Charles,

What L Houston said.

God bless,

Chris

Charles,

I'm not addressing an EF situation -- although in this case, they're the same.

During Lent, in the OF, the organ may be used only to support congregational singing. If this is observed only in the breach nowadays, that's why Ben and Francis prefer the EF. Since the priest is not singing the exsultet as part of the congregation, the rule about accompanying it is moot.

I am in a situation where I have been asked to provide accompaniment and will do so. I knew all the objections you are raising before you commented. I know it wasn't done that way in 19th-century Russia, or the EF. I am not in that environment and don't work for those folks. I asked about accompaniments since finding one already written would be a valuable savings of my time over having to write one out.

If the priest cannot sing the Exsultet without accompaniment he might ask a competent cantor to sing it;

I am sure the priest is going to ask members of this forum what they think he should do - not!

We had a deacon sing it last year who has a pretty decent voice. He couldn't sustain pitch over the length of it and got a bit lost before it ended. It was, to put it mildly, a disaster. Everyone hates the thing and groans when it starts, but there is no way to do away with it. The choices are either read it, or accompany it enough to keep the priest aligned with the right notes and text. This choice has been made for me.

Now back to the normal forum tongue-clucking and finger wagging about 19th-century Russia. No wonder newbies who ask questions here never come back.

As I mentioned, that choice has been made for me. I would rather it be read.

I agree. I have seen some of those altered forms, and they are not pretty. I suspect I will end up playing chords under the melody. The only people who even attend the Easter Vigil are those who have to be there for some reason. This isn't something I will lose any sleep over.

What are we to do when our priest asks us to do something contrary to the rubrics? My practice is first to inform him (in a neutral manner) what the rubrics say according to my understanding, and then if he renews the instruction, obey in all things but sin. Not all apparent rubrical violations are created equal, and deviation -- even significant deviation -- in certain circumstances occurs at all levels of the hierarchy. It is up to the priest to determine what is best. I myself observed at a colloquium some years ago a willful and utterly unnecessary rubrical deviation by a priest who is regarded as nothing less than a hero on this forum.

Were a priest to ask me to do something I regarded as clearly sacrilegious or otherwise sinful, I would obviously have to tell him I could not do it.

Charles' priest has determined that it is better to sing the Exsultet well than to sing it badly, and it is better to sing it than not to sing it at all, and furthermore that it is better for it to be sung well by a priest than to be sung well by a cantor. He ought to be commended for efforts to do this, not castigated, particularly when the fine points of the rubrics are anything but crystal clear on the matter. Personally I bend over backward and do everything in my power to encourage and support my pastor when he tells me he wants to sing something, because he rarely sings his parts. Yet he recognizes that he should sing more and I am at pains to make this possible.

Charles, I don't know of an accompaniment, but if I were in your position, I would put a persistent drone on la -- that is, if it were according to the score on the ICEL site, I would do it on the second A below middle C. Then I would add another one at mi (E) above that, changing to re when it seemed appropriate. I would let the dialogue be a cappella. For the rest of the chant I would move the persistent drone to mi (E) with the moving drone at la (A) above that, going to ti (B) when appropriate with the melody. This should be sufficient to provide a steady pitch reference. If more is needed, I'm afraid I can't be very helpful.

If anyone doesn't like the idea that this is happening, perhaps Charles can furnish them with a rectory address to which they can mail their arguments. Otherwise they would be better off not visiting the thread, to avoid getting their knickers in a twist. Personally I don't intend to return to it, to avoid getting drawn into a neverending argument with others equally as stubborn as I am. Charles, feel free to PM me if I can be any more helpful.

Charles,

No one who disagrees with you on the point in question has insulted you or questioned your sincerity --- and yet you say this:

! I can just hear the rosary beads rattling and the mantilla rendering by the "elect"

To call this gratuitous is to engage in understatement.

SINCE you're intent on having an accompaniment, however, you'll find that Chris Walker (I think) has a re-written version of the Exsultet, complete with accompaniment, and that it is available from OCP.

As a PS, it makes me sad that the people at CharlesW's parish find the Vigil in general and the Exultet in particular to be such a drag. Our's is not heavily attended, but pretty much everyone is there willingly and loves the Exultet in particular.

