LOL. A good woman has been the salvation of many a guy. Wendy must be a very special lady.

G, I agree. All of us who post here likely give our cantors more training than they would need to do anything on that list.

Maybe it's just the Catholic wing of LULAC trying to counterbalance the push from certain Anglophone bishops, theologians, and liturgist who are pushing so strongly that English should replace Latin as the official language of the Church.

Hmm, you left out walking on water. Must have been an oversight. ;-) The problem with some of this list is that it requires things many church musicians would rarely, or never use.

Eh, it's just a brainstorm. You say it includes things that many church musicians would rarely use, but can't that be said of 99% of what one learns in the conservatory? I tend to think of musical training as including as many tools for doing the job well as possible. I will never be at a point where my standing or failing in the liturgy will depend on my knowledge of a phrygian cadence, but it will make my Bach playing that much more satisfying to be able to identify it.

That is to say, I think we need to avoid a bare-bones approach to training musicians.

Aristotle designed a curriculum for chant singers some time ago, and Gavin's suggestion is a good complement to it.

The items I am more interested in are the fundamental things I will use every Sunday. Some reasons for this bare-bones practical approach follow. I suspect many others are in the same situation.

1.) I haven't transposed anything in ages, and have had no need to. I am forgetting how to do it.
2.) I don't sing, other than as a choir singer, but have people who do.
3.) The musical legislation is a tangled snarl of documents going back years. Trying to mesh them into something that really matters or has authority is an exercise in futility. I am familiar enough with them to put them aside and use common sense. They need to be re-written, and some of them should be suppressed. Fooling with those documents is a real time waster.
4.) We don't use neumes. I can read them, but our choir music isn't written in them, nor does it need to be.
5.) I haven't had any real need to improvise since I left the employ of the Protestants. I have so much music for any occasion I use it, instead.
6.) I tend to write descants and harmonies out, not do them from sight or memory. But I'm very careful with such, because they can really throw a singing congregation off.
7.) My memory is not so great that I remember and stay proficient in things I rarely use. If others can do it, then that's wonderful for them.
8.) I am a full-time school teacher and a music/director organist with 4 Sunday masses. I have no extra time for anything I can't immediately use, and barely have enough time to practice. I don't look for other things to do, especially the more esoteric parts of music for their own sake. Must be nice to have that kind of time, but I haven't had it since college.

G, I do essentially agree with you. As you say, it's the "faddish, the ephemeral, and the, oh surprise, property of NPM's contributors" that one could find plenty of reasons to object to.

In church music there are many jobs, and not all of them require the same knowledge or abilities. It would seem that if these certifcations are to be meaningful, they would need to actually apply to the work individual musicians are doing. As for the sacred treasury, that's an unknown to far too many. I suspect there are many more who don't know of it, than there are who oppose it.

It occurs to me as this lively discussion wages on that at the core of it we're confusing utility with benefit of the knowledge. That's a very dangerous, post-Modern (ooo, that word "Modern" . . . declared a heresy as I recall) attitude that taps into the notion that the only things worth knowing are those things that have a utilitarian function. This is suggestive of a lack of interest in acquiring knowledge of a subject or a thing for the sake of the knowledge itself.

For example, simply because in my previous position we didn't sing neumes and the choir wasn't particularly interested in taking the time as a whole group to learn how to read them and sing from square note scores, it doesn't necessarily follow that I shouldn't learn about the form of notation used by the Church consistently for over a millenium and be capable of reading and singing it.

"Not having time" is an excuse we should rail against, especially if we feel that the dailiness of our work precludes us from learning and expanding the knowledge we have. This is even more critical because we as sacred musicians are the holders of an inestimable treasure of the patrimony of the Church, called upon to teach this and pass it on especially to young people. We must therefore jealously guard our time, insisting that our employers provide for adequate time to study, learn, grow and expand the knowledge of our craft.

When I first took my current position, I knew precious little about how to accompany a hymn from a melody-only edition. I have always poured scorn on any organist who couldn't play from a standard score, but failed to realize that being able to play a decent accompaniment from a melody line (and not the typical bar-room "melody and chord" stuff, but an actual hymn-like rendering with good voice leading) was an important skill. I had learned the basics of this in a keyboard harmony skills class I "had" to take in college, but thought to myself, "I'll never need this in a month of Sundays; I always use the standard hymn harmonizations and will always play them as written." Little did I know that the Polish hymnals I'd be playing from in my current job didn't have an accompaniment edition and I therefore would have to be able to render on the spot harmonizations from a melody or two-part harmony version of these hymns, and more importantly do so with the harmonies appropriate to Polish folk-based (read, national/folk) hymns.

