...just gleefully flee to the FSSP or the Ordinariate.

Trenton and Serviam -
We in the Ordinariate of the Chair of St Peter would welcome you with open arms. If I didn't have the Ordinariate I would without a second thought go to an oriental rite parish. I experienced long ago that one was just shouting in the wind, a voice in the desert when attempting to make even a small dent in the cultivated liturgical misadventures of the American Church. Debussy once said words to the effect that 'we shall all die, and we shall die smothered by the all-pervasive blanket of mediocrity'.

Even if one would seem to have succeeded here or there, his efforts stand a very good chance of being wiped out over night by the next ego-centric pastor's ukase. Permanence and consistency, not to mention a shared inbred instinct for what did and didn't belong in God's house, were at least several good attributes of the pre-VII era - even if things were sloppily done there was liturgical and musical consistency in praxis - or theory.

Yes, there are, here and there, parishes and cathedrals which have exemplary liturgy and music, but they are almost as rare as snow in Houston. There is only so much one can attempt without being spiritually, culturally, and intellectually compromised, drained, erased - one might even say raped. It's a matter not of what the Church wants, but 'whatever father wants' - providing father doesn't want what the Church has asked for in its documents and teachings.

Still, I have nothing but praise for those, both musicians and priests, who are in the fray and with prayer, love, patience, and devotion are making strides, sometimes great and sometimes only incrementally, against lamentable odds. And, I rejoice at the successes of those whose efforts bear fruit ad majorem Dei gloriam and to the spiritual aedification of his people. They are real heroes. The Church is blessed to have them, and I pray daily for them.

Ineresting, Jehan -
As you surely know, a very large part of France was in earlier times English. And the English are given very bad press for being presumed bad and nasty oppressors in the era of Joan of Arc. One should realise that in those days all such matters of who belonged to whom were matters of purely dynastic relationships - not nations as such, which really didn't exist at all except in the vaguest of concepts. The multiplicity of independent duchies, grand duchies, free cities, princedoms, kingdoms, and so forth which defined the Germanies until the German Empire was cobbled together in 1871 would be an apt comparison.

I have also read that the Joan of Arc phenomenon which we celebrate today was very much an invention of XIXth century nationalistic romantics. She did, of course, exist, but was not the all-defining personage modern times and XIXth century romantics have made her out to be.

Perhaps you could shed some light on this matter?

Richard,

TO HIS NEW HOME!

Now go away, or I shall taunt you a second time!

To bring the discussion back to the original topic...

Is it permissible to add the Glory be at the end of the lectionary psalm sung in directum without the response?

Concerning the present matter, I often think the Responsorial Psalm should be based on the closest example of responsorial psalmody we had in the Latin Church: the Invitatory Psalm, Venite exultemus Domino.
Does anyone think the same?

MJO - the Responsorial Psalms in the Graduale Simplex are responsorial, as are the Alleluia Psalms. And these are Englished in Paul F Ford's By Flowing Waters, forms and tunes.
Where they are found in the ancient repertory I do not know. They are very austere, and probably do not invite emulation.

I don't envy you, Elmar! Someone up above commented that it is de riguer in Germany to substitute German chorales for the psalm, as well as parts of the ordinary. That's what i heard in listening to Cologne Cathedral's midnight mass, reverent and worshipful as it was. Perhaps this hearkens back to the old custom in German lands (I think from Josephine times), especially Austria, to sing Luther-styled chorales which were paraphrases of the ordinary. There is a name for this custom - was it singmesse or something like unto it?

Re adding Glory Be... at the end of the psalm – there’s no reason to, nor is there any precedent for this. The graduals have no Glory be... and the lectionary doesn’t either.

This is in line with what I was taught: the 'processional' vers(es) at Introit and Communion are not integral part of the proper, but kind of 'add-on' to accompany the liturgical action (this may be done as well by alius cantus aptus in the NO, and we have the Missal antiphons in case they aren't sung either).
The number of verses is arbitrary and depends on the action they accompany, therefore they get the Glory be... whenever it's time for a 'round-up'.
It's to signal to the schola: stop meditating and get your GR ready again for the antiphon.
In contrast the entire Graduale or Resposorial psalm - also the Alleluja with verse - are 'full' propers, and therefore shouldn't be substituted any more than the readings.

I don't comprehend the suggestion that the 'processional propers' are any lass propers than the responsorial ones (Grad or resp ps, and Alleluya). Propers are propers and they all have equal claim to be integral parts of the mass, OF as well as EF. There are five propers, all of which are equal propers, not just the two propers which exist in the current Roman Missal and Lectionary.

It may be pertinent to mention here that the Offertory, while it has for quite a long time has been designated an 'antiphon', current scholarship is of the opinion that the Offertory was originally a responsorial, not an antiphonal form which accompanied the Offertory Procession; so the Offertory 'antiphon' should actually be called a 'respnnsory'. Ditto the communion 'antiphon', which is a processional chant, responsorial, not antiphonal, in form.

One of the better things about the OF is that in it is restored the ancient Offertory Procession which at one time was accompanied by a crucifer and distinct ritual. Too bad the creators of the OF didn't do quite enough study on the matter and make the Offertory Responsory an integral part of the rite.

