'Choir' and congregation

[Dot]

In any congregation there will always be those who feel -- rightly or wrongly -- that musicians (and cantors in particular) are only doing what they do in order to gratify themselves and their vanity. I, for one, can't put my hand on my heart and say that is NEVER true -- but I do try to fight it, and at the organisational level we tackle it by ensuring that all our cantors take it strictly in turns to perform. There are no 'stars' and no 'second rankers' when all are equally committed.

That statement has won me over for its honesty. The other thing to do, as well as exercising equality, is to try and practise transparency, as described by Marian Tolley in her powerful talks at Summer School 2002.

Dot

[Crumhorn]

Thanks, Dot -- I needed that!

Our organist, as it happens, is a solicitor, so he's taken on the difficult task of responding to the PPC's lack of response. He's doing it very sensibly by referring to the lessons he has had to learn about resolving family conflicts, and suggesting that we all try to move on towards the place we all want to be in -- talking together and ironing out the difficulties -- without getting into arguments about who started what, who said what to whom, and who needs to put what in writing.

In the mean time one of our most experienced musicians, who spent some 35 years as a choirmaster himself, has been talking quietly with the PP -- and appears to have sorted out the 'hymns instead of psalms' business. It may simply be that the PP doesn't like the settings we are using -- which is a different problem, but at least gives us the basis of a useful discussion.

So at this point I'd just ask for your prayers that we can end a vituperative debate and begin a constructive one at an adult level. Nobody's perfect (certainly not our music group) and we've been crying out for real input, so we can hardly complain if we get it. (Well, we can, but we probably shouldn't...)

[VML]

This discussion is very useful. I hope you find an amicable solution. We are having to face interesting changes in our parish. A model for a PCC we were given a year or so ago suggested that anyone who wished to serve on the Council dropped other ministries for the duration. Very fine in theory, (or not as the case may be,) but if all those who were nominated or who volunteered dropped other activities for a year or so, quite a lot might not get done!

Right now I am trying to resolve a situation before it becomes a conflict. A few months ago a choir member who, being a working mother, very rarely finds time to came to practices, volunteered to, as I understood, do the planning once a month to give me time out.
She has been joined by an occasional gutarist who appears well qualified liturgically. (Catechist , diocesan summer schools etc.) But they set their own evenings for practice, do not inform older choir members, and have so far used mostly Iona songs, and the 70s American/Israeli Masses.
They have declined to sing the psalm and I now discover that one of them does not read music. At their last Mass she went to the lectern and directed the reading of the psalm, each side of the church alternating verses. This time of year is time out for me anyway in that I usually go away one or two Sundays in Jan &Feb, but I will get together with these two soon. Meanwhile, we have the parish visitation on Sunday...

I realise I will have to work on formation and information, and the 'old' choir is ageing. I have no prejudice about musicians who don't read music. I'm an old folkie, and there are plenty who make great music without reading the dots, but as a choir leader or MD...I'm not so sure.

[Crumhorn]

A couple of thoughts about VML's problems...

Would it be an idea if reps from different 'areas' of parish work (like the music group, readers etc. etc.) were either co-opted onto the council, or chosen as representatives by their group? To reduce the burden on these people, they could be asked to attend PPC meetings only when something relevant to them was under discussion (which in the case of music would either be never, or every time... ) This suggestion emerges from some behind-the-scenes correspondence I've been having about our own difficulties -- hope it's helpful.

As regards the freelance liturgists, that's also tough to deal with. However, it might be an idea if you had a quiet chat with the person concerned and introduced her to GIRM -- in particular the bit about how the psalm should be performed. You can say that it's a bit restrictive, but those are the rules we ALL have to follow, like them or not... (I think you'll find the relevant bit elsewhere on this forum, otherwise drop me a private message and I can give you the reference).