Finally let me leave you with this quote from Mechtilde de Magdaburg, who said,"Stupidity is sufficient unto itself. Wisdom never ceases learning."

"Not having time" is an excuse we should rail against, especially if we feel that the dailiness of our work precludes us from learning and expanding the knowledge we have.

As with CharlesW, I will add that there's a difference between not having time and not getting paid to have the time. We all rail against the old lady who says "I don't have the time to read that stuff" (in reference to liturgical legislation), BUT if she's being paid $75/Mass, why SHOULD she take the time?

CharlesW and Gavin,

I'm working on a reply to your responses. I'm letting it set for awhile because I don't want to turn this into a "spitting contest" and would like to keep my responses civil and intelligent.

I hope, however, that it wasn't your intention to suggest that I was an "ivory tower elitist."

If it was, I take exception to the suggestion. Umbrage, actually.

And, I agree with G. This isn't just a matter of acquiring esoteric knowledge like a collector. There is a moral imperative that we have this knowledge and know how to apply it, even if, and especially if, our employers (priests) don't. In fact, we are obliged in conscience to obey the directives contained in the instructions promulgated by the Holy See. If we know they're there and fail to follow them, it's an error.

CharlesW, is there anybody who can help you, I mean volunteers? So you can cut some of your actual working hours. You could advertise in the bulletin asking for volunteers on things you need help with and/or ask school parents to help.
We have MD who is hired as a full time, but she actually does only 2 Masses out of 5. All others are done by volunteers. And her responsiblity is adult choir and the children's choir once a week practice.

That is unfortunate and you will be in my prayers. I do recall some of your posts at the other church and it sounded like a bad situation. It appears you were not treated in a Christian manner. I would think Catholic churches probably pay better in Detroit, but if they are like the ones here, they pay significantly less than comparable mainline Protestant churches.

At the age of 61, of course I would consider you almost a teenager. ;-) I teach school, but am quite worn down by it. It would be nice to be a full-time musician and not have to do anything else. If I had it to do over again, I might not go into music. You know, when I think about it, the way the Church treats its musicians, it doesn't deserve to have any.

I am hoping to attend St John Cantius next week for the Vigil of the Assumption, when they have Professions every year.
In looking into it, I learned first that there will be an opportunity to pray by joining my mind, heart and soul to the singing of that beautiful Faure, (now THAT's F'cap,) and second, this "reading list" which might be pertinent to the question at hand:

Important Texts
· The Holy Bible
· Catechism of the Catholic Church
· Documents of the Vatican Council II:
· The Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy (Sacrosanctum Concilium).
· The Dogmatic Constitution on the Church (Lumen Gentium).
· The Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World (Gaudium et Spes).
· Post-Conciliar Documents on the Sacred Liturgy:
· Instruction on Music in the Sacred Liturgy (Musicam Sacram).
· The Roman Missal (Missale Romanum).
· General Instruction on the Roman Missal.
· Graduale Romanum.
· The Code of Canon Law (Codex Juris Canonici).
· Papal Documents:
· Pope Pius XII: On the Mystical Body of Christ and Our Union With It (Mystici Corporis).
· Pope Pius XII: On Christian Worship (Mediator Dei).
· Pope Paul VI: On the Propagation of Human Life (Humanae Vitae).
· Pope John Paul II: The Consecrated Life (Vita Consecrata)
· Pope John Paul II: The Splendor of Truth (Veritatis Splendor)
· Pope John Paul II: Motu Proprio Eccessia Dei
· Benedict XVI: Motu Proprio ‘Summorum Pontificum’

(Save the Liturgy, Save the World)

We might consider what are the absolutely non-negotiable skills (let's leave organ out of it for now).

First, I would say the ability to sing from the Parish Book of Chant. This would imply familiarity with the core repertoire and comfort with neumes. You can't really be a parish musician without those skills. No matter how great otherwise, not knowing the basic people's music and sing from neumes mean no progress in the future.

Second, the ability to inspire people and work with a range of personalities. Same here: a vast amount of the work comes down to dealing with people and volunteers.

Third, know about and be able to use technology so as to employ the use of free online materials; otherwise the parish will be spending vast amounts of money on inferior music.

Fourth, the person should be able to defend the case for sacred music from tradition and Church teaching.

I think I would pretty much stop there. What am I missing?

