Annoying Concert Masses

[LilyM]

Personally, I am more spiritually touched by hearing the choir do a Kyrie and Gloria from a Palestrina mass or a mass of any other good composer. I am participating through reflective prayer asking God for his mercy while the choir sings from the choir loft. It hits home to me more. I close my eyes and pray along. I’m much more focused on the mass and the prayer that goes along with hearing the singing of the Kyrie and Gloria. This is often the case at cathedrals and even in some smaller churches in the US and in Europe. If the Vatican does this for Her own masses, I don’t think this is really as bad as people make it out to be - and I think they know a little more than us in terms of liturgical music.

Of course, when it is chanted and repeated by the congregation it is also spiritually fulfilling.

Much as I agree with most of what you’ve said in this thread, in this case I can’t.

Since the rubrics of the Mass indicate that the congregation is to say or sing the Kyrie, it is not good enough for them just to listen meditatively - any more than it is good enough for the choir to sing the final blessing normally given by the priest and the priest just to listen along meditatively.

Our Australian GIRM says so explicitly:

" 52. After the Act of Penitence, the Kyrie is always begun, unless it has already been included as part of the Act of Penitence. Since it is a chant by which the faithful acclaim the Lord and implore his mercy, it is ordinarily done by all, that is, by the people and the choir or cantor having a part in it."

It is important for the congregation to say or sing the prayers assigned to them, and otherwise respond when they are supposed to, just as it is for the priest to say or chant the prayers assigned to him.

 

[ellammcg]

I appreciate on occasion hearing a quality piece of music in church put forth by those who are far more talented than I. Sometimes, I like to just listen and absorb the message and appreciate the musical gift that God has given to others.

Unfortunately, in my current church we have almost no good singers at all including the song leader and soloists or singers of “specials” as they are called. (I won’t even go into the torturous experience our “Singspiration” is to endure.) Nonetheless, our singers/choir expect to be applauded and their expressions show their displeasure if they are not.

 

[MarysGirls]

I appreciate on occasion hearing a quality piece of music in church put forth by those who are far more talented than I. Sometimes, I like to just listen and absorb the message and appreciate the musical gift that God has given to others.

Unfortunately, in my current church we have almost no good singers at all including the song leader and soloists or singers of “specials” as they are called. (I won’t even go into the torturous experience our “Singspiration” is to endure.) Nonetheless, our singers/choir expect to be applauded and their expressions show their displeasure if they are not.

Has anyone tryed to talk to them about this? They really should be focusing on the prayer in the song, not what others think of their singing.

 

[Phemie]

I try not to weigh in on L&S threads since I have my own rather firm opinions. Brother David, I am older than you and grew up with the Missa Cantata in which the congregation sang most of Mass in Latin. People did sing before Vatican II otherwise I would not have learned all those Latin warhorses I learned as a kid.

It all depended on where you lived.

Pre Vat. II I never experienced a Missa Cantata that was sung by the congregation. It was always by the choir alone. I never experienced a dialog Mass either even though that seems to have been the experience of many who post here.

 

[JMJ_coder]

Believe me, I understand what you are saying though as the Divine Liturgy has some very complicated music but as it is something we learn it is not hard to sing along with.

And you should also be aware of some of the great jewels that come from the Cathedrals in Russia that would rival in technical difficulty anything coming from the West.

Don’t misunderstand me; my own personal bias is that I prefer “simple” chants (monophonic Gregorian Chant) for most of what is sung. Examples of what I consider in this category are all of the official Mass settings (e.g., Missa de Angelis), Te Deum Solemnis, Adoro Te Devote, Pange Lingua, etc.

I don’t think that any one of these is beyond any congregation today. You could even add in a bass line (like they do in many Eastern churches in traditional Slavic land and how they used to in old Roman chant) without much difficulty. Hey, if people can catch every latest top 40 hit with ease, they can also learn Gregorian Chant.

I do enjoy the great polyphonic works, such as those by Palestrina, but for the bulk of Parishes (i.e., those that are not Cathedrals, Basilicas, great Metropolitan Churches), I tend to want to reserve these more technically difficult pieces for feasts of great solemnity (e.g., Christmas, patronal feast day, etc.).

