Cantor Conducting Congregation - Concerned
-
Dear Forum ... I have a concern about one of our young cantors who has started conducting the congregation, unsolicited, using what looks like karate-chop style (hence I have dubbed her the karate cantor), something I have seen used only with beginning childrens choirs. I have never seen any cantor conduct the congregation during Masses, especially during the Canon of the Mass, and I find it very distracting and annoying, even insulting. The music director has been allowing this very recent thing largely, I believe, because he is lacking in any solid liturgical training. The cantor took the initiative on her own without asking, and the music director thought it "looked good," and it has continued for the last three Sundays. The cantor has also fallen into the same mentality that singing really loud into the mic will somehow "make" the congregation sing, rather than understanding that the congregation should be helped to sing, to facilitate their sung prayer, not dominate them.
I would like to suggest to him that this "experimentation" is only creating confusion because the director is conducting one tempo and the cantor is asserting her own tempo based on her musical interpretation, leaving me with making a choice, which is of course to follow the music director's tempo, but the poor congregation is left wondering what is going on! Additionally, I would be insulted as a congregant to have someone spoon-feed me during something I have been doing all my life, and the choir is already sufficiently leading. Our senior cantors use a simple hand gesture (one arm extended to the congregation) to "invite" the congregation so sing, and they maintain a simple and controlled voice to compliment the congregation, not overwhelm them. I want to mention to the music director that perhaps under the concept(s) of "active participation" the congregation will sing if they want to, and if they don't, they do not need someone beating them over the head with "spastic" conducting and painting flower pots in the sky conducting.
Is/Are there church document(s) that discuss/prohibit/caution conducting on a congregation by a cantor, especially during the Sanctus, Memorial Acclamation, "great amen," and Lord's prayer. I want to approach the music director with respect and suggest this is probably not a good idea, but I don't want to impose my "opinion" at this point until I have some authority to stand on.
Thank you! -
Cantors should be heard and not seen. This kind of thing is exactly what can happen when you put them "on stage." The ham in them emerges.Thanked by 9Ben francis CHGiffen canadash M. Jackson Osborn kenstb hilluminar Salieri StimsonInRehab
-
There is no way to control a DM who does not have a clue.
There's no church document because no one could foresee such idiocy occurring from the pulpit of a Catholic church. -
The situation reminds me of that feeling when you first dip your feet into ice cold water.Thanked by 1noel jones, aago
-
Well, there are song leaders, and there are song leaders. Once again, our SSPX friends in France are leading by example in the limited and specific area of the liturgy and are giving us an exemplary model of what the word "participation" can mean as regards the Mass and how this can become the model for liturgical renewal in the Church.
Believe it or not, they too have song leaders up on the altar leading the people in the singing of chant--- in this case, the Missa de Angelis as shown in the video below.
It is truly stunning to see a leader of song in the Lourdes basilica directing with great decorum and skill the entire congregation in the antiphonal singing of the Kyrie and Gloria. The congregation is not just singing the Gloria, but rather, they are so well-trained and educated that the PIP's are singing the Gloria antiphonally with the priests and seminarians in the schola.
As an added touch, the video shows toward the end the song leader leading the congregation in a moving rendition of a French hymn during the distribution of Communion----yes, a vernacular hymn during a Solemn High Mass!
What can one say except "Bravo!" and "Well done for showing the whole Church that we can fulfill the wishes of the Second Vatican Council by teaching the faithful to 'sing in Latin those parts of the Mass that pertain to them.'"
http://gloria.tv/?media=45150&language=KiaLEJq2fBR -
I don't know what the current practice is, but when I used to attend St. Paul's in Cambridge regularly, one of the choir boys would be assigned to 'conduct' the people at certain points. At least the gestures were authentic conducting gestures, and not the confused, brute substitutes that some parish cantors use.
-
There aren't any church documents or anything like that, but there is artistic common sense. It sounds like what we would call "over conducting" which is the state in which the conductor is doing too much and getting in the way. She should also be aware that her tempo is not that of the music director, and therefore, her conducting is confusing. As for blasting the mic, she should be reminded that she doesn't have to yell into it. However, this should not come from you. You could politely mention something to the DM, but that's about it unless you want to open the can of worms and go over his head to the Pastor.
-
When describing the gestures of these "leaders" it would be helpful to know, as chonak described, the exact nature of their motions. I've seen folks that-
*mistake each "chop" of their hand for a pulse duration as true chironomy.
