Cherubic Hymn in English
  • RevAMG
    Posts: 162
    Gorgeous!
    Thanked by 1Adam Wood
  • CHGiffenCHGiffen
    Posts: 5,193
    Here's a setting sung by Divna Ljubojević (b. 1970)

    Heruvimska Pesma

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BBLR7utqKoE

    Thanked by 1Adam Wood
  • I especially like the triple alleluya at the end.
    (Of course, you misspelled 'alleluya'.)

    (Actually, it's nice work.)
    Thanked by 1Adam Wood
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,983
    I had wondered where you got that spelling with a "y" instead of an 'I." The "I" is more common in contemporary English.

    I realize that when both of us were in school the Indians were riding around the building yelling and screaming, making it hard to study. Perhaps that explains it?

    In any event, the Cherubic Hymn is quite beautiful.

    Thanked by 1M. Jackson Osborn
  • ...'y'...

    Charles, you are, naturally, correct. The 'i' is not just 'more common in contemporary English', it is universal. 'Alleluia' is, of course, the Latin transliteration of the Hebrew 'praise be to Yahweh'. My adoption of the 'y' as a legitimate English form of the Hebrew is a tribute to Palmer-Burgess and quite a few of the Oxford Movement scholars. I really don't know how historic it is in English usage, but I really do like it because it emphasises beautifully the fact that that last syllable of that Hebrew locution is God's Name. If people were more aware of that it would add yet another level of, shall I say?, 'full and conscious participation' in the liturgy; also, it would make them appreciate the dynamic relationship between the alleluya responsory and the gospel. It might, also, make them realise just how silly most of these (here I go again) cute dance-like triple alleluya jigs are. That the sacred Name of Yahweh is treated to such flippant little jingles such as we find in R&A and elsewhere should offend a properly informed soul.

    In the same vein, one might observe that the German 'hallelujah' (which Handel uses consistently) comes closer to capturing the Hebrew sense than even the Latin. In defense of the Latin, we should note well that the '-ia' is pronounced '-ya', not '-eeah', the 'i' and 'j' having an equivalent 'y' pronunciation in such instances (unless, of course, one is indulging in the late mediaeval and renaissance English five-syllable treatment).
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • Jani
    Posts: 441
    I love it. Goosebumps, even.
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,983
    One good thing to come out of the ban on the use of God's name in prayer, song, and liturgy, has been the disappearance of the dreadful "Yahweh" songs. They were awful, to say the least. I once told someone, in jest of course, that we were going to sing, "Sitting on a log with Yahweh's dog" at mass that morning. If such a song existed, it wouldn't have been any worse than some in published hymnals. Have you noticed those triple alleluias seem to universally be in 6/8 time?
  • Andrew_Malton
    Posts: 1,187
    None of the numerous triple Alleluias in the Graduale Simplex is in 6/8.
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,983
    Unfortunately, we are stuck with U.S. English hymnals that do have them in 6/8.
  • But Graduale Simplex is just that! Simplex for those who can't or won't sing an alleluya that is consistent with historic alleluyas at mass, who just don't or won't 'get' what a mass alleluya is all about. Is it any news that just because 'Rome' publishes something it's not necessarily the most apt for mass? Nor was it necessarily intended to be! The 'simple' is for two kinds of people: 1) those of genuinely limited ability (which, I assume, doesn't apply to most of our forumites), and 2) those of genuine ability who just don't want to bother with the real thing. The simplex is not definitive, nor is it, unlike the GR, understood properly as being normative

    As long as we are pointing out that 'Rome' has provided us with a Graduale Simplex (a Simple Gradual) for those who need it, 'Rome' has also provided us with a real Graduale Romanum (which isn't 'simple') for those who can and wish to do that which is consistent with 2000 years of chants for the mass! - But it's not for those who don't think the sacred Name of Yahweh is worth a melisma - or don't want to be bothered with it.
  • Richard MixRichard Mix
    Posts: 2,805
    Charles, you say "numerous" but are you sure you're not confusing a single notorious fourfold ditty? Even that one I like better than Jerry Sinclair's 14-fold non-compound mess.

    MJO seems to be overlooking a third eventuality, which is that the congregation expects to sing along. I suspect that applies to a good number of forumites. Some language about something like full, non-subliminal and vocal participation can be laid at Rome's feet as well ;-)
  • a_f_hawkins
    Posts: 3,472
    Simplex for folk like us, with a parish income around £600 a week ($850 US), no musicians with training (apart from piano lessons). We can't afford our priest and the building, let alone paying staff. And we don't have anyone who could do justice to the melisma of any GR alleluia.
    Thanked by 1M. Jackson Osborn
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,983
    Charles, you say "numerous" but are you sure you're not confusing a single notorious fourfold ditty? Even that one I like better than Jerry Sinclair's 14-fold non-compound mess.


    That was Andrew, not Charles who used the word, "numerous."
  • Richard MixRichard Mix
    Posts: 2,805
    Sorry Charles! Andrew's use of "numerous" makes perfect sense to me. Maybe it was the word "universally" that stuck me instead.
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,983
    I can't speak for the universe, but the GIA hymnal in use at my parish seems to have an affair going on with composers who use 6/8 time. Is it love or just lust? Inquiring minds want to know. LOL.
  • Richard MixRichard Mix
    Posts: 2,805
    OK, we use GIA's CCH, with 3 out of 14 or so Gospel acclamations in 6/8, but your problem is with "composers who use 6/8 time''. How dare you! ;-)
  • CHGiffenCHGiffen
    Posts: 5,193
    Adam, in nearly all settings of the Cherubicon, there is an "Amen" between "Let us now lay aside all earthly cared" and "That we might receive..." ... as the Choir makes its response to an invocation by the Priest (who has silently said the Cherubicon three times while the Choir sings the first part). What usage do you have in mind for your very nice plainchant setting? As it is, I don't see it as liturgically viable in the Eastern Rite.
  • CHGiffenCHGiffen
    Posts: 5,193
    Here is Dmytro Bortnyanski's setting No. 7, widely considered by many (especially of Ukrainian heritage) to be one of the finest musical expressions of spirituality ever composed. This recording features the Russian octavist Mikhail Zlotopolsky, vocalizing all the way down to low A.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-fE-YsM_Vk
    Thanked by 1M. Jackson Osborn
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,983
    but your problem is with "composers who use 6/8 time''. How dare you! ;-)


    I dare quite easily. 6/8 time can be used carefully and skillfully. In practice, it seems to degenerate into either Irish dance or the Charge of the Light Brigade. It can be used skillfully, as I noted, but I think those "alleluias" are a bit over the top and get out of hand. Jackson is right on this one.
    Thanked by 1M. Jackson Osborn
  • .
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,482
    Adam, in nearly all settings of the Cherubicon, there is an "Amen" between "Let us now lay aside all earthly cared" and "That we might receive..." ... as the Choir makes its response to an invocation by the Priest (who has silently said the Cherubicon three times while the Choir sings the first part). What usage do you have in mind for your very nice plainchant setting? As it is, I don't see it as liturgically viable in the Eastern Rite.


    Thanks for this information.

    This setting was written for an Anglican monastic community with a blended (East/West) liturgical praxis, and they use it at the Offertory.
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,482
    I got another note about the text, via email.

    I noticed that you left off the second half of the cherubic hymn,
    which continues at the conclusion of the great entrance.


    What is that about? I don't see any additional text in any of the sources I've looked at.
  • CHGiffenCHGiffen
    Posts: 5,193
    Don't worry, Adam. Your correspondent is wrong. The "second half" is the part that begins with "That we might receive the King of all, invisibly escorted by th' angelic hosts" or "Яко да Царя всѣх подымемъ, Aнгельскими невидимо дори-носима чинми" in Church Slavonic.

    Here's the full Church Slavonic text:

    Иже Херувимы тайно образующе,
    и животворящей Тройцѣ трисвятую пѣснь припѣвающе.
    Всякое нынѣ житейское отложимъ попеченіе.
    Aминь.
    Яко да Царя всѣх подымемъ,
    Aнгельскими невидимо дори-носима чинми. Аллилуіa.

    And here's the corresponding full English text:

    We, who mystically represent the Cherubim,
    And chant the thrice-holy hymn to the Life-giving Trinity,
    Let us set aside the cares of life.
    Amen.
    That we may receive the King of all,
    Who comes invisibly escorted by the Divine Hosts. Alleluia.

    I don't know of any setting in which the "Аллилуіa" / "Alleluia" is not sung three times.
    Thanked by 1M. Jackson Osborn
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,482
    He wrote back. Apparently he had just skimmed it and missed it (HOW?) because it wasn't broken up into two parts. (I assume the musical brevity was a factor here because most settings are extremely ornate.)

    That inserted Amen seems grammatically awkward.

    Can you link to any English recordings?
  • ClergetKubiszClergetKubisz
    Posts: 1,912
    I like Tchaikovsky's Cherubic Hymn No. 1. This post got me interested in researching the Cherubic Hymn and I found several beautiful versions, but I think I like Tchaikovsky's the best.

    Anyone else here a fan of Sviridov's Sviatiy Bozhe?
  • TeresaH
    Posts: 53
    Adam, it's just lovely.
    Thanked by 1Adam Wood
  • CHGiffenCHGiffen
    Posts: 5,193
    Tchaikovsky no. 1 and Bortnyansky no. 7 are the most popular and best, in my opinion.

    The inserted "Amen" is there for liturgical reasons. The priest is silently reciting several things (including the Cherubicon, three times), and then as the Choir finish the first part, the priest makes an invocation, to which the response is "Amen" ... and then the Choir finishes the Cherubicon. The musical settings are stretched out in the first part to cover the liturgical action. Variously, the text, especially when the congregation sings it, is often proclaimed in short (semi)phrases that dovetail and basically amount to at least two-fold (if not three-fold) repetition of most of the text. In the Ukrainian Catholic setting that I'm familiar with, the basic (hymn) tune is sung three times before the "Amen." This treatment of repeating the main theme or whole tune three times seems (to me) to be related to the "thrice-holy hymn" phrase of the text.
    Thanked by 1CCooze
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,983
    This treatment of repeating the main theme or whole tune three times seems (to me) to be related to the "thrice-holy hymn" phrase of the text.


    We sing it three times both because of the "thrice holy hymn" and because it is needed as liturgical cover music for the priest.
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • CCoozeCCooze
    Posts: 1,259
    he had just skimmed it and missed it (HOW?)


    As a self-proclaimed NON-expert in this matter, but a good reader and pretty decent learner, my guess would be because there wasn't an "Amen" in the "middle" for him to recognize the 2 separate parts.

    By the way, I think this is very pretty.
    Thanked by 1Adam Wood
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,482
    Btw...

    Anyone wishing to adapt this to better suit the needs of the Divine Liturgy is free to do so, and even encouraged.