I don’t think that most of what normally gets strummed and drummed at most parishes these days is proper sacred music. I think they should use the OCP and GIA stuff to light the Easter fire.

 

[Sarabande]

Much as I agree with most of what you’ve said in this thread, in this case I can’t.

Since the rubrics of the Mass indicate that the congregation is to say or sing the Kyrie, it is not good enough for them just to listen meditatively - any more than it is good enough for the choir to sing the final blessing normally given by the priest and the priest just to listen along meditatively.

Our Australian GIRM says so explicitly:

" 52. After the Act of Penitence, the Kyrie is always begun, unless it has already been included as part of the Act of Penitence. Since it is a chant by which the faithful acclaim the Lord and implore his mercy, it is ordinarily done by all, that is, by the people and the choir or cantor having a part in it."

It is important for the congregation to say or sing the prayers assigned to them, and otherwise respond when they are supposed to, just as it is for the priest to say or chant the prayers assigned to him.

I understand this, but I believe that if the Vatican and her masses do this often, (For instance, I heard their choir sing the Kyrie and Gloria from a Mozart mass - only choir was involved and I’ve listened to or attended enough masses at various cathedrals and churches to witness this - usually for their choral masses or special masses) does that mean the Vatican and our Holy Father don’t know what they’re doing and are deliberately going against rules? I don’t think so. I will follow what they do at the Vatican for mass before anything else. I believe it knows more than I do in regards to what is proper and not for mass. At the same time, I have nothing against saying the Kyrie or chanting it back.

Also, as in the bolded part of your quote, it uses the word “ordinarilly”. That would mean that there are times when it wouldn’t be* ordinarily *sung by all. The choir, for instance, would do it during these times. So, when in most masses it might just be recited or chanted by congregation, there would be masses - such as our parish 11:00 masses with choir when it would be done using a setting by Palestrina, Victoria, Mozart, Hassler, etc. or special masses. (I will note that my parish is a cathedral basilica. I wouldn’t expect this at a little parish, although there are a smaller parishes in our city which actually have the ability in their choir to do these.)

 

[LilyM]

I understand this, but I believe that if the Vatican and her masses do this often, (For instance, I heard their choir sing the Kyrie and Gloria from a Mozart mass - only choir was involved and I’ve listened to on the radio/tv or attended enough masses there as well as in other cathedrals and churches) does that mean the Vatican and our Holy Father don’t know what their doing and are deliberately going against rules? I don’t think so. I will follow what they do at the Vatican for mass before anything else. I believe it knows more than I do in regards to what is proper and not for mass. At the same time, I have nothing against saying the Kyrie or chanting it back.

You watch Vatican Mass every single week? Or is it just on special occasions - Christmas and Easter and so on? THOSE are what I would call extraordinary. Sunday Masses, with choir or not, in a Cathedral or not, are more likely to be ordinary.

Are you suggesting that whoever runs liturgies at the Vatican is incapable of stuffing up on occasion and on occasion getting things wrong? It’s hardly a matter affecting infallibility if they do, so it’s just as possible there as in any other place.

And the Vatican has always been a special case in some ways - they’ve always celebrated Mass versus populum there, for example, I think due to some quirk in construction, even when in all other churches it was strictly supposed to be ad orientem.

 

[Sarabande]

You watch Vatican Mass every single week? Or is it just on special occasions - Christmas and Easter and so on? THOSE are what I would call extraordinary. Sunday Masses, with choir or not, in a Cathedral or not, are more likely to be ordinary.

Are you suggesting that whoever runs liturgies at the Vatican is incapable of stuffing up on occasion and on occasion getting things wrong? It’s hardly a matter affecting infallibility if they do, so it’s just as possible there as in any other place.

And the Vatican has always been a special case in some ways - they’ve always celebrated Mass versus populum there, for example, I think due to some quirk in construction, even when in all other churches it was strictly supposed to be ad orientem.

I don’t watch Vatican mass every week. But … it is obvious that having a choral Kyrie and Gloria would be permitted, rather than prohibited for every mass. Because “ordinarily” was mentioned in the GIRM, that would mean in other parishes as well - not just at Vatican. Otherwise, it would have been stated as such.

The 11:00 masses are actually considered special masses at our parish. They usually do a Latin OF mass during this time which is when the polyphonic masses are used with just voices - no organ, unless the music calls for organ. Easter and Christmas masses usually have more.

