Mass of the Angels

[OraLabora]

I can’t say I like the Mass of the Angels so much, as a practitioner of Gregorian chant. To be sure it’s probably better than most modern stuff we hear, but as Mark points out it is a neo-Gregorian composition (along with Credo III that usually accompanies it), that departs markedly from traditional Gregorian chant in many important ways, and it is way overused when trying to expose the faithful to “Gregorian chant”.

For one, the Kyrie is not plaintive enough and is written in mode V, an unusual mode for a Kyrie.

Check out these settings for the Kyrie

Kyrie XVIIA (also XI ad libitum)

Kyrie IV (for feasts of the Apostles)

Kyrie XI (Orbis Factor, for Sundays in OT)

Kyrie XIII (for Sundays in Ordinary Time)

Kyrie IX (solemnities and feasts of the BVM)

Now compare it to the Kyrie in Mass VIII:

Missa de angelis

A Kyrie is a chant of supplication and should therefore have plaintive character; it is pleading God to have mercy on the souls of we sinners. To put not too fine a point on it, the Kyrie from the Mass of the Angels has way too “happy-clappy” character to it for plainchant. Gregorian chant is meant to highlight the word. Kyrie Eleison means “Lord have mercy”. Kyrie VIII from the Mass of the Angels to my ear, fails in this mission.

 

[MarkThompson]

You obviously know way more about music then I do. So I had no intention of going deep into discussion with anyone about it. But you comment about it being “unfortunately a late neogregorian fabrication” as if most people have any idea what that means. I was wondering why music from the Mass of Angels is not heard more now days and why today’s Mass couldn’t incorporate it instead of what currently is used.

As 929dad says, I mean that it is a late composition done in the Gregorian style, not a composition from the authentic period of organic development of Gregorian melodies, which would generally be considered to have come to a close with the rise of organum (multiple-part chant) in the thirteenth century.

Since you do know so much about music and you brought it up, can you give us some background about the Mass of Angels and the Missa O Magnum Mysterium. I just started listening to the Missa O magnum Mysterium and I like it alot also.

If you are asking about the Missa O Magnum Mysterium by Tomás Luis de Victoria, as I would assume, it is what’s called a “parody Mass.” Generally what happens in these cases is that a composer writes a motet or other piece, it becomes popular, and then they are commissioned or otherwise decide to write a Mass using the same musical themes. Sometimes the theme is derived from a piece of secular popular music, as with the countless Masses called Missa L’Homme Armé, based on a war-song that was a hit in the late fifteenth century.

As to the Missa de Angelis, I seem to recall poking around once to find some history, and wasn’t really able. One thing to note is that “chant Masses” of this sort are not integrated compositions – one composer (or group of monks) didn’t sit down and compose a set of works under this title – but rather collections of chants from different places and different centuries. I would not be surprised to learn that the designation “Missa de Angelis” for this particular assemblage dated only from the restoration of chant that took place at Solesmes and Ratisbon from the 1870s or so. As you can see here for instance, the term “Missa de Angelis” really has nothing to do with chant at all, but is the descriptive name of a votive Mass for the angels. Of “chant Masses” that have a name, like Orrbis Factor (Mass XI), most got their names from the first words of tropes, or additional poetic lines, that used to be inserted into the chants to dress them up. This is clearly not the case for Missa de Angelis, so my guess would be that it was once assigned to the votive Mass of the angels, and eventually came to be used more widely.

Is that right, though? This discussion from 1889 says that the Missa de Angelis is “a very beautiful Plain-Chaunt Mass . . . prescribed in the Ratisbon Gradual,” which was published in 1871, and this source shows that by 1907 a reference could be made to “the . . . well-known ‘Missa de Angelis’.” If you look in the Ratisbon Gradual, though, you will find that while the Gloria is roughly the same as what we have in our modern Kyriale under the name “Missa de Angelis,” the other parts are all completely different. Hunting around, I found our familiar Sanctus (which is, as I pointed out, the only actually old part of the MdA) included in a different Mass, while the Kyrie and Agnus Dei were not, to my eyes, to be found there at all. I would suppose then that the particular collection we call “Missa de Angelis” was assembled after 1871, borrowing a name already in use – maybe it dates from the 1908 Vatican Graduale? Believe me, I’m no musicologist, so I’m willing to be corrected here, but I haven’t found any evidence that would seem to indicate an earlier date for the codification of the Missa de Angelis.

