While 'active participation' does not require the congregation to sing everything, no it is certainly not the role of the cantor to be a soloist with the congregation as 'backup', or 'singing the refrain'. (I set aside the responsorial psalm and similarly explicitly responsorial items, of course.)

I haven't seen this happening in my parish, although we very rarely sing anything with 'refrains' in the sense that I suspect you have in mind.

What hymns are you singing? Some contemporary songs, especially, have frankly weird verses (often changing in melody or rhythm from verse to verse) that could be throwing people off. Traditional hymns do not have this problem.

Yes, this happens regularly at our parish. There are a few things that come to mind that could be happening:

1. The initial excitement of singing everything all the time is wearing off, and people don't want to anymore, except for the parts they know really well or still enjoy.

2. If the practice at the parish is (as it is in many places) to sing only enough verses to cover the liturgical action, then the people aren't hearing the entire hymn every time, reducing repetitions of the refrain, but more importantly restricting the number of times they experience those wacky verses if the song has them. This results in the people simply not knowing the song.

3. Especially in the case where your parish has a "Mr. Caruso" as Thomas Day calls him/her (big-voiced cantor bellowing into a microphone), the congregation might be simply listening to the voice that is drowning them out, especially on verses where they might not be as secure in singing.

The problem is that so many churches are just singing songs at Mass and not singing the actual ritual. Go to a church where the actual Mass is sung every Sunday and you'll hear congregational singing - tons of "and with your spirit"s and "thanks be to God"s.

1. Liam's apt comment was, more or less, presaged by Fr. Lucien Deiss' catalogue of psalms and canticles. He was the first post-conciliar composer (of whom I was aware) to specifically write for a dialogue, soloist on verses, all on antiphon/refrain.
2. As I've often said in threads like this before, "cantors" ought not to be normative. Yes I know that's the new normal, but it's wrong in the contemporary culture. Doesn't really matter how talented the singer is.
3. Replace song leaders with choirs, even if only 2 or 3 gather in His Name. Choir needs to be good, not just competent. Work always to improve the choir.
4. Consider this philosophy for choirs bolstering congregational participation for Ordinaries, Processionals, Psalmody, and the various alius cantus types:
PIPs/congregations please note: Lead, follow or get out of the way.
I say that with no malice or hubris. If a DM/choirmaster presents worthy repertoire with that intent, they know what they're supposed to do, it's simply up to them to do it.

I'm sure many of you would like for me to specify what song or hymn but I don't want to get off topic and start tearing apart a particular hymn and song. If it helps we sing mostly from the blue Gather Hymnal. Some works of Andrew Motyka - communion chants mostly, we will be doing the Advent Entrance Rite by Hommerding and we are planing to sing the Hymn for the Holy Year of Mercy for this year and next year and so not to belabor the point in general our music director has a well rounded mix of church music. That being said in my 40 years of singing there seems to be a trend toward having the cantor do all the work...haha

When I cantor, I am very conscientious of my role and booming Caruso's don't exist in our parish, I'm told old to be booming any more anyway. The most favorable of compliments given to me and I hear this more often than not, is that the congregation can understand me. We have a well rounded group of cantors and a good choir.

Also, the topic is not about the sung Mass parts our congregation does a very good job with these. They do quite well when the deacon chants or the pastor. We are still struggling with Latin in the congregation but that's slowly coming.

I like CharlesW comment as it seems to hit the nail on the head

You are correct. MD, that some contemporary songs are seemingly meant for professional singers. They are beyond the abilities of the average congregant. Some of those "hymns" are so poorly written and trite I suspect many just don't find it worth the time and effort to bother with them - yes, Haugen and company, there are intervals other than sixths and time signatures other than 6/8. Why does that stuff from the "contemporary" composers who are no longer young, all sound alike?

To me (IMHO) the difference between a hymn and a song is, a hymn written with a melody easily sung by both adults and children and teaches us the principals of our faith. If it doesn't meet this criteria it shouldn't be in any music directors line up.

I also like PaxMelodious comment, I'm sure this is a big factor in all parishes with choirs and cantors

Someone said to me the other day that "we're not sure if we're allowed to sing any more".

I think from the various comments I have a pretty good picture of whats going on in other parishes. Thanks all for your comments.

The only true cure - 1. literally sing everything at Mass (except the sermon/homily), 2. have singing classes for children K-3 grade more than once a week and if at all possible before they attend the Mass - using chant, traditional hymns as well as classical vocal pedagogical techniques, 3. no more cantors and antiphonal psalmnody between cantor and congregation for it dumbs down the congregation and gets them use to singing refrains, 4. have choirs of children 4th grade to right before voice change for boys then graduated them into the adult choir, 5. no more solos, no garbage music, refrain from refrains and be bulldogedly consistent, steadfast, and uncompromisingly dogmatic. Such a music director may not be loved (at first), but they sure will be respected!

