Vatican II Hymnal — (Installment #3) — READINGS & GRADUAL PROPERS
  • RagueneauRagueneau
    Posts: 2,592
    Here are some samples of what the:

    READINGS and GRADUAL PROPERS will look like in the Vatican II Hymnal.

    Comments and suggestions are VERY welcome, but will not always be obeyed.
  • Just remember, Jeff, that, "I have too much work to do", does not exempt you from changing diapers!

    You have put an incredible amount of work into this!

    Thank you.
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,046
    It might be worth getting a definitive answer from some authoritative source about the liceity of singing the Gradual with an unofficial English text, unless someone has already done that.
  • This does indeed look awesome. A couple of remarks:

    1. The right-justified psalm verses are pretty hard to take. Text meant for reading should never be right-justified.

    2. In readings with short forms, I think it's customary that text which can be omitted is put in brackets. This certainly makes more conceptual sense, since it resembles "parenthetical" text that can be skipped.

    3. The text of the Exultet isn't given? I'd think you'd definitely want to include this (and, heck, the Christmas Proclamation and the Epiphany Proclamation) if only to eliminate any possible excuse for not doing them ("But people won't understand what's being said!").
  • OlbashOlbash
    Posts: 312
    Love. Love. Love.
  • RagueneauRagueneau
    Posts: 2,592
    One quick comment:

    chonak, the text is there for many, many reasons.

    One reason (for instance) is so people can understand when the Gradual is being sung (in Latin).

    There are many other reasons for the text being there ... but is not this one reason good enough?

    God bless!
  • Jeff,

    This project is very, very exciting and I am so grateful for your work! This will be not only such a wonderful thing for those wishing to do the propers in the ordinary form of the Mass, but will save us poor music directors the oodles of time that goes into preparing worship aids for the texts.

    I'm wondering something - is there a reason you've put (Ordinary Form) after the antiphon titles? It seems that the inclusion of the readings and antiphons (ordered according to the 74 graduale) only from the ordinary form would exclude this from use for the extraordinary form and so, presumably, people in the pew wouldn't be looking to this source as a subsitute for a hand missal for the EO. Could you save a bit of space on an already text-heavy page by omitting this?

    Again, thank you for undertaking this gargantuan, but much-needed task.
  • RagueneauRagueneau
    Posts: 2,592
    Hello, Jenny!

    1. I would love to (hopefully soon) do a Missal that would suffice for both forms.

    2. The reason I put "Ordinary Form" is simply to remind people that the GRADUALE is the Church's NORM for the Ordinary Form. It's not like we're just "sticking in" Extraordinary FOrm "stuff."
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,046
    Page footers would be helpful, and that would be a good place to put the "Ordinary Form" note.

    For example:

    Second Sunday of Advent (Year A, Ordinary Form) / 5
    6 / Second Sunday of Advent (Year A, Ordinary Form)
  • DougS
    Posts: 793
    +1 for small footers!
  • Mark M.Mark M.
    Posts: 632
    Jeffrey, again — this is very, very exciting. Incredible, really! Finally… a resource like this from someone who "gets it."

    Many insightful suggestions have already been offered here. Some thoughts of mine:

    (1) Would you consider adding the Latin "title" to each of the propers… perhaps just as a prefix to the English text, like this?
    Laetáre Ierúsalem Rejoice, O Jerusalem; and gather round, all you who love her; rejoice in gladness, after having been in sorrow; exult and be replenished with the consolation flowing from her motherly bosom. V. I rejoiced house of the Lord.

    Or, maybe in italics next to the word "Introit" (or "Communion," or whatever), like how we see it in the Simple English Propers, and in Richard Rice's Communio with English Verses.

    (2) Would you consider including the Responsorial Psalm in square-note notation? To me, this would make it appear all that much more "sacred" — distinct from what we see anywhere else.

    An almost nitpicky idea:

    (3) To indicate the verse on the Introit, can you get that little "Vx" symbol?

    And a bigger question here:

    (4) You're calling this a "hymnal"… but is that really what this is? It almost seems like a missal, with hymns added.

