Ship of Fools: Hymns and Propers: (Like the taco shell commercial) Why Can't We Have Both?

Thread: Hymns and Propers: (Like the taco shell commercial) Why Can't We Have Both? 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=025822

Posted by stonespring (# 15530) on :

Why can't we just make it the norm to have both chanted or sung Propers, in the vernacular or language if your choice, at the introit, offertory and communion, in addition to hymns at the opening procession, offertory, communion, and at the end? I would also add sung Leonine prayers but I guess you don't have to [Smile]

. Would this work at all in the rubrics if the various communions?

Posted by BulldogSacristan (# 11239) on :

You can't? We do at my parish. We chant all the minor propers in English. Then we have hymns at the entrance, offertory, and exit. Sometimes, randomly, there will be one between the gospel and sermon.

Posted by Liturgylover (# 15711) on :

I can think of a few churches that chant the propers (but done by the choir in Latin) and also have hymns.

Posted by Fr Weber (# 13472) on :

quote:
Originally posted by BulldogSacristan:
You can't? We do at my parish. We chant all the minor propers in English. Then we have hymns at the entrance, offertory, and exit. Sometimes, randomly, there will be one between the gospel and sermon.

So do we.

That's uncommon in the RCC, though; you get either the minor propers at the traddy places, or hymns--excuse me, SONGS--most everywhere else.

Posted by stonespring (# 15530) on :

In guess my main concern is whether it is allowed according to the GIRM or whatever liturgy rules other churches follow.

Posted by stonespring (# 15530) on :

It is also worth discussing whether it is a good idea or not. Does it confuse people used to something different ? (in many RCC church visitors are always a significant part of the congregation) I think it should only be done if the congregation participates in chanting/signing both the Propers and the hymns. If the choir adds harmonies, that is ok. Polyphony should only be done if if allows for congregational participation. The Propers are meant to be an integral part of the liturgy prayed by the entire worshipping assembly. I don't think they should be replaced with hymns but they can be supplement Ed with hymns if it is allowed. They should not be performed by musical and liturgical experts only. That will upset many people with deep attachments to settings of the Propers tha are hard for an average person in the pews to participate in!

Posted by Liturgylover (# 15711) on :

quote:
Originally posted by stonespring:
It is also worth discussing whether it is a good idea or not. Does it confuse people used to something different ? (in many RCC church visitors are always a significant part of the congregation) I think it should only be done if the congregation participates in chanting/signing both the Propers and the hymns. If the choir adds harmonies, that is ok. Polyphony should only be done if if allows for congregational participation. The Propers are meant to be an integral part of the liturgy prayed by the entire worshipping assembly. I don't think they should be replaced with hymns but they can be supplement Ed with hymns if it is allowed. They should not be performed by musical and liturgical experts only. That will upset many people with deep attachments to settings of the Propers tha are hard for an average person in the pews to participate in!

I agree with you in theory, but in practice in most English RC churches, no-one seems to sing the hymns or join in with Responsorial Psalm so will they really attempt the propers?

Posted by stonespring (# 15530) on :

I have been to places where they have gotten the congregation to chant the ordinary of the mass in Latin and sing with at least some volume on the hymns. They are a small congregation near a university and have a pofessilnal choir to back them up.

The congregation will sing hymns (or at least a quarter of them will - which is really impressive for an RC church) if you use familiar hymn tunes and have a cantor or choir miked loud so that people aren't worried that their neighbors will hear them sing. Loud mikeing also makes it less likely tha people will be annoyed that their neighbors' singing prevents them from hearing the cantor or choir.

For congregational Propers to work you need to have a liter se if simple chant tones, do them in the vernacular, and do them often and regularly enough at all Sunday Masses (and not just the one near noon) so that people get used to them.

Posted by stonespring (# 15530) on :

Oops I meant you had to have a limited set of simple chant tones, not a limo se or whatever I wrote.

Posted by Liturgylover (# 15711) on :

The most joyful singing I have heard in an English RC service is the Missa De Angelis setting, and the Salve Regina. Our local RC church now has 2 unaccompanied masses with hymns and participation is far better than the main service where the cantor booms and waves quite manically!

Posted by Fr Weber (# 13472) on :

quote:
Originally posted by stonespring:
It is also worth discussing whether it is a good idea or not. Does it confuse people used to something different ? (in many RCC church visitors are always a significant part of the congregation) I think it should only be done if the congregation participates in chanting/signing both the Propers and the hymns. If the choir adds harmonies, that is ok. Polyphony should only be done if if allows for congregational participation. The Propers are meant to be an integral part of the liturgy prayed by the entire worshipping assembly. I don't think they should be replaced with hymns but they can be supplement Ed with hymns if it is allowed. They should not be performed by musical and liturgical experts only. That will upset many people with deep attachments to settings of the Propers tha are hard for an average person in the pews to participate in!

