Non Solum: Introducing Sung Hymns or Songs at Mass

A reader writes in:

My question is this: What is the best terminology to use when cantors announce each assembly-sung hymn or song in a mass, i.e., is the assembly being invited to join in singing “songs,” “hymns,” or “chants?”

Some background on my question — when cantors announce to the assembly the songs/hymns and the corresponding “Breaking Bread” book numbers, there seems to be an extremely wide range of interpretations as to how to announce them, so I am wanting to establish consistency among my cantors in making these announcements, but consistency that is in line with the Roman Catholic Church’s musical/liturgical protocol.

OCP’s โ€œTodayโ€™s Liturgyโ€ quarterly publication identifies the following categories for music options, and I follow each with what has been done here since my arrival:

  • Entrance Chant – we say “Gathering Hymn” (or Song)
  • Presentation and Preparation of the Gifts – we say “Song of Preparation”
  • Communion Chant – we say “Communion Song” or “Song for Communion”
  • Song of Praise or Sending Forth – we say “Recessional Song” or “Recessional Hymn”

Iโ€™ve looked through the Missal and find references to:

  • Entrance Chant
  • Offertory Chant; โ€œchantsโ€ฆ at the Presentation of the Giftsโ€ Iโ€™m always surprised that in the Catholic church that the word โ€œcollectionโ€ is used rather than โ€œofferingโ€ — I like the use of the word “Offertory… Chant/Song/Hymn.” The word “offering” to me denotes the action of the giver [‘we offer ourselves, our time, our possessions, signs of God’s gracious love…’], whereas the word “collection” focuses on the action of the church. Yet if the music is to assist the assembly in focusing on the gifts of bread and wine brought forward (presentation and/or preparation of the gifts), then should “Song of Preparation” or “Song of Presentation” be used?
  • Chant โ€œafterโ€ Communion; chant โ€œatโ€ Communion; Communion Chant

The Missal also has references to “different genres of chant,” “the different chants,” “liturgical chants,” but no reference to the post-mass song/hymn.In line with the terminology used in the Missal, Iโ€™ve unofficially begun suggesting the use of:

  • Entrance Chant
  • Offertory Chant
  • Communion Chant

I canโ€™t figure out what to do about the post-mass song/hymn/chant so most use โ€œRecessional Song or Hymn.โ€

I have already received comments that the music that weโ€™re singing isnโ€™t chant. They are correct in that it is not chant as most people would interpret the word (with some exceptions – “Divinum Mysterium”, etc.). Yet if one follows the Missal terminology, one finds a few references to โ€œsongsโ€ and โ€œhymnsโ€ and โ€œhymnal,โ€ but none of those references are specifically associated with โ€œentranceโ€ or โ€œpresentation/preparation.โ€ One reference that I found is to a hymn ‘after’ Communion. But there are many more references to the word “chant” in the Missal than to “song” and “hymn.” I found the word โ€œsongโ€ used only once apart from its use in specifically-quoted texts or psalms that incorporate the word โ€œsong;โ€ but in the Missal, โ€œsongโ€ is never associated with any music that the assembly sings; yet we announce โ€œSong of Preparation.โ€

I am very interested in knowing what others do to introduce assembly-sung music as well as the rationale behind those introductions. I want to assist cantors and parishioners in understanding why we say what we say, and what the valid reasons are for doing so.

Please comment below.

Editor

Katharine E. Harmon, Ph.D., edits the blog, Pray Tell: Worship, Wit & Wisdom.

Please leave a reply.

Comments

45 responses to “Non Solum: Introducing Sung Hymns or Songs at Mass”

  1. Orin Johnson

    Do they need an announced category? My usual habit is to say something like, “Please join with one another in singing (hymn) number ###, [title], number ###.”. Avoids, mostly, the category issue and subconsciously reminds the assembly what their role is (the “main” choir) and what the music ministry’s role is (leadership, inviting) and isn’t (the only music in the room).

  2. Rick Reed

    We keep it very simple. The entrance song is number, title, number. We don’t ask them to join, we don’t tell them to join, we simply say that the song is. Since there is the translation confusion for using the word chant, I use song. Even during communion, the song is… I feel that if we ask them to join, they can respond no. So we don’t ask.

  3. Clay Zambo

    I use “song” or “hymn” depending on the style of music, number-title-number. Designations are generally “Gathering…”, “…while the gifts are prepared,” “communion…”, and “closing…” or “concluding…”

    I will start using the word “chant” to refer to songs or hymns that are not in chant style when…no, I probably won’t do it then, either.

