Wow, Heath! I am sort of trying to do the same thing! How cool to find someone else trying to do the same thing! I am focusing more on technique and ways/types of singing that a cantor might need to be prepared for. Would love to help you if I can. I don't have that much wisdom or experience when it comes to larger churches' ministries'.

Thanks, Jeffrey. I read some of Fellerer's history yesterday after I posted and it seems that indeed some of the styles were coexisting during the shift to more concerted music for the Mass.

I appreciate the resources and I'll look them up!

Trying to wrap my head around the particular distinctions between High and Low Mass in the post-Trent missal (and now in the EF).

I had thought that in the Low Mass that no official texts (Proper/Ordinary) could be sung (and hence a tradition of singing vernacular hymns sprang up) while EVERYTHING (Propers/Ordinary) needed to be sung in a High Mass.

But I believe I'm mistaken . . . excerpt from Crouan's "The History and the Future of the Roman Liturgy":

"Thus the Sung Mass--the "normal" form of the liturgy--is presented, from the sixteenth century on, as a "Low" Mass, upon which have been superimposed the Gregorian melodies belonging to the Roman liturgy; the schola cantorum sings the pieces from the Proper and the Kyriale, which the celebrant recites in a low voice at the altar."

(And I just now consulted a 1962 Missal guide to music by Rev. Scott Haynes and he seems to corroborate my original understanding. Hmm.)

Any help with these distinctions would be most appreciated!

Very helpful, thanks!

I think the reason Fortescue refers to the Missa Cantata as a Low Mass (but sung) is due to the late development of the Missa Cantata, which didn't occur until the 17th or 18th century. Among theologians, there initially was a dispute about whether to consider it as an elevated form of Mass. I don't think that it was really considered to be an elevated form in its own right until the early 1900's when the Missa Cantata had become much more ubiquitous. In fact, there was a time where the use of incense at the Missa Cantata required an indult from the Ordinary - one that was to be sought for each celebration, not given as a blank check.

Of course even where there was a Solemn Mass, the roles of deacon and subdeacon would be filled by priests.

I believe you mean "could". There were and continue to be situations where a layperson can fill the role of subdeacon (albeit with certain restrictions in that capacity). Typically this would be someone who was at least tonsured, but not always. Additionally, there would have been times when seminarians in major orders would have visited parishes and would have been one of the sacred ministers.

How sad that the low is proposed plus add-ons.
Proposing the higest and subtracting due to necessity would be better.
How differently we think about things and form attitudes due to word choices.

Thanks for the comments about the high/low Mass distinction!

Next question:

In an absurdly brief history of music in the Roman rite...

--In your opinion, what would be the essentials to include of the historical usage of the *organ*?

--Among those essentials, composers and/or trends that should be acknowledged and highlighted?

...what.... of the historical usage of the *organ*?

The styles of organs of the various countries would, as Chris suggests, certainly be a propos. They are important because they defined and were defined by the various usages of the organ from place to place.

Of more importance yet, though, would be a discussion of alternatim practice, which goes back at least to the XIV century, as attested to in the Codex Faenza, and later collections, such as the Buxheimer Orgelbuch and the Robertsbridge Codex. It continued until early into the XX century, when Pope________ abolished it. Alternatim hymn-singing, though, continues to this day in the Lutheran tradition.

While alternatim practice was almost universal, those parts of the office and mass which were sung alternatim varied considerably from 'nation' to 'nation'. Some discussion of this would be good to offer. Also, very often diocesan or city customaries stipulated alternatim usage and its extent. These usages varied more or less widely from place to place.

Also, as evidenced by the works of Frescobaldi and numerous others, the organ was used to supply either improvised or published 'interludes' betwixt the readings and at other points of the mass. The English Voluntary is an example of such improvised or published interludes. Continental equivalents of the English Voluntary would have seen similar usage.

Alternatim was not confined to the mass, but was practiced in the office, as evidenced by innumerable Magnificat, Benedictus, even Te Deum, and office hymn versets for organ.

Thusly were alternatim practice and interludes the chief usages of the organ in Catholic liturgy, though usage and style varied from country to country, even from diocese to diocese. Protestant usage was similar, but a robust tradition of chorale-based compositions and improvisations was practiced in those traditions which did not abolish all use of instruments. It was common for the organ to play a 'prelude' on a chorale and then for the people to sing it a capella; or, to sing the chorale in alternatim fashion. The elaborate praeludia of the Germanic areas were often used to set the tone for chorales, cantatas, or other parts of Lutheran liturgy. These organs were considerably more 'developed' than organs elsewhere - though 'developed' should not necessarily mean 'better', for all organs existed to satisfy the liturgical demands of their particular 'nations'.

