It seems to be the practice here that only the server makes any response. Is this not the required practice? Should we all be singing or saying the responses too? (Talking about the EF)

One thing to watch out for is that the different tones have different responses, e.g. the solemn preface tone and the ferial preface tone. When we started having Sung Masses on weekdays during Lent, we made an announcement that people needed to hold back and listen to the choir until they learned the difference, because they were enthusiastically singing the solemn tone instead.

BTW, Bonnie, according to De Musica Sacra in Chapter III, under the heading "More Perfect Worship," the faithful are encouraged to make these responses at a Sung Mass, which they may learn in stages, called the three degrees of participation:

The more noble form of the Eucharistic celebration is the solemn Mass because in it the solemnities of ceremonies, ministers, and sacred music all combine to express the magnificence of the divine mysteries, and to impress upon the minds of the faithful the devotion with which they should contemplate them. Therefore, we must strive that the faithful have the respect due to this form of worship by properly participating in it in the ways described below.

25. In solemn Mass there are three degrees of the participation of the faithful:

a) First, the congregation can sing the liturgical responses. These are: Amen; Et cum spiritu tuo; Gloria tibi, Domine; Habemus ad Dominum; Dignum et justum est; Sed libera nos a malo; Deo gratias. Every effort must be made that the faithful of the entire world learn to sing these responses.

b) Secondly, the congregation can sing the parts of the Ordinary of the Mass: Kyrie, eleison; Gloria in excelsis Deo; Credo; Sanctus-Benedictus; Agnus Dei. Every effort must be made that the faithful learn to sing these parts, particularly according to the simpler Gregorian melodies. But if they are unable to sing all these parts, there is no reason why they cannot sing the easier ones: Kyrie, eleison; Sanctus-Benedictus; Agnus Dei; the choir, then, can sing the Gloria, and Credo.

c) Thirdly, if those present are well trained in Gregorian chant, they can sing the parts of the Proper of the Mass. This form of participation should be carried out particularly in religious congregations and seminaries.5

- See more at: http://www.adoremus.org/1958Intro-sac-mus.html#anchor36282165

There are four degrees of participation of the faithful possible at the Low Mass:

a) First, the congregation may make the easier liturgical responses to the prayers of the priest: Amen; Et cum spiritu tuo; Deo gratias; Gloria tibi Domine; Laus tibi, Christe; Habemus ad Dominum; Dignum et justum est; Sed libera nos a malo;
b) Secondly, the congregation may also say prayers, which, according to the rubrics, are said by the server, including the Confiteor, and the triple Domine non sum dignus before the faithful receive Holy Communion;
c) Thirdly, the congregation may say aloud with the celebrant parts of the Ordinary of the Mass: Gloria in excelsis Deo; Credo; Sanctus-Benedictus; Agnus Dei;
d) Fourthly, the congregation may also recite with the priest parts of the Proper of the Mass: Introit, Gradual, Offertory, Communion. Only more advanced groups who have been well trained will be able to participate with becoming dignity in this manner.

32. Since the Pater Noster is a fitting, and ancient prayer of preparation for Communion, the entire congregation may recite this prayer in unison with the priest in low Masses; the Amen at the end is to be said by all. This is to be done only in Latin, never in the vernacular.

33. The faithful may sing hymns during low Mass, if they are appropriate to the various parts of the mass.

- See more at: http://www.adoremus.org/1958Intro-sac-mus.html#anchor36282165

True that - from a philosophical perspective, that is, de jure; however, if the priest is whispering the prayers so that only the server can hear them, and the server whispers the responses so that only the priest can here, than the people are ipso facto barred from making the responses because they can't hear them.

Yep, this is true. "No audible responses from the pew," is what we were told was the official diocesan policy at the EF Low Mass, though it has since been changed, thankfully.

That's dumb.

It is defensible when one is viewing the promotion of liturgical piety a la the Liturgical Movement, as fostered by Guerranger, Pius X, and others - even in the Anglican Oxford Movement - however, there remains in the EF world, particularly in these United States, a mentality I have coined 'Nostalgianism' which dictates that the celebration of Mass in the Extraordinary Form must only be celebrated as it would have been in 1954, in a rural parish, with Saint Basil's Hymnbook (if you're lucky).

