How do you remove cantor from the ambo?

noel jones, aago

Hence, the psalmist, or the cantor of the Psalm, sings the verses of the Psalm from the ambo or another suitable place.

A, I suggest that this does not say the Ambo or an alternate place - but permits it to be sung in the most suitable place. In the case of an organ being in the back gallery, the back gallery would be more suitable to the job than the ambo.

Adam Wood

I suggest that this does not say the Ambo or an alternate place

Really? Are we reading the same thing, because it seems to me like it says EXACTLY that. And I don't really even mean "this is what I think it means."

I'm saying that this is precisely equivalent to what is being said.

francis

Yea. If I have an organ in the loft, the cantor should be there, not in the front a thousand cycles per second distant from the source of music.

CharlesW

Every so often this topic comes up. The forum Pharisees and Sadducees parse GIRM to see who is doomed for eating more grain on the Sabbath than is allowed. Geesh! Like we don't have anything important to worry about. Put the d**n cantor, psalmist, tone-deaf soprano, or whatever, somewhere and move on.

francis

lol. Yes! Common sense says put the musicians together ... so they can make pretty music WITH the instruments, don't you think?

Jani

Geez Charles - I haven't been here too long, but beating dead horses is what y'all seem to do best! Me included, btw.

CharlesW

It is the national pastime here, you know.

SamuelDorlaque

Notice the GIRM says "or other suitable place." Since at our parish organ and choir are in a gallery in the rear of the church, that's where the cantors sing, with the exception of Good Friday's Solemn Liturgy, when two cantors (who will sing the Passion with our priest) intone the "Christus factus est" from the ambo, the choir joins on the antiphon, the cantors sing the verse (from the ambo), and the choir answers with the antiphon (from the choirloft).

noel jones, aago

OK, this is the story . . . our priest recently established a parish council and charged each committee to come up with a "5 year vision" for their particular area of the parish. As the choir director, I sit on the "Worship and Music" committee and so have been devising my own 5-year-plan to present to our committee. I'm dreaming big and offering what I think would be the very best (I can dream, can't I :-) ). One detail is to remove the cantor from the ambo to a less prominent place.

I realized it is very simple as my daughter and I now sing the Communion antiphon standing next to the organ (organ and choir are off to the left of the altar area). I see no reason we could not do the psalmody and Gospel acclamation from that same spot. Then when we establish the other propers (as if my vision will be realized) the congregation can be cued from there as well.

I think that she deserves an answer that she can use to make her dream (and the dreams of others) come true. This is a major issue that many seek to deal with.

Paul_D

But her dream seems to be at odds with what appears to be normative. I think many posters have done well to give priority to the norms rather than personal preference, while offering good reasons and practical suggestions.

Paul_D

Some principles that shed light on this question:

1. Consider the unaccompanied chanted liturgy as the exemplar. Chant the first reading, chant the psalm, chant the second reading, chant the gospel. All sacred scripture, all part of the liturgy of the Word, all properly proclaimed from the ambo. But chant only the psalm, in a performance-like accompanied setting, then suddenly we think of it as something different and has to go somewhere else. Solution: more chant, simpler responsorial psalm settings. But ....

2. When the GIRM gives options, consider that often it stems from practical considerations, not just catering to preference. If it is impractical for the cantor to lead the responsorial psalm from the ambo, or to run from the choir loft to the sanctuary, or accompaniment is necessary, another suitable location will do. If the choir sings the Graduale, or if a choral setting of the responsorial psalm is employed, don’t send the choir to the ambo, sing from the loft. The GIRM is not just a set of rigid rules but indicates what practical concessions are to be made based on circumstance, so that the liturgy can be orderly and therefore dignified and worthily executed.

francis

Jani,

Geez... give us a break! If we are not allowed to express ourselves by playing sacred music in our churches, then we have to do SOMETHING with our pent up creative energy.

Jani

Francis...GEEZ! Not like I was trying to diminish y'alls awesome coolness or anything.

chonak

Welcome to new user latebloomer13 (let's be nice to the new folks, everyone!)

He writes: Both arms, or a single arm raised to eye level seems to work.

Let me encourage you to reduce that! It's not a good idea for liturgical ministers to add gestures to the Mass that aren't specified in the GIRM. Cantors in other religious bodies have gotten along without arm gestures for centuries. Maybe Catholic song leaders felt that they had to do *something* when the Responsorial Psalm was brand new in the 1970's, but now the congregation has plenty of experience with it. And half of them are reading the psalm while you sing it anyway.

The music itself should signal to the faithful when to sing: the cadence of the psalm tone and the start of the antiphon. If that doesn't work, the composer is neglecting something! Now, if you're stuck with a musical setting that doesn't have those clear clues for the listener, and you feel you need to give a cue, then you can carry out a nice slow nod leading into the antiphon.

If you ever get into a rare situation where you really do need to direct the congregation clearly, you should be using standard music conducting gestures. They communicate well and they don't look like some inappropriate gesture (blessings, military salutes, etc.)

Again, welcome!

latebloomer13

Chonak, thank you for your warm welcome and advice.

I tend toward a subtle hand gesture or nod at a regular Sunday liturgy, but what about funerals? I often find myself gesturing to many who havn't stepped foot in a church for quite some time: they have no clue when to sit, stand , respond. A slight gesture with some eye contact and a soft smile really helps toward the " full and active participation" as well as putting them at ease..

I play the organ and piano in the loft and cantors sing with the choir beside me.. but for Confirmation, First Holy Communion, Triduum, etc, cantors are down in front. And since our church is not that large , the ' throw ' is not very long, and the delay is minimal.

I guess what I am saying is that while I like to be Liturgically correct , the reality is that sometimes you need to be a bit flexible and adapt...as a bilingual( Eng./Sp.) cantor and music director I can say that is an absolute truth!

Again, thank you !

chonak

Well, funerals deserve a discussion of their own: I'd like to see parishes add extra servers at funerals in some visible place, maybe even a couple of folks planted in the front row of the church, so that they can silently give a correct example of when to stand, kneel, etc.

When someone visits a Catholic church rarely, let them just come and be there with no expectation that they'll sing or stand or cross themselves right away. Just witnessing the liturgy and the participation of other people can be enough of an experience for them. (As a convert, I know this first-hand.)

Jani

Speaking of funerals - I attended one last Friday in a mortuary. A lovely young woman led two hymns, smiled the WHOLE time, and "conducted" the lot of us with her thumb and middle finger delicately put together just so. Most disconcerting. Smiling when singing more often looks like a grimace than an outward show of happiness or pleasure.

Welcome to the MusicaSacra Forum!

Categories