Does the diocese FORBID use of any other Mass? Or is it matter of custom or does the Worship Office strongly suggest it or what?

I actually do believe there should be a deal of uniformity between parishes. We are, after all, all in the Roman Rite! What uniformity would I have in a perfect world? Common usage of Mass XI and the "Jubilate Deo" Mass, as well as holding in common the most time-tested of traditional Western hymnody and many of the popular chants. I believe in variation; one parish might use more propers, another might use mostly hymns, another might only pull out the JD during Advent. But by and large I think we should have a common repertoire to emphasize the unity of our rite and so any visitor can easily participate in any Mass. I think we're starting to see this come about in a real way with the proliferation of the JD Mass at different parishes throughout America and abroad.

It seems that the "Jubilate Deo" composite Mass is the only setting that could or should be deemed "official" and "universal." It's music that every Catholic ought to know by heart, throughout the world! To my knowledge, it's the only music in recently memory that a Pope actually mailed out to every diocese, saying to the bishops, "Here, make sure your flocks know this!" If a particular diocese wishes to have its own official setting (Mass of [Insert Favorite Noun Here]) I would cooperate with that as long as it wasn't done to the exclusion of those chants which ought to be universally known.

I think having a minimum common repertoire is essential to any assembly's external participation. The number one complaint I hear about why people don't sing is that they don't know the songs. If they had been hearing them everywhere they went for the past thirty years, then they would know them. Instead, with each new music director and each new pastor the music at our parish has changed. We also welcome a large number of visitors every week, and I cannot assume that they know anything in common. There is ample room for diversity from Mass to Mass and from parish to parish, but at its core every parish's repertoire should have the chants from Jubilate Deo and the dialogues and responses that are given musical notation in the Sacramentary. Choirs may perform in a variety of musical styles, but this should also include enough chant or poylphony so that the congregation hears it as normal. I hope when the new English translation of the Mass appears that the major publishers find a quality setting to promote, or that we music directors rally behind two or three settings that will emerge as a common repertoire. Of course, an excellent chant based setting to be included in the Sacramentary would be the ideal, but what are the chances of that happening?

The CMAA should not "endorse" one setting of the new English ordinary.

I'm from the shore area.
Another thing that I don't understand is that since every church has their own favorite hymns, and they all do their own thing in that realm, why can't they do their own service music? With the hymns, there is ZERO consistency, but at least with the service music the words are basically all the same, with just different melodies. The first time I heard the Mass of Redemption at a church I was visiting, I was kinda shocked that they weren't doing the Mass of Creation, I was kinda disappointed because I knew many settings but not that one, but I also was glad that at least some church other than my own was trying something different.
When I see someone practicing for a wedding or funeral, I tell them that there are many mass settings more exciting than the Mass of Creation.
It is true that some mass settings may not be very "Congregation Friendly" per se, but even if that's the case, it just takes a little practice.
On a side note, does anyone know the "Jesus, The Compassion of God" mass setting by David Haas? That's one of my other favorites.

Jeff is right. If we want to have a target consistent repertoire, it's Masses XVIII, VIII, XI, I, etc. Many large parishes in fact KNOW four Mass ordinaries, so why not THOSE four??

Kallen: Saying I'm wrong doesn't make me wrong. The CMAA does more good by engaging the Catholic Church in America than ignoring it. If all the churches with CMAA musicians started using, say, a quality setting by Proulx, that would give that setting a huge leg-up in popularity. The fact is that good ol' Catholic Pragmatism dictates there's going to be ONE ubiquitous setting out there in the vernacular. The question is whether NPM should decide it or CMAA.

