propriety of the propers
DESCRIPTION
Rev. David M. Friel: "The Propriety of the Propers: Toward the Independence of Liturgical Chant and Popular Hymnody"TRANSCRIPT
The Propriety of the Propers
Toward the Independence of Liturgical Chant and Popular Hymnody
Rev. David M. Friel
Master of Arts Thesis
Dr. Theodore Kiefer, Advisor
02 April 2011
Friel 1
The Gregorian propers command a singular role as the primary liturgical chants of the
Roman Rite. In recent times, and especially in the United States of America since the Second
Vatican Council (1962-1965), their unique role has been challenged by the growing introduction
of popular hymnody to supplant the proper chants. Both liturgical chant and popular hymnody
are good, even necessary, components of healthy Catholic culture, but the two genres are
strongest individually when they maintain independence from each other. After a brief
introduction to the history of the Proprium Missae, a presentation of the virtues of the propers
and the authentic role of hymnody will help to develop a pastoral plan for building up both
distinct genres.
I. Brief History of the Proprium Missae
Historical Development of the Proprium Missae
The prayers, chants, and other components of the Mass as it is celebrated in the Roman
Rite have developed over the Christian centuries into an immense and precious heritage,
including some texts still in use today that can be traced at least as early as the fourth century.
As part of the process of development, the structure of the Mass was formed to include
unchanging elements as well as parts that vary by the day or season. Thus, what has come to be
called the Ordinarium Missae consists of those parts of the Mass which remain constant
throughout the liturgical year. These “ordinary” components are to be distinguished from the
Proprium Missae (the “propers”), which consists of the parts of the Mass that vary according to
the particular day, saint, or mystery being observed. The present study concerns the seven
propers that have traditionally belonged to a minister other than the priest celebrant (i.e., chiefly
the schola cantorum, cantor, or lector) as part of the concentus (namely, the introit, gradual,
Friel 2
alleluia, tract, sequence, offertory, and communion). There are also three proper prayers to
which the priest gives voice as ingredients of the accentus (namely, the Collect, Secret/Prayer
over the Gifts, and Post-Communion), but attention here will be given to the seven “sub-genres”
of propers generally executed by the choir.
The first such category within the Proprium Missae is the introit, which originally took
the form of a festal, processional antiphon chanted together with psalm verses (or even a whole
psalm, in the Old Roman form). In their modern Gregorian form, however, each introit includes
only one brief verse.1 It is the first words, or incipits, of these introits that have given traditional
names to the feasts of the liturgical year (e.g., Gaudete Sunday, Laetare Sunday, Quasimodo
Sunday, Requiem Mass, etc.). The texts of the introits are, almost without exception, Scriptural,
and roughly two in three are taken from the psalms. Melodically, each introit is very unique.
Whereas the ancient chants for antiphons in the Divine Office often overlap with similarities (as
their vast number almost requires), the chants for these introits, which share the antiphonal form,
appear to have been consciously crafted to be unique.2 The collection of introits displays a wide
selection of modes (all eight) and an aversion to cadential similarity, such that each introit is
very memorable and recognizable.3 Yet, while the introits are melodically quite disparate, they
are at the same time very homogeneous in form, length, and style. Their common form is an
antiphon with a single psalm verse, the Gloria Patri, and the repeated antiphon; their length is
1. Josef A. Jungmann, The Mass of the Roman Rite: Its Origins and Development, vol. 1, trans., Francis A.
Brunner (New York: Benziger Brothers, 1959), 324-325.
2. James McKinnon, The Advent Project: The Later-Seventh-Century Creation of the Roman Mass Proper
(Berkeley: University of California Press, 2000). This landmark work hypothesizes that the musical complexity and
annual organization of the introits are evidence that their composition was the work of an elite schola cantorum,
likely during a time of peace and prosperity (namely, the seventh century).
3. David Hiley, Western Plainchant: A Handbook (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993), 109-116.
Friel 3
uniformly rather brief; and their style is mostly syllabic or neumatic, with occasional melismatic
passages.4
The second “sub-genre” of Mass propers is that of the offertorium (also called the
offerenda). Developed at least from the time of Saint Augustine, the offertory gave musical
accompaniment to the procession of the people, who traditionally brought material gifts to the
Church for distribution among the poor. The chant likely began in the antiphonal style, but, the
collection of material goods having fallen out of practice, the verses were abolished in the Missal
of Pius V. The current form of the offertories, therefore, includes only the refrain, which is
usually a passage from the psalms. The focus of the texts tends to center more on the theme of
the season or particular celebration than on the action of offering. These chants can be rather
challenging for singers, since their melody lines usually combine wide ranges with melismatic
episodes.
The distribution and reception of Holy Communion is similarly accompanied by a proper
chant, called the communio. These pieces, which appear musically tied to the introits, began in
the form of antiphonal psalmody. Verses would be sung until all communicants had received the
Blessed Sacrament, as described in the Apostolic Constitutions of the fourth century.5 Since the
twelfth century, however, when frequent reception of Communion had grown less common, the
form has been a simple antiphon without verses.6 The texts of the communions often derive
from the psalms, like the other propers, but many of them, uniquely, are taken from the Gospels.
4. Christoph Tietze, Hymn Introits for the Liturgical Year (Mundelein, IL: Hillenbrand Books, 2005), 23.
5. See The ,ew Harvard Dictionary of Music, ed. Don Michael Randel (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of
Harvard UP, 1986), 182. Hereafter, abbreviated “Randel.”
6. Jungmann, vol. 2, 396.
Friel 4
Their theme is almost unfailingly pointed toward the particular feast being celebrated, and not
necessarily to the communion rite.7
Each of the foregoing types of chants—introits, offertories, and communions—is
designed to accompany the ritual actions (processions) of the Mass. The two remaining
propers—the gradual and alleluia (or tract)—are, alternatively, designed predominantly as both a
response to and preparation for the Word of God. The time at which these chants occur in the
liturgy, historically, was not filled with any other action. Thus, the gradual and alleluia serve as
liturgical respites for meditation and rejoicing.8
The gradual is so named because it was chanted from the altar step, since only the Gospel
was proclaimed from the top platform.9 It originally involved the chanting of an entire psalm,
with the assembly intervening with a periodic refrain (much like the responsorial psalm, the
counterpart to the gradual in the Missal of 1970). Over the course of many centuries, the
structure of the gradual became simplified to include only a respond followed by an
accompanying verse. With the revised Graduale Romanum of 1908, however, the option was
given to restore the original form, in which the responsum is repeated after the chanting of the
verse.10 In the modern ordinary form, either the responsorial psalm or the gradual may be sung
between the first and second readings. The musical character of the graduals tends toward the
melismatic, and many of them also appear centonate, bearing signs of compilation from
preexisting, stock phrases of chant.
Manuscript evidence shows that, together with the gradual, the alleluia is among the
oldest proper Mass chants. Traditionally begun after the gradual or the second Scripture reading,
7. Jungmann, vol. 2, 399.
8. Jungmann, vol. 1, 432.
9. Jungmann, vol. 1, 432.
10. Jungmann, vol. 1, 428.
Friel 5
the alleluia precedes the proclamation of the Gospel. The musical range of most alleluias is very
small by comparison to the other propers, but they can be equally ornate. In form, the alleluia is
chanted once by a cantor and then repeated by the schola or all present. On its repetition,
though, the terminal –a syllable of “alleluia” is extended into a lengthy melisma, called a jubilus.
The tract replaces the alleluia during penitential seasons. In the ordinary form, this
replacement occurs only during Lent, and, in the extraordinary form, it occurs also during
Septuagesima and Requiem Masses. In form, the tracts consist of a number of psalm verses with
no repetition. Because of their highly melismatic nature, they account for some of the longest
chants in the Liber Usualis. The tracts use only two modes and are highly centonized, often
composed of nothing more than a succession of formulaic passages.
The only element of the Proprium Missae remaining to be mentioned, the sequence, we
shall present in somewhat greater detail here because of the significance it will have in our later
treatment of hymnody. The sequentiae have been named variously over the centuries. They
were predominantly known as prosae throughout the medieval period, but they had also been
called hymni because of their relation to the innovative liturgical hymns of St. Ambrose in the
fourth century.11 No complete account of the origin of sequences can be given, inasmuch as they
seem to have developed organically within the liturgy while receiving little early documentation.
Nevertheless, there is one general account of the sequences’ birth that commands near consensus
among scholars as the most likely explanation of their origin. On this account, the sequences
grew in a way similar to the rise of tropes, corresponding in time to the great age of Western
monasticism.
Tropes were chanted commentaries upon the sacred liturgy that served both as flourishes
and as introductions to such liturgical texts as the introit, offertory, communion, Gloria, Sanctus,
11. Ruth Ellis Messenger, The Medieval Latin Hymn (Washington, D.C.: Capital Press, 1953), 6-7.
Friel 6
and Agnus Dei. Of themselves, tropes were non- or extra-liturgical. The practice of troping
began soon after the close of the Scriptural canon in the fourth century and ended near the end of
the twelfth century.12 Throughout the duration of their usage, tropes came in different forms.
Some consisted solely in the extension of the melody into a prolonged melisma, with no
incorporation of additional words.13 Others were interpolations that grafted a text onto a
melismatic passage of the liturgical chant; that is, a syllable would be assigned to each note of
the melisma. Alternatively, the trope could add both text and tones to the established chant, as in
the famous trope on the Easter introit, Quem queritis in sepulchro. Precisely how tropes were
executed is a matter of some speculation, but their influence in the creation and spread of
sequences is clear.14
The unverifiable, yet widely accepted tradition among musicologists claims that the
father of sequences in the Roman rite is Notker the Stammerer (c. 840-912), rendered in Latin as
“Notker Balbulus.” A monk of the Abbey of Saint Gall, which sits in modern-day Switzerland,
it is believed that he experimented with the practice of troping by giving syllables to each note in
the melismatic ending of the alleluia chants. The jubilus extension common to the alleluia form
afforded prime material to receive syllables for singing. Seizing this opportunity, Saint Notker
added words to the jubili as a mnemonic aid for learning the notes. As the words were given
more meaning and beauty, however, this new kind of trope began to be appreciated for the sake
of the words’ meaning as well as the musical notes. Indeed, it became a genre of its own,
12. Randel, 877.
13. The term “melisma” refers to a musical phrase with several notes sung to a single syllable. Cf.,
Randel, 480.
14. William T. Flynn, Medieval Music as Medieval Exegesis (Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press, Inc., 1999),
13-16, 48-56.
Friel 7
completely removed from the practice of troping. Eventually, the sequence became distinct even
from the alleluia chant from which it received its life.15
The development of the sequences is well categorized into early, middle, and late
periods.16 The early period begins in the ninth century and is summarized in the work of Notker,
who published his Liber hymnorum in 887 as a collection of sequences, among which many were
his own handiwork. These early sequences were characterized by a loose form of couplets
interspersed with a few single, uncoupled lines, particularly at the beginning and end of the text.
One could diagram their structure in this way: A BB CC DD . . . X.17 The sequences of the early
period possessed rather inconsistent meter, and almost no extant sequences from this period
employ any degree of rhyme. Assonance, however, was a common feature of many sequences.18
In terms of usage, the sequence repertory was far from standardized in this period. A few
(perhaps twenty-five) sequences from Notker’s collection became reasonably well known
throughout central Europe, but most sequences were found only locally or regionally.19 An
Italian school emerged early, featuring sequences much shorter than those of Notker. Both the
Italian sequences and those of Notker in southern Germany give “the impression of a solemn
sermon”20 by their artistic style and refined theological content.
The champion of the middle period is Adam of St. Victor (d. 1146), a monk at the
Augustinian monastery of St. Victor near Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris. Encompassing the
eleventh and twelfth centuries, this was a transitional period in which the sequence genre forged
15. Messenger, 41-42.
16. Some scholars, however, prefer to speak of only two categories, early and late, with a period of
transition between the two. Among those preferring this latter categorization is Professor László Dobszay. For our
purposes, however, we shall distinguish the three periods: early, middle, and late.
17. László Dobszay, “The Life and Meaning of the Sequence,” Sacred Music 134, no. 2 (Summer 2007):
10.
18. Adrian Fortescue, The Mass: A Study of the Roman Liturgy (Albany, NY: Preserving Christian
Publications, Inc., 1999), 273.
