I can't say I've seen this attitude "in the wild." Most musicians I know would certainly choose proper sacred music over crap, even if it isn't sung as well. But that would never absolve them from trying to do it as well as possible.

I sometimes get the sense that, for certain practitioners of traditional sacred music, "rightness" of selection covers a multitude of sins, including a poor quality execution.

Many of us have volunteer choirs that vary in strength, ability, and attendance at different times during the year. What may be possible to do well at one time, may not turn out so well at another. Those who can hire singers tend to not have such problems. Selections should be "good" but execution can be variable. I am all for "goodness" but Mae West addressed that issue long ago.

Charles

Ah, Blessed Mae, epigrammatic patroness of the Index ("I believe in censorship. I made a fortune out of it.").

I think liturgical correctness is "necessary but not sufficient."

I don't know that I've ever heard someone say, "Well, that was bad, but at least they did the correct piece." (I have heard, and felt, the opposite, though: Well, that was very well done. Too bad it was not at all what should have happened.)

The closest thing I have ever seen to an attitude that addresses the OPs concern is when musicians in the EF (usually new to the form) spend a lot of time or energy making sure that their less-than-ideal-but-needed-for-sanity decisions (like Psalm-toned propers or accompanied chant or whatever) is legal.

That is to say: I have seen a lot of people who are willing to make compromises (from some ideal) in order to keep quality at acceptable levels, but also want to make sure that those compromises fall within what is allowed by the Church. This can tend toward an overload of scrupulosity ("Yes, I know everyone did it in 1955, and I've seen five semi-official documents that support it. But, I don't know - I'm not convinced that it was really allowed!"), but I generally think the instinct is correct.

Why not? It's the Lectionary text.

Come to think of it, the Lectionary has Neale's version too, so I agree with Richard Mix. If one is singing the sequence, the prose version is never necessary.

MJO,

Most specifically, "singing the right thing," as opposed to, "singing the right thing, and well..."

English and grace beautifully wed

Just want to say that I think this is the prettiest turn of phrase I've ever read.

"But the longer I work with amateurs, the saner it sounds."

There's a lot of *practical* art in the classic admonitions.

I would take Rossini sung well over butchered Gregorian Propers every day of every week.

There are lots of things I would take over "butchered Gregorian Propers": a ricercare by Frescobaldi, anything of Messiaen or Bach, indeed a solo elevation by G. Rossini or Monteverdi. Singing antiphons to psalmtones at Mass, well or otherwise, can all too often becomes a steppingstone to what, unless one likes that sort of thing, is a dead end.

Why do we keep having comments like 'I'd rather hear_______than butchered Gregorian propers'?

Because I keep hearing butchered Gregorian propers.

I was out of town last weekend and heard through the Facebook-grapevine there was a parish that was doing a great deal of Gregorian chant and had an enthusiastic pastor. I can't even describe in words what I heard - the English language does not have the proper words to describe it. Maybe Klingon. Afterward I met the director and inquired a bit about what they were doing. The pastor had insisted on the Gregorian Introit, Offertory, and Communion each Sunday but had no budget for trained singers so he relied on what was already in place and also did not spend any money on the education of the singers he had. The pastor had insisted on correctness without much care for quality.... or he likes the 6-part free-styled improvised polyphonic chant that I experienced that morning.

If a pastor wants to do something that is correct - like singing the propers - he should either be prepared for a transitional period with psalm-tones or something Rossini-ish - or be prepared to put some money into trained singers, or training singers, or both.

The cacaphonic propers

CMAA's next big publishing effort.

The Omni Tono Propers (TM) Jeffrey Quick 2016.
Arranged from the works of old masters like Penderecki and Ligeti.
Meloche, it's a good thing you have a good choir. I'd hate to have to come after you for copyright infringement.

As @matthewj says, this whole situation of pastor-x-demanding-x-that-the-choir-can't-really-execute is going to be a huge problem in the next 20-30 years for everyone trying to do their best with this stuff. The past 30 years have been pastor-x-wants-terrible-music-that-we-all-hate. Now the pendulum has shifted to the former situation.

I was asked to give a talk on "sacred music in the parish" at an archdiocesan seminary in the Midwest before I moved to Birmingham. I started by asking each seminarian what their vision was for the liturgical music program in their theoretical parish, and what they would do with the incumbent if they resisted.

