Its always nice when polyphonic masses are presented in a context of plainchant as in the liturgy. That was one of the nicest epistles I've heard sung. And a Mediaeval variant of the Tonus Solemnior preface, too.

Goodness- why not just have a Mass.

Interesting question, particularly having the priest's parts done by an actor. However, it's not in a Mass, so it's fine. The problem then is that you would have to get a dispensation to do the Liturgy of the Word, the Credo, and the Sanctus in Latin and without participation by the faithful. So it's what I think Ben pointed out accurately that it puts everything in the right context. It makes more musical sense to me, than just a wonderful Mass setting--the whole thing was conceived along those lines.

On top of that, I just think the whole concert was beautiful.

I also have to wonder how often a Mass sounded like that--perhaps some Cathedral or monastery where a priest with a good voice really put the whole thing across. But I suspect it was more hit or miss than this, which is all hit.

Come to Immaculate Conception in Cleveland. We have not sung the Machaut 'Messe de Notre Dame,' but we have sung others such as Busnoys L'homme arme, the Missa Tornacensis, Faugues Je suis dans la mer, the Barcelona and Toulouse Masses, mass parts by Binchois, and others from the transitional period between the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, as masses on regular Sundays or holy days.

They all need to be tweaked - in general, the Sanctus is far too long to fit in the TLM; the Credos are without exception too long so we sing a chant Credo; and other parts may have to be done alternatim so that the choir and music are not keeping the celebrant waiting or making themselves the center of attention. Musicologists would have a fit at someone messing with the beautiful music, but in being used for what it was really intended for, it comes back to life beautifully, and (if the operation is done very carefully) a few adjustments are a small price to pay for that. Besides, the whole idea of improvisation and variation on composed music was much more alive in those centuries than in the Romantic and subsequent eras, when the composer was venerated as some sort of hallowed being whose smallest indication had to be followed to the letter. The idea that the music is the handmaiden of the liturgy necessitates changing things in places, but then the congruence of the liturgy and the music is even more effective.

Sorry for the digression, but what I meant to convey was that the music of the Middle Ages and Renaissance is again being used for the original intention and not just for concerts - and we are glad to be participating in bringing it back to its home.

Scholars greater than I can correct me, but the EF doesn't exist in English. The most we ever get in the vernacular are the Epistle and Gospel read in English (after the Latin), and the homily in English. I even remember the occasional sermon at St. Philomena in Latin - the congregation there was more erudite than at present (fewer people and a lot of university professors) - but those were N.O. Latin masses (it was before the indult).

Actually, in the OF the Liturgy of the Word, including the Readings, Gradual and Alleluia, and the Credo can be sung in Latin without the bishop's permission. You don't need the bishop's permission to do what the Liturgical books tell you to do. Don't forget that the normative form of the OF is in Latin, ad orientem with the choir singing the propers from the Graduale Romanum or in Polyphony; and possibly the ordinary sung by the Choir in Polyphony as well. The use of the vernacular and the position of the priest versus populum are only an option.

Also if a bishop requires permission for the EF to be used in his diocese, after the promulgation of Summorum Pontificum and Universae Ecclesiae he is not thinking with the mind of the Church, which freely allows every Latin Rite priest to use the EF if he so chooses.

I'm not sure I would go so far as to say that the "normative" form of the OF is "ad orientem." I even think there is some evidence to suggest exactly the opposite.

I keep forgetting to say it's Kenneth. There's a discussion of the 1965 translation on another thread, and a discussion of it on another website. That's what I meant.

Kenneth

Now, everyone is filling in details that I was hazy about. And, yes, of course, whatever the ritual books say is automatically licit. I had thought, however, that even with the indult, the preference is for the Liturgy of the Word to be in the vernacular. I may have misunderstood, and sounds like some more documents for me to digest.

There have been a couple of Mass settings unearthed from that 1965-1970 period. I do believe the plainchant Gloria that they use at the Shrine comes from that era, but I would have to look it up.

See? Open my mouth...on the other hand, that's not what others are saying. There isn't much interest in it in any case, but I thought the Word was to be in Englush no matter what. Have to go look it up.

"Reread the Indult" -- er, was that first person past tense, or second person imperative?

"We say the mass according to the Roman missal , but we say it in English." If you are really talking about the Extraordinary Form (Tridentine Mass) (i.e., with prayers at the foot of the altar, Last Gospel, only one Eucharistic prayer, etc.), then you are definitely doing it wrong.

"I assume the 1962 missiles says nothing about language, because language is just assumed." It's not really either one. They say, "here are the words to be said," and those words happen to be given in Latin.

Ah, well I have asked these other people what they are talking about. I mean the NO is in English. Reread in past tense--unless I am in this kind of situation, it's not a document I reread regularly. Veritatis Splendor, Evangelium Vitae, yes. This one, no.

Kenneth:

The Roman Catholic Mass, and the Liturgy of the Hours (Divine Office) is in Latin.

It is sometimes in something other than Latin.
It never HAS to be something else, and in some cases (the EF) it cannot be anything else.

The Propers around the Machaut mass are from the feast of the Assumption of Mary.

Thanks for the references. I assumed of course it was A Mass for Our Lady, but it is not like there are a few settings for those.

As for the "in Latin," of course, there is One Mass, and it is in Latin. I personally would prefer that every Cathedral have a Latin NO in a prominent position on Sunday and that every parish have a High Mass every Sunday with what I call "the communal chants." The basic chants. Joseph Ratzinger has expressed a desire that all children by formed in those chants because of the commonness of international Masses these days. That is quibbling over what I meant. But of course, that NEVER happens on this list.

However, Joseph Ratzinger is emphatic that in normal practice, the Liturgy of the Word HAS TO BE in the vernacular. To contradict your model of succinctness, he means it HAS TO BE in the vernacular. You can argue with him.

In rereading the indult, he emphasized that a public EF must be with a "stable group," that is, a group well formed enough to understand what it is going on. While I have been blessed by the one licit EF that I have been to, I was a little lost. (I hastily added "the one" because I was thinking I had been to a few but in fact I went with a young friend who had been sucked in SPPX out of pastoral concern. I found it weird, and his uncle couldn't stand it. It's a prominent Irish family in the Jesuit circles in our town, and, while he could not be more Latin loving and pre-conciliar in his tastes, he found it badly done.)