Sacred Music, 111.3, Fall 1984; The Journal of the Church Music Association of America

8/14/2019 Sacred Music, 111.3, Fall 1984; The Journal of the Church Music Association of America

1/29

Volume 111, Number 3(Fall) 1984


2/29

B it f y v p h a n u m i i I n r v m n i s

SACRED MUSICVolume 111, Number 3, Fall 1984FROM THE EDITORSW hat Did the Council Want? 3Hymns 5W hat Abo ut Ou r Children? 8

LITURGICAL ABUSE AND THE CHURCH MUSICIAN (PART II)Duane L. C. M. Galles 9

EVENING PRAYER AT WESTMINSTERHarold Hughesdon 17

T H E LIBER HYMNARIUSPaul Le Voir 19

REVIEWS 22NEWS 17

CONTRIBUTORS 28EDITORIAL NOT ES 28


3/29

SACRED MUSIC Continuation of Caecilia, published by the Society of St. Caecilia since 1874,an d Th e Catholic Choirmaster, published by the Society of St. Gregory ofAmerica since 1915. Published quarterly by the Church Music Association ofAmerica. Office of publications: 548 Lafond Avenue, Saint Paul, Minnesota55103.Editorial Board: Rev. Msgr. Richard J. Schuler, EditorRev. Ralph S. March, S.O. Cist.Rev.John BuchananHarold HughesdonWilliam P. MahrtVirginia A. SchubertCal StepanRev. Richard M. HoganMary Ellen StrappJudy Labon

News: Rev. Msgr. Richard J. Schuler548 Lafond Avenue, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55103Music for Review: Paul Salamunovich, 10828 Valley Spring Lane, N. Hollywood, Calif. 91602

Rev. Ralph S. March, S.O. Cist., Eintrachstrasse 166, D-5000 Koln 1,West Germany

Membership, Circulationand Advertising:

CHURCH MUSICASSOCIATIONOF AMERICAOfficers and Board of DirectorsPresidentVice-PresidentGeneral Secretary

TreasurerDirectors

Paul Manz, 7204 Schey Drive, Edina, Minnesota 55435

548 Lafond Avenue, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55103

Monsignor Richard J. SchulerGerhard TrackVirginia A. SchubertEarl D. HoganMrs. Richard K. BiggsRev. Ralph S. March, S.O. Cist.Mrs. Donald G. VellekWilliam P. MahrtRev. Robert A. SkerisMembership in the CMAA includes a subscription to SACRED MUSIC.Voting membership, $12.50 annually; subscription membership, $10.00annually; student membership, $5.00 annually. Single copies, $3.00. Sendmembership applications and change of address to SACRED MUSIC, 548Lafond Avenue, St. Paul, Minnesota 55103. Make all checks payable toChurch Music Association of America.Second class postage paid at St. Paul, Minnesota.Library of Congress catalog card number: 62-6712/MNSacred Music is indexed in the Catholic Periodical and Literature Index and inMusic index.Front Cover: Stiftsbibliothek Gottweig Codex 7(221), f.24rCopyright Church Music Association of America, 1984ISSN: 0036-2255474960


4/29

+ +m

trr lnDirnhtatjol i t

ill t ifFROM THE EDITORSWhat Did the Council Want?

Can it be tha t the prese nt state of church m usic in the U nited States is wh at the fathersof the Second Vatican Council intended to impose upon the universal Church as arenewal of the very source of holiness, the sacred liturgy?Can it be that the Holy Spirit inspired nearly three thousand bishops to gather fromall over the world and decree what we have about us today?Has the Ch urch in the United S tates, twen ty ye ars after the close of the council, effec-tively implemented the decrees on church music found in the constitution on the sacredliturgy?I say emphatically "No!" In fact, far from implementing those decrees the presentmusical establishment in this country has prevented the true implementation of thecouncil's decrees and set the whole reform of church music begun by Pope Pius X backbeyond the turn of the twentieth century. There is no question that the conditions thatprovoked the motu proprio of 1903 were bad, but the present state of church music in theUnited States is far worse. St. Pius objected to the introduction of the opera into thechurch. It was a violation of the Church's demand that music for the worship of God besacred. The music itself was artistic, but it lacked the essential requirement of holiness.Today's music lacks both requirements; it is neither sacred nor art.Du ring the first half of the century , the reforms of Pius X we re slowly m aking head-way. T he reform began late in the United States, but by the 1920's the educational pro-cess had begun. Gregorian chant was being taught in schools, seminaries and novitiates.Parish choirs were attempting to improve their repertory. Dioceses were moving to setup standards for performance and repertory . The popes wh o followed Pius X continuedthe direction of the reform with further directions from Rome. Musicae sacrae disciplina ofPope Pius XII added significantly to the on-going reform, and when the council fathers FROM THE EDITORS


5/29

of Vatican II published the consti tution on the sacred l i turgy, musicians hailed i t as thecrowning keystone o f the whole l i tu rg ica l and musica l re fo rm begun by Pius X.

The council gave musicians great l iberty . All good music f i t t ing for the sacred templewas to be fos te red . The nar rowness o f the p re-Vat ican per iod was gone , and the t ra inedmusic ian was g iven a f reedom tha t cou ld be exerc ised wi th in the fundam enta lgu ide l ines tha t had a lways charac ter ized t rue church music : ho l iness and goodness o fform. I t must be sacred, and i t must be ar t .Bu t jus t when the re fo rm seemed to be approach ing i t s goa l , the co l lapse occur red .The her i tage o f cen tu r ies upon which the new developments in the vernacu larlanguages would be bu i l t was abandoned and even d iscarded as obso le te and ou t lawed .People who had no knowledge o f the a r t o f music began to compose fo r the l i tu rgy .Secu lar fo rms and secu lar id ioms were in t roduced wi th the abandonment o f the concep tof the sacred . Tra ined cho ir s were d ismissed as be ing opposed to par t ic ipa t ion by thepeop le . The p ipe o rgan was rep laced by the gu i ta r and the p iano . What had beenach ieved in the p reced ing s ix ty years s ince Pope Pius X was un kn ow n to those w homoved in to the posi t ions o f church music in par ishes , ca thedra ls and seminar ies . Ahatred of Latin and Gregorian chant and of choirs and ser ious ar t music pushed the train-ed and ded ica ted church music ians f rom the i r posi t ions . The age o f the piccolomini h addawned . The " l i t t le men" were in charge , and what a demol i t ion they have wrought!

Can i t be that an ecumenical council ordered us to sing ballads, show tunes and lovesongs as music for the worship of God? Can i t be that the council fathers wished theabandonment o f the her i tage o f cen tu r ies , the envy o f the wor ld , the music fo r theR o m a n Missa cantata? Hard ly . They decreed jus t the opposi te . Can i t be tha t the combowas in tended by the counci l to rep lace the o rgan? Are schoo l ch i ld ren to be encouragedto "compose" music fo r the i r Masses? One cou ld go on l i s t ing the aber ra t ions tha t su r -round us . How the migh ty have fa l len . Corruptio optimi pessima. "The cor rup t ion o f thebest is a lway s the wor s t ."

But what can be done? I t i s s imple . Al low the Second Vat ican Counci l to be pu t in toeffect! The f lowering of the Church that the fathers of the council envisaged has yet tobe ach ieved . I t has been hampered and b locked by those who have imposed the i r ownideas upon the Church in spite of the clear directives of the concil iar and post-concil iardocu me nts . On e is rem inde d o f the years fo l lowing the Counci l of Tren t , w he n th edecrees o f tha t ecumenica l meet ing were no t even p romulgated in many lands . Butwhen , f ina l ly , the d i rec t ives o f Tren t were implemented by courageous b ishops , newrel ig ious o rders and ho ly laymen and p r ies ts , then came the g rea t 17 th cen tury wi th i t snew arch i tec tu re , new music , new theo logy , new orders o f men and women, newl i te ra tu re , new sa in ts , ne w l i fe . Th e f lower ing ca me th roug h the ded ica ted ef fo rts o f theb ishops , insp i red by the Holy Sp ir i t . Bu t before i t happened there were years o f war ,b loodshed , con t roversy , decay and d is in tegra t ion , the co l lapse o f the o ld , the d isap-pearance o f many ins t i tu t ions and t rad i t ions .

Perhaps our days a re s imi lar . The g rea t p rob lems of the p resen t can be so lved by thed i rec t ives of Vat ican II . W e hav e en ter ed a new era . The m od ern age has passed a way ;we are a l ready in a post -modern per iod whatever the h is to r ians wi l l some day ca l l i t .The er ro rs o f the modern age , ca l led "Modern ism" , have passed l ikewise . The twocouncils, Vatican I and V atican II, ha ve dispos ed of them . Som e of the remn ant s of theerrors remain and are causing the diff icult ies that we see in the present l i turgical andmusica l aber ra t ions , bu t th ey wi l l pass whe n th e decrees o f Vat ican II a re even tua l ly pu tin to p rac t ice .

To the quest ion , "What d id the Vat ican Counci l wan t?" one must answer tha t i t i s a l lc lear in the const i tu t ion on the sacred l i tu rgy and the Roman documents tha t fo l lowed .Jus t a l low us to implement them.

