Lamb of God/Jesus Lamb of God

[Nick Baty]

The issue therefore is this: at this point in time, the texts we are talking about are still permitted, and therefore the approval panel has no basis on which to withhold approval of settings of such texts. When the Missal eventually appears, that situation could of course change.

Surely the Panel only has jurisdiction over the new translation. For permission to publish a setting of the ICET Lamb of God one would go straight to ICET. And those publishers who couldn't care less about accuracy don't need permission from anyone – doubtless Israeli Mass will continue to appear for many years to come.

[Gabriel]

The issue therefore is this: at this point in time, the texts we are talking about are still permitted, and therefore the approval panel has no basis on which to withhold approval of settings of such texts. When the Missal eventually appears, that situation could of course change.

My understanding is that the panel is dealing with the texts of the new edition of the Missal (even if the Lamb of God is one of the few places where the text is unchanged). According to SC's logic it should not be considering texts in the new translation because they are not yet permitted! In a similar way if a composer submitted a setting which included a current translation of a Memorial Acclamation it should accept because it is currently permitted.

To respond to Nick's point isn't the Panel acting on behalf of the Bishops who have oversight of the liturgical text whether it is ICEL's copyright or not. I see that, for example, settings of the Lord's Prayer should be submitted to the panel which in the words of the retired Anglican bishop Colin Buchanan are copyright Jesus Christ who is living and reigns for eternity.

[presbyter]

Now come on SC - tropes in general or just the ICET text? Your posts are ambiguous. Let's have a concrete reference please. Quote the text of the permission.

presbyter, you're straining at gnats. The 1971 permission allowed both the ICET text and troped settings of the Agnus Dei, as well as the Apostles' Creed when sung, for that matter.

As for the actual text of the permission, this is alas hidden in the mists of time. Even Martin Foster is apparently unable to produce it...........

Because it does not exist? I feel sure that MUSIC in the Parish Mass would have mentioned this if it did exist. That document mentions the use of the Apostles' Creed and the ICET Agnus. How do we know you are not making this up?

[presbyter]

To trope or not to trope? ……..


Still wearing the hat of an advocatus diaboli :

Consider the ritual action of the celebration – the “Breaking of Bread” – and the focus of the accompanying texts. What are we bringing to mind?

Background

I suggest that in the background, there might be a host of Scriptural imagery upon which to contemplate. This host could include, for example:

OT

Levitical Sacrifice/Atonement – Lev 4,5,16,17
The Passover Lamb – Exodus 12
The Suffering Servant – Isaiah 53

NT

John the Baptist’s recognition – John 1:29
The Last Supper narratives – Mt 26:26, Lk 22:19, Mk14:22
The Emmaus supper – Lk 24:28,35
Christ the High Priest – Heb 5-10 (cf Leviticus texts above)

Foreground

BUT - in singing Lamb of God, the imagery in the foreground that the Church asks us to dwell on is surely this:

Rev 5 – the slaughtered/sacrificed but victorious Lamb
Rev 7 – the Lamb who is our shepherd
Rev 19 – the marriage feast of the Lamb; the banquet of heaven.

The celebrant's invitation “Behold the Lamb……” combines John the Baptist’s recognition (Jn 1:29) and the blessedness of those invited to the feast (Rev 19:9)

The focus of the ritual is the “sacred banquet” and that “pledge of future glory” given to us….. with the glory of God as our light and the Lamb, our lamp (Rev 21:23)

Tropes – possible effects?

I suggest that tropes – even if they are Scriptural, Christological titles – will shift or distort the focus of the imagery we are being given to engage with in our prayer, as we prepare for Holy Communion. “The Way, the Truth and the Life”, for example, is a splendid text but its immediate focus is not the heavenly banquet.

A litany (an extended litany) of Christological titles and attributes at this ritual moment could, I suggest, simply be too much information about our Lord. Better to focus solely on the victorious Lamb and his banquet, I think.

Tropes that are in some way added extra petitions are superfluous and unnecessary. All our intentions are subsumed/absorbed in the petitions for mercy and the gift of peace.


Readers will no doubt realize that I myself do not see any need for alternative texts of “Fraction Songs” and indeed, I have not indulged in any alternative, troped text in celebrations at which I have presided for at least the last ten years.

A Question - repeated

If anyone wants to adapt / replace the Liturgical text - why? What purpose does this serve?

[alan29]

An excellent post there. To re-apply your question, ...... what function does the repetition of Lamb of God serve? Seems to me it is either a vestigial litany, or someone somewhere needs the message re-enforcing..... I for one can get a message on the first hearing.

[docmattc]

The Lamb of God is a litany to accompany the fraction. and "for this reason, may be repeated as many times as necessary until the rite has reached its conclusion" (GIRM 83). If the fraction rite consists solely of halving the priest's host, the repetition serves no purpose. If however the fraction is substantial....


This does not attempt to address Presbyter's question.

[presbyter]

presbyter, you're straining at gnats. The 1971 permission allowed both the ICET text and troped settings of the Agnus Dei........

Then why - for example - in the 1975 Chapman publication Sing the Mass, are there no troped settings that go beyond the ICET text? If episcopal approval had been given, I suggest this publication would have included some settings.

There are indeed good settings of the ICET text in this book - Bévenot, Rubbra, Atkinson - but none add further tropes.

