Ruthenian cantors currently use a variety of source materials for worship based on eparchial directives, local practices, etc. Not all have the opportunity to attend Cantor's Institute sessions, but some might benefit by having an alternative place to gather to discuss their work for the Church.

What do Forum members think about having a seperate grouping for Cantors to use on the Forum? Could the Forum accomodate it?

I like the idea. From a technical standpoint I see no impediment.

Since most cantors in parishes are volunteers, it seems that sometimes their efforts are diminished by the view that they're only volunteers. It is a vocation that isn't always recognised as such. It seems almost as much a backlash from the days of professional/paid cantors who were held in high esteem.

As a cantor, I have had parishioners complain about my performance. Some days I am in good form some days i'm not. As a volunteer vocational cantor I endure the criticism. Other times I have heard praise for my role in worship which I humbly accept.

While we as cantors are not all perfect in pitch, diction, musical ability and sight reading, We chant because we want to maintain a tradition in our church and because "somebody" has to do it.


Steve

One of the things I have wondered about is the possibility of a week long Cantor's Institute. (say a Monday through Saturday once a year). Since many of us do not live anywhere near Pittsburgh, could the Metropolia sponsor such an event and have the parishes pay for their Cantors to go. The once a month program just isn't realistic for everyone!

My two cents -

Gordo, Cantor

Good chanters and good choir directors do the Church an immeasurably great service, all too often at their own personal expense - but then, as one of the more amusing cynics of our time often comments "no good deed ever goes unpunished"!
It's a pleasure to concur that more attention must be given to providing opportunities for chanters and choir directors to learn more and to compare notes (oops - sorry about that!) with one another; this should certainly be organized and even financed by the Church itself.
One suggestion occurs to me: it would be well to spend some time studying chant systems other than the one that the particular chanter normally uses. That will certainly broaden the chanter's knowledge of the Church's treasures and may very well help the chanter learn the Byzantine tradition better. Besides, a bit of cross-fertilization is often worthwhile.

Saint Romanos the Melodist, pray for us!

Incognitus

I set up an discussion group back several years back ( "Prostopinije", at groups.yahoo.com) for Byzantine Catholic cantors, as successor to the CANTOR-L list from the mid-90's. Several well-known Orthodox cantors and musicologists are also members, and we would certainly welcome discussion there of "how it works on the ground" (mostly we deal with questions of where to find melodies, etc.)

But I would have no objection at all to a cantor's forum here (or elsewhere) as well.

Yours in Christ,

Jeff Mierzejewski

But with limited budgets, how will the lawncare people and parish secretaries get paid? Ignoring eparchial statutes regarding cantor stipends, isn't the maintenance of our temples more important than what goes on inside them?

I am looking for a place where cantors can discuss their work, without necessarily discussing conflicts like the merits of one resource versus another within a parish.

Limited access could also help cantors be more candid with each other without having to worry about stepping on anyone's political toes.

Jim Sprinkle, Cantor
Gilbert, AZ

Good luck, my friend.

Well, even where a resource conflict is at work, there might be a cantor who had already encountered the problem, and had a way to fix it.

We even have directors of cantor institutes who rarely if ever use cantors at eparchial liturgies. Should we include 'choir' music in this too? Trying to "fix" what the church ignored and let go for so many years since they ordained the last cantor can be a challenge.

But I know you are up to it. You think positively and have hope. Have fun like the rest of us did. See you at the pub to discuss. The first three are on me.

Joe

Although I am not a cantor, I am an organist, and so understand music - granted, instrumental music much more so than vocal music. I would like to find resources to improve the singing in our liturgies. We have one talented part-time cantor, and others not so talented. However, there has to be some information out there somewhere that would be helpful.

Where there is Life, there is Hope.

ByzanTN, there are recordings on the Cantor Institute website that can be accessed for listening and downloading, and CDs have been available from the Byzantine Seminary Press. Now and again a parish produces a CD as a fund-raiser as well.

Sheet music resources include the Cantor's Institute as well as some parish websites, such as Patronage Church in Maryland.

As for instruction materials per se, I don't know of any. Voice lessons and academic music courses seem to be the only other alternatives, apart from reading the von Gardner books on the history of Russian church music.

And the first three are on me.

Joe

Caelum, I inquired a while back about a week long Cantor Institute, but received no response. Not sure why.

You presume the decisions are made by the "directors of cantor institutes" as to eparchial liturgies. I would think the Eparch would have the final say of cantor/choir for an eparchial liturgy.

I had not meant to incite a negative verbal onslaught in my post regarding changing views of the vocation of cantor by both clergy and laity. I was NOT advocating that cantors be paid $$$ necessarily, but the respect that their vocation deserves. I certainly wouldn't advocate not paying the parish secretary. It just seems that unless one has a zillion years of service in a parish does a cantor get recognised.

Yes there are challenges and obstacles to overcome! Just setting up a weeklong cantor school can be difficult-coordinating schedules-selecting a location-$$$$-etc. Also there needs to be real support and attendance. A positive attitude will go much farther than cynicism.


If a weeklong cantor school was set up would you make the effort to attend or just pass it off with more cynicism?

Just .000002 cent opinion.

