Fr. Weber's " 'Proper' of the Mass for Sundays and Solemnities"

CHGiffen

Another fix in 8.8.10 (iambic):

True to his conscience must be he,
Who to his own self true shall be,
Nor wish it otherwise be so would we.

Salieri

That seems to be 8.8.10 to me, unless you mean:

Tru to hys conscience must bee hee, [four syllables on 'conscience']
Who to hys owne selff true shalle bee, [two syllables on 'true' and 'shalle']
Nor wysh it otherwyse bee so wolde wee.

CHGiffen

Oops, my mistake (fixed the meter). Sorry for calling it 10.10.10. Leaving out "be so" in the last line would make it 8.8.8 (iambic).

francis

Vera est enim conscientiam suam,
Qui se ipsum erit verum,
Nec velles esse volumus.

mahrt

At the meeting at which they approved "Sing to the Lord," there was a motion to limit the use of missal antiphons to spoken usage; this motion was tabled. Apparently this was followed by the introduction of the contradictory rubric into the GIRM. I think that this is just one small indication that the old principle that the sung liturgy is normative has been abandoned. I agree that this is not our most serious problem, but it does have the effect of removing the practice a small step farther from achieving the usage of the real Gregorian melodies. The presence of only the missal antiphons in the missalettes creates a problem for anyone wanting to use the Gregorian melodies. I would like to see the missalettes include both texts, but I am not holding my breath for it.

eft94530

mahrt: see the missalettes include both texts

Hmm. As I recall, some/most of the Gregorian texts get truncated to form the Spoken texts. [snarky=ON] Maybe the scripture readings style could be applied to them, i.e., the full texts are provided and the "extra bits" gets bracketed, so that the Vatican Two Sacrosanctum Concilium (riches ... in more abundant measure) escape route could be consistently notated. [snarky=OFF]

BruceL

@eft94530, on the contrary, many of the spoken texts are entirely different, corresponding to a greater or lesser degree to various texts/readings of the Mass for any given celebration.

I would hate for the perfect to be the enemy of the good, but I think Dr. Mahrt's insight is true. We print an order of worship weekly with all the music needed for the Mass, so it is not an issue here, but our situation is rather unusual.

Roborgelmeister

When the missal texts are entirely different, isn't because they come from the Graduale Simplex rather the the Graduale Romanum?

ClemensRomanus

Occasionally, mostly no.

eft94530

[EDITS]
Ouch.
Worse than my recollection of my brief opportunity 3.5 years ago
to start looking at the differences [between Graduale texts and Missal texts].

So the [Graduale] Proper [texts] really got the Smoky The Bear technique
[applied to them to get to the Missal texts].
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vmEzMUjPvo

ProfKwasniewski

"I think that this is just one small indication that the old principle that the sung liturgy is normative has been abandoned. I agree that this is not our most serious problem, but it does have the effect of removing the practice a small step farther from achieving the usage of the real Gregorian melodies."

It may be true, and doubtless is true, that the sung liturgy is no longer considered the norm. Nevertheless, the tradition as well as the great magisterial texts of the past certainly tell us that it is the norm, and Fr. Weber's plainchants are masterful adaptations of Gregorian models -- in many cases, the same melody and the same Scripture verse one would find in the Graduale Romanum (as one can see in the Christmas examples given in my review). So, this is an opportunity for rejoicing that we have come a small step CLOSER to the ideal.

Adam Wood

. I would like to see the missalettes include both texts, but I am not holding my breath for it.

The LUMEN CHRISTI MISSAL contains both texts whenever they are different.

In fact it's better than that. The LCM lists:

- The Latin of the GR
- An English translation of the GR. The translation comes from:
- The RM antiphon, if they are the same. OR
- Another RM antiphon that uses the same original Latin text, when this could be found. OR
- Another officially-translated analogous text from the Missal, if there is one. OR
- Another officially-translated analogous text, for example from the Revised Grail Psalter or the official trans. of the Lectionary.
- The English antiphon form Missal, if it is different from the Latin of the GR

Also, the scriptural basis for the antiphon (there usually is one) and its source in the RM, GR, or both, is noted.

The work that went into making the English translations of the GR propers as "official" as possible is really quite a remarkable feature of the LC series, and I think it deserves more attention than it is getting.

Also, if you are wondering which antiphons are shared between the GR and RM, and when they are different, you can simply flip through the LC Missal. It has ALL THE TEXTS.

veromary

Over at ccwatershed we're just past halfway through a series on Fr Weber's new book of Propers for Sundays and Solemnities.

Andrew Leung's article is the latest with a short response to his schola's first use of the book.

smvanroode

The work that went into making the English translations of the GR propers as "official" as possible is really quite a remarkable feature of the LC series, and I think it deserves more attention than it is getting.

I agree. The advantage of the LCM translation of the Latin GR propers over other translations (for example from the Solesmes Gregorian Missal) is, that it is a faithful translation of the Latin, while at the same time it remains very close to the 2010 RM translation in style, wording and phrasing. That way, it looks and sounds familiar, as if it is an integral part of the new English translation, and as a result, the same scripture references are rendered identical throughout the entire liturgy, just as LA stipulated. Furthermore, it has been approved for liturgical use.

francis

by the way... canticanova has both the latin and english texts of antiphons so one does not need to retype them.

BruceL

Everyone, this may not be news, but just wanted to put it out there:

Fr. Samuel is now posting accompaniments to his chants.

Find them here: http://www.sacredmusicus.org/

Richard Mix

As its title suggests, this is a full set of the Proper of the Mass for each Sunday of the liturgical year.

Just so people don't entirely depend on Corpus Christi Watershed reviews, here's a summary of caveats:

The book contains only 3 Propers per pericope (Entrance, Off., Comm), omitting what it terms the "lectionary chants" (Gradual Psalm, Gospel Accl., Sequence).

Each chant is given in 4 simplified versions, the two more advanced ones based on the gregorian melodies. (A non-'stepping stone' English Gradual is available as http://americangradual.org)

It follows a one year sequence, based on the 2010 Roman Missal Introit & Communion and not necessarily corresponding to the texts found in the Gradual.

RevAMG

I am bumping this thread because...

Fr. Samuel F. Weber, O.S.B. has published the entire, complete organ accompaniment book for his Proper of the Mass. This was released on his blog in September so I apologize if this is old news to some/many people. The link is HERE.

Remember that Fr. Weber permits not-for-profit, private use only reproduction as long as the following is included: "Chant settings by Fr. Samuel F. Weber, O.S.B. Copyright © 2017 Saint Meinrad Archabbey, St. Meinrad, IN 47577-1010. All rights reserved. Used with permission."

Welcome to the MusicaSacra Forum!

Categories