Litany" Performance Practice
  • ghmus7
    Posts: 1,469
    OK, now that we've had a long discussion of the Litany of the Saints, can someone explain what the RM means when is says that it "is to performed by two cantors"?
    Which cantor sings what?
    I have never seen this, even the Vatican never uses two cantors, only one.

  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,161
    The cantors can sing the petitions as a duet.
  • CHGiffenCHGiffen
    Posts: 5,153
    That is definitely one way to duet.

    Oh, and 900 = 30 x 30.
    Thanked by 3chonak Ben E_A_Fulhorst
  • Earl_GreyEarl_Grey
    Posts: 892
    Good question, I've often wondered that myself. I used to think that one cantor would chant the invocations while the other would lead the assembly on the responces (gestures optional!). Then I observed at another church two cantors would alternate invocations while the choir led the responces. However after reading the rubrics from the Lieber Usualis (for the EF), I'm thinking that two cantors should be singning simultaneously.
  • The two cantors sing simultaneously.
  • CHGiffenCHGiffen
    Posts: 5,153
    Think ... duet!!!
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,161
    By the way, when I wrote that above, I meant what Earl and Dr. Ford meant: that the cantors sing the intercessions together.

    There's a big difference between spoken and sung intercessions, and I imagine there's also a big difference between sung intercessions with one cantor vs. two: the solemnity of the liturgical act would become even more prominent.
  • ghmus7
    Posts: 1,469
    I don't understand this reasoning. Of course any chant in the whole book can be sung by two cantors, there is no need to mention this possibility. There must be some special point in mentioning two cantors. The only reason I can see is to have some kind of alternation. (Which the Vatican does not do) The question is what alternates?
  • SalieriSalieri
    Posts: 3,177
    It used to be rubricised that on certain days (ferias/penitential days) one cantor intoned the antiphons, on others (more festive days) two cantors, and on the most solemn occassions four cantors. Some places still follow this pracise if the choir/schola is big enough. (cf. "Rubrics for the chant of the Mass", Liber Brevior, Solesmes, 1954)
  • Using two (or four) cantors on solemnities and major feasts is a practice with much antiquity to commend it. The cantors all sing simultaneously that which would normally be sung by only one. (And, the congregation, not being daft, sing their part spontaneously Without annoying gestures.)
  • ghmus7
    Posts: 1,469
    Ok, maybe you guys have convinced me.
    It's great to have a forum like this to get feedback. Now if everyone could just agree with me, how much better everything would be!
  • melofluentmelofluent
    Posts: 4,160
    Oh, hold your water ghmus7! I agree with you. I believe only one Kantor should be officed and honored to intone the invocations in the LoS's, and that would be "Me, myself and I!" Because, after all, I am Mr. Caruso! None before or after me approach the pinnacle of artistry that I bring to the stage, escuse, "ambo," and of which I have placed, ata my owna expensa, the most expensiva BLUE dynamic, phantoma powereda microphona, weeta pre-ampa, Si? So, donna hold back froma your impulses, trust them anna your instincts-a. Saintsa preserva us, San Enrico, San Giuseppe anna San Mario Lanza!"
    Wha' happened there? Non-melofluent, evil twin! Drat.
    Thanked by 1Paul F. Ford
  • Progressive solemnity. Feria: 1 cantor/precentor, Sundays: 2, Solemnities 4. (for
    San Giuseppe anna San Mario Lanza: 1 Lyric Californio!)
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,451
    >>Progressive solemnity

    I wish I had known that phrase when I picked a title for my blog...
    Thanked by 2SamuelDorlaque Ben
  • ghmus7
    Posts: 1,469
    Pretty good!
  • Progressive solemnity! Pah!
    Every Sunday should find every parish celebrating a totally solemn mass.
    For solemnities one adds cantors, acolytes, thurifers, and wears appropriate vestments.
    Otherwise, this silly notion of 'progressive solemnity'
    is a fabrication of chic modern 'liturgists'
    and liturgically lazy clergy.
    Thanked by 1Salieri
  • Agreed! Well said!