I think you would have to be there for any of it to make sense. We had an aging pastor who insisted on staying longer than he was physically capable of doing the job. As his health deteriorated, his singing of the Exsultet worsened from year to year. It reached the point where hardly anyone wanted to hear it any more. With a new pastor, a deacon sang it and it still didn't go well. One of our priests sings relatively well and asked for accompaniment. He will get it.

...intent on having an accompaniment, however, you'll find that Chris Walker (I think) has a re-written version of the Exsultet, complete with accompaniment, and that it is available from OCP.

Thanks for the recommendation. Something like this is what I was looking for from the start.

Rubrics are like Christ mentioned about the Sabbath. Rubrics were made for man, not man for the rubrics.

if accompaniment is desired for prudential reasons, as one might say, I would recommend it avoid being noticeable as far as possible

It will be a soft, 8' string principal, only loud enough to keep the singer on pitch.

Now I have done it. I will hear from the anti-string principal crowd, for sure!

Deacon Fritz

When I hear reference to "accompaniment for the Exsultet" I do naturally think of the ballad settings because those are the only ones I've ever encountered.

I remember a priest-composer-pianist who once sang the Exsultet and ended up about a 4th higher than he started (he''s a tenor, but more a pianist than singer....). No accompaniment. I have zero issue with periodic incipits for chanting presidential prayers; that is customary and prudent as needed.

The problem comes when someone wants to do more and, um, "add value"; I am concerned about that, having seen it many times in action. At that point, it becomes more about the music ministers than the worship as such. So I tend to favor nipping earlier in the process.

I don't want to add value to it. However, after years of it being perfectly awful, it might be perceived by the congregation more favorably if it can go well this year.

There are OCP settings by Chris Walker, John Repulski, and Pedro Rubalcava (the Repulski uses the Book of Common Prayer text, the Walker seems to use an earlier version of the Missal text, while the Rebalcava has both English and Spanish texts). The simplest (and, to me, least objectionable) setting is the Rubalcava.

There is a WLP setting by J. Michael Thompson which uses the Missal text, sung by Priest, Deacon, or Cantors (one or two), with SATB accompaniment. Some of the instructions include:

Part 1 should be deacon or priest. For sake of contrast, Part 2 may be sung by a cantor preferably a female voice. If a deacon or priest does not sing Part 1, use a male voice, but make the omissions required by The Roman Missal.

The choir acts as a foundation for and backdrop to the chant of the cantors, using three devices from medieval practice:
  a) Ison: singing at a sustained tone under the chant;
  b) Organum: singing at perfect fifths around [sic] the chant; and
  c) Murmur: singing with the cantor, but "soto voce," barely audible.

In the usage that I experienced, there was no deacon or priest who sang Part 1; instead, two female cantors were employed, one for Part 1 and the other for Part 2. Moreover, a choir (although one was present) was not used, but instead the choir parts were played on a keyboard using a "strings" synthesizer setting (which seemed to have plenty of reverb and spinning overtone effects) and was generally too loud (everything, cantors and keyboard was miked and piped through the PA speakers). The contrast between the male and female voices called for by the composer was simply not there. In several places, if one of the two singers was taking her role as cantor, the other usually sang the soprano part of the choir part (so a perfect fifth above the cantor, or on an ison drone pitch).

In comparison with the attached recording, linked to below (from WLP), which uses a male for Part 1 and a female for Part 2, plus SATB chorus, a cappella), the effect of the actual "performance" that I experienced was a) splashy, and b) underwhelming (or overwhelming, I suppose).

http://www.wlp.jspaluch.com/download/ExsultetThompson.mp3

Hmmmm... the Thompson setting isn't terrible (and certainly not a Disney ballad) but I feel as if the beauty of the text is best conveyed by a solo voice. The "added value" seems a bit of a distraction.

A bit early, but does anyone have a chant score to the Ordinariate Version (Rejoice now, all ye heavenly legions of angels)? A non-Catholic church near me would like to use it, and I would like one for reference. I don't want to spend 400 dollars for a DW:TM when most Ordinariate priests can barely afford one copy themselves.

MJO: Does the Palmer-Burgess have the whole thing? I'm checking, but I only see the "Rejoice now, all ye heavenly legions of angels...throughout all ages, world without end." part, with the ... instead of the text.