FROM THE EDITORS R J - S -


6/29

HymnsEarly usage applied the term "hymn" to any song of praise or adoration of God. TheGloria in the M ass is a hym n as is the Sanctus, both sung first by the angels. Later the termcame to mean poems newly composed in distinction to psalms or canticles or otherscriptural texts. The eastern churches produced many great writers. Saint Ephraem is

called the "father of Christian hymnody," and in the west Saint Hilary of Poitiers wrotethe first Latin hymns. The form was more quickly and more extensively adopted in theeast than in the west where the hymn was used in the liturgies of the divine office butnot in the Mass itself. The great names in the literature of Latin hymns are Saint Am-brose, Prudentius, Fortunatus, Hrabanus Maurus, Thomas Aquinas and Sedulius. Theextent of the use of the hymn is grasped by the fact that the most useful collection ofmedieval hymns, the Analecta hymnica, is in 55 volumes, and it does not propos to be acomplete collection.The Germans took to singing hymns in their own language before most otherpeoples. Some Latin texts were translated into G erman and set to music and others w erenewly composed. Christmas hymns, Marian hymns and others that are connected withthe crusades set the pattern for the later development of the hymn during the days ofthe Protestant reformation. The form became an instrument for dissemination oftheological ideas during the struggles brought on by Luther, Zwingli and Calvin. TheLutherans developed their chorales and the Swiss and French Calvinists produced theirmetrical settings of psalm texts, both capable of being classified as hymns. They areamong the great musical treasures that remain from those days of turmoil. Catholiccounterparts were likewise composed and remain today in the repertory of German,Austrian, Polish and Hungarian congregations.In those lands where the conflict between the Church and the reformers was foughtout bitterly in pulpit and public forum with debates and tracts and often much moreacrimonious means, the hymn developed as a tool of propaganda for both sides. But inthose lands where the Reformation did not succeed or where it completely took over,no extensive body of hymns was created. The period did not produce an Italian orSpanish hym nod y, n or is there a body of hymns from that period in English. The hym nwas a song of praise of Go d, b ut it was used as a teaching device a nd as a mark of affilia-tion to one or the other side of the conflict.Hym ns in the English language appear in the mid-sixteenth century, b eing introducedas translations from Lutheran originals and from Calvinist psalters from the continent.But the first truly English compositions were associated with the Metho dist mo vem ent,which brought the hymns of Isaac Watts and Charles Wesley into use. Ireland was apersecuted land in which Catholics could scarcely live and attend Mass in the hedge-rows, let alone create music for singing. The English Catholics, their numbersdecimated, were hunted and persecuted as well. What hymns were composed wereProtestant.In the United States, the first hymnals were Protestant, brought from England andlater published in this country in the major cities of the east coast. The immigrantsbrought their hymnals from the homelands, but with the emphasis on learning English,those texts in foreign languages did not long end ure, althoug h the m elodies becam e thebeginnings for many efforts to set English words to the old tunes. Unfortunately manyProtestant hymns and many gospel songs from various sects found their way intoCatholic collections of hymns and the singing of Catholic congregations. The quality ofmost of the early hymn als in English published and used in this country up until the motuproprio of Pope Pius X was bad. O ne of the most successful efforts of the church m usicreforms undertaken at the beginning of the 20th century in this country was the im-pro vem en t of hym nals. M an y of those in use we re not only discouraged but we re pro- FROM THE EDITORS


7/29

hib i ted by d iocesan o rders . On a posi t ive no te , the pub l ica t ion o f The Saint Gregory Hym-na l by Nicola Montani was the most signif icant factor in raising the quali ty of hymns us-ed in the United States.

The p romot ion o f congregat ional s ing ing was no t begun wi th the Second Vat icanCounci l . Amer ican b ishops had long u rged the s ing ing o f hymns, and school ch i ld ren inthe 1920 ' s and 1930 ' s regu lar ly sang hymns a t the "ch i ld ren ' s Masses" which were theusual Sunday p rocedure in Amer ican c i ty par ishes . Peop le sang hymns a t novenas , a tstations of the cross, at benediction of the Blessed Sacrament and at missions and devo-t ions . In most cases the hymns were good , a l though some of the "o ld favor i tes" weres t i l l used , espec ia l ly when miss ionar ies appeared and requested the i r own reper to ry . Butthe peop le sang . An Amer ican b ishop remarked once tha t i t was Holy God We Praise Th yName tha t kep t the fa i th fo r the German immigran ts th roughout the midwest .

With the sp read o f the Gregor ian movement , the p rac t ice o f s ing ing hymns a t Masswas d iscouraged in favor o f s ing ing the Gregor ian chan ts o f the Mass . The Missa recitataalso mili tated against hymn singing. Not a l i t t le responsible for the disintegration ofsinging in general was the introduction of acoustical t i t les that were used to l ine the in-te r io rs o f churches , des t roy ing any cond i t ions sympathe t ic to s ing ing .

But the Amer ic an C atho l ic was no t m ute , as so man y l i tu rg ica l re fo rmers o f the1960 ' s c la imed . Amer ican Catho l ics had been s ing ing fo r a cen tu ry before the SecondVat ican Counci l . They were s ing ing more before the counci l than they are today . Un-for tunate ly the e f fo r ts made in the s ix t ies to p romote congregat ional s ing ing d id no tu t i l ize what had been the ongoing refo rms begun wi th the motu proprio of Pius X. Hadcongregat ions been asked to s ing the hymns they had learned in the Catho l ic schoo lsand had sung in their churches for at least two decades, the increase in congregationalsinging would have been easily accomplished. But instead, the l i turgical reformers in-t roduced new hymns, o f ten taken f rom Pro tes tan t sources , unknown to Catho l ic peo-ple , and as a resu l t of too m uch ne w m ater ia l , the s ing ing in our churches de creased andeven d isappeared . In add i t ion much of the new mater ia l in t roduced cou ld no t beclassif ied as hymns. Rather the reformers brought in ballads, folk-songs, gospel songsand even show tunes , dance music and secu lar songs . These demanded per fo rmers , andthe congregat ion was s i lenced . Hymns tha t were fo r the most par t sacred and o f a r t i s t icwor th , were rep laced by secu lar and banal composi t ions whi le the congregat ion on lyl i s tened . Where the congregat ion d id s ing , o f ten the se lec t ions came f rom Bapt is t andMethodis t reper to r ies tha t lacked the requ irements o f tex t and tune ca l led fo r byCa th o l i c n o r m s .

On the o ther hand , one cannot deny tha t many popular and p leasan t tunes have beencomposed in the pas t decade o r two wi th re l ig ious tex ts . They have been learned bystuden ts and young peop le and they l ike them. These composi t ions fa l l in to theca tegory descr ibed by Pope Pau l VI when he addressed the women re l ig ious tak ing par tin the nationa l conv ent ion of the Ital ian Socie ty of St. Cecil ia , Ap ril 15 , 197 1. Th e H olyFather said:The constitution on the sacred liturgy has counseled musicians to produce "compositionshaving the qualities proper to genuine sacred music. The texts ... must always be consistentwith Catholic teaching; indeed they should be drawn chiefly from holy scripture andliturgical sources." It will be necessary to judge whether new sacred compositions reallymatch these standards and to decide whether they are inspired musically merely by somepassing vogue and devoid of either spiritual or artistic value ... As to texts, the excerpt fromthe council is explicit: the effort must be to have something really sound, rejecting those ex-pressions that in some cases do hono r neither to the sacred meaning nor to the right usage ofthe language and create graceless, trite expressions more typical of a slogan than of a prayer.Other texts and music, making no claim to admittance into the church, do answer modernneeds, especially those of the youn g. The y may be used on other occasions of relaxation orFROM THE EDITORS of meeting s for reflection and study , so that singing may be a mean s of increasing en-


8/29

thusiasm. But the liturgy is "an exercise of the priestly office of Jesus Christ... the action ofChrist the priest and of His Body which is the Church;" it demands, therefore, only w hat ismost suited to its proper and sublime character.The popular religious ballads and folksongs have a place, as the Holy Father has said.They are meant for occasions of relaxation, reflection and study; they can create en-thusiasm and piety. But they are not suitable for liturgical worship. True and authentichymns are and it is those that the Church is encouraging. Music that is truly sacred andis good art, judged according to the standards of knowledgeable and trained liturgicalmusicians, is what the Church seeks for the liturgy, which is the "action of Christ thepriest."

Some of the publishers of Sunday Mass booklets tried to abide by Catholic rules, butthe demands for the ballads, the folksongs and the poorer type of hymn were so strongthat they capitulated. Some efforts to publish hymnals of quality were unsuccessfullymade. Talk about a national hymnal was heard from time to time, but wisely nothingwas done, especially in the face of the diversity of traditions in this country and the vastexpanse of the nation making a single hymnal impractical. Collections of inferior com-positions continue to appear and so set back any possibility of upgrading the music forthe congregation.Connected with the question of hymn singing is that of the use of the pipe organ. Acongregation cannot be led in a hymn by a guitar, even with all the amplification wesometimes unfortunately must endure. The splendor and power of the pipe organ cancause a congregation to fairly raise the roof, since it alone can truly give support.Hy mn s have traditionally been set to four-part harmo nization me ant for the organ. Thatharmony forms the basic familiarity that a congregation must have to sing with con-fidence. If it is lacking or not heard, the congregation does not respond since it cannotfollow an uncertain trumpet. It is not the cantor, so promoted by the liturgists, that thecongregation needs. It is not microphones and amplification that will lead a congrega-tion. It is the pipe organ properly played by a knowledgeable and competent organist.The hymn and the organist are like man and wife, like hand and glove, like bread andbutter.

