Gloria incipit
  • m_r_taylor
    Posts: 316
    I know this has been discussed before, but here I'm sitting on an idea for another Gloria (nothing to do with the recent Mass I posted) - which needs 6 to 8 parts plus organ, generally sounds large and dramatic, and most importantly doesn't begin with a priest's incipit but with the full choir directly on Gloria in excelsis.

    All the renaissance settings I know of begin with the priest's intonation, as well as many others, but I'm not aware of any specific direction on it besides, of course, a long tradition. Even if not a dealbreaker from a rubrical perspective do you think it would be from a practical one? (Perhaps priests might insist on singing the incipit, for example, or...I don't know. You tell me!)
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 8,367
    From generation unto generation, from the beginning of time, it has been the priest's prerogative to intone both Gloria and Credo. If one is in a position to decide on this matter one should at the very least ask the celebrant if he wishes to intone these parts of the mass. It is his prerogative to say yea or nay. If the latter a cantor or the choir may sing.

    You could, of course, provide an intonation for the priest or cantor and another for the full choir if the priest does not care to do it himself. I would never think of beginning with full choir without the priest having been asked and consented.

    I think, historically, that this habit of the choir beginning by itself is a child of the ;ate XVIIIth and XIXnth centuries bloated concert masses, and that we should endeavor to restore proper procedure.
    Thanked by 3m_r_taylor tomjaw CCooze
  • Chris Garton-Zavesky
    Posts: 6,902
    M_R_Taylor,

    Jackson is right on this point (as on many others), but I wonder if the answer to your question might be this: although it is customary and proper for the priest to intone the Gloria and the Credo, is it impossible for the choir to repeat the text?
    Thanked by 1tomjaw
  • Dixit_Dominus_44
    Posts: 181
    M. Jackson Osborn: “From generation unto generation, from the beginning of time, it has been the priest's prerogative to intone both Gloria and Credo.”


    This is false. For example, in Mozart's Masses (which were used liturgically) the priest does not intone the Gloria.
  • Richard MixRichard Mix
    Posts: 2,767
    Well yes; I hope no one takes "from the beginning of time" literally either. I wonder when it was a 'perogative', as opposed to an expectation that the priest would have learned singing? The current GIRM hedges
    It is intoned by the Priest or, if appropriate, by a cantor or by the choir.
    Thanked by 1Liam
  • a_f_hawkins
    Posts: 3,371
    Mozart's Masses do not provide liturgical authority, or an acceptable precedent.
    [EDIT]The Ritus Servandus of the TLM makes it clear that the celebrant is required to say the Gloria, whatever the choir may or may not do. In the TLM the performance of the liturgy does not depend on the choir at all.

    I believe that in the liturgical dawn years the whole Gloria was sung only by the bishop. The gradual extension to other clergy is a traceable development
    Thanked by 1tomjaw
  • SalieriSalieri
    Posts: 3,177
    Both before and after Trent there were a variety of local practices and customs. It wasn't until The Motu Proprio of Pius X (NB, after Vatican I and papal infallibility) that a rigid uniformity was imposed.

    Many Masses from the Baroque thru the Motu have the Gloria begun by the choir. Some would consider this Organic Development, others, corruption. And one could argue whether in 1902 the Pope had the right to stop a universal custom that had been done for over 300 years. But then, we get into the controversy of Pius X's Breviary, Pius XII's Holy Week, etc.
    Thanked by 2ServiamScores tomjaw
  • a_f_hawkins
    Posts: 3,371
    While I am feeling provocative - TLS is not universal legislation. It was written in Italian precisely because it is an instruction for the diocese of Rome, from the bishop to his episcopal vicar. It does not claim to be liturgical law except for the diocese, and has none of the customary legal phrases which would extend its application elsewhere. However that is not say that the Pope's opinion is without weight.
  • SalieriSalieri
    Posts: 3,177
    However that is not say that the Pope's opinion is without weight.
    But in the heady, post-Vatican I era of Ultra-Ultramontanism, every sniffle of the Pope being considered infallible, The Motu was considered as Universal Legislation, at least in the USA: Some local pronouncements of diocesan musicians (the most prominent being Italian, by the way) in the USA seem to regard TLS as having arrived on the scene much in the same way as the Ten Commandments.