19. Dobszay, “The Life and Meaning of the Sequence,” 9.
20. Dobszay, “The Life and Meaning of the Sequence,” 11.
Friel 8
by Notker Balbulus underwent revision and achieved greater solidity. The exemplar of Victorine
sequences is one written to the Holy Cross, entitled, Laudes cruces attollamus. The sequences
composed by Adam of St. Victor and his contemporaries exhibit more strict form than those of
Saint Notker, using only couplets and no single, unpaired lines. It was also at this time that
rhyme was first introduced to this written form, in addition to the assonance Notker employed so
widely. Rhyme was still not a necessary quality of the form, but it had begun to grow in
popularity. Additionally, the length of each line started to become more or less even, albeit not
perfectly so, and the overall length of the Victorine sequence began to grow considerably, often
including ten or more couplets.21
The final stage in the development follows the middle period and lasts until the Protestant
revolt. There is no clear figure to serve as the paradigm of this late period from its inception in
the mid-twelfth century, but the thirteenth-century sequences of Saint Thomas Aquinas (1225-
1274) are perhaps its greatest achievements. Notably, of the very few sequences retained for use
in the Roman rite, one of the texts utilized was written by Thomas Aquinas. These, together with
the other sequences of the late period, display even greater metrical regularity than those of the
former centuries, and rhyming couplets had become the almost invariable standard form of the
now polished genre. Each half of the couplets consisted of two eight-syllable lines followed by
one seven-syllable line (i.e., 8-7-7 / 8-8-7); moreover, the rhyme scheme within these couplets
was A-A-B / C-C-B. Any aberration from the established strophic pattern in these later works
could well be presumed to be the conscious intention of the author.22
More significant than the external conformity of the sequences to a set, hymn-like form,
however, was the immensity of their growth in profundity. The Parisian influence upon the
21. Dobszay, “The Life and Meaning of the Sequence,” 12-13.
22. Dobszay, “The Life and Meaning of the Sequence,” 13.
Friel 9
sequences at St. Victor had introduced the beginnings of Scholasticism to the writing of new
texts, and the scholastic influence burgeoned even further in the late period, such that sequences
became highly vivid, precise, and meaningful expressions of theology. Thus, what likely began
as Notker’s memorization tool for the melismatic jubili of the alleluia chants grew over the
course of centuries into an independent liturgical art blending poetry with music.23
Analysis of the Conciliar Intention
As is widely known, the sacred liturgy is one topic that received particular attention
during the Second Vatican Council. Within the realm of liturgy, sacred music, too, was an area
of special concentration. While many interpretations exist in this field, the authentic intention of
the Council regarding the renewal of music in the liturgy can only be ascertained with fairness
by a genuine reading of two documents: the Council’s own “Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy”
(Sacrosanctum Concilium, 1963), of which the sixth chapter is devoted to sacred music, and the
post-conciliar “Instruction on Music in the Liturgy” (Musicam Sacram, 1967) issued from the
Sacred Congregation of Rites. What emerges clearly from these documents is that sacred music
is an “integral part,”24 indeed, the “humble handmaid,”
25 of the sacred liturgy. The Council
documents regard musica sacra in the same way as had Pope St. Pius X’s motu proprio, Tra le
Sollecitudini—the first papal document ever to be addressed to the universal Church on the sole
topic of sacred music. I propose that there is found a great continuity in the vision of the
twentieth-century pontiffs and the sacred Council concerning the nature, purpose, and usage of
sacred music.
23. Dobszay, “The Life and Meaning of the Sequence,” 13-14.
24. Sacrosanctum Concilium, Second Vatican Council, 4 December 1963, 112.
25. Tra le Sollecitudini, Pope Pius X, 22 November 1903, 23.
Friel 10
This continuity has not been universally perceived, of course, in the near half-century
that has passed since the Council. At least three general perceptions of the authentic conciliar
intention have risen to prominence in that time. (Although we shall employ names that have
been applied to these varying approaches, these terms ought not to be overstated or
misunderstood as mere stereotypes.) The first of these, which has been called the “progressive”
position,26 exalts the so-called “spirit of Vatican II.” This position holds that the “spirit” sought
to abolish Latin in favor of the vernacular, replace chant with folk song, and empower the laity
over the clergy. This reckoning sees a severe disconnect between the Missal of Pius V and the
Missal of Paul VI.
A second common account of the conciliar intention—the “traditionalist”27 position—
begins with ironically similar premises but ends with totally divergent conclusions. Like the first
approach, the traditionalists believe that the missal promulgated in 1970 represents a
fundamental rupture from all those that precede it. They look upon the conciliar documents with
suspicion as untrustworthy texts ridden with loopholes and limitations. They accuse the
Council’s writings of being insincere in their praise for Gregorian chant and their expressed
desire for preserving tradition. Thus, both the first and second accounts agree that what has
actually ensued in what we now call the “ordinary form” is what the Council intended; the
progressives see this as a good and liberating thing, though, whereas the traditionalists view it as
the deliberate destruction of the Roman Rite.
The third perspective takes the alternate position: that the current status quo of liturgy in
the ordinary form is not exemplary of what the Second Vatican Council intended. This
26. Jeffrey A. Tucker, Sing Like a Catholic (Richmond, VA: Church Music Association of America,
2009), 16.
27. Tucker, Sing Like a Catholic, 16.
Friel 11
“conservative”28 position looks to the texts, themselves, rather than their “spirit.” It sees
sincerity in the documents’ praise for chant and polyphony, and it believes that the ordinary form
celebrated well is a liturgy of nobility and continuity. This approach holds considerable appeal
for those younger generations in whom the often-cited “spirit of Vatican II” is not (and never
was) alive.
If this third position is tenable and has legitimate bearing for determining the Council’s
true intention, then one would expect to see sacred music “keeping to the norms and precepts of
ecclesiastical tradition and discipline.”29 The Constitution states (to the surprise of many) that
“the Church acknowledges Gregorian chant as specially suited to the Roman liturgy” and that,
therefore, “it should be given pride of place [principem locum] in liturgical services.”30 It further
praises polyphony,31 holds the pipe organ “in high esteem,”
32 and considers the role of the
Catholic composer to be a “vocation.”33 It is even so bold as to encourage “the whole body of
the faithful” toward “active participation” in celebrating with the “the treasure of sacred
music.”34 Nowhere does Sacrosanctum Concilium suggest a new framework for the Mass in
which the propers, together with the ordinary, would have no part.
The early documents of the Liturgical Movement on music (i.e., Tra le Sollecitudini,
1903, and Divini Cultus Sanctitatem, 1928) also have legitimate bearing on our understanding of
the conciliar texts, since the Council’s treatment of music in the liturgy grew organically from
what it refers to as “the restoration by St. Pius X.”35 These earlier documents show a preference
28. Tucker, Sing Like a Catholic, 17.
29. Sacrosanctum Concilium, 112.
30. Sacrosanctum Concilium, 116. The Latin original, principem locum, more literally means “principal
place” or “first place.”
31. Sacrosanctum Concilium, 116.
32. Sacrosanctum Concilium, 120.
33. Sacrosanctum Concilium, 121.
34. Sacrosanctum Concilium, 114.
35. Sacrosanctum Concilium, 117.
Friel 12
for the term “sacred music” (musica sacra) over “liturgical music” (musica liturgica).36 They
advocate for the cultivation of a “sacred” style of music that is categorically separate from the
“secular” music that had become common in churches throughout the Romantic era. Neither of
these documents, the careful reader observes, demonstrates consciousness of sacred music as
constituting a vast historical repertoire of itself.37 Yet, in the very first words of the chapter on
sacred music in Sacrosanctum Concilium, the “musical tradition of the universal Church” is
described as “a treasure of inestimable value.”38 This newly developed understanding of sacred
music as a treasury (thesaurus) of great worth is, itself, an argument that the Second Vatican
Council favored the preservation and promotion of that selfsame treasury, which includes the
Proprium Missae.
Further evidence that the Council’s intention was to preserve and promote the Church’s
treasury of music comes from the action of Pope Paul VI, who sent a small collection of chants
to all the bishops of the world in 1974. The booklet, entitled Jubilate Deo, was intended as a
minimum repertoire of basic Gregorian chants.39 It contains a basic set of chants for the
Ordinarium Missae, along with some of the traditional Marian antiphons and chant hymns for
Eucharistic devotion. Jubilate Deo was crafted as a companion to the revised chant books (the
Graduale Romanum, Graduale Simplex, etc.). The revision of these books, moreover, continued
to make the distinction between the Ordinarium and the Proprium, even amidst the mild
confusion introduced by the language of Musicam Sacram (which also retains use of both
36. Anthony Ruff, OSB, Sacred Music and Liturgical Reform: Treasures and Transformations
(Mundelein, IL: Hillenbrand Books, 2007), 276, 286-287.
37. Ruff, 291.
38. Sacrosanctum Concilium, 112.
39. Jubilate Deo (Chicago: GIA Publications, Inc., 1974).
Friel 13
terms).40 Still, there was no indication that the role of the propers was defunct in the new order
of Mass.
From the standpoint of the third position, which strives to interpret the documents of the
Church with straightforward integrity, the vision of the Council is found in the values
highlighted in the documents treated above. If this position is taken, it must be concluded that
the intention of the Second Vatican Council, regarding sacred music, was to embrace and
preserve the musical heritage of the Church and to enliven and promote that heritage at the
popular (i.e., parish) level.
Exposition of the Present Situation
Even a brief history of the Proprium Missae would be incomplete without an exposition
of how the conciliar vision has been implemented or ignored in the last nearly fifty years. The
account given here, although parts of it may have a more general or universal application, is
directed specifically at the present situation of Catholic sacred music within the United States.
One of the most excellent overviews of liturgical music following the Second Vatican
Council is given in “The Snowbird Statement.” Published in November 1995, it is the work of a
group of eminent liturgists and musicians from the English-speaking world (including Canada,
Ireland, the United Kingdom, and the United States). In addition to its praise for many of the
positive developments of this time period, it offers a charitable critique of some developments
that its authors “view as problematic, imperfect, or unworthy of the Church’s mission.”41
40. For further discussion of this confusion, see Ruff, 475-479.
41. The Snowbird Statement on Catholic Liturgical Music. Salt Lake City: The Madeleine Institute, 1995,
2.
Friel 14
It first admits concern over the use of music that lacks aesthetic beauty and so
inadequately celebrates the beauty of God’s self-revelation.42 It also praises the creation of “the
concept of ritual music,” but warns against its potential devolution into “utilitarian
functionalism.”43 The statement also addresses the issue of enculturation. While a certain
communication must exist between liturgy and culture, the authors confess, the liturgy should
never take on an ethos that is merely therapeutic or entertaining. They specifically recognize the
dangers of the tendency toward “sentimentality, consumerism, individualism, introversion, and
passivity” in some contemporary sacred music.44
Among its other concerns, the Snowbird Statement suggests that improved vocal
technique is needed among cantors proclaiming psalm verses.45 It describes the liturgical-
musical formation of seminarians as “seriously inadequate”46 and calls upon the music programs
in college, seminary, and cathedral settings to “provide visionary example for the entire
Church.”47 The authors regret that much of the music that has become common repertoire
among Catholics has been “established by default rather than by informed design,”48 and they
lament the collapse of the choir that has recently occurred in many places.49
One very significant observation made in the statement regards another document
published in the time following the Council. Speaking of Music in Catholic Worship, the 1972
document promulgated by the United States bishops, the Snowbird authors contend that “it has
given rise to a particular, rather standardized, model of music in liturgy [that] needs to be
42. Snowbird, 3.
43. Snowbird, 5.
44. Snowbird, 7.
45. Snowbird, 10.
46. Snowbird, 12.
47. Snowbird, 4, 12, 14.
48. Snowbird, 17.
49. Snowbird, 20.
Friel 15
enhanced.”50 This text, together with its 1982 companion, Liturgical Music Today, has
unquestionably had tremendous impact on the state of Catholic music. Whether the impact of
these texts has been consonant with the ideals set forth by Sacrosanctum Concilium, however, is
an open question.
In contrast to the conciliar documents, which assign Gregorian chant “pride of place”51
and the role of primary model for new compositions,52 Music in Catholic Worship claims that
“the musical settings of the past [i.e., Gregorian chant] are usually not helpful models for
composing truly liturgical contemporary pieces.”53 Similarly, Liturgical Music Today
acknowledges that Sacrosanctum Concilium reveres the Catholic heritage of music as “a treasure
of inestimable value,”54 but it immediately refers to the same treasure as “the music of the past”
four times in as many paragraphs.55 Music in Catholic Worship and Liturgical Music Today
present a fundamentally different perspective than all the previous papal legislation and conciliar
writings on sacred music; instead of envisioning an ideal and presenting the challenge to meet
that ideal, as had been done in the past, these new publications looked at the trends of the time
and built a framework around those trends.
Furthermore, there is an implicit preference in both documents from the bishops’
Committee on the Liturgy for freely chosen hymns in place of the Gregorian propers (whether in
Latin or the vernacular).56 Both texts speak with the assumption that the entrance, offertory, and
communion processions will be accompanied with songs and not with the propers. Additionally,
50. Snowbird, 18.
51. Sacrosanctum Concilium, 116; Musicam Sacram, Sacred Congregation of Rites, 5 March 1967, 50a.
52. Sacrosanctum Concilium, 23, 121; Musicam Sacram, 59-61.
53. Bishops’ Committee on the Liturgy, Music in Catholic Worship (Washington, D.C.: National
Conference of Catholic Bishops, 1972), 51.
54. Sacrosanctum Concilium, 112.
55. Bishops’ Committee on the Liturgy, Liturgical Music Today (Washington, D.C.: National Conference
of Catholic Bishops, 1982), 49-52.
56. Ruff, 479.
Friel 16
Music in Catholic Worship makes the surprising claim that “the former distinction between the
ordinary and proper parts of the Mass with regard to musical settings and distribution of roles is
no longer retained,”57 and Liturgical Music Today gives no revision or further treatment to the
propers. That this claim is erroneous cannot be substantiated by Sacrosanctum Concilium alone
(because it does not directly address the distinction of ordinary and proper parts), but the
ongoing presence of this distinction is evident throughout Musicam Sacram.58 On the basis of
the foregoing analysis, these two publications appear to have innovated the vision of a post-
Gregorian chant (or at least post-Gregorian proper) liturgy.
