Don't look a gift horse in the mouth.

It is a good opportunity if you have choral music to sing. I have no music after communion, just silence.

By the sound of it, your parish celebrates Mass in the vernacular, according to the Missal of Paul VI. Assuming that this is true, perhaps you want to rotate 4 or 5 pieces: Lambillotte's Panis Angelicus, Arcadelt's Ave Maria(because to stay close to Mary is to stay close to Our Lord, a Gregorian Ave Verum Corpus --- I think you get the idea. Make what you sing sinple enough to be easily remembered by the congregation, but absolutely focused on Whom they have just received. AT ALL COSTS avoid the trash which passes for "Eucharistic songs" available in most Missalettes. You could also include something like Oremus pro Pontifice, as I did, intentionally, for years. Use the Communion Antiphon. Oh, and have the choir learn to sing while kneeling. It's not hard, but most people are unaccustomed to it, and therefore think it's hard.

Sounds ridiculous, doesn't it. My choir stands when singing. The congregation never knows that, since the choir is not visible. Singing while kneeling isn't going to help anyone's breath control, that's for sure.

That bird will never fly in the east, either.

Pray Tell started a thread yesterday discussing a related topic, Singing during Communion.

What English translation of Adoro te devote do you use, bkenney?

I am quite surprised, only Dr. Fords reply made any sense here...

Your question was a little weird, though: "This is what the GIRM says. So, is that right, then?" Yes, it is right; no, if people on this forum were in charge of drafting the GIRM, myself included, they would not likely have written it that way. What more are you looking for people to tell you?

As far as I can tell, that is all in compliance with the GIRM.

Except for the fact that the GIRM nowhere speaks of two communion songs. Why do so many churches think that it is OK to do a "medley" of sorts at communion time? If all the verses of psalm 34 do not cover the reception of holy communion, add some organ interludes, or even begin the psalm verses again.

@Chonak: You did not address my question in my previous post. As to "interludes," I had in mind improvisation(s) on the antiphon and/or psalm tone, which has always been an acceptable practice to stretch out the communion song. Of course, if the organist is unable to improvise, then he or she should not.

Except for the fact that the GIRM nowhere speaks of two communion songs. Why do so many churches think that it is OK to do a "medley" of sorts at communion time?

I'll get a short digression out of the way: I find it amusing there's a sort of sudden change in group think among those who eschewed rubricism they determined was spawned under the previous pontificate and practiced by the liturgical "right wing," and now quote the GIRM with unwavering specificity. After 20 years in NPM in the previous century, I can hardly remember the GIRM being thumped at any national or regional convention plenum. Must be global climate change.

Churches don't think, DM's, choirmasters, D of Lits. or even pastors think. As Charles mentions, practical decisions occur in a parish with three Sunday Masses. And as in all things, a small parish in Flea Hill, NC might only have one Mass with just enough communicants to barely get through the antiphon in the SEP. We have eighteen weekend Masses. I know, Fr. Krisman, you must have read my modus for just one of those Masses over at the PTB thread, and all of that is out of necessity, nothing is truncated or lengthened. Across town at one of our other three parishes, they may only need the one cantus. I can count on one hand the number of "Communion" classified hymns/songs in Breaking Bread that have sufficient verses to meet your GIRM criterium.

Now, because of the ecclesiogical reality that fewer priests and pastors are resulting in the demands from bishops that new church installations must have seating capacities nearing 2000 so that one Mass will service the populace regionally, so a celebrant can perhaps ride the circuit to other nearby smaller parishes and missions. Where is the repertoire base for a ten minute Communion processional?

And BTW, when there's an event Mass at St. Peter's, the Copacabana, National's Stadium or even in St. Patrick's NYC, there's no evidence of the GIRM police handing out violation citations to the Master of Ceremonies.

Can we ever just get real about using the documents as advisory tools without implying that personal bias is always part of the equation when making decisions?

Peace, CharlesC

I'm going to assume that it's a serious question: "Why would you WANT the choir to kneel to sing?" Accordingly, my answer intends to be serious.