Agreed, too. Of course, how to get to "there" (i.e., the 18 settings, or a portion thereof) from "here" -- heavily-accompanied English settings, even good ones -- is the question. I'm trying to navigate that by using two chant-based English settings -- one here, and the other from what I've found in the Colloquim materials, here (see p. 7 of the document, or p. 9 of the PDF). For the latter (which I'm calling an "Ambrosian English Mass," hopefully not incorrectly), I'm using another Gloria I found on the ceciliaschola site, and for both, I'm adding Memorial Acclamations that Arlene wrote, here and here. Plus, my parish knows the "Jubilate Deo" Mass, as it's in the OCP missalette. (Frustratingly, right now they only sing that during Lent, thereby creating an unfortunate, exclusive association between Latin chant and penitence! Easter comes, and it's good riddance to all that gloomy stuff -- let's break out the guitars! Aarrgghh....)

I'm hoping that after a few (or even several) months of hearing each of these English settings during Ordinary time, we'll be ready to re-acquaint them with Masses VIII and XI… after generations of their absence.

I'm willing to give odds that as soon as the new translation is out, a revised Mass o'Creation will hit the market and this discussion will be made moot (for most).

Since the copyright holders never cared that MoC didn't respect the text of the current translation, why would they bother to change it for a new translation?

(Save the Liturgy, Save the World)

My realistic theory on the translation will be that we will be given a "grace period" during which we may use either translation, as a fair way to give communities time to learn it. Of course, what will happen is NO ONE will change the translation, and then when the grace period is up everyone will turn against the pastors and bishops who enforce the new translation, while the majority of priests will continue to use ICEL. This will be followed by another grace period, with the same consequences. Wash, rinse, and repeat. This will be a rather ugly time for the American church; I bet that it will take 15 years from when Vox Clara is finally released until when the new translation is uniformly used.

Jeffrey's right...

"what I don't get about all this talk of the standard and universal repertoire for the ordinary is that the Church has given us precisely 18 settings plus some extra pieces that constitute precisely this, and these have been around for 1000 and some as long as 1500 years. "

The parish which I am honored to serve has a large number of Asian members, as well as a good number of European members, due in part to a location near a major government facility of scientists, physicists and engineers.

As I seek out new members for the choir, I end up talking with people in German (rather fluent), Italian (can get around nicely) which also gets me into conversations in Portuguese and Spanish, Japanese...sketchy, but they appreciate my efforts. As far as Korean and Chinese...well, they smile when I try.

This isn't bragging. I'm sure any linguist would laugh at my efforts. But if the person I am trying to recruit has ever sung in a choir out comes the Ave Maria or the Pater Noster....and I know I have a new choir member AND that the church is indeed universal.

For these people, often strangers in a strange land, hearing Latin at a Mass is like being home. Unless they are Americans. We are educated...and we are stupid...

noel at sjnmusic.com

As one who spent a decade in the Diocese of Rochester, I salute you Cpt Tom!

CPT Tom, I'm not certain I am remembering correctly, as it has never been in the repertoire or "worship" aids of any parish where I lived, but I think Proulx is the composer, or perhaps arranger of the Missa Oecumenica, which the few times I've sung it in other people's pews, had the virtues of solemnity, beauty and simplicity.

(Save the Liturgy, Save the World)

CPT Tom-
I spent a few years in the Rochester diocese as well, so what you are doing is super!
I'm not too far away in the Syracuse diocese now. Any interest in doing choir collaborations? We do not have a schola, just a 20 member choir leaning towards sacred music.
How does your schola sound with three voices? Are they strong chant singers?

Dear Cpt Tom, Congratulations on your 3-person schola. Perfect! I am in the same boat. As for Mass settings for Sept.: what about using the Sanctus from the Jubilate Deo, which surprisingly is familiar to many people, plus whatever Gloria is familiar to the people, to be soon followed by the Missa de Angelis Gloria, which, after hearing a half dozen or so times, people begin to hum along with. The trap is to think of "instant participation". It takes two or three years of hearing a Latin Mass setting for people to sing it with gusto. But it eventually happens. One piece at a time. Also, if your priest is amenable, English chant responses from the Sacramentary are effective, especially at the dialogues, the Memorial Acclamation and Amen. The trick is to be patient with the people while they learn it, one piece at a time. And then it is theirs for eternity.