*the touchdown or "Hail Caesar" uplift as an imperial exhortation to "SING WITH ME, NOW!"
*random waving of the arm to and fro supposed to what? Indicate tempo, flow, phrasing?
*follow the bouncing ball chironomy to indicated pitch.
ETC.
My stock advice remains the same- avoid cantors, use choirs. Conduct choirs, not congregations as they will "slip stream" sing with the choir if the choir is solid.Thanked by 1ClergetKubisz -
Lagunaredbob,
At the risk of being tiresome, I'm going to assume you mean this as an entirely serious situation and would therefore like concrete help.
There are no documents which give guidance as to how such a thing should happen because, as you point out, this cantrix is doing her own thing, which shouldn't be happening. Cantrices who make up their own mind about being on "center stage" should be sacked. Plain, simple, difficult to accomplish sometimes, but utterly necessary.
What else, concretely? Follow the choir director if he differs from the cantrix, or the celebrating priest if - for some freakish reason - he differs from the choir director.
After Mass, make sure that you clear up whatever went wrong with your direct superior.
There is a general liturgical principle that nothing should distract from the action of the Mass. According to this principle, choirs, if they must stand to sing, should do so in a manner which makes as little noise as possible and in a manner such that they are ready to sing when the proper time arrives. According to this principle, anything during the Eucharistic prayer which distracts or detracts from the sacrifice of the Mass must be avoided: organ introductions (for the sake of pitch) might not be avoided, but arm-waving cantrices could be replaced by simple auditory clues. In a school where I used to teach, Father and I worked it out so that he sang mysterium fidei and the assembled school students, on the right pitch, sang mortem tuam...... It took explaining beforehand, but not during the Mass.
According to this principle, by the way, notices on "hymn boards" or pieces of paper are infinitely preferable to "Our Offertory hymn can be found in the red, Worship hymnal, number ###, 'Let there be peace on earth', number ####.", and "Our Gathering Song is __________. Please stand to greet our presider for today's celebration, Fr. Francis Flapdoodle."
-
If you didn't know this already, Melo's advice is usually very good indeed. I would listen to him. And the above from Chris is solid as well.
-
I have seen/heard of this sort of thing in traditional Baptist and some Methodist churches.
-
I think the only extraneous movement to RCC traditions we should allow requires removing all pews/seating. Then we can have the amoebic, miasmatic continuous processions of the babushka ladies with their tapirs in the Orthodox DL. That's hardcore religion and liturgy!Thanked by 1Gavin
-
It's done regularly at St. Mary Major.
-
babushka ladies with their tapirs
IMO, that's a strange animal to bring into an Orthodox church. But, as they say, YMMV. -
It's done regularly at St. Mary Major.
What's done regularly? Babushka ladies sporting tapirs? -
Thanked by 1JulieColl
-
Pews are a Protestant invention. Was it pews in 19th-century Russia? It was not - it still is not. Is outrage!
We easterners do have seats around the walls for the elderly and infirm. If you look healthy and sit in those seats, the babushkas will give you the evil eye for not standing to worship the risen Lord. -
Since we've drifted entirely off topic, let's comment on something really interesting: Melo's new photo. Lovely lady, but about that tie . . .
-
Back on topic:
The psalmist conducting a liturgical assembly during its psalm response? No, the organist (or choir) leads.
A cantor conducting a liturgical assembly during its refrain to a liturgical song, such as the Taizé Eat This Bread? No, the organist (or choir) leads.
A song leader conducting a liturgical assembly during a strophic hymn, such as O God Our Help in Ages Past? No, the organist leads, and there is no need at all for a song leader (or microphone hugger). -
Since we've drifted entirely off topic, let's comment on something really interesting: Melo's new photo. Lovely lady, but about that tie . . .
Is that the long-suffering Mrs. Melo? She is lovely. -
FYI, all you wiseacres, babushka ladies are so ahead of the curve, they chose tapirs centuries before anteaters knowing that anteaters are maneaters as well. They lead them by virtue of the tapers they carry to the next candleabra.
BTW, yes that is the long suffering (41 years) Mrs. Melo, who is my human spell check and salvation, and a soprano of MACW's calibre. Present during that photo, but not seen, was Elvis Presley, btw.
And I'm smart just enough to know if she wants to conduct the congregation, she has a darn good reason. She didn't choose the tie. Old Valentine's Day conversation piece, and it worked! -
During the sung gloria or credo, when sung in chant antiphonally with polyphonic choir, the cantor at St. Mary Major regularly conducts the congregational singing.
