Expecting the congregation to sing everything will be severely limiting. Everything will have to be simplicity itself. You might have to reduce your hymn selections to Holy God, We Praise Thy Name and Alleluia! Sing to Jesus.

It depends, surely, on what musical resources are available at each Mass (and the time taken to move around the church). The GIRM gives a wide range of options for each element, and a different balance depending on the nature of the element. It seems to favour widespread use of alternating choir/cantor and congregation. The Credo is the only element in which congregational participation is required, (it is assumed that all the dialogues with the celebrant are sung by the congregation).
We should probably take our cue from the Graduals, Roman and Simple, if you have the trained choir follow GR, if you can only get a cantor then GS - cantor and people alternatim as detailed in the instructions. In English we should use these as a guide. If you can, do both congregational hymn and choir introit, as you were doing ... etc.
THIS> "The situation you describe is eccentric."
PS. The instruction Musicam Sacram still represents the mind of the church, as it is part of the VII reform, but does need to be adapted to the subsequent liturgical revisions.

hahaha

Does the congregation have to sing absolutely everything?? Are there directives on this?

No, they don’t have to sing absolutely everything, and as much as some priests want you to think that the Church requires it, she does not. No, there aren’t really any directives on it, which is why you will find drastically different situations depending on who the priest is. There are, as others have already mentioned, documents pertaining to music in the Mass, but they are largely ignored in practice.

In our parish Introits and Communion antiphons from Simple English Propers used to be sung by the choir alone. Now the directive is to sing these to a simple psalm tone so that the congregation can join in.

It always vexed me when priests wanted to usurp the role of the choir and give it to the congregation. Then, naturally, they complain about dwindling numbers in the choir. This is another example of clergy dumbing the music down so that “the people” (who are “the people” anyway?) can “participate.” I don’t know why vocal participation from the congregation in absolutely everything, especially the music, is so important to the clergy. My main theory on it is that if the congregation is participating vocally, with an observable behavior, then the bishop will be impressed and the priest will get to keep his job. There was an article written by an army veteran that was about the fallacy of “looking good to higher up.” I tried to find it again, but I saw it on FB once, and it was a good read, but now I can’t seem to locate it again. If I find it in the future, I will put a link in this post. That’s exactly what I think this is: impressing higher up. Anecdote: when I was a DM, the priest would always crack down on everything and start micromanaging even more than he normally did when he knew the bishop was going to be in town.

Expecting the congregation to sing everything will be severely limiting. Everything will have to be simplicity itself. You might have to reduce your hymn selections to Holy God, We Praise Thy Name and Alleluia! Sing to Jesus.

Correct. When the congregation is expected to sing everything all the time, it severely limits the music, especially the repertoire. Then, naturally, the priest complains that there’s not enough variety in the hymn selections from week to week. However, when more variety is introduced, the priest naturally complains that the congregation isn’t singing well enough. Then, the priest won’t give time for teaching new hymns. So, you are essentially limited to songs the congregation already knows, which as you mentioned, might very well be only “Holy God We Praise Thy Name,” and “Alleluia! Sing to Jesus,” with some Haas and Haugen thrown in.

The TLM never required much of its congregation, and certainly did not require them to vocally participate in the Mass. It is now common practice to do so, to the point where children in Catholic schools are learning that they are required to participate vocally, the louder the better, and are punished if they don’t. Anecdote: I knew a priest that would routinely hold the middle school students after Mass to lecture them about the importance of participation and how they are a model for the younger students, making especially sure to mention that he could not hear them singing. This attitude shows the influence of the modernist Joseph Jungmann, vis:

Besides these short acclamations, the people's share in the Mass since
earliest times also included a certain ever-increasing number of hymnic
texts. The most venerable of them is the Sanctus along with the Benedictus,
which also remained the people's song the longest. Of a similarly
venerable age was the refrain in the responsorial chants, namely, in the
Roman liturgy, the chants between the readings .. ; but these, with their
ever-varying texts, were at an early period turned over to the schola in
their entirety. Similar in character to the refrain was the Kyrie eleison in
the introductory litany which came substantially later. After that the
Agnus Dei was added. The two larger chants, the Gloria and the Credo
(which appeared quite early in the northern countries), were perhaps
intended principally for the clergy assembled around the altar. The individual
fortunes of all these songs will occupy our attention in connection
with the detailed explanation to come. Taken together-aside from the
refrains of the interposed chants-they form the chants of the so-called
Ordinary of the Mass which, along with the ancient acclamation, were
taken over from the people by the choir of clerics and finally by the church
choirs.""

-Jungmann, Missarium Solemnia, Chapter VI, p. 238

The footnote given here leads to a document called Canones Basilii, which I attempted to research briefly but could not find. Jungmann cites the Riedel text Die Kirchenrechtsquellen des Patriarchats Alexandrien, which appears to be a secondary source for the Canones Basilii. In the footnote, Jungmann, I assume is quoting from the Canones Basilii when he states, “…the express charge: the congregation should answer lustily after all the psalms.”