Should we have hy mns at Sunday Mass? Yes, of course. But good ones, truly h ymn s,Catholic hymn s. We must aband on the ballads, the folk music, the gospel songs and thecheap and tawdry tunes that come from the revival tents of the 19th century. Strong,well-composed and well-harmonized melodies with sound and truly Catholic texts willencourage the congregation to sing. We often envy the Lutheran churches for theirsinging; they sing because of the quality of their hymns. We also have a tradition that iswider than the Lutheran's since it embraces so many ethnic groups. It is sad that the lasttwenty years have seen the abandoning of many worthwhile ethnic hymns and theirreplacement by greatly inferior material.How many hymns does a parish need? Certainly not the vast number crowded intoso many modern hymnbooks. If a parish has twenty-five good hymns, it can develop agreat enthusiasm for singing. The people don't mind repetition of good music; in fact,the more they sing the great hymns the more they love them. It is the junk that theydon't sing and don't want to hear. With care for the seasons of the church year, withselection based on the parts of the Mass, with some hymns for the Blessed Virgin andfor the Holy Eucharist, a parish hymnal can be a modest volum e and useful througho ut,not limited to a piece here and there as so often is the case with the boo ks now on themarket.Can one find in the various missalettes what a congregation might use? In most ofthem considerable space is given to hymn s, but they are printed often w ithout notation.

So m any of the selection s are po or, and the organist must always be subjec ted to re- FROM THE EDITORS


9/29

quests for them and have to defend his or her selections. Better that the poor pieces beeliminated altogether. Publishers wish to sell their products. When pastors and musi-cians indicate their preference for the good and their displeasure with the poor, themissalettes will begin to contain good music.The C hurch has a great and long tradition of hym ns. Some of the finest literature andmusic in the history of art is contained in the form of the hymn. Every language has con-tributed to the treasury. Let us use that treasure for the glory of God, and let us createnew hymns that are sacred and are truly artistic. Let us reject the inferior, tawdry andcheap. Let us use only that which is worthy of God in whose praise it is employed.R.J.S.

What About Our Children?Recently a religion columnist for a metropolitan daily paper criticized a Sunday Masshe attended for presenting a religion that was separated from the lives of the congrega-tion because the Mass was said in Latin by a traditionally vested priest with his back tothe people.Of course, when I read those remarks I imm ediately disagreed m entally, arguing thatthe priest's position represents his role as leader and representative of the congregation,rather than turning his back on the concerns of the faithful. Moreover, I thought of theunion between tradition and action, between formal prayer and the preaching and liv-ing of the gospel. But after the first flood of rational defenses of a more traditional Mass,I felt anger, indignation and profound sorrow because I knew that the commentreflected not only the reaction of a Protestant journalist, but would be shared by themajority of Catholics who for the past twenty years have had less and less contact withthe heritage and traditions of the Roman Catholic Church. In fact, recently, after atten-ding a Latin high Mass for the first time, a young Catholic boy asked his parents if theywere in a Protestant church, so foreign had the experience been to him. Catholic

students learn nothing of their heritage in our schools. The treasury of Catholic music atour Masses has been replaced by, at worst, secular non-music, and at best, by fine well-performed music not of our tradition. Last Sunday, the choir in my neighborhoodchurch sang Bach's Jesu Joy of Man's Desiring beautifully to piano accompaniment, butwhere was Mozart 's Ave verum corpus, a Gregorian hy mn , a setting of a part of the M assor the pipe organ?Now I am neither psychologist, nor anthropologist, nor sociologist, nor theologian,but I believe that when a group loses its traditions, it loses its identity. When a groupbegins to talk a new language and act in a different way, even without intending to, it isinternally transformed. The Church has traditionally p ut it very succinctly, Lex orandi, lexcredendi. I for one am devastated to see the next generation grow up on Whatever you dorather than a chant Mass or the Ave Maria. Will the renewal come and from whence? Itcould very well be through the treasury of sacred music. We have certainly seen arevival of interest in Gregorian chant among the young people, both in Europe and inthe United States, who have come in contact with it. We must have faith, but we mustalso act! V.A.S.

FROM THE EDITORS8


10/29

I ,#* T :J

LITURGICAL ABUSE AND THECHURCH MUSICIAN (PART II)The previous article discussed the liturgical abuse of employing female altar servers.The present article discusses a second liturgical abuse, communion unlawfully underboth species. Communion by reception of the host alone has been the establishedcustom of the western Church for the last six or seven hundred years. This custom wascodified in canon 852 of the 1917 Code of Canon Law. The Second Council of theVatican took steps to carve out certain exceptions to this ancient rule. It gave bishopsdiscretion to permit communion under both species "in cases to be determined by theApostolic See." By way of example the council fathers suggested the cases of the newlyordained at the Mass of their ordination, the newly professed at the Mass of theirreligious profession, and the newly baptized at the Mass following their baptism.1

The conciliar decree was implemented in 1965 by a document promulgated by theSacred Congregation of Rites and the Consilium for the Implementation of the Con-stitution on the Liturgy. Besides the instances suggested by the conciliar fathers, com-munion under both species was permitted, at the discretion of the bishop, to l) deaconand subdeacon exercising their ministries during a sung Eucharist, 2) an abbess at theMass in which she is blessed, 3) consecrated virgins at the Mass in which they are con-secrated, 4) the professed at the Mass of their religious profession, 5) the bride andgroom at their nuptial Mass, 6) adult confirmands at the Mass of their confirmation, 7)persons received into full communion at the Mass of their reception, 8) jubilarians ofnum bers 2-5 above, 9) priests present at major con celebrations not able to concelebrate,and 10) lay brothers present at concelebrations in religious houses.2Two years later the list of cases to be determined by the Holy See was further ex- ABUSES


11/29

panded. Communion under both species was now conceded to lay missionaries at theMass in which they are commissioned and to others in the Mass in which they receivean ecclesiastical or canonical mission; at the administration of viaticum; at retreats andmeetings of pastoral commissions to retreatants and commission members. Alsoparents, godparents, spouses, catechists of a baptized adult and relatives, friends andspecial benefactors of an ordinand w ere con ceded the privilege at the baptism or ordina-tion Mass, respectively. Besides these, at concelebrations all exercising a genuineliturgical ministry and all seminarians present enjoyed now the concession. Finallyshould be added members of religious and secular institutes at a concelebrated Mass intheir own churches and their boarders besides. 3These cases determ ined by th e Apostolic See were codified in the General Instruction onthe Roman Missal, issued April 6, 1969. This instruction has been four times revised to re-codify the many post-conciliar revisions, first in 1970 and then in 1972, 1975 and 1983.The 1970 revision permitted relatives, friends and members of the community of theprofessed to communicate under both species at the Mass of first or perpetual profes-sion of religious vows. This placed the professed on par with ordinands in this respect.The 1970 revision also permitted all religious to communicate under both species atcommunity Masses. The 1972 revision dropped the requirement of a sung Mass inorder for deacons and other ministers to communicate under both species.4The greatest extension of cases, however, came in 1970 as a result of the instruction,Sacramentali communione. The instruction's first three paragraphs contained its key provi-sions. The first paragraph repeated the list of "cases determine d by the Apostolic See" inwhich bishops might authorize communion under both species. The next paragraph per-mitted in addition the episcopal conference,

to decide to what extent and under what considerations and conditions ordinaries are em-powered to grant communion under both kinds in other instances that are of specialsignificance in the spiritual life of any community or group of the faithful.On a more cautious note the third paragraph of the instruction hastened to add:

within such limits, ordinaries may designate the particular instances, but on condition thatthey grant permission not indiscriminately but for clearly defined celebrations and that theypoint out m atters for caution. They are also to exclude occasions when there will be a largenumber of communicants. The groups receiving this permission must also be specific, well-ordered and homogeneous.Out of abundant caution the Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship stated in thefourth paragraph:

Before granting the permission they (ordinaries) must have assurances that all measures canbe carried out that will safeguard the holiness of the sacrament.5Based on the permission granted by the Apostolic See in this instruction to episcopal

conferences to lay down the extent, conditions and circumstances for communionunder both species, the National Conference of Catholic Bishops in 1978 voted to per-mit communion under both species at Sunday and holy day parish Masses. When theSacred Congregation for Divine Worship refused such unauthorized extensions of thepermission granted in its instruction, Inestimabile donum, the instruction was dismissed asmerely hortatory or even declared to be contrary to law. The conclusion of theapologists for this liturgical abuse was that the concession remained valid particular lawin the United States despite the sacred congregation's declarations.6The argument fails doubly. First it is not apparent that the National Conference ofCatholic Bishops possessed the authority to authorize com mu nion u nder b oth species atSunday parish Masses. This doubt follows from the rules of interpretation previouslyABUSES set forth. O n e must first consider the text of the pu rpo rted permission und er wh ich the10


