I agree on all of these points, but I would also add a radically purist argument for chant.

During the time of chant, before flying buttresses made Gothic height ceilings possible, humanity sang with one voice. The church called out to God in a pure, clear, unified way. Chant is not social; it is not horizontal. In chant there's nothing to take our minds off God.

Grumpy take: once polyphony begin, churches in the round were inevitable. Polyphony was the first step to the "closed circle."

Grumpy take: once polyphony begin, churches in the round were inevitable. Polyphony was the first step to the "closed circle."

Kathy,

You skipped a couple of steps in your argument, and I got left behind. Could you explain how polyphony leads inevitably to churches in the round?

I'm thinking of a tiny church (no longer used as such, if I recall correctly) called St Benet's, in Cambridge, England. It is build "in the round", but dates from before polyphony was widely practiced -- the short, stumpy building has rounded arches, not pointed ones, for starters.
One of our native Englishmen, still in England, can chime in on this.

Salieri,
Do these composers' works all take 1st place equally?

For liturgy, taxing
For anything else, involving

We sang a Palestrina Missa Brevis this morning... hardly brevis... too much imho

You skipped a couple of steps in your argument, and I got left behind. Could you explain how polyphony leads inevitably to churches in the round?

I skipped many steps!

I think that polyphony introduces an element of mutual attention that expanded over time into other areas, like posture and seating. It's a matter of where our attention is directed. In the chant, we all "face" one direction (God) vocally. Sure, there are brief exchanges among us, based on liturgical roles. But polyphony is not brief. It's an extended dialogical exchange among ourselves towards God. Of course it is still "towards God;" it is not profane. But it begins a liturgical shift of sustained attention among ourselves.

For the curious, here are WP links to St Bene't's Church and Church of the Holy Sepulchre. "Quoin" is my new word for the day.

By the way, I developed my admittedly unusual opinions over the course of attending this lecture series, which I highly recommend watching.

@jonathanboswell

I share the same sentiment about what you have said, especially in your second paragraph, only I would discuss the matter about Palestrina's treatment of dissonances as being a by product of the counterpoint between the voices more so than an actual avoidance. Knud Jeppesen describes in detail about his musicological work about this in his book, "The Style of Palestrina and the Dissonance". It is maybe a matter for discussion somewhere else since to me there are a few different things they considered dissonances in their day, and even Palestrina's own contemporaries tended to be a little more bold when it came to things like the "tritone"; a good example is T.L. de Victoria, who seemed to enjoy such sounds rather than treat them in passing phrases, That's at least what I gather studying their two different methods of the same school of counterpoint, T.L. still treated such chords as a dissonance but was more deliberate in their use.

That's my 2 cents for this discussion, but I'm really very much interested in the theories and treatment of such matters by the composers of that era.

By the way, I'm more of a Palestrina fan myself, and I find it aggravating that more choirs find it easier to sing Victoria...If general choirs were more up to date on the theory of the music, and had a moderate understanding of how to read music, it wouldn't be such a chore to pickup any composer's music of that day and give it a few goes in order to competently sing such wonderful music.

I would propose that the works most fitting for this topic would be those of the late mediaeval and early renaissance composers, such as Gombert, Fayrfax, Browne, Taverner, and others of a like-minded vein. One not only feels that they are expressions of eternity, but that they come from eternity and are icons in sound such as have never been equaled in any age. These works seem at once to emanate from eternity, be portals to eternity, and, since, to put it plainly, they last an eternity, to experience them is almost to be taken up into a near mystical vision of the Triune God who dwells in eternity and who inspired such visionary music. They are truly icons in sound of God With Us and of the world to come. They are without peer in their sacred apartness, other worldliness, and, though their structures and procedures are wondrously complex, their profound ease of expression.

The so called 'sacred minimalism' of the works of Part, Hovhaness, et al., could be suggested very cautiously to be modern likenesses - even though there isn't the remotest commonality of near miraculous contrapuntal skill and craftsmanship, of near mystical artistry.

@jonathanboswell

Simply this: I find more contrapuntal excellence in Palestrina's work in general, it is hard to describe why, but there's just something that "clicks" in my analysis whenever I'm looking over any of the scores of his works. Almost the same way that you can find a comparable musical excellence in the works of J.S. Bach. Yes I also agree that T.L. de Victoria's music is more emotional, and there's nothing necessarily wrong with that. Each composer has worked their craft to their own end. Now all this being said, every composer has their less favorable works, and G.P. da Palestrina is no exception to me, there's definitely stuff I've come across on CPDL that is kind of boring to me, but these are few in general.