 

[OraLabora]

Believe me, I’m no musicologist, so I’m willing to be corrected here, but I haven’t found any evidence that would seem to indicate an earlier date for the codification of the Missa de Angelis.

The Graduale Romanum gives the 15th to 16th centuries for the Kyrie, the 16th for the Gloria, the 12th for the Sanctus and the 15th for the Angus Dei.

Beyond that we haven’t much to go on, when it comes to figuring out when these separate chants were collected into a single Mass setting (De Angelis).

But quite apart from that the Kyrie and Gloria in particular are departures from the other Mass settings.

I remember reading somewhere that the new choirmaster for the Vatican, a French-Canadian BTW, has said that he will practically eliminate the Mass of the Angels from the repertoire, except for certain special occasions when those attending the Mass might be able to better participate, mainly for the reasons that you, and I, pointed out, and especially that in his opinion, the Mass of the Angels is way overused.

 

[hudson]

That is good information. You are right about the Missa O Magnum Mysterium. Here is the cd I was listening to.

amazon.com/Latin-Mass-Quire-Voices/dp/B00005QDGW/ref=sr_1_11?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1311201140&sr=1-11

 

[MarkThompson]

I can’t say I like the Mass of the Angels so much, as a practitioner of Gregorian chant. To be sure it’s probably better than most modern stuff we hear, but as Mark points out it is a neo-Gregorian composition (along with Credo III that usually accompanies it), that departs markedly from traditional Gregorian chant in many important ways, and it is way overused when trying to expose the faithful to “Gregorian chant”.

For one, the Kyrie is not plaintive enough and is written in mode V, an unusual mode for a Kyrie.

Check out these settings for the Kyrie

Kyrie XVIIA (also XI ad libitum)

Kyrie IV (for feasts of the Apostles)

Kyrie XI (Orbis Factor, for Sundays in OT)

Kyrie XIII (for Sundays in Ordinary Time)

Kyrie IX (solemnities and feasts of the BVM)

Now compare it to the Kyrie in Mass VIII:

Missa de angelis

A Kyrie is a chant of supplication and should therefore have plaintive character; it is pleading God to have mercy on the souls of we sinners. To put not too fine a point on it, the Kyrie from the Mass of the Angels has way too “happy-clappy” character to it for plainchant. Gregorian chant is meant to highlight the word. Kyrie Eleison means “Lord have mercy”. Kyrie VIII from the Mass of the Angels to my ear, fails in this mission.

I agree (and also, especially, to your recommendations of Kyries XI and XVIIa). An interesting question is what makes Missa de Angelis so popular? It is so overdone it has been called the “Mass of Creation” of the Latin Mass. There are Masses which are both better and more authentic, so where does the popularity come from?

My surmise would be (1) it is musically unchallenging, because it is basically written in F major and not in any Gregorian mode, and (2), which I say not to find fault, it is relatively simple, and thus allows for congregational participation instead of requiring reservation to the schola.

The more important point is (1) though. Real Gregorian chant often sounds almost alien to modern ears, because the Gregorian musical modes offer starkly starkly progressions than the modern key system. This is in large part where Gregorian chant’s often “haunting” quality comes from. Kyrie VIII does fail, as you say; and I think that this is mostly owing to being written in a fundamentally modern rather than Gregorian idiom.

 

[OraLabora]

You are right about the lack of challenge. Our choir was originally directed by a monk from St-Benoît-du-Lac. While a superb choirmaster and teacher, he didn’t have enough confidence in us to turn us loose on more authentic Mass settings (or do things like Graduals and Offertories). So we overdid Mass VIII as well.

