DW:TM - Propers Intrinsic to the Rite
  • It has come to my attention that the lesser propers are not an option in the Ordinariate. They are intrinsic to Divine Worship: The Missal. Also, none but the language appearing DW:TM may be used at Ordinariate masses. The language is basically that of Palmer-Burgess, with some relatively few exceptions.

    A pew edition of DW:TM is in progress. Word is that Bishop Lopes wants both ritual and hymnody in this pew edition. A committee are working on what to and not to retain from the 1940. Please pray for them!

    This may not merit its own thread, but I didn't want it to get lost in another one.
  • Jackson,

    For the sake of the unknowing, what is DW:TM?
  • canadashcanadash
    Posts: 1,370
    "Divine Worship:The Missal" I think.
  • Yes, Divine Worship:The Missal.
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 7,482
    Jackson, for those of us who aren't familiar with the topic, would you give us a glossary definition of "lesser propers"?

    Also, when you say they're "not an option", does that mean that they are mandatory; or unavailable?

    And an additional note: I've redefined the name of the "Anglican Chant" category so that threads like this one can be assigned to it.
  • Alright: one at a time.

    1. Lesser propers, also known as the minor propers are those very 'propers' which are a normal topic of conversation on our forum; which is to say, The Propers, being Introit, Gradual (or Responsorial Psalm, one of which is what the Gradual is a vestige of), Alleluya, Offertory, and Communion. These traditionally are called 'lesser' or 'minor' to distinguish them from the greater propers, which are the lections and collects of the day.

    2. By 'not an option' I meant that they are mandatory, inherent parts of the ritual text (Divine Worship: the Missal), not an 'option', as they are in the current Roman rite as interpreted by GIRM.

    3. Thus, when we at Walsingham (or other Ordinariate parishes) sing these 'lesser propers' at every mass, we are not just inserting them in deference to our proclivity to preserve old aritifacts, but because they are actually a part of our rite, as expressed in our definitive ritual text, Divine Worship:the Missal. We cannot not sing them. They are in the missal, so singing them is not exercising an 'option'. We have chosen to make them obligatory by enshrining them in our ritual text, which, of course, has Rome's 'imprimatur'.

    (As an example, it is as it would be if The Propers were 'in the Roman missal'. If they were, then they would be sung at every NO mass. No option. No choice. Mandatory - as they ought to be.)

    Is this clear enough, or have I made it worse?
  • But to your point 3, a Introit and a Communion are in the Roman missal, but they are neither said nor sung at most masses. Surely the difference is that there is no "other suitable song" rubric in Divine Worship?
    Thanked by 1David Sullivan
  • SalieriSalieri
    Posts: 2,242
    I do like the 1940 hymnal, though, to be sure, there are some hymns that are more 'period pieces' and don't get much use these days.

    This is really good news. Maybe the Roman Rite will catch up some day?
  • JulieCollJulieColl
    Posts: 2,433
    Thanks so much for the definition of minor and major propers. This was the topic of a heated discussion among some schola members I knew a few years ago. One fellow was adamant that the "minor propers" were the Gradual, Alleluia and Offertory, and the major propers were the Introit and Communion, or something like that. Therefore, he said, it's more acceptable to use the psalm tones for the "minor propers". I had never heard that distinction before.
  • Liam
    Posts: 3,552
    Are the lesser propers recited in the absence of musicians?
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,281
    Is there an Ordinariate equivalent of Low Mass, in which they wouldn't be sung?
    Thanked by 1M. Jackson Osborn
  • Again, one at a time -

    1) In answer to Andrew:
    Yes there are an 'Entrance Antiphon' and a 'Communion Antiphon' in the Roman Missal. As we know, these are not really the historic propers, but have been put there to be said (NOT SUNG) by the priest when there is no cantor or choir to sing The Real Propers or a cantus alius aptus.. These two items are unique to the post VII missals and are not substitutes for the Real Propers at sung masses. In fact, most of us, I think, wish that they would go away. They constitute the sort of liturgical botchment which the Church of Rome is awfully awfully good at.

    2) Salieri:
    Ha! I like your reference to 'period pieces'. Yes, there are quite few of these in the 1940, also a smattering of rather unfit-for-Catholic-usage items that we know better than to use. 'Period pieces' is a polite word for embarrassments such as 'Jesus Calls Us O'er the Tumult' sung to Ass's Bray and worse.

    3) Liam
    I don't know the answer to that. Since they are a part of the ritual text I would assume so.

    4) Adam:
    I have yet to experience a so called 'low mass' in the Ordinariate. This owing to the fact that my experience is limited to the usage of the cathedral church (of which I was an original member and the founding choirmaster). I can't say what the situation is in some of our smaller or newly erected parishes. I should like to think that our custom in this regard would be not unlike that of the orthodox, but I have a 'feeling' that it isn't.

