Post-Conciliar discontinuity

[Gedackt flute]

Is there a danger of this happening now.

Since the late 60's, (I was born in 1963), I have become aware of a tradition in music developing when the vernacular arrived.

Certainly many hymns have now become part of our tradition, and there has, in my view, been a line of development, starting with the 'folk mass' which has become gradually more sophisticated.

Some 'ditties' have survived (Seek ye first ...). Moving on from that, a handful of St. Loius Jesuits titles are now part of our tradition (Here I am -- One bread, one body -- Be not afraid).

Then in the 80's & 90's the music of Farrell, Inwood, Haugen, Hurd, et al, arrived with a fair few songs emerging as classics (Hurd's Ubi Caritas -- Farrell's Christ be our light -- Joncas' Eagles wings).

The psalms of Murray, Bevenot & Rees are now thoroughly part of tradition in the parish in which I serve.

We also sing some gregorian chant (simple settings usually edited by Richard Proulx), and the Exsultet & Tantum ergo.

All, being scripture, or scriture-based are liturgical texts. They are part of our tradition.

Is there a danger that what has been used as prayer over the years is abandoned for a foreign language (latin), and the exclusive use of gregorian and neo-gregorian chant?

[NorthernTenor]

It's good to see such a heartfelt love of tradition (irrespective of how recent & local it is).

[SOP]

Hopefully not, GF.

I was born early 50s so I remember pre Vatican II and used to sing in a good choir with my mum. Thing is, to me the things we were singing, Palestrina, Vittoria, Britten Masses were just good music. Learning the changes in English brought the Mass alive for me, it was no longer a Sunday obligation which I didn't mind because I could go up in the choir loft. I might have had the music we sang at Mass in my head but not the words so much. Could have been singing ee-ay-ah etc, I loved the way the parts came together. I now love having the words in my head too and understand the old "they who sing, pray twice" or whatever the exact words are. Same with Taize, the chants get into my head along with the words.

In that choir we sang the Mass settings for quite a few years in between the English words, so we still sang the Sanctus, the Gloria, Agnus Dei which is actually pretty much what we do now only not those big settings to be sung by the choir only. After a few years, there was much excitement as we were going to celebrate the Tridentine Mass just how it used to be. I was so disappointed that I found the whole thing terribly boring and I missed being involved. Which was odd because by then I was a full member of the choir and singing the Mass along with the responses but it didn't touch me.

I am rambling so apologies but I cannot see how we can go back to an exclusive Mass. Only those who have studied Latin/Greek can fully appreciate it. Why? Is it written anywhere that Jesus was a Latin scholar? Greek scholar? Any kind of scholar? I don't want to go back to the days when ordinary people went along to Mass and said the rosary throughout.

[quaeritor]

. . . ordinary people went along to Mass and said the rosary throughout.

I thought I'd take on GF's proposition, but you make my point for me, SOP. Those ordinary people thought they were doing a good thing - how could anyone object to the pious recitation of the Rosary?

Consider the possibility that in a few years' time someone somewhere will post incredulously that for forty years "ordinary people used to go along to Mass and sing folksy songs" (and please don't call them "folk masses", GF, - no resemblance to any folk music of which I am aware!).

Q

[NorthernTenor]

Now that we've seen the problem with revolution, maybe we can just get back to reform? And it's not really going back. The Council - whose concerns after all were pastoral, not dogmatic - was only yesterday in the grand scheme of things. It's reasonable to expect we might spend a little time working out a balanced response.

[Nick Baty]

I remember a similar situation, SOP – even though I'm around 10 years behind you and we weren't quite up to Britten et al – We sang stuff by Turner, Terry and co. We all stood in a West End gallery – if not separated from the assembly then most definitely not a part of it – and sang while the assembly endured our offerings. And then along came the folksy stuff – which was really more of the same. Again, the assembly endured what we did. And there was only music at one Mass anyway – the other four had none at all.

But thanks to people like Crichton, Gelineau, Inwood, Tamblyn and WInstone, along came an old/new concept that people could and should sing the Mass. Popes and bishops had been requesting this for decades but nothing had happened in the UK. It took the shift to the Novus Ordo for something to happen – and even then, it was a long time filtering through to some areas.

Living in an age when the Alleluia, the Sanctus and Amen are sung at almost every Mass, every day, it's hard to believe that we once had music at just one Mass on the greatest day of the week.

If I have any criticism of the new translation, it's the effect this might have on the music of the assembly. I believe the bishops of England & Wales requested that the assembly's text remain unchanged for the time being – as it did in the 1998 translation. It appears that request went unheeded. I've already heard of three parishes where the music has practically stopped (apart from a hymn sandwich) because the people have nothing to sing, and of two others where the choir has taken on the role of the assembly. Hopefully, these are isolated cases.

