The Dialogue Low Mass versus the Silent Low Mass

[TrueLight]

Do you prefer or wouuld you like to see a dialogue Low Mass rather than a silent low Mass?

“A Dialogue Mass (in Latin, Missa dialogata; also Missa recitata) is a Low Mass, in which the people recited some parts of the Latin text of the Tridentine Mass.”

An important intermediate development in the twentieth century liturgical reform culminating with the vernacular Mass as authorized by Vatican Council II which changed the ethos of Roman Catholic worship which until then had been characterised by quiet and stillness on the part of the congregation and henceforth by sound and movement. This desire for “active participation” in the form of Dialogue Mass rapidly led from congregations struggling to recite the Latin responses in unison during the years of its popularity in the 1950s to the quasi-universal adoption of the vernacular which culminated in the new Mass of Pope Paul VI promulgated in 1969. Since that time silent participation at Low Mass, which was the norm for at least one thousand years (circa 900 -1900), has disappeared throughout the Church and now only survives amongst certain Catholics who continue to celebrate the Tridentine Mass.

Previously, before the introduction of Dialogue Mass, except at Sung Masses, the people had little active participation in the Mass other than interior disposition. This was intended to emphasise the fact that Catholics gathered together to witness and participate in an action (i.e. the sacramental renewal of the sacrifice of Christ on Calvary) rather than merely participate in common prayer which was a hallmark of the Protestant Reform of the 16th century. The introduction of bilingual hand Missals (Latin-vernacular) occurred first in Germany only as late as the 19th century in defiance of Church law which required the liturgical texts to be reproduced exclusively in Latin. Later given authorization, they allowed the laity to quietly follow the Mass (“Pray the Mass”) rather than the traditional practice of saying private prayers as the priest celebrated. The subsequent step was the people actually saying the Latin responses of the Mass called the Dialogue Mass.

In November 1922, the Holy See’s Sacred Congregation of the Council (now called the Congregation for Bishops) gave approval to the practice whereby “at least in religious houses and institutions for youth, all people assisting at the Mass make the responses at the same time with the acolytes”, a practice that it declared praiseworthy in view of the evident desire expressed in papal documents “to instil into the souls of the faithful a truly Christian and collective spirit, and prepare them for active participation.”

Read more

So yes, this is Wikipedia, so it may not be perfect. Nevertheless, would you or do you prefer the silent low mass, in which the server makes all the responses or the Acolyte mass, in which both the servers and the people make the responses and why?

I have read that the dialogue mass is more common outside of America.

 

[Rich_C]

My parish’s Low Mass are silent but I visit one with dialogue Masses often so I have plenty of experience of both.

I prefer the silent Low Mass. I find it’s easier to pray in that silent atmosphere. At dialogue Masses I don’t make most of the servers’ responses, anyway.

 

[AdDeum]

I voted for the silent low mass… both are equally valid. But, the silent low mass allows me to better immerse myself in what’s going on… more contemplative.

 

[Rich_C]

I have read that the dialogue mass is more common outside of America.

The letters of Evelyn Waugh on the liturgy show an interesting national difference in this. He felt that the silent Low Mass was the patrimony of the post-Reformation English Catholics, and complained about the “noisy Germans,” haha. Probably war-bias there, partly.

 

[TrueLight]

My parish’s Low Mass are silent but I visit one with dialogue Masses often so I have plenty of experience of both.

I prefer the silent Low Mass. I find it’s easier to pray in that silent atmosphere. At dialogue Masses I don’t make most of the servers’ responses, anyway.

The closest I’ve come to a dialogue Mass is a low Mass that was supposed to be silent, but I heard individual folks responding here and there.

 

[Rich_C]

The closest I’ve come to a dialogue Mass is a low Mass that was supposed to be silent, but I heard individual folks responding here and there.

Haha, yes that’s almost a third way.

 

[Corki]

I voted for dialogue but I don’t have a really good reason. Most of the Masses of my childhood were dialogue so it’s what is most familiar to me.

 

[mfrances]

I’ve never experienced a Dialogue Low Mass (except for a few people to respond quietly) but I like the silence so I prefer the Low Mass over the High Mass.

 

[CountrySteve]

i have to opinion i voted, because to me a Mass is a Mass, idc if its low, high, or whatever, Jesus is present there and thats all that matters to me

 

[malphono]

The closest I’ve come to a dialogue Mass is a low Mass that was supposed to be silent, but I heard individual folks responding here and there.

It could have been me … I habitually do that albeit somewhat sotto voce. There are a couple of others (all men) who often do the same. Occasionally someone gives me (or us, depending on who is there) “the eye” but in main it goes unremarked. Now if someone actually dared to vocalize a negative comment … well, let’s just say they’d be doing so at their own peril. :bigyikes:

 

[TrueLight]

It could have been me … I habitually do that albeit somewhat sotto voce. There are a couple of others (all men) who often do the same. Occasionally someone gives me (or us, depending on who is there) “the eye” but in main it goes unremarked. Now if someone actually dared to vocalize a negative comment … well, let’s just say they’d be doing so at their own peril. :bigyikes:

Ha ha.

