• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Corpus Christi Watershed

Pope Saint Paul VI (3 April 1969): “Although the text of the Roman Gradual—at least that which concerns the singing—has not been changed, the Entrance antiphons and Communions antiphons have been revised for Masses without singing.”

  • Donate
  • Our Team
    • Our Editorial Policy
    • Who We Are
    • How To Contact Us
    • Sainte Marie Bulletin Articles
    • Jeff’s Mom Joins Fundraiser
  • Pew Resources
    • Brébeuf Catholic Hymnal
    • Jogues Illuminated Missal
    • KYRIALE • Saint Antoine Daniel
    • Campion Missal, 3rd Edition
    • Repository • “Spanish Music”
    • Ordinary Form Feasts (Sainte-Marie)
  • MUSICAL WEBSITES
    • René Goupil Gregorian Chant
    • Noël Chabanel Psalms
    • Nova Organi Harmonia (2,279 pages)
    • Roman Missal, 3rd Edition
    • Catechism of Gregorian Rhythm
    • Father Enemond Massé Manuscripts
    • Lalemant Polyphonic
  • Miscellaneous
    • Site Map
    • Secrets of the Conscientious Choirmaster
    • “Wedding March” for lazy organists
    • Emporium Kevin Allen
    • Saint Jean de Lalande Library
    • Sacred Music Symposium 2023
    • The Eight Gregorian Modes
    • Gradual by Pothier’s Protégé
    • Seven (7) Considerations
Views from the Choir Loft

So, Who Is the “Leader of Song” Anyway?

Richard J. Clark · April 26, 2013

HE VALUE OF GOOD AND TRUSTED cantors cannot be underestimated. Of inestimable value is not only a cantor with a well-trained voice, but one who sings with prayerful humility. Although at times, the best-trained voice may not be the best-suited singer for proclaiming the Word. (e.g., a wonderful opera singer) Instead, a person with clear diction and pitch delivered with prayerful humility is ideal.

That being said, is the cantor the “leader of song”? It may be surprising that there are a few answers to this question, but it leads towards one ideal.

The role of cantor as “leader of song” will be relegated to history as a late 20th Century Roman Catholic invention. Attend any Protestant service with a strong tradition of hymnody, and the concept of someone standing in the front of the church (amplified by a microphone, and sometimes waving their arms no less) is both foreign and highly unnecessary. In fact, the concept is downright silly. (Additionally, that Roman Catholic hymnals do not include the harmonization for the congregation is another concept foreign to most other denominations.)

My own experience some years ago directing the choir at the Boston Temple, S.D.A Church was a prime example. The congregation sang in parts and as loudly as possible—imperfectly, but with joyful exuberance. The organ could not play loudly enough! During hymns, the choir could not be heard, as they were just singing as part of the congregation. (a light bulb should go off here…) A cantor on a microphone would in fact be distracting and would even discourage the congregation to sing. (another light bulb should be going off…)

The U.S. Bishop’s 2007 Document Sing to the Lord: Music in Divine Worship states the following:

31. When the choir is not exercising its particular role, (see no. 30.) it joins the congregation in song. The choir’s role in this case is not to lead congregational singing, but to sing with the congregation, which sings on its own or under the leadership of the organ or other instruments.

So, who or what is the leader of song, especially as when it comes to hymns? The first answer there is usually easy enough: The “leader of song” is the organ—not a cantor or the choir. The organ, when played with solid and balanced principal stops that speak clearly into the nave, is the leader. It is the supporter. It is the conductor. It must breathe with the people. It must breathe with the architecture. Most important to note, here is that the organ is NOT accompanying a choir or a cantor. The organ is accompanying the congregation. It is fitting that an instrument whose sounding board is the ceiling, walls and floor would be accompanying the vast assembly of people, not an individual or isolated group.

But, in an ideal situation, there is yet another answer to this question: Who (or what) is the “Leader of Song?”