When he left us to become chaplain of a monastery of Benedictine nuns, our new (secular) choirmaster was more daring, and we now tackle other Mass settings for the Kyrie, do offertories, and the odd Mode V gradual instead of a responsorial psalm.

But so far I haven’t got him unstuck from Gloria VIII. His reasoning is that it encourages participation of the faithful, but even more and more of them can’t do even that, so why not tackle another Gloria? (we have tried Gloria I in Paschal time).

Fortunately I usually attend Mass in a Benedictine monastery (except when the choir sings, once a month) and there, they follow the appropriate setting for the season or feast from the Graduale Romanum, and I am able to sing along them. They only use Gloria VIII (along with the very simple Kyrie XVI) when there’s a large group visiting, which is about 2 or 3 times a year max. I consider so fortunate to have this resource only 30 min. from home. And best of all, it’s all an OF Mass, so we can have the “best of both worlds”.

 

[Love_Divine]

I prefer hymns, both traditional and modern, in my own language, with a regular melody that I can hum as I am working or playing outside of Mass.

I sing the Kyrie and Gloria from Mass VIII all the time at work and while I’m driving. The more you hear Gregorian Chant, the more you pick up on the melodies.

You asked the question, “Why don’t we hear this more often at Mass?”

The answer is, “Because it’s hard to learn unless you have a musical background and a good conductor, and probably a rehearsal accompanist, since so few people read music.”

Aha! This is false. Gregorian chant is actually simpler to sing than what is currently sung in Mass. First, Gregorian chant can be purchased in regular music notation. Secondly, the musical theory is not complex at all, and for those who can’t read music, or learn better by ear, there are plenty of online resources to teach people how to sing Gregorian chant by ear.

I will give you a practical demonstration of this.

Here’s the Gloria from Mass VIII, written out in regular notation, only using basic quarter notes and eighth notes. Beginning musicians just starting out after only two months at most would be able to play the melody, as it’s just that simple.
youtu.be/_syNqBCbDfg

Now let’s compare it to one of the popular “contemporary” Glorias.

Here’s the Gloria from the Mass of Glory. It’s a syncopated rhythm plagued with accidentals, entire bar rests (most congregants sing right through them), triplets, and at 2:19, all hell breaks loose. I’m 26 and started taking music lessons when I was 5, and even this makes me cringe.
youtu.be/wYAikjow24E

The version that you linked us to is being sung very well by good singers. Honestly now, how do you think that same music would sound sung by the people in your parish? If YOU had to sing it, would YOU sound good, like the people in your link?

No, I wouldn’t because a lot of that is the acoustics of where they were singing it. But it doesn’t have to sound like that. Honestly, what’s being sung now sounds worse at many places. Gregorian chant would be a lot easier for them. I have been to TLMs where those who were singing were by far not professional singers, or particularly gifted in the musical aspect, but they still sing Gregorian Chant and polyphony beautifully.

Here, just to be fair here’s the Gloria from Mass VIII sung during various Masses.

This one it’s being sung at an OF Mass, without accompaniment, and the ENTIRE congregation is singing. Personally I could do without the arm flailing, but the singing doesn’t sound like a dying cat (which is often the case with contemporary music because it’s written in ridiculous ranges).
youtu.be/f5zW08eN094
youtu.be/SwtvcHZznmU
youtu.be/4AOoMqhiwe0

Now with a good conductor and some good singers who actually have time to do some rehearsing, this Mass would sound OK to those who like this kind of music.

It’s not about what kind of music we like. It’s what kind of music the Holy See says should have pride of place and that all Catholics should be able to sing at least the simpler modes. They’re not going to learn by not doing.

 

[hudson]

Now let’s compare it to one of the popular “contemporary” Glorias.

