Warning from others: Do not let the parish experience chant as a Lenten penance.

First and foremost, congratulations on this first and important step! I hope that this succeeds beyond your expectations.

Second, look into Dr. Mary Berry's "Plainchant for Everyone" (the title says it all), which I believe is being republished by the Royal School of Church Music as the "RSCM Guide to Plainchant", or something.

I also caution against beginning the use of chant during Lent--it may never go beyond that season. If you learn a simple Kyrie or Agnus (not Mass XVIII, try Agnus ad libitum II), Adoro te, and Salve Regina, or the like, you should be set to go by Ordinary Time after Epiphany. Just my $0.o2.

Someone came up to me at Easter and told me that we should have the Latin Gloria every Sunday, not just for feast days! Wonderful!

We do Latin during Lent, but since we use the ICEL chant the rest of the year, it's the same tunes and the language doesn't make a noticeable difference. The congregation knows both.

Propers? We do communion chants every week, but at other times, Propers get in the way of what is happening. They don't fit the NO so well, and it is clear they are a holdover better suited to the EF. Could that be fixed? Yes, but it is above my pay grade.

@CharlesW, just for clarity: you mean, you always sing the "proper" Communion chant (as in the Missal or one of the Graduals), but at other points ("times") in the Mass, such as the Entrance and Offertory, the "proper" doesn't fit well into the liturgy, and gets in the way?

Right?

"Propers get in the way of what is happening."

Exactly what gets in the way, muddled minds want to know.

What gets in the way of the offertory is the speedy pastor who wants things moved along too fast for anything extra. Under our old regime, things moved slowly and we had plenty of time. Not any more. I have even had to move longer anthems to after communion. Communion Propers are not an issue since we always have plenty of time. We have older deacons cleaning vessels and a second collection, so I can always squeeze out some extra time there. Entrance, I can do as a prelude, but that is all.

I can see that 'getting in the way' would be a very compelling reason for someone who just doesn't want to use them, no matter what.

No, Jackson. You tend to judge every other place by Walsingham, which is quite an aberration compared to most parishes. The rest of the world is not like that.

I think, Charles, that here and there there are purely Roman rite parishes with a liturgical praxis that would rival Walsingham's. There must be. St John Cantius cannot be unique. I can see that your problem is a priest who is in a hurry. I'm sure that with the proper clerical attitude you would probably join Cantius's ranks.

Walsingham is a cathedral. One of the functions of a cathedral is that it be a liturgical beacon for its diocese - and anyone else who will look and learn. I've no doubt that all or most Ordinariate parishes follow its lead as how they are able. Plus, it is typical of the Anglican ethos. Typical but not unique. Such liturgical intelligence is not a monopoly of Anglicans. Of this I'm sure.

...is closer to...

I'm not altogether certain that this is a viable contention. The Ordinariate ('Anglican') Use differs from the EF in significant ways, most distinctively in that the confession ('confiteor') occurs not at the beginning of the mass but before the offertory, after the creed and prayers of the faithful. Also, it has not the distinctive offertory prayers of the EF, and has several long prayers ('of thanksgiving', the Sarum-inspired 'prayer of humble access', etc.) that have no equivalents in the EF. In the same ways it is distinct from the OF as well.

Of course, too, the use of Old Church English sets it apart. Also distinctive is the use of much ritual body language and ceremonial which long were in use by Anglo-Catholics, some being akin to pre-Vatican II usage, some (such as the Gospel Procession - which has no counterpart in any other form of the Roman rite) borrowed from the East, and some reflective of Anglican spirituality and approach to worship. Some people, noting the degree of ritual and ceremony in the Ordinariate Use jump to the conclusion that it is consiously preserving EF characteristics. This is shortsighted, very incorrect, and does honour neither to the Ordinariate Use nor the EF. Indeed, the EF and the OF are more akin to each other than either of them is to the Ordinariate Use. Though EF and OU share a greater degree of ceremony (as normatively celebrated) than the average OF celebration, the resemblance stops there. The degree of ceremony in the OU is reflective of the Anglican patrimony as regards worship, not a conscious or unconscious aping of the EF or some other rite. One might add that there is no forbiddance of historic ceremony or ritualistic features in the OF. It's bad press is really due to the untutored minds of those bad priests and people who celebrate it badly in most places. Though a conscious low church mentality prevails in most OF places, the OF, in its inherent versatility, is equally inviting of a high church praxis. But! One could well say the same about the EF. One is compelled to point out that the EF has its own low church manifestation - it's called 'low mass', and probably a majority of EF adherents prefer the low church option.

Finally, as I have maintained before in a number of other threads, if the EF had been revised and put into English and the OF had never happened (indeed, if Vatican II had never happened!), the EF would have been treated to much of the abuse that has been heaped upon the OF. Such was/is the zeitgeist of the era. It is people who make a ritual beautiful or not beautiful, not the rite inherently.

Finally, as I have maintained before in a number of other threads, if the EF had been revised and put into English and the OF had never happened (indeed, if Vatican II had never happened!), the EF would have been treated to much of the abuse that has been heaped upon the OF.

True. I am old enough to remember EF abuses when the EF wasn't extraordinary. I have maintained since the Council that the revisions from Vatican II should have looked to existing English models instead of going off into the wilderness as happened.

Never say never, Charles! If church history teaches us anything, things taken for granted can slowly but surely go topsy turvy.

Often true, but this time around I wonder if enough of the church will be left to do much in the way of restoration. Of course, it will survive and scripture says so. What it doesn't say is how much will be left.

We needn't worry about how many they will be

Yes, but...There is a degree of effectiveness or influence that comes from numbers and saturation in the society. That may, I suspect, be lost.

Different time, place, and culture. How much of that could be accomplished today is anyone's guess. I have suspected that the uniformity of Roman culture and dominance is exactly why those from Galilee were successful, and much of that can be attributed to St. Paul.

Short-lived and maybe surface deep. As for the spread of Christianity, 500 years sooner or later could have made a world of difference in its success. Perhaps God just picked the perfect time when conditions were right.

Update on my chant schola. The priest has decided rather starting with a Sunday during Lent, we will be chanting Easter Vigil Mass. I'm excited!!!

Thanks for the link, Janet! I was aware of the program but didn't know the first book was out. Looking forward to the other volumes.

Classes were going well until I developed severe sciatica 2 weeks ago. After an MRI, it was discovered that I have a torn lumbar disc that is impinging on the sciatic nerve. This requires surgery to correct. Since it is too painful for me to walk the distance from the parking lot to the practice room in the parish hall, I had to suspend the classes until after my recovery. (I go to the neurosurgeon Thursday to schedule surgery and find out how long recovery should last)

I am so sorry to hear that, and will pray for you. Thank you for responding so quickly even though you must be having a hard time.

There is a wonderful rubbing oil of frankincense & myrrh available. It is marketed for neuropathy, not sciatica, but you might find it soothing. I use it all the time. I understand now why the wise men brought it to Jesus and Mary!