I am not suggesting that the people who plan the liturgies at the Vatican are infallible. They are capable to flub up once in a while. But I do know that they have to really know what they are doing both liturgically and musically in order to get in there. You can’t continually flub up the same way over and over - and that would be the case since they do these choral masses often. One acquaintance of ours actually did have a position there in liturgical music for a couple of years. It’s a vigorous process to obtain a post - you really need to know your stuff in all ways.

I will stress that I am not saying that we shouldn’t do chanted response or recited Kyries and that it should only be choral. My point is that if it was strictly prohibited - in no way should it ever be sung in a choral/polyphonic setting - the wording would have been much more direct and black and white. Using the word “ordinarily” leaves it open for certain masses to allow this, not just at the Vatican (unless it does state that somewhere else in the GIRM).

 

[Whitacre_Girl]

Okay, I have to say something.

Some of the attitudes expressed in this thread have really angered me, but I will try to lay that aside, and try to make this very clear.

I went to college for 4 years and shelled out thousands and thousands of dollars to study music, train my ears, my voice, and my mind to sing the praises of God, and to be an effective leader for others. I worked hard. VERY hard. I am now in a Catholic church leading congregational hymns once a month, as well as busting my hump helping with the choir. I hae given freely of my time, money, and what little talent that I orginially had, and have honed. It’s been hard work and a lot of sacrifice. Many of your “egotistical” musicians up there have given the same things. Nights away from their families (and even nights where dinner doesn’t come until MIDNIGHT), working VERY hard so they can bless God and the congregation with the gift of music (Which, I might add, the church has always been the leader in for the last 2000 years!), not to mention the COUNTLESS hours of repetitious rehearsal at home. There are times when the congregation should sing, yes. But there are times where the beautiful motets written specifically FOR THE MASS should be sung, because there is a beauty in that that cannot be expressed in words.

How did we come from being a church that was always known as the leader in fine music, to a place demanding only watered down, repetitious hymns? ESPECIALLY calling those who sacrifice so much “egotistical” and accusing them of showboating? I have served in MANY choirs, and have done a fair bit of song leading. I cannot think of ONE person who EVER thought it “was about them.” Most of them I know are like me. We spend 10 minutes before mass in a music closet praying that the congregation see God, not us. Then sing, and when we are done, leave quickly with a brief “thank you” when someone says we did a good job.

I understand that people have different tastes in music. I get that. Me, personally, I think that if the whole mass was done by a gifted choir, and all I did was pray and listen, I would call that a superb experience, and thank God deeply for that. I know not everyone feels that way, but for pete’s sake will you GET OFF the musician’s back until you either do it yourself, or try to realize everything they have to give up to simply be there? They are doing the best they can to make the congregation happy, and to bring them closer to Christ. Music isn’t a gift you are given that you suddenly can wake up one day and do. You have to work your tail off, and it’s probably the MOST unappreciated, and critisized part of the liturgy (as evidenced by the attitudes in this very thread.)

I’m sorry if any of this seems uncharitable, but frankly, I think a lot of things said thus far have been worse.

 

[Cat]

Okay, I have to say something.

Some of the attitudes expressed in this thread have really angered me, but I will try to lay that aside, and try to make this very clear.

I went to college for 4 years and shelled out thousands and thousands of dollars to study music, train my ears, my voice, and my mind to sing the praises of God, and to be an effective leader for others. I worked hard. VERY hard. I am now in a Catholic church leading congregational hymns once a month, as well as busting my hump helping with the choir. I hae given freely of my time, money, and what little talent that I orginially had, and have honed. It’s been hard work and a lot of sacrifice. Many of your “egotistical” musicians up there have given the same things. Nights away from their families (and even nights where dinner doesn’t come until MIDNIGHT), working VERY hard so they can bless God and the congregation with the gift of music (Which, I might add, the church has always been the leader in for the last 2000 years!), not to mention the COUNTLESS hours of repetitious rehearsal at home. There are times when the congregation should sing, yes. But there are times where the beautiful motets written specifically FOR THE MASS should be sung, because there is a beauty in that that cannot be expressed in words.

