Welcome to the Kliros Forum. This forum has been created to allow a separate meeting place for cantors and those interested in chanting the Liturgy. The intended focus of this forum is the practical aspects of being a parish cantor. It is expected that the discussions will range from the order of the Divine Services to available written music for the Divine Services.

Hieromonk Elias has agreed to be the lead moderator and I am drafting Phil Yevics and Jim from Arizona as associate moderators (since they both have spoken of the need for this forum). I originally did not think that there would be enough activity to justify a dedicated forum but Phil’s post earlier today indicated that even if the discussions were few and occasional it would be helpful to have them easily accessible in a dedicated forum.

We can consider making this a private forum. The difficulty with that is that it would be impossible to determine who is a parish cantor and who is not. For now I will recommend those using aliases to update their profile to indicate their home town (or the town their parish is located in) and to provide their real name and parish with the signature of at least the first post of each thread (i.e., “Jim, Cantor at St. Thomas the Apostle, Gilbert, AZ).

I ask those who do not serve their parishes as cantors to refrain from posting here. I ask the moderators to be ruthless in deleting such posts as well as transferring threads not having to do with chanting the Divine Services to a more appropriate forum.

Admin

I thank the Administrator for setting up the kliros forum, and pray that this gathering place may be helpful to cantors!

With respect to our esteemed administrator, I am sure that 'ruthless' moderating will not be needed.



the unworthy,

Elias

Administrator,

What is the definition of "official cantor" as it pertains to "The Kliros Forum". In the Ruthenian
Byzantine Catholic Metropolia, most "volunteer cantors" do not recieve any monetary compensation for their services rendered. There are many "congregational cantors", laity in the pews who have to fill in as a cantor for the day when no official cantor is present. Then there are the
parishes that implement "cantoring by committee". Would these "congregational cantors" and "committee cantors" be welcome to participate on "The Kliros Forum"?

Ungcsertezs

Ung, one place to draw the line is at accountability.

The congregational cantor you mention usually has no continuous responsibility for cantoring service after service. They are more a part of the congregation than they are cantors. One might even call them parishioners who sing, instead.

The group of cantors you mention are more regularly cantoring at the kliros than the congregational ones.

A lead cantor for the kliros works regularly with the priest and/or deacon, reviews the typikon, gets permission to introduce certain music where applicable, and may even arrange music for use if needed. The congregational cantor and those in the group usually aren't involved in the ongoing decision-making or definition of what is required for each service.

These distinctions may appear to be subtle, but they are not really. Those that are responsible for introducing materials to the congregation usually have more accountability. Their work with the priest can help determine whether certain music or language is used, or isn't, long term.

If there are disagreements within a parish with regard to decision-making for cantoring, the ultimate decision is apt to be made by the parish priest, with regard to trying to get everyone to work well together while remaining faithful to the Church.

So, for me, if they aren't at the kliros, they are not really cantors. They are parishioners who sing and give moral support to the cantors at the kliros, instead.

Can someone who is about to become an ex-cantor still hang out around here? (once a cantor...)

I also thank John not only specifically for this forum but all of his tireless liturgical musical efforts over the years. Mnohaja Lita.

Diaks Rule!!!

I just learned about this forum from a post in the Typikon email list. I applaud all efforts at facilitating communication between cantors. I look forward to many useful discussions and suggestions. Thanks to those who took the initiative.

Mike
a cantor at Annunciation in Chicago

You, an ex-cantor? Only if you decide to never sing again. There is no escaping the kliros! I know an Archimandrite who enjoys singing at the kliros when there are other clergy to serve things like Vespers. To top that, we once chanted Jerusalem Matins with Kyr Robert (Moskal) at the kliros! I'm glad I got that one down on tape.

Σώσον, Κύριε, καί διαφύλαξον ηµάς από τών Βασιλιάνικων τάξεων!

You're right, Andrij. It's in the blood (or the throat as the case may be...)

Many times I have seen Archpriest Roman Galadza wander back down to the analogion to sing a few lines and then go back up to the Altar...

Reminds me of a Romanian Orthodox parish I sometimes visit, usually for Vespers - the pastor can often be found walking back and forth between the Altar and the kliros. I was dragged to the kliros on my first visit (I was spotted in the congregation by a friend) and I'm now expected to be there every time I visit. One of these days I must learn how to pronounce Romanian - after a few dozen services, holding the ison can get a bit boring.

Σώσον, Κύριε, καί διαφύλαξον ηµάς από τών Βασιλιάνικων τάξεων!

Diak (and everyone), I hope that even though someone is less active at the kliros than they used to be, that they will contribute here by way of offering referrals to resources for cantors' use when the question comes up. I can safely say from experience that new cantors often find themselves without any local resources to draw on for particular services, so they have to make their own, surf for them, or get them from another parish (assuming they have them).

What I seek to avoid is the idea that anyone who sings is a cantor. That simply does not work. As one cantor from Ohio says, "All cantors are singers, but not all singers are cantors."

Quite true, Jim.

