The Processional

[Peter Jones]

Well, Alan, some of us are comfortable with the idea of a balance of clergy, congregation and schola when singing the text of the mass.

I think that the production of the Processional gives us an opportunity, as it were, to "go back to the sources" and consider pre-Carolingian uses of texts and musical forms. In regard to the Communion chant, for example, there are historical examples of this being solely the domain of the schola; a dialogue between the schola and cantors; a dialogue between the subdeacons and schola; a dialogue between the assembly and cantors/schola - an antiphon or alleluia refrain for the assembly; a hymn of the assembly. Musical forms have also been influenced by the positioning of the chant within the liturgy - yes, this chant has moved back and forth a little over time.

The interesting musicasacra project - even if it appears to make the participation of the assembly difficult, through the complexity of the antiphons - has a firm historical pedigree. As GIRM indicates, there is no necessary need to involve the assembly in the Communion chant. However, both the USA and our own bishops are desirous that there should be some involvement of the assembly in this chant, which is why, in my opinion, looking at historical treatments of texts that did involve the assembly, is important.

Now - can anyone please point me to a collection of Ambrosian transitoria? Amazon supplies a book costing £267 and I cannot afford that. (Yes, I'm a liturgical dweeb and nerd.)

[Peter Jones]

Now - can anyone please point me to a collection of Ambrosian transitoria? Amazon supplies a book costing £267 and I cannot afford that. (Yes, I'm a liturgical dweeb and nerd.)

I've now found a few on the web. Interesting repeated musical patterns in them!

[Peter Jones]

Anyone who wants to be confused by all this might like to know that in the EF (1962) the schola sings the Communion chant during the distribution of the sacrament and then the celebrant says it after purifying the vessels. As to how this came about, John Ainslie penned a magisterial article on such matters in a fairly recent edition of our magazine.

[quaeritor]

The stlye of the music (Eagles wings) seems to me to be a hybrid -- the chorus is in similar territory to the '60's Goffin song 'I'll be true ..'

Ah yes, I remember it well - - that's it! - I've been racking my brains for years, but now I have it. Try that last line ("It warms my heart to think that you remember still the way you do . . . )

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sISWPzEqHLQ

Q

[quaeritor]

But a more constructive post (I hope)

The current tenor of this thread seems to point persuasively to a Composers' Group meeting (or several) to address the whole question of processions and their place and style in the liturgy, and to swap ideas and discuss samples.

Maybe? - please?

Q

[NorthernTenor]

Anyone who wants to be confused by all this might like to know that in the EF (1962) the schola sings the Communion chant during the distribution of the sacrament and then the celebrant says it after purifying the vessels. As to how this came about, John Ainslie penned a magisterial article on such matters in a fairly recent edition of our magazine.

It might also be useful to know that a revised edition of the Graduale Romanum, the church's official book of Proper texts and settings, was published for the Mass of Paul VI (and that this edition includes a commendatory introduction from Archbishop Bugnini, that great advocate of liturgical change). This is not to discourage the composition of alternative vernacular settings (I am exploring that myself and agree with Quaeritor that it would be a good focus for the Composers' Group); it does, however, indicate the importance & continuity of these texts and chants in our liturgical tradition, no matter the transitory dislike of local enthusiasts and their determination to have congregations sing everything, however unsuitable the style to contemplative prayer. It also reinforces the firm message of Council Fathers and Popes that chant has pride of place as vehicle and model for the musical expression of our faith.

I'm not suggesting a straight-jacket - I think that's more the style of the lay enthusiasts who get paid jobs as diocesan liturgical officers or assistant secretaries in Bishops' Conference departments. I'm merely suggesting that we consider the living, received tradition when we choose or compose liturgical music.

[Nick Baty]

The current tenor of this thread seems to point persuasively to a Composers' Group meeting (or several) to address the whole question of processions and their place and style in the liturgy

Or perhaps a slightly broader gathering?

[NorthernTenor]

The current tenor of this thread seems to point persuasively to a Composers' Group meeting (or several) to address the whole question of processions and their place and style in the liturgy

Or perhaps a slightly broader gathering?

That's an interesting suggestion that begs two questions: to what purpose, and the extent to which the Propers concerned are sufficiently described as 'processionals'. I see the point of a meeting of those active in setting or singing proper-settings, to consider each others' approach, efforts and experience. It would be useful to understand the point and scope of a 'broader gathering'. That's not a criticism of the idea, but a request for clarification.

[Peter Jones]

Or perhaps a slightly broader gathering?