Even without a seperate group for cantors on this forum, there are email lists on Yahoogroups.com that cover areas of interest to cantors as Jeff Mierzejewski posted.

Steve Petach

Over time I have developed a file of service music and special services that I draw from as a parish resource, and I make it a habit to review the typikon prior to each service. I also make a point of reviewing infrequently used materials with Father prior to a service as well. Even so, attending a week-long Metropolitan Cantor Institute or a regional alternative would be something I would still want to do. A network of cantors who can tap into each others knowledge is far better than going it alone.

Friends, there is already an OFFICIAL website for the dissemination of OFFICIAL texts and musical arrangements of the liturgy and the changeable liturgical texts: http://www.metropolitancantorinstitute.org/ The Council of Hierarchs has created the Intereparchial Liturgical Music Commission to prepare and disseminate these OFFICIAL arrangements. The use of non-official settings is strictly prohibited. Cantors should not challenge the authority of the Council of Hierarchs by using or disseminating unapproved texts and settings for the divine services. Anyone interested in obtaining copies of the officially approved settings should contact
Professor J. Michael Thompson, Professor of Ecclesial Chant, Saints Cyril and Methodius Seminary, 3605 Perrysville Avenue Pittsburgh, PA 15214 Phone: 412-321-8383 Fax: 412-321-9936 chantermt@aol.com Professor Thompson is also in charge of the Metropolitan Cantors Institute.

Steve,

I think we will agree with what needs to be done regarding cantors and training. I once attended an eparchial cantor institute, and like many attendees, it was basically an extension of one person's ideas. Many cantors just grow suspect and left. The "support" from church leaders was flimsy.

It isn't cynicism, my friend. Just recognition of how things are and how cantors, including myself, did our profession out of the box - bankers box that is. Many of us our self-taught because the church didn't give a rat's butt.

You don't recommend not paying the secretary, but will you be willing to live with only volunteer secretaries? How well will things be run in the office? The church did decide to go with the volunteer cantor and got what it paid for. Non-ordained cantors make no 'promise' of obedience either.

Cantors can come and go; they are disposable and that is the way the church likes them. They are cheaper that way. No obligations attached or any reciprocal relationships.

My argument isn't about $$$$. It is about "priorities." A Melkite bishop wrote about the priority issue and my post only paraphrased what HE said about paying secretaries and lawncare specialists but letting our cantorship go down the tube. Complain to him about being cynical.

Maybe that bishop visited one too many parishes, saw many beautifully landscaped temples, but attended many horribly done liturgies because the music either stunk or the cantors didn't know squat what to do. I attended a liturgy once when the Patriarch visited. What was printed in the special booklet and what was done were two different things.

The church found no problem dumping a whole cantor tradition, not me. I did a lot of volunteering and have decided to leave it gradually. Eventually, I will be gone. Got tired about having priest appreciation day and being reminded about how we need to pay our priests when cantor issues are never addressed. It took its toll when I took one too many vacation days off from work to help bury our dead without a thank you or stipend. That wasn't what bothered me, but it was being told that the parish is obligated to provide to the pastor with a cantor. Are volunteer ministries obligations?

My last effort to help train cantors was when our bishop came to visit a nearby church. I was asked to help them figure out how to cantor Matins et al. Some of the cantors' attitude was so disgusting that I decided never to cantor or train others at that church again. They too can learn out of a box and then get scolded for not having the right music or text in front of them because they are never told where to get the darn books.

I paid my time in volunteer ministries as a cantor. Some priests also like to cantor anyway. Let them do it.

Joe

Unless I'm mistaken, the Cantor Institute does not distribute propers materials on an ongoing basis, i.e. daily/weekly, to parishes in print format for use. They offer them via Adobe PDF files. That is still a showstopper for some parishes. Their materials are very complete, but require more printing than previous materials which can rapidly become costly. Reusable books with limited printed supplements is more cost effective on a day-to-day basis. Perhaps that is coming. I don't know. So, the official status of their editions is one thing. Complete, successful implementation of them universally is another matter. There IS a resource issue that has to be addressed in order for consistency to become reality.

Condolences to Joe on some awful experiences - and thanks to Edward for kind words on the website.

But I need to comment on the statement, "The use of non-official settings is strictly prohibited." The sad fact is that, with the exception of the 1966 (I believe) translation of the Divine Liturgy, the sacramental rituals, and a few mandated changes, there have been VERY few "official texts", let alone texts with music, over the past 25 years. For Vespers and Matins, we have largely made due with "for private use only" and "compiled from approved materials" books from Monsignor Levkulic and the Sisters of St. Basil (God bless them!), Archbishop Raya, and Orthodox sources, combined (everywhere slightly differently) with prostopinije chant - much of it simplified over time.

Wherever the Intereparchial Liturgical Commission has decided on a text, we have made use of it in the service books prepared for the seminary and for the Metropolitan Cantor's Institute, using the melodies agreed on by the Intereparchial Music Commission, which consists of both priests and cantors. In a FEW cases, our hierarchs have formally approved, or are considering approval of, these materials, and I look forward to more of these in the future - having seen the new Ukrainian book and having some idea of what is in the works for our church, I think people will be pleasantly surprised.

