The "prohibition" stems from pre-Pius XII days, when NO women were allowed to sing in the choir--which had to do with a strict interpretation of the term "choir," which was used in reference to monks. IOW, since only monks--who were in orders--sang in 'choir', that became a classification which did not include women. (Except in nunneries, of course.)

Pius XII changed that world with his "Christmas Letter" of 1956 (? 1957?).

Some still adhere to that prohibition.

If you're somewhere that many people do worry about it, it's their problem, and their loss if they refuse to let you join in.

Amen, to that!

Anglican Use and Ordinariate Catholics, who, in continuance of their custom, do not disallow women in choir.

Nor from wearing the cassock and (round-yoked) surplice, it should be noted.

Sponsa -
I think that that is self evident. Still, I think that most (at least, very many) of those who object to men and women together in the same schola do so (unless the schola are actually 'in choir') because of the 'voice thing', the inevitable octaves. I don't have the impression that, for most, the objection is to women per se.

I'm not sure why it would be 'tiring being referred to as a man, or having a "male voice"'.
Unless, of course, one isn't a man, in which case why would such a person be called a 'man'? I, myself, would never tire of being called a man. This is a great compliment. And, as far as I'm concerned male and female are gender descriptors based on one's anatomy and psyche - society's muddling of the facts notwithstanding.

If there is a document from Pius XII that reversed a previous prohibition on singing of propers by women, does someone have a link to it?

This 1955 document expressly includes women: http://www.ewtn.com/library/ENCYC/P12MUSIC.HTM

The footnote for the relevant provision cites several decrees of the Congregation for Rites that were issued between 1903 and 1955, at the request of bishops in the U.S. (and perhaps elsewhere), where lay choirs rather than clerical choirs were the custom, and where choirs were located in the gallery rather than in the sanctuary.

A woman with your range is unusual. You are talented indeed. Perhaps you could just good naturedly accept being an 'honourary man'. On the other hand, if I were a male alto (and I do know quite a few) I shouldn't want to be lumped in and referred to as a woman, honourary or not. You do have a point. If I were your choirmaster (or is it a choirmistress?) I should likely refer to tenors, sopranos, etc., rather than to men and women, especially if one of my tenors was a lady. I have a very talented male tenor-alto (he's very flexible) in my schola and routinely refer to 'men' and 'trebles'. We enjoy this good-naturedly. If a valuable scholar or chorister is needlessly suffering emotional or intellectual discomfort, it is incumbent upon the choirmaster to address the matter with maturity and conscientious understanding. (A chorister or scholar who is an actual nuisance is another matter entirely - and I suspect that you are not a nuisance but a blessing.)

Have you amicably let your choirmaster know how you feel?

I must say that I am no friend of 'gender inclusive' language. Gender exists. We are men, and we are women. We are he and she, him and her. There are intelligent ways of recognizing this objective reality without bowing to those paranoid types who go around with 'gender chips' on their shoulders.

As for your situation - you have my sympathy.
Why can't your schola master refer to the group by the register of their voices rather than by their gender. This would seem so simple. It sounds to me like your schola master might be somewhat immature, and, insecure. This should be such a simple matter.

It has been my observation that choirmasters who are abusive (and there are many who think that abuse and drama go with 'the territory') really don't know what they are doing, nor how to get beautiful results with civilized approaches, without scarring everyone to death. Choirmasterial talent decreases in direct proportion to the increase of choirmasterial nastiness and pretense.

About those men and women who have outstanding ranges, one might offer these observations.

A male alto is a man whose vocal register is in the alto range. He may also sing tenor by 'shifting gears'. He does not have 'a woman's voice', nor does he sound like a woman. He sounds precisely like a male alto. If he sings in a mixed choir (or an English choir of men and boys) his section should be referred to as altos, not women.

Likewise with a lady tenor. They are unusual but not rare. They do not have a 'man's voice', nor do they sound like men. They sound precisely like female tenors. The tone of their voice is quite distinct from that of a male tenor. When singing in mixed choirs their section should be referred to as tenors, not men.

If the choir is a schola that sings only plainchant and it has a male alto or a female tenor, the obviously considerate option would be to refer to the upper and the lower registers, or the bass-tenors and the alto-trebles. Singers are too valuable to be treated with perfunctory rudeness.

(An aside - about the English choir of men and boys. In these choirs the alto parts are sung by male altos. This, in addition to the boys themselves, is what gives the English choir its unique tone and brilliance. <> The continental choirs of men and boys, on the other hand, employ no male altos. Here there are men basses and tenors, and boy altos and trebles. This results in a sound quite distinct from, and noticeably duller that of the English choir of men and boys. <> It is also why the choir of Westminster Cathedral does not have [and careful listening will betray this] the unique brilliance of the Anglican choirs. Like continental choirs, it employs boys, not men, to sing the alto parts.)

