Church Choristers Must Be, & Must Be Male

We cannot do without Church choristers – and acolytes – and they must be male:

  • If cult is to form the culture properly, men must be involved in its hierarchy, at all levels. Where men are not involved in the cult of the Most High, they involve themselves in other, lesser things, and the culture suffers because they then steer its attention away from First Things, and so from Truth, and from the proper adaptation thereto. If the cult is mostly a female thing, so will the culture follow it, and culture will then become mostly a female thing. The men, and typically male concerns, will then be sidelined. The culture will become effeminate. An effeminate culture will sooner or later fall before a masculine culture.
  • Male inculcation in the cult must begin long before puberty. It must be clear to boys that one of the paths of highest honor open to them, as boys and men, is the service of the cult. It must seem to them that the noblest thing a boy – or a man – might do is to serve the cult. It must seem to them that only the best of the boys can graduate to that service; so that, a career spent otherwise is but small beer by comparison.
  • If the cult is to remain important to boys throughout their lives, and so remain a focus of the culture at large, then even if they make their careers elsewhere, the cult must become to them supremely important before they grow interested in girls. Once boys become interested in girls, girls naturally become the main thing for them, unless they are already deeply involved in something else that has nothing to do with girls, in which men whom they admire are also deeply involved, for life.
  • Involvement in the cult must seem to boys to be one of the most important things that men can do. Or else, they’ll do something else, that seems to them – and to the men in their lives – more important: hunting, or fighting, or drinking, or sex, or whatever. Not to deprecate hunting, fighting, drinking, or sex, at all; but these are obviously not First Things. A life ordered first to any such subsidiary creaturely worldly good cannot be ordered properly first to truly First Things, and must therefore fall short, qua life. A hunter or warrior reverent to the cult, on the other hand, is by definition ordering his career of work with Second Things and Third Things under the Lógos of First Things; and, so, ordering it more properly than he might otherwise have been able to do.
  • Prepubescent boys find girls disgusting. If girls are involved in choir or service at the altar – or anything else whatever – prepubescent boys will hate it. If you want young boys to find some activity terrific, you must prevent girls from it, absolutely.
  • Choirboys and acolytes are the raw material of priests and monks – and religious genii of other callings, such as academics and warriors. If you’ve got lots and lots of choirboys and acolytes around, and girls are in no way part of their liturgical activities, why then you’ll have no problem harvesting a sufficiency of vocations for the priesthood and religious life.
  • In short, then: the vigor of the tradition of the cult – and, so of the culture, and then of the nation – depends upon the involvement therein, throughout life, of males. It must begin before they reach puberty. And because prepubescent boys despise girls, girls must be excluded from that involvement. So, boys must be able to take liturgical offices as choristers and acolytes, and girls must be prevented from so doing.

Herenow, a disquisition in greater depth, that touches upon other aspects of the predicament.

The sublime music of the West is founded upon the monastic choir of men and boys. That tradition got its start in the first centuries AD, at the latest. Records are nil, but there are indications that its Christian manifestation continues a monastic tradition thousands of years older. The Psalms are annotated with instructions for the choirmaster.

Almost all the great composers got their musical start as terrified 6 year old choirboys in churches great and small. They were the top boys, the most talented and musical, with the best voices, who were kept on after their voices changed, and so kept singing (and learning) alto, tenor, and bass – and indeed, if my own experience is any indication, treble, on long into their twenties. They continued their keyboard and musicological training under the guidance of their choirmasters. Most of them ended up earning a living from one month to the next (for, commissions and gigs cover the rent reliably for only the top 1%) as singers, organists and choirmasters (and therefore – as themselves teachers & doctors of music – petty local maestri of an ancient initiatic order). They often graduated to the job of choirmaster from that of solo singer and leader of a section of singers; from virtuoso first chair, to put it in the terms of the symphony orchestra.

I myself made a small living for a while as such a soloist. It fit my early peripatesis. Wherever I went, I had a good shot at one of the best church jobs in town – even in the biggest towns, like New York or San Francisco. So with a few exceptions – Lander, Wyoming, say – I could scratch by as a church countertenor almost no matter where I found myself.

