women singing the propers - arguments and documents supporting the practice
-
Personally, I wonder why men would ever be allowed to chant, if the form is to remain revered for its poverty, chastity, and obedience.
But, I am open to making reasonable accommodations for them should an insufficient number of ladies be able and willing.
And, of course, for all priests, if only by virtue of their ordination.Thanked by 1bhcordova -
Since the latest documents governing the musical details of the EF were promulgated many decades ago, it would be interesting to see how this issue would be handled now if any new legislation is ever issued, which I'm not anxious to have happen, obviously. However, and this is personal opinion, it might behoove Latin Mass folks to include women in some fashion in the chanting of the propers (since the Church gave permission for it long ago) to preclude the necessity of further intervention.
If there is supposed to be a "mutual enrichment" between the two forms of the Roman rite as Pope Benedict called for in Summorum Pontificum, this issue is sure to be a sticking point someday if the attention of the wider Church ever becomes focused upon it. -
I think it's great when people apply common sense when reading authoritative documents.
The problem with common sense is it is heavily influenced by the dominant zeitgeist, which is usually oppressive against truth and justice. Common sense is often invoked by lynch mobs. If we were to use common sense in an 18th Century Protestant country, for example, we might consider women and slaves to be inferior creatures. Is there anything good that true studiousness cannot do which common sense can?
It is most relevant to remember that in ancient times women were not educated as they are now.
There were enough exceptions in Roman society, and also orders of women (e.g., Vestals) who were well educated in religion and music and civic values. Our Roman Church has always been urbane and has always honored women and depended upon their leadership. Furthermore we could ask the question about lay men, why lay men were not included in the Schola cantorum of ancient Rome. Why allow lay men at all?
I'm sure women were not trained as organists in ancient times, either.
True, because there were no church organists in ancient times.Although the music proper to the Church is purely vocal music, music with the accompaniment of the organ is also permitted....As the singing should always have the principal place, the organ or other instruments should merely sustain and never oppress it. --Tra le sollecitudini
Truly, why allow women at all?
In other words, why should the hiring process for lay choir directors and instrumentalists at the EF not be biased against lay women in favor of lay men. It's a fair question. These can be construed as ministerial positions, and at least under U.S. civil law, a church could pick gender over qualifications.
The reason that we can exclude this bias is not common sense, left to whose lack of mercy everyone would ought to fear the slippery slope and unjust dismissal from his job, but by looking at the relevant Church documents and finding no mandate for any kind of sex bias in filling musical positions other than singers. That is to say, there is nothing in the music legislation even to indicate that nuns' convents should hire women choir directors over men.
And regarding singers, it would be hard to find a place where there are enough professional quality male trebles to fill the role of the ancient schola, to justify not hiring an adult soprano or alto should the budget arise....Where there are not enough choir boys, it is allowed that "a group of men and women or girls, located in a place outside the sanctuary set apart for the exclusive use of this group, can sing the liturgical texts at Solemn Mass, as long as the men are completely separated from the women and girls and everything unbecoming is avoided..." --Musicae sacrae 74.
-
As the singing should always have the principal place, the organ or other instruments should merely sustain and never oppress it. --Tra le sollecitudini
Tra le fiddle faddle again, speaking of out of date documents that some of you are obsessed with. Don't I wish I had some of the problems old documents were concerned with. It is sometimes difficult to find ANY singers, since singing seems to have fallen from many folk's priority lists. I have also had a few singers that I joyfully used the organ to, if not oppress, at least to suppress.as long as the men are completely separated from the women and girls and everything unbecoming is avoided..." --Musicae sacrae 74.
Oh get real! They already had a go at "unbecoming" in high school and are now thoroughly bored with each other. I imagine few places outside a seminary or school for boys could find enough men to handle all the parts. -
Julie, I've thought the same thing. It's common sense to avoid further scrutiny over needlessly narrow interpretations.
Rob, your characteristic wit is balm for the weary soul. Make no mistake- your director knows you to be a prince among schola members. On the ground, your singing and Christian example are treasured.Thanked by 1JulieColl -
I might have a little more to say on this topic, recurring pimple that it is, but I need to get to the parish and assist the 55 boys and girls who have worked diligently all week at Chant Camp to prepare the music for a Solemn Mass.