    Thankfully, the ban on no-one except the priest intoning the Gloria and Credo is a moot point in the Novus Ordo: the GIRM permits others to intone it (and the number of parishes, at least in the USA, that sing the Creed can be counted on one hand with three fingers missing).
    Thanked by 1Schönbergian
  • Dixit_Dominus_44
    Posts: 181
    TLS is not universal legislation. It was written in Italian precisely because it is an instruction for the diocese of Rome, from the bishop to his episcopal vicar. It does not claim to be liturgical law except for the diocese, and has none of the customary legal phrases which would extend its application elsewhere.


    You are thinking of the letter accompanying "Tra le sollecitudini" - in fact, "Tra le sollecitudini" was considered a juridical code for the Western Church.

    Thanked by 2madorganist sdtalley3
  • trentonjconn
    Posts: 539
    We sing Credo III in English every Sunday! We may be the only OF parish in the state of Georgia to do so lol.
    Thanked by 4M. Jackson Osborn CHGiffen madorganist sdtalley3
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 8,367
    If, as was said above, the bishop sang the entire Gloria alone, that would then indicate that him singing the incipit before all joined in is a vestige of former practice - all the more reason to preserve the practice. Also, as was noted above, baroque masses typically had the choir begin Gloria without a priest. For some of us the baroque era was hardly a high water mark of liturgical practice.
    Thanked by 2tomjaw CHGiffen
  • madorganist
    Posts: 906
    Gotta love what the old Catholic Encyclopedia says on the matter:
    But in any case the choir may never repeat the celebrant's words. Every Gloria in a figured Mass must begin: "Et in terra pax". The custom — once very common — of ignoring the celebrant and beginning again "Gloria in excelsis" is an unpardonable abomination that should be put down without mercy, if it still exists anywhere.
    My, how times have changed! Still a hard and fast rule for the TLM though.
    Thanked by 2M. Jackson Osborn trentonjconn
  • CHGiffenCHGiffen
    Posts: 5,150
    In my Mass in honor of the Ascension, I specified that the incipit of the Gloria could be intoned by the priest. Here attached is the Latin version.
    2a-Gloria.pdf
    138K
    2a-Gloria.mp3
    4M
    Thanked by 4sdtalley3 M. Jackson Osborn Chris Garton-Zavesky tomjaw
  • ServiamScores
    Posts: 2,721
    While I am feeling provocative - TLS is not universal legislation. It was written in Italian precisely because it is an instruction for the diocese of Rome, from the bishop to his episcopal vicar. It does not claim to be liturgical law except for the diocese, and has none of the customary legal phrases which would extend its application elsewhere. However that is not say that the Pope's opinion is without weight.

    I was doing more reading today, and remembered this remark.

    This is what Pius XI had to say in Divini Cultis :

    In our times too, the chief object of Pope Pius X, in the Motu Proprio [Tra le Sollecitudini] which he issued twenty-five years ago, making certain prescriptions concerning Gregorian Chant and sacred music, was to arouse and foster a Christian spirit in the faithful, by wisely excluding all that might ill befit the sacredness and majesty of our churches.
    ...
    It is, however, to be deplored that these most wise laws in some places have not been fully observed, and therefore their intended results not obtained. We know that some have declared these laws, though so solemnly promulgated, were not binding upon their obedience. Others obeyed them at first, but have since come gradually to give countenance to a type of music which should be altogether banned from our churches. In some cases, especially when the memory of some famous musician was being celebrated, the opportunity has been taken of performing in church certain works which, however excellent, should never have been performed there, since they were entirely out of keeping with the sacredness of the place and of the Liturgy.
    In order to urge the clergy and faithful to a more scrupulous observance of these laws and directions which are to be carefully obeyed by the whole Church, We think it opportune to set down here something of the fruits of Our experience during the last twenty-five years.


    It would seem to me that your assessment that TLS was not promulgated to the universal church is incorrect. Clearly Pius XI thought otherwise. (Mind you, he specifically references TLS, as shown.)
  • madorganist
    Posts: 906
    Whether St. Pius X intended for TLS to bind the universal Church or not, it needs to be kept in mind that he began making exceptions almost immediately, starting with Vienna.
    Thanked by 1tomjaw
  • ServiamScores
    Posts: 2,721
    "An exception does not a rule break."

