Good Friday

[docmattc]

I've just listened to a CD from OCP's Choral Review Service. Amongst material of varying usefulness, I've just discovered a potentially very valuable piece for the Veneration of the Cross on Good Friday. This always takes longer than I anticipate and I rarely have enough music planned to cover the veneration.

Its "Behold, before our wondering eyes". Text by Genevieve Glen, music Barney Walker and Gael Berberick.

Its starts as unison chant, but moves on with progressively more challenging harmonies to some quite tricky SATB in verse 4. Without resources for that harmony, I think it would stand up just in unison. Obviously for Good Friday, the bell and organ accompaniment would have to be shed, but to be honest this is minimal in the first place anyway.

I realise that this is ridiculously ahead of time, but there are only 172 days to Easter!

[quaeritor]

It looks like an interesting composition - I was taken by the composer's note appended to the preview page. I'll have to reserve judgment until I can play it through - I don't have a keyboard near the computer and I'm not a good enough muso to "hear" the harmonies from the printed page (or "not printed" to be precise - it proves to be non-printable (obvious really, I suppose) - a useful trick - how do they do that? I couldn't get round it - putting the monitor face down on the photocopier somehow seems just so cheap!)

However . . .

. . . Can you really improve on the words of Reproaches as given in the Missal for that point in the liturgy? - High spot of the musical year for me.

[contrabordun]

- a useful trick - how do they do that?

It's a feature of Adobe Acrobat. When you save a doc as a pdf, there's a bunch of security options you can set, such whether users can print or copy from the document, or even open it without a password.

[docmattc]

. . . Can you really improve on the words of Reproaches as given in the Missal for that point in the liturgy? - High spot of the musical year for me.

I spent 13 years with a PP who had lived in Jerusalem, spoke Hebrew and was the chair of the local CCJ. I also spent a while looking after the website for the Sisters of Sion, who's charism is Christian-Jewish relations. Having this background, I find whether or not to use the Reproaches a complex issue. This linkseems to put forward both sides of the case. I'm not saying we shouldn't use them, but they are open to misinterpretation. Nostra Aetate is one of the documents of the council which isn't talked about much (not that others are!)

[John Ainslie]

The link to which docmattc refers is to a report in the American 'National Catholic Reporter', which states 'The reproaches set events in the Hebrew Bible alongside charges of responsibility for Christ's suffering and death. Though phrased as statements by Jesus, they do not appear in scripture.'

This is incorrect. See Micah 6:3 and following. The whole structure of the Reproaches is built around OT text accusations by Yahweh of his less-than-faithful people, as proclaimed by the prophets, and the Church’s application of these same accusations to the effect that we, the NT People of God, have done no better, that we too are a sinful people in need of Redemption. This is no different in structure than the Lectionary linkage between some Sunday First Readings and the Gospels that follow them (e.g. the recent 26th Sunday in Ordinary Time, year C), and these too are set before us by the Church as the Word of God to be taken to heart ourselves.

I do agree that catechesis or at least a brief explanation in people’s participation booklets is to be recommended. But the Redemption won by Christ for us is crucial (crux = cross!) to Good Friday.

Incidentally, the Reproaches are, to my knowledge, the only occasion in the Church’s liturgy in which the choir or cantor (as distinct from psalmist) address the gathered assembly in the name of the Church. ‘My people, what have I done to you? Answer me.’ The question demands a response from the entire assembly. The text actually provides an answer: ‘Holy is God! Holy and strong! Holy immortal One, have mercy on us’, but gives this response to the choir or choirs. Composers to work, please!

[presbyter]

[quote="docmattc"] "Behold, before our wondering eyes".

It has the structure of an Office Hymn.

What does verse one mean?

What sort of American accent do you need to sing this with in order to get eyes to rhyme with paradise ?

Sorry but it doesn't strike me as a work of literary genius.

[mcb]

Incidentally, the Reproaches are, to my knowledge, the only occasion in the Church’s liturgy in which the choir or cantor (as distinct from psalmist) address the gathered assembly in the name of the Church.