    More thoughts later… I realize I'm being an "armchair quarterback" here, though. Bravo to you for all of this work!
  • incantuincantu
    Posts: 989
    Consider "may replace" (is allowed to) instead of "can replace" (is able to). This is also consistent with language in liturgical documents.
  • Mark M.Mark M.
    Posts: 632
    Armchair quarterbacking, continued:

    (5) The ornate artwork which delineates Year A vs. Year B, etc., is beautiful… but given how frequently they occur, I'm wondering if they're a bit too big. Certainly, I understand the need to distinguish between each of the years within the three-year cycle, but I'm wondering if that could be done in a slightly more understated manner. It would seem to me that the major distinction to be made is between each Sunday, with the A vs. B distinction being subordinate to that.

    (6) Regarding the hymns (which you discuss on your "installment #2" thread), I noticed that you've indicated some of them as "possible entrance hymns" — but, you're also indicating the Introit text, of course, here in the readings & propers section. Is there a way you can clearly but quietly state (or clearly imply) that the Introit is the normative option?

    (7) I'd like to echo a comment from one of the other threads regarding the cover artwork. Again, it's beautiful… but if possible, I would prefer a more muted, maybe monochromatic look.

    (8) I can't wait to see the "Kyriale" section, plus whatever front matter you might include, too!
  • RagueneauRagueneau
    Posts: 2,592
    At this time, let me say this:

    1. I have been having very good conversations with some highly-placed officers in the Church Music Association of America.

    2. God-willing, we will also be collaborating with several CMAA officers and producing a version of the hymnal which has square-note notation, uses (exclusively) square-note notation composed by a CMAA officer, and has a more subtle cover design.

    God bless!
  • dvalerio
    Posts: 341
    I believe the indication of where the short form of Sequence Lauda Sion begins deserves a line of its own, which would make it far clearer.

    Since you do not allow downloading, I presume you do not want people to download these parts of the hymnal as PDF files. But notice (in case you are not aware of this) that if you have a PDF printer installed you can print your Scribd files to a PDF file, thus obtaining exactly what you get if download were allowed. I say this in case you really want to prevent anyone from getting an editable copy of what you are posting.
  • Mike R
    Posts: 106
    GREAT work! I know it would add some pages, but one thing I would like to see is the actual chant for Sequences with the readings. I think these are some of the easier chants for the congregation to sing, and they are prescribed, so why not include the music as well as the text?
  • The general approach to layout is BEAUTIFUL.

    I agree with other particular remarks made above, e.g., left-justify the psalm, add running headers or footers, etc. Obviously, in this Scriptural portion of the book, either page numbers or a number for each liturgy would be crucial so as to be able to announce easily where people should open to.

    Glad to hear about the possible square-note edition.
  • RagueneauRagueneau
    Posts: 2,592
  • I am unfamiliar with the 3rd Sunday of Advent, Year B Responsorial Psalm, "Fill In Later." Surely it is an ancient text. What is the source of that?
    Thanked by 1Ben Yanke
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,428
    It's an old Advent text about how God will fill the world with His love in the coming Incarnation.

    It's more poetic in the the original Latin, but CC Watershed can't afford to pay all the various copyright holders for use of an official translation.
  • Mark M.Mark M.
    Posts: 632
    Jeffrey, a thought here about what Jenny and others said above about the words "Ordinary Form" after every instance of "Introit," "Offertory," and "Communion" as titles: I see how you're trying to reinforce the idea that "hey, this is the normative music for the 'modern' Mass — this isn't just some old nostalgic stuff being dusted off."

    I really appreciate that. And I gather that that's intended by your choice of a title for the hymnal, too — the "Vatican II Hymnal." Good, good.

    I'm wondering if there's another way to reinforce this idea, though, without repeating the words "Ordinary Form" throughout. Along those same lines, I'm wondering if you can avoid the words, 'can be sung in place of the Responsorial Psalm' (or even similar words) after every instance of "Gradual." Again, I'm concerned about elegance of the visual presentation, though I see you're trying to accomplish some much-needed catechesis here.