How did we come from being a church that was always known as the leader in fine music, to a place demanding only watered down, repetitious hymns? ESPECIALLY calling those who sacrifice so much “egotistical” and accusing them of showboating? I have served in MANY choirs, and have done a fair bit of song leading. I cannot think of ONE person who EVER thought it “was about them.” Most of them I know are like me. We spend 10 minutes before mass in a music closet praying that the congregation see God, not us. Then sing, and when we are done, leave quickly with a brief “thank you” when someone says we did a good job.

I understand that people have different tastes in music. I get that. Me, personally, I think that if the whole mass was done by a gifted choir, and all I did was pray and listen, I would call that a superb experience, and thank God deeply for that. I know not everyone feels that way, but for pete’s sake will you GET OFF the musician’s back until you either do it yourself, or try to realize everything they have to give up to simply be there? They are doing the best they can to make the congregation happy, and to bring them closer to Christ. Music isn’t a gift you are given that you suddenly can wake up one day and do. You have to work your tail off, and it’s probably the MOST unappreciated, and critisized part of the liturgy (as evidenced by the attitudes in this very thread.)

I’m sorry if any of this seems uncharitable, but frankly, I think a lot of things said thus far have been worse.

God bless you for being honest. I identify entirely with what you say.

One thing that non-musicians should learn–musicans have very fragile egos.

You can rail against that and say, “Well, they should develop tougher egos. They shouldn’t have egos at all. It’s all about God, not about them. etc. etc.”

Well, you go right ahead and think those thoughts about musicians. But your wishing it were so doesn’t make it happen. The fact is, musicians have very fragile egos. We are easily crushed. A sideways look is enough to convince a musician (or any artist, e.g., dancer, actor, writer, painter, composer, etc.) that they are washed up and should never sing/play/conduct again.

If you don’t like that, well, take it up with God. He’s the One Who creates artists of all types.

Comments like the ones on this board are devastating. Have you ever seen American Idol’s Simon Cowell? I think there are a lot of Simon Cowells in the Church.

I received an email this morning from a liturgical director in our city. She is looking for instrumentalists to play at the Masses at her church. I’ve played there for several years and love the parish. But I’ll be honest, the things said in this thread have made my hands shake. I honestly don’t want to say yes to her. I would prefer to sit in the pews and let someone else take the criticisms and the accusations of “ego mania.”

But I’ll probably say yes because I honestly love to play the piano and serve God and His people. I don’t play to get attention. I play to help other people give HIM attention.

 

[brotherhrolf]

Brother David: I have a very good idea of what you are talking about now. GIA is notorious for its convolutions and they are even hard for a good choir to follow. We only had to sing them for diocesan events (Chrism Mass, ordinations). The choir is not showing off, believe me. For many of us it is an effort to have to sing these compositions and I am being very charitable.

I no longer have the time to devote to my choir and I am not going to do a slip-shod job. So, I no longer sing. But I got to the point years ago where I refused to sing for the Chrism Mass or ordinations because of the music. Oh, yes, the music was there for the congregation to sing in the printed missalette booklet and there were cantors to lead…well, I’ll leave it at that.

I

 

[Sarabande]

One thing that non-musicians should learn–musicans have very fragile egos.

One thing I learned from various boards, from spending my entire life with artists as well as from my own studies, (I studied both journalism and music at university) is that we have to be very careful with the words we choose. Look how the word “perform” is often misinterpreted by non-musicians. Whenever I speak of musicians doing their job in church, I always true to use words like “render”. Our bishop has used the word “presentation”, although I can totally see someone looking for something negative with that word as well.

I understood exactly what you meant by the usage of “ego” in your sentence above. That’s probably because I am a musician and am very sensitive by nature. Most artists tend to be that way, it is true. Other people who are not as in touch “sensitively” may not understand how the word “ego” is used in this purpose. Sort of like how a good medical professional knows how to speak in lay-person’s terms as opposed to mainly medical terms.

I think the term is more of a fragile sense of self worth and confidence as a musician. Musicians do have to have some confidence in their ability, but there is no question that this confidence is always on a tight rope. There is always stories of the great musicians who looked like they were the toughest people on the planet, but one word could crush them completely and could sometimes take years to build that confidence up again. It’s also caused by ourselves as well. We are so hard on ourselves as musicians - sometimes harder than people on the outside. This is because we know how much work goes into this. For me, I feel like I’m letting God down and disappointing Him.

