T WOULD BE dimwitted to attack a rhinoceros for having a neck shorter than a giraffe’s. Similarly, it’s foolish to attack the Brébeuf Hymnal for having different contents than the Liber Cantualis, Parish Book of Chant, or Cantus Varii. The reason is because the BRÉBEUF HYMNAL is dedicated to singable, metrical, vernacular hymns. It doesn’t contain orchestral parts, polyphony, readings, violin scores, lives of the saints, or copious plainsong because such material would be extraneous. Each parish will have unique desires, and my current parish is no different. I’m preparing stickers to be placed inside the covers of each Brébeuf Hymnal as a supplement. Our pastor wants each member of the congregation to learn the Marian antiphons. I also included several settings of the KÝRIE our parish will be learning:
* PDF Download • DRAFT COPY—4 pages
If you notice any typos, please
be so kind as to email me.
Thank you very much!
Brief Overview • For Marian antiphons which are more unfamiliar, I included metrical (“singable”) English translations just in case. I’m almost finished creating organ accompaniments for each chant in this booklet. As soon as they’re complete, I’ll release them online. [Because it contains all the different settings of the KÝRIE, this will be a handy collection to keep on your organ bench.] When it comes to the rhythm of the Marian antiphons, I tried to take into consideration various “schools,” not just the French approach (see below).
I’m the last person who desires “change for the sake of change.” On the other hand, each musician has core beliefs which can’t be violated. In this regard, I’m no different than anyone else. Even though certain editions have become popular, they violate my musical sensitivities. I simply can’t use them. Here’s one example:
To violate what I know to be true and right isn’t an option for me. I take comfort in the fact that Dom Pothier agrees.
(1 of 5) Rhythmic Considerations • Readers who have assiduously followed our blog will recall that Dom André Mocquereau ‘hijacked’ the rhythm of the official edition published by Pope Saint Pius X. In 2013, Dr. Katharine Ellis of Cambridge University published a letter she discovered which suggests Dom Mocquereau’s modifications (“value-added”) were done for financial gain—but others feel the matter wasn’t quite so straightforward. Regardless, because the French language places the accent on the final syllable of each word, Dom Mocquereau wanted to do the same with plainsong. For example, look at the way Dom Mocquereau treated GLORIA IX:
* PDF Download • COMPARISON CHART (Gloria IX)
—Dom Mocquereau adds elongations where they don’t belong.
(2 of 5) Rhythmic Considerations • It took me twenty years to finally break free of Dom Mocquereau’s rhythmic modifications. They are technically forbidden—but that’s not why I stopped using them. They aren’t justifiable from a musicological standpoint (since they purport to reflect less than 0.03% of plainsong manuscripts)—but that isn’t why I stopped. They make the score look ugly and busy—but that’s not why I stopped. I finally abandoned Dom Mocquereau’s modifications because (for half a decade) our parish sang VESPERS (1962) each Sunday. Dom Mocquereau added so many elongations, it became utterly absurd.
(3 of 5) Rhythmic Considerations • Even if I wanted to, I can never return to singing like this, because the chant becomes heavy, funereal, and plodding. Indeed, it is sometimes called “neo-mensuralist” because Dom Mocquereau’s alterations make the singing resemble longs and shorts.
(4 of 5) Rhythmic Considerations • If one sings according to Dom Mocquereau for many years, one will see one’s Latin deteriorate. One begins to believe the word is “pórtare”—whereas the correct pronunciation is portáre. I remember meeting a Mocquereau disciple who erroneously believed the Easter Sequence was pronounced “Victímæ páschalí laudés.” When we look at Dom Mocquereau’s alterations, can we blame him? Or consider the COMMUNION (Mitte manum tuam) on Low Sunday. If one sings long enough—pardon the pun—according to Dom Mocquereau, one begins to mispronounce clavórum as “clavorúm.” This is not good.
(5 of 5) Rhythmic Considerations • When the Vatican Commission on Gregorian Chant (which was assembled by Pope Saint Pius X) published the EDITIO VATICANA, they decided to avoid micromanaging the rhythm in syllabic chant. The committee’s president, Abbat Joseph Pothier, realized that each country had a slightly different way of singing. When it comes to the simple versions of the MARIAN ANTIPHONS, this has created confusion. The root cause is something we have called “Trochee Trouble.” It would take too long to explain “Trochee Trouble” in detail … but it basically refers to how Germans tend to emphasize the tonic accent on every trochee, whereas the French tend to deëmphasize the tonic accent. Because Dom Mocquereau spent most of his life in an English monastery (owing to the French anti-clerical laws), Americans are usually only familiar with the “French” method.
(A) German Hymnal • Consider this example, taken from a 20th-century German hymnal. Many Americans would be surprised to see this! Note their treatment of “coeli.”
(B) German Hymnal • Here’s another 20th-century German hymnal. Again, take note—pardon the pun—of their treatment of the word “cæli.”
(C) German Hymnal • Here’s a third example, taken from a 20th-century German hymnal. Please carefully examine what they do with each trochee:
(D) German Hymnal • Here’s another example from a 20th-century German hymnal. Again, notice the treatment of each trochee:
(E) German Hymnal • Many Americans would be surprised by this because (as I have mentioned already) many are familiar with Dom Mocquereau’s rhythm only:
(F) German Hymnal • When it comes to “Trochee Trouble,” the Ave Regína Cælórum illustrates the matter so well:
