What Makes Propers Proper?
-
To my mind this is a central question in the Propers vs. Hymnody discussion (and PLEASE bear in mind that I'm doing a bit of Devil's Advocate here):
What is the intent of Proper texts - is it primarily to resonate with the Word, or to match with the time of the Church year, or the chant tradition? Has the Church said anything official on this? Is there a false dichotomy in choosing one of the above as primary?
The 1974 Graduale Romanum seemed, at least with the Communion antiphons, to take the Word as primary. Thus many older Propers were replaced with chants from the repertory in order to match the Gospel. We now have A,B,C options for most Sundays in the year (again, primarily for Communion, followed by Offertory, followed by Introit in order of frequency). So, Propers are "Proper" to the readings?
On the other hand, many Propers do not seem to have an explicit link to the readings. This is more the case during Ordinary Time, certainly, when there is less of a 'theme' to the season/readings. So - are Propers proper to the day (as a cycle of texts throughout the Church year)? Does a day have liturgical meaning or 'theme' that is independent of the readings?
Some of the rhetoric surrounding the Propers focuses primarily on the day, as in: "this is the text the Church wants proclaimed on the 27th Sunday of OT." But there seems to be some dissonance between that reading and the extensive re-organization of the 1974 Graduale. I can't help wonder if future editions of the Graduale will be more extensive in this regard.
I would just note two practical ramifications here:
When music planning, do I start with the Gospel and look through the repertoire for complementary music (as the Communio arrangement of the Graduale would suggest), or do I start with the Propers and either sing those or choose a similarly-themed musical setting? I know that the easy answer is "start with the Propers - that way you are striking the same balance as the Church." But my question is what methodology is at the heart of music selection for the Church. Sometimes I strongly suspect myself of jumping for the Propers out of laziness more than fidelity - to avoid just such questions.
Second point - after V2 there is now a dissonance between Proper cycles such as those in the Trent Codices, Choralis Constantinus, Byrd Gradualia, and so forth (not to mention the many 'cycles' that are collections of Introits or Offertories), and the re-arranged Graduale Romanum. Does it make sense to do a complete Byrd Proper cycle for a feast, even if the Proper for Communion is now different? Is the Byrd still "proper" to the feast, even though it is no longer the official Proper for the Church? Are there degrees of "properness" (i.e. is a polyphonic work that exactly matches the Gospel less proper than a Graduale Romanum chant that does not link to the Gospel)? Do we as church musicians somehow craft liturgical properness by fidelity to the Word, or is properness a liturgically independent function (that often but not always explicitly 'lines up' with the readings)? -
And just to lay a couple of personal cards on the table - when music planning I try to do both approaches above (starting from the Gospel and starting from the Proper). The frustration is that I rarely meet in the middle from those two starting points.
-
The Second Half (Part 2) of "Everything you ever wanted to know about Hymns" has some quotes from Fortescue and others that you may wish to consider when treating this question.
-
This is why I oppose the 3-year lectionary.
I have much more to say, but not a lot of time to say it, so I thought I'd just throw that out there. -
JMO - have to run to a meeting, but really quick:
You make a strong case against choosing music based on the readings as a norm. Do you think the re-arrangement of the 1974 Graduale based on the readings has a bearing on this - or on forming our priorities? -
You make a strong case against choosing music based on the readings as a norm.
I was not trying to do so, but perhaps I failed (it wouldn't be the first time!).
What I attempted to do was give some perspective on "why" we do what we do, choose what we choose, etc. and some background, as well. -
One very important distinction needs to be made.
Propers are not only particular texts- they are particular music, incl form. Each was chosen over time to suit a particular liturgical action or meditation. Propers are quite different in form and feel. A communion does not sound like an offertory does not sound like and introit, etc. Each type of proper is its own genre.
Its clear to me that many of those in charge of reforming the liturgy were coming from the perspective of most commonly praying the low mass, or perhaps simplified chants at high mass. Had they regularly lived and prayed the Gregorian propers in the context of a sung or solemn mass, I strongly feel the reform regarding chant would have been different.
And yet, this restoration of the Gregorian propers is precisely the aim to which we musicians serving the Church are called, both before and after the Council.
Without a doubt the 3 year lectionary and the resulting stretching out the propers made our task of restoring sacred music more difficult. This is one reason why I am not a fan of the 3 year lectionary as well.
