A trip to McKay's Used Books always turns into a treasure hunt. In an unlabeled cardboard box in the back, I found this gem for a paltry $0.25: a pristine LP of Palestrina's Song of Songs suite recorded by the Prague Madrigal Choir in 1972! Imagine an album of high-Renaissance polyphony going on sale when the Beatles had just broken up, men were still landing on the moon but no one seemed to care anymore, & Don McLean's American Pie topped the charts.
The style is a little heavy on the vibrato - I was taught that that wasn’t yet a thing – but it’s clear this group knew their stuff. Note the lyrical echo found in some Marian hymns (& In Dulci Jubilo!). I've posted a few of my favorite tracks here for your enjoyment, but beware, it gets a little racy! 1. Osculetur Me Osculo Oris Sui 2. Trahe Me Post Te 7. Ecce Tu Pulcher Es 8. Tota Pulchra Es 12. Vox Delicti Mei 13. Surge Amica Mea 14. Dilectus Meus Mihi 15. Surgam Et Circuibo Civitatem 17. Dilectus Meus Descendit The music, Latin texts, & English (& Dutch!) translations can be found in the Motets section of THIS CPDL page. Fratres, a few references to music in my recent reading worth reflecting upon . . .
From Robert Cardinal Sarah's The Power of Silence - 24. The wonders of creation are silent and we can admire them only in silence. Art, too, is the fruit of silence... Great music is listened to in silence. Wonder, admiration, and silence function in tandem. Popular, tasteless music is performed in an uproar, a pandemonium of shouting, a diabolical, exhausting commotion. It is not something one can listen to; it deafens man and makes him drunk with emptiness, confusion, and despair. We do not experience the same feeling, the same purity, the same elegance, the same elevation of mind and soul that we experience when we listen silently to Mozart, Berlioz, Beethoven, or Gregorian chant. Man enters then into a sacred dimension, into a celestial liturgy, at the threshold of purity itself. Here music, by its expressive character, by its ability to convert souls, causes the human heart to vibrate in unison with God's heart. Here music rediscovers its sacredness and divine origin. According to Dom Mocquereau, a Benedictine monk of the Abbey of Solesmes: Plato has given us an excellent definition of music. "It is," he says, "art so ordering sound as to reach the soul, inspiring a love of virtue." He would have the best music to be that which most perfectly expresses the soul's good qualities. "It is the serve no idle pleasures," he says in another place, "that the Muses have given us harmony, whose movements accord with those of the soul, but rather to enable us thereby to order the ill-regulated motions of the soul, even as rhythm is given us to reform our manners, which in most men are so wanting in balance and in grace." This was the high ideal which the Greeks had of music. 25. The sentiments that emerge from a silent heart are expressed in harmony and silence. The great things in human life are experienced in silence, under God's watchful eye. From St. Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Ephesians - It is proper for you to act in agreement with the mind of the bishop; and this you do. Certain it is that your presbytery, which is a credit to its name, is a credit to God; for it harmonizes with the bishop as completely as the strings with a harp. This is why in the symphony of your concord and love the praises of Jesus Christ are sung. But you, the rank and file, should also form a choir, so that, joining the symphony of your concord, and by your unity taking your key note from God, you may with one voice through Jesus Christ sing a song to the Father. Thus He will both listen to you and by reason of your good life recognize in you the melodies of His Son. It profits you, therefore, to continue in your flawless unity, that you may at all times have a share in God. The Mass as said in Rome stands in continuity with the original proto-liturgy of all the ancient Christian Churches of the Mediterranean Roman world. It was originally in Greek & far less ornamented than we have now, but the essential core of the Roman Mass still stands as it was in the earliest days. To quote Fortescue:
“Our Mass goes back, without essential change, to the age when it first developed out of the oldest liturgy of all. It is still redolent of that liturgy, of the days when Caesar ruled the world and thought he he could stamp out the faith of Christ, when our fathers met together before dawn and sang a hymn to Christ as to a God… In spite of unsolved problems, in spite of later changes, there is not in Christendom another rite so venerable as ours.” That said, let’s concede that the Roman Mass emerges as a unique liturgy with the change of language from Greek to Latin in the 3rd century. While various bishops made additions to the corpus of prayer & ritual along the way, it was truly Pope St. Gregory I (d.604) that set the Mass – & especially the Canon – in the order in which we have it now. He added (or confirmed) the Kyrie & the Pater Noster. He moved the Hanc Igitur to its current location. It is also from around the time of Gregory that have our earliest liturgical books. The Gelasian Sacramentary is one such book, likely from the VIIIth