my liturgical music. I can use them, and sometimes do in my secular compositions and devotional pieces for concert (listen on Spotify to my “Ballad of the King and the Innocents,” verse 6, or “Silent Night,” verse 3, from my CD Carol of the Bells), BUT NOT FOR CHURCH. I see functional notes and harmony as integral to worthy liturgical music, because it is this compositional practice that can most effectively lead people out of themselves and point them heavenward.
2. Is it VITAL? I see someone’s hand up in the back. Yes? Your question is: “Mark, I get why you write the way you do, but with all the great sacred music already available, why bother spending time and energy creating new stuff, AND seeking patrons? Aren’t there other more pressing causes to support?“
To answer this entirely valid question, I’m going to turn, again, to the wisdom of Benedict XVI and also another current Catholic scholar. Benedict said, in 2010:
“An art that has lost the living root of transcendence would not be oriented to God … And a faith that had art only in the past would no longer be faith in the present.”
In other words, for the faith to remain current, we cannot simply rely on the past for our artistic expression. We must have art, which is an expression of the eternal truths of the faith, but created now. We see that with the other arts. Why should music be different?
Cantate Domino canticum novum!
Sing ye to the Lord a new song!
(Psalm 97:1)
Just as the sublime music of William Byrd was undoubtedly a product of the dark times for the Catholics of Elizabethan England, so also, I think, we need a musical expression of the Faith in our current times of turmoil and apostasy.
A music in these times but not of them.
(cf. 1 John 2:15-17)
Dr. Roberto de Mattei, author, historian, and president of the Lepanto Foundation has said:
“Tradition grounds the past, present, and future in timelessness. [And] … it is only through Tradition that our present can have a future.”
So, with regard to art today (most vitally for liturgical art), as the past informs and guides us in our practice and creativity, what we do and create in the present will inform future generations. We need to be the tradition of the future. HOWEVER, if we do not ground ourselves by emulating tradition as both source and practice, we banish ourselves to irrelevance for the future. For the sake of our children, and our children’s children, we must not break the continuity with our forefathers.
Now to the final but just as important question:
3. HOW DO I KNOW IF THE MUSIC I CREATE TODAY IS ANY GOOD?
I may be a coward, but it is not my point in this article to disparage the music of any particular contemporary composer. If you know me personally, you know I have very definite opinions on music. However, with regard to current liturgical music, I would prefer to reserve any judgment for a private discussion or public forum, where the participants have a chance to respond to any of my assertions, and I to theirs. It’s not my goal here to stir the pot. Thus, I shall only try to show the effect my music has had on others.
Now, assuming I’m following the principles I’ve briefly touched on in sections (1) and (2) above, here’s what some individuals have said:
“I wanted my mother’s funeral mass to inspire and awaken her family and friends to the depth of mystery, beauty and truth of the Catholic faith. With this hope in mind, I asked Mark Donnelly if he would sing his Requiem Mass [for Soprano and Tenor (2015)] for Mom’s funeral. The performance by Mark and his daughter, Colleen, gave one reason to believe that there is a God.”
– Gemma Cowhig, Holy Family Parishioner, Vancouver, BC
“After receiving communion and returning to my pew, I heard this luminous music [O Sancta Trinitas ( 2019)]! I wanted to know who the composer was, thinking it was Palestrina or one of his contemporaries. After consulting the bulletin, I was blown away to see that it was written by our own choir director, Mark Donnelly!”
– Mazoe Kaufman, professional sacred artist
“Mark Donnelly’s liturgical motets are truly beautiful and very well written for all voices. They hark back to the Renaissance in style, though at times one can sense they are written in this century … This well-crafted music was certainly written with love and devotion; I would be very happy to have my choir sing this music at my parish!”
– Peter-Anthony Togni, award-winning composer, conductor,
performer, broadcaster [petertogni.com]
“Mark’s work is of the highest quality. More people need to hear his music. It will change and move them in a very positive way. Beautiful music, extremely well-crafted.”
– Peter Allen, award-winning composer for film and television [peterallanassociates.com/site]
“I have experienced Mark’s sacred music for many years. In both spirit and quality, he is truly keeping the great Catholic musical tradition alive. His composing is certainly worthy of any and all patronage and support.”
– Most Rev. J. Michael Miller, CSB, Archbishop of Vancouver, BC
Now, you may not consider these words validation of my position. However, they do help bolster my commitment to compose the way I do, knowing that others consider this style of music conducive to the spiritual life.
NOTE: This is the first of a regular series of music articles for Una Voce Canada. Along with what was discussed in this issue, topics will include: Gregorian Chant, sacred polyphony, and anything else that touches on liturgical music. Stay tuned and God bless! MED
====
To learn more about the compositions of Mark Emerson Donnelly and how you can support his work, visit his website markemersondonnelly.com.
His current project, the trailer Mark Emerson Donnelly: Composer, and five music videos, is in production at Motet Films. Filming and recording has already taken place (the rough edits are outstanding!), and Mark is very excited that he is close to reaching the financial goal for this project!
RELEASE DATE: Second quarter 2020
Una Voce Canada is graciously providing tax receipts to Canadian donors giving to his work through UVC.
Interac e-Transfer to composer@unavocecanada.org
NOTE: Please include your email and mailing address to receive a tax receipt.
Cheque: Made out to “Una Voce Canada,” Memo: composer. Mail to:
Una Voce Canada
P.O. Box 30027
North Vancouver, BC V7H 2Y8
Thank you to all who have supported this grand endeavour. If you have any questions, please contact Mark:
604-339-4435 (text or voice)
markemersondonnelly@gmail.com
Watch for the release of my videos!
Per JMJ – med
Pingback: "An uplifting gift": "Gloria" from Mark Emerson Donnelly's Missa Sicut Cervus | Una Voce Canada