My basic rule of thumb for leading hymns is:
1) If I can hear the congregation singing, and they seem to be lagging behind a bit, I need just a little bit more organ, probably upperwork, not fundamental.
2) If I can't hear them, then I'm too loud.
3) If I can hear them, and we're moving just right, then I can maybe play with the Swell pedal just a bit, or back off a tiny bit in the next verse.
My rule of thumb for accompanying is:
1) Similar to the above, but on a much softer scale!
2) In accompanying chant - no pedal! Play on enclosed division for solo/schola, couple to exposed 8' flute (possibly +4' flute IF NEEDED) with congregation.
Organ music itself is inspiring for prelude, interlude, and postlude. Volumes and styles may vary. Improvisation on chant is always good for short "filler".
The organ IS the instrument of the Church, and has been for centuries, virtually through its evolution to the modern form, which DOES include pipe, digital, and hybrid organs. Any organ is superior to the piano for any Liturgy whatsoever.

For the congregation to sing behind the beat relative to the schola on hymns is just part of what happens, an inevitability from what I can tell. I find the overall effect very beautiful and inspiring, natural and wonderful in every way. Feels and sounds like the real thing. As for organists who attempt to push and pull tempos in Mass, I can only say that I, as a choir director, would never stand for it. Either the organist would change his/her way, he/she would have to go, or I would go.

I've played some Moeller "Artiste" and "Double-Artiste" models, and with a bit of tinkering (revoicing, etc.), in the right acoustic they can be perfectly adequate. For me, I'd rather have a Double-Artiste than a piano any day.

As for the whole a capella issue, I've had some rather interesting experiences over the last several months. The Sunday 5:30 PM Mass is often left "cantorless" because of a scheduling issue. To cover, I announce and play the opening and closing hymn on the organ (not led with a cantor), chant the psalm a capella from the pulpit and the gospel acclamation (also a capella), and accompany the Mass setting (Sanctus, Agnus, etc) from the organ, no cantor. If the offertory hymn is truly a hymn I'll announce and play it as well. If its one of those contemporary stylings that requires a cantor to make the melody semi-intelligible, I'll just play a voluntary. Communion is always on the organ, and usually I'll use Dupre's "Three Elevations" or something else soft, slow and French.

The result? On the unaccompanied bits, the congregation sings very well! The Mass takes on a calm reverence that it lacks when there's all that clap trap on the piano and a cantor catterwauling into a microphone. They sing the traditional hymnody lustily as well.

This goes a long way in dispelling the noise about how the folks at 5:30 want contemporary praise band-style stuff all the time. Quite the contrary, I think the few that like it (most of whom are in the group leading it), are just being noisy. The proof to me is in the reality of what I hear when I play under the circumstances I've described above.

Jeffrey, the congregation often sounds like it is behind the choir, or organ, or anything, especially if the latter is in a loft, even sometimes offset in the front. It's the time lag. I make up for that time lag by anticipating each note just a fraction - evenly, so that my tempo stays the same - but knowing that, if I wait to hear them, and they are waiting to hear me, WE ARE DOOMED! Mind you, I'm talking very slight anticipation. And it works. It's more in the organist's head than anywhere else. I really do try to lead clearly, not loudly. There are other techniques that I use - and I learned them all myself as I needed to compensate for whatever building quirks there were. So far as I know, none of these are taught organ majors anywhere.

If it requires a cantor to make the melody semi-intelligible it does not qualify under the "participation" clause, it shouldn't be sung and leaving it out gains you a blessing....and is a "pastoral" decision that nods to the suggestions of STTL.

Oh, frogman. Frogman, frogman, frogman. 'Round these parts being "pastoral" is measured by how much the DofM absolutely safeguards the cantor's (or any wannabe instrumentalist's) absolute right to sing, sway, croon, flap their arms, toot their flute and strum their geetar during the liturgy. It's all about making sure they feel that they've got a place to "contribute their talent and desire to sing and lead" in the liturgy, not how they can support what the liturgy calls for.

It seems strange that alone among all God's creations, man's song requires accompaniment. I think that a cappella is indeed the ideal. Listen to it at convents and monasteries around the world to discern its beauty and dignity. God did not, however,homogenize us with the Gift of Song at Confirmation, so people are all over the map in vocal ability.

For the typical church, accompaniment is a help. It is when the instrument changes from being the accompaniment of the people to the other way around that you have problems. Bottom line, my experience is that people will sing just fine without the organ, but with a much more limited repertoire.

ancilla,

My organist sits patiently in rehearsals while I hog the keyboard, pounding notes, anticipating entrances, bolstering weak lines while teaching a capella, and then gets to play for a few minutes on the few accompanied things we sing. My goal is to get them to sing everything without accompaniment, even accompanied music so that the organ is an addition to what music that they make, instead of a crutch to fall upon.