I disagree on the third as a non-negotiable skill. Why should someone adopt a libertarian view of intellectual property in order to be an effective church musician? It's a plus to be able to save the church money, but I don't see how it's necessary that they not give the choir anything that isn't a one-sided stapled photocopy. And I think organ skill plays SOME role, but that can be ascertained by having applicants play for a Mass and considering their hymn-leading skills. Although I would agree that it's not a non-negotiable.

I would disagree that it is necessary to know the PBC backwards and forward. It's good, I really like it, and it's good music. But there's much more to Catholic music than PBC. As for neumes, I read them, but am not ready to inflict ancient notation on my congregation, despite the "nuances" evident only to other musicians. Neumes could be a skill along with many other necessary skills, but not a determining factor in whether or not someone is hired.

Why should we leave organ out? It seems that church documents that are used to promote chant also promote organ equally as much.

Dealing with people and volunteers. Sometimes easier said than done, but a good skill to have. However, we are musicians, not necessarily saints. Volunteers can sometimes try the patience of a saint.

Defend sacred music from tradition? Sounds wonderful, but even the church doesn't do all that good a job of it. A musician's leadership in this area can only be as effective as the pastor who backs him.

Technology? Also good, and free is always better. But some churches can easily afford to buy music, so it's not a make or break quality to be able to find free stuff. Superior music can be purchased, too.

It would be good to have a working knowledge of copyright legislation.

I think it depends on whether you are hiring a vocalist or an organist. Not every musician does both. Of course it's a money thing, but some churches can hire both singers and players. And I repeat, those church documents calling for chant mention the pipe organ, as well. So should we have an annual document toss and anathema hurl? LOL. May the weightiest document win. ;-)

You are correct that the PBC is simple. I just wouldn't build an entire music program around it. There's a surprising amount of chant in some hymnals, so chant can always be included in any program.

I am fortunate to work for a priest who was a fine organist in his younger days, and still sight sings better than I do. However, something has happened to music training in the seminaries. I meet priests who really don't know the difference between good and bad music. I suspect far too many wouldn't be able to make very good assessments of candidate skills.

Jeffrey, now that you have explained it, I am in agreement with you.

I think your post is essentially clear. I may have read more exclusiveness into it concerning PBC than you meant. Perhaps if it comes across as one of the ways to accomplish an end, not the only means to it

Cantor Formation and Certification in Los Angeles

Each person attending Cantor Certification, Part A must have:

1. Basic ability to read music notation, both in terms of pitch and rhythm
2. Basic ability to learn music
3. Ability to match pitch and maintain a melody
4. Capability of singing in a clear and pleasant manner
5. Basic knowledge of liturgy and the order of liturgy
6. Basic spirit of hospitality and service.

It is also expected that participants attend Mass regularly and are people of prayer.

Odd, that one "must" have the first 6, (not sure what that "basic spirit of hospitality and service" and who who be determined not to possess it...) but Mass attendance is only expected, as opposed to required, and it need only be regular, not faithful.
Perhaps they train non-Catholics in the program.

(Save the Liturgy, Save the World)

Quite a few posts back, but someone was talking about the NPM becoming irrelevant. The latest edition of the GIA Quarterly (Not to be confused with GQ) has several interesting but rather depressing articles. One by Virgil Funk seems to be a last-ditch effort at rallying the aging -hippies of Vatican II to fire up their "smoldering resistance" to the recent movements of the "hierarchy" to take back control of the liturgy from "the people". Geeezzz... and then another article is about "contemporary ensembles" and their aging membership as most of them evolved from Folk Groups in the 60's and 70's. Both of these authors are NPM insiders. If this is what NPM considers moving forward, they are indeed irrelevant.

The several textbooks are listed on their site as:

1. Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy
2. General Instruction on the Roman Missal (2002)
3. Sing to the Lord
4. Guide for Cantors by Jennifer Kerr Breedlove and Paul Turner, Liturgy Training Publications, Chicago, IL, 2007.

The first three are available on line for no charge that I'm aware of and they should certainly be a part of any cantor's and DM's library. I'm unfamiliar with the last of the four. That being said, the classroom interpretation of those documents would be the important part. They can be spun into just about any direction.

Don't see anything on Part B. I'd even be interested in knowing how many takers they have at $120 a pop for the Part A. Since it interests you, why don't you give their office a call on behalf of all the CMAA membership?

I was intrigued by Chironomo's comment above about the article he saw in GIA Quarterly. Alas, that periodical (and thus that article) doesn't seem to be accessible online, but I was able to find a sample article seemingly in very much the same vein as what Chironomo described.