Here is a somewhat extreme example: I have been playing for the Jesuit Community at Boston College for many years. With anywhere from 50-70 priests in attendance every week, they are the loudest singing congregation one might ever play for. For a time, they were not only the loudest, they were indeed the slowest.

St. Mary’s Chapel is in many ways ideal for congregational singing. There is no carpeting; nothing but wood and marble. The room and ceiling are intimate enough so the sound comes back to a congregation so they can hear each other, yet large enough for some ambience. Furthermore, it has a gem of a one manual, eight rank Flentrop organ in the gallery. Small, but clear in tone, its principals are balanced, speak clearly into the nave, filling the room.

These Jesuits love to sing. But when they sing, as a group, they will let you know what the tempo will be, which often was slower than I might like. Working with a cantor one day, she told me what tempo she would like. I responded that her tempo was very nice, and we could start that way. However, I warned her that once the refrain began, “they will let you know quite clearly what the new tempo will be.“ And so it was.

So, who is the leader of song in this case?: Incontrovertibly, the congregation.

Of course, the organ is the glue that keeps them together. Over the years I have slowly gotten the Jesuit community used to faster, moderate tempi. However, this example raises an excellent point. When playing hymns, is the organist sensitive to the congregation? Is a slight adjustment in tempo or breathing necessary? This does not imply making sudden or drastic changes. However, it is prudent to have a close ear on the first few stanzas. Do they want to slow down or speed up a little bit? Do they want to breathe more liberally? In other words, using “impeccable artistic taste” may not necessary be the best approach.

The same is true of unaccompanied chants. While introducing the ICEL Chants in 2011, (which were mandatory for a time in the Archdiocese of Boston) the congregations at both St. Cecilia and St. Mary’s Chapel were quick to learn them. However, they often forced the choir to slow down the tempo. (This is a first-class problem I am happy to deal with.) I had to be sensitive to this and make adjustments, lest the congregation be discouraged and give up singing altogether. Then in time, as they became more familiar with the chants, they sang them a touch faster.

So, what is the final answer to the question of “Who is the Leader of Song”? With congregations that have been musically nourished and therefore sing well, the “leader of song” is no one thing or person. Ideally, it is an act of chamber music. We listen to each other. We respond to each other. (To quote the great choral director Brian Jones, “We have two ears but only one mouth. There is a lesson in that!”) Worshiping together, we raise our voices to God—united as one voice.

Opinions by blog authors do not necessarily represent the views of Corpus Christi Watershed.

Filed Under: Articles Last Updated: January 1, 2020

Subscribe

It greatly helps us if you subscribe to our mailing list!

* indicates required

About Richard J. Clark

Richard J. Clark is the Director of Music of the Archdiocese of Boston and the Cathedral of the Holy Cross.—(Read full biography).

