Novus Ordo Funeral Options
  • JesJes
    Posts: 510
    Hey so, got a friend who is Tridentine.
    will probably ask the priest to do ad orientem
    His father died and my question is what are the alternatives to the responsorial psalm? can you put any of the latin propers in instead?

    just curious to know also why does N.O. have alleluia in a requiem mass?
  • Ben YankeBen Yanke
    Posts: 3,114
    Yes, you can always use latin propers at the ordinary form, including the gradual in place of the Responsorial Ps.

    just curious to know also why does N.O. have alleluia in a requiem mass?


    Because the OF is a "fabrication, a banal product" -Pope Benedict XVI
  • jczarn
    Posts: 65
    You might find the following thread helpful, in which I was seeking some advice before I cantored for my father's OF funeral Mass:

    http://forum.musicasacra.com/forum/discussion/9110/funeral-mass-advice

    Near the bottom of the thread, I posted a Word doc of the program/"worship aid" I created for the occasion.

    Thanked by 1Jes
  • Liam
    Posts: 3,757
    Re the Gospel Acclamation:

    Because it's not a requiem Mass. Sacrosanctum Concilium called for the funeral rites to be reformed to more clearly indicate their paschal character (and the inclusion of the Alleluia, per #140 of the Order of Christian Funerals, would appear to be among the things added for that purpose):

    81. The rite for the burial of the dead should express more clearly the paschal character of Christian death, and should correspond more closely to the circumstances and traditions found in various regions. This holds good also for the liturgical color to be used.

  • jeseale,

    Not contradicting Ben Yanke, especially since he quotes a wonderful German shepherd, I think I should add something to his answer.

    In its modern formulation, so the thinking goes, there is a Mass of Christian burial ---sometimes called the Mass of the Resurrection, although I don't think they're exactly the same thing -- not a Requiem. If you listen to most sermons (I'm sorry: homily) at most funerals, we are assured that the deceased is already at peace with God in heaven. If that is, in fact, true, then surely there is reason for rejoicing, and an alleluia is appropriate. If not, it is right and proper to pray for the departed, rather than to the poor soul. In this case, "Alleluia, he is ris'n indeed" makes no sense.
    Thanked by 1Ben Yanke
  • fcbfcb
    Posts: 265
    Singing "alleluia" at a funeral Mass is hardly an even implicit denial of the need to pray for the dead. The only reason why we pray for the departed in the first place is the hope given to us by Christ's resurrection. In fact, to pray for the dead without appeal to Christ's resurrection could be seen as implicitly Pelagian.
  • rarty
    Posts: 93
    The Mass at a funeral is simply called a 'Funeral Mass' (Missa exsequiali) in both new and old Missals, and in both clearly formulated to pray for the soul of the deceased. Also, there is a distinct rubric in the (new) Ritual and Missal that the homily at a funeral Mass should be short, and exclude a "eulogy of any kind."

    There are important differences between the old and new funeral rites, but it isn't correct to say that they were meant to serve entirely different purposes.

    Re: the Alleluia (before the Gospel), it is interesting that in the Ritual (Ordo Exsequiarum, n. 40), it says that when the Graduale Simplex is used, the Alleluia chant can be omitted. The 1967 Graduale Simplex seems to be the first instance of singing the Alleluia at a Mass for the dead, and this was in the context of the mass formulary from the old Missal. (And the Ritual was published before the Ordo Cantus Missae, so at the time the Simplex was the only chant book that had an Alleluia in Masses for the dead.)
    Thanked by 2hilluminar Jes
  • MarkThompson
    Posts: 768
    In this case, "Alleluia, he is ris'n indeed" makes no sense.

    Um, if Christ be not risen again, your faith is vain, for you are yet in your sins.
  • Mark,

    You misconstrue my point. Of course I accept that Christ is risen from the dead.... and so my faith isn't in vain. Furthermore, the problem isn't the "He is ris'n indeed", so much as the "alleluia".

