Music during Low Mass vs. Sung Mass
  • CradleRevert
    Posts: 23
    Through my experience in attending the EF, and from the rubrical documents that I've found, here is my understanding of the music layout of a Low Mass vs. a Sung Mass.

    Low Mass
    - Opening/Closing/Offertory/Communion motets are permitted (same for Sung Mass)
    - Organ improvisation is permitted during Offertory, after consecration, etc. (same for Sung Mass)
    - Propers and Ordinaries must NOT be sung by either the priest or the schola

    Sung Mass
    - Propers and Ordinaries MUST be sung by schola or choir.

    My question is...am I correct in my above assumptions? Also, would a deviation from these be a violation of the rubrics?

    A priest nearby has recently begun saying an occasional EF Mass. I believe the Mass would technically be a Low Mass (no incense, only one altar server, no schola singing the propers). However, the priest himself chants the Introit while at the altar. Also, some of the ordinaries (Gloria, Sanctus...the priest actually intones the Sanctus) are sung by a soloist.

    I know the priest means well, and I appreciate that he wants to offer the EF, so I'm not trying to be a scrooge about the whole thing, but I was just curious whether these actions are permitted, and whether someone could direct me to any official documentation stating one way or another.
  • noel jones, aagonoel jones, aago
    Posts: 6,611
    Why?

    I mean, what is your reason for asking?

    You'd be better off talking with the priest. And, if this bothers you, taking over singing the Introit. Maybe he's just waiting for someone, anyone, to stand up and get involved musically.

    You. Could be that person.
  • CradleRevert
    Posts: 23
    Well, that's part of my reason for asking. I may get involved in assisting with music at this Mass. However - and perhaps I'm being too scrupulous - I want to make sure that I'm involved in a way in which the official rules laid out by the Church are being followed to the best of our ability.
  • noel jones, aagonoel jones, aago
    Posts: 6,611
    Thanks! In a world where psalms are paraphrased and sung at Mass, I would not worry.

    But in the TLM world where there can be a much higher level of criticism* and "shusshing?" and criticism from the pews, you'd just need a priest who was willing to slap down the difficult people who, at times, populate the TLM pews.

    Your guy has the nerve to challenge them when he sings the Introit. Cool.

    Come to think of it, what is the priest doing while the Introit is sung...now I wonder if there really is any restriction to him singing the introit as if he was processing into the church prior to approaching the altar. If so, possibly he could.

    Of course he couldn't sing the Communio while he was receiving...

    *At a parish I served for the NO, as many of the TLM men came in in their black suits, they would not look us in the eye, nor acknowledge our presence. (you know who you are, now cut it out!)
    Thanked by 1hilluminar
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,980
    So you have a priest who is willing to say the EF mass. The proper attitude is GRATITUDE, not nitpicking - although that may not be your intent. If you can help him, by all means do whatever you can. Nothing wrong with that.

    My own experience has been the converts complaining about everything, like they ever had any long-term association with any of it to begin with. Every so often, I post the "convert disease" - and you know who you are. It applies to the Orthodox, not Latin Church, but the lesson is the same. LOL.



    Evidently you have never met a true Mnogopravoslavnie convert. It goes like this: You are standing in the back of the Church, assisting the babyshki with their coats and filling the candle boxes. In walks in a young family. The father figure is in his early 30's, with hair in a pony tail and a beard that has not seen scissors in years. As he takes off his fur coat, he is wearing a rybashka with a belt, cossack pants and high boots (or if is really up there, oonychi- bast sandals!). Mama is next with not 1, but 3 scarves wrapped tightly around her head and wearing a hand stitched festival dress from Tula province. The children are all lined up, military fashion in matching rybashki and boots. They proceed to enter the Church, and fling themselves in full prostrations 3 times each as they light approx. 150 candles! As I approach them to let them know that they don't have to prostate for each candle, naturally I speak in Russian, assuming that they are straight off the boat from Dzedyshkagorod in the Northern Theibad. Much to my surprise, none of them speak Russian! It turns out that Barsenuphius Theophylact used to be Harry Smith, and is a convert from the Episcopal Church. Ok, all well and good. But during the service, one notices Barsenuphius becoming agitated. It appears that Father is not doing the full Monastic service. He has omitted several irmoi and polielai has been shortened to only 1/2 hour. Barsenuphius grabs his children in disgust and goes looking for a "True" Church" that doesn't cater to people who are not willing to stand for 12 hour Saturday Vigil services. He has heard of a church only 300 miles away, under Archbishop Epitikimaximus, the last "true" bishop on earth, who does full Athonite style services everyday. There he is happy wearing his hair shirt, with 70 pounds of chains hanging around his neck, kneeling on bricks at home because his "starets", Bishop Epitikimaximus, has told him to mortify the flesh. But the telling thing is, in 2 years, Barsenuphius Theophylact and his family are nowhere to be seen. He has decided that all Christians are heretics, and he and his family are now living in Tibet, practicing tantric Buddhism. Oh and Barsenuphius Theophylact is now called "OM".