It's so simple.
Adam solved it with only nine words - fourteen syllables!
Why didn't I think of that.

I realize the simplicity of fixing this issue, but I don't see a change in sight. Given the way society is headed towards gender not being based on biological reality and how one feels, I do get a little concerned when we have newcomers who might think we swing that way (IOW: That I identify as a man, not as a woman).

Westminster has both Countertenors and Boy Altos.

@SponsaChristi, My sympathies for your dilemma and hope your director will be more sensitive of your feelings. How antediluvian could someone be, for heaven's sake!

I'm envious of your range! Do you ever do solo singing? If I could just sing the F and E below middle C with ease, it would help with some polyphonic pieces I want my schola to learn, but despite all my vocal coach's help, the G is the end of the line for me.

BTW, when we sing propers at our EF Mass, we have the men and women sing together in different octaves some of the time, and also alternate voices on the verses for the Gradual and Alleluia. Sometimes we have the children sing alone, too. I like the variety.

No, I don't sing solo. I have zero formal formal voice training and can't afford lessons. Our choir director (not schola director) told me that if I took voice lessons I could learn how to sing in my head voice. I can sing high (E one octave above middle C, sometimes if I'm really warmed up, I can get the Leger line A, but my upper range is weak and unreliable), but I really only have access to my lower registers. I was just blessed with a good ear and can read music. I can't sight sing, though, which is hampering. I'm also not really interested in singing solo. I'm really only interested in singing to Jesus during Mass.

Yes. That's one way to hear the melody (the tenor line) at the top - similar to using flutes to do that in orchestration. The Boston Camerata has taken that approach in performance of this kind of music.

http://www.hymnary.org/text/welcome_welcome_every_guest

Very cool! What is Sacred Harp? I think I'm hooked. : )

Very cool! What is Sacred Harp? I think I'm hooked. : )

It should be noted that these cleaned-up choral performances are not really what traditional shape note singing sounds like.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98fVjc4MfXQ

It is specifically congregational music --- music to sing, not really to listen to.

Here's perhaps an even more authentic recording, from 1982, filmed by Alan Lomax.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m34OaYzG9NE

If only Catholics had held so tenaciously to their musical heritage.

You mean like Tra le Sollecitudini, V.13? ;)

The egalitarian aspect of leadership of a Shape Note sing is a marvel: children to the very elderly and Everyone in between. Because it's a genuine culture that is given and received, not obtained. (Thinking here - in a hysterically different context - of the famous quip recorded by the late Cleveland Amory in "Proper Bostonians" (1947) about the puzzled reaction of a pair of Beacon Hill Brahmin matrons when a visiting New York matron asked them where they bought their hats: "*Buy* our hats? We *have* our hats".)

MJO, no apology necessary.

I would also say that the tendency I hear currently in English choirs is to minimize the alto sound a bit vis-a-vis what I heard 20-30 years ago. Even St. Thomas Church, 5th Ave, I believe, had this under John Scott after much more prevalent altos under Gerre.

I would also say Westminster Cathedral has flourished under Martin Baker. The choral sound as well as expression are much improved over the prior administration.

Okay my best friend is a countertenor and I have to safely say unless we have enough countertenors or castratis we will need women to sing the organum. :S Keep up your great work.
I don't know why but in my parish I don't think I'm classified as a woman, I'm allowed to do almost anything all the other women aren't allowed to do!
If it becomes enough of a problem I reckon just send those people to Target's bathrooms to distract them whilst you sing? If men still had the extremely high singing skills we wouldn't have to pick up their high notes!
I have a women's schola and we hope that we can respond to the men during vespers in future because it sounds like nuns when we sing! It's so cool!

Thanks so much for the information and videos on Sacred Harp. This is very thrilling stuff.

MJO, I'm re-reading your remarkable comments about male altos:

. . . the alto is sung (with unique and superb brilliance) by male altos . . . Boy trebles are beyond compare when properly trained for subtlety and brilliance, but, as altos, they are notably dull, certainly dull in contrast to the mature male alto.

One rarely hears much about the alto line. It's nice to hear that someone thinks altos are capable of brilliance. I do my best to make my alto line sparkle, but the female lower register is perhaps not the same in tone as the male high register, even though they pretty much share the same musical range, is that the point?

My son and I share the same range, too, and he's always begging to sing the alto, since he LOVES singing high notes, but we all think it makes a better balance when he sings tenor. There is something so wonderful about the tenor part, esp. in polyphonic music. It's not only the flashiest but the sweetest and most satisfying line.