Ship of Fools: Bees are back!

Thread: Bees are back! Board: Oblivion / Ship of Fools.

To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=022505

Posted by St. Punk the Pious (# 683) on :

Forgive me if someone else has mentioned this somewhere, but I cannot restrain myself. Bees are back in the new RC English translation of the Exsultet. (It was always there in the Latin, but foolish translators omitted the godly creatures from the English for several dark decades.)

More here and here.

And there was much rejoicing.

Posted by Zach82 (# 3208) on :

Now we just need to brings the bugs back to Psalm 91.

Zach

Posted by New Yorker (# 9898) on :

Indeed. Rejoice with the buzzing of the bees.

Posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras (# 11274) on :

If you use the version of the Exsultet out of either the American or English Missals, you will get bees.

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :

Good news - it fits in with creation theology.

Posted by Alogon (# 5513) on :

It fits in with the fact that bees are threatened, and that our own well-beeing hangs in the balance along with theirs. Why they are threatened is to some degree still a mystery, but we'd better pay attention, redouble our research, and then do what it takes to solve the problem.

It fits in with the fact that amateur beekeeping has become popular with feminists. But whatever... bees need all the friends they can get. In my teens I kept bees myself, following in Grandpa's footsteps. I'd do it again if it were feasible where I'm living.

Posted by no_prophet (# 15560) on :

Re bees being threatened, this article Bees harmed by low levels of common pesticides from CBC came in to my news feed reader today.

Posted by Alogon (# 5513) on :

quote:
Neonicotinoids, first introduced in the 1990s, are used to kill aphids and other sap-sucking insects. According to a news release from Science, they are now some of the most widely used crop pesticides in the world.

Thanks for the link, No_prophet. I heard some good news in this regard just last night on the BBC. Aphids are a major destroyer of wheat and other crops in Europe. A new strain of wheat has been developed that incorporates peppermint scent. This odor is close enough to the signal secreted by aphids in distress that they will avoid this wheat. Furthermore, this same odor attracts predators of aphids, especially a species of wasp. So it constitutes a double whammy for the aphids. It will reduce the need for this and other pesticides.

Posted by Alogon (# 5513) on :

Perhaps it's not too flighty to mention William Mayne's delightful book A Swarm in May about a beekeeping cathedral organist, his choristers, and the revival of a local medieval service celebrating the bees and the candles made from their wax. It's been made into an equally charming film, now too obscure to be known to Amazon. I don't know how to obtain a copy anymore.

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

The book A Swarm in May is available on Amazon (God bless 'em) and I have duly ordered a copy........

Some of us are off to another Church for the Vigil, so I'll keep an eye (or ear) open for the Bees.......

Ian J.

Posted by Alogon (# 5513) on :

Yes, the book is available from Amazon, but not the film. However, Google is our friend (I guess. Cartoon: Young man woos young woman, hand in hand, over a restaurant table. Flattered, she asks him, "How do understand me so well already?" He replies: "I'm a programmer for Google.")

One learns from experience that many of these sites are flashes in the pan of one sort or another, but supposedly the film can be downloaded here, and legitimately, for a very reasonable token fee: filmous.com

As you can see from the illustration, Frank Middlemass stars, in full avuncular mode. The actual choir heard is the younger choristers of Westminster Abbey, directed by Gordon Rowland-Adams. I knew him in his days as headmaster of St. Thomas Choir School in New York, but was not aware that he'd been a fine choirmaster in his own right.

Posted by +Chad (# 5645) on :

Mother Bee returned to the CofE in Common Worship : Times and Seasons, so she's been buzzing around here for a few years now.

Posted by Trisagion (# 5235) on :

I loved singing it. Of course it fits in with the various things mentioned but most importantly of all, it fits with the text it translates.

Posted by Mama Thomas (# 10170) on :

Glad about the bees, but am always extremely annoyed that every Anglican version of the Exultet that I know of leaves out the most memorable bit, about the happy fault.

Why would they leave that out I wonder?

Posted by Martin L (# 11804) on :

Anglicans have no faults. (Either that, or they have no happiness.)