Here’s the Gloria from the Mass of Glory. It’s a syncopated rhythm plagued with accidentals, entire bar rests (most congregants sing right through them), triplets, and at 2:19, all hell breaks loose. I’m 26 and started taking music lessons when I was 5, and even this makes me cringe.

wow that was terrible

 

[OraLabora]

wow that was terrible

As bad as it is, it still doesn’t make the Mass of the Angels “Gregorian chant”

 

[hudson]

As bad as it is, it still doesn’t make the Mass of the Angels “Gregorian chant”

I didn’t say it was. I said I like it a lot and wish it was used more often. You guys have obviously heard it way to much, but around here it is very rare.

 

[OraLabora]

I didn’t say it was. I said I like it a lot and wish it was used more often. You guys have obviously heard it way to much, but around here it is very rare.

Heard it? I’ve chanted it almost monthly for 9 years. To say I’m sick of it would be an understatement

 

[Timothysis]

Someone always has to do this on every post. I am speaking strictly about music in the Mass not about the Eucharist. I am sure you knew that though and just wanted to try and put me down.

In the future, perhaps you should put a little more thought into your posts to avoid this type of conflict. I can only respond to what you write, not what you’re thinking.

 

[TheMc]

The music from the Mass of the Angels is unbelievable. How can anyone say that the singing with guitar and drums compare to this? I know it is all personal taste, but to me I cannot image bringing one closer to heaven than hearing this at Mass. I see no reason this cannot be incorporated into the Novus Ordo Mass. You do not even need an expensive organ to do it either.

youtube.com/watch?v=p85L3H31ylA

youtube.com/watch?v=IvSgPeVxXOc

youtube.com/watch?v=NyV01zXuW-A

Actually, as much as you might never know by looking at american parishes, music at Mass is not about personal taste. This is the kind of music the church says is best for Mass.

 

[Cat]

I sing the Kyrie and Gloria from Mass VIII all the time at work and while I’m driving. The more you hear Gregorian Chant, the more you pick up on the melodies.

Aha! This is false. Gregorian chant is actually simpler to sing than what is currently sung in Mass. First, Gregorian chant can be purchased in regular music notation. Secondly, the musical theory is not complex at all, and for those who can’t read music, or learn better by ear, there are plenty of online resources to teach people how to sing Gregorian chant by ear.

I will give you a practical demonstration of this.

Here’s the Gloria from Mass VIII, written out in regular notation, only using basic quarter notes and eighth notes. Beginning musicians just starting out after only two months at most would be able to play the melody, as it’s just that simple.
youtu.be/_syNqBCbDfg

Now let’s compare it to one of the popular “contemporary” Glorias.

Here’s the Gloria from the Mass of Glory. It’s a syncopated rhythm plagued with accidentals, entire bar rests (most congregants sing right through them), triplets, and at 2:19, all hell breaks loose. I’m 26 and started taking music lessons when I was 5, and even this makes me cringe.
youtu.be/wYAikjow24E

No, I wouldn’t because a lot of that is the acoustics of where they were singing it. But it doesn’t have to sound like that. Honestly, what’s being sung now sounds worse at many places. Gregorian chant would be a lot easier for them. I have been to TLMs where those who were singing were by far not professional singers, or particularly gifted in the musical aspect, but they still sing Gregorian Chant and polyphony beautifully.

Here, just to be fair here’s the Gloria from Mass VIII sung during various Masses.

This one it’s being sung at an OF Mass, without accompaniment, and the ENTIRE congregation is singing. Personally I could do without the arm flailing, but the singing doesn’t sound like a dying cat (which is often the case with contemporary music because it’s written in ridiculous ranges).
youtu.be/f5zW08eN094
youtu.be/SwtvcHZznmU
youtu.be/4AOoMqhiwe0

It’s not about what kind of music we like. It’s what kind of music the Holy See says should have pride of place and that all Catholics should be able to sing at least the simpler modes. They’re not going to learn by not doing.

Thanks for trying. I couldn’t even sit through more than a few minutes of these. I really really don’t like this kind of music. I didn’t think it sounded good at all.

