Advent responsory: Send forth the lamb

Today's Advent responsory, Send forth the lamb, is the third for Friday in the third week, and also the last for the fourth Sunday of Advent. 

Send forth the lamb

The text of the respond is taken directly from Isaiah 16:1; the verse is from Psalm 84:8:

R. Emítte / Agnum, Dómine, Dominatórem terræ, * De Petra desérti ad montem fíliæ Sion. V. Osténde nobis, Dómine, misericórdiam tuam, et salutáre tuum da nobis. R. De Petra desérti ad montem fíliæ Sion. V. Gloria Patri et Filio et Spiritui Sancto R. De Petra desérti ad montem fíliæ Sion.

R. Send forth the Lamb, O Lord, the Ruler of the land; * From the rock in the wilderness unto the mount of the daughter of Zion. V. Show us thy mercy, O Lord, and grant us thy salvation. R. From the rock in the wilderness unto the mount of the daughter of Zion. V. Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost. R. From the rock in the wilderness unto the mount of the daughter of Zion.

The chant

The chant itself  is a very short chant in mode 2, drawing on standard melodic patterns, making it look, at least to my admittedly inexpert eye, as if it belongs to the older layers of responsories.  

But although it appears in multiple sources, surprisingly it isn't contained in either of the two main 'Old Roman' manuscripts.  

That in itself is not of course decisive, since some responsories that appear in earlier 'Ordines' aren't in the Old Roman manuscripts, so either moved in and out of the repertoire, were perhaps used in particular basilicas or churches not captured by the old Roman manuscripts, or perhaps have a non-Roman (but older) origin.

The lamb, the rock and the daughters of Sion

This responsory is one of those (relatively few) that it are entirely Scriptural and make no changes at all to the text.  The psalm verse is identical in both the Romanum and Gallican versions, so there are no clues as to its origin or age there either.  

The text of the respond is one of those highly symbolic texts from Isaiah, actually part of two chapters taking the form of an oracle directed against  the ancient kingdom of Moab, condemned as a race of idolaters. 

And there is certainly a long exegetical tradition around it.  St Jerome, for example, explained that the lamb is of course Christ; the rock refers to Ruth, who, although of the race of Moab, forms part of the genealogy of Christ; and the daughter of Jerusalem refers to Sion or the Church.

Although there are a number of variant verses, none of them really give much aid to Scriptural interpretation: they assume this is one that everyone is familiar with, despite its complexity.

Since the versicle is also used at Matins of Fridays as the first Nocturn versicle though, as well as the second antiphon for the day hours on Tuesdays in the period December 17 - 23, it was clearly well-known as an Advent text.

Canonical texts and otherwise 

Given the strictly Scriptural nature of today's text, a relative rarity amongst the Advent responsories, this seems like a good point to talk a little about the use of  non-Scriptural texts in the Office responsory repertoire.

As we've seen, many responsories adapt the Scriptural texts somewhat, either to make the link with its usage clearer, to provide an interpretative gloss (sometimes quoting directly from Patristic commentaries), or make it more suitable to be sung as a short extract.

The merits of adapting Scriptural texts, or using non-Scriptural texts in the Office have long been hotly contested at times, with early prohibitions on the use of hymns in some places; indeed the debate still raged in the high middle ages, where the Carthusians, for example, 're-scripturalised' their responsories and other texts.

The responsory repertoire

The sixth century Italian Rule of St Stephen and Paul for example, seems to reflect Roman attitudes in admonishing its monks to stick strictly to the text of Scripture:

May no one in this community presume to sing, learn, or say the responses and antiphons, as some are wont to sing on an ornate tone, doing so as they wish, and not taking them from the canonical Scriptures.."

 Only sing what you read is to be sung," as blessed Augustine has written; "do not sing what you read is not to be sung."  What the Lord desired to reveal to us through his prophets and apostles is not to be rendered in praise so that it differs from what he himself has prescribed.

The comment rather implies that two competing repertoires of responsories, one Scriptural based, one with a more broader set of source texts, were already available in the mid to later sixth century, and indeed one of the earliest preserved Gallic psalm responds, for example, is actually non-Scriptural.

The instruction goes on to insist that what is supposed to be sung should not sound like the recitation of a reading, and vice versa. 

Benedictine vs Roman attitudes

It is difficult, with the limited sources we have for the early Office, to know how this really played out in the acceptance into the repertoire and development of  responsories, but it does seem likely that the wider debate about the use of non-Scriptural texts, which extended far beyond responsories, did have an impact.  

In many of the early Eastern Rites, the use of non-Scriptural texts in the office, in the form of psalm refrains, hymns and other texts, flowered early on.  This tradition was apparently imported to the West by St Ambrose and others.

But in Rome and some other places in the West, there was active resistance to this.

And on this, it is worth noting that the Benedictine Rule is, in this respect (and many others), quite different in its attitude to that reflected in the early Roman Office.

We are used, today, to seeing the Roman and Benedictine Offices as very closely linked, sharing a common rubrics and core texts.  

But in reality this reflects a long history of mutual influence between the two forms of the Office.

Hymns, for example, though certainly part of the Ambrosian and Arles monastic Offices, seem not to have been used in the Roman secular office (and possibly the Roman monastic office as well, as the rule of the Master likewise did not include them) until very late indeed. 

By contrast, St Benedict prescribes at least one hymn (and three for festal/Sunday Matins) for all of the hours of the Office.

Similarly, when it came to readings, where St Benedict famously prescribed Patristic (and possibly saints lives) readings for Matins, these may not have been part of the Roman secular Office until perhaps the eighth century.

These connections may well have played a role in the particular texts selected for responsories, and their allocation over the course of the year, as I hope to show in due course.

And by way of something to listen to for today, I couldn't locate a recording of today's responsory, but one of the other responsories of the day is Rorate Caeli, so herewith Byrd's setting of the text.