The matter of the Offertory Responsory is discussed with great authority in Rebecca Maloy's The Offertory: Aspects of Chronology and Transmission.

Our congregation can sing a psalm trough at vespers using the Meinrad Psalm Tones as they are consistently formulated around the final accent. No pointing is necessary.
Gregorian psalm tones in English require pointing.

In the NO, the processional propers (introit, [offertory,] communion) are legislated very loosely. They can be replaced with another song. You can append 500 verses if you want, or none at all.

On the other hand, one can’t add more verses to the Resp. Psalm, cut the verse off a gradual, or add 5 more verses to an alleluia. I think that’s the difference to which Elmar and others refer.

I agree, a processional must be adaptable.

GIRM 37. Finally, among other formulae:
a. Some constitute an independent rite or act, such as the Gloria in excelsis (Glory to God in the highest), the Responsorial Psalm, the Alleluia and Verse before the Gospel, the Sanctus (Holy, Holy, Holy), the Memorial Acclamation, and the chant after Communion;
b. Others, on the other hand, accompany some other rite, such as the chants at the Entrance, at the Offertory, at the fraction (Agnus Dei, Lamb of God) and at Communion.

BUT I have just driven into a pothole :- What is this chant after Communion listed at 37a ? The optional hymn hardly sounds like an "independent rite", it is the only part of Mass where the choice of text is almose completely free

88. When the distribution of Communion is over, if appropriate, the Priest and faithful pray quietly for some time. If desired, a Psalm or other canticle of praise or a hymn may also be sung by the whole congregation.

I would like to say something: The offertory was originally a responsorial song and not an antiphonal and both in the old rite before the reform and in the new rite it is possible to use the responsorial form and sing verses for soloists that are extremely elaborate. The structure of the offertory is AB+soloist's verse +B+soloist's verse+B. The verse fell into disuse when the long offertory processions fell into disuse and only then was the offertory called an antiphon in the same way that Marian antiphons that never had any psalm verses attached to them are called antiphons. For example: http://www.omnigreg.at/wiki/doku.php?id=grad:0479

"Ad te domine levavi animam meam / deus meus in te confido / non erubescam /
neque irrideant me inimici mei / * etenim universi qui te exspectant / non confundentur." then verse 1: "Dirige me in veritate tua / edoce me / quia tu es deus salutaris meus / et te sustinui tota die." then * "etenim universi qui te exspectant / non confundentur." then verse 2: "Respice in me et miserere mei domine / custodi animam meam et eripe me /
non confundar quoniam / invocavi te." then * "etenim universi qui te exspectant / non confundentur."

It is the same structure of the responsorial psalms of the Graduale simplex but with very melismatic melodies and with distinct melodies for each verse.

https://media.churchmusicassociation.org/books/offertoriale1935.pdf

It's similar to the "responsoria prolixa" of matins in the divine office.

In the gradual and alleluia there is another remarkable feature: the melismatic melody in the end of the respond is the same in the end of the verse but with different text. And in some way this structure can be said "responsorial" with the return of the melody as if it were a respond that returns. (in the gradual B = D in melody but not in text: A*BC*D with choir entering in the * without returning to respond and soloists singing A and C, or - Soloists A* choir B/ Soloists CD/ choir AB - with the choir returning to the respond)


There are in the repeitoire of chant some responsories with this structure:

A - respond BCD
E - respond CD
F - respond D

I don't remember if in the responsoria prolixa of the office or another place, but it is in a solemnity like Christmass.

Ubi caritas is a responsory used in the novus ordo in offerttory but singed antiphonally :
- melody A with text of respond (antiphon) chanted by all choir.
- melody A with text of part 1 of verse (verse 1) chanted by half choir or soloist,
- melody A with text of part 2 of the verse (verse 2) chanted by the other half or by choir
- melody BC with texto of part 3 of the verse (verse 4), chanted by half choir or soloist
- melody BD with text of part 4 of the verse (verse 5), chanted by the other half or by choir.

And then respond "ubi caritas...". And then another verse with the same AABCBD melody. Then respond then verse.

to sing antiphonally is to sing alternately between two choirs.

Problably in ancient times introit and communio was whole psalm in directum by soloist, then a whole psalm chanted antiphonally by two choirs/maybe by the people, after this, one meaningful verse or another text of scriptures (like prophets) was chosed to sing more elaborated in the begining and the end, and then the practice of using this antiphon as refrain (antiphon, verse 1, antiphon, verse 2, antiphon, etc gloria patri, antiphon, versus ad repetenda, antiphon) and finally the structure antiphon, psalm verse, gloria patri, antiphon in the introit became customary.

What is characteristic of both the gradual and alleluia and the offertory with verses is the meditative melody with long melismas. In these two moments of the mass there is this need to melodically explore the text in a more ornate way and releasing more of the affection of the prayer in "jubilus" that express transcendence. The structure similar to the prolix responsoria of matins fulfills the same role here (in matins the prolix responsoria are after and between the readings). In the case of the offertory, it is a transition to the Eucharistic liturgy that in a way concludes the rite of catechumens / liturgy of the word by doing this deep melodic meditation similar to the gradual but after the homily (and after the creed in Sunday masses).