It would be interesting, I think, to see/hear/sing any approaches that monastic communities are making towards these texts.

[NorthernTenor]

I'm interested in the development of vernacular chant complements to the traditional Latin proper settings. Adam Bartlett's Simple English Propers project is a good example of the possibilities, especially for those musicians who lack the confidence to approach the originals (wrongly in my opinion - like most sight-reading exercises, those with basic musicianship skills can achieve a lot with a little application & self-discipline). I would encourage you to explore them. John Anslie's suggestion that they don't do service to the originals misses the point - they represent a preliminary investigation that doesn't aspire to the complexity and subtlety of the original, but offers a useful and accessible blend of traditional style with the vernacular. I also feel that his emphasis on the problems such settings face with regard to text-setting reflects a wholly admirable respect for the perfection of the Latin originals, but a narrow understanding of the relation of text pattern to melody that is happy with psalm tones, yet unwilling to explore the creative fusion of the vernacular with the glories of the melismatic tradition.

Adam's chants are new compositions in a traditional style. I believe there is also room for direct developments of the traditional chants, adapted to vernacular texts in manner that is sensitive both to the language and the melismatic original, without slavishly attempting to reproduce its every note. I am beginning to experiment with this, and have reached the stage where I have begun to commit ideas to paper, but am not yet satisfied that they have reached a publishable state. We will, however, sing one such exploration on Sunday evening at the Offertory, and I offer a link to it here as a suggestion of what might be done.

ps Oh how I wish CC were here to give us his thoughts on the rhythmic issues!

pps you'll note that the secretive, unaccountable, incompetent etc Liturgy Office doesn't (can't) meddle in the publication of settings of these texts. All to the good.

For those of you interested in the relationship of original to attempted development, here is a link to the original, courtesy of our indefatigable friend Jeff (AKA AntoineDaniel).

A supplementary observation and question for Admin: might it be possible to upload pdf files here, as we quite happily do on the site to which I linked (and which I commend)? I understand if there is a cost problem - and if so, please forget I mentioned it as I can't quite bring myself in good conscience to buy membership of your estimable organisation (tho' I would be happy to get round that quibble by buying your journal if membership didn't come with it).

ps before anyone does a double take on the reference to Ordinary Time 12 on the original - the same proper & setting are proper to both Sundays!

[mcb]

I'm not suggesting a straight-jacket - I think that's more the style of the lay enthusiasts who get paid jobs as diocesan liturgical officers or assistant secretaries in Bishops' Conference departments.

Make up your mind, NT. Are you here for reasoned, courteous discussion, or are you here to take every opportunity you can for snide insults? If it's the latter you'll get none of the former, from me at least.

[NorthernTenor]

I'm not suggesting a straight-jacket - I think that's more the style of the lay enthusiasts who get paid jobs as diocesan liturgical officers or assistant secretaries in Bishops' Conference departments.

Make up your mind, NT. Are you here for reasoned, courteous discussion, or are you here to take every opportunity you can for snide insults? If it's the latter you'll get none of the former, from me at least.

It's perfectly reasonable, mcb, to observe the irony that much modern liturgical ultramontanism comes from lay liturgical "experts", who are not only happy to insist we follow their instructions in detail, but also use the levers of power to impose their views when they get half a chance; the obstructions initially put in the way of Summorum on the South Coast, and the secretive, unnacountable, contentious etc Permission to Publish process are good examples. And it's germane to this thread as illustration of what I argue would be the wrong approach to encouraging us to set and sing the Propers. I'm sorry you don't like that, but can only observe that's something I've got used to in your comments. It may well be that they reflect personal loyalties. If so, I commend you for it.

[mcb]

On the contrary, it's about being able to engage in intelligent and informed discussion without appearing to acquiesce in your constant drip feed of petty malice. Pack it in and I'll engage in discussions with you.

[NorthernTenor]

On the contrary, it's about being able to engage in intelligent and informed discussion without appearing to acquiesce in your constant drip feed of petty malice. Pack it in and I'll engage in discussions with you.

I will continue to criticise the secretive, unaccountable, incompetent and dishonest Liturgy Office for as long as it continues its merry way, in threads that touch upon relevant activities. Again, I'm sorry you have difficulty in coming to terms with that, and that it has led you to this intemperate outburst, which I will continue to put down to commendable if misguided personal loyalty. As for your engaging in reasonable discussion with me: sad to say, it isn't something I have had much experience of; but I'm pleased to see you're not against it on principle.

[Peter Jones]

Let's get back to the topic