century. Gregory’s biographer says, “We collected the sacramentary of [Pope St.] Gelasius (d.496) in one book, leaving out much, changing little.” Now, another point must be noted: the Roman Mass was only used in Rome & in the areas under its immediate jurisdiction. There was at this time a great variety & freedom in Christian worship that no one called into question. Inevitably, however, the other ancient centers of Christianity, Alexandria & Antioch, exerted juridical & theological influence on other local churches. The Alexandrine & Antiochene liturgies, & their offspring, came to dominate in the East. In the West, the Roman Mass was used around Rome itself; but from North Africa to the British Isles, & from the Iberian Peninsula to Gaul, there were used variations of what is now called the Gallican rite, a Latin language liturgy that had more in common with the early eastern liturgies than with the Roman Mass. Speculation has it that St. Ireneaus brought the Antiochene rite from Syria to Gaul in the mid-100’s. However it arrived, it spread throughout the West & became the dominant liturgy in lands outside of Rome. Over time, the Gallican rite became more Romanized; likewise, elements of the Gallican rite found their way into the Roman Mass, so that by the time we have liturgical books, it is difficult to tell who influenced who on what points. So, what would it have been like to attend a Mass with the bishop in the days of Pope St. Gregory the Great? Let’s see what Fortescue proposes… All things having been prepared by the clergy & acolytes, the bishop would arrive in the sacristy with his attendant priests & deacons. To prepare to offer the Holy Mysteries, the bishop would say something like the Confiteor. Prayers of this type are common across all rites & very ancient. It was inserted into the liturgy itself only in the XIth century. All preparations complete, the entrance procession would begin. With the cantor’s incipit resounding through the rafter beams of the cathedral, the choir would sing the Introit & the altar party would process forth in order of rank from least to greatest, with the exception of the sub-deacon leading the procession as thurifer. At this time, incense was mainly used for processions, both to honor the dignitary in the procession & to sanctify the route of the procession. Torch-bearers, acolytes carrying various accoutrements, sub-deacons, deacons, priests, sometimes even soldiers or princes would join the procession. The procession was long & slow, necessitating the chanting of a complete Psalm. A particular verse, often the 1st, was selected to be the refrain after each Psalm verse – this became our Introit antiphon. This antiphonal method is believed to be an Antiochene custom introduced in the West by St. Ambrose). Today, the antiphon is emphasized & the Psalm is reduced to a single verse followed by a Gloria Patri (a Roman custom for concluding a Psalm dating at least from the mid-400’s), though the singing of a larger swath of the Psalm is still an option. Further, the antiphon is no longer necessarily from the Psalm, but another verse of Scripture or even a whole-composed verse for the occasion (e.g., 31 May, The Queenship of Mary: “Let us rejoice & make a festive day in honor of the Blessed Virgin Mary…"). While we are at the Introit, two other points should be noted: 1) The variable Mass parts we call “the propers” are (wonderfully) unique to the Roman rite & are already found in all their variety in the oldest liturgical books (IVth c.). The Eastern rites, by comparison, do not have different propers for every Sunday & every occasion as we do; their liturgy is quite fixed, other than the lessons & a few alternative texts for solemnities. Specifically regarding the Introit, the Easterns do not have an entrance procession. 2) We have no record of who originally assigned the different propers to their place on the calendar, & why they chose what they did. Occasionally the connection is obvious, but many times not. When the procession had reached the steps of the altar, the bishop with his ministers pause for prayer, make the sign of the cross, then ascend the steps. There was no Asperges rite at this time. Neither were there formal, fixed prayers at the foot of the altar; priests would offer their own private prayers to prepare for Mass. Psalm 43[42] seems to have arrived here quite early, as well as, perhaps, another confession of sin. However, the written records indicate a tremendous variety of formulae used around the local churches at this point in the Mass. The prayers at the foot of the altar were only formalized in the Missal of Pope St. Pius V. Having arrived at the altar, the bishop kisses it & the Book of the Gospels laid thereupon, then the clergy offer one another the embrace of peace. The bishop now blesses the incense that he adds to the incensor, which is then likely hung up nearby the altar, rather than being swung around as we have it now (Fortescue mentions the possibility of the bishop himself being incensed, too). The entrance chant is brought to completion & the Kyrie is intoned. It is natural to assume that the Kyrie is the last remaining bit of the original Greek liturgy, but it is not. It came to Rome in the VIth