English Gregorian Chant

[bryan123459]

The new English Sacramentary will include English-language, modern music notation Gregorian chants for the entire Mass cycle. From material available online (the introduction), it appears that the translations and notation are very well done. The Sacramentary is moving through the approval process–I think it is in Rome now.

Years ago I attended a Mass that included music led by an “English Chant Schola.” How beautiful to hear and sing Gregorian chant in English. A Rennaissance polyphonic Mass setting (in English) was also used. If anything, it was even more beautiful than I rememember the Latin high Mass of my youth. The contemplation of the text while singing the music was richer for me when heard/sung in my mother tongue. It was a profoundly moving experience.

 

[Bbigam]

Can it be called “Gregorian” if it’s in the vernacular? I ask because I genuinely don’t know the answer.

But anyway, this is indeed exciting news! I love to hear Latin chant, but English chant can also be very beautiful, like how our cantor chanted the Proclamation of the Birth of Christ at Midnight Mass.

 

[bpbasilphx]

This is EXACTLY what I suggested in a thread I started (Clown masses revisited) as a solution to certain tasteless enrichments and irregularities.

 

[brotherhrolf]

We used the 1940 Episcopalian hymnal translations for all of the traditional chants. For everyone of my age who remembers the Latin, it was like taking a shower with a raincoat on. My choir was never so grateful as when we were finally allowed to switch from “I saw water flowing forth from the Temple” to “Vidi Aquam” on Easter Sunday. Alternating Latin and English verses is a good way to expose people to Latin.

 

[Dempsey1919]

While this is certainly a step in the right direction, I think the Church should encourage the use of traditional Latin Gregorian Chant. As brotherhrolf says. English Gregorian Chant is like taking a shower with a raincoat on.

 

[peary1]

The new English Sacramentary will include English-language, modern music notation Gregorian chants for the entire Mass cycle. From material available online (the introduction), it appears that the translations and notation are very well done. The Sacramentary is moving through the approval process–I think it is in Rome now.

Years ago I attended a Mass that included music led by an “English Chant Schola.” How beautiful to hear and sing Gregorian chant in English. A Rennaissance polyphonic Mass setting (in English) was also used. If anything, it was even more beautiful than I rememember the Latin high Mass of my youth. The contemplation of the text while singing the music was richer for me when heard/sung in my mother tongue. It was a profoundly moving experience.

I’m a purist. It should remain in Latin.

 

[bpbasilphx]

I’m a purist. It should remain in Latin.

The Latin chants were adapted to Slavonic texts in the Slavonic recension of the Roman Rite used in Croatia before Vatican II.

 

[Harpazo]

I’m a purist. It should remain in Latin.

Why not be a true purist and have the ENTIRE Mass in Greek with which the Church of Rome started?

I would love to hear Gregorian Chant in English, but many Latins are unaware that there is more to Western Christian hymnography than just Gregorian Chant. I love Ambrosian Chant, Sarum Chant and Mozarabic Chant.

I do not understand why music in the Latin Church has to be in Latin? Yes, that’s the tradition they got it from, but what is so blasphemous about adopting the traditions to the local people, i.e. using the vernacular?

In Christ,
Andrew

 

[peary1]

The Latin chants were adapted to Slavonic texts in the Slavonic recension of the Roman Rite used in Croatia before Vatican II.

I really don’t care as to whether or not Latin chants were adapted to Slavonic texts. I am not Slavonic so it is irrelevant to me. My ancestry is Italian. I grew up with Gregorian Chant in Latin. I prefer Latin. It’s a personal preference, and I’m a purist in that regard. PERIOD.

 

[brotherhrolf]

Why not be a true purist and have the ENTIRE Mass in Greek with which the Church of Rome started?

I would love to hear Gregorian Chant in English, but many Latins are unaware that there is more to Western Christian hymnography than just Gregorian Chant. I love Ambrosian Chant, Sarum Chant and Mozarabic Chant.

I do not understand why music in the Latin Church has to be in Latin? Yes, that’s the tradition they got it from, but what is so blasphemous about adopting the traditions to the local people, i.e. using the vernacular?

In Christ,
Andrew

Andrew…look at your post. Ambrosian, Sarum and Mozarbic chant were not in the vernacular. They were variants in Latin. I have multiple CDs of each.