    In some parishes, holy water is taken out of the stoups, to be replaced by sand, for the duration of Lent. This is silly. From Septuagesima to Good Friday (inclusive) we don't sing (or say) Alleluia, but this isn't because Christ hasn't risen from the dead, but, rather, because at that time in the liturgical calendar we're preparing for the Passion and death of Christ which must be followed by His Resurrection. We don't sing Christmas carols in Advent. We don't sing "Alleluia" after Septuagesima. Since the purpose of the Requiem is to offer the Mass and our collected prayers for the deceased, and since black vestments are worn for this event, somber attitudes are appropriate. Alleluia may be solemn, but it's not somber.
  • The ages-old burial rites are not improved by an alleluia or white vestments; what can this add to the hope that is already there. just two examples

    Quaerens me, sedisti lassus:
    redemisti crucem passus:
    tantus labor non sit cassus. - Dies Irae

    Ego sum resurrectio et vita. Qui credit in Me
    etiam si mortuus fuerit, vivet.
    Et omnis qui vivit et credit in Me, non morietur in aeternum. - Graveside service

    Adding an 'alleluia', or a sermon (oops, homily) assuring people that the person is already in Heaven could be an encouragement for them not to pray for the departed soul. I used to reflect on how the 'poor souls' were Protestants of good will, whose people flatly refuse to pray for them; nowadays it seems there are probably a lot of Catholics in the same spot.
  • Liam
    Posts: 3,757
    The Alleluia is in no way an assurance that the deceased is in Heaven - such an idea is a perverse piece of cotton candy confection. Rather, the Alleluia is a rejoicing in the Lord's resurrection as the Word in the Gospel is about to be present to us again - the death of the deceased does not obscure the reality of the Lord's resurrection.
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 10,005
    Novus Ordo funeral rites are a case of, it is what it is. Last time I looked, none of us were asked to write the rules. I am sure of one thing, however. Relatives of the deceased can ask for some of the most abominable music ever written followed by the statement, "it was his favorite song."
  • Liam
    Posts: 3,757
    And Charles, they could do the same thing at a low requiem Mass today. If the EF were not the province of intentional communities jealously protecting a higher liturgical praxies, but instead the quotidian liturgy of all parishes, many (not all) of those requests would likely be granted. The form of Missal is no magical silver bullet,
  • JesJes
    Posts: 510
    Woah EF OF wars were not the intention here.

    How do we do this was more the question? Thanks to those that addressed it.
    Thanked by 1Elmar
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 10,005
    Funerals are difficult times for family members. I try not to add to their grief, even when I detest some of the music they requested. The saving grace is that I will never see many of them in church again after the funeral.
    Thanked by 2Jes Elmar
  • Charles,

    The purpose of a Catholic funeral is to offer prayers for the deceased, not to engage in pedantic education or harangue.

    Nevertheless, I dispute that helping grieving persons away from their bad choices necessarily is pedantic or harangue.
    Thanked by 1Jes
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 10,005
    The bad choices are there. Sometimes, they even get relayed through the pastor who doesn't think that battle is worth fighting, either.

    The purpose of a Catholic funeral is to offer prayers for the deceased


    I wonder about that being so true anymore. It is all too common for hardly any of the family members to receive communion. They have left Catholicism and moved on. It genuinely is a different world out there.
  • melofluentmelofluent
    Posts: 4,160
    imageimageimage
    598 x 670 - 78K
    601 x 560 - 63K
    596 x 519 - 66K
    Thanked by 1Jes
  • ClergetKubiszClergetKubisz
    Posts: 1,895
    just curious to know also why does N.O. have alleluia in a requiem mass?


    It is because the focus of the Funeral Mass in the OF (often referred to as a "Celebration of Eternal Life") is on Christ's Resurrection, as several above have already mentioned.

    It also, as someone else already mentioned, is not a Requiem Mass, and the Dies Irae is not permitted to be sung.

    I've seen in funeral programs the following: (dates are just an example, and do not necessarily belong to anybody in particular)

    Born: 1935
    Born Into Eternal Life: 2015
    Thanked by 1Jes
  • JesJes
    Posts: 510
    So can you have an OF Requiem instead of an OF Funeral Mass? Is there such a thing?
  • rarty
    Posts: 93
    "Requiem" is not a helpful description to distinguish anything here. The OF Funeral Mass begins: Requiem aeternam dona eis, Domine, et lux perpetua luceat eis.

    An EF Mass for the dead has many idiosyncrasies, besides the proper texts, that distinguish it from other masses. An OF Mass for the dead has the same rubrics as other masses. Mostly because eliminating prayers at the foot of the altar, kisses, blessing, signs of the cross, etc. don't make sense in the context of the new missal (for better or worse).

    If you are familiar with the EF Requiem, musically, the main changes in the OF are the Alleluia (outside lent), the normal Agnus Dei, and of course omitting the sequence Dies irae and the responsory Libera me...de morte at the absolution/final commendation.

