• Requiem æternam and Lux æterna are out; Amazing Grace, On Eagle’s Wings and How Great Thou Art are in. Indeed, these three songs are so ubiquitous at funeral and memorial Masses (at least two of them have been sung at 90% of the Masses for the dead that I have attended) that they almost seem to constitute a new “proper.”
• Black or purple vestments are out; white vestments are in.
• Eulogies after communion are typically in, despite efforts to stamp them out. People expect them today the way they expected the Dies iræ in former times.
• Bodies are, increasingly, out. It’s been several years since I’ve attended a funeral in my parish that featured a body rather than “cremains” or sometimes just a photo of the deceased.
• In terms of overall tone (readings chosen, homilies given, etc.), intercession for the deceased is out; celebration of the life of the deceased is in.

These developments all seem to me to be “organic,” in the sense that they are the result not of legislation but of what the pips (people-in-the-pews) are asking for. Of course, their desire for these things is shaped by larger cultural forces, some of which may be benign and other malign. But hasn’t this always been the case with “organic development”?

Chants of the Roman Missal: A Review

The workshop, held at the University of St. Thomas in Houston, begins with a session open to the public on Wednesday, February 15th, at 7pm. It concludes that Saturday evening.

For more information about the program, please visit www.gregorianchantschool.org or view the flyer here.

Such things are perhaps easier to demonstrate than describe, so for your listening pleasure, the Choir of Westminster Abbey, singing Psalm 138 at Evensong (Sung Evening Prayer) during the Papal Visitation of September 2010:

The translation is from the Coverdale Psalter, which is part of the Book of Common Prayer 1662:

Psalm 138. Confitebor tibi
1. I will give thanks unto thee, O Lord, with my whole heart : even before the gods will I sing praise unto thee.
2. I will worship toward thy holy temple, and praise thy Name, because of thy loving-kindness and truth : for thou hast magnified thy Name and thy word above all things.
3. When I called upon thee, thou heardest me : and enduedst my soul with much strength.
4. All the kings of the earth shall praise thee, O Lord : for they have heard the words of thy mouth.
5. Yea, they shall sing in the ways of the Lord : that great is the glory of the Lord.
6. For though the Lord be high, yet hath he respect unto the lowly : as for the proud, he beholdeth them afar off.
7. Though I walk in the midst of trouble, yet shalt thou refresh me : thou shalt stretch forth thy hand upon the furiousness of mine enemies, and thy right hand shall save me.
8. The lord shall make good his loving-kindness toward me : yea, thy mercy, O Lord, endureth for ever; despise not then the works of thine own hands.
Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost : as it was in the beginning, is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.

In short, harmony and (some) meter, and a history different but not wholly unrelated to that of Gregorian Chant, makes “Anglican Chant” Anglican. That’s the short of it, and we have ample musicological types who can supplement the details if they wish.

I should add — believe it or not — that this complicated-sounding chant is eminently singable, even by congregations with little formal musical training, provided that the pointing of the text is clear.

Of course, Anglicans are capable (some would say ‘must needs be capable’) of poking fun at ourselves, our liturgy and our music. Here are the Master Singers, presenting the “Highway Code”:

The entire missal, including all the priests’ proper prayers, is now in use for Catholic English-speakers everywhere (except New Zealand, that is).

Comments on how it went, second time around?

I’m especially interested in the declamation of the celebrant’s proper prayers. At first I thought these would have to be proclaimed slowly and carefully, with pauses at the punctuation to help make clear(er) the convoluted syntax. But now I wonder if that doesn’t just call more attention to the syntax, which is the hardest part in this whole project. Is it better to keep it moving and not break it up? Will worshipers gradually learn to listen in a new way, grasping various words and phrases but not necessarily catching the whole argument? I was put onto this line of thinking by a fellow monk’s comment that it sounds better not to pause at the comma they put after “that.” Here’s an example, from today’s Prayer after Communion – see the third line.

Replenished by the food of spiritual nourishment,
we humbly beseech you, O Lord,
that, through our partaking in this mystery,
you may teach us to judge wisely the things of earth
and hold firm to the things of heaven.
Through Christ our Lord.

How did this and such prayers go?

I’m also interested (for various reasons) in the missal chants. Were they used where you worshiped? How did they work? I’m really interested in the new Preface tone. I think it’s one of the gems of the missal – and I speak as an objective, neutral observer. I’m very fond of the lilt of it. I dearly hope priests don’t find it too difficult or complicated or Baroque (or whatever unfortunate label could stick). If the Preface was sung, tell us how it went.

