It has been a whirlwind of a weekend, beginning with the much-anticipated but still surprising announcement of the final text for the new translation of the Missal.
It is a good time to read through the new order of the Mass. I’ve read many drafts along the way but now that it is final, my own impressions are becoming much more vivid.
We’ve had a translation for the Mass for many years that is hazy and obscure at too many points, one that generally strikes many people as somehow less confident about Catholic belief that, say, the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Sometimes it is hard to put your finger on it.
And there are of course many specifics about the translation in use that have been points of estrangement. Many traditionalists have wrongly blamed the “Novus Ordo” for problems of the translation itself — and this becomes very clear upon reading the PDF file linked above. The improvement is dazzling. Even the famous “pro multis” controversy of old is settled at last. Most of the in-print attacks on the ordinary form that are in print will have to be thrown out or seriously revised. This translation provides far more continuity with Roman Rite history than any previous attempt.
Looking for a metaphor, I would compare the difference between the current and future translation as similar to a window that is frosted and one that is clear, or a pair of glasses once smudgy but now clean. It allows us to see the same reality but more vividly. With new translation, there can be no question about why we are there and what is happening about Mass — and it is tragic to say that has not always been true.
In some ways, the difference will not amaze anyone in the pews but it will settle many hearts. At last we will experience a lining up of what the sense of the faith tells us – what tradition and sound doctrine teaching – and what the celebrant, schola, and people say and sing during the liturgy. In some says, then, the new translation will be an instrument of peace in our parish. It will help the faith cohere in our public worship. My guess is that the difference will be slight in the short term but immense over the long term.
There is a strong expectation that the new Missal translation will lead to a gradual but dramatic reform of the music to which we’ve become accustomed at Mass. The propers of the Mass will once again take priority over hymns with random texts. The chant, as a style of music and a vessel for the text, will ascend in importance even as pop music will seem increasingly out of place.
Is this reform of the reform? Most certainly. It is a dramatic step, even a new chapter in postconciliar history, but not the last one. It is a new and very promising beginning.
It's a curious stance to take. The MR1 translation was approved all the way up the line: ICEL, bishops, CDWDS. They all seemingly thought that sufficient for the transmission of doctrine.
Personally, I'd say that MR2 was the high water mark: a more accurate translation with artistry. It really is time to act on a suggestion from the 2008 bishops' synod that the link between the liturgies of Word and Eucharist be better reflected in worship and preaching. We need a MR4 that accounts for the Lectionary cycle and links the Missal prayers more explicitly.
I think your hopes for propers overtaking songs and hymns is far-fetched. If anything, there will be lots of attention on the Ordo Missae for the next few years. And that will take a good amount of energy. I would agree that music is the best hope for MR3–we certainly have an opportunity to strain out Mass settings of lesser quality. However, if there is any sort of resistance or resentment, you can bet that pewfolk and clergy alike will be scarred from battle and might resist any big new initiative. Except for parishes that can make that work diplomatically, that is.
Personally, the proper texts have informed my preparation of liturgy for years. But I don't see the fruits of switching, so long as my parish continues with a repertoire with Bible-based texts. But to those who do use propers, more power to you, so long as the congregation gets to sing them, too.
The time of the propers is coming sooner than most people think. I'll have more on this in another post, perhaps later today.
As for the people and the propers ,why must we go round and round and round this bush again and again? It is not necessary for people to sing all or any of the propers. And no, I do not want to discuss this any further. It's foolishness.
I have to say that I expect the transition with the Ordinary will likely be widely digested in about 3-5 years. I think Todd's perspective that the digestion of new settings of the Ordinary will slow the pace of dealing with propers, presumably in Gregorian Latin form, is likely on target.
Fantastic post, Jeffrey. The "bringing into focus" of the Mass is a great analogy.
I'm very curious about this:
"The time of the propers is coming sooner than most people think. I'll have more on this in another post, perhaps later today. "
Curious and staying tuned!
I'm intrigued if this has anything to do with the cryptic comments of David Haas over at PT in the MR3 thread….
1. New translation – yes, Deo gratias!
2. Please God, let someone who knows what they are doing produce an English hymnal that includes the propers and is worthy of the Roman Rite.
