I absolutely love the Dubois "Adoramus Te Christe"! My choir's getting their taste of it this coming Holy Week (we're finally growing to where we can do some anthems and such - not really big yet, but they're starting).

This weekend we're pulling off Holst's "Let all mortal flesh". Nice.

Peace
BMP

I absolutely love the Dubois "Adoramus Te". I use it during Holy Week (Palm Sunday and Good Friday in particular).

Nice lineup all-around.

Peace
BMP

So, here's my question: Are the archaic titles and the Latin titles really helpful in this context? Don't they make it more difficult for most people who are using the standard books and resources? What's the point behind using them instead of the titles in the US version of the GIRM?

Why call it an Introit when it's a hymn and not a psalm that accompanies the entrance procession?

Did one of the deacons read the gospel? (I hope that is the case, since it was spoken, but I realize that's not been always observed at St. Edward in the past.)

Why 2 hymns at the preparation of the table and gifts? (To cover the collection of money?)

Was it possible for the assembly to participate in the "Communion motet" as the GIRM envisions? (I'm not clear if this was a second Communion chant due to the size of the assembly or the communal praise after all have received...)

It's a wonderful model of a well-celebrated solemnity, with judicious use of sung prayer, even though I find the Latinisms and archaicisms unfriendly.

Actually the latinisms make it a bit more user friendly in this multi-lingual context. Besides, a welcome of tradition should never be considered as unfriendly, unless one is unfriendly to tradition.

For the preparation of the Gifts, the choir sang the motet for the collection and then the congregation sang the hymn for the procession.

At Communion, the motet was inserted as a verse of the song, so the congregation sang refrain with other verses before and after the motet.

The congregation did their part well. That they did not sing the motet can never implied that they did not "participate."

Just because a congregation is listening and not singing doesn't constitute non-participation, Maureen. As for the terminology Father used, all of it was proper. Note too that during the "Preparation of the Altar and Gifts", that, according to the GIRM, the "Offertory Chant" (not Presenation or Preparation Song) is sung. That is - action taking place at the altar: "Preparation", song being sung: "Offertory". Father has seen my lists, I'm sure. I *blatantly* use those terms for that reason. I also believe at the beginning of Mass, "Introit" or "Entrance" (not "Gathering") is proper. "Gathering" should have taken place (hopefully) before Mass starts. "Sending Forth" is what Father (or in this case, Deacon) did before the Closing hymn by saying "Ite Missa Est". Sure we still sing (by custom, not by GIRM) to accompany the recessional - then we "go in peace". It's not like "Go! Mass is over! Get outta here!" :-))

Hope this helps.
Peace
BMP

I'd like to stay away from the "participating by listening" discussion. I have a narrower concern in mind--following, as best we can, what the GIRM says about singing, and what it may be recommending.

RANT MODE ON:

It's true that the GIRM alloww the people to alternate with the choir in the communion hymn or even for the choir to take it over. I can't tell if the last sentence in par 87 is for the US only or not, par 87 starts with US adaptations to allow metrical hymns.

As with any Roman document, the GIRM seems at times to come close to contradicting itself. This is one of those places -- this last provision in par 87 seems clearly contradictory to the gradiloquet statements in par 86 about the communion chant expressing "the communicants' union in spirit by means of the unity of their voices, to show joy of heart, and to highlight more clearly the 'communitarian' nature of the procession to receive Communion."

However, allowable doesn't always mean OK on a regular basis. If one ascribes to the viewpoint, often advocated by liturgists when it suits, that the options in the GIRM are listed in a preferential order, chore alone comes out last and thus least preferred. (I've never seen this principle actually written in a document...I would love to see it if it exists.)

There just isn't much place for choir show pieces during the eucharistic liturgy.

Wild generalization here, but based on experience: The period of prayer after all have received communion is one of places most often taken over by choir directors who don't know the GIRM or don't like what it says, or have choirs that push for performance opportunities. There are no options in the GIRM for singing except by the entire congregation.

"Was it possible for the assembly to participate in the 'Communion motet' as the GIRM envisions?"

Someone may envision that, but the GIRM does not, so far as I know.