It occurs to me that, indeed, when one is writing sacred music one should have God alone in mind, and that for it to be worthy of him and to express him and his Eternal Being and compassionate love, it must first and last be like no other music.- and avoid diligently any influence from, or nods to secular idioms. It should be totally other in praise of the Totally Other. This is the genius and glory of our patrimony of polyphony, both modern and aged - not to mention ritual chant, both Eastern and Western. To the degree ro which one appeals to the emotions and familiarities of the people one's music becomes exponentially less sacred and more entertaining. We know, of course that emotions are God-given aspects of our being, and they are not necessarily to be shunned, but, in sacred music they definitely take second place to the intellect and the mindfulness that this is for The Almighty, and that only insofar as it is oriented totally to the divine is it worthy of us. Church, worship, is not entertainment - or, to put it otherwise, entertainment is not worship. If there is nothing enlightening for the intellect and the spiritual eye in a music it is entertainment, not music.

Many thanks for that, Chuck - and, for your singing.
The Eton Choirbook is indeed a trove of some of the rarest and most priceless musical genius in the crafting of rtual music in the service of God.
For anyone who might wish to acquire it, it comprises several volumes of Musica Britannica, published for the Royal Musical Association by Stainer & Bell.

One notices the coincidence that John Browne's tentative birth year is the year in which Constantinople fell to the Muslim crusade.

CPDL's Eton Choirbook page already has a few bluelinks as well as requested works.

Salieri expressed a preference for Franco-Flemish and Tudor polyphony, especially when sung by a men's choir. Attached is the Tallis "If ye love me" sung by the men of Zephyrus, from a concert of Sacred Music of Tudor England - 24 Nov 2002

And for Jonathan Boswell, attached is Surge illuminare by Palestrina, sung by Zephyrus on their CD Angelus.

Just discovered on the internet -
A fascinating analysis and history of Spem lectured by Jakko Montyjarvi followed by a chorally diagrammed performance.
Google - Spem in alium a mystery in forty parts youtube.

That such music could exist and be sung on this earth is a Divine Miracle.

Interesting for me that this thread came up, after an idea I had early this morning:

Can music as we know it exist in Heaven?

Music passes through time. It operates by certain events following others. Events set up expectations which are satisfied or thwarted. After the end of time, in eternity, does a piece exist all at once in the eternal present?

In my book on the composer

Palestrina for All

Chonak,

If music is an act of truth and beauty made in sound by a human, is it possible that whatever music is in Heaven will be wholly comprehensible to us in that eternity rather than in time, as it is now?

Jackson,

[purple] Of COURSE it stands to reason that he is correct: he's the host of such a brilliant crew of commenters, in whose presence he couldn't help but be correct, as their brilliance would rub off on him. [off]

On a more serious note, Lewis and Tolkien and probably many others seem to posit that God created the whole of creation with music. God caused music, which caused creation, I think is how it's fair to simplify the position of both men. If I've got that right, it would follow that music is entirely sensible to us in Heaven, even if it sensible in a different way from how it is now, since we are in time and God is not. Borrow the idea of the Platonic ideal, on the other hand, and what we get here could be understood as a pale reflection of the actual beauty of the music in Heaven--- imagine how beautiful Beati quorum via integra est, Stanford is in Heaven, or Bruckner's Locus Iste, where the limitations of boy trebles aren't limitations anymore.

CHG wrote:

Chonak has an interesting point about heaven likely having no relation to time as we experience it.

Well, I wouldn't go as far as to say 'no relation'. It is reasonable to think that the blessed do experience time in some ways that are like ours. There should be some sense of before and after, inasmuch as souls do not all enter into heavenly life at the same time. Also, there is likely to be some sense of the future, because the resurrection of the body has not taken place yet. But I know little about this subject, so I shouldn't pretend to any serious knowledge about it.

It can't be denied, as M.JO says in reply to Geoffrey Quick, that what happens in heaven is utterly beyond our human comprehension, indeed a mystery, and that applies to music. But, as Chris G-Z suggests, we may speculate that God's Creation of the universe somehow took place through the medium or agency of music. Or that music as experienced in heaven may transcend in sheer beauty the forms we experience in this world - a wonderful idea.

These exchanges began with the question, do certain categories of music have a special ability to serve as icons or distant pointers to the eternal God we believe in as Catholics ?
A more specific question than the wider (sort of Platonic ?) ideas the conversation has recently turned to.

