John Ainslie wrote:The use of hymns in an apparently paraliturgical role in addition to traditional liturgical texts caused some gasps of astonishment from some of those present, who may have been looking forward to hearing hymns being declared abolished from the liturgy altogether.
I suspect that some of the stunned silence that John referred to came from those used to the simplistic, black and white terms in which liturgy tends to be discussed in the English-speaking world. People are either for tradition or for the spirit-of-the-council. A reading of the introduction and essays in Dobszay’s work “The Bugnini-Liturgy and the Reform of the Reform” encounters a more nuanced approach, in which the key assumptions are:
o “the Roman liturgy has changed in an organic way and with small modifications over the past centuries.”
o “The traditional Roman liturgy can be found in what is common in spite of the changes on the surface”.
o To the extent that the Pauline form of the Rite owes elements of form and content to “the creative will of commissions”, it has departed from this continuity.
o The Tridentine form is “but one - and not the most successful one - of the branches of the Roman liturgy; one which existed in many variants, side by side in remarkable orderliness”.
John Ainslie wrote: In the course of his lecture, Dr Dobszay gave a brief synopsis of how he would see the musical programme of a Mass: start with a popular hymn as a Gathering Song, then the introit from the Graduale to original or simple chant, in Latin or the vernacular... the Gradual and Alleluia (or Tract in Lent - no mention of the 1969 Lectionary)... a hymn between the Gospel and homily (John Wesley would be delighted!), another after the Offertorium text has been sung to chant or polyphony... a popular hymn before or after the Communion antiphon, and another at the very end. The use of hymns in an apparently paraliturgical role in addition to traditional liturgical texts caused some gasps of astonishment from some of those present, who may have been looking forward to hearing hymns being declared abolished from the liturgy altogether.
So it would seem position is not either/or but both/and. Is this envisaged as an interim musical programme, phasing out the hymns once the faithful have become accustomed to the use of the Graduale?
As John remarked, the hymnns come from a well-established Hungarian tradition, so Professor Dobszay would see their addition (as opposed to substitution) as an acceptable local variant, rather than a temporary measure.
alan29 wrote:So he isn't using pre-existing antiphons but in effect composing new modal ones in English out of fragments of chant. So does he envisage the liturgy being full of what would be in effect reponsorial psalms? How else would the assembly learn the antiphons? Or is that why he would add hymns to the mix - to give the assembly something a bit meatier to sing? I seem to be not "getting" something here. Alan
He seemed to be suggesting that an approach based on a limited number of simple patterns would be picked up by congregations who were exposed to them week in, week out. There was, however, more to it than the presence of such patterns. The first part of Professor Dobszay's talk covered the intensive educational initiatives that go with the approach in Hungary, particularly focusing on children, teenagers and young adults. My own experience of Anglican parishes that still maintain their traditional music bears this out. They almost invariably include children in the church choir, and usually have an RSCM-based educational program. The result is adults who know their church music tradition.