  4. I’m with Rick. Number, title, number.

    That said, it is very hard to wean a few announcers from the choirs from making the invitation, identifying the song type, and such. One student protested my number-title-number “policy,” suggesting that freshmen from rural Iowa never sang in their parishes back home and need that invitation. In turn, I suggested they watch the people rather than their book while they sing and see if this is indeed true.

    As for the lingo, my long-standing practice is that chant is for chant-style music, hymns describe metrical poetry set to music, and songs are what most contemporary sacred music is.

  5. Therese D Butler

    When I have to announce, I simply say in a pleasing voice making eye contact, “we sing, # title #”. To me, using any variation of the word “invite” runs the risk of creating a sense that all those who are serving on the altar and music area are the “us” and the people in the “pews” as the “them”. I also don’t need to identify the part of the Mass. Let the actions identify the part of the Mass. The two variations is when announcing the gathering hymn is part of the welcoming at the beginning in which I might seque to ” please stand as we sing…” and at the end of Mass in which I might say, “we go forth singing….”. I also try to keep the sending forth short followed by a postlude with the hope of inspiring the folks to do what they have just heard… “go proclaim the Gospel with your life”. Not a big fan of the folks standing in the pew singing while the priest has left the building. The presider is”leading” the assembly out into the world. Blessings.

  6. Scott Pluff

    I was once very anti-announcement, feeling that announcements broke up the prayerful flow of the ritual. I still think this is true, so during holy week when we have a worship booklet including all of the music it’s refreshing not to have to announce anything during Mass.

    But the more I focused on liturgical hospitality (helping unfamiliar people to navigate our rituals), I realized that many people need an occasional prompt as to what comes next.

    I’ve found a good balance between overly chatty “Attention K-Mart shoppers” announcements and leaving the congregation to guess at what comes next. At the beginning of Mass, we have a rather robust announcement including what occasion we are gathered to celebrate, perhaps an image from one of the readings, and a full announcement of the processional song. On days with large numbers of visitors (C&E, baptisms, back to school events, etc.) we also explain how to navigate our two hymnals, hearing assist devices available, where to find ushers for assistance, etc. But once all of that is out of the way, the other announcements during Mass are simply, “Number 1 2 3, Amazing Grace, number 1 2 3.”

  7. Beau Baldwin

    This business about how to announce a hymn seems to be a particularly Catholic phenomenon. I was raised Catholic, and I now am studying for an organ performance degree. I currently work for an Episcopal Church. We have a bulletin that lists the hymn titles and numbers, and we also have a board at the front of the church with the numbers listed. So after the prelude, I get the signal that the procession is ready, and then I just start playing the hymn. The congregation just knows to stand, and they start singing after the hymn introduction. The same process happens at the end of the service. The blessing as dismissal happens, and then we just sing the hymn. I don’t understand why Catholics still seem to have this cruise director attitude about hymns. Are the Catholic faithful not smart enough to figure out the hymns without having someone saying “we invite….”?

    1. Scott Pluff

      @Beau Baldwin – comment #7:
      The complicated navigation of two or three different pew books is often the source of jokes and cartoons about Episcopal liturgy. Assuming that everyone “just knows” the order of service is a bias against the many guests and visitors who attend your liturgies. It may communicate that if you’re not already one of us, you don’t belong here.

      1. Charles Day

        @Scott Pluff – comment #8:
        I am not against hospitality, but I think Todd, Rick and some others are right in that here less is more. We have 7 Masses each weekend and the Cantor does different things at each Mass according to their preference, and I doubt we can get some real uniformity. But if we could I would hope for number, title, play.

        I don’t think that is a bias against the ‘many guests’ because 1) there aren’t many guests or visitors most of the time, and 2) even when there are, they are all mainly Catholic and know the drill. Christmas and Easter bring folks out, including visitors of families. In my parish – a college town – we get visitors on home football game weekends and graduation weekends and maybe when we occasionally host an NCAA championship, but again, the visitors are almost all Catholic, and know what is expected.

        When I am in the pew I find overly lengthy introductions annoying and distracting. And unnecessary: we’re mostly not kindergartners and are fully capable of following a simple announcement even if we are visitors.

