Unless you have a Pontifical High Mass, most Polyphonic Agnus Dei will be too long, the visiting (paid) choir does either Chant, Poly.,Chant OR Chant, Chant, Poly. and is usually finished in time.

When we sing we always do Poly., Chant, Poly. If we take too long the priest has to wait, not that we have had any complaints. The same works with the Kyrie, Gloria, Credo, Sanctus and Benedictus, the Priest has to wait until we are finished.

I have noticed some priests slowing down their actions so they can listen to the music.

I have looked in the Ritus servandus, and I cannot see any instructions... Fortescue?

Mass should not be un-necessarily prolonged or completed hastily. Surely communication between priest and choirmaster can solve the exact notion of timing?

Actually, there is a Confiteor sung by the Deacon before the communion of the faithful in the 1962 Roman Missal. It's in the rubrics for Solemn High Masses.

.

"Authoritative source" suggests that it's your priest who has an issue. Has anyone else had such an issue with a priest?

The issue is not with the priest at all. To clarify, the mixed choir currently sings Agnus Dei 1 without either repeating it or chanting the 2nd instance of Agnus Dei...miserere nobis and moves right into the Agnus Dei 2...dona nobis pacem. The reasons being put forward are that repeating the Agnus Dei 1 in polyphony would take too long and that singing it one time suffices to cover both instances of Agnus Dei...miserere nobis. I can see somewhat the logic behind the first reason, but not the second.

The pastor (who was assigned last year) has NOT been part of any discussions I've had on this topic and is very supportive of good sacred music. My relationship with the director of the mixed choir (I direct the men's schola) is very good and we've sung together for years. So, before I make the argument that only singing Agnus Dei 1 once in a polyphonic Mass setting before moving onto the Agnus Dei 2 is insufficient, I want to make sure I have my ducks in a row.

dad29 wrote:

You'll note that the regs for the OF changed that: one may not receive Communion unless one is present for the whole Mass.

Do you have any particulars about this?

There is a rule like it, which applies to people who wish to receive the sacrament a second time in the day.

I've heard it said also, but I don't believe that the claim is correct in the particular form stated above, and for one simple reason.

Canon 917 places this restriction on people who wish to receive Communion for a second time in the day. We know that. It's documented. But that canon would be redundant if there were already another provision placing the same restriction on receiving Communion at any Mass.

I realize that this will be supremely unhelpful to the O.P., but when I read the title of this thread, my initial thought was "at the heavy double-bar".

The few times I've attended polyphonic Masses in the E.F. my experience, as best as I can recall, supports what Meloche says above.

Chonak is right, because you may receive the sacraments at any appropriate time, provided that you are disposed. For the eucharist, this means keeping the fast and being free from mortal sin. But, since it is possible to go regularly, there are restrictions on its reception a second time. It used to be that the second Mass had to be different in kind and usually that you had to be serving or be involved, e.g. the couple at a Nuptial Mass.

The Mass in question at the Colloquium would have been during the Requiem Mass at the cathedral in Pittsburgh, when the setting by Fauré was sung. That year, the Masses were more closely aligned to the rubrics of the Pontificale Romanum, even to the point of the sacrament being on another altar...

Besides, 1962 is barely observed anyways...and to be traditional is not exactly the same as novel liturgical abuse.

I think that the recitation of the “Domine, non sum dignus“ is an organic development, but it is technically still said by the celebrant alone. The server at my parish even rings the bells at this point, which came about IIRC through the unique rubrics given in the red books.

Oh, that’s not because Fauré had good timing for the congregation. Fauré correctly timed the recitation of the prayers before the priest’s communion, his communion, and the beginning of the ablutions. General Communion was not practiced in his day at the Requiem Mass. Indeed, while exposing people to complete polyphonic Masses of the traditional repertoire is laudable, keep in mind that in fact most Solemn High Masses were likely not to have a general communion of the faithful.

"Making exceptions into rules is how all the liturgical revolutionaries work."

Well, it's also a difference in mindset about law in the Romanosphere vs Anglosphere. The former accommodates the idea that there non-compliance can be excused/permitted without changing the law; the latter not as much, and tends to treat exceptions more as part of the law. Multiculturalism in the Church....

That’s only half–true, Liam: Edward Peters regularly reminds his readers that the Legislator ought to issue far more legislation than he does. The Roman church may be flexible, but that doesn’t excuse much of the conflict between law and practice.

It is important to remember that the EF Agnus Dei settings were composed at a time when the Communion of the Faithful did not take place (by and large) during Mass. In fact, if you look in the Altar Missal, you'll find the rubrics for this are conspicuously absent.

What does this mean?

Historically, we know that the Agnus Dei must have lasted from, well... the 'Agnus Dei', until after the ablutions. There was no need for a 'break' for 'Ecce Agnus Dei' (etc); this was part of the rite of Communion outside of Mass. This probably explains how the Communio and its psalm were whittled down to a mere antiphon as well - with no Communion procession, there was no need for a psalm (even a 'token' one, as we see in the Introit).

So what to do about the EF 'Agnus Dei'? In my opinion, if it's too long, find a way of shortening it. In the case of the Palestrina/Victoria (etc) settings, perhaps take EITHER Agnus Dei I or Agnus Dei II and supply the others in plainchant. This approach ensures that the liturgy is not delayed or disrupted unduly.

Pius X (who reinstated the Communion of the Faithful during Mass) said music was the 'handmaid of the liturgy'. The lengthy Renaissance settings were 'handmaids' until the Communion of the Faithful made a comeback - and with that liturgical change, need to be reworked to meet "new" needs.

The second way of receiving Communion, by showing up during the Canon and leaving after a short thanksgiving, isn’t an abuse per se. The church law still allows for it. Is it encouraged? No, or at least it should not be encouraged. But to call it an abuse is misleading. I would argue that the first isn’t either, so long as one goes to an entire Mass when obliged.