The Age of the Propers and Lessons
  • gregpgregp
    Posts: 632
    I'm in the process of reading both Christopher Page and Willi Apel, and I have a question for the forum; something I haven't exactly been able to find an exploration of in either book. The following is my own summation; I'd be very pleased for corrections/adjustments/links to better info.

    It appears that the Propers for the Mass of the Church Calendar were relatively fixed by about the 8th century, but since these books are mainly concerned with music, they don't really examine the lessons or readings, except tangentially.

    Are the proper texts of similar, older, or more recent date compared to the readings?
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 8,372
    The propers and the lectionary would seem to have developed as separate cycles with little, if any, intended thematic commonality. It is a certainty that the propers were not, necessarily, compiled to illustrate the lectionary, which itself has been revised through history - probably more than the propers themselves. It seems that when new feasts were added to the kalendar there was more thought given to the propers being in accord with said feast than is the case with the long established cycle of propers. Hence, Aquinas' being comissioned to write or compile propers for Corpus Christi, or the later addition of feasts such as the Assumption or the Immaculate Conception, etc. This leaves open the often ocurring complementarity of the gospel and the communio.

    Nor do I intend by this to, in any way, seem to question the desirability and appropriateness of the propers in the Roman rite. They are part and parcel of it! To omit them is to savage the rite. Even when they are not seemingly related to the lectionary, they often have a strong seasonal (if not day specific) theme, particularly from Advent through Eastertide and the solemnities therein, not to mention the sanctoral cycle.

    Others than I may speak more authoritatively on this very excellent question.
    Thanked by 2gregp CHGiffen
  • melofluentmelofluent
    Posts: 4,160
    Mahrt has a substantial amount of data in "MUSICAL SHAPE" if I recall correctly, Greg. You back in Salinas yet?
  • gregpgregp
    Posts: 632
    Yes, I see that he mentions that we have Lectionaries from the 7th century on (p. 40), and Graduals from the beginning of the 9th century.

    So, it would seem that, as far as the extant documents go, the readings came first (insofar as we can judge).
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 8,372
    Since we have lectionaries that are at least a few centuries older than the propers that we have, we cannot, then, know what complementarity of propers to readings may or may not have existed in earlier times. Perhaps Dr Mahrt, or Fr Columba, could comment on this question. One thing is clear: as new or changed feasts appeared the Church always provided propers for them. At no time was a properless mass even thought of. Nor do I think that the fathers of VII ever thought of such. Every mass has proper antiphons/psalm vv. This has been a liturgical given in the Roman rite for at least nearly fifteen hundred or more years.
    Thanked by 1gregp
  • Maureen
    Posts: 675
    Well, people were pretty much always praying the Psalms all day and night (what turned into the Liturgy of the Hours), and synagogue services probably included psalms, and obviously Temple services did. So one would expect multiple psalms to have always been part of Mass, whether or not they were codified into a particular cycle early or late.

    St. Hippolytus probably expresses an opinion somewhere. That man had opinions on the right way to do everything liturgical.
  • Paul_D
    Posts: 133
    Have you read James McKinnon's book The Advent Project: The Later Seventh-Century Creation of the Roman Mass Proper? It is a fascinating read, like reading a detective novel, and he reconstructs a likely way in which many of the propers were written during a burst of creativity and liturgical energy in Rome in the late 600's. Some points of the book are contested by other scholars, but McKinnon makes a very strong case. Great scholarship, highly recommended.
    Thanked by 1M. Jackson Osborn
  • gregpgregp
    Posts: 632
    Paul, I'd love to read that, but our library here doesn't have it, and I can't afford it right now.

    It occurred to me that, although we can't say definitely that the Propers are as old as the Readings, they are both from at least 1300 years ago. Most people would not dream of substituting alius lectus aptus for the Gospel, so why should the Introit be any different?

    And yes, I know that exact substitution has been done in places; but, I hope, not as many these days.
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,178
    If your library participates in an inter-library loan system, you may have access to rarities you would never expect to see in person.
Add a Comment