Sequence for Pentecost: Recited or Sung

  • Thread starter Thread starter CyrilSebastian
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Well, my question is, what is the point whether it is sung or recited? Why does anyone care, unless the sung version is considered superior to the recited? I know I think so. Maybe is there a priest in here who could tell us?
 
A Mini History of the SequencesVeni Sancte Spiritus is a true masterpiece of Latin poetry. In rhyme scheme, it is complex and gorgeous; lines one & two rhyme with each other, and line three always ends in the syllable –ium. In meter, the sequence is a very faithful example of trochaic dimeter. In content, it is a magnificent meditation on the Spirit’s guidance through consolation & desolation. So much is lost when this sequence is not sung in its original Latin.
That is lost no matter what you do, when you are singing with people who do not know a stroke or tittle of Latin.
 
Two points:
  1. No heartfelt glorification of God is “clunky and awkward” nor can any words used in His glorification, if heartfelt, be lacking “grace and ease of expression”.
  2. The Sacred Liturgy cannot be compared to an opera. Opera was entertainment for the masses, liturgy is glorification of God.
Aesthetics may be a blessing to the human senses, but, just my thoughts are just He does not favor animal sacrifice over humble heart and contrite spirit, he does not favor any particular words or sounds of glorification, but would rather they be offered from the heart.
No, that is not what is meant–that is, this is not a dig at English as a language for poetry. Pieces of poetry, when executed well, are masterworks in the use of the tongue they are written in. Translations of beautiful poetry absolutely can be clunky and awkward. It is only with a great deal of skill, sweat, and luck that they are ever anything else. If you render the art of the Sistine Chapel using mosaic tile and show it to someone who has seen the original, the first question is “Why? Why try to do that?” That doesn’t mean mosaic tile is a lesser medium. It means that the Sistine Chapel was not conceived as a mosaic work but as a paint work, and you cannot translate it directly without coming out with something that does neither the poetry nor the medium of mosaic tile an injustice. Trying to pull something like that off can be disheartening, and that is not a bad reflection on people willing to say so.

Yes, there is a sense in which liturgy is like a bouquet given to your mother–it is the thought that counts more than the actual flowers. That does not mean you can’t make a bouquet that would disappoint your mother when you are old enough to do better than you are doing. Our capacities are well-known to God. We need to be honest both about the heart and the skill we put into the work of liturgy. Would you write a dance for a lion and ask a bird to do it, or vice versa?
 
Well, my question is, what is the point whether it is sung or recited? Why does anyone care, unless the sung version is considered superior to the recited? I know I think so. Maybe is there a priest in here who could tell us?
According to the General Instruction of the Roman Missal, “Singing is the sign of the heart’s joy (cf. Acts 2:46). Thus St. Augustine says rightly, ‘Singing is for one who loves.’[48] There is also the ancient proverb: ‘One who sings well prays twice.’”

Singing is not always necessary, but singing is preferred, particularly for the parts intended to be highlighted as important.
 
I think St. Francis might have answered this question in a way you were not looking for.

Peace and all Good!
I have no idea what you mean. A lion and a bird are not capable of the same movements, let alone capable of doing the same movements with equal fluidity. Perhaps I should have used a flamenco dancer and a ballet dancer as my examples…both dancers who attain a very high level of dance, but with a very different sorts of rhythms and movements. Likewise, different languages lend themselves to different rhythms and different artistic devices in general. Even the same devices, such as alliteration, allusion, and rhyme cannot be translated to achieve precisely the same effect. Translating art, even prose, from one language to another is notoriously difficult to do well. Something of the poet’s complex artistic realization from the original piece is always lost, and I don’t know of a translator who would disagree.
 
I have no idea what you mean. A lion and a bird are not capable of the same movements, let alone capable of doing the same movements with equal fluidity. Perhaps I should have used a flamenco dancer and a ballet dancer as my examples…both dancers who attain a very high level of dance, but with a very different sorts of rhythms and movements. Likewise, different languages lend themselves to different rhythms and different artistic devices in general. Even the same devices, such as alliteration, allusion, and rhyme cannot be translated to achieve precisely the same effect. Translating art, even prose, from one language to another is notoriously difficult to do well. Something of the poet’s complex artistic realization from the original piece is always lost, and I don’t know of a translator who would disagree.
Okay, I will endeavor to clarify my comment, on what may be the Franciscan view:

As you say, " A lion and a bird are not capable of the same movements, let alone capable of doing the same movements with equal fluidity."