Well, you don't have to be making noise in order to pray.

Posted by The Silent Acolyte (# 1158) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Fr Weber:

quote:
Originally posted by BulldogSacristan:
You can't? We do at my parish. We chant all the minor propers in English. Then we have hymns at the entrance, offertory, and exit. Sometimes, randomly, there will be one between the gospel and sermon.
So do we.

It's what we do at Our Lady of Hardwork, too. And, just because I'm an annoying one-upper, I'll add that the choir sings the gospel proper, too.

It causes indigestion for some. When do I cross myself for the beginning of the mass: At the incipit for the Introit, Or when the celebrant announces, "Blessed be God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit!" Be excessive Anglocatholics and do both.

[ 12. May 2013, 00:29: Message edited by: The Silent Acolyte ]

Posted by Ad Orientem (# 17574) on :

In my old RC parish I used to sing in the chior. In the NO masses the propers were chanted either in Latin or Finnish. There was usually a hymn during the Communion after the proper had been sung. Under no circumstances do I believe that hymns should replace propers.

Posted by Liturgylover (# 15711) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
In my old RC parish I used to sing in the chior. In the NO masses the propers were chanted either in Latin or Finnish. There was usually a hymn during the Communion after the proper had been sung. Under no circumstances do I believe that hymns should replace propers.

Somebody told me, and I don't know whether it is true, that the GIRM or Musicum Sacram only allows either one or the other but not both. If that's the case it is hardly surprising that congregational vernacular propers are as rare as a hen's tooth. I have never heard them in Italy, Spain, Poland or Germany nor in the Uk - but I would quite like to.

Posted by Ad Orientem (# 17574) on :

I'm not sure how you can have the congregation participating in the propers. The propers are usually too complicated to sing, except by the choir alone, whether in Latin or the vernacular.

[ 12. May 2013, 12:27: Message edited by: Ad Orientem ]

Posted by Oblatus (# 6278) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
I'm not sure how you can have the congregation participating in the propers. The propers are usually too complicated to sing, except by the choir alone, whether in Latin or the vernacular.

Interesting to note that the 1965 Missal, or some hand-sized editions of it, anyway, had the propers "pointed" for antiphonal or responsive recitation or chanting. The Maryknoll Missal is one such. But like many aspects of the 1965 rite, it never took off.

Posted by stonespring (# 15530) on :

By "Propers" I mean the text in any language, so congregational chanting or singing of them in the vernacular could be to a tone or melody that was easy for the people to sing - it does not need to be to the neumes in the graduale, which is in Latin anyway.

Posted by Liturgylover (# 15711) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
I'm not sure how you can have the congregation participating in the propers. The propers are usually too complicated to sing, except by the choir alone, whether in Latin or the vernacular.

A set has been published in English intended, I thought, for congregational use. These were simple chant tones that got traditionalists very excited, with comments about the death of the hymn,but no sign of them in any church I have visited.

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
I'm not sure how you can have the congregation participating in the propers. The propers are usually too complicated to sing, except by the choir alone, whether in Latin or the vernacular.

Not the ones at the back of the old English Hymnal - same tune every week.

We all used to sing them at my church back in the day.

Posted by Ad Orientem (# 17574) on :

When I was in the chior we always used the Graduale. Even in the vernacular translations we still used the chants as in the Graduale. Unfortunately a much unused liturgical book in many, if not most, RC parishes.

Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on :

Stpnespring

You will find the Propers in English in a little book called An English Gradual. Can't think who the publishers are but if you have trouble finding a copy try St Mary's Convent in Wantage...

Posted by PD (# 12436) on :

I would like to have a small choir sing the minor propers in out main Sunday Eucharist. Two or better still three cantors is all it takes. Unfortunately I have not twisted the correct arms yet to get a positive response. If that were to happen the first hymn would cover the entry of the ministers, the Introit the censing of the altar and so on and so forth. I think we might end up moving the hymns around a little but even with the minor propers in place one can still use three hymns - procession, before the sermon/after communion, and as the altar party runs for it.

PD

Posted by Edgeman (# 12867) on :

We generally have both! Hymn during the entrance, Introit during the incensation of the altar. Offertory chant right after the prayers of the people, then a hymn. Communion antiphon (with psalm verses) after the celebrant receives communion until the ablutions, then a hymn. The only time it does'nt work well is when the entrance hymn isn't timed right/is too long.

