Why is the Sequence of the Mass never used in the O.F.?

  • Thread starter Thread starter GloriousOrder
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
G

GloriousOrder

Guest
Friends :),

I have been reading about the various sections of the Mass, attempting to understand it better so I may lector and serve with greater acumen before the Lord. Musically-speaking, there seems to be a good reliable set of Propers and Ordinaries: Introit, Kyrie, Gloria, Gradual, Alleluia/Sequence (depending on EF/OF), Credo, Offertory, Sanctus, Agnus Dei, and Communion…

My question is: why is the Sequence almost never used except on “big” solemnities (basically Christmas and Easter), at least in my archdiocese? Even the celebration of the truly great feasts of the Church don’t seem to merit the inclusion of the Sequence. Are liturgists just afraid of scaring away people with short attention spans? It seems odd to ignore a bit of the Proper that imparts its daily character very distinctly. :confused:

What is the rationale for often omitting the Sequence? It may be optional, but why leave it out? 🙂
 
GloriousOrder said:
Friends :),

I have been reading about the various sections of the Mass, attempting to understand it better so I may lector and serve with greater acumen before the Lord. Musically-speaking, there seems to be a good reliable set of Propers and Ordinaries: Introit, Kyrie, Gloria, Gradual, Alleluia/Sequence (depending on EF/OF), Credo, Offertory, Sanctus, Agnus Dei, and Communion…

My question is: why is the Sequence almost never used except on “big” solemnities (basically Christmas and Easter), at least in my archdiocese? Even the celebration of the truly great feasts of the Church don’t seem to merit the inclusion of the Sequence. Are liturgists just afraid of scaring away people with short attention spans? It seems odd to ignore a bit of the Proper that imparts its daily character very distinctly. :confused:

What is the rationale for often omitting the Sequence? It may be optional, but why leave it out? 🙂
Click to expand...
Almost all the Sequences were abolished at the time of the Council of Trent. There used to be hundreds (including for feasts like Christmas), but for some reason I’ve never figured out – maybe people’s attention spans in the 1560s were too short? – virtually all of them were eradicated from the Mass when Pius V issued his missal. To my mind, the iconoclasm was inexcusable and the loss staggering. The eradicated sequences were absolutely packed with ultra-Catholic theology, beautiful Latin poetry, and rich expressions of the meaning of individual feast days. (Hmm, maybe the Protestant observers who were invited to the Council of Trent had something to do with it? Naw …)

What we were left with is the following: Victimae Paschali Laudes for Easter and its Octave, Veni Sancte Spiritus for Pentecost, Lauda Sion for Corpus Christi, and Dies Irae for the Mass for the Dead. In 1727, Pope Benedict XIII restored the Stabat Mater for the Feast of the Seven Dolors of Mary. That’s it – in the Extraordinary Form. There is no Sequence on Christmas, no Sequence on Laetare Sunday, no Sequence period except the ones listed, nor has there been since 1570. Now, continuing the pruning of the Tridentine redactors (though not with the same slash-and-burn vengeance), the modern Missal relegates the Dies Irae to the Office, and makes the following optional: the Lauda Sion, the Stabat Mater, and the Victimae Paschali on days of the Easter Octave other than Easter Sunday itself.

That’s all there is. I’m not exactly sure what you were expecting.
 
This is very depressing, I must admit. What’s the point of even having the Sequence as an integral Proper of the Mass if it’s only used on a few days out of the year? Mass ought to last as long as it possibly can. 😦 All this pruning started with the perfidious reduction of the number of times “Kyrie, eleison” was repeated starting with Gregory the Great! Stop liturgical innovation! Return to the Mass of Leo I! :eek:

Sorry about that, MarkThompson! I honestly thought there was a Sequence for every Mass. :confused:
 
GloriousOrder said:
This is very depressing, I must admit. What’s the point of even having the Sequence as an integral Proper of the Mass if it’s only used on a few days out of the year? Mass ought to last as long as it possibly can. 😦 All this pruning started with the perfidious reduction of the number of times “Kyrie, eleison” was repeated starting with Gregory the Great! Stop liturgical innovation! Return to the Mass of Leo I! :eek:
Click to expand...
If you are a traditionalist of that stripe, you might want to look into joining the Society of Saint Pius I.
Sorry about that, MarkThompson! I honestly thought there was a Sequence for every Mass. :confused:
Click to expand...
Maybe it’s time for a Reform of the (Tridentine) Reform!
 