12/29

episcopal conference acted. The first paragraph carefully listed a number of specialclasses of cases in which ordinaries might authorize communion under both species. Thethird paragraph carefully laid down standards limiting the discretion of ordinaries ingranting permission in particular cases within these classes, requiring among otherthings that groups receiving this permission be "specific, well-ordered andhomogenous."In view of paragraph one and three it would seem unreasonable to conclude that thesecond paragraph intended to give episcopal conferences carte blanche to authorize com-munion under both species to whatever extent they might wish, without regard to thelimitations imposed on ordinaries in the third paragraph or the types of cases to which itwas conceded in the first paragraph. To interpret the second paragraph as carte blanche in-terprets out of existence the other two paragraphs. They become mere surplusage.One need but consider its ramifications to perceive the unbridled and unreasonablescope of such a carte blanche view of paragraph two. By its terms paragraph two intendsto permit episcopal conferences to authorize in particular law communion under bothspecies in "other" cases that are of "special" significance in the spiritual life of com-munities or groups of Christ's faithful. "Other" refers back to the classes of exceptional

cases set forth in paragraph one. In other words, it limits the authority of the episcopalconferences to cases of the same sort. This intent was made clearer once paragraph twowas codified into the General Instruction on the Roman Missal. There it appears at the end ofa long list of fourteen classes of cases wherein communion under both species is per-missible. Th e gramm atical structure of the codified text serves to clarify the inten t of thelegislator and thus exclude the carte blanche view of the "other."Furthermo re, under p aragraph two the cases where episcopal conferences m ight per-mit communion under both species must be cases of "special" importance to the spirituallife of a community or group. It is not clear that Sunday parish Mass so qualifies. True,ever y S unday is a "little Easter." But every Mass is "special" including the furtive andprivate Mass celebrated on a Monday in Gulag. Sunday parish Mass is not a "special"assembly. It is the general and plenary assembly of Christ's faithful in the local com-

munity. Liturgical law, indeed, recognizes this and takes steps to preserve this quality ofthe Sunday parish Mass. It encourages non-clerical, religious communities, especiallythose with a work in the parish (e.g., the sisters teaching in the school), to take part in theSunday parish Mass. It exhorts parish societies to hold their special group Masses onother days or else to take part in the Sunday parish Mass. Furthermore, liturgical lawprovides examples of what it means by "special groups." These are defined to includegroups making retreats, groups devoting a day to pastoral studies, meetings on theapostolate, meetings of any sector of the parish for the purpose of pastoral activity,groups of the faithful who are of the same category and who meet at fixed times for in-struction or religious formation. For such "special groups" a Mass may be celebrated,even outside a place of worship, with the approval of the ordinary. Such "specialgroups" are expressly contrasted with a "general congregation." Since retreatants andmeetings for pastoral studies are among the special groups to w hom paragraph one con-cedes communion under both species, this usage is helpful towards understanding themeaning of "special" in paragraph two of the same document. If we see the Sundayparish Mass as liturgical law sees it, it does not come within what the law defines as"special."7

Paragraph three is completely eviscerated and becomes merely hortatory under thecarte blanche view of paragraph two. If the injunction to "exclude occasions where therewill be a large number of communicants" and the language "specific, well-ordered andhom ogeno us" of paragraph three are to have any m eaning, they must have been intend-ed to place som e substantiv e restrictons o n the d iscretion of ordinaries. If this was the in-tent of parag raph three, the restrictions of that parag raph must have bee n inten ded to ABUSES11


13/29

apply to the "other" cases authorized b y the episcopal conferences un der paragraph twoas well as to the exceptional cases set forth by the Holy See itself in paragraph one.Most of the cases set forth in paragraph one had built-in safeguards and the restrictionscarefully lodged in paragraph three would not have been necessary for them. Thus, ifparagraph three was to have much operation, it had to apply to the "other" cases andplace substantive restrictions on the episcopal conferences as well. This becomes all theclearer when we recall who are the ordinaries on whom the restrictions of paragraphthree are imposed.Ordinaries include residential bishops, vicars general and episcopal, and majorreligious superiors. 8 Major religious superiors might grant the concession only to theirsubjects. But since their subjects already enjoye d the concession in most cases, ther e waslittle chance that major religious superiors would be the source of abusive concessionsof the privilege. The restriction, then, m ust have been intended to apply to the other or-dinaries. But the vast majority of the "other ordinaries," viz., vicars general andepiscopal, are directly subject to the residential bishops, who are, of course, preciselythose possessing a deliberative vote in the episcopal conference. M oreov er, it should b ekept in mind that these local ordinaries serve ad nutum episcopi and are removable at thepleasure of the residential bishop. In other words, the carte blanche theory of paragraphtwo requires one to believe that the sacred congregation labored on one hand to laydown severe restrictions on the discretion of local ordinaries in paragraph three while atthe same time in paragraph two permitting them or their episcopal employers toremo ve those restrictions at will. The carte blanche view of paragraph two clearly reducesparagraph three to an exercise in futility. The presumption of reasonableness of a lawmust dictate that such an interpretation is wrong. It cannot be presumed that thelegislator intended what is illogical or unreasonable.9 The presumption ofreasonableness requires that the restrictions of paragraph three be interpreted assubstantive and incum bent on ordinaries both w hen acting individually and collectivelywhile sitting in episcopal conferences. Since the concession of communion under bothspecies at Sunday parish Mass does not comport with the requirements that theprivilege be conceded only to "specific, well-ordered and homogeneous" groups and"exclude occasions wh ere there will be a large num ber of commu nicants," the episcopalconference's decree must be unauthorized by the universal law and therefore ultra viresand of no effect.

Moreover, it must be remembered that communion under both species creates an ex-ception to the law. Hence, u nder the rules of interpretation it must be interpreted strict-ly. Thus, if there is doubt whether a concession of communion under both species isproperly within the scope of paragraph two, the doubt must be resolved against permit-ting the concession. The bu rden is on the one wh o claims under the concession to proveits lawfulness. Thus, in the case of communion under both species at a Sunday parishMass, the burd en is on its propon ents to prov e its lawfulness once it is shown to be anexception to the law.The exceptional character of communion under both species is easily shown. Com-munion under both species in the western Church has for the last seven centuries beenan exception to the law, a privilege. Anciently certainly civil authorities, for example,enjoyed the privilege. The king of France, for example, could commu nicate unde r b othspecies at his coronation. Moreover, the Holy Roman emperor (and later the Austrianemperor) could do so on Holy Thursday. In reviving the practice of communion underboth species, the Second Council of the Vatican clearly intended it to remain an excep-tional practice. In the growing list of exceptions authorized by the Holy See after thecouncil, it maintained the character of an exception.10 Indeed, the conci l iar and post-conci l iar except ions bear a l l the indicia of pr ivi leges .As first articulated by the council, the privilege of receiving communion under both

ABUSES species was to be ann exe d to the recep tion of a sacram ent or a sacramen tal holy12


14/29

orders, baptism or religious profession. Under the scheme of the 1917 code, sacramentsand sacramentals were classified as res. That is to say, they were regarded as objects ofrights as distinguished from subjects of rights (or persons). A privilege annexed to a reswas thus classified as a real privilege. "Real" here is merely an adjective denoting thesource of the privilege.11The 1965 amplifications introduced by the law after the council were of the same

character. The privilege was annexed to confirmation, consecration of a virgin, benedic-tion of an abbess, nuptials, sacraments or sacramentals all. But a new note was sounded.Communion under both species now became a privilege of certain carefully selected in-dividuals (deacons, subdeacons, priests unable to concelebrate at concelebrations).Clearly a special status was being accorded to concelebrations, although, except in thecase of priestly ordinations, concelebrations had for centuries ceased as a liturgical prac-tice in the western Church.The 1967 extensions of the privilege continued to broaden its scope while at the sametime maintaining its earlier character. More lay people (beside abbesses, consecratedvirgins and lay brothers) now received the privilege but the concession was alwayslinked with a special occasion, the reception of a sacramental or a sacrament. There was

a new departure, however. Now, seminarians and members of religious and secular in-stitutes (and their boarders) also enjoyed the privilege. For these individuals the conces-sion of communion under both species was in the nature of a personal privilege. The1969 concessions were similar in character.12 Clearly, then, concession of communionunder both species remained an exception to the general rule. The cases of it dovetailwith the law of privileges and this underscores the exceptional character of the conces-sion. It follows, then, that the exceptions to the general rule of communion under theform of bread alone must be interpreted strictly and doubts about the lawfulness of theexceptions resolved against extension of exceptions to the general rule. This conclusionreinforces the earlier conclusion that the concession of communion under both speciesat Sunday parish Mass was unlawful and ultra vires.But even if it were arguably lawful under doctrinal (or private) interpretation, it re-mains that its proponents have misperceived the juridical purpose of Inestimable donum.They have argued that the 1965, 1967, and 1969 and 1970 instructions were oflegislative value because each clearly evinced a legislative purpose, viz., to amend ex-isting law. They then observe that the 1980 instruction does not purport to change thelaw but rather calls for observance of existing law. On the basis of this they concludethat it is what American administrative law would call an interpretive rule, i.e., onewhich does not have the force of law but is merely the promulgating agency's views ofthe law. The argum ent is therefore that the 1980 instruction was merely an interpretiverule, official commentary as it were, which cannot contravene the law itself and whichmerely guarantees a safe harbor against administrative action to those who conform toit. Should such an interpretive rule contravene the law, it is void. Of course, Inestimabile

donum c l e a r l y o p p o s e d th e carte blanche v i e w o f par ag r aph two o f Sacramentali communione.In so far as it did, t h e argument goes , it m a y b e disregarded as cont rary t o l aw. 1 3It is true that Inestimabile donum does not purport t o change the law. It w o u l d b e w r o n g ,

howeve r , t o conclude tha t fo r that reason i t lacks the force of law. T o j u m p t o that con-clusion ignores t h e possibility that t h e instruct ion was given as authori tat ive interpreta-tion. Recalling t h e long history of authori ta t ive interpre ta t ion in the area of liturgicallaw, this possibi l i ty should have been obvious.