So, in answer your question regarding where to start when planning music for a mass, I recommend starting first with the particular feast and traditions surrounding it, including the season, then look at the gospel, then practical considerations, etc.Thanked by 1CHGiffen -
So, Propers are "Proper" to the readings?
What a great and provocative question. My gut says no, they are proper to the feast. But I would love to hear an answer from someone more knowledgeable than I. Ideally I'd like to hear an answer that would be inclusive of both forms of the Roman Rite.Thanked by 1CHGiffen -
They are often proper to the readings. The ABC are not "options" but denote Year A, Year B, Year C which may or may not have different readings for the same Sunday. Quite often the Gospel reading is the same event just from a different gospel.
I personally like the new lectionary. Especially if the preacher has the sense to make mention of the same readings from other years and talks about how this particular reading provides a slightly different emphasis. -
I concur with HM, they are more often than NOT, ordered to the readings of the cycles. And when some appear not to be at first blush, I often pray them through and have found insights through the antiphons and even the varied assignment of verses that reflect (as in complement/contrast) well in any case.
-
Are propers proper to the readings?
I guess my feeling is, looking through the lens of continuity, it seems the propers AND readings are both ordered to the particular feast. It's worth noting that both propers and readings are 'proper' to the day. Other prayers, too, for that matter.
Propers being ordered to the readings could imply that propers come after the readings in order of importance. I'm not sure if that's accurate in the traditional or current (more likely) understanding of the normative (sung) form of mass.
Furthermore, if that is the case in the OF but not the EF, would it constitute another rupture, or an organic development?
Are propers proper to the readings? Again I say this is a question that deserves a long look. Perhaps Prof. Mahrt, or someone else with decades of swimming in both streams (what we now call EF and OF) could chime in here?
-
Sometimes I strongly suspect myself of jumping for the Propers out of laziness more than fidelity - to avoid just such questions.
I think that this kind of 'laziness' is a virtue rather than a vice. Oh, if all priests, MCs, and organists/choirmasters were so 'lazy'! Church has given you the Graduale precisely to spare you from making choices.
Of course, you can have a healthy scholarly curiosity why the texts and melodies are arranged so and not otherwise. This is a different question.
Do you mean by 'Word' readings (Prophecy, Epistle, Gospel)? They, too, are 'propers' and are, like orations, introit, responsorial psalm, etc., i.e., all the changing parts of the Mass, arranged as a set (a Mass formulary) for the given calendar day or special occasion (like votive Masses).
That said, in the OF there is still a lot of officially allowed choices, which makes life complicated. Therefore, for introit, offertory, and communion most choirs sing whatever they have bothered to learn. But if you want to use the Graduale at all the most reasonable would be to sing what is given there for that particular Mass and not to think too much.Thanked by 1ryand -
I like the third suggestion (since Kirchenmusik is only willing to do a bit of Devil's Advocate): the propers exist to make the treasury of sacred music available, including an extant, extensive and apt chant repertoire and polyphonic motets. Among the blessings of V2 were making available to Sunday musicians of many Lenten weekday chants, used to fill in the new Ordinary Time pericopes. That and the 4th option! Long live the middle ground, and perhaps it's as well that the choir's work is indeed second in importance.
A more serious answer to MaryAnn's question is suggested by the instructions in the Gregorian Missal. Sometimes the choice of communion options is permissive, as in De fructu or Qui manducat for this Sunday. When there is a choice of Gospels, as for Lent III, a more perscriptive instruction usually follows for the communion: "Or, when the Gospel of the Samaritan woman is read, Qui biberit". The transfer of Optimam partem from Assumption to the more logical OT 16C seems likewise to be motivated by the new reading.
-
Andris - 'not thinking too much' is not a responsible option. Faith seeking understanding and all that...
If we care about the Propers, we need to have a strong and well-reasoned argument for using them beyond "the Church says so." First and foremost because the Church does not quite "say so" - rather; she holds up Propers as an ideal and first choice, while providing many other licit options.
One of the first questions that comes to my and others' minds is "in what sense are the Propers proper?" This affects the argument for using them, in a broad sense, and in those cases when we are transitioning or taking steps toward the ideal, the answer can inform our choices and priorities within the other options. It's not just a scholarly question - when I need (as most of us do) to choose from the other options at times, is the starting point the Gospel, or the Proper? That is a practical consideration.
Yes, the readings and psalm are 'proper' to the day. But my understanding of the three-year cycle is that the OT reading and Resp. psalm were chosen to harmonize with the Gospel. -
>> 'not thinking too much' is not a responsible option.
