Going down to one Mass

[Nick Baty]

But the choir should be receiving at the end of Communion, not the beginning.

In our case, the choir simply filters into the communion procession unless they're needed as cantors. (The choir is, after all, part of the assembly.) Then they receive at the end, as SC suggests.

[Peter]

The plan going forwards is:
* To continue to select hymns which are a balance of modern and traditional, or right down the middle, as far as possible.
* To alternate between the Latin and English ordinary reasonably evenly - a few weeks at a time on each. I reckon this one will have to be judged as we go along.
* To continue to have a 'choir item' at the start of communion as this now takes some time.

This is a good plan, but rather than strive consciously for a balance at each Mass between modern and traditional, it might be better to have a wide range of hymns and choir items to choose from (including those suggested by your Eastern European choir) and each week make your selection from that repertoire but based primarily on suitability of the texts to reflect on the readings rather than on musical style. You should find that the variety of styles will not be evenly represented at any one Mass but will get averaged out over time. It may be that the Eastern European offerings will find their optimal relevance to the liturgy at irregular intervals but if you do your planning well in advance (as Nick Baty keeps exhorting us to do ) their choir and instrumentalists will have plenty of notice as to when to have their pieces ready. Can their guitarists help out with some of the more modern offerings in English as well? It would help to give the single worshipping community a more integrated feel if they could.

You may find that some selections lend themselves better than others to being sung with Latin rather than English ordinaries (or even to multilingual settings like the Agnus Dei in the Psallité Mass) but, as you say, this needs to be judged as you go along.

The question of whether choir items are better suited to Offertory than Communion has already been discussed but some of the items identified from your repertoire as suitable for reflecting on the day's readings might suit one part better than the other. While SC rightly draws our attention to GIRM 86, it is also worth remembering that GIRM 87 allows the choir alone to sing the Communion Chant (rather perversely, GIRM 87 seems to imply that the people are not allowed to sing the Communion Chant without the support of either the choir or a cantor ).

[Southern Comfort]

While SC rightly draws our attention to GIRM 86, it is also worth remembering that GIRM 87 allows the choir alone to sing the Communion Chant (rather perversely, GIRM 87 seems to imply that the people are not allowed to sing the Communion Chant without the support of either the choir or a cantor ).

The problem with Roman documents, and GIRM is a good example, is that different people with opposing views have a hand in them. Often the results are contradictory, as here.

The underlying theology is laid out in GIRM 86, which talks about the purpose of the singing during the Communion, and implies strongly that the people should be involved in it. Then along comes GIRM 87 from a different hand, which tells you how to do it in practice, starting off with ways that actively exclude the people. The two paragraphs do not tie up.

Which do you give precedence to? For my money, it's the underlying theological principles in para 86 which win out every time. In support of this view, para 87 and its predecessors in different editions of GIRM since 1969 have been changed and edited and tweaked and fiddled with so many times that it is indeed difficult to give any credence to their provisions as a definitive statement. They have blown with the prevailing political wind, and we can see in RM3 that there are different versions for different countries. Para 86, on the other hand, has remained constant in its different incarnations.

[IncenseTom]

Blimey - so much to think about. I'll mull all this over and see how things bed down/ how the balance of styles changes (if at all) and see what I can do.

[markyboy]

I'm following this with interest, as we are going down to one mass in our church around Advent.
Because it is likely to be the main mass which survives (we haven't been told yet!) and I am the only musical link I don't anticipate many problems, except that the disappearing mass congregation will insist on singing slowly however forcefully I try to accompany.
As for the choir going to communion at the end of the line,as it were; our choir is up uneven stone stairs in the west gallery, and mostly elderly. The few times we tried it it caused panic that they would not get to communion in time (!), combined with a tiled floor prone to slipperiness our previous PP and I erred o the side of caution (and Health and Safety). The only time I do it now is Good Friday - when we stay down for the Veneration, go first, and return to the loft.

[Southern Comfort]

As for the choir going to communion at the end of the line,as it were; our choir is up uneven stone stairs in the west gallery, and mostly elderly. The few times we tried it it caused panic that they would not get to communion in time (!), combined with a tiled floor prone to slipperiness our previous PP and I erred o the side of caution (and Health and Safety). The only time I do it now is Good Friday - when we stay down for the Veneration, go first, and return to the loft.

This situation is quite common, and the solution is easy. Two ministers of Communion are deputed to mount the stairs towards the end of Communion to bring it to the singers when the music has ceased. It can be done quietly and unobtrusively and without disturbing the rest of the congregation, who by now are enjoying the post-communion silence to make their thanksgving. The trick is briefing the ministers so that they know they have to do this, every week. It may also be necessary to brief the priest (especially a visiting priest) so that he does not rush on into the Postcommunion prayer until the ministers have descended from the choir loft and deposited their vessels in the sacristy (or wherever) for purification later.

