Am I being a pedantic bore ? (yes)

[Gabriel]

Well, Nick, to play Devil's Advocate.

If you religiously had a four hymn sandwich and nothing else for five years wouldn't it also feel flat if you omit one hymn because it had become the norm?

[pirate]

As it did on Sunday when I put in a thanksgiving-type Communion song and omitted a final hymn. I've explained why, verbally and in the bulletin, and explained we'll not be having a final hymn for a few weeks and so far no major twitching, but it will take some getting used to.

However it 'feels' just the same as the dismissal at a weekday Mass when there's no music at all. 'Go in peace...' and everyone gets ready and goes!

[Nick Baty]

Gabriel, isn't there a difference, when it's an acclamatory text?

[Gabriel]

Gabriel, isn't there a difference, when it's an acclamatory text?

I am not sure if you are seeking reassurance or information.

Why and how is it different?

[Nick Baty]

Scratching head and trying to decide why you're asking when you know more about this than I do. For a start, Holy is part of the liturgy – hymns with the exception of the few remaining sequences – are not. Think high/low points. Try Ernie Sands's Music: Servant of Rite. And then listen in a different way next Sunday. And, I don't know about you, but at our place hymns only feature – if at all – on Sundays. The midweek Masses are celebrated with Alleluia and eucharistic acclamations only.

[Gabriel]

I am trying to suggest that it maybe not enough (to engage with those who have not seen the light) to say do this because the Church says so. One does not need to go beyond areas discussed on this board to realise that people generally have do not a full strict adherence to all aspects of Church (including liturgical) law. We treat these principles as self-evident but they not to many - otherwise every parish would be singing the Mass.

To pick up one point - is high and low points a 'construct' or an experienced reality. You would say that, and I would agree with you, that the Preparation of Gifts is a low point. If I wanted to argue this from Church documents I would start by noting that GIRM [78] says that the Eucharistic Prayer is summit of the celebration - so therefore there must be bits which aren't summits etc. In my practice I will plan music accordingly. Now I would question whether I experience it as such or is it my intellect 'constructing' my experience - 'I know this is a low point therefore I shall experience it as such'. Leaving this aside though I was recently helping prepare a Mass for teachers. The two people I was preparing with, who I think would both experience good 'principled' liturgy in their parishes and are quite informed, both strongly said, unprompted that it really annoys when the hymn at the preparation was not explicitly about offering as this was a real highpoint for them.

To put the discussion more broadly, and beware heretical thought coming on. I am not convinced by the Singing the Mass leaflet and its categorisations of five columns. I do think it is a useful starting point and can really help people think about what they do. In its current form it also does a good job of suggesting that music is one element within the context of the whole Mass.

However I think it works out of a mindset that the renewed liturgy shifted. No longer do we have High and Low Mass etc. there is just Mass. There are three basic assumptions about music in the renewed rites I would suggest that it is sung (so it's not a question of shall we have some music then), that it works from a 'maximum' approach (what might we not sing rather what shall we sing) and that singing is an integral part of the priest's role. 'Singing the Mass', and it may and English and Welsh thing too, has at its heart I would suggest a minimalist approach - what's the least we have to sing. It seems to me that when it comes to making choices the rite assumes that decisions would be made according to the occasion and depending on the local needs and resources.

My version of the leaflet would probably have just two columns. In the first I would have the acclamations, of course, but I would also be inclined to include the dialogues. In the second column would be everything else. It would be, I think, more true to the liturgy but harder to use as a teaching tool we like easy distinctions whereas the Church seems surprisingly to think there are informed and competent adults making these choices.

[Nick Baty]

I don't disagree with a single word or concept, Gabriel. I'm not expressing myself very well, right now (see thread on Swine Flu).

I can only speak from experience with an assembly which sings that which ought to be sung, not just because of documents but because of the whole drama of the ritual. eg, the Great Amen becomes greater by being sung, becomes different from any other Amens - the fact that the priest will probably have spoken much of what has come before and then sings the Per Ipsum to which we all respond – it doesn't really need explanation, it simply becomes what we do. You can feel the difference.

Also, singing this particular word gets over the problem Catholics have with the bottom muscle – have you ever noticed that, when certain texts are said, on the penultinate syllable, the average Catholic automatically stands, sits, kneels? Their bottoms have evolved rather like Pavlov's dogs.

If I was developing Singing the Mass I'd have three columns: 1 acclamations, 2 responsorial psalm, communion psalm and fraction song, 3 everything else.

[Gabriel]

I glad we have reached a moment of concord!

I would suggest that singing the Amen is a good example where the experience not only affirms the principle but does more than that i.e. not only do we acclaim but also help pace the celebration. My only caveat is that it is the link between music and action within the context of the whole that is important - what is the experience when the priest gives up elevating the elements during the sung Amen and/or the Amen is greatly extended.

I may go for three columns: 1. Gospel and Eucharistic Prayer: Acclamations and Dialogues, 2. Nearly everything else. 3. those bits you sing when your progessive solemnity dial has hit 11!

[Nick Baty]

I glad we have reached a moment of concord!

I wasn't sure we had any discord

[admin]

GIRM [78] says that the Eucharistic Prayer is summit of the celebration - so therefore there must be bits which aren't summits etc.

OK. We are also told that the Liturgy is the fount and summit. I suggest that nearly all Catholic laity only experience the worshipping assembly when they meet for Mass: many do not appreciate Mass as a summit because that is all they get, which just makes it a plane. We need a richer, more varied diet in order to appreciate the finer things in life!

What are the Bishops doing actively to get the change in minds and hearts so that we meet to be Church for non-eucharistic celebrations?

It isn't good enough, by the way, to say that there is material on the Liturgy Office website for other things, such as Liturgy of the Hours for parish use - that is not active encouragement for change...

[Nick Baty]

What are the Bishops doing actively to get the change in minds and hearts so that we meet to be Church for non-eucharistic celebrations?

Perhaps not ideal, but it's happening anyway. In our three churches two have regular Liturgy of the Hours, partly because of desire but partly because our priest cannot be in three places at once. And, I'm sure, we're not the only pastoral area in this situation. Necessity might not be mothering invention here, but it's certainly the midwife.

[Gabriel]

When the management questions your quotes one should worry. My reason for quoting GIRM 78 was as a pedantic bore I was wondering whether the language of high and low points was something that could be recognised in Church documents.

Some responses to your question - some quarters would point to the resurgence of Eucharistic devotions - a Calendar of parishes around the diocese with prayers for vocations - an initiative an archbishop brought from Birmingham to Westminster! (Given the number of Birmingham musicians found in these parts it would be intersting to know what music provision is provided - but that would OT)

A more glib response would be to ask the Management to point out successful examples of bishops actively encouraging something. A subtext to my early musing was in a post-modern age what price authority? Behind this whole discussion is a question why other people including clergy don't have the same understanding as us and give these matter the same priority.

A more serious response goes back to the question of experience.To take the example of the Liturgy of the Hours I suspect, and would be happy to be told otherwise, that many of those who are bound to pray it don't find it particularly prayerful. Therefore the experience provides a barrier to offering it to their parishes. Also we have model in many places that relies on (or presumes on) the clergy to implement such celebrations. I would love to believe that the encouragement imagined would cause a whoop of delight in presbyteries across the land but my guess it would be received as another burden or expectation.