Your Law Is the Object of My Mediations
This weekend’s communion chant is Aufer a me, and I still happy with what I wrote on this some time back, so I’ll reprint this here. It is such a wonderful thing to return to these chants year after year. One can greet them like old friends (real friends, not Facebook friends).
________
Anytime the topic of Gregorian chant comes up, the conversation immediately veers in two directions: why can’t this material be in the vernacular, and why can’t we just sing in modern notes? The communio this week, which conveys an intoxicating spiritual power, is a good illustration of why both of these paths seriously diminish the glories of chant. (Here is a recording that is very good.)
We begin with a plea that moves unusually quickly through a long opening phrase: no breaks, no “downbeats,” no time signature, and very effective use of vowel and consonant sounds to match the words. Put this in modern notation and you lose the visuals, the phrase, and, ironically, make it more difficult to place the consonants. Now look at the word “contemptum” in which the first “n” sound closes on the lower note (which is small, a liquescent in the Gregorian notation). I can’t think of a way that this unity of notes and music can achieve the same effects in modern notation.
Now move halfway through, beginning with “nam.” This last phrase is a singer’s dream but only as written. It feels and sounds just like what you expect of meditation. It captures the sense of private, contemplative, concentrated prayer. The intervals are short and the changes in notes are a perfect match with the text, and it is a long and uninterrupted phrase. What you certainly do not want here is a sense of bumping through the notes one by one, as you might get in modern notation. Also with the neumes you can enjoy the visual presentation of what it means to meditate.
As for language, it has been put into English somewhere, but it just can’t capture all that is here. Isn’t it time that we all just acknowledge that the presentation of Gregorian chant is at its highest glory in precisely the form that it has come to us through the ages?
More Missal Chant Recordings
The National Association of Pastoral Musicians has recorded some Missal chants from the new translation. Find them here. (“Recordings of chants from The Roman Missal © 2010, National Association of Pastoral Musicians (NPM). All rights reserved.”)
The Church Music Association of America’s versions are here. (“Recordings of chant from The Roman Missal that you can borrow, sell, propagate, or anything else. All rights freely shared with the world.”)
They do make for an interesting comparison.
Two Commentaries on the New Translation
Jerry Galipeau is feeling ever better about the new translation.
“At this point in my own journey with the new translation, that I am seeing this whole development as much more organic. The only way that the new translation is really going to take root here in the United States is if we give people solid information; solid knowledge directly from the sources. We need to lay it all out for people. We need to show them that there are significant differences between the way the Latin was translated into English and the way the Latin was translated into many of the world’s languages.”
What he is getting at is a point that is so far being avoided for understandable reasons. He senses that the best way to explain the coming change is to show people that this new translation is an improvement, not just a change but an upgrade. I think he is exactly right.
Already, some priests are making their own videos to demonstrate this. Here is an example.
Simple Propers for the 28th Sunday of Ordinary Time, Year C
Download Simple Propers for the 28th Sunday of Ordinary Time, Year C
This week’s installment of “Simple Propers” are a continuation in our experiment in music resource production. As Jeffrey has so deviously shown, I am indeed still working on the melodic formulas that will eventually be used for an entire cycle of antiphons to cover the liturgical year. The plan is to have 8 formulas for each proper–the Introit, Offertory, and Communion–one in each mode for each set, so this will total 24 melodic formulas. The hope with these formulas is that they will be able to meet the diverse demands of the English language while remaining within the bounds of the laws of the Gregorian compositional language. The goal is to arrive at melodies that can adapt to virtually any English text, and the result, it is hoped, is that average parish musicians, even congregations, could learn these melodies and sing them easily to a variety of text settings. Compiling these formulas has not been easy, and the work is far from done, but with the guidance of Fr. Kelly I have great hope that they will be a success.
As Jeffrey has shown, the Introit formulas seem to be mostly stabilized, although there could be changes made to them in the coming weeks. I’m pulling together the communion tones, and the Offertories are still largely unfinished. So in the mean time I will continue with the “simple settings” always, which emply St. Meinrad tones, and there will be cases (such as this week’s Offertory) where this is the only setting available.
