Communio for OT 3
  • Heath
    Posts: 966
    My Graduale lists the Communio for OT 3 as "Mirabantur" and then follows that up by listing the Communio for Year A and B as "Venite" and then the Communio for Year C as "Comedite". In other words, it seems to say, "Do 'Mirabantur', unless it's Year A, B, or C." What gives? I haven't seen this sort of thing anywhere else in the liturgical year . . .
  • rich_enough
    Posts: 1,047
    I don't have my Graduale with me, but I would guess that "Mirabuntur" is intended for the weekdays of Week 3, the other communions for the Sundays of A, B, and C. You'll notice that the music for mass is headed "Hebdomada III" i.e. "Week 3." The music for the 3rd Sunday of Ordinary Time is intended for each of the days of that week (unless otherwise noted or a day with designated chants intervenes).

    Sam Schmitt
  • Jeffrey TuckerJeffrey Tucker
    Posts: 3,624
    Hmm, I use this and it doesn't say that.
  • Heath
    Posts: 966
    Sam, any more insight after looking at your Graduale?

    Jeffrey, the equivalent to that link in the Communio collection published by CMAA has this:

    3rd Sunday of the Year ....................... Mirabantur
    AB ............................................. Venite post me
    C .............................................. Comedite pinguia

    The question remains . . .
  • Jeffrey TuckerJeffrey Tucker
    Posts: 3,624
    Let's ask Richard
  • Richard R.
    Posts: 776
    Sam Schmitt's response seems plausible to me. The Gregorian Missal has only Venite post me (A & B) and Comedite pinguia (C), which suggests those are the Sunday Communios, since the GM is for Sunday use. The Graduale Romanum includes Mirabantur as well, which suggests it is for ferias in the week, since the GR is comprehensive for Sundays and ferias. In the new order, Solesmes (or whoever rearranged the Propers) strove to harmonize the Communio and Gospel for Sundays. I think that's the theory behind the non-chant "communion songs" in the Sacramentary as well, which even more frequently take their text from the day's Gospel.
  • Richard R.
    Posts: 776
    PS. So the reference in Communio to Mirabantur for the "3rd Sunday of the Year" is a misnomer, I suppose. Is it unique in this regard?
  • rich_enough
    Posts: 1,047
    I took a look at my Graduale, and then at my Gregorian Missal, as Richard did, and I come to the same conclusion. Looks like Mirabantur for the 3rd Sunday is incorrect. The last time I sang with a schola for the OF, we sang "Mirabantur" - so the error seems easy to make.
  • rich_enough
    Posts: 1,047
    The last comment should be signed by me,

    Sam Schmitt
  • Ralph BednarzRalph Bednarz
    Posts: 493
    I read through "Comedite" yesterday and was amazed at how the text's excitement is energized by passing through all the modes. Looking for online recordings.
    Thanked by 1Paul F. Ford
  • Paul F. Ford
    Posts: 864
    Ralph, I am intrigued by your remark: "how the text's excitement is energized by passing through all the modes." Help me understand.

    This is the only on-line version I know of: http://www.christusrex.org/www2/cantgreg/cantus/co_comedite_pinguia.mp3

    Gratefully,
    Paul
  • Paul F. Ford
    Posts: 864
    Ralph, do you own this? http://www.paracletepress.com/sundays-in-ordinary-time.html
  • incantuincantu
    Posts: 989
    I don't put a lot of stock in theories based on pitch in general, since I believe we know more about the rhythm of 9th and 10th century chant than the pitch (which has been subject to several local variants and divergent readings). And while discussing the symbolic meaning of different gestures or modal tendencies might help create more lively interpretations in practice, I'm not sure how much support there is in theory. At any rate, Columba Kelly discusses Comedite specifically in The Role of Rhetoric.
    Thanked by 1Paul F. Ford
  • Paul F. Ford
    Posts: 864
    Incantu, thank you SO much for reminding me that I had downloaded this in June of 2011. I found it and will now study it. What a blessing this forum is!
  • Paul F. Ford
    Posts: 864
    Incantu, I have now studied the Comedite as unpacked by Father Columba and I lean more in Ralph's direction than in yours. Let me live with this for a few weeks and I might think differently.
  • incantuincantu
    Posts: 989
    Don't get me wrong—there's something to it. I certainly am not saying we have no idea what the pitches of the chants were or that there is no such thing as a structural pitch. In fact, rhythmic evidence seems to support the idea of structural pitch. However, if you were to use the AISCGre editions of the chants as opposed to the Vatican / Solesmes editions, some of these note-by-note analyses we see floating around wouldn't necessarily stand up.

    In this case, I don't object to calling the third phrase a Dorian cadence, or interpreting the composition as evoking a feeling of "solemn reassurance." I object to saying Dorian mode = solemn reassurance, and then calling it science. That I don't really see support for.
    Thanked by 1Paul F. Ford
  • Ralph BednarzRalph Bednarz
    Posts: 493
    This is becoming my favorite. Wonderful Latin text , even the sounds of the words are beautiful and meaningful in a universal way. English traslations seem to have the texture and tone tone of a recipe book. They lack form; so much so that it diminishes the content of this text.
    Thanked by 1Paul F. Ford
Add a Comment