CPT Tom,

Blessings on your mission. Sorry to hear that a clock is ticking. I suggest keeping the group together regardless and look for opportunities to chant where they may appear. I chose to start my group outside of a parish for exactly this type of reason.

Pax

Consistency in the music for the Mass. Yes, we are all working towards those settings of the Ordinary in the Graduale. However, the situations for choirs in parishes fall into two different categories. There are the (much more numerous) novus ordo Masses into which we are trying to inject some starting place for the restoration of chant. And then there are those blessed Masses that have been dedicated as "schola" masses, or possibly even all-Latin Novus ordo, or maybe even Extr. Rite Masses. I work in both situations, and each presents its unique difficulties. My day job is as DRM at an all-novus ordo/OCP parish at which I play four masses every Sunday. Then, on Sun. evening, I sing with a schola for a Tridentine Mass that has been recently mandated by the Bishop, and set up by the St. John Cantians here in the suburbs of Chicago. Fr. Haines celebrates, and Bro. Robert sings with the schola. (How lucky we are). In this Mass, the subject of Consistency is of course moot, because we simply prepare to sing the set texts of the Mass. This is a blessed shock to my system, because at my parish I spend most of my energy fending off attacks over my choice of music. I cannot believe the inner quiet that comes from everyone being on the same page. ( However, there is a whole nother set of issues with this sort of situation, that I will not go into here because it is not the subject of this blog.) But the subject of consistency is at center stage with novus ordo masses. We do not have a clear mandate in these settings for the choice of music; and, as every music teacher knows, it is the choice of repertoire that is at the heart of success or failure on the part of the student. And our congregations are our students! So I struggle mightily in this no-man's land. My parish uses three settings of the Ordinary, the Proulx, the Owen Alstott, and the Jubilate Deo, which we alternate throughout the year. They rebelled big-time against the Jubilate Deo and the Proulx, but now surprisingly they sing them, even though there is still complaining. I would like to begin teaching them the Missa de Angelis, but Fr. says no. So this is where the English chant settings come into play for people in my spot: could they be the way to keep floating while we wait for people to become accustomed to the sound of chant? But I am wary of all of us using different English chant settings; which is where consistency comes in. I wrote to the Bishop to ask him to set up a commission to write out for the whole Diocese the entire Mass chanted in English, maybe working with someone like Fr. Weber. But he made no response. So we are on our own. But I still think it would be a huge step forward for dioceses to standardize the chanting of the Mass in English in their territories. Our Sacramentary is too spotty to accomplish this.
Sorry this is so long, but it seems to me to be of the greatest importance to have quality English chant to replace the garbage of the p ast while waiting for the glories of the future. I have come to believe that the major road block to chant is not the issue of English or Latin, but the SOUND of the chant, which is Heaven to some, but very threatening to the majority. CPT Tom, I will be at the chant intensive next week also. Good times!!

An English chant-like Mass setting worth looking at is the "New Plainsong Mass" by David Hurd. It's in Worship III, maybe elsewhere too. I don't hear this one sung much.

Overall, I agree with Jeffrey T that the Kyriale provides all the ordinaries we need, but sometimes 'pastoral considerations' --ie, the pastor's orders --requires a vernacular ordinary.

By "the whole Mass" chanted in English, I mean not just the ordinaries but everything, dialogues, acclamations, formulas for collects and prefaces, etc. I am aware of the plainsong setting by Dr. Poterack, which I would like to use. But as for the rest of the Mass, there are too many options, even within the Sacramentary, and I don't feel qualified to say "these are the tones we will use". Even in my parish, our two priests chant the invitations to the mem. accl. and amen on different tones, and the people have had to learn to adjust their responses accordingly, which is good for them but would be confusing for the whole Mass. Simplicity and consistency are the key whenever I teach the people something new. A setting from the Bishop would not only encourage us to do it, but would make it possible for the whole diocese to be on the same page, and also give us an authoritative place to start, and the comfort of knowing that we won't have to change this in another year. The comfort of the chants from the Graduale is that they have been tested over time, and we know that they work. So that no matter how much time it takes to teach them, you can take the pain because you know you are going for something permanent. I am gun shy about introducing English chant, because I don't know what will stand the test of time. In my Bishop's defence, he is very good, and I wondered if he is waiting for the new translations to be approved before he makes any major moves. But I'm ready to go now! The whole Mass chanted from beginning to end, by priest, people and schola. If you are fortunate enough to have polyphonic settings, God love you, but for most of us average places, chant is the baseline where everyone can begin. That is the consistency that I seek.