While we’re posting handwritten manuscripts today, let me add one more. Here is this week’s offertory harmonized in 4 parts according to the Meinrad Tone accompaniments given by St. Meinrad Archabbey:
It occurred to me this past week that this sort of arrangement may be incredibly useful to the “trained parish choir”. This sort of edition could be seen in continuity with many of the resources that parishes are currently used to, such as Respond and Acclaim, et cetera. There could be the benefit of having it in modern notation (accompanying, of course, a chant edition), the 4-part harmony could be a simple organ accompaniment, or even could enable 4-part singing for choirs that are used to singing figured choral music. Since many such choirs are not very familiar with the non-metered style, this perhaps could serve as a bridge to the chanted style, while retaining some of the elements of the current common practice. The benefits are that parish choirs could sing the propers in a somewhat familiar fashion, there could be an immersion in Gregorian modality, and a practice of singing non-metered music. I sense that if a parish choir could sing this beautifully then this would be a big step toward singing more elaborate settings of the propers.
Take a look at this arrangement and try to invert some of the harmonies. I found that this can add a very nice contrast. This arrangement can very easily be sung in the following ways:
1. Swap S and T (cantus firmus in the tenor)
2. A up an octave (becomes S), B up an octave (T), omit T, keep cantus firmus in A [becomes SAT with high soprano]
3. S down an octave (T), A up an octave (S), T up an octave (A), B unchanged [becomes SATB with high soprano]
There could be other possibilities such as harmony in just two voices. These harmonizations seem like a real treasure, and I’m glad that I’ve discovered this approach. I think that I will try it with my own parish choir!
Lastly, if anyone among our readers is able to typeset this score in an engraving program I would be most indebted to you. For the life of me I can’t find a reasonable way to do this. If anyone could find a solution and share a template I would be most grateful!
I also hope to get the propers for 29OT out within the next few days in order to keep us a little ahead of the game.
Adam Bartlett at Work
He doesn’t know that I’m blogging this but I thought you might like to see some of his foundational work on the simple propers, long before the final appears.
False Choices in Catholic Music
Recent experience has brought to light, in my own mind, some false choices that many of us in the Catholic music world carry around. As we make our way toward a musical framework of the Roman Rite that is more in keeping with what the Council Fathers of Vatican might have imagined, we need to think about some of these issues. Clearing away false choices is a crucial step toward realizing that there are solemn options out there that stand somewhere between the schlock that we’ve lived with for far too long and the all-Gregorian Mass that we all know is the ideal native to the Mass in all its forms.
As regards the entrance, offertory, and communion, the usual choice is a hymn of some sort, perhaps one thematically tied to the season. The other option that I and many others have promoted is the ideal, that is the Gregorian antiphon: introit, offertory, and communion chant. The problem here is that there is a world apart between them. One is metric with a beat, and the other is free rhythm. One rhymes, and one does not. One is in modern notes, the other in neumes. One is in English, and the other is in Latin.
Many people have a very difficult time going from one to the other. The distance is great indeed.
The switch is a big undertaking from a pastoral angle. People worry about the response from the people in the pews. Even good pastors who “get” the music issue can be squeamish. Hardly any schola is prepared to work up three large-scale chants every week unless they are ready to rehearse several hours during a week. Young scholas are not competent enough to handle this. The ideal can be so remote that it is never even tried.
So what is the fallback position? To do a hymn. But this can be very disappointing once you understand the role of propers, which are part of the structure of Mass, both in the textual and musical content. Once we understand that, the world of chant can appear almost like an unreachable Valhalla. It is something we might long for and dream of but we are unwilling to die in combat to get there.
Why is it that we carry around this idea that we must choose one or the other? It must be a leftover from preconcilar times, when high Mass meant the Liber Usualis and low Mass meant pulling material from the St. Gregory hymnal, since it was believe that it is not permitted to sing the propers for low Mass. Hymns were the suitable replacement.
I do wonder if many of us still believe this as a holdover from the old days. In any case, there are not too many examples of other options out there. Between 1969 or so and very recently, parishes nearly universally sang hymns; the few that did not (and there are famous and heroic cases!) were using full Gregorian propers. Models of anything in between were non-existent.
Plenty of folks extant, many of whom are associated with Catholic publishing houses, want Catholics to believe that we must make a choice now and forever between 1) sprightly, jazzy, go-get-’em, pop songs, or 2) dusty, dreary, dreadful music of the inquisition. If that is the choice, there is no question of the results. I hope that the image of chant is beginning to change with great exposure. But what we still lack is the trigger to make the switch from music that does not really belong at Mass to music is that is native to the Mass.
Today, there are in fact many options for the English propers. Most recently, Adam Barlett has been posting Simple English Propers that are highly successful for parish use. They can be sung pretty much on the spot or with a quick rehearsal before Mass. They sound thoroughly Catholic, and thoroughly accessible. You can add as many Psalms to them as necessary. They adapt to different singing styles and really do well in bringing out the text of the proper of the Mass. They are far preferred to singing a hymn with a text from from an outside source. Or they can be used in conjunction with a hymn. Pastors should be pointing their musicians to them. They are a fantastic bridge from one world to the next.
In addition, there are many settings of propers now available mostly online, some composed in the 1960s but others being worked on right now, by, for example, Frs. Samuel Weber and Columba Kelly. There are alternative traditions that are well developed in the form of the Anglican Use Gradual. Others are in preparation. These strikes me as the most viable method forward. And what’s great about all of them is not only their inherent textual integrity but their relationship to the chant. They all point the way forward toward the Gregorian ideal.
The objection to all schola-sung propers is immediately raised: what about the people and their expectation of singing at the entrance, offertory, and communion? I’ve come to realize that the belief that either the people sing or the schola sings might in fact be another example of a false choice.
We should know by now that by Protestant standards the singing of the Catholic people, even under the best of conditions (one of the four hymns that Catholics tend to sing; can you name them?), the singing is still comparatively tepid. It is nearly always the case that the cantor or schola is driving forward the production of music, while the people’s voices, among those who choose to sing, are a shadow of a reflection of the primary voice of the cantor or schola.
Now, when I say things like this, I always receive communications from people who tell me of some congregation somewhere that has hugely loud and robust singing, crowds of people in the pews who are giving it their all at full volume. I’m not in a position to dispute this but I’ve been to regular parishes in most parts of the country, and I’ve never once been taken aback at the incredible singing (except at the extraordinary form recessional when the choice is Salve Regina).
Most of the time, the congregation is divided between those who refuse to pick up a hymnal, those who pick up a hymnal and vaguely mouth the words, and those who make slight attempts to produce something resembling a melody. In every case I’ve ever been part of as a person in the pew, my own singing can pretty much dominate an entire congregation, eliciting looks of shock and awe in every direction, as if people are thinking: “what the heck is with this guy? Doesn’t he know that Catholics don’t do that?”
In any case, my point is that these propers I am speaking about are all structured to highlight the text, using melodies that are largely formulaic and repeated. Those who want to join in the singing have every possibility of doing so, as robustly or more so than they would be singing the hymns in the first place. For those who would rather just speak the words as the cantor sings, that is possible, because not as fine a line divides speaking from singing when it comes to this kind of music.
In the Catholic ideal, to sing the entrance, offertory, and communion chants is the job of the schola and not the people, while the people are later called upon to sing the ordinary chants of the Mass that are repeated every week. This reflects the great wisdom of liturgical tradition and the division of labor: it makes sense that non-specialists would sing what is familiar but not be called upon to sing what is unfamiliar. In this way, these English antiphons begin to socialize the congregation into a greater degree of liturgical comportment during these periods of the Mass, so that they can watch the processions or prepare for communion or otherwise be mercifully left alone.