I hope not, CHGiffen. It is my prayer that CMAA will give other smaller areas a chance to host.

I have to admit, I do feel embarassed having done the preliminary legwork, but, I still am serious about bringing Colloquium to South Texas.

BG ... if the Colloquium is in (south) Texas, I'll do everything possible to get there (although flying anywhere is pretty much not an option for us right now), and I do appreciate and share your concerns for sacred music in your area.

Chuck

Nice to try to round up as many CMAA folk as possible though ... Right?

I agree ryand. We seem to have two (or more) purposes or principles that are not exactly synchronous. The two most evident ones expressed here are:

(a) to gather together as many Catholic church musician as possible to experience and discuss and be enriched by the best in sacred music in their work as church musicians,
or
(b) to show as much of the (hopefully Catholic) world as possible what the best in sacred music is and should be in more of their world (at least where it is lacking).

Adherents to the first principle might be accused of wanting a Colloquium that "preaches to the choir." And adherents to the second principle might be accused of advocating a Colloquium that aims to make a public statement by taking our great music into the trenches (possibly including Rome) where Catholic music might be absent, misunderstood, or less than ideal in some way.

Of course there might well be overlap in these principles, more so in the selection of some locations for the Colloquium, less so in others. Personally, I take my cue from the meaning of Colloquium, both as I've experienced it in academic contexts over my professional career and as it is traditionally defined.

In other words, it seems that a Colloquium is so-named because it is supposed to be a extended gathering or collection of meetings, sometimes informal but most often formal in academic or professional circles, for the purpose of exchanging ideas (through various means, sometimes lectures or seminars) on a fairly broad range of subjects, usually with a different leader and/or focus for each meeting within the Colloquium. Although some Colloquia might generate public interest, such publicity or media coverage should not be the reason for convening them. Any public interest generated or information disseminated should be viewed as a side-effect of the real purpose which is one of exchange amongst people with a common interest.

Others may have different views. Be aware, however, that I am not at all arguing against a Colloquium being held in South Texas, in benedictgal's area, where the side effects could be important – provided these side-effects are the sort that arise from the active participation of those being affected is achieved. You can't just take the great music there and show them; instead, you must involve them in it. This is something I can strongly support.

Also be aware, I am indeed arguing against a Colloquium being staged in Rome as a kind of publicity stunt designed essentially to show the Vatican what American Catholics can do (and even do amazingly well), despite all other side-effects such as having the opportunity to make Catholic music in the cradle of our Roman Catholic Church, seeing and otherwise experiencing Rome and the Vatican. That would be making Colloquium into something far different from what it should be. Taking the best of American Catholic sacred music to Rome serves a completely different purpose than that of a Colloquium, and that completely different purpose is best served by organizing and sending a competent, trained, well-rehearsed group of musicians sent there to create that beautiful music.

Chuck

If we were going to be "showing" anything in Rome, it would be showing our love for the church, our esteem for her teaching on sacred music, and our devotion to the person of the Holy Father.

I was to a certain extent reacting to what was expressed here earlier: have a Colloquium in the Vatican and Rome, and show 'em how it's done right. I had hoped it was a tongue-in-cheek remark. I would agree with PGA ... but ... who is going to nail down competent clinicians from the Roman Institutes, and, realistically, just how many of us here can actually afford the significantly larger effort and expense of making the trip to Rome over the already rather steep cost of trying to go cross-country in the United States? And chonak is right, as well as observing something that is ancillary to the real purpose of the Colloquium.

I love the idea of going to Rome and Vatican as Catholic musicians, but it should be with a purpose different from that of the CMAA Sacred Music Colloquium. Any trek to Rome and the Vatican must have well-reasoned and clearly defined purposes to make it justifiable, whether it's a "colloquium" or some other sort of venture. As of now, the reasoning seems hazy and ill-defined, at best.

Well, CMAA is the American affiliate of the Consociatio Internationalis Musicae Sacrae, so there ought to be counterpart organizations in other countries.

I understand the point about the purpose of a Colloquium. The Colloquium is not a traveling choir per se.
Ok, then CMAA members can always go to Rome and call it something else.

I find nothing wrong or arrogant with showing Rome what we can do. As I understand the idea it's about bringing the fruit of our labors to the earthly center of the Church.

When I've been to Rome various nations sing their songs, shout their slogans, wear traditional garb, etc. Charles' idea is along those lines, as I understand it. We would go to Rome as American Catholics offering our collective best to the universal Church. I think that's a noble and beautiful purpose.
I'm more behind the idea than ever. :)

I'm not sure I'd want the Colloquium to be twice its current size, just to pull a number out of the air. If we had six polyphony choirs instead of three, that could make for fewer performing opportunities for each participant, and less exposure to choral works we haven't known before. On the other hand, the performances might become more perfect.

My thought is kinda opposite to Chonak's. I would welcome less extensive, more intensive, learning of choral works. I would prefer to master a single Gloria than to learn an entire difficult Mass in a less thorough way.

As the years go by, I've come to regard the colloquium as more a retreat than a convention, particularly this year's just concluded. There's really nothing conventional about a colloquium. The morning and evening offices, the preparations for Mass and Vespers, the fact that life long, sequential learning provides us all a framework for how to care and share what we experience there, the still communal nature of the lunches and scheduled dinners.
Were we even to double from the current 2-300 average, there'd have to be some real coalescense between facilities' proximity, maintaining the depth and intensity of sessions and rehearsals (as Kathy endorsed), the accessibility from lodging/food to an ideal church and plenteous classrooms/seminar/theater rooms with keyboards, hopefully acoustic keyboards, eh Dr. Hughes?
And as mentioned, we've had some frenetic (not panicky) moments the last few years scurrying from one schola to another choir at various points of a liturgy. So far, so good. But think about all that when projecting a doubling of enrollment. I'm not saying don't go there.
But I would mourn the loss of the monastic feel of colloquium.
Probably regional chapters and regional colloquiums are the next logical move. There appears to be no shortage of top notch people to plan and teach and direct.

The announcement has been made.

I hope many of you who didn't come this year will start planning now. SLC is a wonderful venue for the Colloquium, so a second year is in order. You won't be disappointed. And for some of you who feel it is too far away... remember that it is always too far away for someone!

I know I won't be disappointed at all ... if ... if I can come.

I think as growth continues they'll have to figure out something or it will get too big.