• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Corpus Christi Watershed

“What earlier generations held as sacred, remains sacred and great for us too…” Pope Benedict XVI (7 July 2007)

  • Our Team
  • Pew Resources
    • Brébeuf Catholic Hymnal
    • Jogues Illuminated Missal
    • Campion Missal, 3rd Edition
  • MUSICAL WEBSITES
    • René Goupil Gregorian Chant
    • Noël Chabanel Psalms
    • Nova Organi Harmonia (2,279 pages)
    • Lalemant Polyphonic
    • Saint Antoine Daniel KYRIALE
    • Roman Missal, 3rd Edition
    • Emporium Kevin Allen
  • Miscellaneous
    • Site Map
    • Saint Jean de Lalande Library
    • Sacred Music Symposium 2023
  • Donate
Views from the Choir Loft

Reason #6634 “Sing To The Lord” Was Not Submitted To Rome For Approval

Jeff Ostrowski · December 17, 2013

THE FOLLOWING PARAGRAPH is “dashing, but supremely witless.”

157. The proper or seasonal Responsorial Psalm from the Lectionary for Mass, with the congregation singing the response, is to be preferred to the gradual from the Graduale Romanum. When the Latin gradual is sung in directum (straight through) by choir alone, the congregation should be given a vernacular translation.

First of all, the author seems not to understand the structure of the ancient Gradual chant. While it’s true the entire first section can be repeated after the verse, and this was specifically allowed by the 1908 Editio Vaticana, it’s never sung this way. (One exception is the Gradual for St. John the Baptist owing to textual reasons). The author seems to think it can resemble a Responsorial Psalm — it can’t! — a typical error made by people lacking experience with Gregorian chant. Furthermore, let’s suppose a Latin gradual is sung with its response … should the people then not be given a translation?!!

More importantly, the first half is totally bizarre. They assert that the Resp. Psalm is “preferred” and cite (in a footnote) the Introduction to the Lectionary. However, they fail to cite the higher document (Sacrosanctum Concilium) which says Gregorian chant is preferred. And what about tradition? Why should something invented in 1968 be preferred to the immemorial tradition of the Catholic Church?

They might argue “because it matches the readings better.” We’ve discussed many times how facile that assertion is. However, let’s pretend they’re correct about the importance of “matching the readings.” Does a Seasonal Responsorial Psalm (see above) really match the readings better than the Gradual? The correct answer is: “For someone who knows absolutely nothing about the Word of God, yes!”

P.S.

A few hours after I posted this article, I happened to read the following:

6628 Pro


This is according to the Learn-a-new-word-see-it-within-24-hours theory!


Editor’s Note:   While Sing to the Lord (2007) was a tremendous improvement over the now defunct Music in Catholic Worship (1972) and Liturgical Music Today (1982), it has been the recipient of serious criticism. To put it bluntly, experts in Sacred Music have “torn it to shreds” because of basic errors in musical terminology and other inaccuracies. When Sing to the Lord is revised, we hope that specialists in sacred music will be consulted to help avoid such misstatements.

Opinions by blog authors do not necessarily represent the views of Corpus Christi Watershed.

Filed Under: Articles Tagged With: Learn a new word see it within 24 hours, USCCB Sing to the Lord Document on Music Last Updated: January 1, 2020

Subscribe

It greatly helps us if you subscribe to our mailing list!

* indicates required

About Jeff Ostrowski

Jeff Ostrowski holds his B.M. in Music Theory from the University of Kansas (2004). He resides with his wife and children in Los Angeles.—(Read full biography).

Primary Sidebar

Corpus Christi Watershed

Quick Thoughts

    Tempo?? • 𝘏𝘰𝘭𝘺 𝘎𝘰𝘥, 𝘞𝘦 𝘗𝘳𝘢𝘪𝘴𝘦 𝘛𝘩𝘺 𝘕𝘢𝘮𝘦
    Once, after Mass, my pastor said he really loved the hymn we did. I said: “Father, that's Holy God, We Praise Thy Name—you never heard it before?” He replied: “But the way you did it was terrific. For once, it didn't sound like a funeral dirge!” Last Sunday, our volunteer choir sang that hymn. I think the tempo was just about right … but what do you think?
    —Jeff Ostrowski
    Don’t You Agree About These?
    If you want to make Jeff Ostrowski really happy, send him an email with effusive praise about the individual voice recordings for hymn #296. [Soprano, Alto, Tenor, Bass] They came out dazzlingly sensational, don't you agree?
    —Jeff Ostrowski
    Choral Vowels? Yes? No?
    Here's a live recording of one of the choral “warm-up” exercises my choir enjoys. It was taken during our rehearsal on 27 January 2023. It’s good to make sure each chord is perfectly in tune and balanced before moving to the next one. That only happens when each singer has the correct vowel. If you like, you can freely download that vocal exercise.
    —Jeff Ostrowski

Random Quote

“To treat harmony and rhythm in this matter was a difficult matter. Facing numerous problems both large and small—that arose constantly—we understood that a flawless harmonization of Gregorian chant cannot be created by improvisation, no matter the competence and ability of the organist or harmonist.”

— ‘Mons. Jules Van Nuffel, NOH Preface’

Recent Posts

  • Apply Right Now! • Sacred Music Symposium
  • Tempo?? • 𝘏𝘰𝘭𝘺 𝘎𝘰𝘥, 𝘞𝘦 𝘗𝘳𝘢𝘪𝘴𝘦 𝘛𝘩𝘺 𝘕𝘢𝘮𝘦
  • PDF Download • Belgian Book of Gregorian Accompaniments (Official Edition)
  • Don’t You Agree About These?
  • Choral Vowels? Yes? No?

Subscribe

Subscribe

* indicates required

Copyright © 2023 Corpus Christi Watershed · Isaac Jogues on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Corpus Christi Watershed is a 501(c)3 public charity dedicated to exploring and embodying as our calling the relationship of religion, culture, and the arts. This non-profit organization employs the creative media in service of theology, the Church, and Christian culture for the enrichment and enjoyment of the public.