That depends on what one is thinking too much about.
Should a priest spend a lot of time thinking about whether to use the Roman Missal or some random prayers he just made up? Should he spend a lot of time deciding whether to wear the Purple vestments in Advent, or the Green ones that bring out his eyes? Should lectors spend a lot of time thinking about what passages to read from Scripture?
(Goodness, I could go on.... Should wedding couples spend a lot of time thinking about what to say for their vows? Should little old ladies who pray the rosary spend a lot of time thinking about what prayer to say on each bead? Should I spend a lot of time thinking about what I could add to my grandfather's waffle recipe to make it more meaningful to modern tastebuds?)
>> the readings and psalm are 'proper' to the day. But my understanding of the three-year cycle is that the OT reading and Resp. psalm were chosen to harmonize with the Gospel.
In some cases. When it was possible.
>>"in what sense are the Propers proper?"
In the same sense that the Lectionary Readings are Proper, with the small addendum that something else MAY be used. (Not that something else SHOULD be used.) -
Because I am stuck (for now) using music from one of the big 3 publishers, when I choose a hymn I first read the readings, Psalm and Alleluia verse to try to get a message of the day. Then I read the missal antiphon for the particular part intro, off, comm, Then I will turn to the GR and see if it all still makes sense. It all seems kind of backwards to me, but that is the way I do it.
I never find exact music that fits the the above but I get close sometimes.
After doing the Communion Antiphon for a year my pastor has opened the door for the introit and Offetory Antiphons. Success comes a bit at a time. -
Studying the typical texts of the Roman Rite (i.e. including the propers,) they do not begin with the question, “What readings are we proclaiming today?”; rather, the basis is “What mystery is the Church celebrating at this Eucharist?”
Therefore, the tightness between the readings and the proper texts is proportional to the significance of the day or season. On particular feasts and during certain seasons, a certain unity is evident, because the Church wishes to point us towards a particular mystery (or theme if you prefer).
However, during ordinary time, the Church does not see the need to indicate that a particular mystery is being celebrated in the readings. Therefore the Proper texts in ordinary time tend to explore a wealth of scriptural themes. Indeed, if I limit the “theme” of a Mass to a “theme” that I have chosen from the readings, and restrict the texts sung in the liturgy to this “theme”, this places an undue emphasis on my personal take on the scriptures of the day, and limits the richness of the overall scriptural variety in the texts of the Mass.
I am also of the opinion that the modern mind’s obsession with order, and an Enlightenment mentality that sees the liturgy from a didactic perspective, make us want to concoct perfect liturgies where everything is so neatly tied to the “theme” that one wishes to expound upon. I would rather have a certain messiness in the order of things in ordinary time, as in ordinary life, and let the Spirit tie things together, and not be in such control over the mystery of encountering God in the liturgy.Thanked by 1Jenny -
Choosing the music to match the readings almost always kills the singing of hymns as Catholics do not have a large enough core repertoire in almost all parishes to make it work.
The huge amount of Christmas carols once were great to have and for 6 weeks after Christmas we'd sing them. Now 4 on Christmas and a few more the following week or so and we are done with them.
There should be a huge Advent collection of hymns/carols...but there is not since the church encouraged lack of emphasis then and in Lent on the beauty of music...
Ordinary time is a place where the faith is taught through hymns. -
Charles -
Since the Propers are implicitly or explicitly scriptural in their texts, I think it is safe to say that connections to the readings and spiritual edification could always be found in them.
But you and hartleymartin seem to think that harmony with the readings IS a general characteristic of Propers.
Random example - flipped to a Sunday in OT: 21st Sunday. Introit is "Inclina, Domine" - "Incline your ear to me, O Lord . . . have mercy on me O Lord, for unto you do I cry all the day."
The gospels are neatly summarized by the Alleluia verse (another interesting Proper I forgot to mention before - here arranged to match the A,B,C Gospels exactly!):
A - You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church
B - It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is of no avail
C - For the Lord is a great God; a great king over all the earth
Now of course, a cry to the Lord for mercy is always appropriate - and always has value in connection with the Gospel. I just don't see any explicit connection between the Introit and any of these Gospels. Same for the Offertory - "With expectation I have waited for the Lord, and He has cast His look upon me . . ."
Is it just a scholarly question? NO!!
A "Proper-first" approach (without being able to actually do the first option for whatever pastoral/practical reason) would lead me toward an entrance choral piece - perhaps the Mudd "Let Thy Merciful Ear, O Lord". OR if picking a congregational piece I might aim for the Taize "O Lord Hear my Prayer" or something 'forgiveness' or 'petition' themed.