[ 08. April 2012, 20:50: Message edited by: Martin L ]

Posted by AristonAstuanax (# 10894) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Mama Thomas:
Glad about the bees, but am always extremely annoyed that every Anglican version of the Exultet that I know of leaves out the most memorable bit, about the happy fault.

Why would they leave that out I wonder?

Because "happy fault" isn't a good translation of "felix culpa," but there really isn't a better one. When learning Latin, we used the Exultet as a text for translation; I think our teacher told us that we could leave it untranslated, or, if we just had to put it in English, to use "fortunate."

Which, while better than "happy," alliterates.

I was just a bit too happy to hear of the return of Mother Bee and her children. The two passages where she appears are some of my favorites in the whole blessed thing—but, since I first encountered the Exultet in Latin, didn't know what exactly had been omitted from them. Sure, I realized that the bees had been cut out (aforementioned teacher handed a list of Latin words relating to a major liturgical text with the words for "lightning," "chains," "pillar," and "bees" on it and none of the aforementioned priests had any idea what the text was—the bees threw them off), but not that the references to the candle being a gift to God from a whole set of others ("a gift from mother bee and made with human hands," etc.) had been as well. To me, that's the part that brings everybody involved in the giving together, showing that many had sacrificed in making an offer to God in thanks for His sacrifice—and, of course, it got cut.

And now it's back!

[ 08. April 2012, 22:49: Message edited by: AristonAstuanax ]

Posted by St. Punk the Pious (# 683) on :

And His Holiness mentions BEES not once but twice in his Easter Vigil homily! [Angel]

Posted by Mama Thomas (# 10170) on :

quote:
Originally posted by AristonAstuanax:

quote:
Originally posted by Mama Thomas:
Glad about the bees, but am always extremely annoyed that every Anglican version of the Exultet that I know of leaves out the most memorable bit, about the happy fault.

Why would they leave that out I wonder?
Because "happy fault" isn't a good translation of "felix culpa," but there really isn't a better one. When learning Latin, we used the Exultet as a text for translation; I think our teacher told us that we could leave it untranslated, or, if we just had to put it in English, to use "fortunate."

Which, while better than "happy," alliterates.

I was just a bit too happy to hear of the return of Mother Bee and her children. The two passages where she appears are some of my favorites in the whole blessed thing—but, since I first encountered the Exultet in Latin, didn't know what exactly had been omitted from them. Sure, I realized that the bees had been cut out (aforementioned teacher handed a list of Latin words relating to a major liturgical text with the words for "lightning," "chains," "pillar," and "bees" on it and none of the aforementioned priests had any idea what the text was—the bees threw them off), but not that the references to the candle being a gift to God from a whole set of others ("a gift from mother bee and made with human hands," etc.) had been as well. To me, that's the part that brings everybody involved in the giving together, showing that many had sacrificed in making an offer to God in thanks for His sacrifice—and, of course, it got cut.

And now it's back!

But "happy" can me fortunate in some contexts. But anyway, fortuate fault. Or just say "felix culpa." The idea itself is mind blowing and needs a wider audience.

Posted by Ceremoniar (# 13596) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Mama Thomas:
Glad about the bees, but am always extremely annoyed that every Anglican version of the Exultet that I know of leaves out the most memorable bit, about the happy fault.

Why would they leave that out I wonder?

I am confused. The English Missal, first and last editions, both speak of the "happy fault."

The Anglican Missal (American edition) speaks of the "blessed iniquity" and the American Missal speaks of the "happy failing."

Posted by PD (# 12436) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Ceremoniar:

quote:
Originally posted by Mama Thomas:
Glad about the bees, but am always extremely annoyed that every Anglican version of the Exultet that I know of leaves out the most memorable bit, about the happy fault.

Why would they leave that out I wonder?
I am confused. The English Missal, first and last editions, both speak of the "happy fault."

The Anglican Missal (American edition) speaks of the "blessed iniquity" and the American Missal speaks of the "happy failing."

It is happy fault at our shack. I assume the translation for the Exultet was pinched from the English Missal (1958 ed.)