This relegation of the propers to prayers rarely prayed or practiced has been furthered,
also, by the Missal of 1970. The revised missal, even in Latin, was published with entrance and
communion antiphons that usually, though not always, correspond to the antiphon from the
Graduale Romanum for that day. The proper gradual and alleluia (or tract), although they would
more likely pertain to the revised Lectionary than the Sacramentary, are missing, as are the
proper offertory chants. This omission has likely contributed to the sense that the chant propers
are “music of the past.”59
The importance of Music in Catholic Worship and Liturgical Music Today in our study is
that their vision of sacred music has, in practice, largely become normative in the United States,
such that “the average Catholic parish offers a liturgical experience that no Catholic in the
history of the faith would recognize as aesthetically familiar.”60 Where there appear to be
tensions between these documents and those of the Second Vatican Council, one’s common
experience in America indicates that greater allegiance has been given to those of the bishops’
57. Music in Catholic Worship, 51.
58. C.f., Musicam Sacram 16c, 32, 33, 34, 36, and 47.
59. Liturgical Music Today, 49-52.
60. Jeffrey A. Tucker, “The Year of English Chant Propers,” Sacred Music 136, no. 2 (Summer 2009): 59.
Friel 17
committee, even though they command less authority. As a result, the propers of the Mass
unfortunately constitute a category unknown to many Catholics, and even many Catholic
musicians.61
II. Virtues of the Propers
Having presented some of the history of the Roman propers and their treatment in recent
Church documents, the foundation is set to make an argument for their special status among the
options for liturgical song. By virtue of their unique origin, marriage of melody with text,
universality, and Roman character, we shall assert that the Gregorian propers are the singular
ideal for which every Catholic musician ought to strive.
Our Blessed Lord Sang
An analysis of the value of the propers might well begin with a consideration of their
origin. Our earlier discussion addressed some of the historical background and development of
these chants, beginning in the early Christian centuries. Is it reasonable, however, to suggest that
the Mass propers have their ultimate origin at the proto-Eucharist offered by Jesus on the night
He was betrayed?
Between the Last Supper and Gethsemane accounts in the Gospel of Matthew, we read,
“And a hymn being said, they went out unto mount Olivet”62 (Mt 26:30).
63 This verse serves,
simultaneously, as a conclusion to the preceding Last Supper pericope (Mt 26:26-29) and as an
61. The propers are even sometimes ignored by scholars in the field of sacred music. For instance, there is
no section devoted to the Proprium Missae in Karl Gustav Fellerer, The History of Catholic Church Music, trans.
Francis A. Brunner, C.Ss.R. (Baltimore: Helicon Press, 1961).
62. The Catholic Comparative ,ew Testament, Rheims New Testament translation (New York: Oxford
UP, 2005), 198.
63. An almost verbatim Markan parallel is found in Mk 14:26.
Friel 18
introduction to Jesus’ prediction of Peter’s denial (Mt 26:31-35) and the agony in the garden (Mt
26:36-46), which follow.64 Especially when taken as part of the Lord’s Supper pericope, verse
30 takes on special significance as part of the Jewish Paschal feast, which was a reliving of the
great Exodus. The significance of this interpretation, however, cannot be understood apart from
the Sitz im Leben of ancient Jewish society.
The story of the Passion—indeed, the entire Gospel—is deeply rooted in Jewish life and
history. Because the “hymn” sung by Jesus and His disciples may have been a stock component
of the Passover ritual, the format of these meals is germane to the present study. The Passover
(Pesah) feast, even in ancient times, was celebrated rather uniformly among Jewish households.
It began with the blessing of a cup of wine, to be shared by all present. Then, herbs were dipped
in salt and eaten. After the head of the family had broken one unleavened bread cake and set
another aside, certain psalms would be sung (likely Pss 112-114) and a second cup would be
received. Thereafter, hands were washed, grace was offered, and bitter herbs were eaten. The
highlight of the feast was the consumption of a roast lamb, after which the third “cup of
blessing” was passed. Finally, the ritual closed with the remaining Hallel (i.e., Hallelujah)
psalms (Pss 115-118) and the final cup of wine.65 It is the contention of many scholars that Jesus
either replaced or followed the climactic roasted lamb with the institution of the Lord’s Supper,
using the unleavened bread that had been set aside and the third blessing cup.66
Moreover, many scholars contend that the Hallel Psalter used to close the feast may have
been the “hymn” mentioned in Mt 26:30.67 If this is true, then much further exploration is
64. W. D. Davies and Dale C. Allison, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to
Saint Matthew (Edinburgh: T&T Clark Ltd., 1997), 483.
65. I. Howard Marshall, Last Supper and Lord’s Supper (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 1980),
179.
66. Eerdmans’ Handbook to the Bible, ed. David Alexander & Pat Alexander (Grand Rapids, MI:
Eerdmans, 1992), 492-493.
67. John J. Pilch, “‘After they had sung a hymn...’,” Bible Today 44, no. 3 (May 2006): 186.
Friel 19
possible. The term Hallel actually applies to three groups of psalms: the Daily Hallel, the
Egyptian Hallel, and the Great Hallel. The Daily Hallel, simply, are Psalms 145-50, recited
every morning. The Egyptian set includes Psalms 112-114, mentioned above, and the Great
Hallel describes Psalm 136 by itself. These last two categories of psalms are incorporated in the
Pesah seder, or Passover meal.68
One scholar, Helga Rusche, suggests that the hymn in Mt 26:30 was the Great Hallel.69
This text is a psalm by genre, but a litany by form; every half-verse repeats a refrain (“for his
mercy endures forever”), which was probably chanted in response to the strophes sung by a
cantor.70 The suggestion of Psalm 136, however, is unsubstantiated according to other scholars,
who argue that no historical grounds for it can be established. Rusche further contends that
Psalm 136’s recollection of God’s mighty deeds and responsorial acclamation of love are
appropriate sentiments to be expressed in the interim between the Lord’s Supper and the garden
of Gethsemane,71 but her opponents claim that the Great Hallel seems no more apt for the
occasion than many other psalms.72
It is worthy of note that psalms are not the only material to have been proposed as the
referent of this “hymn” mentioned by Matthew and Mark. Historically, certain sects have
claimed to possess the true text of the hymn in various apocryphal writings. St. Augustine
addresses this issue in a letter to the Spanish bishop Ceretius concerning the heresy of
68. The Oxford Dictionary of the Jewish Religion, ed. R.J. Zwi Werblowsky & Geoffrey Wigoder (New
York: Oxford UP, 1997), 296.
69. Helga Rusche, “Das letzte gemeinsame Gebet Jesu mit seinen Jüngern: Der Psalm 136,” Wissenschaft
und Weisheit 51, no. 2 (1988): 210-212.
70. Pilch, 186.
71. Rusche, 210.
72. J. du Preez, “The Missionary Significance of Psalm 117 in the Book of Psalms and in the New
Testament,” Missionalia 27, no. 3 (1999): 372.
Friel 20
Priscillianism.73 Having explained why apocryphal texts do not merit the same reverence as the
canonical Sacred Scriptures, Augustine cites parts of the apocryphal hymn. Pieced together,
these quotations might take this form:
I want to be born, I want to sing; all of you, dance.
I want to grieve; all of you, beat your breasts.
I want to adorn, and I want to be adorned.
I am a lamp for you, O you who see me.
Whichever of you knocks at me, I am a door for you.
You who see what I do, be silent about my works.74
This conglomerated text is theologically true, or at least innocuous, but its authenticity is
uncertain. There are other lines, however, attributed to the same hymn of unknown authorship
that clearly break with the deposit of Divine Revelation. One such line states:
I have always deceived by word, and I was not deceived at all.75
Augustine dismisses the claim that this hymn is the one mentioned in Matthew 26:30, declaring
it the forgery of Priscillianists, who embraced poor philosophy and theology.
Origen suggests that the “hymn” mentioned by Matthew and Mark represents a
thanksgiving for the bread and cup received at the meal in Jerusalem. It was, in fact, common
practice for Jews of Biblical times to sing together at festival gatherings and meals.76 This
practice has continued into modern Judaism,77 and also in Christian liturgy. The continued,
widespread use of ancient hymns and psalms testifies to the importance and antiquity of sacred
music. It is considered likely that the singing of the Hallel psalms of praise and thanksgiving at
the end of the Passover meal are directly related not only to modern liturgical music, but also to
73. Augustine of Hippo, “Letter 237,” in The Works of Saint Augustine, ed. Boniface Ramsey, trans.
Roland Teske (Hyde Park, NY: New City Press, 2005), 136-141.
74. Augustine, 140.
75. Augustine, 141.
76. Pilch, 186.
77. W. F. Albright and C. S. Mann, The Anchor Bible: Matthew (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1971),
326.
Friel 21
the closing collect, or “prayer after communion,” in the current Roman Rite.78 Saint John
Chrysostom goes so far as to interpret this passage as an encouragement for all Christians not to
depart from Mass until after the thanksgivings have been offered.79 With this understanding, a
strong connection arises between the first Christian Eucharist and the Catholic liturgy of modern
times.
The thought of Jesus and the Twelve singing is, itself, noteworthy. Nowhere else in
Sacred Scripture, save these parallel verses in Matthew and Mark, is it written that Christ sang.
Interpreted in light of the action in subsequent pericopes, this moment of song is a preparation
for the Passion. Saint Augustine writes that “only he who loves can sing,”80 and the hymn on the
way to Olivet is a sign of Christ’s profound love for mankind. The song is an expression of
perfect love, rising beyond even altruism, such that the Son of the Creator would willingly
submit to death for love of the created. In one simple verse, the evangelist links the Lord’s
Supper to the agony in the garden, recalls the psalms and writings of the Hebrew Scriptures, and
conveys the sentiments of the Lord in the midst of the Paschal Mystery. If the Lord, Himself,
may have incorporated the chanting of psalms into the first Eucharistic celebration, perhaps a
wider usage of the psalm-based propers in modern liturgy has a very firm basis.
Marriage of Melody and Text
Text and melody form a marriage in the Gregorian propers that is not replicated in other
musical forms. Each proper “is not just a text that happens to be set to a melody, but rather, it is
78. Catena Aurea: Commentary on the Four Gospels, ed. Saint Thomas Aquinas (Albany, NY: Preserving
Christian Publications, 1993), 192-193.
79. Catena Aurea: Commentary on the Four Gospels, 192.
80. Augustine of Hippo, Sermon 336, 1 (PL 38, 1472). Cf., Josef Pieper, Only the Lover Sings: Art and
Contemplation (San Francisco: Ignatius, 1990), 11.
Friel 22
an integral piece comprised of both melody and text together.”81 This integrity is a hallmark of
all Gregorian chant, but especially of the Proprium Missae, and it is one of the major qualities
that make the propers so ideal.
The increasing popularity of Gregorian chant is, to some extent, the result of its intrinsic
spirituality. It has found acceptance among believers and non-believers alike because it offers an
ethos of peace and serenity in the midst of societal and personal confusion, and it helps to focus
the mind and quiet the passions. This movement toward spiritualization is actually a cosmic
motion that affects the entire natural order. As a motion, it has been described as “bringing
creation into the mode of being of the Holy Spirit and its consequent transformation, exemplified
in the crucified and resurrected Christ.”82 All of creation is destined to be so transformed, in the
pattern of the Paschal mystery. For this reason, “the taking up of music into the liturgy must be
its taking up into the Spirit, a transformation which implies both death and resurrection.”83
Gregorian chant, because of the inherent mystery of its melodies, is the paradigm of this
movement toward spiritualization.
Of the melodies sung and played in prehistoric and ancient times, very little can be said
authoritatively. Music that predates the advent of even a rudimentary system of notation is more
the subject of speculation than of scholarship. Yet, the ancient music that presents possibly the
most data for modern study is the Book of Psalms. Many of the psalms (e.g., Pss 8, 9, 44, 68,
56-8, and numerous others) include superscriptions that appear to give musical directions for
their execution. According to many twentieth-century interpretations, it is likely that these
81. William Mahrt, “Pride of Place,” Sacred Music 135, no. 3 (Fall 2008): 3.
82. Joseph Ratzinger, Feast of Faith, trans. G. Harrison (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1986), 118.
83. Ratzinger, Feast of Faith, 118.
Friel 23
textual notations are indicative of certain melodies or tones associated with lyrical psalmody.84
The growing evidence for this association of particular melodies with particular psalm texts
argues for the value of the Church’s heritage of chants preserved in the Mass propers.
Furthermore, like many of the propers (especially the graduals and tracts), a large group of the
reconstructed ancient psalm tones bear the marks of centonization and fixed melodic formulae.
Musically, each sub-genre within the propers is specially suited to its task. “An introit is
different from a communion, a gradual from an offertory, even if they both might use the same
text, because through differences in musical style each characterizes and differentiates the
liturgical action it accompanies.”85 No other form, ranging from strophic hymnody to the choral
anthem, is so deliberately tailored to the liturgical moment. Therefore, the express suitability of
each proper for its place in the liturgy contributes to the propers’ status as the ideal chants of the
Roman liturgy.