I believe that the styles and internal, often contrapuntal structures of parts of our own patrimony of 'sacred music' do indeed intimate or symbolise the God of mercy, supreme kindness and Triune being. Other parts, often within the major/minor tonal system, may comment beautifully on the successive events of the Church Year or specific mysteries of the Faith. Yet others seem to fall short on both counts.

Robert Parsons Ave Maria for 5 voices, recording by Zephryus from a concert "In Praise of the Virgin Mary" - 7 April 2002.

NB. The attached score is transposed up a minor 3rd, but the recording is in the original key.

I've found these exchanges most interesting. As a Brit, that is, in a contrasting church music situation with the one you seem to have in the U.S. Also as someone not used to quick fire brief exchanges & obviously not known to you 'in-group' folks.

The conversation has taken a turn to comparing intensely personal experiences of particular works of widely different genres & periods. I'm finding this a shade puzzling.
And it differs from the concerns I've tried to share, from the start. So I'm withdrawing just now. With best wishes to you all.

Jonathan Boswell, I'm sorry to see you go, and I hope you'll change your mind, for you views and opinions are valuable. That said, I do think you had rather narrowly focused your attention (and preference for Palestrina) on music for the Mass, which is your prerogative, of course. To me, though, this ignores the vast repertory of sacred music for other purposes and liturgies - even if some of the older liturgies have, sadly, fallen into disuse.

One of the great losses has been the role of the medieval and renaissance Votive Antiphon, especially in the English tradition, on the scale of that represented in the Eton and other two surviving choirbooks from the period. To some extent the grand scale Votive Antiphon was carried on by the likes of Tallis, as with his Gaude gloriosa Dei Mater, and others. These were often (usually?) sung in connexion with evening services, such as Compline or Vespers - and later choral Evensong (a service that still survives to this day and even thrives in some harbors).

More than one person, including myself, has described Gaude gloriosa Dei Mater as 15-20 minutes of heaven - or as glimpse of eternity. Yes, the number of parts in some of these Votive Antiphons is more (6 to 8) than the usual 4-5 parts of Palestrina and many other renaissance works, thus entailing more complexity and florid textues in the polyphony (although most of these works alternate sections for soli with tutti utterances). To borrow from computerese, this may be a bug to some, but for others (including me) it is a feature, even if not everyone is comfortable with it.

Browne, Fayrfax, Lambe, Pygott, Obrecht, Ockgehem, Dunstable, Taverner, Josquin, Tallis, Byrd, Parsons, and many others were giants in the evolution of sacred music that led us to Palestrina, Tye, Sheppard, Gibbons, and countless others who followed.

Here, then, is the Zephyrus performance of Gaude gloriosa Dei Mater from a concert recording (the same concert at the Parsons posted earlier), one of two concert performances in 2002. The double gymels in the Sexta Pars (Soprano) part and simultaneously in the Superius (Alto) part - for a total of 4 voices - over the the Bassus part (which I sang in the recording) are particularly charming. And the tutti final verse and repeated utterances of "Amen" reduce me nearly to tears every time I hear or sing this work. This, from the same person who gave us "If ye love me keep my commandments".

Rejoice, O glorious Mother of God, Virgin Mary truly worthy of honor,
who, exalted by the Lord in glory above the heavens, hast gained a throne.

Rejoice, O Virgin Mary, to whom the hosts of angels in heaven sweetly sing praises:
for now thou doest enjoy the sight of the King whom all things serve.

Rejoice, fellow citizen of the heavenly saints, thou who without blemish bore Christ in thy womb:
wherefore thou art justly called the Mother of God.

Rejoice, most beautiful flower of flowers, rod of justice, mould of virtues,
succour of the weary, a firm foothold for those who fall, light of the world, and refuge of sinners.

Rejoice, O Virgin Mary, who art worthy of the praise the Church celebrates,
which, enlightened by the teachings of Christ, glorifies thee as Mother.

Rejoice, O Virgin Mary, who in body and soul are borne to the highest palace:
and to whom, as Strength and Advocate for us miserable sinners, we make our supplication.

Rejoice, O Mary, celebrated as help of those who intercede and savior of the damned.

Rejoice, holy Virgin Mary, by whose offspring all are saved
from the perpetual torments of Hell and freed from the power of the devil.

Rejoice, Virgin Mary, blessed Mother of Christ, channel of mercy and grace:
to whom we pray that thou wouldst give ear to our devout cry
so that in thy name we may deserve to enter the kingdom of heaven. Amen.

I much rather enjoy discussions like this one as there is a wealth of knowledge on the subject to be shared.