In my home Church the choir sings them always in Latin.

I suppose the reason for omitting is that there is no singable English version, but my only basis to say that that I never heard such. While I was in Hungary in the new form people always sung the traditional vernacular versions. An other possible reason is the 70 minutes usual time limit for a Mass
 
MarkThompson said:
Almost all the Sequences were abolished at the time of the Council of Trent. There used to be hundreds (including for feasts like Christmas), but for some reason I’ve never figured out – maybe people’s attention spans in the 1560s were too short? – virtually all of them were eradicated from the Mass when Pius V issued his missal. To my mind, the iconoclasm was inexcusable and the loss staggering. The eradicated sequences were absolutely packed with ultra-Catholic theology, beautiful Latin poetry, and rich expressions of the meaning of individual feast days. (Hmm, maybe the Protestant observers who were invited to the Council of Trent had something to do with it? Naw …)

What we were left with is the following: Victimae Paschali Laudes for Easter and its Octave, Veni Sancte Spiritus for Pentecost, Lauda Sion for Corpus Christi, and Dies Irae for the Mass for the Dead. In 1727, Pope Benedict XIII restored the Stabat Mater for the Feast of the Seven Dolors of Mary. That’s it – in the Extraordinary Form. There is no Sequence on Christmas, no Sequence on Laetare Sunday, no Sequence period except the ones listed, nor has there been since 1570. Now, continuing the pruning of the Tridentine redactors (though not with the same slash-and-burn vengeance), the modern Missal relegates the Dies Irae to the Office, and makes the following optional: the Lauda Sion, the Stabat Mater, and the Victimae Paschali on days of the Easter Octave other than Easter Sunday itself.

That’s all there is. I’m not exactly sure what you were expecting.
Click to expand...
What happened was very simple, but you have to go back to the year 1209. In 1209, St. Francis of Assisi asked Pope Innocent III for a missal that was concise. The young community had one priest. However, the rule said that they were not to have many books. Actually, it still says that. The Holy Father gave Brother Francis a missal that was very simple. Everything was in one book. It had very few sequences. That’s probably part of what made it one volume missal.

The simpler missal had nothing to do with attention span. It had to do with the size of the missal. Everything was in one tome and you had the Gospel Book along side. Because the idea caught on so well, the Church played with it and came up with the form that Pius V promulgated. This form had less sequences. It worked out well, because it highlighted certain holy days. Over the centuries, the Church has added and deleted sequences, but always trying to keep the missal simple. Even though most people never consciously think about it or even know it, the idea of a simpler missal was inspired by Francis of Assisi and his sons in order to protect holy poverty.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
:eek: I should have known this liberalism reeked of the perfidious conspiracies of those Seraphic types! :mad:

At least the Franciscans are consistent… 😃
 
GloriousOrder said:
:eek: I should have known this liberalism reeked of the perfidious conspiracies of those Seraphic types! :mad:

At least the Franciscans are consistent… 😃
Click to expand...
:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

Not a conspiracy, just being practical.

This is an aside, but an interesting one. Because the Franciscan family began as a brotherhood, priests who entered had to conform to the simple life of a brother. To do so, they had to leave behind all those books necessary to celebrate mass. Everytime they wanted a mass they had to walk to the nearest chapel or church. It was kind of silly to do that if you had a brother-priest in your house. On the otherhand, you couldn’t have these itinerant brothers schlepping all of these books around. Each would need his own set. Lady Poverty prohibitted that. The Seraphic Father was simple, but practical. If there was short version of the missal, why not use it?

The moral of the story . . . follow Lady Poverty and you’ll never go wrong. :yup:

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top