Is that a typo for "in the name of Christ"? If not, I'm not sure quite what it means to speak in the name of the Church; if so, I'm not sure it's the only time the choir sings our Lord's words. What about all the Communion antiphons of the type come to me all who labour and I shall give you rest? There are plenty of texts of that kind, sometimes with the words dixit Dominus added, but by no means always.

It's a conservative-Catholic trope to accuse progressives of having the cantor or choir sing in persona Christi, or of the Father, for that matter (not that I'm suggesting that's your motive here, John), but in fact it seems to me there's plenty of precedent in Catholic tradition.

M.

[John Ainslie]

Is that a typo for "in the name of Christ"?

No, it isn't. Although the first part of each reproach is a quote from the OT, the second half is not the words of Jesus.

The first set of reproaches were written by an Eastern church author sometime before the 7th century, when they were imported into the Roman rite. This set carefully mentions Jesus only in the third person. The later second set has no such scruples: 'but you brought your scourges down on me'.

They have been written as if they were accusations made in the name of Christ - and therein lies one of their difficulties. It is hard to reconcile them with the words of the Fourth Servant Song read earlier in the liturgy: 'Harshly dealt with, he bore it humbly, never opening his mouth' (Is 53:7). Jesus' words 'Father, forgive them...' only occur in Luke's gospel, but they are a long way from the language of the reproaches.

On the quite different matter of using the actual words of Christ from the gospels as direct speech (e.g. "I am the bread of life") I would only comment that in the oldest layer of Gradual books the Alleluia and Communion verses always render such sayings in reported speech by adding "says the Lord". The somewhat later antiphons in the Antiphonaries do not, e.g. the Magnificat antiphon for Corpus Christi. However, I note that all the sayings of Jesus used as short texts for the Commendation of the Dying carry the words "The Lord Jesus says" or equivalent.

[mcb]

Is that a typo for "in the name of Christ"?

No, it isn't. Although the first part of each reproach is a quote from the OT, the second half is not the words of Jesus.

Thanks for that clarification, John. I'm still not sure what you mean by saying that the choir utters the reproaches (and addresses the gathered assembly) in the name of the Church; nor what the evidence from the text might be for that?

Here's the full text in English:

The Reproaches:

I.

1 and 2: My people, what have I done to you How have I offended you? Answer me!

1: I led you out of Egypt, from slavery to freedom, but you led your Saviour to the cross.

2: My people, what have I done to you? How have I offended you? Answer me!

1: Holy is God! 2: Holy and strong! 1: Holy immortal One, have mercy on us!

1 and 2: For forty years I led you safely through the desert. I fed you with manna from heaven, and brought you to a land of plenty; but you led your Saviour to the cross.

Repeat "Holy is God..."

1 and 2: What more could I have done for you. I planted you as my fairest vine, but you yielded only bitterness: when I was thirsty you gave me vinegar to drink, and you pierced your Saviour with a lance.

Repeat "Holy is God..."

II.

1: For your sake I scourged your captors and their firstborn sons, but you brought your scourges down on me.

(Repeated throughout by Choir 2) 2: My people, what have I done to you? How have I offended you? Answer me!

1: I led you from slavery to freedom and drowned your captors in the sea, but you handed me over to your high priests. 2: "My people...."

1: I opened the sea before you, but you opened my side with a spear. 2: "My people...."

1: I led you on your way in a pillar of cloud, but you led me to Pilate's court. 2: "My people...."

1: I bore you up with manna in the desert, but you struck me down and scourged me. 2: "My people...."

1: I gave you saving water from the rock, but you gave me gall and vinegar to drink. 2: "My people...."

1: For you I struck down the kings of Canaan. but you struck my head with a reed. 2: "My people...."

1: I gave you a royal scepter, but you gave me a crown of thorns. 2: "My people...."

1: I raised you to the height of majesty, but you have raised me high on a cross. 2: "My people...."

Aside from the third-person references to "your Saviour" and the refrain Holy is God..., it's all in persona Christi, I think. Not sure I can see anywhere that looks like the Church addressing, well, who might the Church be addressing?

M.

