Has he brought his Liturgical Director with him?

noel at sjnmusic.com

A major issue is that he has a pastoral responsibility to maintain the status quo of the music in the parish as he received it from the previous pastor.

All recommendations for change in STTL are tempered by the caveat that pastoral considerations music be applied, a loop hole for those who do not want to make changes. However, that door swings both ways. If the parish has an ongoing music program that is not flawed and obviously needs no immediate fixing, his responsibility as a pastor is to accept it under the same terms.

If he is coming in with dreams of throwing his weight around, you and all the parish musicians, should immediately act to block his plans.

Now, who might be able to advise what direction you must go to do this? Does this call for a meeting with the Bishop...or other ecclesiastical officer? Who is the correct person to go to?

If you choose to pursue this, I'd also have an alternate plan for getting out of there when and if the chant hits the fan.

I have a friend....Fulbright Scholar in Organ...13 years in one parish in the St. Petersburg Diocese...and then 7 more years in another one in the same diocese. New transplanted British priest comes in, does not hit it off well, criticizes my friend's job performance....inflames his insecurities...and then fires him. One would think that a clergyman in need of a job enough to leave his country and come to the US might be a bit more...understanding when messing with the employment of locals, no?

This Fulbright Scholar...with 20 years of loyal and successful ministry to the Catholic Diocese of St. Petersburg, Florida...I talked with him yesterday while he was at his new console. ..it is a Peterbilt...yes, he's driving a semi-truck over the road for a living, hauling loads across the US...

My letter to the editor of the diocesan Catholic paper concerning this was....never printed, for some reason or other.

So do be prepared to bail out....

noel at sjnmusic.com

I hate to suggest this, because often time this is seen as the "give the choir a bone moment" but as perhaps a compromise, how about a prelude and/or a piece after the communion antiphon/song?

This is like watching a train wreck in slow motion.

'This changed (according to her) in the last few months"
Hardly, the document has been out fro several years... (and not to be misogynistic, but how did I just know it was a "her"? I suppose because it takes one bossy gyno-American to know another.)
Well since she obviously puts SOME stock in the documents, (SttL is not authoritative,) have a look at the current GIRM, Chapter II, The Structure of the Mass, Its Elements and Its Parts, para. 48, 53, 87 (note that "choir alone" is the FIRST option suggested for the communion itself, as opposed to the song after communion.)
http://www.usccb.org/liturgy/current/chapter2.shtml
In Chp III. we read, "103. Among the faithful, the schola cantorum or choir exercises its own liturgical function, ensuring that the parts proper to it, in keeping with the different types of chants, are properly carried out and fostering the active participation of the faithful through the singing."
Notice supporting the people's singing is not mentioned, per se.
One could argue that by singing "the parts proper to it" the choir promotes the aspect of the people's active participation that is called LISTENING.

Save the Liturgy, Save the World

QUESTION: If your pastor asked you to choose 2 gregorian chant ordinaries & stick to them for a year, which 2 would you pick?

Jan: I would recommend a new thread, and I do have an answer!

This sounds like the brand of pastor who will listen as the musician quotes authoritative norms by the dozen, and then will proceed to do as he pleases. I briefly had such a boss some years ago; he had made up his mind long before that it would be his way and he simply did not care what the Church's documents said. I'll keep your situation in my prayers.

On the question of a choir only communion, this is the first GIRM option: sing the antiphon, and with COMMUNIO we can sing it until everyone has received. This period is, IMHO, the worst time to insist on congregation singing. People are so relived to not have to sing while receiving communion. We sometimes put in a congregational hymn following communion and that doesn't seem to create too much of a distraction.

This forum has enough years of experience to write its own recommendations to the US Bishops...and it may be time to start.

noel at sjnmusic.com

I have to second Felipe- our congregation will sing throughout the Mass except at Communion. Our church is not ready for the Latin antiphons, as much as I love COMMUNIO! Any thoughts on how to proceed? English antiphons? (Sorry to impose on this thread, Billiesue. Do hang in there.)

I'm not budging. I still believe that unless you have your mouth open to receive the Sacrament, you should be singing at Communion. This has been an issue I have fought with and fought with and lost hair over until:

"One compromise would be a short, tuneful-but-not-trite refrain that paraphrases/translates the proper communion antiphon. Or to restrict communion music otherwise to pieces with short, learnable refrains."