Discountenancing t h e carte blanche inte rpre ta t ion of paragraph two and making it clearthat ordinaries collect ively as an episcopal conference a r e indeed subject t o t h e restric-t ions of paragraph three of Sacramentali communione, t h e Sacred Congregat ion of Di vi neWorship made c lear in n u m b e r 12 of Inestimabile donum t h e t rue na ture of the restrict ionslaid down in paragraph three . Speaking in the same terms set forth in paragraph three of ABUSES

13


15/29

the 1969 instruction, the sacred congregation said,Episcopal conferences and ordinaries also are not to go beyond what is laid down in the presentdiscipline: the granting of permission for communion under both kinds is to be specifiedprecisely; the groups that use this faculty are to be clearly defined, well-disciplined andhomogenous (emphasis supplied).14As an authoritative interpretation of the law, Inestimabile donum enjoys the force of

law. I t makes it clear that communion under both species at Sunday parish Mass ispredic ated o n a concession of particular law which is bo tto me d on an erro neo us doc-tr inal (private) interpretation of the scope of an authorization made to episcopal con-ferences by universal law. Once the authoritative interpretation had exposed the errorof the private interpretation, concessions predicated on that erroneous interpretationwere exposed as ultra vires and invalid. The law of the superior legislator supercedes thatof an inferior legislator, in this case the purported concession by American particularl aw .1 5

Related to both liturgical abuses of (unlawful) communion under both species andfemale altar servers is the unauthorized and abusive employment of special ministers ofholy communion. In jus t i fy ing communion under both species a t Sunday par ish Massthe apologist for that abuse excused the practice by arguing that the abundance oftrained special ministers removes the danger of spilling or disrespect to the Blood ofChris t. At bo tto m this is a boot- strapp ing arg um ent . I t justif ies on e liturgical abus e w ithanother. Meant really for mission countries where a s ingle priest may serve a "parish" of19,000 souls , this institute has, in disregard of the law, largely been imported into areaswhere it is not legally justif ied. By law, extraordinary ministers may lawfully beemployed only in certain cases, viz., where the communicants are so numerous that notempl oying the m would "undu ly prolong the service ." Mor eov er , before specialministers can be employed, there must be a lack of priests , deacons or acolytes tod i s t r ibu te communion . 1 6 But in the United States this is rarely the case. Here specialministers are employed merely to "speed things up" or to "improve the balance of thesexes in the sanctuary." It need hardly be said that neither is a legally sufficient reason toauthor ize the employment of special minis ters of holy communion.Mo reo ve r, if ther e we re a gen uine nee d for additional ministers of holy co mm un ion ,it would be more proper to institute men as acolytes for that purpose. Indeed, by lawspecial ministers are allowed only when no "priest, deacon or acolyte" is available.Preoc cupied w ith upro oti ng wha t is vie we d as sexism and clericalism in the Church , theAmerican Catholic Church, for the most part, has permitted the lay ministry of acolyteto atrophy and remain merely a s tepping-stone to the ordained ministry. In doing so ithas thwarted a notable post-conciliar reform instituted by Pope Paul VI. In his attemptto restore the office of acolyte as a perpetual ministry or office in the Church, he was at-tem pti ng to impl em ent n ot only th e desire of Vatican II but also the desire of Tre nt. 1 7

The presence of so many female special ministers of holy communion in the sanc-tuary has also been adduced as an argument for the proposition that the 1983 code subsilentio abrogated the traditional prohibition on female altar servers . Again this is clearlya boot-strapping argument. I t uses one liturgical abuse to justify another. Surely the giftof prophecy mus t be extraordinar i ly widespread nowadays when so many churches of -fering only half the number of Sunday Masses that they did a decade ago (but being stil lhalf empty) and served perhaps by two priests (and maybe a deacon besides) can predictwith legal certainty a week in advance the anticipated multitude of communicants at thenext Sunday's Masses so as to be able to publish in the previous Sunday's churchbulletin the names of the following week's special ministers. Of course, the illicit in-troduction of communion under both species at Sunday parish Mass has only served toreinforce the "need" for special ministers of holy communion.

ABUSES It wo ul d no t be truthfu l to sugg est that the neg lect by the Am er ic an Cat holi c Ch ur ch14


16/29

of the prescriptions of canon law is of recent origin purely. A tale from the last centurywill serve to illustrate that it has something of a pedigree. One day a petitioner askedPope Pius IX for the grant of a particular favor. The witty pontiff replied (and at thesame time evidenced the current European opinion of American Catholic respect forcanon law): "What you ask is not in my power to grant. But there is an American bishopin town. Go ask him."

Of course, this careless and cavalier attitude toward canon law is merely destructive.If liturgy is to nourish Christ's faithful, to give them the foretaste of the heavenly liturgywhich Vatican II opined that the earthly liturgy in fact is, it must rest on the "tranquilityof order." Canon law, as Pope John Paul II stated, exists to protect individual rights, topromote common initiatives, and to preserve decency in the administration of thesacraments.18 How can there be peace the tranquility of order when there iswillful, rampant disorder in the liturgy, aided and abetted by canonists?

Learned students of canonical jurisprudence have rightly maintained that prudence isa necessary attribute of the good canonist and good interpreter of law.19 Regardingprudence one should note that it is an appetitive virtue and that sins against it are sins ofexcess. Excess giving rise to sin against prudence includes astutia or cunning.20 Cunningis not a newly discovered sin of lawyers. "The cunning lawyer" is a stereotype runningthroughout the length and breadth of western literature. Nevertheless, it is lamentablethat at the same time that American civil lawyers are recovering a sense of duty to theintegrity of the civil law, American canonists should exert themselves to devise cunningand specious arguments to subvert canon law.21 Church musicians beware!

DUANE L.C.M. GALLESNOTES

1. Sacrosanctum concilium, n. 55, reprinted in Documents on the Liturgy, 1963-1979 (1982), hereaftercited DOL. The first number thereafter will refer to the document number as assigned in thatwork; the number in parentheses will refer to the paragraph number of the original document.DO L (55). John M. Huels, O.S.M., "C omm union under Both Kinds on Sundays: Is it Legal?" Jurist82 (1982) 73 (hereafter Huels I).2. DOL 268 (1). The following year members incorporated into secular institutes were accord-ed the privilege of communicating under both species in their profession rite if it took place duringMass. DOL 269.3. Instruction, Eucharisticum mysterium, DOL 179 (32).4. DO L 20 8 (242). The transformation of the offices of acolyte and lector from clerical ordersto lay ministries by the motu proprio, Ministeria quaedam, in 1972 required special mention in theGeneral Instruction on the Roman Missal that these ministers also enjoyed the concession. Previouslythey had been included within the class, "the ordained." DOL 340.5. DOL 270 (1,2,3,4).6. Huels I, pp. 96-100.7. DOL 179 (27).8. 1983 code, canon 1 34. Th e term "ordi nary" also includes vicars apostolic, prefects apostolicand apostolic administrators. Canon 368.9. 1983 code, canon 477 (l). DO L 270 (4) limits the authority of the ordinary of religious togrant concession to "houses of his institute." Even though canon 406 (2) requires a diocesan bishopto appoint an auxiliary bishop either vicar general or vicar episcopal, the diocesan bishop couldstill reserve from the auxiliary's mandate the faculty to concede communion under both species, ifit were considered desirable to prevent abusive concessions by an auxiliary bishop. Canon 479.Cicognani, An Introduction to Canon Law (1934), p. 612.10 . Huels I, pp. 85-91; M. Bloch, Les Rois Thaumaturges (1934) p. 205. In France it appears theroyal privilege was last exercised at the coronation of King Charles X in 1825. Richard D. Jackson,The Royal Coronation Ceremony From Charles V11I to Charles X (University of Minnesota Ph.D. thesis,1967) p. 147. Privileges of a similar type hav e been conceded even in our ow n day. In 1960, PopeJohn XXIII conceded to King Baudoin of Belgium the privilege of having his name inserted in th ecanon of the Mass after that of the bishop in all Masses celebrated within Belgian territory. CanonLaw Digest, V, p. 135.11. R. Naz, Traiii de Droit Cononique, 4 vols. (1954) I, p. 199, Cicognani, op . it.,p. 784.12. The concession to members of religiou s and secular institu tes (and thei r boar ders) mig ht ABUSES15