    I'd like to know more about these exceptions, though. Is there anything you can point me to?
  • a_f_hawkins
    Posts: 3,371
    I have no desire to deny the authority of TLS, or its wisdom.
    Dixit_Dominus_44 correctly pointed out that I was confusing the Motu Proprio and the covering letter. However while the letter says that TLS is to have the force of liturgical law in the diocese of Rome, TLS is a request to others elsewhere to follow its prescriptions and is not legislative. It describes itself as summarising long-standing prescriptions (which it admits are widely/generally ignored) , but those have always varied from place to place. TLS is to my mind better than a piece of legislation, it as a reasoned discussion of guidelines, in an era when far too many thought in terms simply of rules.
    Incidentally, I find it odd that the Vatican website has translations only into Latin, Spanish and Portuguese.
  • madorganist
    Posts: 906
    I'd like to know more about these exceptions, though. Is there anything you can point me to?
    See Fr. Anthony Ruff's Sacred Music and Liturgical Reform, pp. 280–283, footnotes 30–36, which should be available as a preview in Google Books.
    Thanked by 1ServiamScores
  • ServiamScores
    Posts: 2,721
    Fr. Anthony Ruff's Sacred Music and Liturgical Reform

    Well I went yahoogling and so far, no preview. Even the KINDLE version is $75. yeesh.
  • madorganist
    Posts: 906
    Well, there's always ILL. My public library can usually get me just about anything I need. Anyway, here are the pertinent citations:
    image
    image
    image
    Getting back to the topic of the original post, there are Masses from the baroque, classical, and romantic periods with Glorias that begin with "Et in terra" and Credos that begin with "Patrem omnipotentem," as well as other settings that begin with the incipit. A distinction between "Missa solemnis" and "Missa brevis" forms was observed in Austria, which might have had something to do with it (and apparently had little or no correlation with whether the liturgy itself was solemnis, cantata, or pontificalis).
    ruff1.jpg
    748 x 406 - 138K
    ruff2.jpg
    748 x 195 - 81K
    ruff3.jpg
    757 x 106 - 47K
  • CHGiffenCHGiffen
    Posts: 5,150
    "... instruments such as violin, viola, cello, double-bass, flute, clarinet , and trumpet could be permitted in the cathedral ... "

    Alas, poor oboe, bassoon, French horn, trombone, and tuba. I guess Anton Bruckner's lovely Mass No. 2 in E minor would not have been allowed.

    Thanked by 2CCooze sdtalley3
  • madorganist
    Posts: 906
    Alas, poor oboe, bassoon, French horn, trombone, and tuba. I guess Anton Bruckner's lovely Mass No. 2 in E minor would not have been allowed.
    Perhaps you meant to put this in purple? Such as normally implies a broader range of inclusion than the terms that follow it.
  • ServiamScores
    Posts: 2,721
    Whether St. Pius X intended for TLS to bind the universal Church or not, it needs to be kept in mind that he began making exceptions almost immediately, starting with Vienna

    It is clear from what you've quoted above (thank you) that TLS was indeed universal and was perceived as such by Pius X's contemporaries... hence the bishops in Spain and Austria felt the need to petition for dispensations from certain parts of it.

    I can certainly understand why the Austrians wanted exceptions as their musical culture is indeed quite exceptional.

    I find the polish vernacular footnote (along with that of the "high-ranking German prince") fascinating. I've been doing much reading about the council of Trent and its effect on music, and it turns out that a number of countries had long-standing (read: prior to Trent) traditions of permitting vernacular singing on feast days, particularly in the bigger churches. So it turns out that such a provision has centuries of precedent, particularly in Germany and Hungary, among others. In Germany, in particular, this was also permitted at high mass. Now I'm not going to argue the merits or how this culture came to be in the first place; I merely proffer the information. This might explain, however, why protestant hymnody took off like wild-fire; there such a culture of singing already existed—at least to some extent—even within the Catholic church.
  • dad29
    Posts: 2,217
    It could also explain Luther, Hegel, Kant, and (Cardinal) Marx. Food for thought!
    /sarc
    Thanked by 1ServiamScores
  • m_r_taylor
    Posts: 316
    Reading all this I think my gloria will be featuring its own choral opening but with the option of a given separate incipit for the priest should that be necessary.
    Thanked by 2madorganist CHGiffen
  • ServiamScores
    Posts: 2,721
    FWIW, I work at a NO parish, and our priests since a proper incipit, so it still exists in the wild, even within the novus ordo.
Add a Comment