very pretty.

May be an odd question...when would one sing this (outside of a corporate Rosary of course). It's very lovely, I'm not sure when I could use it.

That's what I was thinking, I've heard (and sung) the Ave Maria on Marian feasts, I just didn't know if there was a rubric about it somewhere. Still learning over here and would rather ask the question than wonder about it.

Prelude or Postlude would be nice.

Dearest...once again in English...for us struggling learners in the gallery...if you please.

Ok. I understand the concept, and if I'm understanding your question...you want to know if the new Memorare should be considered "new" because it was recently composed, or if it should be considered as "not new" due to the style in which it's composed.

Yes?

I would suggest it as a motet after the Offertory chant.

Perhaps I didn't ask my question properly.

I understand that the Memorare is an old prayer. I also appreciate and in no way wish to dismiss the idea that it is a beautiful prayer offered in honor of Our Lady.

That said, are devotional prayers appropriate for the Mass? It seems to me that the Mass is it's own action with its own prayers and texts, offered for the glorification of God and the sanctification of the Faithful, and not the proper time for devotional actions, although acts of devotion can become a part of one's private prayers during Mass, especially after communion. But, the blending of devotional prayers corporately (by the priest or choir) into the Propers and Ordinary, regardless the efficacy of the prayers incorporated, may take away from those attributes (glorification and sanctification) by shifting the prayers of Faithful away from the action of Christ on the altar through the person of the priest and directing it toward some other spiritual exercise.

I think we must be careful about these matters. If we assert on the one hand, for example, that hymns need to at least resemble the Proper texts they replace, and on the other find no problem with inserting into the Mass otherwise orthodox devotional prayers simply because we like them or they reflect our personal piety, we could appear a bit hypocritical.

I should point out that I incorporate Marian hymns into the Masses in October and May, and the Ave Maria is frequently requested for funeral and wedding Masses. That is not to say that I agree with the practice. But if we don't reflect on these questions and evaluate our positions, we become no better than those we criticize and admonish.

Either you missed the logic, or are engaging in absurd reduction. The vast majority of motets, used in the EF at any rate, were polyphonic settings of the Proper texts, as you well know.

My question and the debate it unveils is far more nuanced, and I am looking for considered debate rather than such reductions.

My only point is to ask whether or not the Church has consistently sought to draw lines of distinction between music appropriate for the Mass (texts in particular) and music appropriate for public devotion or private spiritual exercise. That's all. I've personally never heard the Memorare prayed in the context of a Mass, save for when I first served as a full-time DM, and a priest insisted on praying it at the conclusion of communion (prior to the post-communion prayer) during weekday Masses. I wondered then, and wonder now, if it is not inconsistent with Catholic practice to mix the prayers appointed to the Mass with those of devotions, especially Marian devotions. It is a fair question, and one that merits rational answers for the sake of clarification. The rubrics of the Mass seem clear - nobody may add or take away from the prayers appointed for the Mass unless provided for by options that appear in the rubrics. For the sake of this argument I'm speaking specifically of prayer texts, not scripture, psalm or antiphon texts.

I'm not certain that Dr. Marht is asserting that it has always been the practice of the Church to employ music at Mass that was originally intended for use outside of Mass, or that such practice has gone without comment or debate (or indeed legislative proscription). For example, Pergolesi's Stabat Mater, although beautiful and certainly singable in whole or in part during the Mass, was likely not intended for such use, but rather was composed for a devotional service apart from the Mass; such services were popular and common practice throughout Europe, featuring music and devotional prayers and held in oratories and chapels set apart from proper churches. It seems to me he's commenting on current practice, or at least his current practice.

Now, if I'm entirely wet on this line of questioning, then some kind of learned explanation as to why my position is wrong would be appreciated.

This is an exercise in scholarly thought, not an exercise in chumming for forum sharks to see who can come up with the driest retort employing the greatest economy of words. Intelligent commentary would be most appreciated.

Rick, how could we get our hands on other works of Mr. Graham?

My sincere apologies. I was only trying to get this thread back on what I thought was its original purpose.

I don’t believe a there is a standard term for distinguishing works written in strict adherence to historical principles (let’s call that type A), versus a new work based on historical principles with some recognizable contemporary twist (call it type B). For example, we speak of Hindemith (obviously type B) as “neo-Baroque”, but what would we call a new composition that is such an evidently perfect specimen of Baroque counterpoint (type A) that it could fool a modern musicologist? “Pseudo-Baroque” or “Quasi-Baroque” won’t do (or will it?). The living choral composers mentioned above have unmistakable contemporary twists on traditional choral writing – type B. They could not have been written in any other period of music history. Mr. Graham has provided us with an excellent example of type-A; that is to say, there is nothing in the composition alien to authentic Renaissance polyphony. Is there a common label for such type A compositions? What terms would you recommend to distinguish the two? Discuss.

Mel,
I was intrigued by the point(s) you were raising, and I thought I would try to narrow it down to a concise question. But I have done a disservice, because you seem to be after something more. Your last comment raises at least three issues. I’m still intrigued. Would you mind walking us through this by stating one question on which we could focus the discussion? I’m interested to see where this goes.

Well, folks, there you have it. Ok, so we’re looking for Mass settings that have beautiful, inspired, artful, even challenging choral / instrumental content AND accessible yet beautiful and awesome congregational involvement. If you can name one, then the answer to Mel’s (current) question is YES; if not, then the answer is either NO ... or NOT YET, and “OK, composers, what are you waiting for?” And so your nominees are ...

I assure you my intentions were only to further the conversation and no ill will was intended in any way. I am seriously interested in the question as posed. I wish I knew what I said that makes you think otherwise. Honestly, I was looking forward to some answers and had no intention of souring the discussion. Heck, I'll go even further and say that this search for (or prompting to compose) Mass settings of this description will be of service to the Church in some way, and that's what being on this forum is about. There was no ill will intended, but if I made it look like I was belittling your position I am sorry. Now if you'll excuse me I have to go look up "sardonic". But I'm still interested in any nominees for Mass settings that would seem to fulfill the balance sought, which we would have to consider an ideal for the postconciliar liturgy that I wish could be fulfilled in my lifetime.

Heath, I'll let him know that there are requests for more of his work. And I'm not sure of this argument about the stringency of texts of the mass. Does not the Offertory and Communion antiphons take care of singing those texts? If not then should we never sing Sicut Cervus at communion, or O Sanctissima at offertory? It's starting to seem a bit more of the Catholic legalism that kept me out of the church for so long. Just my two cents.

I suspect that we're all trying to direct ourselves in a spiritus catholicus in these endeavours. Also, I don't see a problem with this motet sung during a Marian feast as long as the proper chant of the day gets the primacy of place. To a certain extent I see the concern over using a text that is not specifically liturgical but in the case of this piece it's far more appropriate than other forms. I didn't want this to be a discussion of where it should be used, I do know that I wish it to be used because it is so exquisitely composed. That's all. Veritas and blessings upon all.