Lamb of God/Jesus Lamb of God

[Peter Jones]

Note to readers - revisit my article in a recent M & L concerning setting this text and the significance of the title Lamb of God, followed by Behold the Lamb of God…

By all means offer a cogent argument for tropes but please, not something woolly with no liturgical theology in it.

[Nick Baty]

Why might anyone want to add tropes in the first place?

Well, I could argue about linking the fractio back to Gospel but I suspect you wouldn't accept that one.

[Peter Jones]

I suspect you wouldn't accept that one.

You are correct. ("Of the day", that is. The fractio is in itself, of course, a part of the Gospel.)

[Nick Baty]

Thought you wouldn't. But we've disagreed on here before about linking sung texts to lectionary texts and I suspect we'll never agree on that one. But as long as we can both raise a glass of red wine before sundown we'll not go far wrong.

[Peter Jones]

http://www.adoremus.org/1202AgnusDei.html

I think Ms Benofy is spouting tosh in some of this article but, in my opinion, there are a few sections that read well. She is adept at the broad statement though, with little to back up her opinions - e.g. By the ninth century, after deepened understanding of the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist led to the universal use of unleavened bread...... What?

[Southern Comfort]

So why did the whole of Laudate have to be submitted?
Or am I wrong there?
Was it just the service music pages which were submitted while the whole went to some sort of imprimatur?

To give a proper answer: every hymn in the book (but not the service music, since the Panel dealt with that) had to be scrutinised by a theologian for doctrinal orthodoxy. It's a very slippery pathway to tread, since different theologians hold different views, and there are already instances where the theologian checking material for one hymnbook has come up with a different decision from the theologian checking the same material for another compilation.... The same process was experienced, and I think may still be being experienced, by the publishers of the updated Celebration Hymnal for Everyone. I gather that the delays may be as great as, if not greater than, those experienced by the publishers of Laudate.

In the good old days, publishers would run their hymnbooks past the diocesan censor of the Bishop who happened to be writing the Foreword to the book, or the diocesan censor of the diocese in which the publisher was located. These days, it appears that the Dept for Christian Life and Worship is specifying the theologian who must be used, and this is what is leading both to delays and to differences of theological opinion.

Once again, forethought and consultation would have eliminated a lot of these problems, but forethought and consultation is what there was not, alas.

[mcb]

Yes, Jerry Galipeau does mean that existing settings may continue, but that new ones will not be approved. A classic "grandfathering" clause.

I wonder whether this might be wishful thinking, SC? The USCCB talk about further permission for use rather than further permission to publish.

[Southern Comfort]

Yes, Jerry Galipeau does mean that existing settings may continue, but that new ones will not be approved. A classic "grandfathering" clause.

I wonder whether this might be wishful thinking, SC? The USCCB talk about further permission for use rather than further permission to publish.

You may be right, mcb. Jerry G is clearly hoping not.

the document has been altered to remove any further permission for the use of Christological tropes or other adaptations

but in practice, copies of the document which are out there will continue to be used, as will published settings containing tropes which had until now been approved by BCDW.

I expect publishers to be requested to cease re-printing settings to which this change applies, but I do not see BCDW instructing publishers to pulp existing stock (that path leads to legal action for legitimate redress: "You only approved this last month!") nor instructing them to offer replacement copies to all those who have already bought them. There is clearly going to be a lengthy transition period

[HallamPhil]

Of course my friend Peter Jones may choose not to accept what he describes as 'woolly' proposals for retaining troped Lambs (sic) of God ... but he is not a Conference authority to my knowledge. He is however a priest with considerable liturgical knowledge and musical skill serving the archbishop and people in the archdiocese of Birmingham.

The tropes I offered in my New Wine setting of the Mass were drawn from the 1998 revisions of the Missal. They were precisely intended for those occasions when the fraction rite itself is extended. This, I consider, shows liturgical awareness especially if you consider that the distribution to the possibly many con-celebrants is also part of the fractio. If it is not, then it may be better that the majority of con-celebrants receive later with the assembly... but this may cause a furore among con-celebrants at least. I had also presumed, as did the 800 English-speaking bishop signatories to the 1998 revision, that those charged with responsibility for its creation were liturgically and theologically aware. It seems that it was their translation skills which had subsequently to be re-focussed or differently directed.

Of course such problems do not often arise in Parish life but there will be instances when many clergy will choose to attend a funeral, for instance, in a con-celebratory capacity. There are also occasions when previous Parish clergy return for Parish anniversaries. In many of our cathedrals the normal experience has been that the liturgical action is held up while everybody waits for the choir to finish its rendition of a polyphonic Agnus Dei. Ironically the length of these may, on the rare occasions we are talking about, suggest such settings whereas the Parish musical resources are so remote from this eventuality.

We will be re-opening our Cathedral at the end of November and I was anticipating using a troped setting as I would usually have done, and as we recently experienced to good effect at the episcopal ordination at Portsmouth.

I am interested in exploring further the role of massed con-celebrants at Mass. The expectation is already that a single voice at one time is heard to speak the Eucharistic Prayer. In my experience only one con-celebrant offers the blessing, the greeting and all the other dialogues and others don't seem to worry about that. If however we imagine that they might one day participate in the entire Liturgy of the Eucharist in the same way as the rest of the Assembly then we would need to re-write the Roman Missal, I suspect.

Of course there are ways of speeding up the distribution to clergy prior to simultaneous presbyteral consumption (ugh!) but care needs to be taken so as not to lose the power of the symbol of fractio. I have seen processions of eucharistic ministers from the altar to priestly distribution points prior to the Lamb of God. but if the ideal is 'one bread from which all are fed' is to be retained then I would imagine the fractio will necessarily be prolonged on such occasions and be followed by distribution to clergy. If only a few large hosts are broken then this may be sufficient for the relatively few priests of the Diocese of Hallam but elsewhere eg Diocese of Gdansk, where at the Chrism Mass the large nave was barely capacious enough to contain the priests, there is a challenge.

Thankfully in this context the fractio is not extended to include the pouring of the Blood of Christ from the one cup into several. Although I have seen this done by some who may consider themselves to be liturgical purists, I am presuming that it is not recommended on the grounds of the increased risk of spillage rather than the possibility of the action itself further extending the repetitions of the Lamb of God, which repetition, I fear, might lead to a mantra-induced state of trance which would hardly be appropriate here.

[Peter Jones]

The tropes I offered in my New Wine setting of the Mass were drawn from the 1998 revisions of the Missal. They were precisely intended for those occasions when the fraction rite itself is extended. ..............repetition, I fear, might lead to a mantra-induced state of trance which would hardly be appropriate here.

Are you trying to argue that variety is the spice of life and that on occasions where the litany needs to be extended, textual variation is necessary lest the assembly becomes semi-comatose?
I will go and seek out my copy of your New Wine Mass.

I'll also let you know if our nine-fold Lamb of God introduced a trance amongst concelebrants and others in the assembly during our diocesan opening Mass for the Year of Faith next Sunday.
The composer might comment too, after the event. He posts here occasionally.

[Peter Jones]

For the sake of argument, let's imagine I, or anyone else, composed a litany using the "I am" statements from John's Gospel - each with a petition "have mercy on us" but ending "grant us peace".
So we would form a text based on:

The Bread Of Life
The Light Of The World
The Gate
The Good Shepherd
The Resurrection And The Life
The Way, The Truth, And The Life
The Vine

Would that composition be an appropriate fraction song? My answer is No because excellent as these Christological titles are, they are not the focus of the liturgical prayer/action at this moment in the celebration. The focus is the Lamb of God, whom we are then invited to "Behold..." Is that too nuanced?

[Southern Comfort]

Is that too nuanced?

Possibly yes.

Even when introduced by Pope St Sergius I, the Agnus Dei was not used unvaryingly throughout the papal fraction, and there was no dona nobis pacem (that only became standard around the year 1000). Very early on, the second invocation had already been changed in a number of sources to Agnus Dei, qui sedes ad dexteram patris, [my emphasis] miserere nobis. Clear echoes of the Gloria there.

It seems clear that from the very beginning people were not always convinced by the unvarying mantra principle.

The fact that a scriptural attribute of Christ from John's Gospel was the initial basis for this litany does not seem to me to prevent other scriptural attributes of Christ from also being used. It is a characteristic of litanies that the response remains constant but the invocation changes. If the Agnus Dei is to be used as a litany, rather than a stand-alone utterance, then treat it as a litany. The focus of the liturgical prayer at this point is Christ, not one particular scriptural form of words used to describe him.

Ergo, I suspect that we are going to agree to differ on whether the words Lamb of God need appear in every invocation.

[Peter Jones]

The focus of the liturgical prayer at this point is Christ, not one particular scriptural form of words used to describe him.

Thank you for grasping what I was trying to focus on and you have laid a sound foundation for debate. Not now though....... too late. More later.....

[alan29]

Lamb of God and Bread of life, you take away ....... etc, etc.