Do you sing the Mass Ordinary in read Mass?
  • LarsLars
    Posts: 136
    I had an argument with a few of my choir people regarding singing the Mass Ordinary. They told me they almost never sung the Mass parts and only did the 4-hymn sandwich. I tried to convince them that the Church asks us to sing the Mass rather than merely sing at the Mass. I'm re-reading the Musicam Sacram and I cant find anything to substantiate that.. It talks about the distinction between solemn, sung and read Mass, and all our Masses are low/read, which means anything goes...(Musicam Sacram 36.). Do you sing the Mass Ordinary in read Mass?
  • fcbfcb
    Posts: 392
    Am I correct in thinking you are talking about the TLM?
    Thanked by 1Lars
  • francis
    Posts: 11,221
    Prof Mahrt answered this question years ago on this forum. Let’s see if I can remember the order of importance. I might be able to dig it up because I’m not sure he answered a whole lot of things on the forum. However, here it is from memory…

    1 Priest chant his dialogue parts
    2 People/choir chant their responses (prob includes RP in NO)
    3 People/choir sing the ordinary
    4 Choir sings the Propers
    5 Hymns and other polyphony.
    Thanked by 1Lars
  • AbbysmumAbbysmum
    Posts: 143
    I think you're talking about sung degrees, which is discussed at https://churchmusicassociation.org/sungdegrees/
    Thanked by 1Lars
  • francis
    Posts: 11,221
    Hmmm… my observation is not directly answering your question but addressing which parts are most important to be sung. Singing hymns st mass is actually the last addition to what should take presidence.
    Thanked by 1Lars
  • smvanroodesmvanroode
    Posts: 1,095
    Please keep in mind that the degrees Musicam sacram (1967) lays out, are mainly about degrees of participation of the people.
    Thanked by 1Lars
  • TLMlover
    Posts: 78
    I am in a similar quandary, because neither of our two priests sing ANY of their parts at Mass, ever.

    In reading and wracking my brain over the sung degrees I have come to the conclusion that if the priest doesn't sing his parts, we should not sing anything st all, either, not even hymns. Someone please correct me on this if I'm wrong, but it sure seems that way when you read the passage about sung degrees.

    However, we are a small church with only one Mass on Sunday, and I feel very strongly about having a sung Mass with all the propers, sung ordinary, and Marian antiphon. We usually also sing three hymns but not always. No hymns during Lent.

    So I know I"m not following the theory of the sung degrees but I would find it sad to not have a sung Mass on Sunday. And I think people might leave the parish if it were a low Mass every Sunday. Personally I love low Mass but not everybody does.

    This is the disaster of the NO.
    Thanked by 4Lars tomjaw francis davido
  • LarsLars
    Posts: 136
    Sorry about the confusion @fcb . It's a NO.
    It's exactly the same as @TLMlover . Priests do not chant anything.
    Thanked by 2tomjaw francis
  • francis
    Posts: 11,221
    At the risk of contraversial opinions, I think the NO downgrades and diminished the role of Alter Christus (Personae Christi). It upgrades and promotes the role of the laity. This blurring of roles and actions has an extreme psychological impact on the modus operandi of the liturgy and its participants. Girl altar servers contribute to the psychological impact of decentralizing the very Alter Christus as God came and established the priesthood of men as his disciples to carry out his intentions.

    Jesus did everything on that rock. The people simply stood and watched. His devotees wept and rended their hearts. The enemies mocked and blasphemed. This is how the sacrifice is carried out in the VO. All are focused on the priest, HIS actions, HIS intentions. A priest loses his personal identity and fully takes on the Alter role. Altar boys see this plainly and aspire to become an Alter. Boys becoming men generally do not aspire to the role of the NO priest. The priest must be a “personality.” This is a serious distortion.

    In the NO, concelebration was introduced. This is another pschological displacement of the Alter Christus, making Christ a “congregation of those who are ordained”, which strips the priest of his central identity on the altar. It is silly and damaging to have more than one Alter Christus during a Mass.

    I could go on and on, but the point here is that what is crucial (the chanting of the priest) is perceived as “not that important” or optional at best… the “celebrant” is now a “presider” and just one of the equal actors in the drama… desecration [To violate the sacredness of; profane. (AHD).] Of course this opens Pandoras box to the flaws of the New Mass, but musicians are the flash point in this theological struggle and the carnage is obvious.
    Thanked by 4Lars tomjaw Abbysmum davido
  • Liam
    Posts: 5,510
    The option for celebrant priests to choose to not chant the Mass was introduced with...Low Masses many centuries ago.
    Thanked by 2CHGiffen Lars
  • fcbfcb
    Posts: 392
    This is the disaster of the NO.


    Could you expand on this? Doesn't the NO allow for having singing at Mass (including proper and ordinary) even if the priest won't/can't sing? It seems to me that you're much more likely to have a steady diet of Mass w/out music with the TLM.
    Thanked by 5Liam CHGiffen Roborgelmeister Lars Abbysmum
  • MatthewRoth
    Posts: 3,295
    But not on Sundays and feasts and the Mass itself is sung in that case, whereas either only the parts that can easily be read are sung when nothing else is, or it’s sung in full—except for the recited interlude.

    The pre-1967 all or nothing paradigm causes problems but it does not lead to the four-hymn sandwich reigning supreme as a norm. Musicam sacram (inadvertently) does this.
    Thanked by 4tomjaw Lars Abbysmum francis
  • MatthewRoth
    Posts: 3,295

    The option for celebrant priests to choose to not chant the Mass was introduced with...Low Masses many centuries ago.
    no, because the normative liturgy is sung and when you do chant the Mass you chant most all of it per the rubrics.
    Thanked by 5tomjaw Lars Abbysmum francis davido
  • Liam
    Posts: 5,510
    because the normative liturgy is sung


    A norm "More honour'd in the breach than the observance" given the dominance of Low Mass as the most common observed form.
    Thanked by 4Aristotle Esguerra Abbysmum Lars a_f_hawkins
  • AugustBerchelmann
    Posts: 6
    @MatthewRoth how does MS inadvertently cause the four-hymn sandwich?
    Thanked by 1Lars
  • Aristotle EsguerraAristotle Esguerra
    Posts: 1,186
    @AugustBerchelmann

    "(Presumptively) confirm" might be a better way to describe the outcome than "cause."
    The custom legitimately in use in certain places and widely confirmed by indults, of substituting other songs for the songs given in the Graduale for the Entrance, Offertory and Communion, can be retained according to the judgment of the competent territorial authority, as long as songs of this sort are in keeping with the parts of the Mass, with the feast or with the liturgical season. It is for the same territorial authority to approve the texts of these songs.

    Musicam Sacram 32 (emphasis added)
    Thanked by 5AugustBerchelmann Abbysmum Lars CHGiffen davido
  • SponsaChristi
    Posts: 632
    It is silly and damaging to have more than one Alter Christus during a Mass.

    Not to get technical, but all priests regardless of what they’re doing (ie: concelebrating, sitting in choir, out doing normal people things, laicized, etc) are an “alter Christus” by the nature of their ordination. What you’re referring to is acting in persona Christi, which is what priests do when they confer the sacraments.

    I personally find concelebration more on the irritating side of things (I find it disrupts the natural flow and cadence of the Eucharistic prayer, which takes away my focus, and then I have to deal with all the distractions around me again.) It also makes it more challenging to chant the entire Eucharistic prayer. I wouldn’t mind some mutual enrichment from the Book of Divine Worship the way they solemn Masses with more than one priest present. It’s a lot more similar to the EF with a subdeacon and deacon.
    Thanked by 1Lars
  • Charles_Weaver
    Posts: 170
    "(Presumptively) confirm" might be a better way to describe the outcome than "cause."


    Dobszay and Skeris would call this the anthrax in the envelope. It may not be the material cause or origin of the practice, but it is certainly an efficient cause of its widespread adoption.
    Thanked by 4Aristotle Esguerra Lars Abbysmum CHGiffen
  • MatthewRoth
    Posts: 3,295
    well, it's a cause, I think (as Dr Weaver points out): the propers are now equally interchangeable with anything else, and there's nothing less fitting about doing so, even if all things are equal, i.e. you can actually sing the (full) propers. Today in my chant class, I asked the group if they knew what Alleluia meant and explained that fine, it's a step up to sing the mode VI antiphon of the Paschal Vigil, but let's go back to Advent I (they had already listened to the introit Ad te levavi) and explained that the jubilus is pretty important because of what Alleluia means and then I sang the (to many of us here anyway) familiar mode VIII Alleluia with its jubilus (I left off the verse for the sake of time); it's simply crazy that 99% of people in that room would never have been exposed to the melismatic chants that inspire contemplation in response to the readings. I didn't even mention that in the NO you have to sing it or you just don't do the Alleluia at all, never mind that every option is on equal footing in terms of fittingness. I just believe in saying "here are the propers, here's the chanted ordinary, the office, the devotional and benediction chants: do them first, whatever else you may do that is good and worthy".
    Thanked by 3Lars Abbysmum francis
  • Aristotle EsguerraAristotle Esguerra
    Posts: 1,186
    To @Lars' comment:
    I tried to convince them that the Church asks us to sing the Mass rather than merely sing at the Mass. I'm re-reading the Musicam Sacram and I can't find anything to substantiate that.

    The passage you may be looking for is in the Consilium's Notitiae 5, 406 (emphasis added):
    The question has been raised from several quarters whether the formula from the Instruction on Sacred Music and the Sacred Liturgy, of September 3, 1958, at number 33, is still valid: "In recited Masses, popular religious songs may be sung by the faithful, provided, however, that they are entirely consistent with the individual parts of the Mass."

    This formula is outdated (It. superata).

    It is the Mass itself, the Ordinary and the Proper, that should be sung, and not "something," even if it is entirely consistent, that is superimposed on the Mass. Because the action is unique, it has only one face, one accent, one voice: the voice of the Church. To continue singing motets, even devout and pious ones (such as the Lauda Sion at the offertory on the feast of a saint), but extraneous to the Mass, instead of the texts of the Mass being celebrated, means continuing an inadmissible ambiguity: giving chaff instead of good wheat, watered-down wine instead of generous wine.

    Because in liturgical singing, we are interested not only in the melody, but also in the words, the text, the thought, the feelings clothed in poetry and melody. Now, these texts must be those of the Mass, not others. Therefore, sing the Mass, and not just sing during the Mass.

    Depending on whom you ask and their working definitions of terms in question, this is conditionally contradicted in the current General Instruction of the Roman Missal for the Dioceses of the United States (condition emphasized):
    In the Dioceses of the United States of America, there are four options for the Entrance Chant: (1) the antiphon from the Missal or the antiphon with its Psalm from the Graduale Romanum, as set to music there or in another setting; (2) the antiphon and Psalm of the Graduale Simplex for the liturgical time; (3) a chant from another collection of Psalms and antiphons, approved by the Conference of Bishops or the Diocesan Bishop including Psalms arranged in responsorial or metrical forms; (4) another liturgical chant* that is suited to the sacred action, the day, or the time of year, similarly approved by the Conference of Bishops or the Diocesan Bishop.

    To @Lars' question:
    Do you sing the Mass Ordinary in read Mass?

    In our locale, most of our Sunday Masses are read Masses**. At these, most the Mass Ordinary is sung, and a good amount of the Order of Mass as well, though not in an order that suggests moving towards Sung Mass as described in Musicam Sacram 28-31.

    *What makes a chant "liturgical"? Blood? The will of the flesh? The will of man?

    **Sung Masses are according to the usus antiquior.
    Thanked by 2Lars CHGiffen
  • SponsaChristi
    Posts: 632
    it's simply crazy that 99% of people in that room would never have been exposed to the melismatic chants that inspire contemplation in response to the readings.

    In fairness, singing the full chant propers wasn’t the the standard parish norm prior to Vatican II, and I’m not referring to low Mass with the four hymn sandwich. Because of resources, the simple forms of the propers were the norm for a lot of smaller parishes. It was also discovered during COVID that there was an entirely separate set of rubrics for the Triduum for parishes that didn’t have sufficient servers and ministers to have the usual liturgies with all the ceremonies. We almost didn’t have a Triduum because people in charge assumed that parishes everywhere before Vatican II had all these big sung Masses with a schola and choir, lots of altar boys, etc.
    Thanked by 1Lars
  • francis
    Posts: 11,221
    Not to get technical, but all priests regardless of what they’re doing (ie: concelebrating, sitting in choir, out doing normal people things, laicized, etc) are an “alter Christus” by the nature of their ordination. What you’re referring to is acting in persona Christi, which is what priests do when they confer the sacraments.
    yes… i did refer to to “in personae Christi” initially… but during the Mass it seems to be an aboration to have multiple priests doing what the high priest has always accomplished as a single representative. It appears that much of it continually wanders away from, waters down and even contradicts what has always been done.