Now I’m kind of worried. The Holy Spirit is going to have to do some major work on my soul to help me to listen to this music without cringing. At the moment, it just gives me the heebie jeebies.

I guess if this kind of music ever does become the “norm” at Masses, it will strengthen my character, won’t it? There’s nothing like sitting through something that you don’t like to make you not think about yourself, right?

I fear, though, that if Latin and chant become the norm at Catholic Mass, then I will have to attend a Lutheran service every weekend to hear and sing good, solid hymns in my own language. Oh, well.

 

[TrueLight]

Heard it? I’ve chanted it almost monthly for 9 years. To say I’m sick of it would be an understatement

 

[TheMc]

I personally don’t care for it, not that Cat’s personal opinion matters. But I just want to make sure you realize that not everyone agrees with you that it brings heaven closer to us.
Actually it does. That’s an objective fact. Gregorian chant is the closest thing we have (on earth) to the songs of the angels, and also is the best suited music for the liturgy. I sound nuts, but it’s true.

I prefer hymns, both traditional and modern, in my own language, with a regular melody that I can hum as I am working or playing outside of Mass.
Why can’t you do that with chant? I sing often chant random chants (or practice specific ones, when I’m preparing something for Mass) when I’m driving (when no one else is in the car, that is )

But to each his own. I respect your opinion and preference.

You asked the question, “Why don’t we hear this more often at Mass?”

The answer is, “Because it’s hard to learn unless you have a musical background and a good conductor, and probably a rehearsal accompanist, since so few people read music.”

The version that you linked us to is being sung very well by good singers. Honestly now, how do you think that same music would sound sung by the people in your parish? If YOU had to sing it, would YOU sound good, like the people in your link?

My husband and I listened to a CD of Gregorian chant a few weeks ago. His comment was, “Well, if the singers in the church all sound like that, it would be OK. Problem is, the singers in most churches don’t sound like that. It would end up sounding like those funny cat videos–meeerwwrowal!”

Now with a good conductor and some good singers who actually have time to do some rehearsing, this Mass would sound OK to those who like this kind of music.

comments above in red.

 

[MarkThompson]

Actually it does. That’s an objective fact. Gregorian chant is the closest thing we have (on earth) to the songs of the angels, and also is the best suited music for the liturgy. I sound nuts, but it’s true…

The Byzantines, Copts, Syrians, Old Romans, and others will be very interested to learn that! If only they adopted Gregorian chant (Solesmes editions exclusively, please), just think how much closer they would be to the angels! It’s an objective fact, after all.

 

[Cat]

The Byzantines, Copts, Syrians, Old Romans, and others will be very interested to learn that! If only they adopted Gregorian chant (Solesmes editions exclusively, please), just think how much closer they would be to the angels! It’s an objective fact, after all.

I respect your knowledge, MarkThompson.

So all kidding and sarcasm aside, are you saying that it’s not true that Gregorian chant is the music closest to the angels?

I know that the Church teaches that Gregorian chant deserves pride of place in the Mass. But I don’t know of teaching that says that this music is the closest to the angels. What the document says is that “Gregorian chant is especially native to the Roman liturgy.”

Thanks for clarifying.

 

[OraLabora]

The Byzantines, Copts, Syrians, Old Romans, and others will be very interested to learn that! If only they adopted Gregorian chant (Solesmes editions exclusively, please), just think how much closer they would be to the angels! It’s an objective fact, after all.

And don’t forget the Ambrosian rite!

And I think the Mozarabic rite is still in limited use around Toledo.

 

[Timothysis]

The Byzantines, Copts, Syrians, Old Romans, and others will be very interested to learn that! If only they adopted Gregorian chant (Solesmes editions exclusively, please), just think how much closer they would be to the angels! It’s an objective fact, after all.

I’ve also read here at CAF (boy, you learn something new everyday here!) that the angels also speak Latin in heaven.

I wonder if they use dollar bills since they are engraved with “E Pluribus Unum?”