Jesus, Lamb of God?

ElizabethS

I read a discussion on this subject that took place here several months back, but it seemed a little bit inconclusive. So, here goes again.

My parish is using Dan Schutte's "Mass of Christ the Savior" for the new translation, and I was taken aback that it still had "Jesus, Lamb of God" for the Agnus Dei, rather than just "Lamb of God", especially considering that some other revised settings (such as Haugen's "Mass of Creation") specifically fixed that very mis-translation. The previous discussion I read referenced a 1996 U.S. bishops' policy on composing music which, although stating that the liturgical texts must be followed, allowed for tropes in the penitential rite and Lamb of God, as well as a refrained Gloria (which also bugs me). Someone else referenced "Liturgiam Authenticam and the new GIRM, however, and claimed that these trumped the older document; but not everyone agreed with that claim. Now I don't know hardly anything about hierarchy of documents myself, so it would be good to know what the current rules are regarding this subject and which document holds sway at present for the U.S.

Liam

While I don't have a copy of this setting at hand, one simple solution would be to have the invocation intoned by cantor or schola, and make a melisma of sorts by adding the melody for "Jesus" to "Lamb". It's usually best for musicians to avoid playing canon or liturgical lawyer in actual parish life unless expressly invited to do so by someone who has the authority to support them or not, tempting as it can be.

I've read a lot of rationalizations and explanations based on dicta for the so-called tropes of the Agnus and don't find them persuasive (and I am a persuadable kind of guy). One telling contrast from within the Missal is that alternative invocations not previously scripted in the Missal *are* permitted for the Penitential Rite Form C; if this approach had been intended for the Agnus, the same permissions would have been used there, but are not.

Again, though, while it's all well and good to have a discussion about this outside of the liturgy, on the ground and in real time, it's tough for musicians to play liturgical law bird dog. Simple solutions that avoid arguments are often better.....

Ben

Here's the short answer: it shouldn't be done.

I might also point out that the USCCB has no authority over the laity, unless 1) it's specifically given to them (for example: when the universal GIRM says "or what the local bishop's conferences decide") or 2) when it's documents are approved by Rome.

Their document on liturgical music doesn't fall under either category, therefore, it's simply not allowed to add tropes to the agnus dei or any other supposed new permissions given in this document. The text isn't in the missal. In short, none of 2 the USCC music documents ever held any sway in the US. Read more about this here

It's not really a question of "why can't we do it?" but a question of "why can we?" If you look in any authoritative documents, there is not even a reference to the possibility of this practice (as far as I've seen).

CHGiffen

Seems like it's time to Schutte the door on this "Jesus, Lamb of God" once and for all.

CharlesW

Amen, Amen. I have had it with this Schutte!

AndyintheHague

I cannot see anything wrong with adding "Jesus". To call it a mis-translation is going a little far in my opinion. Just because a word is not there does not mean it should not be included in the translation. In Latin we frequently have words "understood" to be there. As a language Latin likes to subjugate (as opposed to Greek). Lets look at the words:

"agnus dei qui tolliS peccata mundi miserere nobis." The celebrant continues - "ecce agnus...tolliT"

You will notice I have capitalised two letters. the first - tolliS is second person "You". Some word(s) are indeed missing. "Es" is understood - so "Es agnus dei". How do we know this? well two good clues. "qui" the relative pronoun ("who") and the fact that the nominative case is used. The complement in latin is nominative and the case of address is vocative. You can see this in the gloria Tu solus......Jesu Christe (jesu christe is vocative). The fact that the form Agnus is used and not the vocative Agne means that we are not addressing the Lamb, but we are addressing Jesus.

what we are saying is "Jesus, you are the lamb of God and you bear (take on, accept, or even abolish) the sins of the world...."

When the celebrant continues we have agnus dei qui tollit.... and yes we get a different translation for the same words with one letter different.

The Agnus Dei is written in verse. It scans perfectly. With verse, words do get missed out for the sake of the meter.

CharlesW

If I am not mistaken, one of the Vatican congregations recently directed - directed, did not ask - the USCCB to remove permission to use anything in the "Lamb of God" other than the official translation.

Anyone's memory better than mine on this, who has more details than I remember?

Ben

Andy, that's the problem: You.

You are not God.
You are not even the pope.
Heck, you don't even work for ICEL (or didn't have enough clout to change it, in which case, see above).

You do not have the authority to change what is found in the liturgical books. No other discussion is needed. The missal says "Lamb of God." We sing "Lamb of God." No questions asked.

To add this constitutes a corruption of the liturgical celebration. Those are JPII's words, not mine, btw.

Redemptionis Sacramentum, nos. 31 (2004)

They ought not to detract from the profound meaning of their own ministry by corrupting the liturgical celebration either through alteration or omission, or through arbitrary additions.

Wow, that hit a nerve....

Ben

Charles, I too remember what you are referring to. I can't find it at the moment, but it had something to do with also requiring the USCCB to change their (non-authoritative) document, Sing to the Lord, which contained the bad instructions.

No wonder they never sent it to Rome. It would have got rejected. Instead, they chose to be sneaky dissenters, and publish a "non-authoritative document" with instructions contrary to the missal. The only problem: try telling that pastor at the next parish over that it's not authoritative. He sees the USCCB heading, hands it to his musicians. Boom. The problems start.

Please don't get me started on STTL. Too late, I guess...

ClemensRomanus

It's in the Aug. Newsletter, I believe. Maybe Sept.

Bobby Bolin

http://www.ocp.org/products/30103298

Chris Hebard

http://www.usccb.org/about/divine-worship/newsletter/upload/newsletter-2012-08-and-09.pdf

chonak

Andy contends:

I cannot see anything wrong with adding "Jesus". To call it a mis-translation is going a little far in my opinion. Just because a word is not there does not mean it should not be included in the translation.

There's a difference between this and translation. To add the holy Name "Jesus" to the English version is to add a concept not present in the original text. To add it is to add _commentary_. Well-meaning commentary, of course, commentary intended as clarification. But this is not translation.

Mark M.

Slightly off-topic, but what really gets me is the "Lamb of God" setting in the Matt Maher "Mass of Communion" -- alternating between English and Latin. *Sigh.*

Ioannes Andreades

"The fact that the form Agnus is used and not the vocative Agne means that we are not addressing the Lamb, but we are addressing Jesus."

My intuition is that Agnus here is an instance of the nominative used in place of vocative (Gildersleeve 201 r.2; Bennett 171.1), and that we are indeed addressing the Lamb. This explains why the nominative "Deus" is always used in addresses.

Welcome to the MusicaSacra Forum!

Categories