Preface to the Graduale Romanum (1974)
  • deo27
    Posts: 21
    What do you think about the points below compared to today’s rubrics? I am aware that the rubrics since 1974 have changed. Just looking for commentary on the changes.

    1. After the people have assembled, and while the priests
    and ministers are approaching the altar, the entrance
    antiphon is sung. Its intonation may be shortened or protracted,
    or even better, the chant may be begun immediately by
    everyone. In that case, the asterisk, which in the Graduale
    indicates the cantor's part, is only to be taken as an indicative sign.

    Before the final repetition of the antiphon, the Gloria Patri
    and the Sicut erat may be sung together as the final verse.

    If the singing becomes too protracted through the repetition
    of the Gloria Patri and the antiphon, the doxology may be omitted.
    When the procession is very short, only one verse of the psalm
    need be used, or the antiphon alone may be sung without adding any verses.


    8. When the sequence occurs, it is sung after the final 'alleluia
    by the cantors and choir alternating or by two parts of the choir alternating.
    Amen is omitted at the end. If the Alleluia and its verse is not sung, the sequence is omitted.
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,234
    People seem to be distracted by the reference to the "New Gradual" in deo27's attachment (an image from Sacred Music).

    [I've deleted the off-topic comments for the sake of clarity.]

    But what was deo27's post about? Did he have a question or a comment on the rubrics he quoted?
    Thanked by 2Liam deo27
  • Liam
    Posts: 5,608
    That's still a mystery.
  • GerardH
    Posts: 671
    FWIW I frequently adjust the verses and repetitions in the introit to match the amount of time available. I also sing the sequence sequentially after the Alleluia, rubrics to the contrary be damned!
    Thanked by 1deo27
  • deo27
    Posts: 21
    The question somehow got cut off. I just added it. If you don’t have anything helpful to say, kindly refrain from making a comment.
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,234
    I can't think of any rubrical changes after 1974 that affect those two elements (the introit and the sequence). Of course the introit can be replaced by a vast number of "other suitable song[s]", but that's been in place since 1970.

    Can anyone point to changes since then?

    And for what it's worth, my own translation of the Graduale introduction is here:
    https://media.churchmusicassociation.org/pdf/ordo-cantus-missae.pdf
    Thanked by 1deo27
  • Liam
    Posts: 5,608
    Chonak

    The placement of the sequence - from post-Alleluia to pre-Alleluia - changed in this century with the third edition of the Roman Missal.

    GIRM #64: The Sequence which, except on Easter Sunday and on Pentecost Day, is optional, is sung before the Alleluia.
    Thanked by 4CHGiffen Charles chonak Charles_Weaver
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,234
    Well, that's something I got to learn today.

    And apparently the first GIRM didn't even address when the Sequence was to be sung. A 1975 copy I have says that the sequence is optional except on Easter and Pentecost, and says nothing more about it.
  • Charles_Weaver
    Posts: 212
    As has been explored before on this forum and also at CCWatershed, there was a word changed ("post" to "ante") between the 2000 and 2002 versions of the GIRM. See this link:

    https://www.romanrite.com/j040402.html

    One might add that in the older versions of the sequences, "Amen. Alleluia" is included at the end of the sequence. I think one can make a reasonable case, when singing the Gregorian melodies, for retaining the traditional order (Alleluia-Sequence), following the Graduale and also the Gregorian Missal. But if you want to adhere strictly to the GIRM (2002, replacing the more historically consonant 2000 version), the Sequence should come before.

    Similarly with the introit, one could reasonably make the case for singing the doxology, following the rubrics quoted in the original post, when singing the Gregorian melodies. It is certainly part of the tradition of the Roman Rite that can probably be incorporated in the Pauline Rite without too much difficulty. I think this case is especially strong in communities that celebrate both forms of the Mass.
    Thanked by 1novusgordo
  • MatthewRoth
    Posts: 3,538
    Right, and it’s apparently in the appendix. St Louis Abbey did, so we do too, even if the incensation would not take long enough to otherwise justify it, because it’s what our folks know.

    We will probably never have the question of order on. a day with sequences, but we will follow the trad one if we ever find ourselves in times of trouble.
  • ian_udell
    Posts: 14
    I've heard the sequence dilemma explained as that if you are doing the latin gregorian melody (the proper one in the GR) then the sequence should be before, but if you do it in the vernacular and/or to another tune then the sequence should be after. The GIRM and the GR are both right. If this is incorrect, someone please correct me
  • Andrew_Malton
    Posts: 1,248
    Other way round
  • Charles_Weaver
    Posts: 212
    The principle of non-contradiction suggests they can't both be right. Rather, the instructions in the GIRM ought to be definitive. However, this particular ordering (Sequence before Alleluia) is so silly, that it seems entirely sensible to retain the traditional ordering. There is a fitting Italian phrase for this situation: "Non si può, ma si fa."
    Thanked by 2deo27 novusgordo
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,234
    The norms in the front of the Graduale '74 are reproduced from the 1972 Ordo Cantus Missae, and its letter of approval by Cdl. Tabera and Abp. Bugnini (reproduced in the Graduale also) says that the norms apply whenever the celebration of Mass is carried out in Latin.

    So it might be reasonable to treat any differences between the OCM/Graduale norms and the GIRM as an exception to be applied when the liturgy is celebrated in Latin or (perhaps more broadly) when the chants of the Mass are sung in Latin.
    image
    clip-tabera.jpg
    493 x 84 - 21K
    Thanked by 1deo27
  • Liam
    Posts: 5,608
    FWIW, when it comes to sequences, the Latin of the IMGR of the current (2002) Missale Romanum does not make or grandfather, as it were, such a distinction, and specifically covers singing them:

    64. Sequentia, quæ præter quam diebus Paschæ et Pentecostes, est ad libitum,
    cantatur ante Allelúia.
  • MatthewRoth
    Posts: 3,538
    Yeah but they clearly don’t anticipate the Gregorian Alleluia. The Sequence ante Alleluia arrangement only makes sense if you use a triple congregational Alleluia.
    Thanked by 3Liam novusgordo deo27
Add a Comment