Translate

Wednesday, March 21, 2012

TO CHANT OR NOT TO CHANT, THAT IS THE PRIESTLY QUESTION

The Preface Dialogue and Preface chanted in Latin in the EF Mass. However, this can and should be chanted in the vernacular in the OF Mass, but many priests simply don't for personal reasons:

Now this priest has no inhibitions, although he once did, about chanting the Preface in the OF Mass, just as he has no inhibitions about looking at the Mass through rose colored vestments and riding in a parade wearing the same color!
On another blog where my perspective is not always appreciated (although seldom do they censor me outright)a thoughtful comment was made about priests who chant the Mass and why so many priests today do not chant their parts of the Mass in the Ordinary Form when in the Tridentine High Mass, priests chant/chanted their parts as a matter of course no matter the quality of their chanting voice? This person, though, was referring to the Pre-Vatican II era.

Just a bit of a background, the post on which this comment was made was about singing hymns at Mass and that since Vatican II we have borrowed many fine hymns from the Protestant denominations and although these are Protestant, their theology, style and sentiments are "catholic" with a little "c." For example I doubt many Catholic know that "Hark the Herald Angels Sing" is a Wesley hymn.

Nonetheless, hymns technically are not the music of the Latin Rite Mass. Rather, the parts of the Mass are they hymns of our Mass and the Mass as a whole is the hymn of the Church.

For example, our official hymns of the Latin Rite Mass are all prescribed including:

1. The Entrance Chant
2. The Kyrie
3. The Gloria
4. Offertory Antiphon
4. Credo
5. Sanctus
6. Pater Noster and Doxology
7. Agnus Dei
8. Communion Antiphon

Of the above, the Entrance Chant, Offertory and Communion Antiphons are not fixed but change day to day and truly are variable hymns, but prescribed for each Mass. Also as options for the Rite of Sprinkling Holy Water, the water's blessing may be sung with its corresponding Asperges or Vidi Aquam during Eastertide.

But in addition to that their are "priestly" parts that may be chanted:

1. The Sign of the Cross
2. All greetings including the Preface dialogue
3. The Introduction to the Penitential Act
4. The Absolution to the Penitential Act
5. The Collect, Prayer over the Offerings and Post Communion Prayer
6. The Orate Fratres with the congregation's response
7. The Preface
8. The entire Eucharistic Prayer, any choice
9. The embolism after the Lord's Prayer
10. The priest's prayer, "Lord Jesus Christ..."
11. The Ecce Agnus Dei with the Congregation's response
12. The Solemn Blessing
13. The Blessing and Dismissal

And if that isn't enough singing, The entire Liturgy of the Word may be sung, including the lessons, the Responsorial Psalm, Gospel Acclamation and the Gospel itself!

So, do we really need added on metrical hymns and anthems, either Catholic or Protestant to add to this glorious mix? Not really, but even in Pre-Vatican II times, anthems were sung in addition to the Offertory Antiphon and Communion Antiphons and I believe hymns could be sung at the Procession and recessional even at a High Mass without deacon or sub-deacon, but not perhaps at a Solemn Sung Mass (with deacon and sub-deacon) but I'm not sure to be honest.

But back to the original question as to why priests don't chant all the parts that are allowed to be chanted by the priest in the Ordinary Form of the Mass?

My humble opinion:

I don’t know if the psychology of the priest facing the congregation during Mass impacts this, but since I’ve been celebrating the EF High Mass and just this past Monday night an OF Mass ad orientem where I chanted the entire preface and Eucharistic Prayer II, I find that when I don’t see the congregation in front of me as though I’m performing before them, but rather have them behind me as though I’m a part of them, I lose a great deal of my inhibitions especially as it concerns my ability to chant well.

In other words, I feel that I have to make it a good performance for my "audience" when I’m chanting toward them--that's the psychology of facing people and singing to them. That’s not the case,though, when I’m chanting “with them” facing the same direction as they are and leading them in Liturgical chanted prayer.