Kyle -

I've gone through my library and do not have the Palmer-Burgess Exsultet.
I have quite a lot of their versions of various offices and rites which might, indeed, be of interest to some here, but not that. Sorry. I have so much of their other things that I'm puzzled that I haven't managed to get the Exsultet.

This Sunday morning, I'll ask Edmund Murray, our choirmaster at Walsingham, for what we use in the Ordinariate and mail you a copy.

Another avenue would be to contact the (Anglican) Benedictine sisters at St Mary's, Wantage, Isle of Wight, who are the proprietors of Palmer-Burgess' work, and who gave permission for the CMAA to reproduce their Plainsong Gradual.

That is, is it wrong simply because it goes against the law?

I would say yes: if an act goes against the stated law, it is wrong.

I've noticed that people often cite liturgical law as if it settles the question, which it might not do if someone feel that they have a compelling reason to deviate from the law (unless someone feels that there is never a compelling reason to deviate from the law, or that--as CG-Z implies above--that all deviations of liturgical law are created equal).

Please clarify this statement. What sorts of situations would qualify as "compelling reasons?" Those seem to be in the same line as "pastoral concerns:" ambiguous, and could have infinite interpretations. It seems like you are saying that the law does not have to be followed if one decides there's something more important to them. If that is truly what this statement is intended to mean, then they aren't laws at all: they're guidelines.

Greetings, Kyle -

The Exsultet as used in the Ordinariate is found in Divine Worship:The Missal. I will have a copy of this made later this week and will mail it to you if you wish to give me your address, either here or by personal e-mail to me.

...and........

Organ???!!
What organ!!?

With the Exsultet???????
Never on my watch!

Chonak -
I'm not familiar with this Anglican Service Book.
Do you know the provenance?
CofE?
One of the numerous Anglican splinter churches?
Episcopalian?
Other?
________________________

I just looked it up -
It is a supplementary volume to the '79 Episcopalian BCP, providing Elizabethan language versions of various rites that only appear in modern language (rite II) in that BCP.
Strange that I haven't been familiar with it.
Many thanks!

MJO: It was the BDW version, before the Ordinariate. There was never any organ used. Just myself and one other flanking the Deacon to keep him on pitch to moving smoothly.

Does anyone have printing tips for scores that are to be read in low light? Large print? Fluorescent paper? Grey print instead of black?

Charles,

No one who disagrees with you on the point in question has insulted you or questioned your sincerity --- and yet you say this:

! I can just hear the rosary beads rattling and the mantilla rendering by the "elect"



To call this gratuitous is to engage in understatement.

I disagree. The members tend to be very catty towards others who are new, or are asking for things disagree with. While that may not have happened on this thread, there is a history of it here. When I first joined, I almost decided never to come back because of some of the comments. Charles is a long-time member and knows what is and isn't allowed in the rubrics. Yet, the first two answers in this post show no respect, nor acknowledgment, of his long history here, they just in-politely let him know that it's not allowed without finding out why he wants to do so. It amazes me on how little actual Christian charity is seen on Catholic fora.

It seems from the discussion here that the answers to the two original questions are 1/ No, 2/ probably not because it's 'forbidden'.

I had cantors who could sing it well in those disastrous years, had I been allowed to use them.

That is a sad reflection on the pastoral sensitivity of the parish authorities.
Question for the moralists: As CharlesW is working in an OF Latin parish, but is not himself of that rite, what degree of obedience ought he to have to the rubrics when contradicted by the celebrant? The Eastern rites tend [rash overstatement] to direct that things can be adapted at the discretion of the 'boss'.

As CharlesW is working in an OF Latin parish, but is not himself of that rite, what degree of obedience ought he to have to the rubrics when contradicted by the celebrant?

In the Exsultet, there is a small section that has to be sung by a priest or deacon. The instructions state to leave it out when no priest or deacon is available. A cantor would do all except for that section, and as I noted, it is short.

In that year ago case, no rubrics were, or would have been violated by accompanying the Exsultet. It is not forbidden, and accompaniment is allowed.

Fortunately, no priest has asked that I do anything in direct violation of rubrics.