Up until 1967 when the world flipped upside down, all of us in the pew sang Latin chant - yes, Andrew everything you sing today in English was sung in Latin. It was called the Missa Cantata and that is what I grew up with… The Mass was in Latin. There was no Irish chant, English chant, Spanish chant or northern Italian chant. (I have to note that none of those chants were in the vernacular) A Catholic could go anywhere in the world and participate fully in the Mass - which is something we can’t say today.

1967 was not that long ago. There are a whole bunch of us who are alive today. Many of us were teenagers in 1967. We grew up singing Latin.

 

[Harpazo]

Andrew…look at your post. Ambrosian, Sarum and Mozarbic chant were not in the vernacular. They were variants in Latin. I have multiple CDs of each.

Up until 1967 when the world flipped upside down, all of us in the pew sang Latin chant - yes, Andrew everything you sing today in English was sung in Latin. It was called the Missa Cantata and that is what I grew up with… The Mass was in Latin. There was no Irish chant, English chant, Spanish chant or northern Italian chant. (I have to note that none of those chants were in the vernacular) A Catholic could go anywhere in the world and participate fully in the Mass - which is something we can’t say today.

1967 was not that long ago. There are a whole bunch of us who are alive today. Many of us were teenagers in 1967. We grew up singing Latin.

Actually, much of what I sing today was originally in Greek and Slavonic, possibly Arabic and Aramaic.

I went to a Missa Cantata last year. Very beautiful, but I would much rather prefer the same Missa Cantata in the vernacular. I can go to any Orthodox church for Divine Liturgy and know exactly what’s going on because the liturgy has changed very little in 1700 years. For me, the language has nothing to do with it, although it helps, but it’s the internal disposition of my praying to God in repentance,love and reverence that matter the most.

Why can’t the same hymns be sung, but in the tongue of the people?

In Christ,
Andrew

 

[ProVobis]

like how our cantor chanted the Proclamation of the Birth of Christ at Midnight Mass.

This is how it’s done at Holy Name Cathdral in Chicago, but for me it’s more difficult to follow unless I read it.

 

[ProVobis]

The Latin chants were adapted to Slavonic texts in the Slavonic recension of the Roman Rite used in Croatia before Vatican II.

So?

 

[ProVobis]

Yes, that’s the tradition they got it from, but what is so blasphemous about adopting the traditions to the local people, i.e. using the vernacular?

English is not traditional in the Western Rite. And, besides Vatican II emphasized Gregorian chant and Latin.

 

[ProVobis]

My ancestry is Italian. I grew up with Gregorian Chant in Latin. I prefer Latin. It’s a personal preference, and I’m a purist in that regard. PERIOD.

Though I’m not Italian, I’m with you. And if I were Italian, I know it would bother the heck out of me if they tried successfully to Anglicize Italian operas.

 

[ProVobis]

I can go to any Orthodox church for Divine Liturgy and know exactly what’s going on because the liturgy has changed very little in 1700 years.

Yes, but that’s the key. It hasn’t CHANGED. No one can tell me that an opera (a three-hour Madame Butterfly, for example) would be the same if it’s translated from Italian to English. It would lose most of its art and beauty. If it’s all about vernacular, something will be gained maybe, but much of it will be lost. We want to preserve as much as we can.

 

[malphono]

Actually, much of what I sing today was originally in Greek and Slavonic, possibly Arabic and Aramaic.

Greek and Slavonic, yes. Byzantine tunes in Arabic are invariably translations from the Greek. The same is true for Byzantine tunes in Aramaic (used in two or three small villages in southern Syria being the only places where Byzantine liturgy is done in Aramaic).

I went to a Missa Cantata last year. Very beautiful, but I would much rather prefer the same Missa Cantata in the vernacular. I can go to any Orthodox church for Divine Liturgy and know exactly what’s going on because the liturgy has changed very little in 1700 years.

The exact same thing is true in the Roman Rite EF, the non-modified (read: pre-conciliar) Ambrosian Rite, etc, as well as in the non-modified (read: pre-conciliar) Oriental liturgies. It is, of course, not true in the Roman Rite OF, nor in other liturgies which have undergone similar post-conciliar modification.

For me, the language has nothing to do with it, although it helps, but it’s the internal disposition of my praying to God in repentance,love and reverence that matter the most.

