The Responsorial Gloria: A Challenge

[FatHead]

many have said, both here and elsewhere, that there is no problem whatsoever with the so called “responsorial gloria.” the publishing houses also dont seem to care, but that doesnt mean much to me since they often dont follow the liturgical guidelines anyways (such as not following the text exactly, and publishing so called “bi-lingual” mass settings).

but here is the challenge: can anyone show me ANY church document that approves this practice? i have not seen one yet, which reenforces my stand that it should not be happening.

 

[Oneofthewomen]

but here is the challenge: can anyone show me ANY church document that approves this practice? i have not seen one yet, which reenforces my stand that it should not be happening.

Or here’s a challenge- find a document that strictly prohibits it!

I am not crazy about the “responsorial Gloria” either, but as far as I can remember from my liturgy course, it is a valid option in the US

 

[FatHead]

Or here’s a challenge- find a document that strictly prohibits it!

its called liturgiam authenticam, and redemptonis sacramentum. both state the texts of the mass must be followed exactly.

why do you believe it’s ok to do in the US? still no one has posted any authoritive documents condoning the practice, and I’ve posted two against it.

 

[FatHead]

but there’s one problem. where does STTL get it’s authority?
it has absolutely none, unless it is quoting other authoritive documents. this is why adding tropes to the agnus dei is illict, even though STTL “allows” it.

anyways, it goes directly against liturgiam authenticam, and the girm, which states the texts of the mass must not be changed.

 

[MarkThompson]

Or here’s a challenge- find a document that strictly prohibits it!

Good point. The Roman documents often aren’t as cut-and-dried as some people would like to think. “You must sing the text as it is given, without adding anything,” the documents say. But if this were to be understood literally, then it would ban a huge proportion of sacred polyphony from the Mass, since composers so often repeat and interweave the “official” texts. So clearly that is not the intent. The question, then, is whether the use of a refrain is more like other reptitions and embellishments, and thus licit, or more like making things up and sticking in foreign texts, and thus illicit. It is a matter of interpretation, and it can hardly be said that there is one “obvious” answer. The Roman documents do not deal with the question. Consequently, it falls to others to decide on the right course, and that’s what the bishops did on this topic in Sing to the Lord, which was approved by 88% of the American bishops.

I am sure somebody out there is racing to her keyboard right now to point out that Sing to the Lord was never submitted to the Holy See for recognitio, and thus it cannot trump documents like Sacrosanctum Concilium or even Liturgiam Authenticam, with their cautions about not changing the Mass texts. That’s the point, though: what’s called for is an interpretation of those documents, and in the absence of Roman authority to the contrary, the American bishops, through the NCCB/USCCB, are best qualified to carry it out.

 

[FatHead]

I am sure somebody out there is racing to her keyboard right now to point out that Sing to the Lord was never submitted to the Holy See for recognitio, and thus it cannot trump documents like Sacrosanctum Concilium or even Liturgiam Authenticam, with their cautions about not changing the Mass texts. That’s the point, though: what’s called for is an interpretation of those documents, and in the absence of Roman authority to the contrary, the American bishops, through the NCCB/USCCB, are best qualified to carry it out.

i assume you see nothing wrong with adding tropes to the agnus dei, then?

STTL 188 says it’s fine, but you yourself just implied that it’s illicit. obviously sttl has no authoirty, and is riddled with problems.

 

[MarkThompson]

i assume you see nothing wrong with adding tropes to the agnus dei, then?

STTL 188 says it’s fine, but you yourself just implied that it’s illicit. obviously sttl has no authoirty, and is riddled with problems.

Although I don’t particularly like tropes for the Agnus Dei (silly rabbit, tropes are for Kyries!), I agree that, without any contrary clarification from Rome, the current interpretation is that they do not violate the rules for the liturgy. It is important to recall the hierarchy of authority in interpreting documents. One must note that even statements that seem clear on their face to a layman (“Call no man ‘Father’,” anyone?) may in fact require a much more subtle analysis to understand fully. Consequently, if Rome said that Sacrosanctum Concilium means there can be no refrains in a Gloria, that would be the final word. If Rome keeps silence, then it is for the bishops as ordinaries and custodians of the liturgy to issue interpretations of the documents. It’s not as though nobody’s asking. If they were wrong, Rome would correct them; if they were right (or at least within the reasonable gray zone in which authority can make a decision), then Rome would simply let them stand, and even use responsorial Glorias themselves on occasion.

You know, it’s always funny how the tables turn. If 88% of the U.S. bishops approved a document demanding the return of altar rails or something like that but never submitted it for Roman approval, isn’t it enjoyable to imagine the angry fuming of some people that the document had “no authoirty [sic], and is riddled with problems,” and the pompous self-importance of others who would announce, “Our noble bishops have spoken! All who disagree are clearly being disobedient!”

P.S., you’re not texting anymore. Standard capitalization and punctuation would be a nice courtesy you could extend to other readers.

 

[Samuel63]

I have to say, I wish we could just have recited the gloria for a few weeks to get use to it.

 

[japhy]

Does the Church permit repetitions in the singing of certain texts which do not exist in the texts themselves? For example, can you use a polyphonic Mass setting in which “Hosanna in excelsis” in the Sanctus is sung several times? If that is permitted, then a setting of the Gloria in which “Gloria in excelsis Deo …” is repeated as a refrain after “verses” seems permissible to me.

 

[FatHead]

I have to say, I wish we could just have recited the gloria for a few weeks to get use to it.

you could have. it was posted online for over a year. but in the liturgy, it’s preffered that the gloria be sung.

 

[Oneofthewomen]

you could have. it was posted online for over a year. but in the liturgy, it’s preffered that the gloria be sung.

Please show me where it says it is preferred.

From the revised GIRM

The Gloria in Excelsis

1. The Gloria in excelsis (Glory to God in the highest) is a most ancient and venerable hymn by which the Church, gathered in the Holy Spirit, glorifies and entreats God the Father and the Lamb. The text of this hymn may not be replaced by any other. It is intoned by the Priest or, if appropriate, by a cantor or by the choir; but it is sung either by everyone together, or by the people alternately with the choir, or by the choir alone. If not sung, it is to be recited either by everybody together or by two choirs responding one to the other.

It is sung or said on Sundays outside Advent and Lent, and also on Solemnities and Feasts, and at particular celebrations of a more solemn character.

 

[SKWill]

In my experience, verse-and-refrains settings of the Gloria actually discourage congregational participation. Some settings lead to congregations only singing the refrains, while others lead to congregations not singing at all. Sometimes this is due to the refrains being easier to sing than the “verses”; sometimes this is due to both the verses and refrains being not suited for congregational singing; and sometimes this is due to a cantor leading from the front who only raises his/her arms for the refrains.

 

[Samuel63]

That is exactly the problem at my parish. The choir does one part, and the parishioners do another part. I simply rebel and sing all the parts. A lot of people have joined me I noticed.

Secondly, the choir has made the singing rather complicated. It borders on being irreverant and almost impossible for the younger ones and the oldest parishioners to keep up with.

I long for gregorian chant!

 

[JGMendes4049]

Please show me where it says it is preferred.

The word hymn. Last time I checked you don’t usually recite a hymn.