  8. In our parish, we have two hymnals, and although the music board has a “code” to indicate which one, we still announce which book to pick up. We do this once if all are from the same book, but if the next song is from a different book, we make sure to announce which one.

    Our people ask for us to make the announcements, because many older people tell us they cannot read the numbers on the hymn board from the back half of the church. Here is what we generally do:
    “Our gathering song is number ___, (which hymnal), title, (repeat number)
    “Our song during the preparation of the altar and gifts is number ____, title, number”
    “Our song during Communion is ____”
    “As we go forth, please join in singing ____”

    A few of our cantors simply say “Please join in singing ____”

    1. Chuck Middendorf

      @Joyce Donahue – comment #9:

      Exact same as Joyce. Because we some many visitors and we have two books, it’s just friendly and welcoming.

      I’m a bit shocked that Ben considers it coddling. A friendly voice and a simple instruction go a long way to make people feel welcome. In fact, our non-Catholic visitors, and our less-than-frequent Catholic visitors ask us to announce more & point out more. I value the request to point out the Gloria and the Mass parts, etc., (“what’s that ‘Lord, I’m not worthy’ response…?”), but I have to trust the person in the pew next to the visitor to help them out.

  9. Beau Baldwin

    @Scott

    Announcing the hymns, and being visitor friendly is a good thing, and our priests do announce BCP numbers. I just sometimes get annoyed at the Catholic hymn announcements :”we invite you to join in singing our opening hymn ‘Gather Us In’ found in the Red Worship IV hymnal, number 836, number 8-3-6″.

    I think I can get by with hymn announcements at the beginning and end of mass, but announcing communion hymns drives me up the wall. In this most sacred of moments, nothing kills it more than “we invite you to sing our communion hymn…”. I guess I just enjoy the Episcopal Church in that the hymns just happen.

    There has been a post about this, but why do the majority of Catholic Churches not have a bulletin (service guide, order of Worship, etc.)? This would help with the elderly people who can’t see the hymn boards or who might not be able to hear the number…

    1. @Beau Baldwin – comment #10:
      A number of reasons why. Cost. Workload. Bad experiences with mimeographing songs illegally in the 70’s–the major publishers have “trained” us well to use hardcover hymnals.

      I look forward to the day when tablets will be cheaper than hardcover books and I can just program the music wirelessly into the people’s hands.

  10. Alan Johnson

    At the mass with the most music they aren’t introduced at all. There are numbers on the board and people have enough wit to find the hymn and start singing. Why is any more needed?

  11. Paul Inwood

    Having announcements is a courtesy to those who, as Scott implies, have no idea how the liturgy is structured nor when it’s time to sing something โ€” and that means the large majority of worshippers. It draws their attention to the fact that there’s a hymn board / bulletin / worship aid / whatever which will tell them the number.

    And, reverting to the reader’s original question, it’s worth remembering that the Latin cantus does not necessarily mean “chant” but rather “sung item“. Latin cognates are by no means always the best solution to translation difficulties โ€” Liturgiam Authenticam has a lot to answer for and the latest Missal is highly inaccurate in this regard!

    1. Linda Reid

      @Paul Inwood – comment #13:
      YES!! What Paul said.
      We announce as a hospitality – we use neither song, hymn nor chant – just the number in the hymnal or place in the worship aid. ” let us begin……”‘ ” As we prepare the gifts, we sing….” Etc.

  12. At my parish, we sing one hymn before the procession (which is accompanied by the introit) and one hymn during the recessional. In both cases, the organist begins and people look up at the hymn board. We only have one hymnal, so that’s not an issue.

    People aren’t stupid, no need to coddle them. They can look at the two numbers on the board (very top and very bottom) and figure it out.

  13. Beau Baldwin

    @Todd

    I’m not suggesting that the church get rid of hardback hymnals. At my church we still use the Hymnal 1982, but we have a worship aid where we list the hymns (title and number), print the ordinary (because the Gloria is so easy to find), print the readings, responses, psalm, choral anthem titles, etc. This is very helpful for the congregation. It’s interesting that we want to make these over the top hymn announcements for various reasons (inviting people to sing, people can’t see the numbers, etc.), but we won’t print a worship aid with specifics about the particular Sunday. Yes, printed worship aids do cost time and money, but they are very user friendly.

    @Paul

    Implying that the vast majority of worshipped have no idea what’s going on is silly. I would say that 80% of the Catholics in the pews on Sunday know exactly what’s going on.