Was that clear enough for the whole class to understand, or do some people need more information?Thanked by 1CHGiffen -
I always need more information... but not necessarily about anything in this thread.
-
Kathy, may I assume that what is done at St. Mary Major has been happening for some time? For the parishes that I serve in, I have always kept the cantors away from the ambo. They should be heard, not seen, so they stand next to me in the loft.Thanked by 1hilluminar
-
I'm not saying that I like it--just that it happens.
My preference is the same as yours. -
Baptist song leaders take charge of worship, speak about the hymn, lead prayer and wave their arms.
But they are NOT leading or cuing the congregation. Rather they are trying to keep the pianist (almost always on opposite side of the church from the organist because it looks nice) and organist together and in sync with the choir, which is behind the song leader.
The congregation, like Catholics, just follows along.
If there was not song leader for hundreds of years, there is no reason for one today, unless you've got a "rock star " priest and a "rock star" DM.
-
Thanked by 1Gavin
-
A strange irony, isn't it? Catholics (quite a large number of them) just don't seem to 'get' Catholic worship, Catholic liturgy. Most Anglicans do. Certain high-church Lutherans do, even some high-church Methodists. But Catholics? Why is it that so many of them haven't a clue about liturgical decorum, a sense of the holy, a profound reverence for the All Holy, the Numinous, in whose presence, in whose courts, they are? The agents of Vatican II's imagined 'spirit' (as distinct from Vatican II itself!) are responsible largely for this. The lack of catechesis is another factor. Too, there is sort of an unspoken, half-conscious, but pervasive notion shared by many that 'we don't want to be too Catholic'. The sort of things that non-Catholic liturgical churches seem to know by instinct and intuition (as well as, very often, ardent catechesis) seem to be absent from the consiousness of large numbers of the very people responsible for leadership in Catholic worship. This means bishops, priests, deacons, choirmasters, cantors, choirs, and organists, not to mention 'the people' themselves.
One would think that it would never occur to a cantor or cantrix to make a garish spectacle of him or herself with upraised arms and invasive microphonic dominance. One would think that they would be embarassed to behave in such a way. But no, they seem to glory in it, imagining (vainly) that they have fulfilled their noisy ministry. Something is dreadfully wrong with the spiritual formation of very many Catholics as pertains to liturgy, and the moreso with large numbers of their leaders in worship.
Fr Krisman's advice above is most sage. It should be posted in every sacristy, choir hall, and cantors' room. -
I will cop to having done what I called "Excalibur" motions from the organ loft to a choir located off to the side of the sanctuary 180+ feet away where there was at least 100 feet between the loft and the back of the congregation, and the lack of vocal continuum from the loft to the front of the church made for problems that the speed-of-light cueing ameliorated. (Another reason to situate some strong singers in the back half of the congregation if the loft is the location for the music ministry, but most of your congregation sits in the front half of the church; as a general matter, it can be good to sacrifice strong singers in the choir to placement among the back half of the congregation).
-
They should be heard, not seen, so they stand next to me in the loft.
This is allowed, but not mandated. That they should be "heard, not seen" indicates that specific recommendations in the GIRM (its "first option," if you will) are wrong. Don't make preferences into mandates.
-
OP, is there any way you could post a video? You know, for research purposes?
-
but most of your congregation sits in the front half of the church
That's very progressive. Traditional Catholic practice is for the people to sit in the back half so that they can leave faster after receiving Communion. -
That they should be "heard, not seen" indicates that specific recommendations in the GIRM (its "first option," if you will) are wrong.
One might well think that specific recommendations in the GIRM are well-intentioned but misguided, and due for a critical look in the next GIRM. -
It is right that one could think that, but I'm not sure that would be just, as the GIRM/IGRM is a magisterial document. There are vast implications to that proposition.
-
It's a disciplinary document, frequently updated. It's not a doctrinal pronouncement regarding faith or morals.Thanked by 1CharlesW
-
It's probably from being corrupted by working for the government for years, but I think of GIRM as an attempt by the bishops at writing a "best practices" manual for the workplace.Thanked by 1Adam Wood
-
Just to flesh out what I've said above, much ink has been (misguidingly) spilled over Pope Benedict's distinction between the Hermeneutics of Continuity and Discontinuity. But that is not what he said, in his programmatic address to the curia in Advent of 2005.
The contrast he made was between Rupture and Reform. He is against a hermeneutic of rupture, and for a hermeneutic of reform, which he defines as continuity and discontinuity on different levels.