A Gospel first approach would lead me in different directions - perhaps "The Church's One Foundation" for an A hymn; "Come Down O Love Divine" for year B; or "Christ is the KIng" for C. How could I avoid the temptation to program a "Tu es Petrus" setting in year A, instead of the Offertory chant?
Just top-of-my-head examples, but I hope the general point is clear. -
Paul D -
I was writing mine when you posted. EXCELLENT concise answer - just the kind of thing I was hoping for.
Adam -
I understand what you're saying. HOWEVER, for most of your examples there are not other licit options. There are not four categories of things we can choose from for the scripture readings. There are (however much we want to bemoan it) four categories of licit options for the processional music at Mass. When we choose from the other options, what informs our choice? Proper first or Gospel? (when there is not an explicit link between the two - again, more common in OT rather than at major feasts).Thanked by 1Paul_D -
Choosing the music to match the readings almost always kills the singing of hymns as Catholics do not have a large enough core repertoire in almost all parishes to make it work
FNJ, I'm sure you didn't intend to give aid and comfort with the above, but if you think from the perspective of some of our more well-known colleagues in the "loyal opposition," they would counter that, verily, a core repertoire doth exist in the realm of "alius cantus aptus." They would likely add "You folks (CMAA etc.) just don't want to admit song (as vehicles for text) as of equal worth."
But I agree with your perspective if the emphasis of your statement results from the qualification "in almost all parishes to make (hymn singing) work." That unfortunate state generally is the result of the BAD sort of laziness on the part of local musicians and clergy. -
But you and hartleymartin seem to think that harmony with the readings IS a general characteristic of Propers.
Freund Kirchenmusik, I did not think, say or infer what you seem to think in that quote. I well know the disputational POV's on the origin and purposes of the antiphons assigned to the calendar and lectionary/missal. But thanks for the corrective. -
This is only my opinion:
If you are in the process of moving away from lectionary-centered hymns to eventually chanted (or otherwise actual) Propers, my suggestion would be to implement one Proper "slot" (like the Communion) and do it consistently every week (sounds like you are doing that), and then use a Lectionary-centered approach for the non-Propers.
Next year, add another Proper (Offertory), and continue with a Lectionary-centered approach for the Entrance and the Recessional and any other music. Then the next year, replace the Entrance Hymn with the Introit. You still have two or three "slots" (Recessional, Post-Communion Hymn, and potentially and Communion Hymn after the Antiphon) after which to place lectionary-centered music.Thanked by 1Gavin -
Adam, I can name that tune it one note: the "hidden proper, Offertorio," remains so and Kathleen Pluth's (not GIA's) "Hymn of the Day" takes that slot due to its proximity after the Liturgy of the Word transitioning to...
-
Charles - no offense intended :)
I was just going off of this: "I concur with HM, they are more often than NOT, ordered to the readings of the cycles. "
That's why I said "general characteristic" rather than "universal property" of the Proper rep. -
No worries.
-
I still wonder if we are missing the obvious-readings are proper to the feast (or votive) of the day.
The mystery to be celebrated determines the readings and the propers. That's our starting point, no? -
However in ordinary Time it can be difficult to discern what that mystery (theme) is.
The last few weeks was obviously the bread of life discourse but then what?
Is there a guide that tells us what the mystery of the week is or do we need to know by taking courses on the Liturgy? -
In the Fall 2007 Sacred Music (p. 21-22), Prof. Mahrt summarized an article about the communion antiphons, which sheds light on how systematic or not is their arrangement:Advent and Christmas: texts from Old Testament prophets (including David) in a restrained and lyrical musical style.
Post-Christmas: narrative texts drawn from the gospels of the day sometimes in an extravagant musical style.
Lenten Weekdays: an original series of communion antiphons,dating from before the time that Thursdays were celebrated liturgically and in consecutive psalm-number order; some of the series have had the psalmodic textsreplaced with texts from the gospel of the day.
Lenten Sundays and Holy Week: mainly psalmodic texts, but with a few gospel texts of striking depth and dramatic value.
Easter Season: New Testament texts, both epistles and gospels, the gospel texts being from the gospel of the day, but the epistles not from the epistle of the day.
For the time from Ascension to Pentecost, most of these New Testament pieces are actually borrowed from responsories of the night office.
