Where did refrain Glorias even come from?
  • Andrew_Malton
    Posts: 1,186
    Thanks for the above very interesting and pertinent information.

    Guardini rises (still) higher in my view; and Gelineau falls lower (not that there is much room left). ("Permanent workshop" -- brrr!) But it's ironic that Gelineau's Responsorial Psalm form, which in practice has won the field against to the Simplex's approach, is actually less "responsorial" than the latter. I find people pay more of Guardini's "certain amount of attention" with Simplex responsorials than with conventional (Gelineau-style) psalm-with-refrain.

    (When I say Simplex I mean By Flowing Waters, in practice.)
  • dad29
    Posts: 2,232
    it would occur to no one, ever, to omit parts of a ball game because of time constraints or summer temperatures.


    It would occur to me, but I hate baseball.
    Thanked by 2M. Jackson Osborn Carol
  • fcbfcb
    Posts: 338
    I have attended several parishes where the the Gloria was routinely omitted except on Solemnities. One place where you can find the justification for this is Ralph Kiefer, “Our Cluttered Vestibule: The Unreformed Entrance Rite.” Worship 48:5 (1974). The proposed changes for the 1998 Sacramentary reflected this view.

    In terms of practice, the omission of the Gloria seems to have faded since the 90s. I do think the OF entrance rite is a bit clunky. The fairly seamless entrance rite of the sung EF---[Asperges]/Introit/Kyrie/Gloria/Greeting/Collect---is one of the things that I think is superior to the OF. It's not so much a matter of "clutter" (i.e number of items) as it is a repeated shifting of focus.
    Thanked by 3Andrew_Malton cmb Elmar
  • CatherineS
    Posts: 690
    (Re: shifting of focus...)
    One of the most interesting experiences I had was assisting at a Mass in English in Rome where I happened to be the only person in the pews. I didn't know the English Mass very well and had found a laminated card with the responses. The priest seemed to evaluate the situation in a split second and decided to just celebrate as if no one where there - not in a rude way, but in a charitable way (since clearly the pathetic specimen in the pews clutching the laminated card didn't know the Mass very well and might struggle if obligated to respond out loud in English).

    It was really interesting. Calming, steady, simple, without all the interruptions and bustle and fussing that comes with the steady stream of people going up to read things and the uncoordinated responses from the congregation (some shouting, some whispering, some slow, some fast) I was used to in the OF.

    I've seen similar at a convent where an elderly bishop occasionally celebrates privately and the congregants are a few nuns who mostly keep silent, and he does all the readings and everything himself.

    It's my own weakness to be very fond of orderliness, quiet and predictability. But when there is more simplicity it does seem to permit the priest a level of meditation and prayer that must be more difficult otherwise. And the congregation, too, at least for those who are inclined to silence.
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 8,414
    .
  • a_f_hawkins
    Posts: 3,467
    One of the beneficial effects of singing/chanting is in coordinating speed of utterance among the congregation.
    Thanked by 2M. Jackson Osborn CHGiffen
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 8,414
    ...beneficial effects...
    Indeed!
    Music unifies!
    The Doctor of Hippo (among others) knew this and heaped upon it lofty praise.
  • francis
    Posts: 10,821
    The pop movement.
Add a Comment