century. Even in the East, it is only seems to be as old as the IVth century. The words themselves go back to the beginning of Christianity, but in the liturgy they were used to introduce a litany of petitions. In this regard, the Kyrie is not penitential, but rather implores God in his mercy to answer the petitions. The Kyrie originated in Syria & occurs with many variations in nearly all Eastern liturgies, where it is sung by the deacon along with the petitions. The “Christe eleison” is uniquely Roman. The litany form, as used in Rome, still occurs in the Litany of the Saints. However, by Gregory’s time, the petitions seem to have been dropped, perhaps displaced by the addition of the Gloria. A side note: In the Middle Ages, the Kyrie - & other parts of Mass – were commonly “farced,” meaning additional texts called tropes were worked into each Kyrie verse & fitted to the chant melodies. For example: Orbis factor, rex aeternae, eleison; Kyrie eleison. Pietas fons immense, eleison; Kyrie eleison. Noxas omnes nostra pelle, eleison; Kyrie eleison. Although the tropes were eliminated from the Tridentine Mass, the various chant ordinaries are still identified by those names (e.g., Mass XI, Orbis Factor). The New Mass brought the tropes back as Penitential Rite Option C. When you hear the deacon pray, “You came to heal the contrite of heart, Lord have mercy,” you are hearing a version of the tropes. The Kyrie (& possibly its litany) having been sung, the Gloria is now intoned. It is a translation of a very old Greek devotional hymn. Pope St. Telesphorus introduced it into the Roman Mass at the Christmas Vigil in the second century. St. Hillary of Poitiers altered it into our current form in the mid-300’s. Pope St. Symmachus (d.514) placed the Gloria after the Kyrie for all Sundays & martyrs’ feast days for Masses said by a bishop. By the XIIIth century, priests, too, were allowed to say it at every Sunday Mass, except those during Advent & Septuagesima/Lent. To conclude the introductory rites of the liturgy before the lessons, the bishop kisses the altar, turns to greet the people (“Dominus vobiscum”), & then prays the Collect on their behalf. These prayers have a complicated history derived from peoples’ processions to the Station churches of Rome. Their history is also unclear as to who composed them & when, but they (along with the Secrets, Post-Communions, & final prayers over the people) are fully developed in the Leonine Sacramentary (IVth c.). Fortescue questions if the Good Friday form of the Collects, with the deacon instructing the people “Flectamus genua… Levate” at each oration, is the original form. The prayers completed, the priest & people prepare for the lessons. Image at top: Detail of the Gelasian Sacramentary (VIIIth c.) The question arises: How did we get from the original, proto-liturgy common across the whole Christian world to a unique Roman rite?
The answer is simple: No one knows. But what fun is that!?! Though we have almost no liturgical records from those critical first four centuries, church historians have made a perennial sport of stitching together theories to explain the scant evidence that does exist. So whenever someone asserts, "But this how the Early Church did it!", you can reply with a dismissive, George Carlin-like wave of the hand, "Au contraire, mon frere." Even if there is some evidence of a particular practice (e.g., liturgical references in the Church Fathers), there is no certainty it was either an original or a universally-applied practice or that the full context of the practice is understood. A classic example would be St. Cyril of Jerusalem's oft-cited description of how to receive Holy Communion in the hand. But what about his instruction on how to receive the Precious Blood? "Then after Communion of the Body of Christ, approach the Chalice of His Blood, not extending thy hands, but bending low, and with adoration and reverence saying Amen, sanctify thyself by receiving also the Blood of Christ. And while thy lips are yet wet, touch them with thy hands, and sanctify thy eyes and thy forehead and thy other senses" Cat. Myst., v, 22, 21-22 In other words, the modern practice of the laity receiving the chalice was nothing like the practice of this one small community at a particular point in antiquity. You can also see why this practice quickly fell out of favor due to the dire threat of profanation. I am not aware - at least in my poor reading of this subject - of Cyril's described practices occurring anywhere else in the early Church. Let us conclude this introduction by saying that what is not known about Christian liturgical practice in the first four centuries absolutely dwarfs what is known. So, how did a unique Roman rite come to be? Let's speculate! The main driving factor would almost certainly be the movement of Christianity almost overnight from a despised & secretive "mystery cult" that gathered in private homes or cemeteries to a religion that was not only public, but actually held favor with the emperor & his court. The reader surely understands that the requirements for a religious ceremony in the Lateran basilica for hundreds or thousands of people are different from those for a few dozen souls gathered in secret in a