    I agree with Ben. I don’t think we need to coddle people all the time, because they aren’t stupid. The cantor pleading with the congregation to pick up a book and sing can be a bit much.

    1. Scott Pluff

      @Beau Baldwin – comment #15:
      Perhaps 80% of the people know what’s going on. But that leaves 20%, which on a typical weekend would be 200 people in my parish. I’ll announce the hymns for the benefit of 200 people, considering these are the very people we are trying to welcome into the fold.

      Why are some churches perceived as warm and welcoming, while others seem cold and aloof? Details like this make a difference to people.

    2. Paul Inwood

      @Beau Baldwin – comment #15:

      You could be right, and perhaps 80% of the people do know in theory what is going on, but that still doesn’t equate to a signal in everyone’s head saying “Now is the time to pick up the hymn book”. Just watch the average assembly and see what proportion of folk are still picking up the book halfway through verse 1 when there’s no announcement. The purpose of the announcement is an act of courtesy, a reminder, and a way of ensuring that we all start together โ€” if we can’t sing together, how on earth can we pray together?

      The point of this thread was not to debate whether or not there should be an announcement but how to do it. I think that, in addition to phraseology, there is the whole question of tone of voice. Many announcements that I hear are bald and prosaic, even hectoring, and would certainly quality as intrusive. It is possible to use a quieter, more inviting tone of voice, especially at times like the distribution of Communion.

  14. Ron Jones

    The only problem I have with hymn boards is that there are always some people who simply can’t see them. They are either out of their line of sight or too far away to read the numbers. Hymn boards work well in particular types of interior design but not all. When I was working at a church that was 3/4 round, I had this problem. The issue is always one of hospitality. Having spent some time investigating my options, I devised the idea of a weekly bookmark to use along with our hymnals. It had the entire liturgy listed clearly in order. No one ever complained and I cut way back on paper waste each weekend (being good stewards includes taking care of the environment). I even got clever enough to color code them with the liturgical season. Hymnals were in the pews and the greeters handed out the bookmarks.
    My situation now is quite different. My present parish has a tradition of announcing songs, and lately (just before my arrival) using projected images on the walls flanking the sanctuary. I am all by myself at the 11:30 mass so the projector is out of the question. I simply say, “Please turn to number____, number _____.” I have been asked to speak louder and repeat the number for those who have trouble hearing. But I keep the words to a respectful minimum.

  15. Todd Orbitz

    The idea that Cantus doesn’t mean chant, but includes the word song is ridiculous, when the IGMR specifies the Graduale Romanum as the first option, relegating song or hymn to th he fourth.

    It is quite clear what it means.

    1. Anthony Ruff, OSB

      @Todd Orbitz – comment #18:
      No, it isn’t ridiculous, but if I may say so, your logic almost is.

      What the word ‘cantus’ means in Latin isn’t determined by how the IGMR (also known as the GIRM) uses the term! The term predates the IGMR. Paul Inwood is correct, in Latin it means “sung item.”

      And the IGMR, in point of fact, lists Graduale Romanum as the first but not the only option, so the ‘cantus’ can be any of the four – including the fourth, another hymn or song. So the IGMR works against your argument here because it includes not only the first option but also the others.

      And please, PLEASE, let’s not do the “hymns vs. propers” battle for the 100th time here. My comment is not meant to derail us onto that topic.

      awr

      awr

    2. Paul Inwood

      @Todd Orbitz – comment #18:

      Of course we aren’t the only language group to have difficulty with translation when it comes to the word cantus

      The French Chant d’Entreรฉ can occasionally mean “Entrance Chant” but 99% of the time it means “Entrance Song” or “Entrance Hymn” since the French seldom make use of Gregorian Chant propers. Some people object that the French for “song” is chanson, but that is a secular song. The technical term in French is cantique, which doesn’t mean “canticle” but rather “liturgical song”, but no one would ever refer to the Cantique d’Entreรฉ

  16. Karl Liam Saur

    no categorization of the sung item is necessary or particularly useful to the PIPs.

  17. I think hospitality is more the attitude of the greeters at the door, the parishioners in the pews (not glaring, frowning, or otherwise being mean), the clergy in the narthex before Mass, and maybe the overall spirit after Mass. Music people shouldn’t have to do the task appointed for others.

    I think I’ve posted this elsewhere on PT, but one of my choir directors instructs her group NOT to exchange the peace with one another. They are to leave the choir area and exchange with people they don’t know. She also has an experienced radio announcer and actor doing her announcements. If all were like him, I wouldn’t get trussed about them sticking to number, title, number.