 

[Sarabande]

You can rail against that and say, “Well, they should develop tougher egos. They shouldn’t have egos at all. It’s all about God, not about them. etc. etc.”

It’s not tougher egos… it’s a tougher skin. It is a fact of life that musicians and artists in general must develop tough skins in order to survive in the arts. Any professional knows this. For me and I know for many of my colleagues, it’s a process of learning how to balance it out - to keep all the artistry, spirituality, humility, faith and sensitivity, while keeping a tough skin on the outside for protection so that what’s inside isn’t destroyed and you become one of them - cruel, negative, judgemental, jealous, etc. They NEVER focus on the beauty of the music and the special talents and inner beauty of the musician. There is a lot of backbiting, cruelty, competition, back stabbing, etc. They look for all the wrong rather than to see what is good. It is sometimes worse than what is experienced in the church. That said, there are also A LOT of wonderful and loving people in the secular music world as well. I don’t want to paint this picture of horror. You just learn to spot these kinds of people and steer clear of them. Although sometimes, they’re your boss or conductor and you can’t really avoid them. As I’ve worked more in this world, I have noticed that we all go in with the idea of protecting ourselves and then once we get to know each other, we let go of the tough shell. You just keep it on with those who aren’t loving.

The mentors and musicians I respect the most as people and as artists, are those who have always taught me personally or from watching them that there is no such thing as ego when you are an artist. Confidence, yes. But ego, no. My voice teacher, who had an international career, performing on stage with some of the most famous conductors and opera singers of her time and sang at the Met Opera for almost a decade, drives that home to me all the time. The ego (at least the bad part of the ego) gets in the way of an artist. You have to be totally giving AND totally spiritually in touch with God when you use your instrument. There is no such thing as “showing off”. It’s not tolerated.

In many ways, it’s easier to overcome the bad parts of the music world, because you expect it from a non-religious institution. There are people from all different walks of life. When it comes from within a church, though, it is actually much harder to handle. We just don’t expect people to make pre-judgements and tear us apart like we were in some sort of masterclass but with “masters” who don’t know anything about being a musician. We go in idealistic, thinking because it is a house of God and we are there doing things for God, everyone involved also has good intentions. Unfortunately, we soon learn that is not the case. I’ve learned to take the tough skin I’ve developed in the secular music world and bring it into the sacred music world. I personally think it is a sad thing that musicians have to do this in the one place where everything goes into giving to God and offered up as a prayer. In a way, I feel fortunate that I’ve experienced the wolves outside of the Church to be able to handle it when it’s experienced in church.

 

[Sarabande]

Comments like the ones on this board are devastating. Have you ever seen American Idol’s Simon Cowell? I think there are a lot of Simon Cowells in the Church.

Sad thing is that mostly everyone in Church music aren’t in competition and aren’t trying to “make it big”. They don’t deserve that kind of treatment.

I’ve been in masterclasses where the masters really rip on the singer - and they are good singers. I remember one in Italy where the master made the poor girl cry. We were all crying for her. The more he yelled at her and told her that she could never make it if she sang it that way, the harder it was for her to sing. Imagine this in front of a room full of young singers and a bunch of Italian locals sitting in. This is real life and a tough learning lesson. He, in a way, was preparing us for the wolves. As much as we were afraid to sing for him, it also taught us to work harder so that we wouldn’t experience this in the real world and would ultimately bring us to a higher level in artistry and musicianship. We had to develop tough skins to be even able to sing in front of him and everyone else in that room while getting picked apart (constructively) or torn apart (cruelly).

Ideally, the church shouldn’t be the place where a musician has to deal with the above. That type of harshness is expected in the secular music world, but not in sacred music. They shouldn’t have to worry about people ripping them to shreds. It should be supportive and encouraging and prayerful. Perhaps if there are people out there who want to be “masters” they should offer master classes for liturgical musicians and offer their constructive criticism in these classes. I’ve actually experienced something like this a few years back for the cantors and other musicians. The music director had us all come in during the week and we practiced how to work in the room and to render the chants, music, etc. It was very good feedback, but again, he was a real “master” who had been working in music liturgy for decades and had a real respect for the mass.