To be a virtuoso church singer (and, so, a fairly consistent soloist at profane venues) is a good life, albeit too poor to fund a family. In worldly terms at least – i.e., in the terms that do not matter ultimately – it is therefore a bootless enterprise, despite the sublime elevations and ravishments a good singer can produce in audiences.

In otherworldly terms, on the other hand, there are few higher callings. Looking back on my career as a liturgical singer with the dourest most cynical eye I can muster, and fully aware (o so fully; you have no idea, and do not want to have any such) of the moral defects that inveterately plague the choral offices, I cannot but say: sub specie aeternitatis, the calling of the Levite chorister in the Temple is of all human occupations second in nobility and majesty only to that of the priesthood.

Excursus: I have martial training, but no military experience. I do not at all doubt or question the glory of the way of the warrior. But I do not know it myself, as my own profession. So I do not speak of it; for, I cannot. I know – from the outside – that the way of the warrior involves the sacrifice epitomized on the Cross, and at the stake by Nathan Hale.

I doubt not therefore that the way of the warrior is as sacred – in potential, at least – as any other. No way could donate more, or even as much, except that of the martyr. But then, every way, of every calling, ends ultimately at the donation of everything to the Good; to martyry, that is, and an utmost rejection of anything less than the Good; or else at damnation.

In the end, everything boils down to everything else. In a coherent system of things, how could it be otherwise? To be a priest then, e.g., is to be a warrior; and to be a warrior is likewise to be a priest (in this lies the primordial unity and concord of the various anointed sacred offices of priest, king, and prophet, in virtue of which a man of any such order might serve also in one of the others – and, in virtue of which, the king was High Priest and Great Prophet (in coherent organic societies, anyway)). All occupations must in the end serve the Truth, at bottom; or else, they are but deceptions, and ruinations. So may any soldier speak dour dire prophecy; so may any professor speak governing truth; so may any priest preach a Crusade.

I shall however say but this: the Levite chorister in the Temple is *not at all concerned in his quotidian offices with worldly affairs.* On the contrary: the heart and soul of that music which absorbs his whole attention, its whole end, its whole fulfillment, and its whole expression – whether performed, contemplated, enjoyed, or composed – is the Lógos. The true ends of the Levite’s attentions to his official duties strictly as liturgist *cannot therefore injure.* In this, his official acts are, with those of the priest, unlike those of any other social officers. Every other sort of social actor acts for the most part socially, and so might by his strictly official acts injure. The Priest and the Levite, per contra, are in all the acts proper to their strictly liturgical offices ordered only to the Most High, on behalf and instead of their social fellows. Their properly liturgical acts then cannot injure, except insofar as those acts are themselves defective.

They might of course hurt. Contact with eternity, such as is the meat of liturgical offices, cannot in its reproaches to our worldly attachments do otherwise than to diminish them, at least apparently. Such is the whole point of worship. And that can engender the pain of ascesis – of that peculiar pain we feel when we revisit our past injuries to the moral Truth, and feel them. It is the pain of repentance: of a repain.

A religion that does not challenge you totally and to the roots, and indeed painfully, is useless to you, and false. It is a Fake Religion.

Improper religious acts there are of course in plenty. Most acts, of any sort, are mostly false, and wicked, and wrong. And they work wreak of our wickedness. Of such consists almost all of ecclesiastical history. So it goes, for those of us yet constrained by this mortal coil, under the orbit of the Moon.

Church choirs are still the basis of the musical profession. Professional musicians try first to get a church job in order to secure a portion of the rent; then, they take a shot during the regular work week at setting up on the side some concerts with a consort of friends that might garner a recording contract, or a few paying gigs, or a tour – usually, of municipal churches in the near vicinity. Only the top 1% get a paying job with a musical institution like a symphony orchestra.

College jobs are good, too, to be sure. But there are not nearly enough of them to keep the tradition going.

The great difficulty – the pinch point in the history, not just of the Christian cult of the West, but of her high music, which now we traverse – is that there are almost no church choirs of men and boys these days, anywhere. Boys are no longer trained as singers and musicians in anything like the numbers of even 50 years ago. There are no longer thousands of boys learning each year in thousands of churches from thousands of quondam choirboys that music is the most reliably delicious and rewarding of all earthly pursuits, and so realizing that they must do their best to stick with it, come what may, whatever else they might do, and despite the inevitable disaster of puberty and the loss of their pure puerile untrammeled capacity to channel the Platonic Forms into the created order without taint of noise or buzz or disharmony.