Chant melodies are distinctive because they lack the regular beat found in all other
musical styles. Plainsong does demand rhythm, but in a much freer way than other forms. For
this reason, while it maintains rhythmic order, chant does not bind itself to time, so it is
immensely fitting for use in the sacred liturgy, which exists to connect its participants with
eternity. The unique relationship between plainsong and rhythm helps to raise the senses to that
which lies beyond the simply sensorial, unbound by the rigidity of regular beat.86 Gregorian
chant is the pinnacle of “music that draws senses into spirit and so brings man to wholeness. It
does not abolish the senses, but inserts them into the unity of this creature that is man. It
elevates the spirit precisely by wedding it to the senses, and it elevates the senses by uniting
84. Robert A. Skeris, “On the Problem of Religious Hymn Contrafacta: Reflections Theological and
Hymnological,” in Divini Cultus Studium: Studies in the Theology of Worship and of its Music, ed. Robert A. Skeris
(Altötting: Verlag Alfred Coppenrath, 1990), 115-116.
85. Mahrt, 3.
86. Tucker, Sing Like a Catholic, 78.
Friel 24
them with the spirit.”87 Unlike some profane music, which drags people into an “intoxication of
the senses,” chant engenders a “sober inebriation” that harmonizes the interiority of the
listener.88
Another distinctive attribute of plainsong is its humility. Whereas some musical forms
tend naturally to focus attention on the person who is performing, chant accomplishes the
opposite. By its nature, “it does not seek to put the talent of the singer on exhibit.”89 It directs
the community, rather, to a shared experience of prayer that buries the ego and allows the
encounter with the Lord to “increase” (c.f., Jn 3:30). Chant, by its humility, requires its
practitioners to embrace submission to one another and to the Lord—the One to Whom it is
ultimately directed.
In addition to their melodies, the texts of the Gregorian propers also contribute to their
ideal suitability. Deriving almost exclusively from the Bible, the orthodoxy of the texts is
beyond question. Their appropriateness is similarly clear, on the basis of their careful selection
and the refining of that selection over time. There is no hymnal or set of chants for the Mass that
offers such a rich Scriptural basis and pertinence to Christian life as is found in the Graduale
Romanum. Moreover, the preference of the proper chants toward invoking the psalms, which
display an intrinsic “musical character,”90 lends to their practicality in liturgical use.
A close analysis of the selection of psalm verses for each of the propers shows that no
clear effort was made to direct all the texts of a particular Mass toward the same theme; instead,
it appears that passages were chosen from the psalms and applied to the propers so as to be
87. Joseph Ratzinger, The Spirit of the Liturgy, trans. John Saward (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2000),
150.
88. Ratzinger, The Spirit of the Liturgy, 150-151.
89. Tucker, Sing Like a Catholic, 78.
90. Jungmann, vol. 1, 422.
Friel 25
representative of the complete psalter.91 Thus, while the chosen texts are not always closely
aligned with the celebration of the day (although sometimes they are), they collectively
incorporate an immense range of the psalms over the course of the liturgical year. This has the
benefit, like the revised Lectionary, of presenting a wide amount of Sacred Scripture to the
faithful through the liturgy.
The Gregorian propers have been called “liturgical lectio divina by means of high art.”92
This description highlights the importance of the texts used in the chant. By recognizing the
propers as an opportunity for lectio divina, their performance is rarefied into a sacred reading of
the text that encourages meditation. Of particular note is that this meditation occurs not just
individually, but in common (i.e., liturgically). The use of the propers at Mass, then, helps to
stimulate the interiority of the assembly both as individual persons and as a community. Herein,
the task is not to make the text most comprehensible in terms of audibility and enunciation
(although these are indispensable factors in quality chanting); the essential task, rather, is to
make the text most comprehensible with respect to understanding and spiritual insight. A long
melismatic passage may not be the ideal way to communicate words clearly, but, more
importantly, it does apply the highest artfulness of man to the work of worship and
contemplation. In the ideal situation, the texts would be so familiar to those present that the
words would be easily distinguished, but the most significant aspect always remains their
intelligibility for prayer.93
In this treatment of the texts of the propers, some attention should be given to the
language they use to communicate the Word of God. In its second paragraph regarding sacred
91. See table in Jungmann, vol. 1, 331.
92. Ruff, 495.
93. Ruff, 495-496.
Friel 26
music,94 Sacrosanctum Concilium refers back to an article from its section on general principles,
where it is written that “the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites.”95
Speaking specifically of the Mass, the document also upholds that “a suitable place may be
allotted to [the] mother tongue.”96 It mentions the readings, intercessions, and other parts
pertaining to the people as particularly suited for employing the vernacular. The propers,
however, traditionally belong to the schola cantorum, and they are originally composed in Latin.
Furthermore, the difficulties posed by translation and the application of translations to traditional
chant melodies make a strong case for the retention of the propers in their original form.
With these arguments for Latin propers in mind, the proprium chants may nevertheless
be the most sensible place to introduce vernacular languages into the liturgy.97 Precisely because
they change with each liturgical celebration, they will necessarily be less familiar to the common
congregation. Today’s apparent “monopoly of the vernacular” may indeed be a “childhood
sickness,”98 but the liturgical vernacular does have a role in the vision of Second Vatican
Council. The purpose of the propers’ texts is to focus the thoughts of those present on the
mysteries being celebrated, and, in current practice, this might best be accomplished through the
use of the vernacular. Still, it is of “primary importance,” whenever the vernacular is introduced,
“to use a worthy translation which renders the meaning quite precisely whilst preserving the
traditional biblical-liturgical style of the particular native tongue.”99 While no translation can
94. Sacrosanctum Concilium, 113.
95. Sacrosanctum Concilium, 36 §1.
96. Sacrosanctum Concilium, 54.
97. Dom Jean Prou, OSB, “Gregorian Chant and the Sanctification of the Faithful,” in Divini Cultus
Studium: Studies in the Theology of Worship and of its Music, ed. Robert A. Skeris (Altötting: Verlag Alfred
Coppenrath, 1990), 205. This position is also taken by László Dobszay.
98. Johannes Overath, “Sancta Sancte (St. Pius X),” in Crux et Cithara, ed. Robert A Skeris (Altötting:
Verlag Alfred Coppenrath, 1983), 271.
99. László Dobszay, “Proprium Missae: Unity, Variety, and Rupture in the Roman Rite,” Sacred Music
134, no. 1 (Spring 2007): 26-27.
Friel 27
ever achieve perfection, any translation that grossly skews, diminishes, or ignores the meaning of
the original text is unfit for liturgical service.
The melodies and texts of the Proprium Missae, as might be expected, are eminently
sacred and never profane. For this reason, they possess native liturgical propriety. The marriage
of text and melody in Gregorian chant creates a certain “two-part counterpoint,” the first voice of
which is the text and the second of which is the melody.100
This marriage is one of the greatest
virtues of the proprium chants.
Universality
In his 1903 motu proprio, Tra le Sollecitudini, Pope Saint Pius X proposes three qualities
that, as a general principle, ought to characterize all sacred music: holiness, artistry, and
universality. Sacred music, he writes, should be holy, excluding any profane dimension. It must
also be “true art,”101
in order that it might be efficacious in engaging the minds and hearts of the
Christian faithful. These two traits conspire to produce the third, universality, as an effect.
“Sacred music should consequently possess, in the highest degree, the qualities proper to the
liturgy, and in particular sanctity and goodness of form, which will spontaneously produce the
final quality of universality.”102
For Pius X, the notion of universality is a broad idea that applies to many aspects of the
liturgy, not only its music. In its application to music, however, it requires that the native
cultural characteristics of compositions be subordinated to the general qualities that typify sacred
100. Prou, 201.
101. Tra le Sollecitudini, 2.
102. Tra le Sollecitudini, 2.
Friel 28
music. In the estimation of Pius X, “these qualities are to be found, in the highest degree, in
Gregorian Chant, which is, consequently, the Chant proper to the Roman Church.”103
One manner in which chant shows itself to be universal is its univocal structure. The
value of singing in unison is, unfortunately, often not appreciated in our contemporary society.
Speaking of the jubilus appended to the alleluia, Jungmann writes, “No doubt, in the ages before
people were spoiled by the charms of harmony, the untiring reiteration of the melismatic
melodies with their endless rise and fall must have been a wonderful experience for the devout
congregation.”104
Assiduously engaging chant helps us to reclaim some of that wonder to which
our modern ears have grown calloused. Learning to love the subtlety of Gregorian chant is a
process of entering into the beauty of the moment in which the three young men—Shadrach,
Meshach, and Abednego—sang “with one voice” (Dan 3:51).
Parish choristers of the twenty-first century may feel “vocally naked”105
at the suggestion
of singing monophony, but teaching them to appreciate its unitive force is a worthy endeavor.
“From Dante’s Purgatorio to Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s Life Together, the unison voice extinguishes
wrath and is the audible expression of Christian unity.”106
The splendor of unison singing is its
invitation to value and become one with the voice of another. Indeed, chant cultivates
community. Those who practice monophony join, in fact, not only the voices of the choristers
around them, but also the larger voice of the universal Church. “To be well in tune,” Pope
Benedict XVI teaches, we must “enter with our mens into the vox of the Church . . . and thus not
only speak to God as individuals, but enter into the ‘we’ of the Church, which is praying.”107
103. Tra le Sollecitudini, 2.
104. Jungmann, vol. 1, 430.
105. Mary Jane Ballou, “Singing in Unison? Selling Chant to the Reluctant Choir,” Sacred Music 136, no.
4 (Winter 2009): 55.
106. Ballou, 54.
107. Pope Benedict XVI, Meeting of His Holiness Benedict XVI with the Priest of the Diocese of Albano,
31 August 2006, available from
Friel 29
This transformation of our “I” into the “we” of the Church attains the tandem benefits of
enlargement and enrichment.
According to Pius X, an essential attribute of truly universal music is that, on hearing it,
“nobody of any nation may receive an impression other than good.”108
This sentiment speaks to
the core of authentic multiculturalism. A musical heritage common to all Catholics throughout
the world should be a desirable thing, and, in the wisdom of the Church, that heritage has been
provided in her patrimony of chant. Gregorian chant, were it practiced more prevalently, could
be a tremendous force in favor of global unity. It sadly happens frequently that so-called
“multiculturalism” becomes patronizing, “a disguised form of elitist imperialism in which we
conjure up what we imagine what the foreign peoples of the world—aggregating in their class
interests—might desire.”109
Contrariwise, the ability of all people to sing chant unaccompanied,
using the voice given to them, avoids any pretense of elitism. Chant thus draws people of
diverse heritage, age, and status into real communion; rather than patronizing the foreigner,
chant presents a musical form that is both sufficiently foreign from and mysteriously connected
to every culture, time, and place.
An increased usage of the Proprium Missae, specifically, would foster another aspect of
chant’s universality. Parishes and other congregations throughout the world utilizing the propers
would hear the same words proclaimed at the daily celebration of the Eucharist. Rather than
devolving into a programmatic rigorism, this commonality could serve as a remarkable blessing,
moving the whole Body of Christ at once to contemplate the same mysteries of faith in accord
with one another spiritually. The prospect of singing the same texts at Masses throughout the
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2006/august/documents/hf_benxvi_spe_20060831_sacerd
oti-albano_en.html; Internet; accessed 13 December 2010.
108. Tra le Sollecitudini, 2.
109. Tucker, Sing Like a Catholic, 5.
Friel 30
world on a given day, while certainly not essential, could encourage greater Church unity and
catholicity—that is, universality.
The universal character of chant is exemplified in its monophonic texture and in its
encouragement of unison among its practitioners. Chant further demonstrates universality as an
authentic expression of multiculturalism and a normative factor in the worldwide work of
liturgy.
Roman Character
A final consideration regarding the virtues of the propers concerns their distinctly Roman
quality. The Roman Rite, as a whole, possesses a number of peculiarities demonstrative of its
separation from the Eastern liturgies; among these are included the absence of litanies of
intercession, the late position of the kiss of peace, and the “comparative eclipse” of the role of
the deacon.110
Another uniqueness is the Roman distinction between the Ordinarium Missae and
the Proprium Missae. In none of the Eastern Churches is a similar system found to be so
foundational and so integral to the structure of the Divine Liturgy as it is to the Holy Sacrifice in
the West. Solicitude for the defense of the Roman contribution to Catholic liturgy therefore
proposes a case for the increased usage of the Roman propers.
As discussed above, the texts for the chants in Roman liturgies are almost exclusively
drawn from Sacred Scripture. “Though to us this seems self-evident, the liturgical usage of the
Eastern Church makes it clear that this is a special characteristic of the Church in the West and
of Rome in particular.”111
The abundant use of Holy Scripture in the Roman Mass—and
110. Fortescue, The Mass, 110.
111. László Dobszay, “The Proprium Missae of the Roman Rite,” in The Genius of the Roman Rite:
Historical, Theological, and Pastoral Perspectives on Catholic Liturgy, ed. Uwe Michael Lang (Mundelein, IL:
Hillenbrand Books, 2010), 88.
Friel 31
especially the chants—contributes to the fulfillment of St. Paul’s command to let the Word of
God dwell in us richly (c.f., Colossians 3:16). Moreover, it is a token of the rich reflection
handed on by the Latin Church Fathers. The interpretatio Christiana that they gave, not only to
the Gospels, but to the entire Bible—and especially the Psalms—allows the presence of Christ to
be acknowledged and sung in every facet of the Roman liturgy. The mysteries of the faith are
thereby conveyed through the Christological and Trinitarian dimensions of the proper texts.