Not contacting the other members is really a bit inconsiderate: the line we try to take (as I've mentioned before) is that everyone has equal weight in the choice of music, and everyone is equally important -- whatever their musical ability or lack of it. There are no 'stars', in other words, so we have to be patient when someone takes a long time to learn a particular psalm, and remember that years ago even the most 'professional' of us would have taken just as long! If you can 'sell' that as an ethos for the choir, you might be able to make these two see what they're missing -- the input of older members is very important to any music group, because they provide a useful 'reality check'. If they like it and can cope with it, there's a better chance that the older part of the congregation can also cope -- and as musicians we are, after all, supposed to be serving the congregation and the church (as well as trying to 'educate' them... )

On Mass settings our group has a rule that we change the Mass setting only when the season changes (or when we're in Ordinary Time and have been doing the same one for about 10 weeks... ) We don't think it's fair on the congregation to keep chopping and changing -- but that may be because we're being TOO considerate. I'd be interested to hear what other people do about this one. In VML's case it might get you off the hook with this particular problem, though.

[dunstan]

On Mass settings our group has a rule that we change the Mass setting only when the season changes (or when we're in Ordinary Time and have been doing the same one for about 10 weeks... ) We don't think it's fair on the congregation to keep chopping and changing -- but that may be because we're being TOO considerate. I'd be interested to hear what other people do about this one. In VML's case it might get you off the hook with this particular problem, though.

Yup, I do the same. The year breaks into:

Christmas to Lent
Lent
Paschal Season
Trinity to end of July
Spoken Ordinary (Hymn Sandwich) for August
September to Christ The King
Advent

Towards the end of one of these seasons a mass does begin to feel a little tired, however.

[sidvicius]

There are a lot of problems going on here, and my sympathy goes out to Crumhorn. The bit that struck a chord with me was about the psalm - replacing with a hymn. That's probably not 'allowed' is it? I guess my initial solution to that would be to use any of the many settings available in the Hymnals - Laudate and Celebration both have large sections dedicated to the psalms.

Is there any rule over whether the psalm should be cantor-sung rather than congregation sung? I think my preference would be for the latter - but there should be some flexibility for both methods.

(How can any man-made rule deny anyone their wish to sing to God?)

Maybe what they're trying to say (badly) is 'move away from the 4-hymn sandwich'? As such, that might be acceptable, though they do seem to be saying it in a very autocratic manner.

[VML]

Thanks for the feedback
We do each Mass setting 2 weeks at a time if its an 'old' one and for a season when it's newish. But the other planners do their own thing so far.

To be fair, I have been MD on and off for 17 years, with three separate years out when other people have come into the parish with skills and experience, but each has moved on after a couple of years and I have carried on. We have a core of 7 people who have been together for 18 years, and a few who have joined in and stayed, but only one other of the group, apart from the 'new' planners, takes over for the occasional Sunday. It seems to be seen as a chore rather than a privilege. We all know it can be both. We have been very blessed with a hugely supportive PP who is about to retire.

He encouraged my development in the task from the beginning, and no one else is willing to do it longterm at the moment. When he arrived in 1984, it was only the 4 hymn sandwich, and no music at all for Holy Week and Easter. Our children were small then, and we weren't involved, but one Maundy Thursday, I asked if it would be in order to sing the Pange Lingua.

We have to bring in new blood, and I'm sure we will work towards more cooperation and persuade the newcomers to use at least some hymns that the congregation knows. This forum is great for peer support.

[Crumhorn]

Responding to sidvicius, GIRM suggests, in order of preference, that the psalm should be:

sung by a cantor with clear diction and good musical ability, with the congregation singing the response OR

sung by a cantor with the congregation taking no part OR

in the absence of a cantor, spoken with a spoken response.

The critical passage is this one:

21. The singing of the psalm, or even of the response alone, is a great help toward understanding and meditating on the psalm's spiritual meaning.

To foster the congregation's singing, every means available in all the various cultures is to be employed. In particular use is to be made of all the relevant options provided in the Order of Readings for Mass (see nn89-90 of this Introduction) regarding responses corresponding to different liturgical seasons.

I have no objection to using a hymn setting (of the right psalm) if we can't muster a suitable cantor, or if we feel the need, in a particular liturgy, for greater congregational involvement. But in our particular circumstances, where musical participation is still rather weak, I think we NEED to have a cantor. After all, a good cantor can do so much with body language and eye contact to encourage reluctant singers.