As St. Francis might contend that the differences in movement between the lion and the bird actually depict the perfect harmony of God’s creation…If the roar of the hungry lion capturing the squawking bird is a song of praise to the Creator.

As you say, “a flamenco dancer and a ballet dancer as my examples…both dancers who attain a very high level of dance, but with a very different sorts of rhythms and movements.”

A Franciscan might contend, “If the two dancers, admittedly of very different styles, plied their talents, together, for the glory of Him who granted them their talents, those movements might not be appealing to the worldly sensitivities of man, but would be received with great joy by our Father”.

You say, "Translating art, even prose, from one language to another is notoriously difficult to do well. Something of the poet’s complex artistic realization from the original piece is always lost, ".

The heart of a Franciscan might say, "The same could be said of language in general, not just art, yet we saw on Pentecost that Holy Spirit made such “complex artistic [or otherwise] realization” quite easy, by giving man the ability to speak and understand other tongues…for ‘nothing is impossible with God’.

And, finally you say, “I don’t know of a translator who would disagree.”

Franciscans might say, “Maybe no earthly translator, but The Heavenly Translator might”.

Peace and all good!
 
Sadly, read out of the missallette. In English.
At least you had it. I was in florida this past weekend for Mass and the parish i went to skipped it altogether. Made me appreciate my diocese more and more!
 
On Pentecost Sunday, there are different Sequences that can be used:
The Sequence Veni, Sancte Spiritus
Come, O Holy Spirit
Come, O Holy Spirit, Come

At your church, which Sequence was used? Was the Sequence recited or sung?

:harp::harp::harp:
We chant a four part “Veni Sancte Spiritus” in repetition while our director sings 4 verses in English. It starts with the basses on “A”. This has a nice effect as we have a couple basses with very robust voices. Add the altos, sopranos, tenors, then the director comes in.
 
Some awful English translation recited.

Pentecost is one of the most beautiful Latin Masses to sing and I just love that sequence chanted.
 
Away from home at the Cathedral of St. Cecilia, Omaha, Nebraska. 9:30 a.m. mass.

Chanted in Latin by the schola from the choir loft at the rear of the church.

Breathtaking.
 
Away from home at the Cathedral of St. Cecilia, Omaha, Nebraska. 9:30 a.m. mass.

Chanted in Latin by the schola from the choir loft at the rear of the church.

Breathtaking.
I went to that Cathedral for the 9:30am mass last summer! 😃

Their schola is wonderful!

My mom and dad were married in the little side chapel at St. Cecilia’s, and the house my mom grew up in was only about 3 blocks away. It was so amazing to be there for mass that Sunday.

God bless you!

Gertie
 
As St. Francis might contend that the differences in movement between the lion and the bird actually depict the perfect harmony of God’s creation…If the roar of the hungry lion capturing the squawking bird is a song of praise to the Creator.
Correct, which is precisely WHY Francis would not wish to see the bird attempt to emulate what the Lion is doing, for doing so would a rejection of harmony of God’s creation.

Francis would wish to see the bird being a bird and doing the movements of a bird, for that is how God wished the bird to be

Likewise for the Lion to be Lion and to do the movements of a Lion. For that is the plan of God, and thus the harmony of God. They were each created to praise God in their own, unique way, not to attempt the ways of others, for that would for them to change into something the God did not create them to be.

So to the question “Would you write a dance for a lion and ask a bird to do it, or vice versa?” St. Francis would have answered the question in a way much closer to what EasterJoy envisioned. It would be for the bird to be a bird and to NOT emulate the ways of a Lion that God finds praise in the bird.
 
Come, O Holy Spirit was the Sequence for Pentecost used at the church here.
Come, O Holy Spirit was sung.
 
At the Mass I attended, the sequence was chanted in Latin, with men and women singing alternate verses. I was happy to be able to sing it as I had read that a plenary indulgence could be gained for singing it on Pentecost Sunday.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top