Posted by Fr Weber (# 13472) on :

quote:
Originally posted by The Silent Acolyte:
And, just because I'm an annoying one-upper, I'll add that the choir sings the gospel proper, too.

It causes indigestion for some. When do I cross myself for the beginning of the mass: At the incipit for the Introit, Or when the celebrant announces, "Blessed be God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit!" Be excessive Anglocatholics and do both.

Oh, we sing the Gradual & Alleluia (or Tract in Lent, or double Alleluia in Eastertide) as well.

But since we use the 1928 BCP/American Missal, there is no public invocation at the beginning of the Eucharist, so the signing is at the Introit.

Posted by georgiaboy (# 11294) on :

quote:
Originally posted by stonespring:
It is also worth discussing whether it is a good idea or not. Does it confuse people used to something different ? (in many RCC church visitors are always a significant part of the congregation) I think it should only be done if the congregation participates in chanting/signing both the Propers and the hymns. If the choir adds harmonies, that is ok. Polyphony should only be done if if allows for congregational participation. The Propers are meant to be an integral part of the liturgy prayed by the entire worshipping assembly. I don't think they should be replaced with hymns but they can be supplement Ed with hymns if it is allowed. They should not be performed by musical and liturgical experts only. That will upset many people with deep attachments to settings of the Propers tha are hard for an average person in the pews to participate in!

Stonespring, I'm afraid this reflects a very post-V2 concept of the music of the Eucharist (and is, in fact, verging on Pelagianism!).
From their beginning, what we term the 'minor propers' were sung by folk specially appointed to do so, in fact Gregory set up a schola to sing the graduals when they got too complicated for his deacons! Other bits (Offertory & Communio) were sung while there was much moving about
I think the idea behind the *Lets all sing everything* was an attempt to force the faithful to use the (pardon the word) Missalette!
And certainly both Pope Marcellus and Pope Pius X would disagree with you about polyphony.

Just my opinion of course!

Posted by shamwari (# 15556) on :

All this is way beyond me.

I am a simple-minded Methodist inister.

I use hymns to elaborate the theme of the service and to include those aspects which might otherwise be lacking.

Seems to me that people are advocating the use of hymns for all sorts of other reasons.

Lord have mercy on me. I am an ignormamus it seems

Posted by stonespring (# 15530) on :

Does Pelagianism mean something other the the idea that people can merit their salvation by following Hrist's moral example? I am guessing the alternate meaning is that the congregation offers the Eucharist in the same way as there celebrating priest(s)? If so then no, I do not believe either of those things.

I am not sure of what Vatican II said about congregational participation in Propers. I know it urged congregational participation in the ordinary of the Mass (Kyrie, Gloria, Credo, Sanctus, and Agnus Dei), sung on Sundays at least when possible, and that they know the Latin of the Ordinary without having to use it all the time. Comparing things to before V-II is not helpful since there were no rules for congregational singing of the parts of the Mass itself before it.

Posted by The Silent Acolyte (# 1158) on :

quote:
Originally posted by shamwari:
All this is way beyond me.

I am a simple-minded Methodist inister.

I use hymns to elaborate the theme of the service and to include those aspects which might otherwise be lacking.

Seems to me that people are advocating the use of hymns for all sorts of other reasons.

Lord have mercy on me. I am an ignormamus it seems

And Sam Ervin was jus' a simple country lawyer, Shamwari, you ole fox you.

The minor propers are, in fact, "hymns to elaborate the theme of the service and to include those aspects which might otherwise be lacking." Although saying, 'the theme' may be pushing it a bit.

Their texts may be old, but they are predominantly quotes from scripture (or elaboration on scripture).

I'm not sure what other reasons you see being advocated, but they are all sung to the praise and glory of almighty God.

Despite your false modesty, Shamwari, we still love you.

Posted by Olaf (# 11804) on :

Every Methodist service I've ever been to has been chock full of random scriptural sentences here and there. I'd take an official set schedule of them any day over the pastor's (or more often random church liturgy writer's) personal preferences.

Posted by Alogon (# 5513) on :

quote:
Originally posted by stonespring:
Why can't we just make it the norm to have both chanted or sung Propers, in the vernacular or language if your choice, at the introit, offertory and communion, in addition to hymns at the opening procession, offertory, communion, and at the end?

1) It would make the service too long for some people's taste.