  18. On one hand, I really like being able to invite people to sing and cue people in to what is coming next.

    However, I would love to go into the communion hymn without disrupting the action with an announcement. Some well-placed hymn boards and an educated assembly might be able to alleviate some of this. Maybe a combination of announcing and visual aids would help.

  19. James Mackay

    I follow a fairly standard British (Anglican) non-wordy custom, i.e., ‘We sing hymn number four hundred ninety, “Praise to the Lord, the Almighty,” number four nine zero.’ I find announcing ‘offertory hymn’ at the time of the offertory to be superfluous. I find phrases like ‘please join me in singing’ to be exclusionary, ‘please join in singing as you are able’ to be patronizing, and ‘please join in singing our offertory song at the preparation of the gifts’ to be verbose. The point of the announcement is to get the assembly singing, to not make the cantor or ensemble the focus, and to essentially stay out of the way. Clarity. Brevity.

  20. Fr. Jack Feehily

    Our parishioners sing very well because we offer them songs and settings that are singable. Before the procession begins, I greet the people warmly and direct them to the hymnal number as I invite them to stand. We have readable hymn boards and find no need for other invitations. Occasionally the music director chooses a preparation song which she knows and likes but is not a part of our repertoire. I will verbally point out that the song is very lovely though it’s not one we presently know, the cantor or choir will lead us until were ready to enter the song.

  21. Louie Macari

    In our cathedral the hymns are generally printed on a sheet together with other information such as the acclamation to be used after the consecration and music where relevant for parts of the Mass as there is a licence to do this for which there is a fee, so no breach of copyright. There is no announcement at all in this case. On occasions eg during holiday period when the sheets are not printed “hymn books” are used and there is an announcement from the organ loft of the “hymn number”

  22. Beau Baldwin

    As Louis notes in #26, at his Cathedral there is an order or worship with everything listed that will be sung for the service. When everything is clearly laid out, there doesn’t need to be all of these extraneous announcements and directions. My original post was basically noting the difference in Catholic Churches vs. most Episcopal Churches (the RC and Episcopal services are about 95% identical). Most Episcopal churches have bulletins that list the music and other responses in an easy to read and convenient format. We don’t have a lot of additional announcements, and I have seen individuals help visitors in the pews if they are lost.

    I know this doesn’t bother some, but it’s nice when the very first spoken words of the service are “in the name if the Father…” . I think a lot of announcements and extra directions are distracting from the service.

    A lot of the arguments for announcing the hymns on this thread are dressed up as being hospitable. This may be the case, but I don’t think this is the main issue. Most RC churches have several different books (hymnal, missallette, etc.), and it can be confusing to find things. Catholics seem to refuse to print orders of worship! I don’t know if it’s a combination of laziness or cost, or both. I think Catholics should move to orders of worship that would make things more streamlined, more visitor friendly, and they would help eliminate a bunch of extra spoken words from the service.

  23. Todd Orbitz

    Anthony Ruff, OSB : @Todd Orbitz โ€“ comment #18: What the word โ€˜cantusโ€™ means in Latin isnโ€™t determined by how the IGMR (also known as the GIRM) uses the term! The term predates the IGMR. Paul Inwood is correct, in Latin it means โ€œsung item.โ€ And the IGMR, in point of fact, lists Graduale Romanum as the first but not the only option, so the โ€˜cantusโ€™ can be any of the four โ€“ including the fourth, another hymn or song. So the IGMR works against your argument here because it includes not only the first option but also the others. awr awr

    But cantus definitively means chant.

    From the IGMR:

    Introitus

    47. Populo congregato, dum ingreditur sacerdos cum diacono et ministris, cantus ad introitum incipitur. Finis huius cantus est celebrationem aperire, unionem congregatorum fovere, eorumque mentem in mysterium temporis liturgici vel festivitatis introducere atque processionem sacerdotis ministrorumque comitari.

    48. Peragitur autem a schola et populo alternatim, vel simili modo a cantore et populo, vel totus a populo vel a schola sola. Adhiberi potest sive antiphona cum suo psalmo in Graduali Romano vel in Graduali simplici exstans, sive alius cantus, actioni sacrae, diei vel temporis indoli congruus, cuius textus a Conferentia Episcoporum sit approbatus.56

    Si ad introitum non habetur cantus, antiphona in Missali proposita recitatur sive a fidelibus, sive ab aliquibus ex ipsis, sive a lectore, sin aliter ab ipso sacerdote, qui potest etiam in modum monitionis initialis (cf. n. 31) eam aptare.