The above (emphasis added) is interesting. Keep in mind that there are people (oh horrors! even Orthodox people) who prefer liturgy in the liturgical language proper to their tradition (there are a variety of reasons for that preference which I’m not going into here) and of course they know “what’s going on” even if they are not fluent in that language. And then there are those who prefer liturgy in vernacular translation (and those who do so also have reasons for their preference).

Why can’t the same hymns be sung, but in the tongue of the people?

One reason might be that here are those who believe things “get lost” in translation. Particularly modern translations.

 

[peary1]

Though I’m not Italian, I’m with you. And if I were Italian, I know it would bother the heck out of me if they tried successfully to Anglicize Italian operas.

LOL - What’s funny about that is Italian opera is sung in German in Germany, or in French in France; however, it is sung in Italian in America. Go figure…

 

[Harpazo]

Greek and Slavonic, yes. Byzantine tunes in Arabic are invariably translations from the Greek. The same is true for Byzantine tunes in Aramaic (used in two or three small villages in southern Syria being the only places where Byzantine liturgy is done in Aramaic).

The exact same thing is true in the Roman Rite EF, the non-modified (read: pre-conciliar) Ambrosian Rite, etc, as well as in the non-modified (read: pre-conciliar) Oriental liturgies. It is, of course, not true in the Roman Rite OF, nor in other liturgies which have undergone similar post-conciliar modification.

I understand that the same exact thing can’t be said for the Novus Ordo Missae, and I believe that is a shame. However, there are parts of it that would be recognizable to any practicing, regular Mass-attending Catholic, wouldn’t you say?

The above (emphasis added) is interesting. Keep in mind that there are people (oh horrors! even Orthodox people) who prefer liturgy in the liturgical language proper to their tradition (there are a variety of reasons for that preference which I’m not going into here) and of course they know “what’s going on” even if they are not fluent in that language. And then there are those who prefer liturgy in vernacular translation (and those who do so also have reasons for their preference).

Believe you me, I know what you’re talking about. But, this preference can detract from the purpose of being at Liturgy. Too much emphasis is being put on the language rather than the worship, as if Latin made the Mass better, whim bam boom. Or for some Russians, Slavonic; Greeks, Koine, etc.

One reason might be that here are those who believe things “get lost” in translation. Particularly modern translations.

I agree. ICEL is a disgrace. The priest at my former Maronite parish spent half of a liturgy class talking about how ICEL botched translations not only for the Latins, but the Byzantines and Maronites. Every so often I read Fr. Zuhlsdorf’s blog and wonder why someone like him is not used to translation Latin prayers into English.

In Christ,
Andrew

 

[malphono]

I understand that the same exact thing can’t be said for the Novus Ordo Missae, and I believe that is a shame. However, there are parts of it that would be recognizable to any practicing, regular Mass-attending Catholic, wouldn’t you say?

At its best, in its “reform of the reform” mode, most of the Roman Rite OF would be recognizable. But other than that, I suppose it would depend on which “options” (or variations) are being used on a particular day by a particular celebrant. As I recently said in another thread, that’s one of the big problems with the OF: too many “options” and too much room for improv.

Believe you me, I know what you’re talking about. But, this preference can detract from the purpose of being at Liturgy. Too much emphasis is being put on the language rather than the worship, as if Latin made the Mass better, whim bam boom. Or for some Russians, Slavonic; Greeks, Koine, etc.

As I see it, far too much emphasis is put on the vernacular, to the detriment of tradition and identity. In case you’ve forgotten from other posts of mine in the past, what I neglected to note earlier today was that I am one of those who would prefer to maintain the traditional liturgical language. Very strongly so. And no, I don’t think it detracts from the purpose one iota. Rather, for those of us who hold to the liturgical language, it enhances the experience immeasurably.

I agree. ICEL is a disgrace. The priest at my former Maronite parish spent half of a liturgy class talking about how ICEL botched translations not only for the Latins, but the Byzantines and Maronites. Every so often I read Fr. Zuhlsdorf’s blog and wonder why someone like him is not used to translation Latin prayers into English.

Now that one is easy: the ICEL has had the bishops in its thrall. That plus the fact that the powerful progeny of the “spirit of Vatican II” would be horrified. It would mean and end to their “inclusive language” and an end to the loosey-goosey liturgical approach that they favor. I suspect that is the basic reason behind the interminable delay in finalizing the new Roman Rite OF translations.