17/29

also be considered in the nature of a local privilege, since it might be exercised only within theirchurches and was annexed to habitation in a place (locus) rather than attached merely to member-ship in the institute. With the advantag e of hindsight it is interesting to view a list of m ooted casesfor communion under both species given after Sacrosanctum concilium but before the Holy Seepublished its first list in 1965. A noted Belgian liturgist would have added to the three cases in-stanced by the Vatican Council, newlyweds at their nuptials, "Masses for homogenous and close-knit group s," religious comm unities of both sexes "wh o are ready for this type of active participa-tion," and "even confraternities, third orders, and other similar associations." F. Vandenbrouke,O.S.B., "Communion under both species and concelebration," in W. Burauna (ed), The Liturgy ofVatican II: A Symposium, 2 vols. (1966) II, p. 112. It is interesting that these were precisely the kindsof "special" cases which the Holy See would in fact select. Nowhere did the Belgian expert opinethat communion under both species was appropriate for Sunday parish Mass. Indeed, he stated:"We need not be afraid of introducing in this way a partitioning am ong the Christian people, someof whom are judged fit to receive communion under both species, others not." Ibid.Regarding concelebration and its special character we might recall that Sacrosanctum concilium con-sidered by it the unity of the priesthood is appropriately manifested. DOL 1 (57). The General In-struction on the Roman Missal adds that "concelebration effectively brings out the unity of thepriesthood, of the sacrifice, and of the whole people of God." DOL 208 (153). Recalling thatVatican II called the Church the sacramentum mundi, concelebration would then re-present three"sacraments." Hence, its special character. As its revival was motted by the council its frequencywas to be somewhat "special," too. It was authorized on Holy Thursday, at Masses during coun-cils, bishops' conferences, and synods, and at the M ass for the blessing of an abb ot. W ith the per-mission of the bishop and without the presence of a prelate, it might be authorized at conventualMasses, at Masses celebrated at any k ind of priests' meeting, and at the principal Mass in churches.DOL 1 (57). See Vandenbrouke, op. cit., for a rapid history of concelebration.13 . Huels I. pp. 98-105.14. Inestimable donum, A.A.S. 72 (1980), n. 12.15 . It is beyond the scope of this article to discuss whether the authoritative interpretation ofthe sacred congregation given in Inestimabile donum was declaratory (and thus retroactive to the dateof promulgation of the law it interpreted) or extensive (and thus effective only from the date theinterpretation itself was published). 1983 Code, canon 16 (2). On this question, however, it isnoteworthy that one American canonist has taken the position that the sacred congregation's in-tent was "simply a reminder of discipline already in effect." K. Seasoltz, O.S.B., "The SacredLiturgy: Development and Directions," Jurist 43 (1983) 24.16 . Under the law extraordinary ministers of holy communion may be employed if otherwise

the service would be "unreasonably prolonged." Moreover, for the employment of specialministers (that is, lay persons w ho have n ot been instituted acolyte) additional conditions must b emet. There must be 1) no priest, deacon, or acolyte available, 2) necessity, and 3) a pastoral benefitto the faithful. DOL 266 (17).17 . For a rapid history of the office of lector (from which the office of cantor derives) andTrent's attempts to revive it as a perpetual church office, see my earlier articles, "The Office ofCantor," Sacred Music 108 (1981) 17, and "Cantors and Church Ornaments," Sacred Musk 110(1983) 12.18 . Sacrosanctum concilium, DOL 1 (8). In his address opening the 1984 session of the SacredRoman Rota, Pope John Paul II noted that this was the first opening of that court since the cominginto effect of the 1983 Co de. He stressed that no w that the code was in effect, the time was passedfor critique. Now was the time for obedience. Canon Law Society of America Newsletter (Spring,1984) p. 3.19 . James A. Corriden, "Rules for Interpreters," Jurist 42 (1982) p. 280.20 . G. Heinzel, S.J., Summa Theologiae Moralis (i960), p. 249. The relationship betw een prudenceand jurisprudence has not escaped earlier writers. The great canonist Reiffenstuel defined law as

recta agendarum ratio a publica potestate communitati denuntiata, cum voluntate earn perpetuo obligandi ad aliquidagendum vel omm ittandum, quot ed i n G . M i ch i e l s , Normae Generalis Juris Canonici, 2 vols . (1923) I , p .124. This seems a conscious rearrangement of Saint Thom as' definition of law to align th e defini-tion of jurisprudence with that of prudence, commonly defined as recta ratio agendorum. Heinzel, op.cit., p. 248.21 . A recent article has called on canonists practicing in the area of matrimonial canon law touphold the integrity and communi ty of values of the law. It calls on tribunal practitioners toeschew th e modernist role of mere therapist, fo r "wha t w e seek behind th e masks of annulmentsand other canonical procedures are, in fact, not the common good bu t rather preferences of ar-bitrary will and desire. Nietsche amply described this appeal to objectivity as little more than th ecowards ' way of disguising even from themselves their o w n desires and the will to have their ow nABUSES w a y / ' Valentine J. Peter, "Judges Must Judge Justly." Juris 43 (1983) 178.

1 6


18/29

EVENING PRAYER AT WESTMINSTERI have previously had the privilege of writing in these pages about some of thecelebrations of the liturgy I have witnessed in various parts of the world. 1 On the fifthSunday of Easter, 1 984 ,1 was in London, and after atten ding high Mass at the Ch urch ofthe Orato ry, I made my w ay o n a wet and rather cold afternoon to vespers (or as they

now are called, "evening prayer") at Westminster Cathedral.As an alumnus (or in the English usage, "old bo y" in all senses of those words!) ofWestminster Cathedral Choir School, I have perhaps more of an affection for thecathedral than the average visitor. I was pleased with what my visit disclosed.Vespers began at 3:30, and the opening procession looked much as it did when I waspart of it, rather more than fifty years ago: led by a thurifer, then the cross bearer (butno acolytes), and followed by thirty to forty boys in purple cassocks, surplices and star-ched Eton collars. I found myself wo nde ring if they still chew ed the starched tabs to getthem on to the collar buttons more easily.After the boys came the men of the choir, and then the celebrant, flanked by his twoassistants in cope. When all had made their way into the sanctuary, Deus in adjutoriumwas intoned in the solemn form, and vespers had begun.I noted imm ediately that the hym n, wh ich was sung in Latin, was taken from the newLiber Hymnarius.2 During the hymn, the Blessed Sacrament was brought from the BlessedSacrament chapel, exposed on the temporary altar at the front of the sanctuary and in-censed in the usual manner.After the hymn, the first antiphon was intoned by the choir, followed by the psalm.Unlike the old rite, there were no cantors. I followed the ceremony from the LiturgiaHorarum, and the first variation which I noticed was textual, not musical. The antiphonused was not that from the Sunday but one similar to it in meaning, although not tex-tually identical. The psalm which followed (Dixit Dominus) was not in the prescribedmode for paschaltide, viz., 7, c, 2. The same thing was true of the second psalm and itsantiphon, and also for the canticle. The modes were all different and the antiphons,while similar to those of the new office, were not the same.A comparison of the antiphons will illustrate the point:

Liturgia Horarum Westminster versionA n t . 1. Surrexit Dominus et sedet ad dexteram A n t . Sede a dexiris mtis, dixit DominusDei, alleluia. Domino meo, Alleluia.A n t . 2. Eripuit nos de potestate tenebrarum et A n t . Educ de custodia animam meam Domine,transtulit in regnum Filii sui, Alleluia. ad confitendum nomini tuo. Alleluia.A n t . 3 . Alleluia, regnavit Dominus noster; ex- A n t . Alleluia. Dominus regnavit, decorem in-sultemus et demus gloriam ei, alleluia. duit. Alleluia. Alleluia.

These a re t ranslated respectively in the English Liturgy of the Hours,5 a n d t hey a re con-tained in the leaflet handed ou t a t the cathedral , as fol lows:1. Th e Lord has risen and is seated at the Si t on m y right, said t h e Lord t o m yright hand of Go d, alleluia. Lord. Alleluia.2. H e h a s rescued us from th e p o w e r of Lead m y soul out of this prison that Idarkness and has b r o u g h t us into t h e m a y praise your name. Alleluia,k i ngdom of his Son, alleluia.3. Alleluia, our G od is king; glory a n d Alleluia. T h e Lord is king. Let us rejoicepraise t o him, alleluia. a n d give glory to him. Alleluia. Alleluia.The explanat ion of this I found o u t later. WESTMINSTER

17


19/29

Periods of silence occurred betw een the psalms, and the canticle was followed by theprescribed scripture reading, bu t in English. Th e short respo nsory was in the usual formand in Latin. The Magnificat antiphon was that in the Liturgia Horarum, and the Magnificatwas also sung in Latin.The language then switched completely to the vernacular, the intercessions beingrecited rather than sung and directly translated from those in the Latin text, with thesame response. The "Our Father" was sung and was followed immediately by thereading of the concluding prayer, which was of course the same as the collect of theday.Vespers were followed by benediction, after which the Blessed Sacrament wasreplaced in the Blessed Sacrament chapel and the procession left the sanctuary. It will beseen that the cerem ony was that of the new rite with essentially two m odifications. T hefirst was tha t the first part of th e service wa s entirely in Latin; the latter half was substan-tially all in English.

As I was leaving the cathedral, the leaflets used by the congregation were being col-lected, and on my asking if I could keep a copy, I was referred to the organist wh o hadbeen playing from a console near to where I was sitting. This turned out m ost fortunate-ly, since it deve loped that he was th e choir school music master, and he w as able to ex-plain the changes in the texts.The cathedral music authorities have tired of waiting for the new equivalent of theVesperale to be published and since there is no m usic for the bulk of the n ew office, theyhave embarked on the somewhat ambitious task of compiling their own, making aliberal use of com puter technolog y in doing so . I was able to examine o ne of their wo rk-ing books, but unfo rtunately it is just that, a "wo rking" boo k, and the y will not be re adyto publish anything until they have b een throug h a complete one-year cycle. Only thenwill an estimate of the practicality of this approach be made.Th e reason for the different texts is that the cathedral approach is not to set the newantiphons to music but rather to look for antiphons already in existence which aresimilar in me aning and to use them . This accounts for th e variation and also for the factthat the psalm mode was different from that expected for paschaltide, since of coursethe mode of the psalm was determined by the mode of the antiphon.The overall approach is nothing if not courageous. If a Liber Antiphonarius is publishedas a companion to the newly available Liber Hymnarius the cathedral work presumablywould be superfluous, although the contents of the Liber Antiphonarius have yet to beseen. If these include such things as the setting of the intercessions then it is a pity thatthe cathedral authorities have opted for the recited English format of the second half ofthe service. Ab sent such a wor k, how ever, the cathedral approa ch m ay well be the onlypractical one for those parishes which wish to carry out the instructions of the SecondVatican Council as indicated in paragraph 27 of the general instruction of the Liturgy ofthe Hours: "Gatherings of the laity are encouraged to fulfill the Church's office bycelebrating part of the liturgy of the hours."