Therefore: a priest immersed in the Way of the Liturgical Movement would "direct" the sacred liturgy in his parish according to the principles of the Liturgical Movement; a priest immersed in the 1950's AmeriCatholic Low Mass/Rossini-Propers High Mass will "direct" the sacred liturgy in his parish according to those principles.

So, when it comes to Liturgy, the pastor reigns supreme, and can have the people and schola in his parish do whatever he wants them to do. Gee, that sounds familiar...

Jahaza, it's my understanding that the degrees of participation in De Musica Sacra were meant to be used as a consecutive program for every parish in the world to follow and implement and not as a pick-and-choose list of options or mere suggestions. I don't think it follows the spirit of that section of the document which was to present a method of achieving "more perfect worship" if a pastor decides, 'We'll just implement the first degree," with no intention of ever moving on.

If that were the case, there would never be any standardization of worship. Some parishes would be first degree, some would be second degree, some would be third degree and some would probably never get to first base degree at all!

Also, it would seem that following the clearly expressed prescriptions of De Musica Sacra cannot be characterized as a slavish adherence to an ideological movement but rather as obedience to the Church's liturgical documents. Like it or not, Pope Pius XII enshrined the ideals of the early Liturgical Movement in De Musica Sacra, which was an Instruction issued by the Prefect of the Sacred Congregation of Rites, Cardinal Cicognani.

This is the statement at the end of the document (which remains the most complete legislation on the Extraordinary Form still in force in the Church):

This instruction on sacred music, and the sacred liturgy was submitted to His Holiness Pope Pius XII by the undersigned Cardinal Prefect of the Sacred Congregation of Rites. His Holiness deigned to give his special approval and authority to all its prescriptions. He also commanded that it be promulgated, and be conscientiously observed by all to whom it applies.

Anything contrary to what is herein contained is no longer in force.

Issued at Rome, from the office of the Sacred Congregation of Rites, on the feast of Saint Pius X, Sept. 3, 1958.

C. Card. Cicognani, Prefect
+ A. Carinci, Archbp. of Seleucia, Secretary

- See more at: http://www.adoremus.org/1958Intro-sac-mus.html#sthash.iaIcsQ8d.dpuf

Thanks - very informative

Basic responses: learned by attending Mass where someone (anyone) who knows what to sing, sings.

Ordinaries: Sometimes learned by repeated hearing. Sometimes music cards are available.

Propers: Not normally sung by the lay faithful, although nothing in theory prevents this -- imagine a congregation of former Episcopalians singing the Propers using Organum for the antiphons and formerly Anglican chant for the verses during the Introit and Communion.

Remember that the posture of the assembled lay faithful is governed by tradition and custom, not by rubrics (as it is in the Ordo of Paul VI).

Very interesting perspective, Tomjaw, but I'm fairly certain that encouraging the faithful to practice their own individual devotions during Mass does not represent the wishes of the preconciliar Popes and the heart and mind of the Church in her preconciliar documents on the liturgy, and if you would like quotes from those documents, I'll be happy to produce them.

I know Pope Pius XII in Mediator Dei conceded that for those not capable of reading a Missal in the vernacular it was fine for that person to say the Rosary silently, but he wasn't making that a blanket recommendation semper, ubique et ab omnibus since he clearly desired the active participation of the faithful in the sacred mysteries. From Mediator Dei:

"Therefore, they are to be praised who, with the idea of getting the Christian people to take part more easily and more fruitfully in the Mass, strive to make them familiar with the "Roman Missal," so that the faithful, united with the priest, may pray together in the very words and sentiments of the Church. They also are to be commended who strive to make the liturgy even in an external way a sacred act in which all who are present may share. This can be done in more than one way, when, for instance, the whole congregation, in accordance with the rules of the liturgy, either answer the priest in an orderly and fitting manner, or sing hymns suitable to the different parts of the Mass, or do both, or finally in high Masses when they answer the prayers of the minister of Jesus Christ and also sing the liturgical chant."