It's hard work, with immense rewards! -
Salieri, regarding your mandate above, trust me- Sen. Reid, Representative Pelosi and maybe even POTUS are on the job as we speak!Thanked by 1Salieri
-
It sounds odd here in 2014 in the U.S. that there had to be warnings against untoward behavior between men and women in the choir loft back in the 1950s. Here we expect that everyone in the choir can be counted on to act as perfect ladies and gentlemen.
On the other hand, not every culture is the same, and not all individuals are the same, and maybe not everyone behaved as perfect ladies and gentlemen in the 1950s. Maybe some people, in some cultures, in some situations, perhaps depending on their age, even, sometimes didn't behave themselves well in the presence of the opposite sex, even when standing in choir stalls.
The provision reminds me of a episode in the life of St. Augustine. When he was visiting a certain church and preaching there, he mentioned the dividing barrier in the congregation which kept men and women separate, for the reason that some young men and young women used the church service as an opportunity to socialize and flirt more than as an opportunity to adore God.
-
Chonak, the choir has always been a great place to find a spouse. A choir member is a believer who is willing to put his/her faith into action, so I guess this was so even in the time of St. Augustine. Of course, socializing should be done after rehearsal and outside of mass.
-
I think it depends on your definition of untoward.
The current culture is VERY different from the culture in the 1950's. In this country at least. I'm sure there are people on this board who remember when a woman dressed up to go shopping, including the hat and gloves. That certainly is NOT the norm currently.
In my copious spare time, I'm a living historian. Researching the social mores of different time periods is fascinating, and one of the first things we're taught is to make sure we judge things in context. What we may consider perfectly reasonable behavior may have been scandalous in the 1950's. Don't even get me started on the differences between polite behavior today and during the 1860's...:) -
CharlesW, is it true that you trace yourself back to the guy who got the fig leaf franchise for the Garden? Or was that someone else.
-
Well, Old Guys, at least Adam had the sense to choose fig leaves for coverage, as he could have tried out a clam, mussel or oyster shell......bada boom.
-
However, and this is personal opinion, it might behoove Latin Mass folks to include women in some fashion in the chanting of the propers to preclude the necessity of future intervention.
Or, better yet, we could include women in music out of obedience to existing Latin Mass rubrics? Can we just do that, or do we have to be all sneaky and fearful? -
No sneaky, fearful oddity here, Chrism!
You should have heard all the children (and teens) singing at the Solemn Mass today- beautiful tradition! -
Dear Chrism, you're the only person I can ever recall who thinks I'm sneaky and fearful.
LOL! The point I was trying to make is that since the liturgical rubrics for the EF leave some wiggle room and permit but don't absolutely mandate that women sing the propers, I was trying to point out to those who might prefer to exclude women altogether that it might be a good idea to consider making some concessions.
I was trying to point out as diplomatically as I could that there are many reasons to allow what the Church permits, but if no other argument works to persuade people to allow what the Church permits, the thought of what may happen if this issue of women being denied a legitimate place in chanting the Church's liturgy in some EF Latin Mass venues goes to a higher authority might work, since things could easily devolve----as we have seen happen in recent events in the traditional Catholic world.
It's kind of like what motivates us to do good. Ideally, we should be motivated to do good because we love God, but if in the end that isn't sufficient to get us to do good, as it says in the Baltimore Catechism, sometimes the fear of the consequences is sufficient. : )
P.S. I want to emphasize as I said before, that this is pure speculation on my part, but I'm pretty certain that if most authority figures in the wider church, as I said before, were aware of this kind of thing, it wouldn't sit well with them. -
I know that I have no time or interest in playing "Where's Waldo?" games. Whoever has been diligent in preparing the Propers is going to be the one to sing them, whether that be the men's, women's, or children's schola. If the men have skipped practice or shirked their duty in preparing them, I will instead go with one of the other scholas, without hesitation. Men do not get a preferred gender pass to just amble on in and "give it a whirl" the day of the Mass.
As I had posted on another thread discussing this topic, I was forced to scramble during Holy Week when I abruptly lost my primary male cantors (SSPX down the road was the beneficiary of my loss) and had to hurriedly teach a female schola, who rose to the challenge admirably. And this, despite head-shaking and comments by some.
I am fortunate that I have a pastor who has told me that we will do what we have to do, and that malcontents are free to go to Mass elsewhere if they don't like the way we do things.
-
As a person gets older it reaches a point where you look back and wonder...how much of this is just personal prejudices of some miserable old priests who wanted nothing to do with women anyhow...and how much made sense.
