The Propers of the Mass: The Neglected Handmaid of the Liturgy
Whenever I see debates about Church music, they are generally about stylistic issues, instrumentation, and the like. These debates usually center around music selection — which hymns to select and why. It’s been this way for at least as long as I’ve been involved in church music (13 years). I wish to change the terms of the debate; I’m not going to center on style or instrumentation. Instead, I wish to concentrate on the texts of the music assigned for the Mass each and every week.
Now many will wonder at the final part of that phrase. “I didn’t know each and every Mass has music assigned already. I thought pastors, music directors, and liturgical committees chose the music for the Mass.” This kind of question is a manifestation of what I see as a case of deep liturgical amnesia that has plagued the Western Church since even before the Second Vatican Council. But that is another post for another time.
Yes, the Mass has its own assigned music for the Entrance, Offertory and Communion. These may be found in the 1974 edition of the Graduale Romanum — the Roman Gradual, the official songbook of the Roman Rite in its Ordinary Form. Many people — even music directors — do not realize that the Mass has assigned music for each and every week. The Gregorian Missal for Sundays offers parallel English translations of the Latin texts.
The Introits of the Mass give us the names of certain notable Sundays and other Masses. For example, Gaudete Sunday — the Third Sunday of Advent — derives its name from St. Paul’s Epistle to the Philippians 4:4-5.
Gaudete in Domino semper; iterum dico, gaudete: modestia vestra nota sit omnibus hominibus: Dominus prope est. Nihil solliciti sitis, sed in omni oratione petitiones vestrae innotescant apud Deum.
Rejoice in the Lord always: again I say, rejoice. Let your modesty be known to all men: for the Lord is near. Be nothing solicitous: but in everything by prayer let your petitions be made known to God.
Other examples would be Laetare Sunday (”Laetare, Jerusalem”) and the Requiem Mass (”Requiem aeternam”).
Let us be frank, however — it is a demonstrated fact that the majority of parishes have attached some level of psychological unapproachability to Gregorian chant and the Latin language. Still, that doesn’t prevent a composer from setting Philippians 4:4-5 in the vernacular and allowing choirs to sing the text directly related to the original Gregorian chant assigned for the day.
(I have always marveled at this discovery. Using this reasoning, the texts at the Entrance for Christmas Mass during the Day — Puer natus est nobis (Isaiah 9:6) — are respected by singing “For unto us a child is born” from Handel’s Messiah than most other selections that people will hear at the local 10 AM Christmas Day Mass. Imagine that for an processional hymn!)
These texts cannot be shoehorned into hymn tunes, which is fine — I say it’s better that they not be. The Our Father chant, whether in Latin or the vernacular, is not shoehorned into 88 88 meter; the Church is no poorer for it. Since these are prose or liturgical poetry, why not set them to free-rhythm psalm tones? We have many options to choose from in this regard; Respond and Acclaim psalmody, Gelineau psalmody, Meinrad psalm tones, and even Anglican chant can get this job done. In the case of limited resources, one can arrange for three-part, two-part, or even unison choirs.
Going back to last Sunday’s Introit text, we could arrange it as follows:
Rejoice in the Lord always * again I say, rejoice | Let your modesty be known to all men * for the Lord is near | Be nothing solicitous * but in everything by prayer ** let your petitions be made known to God.
E D-E C * F D E | G F-G A * A F# G | G Bb A * A F E D ** D F-E D C.
(Feel free to lift the melody and harmonize it for your own choir’s use next Gaudete Sunday, but please attribute the melody to me if you do.)
There is the problem of repetition as far as changing texts on a weekly basis, which is why many singing parishes seem to have a core repertoire of about two dozen hymns (hopefully of theological soundness). I counter by saying: let the texts change; keep the melodies similar. If parishioners can learn two dozen hymns, certainly they can learn two dozen standard free-rhythm psalm tones over time!
Finally, I have mentioned the questionable theology of certain modern hymn lyrics. Without giving examples, remember that Arius of ancient infamy spread his heresy by means of song. If we use the Propers of the Mass (assuming a sound translation is available and employed), we deftly sidestep this issue entirely. The Propers of the Mass are compact, theologically rich, and almost entirely Scriptural. To employ them where they are meant to be employed is to restore no small amount of vitality to the Mass.
(Originally posted on 4marks.com).
9 Responses to “The Propers of the Mass: The Neglected Handmaid of the Liturgy”
Comments (Leave a Comment)
Trackbacks/Pingbacks
-
[...] yet repeated by analogy in their own music selection. See also my December 21, 2008 blog post “The propers of the Mass: the neglected handmaid of the liturgy.” [↩]I do not, at this point, wish to address issues of catechesis, worship politics, and the [...]