To sum up:

1. For the first time in ages, our bishops followed the process they created, OFFICIALLY promulgated a service book, and saw that it was widely available and used. The details might have gone more smoothly, but I've heard that a lot more was sung on Holy Friday than might have been. When our bishops promulgate a service book and say no other is to be used, THEN "The use of non-official settings is strictly prohibited" for that service.

2. Where no official text is available, the Cantor Institute is producing books used the best texts we have available: either from the Liturgical Commission when possible, or from "traditional" materials in our church, checked against Orthodox usage where necessary.

3. And when you need a text you can't find, use any reliable Eastern Catholic, or non-controversial Orthodox, text. God is to be praised in all.

I just wanted to make sure people knew that the books on the Cantor Institute website are not the only editions that can be used in our churches.

Christ is risen!

Jeff Mierzejewski

Since not eveyone here receives prostopinije mailing music settings: An email went to prostopinije mailing subscribers regarding the correct and incorrect use of materials from the Cantor Institute. Only materials officially approved for use are to be implemented. Many older non-Institute materials have that endorsement previously (e.g. green book, etc.), but not all recent Cantor Institute materials are officially approved- yet.

I personally hope for the endorsement of all the Cantor Institute materials soon, so that we can be more clearly organized in our services everywhere. Once approved, maybe we can get on with the business of publishing more durable materials for use in the parishes, and eliminate the need for lots of local desktop publishing.

Jeff,

So the Filioque IS official?

Joe

Let's review.

There were both a People's Book and a Priest/Cantor Book promulgated by the metropolitan for Holy Friday, March 25, 2005, with a directive that no other book was to be used.

The people's book was made available to me to put on the Cantor Institute website, and was distributed in quantity to parishes. After the Alleluia for the Gospel, this book simply says "The Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom continues." No filioque here.

I did see (in church that night) the separate Priest/Cantor book (which we used at the kliros, and which a few parishes gave out to all the people, sparking some complaints about extraneous material). The creed contains the words "from the Father [and the Son]". From the conventions used throughout our books, this fairly obviously means that the words might be used in some circumstances, and not in others. Why?

We have not had a new text of the Divine Liturgy for use throughout the Archeparchy since 1965. In certain, but I believe NOT ALL, eparchies, the filioque clause has been stricken from use. If this is the case, then putting it in brackets is the precisely correct thing to do, unless the hierarches wanted to distribute two books, or make Holy Friday the day to promulgate a permanent change in the Divine Liturgy throughout the archeparchy. (And if some eparchies still use the filioque, I would think some real catechesis is in order when the change is made!)

Having said that, I would be willing to wager a bottle of plum brandy that when an new official text of the Divine Liturgy is finally promulgated by our bishops, you will see no sign at all of "and from the Son" in the creed. Until then, "from the Father [and the Son]" reflects the state of the Divine Liturgy in our metropolia.(Heck, here where it IS stricken, it's still in the Liturgy book - so showing that it is optional was an improvement.)

Yours in the risen Christ,

Jeff

....Returning back to our original topic.....

What do Forum members think about having a seperate grouping for Cantors to use on the Forum? Could the Forum accomodate it?

After being derailed by the filioque question, WOULD the forum accomodate it?
Seriously,the need for interchange among cantors in parishes spread out over long distances is much needed. Even more so with the plight of volunteer cantors where there is no formal organisation to exchange information, news, and ideas.
Even without a seperate forum there are a number of cantor email lists available.

Steve

After over 20 messages back and forth, we appear to be no closer to a cantor forum within the website than when I first posed the idea. Perhaps phone calls and email between cantors would prove more effective than internet postings in working the various issues they encounter, though it hasn't worked for me in the past. Maybe now the time is right.

Well, I'll second the suggestion, if we're following "Robert's Rules". I think a forum for cantors is a good suggestion, it seems like a lot of cantors gather here already, it seems like a great idea. I'm not a cantor, but I do like to sing!

Patience, please!

This thread has not yet been active for four days. I only have a limited amount of time available to monitor the Forum. This week, with the death and funeral of the Holy Father, I have been glued to my television (along with two billion others!). Plus I have a number of publishing commitments I am behind on. Not to mention that the website content is in serious need of being updated.

A few Forum participants know that I am a cantor and that I have provided much of the music used in our Byzantine-Ruthenian Church during the last 25 years. The idea of a special forum for cantors is one that has appealed to me since the Forum went online in 1998. A reasonable requirement for a cantors� forum is that cantors and others interested in the nitty gritty of chanting the Divine Services actually participate in it. We have visited this issue 3 times in the past 7 years. Each time it seemed reasonable to ask cantors to start threads in the �Parish Life� forum. The idea was that if it took off I could then create a cantors� forum and then transfer those threads to the new forum. In the past there was not enough activity to justify a dedicated forum (I think that after one or two threads it died). It could be that now there is enough interest. But the Prostopinije List on Yahoo! already provides a vehicle for discussions (although a messageboard format like ours does have lots of advantages over an e-list).

Keep talking�. And start a few threads�. And please allow me the weekend to discuss it with others.