The text he cites for this is Wilhelm Riedel’s Die Kirchenrechtsquellen des Patriarchats Alexandrien, which includes the following phrase immediately after the one above: “When a man is sick in his love, so that he answers after them, there is no fault on him; but if he is healthy and silent, stand him alone: he is not worthy of the blessing.”

It is worth noting that Missarium Solemnia relies heavily on secondary sources, and narrow citations. It is a difficult read, because one is almost required to explore the footnotes and delve into the sources he cites to be able to understand what he’s talking about half the time. Just make sure you can read German. Jungmann also cites himself from another of his works.

I like the suggestion of a choral introit/Communion, so will try introducing that on an occasional basis at first. Any recommendations for suitable material?

Try Aristotle Esguerra’s “Choral Graduale Simplex.” Here is the link to another thread on this forum, where he provides the information: http://forum.musicasacra.com/forum/discussion/8894/the-choral-graduale-simplex-english-harmonized-satb-plainsong/p1

Choir members are people too.

If the antiphon is being repeated several times, surely at least some of the people will join in to some degree?
I wouldn't consider it necessary for them to do so, but certainly an option for the ones that pick it up.

the people's share....

It is a matter of historical record that the earliest singing in the Church was hymnic, not, as is yet commonly supposed, psalmodic. The New Testament is bulging with hymnic texts, 'Worthy is the Lamb...', from the Revelation, being perhaps the most well known of many. These texts are commonly very Christological and, often, eschatological. Such texts, either biblical or freshly composed, even improvised spontaneously, were the norm for several hundred years. Not until into the third and fourth centuries did the bishops, due to the proliferation of texts of dubious theological merit, banish such hymnody from the mass and permitted only scriptural texts. It was at this point the the psalter became 'the Church's hymnbook' and the repertory of propers began slowly to develop.

Too bad, isn't it, that our bishops of today lack the theological perspicacity and zeal for orthodoxy of their third century ancestors when it comes to music for the mass!

It is a matter of historical record that the earliest singing in the Church was hymnic, not, as is yet commonly supposed, psalmodic.

Please cite your source for this, and whether or not that singing was restricted to the priests/clergy, or if it was expected that the congregation sang them.

I went and read the entire quotation you mention. It seems like St. Augustine is supporting the kind of situation one would find in the average parish in the United States:

At the other intervals not thus occupied, I do not see what could be a more excellent, useful, and holy exercise for a Christian congregation.

He seems to be stating that whenever something else isn't happening, the congregation should be singing something.

Philippians 2, as well MJO.

Personally I appreciate a bit of sacred silence, which seems rather threatened by what St Augustine has to say.

Should the singer (s) "sing well," as the condition of S. Augustine's maxim oft not cited states, no one need feel threatened. Of course, that requires all the exegetes herein to flay out the definition of "well." Heh, heh.

This could be grist to the mill of those who want the congregation to sing incessantly.

Yes.

Personally I appreciate a bit of sacred silence, which seems rather threatened by what St Augustine has to say.

Emphatically, yes.

Let's use what used to be "common" sense. St Augie is a good guy. His testimony about his PERSONAL journey is valuable, but is it meant to be some sort of Liturgical Commandment? Guideline? Rubric? Nope. It has the force of being testimonial to the customs of that time, and gets extra juice because Augie is a Saint/Doctor.

But shall we slavishly imitate?

Let us remember that "antiquarianism" drew a warning flag from Pope Paul VI, who was not exactly a liturgical Conservative. And let us also remember that millions of Catholics were silent during Mass since the beginning; it is silly--or worse--to infer that they were less Catholic than Belt-Em-Out psalm- and hymn-singers.

Do what you can to save souls. Music is nice, too.

Amazing, all the bitching and moaning about congregational singing. Many musicians I have known were more concerned about their congregations not being willing to sing anything.

We have both choir and congregational singing. It works well for us.

Employ musicians, verily I say unto you, for they are among the least of your brethren, too, and need food."

Yep. Should be in scripture somewhere.

FWIW, we do have some periods of silence, too. I'm fine with singing but it isn't musical cover for empty slots in the mass. I have seen some masses that were more like silent movies with constant accompaniment of one kind or another.

Is there someone here who thinks their congregation is singing too much?

Hear, hear!
The above are some of Francis' more wise and intuitive verba.

It seems to be the nature of too many of our brethren in holy orders that they think that their ordination confers on them expertise in all matters (indeed, some of them even act as though they were infallible as the pope in their little kingdoms), needing no advice from those who have been endowed by our Creator with exceptional gifts. Why, some of them even imagine in the vanity of their hearts that they have the authority to forbid and obstruct, or just simply ignore the express wishes of an oecumenical council!