The problem we have in our parish (and I don't think I'm being paranoid here) is that some people want the psalm replaced with a hymn because it looks like an easy way to get rid of the cantor. In fact they don't recognise that the cantor has any role whatsoever in the liturgy. THAT I have to fight, because it's a backdoor way of devaluing the music and those who perform it. And if I sound passionate about that, it's because I am...

[contrabordun]

psalm - replacing with a hymn. That's probably not 'allowed' is it? ....
Is there any rule over whether the psalm should be cantor-sung rather than congregation sung?

We've been here before - see mcb on p4 of Nick Gale's Hymnbooks thread.

I still don't know what it means...my copy of GIRM was downloaded from the web, (I forget where from now) and is slightly different both to what mcb quoted and to Crumhorn.

Leaving aside the cantor politics, I don't see what would be the objection to a good metrical version sung through by all. I'd always assumed that we ended up with the Responsorial version because of the practical difficulties involved with everybody singing it.

Enlightenment would be most welcome!

[sidvicius]

True - and my apologies if I have inadvertently started us out on that old chestnut again. This is just one small facet of Crumhorn's considerably larger problem. I am glad to hear however, that in this particular respect, the 'rules' are apparently open to a variety of interpretations!

[Crumhorn]

Progress report -- no progress.

We have now written two separate letters to the PPC, both inviting them to stop writing letters (!) sit down and discuss the issues that appear to be causing us difficulty. The first one met with a blank refusal, and I have yet to see a reply to the second one.

In the mean time we are rapidly approaching Lent, and need to decide what (if anything) happens at the Triduum services. Our organist and I are both suffering from interrupted sleep patterns and classic stress symptoms -- bad for both of us, as we both also suffer from raised blood pressure. Still, if we both have heart attacks that will probably solve the problem...

Please keep us all in your prayers -- it's just as bad for the other five members of the group, and for their partners.

[sidvicius]

Dunstan

Towards the end of one of these seasons a mass does begin to feel a little tired, however.

Yes, although only for the musicians and choir - I think among the regular (and irregular) congregators, the effect is much less pronounced, and their familiarity with a tune will not breed contempt (i.e. "Oh no, not this again.") in the same way. Rather, they may grow to like it, thus giving the musicals more time to perfect the old and learn the new.

[Crumhorn]

Update.

After a direct and disparaging reference to the musicians in the PP's sermon on Sunday, I rang him and suggested a meeting.

Result? I'm now having a head-to-head with the PP tomorrow (Tuesday). I will do my best to ensure it isn't a dialogue of the deaf, but he does not seem to have any real understanding of the amount of grief he has caused.

He also tells me that the PPC are arranging a round table discussion with us about the music -- pity they didn't actually bother to tell us, or I might have got a little sleep on Saturday night.

I'm not afraid of difficult conversations, but this one will take some beating. Prayers and moral support very welcome...

[VML]

I hope things have gone well today, C. I hope you feel our support,

V

[Crumhorn]

Hi, everyone,

Met the PP today. I set the agenda for the meeting by saying a) that I wanted to clear the air, so that he would fully understand our reaction to the original meeting and then b) that I wanted him to take the gloves off and tell me exactly what was going on as he saw it -- provided I could have exactly the same freedom in replying.

He did -- and what emerged was a sorry tale of bad communication going back many, many years, with fault on all sides. In all that time people have been pussyfooting around issues and grievances without addressing them properly or bringing them out into the open. The perception some people have of our music group is so far from the truth it's frightening. As you can imagine, some fairly bruising comments were made on both sides -- but they were made calmly and quietly, in a spirit of real openness, and without any rancour attached. As a result -- I hope -- it's now possible for us to see where the real problems are, and to have at least some hope of addressing them.

It's now horribly late, and I must get to bed -- but not before posting this and thanking all of you out there who have given me your support, advice, and prayers. We are by no means out of the woods yet -- but at least we all have enough light to see where the obstacles are, and I now know that the PP and I can both speak frankly without making life untenable for each other. And that's good enough for one day's work...

All the best to all of you,