The idea of writing a complete book of the office for at least all the Sundays of theyear is ambitious, but one cannot help wondering at some of the duplication of effortwhich is necessarily involved. Also there is the by no means irrelevant question ofwhether the recitation of a mixture of Roman vespers and Anglican evensong is reallywh at was in the minds of the founders of that great cathedral in Westm inster. After all,evensong is done impeccably in Westminster Abbey, a mere mile away.H A R O L D H U G H E S D O NNOTES1. Sacred Music, Vol. 110, No. 3 (Fall) 1983, p. 16-18.2. See Paul LeVoir, Liber Hymnarius, in this issue.3. Christian Prayer: The Liturgy of the Hours, New York: Catholic Book Publishing Co., 1976. Vol.WESTMINSTER 1, p. 523.18


20/29

usfct tustfHto to mummpt

THE L/BR HYMNARIUSAt long last, the new Antiphonale Romanum has arrived. T he Liber Hymnarius is the firstbook of a propose d two-volume set that is to comprise the new Antiphonale. The secondbook (due to be published early in 1985 by Solesmes) is to be called the Liber An-tiphonarius. Tog ether they will constitute a considerable step forward in Grego rian chantliterature and research. The Liber Hymnarius alone is a truly fine work a musical andspiritual goldmine. It is impossible to overemphasize its importance. The monks ofSolesmes deserve the highest comm endation and praise for this splendid contribution tothe art of sacred music.The Liber Hymnarius is easy to use, durable, and handsome in every respect. Its hardcover is a deep , lustrous blue, and the lettering on the front and on the spine is engravedin gold, as is the small cross be nea th the title on the front. T he pages are m ade from highquality non-reflective paper. Thus, the book will lie flat when opened to any givenpage, and will help reduce eye strain. The Liber Hymnarius is the same size as the 1974Graduale (approximately 5-1/2" x 8-1/4"), has 640 pages (i-xvi, 1-624), and has two veryuseful blue ribbon s. An attractive new type face and a streamlined G regorian staff andnotation were also used throughout the entire volume. All of these physicalcharacteristics, combined with plain page edges, give the Liber Hymnarius a rejuvenatedand modern liturgical appearance.Basically, the Liber Hymnarius contains all the hymns and invitatories, and some of thelong responsories of the revised Liturgy of the Hours. The hymns and invitatory antiphons

are arranged according to the traditional order (the prop er of the seasons, ordinary time,and the commons and propers of the saints), and there are special sections near the endof the boo k for the Benedictine monastic propers, the responsories, an appendix, and agood table of contents.Since the hymns make u p the largest portion of the Liber Hymnarius and give the bookits name, they will be treated first. All hymn texts are the new and restored Latin onesof the official Liturgia Horarum, and every hymn has been set to an authentic Gregorianmelody. Like the texts, all of these melodies have been restored to their original ver-sions. For many, this could mean becoming accustomed to slightly different (and fre-quently better) settings for even the most familiar hymns (for example, Veni, Creator, an dPange lingua ... corporis). This should be view ed as a challenge by choirs and choirmasters,19


21/29

and should provide enrichment to all who participate in the various liturgies of whichGregorian chant can form an integral part.It is possible that there could be some objections to the fact that many of the hymnshave only the first verse set under the melody, with the following verses printed outbelow in paragraph form. Never fear, however, for the editors have used discretion intheir choices. As a general rule, the easiest hymns, those that are not sung very often (ifat all), and those that are sung very frequently were the ones that received the first-verse-only treatment. The most difficult hymns, those in the commons, and the hymnsfor all the major celebrations have normally been set in full. This balanced, thoughtfuland flexible plan works very well.The invitatories make u p the second largest part of the Liber Hymnarius, and they havebeen handled in an interesting way. Each antiphon is included with the proper of theseason, the proper or common of the saint, and so on. Near the center of the book is asection devoted entirely to the 15 tones of psalm 94 (Venite, exsultemus). After each in-vitatory an tiphon is printed the first word of psalm 94 (Venite) with its melody, and thepage on which the co mplete tone and text of psalm 94 are to be found . In choir this willrequire some page-flipping, but practically speaking, this is a convenient and space-saving arrangement for the invitatories. The only exceptions to this design are the in-vitatories for the Christmas season, Christus natus est and Christus apparuit. In the case ofthese two invitatories, the antiphon and psalm 94 are printed together. (Finally, we havean exception that actually makes things easier.)

Several items of further interest should be mentioned about the invitatories. First, thetext of psalm 94 that is used is not that of the new Latin translation (Nova Vulgata); it isthe same text that has always bee n used. Th e new translation is simply printed after allof the different tones of psalm 94, and is to be used only when the office is recited, butnot w hen it is sung. Second, in the new office there are three o ther psalms (23, 66 and99), any one of which can be said in place of psalm 94. The texts of these psalms are alsosimply printed in this section of the Liber Hymnarius, and their texts are taken from thenew Latin of the Bible. Unlike the new text of psalm 94, however, each of these psalmsmay be sung to the appropriate simple psalm tones when the office is sung. Thus, theentire plan for the invitatory antiphons and psalms provides great flexibility with regardto text, melody and length.Third, many new texts for the invitatory antiphons were introduced when theRoman office was revised. Since no au thentic chant exists for these ne w texts, they havebeen set to authentic Gregorian formulas in the Liber Hymnarius. No "new" chant wascomposed for these antiphons; thus the integrity of Gregorian chant has been preserv-ed. At the same time, the fullness and riches of the new texts are now available to besung in Gregorian chant.The long responsories are the third major component of the Liber Hymnarius, and the46 that are included will provide a sufficient repertory for the office of readingsthroug hout the entire liturgical year. It is to be hoped, ho wev er, that more long respon-sories will appear in the Liber Antiphonarius or some other volume. The long responsoriesare elegant and intricate pieces of chant, and their restoration alone is of the highest im-portance.The Liber Hymnarius is such a fine piece of w ork that even the index is a step above theordinary. It gives all of the information about the hymns, antiphons, responsories andcelebrations that is expected of a good index, but w ith one ad ditional feature of interest.The source (or author) and/or the composition date of the hymns are provided whenthat information is known. This is just one of the small extras that makes the Liber Hym-narius the attractive volume that it is.It would be unfair to conclude without a brief mention of some changes in therhythmic signs, notes and groups of notes (neums). In short, the use of the vertical

LIBER HYMNARIUS episema has bee n drama tically decreas ed, and the use of the horizo ntal episema and the20


22/29

neumatic break (diremptiones neumaticae) have been considerably increased. The Liber Hym-narius also introduces many neums with unfamiliar shapes and/or names. Among thema re the oriscus, apostropha, pes quassus, podatus initio debilis, torculus initio debilis, and thetrigonus. All of the rules and neums are explained in the preface to the Liber Hymnarius.For more complete details on the rhythmic signs and all neums, and for a deeperunderstanding of their functions, Dom Eugene Cardine's Gregorian Semiology is indispen-sable. It is available in English and French from Abbey Saint-Pierre de Solesmes,F-72330 Sable-sur-Sarthe, France. A mastery of the new rules and neum s can yield a farmore expressive and superior chant than has ever been available to us in the 20th cen-tury.Clearly, the Liber Hymnarius receives our highest possible recommendation. It is abook of exquisite quality and inestimable value. It should be promoted widely andvigorously for use in churches, schools and especially seminaries. After more than adecade and a half, the new liturgy of the hours is becoming available to the world inGregorian chant. When the Liber Antiphonarius is published, no excuses will remain forthe widespread neglect of Gregorian chant in our churches. The complaint that thereare no suitable chant books available for the liturgy will no longer be valid.It is to be hoped that a promotion and fostering of Gregorian chant will at last takeplace throughou t the wo rld as the Second Vatican Council requested. We at the Churchof Saint Agnes in Saint Paul and at Sacred Music are doing our part by supportingGregorian chant and the new chant books. We urge those in charge of church musicprograms to rediscover the glories of Gregorian chant. Simply write to Solesmes, andfind out about all their books and recordings.These are exciting times for the Church. T hey are times that offer new challenges toclergy and laity alike. Man y of the riches of the new liturgies are either m isunderstoodor remain to be discovered. Being informed abo ut the latest books and dev elopm ents inGregorian chant is quite simple, and it is one way to mee t the challenge of church m usicin the modern world. The rewards to be reaped would certainly be well worth the ef-fort.Will the effort be made?

PAUL LE VOIRT e mpus Pa sc ha l e

In Officio dominicali et ferialiFeria V post Ss.mam Trinitate

V " ' i;4 ' =E-ni, ere- a-tor Spir itus, mente;es tu-6-rum vi-si-

2 Qui dice- ris Pa-rac litus, donum De- i al-tissimi, fons

SS.MI CORPORIS & SANGUINISCHRISTIUbi sollemnitas Ss.mi Corpora et Sanguinis Chrisli non est depraeceplo servanda, assicjnatur, lamquam diei proprio, dominicaepost Ss.mam Trinitatem.

A D I ET IIVESPERAS

-t--t-

vi-vus, ignis, ca-ri-tas et spi-ri- ta-li s iincti- o. 3. Tu sep- Ange, lingu a, glo-ri- 6-si corpo-ris myste-ri- um,

ti- formis mune-re, dextra? De- i tu digi-tus, tu r i t e pro1 1 a 3 _" - % _ " - !LJJ^

sangui-nisque pre-ti- 6-si, quern in mundi pre-ti- um fructus

-TI =- ^missum Patris sermone ditans guttu-ra. 4.Accende lumen

sensibus, infunde amorem cordibu s, infirma nostri cor

ventris genero-si Rex effudit gent i-um. 2.Nobis datus,

nobis natus ex intacta Virgine, et in mundo conver-

po-ris, virtiite firmans perpe-ti. 5. Hostem rep ell as lon- satus, sparso verbi semine, su- i moras incola-tus miro t ipcn 1-4YK4MARII 19

21


23/29

REVIEWSBooksGregorian Semiology by Eugene Cardine. Translated byRobert M. Fowells. Abbaye Saint-Pierre de Solesmes,-72300 Sabl-sur-Sarthe, France. 90 Frs., paper. 1982.

Gregorian Semiology is, without doubt, the most impor-tant book to be published on the interpretation ofGregorian chant in many years. A number of great andsmall works have been published on interpretation todate, but he re, in one read able volum e in English, is theessence of an entirely new vision of Gregorian chant. Itis a vision based on the study of the musical symbolscontained in the most ancient manuscripts. This, ofcourse, has been done before, and was thought to havereached its conclusion with the publication of theVatican edition of the Graduate Romanum in 1908.Paleographic study (which brought forth the Vaticanedition) yielded mainly the melodic value of themusical symbols found in the oldest chant manuscripts."Semiological study," according to Cardine, "...ex-amines the reasons (logos) for the diversity of the signs(semeion) in order to deduce the fundamental principlesfor an authentic and objective interpretation" (p. 8).Thus, semiology not only yields the melodic, it alsoyields the rhythmic subtleties of these ancient signs.Dom Cardine thoroughly examines everything fromthe virga, tractulus and punctum, through all of thecomplex neums, to liquescence and some specialalphabetical signs. Each topic is loaded with examples

and is clearly and precisely written.Gregorian Semiology is actually a textbook based on thecourses given by Dom Cardine at the Pontificial In-stitute of Sacred Music in Rome. Hence no one, noteven the reader w ith a casual interest, should let the ap-parent complexity of the subject of this book turn himaway without a look. Since it is intended for use bystudents, anyone should be able to profit from it.Some may question the validity of semiology whenapplied to Gregorian chant. After rea ding this book andlistening to any of the latest recordings from Solesmes(on which semiological study has had a directinfluence), no doubt should remain in anyone's mind.

Semiology works. It turns "plainchant" into somethingexquisitely expressive, and makes it more easily andcompletely understood. Gregorian Semiology leaves all ofthe old methods and concepts of Gregorian chant farbehind in the musical dust.Regretfully, there are many typographical errors inthis translation. O n p . 56 , for example, an entire line oftext is missing except for the last two letters. All of thiscan be excused because none of these errors distorts theintended meaning of any part of the book, and theEnglish translation was printed in a non-English-speaking country. I think I need say no more.

11

Regardless of its minor faults, Gregorian Semiology ismust reading for every student of music, especiallythose involved with chant. Dom Cardine's argumentsare logical and strong. Best of all, however, his decadesof research make Gregorian chant come to life as itnever has before. PAUL LE VOIRMagazinesNO VA RE VISTA DE MUSICA SACRA. Vol. 11,Ser ies 2 , No. 30. 1984. Trimester periodical of the SacredMusic Commission of Braga, Portugal.The theme of this issue is liturgy and music forchildren. The illustrations are of children and themusical supplement, which is always very e xtensive inthis journal, gives some examples of quite singablepieces for children's liturgies in the vernacular. Theeditor makes a most important point, however, thatchildren must be prepared to be adults and they have aright to be introduced to the music that they will be re-quired to know and use as adults. Children, andadolescents especially, must not be patronized nor fedwith a false infantilismo, which would only alienate themfrom the Church. Music must be authentic and themystery which it conveys must be preserved.

Ano ther article continues the praise of Ma nuel Faria,the priest w ho did so much for sacred music in Portugalas a composer, conductor and editor.Perhaps of interest to readers of Sacred Music is a briefnotice of our journal among the various internationalpublications received. Singled out for special notice was"A Chronicle of the Reform," a series that was publish-ed in Sacred Music about the events beginning withPope Pius X and continuing through the post-conciliarp e r i o d RJ.S.BOLLETTINO CECILIANO. Anno 79, No. 6-7, June-July 1984.After a very large issue in May, the journal hasreturned to its traditional size and format. Themonographs on "the sign in the liturgy" are followedby a few notes on the subject in this issue by SecondoMazzarello in which he makes these points: l) the ex-terior nature of liturgy is important; 2) liturgical signsare of a provisional character; and 3) liturgical signs arerelative. The series is thus c ompleted.

Another article on organs and organ literature fromvarious regions of Italy is presented, this time on theTreve nto, wh ich is the northeastern section of the coun-try. A very extensive bibliography is included. Areport on the 24h International Congress of Choirs,held in Loreto at Easter, lists some seventeen groupsthat participated, including Saint Paul's Choir fromAkron, Ohio, and others from England, Poland, Spain,Austria and Yugoslavia. The Cappella Sistina wasamong them.


24/29

JUBILUS REVIEW. Vol. I, No. 2, Summer 1984.The editor reaffirms the demands of the Church thatmusic used in the liturgy be sacred and good, c omposedspecifically for divine worship. He repeats the Church'sdemand that Gregorian chant be given primacy ofplace and shows the efforts of the instruction, Musicamsacram of 1967, to resolve many of the problems arisingfrom the reforms begun by the council.An article by Duncan Blake gives an account of thesymposium on chant held in Washington, D.C., in thesummer of 1983, stating that the meeting was clear inits direction and precise in its resolutions. James Davernhas an article entitled "The Choir and the ListeningCongregation," a discussion of the role of each in actuosaparticipate populi. D. M eeha n continues his instruction onhow to conduct a rehearsal with a parish choir, whichgives practical hints on many essential matters, in-cluding voice production.

An interesting section reproduces some notes froman Irish organist of one hundred years ago. It describesthe repertory, the singers, attempts at musical reformsand the conflict between the chant of Ratisbon andSolemnes. The article is the work of W.H. GrattanFlood.News about musical events in Ireland, a large sectionof music in Latin, English and Gaelic for various com-binations and a book review section (much of which isborrowed from Sacred Music) conclude a good secondissue of this new review.

R.J.S.CAECILIA. Society of St. Cecilia of the Diocese ofStrasbourg. No. 7-8-9-10. July-October 1984.This issue gives the program for the annual generalassembly of the Cecilian societies of Alsace which tookplace on September 2 3 at Strasbourg. The Mass for theoccasion included the Gregorian setting of the Kyrie,Credo an d Sanctus as well as selections in French an d Ger-man. Announcement is also made of the Europeanchoral festival "Europa cantat" which will take place inStrasbourg from July 17 to 28, 1985. Part of the Euro-pean year of music, its organizers expect some 4000participants from the best choirs of more than thirtycountries. More than 100 concerts will be presented allover the city of Strasbourg during the festival. In addi-tion to the usual music supplements and pedagogical in-struction in this issue, there is an article which com-memorates the 20th anniversary of the constitution onthe sacred liturgy by thanking all those who have par-ticipated in the implementation of its ideas while remin-ding the readers that much remains to be done.V.A.S.UNA VOCE (France). No. 116. May-June 1984.The editors of Una Voce pause on the eve of the 20thanniversary of the founding of the association to reaf-firm their mission and the need for the existence of thesociety and its journal. They state that the Latin

language remains the most certain guarantee of or-thodoxy, that Gregorian chant fulfills a pastoral need,and that the liturgy as celebrated in Latin and G regorianchant is the affirmation pa r excellence of the unity anduniversality of the Roman Church.An article by Dominique Francois criticizes thepreparation in France for the m eeting of presidents and

secretaries of national liturgical commissions which willtake place in Rome at the end of October. It questionsthe continued experimentation with the liturgy and theFrench pre-occupation with such items as liturgicalcelebrations without priests and the role of women inthe liturgy.The annual meeting of Una Voce took place in theform of a pilgrimage to the shrine of Notre Dame ofLiesse, a beautiful 14th century church which w as onceone of the principal pilgrimage sites in France.Announcement is made of several recent publica-tions which might be of interest to Sacred Music readers.A volume of organ accompaniment for Gregorianchant by Fr. Ferdinand Portier has just come out. The

f i r s t volume of the Graduale Romanum comitante organo in -cludes Masses for solemnities and major feasts whilethe second and third volumes in the series which willfollow soon will contain accompaniments for the Sun-days of the year. A ten-volume new edition of DomGueranger's Aunee Liturgique prepared by Dominique'M

Sacred Music, 111.3, Fall 1984; The Journal of the Church Music Association of America

Documents

Transcript of Sacred Music, 111.3, Fall 1984; The Journal of the Church Music Association of America