De Musica Sacra, issued 11 years later, represents Pope Pius XII"s even further defined, clearly expressed mandate that the entire Church begin teaching the people "to say and sing in Latin those parts of the Mass that pertain to them." If you read the closing paragraph of De Musica Sacra which I posted above, it leaves no doubt that this was what was to be done. I think it's fair to say, as I said before, that Pope Pius XII, who was at the end of his pontificate by 1958, was enshrining into law the ideals of the early Liturgical Movement.

The prescriptions of De Musica Sacra remain the most complete legislation on the Extraordinary Form to this day so I think we can conclude that even though the faithful are free to practice their own private devotions during the EF Mass, it is the express desire of the Church that their priests teach them the three degrees of participation. I will venture out on a limb and respectfully suggest that it might be possible that EF priests are mandated to do so by the liturgical laws of the Church.

The fact that this mandate was repeated and emphasized in Sacrosanctum Concilium in 1963, five years later, when the 1962 Missale Romanum was still in force reinforces that conclusion. That's my take on it, anyway, for whatever it's worth.

While it's certainly true that if you want to go to Mass and pray your Rosary in your pew, you're certainly free to do so, it's also true that the clear teaching and preferences of the popes for roughly the last 100 years is that the more perfect form of participation be that "the people sing or say in Latin those parts of the Mass that pertain to them."

Lastly, I do not see on what possible basis a priest who offers the EF Latin Mass could tell people that they are not allowed to make the responses based on the immutable principle of Church law that a lower authority cannot forbid what a higher authority has already permitted.

I hope to respond in a longer way when I get a chance, but the language of De Musica Sacra is permissive... "may" not mandating.

If these degrees of participation are a progressive program to be universally implemented, you are breaking the rules if you are not actively working to have every person in your congregation eventually sing all the offertory chants!

But what it actually says is, "Therefore, we must strive that the faithful have the respect due to this form of worship by properly participating in it in the ways described below."

These are what the document says they are... ways that the people *may* participate. It mandates lays out that "Every effort must be made that the faithful of the entire world learn to sing these responses [of the first degree]." But in the second degree it specifies a broader repetoire, but acknowledges that this may not be possible for all congregations (and remember that this can be moral as well as musical impossibility). The third degree is suggested particularly for religious houses and seminaries... I don't think it's a realistic parish program in most places!

The document, rightly allows for local conditions to rule its implementation.

Going on to Low Mass, the document is clear that the most perfect form of participation is the making of the responses with the server. But it is also clear that while "[t]hose who ... pray with priest in the very words of the Church, are worthy of special praise," "not equally capable of correctly understanding the rites, and liturgical formulas; nor does everyone possess the same spiritual needs; nor do these needs remain constant in the same individual. Therefore, these people may find a more suitable or easier method of participation in the Mass when "they meditate devoutly on the mysteries of Jesus Christ, or perform other devotional exercises, and offer prayers which, though different in form from those of the sacred rites, are in essential harmony with them".

That italicized portion... that's talking about things like praying the Rosary at Mass... a meditation on the mysteries of Christ... a devotional exercise. It's not the most perfect method, but it's not WRONG. Just like Thomas Aquinas can say that the active contempletive religious life is the most perfect form of life without saying that people who get married, or become diocesan priests thereby do wrong.

Given that a congregation will be composed of a mixture of people, some of whom are capable of the more perfect form of participation and quite likely others who are not, it's not neccesarily fair or promoting of the common good for the responses to be made out loud by the people. The pastor has the duty to regulate this at his level, just as the bishop regulates it at a diocesan level.

Don't mistake me. I'm all for dialogue Masses in the proper setting (though I think some argument can be made about certain elements of the dialogue, e.g. the Pater Noster as chorally recited, when it isn't at Sung Masses) but large mixed congregations of various levels of ability, understanding, and preference in large Churches are not neccesarily the right place for them.

OK... I guess I did go ahead and write at length.

His Holiness clearly did not believe that people should be prevented from participating according to their abilities. I have written previously that the postures and so on of the laity are NOT regulated by rubrics the way the priest's are. Custom, and proper catechesis, teaches us to stand for the Gospel, to kneel for the Consecration..... and so on.