Basically, this is a rather ridiculous discussion. The only people who would try to impose the church documents to prevent women from singing in the church have a problem with women... -
Ideally, we should be motivated to do good because we love God, but if in the end that isn't sufficient to get us to do good, as it says in the Baltimore Catechism, sometimes the fear of the consequences is sufficient.
Right, but it's a little different when we're trying to convince people who think they are doing God a service by excluding all women. If they are true-hearted about it, fear of suffering ought only to encourage them.
P.S. I want to emphasize as I said before, that this is pure speculation on my part, but I'm pretty certain that if most authority figures in the wider church, as I said before, were aware of this kind of thing, it wouldn't sit well with them.
I think they are aware of the question, and they wrote us a nice letter - still a good read.
In Rome, the Capella Sistina remains all-male, while the Capella Giulia is now mixed. The latter sounds better, in my opinion, but neither holds a candle to the Westminster Abbey Choir (all male, Anglican), which traveled to St. Peter's in 2012 at the invitation of Pope Benedict. -
I don't care if it's a man or a woman who sings as long as they can do a proper job of it.
I'm not a fan of putting women into cassocks as the cassock, strictly speaking, is a priest's street garb. It is generally preferable to have them wearing albs (symbol of baptism) or even wearing an academic robe. Before you have a go at me for promoting the use of academic robes, they actually have their origins in religious attire. It is however, horses for courses. I usually wear my academic robe when playing the organ because it doesn't get in the way of my pedalling. -
By the way, I like having women in the choir. I like to alternate psalm verses and hymn verses between the men, women and tutti. It works nicely.Thanked by 1JulieColl
-
It was not uncommon in Ireland a century ago for men and women to sit on opposite sides of the church, or at the front and back, not surprisingly the men took the back seat.
There was also the habit that sprang up after the civil war of men who were estranged from the church in some way because of the war, in standing around the porch, or wearing black gloves when going to communion.
Wearing mantillas was still common when I was very young (1970's), but had died out long before the New Code of Canon law removed the obligation.
The New code says the following (my emphases)
Can. 28 Without prejudice to the prescript of ⇒ can. 5, a contrary custom or law revokes a custom which is contrary to or beyond the law (praeter legem). Unless it makes express mention of them, however, a law does not revoke centenary or immemorial customs, nor does a universal law revoke particular customs.
Can. 19 If a custom or an express prescript of universal or particular law is lacking in a certain matter, a case, unless it is penal, must be resolved in light of laws issued in similar matters, general principles of law applied with canonical equity, the jurisprudence and practice of the Roman Curia, and the common and constant opinion of learned persons.
Which suggests to me that removal of the legal obligation for women to cover their heads, without replacing it with another legal prescription, means that the matter, which remains a longstanding custom, underpinned by scripture, should once again be understood in the light of that scripture and that custom. That means head covering is still in. And puts it back in its proper place, not as a legal matter, but as a matter concerning prayer and pious customs and usage. (I was struck by the talk at the colloquium where it was pointed out that we need a deepened theology of liturgy, not just a focus on the legalities of liturgical practice.
I was stunned at a recent parish meeting when someone piped up to suggest that something needed to be done about the boys and even some men who were wearing hats in church. This was not from a group with any traddie leanings from it. I couldn't help smiling to myself and wondering why that custom was still felt as strongly important, while its counterpart for women would have been vehemently opposed, I suspect, by the same people. But it shows the strength of custom, hence the impact customs can have on inculturating and inculcating faith ideas attitudes.
I propose that mantilla wearing members of the CMAA form a sub group for the promotion of the practice, while singing the propers. This group to support our right to customary covering practices, and to singing Gregorian chant could be called the
Right and Proper group. Or if we included general modest dressing principles of avoiding short skirts and low décolletages, we could call it the Head, shoulders, knees, and Dohs group.Thanked by 1eft94530 -
I will go for the modest dressing, since I don't think bare midriffs are acceptable at mass. Head coverings, not so much. We now have 50 years of tradition without women wearing head coverings and I see no good reason to bring them back. With the guys, how much of hats vs. no hats really matters? Too many of these regulations and customs on who can or can't wear head coverings have to do with privileges accorded to European nobility because of their rank and status. I am not for bringing those back, or the nobility, either.