That the Roman propers constitute a venerable tradition of their own has been well
exemplified in the work of László Dobszay. In a recent chapter, he establishes well the
tremendous continuity of the Roman chant tradition from the early Church up to the twentieth
century.112
The propers included in the Missal of Pius V overwhelmingly correspond (either
exactly or very nearly) with the propers included in such sources as the Antiphonary of the Old
Lateran, the most ancient Gregorian Mass antiphoners (e.g., the Rheinau, Mont Blandin, and
Senlis), as well as later such antiphoners (e.g., the Chartres 520, Benevento 34, and
Strigonium/Esztergom). Like congruency is noticeably absent when these sources are compared
with the 1970 Missale Paulinum and the 1972 Ordo Cantus Missae. Increased appreciation for
the distinctly Roman tradition of propers could serve to bolster greater congruency between
contemporary chant resources and those of former centuries.
III. The Authentic Role of Hymnody
Hymnody possesses roles both within sacred liturgy and outside it. Distinguishing what
are these appropriate roles is an important step toward establishing the independence of
hymnody as a genre that contributes to the life of faith and culture.
112. See tables in Dobszay, “The Proprium Missae of the Roman Rite,” 104-111.
Friel 32
The Snowbird Statement (1995) calls for “a positive approach to hymnody in the Roman
liturgy and the development of criteria for the appropriate use of hymnody in all liturgical
rites.”113
It further posits, “We acknowledge that the hymn form poses certain challenges in
relating well to the ritual and textual structure of the eucharist, but we reject the view that
hymnody is intrinsically incompatible with the eucharistic liturgy.”114
We shall in what follows
attempt to forge a positive argument for the intrinsic value of hymnody and its liturgical role, but
we shall further propose that this role is not found primarily within the context of the Eucharistic
liturgy.
Liturgical Roles of Hymnody
It cannot fairly be said that hymn-singing has no part in Catholic liturgy or even the
Catholic Mass. It can be shown, however, that the instances in which hymns are proper to the
Mass are very few. The hymns proper to the Eucharistic liturgy include:
1. Gloria in excelis Deo, sung on solemnities, feasts, Sundays outside the strong seasons of
Advent and Lent, and certain other solemn celebrations
2. Benedictus es, given as an option to replace the gradual on the Solemnity of the Most
Holy Trinity
3. Gloria, laus, et honor, as a processional for entering the Church on Palm Sunday
4. O Redemptor, an antiphonal offertory at the Chrism Mass
5. Crux fidelis, which accompanies the Adoration of the Holy Cross on Good Friday
6. Sequences on Easter Sunday (Victimae paschali laudes), Pentecost (Veni Sancte
Spiritus), and Corpus Christi (Lauda Sion Salvatorem)
7. At an episcopal ordination, Veni Creator after the Gospel and Te Deum after the Prayer
after Communion
8. Pange lingua gloriosi, during the Holy Thursday procession to the altar of repose
113. Snowbird, 19.
114. Snowbird, 19.
Friel 33
9. Pange lingua gloriosi, Sacris sollemniis, Verbum Supernum, Iesu nostra redemptio,
Aeterne rex altissime, and Te Deum, during the Corpus Christi procession115
From the foregoing list, we see that hymnody does, in fact, have a historical presence in
the Eucharistic liturgy. What is not found historically, however, is the persistent use of metrical
hymnody to supplant proper liturgical texts, which has become commonplace in contemporary
America.
Scholarship in the field of Sacred Scripture has suggested that certain sections of the New
Testament (e.g., Eph 5:14, 1 Tim 3:16, Rev 15:3-4, and other pericopes) may have originated as
popular hymns sung among early Christians in their primitive liturgy. There are many
authorities within this discipline who maintain, though, that these passages are just as plausibly
sections of rhetorical prose as they are fragments of liturgical hymnody.116
While it is
impossible to take up a full account of this scholarship here, it will not be necessary for our
purposes. If we presume that some New Testament texts derive, in fact, from early hymns, a
point can be made whether they were sung in the context of the Eucharistic celebration or not.
In the first case, if these texts were originally hymns but were not sung at the “breaking of the
bread,” their disuse would, itself, be clear evidence that the presence of hymns at Mass is not a
historical reality of ancient tradition and present throughout the history of the Church.
If, in the second case, they were originally hymns and were, in fact, sung at Eucharistic
celebrations, the point is more complicated but still tenable. The earliest missals appear to have
been created no earlier than the fourth century. When these books began to be published, with
the help of the standardization begun under Constantine (A.D. 306-337), choices had to be made
115. Eric M. Andersen, “History, Reform, and Continuity in the Hymns of the Roman Breviary,” Sacred
Music 136, no. 1 (Spring 2009): 7.
116. C.f., McKinnon, 32.
Friel 34
concerning what the official liturgical texts would be. Popular hymns would likely have been a
viable option, especially since the Scriptural canon was only being fixed at roughly the same
time.117
Yet, from what is found in the earliest missals, Scriptural texts won the favor of those
who were crafting the liturgical books. When the liturgy began to become universalized and
standardized—that is, when it began to be “Roman”—hymnody was not included. Thus,
whether popular hymns were sung in the Eucharistic celebration during the first centuries of
development or not, the Roman liturgy forged by the fourth century was marked by reliance on
Sacred Scripture to the exclusion of hymnody.
The true, native home of liturgical hymnody is found not in the Eucharistic celebration,
though, but in the Divine Office. In this role, hymns have traditionally served as the poetic
response of man to the Word of God encountered and proclaimed in daily prayer. Additionally,
and especially in recent decades, emphasis has been given to the role of the breviary hymn as a
poem that “gives shape to the particular Hour in the way [it] identifies the time of the day, the
liturgical season, or the liturgical observance.”118
A historical perspective on the breviary hymns
shows that, through centuries of use, they have become proper to the various Hours. Introduced
perhaps first by St. Hilary of Poitiers (310-366), breviary hymns spread rapidly during the fourth
century under the advocacy of St. Ambrose (340-397).119
The Rule of Saint Benedict in the sixth
century appointed hymns to be sung at each of the canonical Hours.120
These new liturgical
hymns grew into wide usage throughout the patristic and Carolingian eras, such that, by the
117. The first complete listing of the canon is found in the “Easter Letter” of Saint Athanasius, dating to
the year A.D. 367.
118. Gerard Dennis Gill, Music in Catholic Liturgy: A Pastoral and Theological Companion to Sing to the
Lord (Mundelein, IL: Hillenbrand Books, 2009), 112.
119. Adrian Fortescue, “Concerning Hymns,” Sacred Music 134, no. 3 (Fall 2007): 35-36.
120. Randel, 385.
Friel 35
scholastic era, they were not a mere flourish, but, indeed, an integral component of the Divine
Office.121
At the same time, hymns also maintained their extra-liturgical role. They enjoyed
tremendous popularity among the faithful, for whom they were composed by the Church Fathers
as an accessible form of catechesis and training against heresy. The hymns of the earliest
Christians, perhaps captured in the New Testament writings, and those of the Fathers and
Doctors, passed down by tradition, form a collection of music both inspired by faith and
designed to inspire faith. These hymns, indeed, form a deposit of distinctly Catholic culture.
Our attention at this point turns to the sequences of the Roman Rite. Having given a
detailed historical account of them above, the way has been prepared to show how the sequences
function uniquely as a genre of hymn actually prescribed for use at Mass. In analyzing how the
sequentiarium came to be used and continues to be used liturgically, just as with its historical
development, one must look at various stages. It can first be said that, from the time of their
invention, sequences always occurred within the liturgy, if the belief that they were originally
built upon the alleluia is to be held. Although sequences are not an essential component of the
Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, the sacred liturgy is nevertheless their native home.
Just as the tropes were textual interpolations into the liturgy, so the jubilus of the alleluia
is thought to have been a musical interpolation. One interesting argument in support of this
notion claims that the terminal vowel sound was extended as an ornament to accompany the
procession of the deacon to the ambo.122
This is a reasonable claim, especially considering the
common placement of the ambo in medieval times, which was high above the pews toward the
middle of the nave. (The name “ambo,” itself, derives from the Greek infinitive anabainein,
121. Andersen, 7-16.
122. Dobszay, “The Life and Meaning of the Sequence,” 9.
Friel 36
meaning, “to mount to a high place.”)123
Others hypothesize that the jubilus was introduced
from a Greek practice through an interface with the Byzantine rites. The most spiritual
interpretation of the melismatic ending—held by Rupert of Deutz, Durandus, and Dom J.
Pothier, among many others—calls the jubilus “an inarticulate expression of joy, by which the
mind is carried up to the unspeakable joy of the Saints.”124
Still other arguments are plausible,
and current scholarship does not admit of a definitive resolution.125
From the time of Saint Notker to the sixteenth century, the number of sequences grew
exponentially. Notker, himself, penned a sequence for each of the feasts of the Church year.
Others did the same, and there grew an immense treasury of these liturgical poems. The largest
number of them originated north of the Alps and Pyrenees, especially in modern-day Bavaria and
France.126
The chief authors, in addition to the Stammerer and Adam of St. Victor, included
Ekkehart of St. Gall (d. 973), Gottschalk of Limburg (d. 1098), and Thomas of Celano (d. 1250).
Before the end of the medieval period, virtually every Sunday and feast day on the Church
calendar had a proper sequence, penitential seasons excepted. There were Marian sequences and
common sequences, used for feasts of saints that did not have a proper one. Some sequences
were sung every day of the octave, while others were written for the Requiem Mass. The
sequences were never obligatory, though, and so their actual practice varied greatly. Small
country parishes with few musical resources may have utilized only very few sequences, whereas
monasteries and cathedrals were likely to have a very rich practice of them.127
123. Steven J. Schloeder, Architecture in Communion (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1998), 88-94.
124. Fortescue, “The Mass,” 269.
125. Messenger, 35-36.
126. Fortescue, “The Mass,” 274.
127. John F. Bullough, “Notker Balbulus and the Origin of the Sequence,” The Hymn 16, no. 1 (January
1965): 14-15.
Friel 37
The liturgical reform of 1570, in conjunction with the counter-Reformation efforts of the
Council of Trent, limited the number of sequences to just four. These included: Victimae
paschali for the octave of Easter, Veni Sancte Spiritus for the octave of Whitsun (now called
Pentecost), Lauda Sion for the octave of Corpus Christi, and Dies irae for All Souls’ Day and
Requiem Masses that immediately follow a death. More than a century and a half later, in 1727,
the Stabat mater was added for the new feast of the Seven Sorrows of Our Lady.128
It is
important to note, however, that these were not the only permissible sequences. Certain French
and German dioceses retained the right to use others, on account of their instrumental connection
to the creation of the form. The same was true of many religious orders, including the
Augustinians, Benedictines, Franciscans, and others who had played a part in the development of
the sequentiarium.129
Before looking at the subsequent reform, it will be worthwhile to examine in greater
detail each of the five sequences retained in the missal as revised by Pope Pius V in 1570.
Interestingly, the selection of these five was based not on the importance of their corresponding
feasts. This can be seen from the fact that, although the sequences on Easter and Pentecost were
retained, those for Christmas, Epiphany, and Ascension, which are feasts of equal rank, were
abolished. The first sequence that was retained, the Victimae paschali, was probably kept on
account of the grand festivities surrounding the feast of Easter.130
Both its text and tune are
anonymous, but attributed to Wipo (d. 1048). Although its original purpose was as a sequence
for Mass, it became quite popular as part of Resurrection mystery plays. Its meter varies, it
rhymes occasionally, and it portrays a lovely image of Christ, the Paschal Lamb.131
128. Dobszay, “The Life and Meaning of the Sequence,” 15.
129. Bullough, 15.
130. Dobszay, “The Life and Meaning of the Sequence,” 15.
131. Fortescue, “The Mass,” 276-277.
Friel 38
Second, the Veni Sancte Spiritus may have been composed by Pope Innocent III at the
turn of the thirteenth century or by King Robert the Pious of France at the turn of the eleventh
century. It is sometimes called the “Golden Sequence”132
because of the august regard it has
attained among the faithful. It should not be confused, though, with the Veni Creator Spiritus,
another very worthy but separate hymn attributed to Charlemagne.133
This sequence was likely
retained for the same reason as the Victimae paschali, insofar as there were many customs and
traditions associated with the annual feast of Pentecost.134
It has been the inspiration for
numerous books and musical works.135
The sequence for Corpus Christi, Lauda Sion, seems to have been preserved out of
respect for Thomas Aquinas (d. 1274), its venerable author, and for its sublime theological
content. Written in trochaic dimeter, it is composed rhythmically, but not with strict syllabic
form. It is patterned perfectly upon the metrical structure of Laudes cruces attollamus, the
famous sequence of Adam of St. Victor written to the Holy Cross that marked the major shift to
the middle period of sequence composition.136
This composition, which appears to have been
written by Aquinas on commission,137
is structured so as to highlight, through poetic extension,
its concluding strophes. They are well known of themselves by their incipits, Ecce panis and
Bone pastor.138
132. Messenger, 48.
133. The Seven Great Hymns of the Mediaeval Church, (New York: Anson D. F. Randolph & Co., 1868),
134.