    Introitum is a word which has a definitive meaning, and cantus modifies it here. It means “chant”, and it IS referring to a specific proper.

    ____

    Now with 48, we specifically see that the Conference can modify…

  24. Todd Orbitz

    (continued from last)….

    Yes, the Bishops modified the GIRM, providing four options, but maintaining the priority of the universal law in accord with liturgical norms.

    If you would like a definitive ruling on this, I think I can turn one around from the CDW pretty quickly. In fact, I think I will.

    It’ll be signed by H.E. Llovera and the Secretary – who I think is still Art Roche.

    1. Anthony Ruff, OSB Avatar
      Anthony Ruff, OSB

      @Todd Orbitz – comment #33:
      No, I’m sorry, but the official GIRM in Latin has said “cantus” ever since Vatican II and this has meant all four options including vernacular hymns and songs. The four options are in the Latin document from Rome, not just in the adaptations of national conferences. So the Latin has used “cantus” to mean not just “chant” but all the things which may be sung, including vernacular hymns and songs. Rome doesn’t use the term the way you claim.
      awr

    2. Bill deHaas

      @Todd Orbitz – comment #33:
      Definitive ruling from the CDW – still waiting?

  25. Philip Spaeth

    This is where I find printed worship aids to be well worth their cost of both time and money. They go a long way toward liturgical hospitality without interupting the liturgy with awkward announcements. We use a worship aid with the songs reprinted (with permission) on it, in order with the other assembly responses, so that it is easy to follow for parishioners, rechurched, or unchurched folks alike. No juggling of hymnals. We make one music-related announcement at the start of Mass: “Let us stand as we sing together our Gathering Hymn.” Truth be told, I don’t think even this announcement is necessary, but, considering we do parish announcements before Mass, this seems to serve as a way of refocusing our attention from other goings on to the liturgy for which we have gathered.

    That being said, if you are in a situation such as described in the original post, I think something akin to, “For the Preparation of the Gifts, we will sing [#, title, #],” sounds like the best option. Probably best not to use words like “chant”, “song”, “hymn”, so as not to have folks get hung up on their connotations. That being said, if one of these words must be used, “hymn” is probably the most universal fit of the three in modern church parlance, and the least likely to cause any hang-ups.

    I will also say that I was recently on vacation and attended Mass in a parish in another diocese. They had a hymnal, hymnboard, and announced numbers prior to each hymn. I do not remember how the announcements were worded. I do remember that the priest and deacon were wonderful, the organist and cantor were very competent, the hymns selected were familiar ones, but the people barely sang! Not sure why. Perhaps it takes a congregation to lead a congregation, if you take my meaning. Seems like the parish we were visiting also had a new-ish pastor, so perhaps he will work on this, as he seemed to be a confident singer. Anyway, I am very much looking forward to leading my parish in robust singing this weekend!

    1. Peter McGuire

      I attended mass at the cathedral in Boston and no one sang or spoke in respected to the priest.

  26. Jonathan Day

    Todd, cantus can also mean ‘birdsong’, or the crowing of a cockerel. As Anthony says, it simply refers to something sung.

    The similarity with English ‘chant’ is yet another false friend.

  27. Paul Inwood

    At the risk of prolonging this discussion still further,
    (1) cantus means “sung item” โ€” no dispute possible about that;
    (2) cantus ad introitum can mean “Introit Chant” but it can also mean “song [sung item] at the introit or entrance”.

  28. Todd Orbitz

    Fun, fun. I know what the IGMR HAS said since 1970. I spent years working with this as my base text.

    Perhaps you can refer to Notitiae’s Dubia from DOL to try to prove a point, but we’ll get a real answer. And yes, it may take a few months, but it will come, and in a move authoritative format than a dubium

    It was also asserted that the Pian rite had been abrogated for over 40 -years, then magically, we find out it hadn’t been.

    We need the definitive ruling.

    1. @Todd Orbitz – comment #39:
      Yawn. We don’t need a definitive ruling. This is a web site, not a parish or diocese. End result: you will find a community more to your liking and other commentators will guide or merely celebrate their liturgy as they wish, singing songs mostly. Hymns maybe a bit less, and chants here and there. The ruling may even be irrelevant because of the way the question was framed.