Admin

One of the reasons for proposing a cantor forum was to try to create a place where cantors could be candid with each other about issues effecting the performance of their ministry, without having to concern themselves so much with general church or parish politics. I'm not so sure that can be accomplished if it is open to everyone, cantors as well as non-cantors, because personal agendas can and do enter into threads routinely in cases where access is unlimited. Could that be why the deacon's door is open only to deacons? Seems likely. It might be helpful to know how many threads occur within the deacon's forum. Also, wide-open threads tend to morph into other subjects, just as the filioque entered this thread earlier. Just my two cents.

The suggestion to start a "Cantor's Corner" analogous to the Deacon's Door on this Byzantine Forum had occurred to me over the last week, and so it was with great interest that I have read the discussion so far.

I am very appreciative of all that the Administrator has done in this area for decades now, and I also appreciate all that is currently being done by the Metropolitan Cantor Institute and the InterEparchial Commissions. I have only been on the Prostopinije List for a few months, but I have already benefited tremendously, and there is much more I hope to gain from it.

I am especially grateful for those who are willing to explain and defend their decisions in these electronic media. It is notoriously easy for discussions to generate into flame wars, especially on topics that people care deeply about. In general this Forum handles those tensions much better than most others I have seen, still there have been many times when my spirit has been grieved by the tone and content of exchanges that have taken place here. God bless those who enter that furnace with their eyes open!

I would not support such a Forum if it would be seen or used as an alternative or competitor to what is being undertaken on Prostopinije, and ultimately Jeff and the others involved in its creation and maintenance would be the best judges of that.

However I suspect a limited access forum using this Bulletin Board Format might have some advantages and could act as a supplement and complement rather than competitor to the excellent resources already available.

I respect the wisdom the Administrator has shown in discerning the path for these Fora up to now, and I specifically endorse his suggestion that we take some time to "test and discern" before jumping to conclusions.

One of the distinct differences of a bulletin board vs email list is the ability to view the thread 'all at once'. With email unless you seperately archive the emails form the list it is harder to follow a particular thread.

I have been on the 'Prostopinije' list for several years and have archived most of the posts. The list currently has 119 members. a similar list though more tchnical in nature is 'Podoben' which has 129 members. Both groups require membership approval which helps keep spam out as well as allow candid communication.

I don't think a forum would be a competitor to prostopinije, particularly if there are those who aren't comfortable with email lists as a menas of sharing information.

just my humble $.00002 opinion

Steve

It's worth noting that the Cantor's Institute website now has its own archive as well. That makes it less (or even un) necessary for recipients of the prostopinije mailing group to archive some, if not all, of the materials they recieve after use.

Jim,

I meant that I archived the emails that go back n forth, too. Though Yahoogroups also archives the Podoben and Prostopinije emails as well.
I save the music PDFs on my local drive for faster access and printing as I refer to the material fairly often.


MANY MANY thanks to Jeff Mierzejewski for the online archive!

Steve

This post is let everyone know that I am still investigating the possibility of a cantors� forum. Over the last few days I have been discussing a possible cantors� forum with several people in the Church. These are the questions I�m thinking about:

Issue 1: Are there enough interested people to justify a cantors� forum?

Unknown. It has always been my hope that threads about chanting the Liturgy would become numerous enough so that creating a separate forum for them would seem a very natural thing to do. This hasn�t happened yet.

I am not adverse to creating a dedicated forum and see what happens. If we wound up with just one thread in the first month I could easily abolish the forum and move that thread to another forum. This is still something I am thinking about. I encourage your input.

Issue 2: Should such a dedicated forum be open to all members or restricted to functioning cantors?

�The Deacon�s Door� forum was created to offer a quiet place for deacons and their wives and deacon candidates and their wives to discuss issues pertaining to that particular ministry. It is a private forum because those originally interested in participating there were looking for a place to discuss things that would be free from lots of questions by those not sharing in that ministry. Such questions are, of course, always welcome in the public forums.

A cantors� forums is going to be different. The Deacon�s Door forum has membership restrictions. I have official lists of deacons and deacon candidates for the Byzantine - Ruthenian Church to refer to whenever anyone asks for admission. For other Eastern Catholic deacons and deacon candidates (and/or their wives) I can send an e-mail to their pastor to verify their status. But there is no official list of cantors for any of the Byzantine Catholic Churches. Most parishes welcome all who are interested to serve as cantors. Thus it is almost impossible to place any restrictions on membership. [Like the Prostopinije List, such a dedicated forum would have to be open to anyone who wishes to be part of it. The restrictions are on the topic, not on those who are allowed to be involved.]

Issue 3: Is this a better format than an e-list (such as the Prostopinije List)?

I have no desire to compete with that excellent list. What do cantors think about this? Only a few have provide their thoughts so far.

Issue 4: Personal Agendas

As a cantor for over 25 years I have learned that there are a number of valid ways to set the tones. The one thing that I disagree with is the mandate of any particular setting, beyond those of the Divine Liturgy that have been in common use over the past 40 years. It has always been my stated preference that everyone put their gifts on the table and that whatever is still being used in 30 years is what the Lord wants.

Some cantors wish to simply prostopinije beyond recognition. Others wish to simply erase the Slavonic text and fit the English text without any adjustment of the notes. Can these two groups co-exist in a single forum? [I am in the middle here. I see a need to set music to properly accent American English. Liturgical music must always be subservient to the Gospel. If our received chant were detrimental to the proclamation of the Gospel I�d recommend finding new chant. Luckily we Ruthenians have a chant that is possibly the most adaptable for use in the Christian West.]