[Vox Americana]

Still wearing the hat of an advocatus diaboli :

You have no hat in your avatar, Presbyter, not a biretta nor a mitre, whichever is the more suited to diaboli…

A Question - repeated

If anyone wants to adapt / replace the Liturgical text - why? What purpose does this serve?

• The Bible instructs us to "sing a new song"; surely this does not only mean composing new tunes, but that we should seek new texts too.
• Blessed John Henry Newman asserted that growth is the only evidence of life; perhaps then for the Liturgy to considered alive, it must be allowed to grow, which arguably involves experimentation, changing texts and making mistakes. I understand there is a history of changing texts in the Liturgy. Why stop now?
• Blessed John Henry also said 'To live is to change, and to be perfect is to have changed often'. If we stop the Liturgy changing, are we preventing God from perfecting God's work, from living in the Liturgy?
• It's OK being faithful to the Latin/Greek, but who says the original is any good in the first place? 'Tradition' does not necessarily imply good.
• why not?

I merely throw these out for discussion.

[Southern Comfort]

I feel sure that MUSIC in the Parish Mass would have mentioned this if it did exist. That document mentions the use of the Apostles' Creed and the ICET Agnus. How do we know you are not making this up?

Indeed, one of the many criticisms levelled at Music in the Parish Mass when it first appeared was precisely that its authors were not au fait with the then current liturgical legislation. The document was also thought to be less than ideal because it had been produced by a small group of people who did not consult widely.

And no, I am not making this up either.

[Nick Baty]

I see that, for example, settings of the Lord's Prayer should be submitted to the panel

Why? This is not ICEL's copyright. So how can the panel be involved?
What of evangelical publishers with no link with the Roman church?

The Lamb of God is a litany to accompany the fraction. and "for this reason, may be repeated as many times as necessary until the rite has reached its conclusion" (GIRM 83).

In which case, the Lamb of God as given in the latest translation (and its predecessor) contradicts GIRM 83 because, as laid out, it is far too long for the fractio in the average Sunday parish liturgy. It therefore ceases to be a cultic song and becomes just another piece of music sung at Mass which might have a once had a particular functionality.

And as the Lamb of God is in the public domain, a composer who used this text with tropes wouldn't need permission from the Permission to Publish Panel. (I'm not saying that its use would be legitimate, just that permission to publish would not be needed.)

[presbyter]

The answer is the same as before. In 1971, the Bishops' Conference permitted tropes in sung settings of the Lamb of God. This permission, too, has not been rescinded.

I have now used my "phone a friend" option. (I retain the right to "ask the audience")

SC - do please check your memory (and, if you have any, your documentation)

The final ICET collection of texts was produced in 1975 (drafts were issued in 1969 (no alternative Lamb of God text) and then in 1971, 1972 and 1973)

According to "my friend", our Bishops approved the singing of the ICET Lamb of God text probably in the period 1975-1983 (MUSIC in the Parish Mass - 1983)
(However, Sing the Mass is dated as a compilation in 1974 and published in 1975. It contains settings of the ICET Lamb of God.)

"My friend" knows of no evidence to support your insistence that in 1971, the Bishops of England and Wales gave permission for troped settings of the Lamb of God beyond that of the ICET text. (There are no such settings in Sing the Mass)

"My friend" wonders if you are being a little confused by the work of the Liturgy Committee of the Bishops of the United States of America. The US committee seems to have seen a particularly important need for flexibility in texts for the Lamb of God in a report dated 1979. The earliest troped setting "my friend" can think of is David Clark Isele’s Holy Cross Mass - GIA, dated 1979 - possibly a first-fruit of the US committee's deliberations?

I put it to you that you could well be in error in insisting that the Bishops of England and Wales gave permission for troped texts of the Lamb of God, other than the ICET text (be that in 1971 or any year up to 1983) and that what is more likely to have happened is that some composers took on and imported an American practice here
from 1979 onwards.

(Geoffrey Boulton Smith's compilation Music for the Mass - containing troped texts other the ICET text - is dated 1985. A glance at pre-compilation, single sheet editions of two of the expanded troped texts therein, shows copyright, the composer, 1980 and 1982. These two pieces are among the earliest, published examples of the genre in this country.)

[presbyter]

it is far too long for the fractio in the average Sunday parish liturgy. It therefore ceases to be a cultic song and becomes just another piece of music sung at Mass which might have a once had a particular functionality.

Oh no! Please, please, please see beyond the narrow confine of practical function. Read my analysis above of why I don't care too much for troped texts. Above all PRAY the text, in preparation for the banquet. Do some imaginative contemplation on the text, so that next time you sing it at Mass, it grabs your body, soul, mind and spirit. Think of the Adoration of the Lamb as you pray it.......... this text is, to borrow a word, "awesome".


It matters not if the music runs a little over the time of the fraction.

[Nick Baty]

To separate the music from its reason for being there will surely denigrate the rite it accompanies. (If that sounds convoluted, it's because I'm on the fourth, perhaps fifth, scotch!)

[presbyter]

To separate the music from its reason for being there......

better to discuss that without scotch, I think.

[presbyter]

presbyter, you're straining at gnats.

You know, having just realised where this phrase is from - that's very insulting.