    5) To all -
    In the Anglican tradition the cathedral church has the honour and responsibility to be a liturgical beacon and to exemplify the highest praxis to which all should aspire. Many, if not most, parishes will make it their goal to emulate to the extent they are able the customary practice of the cathedral church. One may often hear 'this is the way its done at the cathedral'. One would rarely, if ever, hear this in the Catholic Church. This relationship, so far as I can tell, is non-existent in Catholic practice. It would never occur to the people at St Happiclappia's to emulate a cathedral (if it existed at all) which exemplified in its worship all the Benedictine finest of the western liturgical tradition.
    Thanked by 2Salieri CHGiffen
  • SalieriSalieri
    Posts: 2,242
    The only time I have ever heard 'this is the way it's done at the cathedral' is as an excuse for -- or worse, promotion of -- poor music and shoddy praxis. So, good on the Anglicans and, especially, the Ordinariate to expect exemplary praxis in Cathedrals and its emulation in the parishes -- it sounds like the best of Percy Dearmer. (YMMV -- I know there are some exemplary [Roman] Cathedral situations out there, thankfully.)
  • Richard R.
    Posts: 642
    I always understood "minor" propers to refer to entrance, offertory, and communion, while "major" propers refer to gradual and alleluia. But I will take your word for it.

    Having worked through a chunk of the propers in the new Ordinariate Missal, attempting to adapt them to the Graduale melodies, I would say the translations show substantial differences from Palmer-Burgess. The new seem more inclined to a terse, literal translation, where the older seemed more free to adjust the English to fit the chant. More to the point, because the new Missal uses the modern Roman cycle, Palmer-Burgess doesn't cover all the propers needed for the year.
  • awilliamsawilliams
    Posts: 94
    @Richard R.

    Are we going to start to see these chants?

    Also, another thought, how closely do the calendars match up? Could we be talking about the first official translation of the gradual chants?
  • Richard R.
    Posts: 642
    The calendars seem to match, and it does look very much like an official translation of the GR. Whether that means you can use English Graduals at your Roman Mass is another question. As for seeing these chants, I wouldn't hold my breath, at least for any of mine. But I don't doubt many able people are on the case.
  • MatthewRoth
    Posts: 1,224
    St. Luke’s in D.C. is using PB anyways…

    Yes, I believe they are recited sans choir. Hence the Gradual and Alleluia or Tract are actually in the missal. Communities preferring the missal practice as Anglicans (i.e. the TLM rubrics and text) can choose (legitimately or not is another question, but it’s without a doubt traditional) to double under the sung propers at Solemn High Mass and the Sung Mass.
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • We have, currently, the following standard regimen at Walsingham -

    Saturdays -
    4.00pm, Vigil - a said mass with hymns

    All Sundays -
    8.00am - sung mass, all chant (these people are adamantly attached to singing the ordinary in Latin - and they do! Gloria, Creed, and all) with cantoral propers.

    9.30am - Sung mass, with choir and deacon

    11.15am - Solemn High Mass, with choir, deacon and sub-deacon

    6.00pm - sung mass with cantor and hymns

    All Solemnities -
    12.00pm - said mass

    7.00pm - Solemn High Mass, with choir, deacon and sub-deacon
    ________________________________

    Here is a 'choice line' from our liturgy. It occurs as a bidding before our version of the Confiteor which, in DW:TM, is placed betwixt creed and offertory, just before the anaphora:
    Deacon:
    Make your humble confession to Almighty God,
    meekly kneeling upon your knees.

    This comes from one of the historic English BCPs, and the English insisted on its inclusion. Mostly, though, the English were not as devoted to BCP language as the Americans were. As is commonly known, most English Anglo-Catholics have for decades eschewed the BCP altogether and have used the Novus Ordo.

    Here is the Prayer of Thanksgiving, which follows the Post-Communion Collect:

    Priest and People:
    ALMIGHTY and everliving God, we most heartily thank thee, for that thou dost vouchsafe to feed us who have duly received these holy mysteries, with the spiritual food of the most precious Body and Blood of thy Son our Saviour Jesus Christ; and dost assure us thereby of thy favour and goodness towards us; and that we are very members incorporate in the mystical body of thy Son, which is the blessed company of all faithful people; and are also heirs through hope of thy everlasting kingdom, by the merits of his most precious death and passion. And we humbly beseech thee, O heavenly Father, so to assist us with thy grace, that we may continue in that holy fellowship, and do all such good works as thou hast prepared for us to walk in; through Jesus Christ our Lord, to whom, with thee and the Holy Ghost, be all honour and glory, world without end. Amen.
  • MatthewRoth
    Posts: 1,224
    Had the TLM not been believed to be suppressed, Anglo–Catholics would have used the TLM as had been the case before the reforms, as Fr. Hunwicke says. As good as Anglo–Papalism was to bring about unity via the Ordinariates, he would certainly say that one sees the limits of the papacy in liturgy.
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,281
    4.00pm, Vigil - a said mass with hymns
    12.00pm - said mass