Are there other issues? I�d appreciate a thorough discussion of these (and any other) issues before making any decisions.

Thanks!

Admin

A 'Cantor's Corner' could be a useful addition to Byz. Forum. I hope it will be possible to move beyond the dichotomy between oversimplified chant on one hand and English text inserted without regard to the fit of the accents on the other, but perhaps this topic needs to be aired. Also a 'Cantor's Corner' might help the cantors to achieve some solidarity in stating their concerns, which certainly need more than a shoulder to cry on.

Meanwhile, the Prostopinije list is currently rather underused as a resource; several of the contributers to this thread I don't recall as participants in the list. Jeff M. has taken pains to make it available, so let's make use of it.

I am aware of some potential controversies that might arise in a cantor's corner; it would be necessary, I think, to insist that discussions on some points avoid dealing in personalities and stick to specific points of controversy discussed in as factual a manner as possible. It will do little good to give vent to grievances, however justified they might be, but it might do some good to discuss how the chant is best sung with English texts.

Stephen

One of the difficulties with open access is that everyone can offer their opinion, whether it is relevant or not to the discussion at hand. Getting off topic happens on the Forum often.

There are certain types of expertise necessary for a cantor to be effective, but like it or not, not all parishioners are in a position to offer relevant criticism or advice, though they may think otherwise. Everybody's a critic, so they say.

Perhaps a cantor could designate him/herself as such in their forum profile in order to have access?

An open forum can also dampen discussion of difficult topics. I suspect an open forum will not be used so much, as few cantors will want to discuss potentially controversial topics there. But, it could be helpful for bringing inexperienced cantors up to speed on resources, etc.

Back to private emails and phone calls for now

My two shekels worth on the issues raised by the Administrator.

Issue One: Numbers
"Critical Mass" is a worthwhile consideration, however this is one advantage of the Discussion Board Format over the e-mail distribution list format. I discovered the "Holy Week Reforms" thread a full year after it was initiated, but I was still able to follow it in its entirety. Fewer, more substantive posts that reflected time given to thought and discernment would in my mind be a plus.

Issue Two: Open or closed?
I vote yes! What I mean is that the forum should be limited to those who are willing to give a self-description of their interest in the Forum, but that whoever Adminsters the Forum would take their self-representation at face value and would not need to verify it with any other authority.
I suspect the creation and maintenance of an un-offical "Contact List" of folks interested in Cantoring issues could be of service in and of itself.

Issue Three" Format
I have gradually come to think that there are distinct advantages to the Discussion Board/Forum format that probably warrant a new Forum.

Agendas, Personal and Shared
The Administrator's observations about personal agendas are well founded in experience, yet even here I think the careful articulation and discussion of what are often hidden [or unreflective] agendas could be a service.

I can think of several issues that I hope would provide a common interest base for discussion:

1. Typika Issues What services should be held when, how should they be celebrated, according to whom?

2. Text Issues What texts are being used for services? Why? What are the relative strengths and weaknesses of existing texts? What are desiderata for the future?

3. Music Issues What musical melodies are being used, where does they come from, how effective are they, what criteria do we use to judge such effectiveness ...

4. "Ministry" Issues What is the role of the cantor in our parishes and eparchies, What would we like it to be, how can we get from here to there ... How does this ministry influence our spiritual lives, our family lives, ...? What could and should be done to foster this ministry in our communities?

That is probably four shekels worth, so I'll stop!

The forum might be interesting and useful, but please don't call it "The Cantor's Corner." It sounds like a corner store.

Isn't there some technical term for the cantor stand? You know, the spinny thing that one puts all the books on? Have patience with me--I've only been cantoring in Byzantium since 1996. I don't know all the terms yet.

Thanks to everyone for their comments. Please keep the feedback coming (either here in this thread, via PM or via e-mail).

The cantor�s stand is generally called the �Krilos�.

Will this virtual kliros be open to all chanting traditions?

Andrij, a cantor
(who will not be offended if the proposed forum is limited to those using prostopinije)


Σώσον, Κύριε, καί διαφύλαξον η�άς από τών Βασιλιάνικων τάξεων!

I think it would be a good thing. We have many "official" cantors on the Byzantine Forum as well as others who are intersested in Prostopinije and other liturgical singing. At least in the Byzantine-Ruthenian Metropolia, most parishioners and cantors do not have a say in newly-created versions of "Prostopinije" and
many feel left out of the process. If a "Cantor's Corner" is created, it would enable "everyone" to give their input on the subject of liturgical singing.

Ung-Certez

A Typikon type question:

What is the proper format for Weekday Liturgies during the Paschal Season?

Apparently Bright Week uses the same format as the Paschal Liturgy all week.

After Thomas Sunday, do we return to the "Weekday Antiphons"? Are the Prokeimena and Alleluias taken from the Oktoechos? Should the Resurrection Troparion and Kontakion be added to the daily propers?

How many of us "official" and unofficial cantors had any say into the existing english translations and music settings, aside from the insert work of cantor john Vernoski? I know I didn't, but I do appreciate the work.
"newly created versions" of prostopinije? The texts are approved by the IELC and the music is the same melodies that our ancestors sang in Slavonic. Once you can get past that hurdle the concepts make sense and it is singable!