    The rubrics also specifically allow for the Subvenite before the introit (OE, 37), but otherwise it is given as an option for the final commendation/absolution.
  • JesJes
    Posts: 510
    I'm familiar with both I just can't see the reason why one would have something and the other would have another and for it to be SO different.
  • ClergetKubiszClergetKubisz
    Posts: 1,895
    I think, and this is just my somewhat informed opinion, that the reason the two Masses are so different is because in the Church in the modern era, they don't want to talk about death and sin. Hence, when dates are given sometimes, they use the format I showed you above: they don't say the person died.
  • >> they don't say the person died.

    so the idea, with white vestments, alleluia, whatever, is to stress resurrection.

    No perverse cotton candy confection intended, but ... resurrection from the.... um..... ??
    Thanked by 1Jenny
  • gregpgregp
    Posts: 632
    Someone on this Forum, in a conversation awhile ago, said that the NO funeral Mass did not seem as though it was taking his grief seriously. That sounds right to me. The EF Requiem Mass is cathartic. YMMV.
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 7,764
    Another element added to the Mass in the reformed Roman rite that seems to insistently add a Paschal emphasis is the memorial acclamation: the texts point to the death, resurrection, and second coming, immediately after the eucharistic consecration.

    Whether the added Paschal-themed emphases in the rite, at all times of year, under all circumstances, are a wise addition to the Roman rite is a question liturgical historians will have to judge.

    As a matter of opinion: in the funeral Mass, the addition of the Alleluia does not seem sensitive to the feelings of mourners, even though it's intended as an expression of Christian hope -- certainly an appropriate theme at a funeral Mass.

    But there's room for variations, to suit the practice to your local culture and how mourning is expressed. If the Alleluia is not sung, it may be omitted. And certainly the Gregorian repertoire has a great array of melodies, simple and ornate, that avoid any sense of frivolity.
  • melofluentmelofluent
    Posts: 4,160
    The (EF) Requiem Mass is cathartic.

    No argument there, mein Freund. However, a ritual doesn't "take" anything, per se. Nor does some seeming comparison reflect its value.
    What a ritual presents to each and every soul is quite dependent upon what each and every soul attends, or gives to it. In the perfection of the Divine Liturgy one will find more than what one seeks for, if the seeking is genuine, attributes and accidents notwithstanding.
  • gregpgregp
    Posts: 632
    Of course. I actually should have specified that it's cathartic for me as a singer, even if I don't know the deceased.
  • JesJes
    Posts: 510
    I totally should have got us to do the sicut cervus as the r.p. thats clever.
  • Ben YankeBen Yanke
    Posts: 3,114
    I totally should have got us to do the sicut cervus as the r.p. thats clever.


    Is that licit, outside of the easter vigil where it's proper to the mass?
  • JesJes
    Posts: 510
    as the responsorial psalm totally IT IS A PSALM!
  • melofluentmelofluent
    Posts: 4,160
    Is that licit, outside of the easter vigil where it's proper to the mass?

    Should I have programmed "Shepherd me, O God", Ben? ;-)
  • ClergetKubiszClergetKubisz
    Posts: 1,895
    Is that licit, outside of the easter vigil where it's proper to the mass?


    Whether it's licit or not doesn't seem to matter to some people.
    Thanked by 1Ben Yanke
  • MatthewRoth
    Posts: 1,224
    The funeral options are pretty expansive, and at least it is Scripture. Also, in Lent it would be licit for the Tract, because the texts from medieval usages were restored, which included the “Sicut Cervus.”
    Thanked by 1Jes
  • melofluentmelofluent
    Posts: 4,160
    some people

    .
  • JesJes
    Posts: 510
    Haha some people...

    N.O. Options are hugely expansive. If we are allowed to put random objects on the coffin during mass then we are totally allowed to do the Sicut cervus.
  • dad29
    Posts: 1,712
    and the Dies Irae is not permitted to be sung.


    Yes it is, under the "alius aptus cantus" language.
  • Ben YankeBen Yanke
    Posts: 3,114
    If we are allowed to put random objects on the coffin during mass then we are totally allowed to do the Sicut cervus.


    Those two things really don't equate... I really don't like the OF. But if you're going to use it, it's the law of the land, and the rubrics should be followed. Unless Sicut Cervus is one of the responsorial psalm options, it really shouldn't be done....
    Thanked by 1CharlesW
  • ClergetKubiszClergetKubisz
    Posts: 1,895
    Yes it is, under the "alius aptus cantus" language.


