Colloquium with László Dobszay

[NorthernTenor]

Some may be interested to know of an up-coming event organised by the Society of St. Catherine of Siena: Alter ad Alterum: The Seraphic Voice in the Liturgy - A Colloquium on the Possibilities for Chant at Mass and other Occasions. It's to be held at the London Oratory School on 1st June. Here is a link to the details:

http://the-hermeneutic-of-continuity.blogspot.com/2009/04/colloquium-with-laszlo-dobszay.html

[Southern Comfort]

Some may be interested to know of an up-coming event organised by the Society of St. Catherine of Siena: Alter ad Alterum: The Seraphic Voice in the Liturgy - A Colloquium on the Possibilities for Chant at Mass and other Occasions. It's to be held at the London Oratory School on 1st June. Here is a link to the details:

http://the-hermeneutic-of-continuity.bl ... bszay.html

This is what the blurb says on a certain unmentionable blog:

The colloquium will examine a variety of possibilities for reintroducing Gregorian chant into the life of ordinary Catholic Parishes, in all forms of the Roman rite.

This rather arrogantly assumes that the chant is not being used in ordinary Catholic parishes. I would suggest rather strongly that this is a calumny. Pieces of chant are being used all over the place, even if it's only Agnus XVIII. What this event is about is trying to persuade people that they ought to be using chant for everything in preference to anything else, which is a highly debatable assumption.

[musicus]

What this event is about is trying to persuade people that they ought to be using chant for everything in preference to anything else, which is a highly debatable assumption.

SC, do you know this, or do you merely suspect it? In other words, are you making "a highly debatable assumption"? I only ask.

[Southern Comfort]

What this event is about is trying to persuade people that they ought to be using chant for everything in preference to anything else, which is a highly debatable assumption.

SC, do you know this, or do you merely suspect it? In other words, are you making "a highly debatable assumption"? I only ask.

I don't think this would have appeared on the aforementioned-but-unmentionable-and-incidentally-notorious blog if this hadn't been the underlying agenda. So, no, I don't know for sure, but yes, I strongly suspect it.

My problem was with the word "reintroducing" which, I maintain, implies an unwarranted assumption in the context of Gregorian chant.

[NorthernTenor]

One of the things that attracts me to this board, and has me considering a membership I wouldn't have dreamed of previously, is the sense that the SoSG may be representative of the Church in England and Wales grappling with the musical-liturgical implications of VII. On the one had there is an emerging sense that VII did not demand a year zero approach, that the development of our ideas and practise needs to be embedded in the context of tradition. On the other, there is an understanding amongst many traditionalists that the world did not end in 1962. I posted details of the Colloquium because I believe Professor Dobszay's thoughts on these matters to be illuminating. Cross-border sniping is equally illuminating, but less constructive.

[mcb]

Agreed. I'm not sure that reintroducing is all that wide of the mark, for most parishes I'm familiar with; especially embedded in the phrase reintroducing chant into the life of parishes, which to my ear implies a centrality that the occasional trotting out of Agnus XVIII might not fully accomplish.

Officers of the SSG are always quick to point out that there's no official 'party line' on matters such as these, and that the Society consists of members who make up their own minds. But if there's one thing that appeals to me about discussions here and in the Society's journal and at Summer Schools, it's the prevailing view that it's not either-or, not a fight to the death between tradition and progress. If anything, the SSG's prevailing sense that the chant tradition is 'part of the mix' rather than a regime-in-exile waiting for the counter-revolution to come, is to my mind likely to do far more good than all the intemperate sniping elsewhere on the internet, from those who want to reform the reform without having first tried it.

[musicus]

Nicely put, NT. Quite so.

[presbyter]

"In the second session Prof. Dobszay will illustrate future possibilities in the form of an initial proposal for a ‘Graduale Parvum’ for parish use, in English and Latin, based on a return to practices widespread at an earlier stage of the development of chant, practices that were – somewhat unsuccessfully – adapted to the ‘Graduale Simplex’ published by the Vatican in 1967, and republished in 1970 in a version arranged for the 1970 Missal."

I think we need to bear in mind that GIRM as we have it at the moment is not giving us a complete picture of what we are being asked to sing at the Entrance, Offertory and Communion processions and chants between the readings - (and if we want to see what GIRM is really saying, look at the Latin text for the universal law of the Church, or the USA version in English)

When Mass (i.e. today's Missal of Paul VI/John Paul II) is being celebrated in Latin in its entirety - apart from the readings, homily, prayer of the faithful - it' s then that Gregorian Chant has pride of place. We are not being asked to use the Latin chants of the Graduale when Mass is celebrated in English. See Musicam Sacram (no 50) and the recent Chirograph (no 7 - the "other things being equal" here referring to the necessary condition that sacred music promotes the full, conscious and active participation of the faithful in the Liturgy).

However, the idea of a Graduale Parvum with English Texts could be interesting... which raises the question 'What texts?' (I wonder, for example, if Dobszay has researched what is already being used as a core repertoire of texts at places such as Mount Saint Bernard Abbey)

Then there's a further consideration - is the Professor going to give examples of existing, simple antiphonal chants with Latin texts and English "translations" to the same chants? If so - been there, done that, doesn't always work. Our monastic communities have a wealth of expertise in producing prayerful antiphons and psalm tones with English texts - composed 'in the spirit' of Gregorian chant - and I personally would hope that Dobszay would take into account the years of work done by the Panel of Monastic Musicians in this area. (Yet I suspect he knows little about it.)

I do hope that he will not suggest singing Grail Psalm Texts to Gregorian Psalm Tones - we really have been there, done that, and found that it doesn't work ....... years ago!

Read paragraph 10 of the Chirograph very carefully. I suggest that what we should continue to aim for - as many of our monastic houses do - is English chant for English texts - composed in the spirit of the Gregorian melodies - and not the imposition of English texts to existing Gregorian melodies - which can be a botch job (but not always). The chant serves the texts, not the texts serve the chant.

I cannot go to this event but I would express a hope that a transcript of session two might be published - with musical examples. It would be interesting to examine Dobszay's feel for the cadences of the English language in relationship to the chant - and apply the ultimate test to his examples - that the music enables the faithful to pray the liturgy.

[NorthernTenor]

The encouraging thing about current discussion of the use of chant is that it's increasingly recognising opportunities for continuity with liturgical tradition. Compare this with the typical discussion of not so long ago, in which all sides of the argument seemed to assume a disruptive interpretation of Vatican II and of the post-conciliar liturgical reforms. My impression is that dialogue now tends to grapple with issues of continuity as much as reform.

Not that we haven't been encouraged to do so by the Holy Fathers; how many years is it since Paul VI gave us Jubilate Deo,

to make it easier for Christians to achieve unity and spiritual harmony with their brothers and with the living tradition of the past

, observing that

those who are trying to improve the quality of congregational singing cannot refuse Gregorian chant the place which is due to it.

? Unfortunately, we have had a tendency to run ahead of Council Fathers and Popes in our interpretation of Vatican II. It's understandable, given the excitement of youth and the zeitgeist, but sometimes we turn around and notice they haven't followed us.

Professor Dobszay is, like the Council Father who is now our Pope, one of those scholars who is exploring the reconciliation of tradition and reform, not least in his work on Hungarian vernacular chant (I'm not aware that he pretends to expertise in its English equivalent). I for one look forward to hearing him at the Colloquium.

[presbyter]

Not that we haven't been encouraged to do so by the Holy Fathers; how many years is it since Paul VI gave us Jubilate Deo.........

http://www.youtube.com/watch?hl=en-GB&v ... NR=1&gl=GB

38 years after Tra le Sollecitudini and 13 years after Divini Cultus - and still the people have nothing to sing. The Church doesn't work to deadines!

[John Ainslie]

I have contacted Dr Hemming at the Society of St Catherine of Siena and will be attending the colloquium. He replied:

We are getting a very good response, but do please circulate details to your members if you wish. Should any of your members want to attend, I’d be grateful if they would write to me first, as we have a cap on numbers, but I will do my very best to get anyone in who wants to be there.

His email address is laurence.hemming@caterinati.org.uk

[PaulW]

…for the friends of the ‘Latin Mass’, such broad use of vernacular chant may seem a betrayal. They are afraid that Gregorian would cease to be the symbol and expression of universality. They are mistaken: vernacular chant opens a realistic way for those now far from the influence of liturgical music to be introduced to its culture, texts, musical style, atmosphere, spirituality and taste. It builds a bridge between parish communities and the great Latin liturgy.

The whole article is worth a read, in my opinion.

[Southern Comfort]

I'm very happy to admit that I might have been overhasty in my judgement.

However, Tim Finigan's Hermeneutic of Continuity blog (named after something that BXVI didn't actually say) is not a nice place to be at all [edited for flaming (forum rule 1) - moderator] Forgive me if I seem somewhat cynical as to what is driving their support of the event in question.

I hope that John Ainslie has a good time and is able to put a rational point of view without being shouted down by these intemperate people.

[NorthernTenor]

SC wrote:

However, Tim Finigan's Hermeneutic of Continuity blog (named after something that BXVI didn't actually say) is not a nice place to be at all. [original deleted - moderator] Forgive me if I seem somewhat cynical as to what is driving their support of the event in question.

.

On a point of fact, the Vatican's English translation of Sacramentum Caritatis contains the following:

I am referring here to the need for a hermeneutic of continuity also with regard to the correct interpretation of the liturgical development which followed the Second Vatican Council

(see footnote [6]).

And I'd venture to suggest the use of the phrase "[original deleted - moderator]" ill advised, in that it might draw the reader's consideration to the character of the comment itself.

[presbyter]

Forgive me if I seem somewhat cynical as to what is driving their support of the event in question.

Does the moderated red removal refer to - http://www.caterinati.org.uk/aim.html - Society of Saint Catherine of Siena? Their aims - taken strictly as read - could be said to fall under the umbrella of the SSG's four aims, couldn't they? They seem to be studying liturgy in accordance with the mind of the Church - and Alcuin Reid's The Organic Development of the Liturgy is well worth the read - and it says a lot about active participation. All right - I myself, and most of us here, would find their avowed remit far too narrow - but that's not to deny their academic freedom and right to speak/publish..... and, of course, not to deny anyone else's academic freedom and right to speak/publish in opposition to their conclusions/views.

It doesn't state anywhere on the website that their aim is to blot out the use of the 1970 Missal, does it?