Many who sing well feel uncomfortable about being the leader/(cantor) in a congregational setting. There is a discipline to leading a congregation in worship that is different from singing in a choir or schola. I noticed this recently when having to switch gears in singing with the choir then leading for the troparia and switching back to following the choir director.

Steve

Diak,

In an earlier post you wrote:
"Many times I have seen Archpriest Roman Galadza wander back down to the analogion to sing a few lines and then go back up to the Altar..."

Was this during a Divine Liturgy or perhaps during Vespers?

Steve - he does that mainly at Vespers and Matins, but I have seen him also do that at DL when another priest was main celebrant.

Diak, I hope that the Father you mentioned was not seeking to correct problems at the kliros during a service. I saw that once. Unfortunately, the priest involved believed in fixing mistakes when they happen, and was soon making trips out to the kliros during most services, sometimes more than once. Sorta disrupts personal piety when that happens.

Jim - it was absolutely not as a punitive measure. As Andrij and I were discussing, once a diak, always a diak - lending help on one of the harmony lines that may not be as strong as the others.

Redolent of the hosts in Revelation always coming and going, fluttering about, I not only don't mind clergy and servers coming and going during services, I like it very much. Our Byzantine tradition is full of liturgical motion, explicit and implicit.

Regarding "personal piety" I think perhaps too often we maintain Western subjective, static notions of that concept. The Ethiopians make even the examples we are talking about pale in comparison with all of the extra moving about, motion, processions, coming and goings, wanderings, etc. that happen in every service.

I'm glad he wasn't following an agenda.

As to personal piety (or pious practices), there are very few blanket answers, of course.

While I've cantored in the past I am not presently a Cantor. I may once again function in that way but our congregation is now blessed with nine Cantors who are much superior to me. I realize now that I should not be posting on this forum.

God bless you all.

Dan L

I suggest then:

1-Create a full and clear definition of cantor. I would say someone who stands at the Kliros with the blessing of the priest to lead services or assist the person leading services by invitation of the cantor or the priest.

2-Include in the cantor definition note what is and is not on-topic. I would have hoped in posting my thread that cantors could discuss constructive ways to approach the coming liturgical reforms. Our responsibility to lead and teach this music gives us a specific twist that is not necessarily served in the general liturgy thread. This did work at the start where we saw process and names to contact. It did desend rapidly from there.

3-Create a permanent top "Introductions" Thread. Here each poster would place their brief self-description of their cantor responsibility level and general experience in music and church leadership.

Steve

I support Steve's recommendations.

Jim

OK. For the Klrios form how about this formal definition of a cantor:

Cantor: One who has the blessing of his or her priest to lead the chanting of the Divine Services or has an invitation by the priest or cantor to assist in leading the chanting of the Divine Services. This would include anyone who occasionally gets a frantic call from a priest: “No one else can make it, please come and chant the Liturgy” but not someone who just happens to like to stand near the cantor and is not shooed away.

It is possible to take this forum private, but we would have to rely on each individual’s word as to whether they function as cantor or not. That might be the best course. [I ask for your input on this.] Also, clergy are always welcome. Also, we cannot limit this to just the Ruthenian Church. We can, however, limit it to the Byzantine Churches (Catholic and Orthodox).

I would prefer to keep the definition of what is acceptable for discussion very broad. It is my opinion that those who support the proposed liturgical revisions have an obligation to speak for them and to convince others that they are good for the Church, and those who oppose the proposed liturgical revisions have an obligation to speak against them and to convince others that they are not good for the Church. I do not see any reason for cantors not to be part of this discussion. I also do not see the discussion ending until, very literally, “Rome has spoken and the case is closed” (surely there will be direct appeals to Rome over this revision).

It is appealing to simply state that a discussion of the possible reforms is off topic. But since the reforms affect the liturgical rubrics, texts and musical settings I don’t think declaring it off topic would work.

People can start posting in that thread now.

Admin

On Going Private

I believe that taking the forum private is a good idea, because of the potential for controversy when dealing with intra-parish issues as a cantor. Participants would need to provide their cantor bio within the Introduction thread. A deadline for doing so will likely be necessary. After that, additional parties interested in participating would need a mechanism to request access. PMing a moderator would get their attention, then access would need to be set up. Perhaps whatever method is used to establish Deacon's Door access could be used (except, of course, for the official recognition part). The Cantor's bio would still need to be made available within the Introduction thread.

On Posting Elsewhere

With the private environment in effect, someone, not necessarily a moderator, could start a separate thread elsewhere, such as in Town Hall, or Faith & Worship, if a topic has broader implications than for Kliros. The Kliros topic does not necessarily have to be moved. That way the topic can receive scrutiny for reasons other than those of Kliros when warranted, and Kliros participants can continue to focus on their concerns without necessarily having to address the wider audience, and there is likely less occasion for going off-topic.

On Who is a Cantor

I also believe that the definition of cantor that our Administrator has put forwarded is pretty accurate as to who should be regarded as a cantor, and who should not be, at least within the Ruthenian tradition of the Byzantine Catholic Church. It ties in to the saying, "All cantors are singers, but not all singers are necessarily cantors."

Jim