 

[Whitacre_Girl]

The truth is, it’s easy to sit back and criticize. It’s something else entirely to stand up in front of a congregation and present your gifts to God. It’s HARD. ESPECAILLY when you know that a good 20-30% of the people in the seats are going to dislike what you do, no matter what.

I am a firm believer that if you don’t like the music, volunteer yourself and change it. DON’T sit back and throw stones until you can do better.

Also, it’s not about developing a “tougher ego” or anything. It’s easy to say when you’re not up there. ESPECIALLY in a church setting. You are giving your all for God, with your most sincere hope that people see GOD not you. It’s thankless. If you do a good job, people will be blessed by God, with you being barely a forethought. If you mess up horribly, people will judge YOU negatively (not God). The best any church musician can hope for is to not be remembered.

I submit that these “concert masses” are merely the musicians bringing what they think is the best to the congregation. Some people don’t get into that kind of music. That’s fine. But be constructive and go to the music department. Maybe even volunteer yourself. Don’t get on a forum and whine about it, and feed the constant negativity musicians face.

There are also some things I’d like some people here to do. Look these up:

Vivaldi “Gloria”
youtube.com/watch?v=uzx2BOMo9tY (selection is Gloria in excelcis deo)

Mozart “Requiem”
youtube.com/watch?v=swkT07TP-mo (selection is Lacrymosa)

Bruckner “Ave Maria”
youtube.com/watch?v=58-IpeQT4l0

Eric Whitacre “Lux Arumque”
youtube.com/watch?v=7ggQuU7ApjY

Morten Lauridson "O Magnum Mysterium"
youtube.com/watch?v=1J0O8wTzvIc

Victoria “O Magnum Mysterium”
youtube.com/watch?v=zjIWwLFdI94

These are all pieces written specifically FOR the church. THIS is our heritage that we are turning our backs on to be more “appealing” to the world. I came from a protestant church, and trust me when I say that when you sacrifice your intergrity to put butts in the seats or to sing ONLY songs you think the people like, it will ruin you. People come to the church looking for this mystery and beauty. And when they come in and find the same watered down hymns they were force-fed, they are left feeling lost. There is a reason our Holy Catholic Church has supported the arts so strongly for the last 2 millenia.

 

[Sarabande]

The truth is, it’s easy to sit back and criticize. It’s something else entirely to stand up in front of a congregation and present your gifts to God. It’s HARD. ESPECAILLY when you know that a good 20-30% of the people in the seats are going to dislike what you do, no matter what.

So true. In a way, being critical (I don’t mean constructive criticism - I actually welcome constructive criticism) is like a drug. It makes the critic feel better about himself/herself. When I first started in my childhood parish, I’d be so nervous. When I started cantoring at our Cathedral - now that was incredibly intimidating, frightening and a humbling experience in the beginning. My body would shake. Sometimes our masses, like the ordinations and such were broadcast live at the Vatican or throughout the region. You knew that every person involved in the Liturgy was being watched and the pressure to do everything right according to the Church and to give your best to God was even more palpable. There was no room for mediocrity.

I am a firm believer that if you don’t like the music, volunteer yourself and change it. DON’T sit back and throw stones until you can do better.

Again, spot on. I have much more respect for those who also speak or critique from real experience. They understand the ins and outs, rather than just perceived ideas.

Also, it’s not about developing a “tougher ego” or anything. It’s easy to say when you’re not up there. ESPECIALLY in a church setting. You are giving your all for God, with your most sincere hope that people see GOD not you. It’s thankless. If you do a good job, people will be blessed by God, with you being barely a forethought. If you mess up horribly, people will judge YOU negatively (not God). The best any church musician can hope for is to not be remembered.

Once again, I agree. We shouldn’t have to bring our tough skins into a sacred setting. That’s for the secular world of music. YET, so many of us are forced to because of certain attitudes. And here’s a sad thing, when you are “remembered” for something good, suddenly there are those negative people twisting it to say that you were remembered because you were doing it for your own glory, not God’s. So wrong. I have been brought to tears and with a deeper understanding of what was taking place at mass because of what the musicians were able to give. It was a musical prayer.

I submit that these “concert masses” are merely the musicians bringing what they think is the best to the congregation. Some people don’t get into that kind of music. That’s fine. But be constructive and go to the music department. Maybe even volunteer yourself. Don’t get on a forum and whine about it, and feed the constant negativity musicians face.