3. We are so blessed to have a pope who is a musician. I work with a (former Anglican now Catholic) priest on chants in the Missal. He has also learned a few Latin chants and hymns. He doesn't read, but can carry a tune just fine. He does far better than most priests who have been exposed to the music a lot longer. Mandate thorough musical formation for seminarians!
4. My hope is restored when I hear Kevin Allen's music. I hope he puts pen to paper to produce a full setting of the Mass in English.
Kudos to you, Mr. Tucker, for being part of the vanguard of the re-beautification of the Liturgy!
This past Sunday, as an insert in parish bulletin, there was:
http://www.americancatholic.org/Newsletters/CU/preview.aspx?id=241
Speaking as an"elder" Catholic who was brought up with the chants and Latin hymns firmly planted in my musical soul, I am so glad to see these first steps in restoring the sacred to the music in the liturgy. In my experience as a music director, I know that the "liturgitainment" so popular now in many catholic parishes will die very slowly, and not without pain and division. Remember how long it took peole to change from "Holy Ghost" to Holy Spirit"? I am very encouraged by the release of the new translation. Music in the American Catholic Church is in need of much revision and this is the first step.
Jeffrey;
I'll be interested to read your thoughts on why you believe Propers are coming sooner than most think. I also have come to this conclusion for what I find to be very good reasons… I wonder if yours are the same. I'll wait to see that "New Post" alert on my Blackberry…
Charles;
What "cryptic comments" of the illustrious Mr. Haas are you referring to? None of what I read seems all that cryptic for him…
I do recall that he gave a big round of applause to the Priest who broke away from the Diocese to form a new "faith community" and suggested that this is somehow acting in an authentically catholic way… but that isn't really all that cryptic.
"Just back from Atlanta from the gathering with Msgr. Wadsworth (ICEL President), Jerry Galipeau from WLP, Jeffrey Tucker…. the word that we received from Msgr. regarding “easing things in” earlier than the Advent 2011 date is that there is no real decision, being that, individual bishop’s conferences will be dealing with this in the coming weeks among many other issues… so the issue of whether or not the music can be introduced earlier, is not really determined yet.. other than that there are many different opinions among bishops as to whether or not it should be allowed or not. So, I guess what I am saying is…. stay tuned!"
The last sentence elicits suspicion, to me, even though the statement is nominally about early release of "settings" of MR3. Given that I'm old, delusional and a wary Scots, the reality that publishers have their "cash cows" already lined up and that they splashed that news on their websites, I wonder whether certain principal parties have also colluded about a proper project.
First, Deo gratias and Te Deum laudamus for the new translation. I've only been Catholic since Easter '09 (after 25 years as a Southern Baptist and 18 months as an Anglo-Catholic Episcopalian), but the words of the prayers have been, as Jeff says, always felt just slightly "off."
Second, to Charles Culbreth (23 Aug 2010 7:47 am): at this point, I would prefer OCP-style settings of the propers (if they really were just the texts of the new Missal's antiphons without glosses, tropes, or additions) to a lot of the music that is being sung at Mass. Better a happy clappy setting of the Word of God from his Church than various authors' efforts to "Sing a New Church Into Being" by a SATB choir with full organ, brass, and percussion.
Diezba;
Indeed… I am with you on this one. I think the word "Propers" elicits in many the image of Gregorian Propers and Chant. There is no reason why there can't be "contemporary" settings of the Propers. None. But the problem is one of advancing an agenda, and that requires one (composers) to insert their own personal theology into the music. They are lyric writers first and musicians second…
Charles;
Also, I find the Msgr's comments about a "common setting of the Mass" for the English speaking world to be provocative… isn't this what the ICEL Chants are intended to be? I wonder, like you, if there is a genuine effort to make this happen, and the reason for the "no grace period" approach is to allow the common Mass setting to be implemented first. Could happen…
DIttos to Diezba, but in OCP/R&A format, preferably not anywhere near sing-song, happy clappy. Provided that the opportunity to sing the antiphons via psalm tones/GM/AG/SCG etc. is not afforded music leadership.
The power and the majesty of the Roman Mass comes from the chanting of the Mass (whether in Latin or the vernacular) by and among priest, choir, and congregation. If I had it in my power I would ban the use of hymns other than as an add-on. They should not replace the chants of the Mass, including propers. That's what the Council Fathers intended, not withstanding Jesuitical comments to the contrary.