house. The use of processional chants (id est, the Introit) is an easily-identified example of a change implemented to suit a practical need. Also, the translation of the liturgy from Greek to Latin would have initiated a change in how Roman bishops, clergy, theologians, & apologists thought about & defended the Faith. Language & gesture would inevitably been borrowed from existing Roman political, social, & religious customs. Emperors & royalty, senators & statesmen would demand a more regal & embellished ceremonial for the new "state cult" than what would have been found in the simpler, earlier days. During this expansive time, the Church would call the great Christological Councils (Nicea 325, Constantinople 381, Ephesus 431, Chalcedon 451, etc.) to teach & defend the deposit of Faith against the many emerging innovations & permutations that departed from the narrow line of orthodoxy. The actions & gestures of the liturgy would increasingly take on a Christologicaly meanings, such as the addition of water to the chalice: what was originally just the Roman custom of cutting wine with water became a symbol of the divine Christ taking to Himself a human nature. At nearly the same time that Christians were free of the threat of persecution, an event occurred that would have repercussions on the Christian world till this day: Caesar moved the capitol of the empire from Rome to Byzantium. Suddenly, the backwater see of Byzantium, a suffragan see of Heraclea, became the most prominent see in the empire, surpassing & swallowing up the honors, titles, & even lands of the ancient Eastern sees of Alexandria & Antioch. This absorption of all things into Constantinople was even attempted against Rome & its Bishop by the repeated attempts of certain Eastern bishops to affirm in the councils' canons the equal standing of "New Rome" to that of "Old" Rome, an exercise that repeatedly failed. Nevertheless, one can discern at least two ways in which the rise of Constantinople affected the liturgy of Rome. First, the magnificent royal court of Constantinople required an equally magnificent liturgy, with orations, litanies, processions, music, choirs, vestments, objects, furniture, architecture, mosaics, & the rest all suited for the King of kings & Lord of lords, or at least to the eastern emperor. A well-known event that supports this notion is recounted in a homily by Fr. F. McAfee: When the envoys of Vladimir, Prince of Kiev returned from attending the Divine Liturgy at the in Hagia Sophia Cathedral in Constantinople in the late tenth century, they gave this report: “We knew not whether we were in heaven or on earth, for surely there is no such splendor or beauty anywhere on earth. We cannot describe it to you; only this we know, that God dwells there among men, and that their service surpasses the worship of all other places. We cannot forget the beauty!” Ideas & practices were exchanged as legates & diplomats traveled back & forth from East to West. Even as the Byzantines were jealous of the prestige & spiritual power of "old" Rome, Rome would take note of the raised liturgical sensibilities of its Eastern rival, while remaining steadfastly entrenched in its own liturgical tradition so as not to be swayed to become more "Byzantine" (many writers have noted the restraint & noble simplicity of the Roman rite compared to the Byzantine rite). Also, as mentioned, this time period sprouted forth a bumper crop of new & heretical ideas that shaped the liturgy via the mode of "lex orandi, lex credendi". Orthodox Catholic belief was reinforced by the content of the liturgy itself. Despite the growing rivalry between Constantinople & Rome, it must be noted that liturgical variety thrived throughout Christian world. Varieties of Galican rites thrived in Spain, Gaul, the British Isles, & even north Africa. At this time, Greece & Illyria were part of the Roman partiarchate, yet retained their own liturgy, while nearby Milan shunned Roman use & kept their own Gallican-derived rite. The partiarchates of Alexandria & Antioch retained their own liturgies. The only areas that steadfastly kept the Roman rite were the city of Rome herself & her immediate provinces. The next article will look at the some details of the Roman rite & what a papal Mass might have looked like at the time of St. Pope Gregory I. Top picture: Mosaic depiction of St. Cyril, patriarch of Alexandria, extolling the divine maternity of the Blessed Virgin Mary at the Council of Ephesus. Basilica of Notre Dame de Fourviere, Lyon, France. Fratres, I have been boring everyone with little snippets that I've gleaned from reading Rev. Adrian Fortescue's The Mass. Occasionally on these digital pages, I will share some of the more interesting points of the history of the Roman Rite that we cherish & serve each week. It is noteworthy that this was written just before the carnage of WWI began. The Western world was exploding with scientific research & discovery. This was no less true in Church matters, where, due to new discoveries about old things, the established order was beginning to be called into question - resulting in what would become known as the liturgical renewal movement. As a priest & first-rate historian, Fortecue used his rare intellect