Steve,
"unofficial" cantor

Phil,

Several years ago Bishop George (Van Nuys) sent out instructions for the weekday and Sunday Liturgical formats for the Paschal season. I will try to locate it and post the pertinant info.

Steve

The Virtual Krilos will be open to all Eastern Christian chant traditions. (Maybe you just gave us a name? )

If created, a cantors� forum would be strictly unofficial.

For participants from the Byzantine-Ruthenian Catholic Church the focus would be mostly on the �how do I?� of chanting the Divine Services. Sharing of texts and musical settings would also be appropriate. Such a forum should not be seen as a vehicle to provide input to the Liturgical Music Commission that the bishops have created to produce official settings. Those with suggestions along those lines should contact the appropriate authority within their local eparchy to see if input is welcome and, if so, how to submit their suggestions.

--

One thought on membership to a restricted forum. We don�t want to undertake a task of verifying that people who say they are cantors are actually active cantors in their parishes. But we could either 1) ask them to sign their real name to each post or 2) keep a running list of members and make it available within the forum (either as a sticky that stays at the top of the forum or on a separate page that is linked from the top of that forum). Such a list would contain real name, hometown, and parish.


It has been the custom among Carpatho-Ruthenians to sing the Paschal Antiphons (�Shout joyfully�.�) for the entire 40 days of Pascha. Other traditional customs included singing �Christ is risen�.� for all 40 days in place of �Blessed is He who comes in the Name of the Lord�.�, �We have seen the true light�.�, �May our lips be filled��, �Blessed be the Name of the Lord�.� and the �Glory be� of the dismissal. This makes sense because most people no longer have the opportunity to participate in the Divine Liturgy everyday during Bright Week and singing them just on Pascha Day was not enough after 40 days of the Fast. Unfortunately this custom is now prohibited by some Ruthenian bishops. Of course, �The Angel exclaimed� and the Paschal Communion Hymn are always sung in their appropriate places.

Regarding the Troparia and Kontakia the usual custom is to first sing the Troparia and Prokimny of the previous Sunday followed by those of the Saint of the day. In practice this varies. I am unaware of any survey to tell us exactly what parishes are doing here but many cantors I know sing the troparia from the previous Sunday and then add only the troparion of the Saint(s) of the day (skipping the kontakia of the Saint(s) of the day) and then close with the �Glory�now and ever�� and �Although you descended�. (the Kontakion of Pascha). They also usually sing only one Prokimenon (either that of the Sunday or that of the day).

BTW, I have often suggested to new cantors who chant daily Liturgies to sing only the troparia from the previous Sunday, even if outside Pascha. This allows them to get used to the mechanics of singing troparia and to learn the Eight Tones (texts and music). Once they are familiar with the Eight Tones I then suggest they start adding the troparion of the saint of the day, etc., as it works for them.

Kliros or Krilos?

Steve,

Good question. Since it comes from Greek it should be kliros. Many Slavs however say kriloshan. Rusins are the only ones that I know of who say krilos though. Msgr. Alexis Mihalik who taught Church Slavonic at the seminary in Pittsburgh said that krilos was wrong and that it should be kliros. So, your pick. I prefer kliros.

Tony

"How many of us "official" and unofficial cantors had any say into the existing english translations and music settings, aside from the insert work of cantor john Vernoski?"

Well, I can say that I have set tropars, kontaks, aposticha verses, etc. from resources of the Sisters of St. Basil, as well as service books that called for certain tones to be used, but did not include the printed musical settings. There was no printed music available locally for use on those occasions. There may be other cantors who do the same, or who know the tones so well that they don't have to set prayers to them on paper beforehand (not me ).

Jim, Cantor

In my zeal to demonstrate the viability of such a forum, I posted a poll - http://www.byzcath.org/bboard/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=002111

I assumed it would remain under this thread, but discussion of it does belong here:

WHY do you (like/dislike) musical notation in pew books intended for parishioners?

Many cantors, who like to do their own thing, never follow anything that resembles consistency in their chants. Everything ends up sounding like Tone 4. People like to sing, but if they are alway second guessing where the cantor is going with Tone 4 this time around, they might just stand/sit and listen only. Music notation is to assist where the church has failed in providing a better system to train its cantors to be better leaders of congregation singing. And if the parish has a pastor who will only "say Mass" then the people will forget or never learn more than just Tone 4. So, in many cases, the music notation helps only because the people, especially the younger people are musically inclined and can probably follow the proper notes and key than their Tone 4 cantor.

Joe

Musical notation shortens the learning time for new settings, as long as the worshippers read music. It also helps keep people together. After all, if the cantor can wander because he doesn't use music, so can the rest of the congregation. And the more people who read music, the easier it is to reinforce the setting - by the number of people singing the same thing, for those who don't read.

A case could probably be made questioning the ethnic authenticity of some musical settings and styles of delivery (Should vocal vibrato be used? Is the setting like my grandparents sang it? etc. ), but without a common source to refer to, anyone can be a loose cannon- anyone.