Both in preparation for receiving Our Lord, and in thanksgiving for said reception, a posture of adoration is entirely appropriate. Please notice that I didn't advance the notion of what the GIRM says, because I'm not making a legal case here. I would assert that, logically, the Mysterium Fidei dialogue should be sung without a change in posture: priest already standing stays standing; choir, already kneeling for the consecration, stays kneeling. I lose the argument because people claim that this is idiotic or impractical (neither of which is true, but there it is.) One can sing equally well standing or kneeling, because the diaphragm and the lungs are in the same orientation. All the clatter of standing, having been kneeling, or the obvious disrespect for Our Lord if one hasn't been kneeling, is distracting and destructive of the nature of the action of the Mass.

Besides -- and, yes, I intend this to be taken seriously -- how much help do choirs need in developing a sense of humility?

By not kneeling, one is not showing "obvious disrespect for our Lord," or "being destructive of the nature of the mass." Kneeling is a medieval practice that departs from the original practice of standing. Even as the Council of Nicea stated in Canon 20, "Forasmuch as there are certain persons who kneel on the Lord's Day and in the days of Pentecost, therefore, to the intent that all things may be uniformly observed everywhere (in every parish), it seems good to the holy Synod that prayer be made to God standing."

The mistake, often promoted here, is that the Church began with the Council of Trent, and nothing before or after can be different. That is so wrongheaded, especially since it is no different than the same argument advanced by those who think the Church began with Vatican II. Perhaps it would be better to look at interior dispositions of the heart, rather than at externals. Now there is a radical concept!

My beef is that it is ritually incoherent. It also create a divide between the ministers, who have their special music - Latin, no less - for their communion, while everyone else gets their Bob Hurd music (which I do not consider at all to be wonderful). Then there are the folks at the end of the line that are further separated from everyone else; they are not even being invited to sing as they approach holy communion. The choir has already taken over.

In theory while I agree with the good Father & Mr Wood; I must object in practise, as in NO parishes I have been to/played for have the people actually WANTED TO SING WHILE THEY ARE RECEIVING COMMUNION; perhaps AFTER Communion when all have returned to their seats and have had SUFFICIENT time to make a private thanksgiving would they welcome a hymn.

Father, your beef is theoretically incoherent from your perspective. Taking my example, if the schola chants "Gustate et videte" OR a vernacular version upon the celebrant's communication, and then that of the deacon and any EMHC's (say you have 700 PiP attendance), upon completion of that ritual action in the sanctuary, the music segues smoothly to the James Moore "Taste..." with the invitation to ALL either presented via hymnboard, bulletin, ordo or announcement, how does that exclude the participation of the real catholics hanging out in the back pews. They're invited. Their proximity in the procession is not relevant. There's no natural disadvantage, or faux "back of the bus" dynamic at play during the singing of the paraphrased proper. So, if by the time they finally reach the point of reception if the song has run its course, with all the people in the front of the church who received earlier joining the song btw, should the choir take up an appropriate motet/anthem that resonates either with the specific communio or scriptural allusion, the voice is still the instrument of praise accompanying the ritual through to its conclusion, at which time silence is quite welcome.
That's not to say, that a so-called hymn of praise cannot be utilized, but in large congregations that also may disturb the coherence by "waiting" for the deacon to return to his place by the president chair and the canting of the collect.
One size fits all I think not.
And have you mentioned to Bob directly your review of his material? Hmmmm.

Charles, thank you for your response, and particularly for calling my attention to the way I referred to Bob Hurd's Ubi Caritas. You had called it "his wonderful UBI CARITAS." I think it's OK, nothing objectionable, nothing that great either. My comment should have used quotation marks around the word "wonderful," that you yourself had used.

As to your principal point: the folks in the back of the church may indeed join in when others are singing as they process to receive communion, but those folks don't get to sing when they themselves are processing to receive communion.

I would love to be at a parish in which people actually sing while processing to receive communion. I never have been, and I've lived in five different states as an adult.