    So that's a lot like "Low Mass."
    Are the minor propers read by the priest?
  • I don't know.
    There may be a cantor at that mass. I really don't know. I'll find out.
    Please do understand, though, that our cantors are cantors.
    They are located 'in choir'.
    They are not microphonists.
    They do not stand at the lectern and display their armpits and do pirouettes.
    They announce nothing.
    They just do what cantors do - sing chants or lead them purely vocally.
    The hymns are led by the organ.
    No announcements of any kind are made by anyone at any time.
    There are service folders for all masses (and our people know how to read).

    How do they know when to stand and sing at the beginning of mass? When the organ finishes the voluntary and any necessary improvising and smoothly goes into the hymn introduction - they spontaneously stand and sing.

  • @MJO Wow, thats awesome. I wish our congregations knew to do that.
  • You could easily train them to - if you had a sympathetic priest who knew the first thing about liturgical flow. Our masses are a continuum, a seamless garment, of song and ritual text from beginning to end.
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,281
    How do they know when to stand and sing at the beginning of mass? When the organ finishes the voluntary and any necessary improvising and smoothly goes into the hymn introduction - they spontaneously stand and sing.


    Even the most (from my opinion) liturgically lame Episcopal congregations can figure this out. I don't understand the American Roman Catholic compulsion to ask everyone to "Stand and greet [the celebrant / each other] as we sing our [opening hymn / gathering song / processional ditty], number six hundred and sixty six, in the BLUE HYMNAL, Silence, Frenzied Unclean Spirit, number SIX SIX SIX in the (hold it aloft) BLUE HYMNAL."
  • ...compulsion to ask...

    It's all a part of the conundrum to which we have given repeated attention on this forum: the assumption that the people are stupid, the determination that they will be treated as if they were whether they are or aren't, and the fundamental embarrassment (of clerics and people alike) over the profound gravity of the sacral proceedings which are about to begin which makes cutening up the air with pablum greetings, harmless invitations, and clever chit chat seemingly necessary. These are the cathartic behaviourisms of those who are uncomfortable with the mighty act which is the mass. The way many Catholics enter into mass and get through it is an affront to human dignity, a demeaning assumption of idiocy, and a cheap debasement of the honour and glory due to the All Holy. What should be an offering of our very very best, of ecstatic, gorgeous, beauty is turned into a sort of a tepidly sacralised Ed Sullivan show.

    P.S. -
    It occurs to me that the ritual text provides a few words addressed to the people -
    >at the Confiteor (let us confess our sins...)
    >the Lord be with you (at various places...
    >the lectionary itself
    >the dialogue surrounding the gospel...
    >the homily...
    >sursum corda, which begins the anaphora...
    >the pax...
    >the dismissal....

    (did I miss any?)

    Other than these moments, the entire mass is addressed solely to the Trinitarian Godhead, and, most specifically, to the Father. This and none other.


    other than these there is no leave for one word to be addressed to the people about anything at all betwixt the Trinitarian invocation and the dismissal. Any such presumptuous insertions of verbiage into the ritual text are a mindless besmirchment of the sacred act which is the mass. And, since they have no genuine authority, they are ipso facto acts of tyranny.
  • a_f_hawkins
    Posts: 1,092
    If you have a single sheet/booklet with everything in it seriatim including hymn texts and directions on posture, this works for all who can read (are literate and have any neccessary glasses with them). It just about works if the service sheet includes numbers in the hymn book but is otherwise seriatim. When the translation changed I remember in Westminster Cathedral being confronted with a sheet with a partial index to texts (some with tunes) scattered through two books (missal and music). Although I have, I think, high liturgical awareness, I could not cope.
    BTW the Tridentine rite on occasion calls for the deacon to say (to the congregation?) Flectamus genua and Levate
  • Our congregation is lazy, sometimes Father has to tell them to stand and sit. Or to repeat the Amen.
  • MatthewRoth
    Posts: 1,224
    Well, to the choir and thus congregation. In the 1962 rite, the Good Friday commands might both be done by the deacon, but Levate in the Tridentine rite (until 1962, and even then I think only Holy Week changed) and the preceding curial usage is most definitely sung by the subdeacon.
  • matthewjmatthewj
    Posts: 2,559
    Or to repeat the Amen.


    image
    Thanked by 1Adam Wood
  • matthewjmatthewj
    Posts: 2,559
    I don't understand the American Roman Catholic compulsion to ask everyone to "Stand and greet [the celebrant / each other] as we sing our [opening hymn / gathering song / processional ditty], number six hundred and sixty six, in the BLUE HYMNAL, Silence, Frenzied Unclean Spirit, number SIX SIX SIX in the (hold it aloft) BLUE HYMNAL."