134. Dobszay, “The Life and Meaning of the Sequence,” 15.
135. C.f., Nicholaus Gihr, The Veni Sancte Spiritus: An Explanation of the Pentecostal Sequence, trans. L.
M. Dooley (Island Creek, MA: Miramar, 1947).
136. Joseph Connelly, Hymns of the Roman Liturgy (Westminster, MD: The Newman Press, 1957), 125.
137. Bullough, 15.
138. Dobszay, “The Life and Meaning of the Sequence,” 16.
Friel 39
Generally considered the greatest of all sequences and often called the “Great Hymn,”139
the majestic Dies irae may have been preserved on account of sheer popularity. Written at the
time of the Black Death by the Capuchin companion of St. Francis of Assisi, Thomas of Celano,
OFM (d. 1250), it was not originally intended as a sequence. The very idea of a sequence
written for the Requiem Mass is somewhat of a misfit, inasmuch as the Requiem has no alleluia
and consequently no jubilus from which a sequence might flow.140
It was first a poem inspired
by the prophet Zephaniah and used in private devotion around Advent,141
but it appeared in the
missal as a sequence for Requiems by the thirteenth century. Its final six lines (beginning at
Lacrimosa dies illa) are not original to the work, and they break the rhyme and thought of the
poem. The rest of the poem features rhyming trochaic stanzas, and its manipulation of closed
and open vowel sounds is considered extraordinary.142
Lastly, the Stabat mater, added to the missal in 1727, is perhaps second in fame and
admiration to Dies irae. Its author, Jacopone da Todi, OFM, had lost his wife before entering the
Franciscans, so he was well acquainted with the sorrow of which he wrote.143
Like Dies irae, his
poem was not first intended for liturgical use. It has been widely imitated, which is evidence of
the great affection is has won among the faithful of many generations. A Christmas imitation,
titled Stabat mater speciosa, is memorable for its quality and mystical approach to Christmas joy
through Lenten affliction.
The liturgical reform of the Second Vatican Council again reduced the number of
sequences in the missal. In the current usage of the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite, the
sequence is prescribed only for two feasts (Easter and Pentecost) and recommended for one
139. Seven Great Hymns, 46, 96, 98.
140. Fortescue, “The Mass,” 278.
141. Messenger, 50.
142. Nicholaus Gihr, Dies Irae, trans. Joseph J. Schmit (St. Louis: B. Herder Book Co., 1927), 3.
143. Seven Great Hymns, 96-97.
Friel 40
(Corpus Christi). Still, the singing of other sequences is nowhere prohibited, so it is permissible
to incorporate them into the sacred liturgy, especially as a means for adding solemnity to certain
feasts.144
The Dies irae and Stabat mater were moved from the missal to the breviary, where
they now appear as optional hymns for the Office of the Dead and in the days leading up to the
penitential seasons.
The placement of the sequence, from its inception, had remained constant because of its
close affiliation with the alleluia. It followed immediately upon the alleluia (as its name, from
the Latin sequere, suggests) and preceded the Gospel. The reading of the Gospel, in liturgical
terms, is not simply a cognitive activity, but actually an encounter, or “apparition of Christ.”145
In this light, the role of the sequence can be seen not merely as filler; rather, it introduced the
Gospel by the nature of its text, which often concluded with an eschatological couplet, directing
our minds to the coming of Christ. The reform of the Second Vatican Council, however, places
the chanting or recitation of the sequence before the alleluia. The modern rubric appears rather
anomalous,146
since it separates the sequence from the component of the Mass from which it
draws its existence and life. Even the name “sequence” becomes a misnomer with this new
placement.
From the foregoing analyses, it is clear that the blossoming of the sequence in Catholic
liturgy reached an unwieldy point. The over-abundance was resolved by the selective reduction
of the Catholic reformers, and the process continued with the reform of the twentieth century.
This reduction can easily be viewed as the needed reform of “what had become an abuse and a
threat to the integrity of the liturgy.”147
In the same light, the action of reformers would be
144. Dobszay, “The Life and Meaning of the Sequence,” 19.
145. Dobszay, “The Life and Meaning of the Sequence,” 18.
146. Dobszay, “The Life and Meaning of the Sequence,” 18.
147. Bullough, 13.
Friel 41
tantamount to the squelching of creativity that had legitimately found its home in the Roman
liturgy.
One could alternatively say, however, that the Council of Trent, in drastically reducing
the sequentiarium, universalized such creativity and the singing of hymns within the Eucharistic
liturgy. Prior to Quo primum (1570), the complete rite of Mass had never before been legislated
so specifically and universally. The threat of Protestantism, however, demanded the
safeguarding of the liturgy, while still permitting a great deal of freedom, particularly in terms of
ancient rites and usages. Indeed, by saving just the few most precious sequences for continued
use, the Church implicitly embraced the art form that had previously been “merely tolerated” and
“not obligatory.”148
It was the great “prudence of the Tridentine reformers”149
that they
eliminated the plethora of poorer sequences and so let the principle of the sequence be dignified
and made official by the retention of its best examples.
The revised missal promulgated in 1570 by Pope Pius V curiously included certain
developments (e.g., the praying of Psalm 42 at the foot of the altar) and eliminated others (e.g.,
the majority of the sequences). All of the sequences, those eliminated and those retained, are of
inestimable value to the Church’s liturgical, musical, and cultural patrimony because they
represent a phenomenon completely unique to the Roman Rite.150
Just like the troparium, the
sequentiarium “conceded a legitimate means for the creativity of man to find expression in the
liturgy: a canticum novum appeared, which was, however, not intended to displace the canticum
sacrum.”151
Herein, the Church’s affirmation given to sequences, which are a form of hymn, has
helped to establish a legitimate role for hymnody within the Eucharistic liturgy. But their
148. Bullough, 15.
149. Fortescue, “The Mass,” 275.
150. Fortescue, “The Mass,” 279.
151. Dobszay, “The Life and Meaning of the Sequence,” 8.
Friel 42
affirmation comes within limitations, so that the rest of the liturgical treasure of the Church
ought not to be oppressed or threatened by the comparatively new acceptance of the sequence.
It must remain very clear, however, that the sequence is fundamentally part of the
Proprium Missae. Thus, sequences possess a role within the Mass because they are prescribed.
The history of the sequence shows that hymnody, as a genre, is not essentially unbecoming of the
worthy celebration of the Eucharistic liturgy; yet, at the same time, its history argues for a
renewed appreciation for the particular worthiness of the prescribed texts of the Mass.
Popular Roles of Hymnody
Most hymns, unlike the sequences, do not originate in the liturgy. Rather, most hymns
historically derive from and find their place in popular life. An overview of some of the sources
and roles of non-liturgical hymnody will help to show the vital need American culture has for a
new blossoming of the genre.
The later Middle Ages marked the highpoint of the practice of hymn contrafaction,
whereby profane songs were re-texted with religious lyrics. This much is clear from the witness
of the first printed hymnals, published in the sixteenth century. It is not so sure, however, that
these contrafacta were published for use at worship. Many of these early printed hymnals, in
fact, discriminate between hymns for use in church and those for use at home. A 1537 Catholic
hymnal by Michael Vehe, for instance, includes a section subtitled, “Möchten in und ausser der
Kirchen gesungen werden” (“to be sung in and outside the Churches”).152
Thus, there emerges
152. Robert A. Skeris, “On the Problem of Religious Hymn Contrafacta: Reflections Theological and
Hymnological,” 119.
Friel 43
evidence of a historical role for hymnody outside the liturgy, since these contrafacta “were really
intended for use outside of the church, in family circles.”153
The spiritually re-texted hymns, therefore, served to counteract the negative influence of
profane lyrics while at the same time promoting faith among families. Both of these tasks are
deserving of attention in the modern day. Of particular consequence would be a greater
cultivation of familial singing. The advent of amplified and recorded music in the early
twentieth century has established a near-monopoly of the entertainment paradigm: a soloist,
representing the few, performs for an audience, representing the many.154
It is largely assumed
in contemporary Western civilization that only the few have musical talent, while the many
ought to remain passive listeners. This has obvious effects on the singing of both liturgical chant
and popular hymnody. The singing of hymns around the family dinner table could at once
counteract this cultural downtrend and inspire greater cultural religiosity among the faithful.
At international gatherings, particularly among youth, it is not uncommon for one to hear
various groups joining in folk songs, many of which contain religious references or possess an
intrinsically faith-based character. They are often traditions kept alive by the ingrained
religiosity of the cultures from which they come. For example, the Polish can all sing Serdeczna
Matko, the Italians can sing Tu Scendi Dalle Stelle, and every Spaniard can sing La
Guadalupana. On the contrary, “‘Happy Birthday’ is the last vestige of communal singing in
U.S. culture,”155
and it has no religious connection. Even in the case of The Star Spangled
Banner, only the first verse, if any, is commonly known, so the religious content of the
subsequent verses is lost. The same is true in large part of America the Beautiful, the latter
153. Robert A. Skeris, “On the Problem of Religious Hymn Contrafacta: Reflections Theological and
Hymnological,” 118-119.
154. Quentin Faulkner, “Musical Illiteracy Revisited,” Sacred Music 135, no. 2 (Summer 2008): 86.
155. Faulkner, 87.
Friel 44
verses of which are religious but unknown. Furthermore, the National Anthem is more often
than not relegated to a soloist, so it fails to be a true experience of communal singing. Fresh
focus on the need for communal song in the home and community can only enhance one’s
appreciation for the meaning and value of communal song in the liturgy.
Throughout the history of hymnody, a frequent purpose of the form has been
fundamental catechesis. The hymns of the early Fathers, for instance, very often served the
function of teaching children and neophytes the basic truths of Christianity; in the days of the
Renaissance, too, catechism hymns were circulated by men such as Georg Vogler and Johann
Leisentritt.156
This non-liturgical function of hymns could be useful in the modern day, too, as
part of the Church’s effort to re-evangelize those who have been poorly catechized. Teaching
children a few basic, but solid hymns could offer real assistance in teaching the faith and forging
a more vibrant Catholic cultural consciousness.
In order to bolster the authentic role of hymnody outside the liturgy, American culture
would do well to rediscover the tremendous value of cantus religiosus popularis, or the religious
folk song. Some of the popular songs so commonly published in modern hymnals and sung
widely at Mass could better serve as the beginning repertoire of a movement toward such a
revival. As the hymns of early Christians were a weapon against the Greek and Latin lyrical
poetry focused on worldly attractions and the medieval contrafacta were an antidote to profane
hymn texts, so a revived (or, perhaps, newfound) practice of religious, non-liturgical song in
America could help to wage the necessary fight against the din of secular music today.157
Laboring toward that end would be a concrete manner of “addressing one another (in) psalms
and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and playing to the Lord in [our] hearts” (Eph 5:19).
156. Fellerer, 131.
157. Fortescue, “Concerning Hymns,” 30.
Friel 45
IV. Pastoral Implementation
The virtues of the Gregorian propers and the appropriate role of popular hymnody have
been presented theoretically above. Any effort in actual ecclesial life to foster authentic use of
both genres will, of course, demand a well-conceived plan for pastoral implementation. There
are currently numerous resources available that will help to make the propers, or similar
substitutes, accessible at the parish level. There are also many projects still underway to provide
even more such resources. The ubiquity of the Internet has made possible the wide distribution
of invaluable materials, and it has, further, inspired many contemporary artists to place their
work freely in the public domain. These newfound realities are very encouraging for the future
of sacred music in the Church in the United States of America. At this point, we shall present a
basic review of several resources that may assist in the movement toward the independence of
liturgical chant from popular hymnody and outline a call to action that would facilitate the same
movement.
Review of Organizations as Resources
The first resource that merits recognition is not a book or collection, but an organization.
The Church Music Association of America (CMAA) is unquestionably leading the way toward
the renewal of sacred music in the aptly named “reform of the reform.”158
The Association’s
quarterly journal, Sacred Music, to which much of the present research is indebted, is a
prominent vehicle promoting Gregorian chant, quality scholarship, and critical, but charitable,
consideration of contemporary parochial experience. All the efforts of the CMAA—including
their journal, website, colloquia, workshops, and other programs—aim at encouraging the
158. C.f., Ratzinger, The Spirit of the Liturgy, 7-9.
Friel 46
gradual improvement of Catholic musical-liturgical experience in America toward the ideal
envisioned in the documents of the Church on music.
Another organization is worthy of similar praise for its work in advocating chant-based
music and making it available electronically at no cost. The Corpus Christi Watershed, under
the leadership of its new President, Jeffrey Ostrowski, is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization that
“exists to assist artists in their service to the Church.”159
A pioneering effort in the world of
public domain and creative commons music, their website offers free resources in several
different categories: responsorial psalms, Gospel acclamations, Mass ordinaries, polyphonic
motets, and rare Gregorian publications. A section on hymn resources is also under
construction, and the group has begun to publish select new compositions. One of the most
unique aspects of their work is a calendar-based chart that provides hyperlinks to the appropriate
Roman propers for the Sundays and major feasts of the Church year. This chart, moreover, is
given in two forms—one for the ordinary form of the Roman Rite, and one for the extraordinary
form. The Corpus Christi Watershed, in a very short time, has attracted the attention and
contributions of an impressive group of Catholic musicians. Their role in the promotion of
propers-based liturgy has the potential to be extraordinary.
Review of Latin Resources
It must be stated at the outset that the singular resource for Catholic musicians is the
Graduale Romanum. As the missal belongs to the priest, the Book of Gospels belongs to the
deacon, and the lectionary belongs to the lector, so is the Roman Gradual proper to the schola, or
159. Corpus Christ Watershed: About Page, available from http://www.ccwatershed.org/about; Internet;
accessed 31 March 2011.
Friel 47
choir. This official liturgical book is a compendium of the Church’s chants that represent the
ideal music for service at the Eucharistic liturgy.