      There are reasons Gregorian chant faded into near-oblivion, and there are reasons for its return in many scattered places. If the movement had a hope of success, it might have been tried seventy to a hundred years ago. But it wasn’t. Its early 20th-century proponents did not have evangelization and spreading the Gospel in mind. Any movement too much focused on musical style, performance, and even the “correct” interpretation from above is doomed, I think, to frustration and failure.

      What spreads the faith and grows it? Better texts inspired by the Scripture, especially the Lectionary. Better trained music leaders who can put life into any music they present to their assemblies. Focusing too much on the particulars of sacred music is a form of idolatry. Focusing on the hearts of believers and what will sustain and inspire people, regardless of genre, is what is needed.

      1. Michael H Marchal

        You must have missed Catholic grade school in the 50’s. Every morning five days a week at 8 am we sang High Mass in Gregorian chant–with an interlinear translation. From my earliest years I was actively participating so the conciliar changes were just the next step to me. To this day I read neums better than notes.

  29. Fred Crouch

    I’d prefer a worship aid over announcements- and I see those more often when in sub in at parishes with a full time music director liturgist and then the announcing can be limited or non-existent. But there’s time and cost involved and a smaller parish may not have the personnel to prepare. So most parishes need the announcements. Shorter is better – but some parishes do have a choice of hymnals so that information has to be communicated as well. Hymn boards with numbers work best in small churches otherwise unless there are multiple hymn boards – those in back or on the sides cannot see. I like to use the word “hymn” even with contemporary music as I believe the common definition of “hymn” is a little more precise (I.e., it is a sacred song) than the generic “song” and I hope reminds us that what we are singing is different from music we hear in the car or on our iPods.

  30. John Webber

    We now use the third edition of the Roman Missal. In it we find the General Instruction (GIRM). – the universal church instructing us in how to celebrate Mass. In each of the three editions we can turn our attention to the Entrance, the Offertory and the Communion sections to find instruction concerning the music. What is interesting is the word “chant” was used exclusively in the English Translation of the GIRM (1st edition 1970 and 1971 and 3rd edition (2002) but in the second edition (1975) the word “song” was used extensively. Curiously the LATIN EDITION of the GIRM had NO change in the wording throughout all three editions in reference to music. The GIRM consistently offered four options – for what should be sung at Entrance, offertory and communion. (1) the Antiphon and its psalm from the Graduale Romanum as set to music there or another setting,(2) the antiphon and psalm from Graduale Simplex for the season, (3) a chant from another collection of psalms and antiphons approved by the national conference (4) another liturgical chant approved by the national conference or the local bishop. This is the gist of the current third edition English wording. HOWEVER for 25 years the 2nd edition prevailed. Item number 4 read – another liturgical SONG…Thus legitimizing the prevailing practice (the use of hymns and songs)…. Addressing this overreach – This “making the practice form the rule” interpretation, was one of the reasons for the publication of the 3rd edition. By the time the 3rd edition came out Liturgical Music Industry empires had been built. With the change of a single word – “Song” – back to the word “Chant” that empire was forced to embark on a campaign to re-imagine the word “chant” back into “song” – in the minds of its consumers – so the third edition would continue to support its business model. Look at the wording of any current Liturgy planner for confirmation of that reality. In this grand industry saving plan in 25 years or probably a lot less – the word “chant” will, by the nature of persistent common usage, be etymologically converted from its current precise meaning in catholic music culture into anything they need it to mean.

    1. Br. Darren O'Reilly

      This is entirely a false issue (and one that only exists in English), given that the word for song in Latin is ‘cantus’, and the verb to sing is cantare (in French ‘chanter’). Liturgists of a bygone age in England adopted the French word in their monasteries (all monasteries in the British Isles from 11th century onwards came via the Norman dynasty, whose lexicon was borrowed heavily in the publication of the Book of Common Prayer of the Anglican communion). In fact, the error is probably that in order to set Church music apart from folk music, two words existed in English when they both mean the same thing (e.g. Gregorian Chant means Gregorian Song). If I was to ask an Italian whether there is a difference between canto or canto they’d look at me strangely, and probably would even laugh in my face to this day. To argue any difference is to encourage some conspiracy theory, rather than the valid translation of the original Latin either way.


Posted

in

, , ,

by

Tags:

Discover more from Home

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading