Ex Oriente Lux
I had the privilege, this past Holy Week, of preaching three times in Tulsa’s Maronite Catholic Church of Saint Thérèse. The Good Friday liturgy of the Burial of the Lord, with its procession and veneration of the enshrouded image of the Body of Christ, was profoundly moving. It was a first-hand opportunity to witness the richness of an uninterrupted and continuous tradition of liturgical chant. Unlike Latin Rite Catholics, the Maronites have never suffered a rupture in their musical traditions; they sing today the very same chants sung by their fathers and mothers in the faith a thousand years ago. They know them by heart. The people sing as they have always sung, and the chants proper to their splendid tradition continue to be passed on, in their original language, from one generation to the next.
The experience at Saint Thérèse Church compelled me to reflect on the contrasting situation in Catholic churches of the Latin Rite. In the vast majority of parishes, the rupture of organic continuity with the past continues to have dire consequences. An unending and tiresome reinvention of the liturgy, inspired more often than not by principles other than those set forth in the Church’s official documents, dismantles and re-assembles the liturgy over and over again, in a futile attempt to get it right.
One egregious example: the omission of that precious jewel of the Roman Rite that is the solemn intonation of the Great Paschal Alleluia. Note that the Great Paschal Alleluia is prescribed (not merely suggested!) in Article 352 of the Ceremonial of Bishops. In how many churches across the United States (and elsewhere) was another arbitrarily chosen musical setting of the Alleluia used at the Paschal Vigil?
The First and Indispensable Source of the Christian Spirit
In 1903, in terms that would be taken up and amplified by the Second Vatican Council, Pope Saint Pius X called “active participation in the most sacred mysteries and in the public and solemn prayer of the Church . . . the first and indispensable source of the Christian spirit.” Hearing the Pope affirm that active participation in the public and solemn prayer of the Church is the first and indispensable source of the Christian spirit caused the pioneers of the last century’s classic Liturgical Movement to jubilate.
Sing Alternately With the Clergy or the Choir
In 1928, twenty-five years after the Moto Proprio of Pope Saint Pius X, his successor Pius XI enjoined the Catholic faithful “once more to sing the Gregorian Chant, so far as it belongs to them to take part in it. … Filled with a deep sense of the beauty of the liturgy,” he said, “they should sing alternately with the clergy or the choir, as it is prescribed.”
A number of interesting, and still quite relevant, points emerge from Pius XI’s Apostolic Constitution, Divini Cultus:
All those who aspire to the priesthood, whether in Seminaries or in religious houses, from their earliest years are to be taught Gregorian Chant and sacred music. At that age they are able more easily to learn to sing, and to modify, if not entirely to overcome, any defects in their voices, which in later years would be quite incurable. Instruction in music and singing must be begun in the elementary, and continued in the higher classes. In this way, those who are about to receive sacred orders, having become gradually experienced in chant, will be able during their theological course quite easily to undertake the higher and “aesthetic” study of plainsong and sacred music, of polyphony and the organ, concerning which the clergy certainly ought to have a thorough knowledge.
In seminaries, and in other houses of study for the formation of the clergy both secular and regular there should be a frequent and almost daily lecture or practice – however short – in Gregorian Chant and sacred music. If this is carried out in the spirit of the liturgy, the students will find it a relief rather than a burden to their minds, after the study of the more exacting subjects. Thus a more complete education of both branches of the clergy in liturgical music will result in the restoration to its former dignity and splendor of the choral Office, a most important part of divine worship; moreover, the scholae and choirs will be invested again with their ancient glory.
Those who are responsible for, and engaged in divine worship in basilicas and cathedrals, in collegiate and conventual churches of religious, should use all their endeavors to see that the choral Office is carried out duly – i.e. in accordance with the prescriptions of the Church. And this, not only as regards the precept of reciting the divine Office “worthily, attentive and devoutly,” but also as regards the chant. In singing the psalms attention should be paid to the right tone, with its appropriate mediation and termination, and a suitable pause at the asterisk; so that every verse of the psalms and every strophe of the hymns may be sung by all in perfect time together. If this were rightly observed, then all who worthily sing the psalms would signify their unity of intention in worshipping God and, as one side of the choir sings in answer to the other, would seem to emulate the everlasting praise of the Seraphim who cried one to the other “Holy, Holy, Holy.”
Lest anyone in future should invent easy excuses for exempting himself from obedience to the laws of the Church, let every chapter and religious community deal with these matters at meetings held for the purpose; and just as formerly there used to be a “Cantor” or director of the choir, so in future let one be chosen from each chapter or choir of religious, whose duty it will be to see that the rules of the liturgy and of choral chant are observed and, both individually and generally, to correct the faults of the choir. In this connection it should be observed that, according to the ancient discipline of the Church and the constitutions of chapters still in force, all those at least who are bound to office in choir, are obliged to be familiar with Gregorian Chant. And the Gregorian Chant which is to be used in every church of whatever order, is the text which, revised according to the ancient manuscripts, has been authentically published by the Church from the Vatican Press.
Pius XI reaffirmed that Gregorian Chant is to hold the first place in the Catholic liturgy, not just theoretically, but practically. This, of course, was reiterated by the Fathers of the Second Vatican Council. He also assumed that the clergy should be prepared and wiling to sing. One cannot object that Pius XI’s vision of a singing clergy was not affirmed by the Second Vatican Council; Musicam Sacram (1967) places the first level of singing at Mass squarely on the shoulders — not of the choir director, cantor, or organist — but of the priest and other ministers!
In selecting the parts which are to be sung, one should start with those that are by their nature of greater importance, and especially those which are to be sung by the priest or by the ministers, with the people replying, or those which are to be sung by the priest and people together. The other parts may be gradually added according as they are proper to the people alone or to the choir alone. (Musicam Sacram, art. 7)
Actual Participation: Both Listening and Singing
The Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, promulgated on 4 December 1963, identified “full and active participation by all the people” as the “aim to be considered above all else in the restoration and promotion of the sacred liturgy.” It is clear that chant fosters “full, conscious, and actual participation” in the liturgy by engaging the assembly in both listening and singing. Abraham Joshua Heschel offers a reflection that is as refreshing as it is realistic: “People may not be able to pray; they are all able to chant. And chant leads to prayer.”
The Catholic and Orthodox attribution of various forms of liturgical chant to the priest, deacon, psalmist or cantor, schola, and assembly is neither arbitrary nor optional; it pertains to the essential nature of the liturgy as a corporate action of the whole worshiping Church. Hymn singing, borrowed rather uncritically from Protestant traditions of worship, effectively minimizes, or entirely eliminates, the dialogical and responsorial forms of chant that, in the Catholic tradition, impress and express the hierarchical nature of every liturgical action.
I am astonished at the number of clergy and professional musicians in the service of Catholic churches who are ignorant of the proper place of hymnody in the Catholic liturgy. With the exception of the Gloria and the Sanctus (hymns in the very broad sense of the term), and of the Sequences sung for Easter, Pentecost, Corpus Christi, and Our Lady of Sorrows, hymns, as such, are entirely foreign to the celebration of Holy Mass. In the Divine Office, however, there is a metrical hymn at every Hour. Hymns, then, properly belong to the Liturgy of the Hours, while sung dialogues, antiphons, psalmody, and acclamations belong to the Mass.
The standard hymn singing that characterizes Protestant (or protestantized) worship is performed in a relatively uniform and congregational manner. The liturgical chant of our Catholic tradition, on the other hand, privileges the responsorial, dialogical, antiphonal and acclamatory modes of performance. These, being among the most effective forms of actual sung participation, manifest more adequately the mystery of the Church as a Eucharistic organism of different members, characterized by “the order of symphony, an order in liberty and in love.” The way we sing at Mass effectively shapes one’s understanding — or misunderstanding — of the Church, of the priesthood, and of the hierarchical ordering of the liturgical assembly. A protestantized approach to music at Mass will inevitably engender a protestantized ecclesiology.
Sing the Liturgy Itself
A composition that does not belong to the liturgy and lead more deeply into the mystery celebrated, even though it be sung with full-voiced enthusiasm by all, cannot be qualified a true expression of conscious and active participation in the liturgical action. Active participation implies that the assembly is singing the liturgy itself, beginning with the dialogical chants, acclamations and refrains.
The Fully Sung Liturgy Is Normative
Musìcam Sacram presents the sung celebration as normative. Contrary to a widely-held misconception, the fully sung celebration is not a solemnization of the spoken form of the liturgy; on the contrary, the spoken form is derived from the fully sung celebration which is normative.
Chants for the People
The chants of the assembly require a cantilena that springs from the liturgical texts themselves and expresses their natural verbal inflections by means of simple musical formulae adapted to the specific liturgical function of each piece. Examples from the Roman liturgy abound: the various dialogues and acclamations, the simple tone of the Te Deum, the brief responsories of Lauds and Vespers, Gloria XV, Credo I, and Sanctus XVIII.
Where Do We Begin
1. Priests, learn to sing your parts: the dialogical elements, salutations, Preface Dialogue, Preface, Words of Consecration, etc. The official melodies are laid out in the Sacramentary. It may be laborious in the beginning, but repeat it until it becomes “secod nature.” Do not reserve your sung parts for so-called special occasions or solemnities. They belong to the very first level of singing at Mass. If you sing your parts, the people will sing theirs.
2. Sing the Ordinary (i.e., unchanging parts) of the Mass. The repertory can be built up by learning one Ordinary at a time. Privilege the Ordinaries of the Roman Kyriale or simple Plainchant Ordinaries in English, such as those available from Musica Sacra.
3. Sing the Propers. The “law” governing the Propers is laid out in the GIRM, art. 48. Let’s look at it carefully. Comments in italics are my own.
48. The singing at this time is done either alternately by the choir and the people or in a similar way by the cantor and the people, or entirely by the people, or by the choir alone.
Note the four ways of executing the Entrance Chant. On solemn diocesan and parochial occasions I recommend having the people sing a metrical version of the day’s Introit in English during the procession, followed by the Chant version of the same Introit from the Graduale during the incensation of the altar.
In the dioceses of the United States of America there are four options for the Entrance Chant: (1) the antiphon from the Roman Missal or the Psalm from the Roman Gradual as set to music there or in another musical setting; (2) the seasonal antiphon and Psalm of the Simple Gradual; (3) a song 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) a suitable liturgical song similarly approved by the Conference of Bishops or the Diocesan Bishop.
The choices are given in order of preference! The first choices (not found in the Editio Typica 2002 of the Roman Missal) are the antiphon from the Roman Missal — the American “adaptors” are assuming that these texts have been put to music — then the antiphon and psalm in the Roman Gradual, either in the chant setting or in another musical setting.
The second choice is the Simple Gradual, rendered in English under the title By Flowing Waters by Dr. Paul Ford.
The third choice, a collection of psalms and antiphons approved by the Conference of Bishops or by the Diocesan Bishop, does not, to my knowledge, exist anywhere in the U.S.
The fourth choice — clearly the last resort — is a suitable liturgical song (here, there is a departure from the psalms and antiphons found in choices 1 through 4) similarly approved by the Conference of Bishops or by the Diocesan Bishop. Nowhere is there a blanket authorization to replace the chants of the Proper with “a hymn” making abstraction of all other liturgical criteria.
48. If there is no singing at the entrance, the antiphon in the Missal is recited either by the faithful, or by some of them, or by a lector; otherwise, it is recited by the priest himself, who may even adapt it as an introductory explanation (cf. above, no. 31).
The Entrance Antiphon is, in many places, routinely omitted even at “spoken” Masses.
It’s interesting that this American “adaptation” differs from what is found in the GIRM of the Editio Typica Tertia (2002) of the Roman Missal. Compare:
48. Peragitur autem a schola et populo alternatim, vel simili modo a cantore et populo, vel totus a populo vel a schola sola. Adhiberi potest sive antiphona cum suo psalmo in Graduali Romano vel in Graduali simplici exstans, sive alius cantus, actioni sacrae, diei vel temporis indoli congruus , cuius textus a Conferentia Episcoporum sit approbatus.
The Graduale Romanum and the Graduale Simplex are given as the primary references. The American accomodation of the text gives the antiphon from the Roman Missal as the first reference; this is very odd, as those antiphons were composed to be recited, not to be sung.
The infamous “alius cantus” (other chant) is very carefully circumscribed. It must be, (1) suited to the action, (2) to the day or season being celebrated, and (3) its text must be approved by the Conference of Bishops.
Si ad introitum non habetur cantus, antiphona in Missali proposita recitatur sive a fidelibus, sive ab aliquibus ex ipsis, sive a lectore, sin aliter ab ipso sacerdote, qui potest etiam in modum monitionis initialis (cf. n. 31) eam aptare.
I don’t have time to pursue this entry today, but wanted to offer some modest contribution to the ongoing discussion.