Be nice, everyone. But do be honest.

awr

Q. Any comments on the way music works in the new translation of the Mass? My opinion is that it does not work very well. I have noticed a big decrease in singing recently since the new translation of the sung parts was introduced. Is this your experience?

A. Actually this in not my experience at all. We tried to introduce a new Mass, but gave up because it was unsingable. I won’t mention the composer’s name. Before he died, Richard Proulx adapted his famous Community Mass to the new translations; we now use that, and the people have got the hang of it pretty well. I read an essay by Rita Ferrone in a recent issue of Commonweal in which she said that the new Mass does not sing very well. I disagree. I think it is most singable. The chants are particularly good (I know one of the music composers well!). Chant serves very well when the texts are not rhythmic, but are more prosaic (as in prose). I am excited to introduce the new chants to the people, especially the dialogues between priests and people.

As a lead-up, a panel was held a few weeks ago with Thomas Fisher, Dean of the College of Design at the University of Minnesota, and Bill Franklin, Episcopal bishop of western New York and former theology professor at St. John’s. Do listen to it.

Fr. Hilary Thimmesch OSB, former president of St. John’s University and youngest member of the planning committee back in 1961, has written a delightful account of how we got the abbey church, Marcel Breuer and a Committee of Twelve Plan a Church: A Monastic Memoir. LitPress says this about the new book:

The junior member of the twelve-monk planning committee recounts in warm and frequently humorous detail how its members related to the Hungarian-born Bauhaus-trained architect who had no background in church architecture but shared their belief in the enduring quality of simple materials sympathetically used. How the strong architect-client relationship survived the strain of disagreement at a critical moment in completion of the church is the narrative high point.

There is Worship 4 and Gather 3 and Lead Me, Guide Me 2 and Oramos Cantando from GIA.

OCP doesn’t seem to mention it on their website but I believe they’re planning to revise JourneySong to come out in 2012.

There are several hymnals from the “traditional/conservative side” competing for a small but growing market:

the Vatican II Hymnal from Corpus Christi Watershed,
the Adoremus Hymnal from Ignatius Press,
and St. Michael’s Hymnal from Linda Schafer and Br. Michael O’Connor, OP.

We’ll have occasion to talk more about all these hymnals.

But for now, let’s step back from the hymnal contents and look at the prior issue of the editors of hymnals – the background and knowledge editors need to do their work of editing.

What qualifications shouls hymnal editors have? I’ll start the conversation with this short list. (I’m limiting myself to English-language hymnals.)

Knowledge of the reformed liturgy: an understanding of all the reformed rites of the Catholic church, and a vision of the role of music in the reformed rites. Because there are competing visions of the meaning of Vatican II out there, it is now more necessary than ever for editors to be well-informed in liturgical theology and well-read in liturgical scholarship.

Experience and practical knowledge in promoting congregational song. This includes the ability to recognize melodies (of Mass settings, or refrains and antiphons, of hymns) that are and are not singable by congregations.

Practical wisdom on layout and presentation. For example, knowing what a congregation needs (clear font for text, music for all sung items) and what it doesn’t (guitar chords, page references for accompaniments, planning help and advice alongside congregational repertoire).

Understanding of the role of the choir in Catholic worship so that appropriate distinctions are made between things sung by choir and things sung by congregation. Choir editions should help the choir carry out its unique ministry rather than duplicate the congregation’s role.

Knowledge of Gregorian chant in Latin and English, with good sense about the available repertoire, what is appropriately provided to congregations, and how it is best laid out to encourage congregational participation.

Openness to cross-cultural expansion of congregational repertoire– both because Church documents call for cultural sensitivity and because the canon of English-language church music is being expanded in many directions (culturally, linguistically), as seen in so many recent hymnals.

Then there are so many things needed to edit the hymns.

Knowledge of the liturgical role of strophic hymnody in Catholic worship, including both the extensive history of Catholic congregational vernacular hymnody at Mass and the wide latitude granted to liturgical planners by current Church legislation. A vision of how hymnody relates to the rites, and how hymnody relates to the Mass lectionary, is very important.

Knowledge of the [ever-changing, ever-growing, ever-being-redefined] “canon” of congregational hymnody in all its historical depth. A good hymnal editor should be a hymn/hymnal geek, with a large collection of hymnals from many traditions. A lifetime of regular attendance at Hymn Society conferences would be a great help.

Knowledge of the sources and reference material so that wise editorial decisions can be made about melodic and textual variants. On the editor’s shelf should be Julian, Higginson, Westermeyer (Let the People Sing), Routley (the one on texts and the one on tunes), and the like.