Agree again! Although, it’s good that this thread was started because it gives people a chance to discuss and to learn what is actually going on in musicians’ heads, hearts and souls. It’s a learning experience for both.

 

[agapewolf]

I have a little different perspective.

Taste and dislike aside, I do not like it when someone sees the drumset and automatically assumes that the contemporary music group is all about performing a concert. My contemporary musicians are so much more humble and about the glory of God and being at the service of the Mass than many of the choirs I have worked with. (My current choir is pretty good right now-even though I have one or two that might get huffy if they don’t get a cantoring spot on easter vigil- I don’t have that problem with my contemporary group).

2nd, I know that many cathedral choirs in many areas have at least some members that are there for the sake of the music, not for God. They are there because they want to be a part of doing the classical literature (some aren’t Catholic). This isn’t good either.

As a music director, I take it as my main mission to foster and lead the singing of the congregation. This is in everything we sing. I understand there are parts that are allowed to be choir only, but my parish sings sooooo well, that when we try one of those, it feels empty. The people put their books away and the “mood” falls kind of flat. I feel the change. My parish loves to sing, and they do so loudly. (They drown out my instruments- yes, even the drums).

However, I understand there are parts that are allowed to be choir only. I want to only assume the best- they are doing what they do, and its probably not about self-glory, but because the Mass calls for it.

 

[Sarabande]

Taste and dislike aside, I do not like it when someone sees the drumset and automatically assumes that the contemporary music group is all about performing a concert.

This is true. Although I personally don’t think the music is appropriate for mass, I also have known or worked with enough contemporary musicians (some parishes like the mix bag of contemporary and classical music in the liturgy, so I’m hired to do the classical end) to know that they are definitely not doing it for self-glory. It’s what they can do best. There have been some who were there more for the music, BUT in every style there are those few who will be doing it for the wrong reasons. On the most part, though, from doing a lot of freelancing in various states and cities, I believe most sacred musicians are doing it for God. You run into these select few, but it’s not the majority. And that’s important to note. I believe almost any parish you attend, you will find that your musicians are humble in what they do.

2nd, I know that many cathedral choirs in many areas have at least some members that are there for the sake of the music, not for God. They are there because they want to be a part of doing the classical literature (some aren’t Catholic). This isn’t good either.

That would be the case in many arenas, not just in cathedral choirs who do only classical literature. But again it is a select few, not the majority. Our cathedral parish choir is about 30 voices, but all are Catholics. I know all of them from when I used to sing with them and know that they are there for God - not for any self-praise. Of course, they love the music, but why would anyone want to join any choir or music group if they thought the music was horrible unless they wanted to try to change it? I think it really has to do with the director and how he/she handles the choir and the individuals as a whole. The director sets the mood and is responsible for making sure the people under him/her understands why they are there. Our director, for example, has thrown people out whose heads were floating up in the sky if they didn’t learn to park their egos at the door. It isn’t often because, again, they are few and far between, and if it does look like someone is forgetting the reason why he/she is there, he nips it right in the bud with a good little reminder and wake up call. You need those kinds of directors - and it sounds like you are handling your choir well, too.

As a music director, I take it as my main mission to foster and lead the singing of the congregation. This is in everything we sing. I understand there are parts that are allowed to be choir only, but my parish sings sooooo well, that when we try one of those, it feels empty. The people put their books away and the “mood” falls kind of flat. I feel the change. My parish loves to sing, and they do so loudly. (They drown out my instruments- yes, even the drums).

