The Recovering Choir Director

Slight caveat:

Often liturgy committees or commissions are established as arms or subgroups of the parish pastoral council, along with other groups (outreach, religious education, etc.).

While they have no final canonical authority, as in most things they may wield as much functional authority as the pastor desires or wants.

Peace, all.

I think it’s a bit over-the-top to consider parish liturgy committees as canonical entities. The mission statement of the one at my parish clearly states its advisory role to the pastor and staff, and its accountabililty to the parishioners.

An important aspect to consider, as with all parish lay involvement: the quality of the work a parish group does aligns generally well with the respect they are given. If people want liturgical competence on a committee, it would be important to seriously consider advice coming from such a body. If a committee is deemed useless by the powers-that-be, then eventually the membership will rise or fall to the level of expectation.

Whether with a liturgical committee or without, the pastor remains the chief liturgist of the parish.

He is ultimately responsible for what the liturgical committee does. And, like it or not, he can change his mind about things.

When our pastor first gave me permission to sing the Jubilate Deo Ordinary for our Sunday Mass, my organist and I were thrilled beyond words.

After three months of what we thought as the first step toward the restoration of the sense of the sacred in our celebration of the Liturgy, it was over. Some influential aging hippies in the Liturgy Committee complained that many in our congregation could not stand the Latin Gloria (De Angelis) because:

1. They don’t understand the words.

2. It was too long for people to be standing. (Even in the pre-Vatican 2 days, people could sit through a long, laborious, polyphonic Gloria.)

3. They hate anything Latin.

I bargained with out pastor that if I could produce a few persons in our congregation who actually like Latin, would be reconsider?

He said no. The horrors of all horrors, he said he didn’t want to be identified with Lefebvres and his minions - no matter how remote.

He said that Latin should only be used during solemn Masses in basilicas and cathedrals and during pontifical Masses, but not during regular Sunday Mass in our small parish.

That our parish, being a mission-type, multi-ethnic, “neighborhood” church, it is not authorized to have any Mass or parts of the Mass celebrated in Latin. That the English Mass must be in English and the Spanish Mass in Spanish.

There was an elderly priest who tried to explain on my behalf that Vatican II does allow for the use of some Latin in the English Liturgy, but it was obvious that I lost the battle - not because the Liturgical Committee (of which I am a member) defeated me - but because the Pastor ruled so.

It was most unfair. But I decided I’d take my lumps. At least I have a free hand in choosing the English hymns for our liturgy.

Moral of the story: It’s still the Pastor’s turf, and rightfully so.

I am in a similar position, but so far the pastor is allowing me free rein — I am terrified lest the “aging hippies” convince him that they are in the majority and that chant is to be squelched.

I am going slowly.
Only two bit of Latin for the congregation in the past four months (Adeste Fideles, and O Sanctissima,) but lots of “Englished” gregorian.

More member of the congregation have voiced their approbation than their displeasure to me, and since we are a cranky, out-spoken lot, I think I’m winning the battle so far, but the tension at the liturgy meetings? You could cut it with a knife.

Oddly, the most vociferous opponent of the chanted psalms is a dreadful cantor who always sounded embarrasing bad on the sugary Haugen pslams since her range is so limited and intonation so bad, and she sounds quite creditable on the chant.