Sundays after Pentecost: a series of texts centered upon themes of Eucharist, sacrifice, and harvest, placed in psalm-number order (though they are not consecutively numbered psalms), but including texts from the wisdom literature and the gospels; the series begins with four of the replaced psalm-based communions from the weekdays of Lent, proceeds to a series of Eucharist, sacrifice, and harvest texts, with a few concerning justice toward the end.
-
Donr,
See my third paragraph above; ordinary time has its own character. The logic is this: ordinary time is not the time the Church says, today’s mystery of the faith is this, next week’s mystery of the faith is that, etc. Fundamentally, in ordinary time, the Church is doing a continuous reading of the Gospel and Epistles, without designating this Sunday as “The Sunday of Jesus’ walk on the water” or something like that. Like the Luminous Mystery, Ordinary Time is something like the mystery of the Proclamation of the Kingdom, spread out over many weeks.
Therefore, since the typical chants don’t worry too much about reflecting the readings, I wouldn’t worry if the hymns substituted for those chants aren’t closely tied to the readings.
It is the task of the priest in his homily to elaborate on a spiritual theme which is drawn from the readings. The musician should not feel obliged to do the same. I know that people do derive great satisfaction from choosing hymns that relate to the readings, and it can reinforce a point made in the readings or homily. Some of that is great. But too much of it can also take away the “given-ness” of the liturgy, and make it seem too much like something of our own making. And as I said above, it can flatten the breadth of the richness of scripture if we try to make every Mass (particularly in ordinary time) too much about one theme.
Thanked by 1donr -
kirchenmusik wrote: If we care about the Propers, we need to have a strong and well-reasoned argument for using them beyond "the Church says so."
Another way to look at it is that we care about the propers because we want to pray the way the Church prays, as mentioned in the opening of this thread. Just as the Church has arranged scripture readings and prayers, so there are chants arranged as part of the prayer of the Mass, and we want to be part of that. As the Church has heard and read the Gospel of the ten lepers on the 13th Sunday after Pentecost, so has the Church heard and sung the Introit Respice Domine, and it's a joy and comfort to me to be part of that when I attend Mass. Also a source of reflection.
If you don't know it, "Chants of the Vatican Gradual" by Dom Dominic Johner for occasional mentions of connections between the chants and the readings (it's a CMAA reprint). Of course, his connections apply to the traditional Missal/Gradual. It may take a long time before we are familiar enough with the post-1970 Missal/Gradual to see the connections.
But I don't think we'll find a rationale or program for the old Missal that says, "here's what the propers mean and how they were chosen," except as a result of scholarship and inference as in the Mahrt article. For the new Missal, perhaps there are records or meeting minutes in the archives that can shed light on the selection.
(excellent discussion, by the way) -
Well, I should note that it is quite possible to get meta with the course readings of the Gospel in Ordinary Time. Often, in the sections of the Gospels that treat the public ministry of our Lord, there are overarching or metathemes under which several Gospel pericopes fit. One can even find the Sundays of Ordinary Time group under such metathemes. One might then see how the propers provide underscoring or counterpoint to them. Et cet.
I tend to prefer what this approach invites: rather than analyzing each Sunday and each individually - a photo, shall we say - I prefer to looking at an arc of them - a movie, shall we say. -
Yes, David Sullivan! I've wanted to somehow echo your sentiment about the discussions here currently. Very vital and helpful. Devoid of rancor. Elevated but not pretentious. I do miss many voices old of yore not chiming in, you know who you are! If my blovation needs moving for you to come back on board, I'll gladly yield the keyboard.
Welcome to the MusicaSacra Forum!
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.
Categories
- All Discussions21,349
- General Music Discussion7,695
- Job Openings1,350
- Management of Music Programs834
- Choral Matters522
- Church Documents and Rubrics511
- CMAA Notes291
- Events661
- For Newcomers: Read First23
- Sacred Polyphony531
- Hymnody834
- Gregorian Chant: General2,598
- ↳ Graduale Romanum and Liber Usualis356
- ↳ Graduale Simplex55
- ↳ Semiology58
- Vernacular Plainsong678
- Anglican Use and Anglican Chant66
- Organ, Other Instruments and Repertoire417
- New Composition/Works in Progress1,224
- Recordings223
- Music for Hispanic Ministry153
- Music Education: Children206
- Music Education: General216
- News Items242
- Positions Wanted58
- General Discussion: Catholicism727
- Amusements172
- General Discussion1,003
- Opinions114