Thank you for all your input. Would anyone care to comment on the history of solo organ playing? I know nothing about its history in Catholic liturgy. Or point me to a good link? Thank you very much:)

Francis,

I disagree. The organ is a liturgical instrument and people associate it with church. The piano may well be in a bar. It is not acceptable. And that's what the church has said for years and years. Though other instruments were given permission to be played in the excesses of VAT II, that does not change the history, the reasoning, the reality that percussion instruments do not belong in worship.

And that they are not long for worship.

Solo organ playing is best explored by by studying the French...organ improvisations and compositions introduce the chant, they echo it after it has been sung, they use it's melodies for toccatas after Mass, for Elevations and Offertories....the organ stands up against the choir. And occasionally adds its voice to the choir, but it does not lead the choir in chant, is sings with the choir.

Liturgically it is appropriate to play the organ throughout the year, diminshed during advent and lent....with varying opinions on how diminished, but surely diminished enough so that it tells people by how it is used on Easter and after that EASTER HAS HAPPENED.

frogman:

You are preaching to the choir (director).

I, too, am an organist. I studied all the schools of organ playing also. I was simply saying if a church did not have an organ, a piano CAN create beautiful music if that was all they had. I do not condone it as a substitute for the organ and I quite fully agree with you on the importance of the organ. I have lost music positions over insisting on the organ over piano so believe you me, I am totally with you!

Noel: http://www.organstoppizza.com/ You can send your Heathen Pipes to me in Michigan, I'll put them to good use. Good luck finding the One Holy Instrument Deigned by God (TM) to use at your church. And if you want to defend the organ further, I've got some Greek Orthodox buddies you can talk to about your parish's wanton paganism.

And this is the problem with Ancilla's view at the beginning. Yes, chant has pride of place. But why leave it at that? We have so much music, organic (polyphony) and inorganic (protestant hymn and choral tradition), that the Mass is poorer without. The organ is part of that. Yes, it has pagan roots, but so much of its development as we know it is in the church that "church" in our culture is linked with the sounds of Bach's organ music. A capella has great beauty to it, and theological significance as the instrument made by God. BUT the organ also has great beauty, and it should not remain silent as scholas rise; rather the musicianship of organists needs to improve along with the state of church music.

To sum up, it's just foolish to pit beauty against beauty.

Dear Steve,
Thank you. Do you play the chant line at all? I would imagine that if you had a very solid schola, there would be no need - just play the underneath voices. However, in the response sections for everyone, should one play the chant line?

Dear Gavin,
I also agree that the organ has great beauty. It has a sublime beauty! I have loved Bach organ works since I was 12. What I am wondering (bottom line) is what the Church's ideal is (i.e. what has been specified in documents), liturgical development and appropriatness of literature for liturgical use and also practical ideas. I am asking people for their more expert opinions (yours included) because I am trying to figure out practically what to do with our schola and also how much I should try and revive my organ skills and prepare certain works for Holy Mass ( I was a piano performance major and did study organ for about a year and a half. So, I really appreciate your comments and everyone else's. Thank you!

I'm not familiar with what exactly is described as "ideal" in the documents (chant is "pride of place", I believe), but to offer something flowery and totally unhelpful, I'd say that the ideal is the singing of the choirs of angels - good luck getting some use out of that statement! Really, my point is that any form of adding beauty to the Mass should be the goal rather than fretting over which form of beauty is better.

Steve, it was my impression that "treble ascendancy" as you describe is characteristic of French Romantic instruments. is this common in other schools of organ building as well?

it'a always interesting to hear all these various comments. We have a new organ, so I experiment as to what works well. From what others tell me, the melody has to be clear - it works well to solo out the melody of a hymn or chant. I sometimes use a cornet combination (or reed for more volume)for this and the congregation seems to sing fine to that - providing they know the tune! It may help to solo out the tune in this way because the people can hear the tune clearly when it is not 'merged' with the other accompanying voices...Thoughts?

hello, i have as a home organ a 1954 moller double artiste. (II 6) it is a fabulous and versatile instrument. all organs sound like the sum of their ranks. if you are a purist, you can create an un- unified organ by pulling only single pitches. or add by octaves couplers. it is amazing how no matter what you do, the organ is a sum of it's pipes. but it is nice to decide what pitches are used when. i applaud unification on small organs.

And for us, we hope that your transfer to the new console will not be soon.

The organ makes people think church. That can't be bad.