    This is what used to be known as the "Convert Disease"

    Thanked by 3rogue63 Liam CHGiffen
  • MatthewRoth
    Posts: 2,315
    In general, yes, you are right. De musica sacra lays out the norms in more detail, as you might already know.

    You aren’t nitpicking, and you’re being polite about it. It is odd to read about, if only because that means something that ought to be done while the schola sings is being modified...
  • rogue63
    Posts: 410
    Wow! That was me and my wife a few years ago---thank God we've calmed down since then. God is truly great and good, but---nolite confidere in principibus. And that means both secular and ecclesiastical; the church of Christ is nowhere perfect because we are always striving for perfection.
  • Chris Garton-Zavesky
    Posts: 6,902
    At the request of my priest, I'm providing organ for 2nd class feasts which fall midweek, and which would ordinarily be Low Mass. I don't sing anything, but I use the propers as subjects for improvisation, beginning with a simple presentation of at least a portion of the introit. Feasts of Our Lady I enrich with parts of Mass ix.

    Am I reading correctly that I shouldn't be doing this? Organ at Mass, fine, but not what I'm doing?
  • MatthewRoth
    Posts: 2,315
    I can’t see why that is a problem...
    Thanked by 1CharlesW
  • CradleRevert
    Posts: 23
    I couldn't find any clear rules regarding music at a Low Mass in De musica sacra, but I have referenced this document from this very website before: http://media.musicasacra.com/pdf/lowmass.pdf

    That document does not appear to come from any official Vatican source, nor does it seem to source one (other than a few quotes).
  • tomjaw
    Posts: 2,782
    Am I reading correctly that I shouldn't be doing this? Organ at Mass, fine, but not what I'm doing?


    Chris what you are doing is fine, the documents are quite clear it is all about singing! not the melodies. As far as I understand the only ruling for Organ music is no Secular melodies, frequently ignored in some places / times. The question being what is a Secular melody.

    I couldn't find any clear rules regarding music at a Low Mass


    Try the following,
    1. Ritus Servandus in Celebratione Missae
    2. http://maternalheart.org/library/1962rubrics.pdf
    3.http://www.lms.org.uk/resources/gregorian-chant/scholas-guide-to-sung-mass
    4.http://media.musicasacra.com/books/7848318-Psallite-Sapienter-A-Musicians-Guide-to-the-Extraordinary-Form.pdf

    I would like to add that while the first post on this thread gives a good guide to music in the E.F. this can be described as an ideal. For which there are sadly exceptions...

    It has been the custom (well from around 1850) in certain places in Germany to sing the Ordinary but not the Proper at a (deformed) Missa Cantata. Various Hymn books (c. 1900) give suggestions for Vernacular Hymns to be sung instead of the Propers

    From 1955, changes to the Rubrics came think and fast, particularly the Rubrics involving the Low Mass and the 4 degrees of Dialogue Mass. These hurried changes mean that many books do not always give a clear description of the Rubrics in force in 1962, for which the question should be asked which month! Do we follow the 1962 (printed) Missal, or do we follow the last changes made up to and including December of that year!
    Thanked by 1JulieColl
  • MatthewRoth
    Posts: 2,315
    I have even been to a deformed Solemn High Mass with orchestra in Vienna...
  • CHGiffenCHGiffen
    Posts: 5,193
    deformed Solemn High Mass with orchestra in Vienna
    Deform of the reform? Or deform of the deform?
  • MatthewRoth
    Posts: 2,315
    Heh. I meant without the propers being sung. They had all the ministers, they had an orchestra for the Ordinary, and it’s Vienna... There is no reason for them not to have a schola other than their custom which ought to be reprobated. It seems to be illegitimate to take away the sung propers away from the Mass which is why I dislike the idea of a Mass where only the Ordinary is sung... And since that is not permitted in the older form the PCED would have the authority to tell them “No, you must sing the propers.” The SRC did write this in a binding letter to the archdiocese of Boston in the 1930s or thereabouts... But I doubt they cared or even knew of it in Vienna.