2) If you use a lectionary in which the major propers (Collect, Epistle, and Holy Gospel) have been totally revised, perhaps on a three-year cycle, then either you continue using the minor propers as set up centuries ago, or you DIY your own reordering, trying to make them migrate along with the biblical readings they originally accompanied. Either way, it looks suspiciously like stirring the bathwater after the baby has disappeared.

I love the minor propers myself, partly for their musical value. Here lies the real meat of the Gregorian chant repertoire, and composers of figured music (as it used to be called) have done a great deal to adorn them as well, ever since. But unless we turn our backs on all new lectionaries, their use nowadays raises some unprecedented issues.

Posted by Quam Dilecta (# 12541) on :

The sheer variety of the Proper texts would make it difficult for most congregations to sing them, let alone chant them well. (It has already been pointed out that they have been the province of the choir since time immemorial.) Even if only a limited range of Tones is used, sight reading different texts each week requires a level of musical literacy found only in exceptional parishes. The feebleness of most efforts at congregational Psalm-chanting does not encourage optimism where the Propers are concerned.

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

I think every Anglo-Catholic shack I've ever been to has done both the chanted propers in either English or Latin, and hymns at the points in the service one typically has them.

Posted by stonespring (# 15530) on :

Why not just sing the Propers to a well
Known hymn tune? Not every mass with music even has a choir. Most catholic parishes on Sunday have one or no choral masses and some masses just with a cantor and at times a few masses with either no music or just whatever the congregation can sing on their own unaccompanied. Universally known hymn tunes are the only way to get even a tenth of the congregation to sing in such cases.

Posted by Jengie Jon (# 273) on :

Has anyone thought to put the propers into common meter?

If they are then your suggestion would work.

Jengie

Posted by LA Dave (# 1397) on :

Our parish choir routinely chants the Introit and Communio, in Latin, to Gregorian settings. The congo joins us for the entrance hymn and (generally) a hymn during the preparation of the altar and sometimes a hymn during communion. Yesterday, the men of the choir were pleased to chant all of the propers for the vigil of Pentecost, led by Maestro Paul Salamunovich, former conductor of the Los Angeles Master Chorale and retired choir director at St. Charles Borromeo parish, North Hollywood.

Posted by stonespring (# 15530) on :

I was not at my usual parish for Pentecost and at their 5:30 pm service they had the cl gregarious chant a simple vernacular introit and communio, with psalm verses chnated by a cantor in between the antiphons. The ordinary except for the creed was also chanted in the vernacular, Sanctus and Agnus Dei I the requiem setting everyone knows (that can be technically classified as something other than a requiem setting so it is not depressing), and the Glora was from a setting I did not know (it was not the Missa de Angelis). The Vidi Aquam (in place of the Kyrie) was chanted in Latin by the cantor alone, as was the offertory chant. The sequence Veni Sancte Spiritus was chanted by the cantor alone although a few brave souls tried to join in. After communion the congregation chanted Veni Creator Spiritus and that was the only hymn being used separate from the material in the missal and gradual. No music whatsoever after the blessing an dismissal. It was very solemn and peaceful but the congregational participation was not huge (although pretty impressive for an a Capella chanted Mass with neumes in the handouts instead of modern musical notation). It probably helped that it was a university parish in a wealthy urban neighborhood that tends to attract traditional diehards and zealous students. Not sure if this could be done at a typical neighborhood parish in this liberal city with a large Spanish speaking community that is even less used to chant than the English speaking community.

Posted by Edgeman (# 12867) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Alogon:

quote:
Originally posted by stonespring:
Why can't we just make it the norm to have both chanted or sung Propers, in the vernacular or language if your choice, at the introit, offertory and communion, in addition to hymns at the opening procession, offertory, communion, and at the end?
1) It would make the service too long for some people's taste.

2) If you use a lectionary in which the major propers (Collect, Epistle, and Holy Gospel) have been totally revised, perhaps on a three-year cycle, then either you continue using the minor propers as set up centuries ago, or you DIY your own reordering, trying to make them migrate along with the biblical readings they originally accompanied. Either way, it looks suspiciously like stirring the bathwater after the baby has disappeared.

I love the minor propers myself, partly for their musical value. Here lies the real meat of the Gregorian chant repertoire, and composers of figured music (as it used to be called) have done a great deal to adorn them as well, ever since. But unless we turn our backs on all new lectionaries, their use nowadays raises some unprecedented issues.

This isn't really an issue, the post-Vatican II Roman Gradual follows the three year lectionary and has appropriate references to the gospel of the day/other readings in the propers of the mass.

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0