Primary Sidebar

Corpus Christi Watershed

President’s Corner

    PDF Comparison Chart • “Serious Problems with the Lectionary Translation”
    EARS BEFORE truly revolutionary changes were introduced by the post-conciliar reformers, Evelyn Waugh wrote (on 16 August 1964) to John Cardinal Heenan: “I think that a vociferous minority has imposed itself on the hierarchy and made them believe that a popular demand existed where there was in fact not even a preference.” We ask the kind reader— indeed, we beg you—to realize that those of us born in the 1940s and 1950s had no cognizance of Roman activities during the 1960s and 1970s. We were concerned with making sure we had the day’s bus fare, graduating from high school, taking care of our siblings, learning a trade, getting a job, courting a spouse. We questioned neither the nuns nor the Church.1 Do not believe for one instant any of us were following the liturgical machinations of Cardinal Lercaro or Father Bugnini in real time. Setting The Stage • To never question or resist Church authorities is praiseworthy. On the other hand, when a scandalous situation persists for decades, it must be brought into focus. Our series will do precisely that as we discuss the Lectionary Scandal from a variety of angles. We don’t do this to attack the Catholic Church. Our goal is bringing to light what’s been going on, so it can be fixed once and for all. Our subject is extremely knotty and difficult to navigate. Its complexity helps explain why the situation has persisted for such a long time.2 But if we immediately get “into the weeds” we’ll lose our audience. Therefore, it seems better to jump right in. So today, we’ll explore the legality of selling these texts. A Word On Copyright • Suppose Susie modifies a paragraph by Edgar Allan Poe. That doesn’t mean ipso facto she can assert copyright on it. If Susie takes a picture of a Corvette and uses Photoshop to color the tires blue, that doesn’t mean she henceforth “owns” all Corvettes in America. But when it comes to Responsorial Psalm translations, certain parties have been asserting copyright over them, selling them for a profit, and bullying publishers vis-à-vis hymnals and missals. Increasingly, Catholics are asking whether these translations are truly under copyright—because they are identical (or substantially identical) to other translations.3 Example After Example • Our series will provide copious examples supporting our claims. Sometimes we’ll rely on the readership for assistance, because—as we’ve stressed—our subject’s history couldn’t be more convoluted. There are countless manuscripts (in Greek, Hebrew, and Latin) we don’t have access to, so it would be foolish for us to claim that our observations are somehow the ‘final word’ on anything. Nevertheless, we demand accountability. Catholics in the pews are the ones who paid for all this. We demand to know who specifically made these decisions (which impact every English-speaking Catholic) and why specifically certain decisions were made. The Responsorial Psalms used in America are—broadly speaking—stolen from the hard work of others. In particular, they borrowed heavily from Father Cuthbert Lattey’s 1939 PSALTER TRANSLATION:
    *  PDF Download • COMPARISON CHART —We thank the CCW staff for technical assistance with this graph.
    Analysis • Although certain parties have been selling (!!!) that translation for decades, the chart demonstrates it’s not a candidate for copyright since it “borrows” or “steals” or “rearranges” so much material from other translations, especially the 1939 translation by Father Cuthbert Lattey. What this means in layman’s terms is that individuals have been selling a translation under false pretenses, a translation they don’t own (although they claim to). To make RESTITUTION, all that money will have to be returned. A few years ago, the head of ICEL gave a public speech in which he said they give some of “their” profits to the poor. While almsgiving is a good thing, it cannot justify theft. Our Constant Theme • Our series will be held together by one thread, which will be repeated constantly: “Who was responsible?” Since 1970, the conduct of those who made a profit by selling these sacred texts has been repugnant. Favoritism was shown toward certain entities—and we will document that with written proof. It is absolutely essential going forward that the faithful be told who is making these decisions. Moreover, vague justifications can no longer be accepted. If we’re told they are “making the translations better,” we must demand to know what specifically they’re doing and what specific criteria they’re following. Stay Tuned • If you’re wondering whether we’ll address the forthcoming (allegedly) Lectionary and the so-called ABBEY PSALMS AND CANTICLES, have no fear. We’ll have much to say about both. Please stay tuned. We believe this will end up being the longest series of articles ever submitted to Corpus Christi Watershed. To be continued. ROBERT O’NEILL Former associate of Monsignor Francis “Frank” P. Schmitt at Boys Town in Nebraska JAMES ARNOLD Formerly associated w/ King’s College, Cambridge A convert to the Catholic Church, and distant relative of J. H. Arnold MARIA B. Currently serves as a musician in the Roman Catholic Diocese of Charlotte. Those aware of the situation in her diocese won’t be surprised she chose to withhold her last name.
    1 Even if we’d been able to obtain Roman journals such as NOTITIAE, none of them contained English translations. But such an idea would never have occurred to a high school student or a college student growing up in the 1960s. 2 A number of shell corporations claim to own the various biblical translations mandated for Roman Catholics. They’ve made millions of dollars selling (!) these indulgenced texts. If time permits, we hope to enumerate these various shell corporations and explain: which texts they claim to own; how much they bring in each year; who runs them; and so forth. It would also be good to explore the morality of selling these indulgenced texts for a profit. Furthermore, for the last fifty years these organizations have employed several tactics to manipulate and bully others. If time permits, we will expose those tactics (including written examples). Some of us—who have been working on this problem for three decades—have amassed written documentation we’ll be sharing that demonstrates behavior at best “shady” and at worst criminal. 3 Again, we are not yet examining the morality of selling (!) indulgenced texts to Catholics mandated to use those same translations.
    —Guest Author
    “Music List” • 17th in Ordinary Time (Year C)
    Some have expressed interest in perusing the ORDER OF MUSIC I prepared for the 17th Sunday in Ordinary Time (27 July 2025). If such a thing interests you, feel free to download it as a PDF file. As always, the Responsorial Psalm, Gospel Acclamation, and Mass Propers for this Sunday are conveniently stored at the the feasts website.
    —Jeff Ostrowski
    Communion • “Ask & You Shall Receive”
    All of the chants for 27 July 2025 have been added to the feasts website, as usual under a convenient “drop down” menu. The COMMUNION ANTIPHON (both text and melody) are exceedingly beautiful and ancient.
    —Jeff Ostrowski