Excursus: Speaking as one such choirboy, I can testify that the capacity so to channel the Forms unsullied and make them manifest here below, and so to ravish souls with unspeakable, unearthly Beauty, is the mightiest power I have known. And I have been fortunate to know and to exert several other powers, of quite different sorts; so that I have a basis for comparison.

There are no longer thousands of thousands of such boys. There are rather a few thousand each year, these days, or maybe only a thousand in all, worldwide; no more.

That is not enough to sustain the cult. It is not enough to feed the symphonies, chamber orchestras or piano quintets with the cream of the crop. It is not enough to supply the necessary piano teachers or university professors of music (who are any good). So, it is not enough to sustain the West.

All the foregoing is as true for acolytes as for choirboys, I should emphasize. We choirboys always looked down on acolytes, a bit, thinking them dull. I bet the acolytes returned the favor, thinking us choirboys too fancy by half. But both orders understood each other as allies, at bottom. And the firmament between the two orders is permeable; a talented boy who started singing just as I left for university is now a verger.

I have nothing against girls, NB. I have girls as children and grandchildren, and would not by any means prevent their involvement in music per se. But I would prevent their involvement in liturgy, not because of any defect in them, but rather only because the little boys upon whose deep love for her activities the future of the Church and of the West depends find little girls revolting.

26 thoughts on “Church Choristers Must Be, & Must Be Male

  1. All good and agreed about the Woman Problem. Now about the homos (I won’t capitalize them)? Polyphonic Cult of Elagabal not being the presumed desired end result and all…

    Seems to me that there are very *few* naturally celibate men during virile years. Sure there are *some*. Just not many. A young man is going to have to be shown some aFaustian version of the Brass Ring in order to sugar the pill and then will need some major league goading to keep him in line later.

    As an aside, I wonder how henpecked and cucked the married Orthodox secular priesthood is? Not very in Slavic lands one imagines… but let’s imagine for a moment Rod Never Shut Up About Muh Orthodoxy Dreher’s PP here in partibus infidelium for example…

    FWIW, I’d posit that a good many men return to a level of disgust with or amused contempt for women by (say) their early 50s; declining T levels and accumulated life experience will tell. So at least some of the Priesthood could profitably be recruited here.

    • I sang for decades in exclusively male cathedral choirs. A few of the men and boys I knew were homosexual. Not once did sex ever enter into our life together, even when we were on tour for extended periods, and despite the fact that there were lots of boys involved. It just didn’t happen. We were engaged together in something nobler.

      That is remarkable in itself. What is more: we formed lifelong friendships with each other, including those of us who were homosexual. Sex just isn’t on the radar when we are together. We relate on a different plane.

      I dare say that it is a more intimate plane. Some of the strongest episodes of affection and admiration I have ever experienced occurred in the context of performance of sublime sacred music, in which another singer and I were caught up together and transported – and ravished – by Beauty himself.

      This is why it is best to get boys involved before the onset of puberty. That way, they learn that there is something they can do – something not only fun, not only honorable and prestigious, not only serious, difficult and rewarding, not only wonderfully pleasant, not only noble, but *holy* – that is far more important and far more wonderful than sex (or than anything else they might do, for that matter). For boys who have learned this lesson, and what is more experienced its profound truth in and by means of their very bodies, a life of celibate service at the high altar can look like a pretty good option. They can understand that the life of a priest is properly a life spent on the verge of ecstasy – and from time to time passing up and through the veil that separates sublime beauty from the unsurpassable glory of the mystical ascent.

  2. But obviously a Based Muscular Christianity ™ Mark II without Kingsleyite Heresies is going to require more than just Older Men Gotten Over Women for Good. Short of Divine Intervention, who is the Curtis Yarvin who could design a system to encourage and enforce Based Celibacy amongst the young and virile, *and* a way to get from here to there?

    • That is indeed the problem. It afflicts every institution of society. I vest my hopes – my dim hopes – in the movement toward traditional music, architecture, and liturgy – aye, and theology, too – among Catholics, which is gaining strength bit by bit.

  3. Now the problem is dealing with the Sodomites. Death Penalty.

    In regards to Choirboys. I prefer Men to boy choirs. The Baritone has more grandeur in my opinion.

    And choirboys end up being sodomite magnets who would want them so we have to be careful about them.

  4. Several years ago, I was standing during the liturgy when my mind began to wander (and then to wonder) as some mischievous rascals defied all decency and the scowls of old women by running around and making a nuisance. I saw before me a vivid contrast between the wild boys in the nave and the angelic boys in the altar (sanctuary). The well behaved boys were well behaved because they had a mission and were focused on its success. The wild boys were acting like heathen because they were not aware that they also had a mission and had decided to use their time for play. Of course, I had witnessed similar situations for years, but it never struck me that, pastorally speaking, the job of an altar boy engages that boy in worship. Girls, for the most part, do not need assigned tasks to soak in the significance of their surroundings. Boys, on the other hand, must be engaged, and assisting in the liturgy gives them something concrete to do. And they take it very seriously. Yes, adult acolytes are needed and useful, but one of their main jobs is to direct the altar boys so that the priest can attend to the most important business while the rest of the team makes sure that everything else gets done correctly and timely.

    Every time I witness “altar girls” (which is extremely rare, as I avoid N.O. masses like the plague), I feel sickened. It’s not that the girls (or women as “eucharistic ministers,” readers, or what not) are disgusting. Rather, it’s disorder . . . like seeing a seal in the desert. Now, I’m not a little boy, but even as a little boy, I never found girls disgusting. But there are proprieties — which liberalism fanatically attacks in its perverse quest for sexless, sterile, faceless equality. Women larping as clerics is as repellent and absurd as a ballerino’s transgressively wearing a tutu and taking a ballerina’s part in dance. Both male and female dancers are awesomely beautiful and admirable when they follow their proper roles. When the roles are reversed, the resulting spectacle degrades the dancers and the audience alike. Such is an attack on nature and civilization. And likewise is the abomination that many “churches” have implemented in their sacred services. Of course, ballerini have their own special feats; their athleticism naturally exceeds that of women. Their jumps and stamina wow and delight . . . but they are, in the end, supporting actors. They support the real stars on the stage, who wear the tutu. That’s just the way of classical dance, and it’s a splendid art. In the Church, the Lord in his wisdom has chosen men as the actors for her communal worship. There are permissible support roles open to women, the extent and wisdom of which remain debatable, but that’s just the way the Church is. You don’t have to have read pages and pages of 20th century Catholic theological-anthropological reflection to know, in your gut, that priestesses make a mockery of Christian divine worship. Even the pagan Romans accorded proper roles in the worship of the gods. The Vestal Virgins didn’t tend just any sacred fires. They had their assigned duties. The colleges of priests and priestesses had specified roles . . . because the Romans thought that their work was real and important. You don’t want your heart surgeon doing your (house) plumbing, as much as you might esteem heart surgeons. Where there is real work to be done, there are specialization and discrimination . . . the division of labor . . . the benefit of expertise.

    Zaphod asks whether Orthodox priests suffer under the pecking of hens. I do not think so. I’ve known a fair number of presbyteresses, some of whom were meek, many others not by any stretch of the word. Yet, even the most stubborn and opinionated priestwives appear, to the laity, at least, to “stay in their lanes.” If they share their opinions on church matters with their husbands, I’m pretty sure it’s commentary about who is overburdened in parochial tasks and who is slacking. Inside every priest’s wife must lurk a Martha who worries about the proper keeping of the Lord’s house.

    • One of the best lessons taught to me as a terrified 6 year old chorister was the crucial importance of not fidgeting. We were told that we must sit – or stand, or kneel, as the case might be – *absolutely still.* It was unbelievably hard to do that, especially during the 15 minutes of the sermon, but we did it. We would hiss at boys who fidgeted, or who – horrors – talked. So I learned patience.

      We were taught also that we must at all times pay close attention to everything happening, so that we missed no cues. We were told that we must listen carefully to the prayers, the lessons, and the sermon. So we did. From them, and from the passages of scripture and the prayers of saints and inspired poets that we sang, was laid the foundation of my theological education. I would wrestle earnestly with the meanings of the creeds at every iteration – especially when I was singing them in Latin.

      We were taught that the reason we were being taught these things was that the liturgy in which we were engaged was a deadly solemn business, the most serious, important thing a person could do. So, we approached our liturgical service with humble awe. And that opened to us the gate of joy.

  5. Pingback: Church Choristers Must Be, & Must Be Male | Reaction Times

  6. fair play to you. Good to hear a prophetic voice calling traditionalists to go a level deeper. I was challenged by the article but also convinced. In the past at the tlm I have tolerated a women choir as something to offer them but I can see that this was imperfect. Although it does mean that if I had taken your route I would have never had missa cantata or solemnis because I had a couple of women who were willing and able to sing…. a small parish, only 30 at the tlm on sunday.

    • The predicament of the parish priest these days is indeed dire. I myself now sing in a terrific mixed choir. It is not the ideal, but it is closer to that ideal than anything I have heard in other Catholic parishes, or even at most Anglican cathedrals. There is no possibility whatever, in the political climate today, that my parish might turn to men and boys, even though it is blessed with an active priory and a big school on the premises – and with a music director who grew up in the Anglican choral tradition. All the raw materials, i.e. Not to mention a great building.

      My recommendation is to set your music program so that all the music heard in your church is beautiful. It is better to have no music than to have music that is bad. Silence is a sort of music. So are the cadences of the TLM. Be sure that you are not running through the Latin like a speed reader, but deliberately, carefully, and with a good, clear Italianate enunciation. Make it rich rather than flat.

      Plainsong is the next step. Form a Schola Cantorum, that will meet together at least twice a week to rehearse for a few hours, and then sing on Sundays. Its repertoire should consist entirely of plainsong – very simple plainsong, to begin with. After a few months, you can spice things up with a bit of organum at the climaxes. Polyphony can start when the group gets musically solid, and has begun to attract enough good singers for part singing.

      Notice that the sequence above replicates the early history of Western music: oracular speech → unison chant → organum → polyphony.

      Sell it as a chant group for men – especially young men – that has a devotional purpose. The goal of a perfect unison in the performance of plainsong suffices to order a group of singers properly, in mind, heart, and body. The right way to sing each chant appears naturally from the chant itself, if it is sung enough times to learn the tune. And each choir naturally evolves its own approach to its music. If you regularly attend rehearsals and spend some time in catechesis about the texts, and about the function of each chant in each Sunday’s service, you’ll start getting some traction. Ask the question: “How does this chant setting evoke the meanings of the text?”

      Be sure that each rehearsal involves some time for socializing (with some cheese, crackers, and wine supplied by members in rotation). Among other things, you are aiming to generate a männerbund.

      You might find after a while that the liturgists at your TLM sometimes outnumber the congregation. But then, a really good schola will attract congregants. That in turn increases the number of potential recruits for the schola (and for every other lay office). If things get going well enough, then you can begin to think about proposing to the parish that the schola add a few boys. You don’t need the full complement of 16 boys usual for cathedrals and chapels. Four or five will do to begin with.

      You may need to start a women’s chant group, too. Resist the temptation to mix the men and women, even for special occasions.

      God be with you.

      • some nice points and good ideas. I think one extra problem with pitching it to young men and boys is that, in a small setup, the priest is desperate to get all the boys and young men to be servers… maybe in the US things are different but many places in the UK the tlm is only attended by older people and maybe the odd couple with a few babies.

      • A tough situation. I would sell it first though not as a choir for singing in the TLM but as a men’s group for spiritual development using chant. And not just for young men or boys, but for men in general; not just for the regulars at the TLM but for the whole parish. If you can get even 4 or 5 men to give it a shot, who knows what might happen? If it goes OK, then in a few months’ time there could be an announcement that the Men’s Contemplative Chant Group would be singing at a special TLM …

        By the way, the image of a contemplative chant group that includes both men and women is an apt illustration of the problem that inherently besets mixed choirs. If women are in the room, men can’t but notice them qua women. The presence of women is bound to distract men from the business at hand, whatever it might be. So, it is a defeater for a group intended precisely to eliminate all distractions.

        I doubt that women in that situation would do otherwise.

  7. All children should be exposed to music and encouraged to sing. Singing significantly promotes and structures consciousness. Post-literacy is also post-musicality. Our youngsters “have” songs only in the sense that they store digitally on their devices bits of studio-produced rhythms that no one actually sings (I mean, there is a vocal track, but it is so thoroughly processed that anything human in it has been expelled) and that no imitator possibly could sing because our vocal apparatus is not a synthesizer. The sudden, intense, and likely transient popularity of sea-chanties among twenty-somethings points to the need for vocal musicality. It would be nice if the trend established itself, but I doubt that the music industry will permit it.

  8. I see that in your reply to Fr. Ignatius you recommend also starting a women’s chant group. But if there should never, ever be women singing in church, then isn’t that kind of misleading? That is, you’re setting it up, but planning to eventually disband them? Is there anything in the liturgy that you approve of for girls and women other than participation as lay congregants?

    As a woman who somehow survived girlhood, I agree with you wholeheartedly that little boys find little girls disgusting. I can also assure you that oftentimes little girls find little boys disgusting. So I don’t blame you at all for wanting boys to have all male groups and activities, so long as you allow the girls to also have them. (Objection number one to transgender madness!) What I don’t get is the absolutism of your stand. No girls ever!!!! What? Of course, I’m a protestant, so my ignorance is, I hope, understandable. But if choir helps boys discover vocations to the priesthood, then what is there to help girls discover vocations to the religious life? Are choirs of nuns okay? I thought singing was a big part of what nuns do? Is that only in the movies? I’m serious. What you wrote has me seriously confused.

    • It is a vexed problem, to be sure. I did not mean to suggest that women ought not to be allowed to sing in church *at all.* A chant group for women could sing at contemplative services, such as Vespers. The more sung services, the better. Participation by some nuns would be icing on the cake.

      The main thing, for both male and female choirs, is to make participation an exercise in humility, and to ensure that the main point of the group is spiritual development, and not about puffing anyone up.

      • The different choirs could sing different parts, depending on the service, and, not heeding Kristor’s advice in this particular matter, sing together for other parts. Various arrangements are possible.

        Outside of a monastery, I have not discovered a native, single sex Orthodox choir in America. They’re all mixed. On certain special days, many parishes have a single sex segment of the choir. I’ve witnessed all male choirs on Mother’s Day, followed by a meal prepared by the parish brotherhood, in honor of the mothers (and to give them a “day off”). We always have female only choirs on the Sunday of the Myrrhbearing Women a few weeks following Pascha. In many parishes, the lamentations on Holy Friday are sung by women only (again, in memory of the faithful women at the cross). However, I’ve attended liturgies with visiting all male choirs such as the amazing — wonderworking — Sretensky Monastery Choir. They are a professional choir who sing for patriarchal services, and they’re beyond superb. Skeptical readers may dismiss Kristor’s words above above the religious power of music. I’m not a singer and cannot attest to its influence on the choir, but as a listener, I assure you that a choir can indeed transport your consciousness to another realm. We sing the cherubic hymn at the divine liturgy, wherein we are “to lay aside all earthly cares.” With an excellent choir, this becomes possible not just for the saints but for us distracted, carnal wretches, as well.

        I admire the Anglican choral tradition. Owing to the Episcopalians’ early entanglements with modern madness, I grew up with a suspicious dislike of Anglicanism — they were among the first Christian enthusiasts for cremation, contraception, and priestesses. To my young self, that was all I needed to know. However, I attended a Christmastime service at the American Cathedral in Paris when I was studying abroad out of homesickness, and I fell in love with the music. They had me right at the beginning with “Once in Royal David’s City.” Since then, I’ve been scandalized by the juxtaposition of so rich a liturgical tradition (even in ecclesial rebellion) alongside latter day apostasy. It’s heartbreaking to see what has happened to our Lady’s dowry.

      • The spiritual impact of sacred music can be massive. In one of the larger cathedrals where I sang, the congregation at Evensong was invited to sit in the choir with the choristers – behind us in the stalls, and on either side. So, they could sit as it were in the very midst of the music. I could look across the choir toward the choirmaster and my colleagues of the cantoris, and out of the corner of my eye observe the reactions of the congregants. I well remember their expressions of ecstatic bliss.

        The spiritual impact of sacred music upon the singer is about ten times as great as its impact upon the congregation. But the singer must never relax his attention to the strictly technical aspects of the performance, and so allow himself to sink into the beauty. That way lies terrible hazard of error.

      • @Kristor

        “It is a vexed problem, to be sure. I did not mean to suggest that women ought not to be allowed to sing in church *at all.* A chant group for women could sing at contemplative services, such as Vespers. The more sung services, the better. Participation by some nuns would be icing on the cake.”

        A good example:

        The Male Choir is the core group in this setting.

  9. Back in the well-incensed days of yore, it was a female status flex for mothers to have sons become altar servers, and x10 join the priesthood.

    Ask yourself how these play in the X Locality Mum’s Group on Faceborg or in an Instagram feed.

    I appreciate that it’s possible to get a bit too obsessed with Briffault’s Law and the Red Pill as an explanatory key to the world around us — just as one can go a little too far down the rabbit hole with JQ and end up a bit mad.

    Another whole submerged issue is the pill and only semi-correlated reduction in family sizes. There seems to be evidence that male sexual orientation is affected by a combination of birth order, sibling order, with a compounding factor when there are many births to a single female. This postulated to have something to do with hormonal interactions + immune reactions and counter reactions between mother and fetuses through multiple pregnancies. Point being that the supply of relatively asexual or mildly and willing to sublimate it homosexuals (spectrums, Baby, spectrums) has been drastically reduced. Obviously this reduces number of candidates for a celibate male priesthood.

    We live in a Matriarchy. I don’t believe that it is possible to credibly dispute this in the Current Year… For very brief periods in history, this has been untrue. Hetaerae anyone? Impossible to keep women down. Biology won’t allow it. Re-establishing balance to the Force will have to be something like Douglas Adams’ definition of flying as ‘Jumping and Missing the Ground’. Going to need some slippery sleight of hand worthy of a great artificer. We’ll have to trick the birds into chaining themselves.

  10. Although I’m not averse to a few public demonstrations along the lines of Margaret Atwood’s fever dreams in order to nudge (no, I didn’t go to Harvard, sorry) them in the correct direction.

  11. I much prefer the singing of adult females, whose voices harmonize better with adult males. Another consideration is that the music, which is often quite difficult, benefits from an adult’s interpretive skill versus a pre-teen boy’s.

    I’m an enthusiast for historically informed performance (HIP) practices, but even these groups today have moved away from those insipid boys’ voices.

    • The early music groups that use women for performances of sacred music do so for economic reasons. A single talented woman can sing for decades, whereas a boy’s career as a soprano can last for at most 15 years. Where the supply of talented boys is impoverished, there’s really no alternative but to use women.

      But this is an argument, not for women as such, but for an ecclesial economy that reliably generates a plentiful supply of talented boys – and, thus, altos, tenors, basses, organists, composers, pianists, etc. That there is no such economy anymore is an important reason that serious music in the West is in danger of disappearing.

      Another factor in the use of women by early music groups is that women have responded to the strong demand from the audience of such music for women *who can sound like boys.* There were no such women at the beginning of the early music scene back in the 70’s. I knew and sang with some of the first few who could manage it. It was *such a relief* to be able to sing with them. Believe me when I tell you that the vocal style of the 19th century female soprano *just does not work* with that of a choir of male altos, tenors, and basses trained in the vocal style appropriate for liturgical song.

      The foregoing applies more of course to the performance of sacred than to secular music.

  12. Perhaps one glimmer of silver lining the cloud of this plague of Trannies is that we may get a second Farinelli. Given the fetish for starting them young, this not beyond bounds of possibility.

    Won’t be any shortage of Cardinals to adopt Xir either 😛

    • The sort of parents who would allow the castration of a son for ideological reasons, or just to signal their “virtue,” or to assuage their own mental illness, or from simple deep moral confusion, are not going to want to allow him anywhere near a church job. And anyone who thinks it might be good for a son to get into a church choir is the last sort of person who would want to cut off his nuts.

    • Trannies are an abomination in the sight of the the LORD(Deuteronomy 22:5). He will not accept this sacrilege.

      Why else do you think that Castrati in the Old Testament is considered Ritually unclean and excluded from the LORD’s assembly(Deuteronomy 23:1)?

      Mature Men with a hearty Baritone is preferred it seems even back then.

Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.