The reality I have experienced, is that the congregation does not sing while processing, nor do they sing just after receiving. As usual, YMMV.

Reverend Father, I was referring to singing a hymn AFTER the distribution of Communion.

And for the record, I am a singer. I like to sing; I like to sing during the liturgy (if the music is good quality music - I wouldn't sing "take the bread children" if you payed me a mint). When I am in the pews, I will sing all of the ordinary and all of the 'hymns', lustily, except I will not sing ANYTHING (Hymn, Antiphon, Psalm, whatever) while I am in line receiving Communion or in my pew afterwards when making my private thanksgiving. After the distribution of communion I will gladly stand and sing a "Hymn of praise" if there is one; but I will NOT sing while I am standing in the communion line or kneeling at the altar rail, nor do I expect others to do this, and I do not encourage it; I think it is gimmicky, uncouth and vulgar.

Oh bk27, Dad's a great old curmudgeon, he meant no dis.

Kneeling is a medieval practice that departs from the original practice of standing. Even as the Council of Nicea stated in Canon 20, "Forasmuch as there are certain persons who kneel on the Lord's Day and in the days of Pentecost, therefore, to the intent that all things may be uniformly observed everywhere (in every parish), it seems good to the holy Synod that prayer be made to God standing."

Charles,

I won't quote documents if you won't. This is sufficiently out of context as to be unhelpful. Moreover, it is an appeal to what is generally termed archaeism -- the assumption that nothing happened between (whatever point is being cited in the distant past) and now In any event, so what if kneeling were- for the sake of the argument - a medieval practice? How long was the medieval period?

The mistake, often promoted here, is that the Church began with the Council of Trent, and nothing before or after can be different. That is so wrongheaded, especially since it is no different than the same argument advanced by those who think the Church began with Vatican II. Perhaps it would be better to look at interior dispositions of the heart, rather than at externals. Now there is a radical concept!

Charles,

I don't know anyone who promotes the idea that the Church began with the Council of Trent, here or elsewhere. Interior dispositions are impossible to evaluate, but external posture is. One stands when the national anthem is played, out of respect. Often, people bow their heads in prayer, to represent a prayerful attitude, regardless of what is in the heart. The Holy Synod can't regulate internal dispositions. It is, of course, a good thing for people to be properly disposed.

I should note, by the way, that in the Extraordinary Form, there are no rubrics about the posture of the lay faithful, only custom which governs such things.

Exactly, Adam.

CGZ, you are generally the one who chimes in and implies that all who don't subscribe to your views are unfaithful, not humble, and not devout enough. One only has to look back through your posts to pick up on that. Trent was the law of the land until Vatican II, but it isn't anymore. So quit trying to beat everyone over the head with it, since it is not a standard any of us working in the OF should follow. Those in the EF need to follow what is in the 1962 missal. It doesn't apply to anyone else. Some of us are not EF people and don't care whether you kneel or not, and don't look to you for approval or guidance. If kneeling makes you feel humble, or just superior, go ahead and do it. Why would anyone care? I certainly don't. I suspect you know exactly how long the medieval period existed.

To get back to the original question on this thread, ghmus7 writes:

I have been asked to put choral music in the place of the "communion meditation" in the Mass.

Does this mean, ghmus7, that the practice at your church has been to sing a piece after the distribution of Holy Communion, and designate it as the "communion meditation" piece -- but it hasn't been choral music?

They're not clever enough, Charles. Flog them a bit more.

Oh, they are plenty clever enough, but are highly independent, and have always done as they pleased.

To add a bit to this, there is some history at work here. A previous DM/organist refused to allow communion hymns for over 20 years. A couple of successors after him tried to introduce them. The congregation resisted by refusing to sing them. I have communion hymns, but don't try to force them on anyone. The hymns, in practice, are either cantor solos or choir pieces.

I'm of the mindset that one communion hymn with a limited number of verses, followed by sacred silence (especially after distrubtion of Eucharist) is the way to go. Or, of course, delete the hymn completely and just go with the antiphon.