[JW]

The use of the vernacular should not, perhaps, be seen as discontinuity, but rather continuity in that 'church' Latin was the standard vernacular of the late Roman empire, which everyone spoke and understood. In those major territories where a language other than Latin was the lingua franca, such as Greek-speaking territories, the Byzantine Rite developed, which includes a large number of both Eastern Catholic churches in communion with Rome, as well as the Orthodox churches which aren't. I believe Byzantine Rite services are conducted in many languages.

As far as the Latin Rite is concerned, even into the early 20th Century, Latin was widely taught in most schools and was considered to be a universal language of the educated elite, so John Milton, for example, wrote poetry in Latin as well as in English. By the 20th Century, however, only a few would still be able to read and understand Latin works.

So Vatican II was not introducing any discontinuity if you consider that, over the centuries, the Mass has nearly always been celebrated in a language that was familiar to many people.

Vatican II's Consitution on the Liturgy allowed the vernacular because it "frequently may be of great advantage to the people". It also stated that "the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites."

It seems to me therefore, that the vernacular should be widely used wherever there is "great advantage to the people", and indeed, this is generally the situation today. As a Church, we seem to be struggling with the tension between this pastoral requirement and the requirement to preserve Latin, which would not seem to have been fully oberseved. At one time, it was considered that it might be appropriate to preserve Latin in our monasteries, convents and cathedrals, but this has not always happened.

As far as musical settings are concerned, the musical fashions of the day have always been reflected in sacred music so the use of the folk idiom in the late 1960's is not necessarily a discontinuity. The same applies to instruments - only the richest churches had organs before about 1800.

For example, I guess the Haydn Masses, with orchestra, would have been part of the repertoire of many Austrian Empire cathedrals from about 1800 to 1900 (so therefore traditional) till the Church began to voice concern at the 'theatrical' nature of some sacred music. Fashions in liturgical music have ever been changing and will continue to do so.

Perhaps someone with a more scholarly background can comment on this?

With regard to Nick's point that some churches are not singing the Mass anymore, I have heard that this is also happening south of Watford.

Perhaps it is time for the young people (e.g. the musicians among those at the Madrid World Youth Day) to step up to the plate and compose liturgical music for the 21st Century. It is only too clear that most of those (including myself) that have written settings for the new texts are nearer death than birth

[nazard]

Is there a danger of this happening now.

Since the late 60's, (I was born in 1963), I have become aware of a tradition in music developing when the vernacular arrived.

A tradition could be developing, but I think we are a few hundred years off having a tradition. The word tradition does seem to have become very debased in recent years.

Certainly many hymns have now become part of our tradition, and there has, in my view, been a line of development, starting with the 'folk mass' which has become gradually more sophisticated.

Many - not really. Its too soon to say.

Some 'ditties' have survived (Seek ye first ...). Moving on from that, a handful of St. Loius Jesuits titles are now part of our tradition (Here I am -- One bread, one body -- Be not afraid).

I, for one, would be grateful if I never heard them again.

Then in the 80's & 90's the music of Farrell, Inwood, Haugen, Hurd, et al, arrived with a fair few songs emerging as classics (Hurd's Ubi Caritas -- Farrell's Christ be our light -- Joncas' Eagles wings).

This depends on the definition of a classic. Surely they are a few hundred years too new to be classics?

The psalms of Murray, Bevenot & Rees are now thoroughly part of tradition in the parish in which I serve.

They are on the young side too, but a promising development. Why do you not sing Gelineau (Jelly nose?) psalms too?

We also sing some gregorian chant (simple settings usually edited by Richard Proulx), and the Exsultet & Tantum ergo.

I'm glad to hear it.

All, being scripture, or scriture-based are liturgical texts. They are part of our tradition.

I don't think there's much scripture in "Tantum Ergo." Its from the poetry of Thomas Aquinas.

Is there a danger that what has been used as prayer over the years is abandoned for a foreign language (latin), and the exclusive use of gregorian and neo-gregorian chant?

I don't know. It all depends on what happens. The number of Tridentine masses offered is growing, and the number of people attending them, and particularly the number of people too young to have known the Tridentine mass when it was universal. I believe this is because the faithful are only given two choices, the Tridentine mass, or the Novus Ordo. In some parishes the Novus Ordo is dire. The music is often trite, what you would call a ditty, that vacuous Eucharistc Prayer 2 is virtually universal, the homily is often anodyne, the priest makes gormless asides in the liturgy, and so on.

Some people say that the Tridentine mass is perfect, and cannot be improved upon. That I cannot agree with, but it is an opportunity to pray. It has become the norm at Tridentine masses to give out copies of the ordinary of mass, so people can follow. Because much of it is silent, you have the opportunity to reflect on phrases with catch your attention, and so, over a period you can develop a relatively deep understanding of the mass. Tridentine mass is a strange experience after over forty years of the new mass, and it took me a dozen or so Tridentine masses to get back into it, but I feel that it was time well invested. Now about one mass in four which I attend is Tridentine. The new masses have become a very second rate experience.