[Anne]

I find the reproaches hard to take. I know they are very old and part of a long tradition of music for Good Friday. However, I think that they could be so easily misunderstood by people who don't know their origin.

The first part of each line -
I led you out of Egypt,
for 40 years I led you through the desert,
I led you from slavery to freedom, and drowned your captors in the sea,
I opened the sea before you,
I led you on your way in a pillar of cloud
I core you up with manna in the desert.......
is clearly the history of the Jewish People. Unless things are explained very well, the reproaches could be terribly misunderstood as being addressed to the Jewish people and implying that they, the Jewish People, are responsible for the second half of each line :
you led me to the cross,
you pierced your saviour with a lance,
you brought down scourges upon me,
you gave me a crown of thorns,
you raised me on a cross....

The Church, being aware of the danger of such misunderstanding as written the following

'True, the Jewish authorities and those who followed their lead pressed for the death of Christ;(13) still, what happened in His passion cannot be charged against all the Jews, without distinction, then alive, nor against the Jews of today. (Nostra Aetate - Vatican II, 1965)

With respect to liturgical readings, care will be taken to see that homilies based on them will not distort their meaning, especially when it is a question of passages which seem to show the Jewish people as such in an unfavourable light. Efforts will be made so to instruct the Christian people that they will understand the true interpretation of all the texts and their meaning for the contemporary believer. Guidelines for implementing the conciliar declaration 'Nostra Aetate' 1974

Because of the tragic history of the 'Christ-killer' charge as providing a rallying cry for anti-Semites over the centuries, a strong and careful homiletic stance is necessary to combat its lingering effects today. Bishops of England and Wales, Department of Dialogue and Unity
Committee for Catholic/Jewish Relations The Readings During Lent , 2004

Unless we get 'strong and carefull' homilies which explain the reproaches very well, I think it is better to leave out the reproaches altogether and have a suitable hymn like the one Docmattc suggested at the beginning of this thread


[/quote]

[alan29]

Gosh, I must be naive. I have always thought that the placing of this text at that point was a stroke of genius, not because it blamed the Jews or anyone else, but because it puts us all in the frame. I always assumed that the Israelites represented us all as recipients of God's goodness. Not one moment did it occur to me that this could be seen as an anti-Jewish text. My own parish experience is that the text is incredibly powerful and adds immeasurably to the sense of the veneration - I have seen people weep in response.
Alan

[MaryR]

....not because it blamed the Jews or anyone else, but because it puts us all in the frame. I always assumed that the Israelites represented us all as recipients of God's goodness. Alan

I'm with you on this, Alan. That has always been my understanding too. I think we can be unnecessarily sensitive sometimes. Or am I being insensitive?

[Reginald]

At Clifton the Damian Lundy Reproaches are sung to a 4 part arrangement by Mr. Walker - unaccompanied. It is indescribably beautiful IMO. I don't expect to be able to make it Westwards for the Triduum this year because of term dates and this is high up the list of things I'll miss most.

Unfortunately I don't know if it's been published somewhere.

[docmattc]

Mary and Alan's understanding of the text is very reassuring. If everyone understands the Reproaches to mean all of us that's wonderful.

After Nostra aetate in 1969, Rome had to follow it up with Guidelines and Suggestions for Implementing the Conciliar Declaration Nostra Aetate in 1974 and then Notes on the Correct Way to Present Jews and Judaism in the Teaching and Catechesis of the Roman Catholic Church" in 1985, and our bishops felt the need to say what Anne has quoted above in 2004. This would suggest to me that this correct understanding of the Reproaches, and of our relationship with "our elder brothers" might be less than universal.

Last Holy Week, my brother heard a sermon that laid the blame for the crucfixion firmly at the feet of the Jewish people collectively.

[presbyter]

Last Holy Week, my brother heard a sermon that laid the blame for the crucifixion firmly at the feet of the Jewish people collectively.

What a remarkably ignorant preacher that must have been .... ignorant not only of sound doctrine but also Scriptural exegesis. Are those baying for Christ's crucifixion of pure Jewish descent? Discuss!