    As has already been suggested, perhaps small footers might be best. (Or, maybe even just the word "or" in front of the word "Gradual" might do the trick.) In any case, I'm sure it'll look great, whatever you do.

    And as I've already suggested, I'm curious if in the "front matter" of the volume, you might include some brief explanation of sacred music, and of the contents of your hymnal — might be especially helpful for those who are accustomed to 'glory & praise'-type music.

    Oh, and another question here: Do you see a target page length for the entire volume?

    I know you'll keep us posted on your progress!
  • Mark's suggestion is exactly right. The introduction is the place to quote the GIRM as support for the various musical selections and options, e.g., that the Gradual is more traditional, is the official chant in the Graduale Romanum edition requested by Vatican II, and may always be used in place of the Responsorial Psalm. But in the hymnal itself, a modest "or" should suffice. Similarly, if the entire hymnal is for the Ordinary Form, then repeating that over and over will start to sound like special pleading. The inside title page could say "Music for the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite" and the introduction (again) would give the quotations that support the use of Propers.
  • PS -- Abundant quotations for the hymnal's introduction may be found in:

  • I'd suggest just putting the gradual first and no comment:

    Gradual • Ps 24:3-4
    They will not be disappointed, O Lord, all those who are awaiting you. Make your ways known unto me, O Lord, and teach me your paths.
    Responsorial Psalm • PSxxxxxx
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,046
    I like Noel's suggestion!
  • GavinGavin
    Posts: 2,799
    Noel's suggestion makes great sense.
  • musings
    Posts: 23
    In terms of the discussion regarding the text after the title Gradual/introit/etc. (can be sung.....) I think that the suggestion of saying OR is better, especially as the hope is that more of the Church moves to make this the norm and regard the Responsorial Psalm as the lesser preferred choice. This would insure a longer life of the Missal/Hymnal itself. The current suggestive language is more in keeping with the transition that we are currently in rather than looking to the future where the Gradual, Introit, etc. will be the norm. It is just more succinct, direct, and to the point as opposed to gently suggesting or hinting.

    Looks great and it is exciting to see this work for the benefit of so many.

    Bravo - chris
  • Mark M.Mark M.
    Posts: 632
    As you know, Jeffrey, we're all thrilled to see the translations of the propers (from the Graduale) included in the hymnal/missal. I was thinking this morning, though, that it's also notable that the Entrance Antiphon, Offertory Antiphon, and Communion Antiphon as found in the Missale are not included. (A fantastic article about the confusing history of the differences between the two are found in the Winter 2006 (pdf) issue of Sacred Music.)

    I'm not advocating including those texts, too, which are intended to be spoken rather than sung — doing so would probably only clutter and confuse matters. But I'm wondering if some sort of explanation in the front matter of the volume would be warranted. This might be especially helpful for those who are used to seeing the antiphons printed in things like the St. Joseph Missal or the OCP "Breaking Bread" and other missalettes.
  • Erik P
    Posts: 152
    looks great, the formatting, page layout etc. I especially like the graphics for the years A, B and C. They help draw the eye quickly to the right day and separate the readings.
  • RagueneauRagueneau
    Posts: 2,592
    Thanks, Erik: I am hoping to add the Latin titles, but this was very difficult to decide, which is why I did not put them in the first place --- sometimes the Latin simply cannot be neatly broken off --- I will try.

    Mark M. --- Offertory verses by ICEL? Where? I never knew about those.
  • Mark M.Mark M.
    Posts: 632
    Jeff — scratch what I said about "Offertory antiphons." My error.
  • Erik P
    Posts: 152

    very true that the names Latin titles don't truncate easily, but it seems you may have already done this at and its just a matter of copy/paste. most of them have been neatly shortened to no more than 3 words.
  • RagueneauRagueneau
    Posts: 2,592
    Erik and Mark, please pray that I can find the time to do this! This is a great idea.
  • bcb
    Posts: 36
    I don't know if it's possible, but is there any chance you'll have a version available without the text of the readings? My pastor wants the congregation to focus on the lector/deacon, and doesn't want to purchase a hymnal with the text included.