What music is required and/or appropriate for an EF Low Mass?
  • eft94530eft94530
    Posts: 1,577
    If you leave your Code of Canon Law at home or at the church office,
    you can use the online versions ...

    http://www.vatican.va
    English
    Resource Library (medallion at 7:30)

    Then, you have two choices ...

    Code of Canon Law (1983)
    (English, French, German, Italian, Latin, Russian, Spanish)
    http://www.vatican.va/archive/cdc/index.htm

    ... OR ...

    Codex Canonum Ecclesiarum Orientalium (1990)
    http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_constitutions/documents/hf_jp-ii_apc_19901018_index-codex-can-eccl-orient_lt.html
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,934
    Jam is correct about Orthodox canon law being sparse. Orthodoxy is bound by the canons of the first seven ecumenical councils. The bishops have a great deal of latitude in applying "economia" to do what is in the best interests of the church and the people. Holy synods can address specific issues, but they tend to be large issues of significance to the entire church. The legalism that's in the western canons does not exist in the east.
  • JamJam
    Posts: 636
    "The Code of Canon Law isn't an encyclopedia set ..."

    Forgive my hyperbole. I used that expression not to be precise, but to contrast it with the sparse Eastern Canon law that CharlesW described. And I unintentionally was lumping together all of those disorganized documents you mention under the category "canon law" which was a mistake on my part. I meant, rather, "official, binding documents" rather than "canon law" -- the official, binding documents (and there are a lot of them) are what try to spell out every exception. I have a copy of the GIRM, and I see how many exceptions and stuff it writes in. And there is a lot of legalism in the Western Canons, too; I've read big chunks of it, especially that which concerns valid/invalid consecration.

    Do I realize that most disparaging things non-Catholics say about the Church are myths? Of course. I like the Catholic church, remember. I defend it to my Orthodox friends and I defend it to my protestant family. But there are some things about it I cannot defend--and of course that is the case: I'm Orthodox. But there is much, much good in Catholicism which cannot be ignored; nor can her history and attachment to a honorable Apostolic See be ignored.
  • miacoyne
    Posts: 1,805
    Thanks, Jam. I think we also have to remember the size of the Church. I don't know the actual number of the Cathlics (including those claimed to be Catholics, I guess) , but I think it seems to make sense that the amount of "binding documents" is necessary. There are many Catholics who are trying and get into different exceptional cases. Of course you cannot spell out every situation, but I think we need solid guidelines.
    ( I always thought there are to many laws in America than the small country where I'm from. But I think the nature and the size of the country make it necessary. Of course not all the human laws are good or perfect, but that's besides the point.)
    I think it's a miracle that there is one church with so many people and still exist as one community of faith, in spite of all the hardships that the Church had to go through. To me this is a proof that our Church is guided by the Holy spirit, and Christ is always with His spouse. But He also leaves room for the faithful to help the Church to fulfill Her mission on earth by doing what we are called to do as best as we can.

    “Remember that you have been sent for the salvation of people, not because of your own merits, since it is the Lord Jesus and not you who died for the salvation of souls.... I must cooperate with the divine goodness of our Lord who has deigned to choose me so that by my ministry, the divine promise would be fulfilled: ‘There will be only one flock and one shepherd’” (John 10:16).
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,160
    Thanks, Jam. Another angle to keep in mind is that a lot of the arguments we see about church rules come from Americans. Americans don't understand the Roman approach to law.

    Roman church law doesn't have a life of its own apart from the authority who gives the law; the Pope is (nearly) always available to give an authoritative interpretation of what it means.

    But in the American legal system, we treat law as having an independent existence, once it goes into force. After a legislature makes laws and the executive signs them, we don't go back to the legislature to ask what it means. Instead, people make arguments about contending interpretations, and present those arguments in public and before judges. This has turned Americans into a particularly legalistic and litigious people.

    When people apply those same habits to church law, we get a lot of wrangling and nitpicking.
  • -b
    Posts: 55
    Read Dobszay's "The Bugnini-Liturgy and the Reform of the Reform" for a passionate history of the Roman rite, both mass and divine office. The Tridentine mass that we use now for the EF is only one historical form of the Roman rite, and it is a scaled-down form, created in response to the mood of the counter-reformation.

    Dobszay says on p. 162 "the outward appearance [of the Tridentine liturgy] reflects the private liturgy of the Curia Romana, and consequently, when compared with the medieval cathedral liturgy which originates in the celebrations of the ancient Roman basilicas, it proves to be poorer in many respects."

    If I read correctly, the basis for our EF low mass is this private mass celebrated by priests of the Roman Curia at which no congregation was present--working at the Vatican, they were not parish priests. With only the priest and the server, no singing was involved. Over 500 years as that form was "digested" by the worshiping faithful, we got low and high mass by the same means that have appeared in this discussion--following the rubrics where possible, taking the allowed alternatives where necessary, adding what's not specifically proscribed, etc.

    The model for parishes has always theoretically been the bishop's mass at the cathedral where all the resources were available for celebrating the liturgy in full solemnity and richness of ritual. What Dobszay laments is that the Bugnini Commission took the Tridentine mass for the particular form of the Roman Rite to be "reformed" instead of the richer medieval (pre-Tridentine) mass.
  • JamJam
    Posts: 636
    I've sung at a three EF low Masses, but my only other experience with a Latin Mass was a sung Dominican Rite Latin Mass. I studied it up a little bit... it came in "low" and "high" varieties also, and its low Mass was even more abbreviated than the Tridentine EF, believe it or not. The sung Mass, however, from the pews was not discernibly different. Only I guess the priest's prayers were different, and what the altar servers did when was different. And, of course, the priest's vestments were Dominican.

    But, what I mean to say is I have direct experience with the fact that the low EF Tridentine Mass is not the only pre-OF kind of Mass out there...

    I still think it's sad everything ended up recited. No matter how few people are present at Orthodox liturgy (I've been to Matins with three nuns on a remote Alaskan island) everything's still chanted. Recto tono or simple tones, but still chanted. It's not that hard.
Add a Comment