-
I appreciate mantilla-wearing ladies and would fight to the death for their right to wear the head-covering of their choice, but because of my own personal antipathy for wearing lace on my head which goes back to my childhood, you'll never catch me dead wearing a mantilla in any shape or form. Even though I sing the G.R. propers every Sunday, I'm afraid nobody will ever be able to convince or coerce me to wear a doily while doing so.
I should add---not unless it were the Pope himself. : ) -
LOL! I don't think I'd wear a mantilla even if every other lady in the entire Universal Catholic church was wearing one. Now this is just my own take on things, and you have to realize I'm probably an anomaly (and am an anomaly wherever I am or wherever I go!) but the instant I put on a mantilla, I can feel my brain, my personality and my individual identity evaporating into thin air, and I hate that, but maybe that's what St. Paul wanted? I don't know.
All I know is that I've been in too many church gatherings (OF and EF) where the women and men all stand in separate clusters after Mass and have been bored out of my mind too many times trying to keep up a conversation about potty training techniques and someone's kid's ballet recital in excruciating detail with the ladies while the men were having all the fun arguing about religion and politics, and I've had too many men look at me like I have two heads (and am a shameless hussy besides) if I ever try to start up a conversation with one of the lords of creation. (My husband and maybe two other men are the exception to that!)
And bringing back mantillas isn't going to solve that unfortunate gender divide, and maybe nothing will, but until and unless I'm in an environment (EF or OF) where I feel like the women are intellectual equals, I won't wear one and won't let my daughters either.
That's just my two cents, and again, I'm an anomaly, so it's probably not even worth two cents. : ) -
Purplebold=ON
It is all because of what happened in the 1400s in France
as captured on video starting at timestamp 0:07:45
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lq7E8kFycOcThanked by 1bonniebede -
My understanding of the issue on head coverings for women was that it was no longer a requirement, but an encouraged pious practice. If you don't want to wear a doily or a hanky on your head, you can always wear a beret or a hat. In some winters I wouldn't mind wearing a beanie on my head (I've sometimes wondered if organists could wear birettas.)
-
Ideally, I think all men is better (or all women) - the chant is not sung in unison otherwise, and doesn't have the same purity and unity of sound as chant sung on a single pitch. Having said that, in practice, this consideration is of no consequence to 99% of the congregation, so better then to try and get many people (men and women) involved.
-
@eft brilliant!
You clip has convinced me of a number of things, thank god someone on this forum is doing some rigorous historical research. Clearly head coverings have not helped those ladies from lascivious side-long glances while singing in church thus proving their uselessness in this regard. (Sounds of shredding lace.) Furthermore, it makes all too clear the distraction caused by mixed choirs - single gender scholas from now on for me.
The usefulness of this forum in driving chant research forward daily never ceases to amaze me. ;-)Thanked by 1eft94530 -
@Julieunfortunate gender divide
Well. although I sometimes wear my mantilla (or as a six year old friend called it, an armadillo) I am glad that it has been removed from law and returned to what it should be,- an optional custom.
As for feeling like an intellectual equal to men, I don't think this is something that resides in the feelings. It's a simple reality. Facts don't necessarily need to be asserted, or experienced at an emotional level. They just are.
I understand the 'stuck in another potty training story' difficulty. Being unmarried and childless, it can seem that one is often surrounded by women whose lives are, at least for the time being , wholly preoccupied with concerns that will never be my practical daily lot. But it is theirs, so it behoves me to enter into their concerns to some degree, for charity's sake, if not for friendship's.
I can't say I identify with what you described experience of an unfortunate gender divide. Maybe our cultures are quite different. Here, it is more of a struggle to make space for men and women to be themselves as men and women in our overweening culture of androgynous uniformity. (Is that even a real phrase? but I hope you know what I mean).
@charlesw Thank you for that unshakeable image of men in doilies. It will aid my prayer no end this Sunday. :- 0
-
Bonnie, what I should have said is that it seems to me that if social dysfunction already exists in an environment (and what environment is immune from that?) I think the wearing of veils and hijabs will only accentuate any weirdness that may already be there.
Now hats are a different story altogether, in my opinion. -
Just a few words to say that @bonniebede is incorrect in what she says about law and custom. (And her error is a common one, BTW.)
A law is a law and a custom is a custom. A certain course of action arises from one or the other, but not from both at the same time. Customs may become laws if they are legislated (and, once the course of action becomes law, it is no longer custom), but laws do not become customs when those laws are abrogated.