Here, I think it really depends on the dynamic of the parish. For instance, at a couple parishes I’ve worked in, the congregation will raise the roof of the church when they sing, but they also love it when the choir sings alone. The feel doesn’t change. They love both equally. Then there are parishes where all they’ve done are hymns and I know that if a choir came in, they wouldn’t want any choral pieces without the congregation. It would definitely fall flat. Then, I’ve also freelanced in parishes where the congregation doesn’t like to sing no matter what style you use to encourage and foster it. Those directors racked their brains until they realized that the congregations there truly prefer to have the choir or the cantor after the pastor will bring the subject up to the congregation. In cathedrals, depending on where it is located, it is a totally mixed bag. I’ve attended and worked in cathedrals where the congregation will blow the roof off with the traditional hymns and even chants. I think the more well-visited cathedrals are the kind where you might not get the same fervor in singing from the congregation because it is so mixed and many times you might get people attending who aren’t Catholic and don’t know what is going on. Our parish is not a high profile cathedral, which I prefer. Most people who attend mass at our cathedral are Catholic. Depending on the mass and the visitors, you’ll get masses with singing congregations that can be heard far away and then masses where the visitors are just not as into singing. The parish is more traditional in general. For the Hispanic parishioners, they have their own mass which the music is apparently totally different. So, I really believe it is depends on the dynamic and the people of the parish.

I think when people attend mass in any cathedral (unless the cathedral is their parish), they expect an extraordinary liturgy (I’m not talking EF) and hear a decent to great choir. Many want to be spiritually inspired in that way to help them focus on mass. So, the expectations are different than when they would visit a regular parish. That’s fine, but they do have to realize that we’re no more special than the typical parish. I think it is a little funny when they attend one of the masses without the choir and find it is just like any other mass, except in a much bigger church and with more traditional hymns and chants.

 

[whatevergirl]

***I agree with you, OP. I dislike clapping at the end of mass for the choir, as if we are seeing a show. We were attending masses at a parish for a while when we moved to Florida back in 2007…it was a very large parish (I’m accustomed to smaller ones) and it was just irreverent, in many many ways. I loved the priests, it was hard to leave it, but I just didn’t feel like my kids were hearing anything, the loudness and shrieking of the microphones every mass, the clapping after songs, and after mass…the Billy Joel/Piano Man type piano playing that they had, it just was not for us. I thought the music minister should have had a tip jar on his piano, that is how much of a performance it was turning into.

Different strokes for different folks. Mass should be celebrated, and we should rejoice in song…but EVERYONE should, not just the choir, choosing impossible compositions that no one has ever heard of in the parish…and basically, then, the choir sings with no participation from anyone. That’s not their role, their role is to lead us ALL in song and praise…not singing as though they are solo performers. It irks me, so we left.

We now belong to a most wonderful parish, where no one claps when it’s over, the priest waits for mass to be OVER, before making announcments, as opposed to while people are still praying after Communion It is a day and night experience. Celebrating mass as a mass, not as a performance. Not as a Christian rock concert.

Just my thoughts.***

 

[MarysGirls]

***I agree with you, OP. I dislike clapping at the end of mass for the choir, as if we are seeing a show. We were attending masses at a parish for a while when we moved to Florida back in 2007…it was a very large parish (I’m accustomed to smaller ones) and it was just irreverent, in many many ways. I loved the priests, it was hard to leave it, but I just didn’t feel like my kids were hearing anything, the loudness and shrieking of the microphones every mass, the clapping after songs, and after mass…the Billy Joel/Piano Man type piano playing that they had, it just was not for us. I thought the music minister should have had a tip jar on his piano, that is how much of a performance it was turning into.

Different strokes for different folks. Mass should be celebrated, and we should rejoice in song…but EVERYONE should, not just the choir, choosing impossible compositions that no one has ever heard of in the parish…and basically, then, the choir sings with no participation from anyone. That’s not their role, their role is to lead us ALL in song and praise…not singing as though they are solo performers. It irks me, so we left.

We now belong to a most wonderful parish, where no one claps when it’s over, the priest waits for mass to be OVER, before making announcments, as opposed to while people are still praying after Communion It is a day and night experience. Celebrating mass as a mass, not as a performance. Not as a Christian rock concert.

Just my thoughts.***

Funny how alot of people like to clap for the choir yet no one ever claps for Jesus… hmm…
Anyway, sometimes my choir director will find a really pretty, moving song. She’ll let the rest of the choir listen to it, and everybody agrees: we’ve just gotta sing this song! So, even though the congregation’s never heard it before, we sing it… again…and again… Until eventually the congregation is singing just as loud as us.
I’m totally with you on the Mass being a celebration instead of a performance, however, I understand that some people (mostly teens like me) get more out of Christian rock than they do hyms. That’s why I think there should be either both hyms and more modern songs in the Mass, or two separate Masses.
But that’s purely my opinion.