You might discuss how that the organ was highly esteemed as a technological marvel by towns and large churches, who vied with one another to have the best or largest organ. Often it was the municipality which financed the organs in churches and saw to their upkeep, and procured the services of the finest musician they could afford, the object consistently being to have a person skilled in the most 'modern' developments in music. (I hasten to point out that 'modern' in this context does not mean music that sounded like street music or tavern music (pop-music of the day), but music which represented the highest achievements of the musical craft and art.)

The important difference between historical and modern praxis is that, historically, the organ's role was almost entirely to supply versets for alternatim singing, and, in some countries, to play interludes between readings, and so forth. They did not, as in modern usage, play what we term preludes and postludes, nor accompany congregational singing, and their use as a continuo instrument in choral works was very limited. Too, whereas in our day the organ is used every Sunday and Solemnity, its use in past eras was often, until modern times, limited to great feasts.

Perhaps these ideas will serve as an outline and be enough to get you started. You can 'flesh them out' as you see fit.

Yes -
Some of Sweelinck's chorale variation settings were intended to be played at recitals through the week, to familiarise people with the tunes which they would sing a capella on Sunday.
And, Some English voluntaries would indeed have been more 'service friendly' than others. Speaking of time, though, one can only wonder at the time an office or a mass took what with the elaborate and sometimes lengthy French versets, or, for that matter, some of the German ones, e.g., Scheidemann's magnificat versets.

(I did not intend 'interludes between readings' to be an accepted formal signifer, only to indicate that certain pieces were meant to be played at points inter- 'within' a service.)

Some bishops asked for that in their dioceses.

Not the first time, Fr. Krisman. : )

Going to nuance my question above...I'm ALMOST positive that there was a request from some official body to have the ICEL Ordinary placed in the midst of the Order of Mass that most hymnals and missalettes all contain (rather than isolated in the "Mass settings" section). Can someone help me find this written request?

Because it's topical (i.e., in the news) you could use whatever details we have of the organ at Notre Dame and drive home the point that the building is essential to the proper sounding of the organ.

(GIA's hymnals (The Catholic Community Hymnal, Worship, Gather) have put the Mass of Creation (and now ICEL instead) within the order of service, with a few other ordinaries in a following section. Lutheran hymnals (Service Book & Hymnal, Lutheran Book of Worship, Evangelical Lutheran Worship) differ only in repeating the order of service with each of several settings. One reason may be that some only celebrate the Eucharist every other week, alternating with a Service of the Word, which has its own setting & Order of Service, a drill Catholics aren't subjected to.)

(Apologies for the cross posting on two threads)

Friends, with your help, I've written a "Concise History of Music in the Catholic Mass" (My subtitle may be "20 centuries in 20 pages" :) )...and I'd love to get some feedback from my esteemed colleagues!

I'll be sending it out probably Wednesday morning (July 10) on the mailing list for my website, www.englishmotets.com (you can sign up at the bottom of the home page). If you're interested, sign up and check out the site while you're there! :)

Blessings,
Heath

Anamnesis - I was taught (in my Anglican youth!) that this Greek term means literally to re-make, or literally to make objectively present a past event or thing - not a mere memorial, but a literal re-creation. It is otherwise understood as making our Lord objectively present in his ordained eucharistic feast. This anamnesis is realised in the eucharistic prayer's words of consecration and owes nothing to the MA, which is an unnecessary, non-operative (and very clumsy) interpolation which serves merely formally to acknowledge publicly the now-made presence of our Lord in his sacrament.
A better theologian than I may put this in better perspective.

Like a number of aspects of our worship, the MA has parallels in Roman society and courtly ceremony. In the case of the MA, the parallel is the presentation of a new emperor to the waiting public, to be acclaimed by them. However, it is redundant in that this 'presentation' and 'acclamation' has already taken place in the elevation of the newly consecrated species at the time of their consecration; when all see and adore Christ newly present, held and presented on high, and acclaim him in their hearts whilst appropriately making the sign of the cross, that uniquely Christian gesture both of praise and blessing. The MA is not in any way operative of the anamnesis, but is a response to it.

Thank you, gents.

a_f_hawkins, two items:

--Do we consider the Sanctus part of the EP? It's listed in GIRM 79...

--It seems to me that EVERY other item that takes place from the Preface Dialogue to the concluding Amen is covered...EXCEPT the Memorial Acclamation (assuming it is indeed NOT the anamnesis). So strange...in fact, the MA is only mentioned once in the whole document (GIRM 37).

All that being said, I think you're both right...I'm just baffled that we're given so little in this document about the Memorial Acclamation.