Ghunter,

Not all "gaps" are created equal. The Introit has a shorter completion time (under most circumstances) than the Communion.

Somewhere in the documents (I can't remember where) the idea that the singing during the Communion should continue until reception by the faithful (assuming this takes place) has concluded. There's more than one way to do this, and not all methods are created equal.

1) Sing the antiphon with Ps. 118, or with a selection of other psalms (33 comes to mind)
2) Sing the same hymn multiple times.
3) Sing one hymn, once only, slowly enough so that it ends as the last person receives Holy Communion.
4) Sing the antiphon and then supplement with polyphony or some other kind of music (organ, hymn....)
others?

I don't understand the pastor's reasoning here since the very section of the GIRM he cites (#86) gives chant + hymn as a possibility: "if there is to be a hymn after Communion, the Communion Chant should be ended in a timely manner."

For starters, communion antiphons are not long enough to support communion unless they are repeated many times with psalm verses interposed. Secondly, for larger parishes, even long hymns are not enough. Thirdly, it is very long-standing custom to at least fill any communion / purification time left over with at least additional organ music, so you're already looking at a bare minimum of two pieces of music during communion. What this priest has suggested simply makes no sense, especially when considering the fact that #86 is then qualified by #87 which permits multiple options for what exactly constitutes the "communion Chant" (notice it is "chant" (generic term).

While I most certainly support the priest's desire to have the communion antiphon sung first and foremost, that does not have to happen to the exclusion of other music. In fact, there are traditions of singing vernacular hymnody at communion going back centuries in Europe. (I recently learned this when doing some reading about the effect of the Council of Trent upon liturgical music.)

If anything, this sniffs to me of him possibly not liking your hymn choices during communion, more than not wanting hymns themselves. Perhaps this is a less offensive way (in his eyes) of addressing the hymnody. Not knowing your situation it's hard to tell. But perhaps that question could be posed to him. If, for instance, you do a communion chant, and then follow it with a less-than-reflective P&W "hymn" rather than something with organ, played with reserve, and supporting a traditional eucharistic text (Tantum Ergo, O Salutaris Hostia, O Lord, I am not Worthy, etc.), this could be the problem. Again, this is speculation on my part and I do not mean to impute any motives or duplicity to him.

Also, as others have observed: singing motets at communion during missa cantatas is also a centuries-old, well-established praxis common to the universal church.

Hawkins, are you suggesting that the repetition of the antiphon-psalm-antiphon-psalm for the entirety of communion is indeed which is desired by the rubrics?

We sing some version of the communion antiphon (be it Fr. Weber or straight from communio with either Latin or English verses) every week, but it is still relatively rare that the chant is sufficient for all of communion when there are 250+ people there.

I would think that it is the Lord's Prayer and the sign of peace that express our com-unity, after which we having individual mouths necessarily receive the sacred elements individually. Also we are each in our own state of imperfection and need to express, mentally, our own response.
GIRM 86 may express a theological truth, but it does not express a physical reality, some people will not sing, many will not listen to the words a choir is chanting, as congregants leave pews, walk up and back, they cannot coordinate that with singing a hymn.

I did communion chants for years then followed with a hymn.

Completely untrue, otherwise we would see no issue with receiving Communion with (otherwise sacramentally valid) churches with whom we are not in communion.

With this I agree, but there is a hierarchy: Communion with Christ first, then the 'community'. What most parish 'liturgists' do is focus on the second and ignore the first.

GIRM 86 may express a theological truth, but it does not express a physical reality, some people will not sing, many will not listen to the words a choir is chanting, as congregants leave pews, walk up and back, they cannot coordinate that with singing a hymn.

This is part of the point I was attempting to make: a_f_hawkins expresses it much better than I do. In my personal opinion what works best is: Sing the Communion Chant during communion, supplement with the choir/cantors singing motets/hymns/other chants if needed: After the reception of communion, during the Hymn of Praise, is the best time for the community to be united in praise by singing a hymn.

Communion Chant plus Hymn is what we have been doing at Mass for a while.