PD

Posted by Mama Thomas (# 10170) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Ceremoniar:

quote:
Originally posted by Mama Thomas:
Glad about the bees, but am always extremely annoyed that every Anglican version of the Exultet that I know of leaves out the most memorable bit, about the happy fault.

Why would they leave that out I wonder?
I am confused. The English Missal, first and last editions, both speak of the "happy fault."

But that truly wonderful tome was never officially accepted, even though I have heard of a few parishes that proudly have a copy that has bee signed by a bishop.

I think the US 79 and others of that era were simply copying and pasting and slightly editing the then current Roman translation. Which makes prayer books of that era increasingly out of date.

The Anglican Missal (American edition) speaks of the "blessed iniquity" and the American Missal speaks of the "happy failing."

Posted by Bos Loquax (# 16602) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Mama Thomas:
Glad about the bees, but am always extremely annoyed that every Anglican version of the Exultet that I know of leaves out the most memorable bit, about the happy fault.

Why would they leave that out I wonder?

My old parish began using English texts that were "expanded" compared to what's in our prayer book, and my new parish, at least this year, used a Latin text. Although I don't remember if Old Parish used "happy fault," we had something to that effect, and although I am unfamiliar with the Latin for the Exsultet, I do recognize "felix culpa."

It's also possible that those Expanded Texts got into bees, and--thanks more to my interest in astronomy (Apis is the former name of a southern constellation) than to my knowledge of Latin--I did recognize the "apis" in Our Latin Version.

Posted by Pancho (# 13533) on :

quote:
Originally posted by AristonAstuanax:

quote:
Originally posted by Mama Thomas:
Glad about the bees, but am always extremely annoyed that every Anglican version of the Exultet that I know of leaves out the most memorable bit, about the happy fault.

Why would they leave that out I wonder?
Because "happy fault" isn't a good translation of "felix culpa," but there really isn't a better one. When learning Latin, we used the Exultet as a text for translation; I think our teacher told us that we could leave it untranslated, or, if we just had to put it in English, to use "fortunate."

Which, while better than "happy," alliterates.

Isn't this a case where the meaning of the word "felix" shifted between Classical Latin and Vulgar and Ecclesiastical Latin? When I look it up in Casell's Latin Dictionary it says:

(originally: fruitful, fertile)
1)of good omen, favorable, bringing good luck
2)fortunate, lucky;

but just above that is the derived word "felicitas" which says:

happiness,good fortune, success;

and when I look it up in Stelten's Dictionary of Ecclesiastical Latin it says:

happy, blessed.

In Spanish the word "felix" became the word "felíz" which means "happy" and the phrase "O felix culpa" is translated "Oh felíz culpa" in the Exsultet.

Posted by LutheranChik (# 9826) on :

I'm a novice beekeeper who is always happy when non-beekeepers pay respect to honeybees...how nice to see that in a liturgy. They're really a fascinating species, and I feel a sense of responsibility providing them with a home in our backyard. (We were called out of state on a family medical emergency in February and didn't get home until two weeks ago; we left convinced that our two hives had died over the winter largely due to our incompetence -- we listened to the hives and heard nothing inside -- how relieved we were to return and find the new generation buzzing around the dandelions, apparently doing fine despite an abnormally early spring punctuated by snowstorms and with no human feeding intervention, which is usually necessary in these parts.)

Posted by AristonAstuanax (# 10894) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Pancho:

quote:
Originally posted by AristonAstuanax:

quote:
Originally posted by Mama Thomas:
Glad about the bees, but am always extremely annoyed that every Anglican version of the Exultet that I know of leaves out the most memorable bit, about the happy fault.

Why would they leave that out I wonder?
Because "happy fault" isn't a good translation of "felix culpa," but there really isn't a better one. When learning Latin, we used the Exultet as a text for translation; I think our teacher told us that we could leave it untranslated, or, if we just had to put it in English, to use "fortunate."

Which, while better than "happy," alliterates.
Isn't this a case where the meaning of the word "felix" shifted between Classical Latin and Vulgar and Ecclesiastical Latin? When I look it up in Casell's Latin Dictionary it says:

(originally: fruitful, fertile)
1)of good omen, favorable, bringing good luck
2)fortunate, lucky;

but just above that is the derived word "felicitas" which says:

happiness,good fortune, success;

and when I look it up in Stelten's Dictionary of Ecclesiastical Latin it says:

happy, blessed.