When Mass was violently pressed into the vernacular of each region, people had to be told what to do, although the rites were supposed to be within the abilities of the assembled lay faithful to understand.

Here's a schizophrenic idea: there should be a commentator to comment on the Mass, and the rites should be un-encumbered with needless accretions. There should be ongoing explanations and the rites shouldn't need explanation. The meaning of the Mass should shine forth clearly in the revised rites and there should be a commentator, explaining what is disjointedly difficult to understand........ Rocket scientist I'm obviously not, but I can't square that circle.

Chris, that's a very good point @ the people's posture not being regulated by rubrics. That is no doubt why De Musica Sacra uses the words "may" and "can" in the degrees of participation, meaning that they are allowed to say or sing in Latin those parts of the Mass that are listed, if they wish to do so.

I still maintain that it might be possible to interpret the 1958 Instruction De Musica Sacra to mean that EF pastors are required to teach the people to sing and say in Latin those parts of the Mass that pertain to them. Whether the people choose to do so, however, is up to them.

De musica sacra seems to be virtually ignored when introducing the EF to newcomers. It's especially irksome when it's claimed no one is allowed to say the Pater Noster... the document expressly permits it. Granted, there's a lot going on and I don't wish to force people to participate in every way. Moreover, the fullest sign of participatio actuosais the reception of Holy Communion.

Would someone happen to know if the Pater Noster is expresslyforbidden to be sung by the people at Sung or Solemn Mass? I'm not really interested in the history of it as a priestly prayer; I know all that already and it's not the issue at stake. I also realize the use of the ferial tone, while rare, is something to be considered. (OTOH, one has to teach the choir that no, Father won't always use the solemn Preface or the same tone at the Collects...)

EF mass:
Priest: Dominus vobiscum
People: Mumble, snort, grunt

OF mass:
Priest: The Lord be with you
People:Mumble, snort, grunt

What's the difference?

Matthew, very laudable sentiments to be sure, but De Musica Sacra is an Instruction from the Sacred Congregation of Rites, so I would argue that it has just as much juridical weight as GIRM (General Instruction of the Roman Missal) has for the OF. I wish someone more expert than I could verify this, but it would seem to me that De Musica Sacra, since it is is the latest and most complete legislation governing the EF and is an Instruction, is indeed the GIRM of the EF.

If that is indeed the case, instructing the people in the degrees of participation listed in Chapter III of De Musica Sacra, the actualization of the so-called Dialogue Mass, would appear to be---- dare I use the word?----mandatory for EF pastors to implement, although, as several people have already pointed out, the people in the pews at the EF cannot be forced at gunpoint to sing or say the responses in Latin and are perfectly free to participate in the manner of their choice.

De musica sacra seems to be virtually ignored when introducing the EF to newcomers. It's especially irksome when it's claimed no one is allowed to say the Pater Noster... the document expressly permits it.

It permits it, but it does not require that it be done in a particular place, let alone in every place, and almost nowhere is it done. It's like penitential rite b in the revised liturgy.

Would someone happen to know if the Pater Noster is expressly forbidden to be sung by the people at Sung or Solemn Mass?

It's not expressly forbidden, but it is generally forbidden (with the exception below). De musica sacra, as is quoted above in number 25 describes the way that the congregation may participate in the Sung or Solemn liturgy, and singing the full Pater Noster is not included in the list there.

There is a private reply from Ecclesia Dei dated 26 March 1997 that permits the practice, but as a understand it, as private reply, it is binding only on those who receive it. As JullieColl keeps pointing out, though it's not disputed, De Musica Sacra is the authoritative general rule. Others are permitted to adopt the position found in the private reply, but are not required to do so. (I.e. if your priest says it's not allowed, he's not wrong).

Julie, I agree. I'm just not in a position to fight the Dialogue Mass battle, and honestly, most people aren't. I'd rather be able to have the Mass in the ancient form with the full Propers and Ordinary, especially on Sundays and the major feasts... but yes, DMS ought to be implemented fully.

I threw together this VERY incomplete version a LONG time ago but it may be a place to start.