Leave a Comment
Follow CantemusDomino
![[SMMMHDH]](http://www.cantemusdomino.net/smmmhdh.png){kind=small}
![[Listed on blogs4God]](http://www.cantemusdomino.net/blogs4god.png){kind=small}
![[Valid XHTML 1.0]](http://www.cantemusdomino.net/xhtml10.png){kind=small}
![[Valid CSS 2.0]](http://www.cantemusdomino.net/css.png){kind=small}
Thank you very much for an excellent post on the propers of the Mass. Where can I purchase a book containing the propers of the Mass? Would I purchase a copy of the Graduale Romanum on Amazon?
Jane Teresa,
I would recommend buying the 1974 Graduale Romanum from CanticaNova Publications; they provide a supplemental booklet that gives English translations for instructions on using the book (the entire volume is in Latin). The Gregorian Missal for Sundays, also for the Ordinary Form, doesn’t have all of the content of the Graduale but provides actual translations of the proper chants contained therein. Hope this helps.
Right on, Aristotle. And what opportunity for “actual participation” by doing the psalm verses with the antiphons.
Indeed, nw. Literally participating in the Mass as outlined by the Missal and accompanying books, other than figuratively “papering it over” with hymns. Not that I have anything against hymns, but I’d use them in addition to the propers and not as a substitute for them.
Without endorsing the Four Hymn Sandwich, hymn choices can be a stepping stone on our path back to the propers.
Someone criticized a hymn I had programmed during Eastertide, as “not an Easter song” and when i showed her what a good match it was for the proper I gave her something to think about (this is a church musician who didn’t know of the existence of propers.)
Unfortunately, a similar encounter with a priest did not go so well, his answer was I don’t care, we’re going to sing “Alleluia! Alleluia! Let the Holy Anthem Rise.”
Oh well, ya win some, ya lose some…
(Save the Liturgy, Save the World)
In many cases the texts of the propers help to either tie together or to emphasize significant points made in the readings for the day. As such the propers are a tool for catechesis. This is the foundation of the case I’m going to be making in my parish for the adoption of the propers.
Very clear post on the topic - and think of all the time everyone would save by using the propers. No tedious committee meetings, no perusing the suggestions of OCP, NPM, GIA, etc. Time that could be devoted to improving one’s singing.
Now, just how do we get their hearts and minds on board with the project? One music director, when an assistant (not me) pointed out The American Gradual on the bookshelf, harrumphed in disgust, “Oh, chant! Ugh.” Hearts and minds….
Taking the scriptures assigned for the day’s Mass and setting them to music is a very good idea. It’s also an opportunity for musicians to work with the priest directly. I’ll give an example: On Dec. 11 (Vigil of Our Lady of Guadalupe, though not a Solemnity in the U.S.), the music was a bit disorganized since the regular choir and music director were not involved. It came as something of a surprise to many folks that a few musicians were present and prepared to sing the Mass, all in Spanish vernacular, to be sure, but a sung Mass nevertheless. Our priest had selected a Psalm (also vernacular). I can no longer remember which one precisely, but one of the ladies responsible for preparing the Church for Mass asked me if we planned on singing the Psalm. I said that we could, and she gave me a page with Father’s selected Psalm text from the Lectionary. I provided a very simple setting for it, I think in B-minor. Nothing very extravagant (most of my music training is self-teaching in the past five or six years, so I’m kinda green).
One of the Guadalupanas came to the choir after Mass to thank everyone because the music “was so beautiful.” Now, that Psalm was only a small part of everything else, but it was Father’s own selection. And this is no mere assuaging of the ego: I don’t quite remember which it was, but I do remember thinking it was a good fit for the Feast day insomuch as the text was concerned.
If you think about it, getting the texts right for Mass is (or should be) a big part of a priest’s job This goes beyond the Readings and Gospel and Psalm because the Ordinary Form of the Mass has many areas where a Priest may legitimately exercise some choice. This is especially true in the Spanish vernacular. Our current priest is from Colombia, and his recitation of the Eucharistic Prayer is subtly different from that of our previous Priest, who was Mexican and trained in U.S. Seminaries. I am now convinced that the different Latin American Episcopal Conferences have approved slightly different Spanish translations, based on local need.
Supporting the Priest’s legitimate choice of text is one way to align ourselves with Father and the rest of the liturgical corps.