Veneration on Good Friday is another story. I know many choirs who, because they are keeping the music going all through the "adoration" (as we are now asked to call it), do not venerate at the time but do so after the service is over (along with not a few other people who also, for whatever reason, did not come up to venerate at the time either). Not a problem.

[JW]

Gospel I wonder whether a sung Psalm, and Gospel Acclamation before and 'Alleluia' after the Gospel reading isn't sufficient. In a parish like ours, our Sunday Masses can last 80 minutes, Surely the best reflection immediately after the Gospel is the Homily? Our PP may break into song during the homily anyway.
Offertory: Processions can be quite long especially if the children are presenting work they did at children's liturgy. One needs to be ready to either extend the Offertory Processional hymn, or sing two hymns (which is a total of 5 in all at Mass), or add a voluntary, especially if the gifts are to be incensed. We find that repeating a hymn is boring, I prefer an organ voluntary but the current PP prefers a second hymn.
Communion I'm with markyboy on that one. We have a quiet organ voluntary during the Communion Procession, while the singers go down to receive (only the Body is brought up to the West Gallery and there are those who will only receive from a priest). A choir member who is a minister brings Communion up to me and a couple of others. For a month or so last year, the PP was insisting that ordained ministers only should distribute the Body and extraordinary ministers should distribute the Blood. For a couple of weeks a deacon robed in dalmatic and alb brought Communion up the stairs to the West Gallery, and his heart is not the best; I was concerned about his health & safety and about the possibility of the ciborium being dropped on the way up the stairs. I assume the 2 ministers mentioned by SC are for the Body and Blood. In my personal view, it's better if a chalice is not be brought upstairs - it just isn't necessary in our situation. Once the singers return a hymn is sung - if pressed I would say that this is a Communion Thanksgiving hymn but, am I bothered? And we do have a recessional hymn.

[JW]

PS. Of course, the PP's dislike of an organ voluntary after the Offertory Hymn may be down to my playing

[Nick Baty]

We have a quiet organ voluntary during the Communion Procession, while the singers go down to receive....

This, surely, is your solution: Your singers go down, join the communion procession and help the singing of the communion song along the way!

[Southern Comfort]

Offertory: Processions can be quite long especially if the children are presenting work they did at children's liturgy.

Grrrr!

The children should not have been "doing work", and it not "their" liturgy but the Church's.

During the Liturgy of the Word with Children (NB correct title), they should be listening to and then responding to the word, using a simplified form of the readings and what is in effect a shared (dialogue) homily with the leader. If this is done properly, there will be no time for "work" in any case. Activities such as making artefacts and colouring in pictures are only to keep the very youngest children (say 3-4 and under) occupied. All the others should be celebrating a Liturgy of the Word as described. LOWC is not some kind of liturgical crêche, but a genuine liturgical celebration. The children should go out with nothing but the Book of the Word, and return with nothing but the same Book — no corkboards covered with "work", no pieces of paper or cardboard models.....

And ideally the priest should not be quizzing them about what they have been up to when they return. This can frequently be cringe-making. If he does ask them, the answer should be "The same as you. We have been celebrating the Word — at our level." If indeed that is what they have been doing, there will be no need for an "inquisition" by the priest, which serves only to hold up the liturgy at a time when it is supposed to be transitioning from one part to the next — from Word to Eucharist.

We are already in a situation where so many people routinely get Liturgy of the Word with Children wrong that a major exercise in (re-)education is well overdue.

<rant off> !

[Nick Baty]

Wish we had a Facebook-style "like".
In its absence, LIKE, LIKE, LIKE!

[IncenseTom]

Wish we had a Facebook-style "like".
In its absence, LIKE, LIKE, LIKE!

Quite. I agree entirely.

Is it permissible/ a good idea for:

1. A lighted candle to be presented for one of the children to take with them (as well as the Book of the Word - although NOT the same child!!!)
2. The celebrant to bless the children as a group when he gives them the Book at the sanctuary steps before they depart? I think my PP says something simple like "May God bless you as you listen to the Word of the Lord".

I have seen 1. done before but not in my current parish. 2. happens every week at my current parish.

To swing back to topic slightly, the LOWC happened at the 9:30 Mass which has now been cut, and some were worried that it would not be resurrected for, what they perceived to be, the more traditional/ solemn 11am Mass. Happily, and quite rightly, the PP has asked for a new team of people from both former congregations to volunteer to lead the LOWC and something of a 're-launch' is under way.