Others, it must be said, glory in the flowering of the gifts bestowed upon all their flock and delight in liturgy and music that is resplendent in God's own graciously engendered artistic endowments. Many of them are gifted themselves. Many others know a good thing when they see (or hear) it.

The priest and deacons sing all their parts except the canon

Just out of curiosity, do you use the Prayer for the Whole State of Christ's Church or some other form of the prayer of the faithful? In either case, is it sung as well? (And, while we're at it, do you use the Summary of the Law and if so is that sung?)

To Deacon Fritz -

Just out of curiosity...

Good questions.

About the Universal Prayers - we use serial petitions such as are commonly sung in most (all?) Catholic churches and always sing them to Byzantine chant. These are sung by the deacon from the altar (ad orientem) and are answered by the people. On some penitential seasons we have used the spoken Prayer for the Whole State of Christ's Church, said by the deacon from the altar.

About the Summary of the Law - yes, this is in the Ordinariate Use. The opening rites are thus: Trinitarian invocation, the Collect for Purity (sung or said), the Summary of the Law (spoken), Kyrie, etc.

(Incidentally - all Ordinariate liturgy is ad orientem)

Part 2 of 5

There is confusion as to what is set aside for the choir, in light of V2’s desire for an expanded role for the congregation. Much of what the choir used to do on behalf of the congregation is now done by the congregation itself, and the role of the choir has been reduced because of it. There are only a few items that remain solely in the role of the choir:

1. The Introit at the beginning of Mass.

2. The verses of the Responsorial Psalm, in some places sung by the cantor alone.

3. The verse of the Alleluia, in some places sung by the cantor alone.

4. The Offertory Proper and possibly a motet.

5. The Communion Proper and possibly a motet.

6. Possibly a motet after Communion, during the ablutions.

From my experience, the majority of the parishes in the United States use the cantor/congregation/accompanist model, while substituting the Propers for hymns. This reduces and/or precludes the role of the choir completely. If the Proper of the Mass is not sung, but instead replaced by congregational hymns, which again are NOT part of the Mass, you have the following left for the choir:

1. Possibly a motet at the Offertory.

2. Possibly a motet at the Communion.

3. Possibly a motet after Communion, during the ablutions.

With the current common practice, the role of the choir is reduced to a possibility at best.

Some will make the argument that the role of the choir or cantor is to support congregational singing, for example by leading it and providing a good example for them to follow. However, if the cantor is filling the role of “song leader,” as has been my experience in many parishes in the United States, then this person is doing all of the work of leading the congregational singing and supporting it, thereby removing the necessity of the choir for that purpose. If the song leader and choir are both trying to lead congregational singing at the same time, they will compete for musical space. The song leader having a microphone will tip the balance towards him. It is also worth noting that in many parishes, the “cantor” is doing all of the work, and the congregation is just simply listening, and enjoying the performance.

Part 4 of 5

Some will at this point make the argument that some priests and deacons do not have good singing voices, and “can’t carry a tune,” so they should not be required to sing those parts of the Mass reserved to them. However, this ignores the legitimate practice of singing recto tono.

Some may also make the observation that some priests and deacons are embarrassed to sing, especially by themselves in front of their congregations. If the priest is not obliged to sing, then why should the congregation feel obliged to do so? It has been my experience, in the limited number of times I have witnessed a fully sung Novus Ordo, that congregations are very forgiving of a priest that has difficulty singing, or perhaps does not possess a beautiful voice, and will respond as they should, sometimes with increased fervor, in spite of any limitations the priest may exhibit.

It is now time for me to bring up what I believe is the main contention regarding congregational singing, and a salient point about congregational singing: 1. that the main contention is the content of the congregational singing, and 2. that clergy demand it of them, and place responsibility for the singing or non-singing of the congregation on the musicians. Jeffrey Tucker has a poignant article on this exact subject in Crisis Magazine:

http://www.crisismagazine.com/2012/catholic-music-its-time-to-stop-making-stuff-up

In relation to this, here are five factors that influence whether or not a person will choose to sing:

1. Intrinsic desire to sing.

If a person does not have any desire to sing whatsoever, they will not. This is beyond the control of clergy and musicians. It is not, as some may have you believe, simply about finding something they like so as to motivate them. If they don’t like singing, they won’t sing.

2. Confidence in one’s ability to sing.

A person may very well enjoy singing, but they might not think they’re very good at it, so they remain silent when asked to do so in public. I was this way for a very long time, until I realized my own misconceptions about my voice. This is a personal journey for every individual, and is beyond the control of clergy and musicians.

3. Knowledge of the song.

If a person does not know the song, no matter their confidence in their abilities or their desire to sing, they cannot sing it. This is within the control of clergy and musicians in the form of education and teaching.