In Spanish the word "felix" became the word "felíz" which means "happy" and the phrase "O felix culpa" is translated "Oh felíz culpa" in the Exsultet.

Which is interesting, if true, as the Exultet is a classical text—IIRC, isn't it attributed to Ambrose of Milan? Both Ambrose and his student Augustine were great classical Latin stylists (especially Auggie!), and wrote very rhetorically influenced Latin in the classical mode. Now, the meaning may have shifted, with ICEL using an anachronistic ecclesiastical meaning (or at least being unwilling to listen to overly pedantic Latin teachers), but the date of composition of the sequence is very much classical.

Posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras (# 11274) on :

It might interest you to know that in Lithuanian, one of the words meaning "friend" is "bičiulis", which actually means a fellow bee-keeper. This is related to a verb, "bičiuliauti" that originally meant (and can still mean) "to keep bees in common", or alternatively, "to be friends". In case you're wondering, the word for bee is "bitė" (endings with t- get transformed to č- in particular instances involving plurals).
Č is pronounced as the English ch- sound. The more usual and more prosaic word for friend in Lithuanian is "draugas". The idea of being bee-keeping mates together, though, seems so much more ancient and folkloric/folksy.

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Mama Thomas:
Glad about the bees, but am always extremely annoyed that every Anglican version of the Exultet that I know of leaves out the most memorable bit, about the happy fault.

Why would they leave that out I wonder?

Common Worship (Times and Seasons) doesn't.

Posted by +Chad (# 5645) on :

Yes, CW includes the 'happy fault' in both prose and metrical versions.

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:

quote:
Originally posted by Mama Thomas:
Glad about the bees, but am always extremely annoyed that every Anglican version of the Exultet that I know of leaves out the most memorable bit, about the happy fault.

Why would they leave that out I wonder?
Common Worship (Times and Seasons) doesn't.

I added it this year when i sung it. It's easy if one is familiar with the way the chant works.

[ 26. April 2012, 16:24: Message edited by: leo ]

Posted by Alogon (# 5513) on :

There were no bees in the Exultet at Holy Apostles this year. [Disappointed]

Surely we can all agree that Something Must Be Done about this. I mean, this is the Episcopal Church, and 815 Second Avenue is crawling with feminist tree-huggers. If liturgical and musical traditionalists like us are intelligent enough to frame our argument for the bees in the correct terms, it should be a pushover. [Snigger]

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :

quote:
Originally posted by leo:
]I added it this year when i sung it. It's easy if one is familiar with the way the chant works.

Why did you need to 'add' it? Which text were you using?

Posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras (# 11274) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Alogon:
There were no bees in the Exultet at Holy Apostles this year.

Surely we can all agree that Something Must Be Done about this. I mean, this is the Episcopal Church, and 815 Second Avenue is crawling with feminist tree-huggers. If liturgical and musical traditionalists like us are intelligent enough to frame our argument for the bees in the correct terms, it should be a pushover.

I was looking at the 1979 BCP text of the Exsultet today and realised how terribly abbreviated it is. I think the agenda was obviously to cut out anything "unnecessary" so that the congo wouldn't get bored with it and tired of standing. It really could be lengthened a bit and still be within the limits of internet-attention span. "O felix culpa" needs to be returned as does some citation of the bees (don't have to sing about them too much). The thing is, I've seldom heard the 1979 BCP text because I'm usually somewhere that uses one of the old texts from one of the traditional Anglican missals or a like translation.

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:

quote:
Originally posted by leo:
]I added it this year when i sung it. It's easy if one is familiar with the way the chant works.
Why did you need to 'add' it? Which text were you using?

Not sure but it's the one I first sang in 1971 -'thee and thy' form and a photocopy (in ye olde days copies came out with a silver background, which is why I need acolytes to help me see it).

I know it so well that I am nervous of learning another version. We have a deacon next year and she is quite musical, so i am going to take a year off so that she can do it.

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0