Nomenclature of "schola"
  • Charles in CenCA
    Posts: 2,416
    Over at NLM there's a handy GPS cartography of "registered scholas."
    I'm a bit troubled about who and how the criteria for the designated sites and ensembles was constituted. (I was similarly troubled by the same criteria that assembled the Snowbird Statement crew, but that's another story.)
    Before anyone twists their knickers, think about what the literal translation of "schola cantorum" amounts to: "school of singing." Well, it seems that there's a more concentrated, refined (understandably) definition at play amongst us who visit and are enjoined to MS and NLM- a "schola" provides music at EF Masses, even if those Masses are compromised by local conditions which could amount to anything from a trio of warbling, elderly sopranos to the Gonzaga Cantorum, or vernacular traditional hymns sandwiched betwixt some Propers and portions of Jubilate Deo.
    Is there something that distinguishes a program that strives for the highest levels of artistry and choral distinction while acknowledging and practicing FCAP and the unique role of the choir that nonetheless precludes said choir from being essentially a "school of singing" for worship? If a choir program that has maintained such high standards, whether singing hymns, service music or motets, is consistently, relentlessly striving to recover those attributes of "progressive solemnity" in the face of clerical and lay apathy, excluded by a traditional and archaic notion of what comprises a "schola cantorum?" Does such a choir, which capably sings chant and polyphony week after week, get excommunicated from the club because they can also sing a "kick-ass" spiritual arrangement by Moses Hogan or a lovely anthem by Randall Stroope?
    Just give me the rundown so I know to what levels my personal iconoclasm keeps me at a distance from the "club."
  • Jeffrey TuckerJeffrey Tucker
    Posts: 3,624
    Let's have a committee that flies around the country to investigate!

    Truly, this sort of thing has to be self-managing. We are all trying our best and results differ week to week. I really think the difference between one choir and the next has to do with its ideals, not so much its week-to-week repertoire.
  • GavinGavin
    Posts: 2,799
    It's a code-word, Charles. "Schola Cantorum" really means No Haugen Allowed.

    Actually, I think the misgivings you have with the directory are somewhat unfounded. There may be a lot of "Garage Scholas" which consist primarily of disaffected rad-trads who won't set foot in a church which offers the OF, but I think the thing that all on there have in common is a desire to do chant and the music of the Roman Rite in excellence. I too question whether it's true that a "schola cantorum" must do chant, but I think for the purposes of the directory that's what's meant. The main reason choirs of excellence in contemporary genres aren't listed is that they have no desire to list there.

    I've been thinking that the next time I work in a Catholic church I may form a "schola cantorum" more true to the name than a "boys-only club" that sings Regina Caeli. Form a group dedicated to the STUDY as well as the performance of music, including but hardly limited to chant.
  • Charles in CenCA
    Posts: 2,416
    Too funny, Gavin, thanks. Jeffrey- just so you know, I wasn't in a foul, contentious mood wid m' query. It is sort of an honest question about the specific criteria for the "registry." But, as you well know, I seem to have always subscribed (even in high school in the 60's) to the Twain (?) motto: "I wouldn't join any organization that would have me as a member!" But I have to tell you, it's because of you, Dr. M., Horst, Scott, Richard and that lovely flower of the South, AOZ, that my inclination to stay closer to CMAA's fold as opposed to ACDA's remains much stronger.
    We're doing our annual Christmas Concert "gift" this Sunday, and for the first time our local "garage" schola (of which I'm not the director) will participate with a brief prayer service appointed with three Advent chants, at my invitation. Our Women's Ensemble will sing Purcell, Handel and Sussex, then our "Schola" will roam the musical universe which will include a lovely version of "There is ne rose" that retains the medieval "antiqua" but spices cadences with some wonderfully prepared chord clusters.
    Anyway, thanks for the forum and all.
  • Jeffrey TuckerJeffrey Tucker
    Posts: 3,624
    Well, it's a serious question. I'm constantly obsessing about "mistakes of the past" and how we can fix them. One mistake (major) I think that "our people" made in the old days--30s through 50s and after--was to become extremely severe and exclude from the fold people who were just getting started or who did mixed programs or whose singing wasn't up to recording standards or who didn't have advanced degrees or who didn't know the Graduale by heart etc. They kept raising the bar and then one day no one cared anymore. That's the way I see it anyway. I do think it is extremely important for everyone to remember that we are pretty much starting from scratch here and that the learning curve is steep and (frankly) infinite. So toleration must be a priority, and no one should get on any high horse. No time for that nonsense. Nor do I believe that means sacrificing excellence. There are ideals always but we might never reach them. So long as any group is tending in the right direction, from wherever they are beginning, they deserve mention, credit, praise, and should be part of the community, which is not an organized community so much as a cultural force within the Church that has a spontaneous development and growth.
  • Charles in CenCA
    Posts: 2,416
    Bravo, Jeffrey. Beautifully stated.
  • mjballoumjballou
    Posts: 994
    CMAA works very hard to promote excellence without exclusivity. And Gavin is right about the code. As they say in Alexander Technique, "begin where you are" - and for many of us it's somewhere around zero on a scale of 1-1,00,000.

    Excelsior.
Add a Comment