As though the celebrant sitting at the sedilia were the liturgical action rather than the sung proclamation of a sacred text...in the preconciliar liturgy because the singing of the schola was parallel to the liturgical action instead of being the liturgical action
I have never attended a Catholic funeral where this "ideal" was realized. The substitute for real congregational singing is typically an amplified cantor and a mostly silent congregation, which they call active participation.If a musical setting of the ordinary cannot be sung by all, it is probably unsuitable for frequent use in the new Mass.
Perhaps what you are beginning to realize is that some of the music composed for the preconciliar liturgy is not suitable for use in the reformed, postconciliar liturgy.
It is not ideal to use musical settings of the Mass ordinary that the congregation will stand and listen to instead of sing. That worked and was acceptable in the preconciliar liturgy because the singing of the schola was parallel to the liturgical action instead of being the liturgical action.
Now, in the reformed liturgy, the sung ordinary is not parallel to the liturgy, the sung ordinary is the unified liturgical action at that moment. If you are using settings of the Mass ordinary for which "the priest is waiting at the altar for it to be over, and the congregation is standing in their pews doing the same," instead of the priest and the congregation singing those texts, which belong to them to sing at Mass, then you have chosen an unsuitable musical setting for the postconciliar liturgy.
"Now, in the Novus Ordo the priest always has to wait for the chants to be over before he continues." That's because the sung ordinary is the unified liturgical action at that moment. Musical settings of the ordinary should be sung by all, as a general rule and as an ideal. If a musical setting of the ordinary cannot be sung by all, it is probably unsuitable for frequent use in the new Mass.
- At a Novus Ordo funeral (ie: with the body present) there is no "penitential act" so there is no need for anyone to recite anything afterward, however you can sing the introit followed by kyrie (it is permitted by the rubrics) as you describe
Right from Pius X the congregation could, if capable, constitute the schola. SC§50 calls for the elimination of unnecessary duplication, and when the 1965 rubrics applied that to the Gloria etc. Abp Lefebvre wroteIt’s not “parallel” to the “real” liturgical action. Indeed, without a choir there can be no Solemn Mass. Even Vatican II, which did not know the Missal of 1970, says this.
... the priest singing in the traditional melodies the Kyrie, the Gloria, the creed with the faithful; these are so many good reforms ...
Order of Christian Funerals, 158: "if the rite of reception of the body takes place at the beginning of the funeral Mass . . . the usual introductory rites for Mass, including the penitential rite, are omitted." The Kyrie is still sung, however, as provided in the Graduale Romanum. If there is a "rite of reception" (of the body), the Sign of the Cross is done to open this rite, prior to the Introit.
LIBRERIA EDITRICE VATICANA
Ordo Missae
et Ritus servandus
in celebratione Missae Editio typica
In-16°, pp. 72, L. 800 ($ 1,40)
Recens Instructio de sacra Liturgia quasdam induxit variationes rituales in Missam,
integra atque immutata manente eius generali structura. Revisio proinde sive Ordinis
Missae, sive Ritus servandi omnino necessaria erat, ut omnia in cultu divino secundum
ordinem fiant.
The ‘alius cantus congruus’ (mind the change in wording in the 2002 GIRM) is not an excuse to sing anything you want. ‘Congruus’ means that the alternative chant should at least correspond to the liturgical characteristics of the chant it replaces (without stretching its qualities too much to satisfy arbitrary wishes).
Right from Pius X the congregation could, if capable, constitute the schola. SC§50 calls for the elimination of unnecessary duplication, and when the 1965 rubrics applied that to the Gloria etc. Abp Lefebvre wrote
I just compared the 1969 text with the 2002 text; and they seem to be identical. What is the precise change in wording?
Thank you.
Nice prelude, magnificent processional hymn, Introit. Last note still hanging in the air:
Bishop: “Good evening, I’m so glad you all could join us tonight. Before we begin our celebration, I’d like to say a few words [...]”
trentonjconn - it is a mistake to suppose that liturgical practice before 1570 at parish Masses, or indeed at any Mass with a congregation, had a rule of ignoring the congregation.
To participate in the discussions on Catholic church music, sign in or register as a forum member, The forum is a project of the Church Music Association of America.