But in terms of the High Mass of the Extraordinary Form, the rubric states what you are to sing and what you aren’t. In the Low Mass nothing of the Mass is sung, but four hymns are allowed. Thus, the Ordinary Form Mass borrowed heavily from the EF's Low Mass allowance for hymns in the vernacular although the Mass itself was not sung one bit. The so-called renewal of singing the Mass in the Ordinary Form relied entirely upon a "corrupt" pre-Vatican II allowance for hymns to be sung at a Low Mass (usually Marian and other saints devotional hymns and Benediction hymns. Whereas the authentic post-Vatican II renewal of the Mass should have focused on the laity singing the actual parts of the Mass including the official Entrance Chants and Offertory and Communion chants. That did not take place and still hasn't for the most part some 50 years after Vatican II began! That's a shame!

In the High Mass, the priest is mandated to chant the greetings, collect, Gospel, Preface dialogue and preface (not the Roman Canon as this is in low voice) and the Pater Noster, the Dismissal and Blessing. It’s not the priest's choice in other words. Whereas in the OF sung Mass, the priest can pick and choose as there is no distinction between low and high Mass, just Mass with music or without music or with some music depending on how the priest feels that day. That's a very odd criteria and so "chanting priests" are becoming as rare as Pink (I mean rose) Flamingos!



10 comments:

Anonymous said...

I wonder if the chant was also a memory aid? With introduction of the vernacular the metre of the chant did not translate as easily so maybe the priests were simply confused.

Fr, you mention how you are less inhibited and let 'er rip when ad Orientem. I suspect your inner Italian has something to do with that. A less tonically challenging chant could be nearly mono tonal. When you are taught chant in Seminary (or would that be hymnary?) do they teach the importance of rests? That, along with the ability to determine the priests natural key would seem to make the chant relatively easy to execute in any language.

I was discussing the link between Old Time Mountain Music and Rap/hip hop with a good friend and ethnomusicologist. The link is not apparent to the average listener until the tunes are played in the beat of the respective genre. For example, I like to play 'Cluck Old Hen' in a sort of West African style. There is a call and response pattern in 'John the Revelator' that can get tricky depending on the verse so the timing of the rests is crucial.

It seems there is a chance for priests to embrace the chant rather than melody so they can add to the beauty of the Mass with out need for Eagle's Wings.

rcg

Marc said...

"Those who sing pray twice" - St. Augustine

Since I've been at St. Joseph, we have had priests who chant very nicely. I personally like it quite a bit when you chant the Gospel at the OF Mass (and the EF, of course).

The chanting throughout the Mass helps to draw the connection between the OF and the EF for me - it is nice when the same chant is used for the Agnus Dei, the Sanctus, and the Preface Dialogue, whether they be Latin or vernacular.

I think that chanting the Latin (in the OF or EF) would make it easier to pronounce because it forces you to slow down with it.

Anonymous said...

You most certainly pose some good point.

What should have happened, but did not, was that the Low Mass/High Mass/Solemn Mass distinction should have been left alone, but some mandates should have been put in place to the effect of at least one High Mass and/or Solemn Mass being required on all Sundays and Holy Days of Obligation, with the encouragement also that all additional masses on such days be either High or Solemn.

While I think that most of what the liturgical wreckovators did in practice (and many times in principle) is truly to be abhorred, I think what they wanted musically was very noble. They wanted, yes banished-to-Iran Abp. Bugnini wanted, the Propers to be sung at every musical mass to the exclusion of hymns. And so what they did was they went the route of destroying the distinctions between the official levels of mass in the hope that more masses would have sung Propers. Did this happen? Nope. Instead we have the disgusting Option Four of the relevant GIRM paragraph (I wonder what wreckvator snuck that in there?) and now most of our sung masses have absolute CRAP music, and in reality, you can't even call them sung masses anymore because there is actually less singing in your average OF Sunday mass than there is in any EF High Mass or Solemn Mass, and 99% of the time its junky hymns.

