I would agree. My predecessor (prior to 2001) would choose at least one new hymn per week, sometimes more. The congregation never learned them so you could see people closing their hymnals and putting them back in the racks.

Long story short, I settled on 20 to 25 hymns they knew and didn't do anything new for a year. After that year, I introduced one or two new hymns each year. Now they know them and sing.

You can't constantly throw new music at the congregation (oops, I said the "C" word instead of assembly) and expect them to learn it.

I really like Jeffrey Quick's solution to this: using the same hymn for processional and recessional, just picking up on the latter where you ended verse-wise. Not only do you have a better chance of singing every verse, it means more repetition; hence, easier for congregation to learn in shorter period of time. Also has a sort of unifying feel to the music of the mass (if that makes sense).

I introduce new hymns by using them as anthems or choral preludes. If the new hymn is a request from priest and likely will not be sung much in future, I simply play it during prelude so that melody is not totally alien. People normally forgive, tolerate, or even enjoy a new hymn if it is balanced with familiar hymns at the same liturgy.

We generally don't sing a hymn at the Offertory, and I consider the Communion hymn[s] to be the choir's job. That leaves the entrance and the recessional which are generally familiar hymns. If they are new, I repeat them frequently, but not necessarily every week.

I agree with TCJ. I really think asking the congregation to sing the ordinary, and opening/closing hymns is plenty for them to sing, and having choral pieces at offertory/communion for God's glory that adds elevated beauty, which helps the congregation to pray, is a good balance. Maybe a last piece at communion focused on the Eucharist that they can sing. Generally, I think there can be an over-obsession on matching hymns to the readings. that is why the chants of the actual mass are supposed to be primary, along with chanted ordinaries. But I know that is not reality almost everywhere. But does that mean we should try to make all the hymns FIT the readings? I would think it's just as appropriate to have Eucharistic themed hymns at communion, and Marian or eucharistic hymns at offertory. Either ones in English, or good standard chant hymns that can be repeated to familiarize the congregation with some of them (this being a good option of there's no choir). A choir allows for more variety by singing anthems/motets. We established a singing congregation here, by the priest's insistence, by using the same chant mass setting for 3 years straight, and only about 20-25 hymns for processional/recessional hymns. It made such a big difference. We now rotate between Chant masses VIII (festive seasons), XI (summer/fall), XVII (advent/lent) and sometimes Mass IX (Marian feasts), and Credos I, III and IV. We also introduced about 1 new hymn per quarter, and try to sing it for at least 3 weeks in a row. Then the following year the congregation is singing it well! It makes a big impact on newcomers to the parish, in making the high mass (TLM) feel more comfortable/welcoming, when they are used to music/singing at the NO. Our parish has grown exponentially, and I know the music (both those parts elevated by the choir, balanced with leaving room for congregation participation) along with a number of other factors, are the main catalysts for that growth.

I do respect the sentiments and practices of some of those above. However, it is really strange to me that learning a new hymn should be such an earthshattering endeavour. Repeat it for three weeks or a month? Play it to death on the organ for weeks in advance? Etc., etc. I shant say what I think of this liturgically, musically, and aesthetically. In my current church and any I have served in the approximate 50 years I have been an organist and choirmaster, no such coddling was necessary. One simply put the hymn in the service folder, the peole turned to it and sang it. If they didn't get it the first time they kept trying and got in on the second or third stanza. It certainly was not made into a weeks-long exercise.

The presumed purpose of learning a new hymn lies precisely in that no other hymn in the repertory fits so well as it on a given day's lectionary. (The other side of that coin is that there is no reason to learn a new hymn just for the sake of learning a new hymn - one sings what is appropriate on a given day on that day.) For my voluntaries (preludes) I have always improvised on the processional hymn and have had a few congregations who would begin singing immediately following the improvised praeludium. If it was within the liturgy I simply introduced it as I would any other hymn (but with the melody on a prominent stop) and the people sang it. The hymn was not repeated for weeks on end because it may not have had anything at all to do with the lectionary except the day it was introduced.

The primary concern here is the integrity of the particular liturgy and what does or does not have anything to do with the propers or the lectionary of that given liturgy. Above all, no liturgy should have any part of it repeated week after week as a classroom exercise, a catechetical effort. Liturgy, the mass, is not catechesis, and to make it an avenue for catechetis of any sort is something near to blasphemy. Catechesis of any kind belongs in a separate environment.

At my present church, we sing whatever hymn is listed in the service folder. Sometimes it is a hymn that is sung only once, twice, or thrice a year. Sometimes it will only be sung at that particular celebration and who knows when it will be sung again. It is good that people should be brought to understand what hymnody is for as a complement to propers and lectionary. Our complaints are very rare and eccentric. Singing a new hymn should not be the earth shattering and toilsome, worrisome and fearful, delicately approached thing that it seems to be with some of our honourable colleagues. A new hymn is a joyful gift and should be nothing to fret about.

"some extremes". Really? I am shocked.

I've never really given any thought to teaching hymns. We only do one, and they're generally traditional tunes. People pick them up, or not. I could make the argument that, in our specific situation, we needn't do hymns at all. But I'm a cradle Lutheran, and given a volunteer Schola. I think it's important to keep the people singing. The last new congregational thing we introduced was Credo IV. We did it 6 weeks running in the summer, then put it into rotation. Now 2-3 years later, people are finally sounding comfortable with it.

May I pose this question from a different perspective?

If hymns are at any level replacements for the Proper chants which, formerly, or historically, used to be sung at these places, then shouldn't they follow the pattern of changing for each liturgical celebration, having Commons when a common would apply?

Seen in this light, the important role of the choir (to pick up an idea from a different thread) comes into sharper focus.

Ahh, yes, court composer, what would you say it was?
Um, too many notes hymns, sire..........

