Communion antiphons in new Sacramentary
  • ghmus7
    Posts: 1,483
    Thank you all for your contributions. I think it laudable that composers are composing settings of these new antiphons. But I wish that we could standardize something. Why can't the universal church everywhere sing the same antiphon on the same Sunday? The Lutherans on the Feast of Pentecost sing the same hymns... Wouldn't this encourage unity? I think that fact that we are always composing new sests of propers - not a bad thing in itself - means that we never settle down into a a returning set of propers that we return to year after year - which is the advantage of the Gregorian antiphons - after a few years, they become part of you and you can sing them better each year. Wheras when we are constantly re-composing them - everybody has their own favorite version, we lose some permanence. And it's gets more confusing when the antiphons are all changed. I guess I'm just an old fuddy.
  • RomanticStringsRomanticStrings
    Posts: 339
    What bothers me about the US GIRM is that is says to sing the antiphon from RM or GR as set there or in some other setting. But for RM, that would be like asking you to sing my post, as a congregation. There's no music! It seems as though the process of revision originally intended to provide music, and an official chant tone would be a simple way to achieve that, but I don't understand why the bishops didn't correct that when it never happened.

    This thread has provided me with some real clarity for how to proceed with my own new job as music director.

    Thank you!
  • dad29
    Posts: 2,232
    ...you must do option one, then option two if you can't do one, then option three if one and two are impossible, ...


    Standard rhetorical technique place things in order of preference or importance, so the standard interpretation is do One, if not, do Two, ....etc.
  • RomanticStringsRomanticStrings
    Posts: 339
    It seems like it's a question of the rhetorical weight of the list. Is it, "Do 1; if not, do 2; if not, do 3( and U.S., if not, do 4)"? Or, is it, "1 is best, but here's our list in order of merit; do your best"?
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,216
    Some users of the GIRM interpret the lists in different ways. I don't know of anything resembling official guidance about any weighting of the options.
    Thanked by 1CharlesW
  • RomanticStringsRomanticStrings
    Posts: 339
    I know how Catholic music programs weight them. "There are directives? No, hymns are prescribed."
  • JaredOstermann
    Posts: 488
    I just don't know how fruitful the hierarchical argument can ever be, when even the first option includes multiple languages, texts, and musical settings. My takeaway is simply that prescribed psalms/antiphons, if you can find a good resource for them, are a better option than freely chosen hymns and songs. And I actually think we would get farther improving parish music if we embraced that general language rather than trying to micro-analyze an intentionally vague and broad text. Or, look at it this way: even if it could be conclusively proven that the Church wants the Latin Graduale chants, unequivocally, as the first option, would that matter at the practical parish level? No, the conversation would still revolve around implementation, education, resources, and other practical and pastoral questions.
Add a Comment