Audio Accessibility

Stephen Webb at First Things just posted an article on “Catholic Churches and the Hard of Hearing.”

The church is a sacred space that opens onto the heavens. Churches that aim toward the light, however, often end up burying the human voice. There is plenty of room for incense to waft but also for voices to disperse.

Before and after the Council many Catholic churches were built to experiment with new ways of relating the altar, ambo, priest, and people. But as Webb points out, not all of these new church designs are conducive to the hard of hearing. This is ironic given the instance of the Liturgical Movement on the comprehensibility and accessibility of liturgical texts.

We gather around the pastor, rather than lining up in pews before him, and we can see each other, which reinforces our sense of community. The room is way too wide, however, for a speaker to fill its extended girth. There’s a reason concert halls are rectangular with parallel walls. Fortunately, there is plenty to look at, because I rarely understand more than a few of the words that are spoken.

One could perhaps argue that the Tridentine Mass with its three vocal tones for the priest (as Webb notes) was actually more attentive to audio clarity than many of our contemporary liturgies in which “a certain funereal flatness pervades the verbal tone of the Mass, as if its central mystery were a death without a resurrection.”

The Liturgical Movement worked so hard to make the liturgy’s prayers and scripture readings accessible to everyone. Because of that, it is important that we make sure they truly are accessible to all.

Nathan Chase

Nathan P. Chase is Assistant Professor of Liturgical and Sacramental Theology at Aquinas Institute of Theology in St. Louis, MO. He has contributed a number of articles to the field of liturgical studies, including pieces on liturgy in the early Church, initiation, the Eucharist, inculturation, and the Western Non-Roman Rites, in particular the Hispano-Mozarabic tradition. His first book The Homiliae Toletanae and the Theology of Lent and Easter was published in 2020. His second monograph, published in 2023, is titled The Anaphoral Tradition in the ‘Barcelona Papyrus.’

Please leave a reply.

Comments

6 responses to “Audio Accessibility”

  1. Karl Liam Saur

    If pastors, architects, designers and critics thought to give equal weight to aural (natural, unamplified, acoustics – just to be clear) and visual consideration in building churches, we would be in a far better place.

    This is one area where we should also understand that the liturgical reforms make this even MORE important than it was before, when the ideals of the liturgy were such that is was fine if the priestly orations were unintelligible and a hazy nimbus of choral sound was acceptable. Such ideals allowed for gigantism, among other things, and deep domes on high drums that sucked up sound. Those older models should no longer be taken as good models for the reformed liturgy. That said, the classic early Christian basilican models (Santa Sabina for a parish-size church; Santa Maria Maggiore for a big cathedral) can be acoustical wonders that work well for the reformed liturgy.

  2. Nathan: One could perhaps argue that the Tridentine Mass with its three vocal tones for the priest (as Webb notes) was actually more attentive to audio clarity than many of our contemporary liturgies.

    One of the greatest deficits of the reformed liturgy is the deprecation of the tones and sung incipits. One aspect of regular EF attendance which I miss is the sung tones at solemn Mass. Certain sung portions enter my mind randomly, even during mundane tasks: gloria in excelsis …, et ideo, ite missa est, benedicat vos … etc. These are the hinges of the Mass, accentuated by a drop or rise of pitch as well as the complexity of the chant. The reform has for the most part destroyed this heritage. For what good?

    Didacticism and aesthetic prayer can coexist. I still do not understand why the former has been exalted and the latter discarded.

  3. Jordan Zarembo

    Might I add that not only does the entirely of eastern Christianity, as well as Judaism and Islam, place great emphasis and deeply revere the cantillated liturgy. So then, where did western Christianity move away from a celebration of the sung liturgy?

    Certainly, the proliferation of the low Mass from the medieval period removed most of the laity from chanted liturgy. Did not the reformers of the Reformation encourage congregations to sing? And yet, I am convinced that the way information is imparted in the late 20th and early 21st centuries has suppressed a desire for sung liturgy. Did Walter Cronkite chant the evening news? Is the embellished Word and prayer relevant in an age of texting, email, and the newspaper on an iPad? Perhaps we have yet to reawaken our minds to another means not of merely processing information, but reveling in the subtext.

  4. Cameron Neal

    I long for sung Mass parts (ie besides the Ordinary).

  5. Jonathan Day

    I am very lucky to worship in a parish church with very good acoustics.

    The sanctuary is not deep and the pulpit is thrust into the nave; the Jesuits who built the church in 1849 were already looking for visual and sonic accessibility. A Morning Post reporter wrote in that year: “There is no rood-screen. Nothing separates the eyes of the people from the solemnities of the sanctuary which they desire to behold.”

    Renovations in the last 50 years have taken this further, raising the sanctuary and moving the main altar closer to the people. The sanctuary is carpeted but the rest of the church is not.

    The principal parish Mass, a Latin Novus Ordo, is sung, and most of our priests have good strong voices for singing and preaching. The priest faces the congregation throughout.

    Even so, aging congregations have led us to invest thousands in a sound system to enable people to hear what is going on, and to adjust and upgrade the system frequently. There is now a “T”-type hearing aid loop as well.

    Good design and a sung Mass are no longer sufficient.

  6. Richard Skirpan

    I’ve recently begun making the comparison that saying in a particular room “there are good acoustics” is like saying that on a particular day “there is good wind.” It all depends on what you’re trying to accomplish. It might be a great day for flying a kite, but a terrible day for a hot-air balloon ride. Same with acoustics. A great room for spoken words may not be ideal for music – and a room that’s great for one style of music may not be for another.

    Granted, an excellent design by a skilled and talented engineer may be able to accomplish all of above, but first you have to know that you want all of that and be aware that these goals can be in conflict with one another. I’ve always assumed one of the poor assumptions of post-conciliar church design was that modern amplification will make up the difference for not giving enough attention to acoustic design in the room.


Posted

in

,

by

Discover more from Home

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading