Some Thoughts On "Englishing" Gregorian Chant
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,451
    I didn't say self-contained. I said self-selected.

    Unlike an average Catholic parish - all the people are there because they want to be there and want to have good, traditional liturgy.
    Thanked by 1Gavin
  • JulieCollJulieColl
    Posts: 2,465
    Well, as long as you don't say "self-serving", I'm okay with it. : )

    I just wanted to add to my comments above that we attended an OF Sunday Mass at St. Bonaventure's in Cape Cod yesterday (our first OF Sunday Mass in about 2 years, although we go to the OF during the week) and I was very impressed by the joyful, enthusiastic singing of the people and the large attendance. It seems like a very committed parish--they built a new, bigger church without any monetary assistance from the diocese.

    I have to say upon reconsideration that the SEP and similar endeavors are probably the best way forward for most parishes, considering the anti-Latin block that exists, but I still can't help but think how easy it would be to slip in a Mass setting from the Kyriale and some Latin propers from the Solesmes 1984 Graduale Romanum and keep everything else as is, even the cocktail lounge piano Communion meditation. The people are such good singers at St. Bonaventure's, it would be as easy as pie.
    Thanked by 3Adam Wood CHGiffen Gavin
  • MaryAnn Carr WilsonMaryAnn Carr Wilson
    Posts: 1,738
    And if the people at St. Bonaventure's, and similar parishes, were to learn some basic Gregorian repertoire, and if their schola were to sing the authentic propers, it would unite them to their universal community.

    It's not healthy to sing English mostly or only and deny the ecclesiastical identity problem. Vatican II did not envision that! We are Catholic first and English/Korean/Finnish/Cornish speakers second.

    Otoh, when the Latin block is insurmountable, musicians can and will find a way to move forward.

    Basically, I'm ok with reductions of chant when they are 1) transitional and don't serve as a terminal end, drawing people to their heritage rather than further dividing the Church, and 2) are musically worthy, and not too simple, short, or Office-like. Simplifications must suit the action and be beautiful. English speakers remain a small portion, about 6% of the Church.

    Thanks, Richard, for starting this thoughtful discussion. I share many of your concerns, and I'm grateful there's a place where we can talk about this. I also want to thank Adam for chiming in with some fair points, and for all his work.
    Thanked by 2JulieColl CHGiffen
  • Chris_McAvoyChris_McAvoy
    Posts: 389
    I do not especially care if something is terminal or transitional, as long as it is adheres to unchanging tradition. Unchanging tradition beyond actual language that is. New cultures call for new unchanging liturgical languages. No simplifying or dumbing down. Why people think the latin rite must be in latin in the entire world when the greek rite is not in greek in the entire world is a mystery to me. Using exclusively greek and latin in liturgy in Korea and China strikes me as being a form of cultural imperialism. For europe it ought to be latin, but not for the whole earth.
    Thanked by 3CharlesW melofluent Gavin
  • JulieCollJulieColl
    Posts: 2,465
    I agree completely with you, Mary Ann, @ reducing/simplifying the G.R. propers---only if absolutely necessary and as a stop-gap measure or temporary arrangement. After singing the Liber Usualis for the last four years, I'm just completely and hopelessly biased. I don't believe the propers can ever be satisfactorily replicated because they are a product of a long lost ancient age, maybe even of another realm.

    To think that anyone in the midst of the rush and roar of modern life, with an IPhone in one hand and an Ipad in the other might be able to hear and set down in writing celestial melodies like these seems impossible.

    I'm starting to believe these melodies could only come from someone who has lived forty years on a mountain top or in the desert, steeped in Sacred Scripture, meditation on the Mass and in communion with God.

    Speaking for myself, I'm overwhelmed with awe and gratitude that I have been given the opportunity to sing the Graduale Romanum and regard it as an indispensable part of my Catholic heritage, part of "the wealth of the received liturgy in its hundreds and thousands of years of history," (Ratzinger) and believe it is my duty and privilege to learn to sing them and pray them to the best of my ability for as long as I have breath in my body.
    Thanked by 3Ralph Bednarz CHGiffen tomjaw
  • Ralph BednarzRalph Bednarz
    Posts: 489
    I'm overwhelmed with awe and gratitude that I have been given the opportunity to sing the Graduale Romanum and regard it as an indispensable part of my Catholic heritage,
    Very true. It is also important to experience, or to hear the voice speaking in many of the antiphons as the Lord, often the Blessed Trinity in a trialogue: as in " In the splendor of the saints I have begotten you," or I am risen... Father your wisdom is wonderful," "I will rescue him," "This is my son." It is wonderful to hear God speaking first in every rite. The modal texture of these antiphons and the way the melodies help us grasp the energy hidden behind the text( the deep structure that precedes phonetic language) allowed me to recognize His voice again in the liturgy.
  • Ralph BednarzRalph Bednarz
    Posts: 489
    Someone mentioned that the jubilus or melisma does not flow from the text: True, but in some ways it imitates a language with musical parts of speech : subjects often settling around the structure pitches and adverbs and subordinate clauses hovering above and below. The melismatic intonation of the "Ave" (OFF 4th Sunday of Advent) easily copied every note to become a new syllabic chant.
  • aria
    Posts: 85
    ... I, for one, have used the SEP or Illuminare materials in the past year I've been working in a parish less times than I can count on one hand. Let me be blunt, I don't think they will give my parish a positive impression of chant in our effort to get where we want to go with our liturgy. Instead, I actually fear those kinds of resources would make them turn against it. ...


    With respect, I disagree.

    My schola started w/ SEP (and the Parish Book of Psalms) about 2 yrs ago and have since moved to LCM. Our priest is very supportive and our parishioners have not rebelled. In fact, they're telling us that it's some of the most beautiful music they've ever heard. Now it's true that they haven't heard anything from GR, but we're a suburban parish that literally grew up in the "guitar Mass" era (our church was built in the 60's) so I don't think they're exaggerating when they gush about how much they love the LCM chants.

    Our schola only sings a few Masses a month and the other Masses are pretty much P&W style, which I don't see changing anytime soon. And I don't see it being realistic to "graduate" from LCM to GR anytime soon, either. But it's my hope that giving the people LCM (even just a few Sundays a month) will open their minds/hearts to even more glorious sacred music down the road. I don't know whether we'll ever get back to GR, but I am very certain that LCM has been a *huge* blessing to our parish!
    Thanked by 3SkirpR Adam Wood noel jones, aago
  • bonniebede
    Posts: 756
    I think one of the advantages of SEP is it introduces a chant sound, quite distinct from the STJ sound our congregation is used to, but without some of the additional barriers like Latin language.
Add a Comment