Commitment to ecumenism and love of the ecumenical richness of hymnody. Catholics have sung vernacular Protestant hymns at Mass in every era since the Protestant Reformation. (Yes, this is really true. For further info, see chapter 23 of my big book.) The reformed liturgy offers an excellent means for ecumenical convergence between Catholics and other Christians, and the editor should know how to make good use of Protestant hymnody.

What would you add to or change in this list?

The General Instruction of the Roman Missal gives helpful explanation of the purpose of the sung texts at entrance (47-48) and communion (86-87). But no. 74 says little about the “offertory chant,” except that it accompanies the procession, and singing may happen even if there is no procession. That latitude in free selection of hymns is the same as for the entrance (48), but unlike at 48, nothing is said about the purpose of the offertory chant.

The U.S. bishops’ document Sing to the Lord is similarly reticent about the purpose of the singing at Prep. The General Instruction’s brief instructions are quoted, and then it is stated that instrumental music may also be used.

Communion and Eucharist hymns aren’t appropriate, obviously. But should Prep hymns refer to Eucharist (at last indirectly) in the sense of preparing us to offer sacrifice and partake of banquet? Is this the time for gratitude for the earth’s blessings, picking up the theme of the prayers (“Blessed are you, Lord God of all creation…”) which may be said aloud? Or the offertory antiphon in the Lutheran hymnals, “Let the vineyards be fruitful, Lord”?

The Latin chant propers sometimes tie together Word and Eucharist in that the communion antiphon quotes the Gospel of the day. Should the piece at Prep tie in to the Scripture readings? Is this the time to sing the lectionary hymn (or Gospel hymn, or hymn of the day)?

I recall Kevin Irwin writing in Text and Context that the direction of the liturgical action shifts after the General Intercessions: at the Preparation of the Gifts, the focus moves to the table. Hymns that bring us back to the Liturgy of the Word are out of place. Do you agree?

I had Irwin in mind a week ago when my Gregorian Chant schola sang at Abbey Sunday Mass. We sang the proper introit and communio, the former as a prelude before the congregational hymn. But we didn’t sing the proper offertorium. Oftentimes, that particular chant is one of the most difficult of the propers. Instead of it I programmed a chant quoting the Gospel reading: Malos male perdet, “He will put those wretched men to a wretched death.” (That text is a challenge to interpret allegorically for spiritual benefit, btw, but that’s a conversation for another day.) I found this Gospel-based text by going to the Antiphonale Monasticum with its Benedictus and Magnificat antiphons tied to the 3-year lectionary. Did my selection distort the direction of the liturgy at this point?

At the end of this post are the offertorium texts of the Graduale Romanum for the Ordinary Time Sundays up to the 10th Sunday. I don’t see a clear pattern in their themes – do you? There is no clear focus on offering sacrifice, for example. The texts seem to range freely over themes of praise, worship, discipleship, and appeal. Does this suggest that we are quite free in selecting texts for congregation or choir at this point in the liturgy?

I welcome your contributions to this discussion.

* * * * *

Texts of the Offertory Chant in the Graduale Romanum up to the 10^th Sunday in Ordinary Time

Shout joyfully to God, all the earth; let all the earth cry out with joy to God, and sing a psalm to his name… (Ps 66: 1, 2, 16)

The Lord’s right hand has shown strength, the Lord’s right hand has exalted me. I shall not die, but live; and I shall declare the works of the Lord. (Ps 118: 16, 17)

It is good to give thanks to the Lord, to sing a psalm to your name, O Most High. (Ps 92: 2)

Make my footsteps sure in your paths, so my feet do not slip; incline your ear and hear my words; display your wonderful mercies, O Lord, Savior of those who place their hope in you. (Ps 16: 5, 6, 7)

Blessed are you, O Lord; teach me your commandments. With my lips I have declared all the judgments your mouth has spoken. (Ps 119: 12, 13)

Attend to the voice of my prayer, O my King and my God, for it is you, O Lord, whom I implore. (Ps 5: 3, 4)

Turn to me, Lord, and deliver my soul; save me for the sake of your love. (Ps 6:5)

Let those who know your name trust in you, O Lord, for you do not abandon those who seek you. Sing psalms to the Lord who dwells in Zion, for he does not forget the cry of the poor. (Ps 9: 11, 12, 13)

Enlighten my eyes, lest I fall into the sleep of death, lest my enemy say, “I have prevailed against this one.” (Ps 12: 4, 5)