    I think my reasoning appears inconsistent since elsewhere (maybe not on this forum, though) I defend the French practice of alternating verses on the organ... Well, they only did that on Gospel canticles and hymns that never changed, and it was generally banned at Mass. And this way preserves the chant. Though perhaps the proliferation of the so- called ton parisien is in response to those who opposed the organ: you can alternate either with organ or polyphony, and either way is quite simple.
  • CradleRevert
    Posts: 23
    So you have a priest who is willing to say the EF mass. The proper attitude is GRATITUDE, not nitpicking - although that may not be your intent. If you can help him, by all means do whatever you can. Nothing wrong with that.


    I have thanked the priest on more than one occasion for offering the Mass. I really am not trying to come off as nitpicking. We are thrilled to have an opportunity to attend this Mass so close to home.

    On the other hand, however, those who offer or assist at Mass have a solemn duty to follow the rubrics - as given to us by the Church - to the best of our ability . If I do end up assisting with the music of this Mass, I want to make sure that I am indeed not mistaken in my assumptions, and I would like to have the proper documentation on hand if needed.
  • JulieCollJulieColl
    Posts: 2,465
    We had a similar experience some years ago where the celebrant had been saying an EF Low Mass but wanted to add sung elements gradually and eventually "work his way up" to a High Mass because he believed the people needed a few years to become acclimated to a complete Missa Cantata.

    He would come up to the choir loft before Mass to give our schola the program for the day, according to the time constraints, i.e., whether there was a Baptism right after Mass or upon the length of the sermon he had planned. He would say, 'Okay, you can sing the Introit, Kyrie and Alleluia, but we'll recite the Gloria and I'll say the Gradual. We'll say the Credo but no Offertory proper because it's too long today, but sing the Sanctus and the Agnus Dei," and the program would change the next Sunday, according to his whims.

    Because he was elderly and not in good health, we didn't like to object. We tried at first to show him all the documentation forbidding such a hybrid configuration but he casually waved it away with a laugh, so we concluded that forty years of having multiple options in the OF had conditioned him to believe he could do basically whatever he wanted in the EF.

    After some soul-searching, we decided to move on from the situation since we couldn't in conscience keep ignoring the 1962 rubrics with no end in sight. Perhaps if Father had said the transition phase would take a month, that might have been acceptable, but the prospect of years of weird arbitrary liturgical game-playing in the EF was just too much.
  • noel jones, aagonoel jones, aago
    Posts: 6,611
    have a solemn duty to follow the rubrics - as given to us by the Church - to the best of our ability


    Right. Tell that to a priest. He does have the duty but you have no ability to try to make him follow them. This alone has been why some directors of music get fired.

    "But Bishop..." Right. Like he's going to come down on a priest when priests are hard to find.

    Why does the phrase, "You're not the BOSS OF ME!" come to mind. Let's just all go to lunch.
  • JulieCollJulieColl
    Posts: 2,465
    P.S. I think it's fair to say that the OF cultivates, almost by default, a laissez-faire, loosey-goosey, "anything goes" attitude towards the liturgy. The EF rubrics, on the other hand, are precisely regimented and prescribed, so much so, in fact, that, according to preconciliar rubricists, the rubrics of the Missale Romanum were considered to be positive ecclesiastical laws which are binding under pain of mortal or venial sin, depending on the gravity of the matter.

    The venerable old priest I mentioned above can't be blamed for disregarding the rubrics of the 1962 Missale Romanum. For decades he attempted to preserve a sense of reverence, sobriety and dignity in the Novus Ordo Mass which he celebrated. He filtered out most of the innovations and experimentation which all of his neighboring parishes allowed, and it was truly heroic how he managed to maintain a level of liturgical sanity in the midst of liturgical chaos.

    It is ironic and almost tragic that his role as priest-as-sovereign-liturgical-arbiter served him so well in the OF but did not serve him well when he began celebrating the TLM in his parish.
Add a Comment