My copy says "Pro cantu ad communionem adhiberi potest aut antiphona ex Graduali Romano sive cum psalmo sive sola, aut antiphona cum psalmo e Graduali simplici, aut alius cantus congruus a Conferentia Episcoporum approbatus. CANTATUR SIVE A SCHOLA SOLA, sive a schola vel cantore cum populo." [emphasis mine]

The English translation with the US adaptations uses the phrase "This is sung either by the choir alone or...."

It seems to me that singing by a schola with no congregational singing is not only licit, it is the FIRST option envisioned by those responsible for the General Instruction.

I didn't know you could transfer St Gaspar's memorial to a Sunday -- what a great idea. (I knew you could do that with the feast of the titular patron of a parish.)
I'm assuming any parish staffed by CPPS may do that?
I may suggest that to Fr. Kalicky for next year.
I wonder, could we do it for Maria de Mattias's memorial as well?

I really like that Proulx setting of the Ordinary, but I can't introduce it here.

"Don't they make it more difficult for most people who are using the standard books and resources?"

Maureen, not trying to be argumentative, (although my husband says I'm seldom anything else,) but what are "the standard books and resources," don't you think they vary from place to place?

Using the Latin titles seems to me the best bet for being most widely understood.

Unlike Maureen, I don't mind chiming in on the "participating by listening" discussion. There is often a dange rof the parish's musical "culture" overtaking and horning in on the proper role of the assembly. I actually don't see this in Fr Keyes' listing.

A choir does indeed need to flex its musical muscles by singing special items at times when listening is more appropriate. But it might be that the organist might want to concede prelude or postlude material from time to time to assist in this.

The prescription for full, active, and conscious participation is echoed in many of the Vatican II liturgy documents, not just SC. Choirs performing during Mass on a regular basis and at the exclusion of the prescriptions of the GIRM should be avoided. If the musicians want a concert, do that instead.

One last thought: the parish's dedication anniversary is of a higher importance than patronal feasts and also can (and perhaps should) supercede the nearest Ordinary Sunday when possible.

Thanks, Todd.

The parish anniversary of dedication is in the middle of the Easter Season and and is often on Easter itself. Also the Spring is very busy with First Communion, Confirmation, etc. It is also an anniversary that has NEVER been celebrated here. Also before my arrival it was no common practice to celebrate Gaspar or Edward on a Sunday. The fact that both celebrations are in October presents some difficulties, but we decided to celebrate them two weeks apart and place the annual Parish Feast/Fiesta in the center of the celebration. So this past Saturday we had a grand feast which raised nearly $22000 and then on Sunday we celebrtaed the Feast of St. Gaspar. The feast marked our celebration of Edward's 1000th Birthday, The parish 125th anniversary.

It's solemnities that transfer -- which includes Gaspar and the Precious Blood for the CPPS, but not Maria de Mattias.

The patron is a solemnity for the parish, as is the anniversary of dedication, so that's why they can transfer in Ordinary Time. Proper solemnities are rank 4 in the table found in the General Norms for the Liturgical Year and Calendar. Sundays of Advent, Lent, and Easter have rank 2 and thus take precedence (available on the internet)

As far as resources: I think most have access to the official translation of the GIRM in the language in which they celebrate the liturgy, with the specific adaptations by their conference of bishops. I'll bet the translated GIRM is more commonly available than resources in Latin. If Father Jeff feels Latin works within his international community, that may be so for all but the USA folks. But for the Pilipinos and Spanish speakers at St. Edward, I really wonder if Latinisms aren't a barrier unless the terms are close cognates in their languages.

Happy presbyteral ordination anniversary, Father Jeff! If I remember accurately, Oct 26 is the 15th anniversary!

Nope, 14th anniversary. This year was my 15th anniversary of profession/incorporation into the CPPS.

Fr Keyes, I was thinking of that when I noted your parish's two Sunday feasts. The Missal proscribes the parish's dedication anniversary to be celebrated on the last Sunday in October when it would normally fall during one of the four main seasons.

It strikes me that moving readings off three of October's feasts might be a pastoral/liturgical problem. But then again, maybe not. Starting this all in one year could be ...

"The Missal proscribes the parish's dedication anniversary to be celebrated on the last Sunday in October"

Proscribes or prescribes?

Maureen, thanks.