I do nothing. I just delete it and write the person off as a crank.

On one hand, Mother's Day isn't a religious observance, and the tradition of May as Our Lady's month is a devotional, not a liturgical idea, so from a liturgical-purist point of view, there's no need to include Marian favorites in a Mass for the Sixth Sunday of Easter.

On the other hand, Mother's Day is a hugely sentimental annual event, and priests often shape their homilies around it or add something to the Mass: e.g., a blessing for mothers. So it's probably wise to acknowledge that sentiment and let people express their proper Marian devotion with a sentimental favorite or two on the day.

"Be Joyful, Mary" (with its text based on "Regina Coeli") sure is suitable for any Sunday in Easter -- we sang it too. On the other hand, it's less known than the top 3 or 4 Marian hymns.

And by the way, I'd be grateful for the priest sharing his feedback. It's a help. If you've read "When Sheep Attack", you know how important it is to keep your pastor's support. You don't want a bunch of unhappy people to pressure the pastor into putting some onerous restrictions on the music program or, God forbid, replacing you.

What to do? Feel free to include familiar favorite hymns on days with nostalgic associations. Since Pentecost and Corpus Christi are coming up, you have time to check your selections for those days.

I diagree, Gavin. The woman needs a serious fraternal correction, as she challenged Luke's competency and personal integrity ("Shame on Luke.") I'd employ a neuton bomb approach-pointing towards both the Easter and Marian appropriate hymn in question, citing both its history and its eminent singability. Then move on towards issues of whether her "choices" are, in point of fact, appropriate. Whose setting of "Ave Maria" sung by whom? HHQ possibly for May Crowning, a week prior...etc., thereby edifying Luke's intentional efforts to fulfill his official duties with serious circumspection. The pastor also needs a clear reminder why he hired Luke. And this "attack sheep" needs her claws clipped pronto. Professionally and with precision. "That won't cut it" and "...so I can actually enjoy the day." Honestly? Leave her integrity standing, but empty her of pride for humility's sake.

Remember you have the Recessional as a great time for things like this too. It is already outside of the liturgy. Here's were you can get away with things falling outside of the liturgical obligation.

In reading Chonak's response, he is completely dead on with "When Sheep Attack" In some of my other posts it is just as I commented, you won't see a complete change in the way things are, why? because as much support as you may have or not have from a pastor, when it comes down to it, they have to rely on the parishioners tithing and giving, and it all comes down to, they rule with their wallets.

How can we entirely clean up the liturgy, and do just as that, a purist attempt at liturgy, when all it takes a few people that could call, or in this case, write the pastor, state their anger, and get you fired. Pastor's realize without that wallet and basket filling up, the sustainability of a parish would be limited, so they often do cave to the demands of those few. That's why hymns will never depart the liturgy, and when it comes time for May, October, or even July 4th, we have to give in, and just do your best.

For those that don't work full time, or are just so overly wealthy they don't have to work, that's great that you can stand up, but when you have to put food on your family's table, you have to cave in to these pressures. Otherwise the unemployment line just gets bigger.

I had an instance of "when the sheep attack" and can tell you from experience, though I was trying to do the right thing, the fair thing, with a choir, I was attacked in that manner, and all for trying to keep attendance to choir rehearsals fair and the same for all, not just for those elect stars of the show.

I would also check with the pastor and ask why he sent it to you. It could simply be courtesy--letting you know that you're being maligned, which is actually a helpful thing to know, imho. I especially think it is positive that you are in the loop if you've got one of those gossipy parishes, although this email is egregious!

I once had a very supportive boss, who nonetheless always wanted me to hear any and all criticism, and respond positively and politely to it, and really take it into consideration. That never meant that I had to give into ridiculous demands, but he insisted that I listen to the parishioners. And then, to use my best judgment, which he always backed up 100%.

Whatever the reason, he should have mentioned it in the forward. On the other hand, since he didn't, there's a good excuse for you and the pastor to sit down and have a long talk, which can be a very good thing.

No great insights coming from this corner, but when I encounter the "snarkies" of the world, I have my own little mantra that I sing to myself: "Whether I do a "bang-up" job, a "sucky" job, or just simply fall down in the job and choose to do nothing....I am going to have my detractors.....SO, I am simply going to do what it was I intended to do, to the very best of my ability." Overly simplified I know, but it saves me from descending into some kind of creative paralysis.

"Leave her integrity standing, but empty her of pride for humility's sake."

I agree with your motives, Charles. But the spiritual care of this person is not Luke's responsibility. It's the responsibility of the pastor.

Mara gave us a bit more info, but I have to ask, how can ANY reasonable person see this e-mail as anything but rude, selfish, and crazy? Perhaps an e-mail to the pastor is in order, but something along the lines of "She's going to leave the church because she didn't hear her one favorite song on Sunday? What a nut. Sorry you had to get bothered with this!"

Paix, not every pastor would take the complainant's side. I'd go so far as to say no decent human being could act approvingly of such an abusive correspondence as you or Luke describe. My last several employers have actively supported me against attacks such as you describe.

We had a Quince Anos celebration at my dad's parish. I chanted the SEP Introit and Communion Antiphon; however, for the Offertory, I did O Sanctissima and then after Communion, I chanted the Regina Caeli (I have been chanting the Regina Caeli every Sunday).

I agree that even though May is dedicated to the Blessed Mother, it is extra-liturgical (unless you are doing something for the Feast of the Visitation); however, there are folks with sensibilities that could be taken into account. Nonetheless, I was not going to make every hymn a Marian one. One should be judicious in these things, I think.

She sounds like a crank. "Shame on Luke." Really? You can listen to her when she has some civil comments to share with you. Until then...

It might be worth responding in a classy way, but don't let it get to you. I've heard worse.

I've been in situations with people complaining about me and the pastor not backing me up, even when, a couple times, it was shown that the person actually lied to him about me. But something I've never had (to my knowledge) is a person claiming that I don't play enough Marian hymns. And it's not exactly because I played a lot at those two churches. I actually had two pastors who didn't want me to play Marian hymns. Odd, but true.

An interesting underlying issue here is the non-liturgical devotional life of a parish. Marian devotion during May isn't strictly speaking liturgical. But it's a great devotion.

I've run into folks who believe that there is one, particular, only appropriate May crowning song. In fact, I know of 3 different songs that people believe are the one unique May crowning song!

When I was first starting out (very early on!), I used to think that there was one best way to make musical decisions for liturgy. I've since come to realize that, with the exception of correcting honest-to-goodness abuse, it's important to be very aware and graciously indulgent of the traditions of the parishes for which I've found myself making musical decisions.

I remember as a teenager (before I had any real knowledge or understanding of true sacred music), looking forward to hearing this or that music at given points of the year, and the feeling of genuine disappointment I felt when our parish music director decided to move in a different direction for whatever reason. Of course, I wasn't in a position to write a letter to the pastor, but I remember what it felt like and can understand what someone's emotional motivations might be for bringing it to the attention of the music director or pastor (even if I don't agree with the way in which it was done, or the tone that was used in this case).

So now when I come into a new parish, I try to figure out what the traditions are before I simply try to do what I believe is objectively best. I ask the pastor, the staff, the secretary, and/or trusted choir members whether there's been something that's always done for various Sundays/feasts/secular holidays (especially those days like Mother's Day that walk the fuzzy line between devotional and secular importance - they're the most dangerous).

Even if the pastor is looking to turn the music in a completely new direction with my arrival, there have got to be reasonable things that are important to people. And yes, the things which are most important to them are likely more devotional and less important liturgically. I just try to accomodate them when I can, for the good of the less liturgically-, more devotionally-minded souls in my care.

Thank you all for the valuable input. I did ask the pastor his intention for forwarding the nastygram and his response was basically that he always forwards emails he gets about his staff, good or bad. He wants us to know what is being said. Also, I learned that he told this lady to bring her complaints up to the liturgy committee - he tries not to address these kinds of angry complaints one way or the other, but says he prefers to channel this kind of thing to the "appropriate venue" so that maybe people will learn to stop ranting to him, which I guess makes sense, though I don't think I would do it that way.

I have to admit, that I feel rather good seeing this thread as "misery does like company". Your post is exactly what I've been dealing with for the last year. The fact that your pastor forwarded the e-mail to you, shows he trusts you and wants you to know what is happening in the parish. We will NEVER be able to please all the people all the time. NEVER. Bottom line. You probably have a lot more support for your music than you know, but the people who are unhappy and miserable are always the ones who speak the loudest, and, therefore, appear to have a majority in opinion. I've gone the entire gamut of music this year......from contemporary, to SEP, to hymnody, back to contemporary coupled with some SEP, contemporary coupled with hymnody, etc., and I cannot please the people.

As far as Mother's Day, "Be Joyful Mary", is, at least in English. I played "Regina Coeli Jubila" and met with all kinds of opposition, but I did play "On This Day O Beautiful Mother" with the children's choir as a prelude and the people enjoyed that. But, we should not have to PLEASE the people. We are responsible for providing good music that enhances liturgy, not for providing entertainment for holidays (or any Sunday, for that matter).

I'm sorry you received that e-mail, but please know you are not alone. I also teach at our parish school and graduation is next week. I selected music for the mass with "help" from the graduates, but, of course, it's all contemporary, i.e., "Lead Me Lord", "With One Voice", etc. The pastor asked me for my menu and when he saw it told me I had to change the entire thing because he is very pro-Benedict XVI, and wants SEP and hymnody. I cannot WAIT for the response to this one, and I'm sure the e-mail you received will be very mild in comparison to what I'll end up receiving.

As for the topic of the email and responding to such messages, I think the pastor bears he responsibility for responding and doing something. And he should. Pastors need to show to their parishioners that they're 100% behind their staff.

But I want to lodge what I suspect will be an unpopular comment concerning devotional practices. "Be Joyful Mary" may be the English setting of the appropriate Marian antiphon, but it is not a traditional song as recognizable as others. If you're going to sing the antiphon, do it in Latin. That being said...

Chant and polyphony hold primacy of place in the sacred repertoire of liturgy. Granted. But there are other musical traditions that are part of folk Catholicism. Hymns like "Bring Flowers of the Rarest" and "On This Day," as much as we may dislike them, have long been a part of devotional life. They've been sung for the May Crowning for years. People expect it. And the Crowning is outside of Mass anyway, so there are no rubrics, etc. I don't see why we can't sing these sorts of pieces occasionally. The same goes for traditional hymns like "Hail Holy Queen," "Ave Maria, O Maiden, O Mother," and "O Sanctissima," etc., especially if it gets the congregation singing.

A bit off topic but we used this gem from St. Gregory for crowning;
THIS IS THE IMAGE OF A QUEEN by Rv. Caswell from a Slovakian hymntune. Schola has not traditionally done the "crowning Mass" so their usual faire was "Bring flowers..."
This other hymn was enthusiastically rec'd by the Catholic Daughters.