Another great excised introit
This text is, in the 1962 rite, the normative introit for wedding Masses:
Deus Israel conjúngat vos, et ipse sit vobíscum, qui misértus est duóbus únicis:
et nunc, Domine, fac eos plénius benedícere te.
Ps.: Beáti omnes qui timent Dóminum: qui ámbulant in viis ejus.
(Tob. 7:15; 8:19. Ps. 128)
Translated:
May the God of Israel join you together: and may He be with you, who was merciful to two only children: and now, O Lord, make them bless You more fully.
Ps.: Blessed are all those who fear the Lord, who walk in His ways.
I am starting to be intrigued: just how many texts from the Proper did Solesmes cut out post-V2?
posted by Cantor @ 4:02 PM
5 comments
5 Comments:
I've never seen a list. I asked William Mahrt about a few and in each case, he said that they are chants of newer vintage and of questionable Gregorian authenticity. But I really don't know. It can be very disorientating to discover some beautiful melody has just disappeared down the memory hole. Makes me sad in some way.
Maybe there should be a special volume of all the missing chants published, so they can be used as other appropriate songs?
That could be useful, especially for those of us who adapt Proper texts to responsorial or strophic idioms, since the reasons for their removal are entirely musical and have nothing to do with their texts.
In a sense, given the tradition of composers writing new settings of fixed texts (from the Ordinary as well as from the Proper), Solesmes’ decision to omit these “neo-Gregorian” chants is a break with tradition - and a needless one at that. The Roman Rite has no problem with new music, so why did Solesmes? The idea of discounting a piece of music merely because it’s too new, with no regard for the advantages of its text’s fittedness to the day’s liturgy, seems absurd to me.
It should be noted that the body of the Prænotanda of the 1974 Graduale actually says that the neo-Gregorian chants are retained; one has to look at a footnote to read a statement that basically says that’s a lie and they left them out. (I’m not kidding - the footnote really and truly just negates what the body of the text says.)
Isn't that strange. And then you have the interesting Hymnarius that actually contains new compositions. So I don't understand the method here. There must be a list of what was omitted, somewhere.
Well, the new translation of the Pauline Mass in English has been leaked.
I heard that now they are trying to translate the Propers.
Post a Comment
<< Home