In many, if not most, American parishes, though, jumping headlong into the Graduale
Romanum would be impossible. An option that would help to build basic chanting skills is the
Graduale Simplex, which could serve as a fine preparation for the later acceptance of the actual
Graduale Romanum. One of the great strengths of the Graduale Simplex is that it serves as a
step toward the ideal. Insofar as it is leading to that eventual goal, it is a help, and to the extent
that it becomes disconnected from the goal, it will be unhelpful. It employs the unaltered
traditional text and respects the traditional introit form, which are additional positive attributes.
Its chief limitation is that it does not employ the traditional Gregorian melodies. This may be a
necessary concession, however, as part of the training of a schola that takes the Roman propers
as their ultimate goal.
A similar resource is found in the famous “Rossini Propers,” the handiwork of Carlo
Rossini, the great priest-musician of the Diocese of Pittsburgh. The collection can be difficult to
navigate for those involved in choir direction today, since it is arranged according to the calendar
that now pertains to the extraordinary form of the Roman Rite; with sufficient background,
however, one can align the propers with their corresponding days in the ordinary form calendar.
The Rossini propers, like the Graduale Simplex, do not convey the same beauty and richness
contained in the actual Gregorian propers. Their evident accessibility, sufficiency, and
expediency can unfortunately lead choirs into the conundrum of liturgical functionalism. It is
noteworthy, however, that Father Rossini’s purpose in creating this edition was to ensure that
Friel 48
there “be no excuse . . . for omitting the Proper at High Mass,”160
as he states in his preface to
the work. In the words of Musicam Sacram:
“To have a more ornate form of singing and a more magnificent
ceremonial is at times desirable when there are the resources available to
carry them out properly; on the other hand, it would be contrary to the true
solemnity of the Liturgy if this were to lead to a part of the action being
omitted, changed, or improperly performed.”161
Thus, although the Rossini propers are not ideal on account of their divergence from the
authentic chant melodies, their original goal of bolstering the importance of the propers must be
recognized as very noble.
Review of English Resources
Thus far, the options discussed have represented only Latin language resources. In many
places, though, the language, itself, presents an obstacle to liturgical usage. This is sometimes
the result of a choir’s lack of confidence in pronouncing Latin texts, and at other times it is a
prevailing attitude of suspicion among members of the clergy or congregation that presents the
obstacle. While recognizing the original Roman propers as the ideal, it seems unnecessary to
obviate the potential value of vernacular propers; as was argued above, if there is any component
of the Holy Mass that would sensibly take on the vernacular, it is likely the Proprium Missae,
not the Ordinarium Missae. To this end, there is great hope to be found in the numerous projects
that are providing English-language options for service at the liturgy, in the absence of an
official vernacular gradual.
One of the first comprehensive efforts in this regard was the 1999 work by Paul Ford,
Ph.D., By Flowing Waters. A collection using the official English translation of the Graduale
160. Carlo Rossini, ‘Proper’ of the Mass for the Entire Ecclesiastical Year (Pittsburgh, PA: 1933), ii.
161. Musicam Sacram, 11.
Friel 49
Simplex (entitled The Simple Gradual), its melodies are based on authentic Gregorian chants. It
is a fine example of the singable marriage between English text and Gregorian melody. The
chants appear in modern notation, with stemless round notes on five-line staves, so they are
eminently accessible to choirs lacking familiarity with Gregorian notation. It is further
praiseworthy for its inclusion of the contents of Jubilate Deo. By Flowing Waters “is clearly not
a simple retrieval of the past,”162
but rather a pastoral effort to bring plainsong alive in typical
parish experience. Perhaps the volume’s greatest weakness is its employment of the ,ew
Revised Standard Version (NRSV) for the English translations of Latin texts. This translation of
the Bible, supposedly “inclusive” and “ecumenical” in its language, has been refused approval
for liturgical use by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), and therefore
causes some question regarding its fittingness for use even in an official volume of liturgical
chant.
Another major vernacular contribution is the Simple Choral Gradual of Richard Rice,
which was originally composed some fifteen years ago but has recently received new
attention.163
Available both online for download at a nominal fee and in print from the CMAA,
this gradual provides propers (arranged SATB) for every Sunday and solemnity of the Church
year. The propers include the entrance and communion antiphons from the Roman Missal
together with their accompanying psalms from the Ordo Cantus Missae. Also included are
offertory antiphons from the Graduale Romanum with their accompanying psalms from the
Offertoriale Triplex. These propers have the benefit of being easily learned, and they serve the
double blessing of helping to train and strengthen the part-singing abilities of a choir. They
162. Judith M. Kubicki, C.S.S.F., review of By Flowing Waters: Chant for the Liturgy, by Paul Ford,
available from http://www.pford.stjohnsem.edu/ford/by-flowing-waters/docs/reviews-and-
praises/Kubicki%20Worship.pdf; Internet; accessed 23 March 2011.
163. For example, Tucker, “The Year of English Chant Propers,” 72.
Friel 50
could be learned on a week-to-week basis with little difficulty by most choirs. They may also be
sung simply in unison, or even with congregational participation. A legitimate criticism of these
antiphons, however, concerns their melodies, the overarching similarity of which can become
routine. Additionally, the narrow melodic texture is harmonized characteristically by a small
pool of root position chords. Nevertheless, this complete English gradual represents a significant
achievement and is quite fit for liturgical use. Using these propers just once a month in a parish
would avoid the musical repetition and still assist in leading the parish toward singing the
propers of the Mass.
The Simple Choral Gradual was released in printed form in June 2011 at the CMAA’s
Colloquium XXI, along with the freshly completed Simple English Propers. The Simple English
Propers, which will likely be a crowning achievement for composer Adam Bartlett, editor of the
Sacred Music Project, provide a complete English edition of propers for all the Sundays and
solemnities of the Church year. Included are all the entrance, offertory, and communion
antiphons with their corresponding psalm verses. The project demonstrates greater melodic
variety than the Simple Choral Gradual of Richard Rice, yet they are no more difficult to
perform. Each of these chants is set simply, but beautifully, in square notation on four-line
staves and with pointed psalm texts. This method of engraving is both a virtue and a vice; the
four-line staff lends itself to greater subtlety and ease of performance, but it will, at first, be
unfamiliar to many Catholic musicians. Another significant advantage of this resource is that its
melodies preserve the modes of the Gregorian originals. Amazingly, these propers have been
published freely through “creative commons” on the CMAA website, and they are available in
printed form for only a nominal fee.164
The completion of the Simple English Propers has filled
164. C.f., http://musicasacra.com/simple-propers-of-the-mass-ordinary-form.
Friel 51
a void that went largely unspoken in the decades since the promulgation of the ,ovus Ordo of
the Roman Rite.
Closely related to the Simple English Propers is a similar project being undertaken by
Father Samuel Weber, OSB. Fr. Weber is Director of the Institute of Sacred Music, founded in
2008 by then-Archbishop Raymond Burke in the Archdiocese of St. Louis. He is, at present,
working towards the completion of a gradual that will include, like the Gregorian Missal, all the
Sundays and feast days of the year. The portions that have been published already on the
Institute’s website165
utilize square notes and four-line staves and are well laid out. Something
that distinguishes the work in St. Louis from any other project is that it includes an emphasis on
Spanish-language propers, as well. Since the Spanish language has an ever-growing presence in
the United States of America, this facet of Fr. Weber’s work signifies a tremendously pastoral
effort to bring propers-based liturgy to all the members of the Church in this country.
Also available freely on the CMAA website is Communio, another project of composer
Richard Rice.166
A collection of all the communion chants for Sundays and feast days, the
contribution of this volume is the practical format in which it pairs the communion antiphon with
its psalm verses, thus making the relatively short antiphon more liturgically fit for the
communion procession. Originally published in 2007 with Latin antiphons and Latin psalm
verses, the engraver released an alternative edition in 2009 with Latin antiphons and English
psalm tones. This second version gives evidence of the growing realization that resources must
be provided as stepping-stones if the ideal is ever to be achieved.
There are many other similar resources available, of course, in both Latin and English. It
is not the task of the present study to name or to analyze them all. But those that have been
165. C.f., http://archstl.org/worship/page/institute-sacred-music.
166. C.f., http://musicasacra.com/communio. Also, Communio: Communion Antiphons with Psalm Verses
for Sundays and Solemnities, ed. Richard Rice (Richmond, VA: CMAA, 2007).
Friel 52
presented above are representative of what is available and what is becoming available, and they
make the point that the goal of a propers-based liturgy is not beyond reach.
A Call to Action
The quality of sacred music cannot possibly be everywhere equal, on account of the
varying abilities and resources present in each community of faith. In every situation, however,
goals can be set, new ideas can be tried, and ideals can become the benchmark for which
musicians strive. Indeed, “music for worship should be the best that is possible in any given
milieu.”167
Placing this foundational belief in the context of contemporary America, the action
first proposed by Professor László Dobszay seems relevant at this juncture: “the formula alius
cantus congruus as a substitution for the Roman Gradual or the Simple Gradual must be
removed from the normative text of the General Introduction to the Roman Missal.”168
First issued in 1969, the General Introduction to the Roman Missal (GIRM) ratified the
permission given in Musicam Sacram (1967), which referred to “substituting other songs for the
songs given in the Graduale for the Entrance, Offertory, and Communion” as a “custom
legitimately in use.”169
According to the GIRM, “there are four options for the Entrance Chant”
in the dioceses of the United States of America: the antiphon from the Roman Missal or the
psalm from the Roman Gradual, the seasonal antiphon from the Simple Gradual, a song from an
approved collection of psalms and antiphons, or “a suitable liturgical song [alius cantus
congruus or aptus] similarly approved by the Conference of Bishops or the Diocesan Bishop.”170
167. Francis P. Schmitt, “Leaning Right?” in Crisis in Church Music? ed. The Liturgical Conference
(Washington, D.C.: The Liturgical Conference, 1967), 53.
168. Dobszay, “The Proprium Missae of the Roman Rite,” 100.
169. Musicam Sacram, 32.
170. General Instruction of the Roman Missal (Washington, D.C.: USCCB, 2003), 48. Hereafter,
abbreviated GIRM.
Friel 53
The same four options are understood of the offertory chant and clearly stated of the communion
chant.171
No norm is given to regulate the meaning of congruus or aptus, and, judging from the
typical experience of Holy Mass in modern America, this fourth option has eclipsed the first
three options on a grand scale. Perhaps great good would be accomplished, as Dobszay
suggests, by the wholesale elimination of the option for “another appropriate song.”
This action, were it to be taken, would still admit of variety and the necessary inequality
of the musical-liturgical experience in different setting. The propers could be sung by a cantor, a
choir, or the whole congregation; they could be sung accompanied or unaccompanied; they could
be sung in English, Latin, or Spanish. This action would not necessarily eliminate the possibility
of singing something in addition to the propers, either, but it would certainly help “to restore the
musical ordering that has always been a feature of the Roman Rite.”172
Thanks to the dedication of many selfless Church musicians, a lack of sufficient
resources (in Latin or in the vernacular) is finally no longer a legitimate excuse for the
replacement of propers with hymnody (or anything else). Choices among Latin and vernacular
propers are now widely available, and many of them are available at no cost.
This is not an impossible goal. It is the onus of our present generation to see that the
Second Vatican Council’s “original vision of a musical renaissance consistent with tradition is
achieved.”173
Professor Dobszay has, himself, testified to the real viability of this call to action,
speaking of the current liturgical life of his native Hungary. There, “despite very adverse
conditions,” the chanting of the propers “has in fact been achieved.”174
In both urban and rural
171. C.f., GIRM, 74 and 87.
172. Tucker, Sing Like a Catholic, 118.
173. Tucker, Sing Like a Catholic, 20.
174. Dobszay, “The Proprium Missae of the Roman Rite,” 103.
Friel 54
parishes, the voice of the Church is heard through the sung propers of the Mass as presented in
the 2007 volume, Graduale Hungaricum.175
Similar success is possible in the American milieu.
Whether or not the repeal of the permissive phrase legitimizing “another suitable song” is
effected officially within the Church, Catholic musicians of the current generation have the
freedom to make the option extraneous. Choices can be made in favor of the propers even now,
and the fruits of such action could be extraordinary for the Church and for the faithful.
V. Conclusion
We have argued that the Roman propers are the unparalleled ideal of Catholic liturgical
chant. Their preeminence having been challenged by the contemporary practice of supplanting
proper texts with popular hymnody, it has been shown that the propers possess particular virtues
that make them uniquely apt for service at the liturgy. Popular hymnody also has a vital role for
Catholics, but this role is expressed most authentically as part of the culture and not the
Eucharistic liturgy. With an abundance of propers-based resources now available, the movement
toward the independence of liturgical chant from popular hymnody has become possible. It is
the charge of the present generation of Catholic musicians in America to initiate this movement,
participate in it, and bring it to a happy completion.
175. Graduale Hungaricum (Gödöllö: A Premonterei rend Gödöllöi Kanóniája, 2007).
Friel 55
Bibliography
Albright, W. F. and C. S. Mann. The Anchor Bible: Matthew. Garden City, NY: Doubleday,
1971.
Andersen, Eric M. “History, Reform, and Continuity in the Hymns of the Roman Breviary.”
Sacred Music 136, no. 1 (Spring 2009): 7-31.
Augustine of Hippo. “Letter 237.” In The Works of Saint Augustine, ed. Boniface Ramsey,
trans. Roland Teske. Hyde Park, NY: New City Press, 2005.