[Southern Comfort]

Is it permissible/ a good idea for:

1. A lighted candle to be presented for one of the children to take with them (as well as the Book of the Word - although NOT the same child!!!)
2. The celebrant to bless the children as a group when he gives them the Book at the sanctuary steps before they depart? I think my PP says something simple like "May God bless you as you listen to the Word of the Lord".

I have seen 1. done before but not in my current parish. 2. happens every week at my current parish.

1. IMO the primary symbol is the book itself. I have seen other things added to the procession — lead child wears a sash or stole, procession is proceeded by cross and candles (to give the servers something to do?), etc. None of these is necessary, nor indeed desirable.

Some people do justify the use of one or more candles by saying that taking the light from one of the altar candles to another place is a symbolic way of linking the two celebrations of the Word, but it seems to me that it also perpetuates the false notion that you can't have a procession without lights. Here we encounter a confusion between processions involving only the ministers, which normally do have lights (remnant of an element of respect from Roman imperial times, like incense), and those involving members of the assembly, which don't (think of the Communion procession....). While we're talking about this, there is absolutely no need to have the procession of gifts headed by crossbearer and candles. It's a procession of assembly members, not ministers.

2. Yes, there should always be a proper dismissal. The words Tom's PP uses are OK, and there are many other possibilities. I find that most priests do not understand the concept of dismissal. The most that they do is hand the book to a random child, saying "Off you go. We'll see you later", if indeed they say anything at all.

The dismissal should really be accompanied by a gesture of blessing, for example the priest extending both hands over the children. Even better, the priest should encourage the whole congregation to extend their hands over the children. Better still, the form of words should be inclusive of all. So, using Tom's example, the priest might say "May God bless us all as we listen to the Word of God in our different places".

A sung dismissal song (there are a number of published examples available) should be used as the children move away. Apart from disguising the sounds of departure, it also calms the people down and prevents the priest from continuing while half the children are still noisily exiting the church, something which I also see far too often. If we are going to bid a ritual farewell to the children, let us do so properly, rather than give the impression that getting rid of them is somehow an intrusion on the Mass. If you're not going to have singing, at least have quiet music on the organ, or other instruments, preferably in the same key as the entrance hymn/song we just sang a few moments before, and let it last until the last child has left the church. (Priests often get twitchy about this because they can't see when the last children have gone, and so want to get a move on. It helps to tell them that others are in a better position to see that than they are.)

[JW]

Thanks for the comments / rants.

(1) Communion - our current system isn't seen as a problem needing a solution. We trialled a few things, including Nick's suggestion and what we do is what works for us. (Our people prefer to sing when they've received Communion - they prefer to prepare and process quietly beforehand. As SC has said, a procession doesn't need singing).
(2) Children's liturgy - likewise it works well for our children, leaders, ministers, parents and the worshipping community By the way, the book and candle are given to adults, not children nowadays, on health & safety grounds! - they have to walk from the church to the hall, via the sacristy. They disappear so quickly that music would only add to the 80 minutes of the Mass! Incidentally, readings and topics are notified to the priest. And if you simply have readings and a shared homily for the children as SC suggests, that is suited to the most academic children only. No primary teacher would contemplate running a half hour whole-class teaching session nowadays. The use of symbols when the priest processes out is linked to this: the symbols help us understand the solemnity of the Word. I'm academic yet I remember being bored to tears at Sunday Mass, even though I had a 'Junior Missal' to follow (and never said a word to a priest till my first confession!) Some priests aren't good at talking to children so probably shouldn't say anything, though we prefer them to make at least some effort. However others are brilliant at it and, at its best, children to have some sort of interaction with the priest, with both children and people gaining extra insights into the day's readings.
So no-one in the parish would contemplate changing our children's liturgy thank you very much!. If it ain't broke....

[Southern Comfort]

As SC has said, a procession doesn't need singing).

I didn't say any such thing, JW. In fact it is the opposite. Singing is what makes it a procession rather than just a queue.

And if you simply have readings and a shared homily for the children as SC suggests, that is suited to the most academic children only. No primary teacher would contemplate running a half hour whole-class teaching session nowadays.

But that's the whole point. Liturgy of the Word with Children is not a teaching session, and shouldn't be. It is listening to the Word and then reflecting on it together. Completely interactive. The leader facilitates the celebration and elicits reflections from the children. There is excellent material available to assist leaders in doing this. If you've never seen this done well, you've missed out on a lot.

I know, though, that a lot of leaders treat LOWC as a catechetical session. It isn't, and shouldn't be. Someone needs to tell them to stop! They'd find it easier on themselves, too — much less preparation!

As for saying that readings and a shared homily is only suited to academic children, I have to disagree completely. In fact it gives the less academic children a chance to interact with the Word in a way that would not be possible in other scenarios.