When they only know the refrain...

http://youtu.be/shIACXmg7Bc

The consistently greatest effect in congregational song I have ever been able to achieve in my exceptionally normal parish is with anything call-and-response. "I say Kyrieleis, you say Kyrieleis..." Psalms always elicit good participation, as do Gospel Acclamations. Dialogues take a bit of work when the people aren't accustomed to them regularly, but somehow are mostly there in the Catholic brain.

New music, unless you are coaching (when?) will always depend on your determination to use new repertoire consistently and their willingness to open the book. Nor do I begrudge the people who don't open the book, esp. at the offertory (much rather they open their wallets) and communion (their mouths). But I do know that if I introduce a new "refrained" piece, it will get a much better response initially than a new foursquare hymn, since the hymn is not call-and-response.

From the remarkable 1880 article from "Studies in Worship Music" about congregational singing at the London Oratory, I can only reproduce:

"The refrain or chorus which many of the hymns have is also a secret of their power. As the couplet returns, verse after verse, the most listless can join; those who have no books, or, having them, cannot read, take up the words which form the burden of the hymn, and which repetition has made familiar."

And I have to reproduce as well:

"There can be no question, in the second place, that the Oratory congregation sings heartily because of the easily caught and tuney melodies to which the hymns are set. The Roman Catholics are under no Genevan traditions as to the type in which a hymn-tune should be cast. They have no “syllabic” propriety; their notion seems to be that the best hymn-tune is that which common people take up most heartily. They adapt airs from all sources; national songs, instrumental movements, &c., and are careful to admit no tune without strongly marked character, and rhythm easily learnt and easily remembered."

And of course,

"Mr Pitts, in his “Oratory Hymn-Tunes,” has arranged the melodies for unison singing. The harmonies are not in vocal counterpoint, but in the form of instrumental accompaniment. The air is accompanied by staccato chords on the first of the bar, by arpeggios, by pedal passages, and such devices. In this way the hymns are sung at the Oratory – men, women, and children all taking the air. The pronounced rhythm of the organ part keeps up the spirit of the singing, and prevents dragging."

Uncanny how like the tunes and rhythms (and structures) of the tunes in 1800's Catholic hymnbooks are to the stuff in Gather. Perhaps Haugen & Co. were onto something after all. Then again, this wasn't liturgical music at the time, but devotional.

Also worth a thought: Strophic stuff is for the Office. Mass music has always been antiphonal, and yes, with only the cantors singing the verses.

"Just tell us what to do: we don't want to think on Sunday mornings, much less pray."

Someone mentioned on another thread that the major issue is that there is a problem in Catholic prayer life. This is proof.

That's hardly proof, unless there is also a problem with Catholic prayer life in the Liturgy of St John Chrysostom, which is mostly this kind of singing. If you haven't figured out how to sing along with the Litanies by the third intercession, you have a problem. This is also the kind of singing that the estimable Mr. Meloche considered a great virtue of traditional liturgy earlier in this thread.

I think that a lot of parishioners prefer an unmediated liturgical experience. They don't want to pick up a hymnal, read the text, fiddle for their wallets/envelopes, switch to the other book (missalette, mass-setting insert, whatever) for the next thing, and then at the end of the liturgy have sung everything, read a lot of words in a book, but experienced nothing. But if the song is intuitive, if there is a refrain that they can sing as they process to communion, if they are led, without a book, into the sung Kyrie after the penitential act through good use of a precentor, then it is a very authentic, meaningful, and enriching experience of worship for them.

And I don't think this approach to liturgy is necessarily a defect in prayer life. In fact, it is historically the approach Catholics took to praying the Mass, until the liturgical movement, only augmented to allow for sung participation.

If changing liturgical chants were mostly antiphonal, and the unchanging parts of the Mass sung to a few solid settings, why couldn't the entire assembly chant the Mass without a book, and then through seeing, listening, and praying, experience unmediated the liturgical action unfolding before them, really the only good reason to do it in the vernacular in the first place.

Not so unappealing.

Sadly, I think part of the issue might be that they are tiring of a constant feeling of "new music" and change, even though in our cases the "new music" is old music. They just want someone once and for all to set a repertoire and stick with it. Change is tiresome. Radical change unabated for 50 years is exhausting. At least Pope St. Pius X's reform felt like it was a one-time deal unto perpetuity and universality.

They just want someone once and for all to set a repertoire and stick with it.

Like this?

Clever retort, but off the mark as regards CONGREGATIONAL music.

So this.

I have been reading through many of the comments and I like what Carl D says.

One phenomenon I've noticed with modern G&P songs is that the congregants are given only the words, not music.

This is very true or they are only given the music of the refrain and not the words at all of the song.

I take point with ClergetKubisz,

The problem wasnt in the type of singing but the attitude that supports mainly call and response with general congregations not willing to learn entire hymns anymore, at least not in my parish.

I don't think congregations are unwilling to learn new hymns if the content of the hymn is worth learning and is easy to learn given the definition I expressed above in my previous post.


And I feel that what NihilNominis says is great observation

Sadly, I think part of the issue might be that they are tiring of a constant feeling of "new music" and change, even though in our cases the "new music" is old music.