Augustine of Hippo. Sermon 336, 1. PL 38, 1472.
Ballou, Mary Jane. “Singing in Unison? Selling Chant to the Reluctant Choir.” Sacred Music
136, no. 4 (Winter 2009): 54-56.
Pope Benedict XVI. Meeting of His Holiness Benedict XVI with the Priest of the Diocese of
Albano. 31 August 2006. Available from
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2006/august/documents/hf_ben
-xvi_spe_20060831_sacerdoti-albano_en.html; Internet; accessed 13 December 2010.
Bernard of Clairvaux. Talks on the Song of Songs. Ed., Bernard Bangley. Brewster, MA:
Paraclete Press, 2002.
Bishops’ Committee on the Liturgy. Liturgical Music Today. Washington, D.C.: NCCB, 1982.
Bishops’ Committee on the Liturgy. Music in Catholic Worship. Washington, D.C.: NCCB,
1972.
Britt, O.S.B., Matthew. The Hymns of the Breviary and Missal. New York: Benziger Brothers,
Inc., 1955.
Friel 56
Brown, John, N E Barry Hofstetter, and Christopher Coldwell. Singing of Psalms, Hymns and
Spiritual Songs in the Public Worship of God. [1].” Confessional Presbyterian 3,
(January 1, 2007): 276-279.
Brown, John, and Steven Dilday. “Singing of Psalms, Hymns and Spiritual Songs in the Public
Worship of God. Part II.” Confessional Presbyterian 5, (January 1, 2009): 298-304.
Bullough, John F. “Notker Balbulus and the Origin of the Sequence.” The Hymn 16, no. 1
(January 1965): 13-16, 24.
Catena Aurea: Commentary on the Four Gospels. Ed. Saint Thomas Aquinas. Albany, NY:
Preserving Christian Publications, 1993.
The Catholic Comparative ,ew Testament. New York: Oxford UP, 2005.
Chirograph of the Supreme Pontiff John Paul II for the Centenary of the Motu Proprio “Tra le
Sollecitudini” on Sacred Music. John Paul II. November 22, 2003.
Communio: Communion Antiphons with Psalm Verses for Sundays and Solemnities. Ed. Richard
Rice. Richmond, VA: CMAA, 2007.
Connelly, Joseph. Hymns of the Roman Liturgy. Westminster, MD: The Newman Press, 1957.
Corpus Christ Watershed: About Page. Available from http://www.ccwatershed.org/about;
Internet; accessed 31 March 2011.
Cum Angelis Canere: Essays on Sacred Music and Pastoral Liturgy in Honour of Richard J
Schuler. Ed. Robert A. Skeris. Saint Paul, MN: Catholic Church Music Associates,
1990.
Davies, W. D. and Dale C. Allison. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel
According to Saint Matthew. Edinburgh: T&T Clark Ltd., 1997.
Friel 57
Detwiler, D. F. “Church Music and Colossians 3:16.” Bibliotheca Sacra 158, no. 631 (2001):
347-369.
Dobszay, László. “Proprium Missae: Unity, Variety, and Rupture in the Roman Rite.” Sacred
Music 134, no. 1 (Spring 2007): 16-32.
Dobszay, László. “The Life and Meaning of the Sequence.” Sacred Music 134, no. 2 (Summer
2007): 8-20.
Dobszay, László. “The Proprium Missae of the Roman Rite.” In The Genius of the Roman Rite:
Historical, Theological, and Pastoral Perspectives on Catholic Liturgy, ed. Uwe Michael
Lang, 83-118. Mundelein, IL: Hillenbrand Books, 2010.
Du Preez, J. “The Missionary Significance of Psalm 117 in the Book of Psalms and in the New
Testament.” Missionalia 27, no. 3 (1999): 369-376.
Eerdmans’ Handbook to the Bible. Ed. David Alexander & Pat Alexander. Grand Rapids, MI:
Eerdmans, 1992.
Faulkner, Quentin. “Musical Illiteracy Revisited.” Sacred Music 135, no. 2 (Summer 2008): 86-
88.
Fellerer, Karl Gustav. The History of Catholic Church Music. Trans. Francis A. Brunner,
C.Ss.R. Baltimore: Helicon Press, 1961.
Flynn, William T. Medieval Music as Medieval Exegesis. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press, Inc.,
1999.
Ford, Paul. By Flowing Waters: Chant for the Liturgy. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press,
1999.
Fortescue, Adrian. “Concerning Hymns.” Sacred Music 134, no. 3 (Fall 2007): 30-45.
Friel 58
Fortescue, Adrian. The Ceremonies of the Roman Rite Described. London: Burns, Oates &
Washbourne, 1937.
Fortescue, Adrian. The Mass: A Study of the Roman Liturgy. Albany, NY: Preserving Christian
Publications, Inc., 1999.
Geim, Maximilian. “Divine Office: Joining in the Song of the Holy Spirit.” Sacred Music 136,
no. 2 (Summer 2009): 40-47.
General Instruction of the Roman Missal. Washington, D.C.: USCCB, 2003.
Gihr, Nicholaus. The Veni Sancte Spiritus: An Explanation of the Pentecostal Sequence. Trans.
L. M. Dooley. Island Creek, MA: Miramar, 1947.
Gihr, Nicholaus. Dies Irae. Trans. Joseph J. Schmit. St. Louis: B. Herder Book Co., 1927.
Gill, Gerard Dennis. Music in Catholic Liturgy: A Pastoral and Theological Companion to Sing
to the Lord. Mundelein, IL: Hillenbrand Books, 2009.
Graduale Hungaricum. Gödöllö: A Premonterei rend Gödöllöi Kanóniája, 2007.
Green, Andrew, and Herman J. Koch. The Proper of the Mass Set to Gregorian Themes.
Boston: McLaughlin & Reilly, 1949.
Harrison, Helen. “Singing Hymns Instead of the Proper of the Mass.” Sacred Music 135, no. 3
(Fall 2008): 40-47.
Hiley, David. Western Plainchant: A Handbook. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993.
Hourlier, Dom Jacques. Reflections on the Spirituality of Gregorian Chant. Orelans, MA:
Paraclete Press, 1995.
Howell, Clifford W. “A New Approach to Vernacular Psalm-Singing.” Worship 30, no. 1
(December 1, 1955): 25-31.
Friel 59
Pope John Paul II. “Letter to Artists.” Origins: C,S Documentary Service 28, no. 46 (May 6,
1999): 786-793.
Jubilate Deo. Chicago: GIA Publications, Inc., 1974.
Jungmann, Josef A. The Mass of the Roman Rite: Its Origins and Development. Volumes 1 & 2.
Trans. Francis A. Brunner. New York: Benziger Brothers, 1959.
Karp, Theodore. Introduction to the Post-Tridentine Mass Proper. Middleton, WI: American
Institute of Musicology, 2005.
Kubicki, C.S.S.F., Judith M. Review of By Flowing Waters: Chant for the Liturgy, by Paul
Ford. Available from http://www.pford.stjohnsem.edu/ford/by-flowing-
waters/docs/reviews-and-praises/Kubicki%20Worship.pdf; Internet; accessed 23 March
2011.
Liber Usualis. Ed. The Benedictines of Solesmes. Boston: McLaughlin & Reilly Company,
1938.
Mahrt, William. “Pride of Place.” Sacred Music 135, no. 3 (Fall 2008): 3-4.
Malan, F. S. “Church Singing According to the Pauline Epistles.” ,eotestamentica 32, no. 2
(1998): 509-524.
Marshall, I. Howard. Last Supper and Lord’s Supper. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans,
1980.
McKinnon, James. The Advent Project: The Later-Seventh-Century Creation of the Roman Mass
Proper. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2000.
Messenger, Ruth Ellis. The Medieval Latin Hymn. Washington, D.C.: Capital Press, 1953.
Mills, B. Andrew. Psallite Sapienter: A Musician’s Practical Guide to the 1962 Roman Missal.
Richmond, VA: CMAA, 2008.
Friel 60
Missale Romanum. New York: Roman Catholic Books, 1996.
Murrett, John C. The Message of the Mass Melodies. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1960.
Musicam Sacram. Sacred Congregation of Rites. 5 March 1967.
Musicae Sacrae. Pope Pius XII. 25 December 1955.
Neubauer, John. The Emancipation of Music from Language: Departure from Mimesis in
Eighteenth-Century Aesthetics. New Haven: Yale UP, 1986.
The ,ew Harvard Dictionary of Music. Ed. Don Michael Randel. Cambridge, MA: Belknap
Press of Harvard UP, 1986.
Oremus: Speaking with God in the Words of the Roman Rite. Trans., Martin D. O’Keefe. St.
Louis: Institute of Jesuit Sources, 1993.
Overath, Johannes. “Sancta Sancte (St. Pius X).” In Crux et Cithara, ed. Robert A Skeris, 270-
274. Altötting: Verlag Alfred Coppenrath, 1983.
The Oxford Dictionary of the Jewish Religion. Ed. R.J. Zwi Werblowsky & Geoffrey Wigoder.
New York: Oxford UP, 1997.
Pieper, Josef. Only the Lover Sings: Art and Contemplation. San Francisco: Ignatius, 1990.
Pilch, John J. “‘After they had sung a hymn...’.” Bible Today 44, no. 3 (May 2006): 185-189.
Planchart, Alejandro Enrique. Beneventanum troporum corpus, 1: Tropes of the Proper of the
Mass from Southern Italy, AD 1000-1250, 2 V. Madison, WI: A-R, 1994.
Poterack, Kurt. “Hymns, Propers, and the Mass.” Sacred Music 134, no. 3 (Fall 2007): 70-71.
Prou, OSB, Dom Jean. “Gregorian Chant and the Sanctification of the Faithful.” In Divini
Cultus Studium: Studies in the Theology of Worship and of its Music, ed. Robert A.
Skeris, 198-213. Altötting: Verlag Alfred Coppenrath, 1990.
Friel 61
Ratzinger, Joseph. A ,ew Song for the Lord: Faith in Christ and Liturgy Today. Trans. Martha
M. Matesich. New York: Crossroad Publishing Company, 1996.
Ratzinger, Joseph. Feast of Faith. Trans. G. Harrison. San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1986.
Ratzinger, Joseph. The Spirit of the Liturgy. Trans. John Saward. San Francisco: Ignatius Press,
2000.
Robertson, Charles. Singing the Faith: Essays by Members of the Joint Liturgical Group on the
Use of Hymns in Liturgy. Norwich, England: Canterbury Press, 1990.
Rossini, Carlo. ‘Proper’ of the Mass for the Entire Ecclesiastical Year. Pittsburgh, PA: 1933.
Ruff, OSB, Anthony. “Proper Chants and Improper Hymns: What Texts Shall We Sing in
Worship?” Hymn 56, no. 4 (September 1, 2005): 19-27.
Ruff, OSB, Anthony. Sacred Music and Liturgical Reform: Treasures and Transformations.
Mundelein, IL: Hillenbrand Books, 2007.
Rusche, Helga. “Das letzte gemeinsame Gebet Jesu mit seinen Jüngern: Der Psalm 136.”
Wissenschaft und Weisheit 51, no. 2 (1988): 210-212.
Sacrosanctum Concilium. Second Vatican Council. 4 December 1963.
Schloeder, Steven J. Architecture in Communion. San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1998.
Schmitt, Francis P. “Leaning Right?” In Crisis in Church Music? ed. The Liturgical
Conference, 52-64. Washington, D.C.: The Liturgical Conference, 1967.
Sedlmayr, Hans. Art in Crisis: The Lost Centre. Trans. Brian Battershaw. London: Hollis &
Carter Limited, 1957.
The Seven Great Hymns of the Mediaeval Church. New York: Anson D. F. Randolph & Co.,
1868.
Sing to the Lord: Music in Divine Worship. Washington, D.C.: USCCB, 2008.
Friel 62
Skeris, Robert A. “How to Start Singing Again.” Sacred Music 123, no. 2 (Summer 1996): 11-
14.
Skeris, Robert A. “On the Problem of Religious Hymn Contrafacta: Reflections Theological and
Hymnological.” In Divini Cultus Studium: Studies in the Theology of Worship and of its
Music, ed. Robert A. Skeris, 114-123. Altötting: Verlag Alfred Coppenrath, 1990.
Skeris, Robert A. “Roman Missal 2000: The General Instruction.” Sacred Music 128, no. 1
(Spring 2001): 11-15.
Skeris, Robert A. “The Anthropology of the ‘Doctor Humanitatis’ and Active Participation in
the Liturgy.” In Atti del IX Congresso Tomistico Internazionale, 5, 394-397. Vatican
City: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1991.
The Snowbird Statement on Catholic Liturgical Music. Salt Lake City: The Madeleine Institute,
1995.
Tietze, Christoph. Hymn Introits for the Liturgical Year. Mundelein, IL: Hillenbrand Books,
2005.
Tra le Sollecitudini. Pope Pius X. 22 November 1903.
Tucker, Jeffrey A. Sing Like a Catholic. Richmond, VA: Church Music Association of
America, 2009.
Tucker, Jeffrey A. “The Year of English Chant Propers.” Sacred Music 136, no. 2 (Summer
2009): 66-73.
Tunger, Michael, and Robert A (Robert Alexander) Skeris. “Guardian of an Unique Treasure.”
Sacred Music 132, no. 4 (2005): 24-26.