This is what I introduced. I use the proper seasonal psalm at communion, sung by the congregation, with the text of the entire psalm and a doxology when we've used enough verses. This has turned my congregation from being mute to ANY hymn at communion to taking part in the refrain of the psalm. They are truly externally unified in their singing of the psalm, and they have their taste of "active participation" by hearing the cantor sing the verses of the psalm.

I highly recommend my "communion psalm" practice to anyone. I think it's the easiest fulfillment of the requirements of the GIRM that people "express their union in spirit by means of the unity of their voices."

I've mentioned this on a different forum, but the Church's insistence on emphasizing the communal aspect of communion has not been accepted by most Catholics IMO. The act of receiving communion is an individual one and even the lightly catechized understand the profound impact it has on their soul. The Church can educate and the liturgists can stamp their feet, but for most it really is a "me and Jesus" moment. This is made more true by communal responses for the rest of the Mass.

Well put Michael.

No crime in a 'me and Jesus' moments every once in a while (call me old fashioned).

Then there's the walking, singing, holding the 'missalette' then putting it under the armpit to take communion in the hand part that has never work for me.

One of the most meaningful moments in my life was receiving Communion at Solesmes (while the monks sang the communion chant of the day), the priest held up the Host, looked me in the eye at said: "Corpus Christi". I ran to the bookstore, bought every book they had on chant & the rest is history.

Jan and Michael - I agree with both of your comments. Communion is a time for reflection for many people. Their union with the next PIP is through their reception of Christ, not through through their "join us in singing hymn number umptyump". I was most disappointed when I didn't find in SttL that this would be a good time for the choir to perform its key ministerial work. I can understand, however, that it could devolve into "and now it's showtime folks" if not done reverently.

Jan nails it with the already-existing calisthenics going on. I don't see a lot of folks carrying books up to communion. Indeed the sound volume decreases throughout communion, because people returning do not rejoin and gradually there are fewer and fewer people engaged. Perhaps some of the best luck we have is with the antiphonal format hymns. The short antiphon is in the PIP booklets while the Gather verses are sung by the cantors/choir. (The cantors sing until the choir has received communion and can take over.) The short responses can be quickly picked up and people can sing them while walking. But once they've received, silence reigns. It's a hard habit to break.

Gavin - maybe if we went back to posting the numbers! It could just be they don't remember the hymn number.

Someday I should get a decibel monitor to chart things. The only one I note for sure is that the loudest singing in the ordinary is when we do the Greek Kyrie and Latin Agnus, but our pastor is averse to doing any sort of Latin Mass because the people don't understand it. But that's yet a different problem.

Yes, I tend to have the same sentiment as St. T., but I have been corrected about it in other posts here.

I suspect that a document from CMAA would hold no weight whatsoever. I agree you should highlight that which is good in Sing to the Lord. Another couple documents to use would be those from Benedict XVI, such as Sacramentum Caritas and Summorum Pontificum. And it's a great move to hold up the papal liturgies as a model.

In all uncharitable candor, I say run and don't look back. But if you think it's worth fighting, those are my suggestions. That way you can't be told "well such and such document is irrelevant these days."

You have my prayers and thoughts.

"To build may have to be the slow and laborious task of years. To destroy can be the thoughtless act of a single day." (Winston Churchill)

I will pray that your pastor and liturgical director will show themselves to be builders not destroyers.

Prayers, and good wishes, BillieSue.
Although a paper from the CMAA doesn't, I think the GIRM quotes ought to have weight, they certainly trump SttL.

(Save the Liturgy, Save the World)

Gavin,

You certainly do stand by the Church's line (but I suspect that professional liturgists have exaggerated it) on this one and I wish you luck. In my experience, the PIP is no dummy. He/She won't sing crappy songs and he/she knows instinctively that Communion is a sign of the Church's unity, but that it is a powerful encounter with Christ directly. One trumps the other in a very natural way that I think the Church should examine this historical and psychological attitude more closely rather than dismissing it. In the EF there is none of this attitude that says "sing or or you are not expressing your unity!" mindset. The two liturgies are supposedly two parts of the whole Roman Rite after all.

Prayers all around. Including that Gavin's hair will grow back. I can live with chant at Communion - and if there is a refrain that is accessible (a la Taize style) great. Some will sing; many will not. The Orthodox sing the same refrain every week "Receive the Body of Christ, Taste the Fountain of Immortality" over and over until everything is finished and they tag on three Alleluias (everything is always in threes) to close it off. Oh, it's so much easier.