4. Opinion of the style/genre.

If a person simply does not like the style of the music, they may choose not to sing. This is beyond the control of clergy and musicians.

5. Opinion of the individual song.

A person may have the desire to sing, confidence that they can do it, know the song very well, have a favorable opinion of the musical style/genre, but just not like an individual song, in which case they will not sing it. This is beyond the control of clergy and musicians.

Points 4 and 5 open up the question of whether the music of the Mass should reflect what the congregation likes. In practice, doing so has removed us from the vision of the Second Vatican Council that the people should learn to sing or say their parts in Latin, the desire of the same for the primacy of Gregorian chant in the liturgy, and the desire of St. Pius X to have the congregation singing Gregorian chant, vis (emphasis mine):

3. These qualities are to be found, in the highest degree, in Gregorian Chant, which is, consequently the Chant proper to the Roman Church, the only chant she has inherited from the ancient fathers, which she has jealously guarded for centuries in her liturgical codices, which she directly proposes to the faithful as her own, which she prescribes exclusively for some parts of the liturgy, and which the most recent studies have so happily restored to their integrity and purity.
On these grounds Gregorian Chant has always been regarded as the supreme model for sacred music, so that it is fully legitimate to lay down the following rule: the more closely a composition for church approaches in its movement, inspiration and savor the Gregorian form, the more sacred and liturgical it becomes; and the more out of harmony it is with that supreme model, the less worthy it is of the temple.
The ancient traditional Gregorian Chant must, therefore, in a large measure be restored to the functions of public worship, and the fact must be accepted by all that an ecclesiastical function loses none of its solemnity when accompanied by this music alone.
Special efforts are to be made to restore the use of the Gregorian Chant by the people, so that the faithful may again take a more active part in the ecclesiastical offices, as was the case in ancient times.

-St. Pius X, Inter Sollicitudines, Chapter II, #3.

Viola -

It seems to me that your people are singing everything that a normative congregation should, EXCEPT the propers. These should be sung only by the choir, schola, or cantor. They are NOT congregational music - not even if the version sung is easy enough for them. The propers are for choir only. I think that singing the creed (which you say is under discussion) is laudable - highly commendatory - and should be done. (There really shouldn't be any question about it at all - it's part of the mass: we sing the mass, all of it.) The Taize chant is a bad idea. Some people, it seems, have a paranoid discomforture over silence. Silence really is golden and should be treasured.

What so many people just don't seem to understand (and some just refuse to 'get') is that the mass itself is a song, a continuous song from beginning to end. It isn't 'now we do this and now we do that', 'we sing this, but we don't sing that'. There is no this and that in the mass. It is a kaleidoscopic continuum of thought and song from the Trinitarian invocation to the Dismissal. The only question is who sings what, not whether it is sung. Some is sung only by choir or cantor, some is sung by people, some is sung by priests or deacons, but all is sung in a continuum unpunctuated by a single non ritual utterance or interjection by anyone.
______________________________________

Without prejudice to singing and the fact that The Mass (all of it) should be sung, there is the question of silence, which Viola brings up. Too often there is little space for silence in the mass as priests and others go from one item to the next without a seemly pause or a moment for reflection as might be appropriate after each reading, after the homily, or at other moments which shouldn't see a hurried going from one thing to the next. Especially after communion a generous space for silent meditation would be of great value and spiritual profit for all. Perhaps some catechesis about silence, the 'still small voice', meditation and mindfulness would benefit all who attend mass. When teaching youth about the mass, the role of silence should be integral... as should an appreciation of the crucial matter of the absolutely unhurried performance of each aspect of the mass. Further, singing, too, should be thoughtful and unhurried regardless of the appropriate tempo (even 'fast' music can be 'unhurried'). All should be deliberate and thoughtful and performed in a meditative state of mind - meditative even as one reads, listens, or sings.

Liturgy is not an entertainment like television or radio, but too often is influenced by attitudes that come from them. The avoidance of silence may be appropriate in a news broadcast, but deliberate pauses are essential for liturgy, as GIRM lays down.

For in the Penitential Act and again after the invitation to pray, individuals recollect themselves; whereas after a reading or after the Homily, all meditate briefly on what they have heard; then after Communion, they praise God in their hearts and pray to him.

When the priest says 'Let us call to mind our sins' he really should give us (and himself) a chance to do so, otherwise he can hardly be supposed to mean what he says. And so on ...

.

Recently, at a lecture, I heard the speaker suggest that today people are afraid of silence. We are surrounded by noise, muzak everywhere we go. I value periods of silence in the Mass. Also, if we are told 'Let us pray/Oremus' then we need time to do that. The length of the silence should be carefully judged.
A silence after Communion is welcome too and can be intensely prayerful. Even organ music can be intrusive and distracting at this point.