Practices change by the Church's self-reform, while teachings on faith and morals perdure. -
Point taken, thanks.
-
No prob.
Btw, wouldn't it be interesting if a future GIRM tossed the 4th option out, at least at the Entrance and Communion processions!Thanked by 1CHGiffen -
It would be interesting, but I wouldn't hold my breath that (i) it would happen in my lifetime, or (ii) that, were it to happen, it would be seriously enforced at the parish level (and, if enforced, more likely to cause pastors to dispense with music - and music directors - entirely).
-
I couldn't agree more, and despite my errant comment above, my "wish list" includes your proposed revisions. Charles' analysis as a "conventional practices" document is a most unfortunate result of realpolitick in the modern era, post Vatican I. That's why Liam's prediction also rings true for me. Look at the evolution of democratic governance as it currently appears in our nations' governent: "death by committee" now has become stasis. Advice and consent isn't a stranger to monarchies though, depends upon who's advising (St. Francis of Assisi or St. Thomas More) and who's listening (Innocent III or Henry VIII.)
The one thing I don't get is the great unwashed "we" hear and accept in the gospels the graces of discipline, true freedom through adherence to God's law and Christ's commands/mandates, but the cacophony coming from our prelature has resulted in anything goes.....meh.
I'd be happy to be dispensed with if the dreams of Pius X were to become reality. -
Kathy, would you mind terribly giving the quote where, if I understand you correctly, Pope Benedict incorporates continuity and discontinuity into the hermeneutic of reform?
-
Sure. The whole doc is here, and these are the passages that point directly to the issue.
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2005/december/documents/hf_ben_xvi_spe_20051222_roman-curia_en.html
On the one hand, there is an interpretation that I would call "a hermeneutic of discontinuity and rupture"; it has frequently availed itself of the sympathies of the mass media, and also one trend of modern theology. On the other, there is the "hermeneutic of reform", of renewal in the continuity of the one subject-Church which the Lord has given to us. She is a subject which increases in time and develops, yet always remaining the same, the one subject of the journeying People of God.
The hermeneutic of discontinuity risks ending in a split between the pre-conciliar Church and the post-conciliar Church. It asserts that the texts of the Council as such do not yet express the true spirit of the Council. It claims that they are the result of compromises in which, to reach unanimity, it was found necessary to keep and reconfirm many old things that are now pointless. However, the true spirit of the Council is not to be found in these compromises but instead in the impulses toward the new that are contained in the texts.
These innovations alone were supposed to represent the true spirit of the Council, and starting from and in conformity with them, it would be possible to move ahead. Precisely because the texts would only imperfectly reflect the true spirit of the Council and its newness, it would be necessary to go courageously beyond the texts and make room for the newness in which the Council's deepest intention would be expressed, even if it were still vague.
In a word: it would be necessary not to follow the texts of the Council but its spirit. In this way, obviously, a vast margin was left open for the question on how this spirit should subsequently be defined and room was consequently made for every whim.
The nature of a Council as such is therefore basically misunderstood. In this way, it is considered as a sort of constituent that eliminates an old constitution and creates a new one. However, the Constituent Assembly needs a mandator and then confirmation by the mandator, in other words, the people the constitution must serve. The Fathers had no such mandate and no one had ever given them one; nor could anyone have given them one because the essential constitution of the Church comes from the Lord and was given to us so that we might attain eternal life and, starting from this perspective, be able to illuminate life in time and time itself.
....
It is precisely in this combination of continuity and discontinuity at different levels that the very nature of true reform consists. In this process of innovation in continuity we must learn to understand more practically than before that the Church's decisions on contingent matters - for example, certain practical forms of liberalism or a free interpretation of the Bible - should necessarily be contingent themselves, precisely because they refer to a specific reality that is changeable in itself. It was necessary to learn to recognize that in these decisions it is only the principles that express the permanent aspect, since they remain as an undercurrent, motivating decisions from within. -
Thanks, Kathy. There it is in black and white:It is precisely in this combination of continuity and discontinuity at different levels that the very nature of true reform consists
. . . It's going to take me a little time to process that. -
Yes, just like Vatican II, there's what people have been led to think B16 said/taught, and what he actually said/taught....
-
From what I know of Pope Benedict's 2005 Christmas address which Kathy posted above, I don't believe he was specifically referring to the liturgy but was speaking of three specific areas of doctrine, "three circles of questions"---one of them being religious liberty.