Careful, MJO!!!

that was Liturgiam Authenticam, and that requirement was a dead letter when it was issued, hardly the first time that's happened in legislation on sacred music.

It occurs to me that, in those situations in which much ado is made over new hymns or too many hymns, there should be no hymns at all. Let the choir-cantor-schola sing the propers and anthems, and let the people sing the ordinary, etc. That, after all, would be just what is right and pure for the Roman rite, OF or EF. This way no one would have anything to complain about - certainly not 'too many hymns' or 'too much singing'.

A hymn after or during communions, though, would be very nice and would echo the fact that 'and after they had supped they sang a hymn'. (The 'hymn' that they sang was in all likelihood a psalm, probably one of the hillel psalms associated with the Passover. Not only was the psalter the 'hymnbook' of the Jews, but 'hymn' and 'psalm' are pretty much equivalent in our New Testament translations.)

I happen to be at a parish without a tradition of singing good hymns, so MJO's point above about having no hymns is well taken. But I think there's more to it. It's not so much a matter of "too much singing" as a loss of focus.

Having the proper sung and then singing a hymn at offertory means that the people, after (hopefully) praying along with the proper chant, have to switch gears, pick up a hymnal, and sing a non-liturgical text which may or may not have a connection with the readings (are people supposed to try and figure out what this connection is?) The proper is more or less forgotten as they move on to the next thing on the program.

There's a reason why hymns work in a non-Catholic service - the people stand and the hymn is the liturgy at that moment. Or a Catholic service of lessons and carols I went to last Advent: the hymns were really part of the service - not a way to fill the time - so people really sang! It's wasn't covering an action, which can make it awkward when the action stops.

I see it as a case of less is more. Give people one thing and let it sink in without feeling the need to keep them busy.

Seder ( סֵדֶר ) as currently practiced often concludes with a song One little goat, the text of which can be found on the last page here. Just sayin'

I came to a new church in August and this parish had a healthy diet of the things that I tend to avoid (there was good stuff too, but plenty of things I’d tear from the hymnals in a New York minute). I started scheduling lots of traditional hymns. At first I had raised eyebrows and a few comments of too much too soon. I’ve even printed hymns in worship aids totally unknown to the parish multiple times. Suffice it to say, very few comments are made to me now, and those that are are from the bread and butter of the parish who are grateful for the change. Perhaps people have come to expect it now. Regardless, I schedule good stuff as regularly as I please (assuming it’s liturgically appropriate) and expect that overall participation will increase with each repetition. I don’t fret about it. (I also put the occasional column in the bulletin discussing beauty / aesthetics and what church documents actually call for.)

People don’t sing the first time. So what? Perhaps that sounds callous, but in all seriousness: what’s wrong with someone just reading the (carefully chosen) text or simply listening? The answer is unequivocally: nothing. This whole V2 idea of everyone has to be dizzyingly busy the whole time is just nonsense. They will never learn or adapt if they aren’t given the opportunity.

I can attest that every week we have a new hymn. One reason for this it seems is that the DM is searching for hymns that match the readings or psalm for that weekend. Since the readings change everyweek so does the hymnody. Even if the hymn is sung more than once during the month in an attempt for the congregation can learn it, or even if it is sung before mass begins for the same reason, to help the congregation learn it, we may not hear it again until the readings cycle around again. It seems to be vicious cycle. To add to this new hymns are being published all the time. I'm not saying this is wrong but the results are that hardly anyone in the congregation sings anymore.

For example, this weekend for Benediction, after the choir sings "O Salutaris", the choir is singing "Peace is flowing like a river", Gather #819. (Yuck!) Pardon my expression but heres another reason why the congregation doesn't sing. Of all the good Catholic hymns we could sing as a reflection, we sing this song I never heard of.

chonak, That's why I don't know it. We didn't sing stuff like that at St. Mary's in the 80's.

We always have an entrance and recessional hymn. I post the number for a communion hymn which the choir sings at the choir mass. If a cantor at other masses who once attended St. Sycophant by the Drain has been ruined by that experience and doesn't know a particular communion hymn, I will play something instead. I am flexible on those communion hymns because the people don't sing them, nor do they want to. I dropped the offertory hymn a long time ago because I thought 4 hymns were too many.

Too bad so much effort was put into people singing music that's not even part of the mass.

As someone who regularly attends matthewj's Sunday morning Masses, I sometimes feel like one less chant and one more hymn would be the perfect balance for me personally. It is a feast of chant, including the presidential prayers, and just slightly less than a feast of hymnody, imho. I would prefer all the things.

Kathy, just to play devil's advocate: Would the loss of a chant and the addition of a hymn result in the loss of one of the Propers and its replacement by (what might or might not properly be termed, based on translations) an alius cantus aptus?

Only now will I allow myself a grin at the twin expressions of consternation on the faces of last week's visiting missionaries as verse 2 of the entrance was begun. By the 11:00 Mass they were scurrying up the steps to retrieve the pulpit hymnals and singing along.

Start at the 42 minute mark for yesterday's offertory. https://youtu.be/-H0rCtW-gME

I think good hymns are fine things to have and our Anglican friends have done them excellently for some centuries now. It's a bit of a false comparison to decree hymns or propers. It is possible to have both and do both well.

In the 1950's we had plenty of opportunity to sing hymns at Benediction, Holy Hour etc., possibly at Vespers though I cannot recall the precise structure.

our Anglican friends have done them excellently for some centuries now

It is interesting to note that the Book of Common Prayer does not have a role for hymns, there is an optional Anthem at Morning and Evening Prayer. The development has been outside the rubrics, one advantage of not being strictly policed by centralised authority. However German catholics seem to have been able to move the same way in adding hymns to the TLM for many years.