So I propose that the CDWDS bring back the distinction between Low Mass, High Mass and Solemn Mass, and make at least one High or Solemn required every Sunday and Holy Day where this is feasible (which is most places), taking the musical blueprint as far as what must be sung from the EF, with these masses only allowing the Propers. This does two things: it makes a more consistent product so masses are more easy to predict and it forces the music to be what it should be, the Propers.

As far as settings for the Ordinary parts of the Mass, these must be regulated as well, preferably by the CDWDS. That is, the old lists of explicitly forbidden and allowed mass settings need to come back. I've seen PDFs of them and they are truly wonderful, and very clear and easy to understand. And if the CDWDS doesn't do this, then the bishops' conferences need to be made to do this, with the requirement that they receive recognitio from the CDWDS.

This is one area where I think the SSPX can help a lot with, as long as Bishop Fellay accepts the Holy Father's last olive branch, God willing.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

What I do like about the Ordinary Form of the Mass is that it does allow for some flexiblity, but I think it would be wise to label the Mass with specific singing rubrics and ceremony:

1)Low Daily Mass--no singing, period,

2)Daily Memorial/Feast/Solemnity(Saints' Mass) Sung Mass--Alleluia,Sanctus, Memorial Acclamation, Great Amen and Agnus Dei Sung

3) Sunday Low Mass: Entrance Chant; Kyrie, Gloria, Offertory Antiphon, Sanctus, Memorial Acclamation, Great Amen and Agnus Dei and Communion Antiphon sung

4) Sunday High Sung Mass:
As above for Sunday Low Mass, but to include the Priest's chanting of all His parts, including the Sign of the Cross, all the Greetings, introduction, penitential act absolution,
Preface, Prayer over the Offerings, Prayer after Holy communion, Blessing and dismissal (deacon optional)

5) Solemn High Sung Mass: all of the above as for the High Mass, but Gospel is chanted and Eucharistic Prayer is chanted, two deacon are mandatory

Anonymous said...

No doubt the performance aspect is a consideration for many priests. But, from the other side of the communion rail, I see another aspect that may correlate more with priestly chanting.

In recent years, I've been blessed (and chosen) to attend daily and Sunday Mass celebrated mainly by priests who usually chant the Preface and the proper prayers. I observe that this is done by most priests who (in my observation) otherwise exhibit a vertical view of the liturgy, and is not done by most who exhibit a horizontal view. Though of course there are exceptions both ways.

So chanting correlates with a vertical view of worship, not chanting with a horizontal view?

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

Henry, I hadn't thought of it that way but I agree. We were taught in the seminary to "proclaim" prayers, such as the Preface and Eucharistic Prayers. Chanting these isn't a proclamation, it makes it a prayer and thus vertical as you say.Proclaiming something, even to God, does seem more horizontal!

Anonymous said...

Thinking further, the most horizontal celebrants are those who adopt a conversational tone, with gestures toward and eye contact with the audience, an attempted projection of "we're all in this together" intimacy.

But one doesn't chant in a formalized but otherwise expressionless way when in intimate conversation with other folks on the same plane, only in addressing oneself upward to God. Perhaps in mediation for someone else.

Though I can hardly resist recalling an occasion when I was represented by a lawyer in court. When it came time for him to make argument for me, I was happy for him to approach the bench, turn his back to me, and address the judge sotto voce (inaudibly to me). Sort of like an an orientem silent canon. Hmm . . . . .

Anonymous said...

Henry, I that is the most appropriate comparison I can imagine.

rcg

James I. McAuley said...

AS an attorney, I have to agree with Henry's comparison -- I used to do it all the time.

On an aside, it has been my experience that many methodists/weslyans do not know that "Hark the Herald Angels Sing" comes from a Wesley. But then, it has been my experience that most do not understand what the Wesley's were about and reflect an approach more appropriate to Baptists.

Gene said...

James, Of course you know that Wesley was nuts...LOL!