When he speaks of the combination of continuity and discontinuity at different levels, I believe he means that at the level of doctrine, the essential principles are permanent and must remain the same, but the expression of doctrine may change or new insights may be added, and discontinuity occurs when it is asserted that the texts of the Council as such do not yet express the true spirit of the Council.
As he says earlier in his address, "It is necessary that "adherence to all the teaching of the Church in its entirety and preciseness..." be presented in "faithful and perfect conformity to the authentic doctrine, which, however, should be studied and expounded through the methods of research and through the literary forms of modern thought. The substance of the ancient doctrine of the deposit of faith is one thing, and the way in which it is presented is another...", retaining the same meaning and message."
It's interesting to look at his 1998 address on the 10th anniversary of Ecclesia Dei since he refers to a similar disconnect between theory and practice, between the spirit of the Council and the texts. -
Melo, you don't think the USCCB suffers from death by committee? It isn't just a government problem.
Be careful what you ask for. It wouldn't be THAT much harder to throw out the first option, as well as the fourth.
The communion procession is unrealistic. It is very difficult for people going to communion to keep a song going throughout the procession. Singing is generally the last distraction they need or want at that time. -
The communion procession is unrealistic. It is very difficult for PEOPLE going to communion to keep a song going throughout the procession. Singing is generally the last distraction they need or want at that time.
YES! THANK YOU! The peoples participation at the Communion is receiving Communion prayerfully from the Sacred Ministers, not carting 'round a hymnal or worship aid and singing some refrain while waiting in line for their Big Mac. And in practical experience - I have given the people the Communion proper (Psalm-tone, SEP, LCG, Gregorian), Hymns with simple refrains/burdens/antiphons, Taize things, whatever - the majority of people do not want to sing while they are in line for Communion. Even the people who will Lustily join in singing practically anything of any musical value - they refuse to sing SLJ, oddly enough, I don't know why #snark - will not sing during communion.
This should be a time for the Choir to fulfill its liturgical role by singing the Communion Proper (with Psalm verses, please!) - the organist should play while the choir receive - after singing the proper + plus any extra devotional motets to aid people in their quiet reflection and meditation on the extraordinary gift they have just (hopefully right worthily) received. There should also be a time of Sacred Silence after the final choir piece and before the 'hymn of praise' - this should preferably happen while the priest is reposing the Blessed Sacrament in the Tabernacle after Communion. Only once the Sacrament is reposed should the Hymn begin - and then people will gladly take it up.Thanked by 1CHGiffen -
Btw, wouldn't it be interesting if a future GIRM tossed the 4th option out, at least at the Entrance and Communion processions!
FWIW, no fourth option is found in the GIRM particular to England and Wales (though one could argue that their option 3 combines Options 3 and 4 in the U.S.). -
CDub, that's precisely the analogy I suppose was implied, apparently unsuccessfully.Be careful what you ask for. It wouldn't be THAT much harder to throw out the first option, as well as the fourth.
The communion procession is unrealistic. It is very difficult for people going to communion to keep a song going throughout the procession. Singing is generally the last distraction they need or want at that time.
Yes, yes and yes.
That's why it's almost farcical for us to realistically hope for ideal "solutions." That's also why I continue to quote Tip O'Neill's "All politics is local" and keep my nose in my business as much as I can. When I sally forth into larger venues, as in my OCP post at the Cafe, I still have a direct and vested interest in the outcome at my own joint.
To paraphrase another cliche, "If Pastor ain't happy, nobody happy."
@Maestro EsguerraFWIW, no fourth option is found in the GIRM particular to England and Wales
I'll pay you a hundred dollars to say that to Paul Inwood face to face! ;-) -
Paul would not only be unfazed, but spin so fast you'd check your wallet.
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 Discussions21,507
- General Music Discussion7,775
- Job Openings1,365
- Management of Music Programs838
- Choral Matters523
- Church Documents and Rubrics513
- CMAA Notes293
- Events665
- For Newcomers: Read First24
- Sacred Polyphony531
- Hymnody840
- Gregorian Chant: General2,614
- ↳ Graduale Romanum and Liber Usualis357
- ↳ Graduale Simplex55
- ↳ Semiology58
- Vernacular Plainsong681
- Anglican Use and Anglican Chant67
- Organ, Other Instruments and Repertoire418
- New Composition/Works in Progress1,232
- Recordings223
- Music for Hispanic Ministry155
- Music Education: Children207
- Music Education: General217
- News Items242
- Positions Wanted58
- General Discussion: Catholicism729
- Amusements173
- General Discussion1,009
- Opinions115