One of the chief complaints of the dialogue Mass is that people respond at different rates of speech, which can throw off the server. I can see how that would be annoying. But knowing myself and how I wish people would sing the Credo and some of the propers at the high Mass, the way they do in those French YouTube videos, I suspect I would like the dialogue Mass.

 

[malphono]

So yes, this is Wikipedia, so it may not be perfect. Nevertheless, would you or do you prefer the silent low mass, in which the server makes all the responses or the Acolyte mass, in which both the servers and the people make the responses and why?

This is a case where wikipedia is generally correct. The only thing I would really argue is the 6th paragraph (“Nevertheless …”) which seems to me to be somewhat skewed. The question asked was "… instead of the server " and the response from the SRC was quite to the point, despite the author’s comment. The practice was for the server to make the responses and that was never changed. The question suggests that the servers are silent, hence the SRC’s response. Had the question been “along with the server” the response would have been different.

In any case, I rather like missa recitata. Shame that more things, including the Pater Noster, weren’t included therein. Oh well …

I have read that the dialogue mass is more common outside of America.

Quite true, at least in the US (and, IIRC, Canada – I have no idea about other anglophone places). The “why” of that has always escaped me. From what I understand, it was reasonably popular in France and Germany, but I don’t know about elsewhere in Europe or Latin America.

 

[malphono]

Ha ha.

One of the chief complaints of the dialogue Mass is that people respond at different rates of speech, which can throw off the server. I can see how that would be annoying. But knowing myself and how I wish people would sing the Credo and some of the propers at the high Mass, the way they do in those French YouTube videos, I suspect I would like the dialogue Mass.

That’s really a silly complaint: when there is more than one server, even the servers respond at different rates.

BTW, at High Mass, I sing whatever I know. And yes, I get the “fisheye” for that too. Their problem, not mine.

 

[TrueLight]

That’s really a silly complaint: when there is more than one server, even the servers respond at different rates.

BTW, at High Mass, I sing whatever I know. And yes, I get the “fisheye” for that too. Their problem, not mine.

It pains me when there is dead silence at the high mass. I know some people say they’re not obligated to sing, etc (which is true), but what a beautiful thing it would be if everyone sang the Credo with conviction and the Kyrie with repentance, the Sanctus in awe of God on the throne and the Agnus Dei, in grateful pleas.

 

[TrueLight]

Does anyone have a video of a dialogue Mass?

 

[malphono]

It pains me when there is dead silence at the high mass. I know some peopel say they’re not obligated to sing, etc (which is true), but what a beautiful thing it would be if everyone sang the Credo with conviction and the Kyrie with repentance, the Sanctus in awe of God on the throne and the Agnus Dei, in grateful pleas.

Yes, and what pains me even more are those people (the “fisheye” crowd, of course) who insist that no one, save the choir, is supposed to sing. Apparently they’ve never been to a Conventual Mass or, if they have, they think “well, they’re religious so it’s different.” I hate to be the one to tell them but … well, you get the idea.

 

[Rich_C]

Ha ha.

One of the chief complaints of the dialogue Mass is that people respond at different rates of speech, which can throw off the server. I can see how that would be annoying. But knowing myself and how I wish people would sing the Credo and some of the propers at the high Mass, the way they do in those French YouTube videos, I suspect I would like the dialogue Mass.

I suspect you would as well, and I hope you can find one. It’s not my cup of tea but its good for some people and I’m glad it exists. I’m just grateful for my quiet Mass, too.

 

[Rich_C]

Yes, and what pains me even more are those people (the “fisheye” crowd, of course) who insist that no one, save the choir, is supposed to sing. Apparently they’ve never been to a Conventual Mass or, if they have, they think “well, they’re religious so it’s different.” I hate to be the one to tell them but … well, you get the idea.

“Fisheye,” never heard that one before. No one at my parish seems to care too much what other laity do. I sometimes sing, sometimes not depending on whether or not I think it will add or detract from the beauty of the chant and don’t really noticed whether or not other people do because our aucoustics are very good so the schola sings over us all.

 

[Jane_of_Arc]

It could have been me … I habitually do that albeit somewhat sotto voce. There are a couple of others (all men) who often do the same. Occasionally someone gives me (or us, depending on who is there) “the eye” but in main it goes unremarked. Now if someone actually dared to vocalize a negative comment … well, let’s just say they’d be doing so at their own peril. :bigyikes:

**I voted that either is fine with me. I attended a silent Low Mass throughout my early years. When I attended the Sacred Heart Convent/high school, we had a daily dialogue Mass. I loved them both. I have missed them both through the years.
**

 

[TrueLight]

I suspect you would as well, and I hope you can find one. It’s not my cup of tea but its good for some people and I’m glad it exists. I’m just grateful for my quiet Mass, too.

Oh no. I don’t NEED to find one. I’m fine with the silent Mass. I’m just saying I probably would like it.