E
Edmundus1581
Guest
Yesterday our choir received a puzzling comment from a visiting priest, and to understand it I must give the background. Hence this long post. Thankyou for your attention! 
My parish is mainstream OF. I sing in the choir which uses an electronic organ, played well, and sings a mix of traditional and modern hymns, also well, and sings the Ordinary of the Mass (Gloria, etc). Overall, our selection of music and style is mostly for leading the congregation, rather than as a "performance’, and we have reasonable success in that. The words for both the parts of the Mass, and the hymns, are put on the overhead to encourage the congregation to sing. Still, we add a descant, and there is clearly a “performance” aspect to some our singing.
For the Ordinary we use the “Mass of St Francis”, a recent setting of the new translation, which has been approved, and even encouraged, by our Bishop for singing across the diocese. To my ear it is musical, singable, and not in any particular genre. (nb: This information has been added just to emphasise that we are not doing anything unusual or difficult. This priest is from outside the diocese, and would be unaware of the bishop’s stated preference).
On the last Sunday Mass was said by the visiting priest. He is quite old, but would appear to be more of an “innovator” than a “traditionalist”. He is also Irish, and I have heard that the old Irish church had a Jansenist leaning, which resists finery in the Mass - and possibly this includes music. This is not his first visit, so he is familiar with the place our choir plays in the liturgy. We sang “He is Lord” (for Christ the King) as the opening hymn. We didn’t get to sing the Gloria and Kyrie because he was very quick to start the congregation in reciting them. At the time, it appeared that he was just reciting the Mass automatically, forgetting to allow for singing, but now it seems this might have been a deliberate. To compensate for the priest’s apparent “forgetfulness”, and to ensure the remaining response were sung, our organist came in quickly for the Sanctus, Amen, etc…
Getting now to the point of issue. For the psalm we lead the congregation in a musical, slightly Gregorian, setting. I don’t know how well the congregation joined in the response, or if they even tried… After the psalm the priest said “That was beautifully sung, but it would be nice if the congregation joined in”.
After Mass he came to have a chat with us. He complimented us on our singing, then told us a little “history” of church choirs. How, centuries ago, there were no choirs, but over time the strong singers in the congregations felt that the others were holding them back, so started to form choirs. Then instruments were added, and eventually there was a musical performance like Verdi during the Mass. He seemed to think the Verdi was wrong, but was he saying that having any church choir is wrong? It seemed so, but he wasn’t making himself clear.
His tone and manner was all very cheery and pleasant, leaving us to guess his intention. Then he finished by saying, “You are an East Choir”, with a smile. I have never heard of an East Choir, and can’t find it in google. Perhaps I misheard. Did he mean “Feast Choir”, “Eastern Choir”,…???
Can anyone enlighten me on what this priest might have meant by describing us an “East Choir”?
My parish is mainstream OF. I sing in the choir which uses an electronic organ, played well, and sings a mix of traditional and modern hymns, also well, and sings the Ordinary of the Mass (Gloria, etc). Overall, our selection of music and style is mostly for leading the congregation, rather than as a "performance’, and we have reasonable success in that. The words for both the parts of the Mass, and the hymns, are put on the overhead to encourage the congregation to sing. Still, we add a descant, and there is clearly a “performance” aspect to some our singing.
For the Ordinary we use the “Mass of St Francis”, a recent setting of the new translation, which has been approved, and even encouraged, by our Bishop for singing across the diocese. To my ear it is musical, singable, and not in any particular genre. (nb: This information has been added just to emphasise that we are not doing anything unusual or difficult. This priest is from outside the diocese, and would be unaware of the bishop’s stated preference).
On the last Sunday Mass was said by the visiting priest. He is quite old, but would appear to be more of an “innovator” than a “traditionalist”. He is also Irish, and I have heard that the old Irish church had a Jansenist leaning, which resists finery in the Mass - and possibly this includes music. This is not his first visit, so he is familiar with the place our choir plays in the liturgy. We sang “He is Lord” (for Christ the King) as the opening hymn. We didn’t get to sing the Gloria and Kyrie because he was very quick to start the congregation in reciting them. At the time, it appeared that he was just reciting the Mass automatically, forgetting to allow for singing, but now it seems this might have been a deliberate. To compensate for the priest’s apparent “forgetfulness”, and to ensure the remaining response were sung, our organist came in quickly for the Sanctus, Amen, etc…
Getting now to the point of issue. For the psalm we lead the congregation in a musical, slightly Gregorian, setting. I don’t know how well the congregation joined in the response, or if they even tried… After the psalm the priest said “That was beautifully sung, but it would be nice if the congregation joined in”.
After Mass he came to have a chat with us. He complimented us on our singing, then told us a little “history” of church choirs. How, centuries ago, there were no choirs, but over time the strong singers in the congregations felt that the others were holding them back, so started to form choirs. Then instruments were added, and eventually there was a musical performance like Verdi during the Mass. He seemed to think the Verdi was wrong, but was he saying that having any church choir is wrong? It seemed so, but he wasn’t making himself clear.
His tone and manner was all very cheery and pleasant, leaving us to guess his intention. Then he finished by saying, “You are an East Choir”, with a smile. I have never heard of an East Choir, and can’t find it in google. Perhaps I misheard. Did he mean “Feast Choir”, “Eastern Choir”,…???
Can anyone enlighten me on what this priest might have meant by describing us an “East Choir”?
Yes, that’s a real possibility! His whole manner was classic Irish understatement and suggesting a point, without stating it!