Fellow bloggers,
I suppose you all, or most of you, come from the more traditional Catholic environment. I apologize, but you're all speaking a foreign language to me. I know very little traditional music, mostly hymns, and I know little to no traditional service music (i.e. chants). I come from a very modern and progressive Catholic community, and most of our music comes from GIA and OCP Publications. My church is always open to new music from those companies, even though we still do a few traditional hymns here and there (i.e. All Glory Laud and Honor, Crown Him with Many Crowns, Jesus Christ is Risen Today). My church has only been around since 1974, and I think the oldest Mass Setting we've ever used is the St. Louis Jesuits' Mass. I'm only 20 years old, and the Music Director at my church is barely in his 30's. The composers you are talking about, I've heard of them, but I don't think we've used their music. I'm sorry if I haven't been any help to anyone, but if you're able to help one another out with this blog, you're more than welcome to keep the thread going.

Simba, seconding Chris that you should not apologize for your age or experience (or lack thereof.)
I think it's a good idea, if we as musicians want to be truly useful, (and I choose that word deliberately,) to the Church, to approach the question of "what should we be singing?" from the POV of "what does the Church ASK us to sing?"
And I don't mean the parish, or the diocese, I mean the Church Universal -- rather than coming at the decision making process from our personal taste or experience, we can start with the authoritative documents of the Church.
I actually suspect many of us here did NOT come from a "more traditional Catholic environment," and indeed, some are pretty angry about having been deprived of the musical and liturgical tradition of the Church by musicians and liturgists who were completely ignorant of it.
I had no idea your diocese, or any other, had "official" ordinaries, Mass settings.
To be honest, I think anyone "in charge" who selected an ordinary that does not even respect the integrity of the text of the Missal should be ashamed of himself and is probably not knowledgeable enough for the power he has been given to wield.
You describe your parish as "progressive."
My parish is not.
It is a bit backwards looking, stuck in the '70s and '80s.
In what way is a parish "progressive"? where is it making progress TO?
I know from personal experience that it's really easy to make great time if you don't particularly care where you're going.
Real progress sometimes requires a map, and sometimes, stopping, turning around, and heading the other direction...
I think the most progressive parish I have ever been to is St John Cantius in Chicago.
(Save the Liturgy, Save the World)

The important thing to remember about all of us as Catholic musicians is that we are ALL on a continuum of ignorance at some level. I feel that way constantly. No matter how much I study and how much I learn, there is always so much more to know. It's not just the case that there is always someone else who knows more than we (I) do. It is even more profound than that. In a lifetime we can only know a fraction of what our tradition "knows" in that higher sense.

This is why it is that people who are studying the Graduale and singing chant have deep affection for those who have not yet discovered these riches but are on their way. It's because we all know that we are on a journey to the ideal -- an ideal we can never accomplish with perfection in our lifetimes but one which inspires us all in the direction we should be moving -- and that direction is always toward Heaven, toward that liturgical time when time and eternity meet and touch. Music is an essential part of that travel to the transcendent, and we are all so privileged as musicians to take some part in this.

Further, this is also why the movement for chant and the CMAA in general is so broad minded in its approach to music and liturgy. Circumstances of time and place differ in ways that are impossible to name. There is no fixed plan on what your circumstances dictate that you should or should not sing this sunday. So much depends on the human details. But what the Church teaches is that regardless of circumstances--all else being equal--the Gregorian chant has pride of place in the Roman Rite precisely because it is the sung version of the Roman Rite. Here is the normative standard to which we, as Catholic musicians, should aspire. How liberating it is to have a destination as we go about our journey!