to work refute much error that was being proposed in his day. The Mass itself was being called into question; he wrote a detailed history of the liturgy. There was a fad of preferring all things Oriental & Orthodox; he wrote a history of the Eastern Churches. As an aside - & a confirmation - Chesterton wrote a spoof, The Flying Inn, in which the bourgeois of England had becoming prudish about the good things of Christendom (beer & brandy, especially) & faddish about Mohammedanism. He paints a picture of Englishmen strolling about London streets in fezzes instead of top hats (I'm somewhat grateful he didn't live to see it!). Ah, but I digress... To check some of this enthusiasm for all things dusty, Pope Pius XII in 1947 penned the encyclical Mediator Dei on the Roman liturgy, in which he condemns "exagerated & senseless antiquarianism" in liturgical matters: "But ancient usage must not be esteemed as more suitable or proper... on the simple ground that it carries the savor & aroma of antiquity. The more recent liturgical rites likewise deserve reverence & respect. They, too, owe their inspiration to the Holy Spirit who assists the Church in every age..." It is even more interesting for us to read this, since the protagonists in the liturgy wars have fought their first great battle; & when the dust of the Council cleared, the progressives - who asserted that they were merely pruning a few Medieval accretions & returning to a more authentic Roman rite - had squarely won the first round. Now we can see whether or not the Missal of St. Paul VI is really an authentic restoration, as proposed. We can further judge Fortescue's observations against our experience of the revived Missal of St. Pius V, et alia. Fortescue begins his study of the liturgy from its earliest known sources: the Scriptures, esp. the letters of St. Paul, the writings of the Apostolic Fathers (Ignatius, Irenaeus, Justin Martyr, etc.), & various other early works, such as the Apostolic Constitutions. The conclusion of his first section is that, until the 3rd century or so, there existed a fairly uniform Christian proto-liturgy across the entire Roman world, so that a Catholic travelling from Alexandria or Antioch would find a very familiar liturgy when visiting Rome or Valentia. Though no liturgical books survive - much of this liturgy was recited from memory or proffered extemporaneously - snippets of it are preserved in various places, including the now-familiar description of the liturgy from the 1st Apologia of St. Justin Martyr to Emperor Titus in the mid-100's: "On the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits; then, when the reader has ceased, the president verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things. Then we all rise together and pray, and, as we before said, when our prayer is ended, bread and wine and water are brought, and the president in like manner offers prayers and thanksgivings, according to his ability, and the people assent, saying Amen; and there is a distribution to each, and a participation of that over which thanks have been given..." At this stage - with the Church spreading like wildfire through the Empire, but nevertheless, still fighting for its life - the liturgy remained simple; firstly, because it needed to be portable & discreet, & secondly, because the circumstances did not allow the kind of deep theological reflection that would later influence the liturgy. The liturgy was conducted entirely in Greek, the common tongue of the Empire. In the coming century, the Church & her liturgy would undergo profound & unforeseeable changes that would resonate to the present day. + JMJ +
"The chronic, underlying illness of the Church... isn’t prone to quick fixes, and real lay “power” doesn’t reside in money or professional skill or positions of influence... It proceeds from a personal witness of holiness." Choir, I had been thinking about starting a web page to offer some food for thought on what we do & why we do it. I realized that everything I wanted to say had already been said when I came across this article on the role of the laity in the Church by Francis Maier at The Catholic Thing. I ask you to indulge me in offering a little choir-specific commentary. That there is an illness in the Church today is a surprise to no one. The surprising part is where the cure lies. Does God the Spirit live within the Church? Of course. But does not God frequently allow His wayward people to suffer the ill effects of their choices? He does. The problems in the Church are a projection writ large of the war that rages within every human heart. The scandals in the Church echo our own scandalous behavior. The Church will be holy when we, the people of God, are holy. And we will be holy when we value the things of God above our desire for the passing things of this world or the satisfaction of our own egos. Such self-emptying & purification is not fun, but it is necessary. It is the only ground in which the Seed will take root, grow, & bear fruit. We do not serve God or help the Church, including the people of Holy Ghost parish, primarily by singing; we do it by our pursuit of holiness. More to come. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
March 2021
Categories |