    I think this compulsion comes from the fact that PERSON X sees VARIOUS PEOPLE not doing ALL THE THINGS and thus thinks they must not feel INVITED ENOUGH to do ALL THE THINGS. Thus they start creating multiple ways to try to force VARIOUS PEOPLE to do ALL THE THINGS and thus they get a hymn board, make announcements, repeat the announcements, hold up the book, etc.

    The problem is that no matter what you do - having a nice comprehensive worship aid, doing quality music, etc... there will still be a few VARIOUS PEOPLE who just don't want to do ALL THE THINGS. And the various PERSON Xs who are upset by this just need to be told to calm down. It's okay if VARIOUS PEOPLE don't want to do ALL THE THINGS just yet.
    Thanked by 2CHGiffen Jenny
  • Kathy
    Posts: 4,978
    image
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 7,482
    Much as I would prefer not to announce the hymns in the manner cited above, people do use the announcement as their cue to pick up the book.
  • Liam
    Posts: 3,552
    The "announcement" can be silent. The song leader can just stand and lift up the hymnal/aid to be used without announcing anything. This should not be necessary if the congregation always sings out of one single resource, but if the resource can vary (which is true in many places), the visual confirmation can eliminate unnecessary confusion.
  • Kathy
    Posts: 4,978
    Btw, is there a greater expectation in the DW:TM that the people will sing much of the Mass, than in the Roman Missal?
    Thanked by 1M. Jackson Osborn
  • kevinfkevinf
    Posts: 1,049
    My community: they ring a bell,people stand either for the introit chant or at one mass the hymn. Yes, RC folks can be trained to stand without spoken direction.
  • ...is there a greater expectation...

    Yea verily, the expectation and the reality are the same in that the people sing all the mass parts, dialogues, responsories, ordinary, hymns, that are theirs by right - and they heartily fulfill this expectation with a gladsome mind. No microphonists are necessary. In fact, should any appear they would likely be booed. Our people just know what to do and they do it spontaneously, eagerly, and with gladness. The rite itself is regarded with such awe, its inviolable sanctity so profoundly respected that interjecting vocal instructions on what to do throughout it would be thought all but blasphemous - not to mention preposterously insulting. It's not just that DWLTM presumes this, but that this is the of the essence of the heirs of the Anglican patrimony at worship.

    It should be the same with the Roman Missal and the NO. Any and all Catholics are, of course, fully capable of such spontaneous participation in a mass in which they are fully aware of what is happening and their role in it. They don't do this because a contrary culture has been cultivated. The time has far passed when we should uproot this culture and stop watering it. I'm gathering from some of the comments here by my very own colleagues that they are really comfortable with this situation and see nothing intrinsically reprehensible in it even though it chops up the flow of the sacred rite and peppers it with distracting interjections, announcements which a poorly, very poorly catechised people have come lazily to depend on. But! It is intrinsically reprehensible - and crude! Priests should not put up with this. Priests should not put up with this, and the people should be ashamed of it, ashamed and embarrassed greatly. This is not what the council had in mind.

    Give the people a hymn board. Give them service folders. Give them systematic catechesis in which they are informed of why every item in the mass is there, and their role in its flow. Let their priests inform them (as forcefully and insistently as necessary) of their obligation fully to participate with thankful hearts. But, dismiss the announcers and the antics of what are 'supposed' to be cantors (and cantors only!) and let the mass be offered intact and inviolate.



    Thanked by 2CHGiffen Salieri
  • Ben YankeBen Yanke
    Posts: 3,113
    We're the same as Kevin at our place. It's more than possible to do.
  • SalieriSalieri
    Posts: 2,242
    My [now technically retired but still acting as administrator] Pastor told me about a Confirmation at a parish when he was curate where the announcement came: "Let us now greet our bishop as we sing 'Hail, Holy Queen'." Ouch.

    On the rare occasion where I need to announce a hymn -- like when I'm lysdexic and put the number up backwards on the hymn-board -- I simply say "We sing hymn number [blah-blah]." And begin the introduction.

    Also, for the Entrance, we do the same as in Kevin's and Ben's places. It's immemorial tradition for us, here.
    Thanked by 1M. Jackson Osborn
  • .