    Can it be sung as the Sequence, even though no Sequence is prescribed in the Missal?
  • Settefrati93
    Posts: 172
    @Ben... I agree. Either do one of the approved responsorial psalms or use one of the approved graduals from the graduale romanum.

    Sicut Cervus is actually an alternate tract in the Missa Pro Defunctis
  • melofluentmelofluent
    Posts: 4,160
    It is remarkable, curious and somewhat ironic....that the programming of likely the most celebrated choral psalm motet written by the "Prince" of Roman Catholic Sacred Music Treasury is decried within the CMAA community as illicit. Moreso, that such criticism stands alongside the "another suitable song" defense for including a "Dies Irae" in a non-Requiem context.
    I said it back when I first joined CMAA, the only thing that would discourage or disable unity among this, the finest "guild" with which I've ever associated, would be when "we start eating our own."
    What profit was earned by this pithiness?
  • We use it as a sequence. My pastor just says it's mutual enrichment whenever someone asks.
    Thanked by 1Jes
  • dad29
    Posts: 1,712
    including a "Dies Irae" in a non-Requiem context


    LIke it or not, there's a dead body up there, JUST LIKE the dead bodies in the EF. Same occasion. No reason not to use the same music.

    But you don't have to listen to it. See, that's "diversity."
    Thanked by 1Jes
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 7,764
    Just for the sake of information: "Sicut cervus" coincides with one of the options for the Responsorial Psalm for funeral Masses (Ps. 42: 2, 3, 5cdef; 43: 3, 4, 5). The Palestrina motet is a setting of the first verse.
  • melofluentmelofluent
    Posts: 4,160
    LIke it or not, there's a dead body up there, JUST LIKE the dead bodies in the EF. Same occasion. No reason not to use the same music.

    Uh yah, Dad. But despite missing my point, you've helped make my point. First, I'm all in favor of reasonable cross-fertilization, particularly with the Dies irae. Even should my family be denied a Requiem pour moi, it will be sung at my digs. Secondly, "licit this, licit not" is a sad symptom of parcing out "stuff I don't like" for whatever motivation or rationale someone's carrying. I was just pointing out the duplicity of it here in CMAA. What a certain cadre forgets is that many CMAA'ers still labor on sandy shoals of support and thus use material which even they must regard as anathema. To castigate such people for that reality is counter-productive. BTW, I don't count you among the nay sayers.
  • dad29
    Posts: 1,712
    "licit this, licit not" is a sad symptom of parcing out "stuff I don't like" for whatever motivation or rationale someone's carrying.


    Yes and no.

    First: am personally well-acquainted with the 'sandy shoals syndrome,' and hold no animus towards those who persevere towards the goal, even if very slowly. Thanks for your acknowledgement of same!

    At the same time, "liceity"--properly defined--IS the point. Either a text, action, or musical offering IS or is NOT 'licit.' In re: music, the 'liceity' question becomes subsumed in the larger ....ahhh.....'discussion' which is actually about musical taste. That's good in its own way, but not to be confused with 'liceity.'

    The Dies Irae clearly falls under the 'alius aptus' (emphasis on 'aptus.') Thus, it may be used, licitly, despite the modern faddism surrounding the Mass on the day of burial.
    Thanked by 2melofluent CHGiffen
  • StimsonInRehabStimsonInRehab
    Posts: 1,557
    "Sicut Cervus" is also an optional gradual for the Dominican Rite Mass.

    < /pointless contribution to discussion>
  • ClergetKubiszClergetKubisz
    Posts: 1,895
    Stim, I'm not sure what the HTML is for that.
    Thanked by 1StimsonInRehab
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 7,764
    "Sicut Cervus" is also an optional gradual for the Dominican Rite Mass.


    That's an interesting point! If only it were among the gradual texts in the Graduale Romanum, there would be no reason for scruples about its correctness.
    Thanked by 2melofluent CHGiffen
  • JesJes
    Posts: 510
    I like both styles of funeral or requiem and I wish I could kinda steal bits from both sides. We tried this for my friend in a OF setting and the priest kept forgetting we were going to sing stuff. It ended up being quite good just wish we had more time with the priest to do things.
    Here's what I don't understand why do we rehearse weddings and not rehearse funerals?