I was shocked at how many said, "oh, I'll just fire him", to which I offered the typical scenario of the next hire being a technically deficient Catholic musician vs. a musically rich, but perhaps lacking in virtue, non-Catholic. I was again shocked that many would go with option #1, even when theoretical option #2 was declared to be a person "who would listen to reason".

I told them (in the nicest way possible!) that if they held these views, they were crazy! Good men, I have no doubt, but there are some things that are difficult to teach!

I've been very fortunate the past few years to be relatively left alone to work hard, and so have had some success, but then we have people that are disposed to (for example) learn the chant and whom are relatively good singers! That is not the case most places, especially starting from the ground up.

I recall a former pastor of mine, not much missed, who wanted Parry's "I Was Glad" at his installation.... It was grand(iose).

@BruceL --

Could you provide more information about exactly what a "technically deficient Catholic musician" looks/sounds like?

Would any or all of the following qualify? Let's assume all are interested in implementing the pastor's vision for authentic sacred music for Holy Mass.

Musician A:
Practicing, orthodox Catholic
No music degree
Liturgical music experience consists of 5-10 years of singing in the church choir
No conducting experience, but willing to take a college course and/or lessons
Has limited piano proficiency; none on the organ -- would require multiple years of lessons to gain proficiency. In the meantime, a separate accompanist would need to be employed.

Musician B:
Practicing, orthodox Catholic
Has a BA in general music
Sings in tune, but not exceptionally beautifully
Took 1 undergraduate conducting class and remembers the basics
Can play piano competently, and is willing to learn organ

Musician C:
Practicing, orthodox Catholic
Has a BA in general music and some post-graduation music studies (either privately or in some sort of an MM program)
Sings very well
Took 1 undergraduate conducting class and remembers the basics
Plays organ at a modest level, including pedaling the bass line of hymns accurately
Limited grasp of actual organ repertoire, often playing manuals only or pedalpoint pre-, inter-, and postludes

---------

These are just examples. I want to make sure I understand your point.

@irishtenor: which of the three is the least expensive option?

Could you provide more information about exactly what a "technically deficient Catholic musician" looks/sounds like?

Would any or all of the following qualify? Let's assume all are interested in implementing the pastor's vision for authentic sacred music for Holy Mass.

I'll attempt. I've met a lot of Catholic musicians who (pax) feel that their professional development (including lessons on their major instrument, etc.) is not that important, or that an ongoing "I'm going to push myself" attitude is not key. I think this reveals the very low standard of music in Catholic parishes, and of course I don't want to be complicit in that (nor do I want to add to their time in Purgatory with such a mediocre attitude!) My experience is that they are often overly opinionated about the pastor's vision vis-a-vis their own skills in their area. This is not a good combination! Plus, even assuming docility to the Holy Spirit AND the pastor's vision, they may simply not have the vision or skills necessary to make an honest assessment of the congregation's/choir's/cantor's ability to carry out said vision. I wish this were not the case: I did not grow up Catholic and have (fortunately) had an extremely wide experience of different liturgical styles, etc., and so I feel like I can speak to this objectively.

First, I don't care about a degree...ultimately. The applicant SHOULD, because ultimately, that is how you peg a salary, for better or worse, excepting outstanding actual ability (of which I do not envision in your A/B/C scenarios). The degree can be great, or they could have squandered that time. Keyboard skills are important. Will to learn is crucial (the organ is NOT that similar to the piano in how it's musically conceived). Vocal comfort/modeling or ability to convey concepts is crucial; this extends to organ-playing—how do they conceive the organ? Hopefully like a singer.

My point is that A/B/C are all very imperfect solutions. When presented with an outstanding non-Catholic who is at least amenable toward the teachings of the Church (and not living a publicly sinful life) and willing to implement the pastor's vision, that should be considered seriously.

It is easier for the Holy Spirit to convert a heart than for another frail, flawed human like myself to try to instill innate musicality. If this is a choral singer I'm trying to "convert", that's another story, but a leader...different calculus.

a leader

Thanks for bringing up that quality. One could argue that--for better or worse--that is the most important one.

Thanks, Chuck. I'm no genius. If I was, I'd invent some crazy repository of choral music that the whole world could access for free. That's crazy...and great! ;)