Quick Thoughts

    Pope Pius XII Hymnal?
    Have you ever heard of the Pope Pius XII Hymnal? It’s a real book, published in the United States in 1959. Here’s a sample page so you can verify with your own eyes it existed.
    —Corpus Christi Watershed
    “Hybrid” Chant Notation?
    Over the years, many have tried to ‘simplify’ plainsong notation. The O’Fallon Propers attempted to simplify the notation—but ended up making matters worse. Dr. Karl Weinmann tried to do the same in the time of Pope Saint Pius X by replacing each porrectus. You can examine a specimen from his edition and see whether you agree he complicated matters. In particular, look at what he did with éxsules fílii Hévae.
    —Corpus Christi Watershed
    Antiphons Don’t Match?
    A reader wants to know why the Entrance and Communion antiphons in certain publications deviate from what’s prescribed by the GRADUALE ROMANUM published after Vatican II. Click here to read our answer. The short answer is: the Adalbert Propers were never intended to be sung. They were intended for private Masses only (or Masses without music). The “Graduale Parvum,” published by the John Henry Newman Institute of Liturgical Music in 2023, mostly uses the Adalbert Propers—but sometimes uses the GRADUALE text: e.g. Solemnity of Saints Peter and Paul (29 June).
    —Corpus Christi Watershed

Random Quote

“Both of these appointments—of Cardinal Lercaro and Father Bugnini—to key positions on the Consilium made it possible for voices to be heard that could not be heard during the proceedings of the Council, and likewise silenced others.”

— Alfons Cardinal Stickler, Vatican II ‘peritus’

Recent Posts

  • PDF Comparison Chart • “Serious Problems with the Lectionary Translation”
  • “Music List” • 17th in Ordinary Time (Year C)
  • Flor Peeters In A Weird Mood?
  • Communion • “Ask & You Shall Receive”
  • Jeff’s Mother Joins Our Fundraiser

Subscribe

Subscribe

* indicates required

Copyright © 2025 Corpus Christi Watershed · Isaac Jogues on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Corpus Christi Watershed is a 501(c)3 public charity dedicated to exploring and embodying as our calling the relationship of religion, culture, and the arts. This non-profit organization employs the creative media in service of theology, the Church, and Christian culture for the enrichment and enjoyment of the public.

The election of Pope Leo XIV has been exciting, and we’re filled with hope for our apostolate’s future!

But we’re under pressure to transfer our website to a “subscription model.”

We don’t want to do that. We believe our website should remain free to all.

Our president has written the following letter:

President’s Message (dated 30 May 2025)

Are you able to support us?

clock.png

Time's up