I must admit it seems at my parish there is always something new being introduced and it's up to the cantor to carry the verses and the congregation the refrain. Whether it is something from a G&P hymnal or a home brew.

Here is what I think what is most lacking in Catholic hymnody today, our "communion with the saints".

When I look at the hymns that my grandparents sang the content of the hymn was decidedly devotional. There was a communion with the saints in praising God. The words were prayerful and meaningful and most importantly they evangelized the individual when he or she was away at work, play or driving down road.

The real measure of a good hymn is whether that hymn is teaching us anything of our faith and steers clear of this "identity crisis" that I'm Jesus in one verse and somebody else in another verse. I can't raise you up from the dead and you can't satisfy the broken heart and by all means please remember me.

Salieri and ryand had me rolling. Just saying.

AMEN Noel! AMEN!!!

The protestants understand that a hymn is prayer

Very true, that is a key difference between protestant and Catholic worship. If the Catholic Church had an official hymn book for Mass, with texts given the same scrutiny as they give to the propers, then we could use it without undermining our faith. However as things stand, some hymns commercially available are pernicious.

I'm just amazed that there are Catholic congregations out there that actually sing! Most of the people in my parish don't even open the hymnal.

Is music at Mass a prayer, or is it meant to cover "liturgical action"?

The introit, alleluia, offertory, and communion propers, with their psalm verses, cover liturgical actions. The gradual psalm and the Mass ordinary are themselves liturgical actions.

I often wonder about the Agnus as a liturgical action: Anglicans have several options for a "Fraction Anthem". How usual is it for the Agnus to be followed a long silence punctuated by snapping before the communio begins?

Music is integral to the Mass, and sometimes - like a ballet- two actions take place simultaneously.

No.

Otherwise, organists and choir directors would be ordained and celibate. And that dog won't hunt.

If music were as important or even important to the church for Mass, it would not be in the state it is in now.

Saying this is as silly as saying that a Mass without burning candles is not a valid Mass.

(OK, Ben, we won't bring up incense.)

To say and believe that music is integral to the Mass completely and utterly puts music and gaudy vestments on the same level as Transubstantiation.

These things only clothe the Mass with sounds and sights but are trivial in comparison.

But the Goldberg is transcendental.

There's something annoyingly Roman about the compulsion to determine which elements of the liturgical praxis are "integral" and which are trivial or could be dispensed with.

bugia

FYI: I view this forum mostly on Chrome on a laptop, and YouTube plays audio embedded here....it may be your own settings or a device issue.

Liam - Look at Catholic parish websites: pitiful pitiful pitiful on average. It becomes very clear that the normal Catholic approach to evangelization is: we and you are obligated to do X, so we have no need to advertise.

I don't know about other Catholic websites I think my parish has a well thought out and user friendly design as well as informative. St. Paul Parish

We have a section under our Music Ministry to help the congregation, choir, and cantors at least for those who are interested. It's a slow start and we are working on ways to improve and let church members know whats coming up and what is required by them.

Noel Jones - There are too many roadblocks stuck in the way that music chosen, performed and made available to the people in the pews at the present time, to foster congregational singing at Catholic Mass.

In every parish you have those who pick up the hymnal and sing and those who just wont. So we have two extremes except there is another group, they are the ones who pick up the hymnal and they want to sing but quickly put the hymnal down. Why? They have music, they have the words. There is a cantor doing the singing for them...I mean, helping to lead the singing. Why did they put the hymnal down?

I can tell you there many times I wish I could put the hymnal down. There's nothing more difficult in introducing and helping the congregation learn a new song that goes against everything you know to be sacred. Thank God that I only had to sing two verses. Sometimes I find myself wishing Father would quicken his pace to the altar and save me and the congregation the 3rd verse. The same can be said at Offertory, Communion and Recessional. Although generally speaking Father seems eager to great his parishioners (haha) and if we are lucky we get two verses.

But then every once in awhile a traditional hymn is sung like To Jesus Christ Our Sovereign King, Holy God We Praise Thy Name, In This Sacrament Sweet Jesus, Attende Domine, Ubi Caritas, you know the ones I speak of...and I'll see more people singing, we sing more verses and everyone loves the old traditional hymn.

We should sing that more often they'll say. It felt so good to sing that hymn and I feel like I went to church today. I love that hymn, why don't we sing it more often? I hear many other little anecdotes.

ClergetKubisz - Not singing the Mass is also a way for some priests to get out of what they believe is certain embarrassment. Some just don't have the guts to try. Still, others think it saves time to eliminate that "unnecessary" music, perhaps in order to have time for something else they'd rather do, such has elongating the sermon.

Our pastor is a young priest and he has good voice, he chant's really well and I know he and the music director go over most if not all the music for the Mass and what we will be doing for that week or month. I guess it all depends on your parish.

To say and believe that music is integral to the Mass completely and utterly puts music and gaudy vestments on the same level as Transubstantiation.

So that Vatican II phrase about 'pars integralis' is--what? Jibberjabber?