    Another comment came to me privately…

    Hi Francis. You mentioned that NO priests tend to need a "personality"

    Wouldn't you say that certain TLM priests also do that? Some celebrate the liturgy differently than others, and many of them have a distinct style of preaching
    I have not experienced priests celebrating the VO to insert their personality, opinions, comments, and idiosyncrasies into the rite. IMMHO, preaching is where “personality” rightly displays personal charisms of intellect, knowledge, virtue, etc. and the only fitting place where it naturally shines.
  • Benton
    Posts: 21
    To answer the original question, it is perfectly fine to sing the Mass Ordinary when other things aren’t sung. Of course, the Church teaches us the ideals, but allows us the freedom to customize to our own situations.
    Thanked by 2Roborgelmeister Liam
  • a_f_hawkins
    Posts: 3,646
    MatthewRoth - maybe just an Anglo-Saxon thing, but,
    Fortescue 'Ceremonies...' Second Edition New Impression 1920 p.41
    Although High Mass, historically, is the original rite, so that Low Mass is really only a shortened form of that, nevertheless, ...

    Heenan, at the 1967 Synod of Bishops
    Our people love the Mass, but it is Low Mass unembellished by singing to which they are chiefly attached.

    Bugnini, Reform p.358 (tr. O'Connell)
    The English speaking segment of the Synod was decisively influenced by the fear that the intention behind the normative Mass was to do away with the read Mass (which is so important in English-speaking regions), ...
    N.B. All three were enthusiasts for sung Mass.
    However I blame the SCR bureaucrats for setting out the Ritus servandus as though the Solemn Mass is an addition to the Low Mass.
    Thanked by 1Roborgelmeister
  • MatthewRoth
    Posts: 3,295

    In fairness, singing the full chant propers wasn’t the the standard parish norm prior to Vatican II, and I’m not referring to low Mass with the four hymn sandwich.


    No one said otherwise! I am fully aware of the problems. Nevertheless the solution is not to jettison the propers entirely.

    However I blame the SCR bureaucrats for setting out the Ritus servandus as though the Solemn Mass is an addition to the Low Mass.

    The real problem is that the RS was not the end-all, be-all. The Caeremoniale Episcoporum is decidedly not low Mass with high Mass glued on to it.
  • FSSPmusic
    Posts: 450
    *What makes a chant "liturgical"? Blood? The will of the flesh? The will of man?
    The latter! Apparently a text approved by the bishops' conference. The Latin:
    alius cantus, actioni sacrae, diei vel temporis indoli congruus, cuius textus a Conferentia Episcoporum sit approbatus.
    Presumably a Latin text from the liturgy itself or from scripture needs no explicit approval, so the context must concern vernacular texts and translations or, far less likely, extraliturgical devotional Latin texts sung as motets or congregational hymns.

    So, we see that the GIRM itself contradicts the "sing the Mass rather than merely sing at the Mass" principle, but now instead of the "chaff" and "watered-down wine" of Latin motets replacing propers, the junk food and Kool-Aid of religious songs composed within the last 60 years is offered. Instead of the deprecated "Lauda Sion at the offertory on the feast of a saint," you'll hear "Blest Are They" if someone's really trying to stick with the theme, otherwise perhaps "Here I Am, Lord," "On Eagles' Wings," "Be Not Afraid," "The Swan," or even "Imagine." Sure, there have been texts and compositions of genuine artistic value in recent decades, but we all know the kind of stuff that's mainstream rather than the "inadmissible ambiguity" its ilk ought to be.
  • StPatrick
    Posts: 3
    Do you sing the Mass Ordinary in read Mass?

    My choir sings the Ordinary of the Mass every Sunday, but the priest almost never sings his "solo" parts, except perhaps on Easter and some other Solemnities. I'm not sure why as he has a very nice voice.
Add a Comment