If a law is abrogated, one cannot then claim that the course of action called for by that now abrogated law is still to be observed because a "custom" has been established over the course of 30, 100, or an undetermined number of years greater than 100. No, the community observed the former practice not because it was a custom (consuetudo), but because it was a law (lex).
Nevertheless, the former practice called for by the now abrogated law may become a legitimate custom either beyond (praeter) or contrary to (contra) a legitimate norm (ius), but the "clock" for establishing such a custom starts at zero once a community decides that it is going to act beyond or contrary to the current universal norm. -
Cute, CDub,
The only mantilla my wife or daughters may lay over me actually is called "a shroud."
Don't get your hopes up. -
Thanks for the excellent clarification, Fr. Krisman. It was very helpful.
I want to apologize for going ballistic at the mention of veils yesterday. I guess it's pretty obvious my veil-wearing experiences haven't all been warm and fluffy. Maybe some veil therapy is in order. LOL.
I know many sweet, lovely, pious veil-wearing ladies, and I appreciate and admire their often brave decisions to continue this tradition. If it ever again becomes the law of the Church, I promise I will immediately submit and wear a doily on my head till the end of my days, and God bless the women who do so now. It is highly likely they are way ahead of me on this matter.
All I hope is that this practice always be carried out in an atmosphere of kindness, reasonableness and respect. Amen. : )
(Dissonant chord resolved, I hope.) -
Melo, we are doing CROOKED BOWTIE at your funeral. ;-)
Sure, CDub, if it is to be found among the Propers of a full on chanted Requiem. I already done my liturgical will, signed, sealed, delivered I'm His!
Ben, if you show at my wake (no vigil for a Scotsman) feel free to launch into CROOKED BOWTIE, Meloche-style. -
To Fr. Krisman's point regarding law and custom in the universal church, it also bears mention that the Extraordinary Form is governed by special norms that make things simpler:By virtue of its character of special law, within its own area, the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum derogates from those provisions of law, connected with the sacred Rites, promulgated from 1962 onwards and incompatible with the rubrics of the liturgical books in effect in 1962. --Universae ecclesiae, 28.
-
I sometimes wonder how we talk obvious things to death...
Regarding head coverings for women, not so long ago it was law, now it is no longer a law though it is an option. No one should brow beat a girl or woman into it, and no one can claim it is wrong for a girl or woman to cover her head either.
I must say, in my experience it is the womenfolk who give odd or even rude stares at veiled or non-veiled women. And reactions from women who are against the practice are far more severe. -
Cool as a cucumber.
Though I bet I've been a "rude looks" offender at some point, if only accidentally. More and more my face gets stuck in a disgruntled look when I'm not upset about anything...
Gravity- you horrid foe!!! -
And reactions from women who are against the practice are far more severe.
And sometimes that's because of lived experience and not just an ideological slant. I'm a pretty old-fashioned gal in every respect, but this is a tough issue for me. It's kind of like what happened to the women religious after the Council. It might be easy to think they were all brainwashed and threw out their habits and veils in a temporary fit of 60's-induced madness, but if you've ever heard some of their preconciliar experiences, the speed and ferocity with which they rejected the entire traditional praxis begins to make more sense.
And, I might add, the same visceral reaction against the Latin Mass which many people of a certain age have might also be traced to negative emotional experiences and not necessarily be based upon rational intellectual/spiritual/theological grounds.
Welcome to the MusicaSacra Forum!
To participate in the discussions on Catholic church music, sign in or register as a forum member, The forum is a project of the Church Music Association of America.
Categories
- All Discussions21,097
- General Music Discussion7,589
- Job Openings1,300
- Management of Music Programs833
- Choral Matters519
- Church Documents and Rubrics503
- CMAA Notes291
- Events651
- For Newcomers: Read First23
- Sacred Polyphony528
- Hymnody821
- Gregorian Chant: General2,582
- ↳ Graduale Romanum and Liber Usualis354
- ↳ Graduale Simplex55
- ↳ Semiology57
- Vernacular Plainsong671
- Anglican Use and Anglican Chant66
- Organ, Other Instruments and Repertoire414
- New Composition/Works in Progress1,208
- Recordings222
- Music for Hispanic Ministry151
- Music Education: Children205
- Music Education: General214
- News Items242
- Positions Wanted58
- General Discussion: Catholicism723
- Amusements170
- General Discussion1,000
- Opinions113