I believe that the problem with the new mass is that it was considered to be perfect right from the start, and some seem to hold a similar view about the music which goes with it. I don't think that the new mass text is any better than a stab in the dark at what is required. Its use should not have been made compulsory, and it should have been allowed to develop for a few hundred years before it was considered the norm. I think now the best thing to do is to let the Tridentine mass grow until the new mass supporters get the message that all is not well, and put pressure on the church to sort out the new mass.

You seem personally to be fearful of the Tridentine mass, and of the other practices which are truly old enough to deserve the title "traditional." I don't think that you need to be. I don't think that any future Pope will press a liturgical reform on the church as hard as Paul VI did. The collapse in mass attendance and vocations in europe of the last forty years should have been enough to put them off. If you want to do something to advance the new mass, I think you should do you best to make it as well done as possible. You seem to be a musician, so practice hard, take music lessons and choose music carefully, aiming for as broad a spectrum of acceptability as you can.

Music will take a long time to settle down. The Anglicans have been trying for four hundred years, and although they have got cathedral choir music I don't think much of their congregational music apart from strophic hymns, which we largely share. I don't think that Haydn and Mozart managed service music, let alone Haugen, Hass et al. By the way, Delibes wrote a mass setting. It is worth searching out just to imagine servers pirouetting around the sanctuary.

Finally, I would like to turn your last point around. Is there a danger that what has been used for prayer over the years, latin, will be replaced by inaccurate and watered down vernacular translations?

[Peter Jones]

I believe this is because the faithful are only given two choices, the Tridentine mass, or the Novus Ordo.

Or the Novus Ordo in Latin? Brompton, Oxford and Birmingham Oratories - their principal Sunday Masses in Latin use the Missal of Paul VI - and the EF celebrations are earlier in the morning.
Why does celebration of the OF in Latin so often get overlooked in conversations that can tend to generate more heat than light? Indeed, why do the LMS show little interest in this form of celebration? Almost makes a nonsense of that society's title, don't you think?

By the way - GF - what on earth is the topic of this thread?

[Peter Jones]

Is there a danger that what has been used as prayer over the years is abandoned for a foreign language (latin), and the exclusive use of gregorian and neo-gregorian chant?

In general or along a cul-de-sac of blasted heath, whose indeterminate royal ownership was attributed by both pre- and post-conciliar civil assembly, and who to date, steadfastly remain in shameful, pitiful and culpable apostrophic ignorance? I make a case that ICEL be commissioned to manufacture suburban signs. Google map B14 7JN for the correct spelling of this district. How come Google can manage correct punctuation and the council not?

[Nick Baty]

This depends on the definition of a classic. Surely they are a few hundred years too new to be classics?

Diana Ross?
Victoria Wood?
Classics!

[Peter Jones]

Classics!

I see we have not yet entered the realm of current parlance that seems to have abandoned classic for iconic and anthemic. Is I, the Lord of sea and sky… anthemic now? Is it a tradition? I ask for I have suffered it sung as a responsorial psalm while concelebrating at a funeral Mass today.

[nazard]

...
Diana Ross?
Victoria Wood?
Classics!

No! You're an example of the problem. They are not classics - merely notable examples of recent practice. Is Diana Ross any more famous than Marie Lloyd was a century ago? Marie Lloyd is now almost forgotten and definitely not a classic. The word has become overworked to the point of meaninglessness.

...Or the Novus Ordo in Latin? Brompton, Oxford and Birmingham Oratories - their principal Sunday Masses in Latin use the Missal of Paul VI - and the EF celebrations are earlier in the morning.
Why does celebration of the OF in Latin so often get overlooked in conversations that can tend to generate more heat than light? Indeed, why do the LMS show little interest in this form of celebration? Almost makes a nonsense of that society's title, don't you think?

That thought has occurred to me. I'm not a member, so i really don't know what the LMS think of the OF in Latin. I only went to an OF mass in Latin once, in Cambridge, but I was not taken by it. I don't hold with the theory that the actual language is important - its the meaning which matters.

LMS - the bit of the Black Country I grew up in was GW territory.

[Nick Baty]

Is Diana Ross any more famous than Marie Lloyd was a century ago?

Yes. Marie Lloyd did not have the privilege of the mass media.

Marie Lloyd is now almost forgotten and definitely not a classic.

No she isn't and yes she is.
Marie Lloyd took on the clean-up campaigners – and won.
She took on exploitative employers – and won.
Just listen to Marie's recording of "Every little movement has a meaning of its own" and then try to claim this was not a classic.

[Peter Jones]

[
LMS - the bit of the Black Country I grew up in was GW territory.

I confess to possessing an illustrated guide to GW branch line signalling - so important for the correct rubrical operation of the liturgy of God's Wonderful Railway. I just wish I could remember when to ring the bells and how many times.

A former Dean of Studies of a major seminary possesses a real station noticeboard of the Great Central Railway. I am content with a GWR porter's lamp. (All a part of a lost tradition - to get us back on topic)