Beautiful. I'm going to check Gloria.TV out.
A serious question, not meant to be snarky, but concerning an area that confuses me.
According to the 62 Missal and rubrics, would these two women be allowed to chant this during Mass? Or would only males be allowed?
Wow! That's beautiful. At my church the lector simply read it's English translation along with the assembly. =/
Women could chant it.Pope Pius XII changed that law.
Beautiful...thank you. Praise God again for the Internet.
Thank you. I was denied this part of the liturgy at my church today. At first I thought it was to save time by omitting an optional prayer at a crowded Mass. Couldn't have been that, though. The choir sang the entire Hallelujah Chorus before the final benediction. On a positive note, the celebrant wore a beautiful Roman chausible today.
These ladies have very nice voices. They just need some coaching in phrasing this chant and breathing. One them was trying to sing "on empty" at times and they kept breaking the phrases. Thanks, though. I couldn't go without hearing that sequence today.
It is not optional even in the N.O.
The GIRM specifies the sequence is optional "except at Easter and Pentecost."
Beautiful! This was one of my favorite portions of Mass today. Thank you for reproducing it here.
In reality of practice it is optional. Even those churches that include it often substitute something simpler for participation's sake.
Could anyone enlighten us as to the situation surrounding the removal of the invective against the Jews from this sequence?
see the wikipedia article on it
At our parish, the choir sang Richard Proulx's setting of Peter J. Scagnelli's translation. I believe his arrangement reproduces the original chant. It went quite well.
If it had been used as a processional chant for the celebrant's progress to the ambo, a few minutes may have been "saved" from the mass's length
Since this version in both English and Latin is available in the widely used "Worship" hymnal, there is no excuse for not singing the sequence.
It's even in the nasty OCP "Today's Missal" - where they include an admonishing note that it is not to be ignored...
I sang it (in Latin) at my little country parish where up until my arrival 2 years ago they had only heard 'folk masses' for 35 years. You could have heard a pin drop!
Parishioners seemed to especially be enchanted by it. It has been a long and contentious two years, but now that they're used to a little Latin, some of the Ordinary in chant, a little polyphony when the choir can manage it, and actual hymns (yes, yes, I know, it's still a regrettable 4-hymn-Mass but at least it's not praise choruses anymore) - people seem to like the reverence, and I had 15 or 20 specific complements on the Sequence. "yes," I agreed, "isn't the timeless, transcendent splendor of chant wonderful?" and they had to agree!
Heh, heh. The revolution is underway...
conservatory grad
way to go!!!
Beautifully done!
That was the pre-Vat. II version, since it included the "Amen. Alleluia." This is one of my pet peeves - the new placement of the Sequence - BEFORE the Alleluia.
Of course the Alleluia verse has become the "Gospel Acclamation", surely a misnomer since the Deacon and people exchange the "acclamation" just prior to the proclamation. It is another example of "active participation" run wild. The onle reason I can see for this reversal is so that everyone can remain seated for the Sequence, and therefore the "Acclamation" remains of the unmost importance.
But the Sequence IS an outgrowth of the Alleluia verse. Originally each Alleluia (multiple at the time) had a troped verse after it. Now we have the "jubilus" - the melismatic series of notes on "-ia". Look at the 1962 Missal. The Alleluia is first, but without its final "alleluia", it flows directly into the Sequence, which ends with both an "Amen" and the final "Alleluia".
So, once again, we have some sort of "historic" version of what is said/sung between the readings, but which "history"? Certainly this example denies the origins of the Sequence, and relegates it to a more or less "protestant" position of "Sequence Hymn".
'These ladies have very nice voices. They just need some coaching in phrasing this chant and breathing. One them was trying to sing "on empty" at times and they kept breaking the phrases.'
Agreed. Lovely voices, phrasing and breathing could have been helped most simply by taking a brighter tempo.
Chant starts to lose line and direction when the tempo is too slow. Its also hard to sing slow- arguably harder to sing for women due to (usually) smaller lung capacity.
This is a delightful sequence with a glorious text- thanks for posting it!
It should be chanted in dialogue. Not like this.
"It should be chanted in dialogue. Not like this."
It should be chanted. Period. In about 16 years, when it is being chanted everywhere, let's discuss how it should and should not be chanted. My compliments to these two ladies.
And it should be chanted through all the Octave.
Let us bear in mind that Pius V (if my memory serves me correctly) removed a verse from the Easter Sequence, one which has nevertheless been retained in the Premonstratensian rite (and other religious may wish to report on its retention in their respective missals), and it is the following, to be inserted at the words "praecedit suos in Galileam":
"Credendum est magis soli Mariae veraci
Quam Judaeorum turbae fallaci"
This from the Graduale published in 1931, and therefore to my knowledge the graduale still in force in that rite.
FANTASTIC!!!
2 Visitors Online
Commenting by HaloScan