One other thing. Music is art moving through time. It changes over time, which is why we can seperate its history into prevailing styles, etc. In other words, even with musical notation it will not necessarily stay the same, especially when it comes to interpretation. We can try to be "authentic", but each generation decides what it will or won't keep the same for all sorts of reasons.

Make a joyful noise unto the Lord! It sounds if a forum is created for Cantors we're in agreement it would be open to those of us who assist when there is no official cantor. Having been a member in 5 different BC parishes (because of job moves) across 2 eparchies, I have been privileged to have been asked on occasion by the priest to assist the congregation. I am not professionally trained, but have music background. But I wouldn't dare call myself a cantor! I do believe, however, that being allowed to pariticpate in such a forum would strengthen knowledge of the richness of the liturgy! We would have to return to tonsured Readers only leading the congregation to exclude the rest of us.

The same with ECF teachers. Many years ago there WAS a "real" class (in the Passaic diocese) taught by visiting Sisters of St. Basil to become an ECF teacher (I have my diploma to prove it -- it was a 6-week, one-day-a-week class). But out of necessity we humbly accept the talents of anyone coming forward to spread the Good News. Should we start a forum for ECF teachers, would we limit it only to those "officially" identified as ECF teachers? What DOES that mean? We all serve the Lord in our small way when called.

Christ is Risen!

(Mrs. H attends services at the church where I am currently the lead Cantor. Our former lead cantor is retired and was honored with the Papal Knighthood last year, but wishes only to assist nowadays, not lead. As far as I know, which is mainly from third hour, liturgy, matins, panakhida, funeral, wedding, and vespers services throughout the year, Mrs. H has not been singing at the Kliros for several years now (except for one Christmas where she helped sing hymns in Old Slavonic for a portion of a service). However, she has assisted from within the congregation, to help introduce new musical settings on occasion when asked. She is not currently part of our cantor team.)

I guess with Pascha, Pascha, and Pentecost the cantors on the board have been quiet here.

The Prostopinije list has been quiet too.

Has interest waned in the idea?

With all the posts regarding the changes to the liturgy, there are times when it might help by having a closed or semi closed forum to discuss some of the issues without the threads diverging on different agendas.

Steve

I have been away for a while, but as nearly as I can determine after reviewing the posts within this thread again, the case for a Cantor's Forum or Virtual Kliros within the Byzantine Forum, for use by Byzantine Catholic (Ruthenian) Cantors only, is proving impractical to administer.

There is a perceived need to include all eastern christian traditions on such a forum, not just Ruthenians.

Besides, there is no reliable way to differentiate those who are officially designated (within the Ruthenians) to enter from those who are not, especially once you introduce other jurisdictions to the mix.

Such a forum would likely have the same sort of access that all the other forums here do except for the Deacon's Door- an outcome that means it may not get off the ground at all, since other venues for inter-jurisdictional discussions already exist, and welcome all who are interested in discussing eastern church music.

An open access cantor's forum is not one I would use much, because I would not find it particularly useful or helpful- too many disagreements, and wandering off to other topics.

Oh well. Other ways to work cantor's issues do exist. They just take longer, and are not as internet-friendly, but they work. Patience is a virtue after all!

For what it's worth ...

I think the separate forum for cantors suggested here is a wonderful idea, and could well be additive to the resources mentioned to date if properly framed, focused and "publicized".

I emphasize "publicized" intentionally. OBSERVATION: How many people in the "Prostopinije" group are active cantors in Byzantine - Ruthenian churches (vs. clergy and other interested parties, including our Orthodox brothers & sisters)? How many more members would there be if ALL cantors in the Archeparchy (assuming all online access) we members of the group)? NOTE: This is not at all a criticism - just an observation. Point = we need to find a way to get the word out about all of these resources to our community!

Changing subject slightly, I consider myself one of the lucky "volunteer" cantors who was blessed with the opportunity to learn from one of the "masters of the art" at the Eparchial cathedral parish to which he was assigned.

That said, how many of us can say that (i) we've had a opportunity to formally study and train for this vocation in any form or fashion and (ii) if so, what was available for use as "officially promulgated" study material & for later liturgical use?

How many of our parishes today have no cantors (or volunteer cantors whose knowledge does not extend beyond the "Green Book")?

How many of us truly comprehend the effort being undertaken today to introduce an newly translated liturgy, including revised musical settings?

I've stumbled on this discussion today, but regrettably have little time remaining at present to expand my argument in favor of this idea beyond the few points noted above, but will do so as soon as possible. However, I'd ask everyone to consider that all truly great "volunteer" efforts survive and thrive via the unity of those bonded together with similar passions, backgrounds and beliefs.

Seems to me that our own natures (the very thing that drove us to this "volunteer" vocation), our common interests and needs (and perhaps a little "divine intervention") should be enough for us to justify creation of this forum.

Truly yours in Christ,
Joe

Joe,

I know of at least 18 cantors by way of email and having personally meeting them. Also several professors of chant and a few seminarians on the list. There are most likely more cantors and interested parties. The complete list of members includes some of the "who's who" in the Eastern chant world! Both cantors and professors.

You write correctly that publicizing of the prostopinije list has lagged and could use a boost. While the 'prostopinije' list is great it doesn't have the convenience of a bulletin board format, particularly the ability to scan an entire thread quickly.

Steve

Allow me to articulate another reason in favor of a "Virtual Kliros" - focus.

Like many (I suspect most) readers of this Forum, I have not yet found a way to make it part of my daily routine. I will often go 2 or 3 weeks without attending to it.

Over the last 4 days I have spent 6-8 hours searching for this thread! Admittedly much of this has to do with personal shortcomings, yet even those more organized than I would benefit by having a clear focus for a well defined area of interest

Several respondents have raised the issue of focus so far, noting the connection to the question of this being an open or closed forum. My personal feeling, which I think was the point raised by several others, is that providing such a focus could be a major benefit of such a Forum. The point has been raised that such focus could easily be compromised in an open forum.

My suggestion is that the forum technically be a closed forum, in that only registered users would be allowed to participate. The nuance here is that the only criteria needed to register would be a self-identification as one who is interested in the topics addressed by the "Virtual Kliros" and a willingness to accurately identify oneself and their ecclesial situation when registering.

I personally would have no difficulty with the routine use of Avatars while posting as long as we had access to posters' real names, their parish affiliations, and self-descriptions of their role[s] in the parish.

Add to this a few ruthless Moderators who would diligently remind participants of the existing protocol on courtesy and the proposed focus of the Forum, and I believe the ideal could be approached.

I would favor the Forum being open to those who have an interest in any of the Eastern Christian Chant traditions. One can always skip over topics one is not interested in, and there can be many benefits in monitoring discussions of other communities and traditions.

Phil Yevics

Here are the available options for a possible �Virtual Kliros� forum with this software:

1. Regular Forum � No registration on The Byzantine Forum is required to read these forums. Registration is required to post. [This the way all the forums except The Deacon�s Door forum operate.]

2. Restricted Forum � A user must be a registered user on The Byzantine Forum both to see the contents of that forum, to read them and to post. [This is the way The Deacon�s Door Forum works.]

I am willing to give the whole thing a try. What I want from those participating in this topic is an agreement for the criteria for entrance to �The Virtual Kliros� forum. These are the questions I want addressed:

Question A: Who is given access? If access is limited only to official cantors how do we define a cantor and how do we verify that they are official?

Question B: If access is granted to anyone who self-identifies as one who is interested in these topics it is theoretically possible that every registered user could request access. Jim has already stated that he will not participate in this type of forum. What does everyone else say?

Question C: Would it be better simply to create a public forum (like most of the other forums) to allow the topics discussed to be contained all in one place?

I had indicated earlier that I wanted to see at least some threads dedicated to the issues of chanting the Liturgy before creating a dedicated forum. So far, there have been only a few threads. What I am willing to do, however, is to create a public forum and allow users to post to a thread in that forum their interest in participating. We can allow a fixed period for people to declare their intentions (say two weeks) and then take the Forum private.

How does this sound to everyone?

Admin

Though I am not a cantor and would never pretend to be. I would see this forum as a tool of evangelization. Not in reaching out as to evangelize those not in the Church, but to call for a desire for those who would serve the Church in this manner. There are many out there who may wonder if they have the skills or the aptitude and by reading here, it would help in that decernment process of offering their talents to God.

Pani Rose

I like Admin's plan. I'll save other threads for that Forum!

Maybe I have had a change of heart:

If the Cantor's Kliros has general registered user access for posting, I figure I can read it, then private message anyone whom I would like to talk to further. Some cantor issues are delicate in nature, and not suitable for general discussion. A private forum would make such discussion easier, but the problem of identifying cantors still remains.

I see no way to definitively identify bonafide cantors versus wannabees, etc., within the church itself nowadays. Not all jurisdictions see cantors the same way, or have a way to recognize them. Not all jurisdictions have cantors for that matter.

I also see the administrator's idea of going private after a couple of weeks as a probably workable solution as well.

Jim:

thanks again for all you're doing for us Cantor's. I can read into some Cantor's feeling negative but I can't be in their shoes. All I can say is I want to do as good as I can, and listen to my Pastor to see if I can improve and work with him to make the Divine Liturgy better for Our Lord. Some days the ole voice does not work that good, and certain additions on festive days, I know will be tough(since I don't read music) but a little prayer to Holy Mary or Our Lord or my angel, and it will usually come out better. This is really a great site. John

Nice to have you here, John. Folks here on Kliros can help you out with their resources and experiences in their own parishes, if you want or need help. Just ask.

As a non-music reading Cantor, I have on occasion had a hymn placed in the bulletin by the Pastor, and I had no clue of how to do it properly, and if I don't feel I can do it properly, I really don't want to do it. So my question is to ask those Cantor's out there, if there is a cassette or Cd that has Marian, Eucharistic hymns for as starter. I can't learn from a choir, nor an opera or primadonna singer inflecting their own style. I can pay for the right material. Thank yu to all. God bless You. John

John, I did a search for "music recordings" on the Forum. There are 2 threads within Kliros itself that reference some recordings. Much of it has to do with how to pronounce church slavonic or music for the liturgy itself. You might try the search, read the threads, and see if there is anything within them to help you.

MCI has also offered to post certain recordings and their corresponding sheet music provided there are no copyright constraints. They are at www.metropolitancantorinstitute.org .

A broader search using just "recordings" produced 53 matches throughout the entire Forum.