• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Corpus Christi Watershed

“What earlier generations held as sacred, remains sacred and great for us too…” Pope Benedict XVI (7 July 2007)

  • Our Team
  • Catholic Hymnal
  • Jogues Missal
  • Site Map
  • Donate
Views from the Choir Loft

Progressive Solemnity

Fr. David Friel · December 21, 2014

ITHIN THE STRUCTURE of High Mass and Low Mass in the Extraordinary Form, the liturgical elements to be sung at a particular Mass are well established. With the loss of that structure in the Ordinary Form, there has come about a new principle, referred to as “progressive solemnity.” In this new model, the rule of the Church permits for only some elements of the Mass to be sung, decided by the priest and liturgical musicians.

In recent weeks, there has been some online discussion of “progressive solemnity.” It began, so far as I can tell, with an article posted by Fr. Thomas Kocik on NLM. Ben Yanke posted a nice response, also on NLM. I would like to add a perspective that has not surfaced in those two very good posts.

“Progressive solemnity” may be a fair theory for working in the Novus Ordo, but, in practice, is it perhaps a concept that is too often employed in reverse?

Quite commonly, priests & musicians ask the question, “What are we going to sing today?” It’s as if there is an assumption that a purely spoken Mass is the default base onto which we add the ornamentation of a little music here, a little music there. But, as the documents on sacred music take great pains to make clear, true liturgical music is never just “ornamentation.”

Would it not be better, more proper, more consonant with the view of Sacrosanctum Concilium, to view the fully sung liturgy as the default and to make that the norm from which we make adaptations?

HE VERY TERM “progressive solemnity,” I believe, is part of the problem. It makes it sound like we should be minimalists, starting with a tabula rasa rather than with the richness of totally sung liturgy. It also seems to advocate the simplistic approach that sprinkling music over the rite adds solemnity. In the Roman Rite, however, solemnity is added not so much by singing more elements, but by raising the form—the nature and style—of what is sung. This explains the existence of the ferial tones & solemn tones found in the missal.

This point has been made persuasively by Prof. William Mahrt, President of the CMAA:

The differentiation of the solemnity of days should be achieved principally through the kind of music employed, rather than how much. As a matter of principle, I would suggest that “progressive solemnity” does not properly serve the sung liturgy, since it omits the singing of certain parts of the Mass which should and could be sung and thus gives up on the achievement of a completely sung service. (Mahrt, The Musical Shape of the Liturgy, 168)

At the very least, if we are to adhere to the principle of progressive solemnity, we should first agree that our starting point is the fully sung Mass, not an entirely spoken Mass. Otherwise, we fall into what might better be called “regressive solemnity.” The fully sung liturgy is our root chord, so to speak, and the innumerable permutations of partially sung liturgy are its various positions.

The phrase “progressive solemnity” first appeared under the heading “Singing in the Office” in the General Instruction of the Liturgy of the Hours (GILOH). It says there:

A celebration performed entirely with singing is commendable, provided that it has artistic and spiritual excellence; but it may be useful on occasion to apply the principle of “progressive solemnity.” There are practical reasons for this; there is also the fact that the various elements of liturgical celebration are not then treated indiscriminately, but each of them can be restored to its original meaning and genuine function. (GILOH, #273)

Of course, the selection of more solemn elements of the liturgy is not limited only to sacred music. Progressive solemnity can refer also to other matters, such as the number of candles on the altar, the nobility of the vestments worn, the length of the processions, etc.

After several decades in force, it is time for an evaluation of the merits of progressive solemnity. Arguments could be made in its favor on the basis that it is a practical solution and that its initial intention was to increase the amount of sacred music at Mass, in contrast with the restrictive High Mass/Low Mass model. The evidence, however, bears clear testimony that the principle of progressive solemnity—whether intentionally or not—has significantly reinforced the errant perception that music is an “extra” in the sacred liturgy. Who hasn’t heard the simplistic argument: “It’s just a ferial day. Why would we sing the [insert name of any Mass part]?”

All of this is why I see a degree of conflict inherent in this teaching from Sing to the Lord:

Music should be considered a normal and ordinary part of the Church’s liturgical life. However, the use of music in the Liturgy is always governed by the principle of progressive solemnity. (Sing to the Lord, #110)

Instead of adopting the view that “adding singing” to the Mass adds solemnity, would it not be better to take the view that “subtracting singing” from the Mass subtracts solemnity? When we embrace this fundamental shift in perspective, the principle of progressive solemnity loses some of its luster in its governance of our liturgy.

Opinions by blog authors do not necessarily represent the views of Corpus Christi Watershed.

Filed Under: Articles Tagged With: Liturgy of the Second Vatican Council, Progressive Solemnity, Reform of the Reform, Sacrosanctum Concilium, Singing the Mass, USCCB Sing to the Lord Document on Music Last Updated: January 1, 2020

Subscribe to the CCW Mailing List

Fr. David Friel

About Fr. David Friel

Ordained in 2011, Father Friel served as Parochial Vicar at St. Anselm Parish in Northeast Philly. He is currently a doctoral candidate in liturgical theology at The Catholic University of America.—(Read full biography).

Primary Sidebar

Corpus Christi Watershed

Quick Thoughts

Surprising Popularity!

One of our most popular downloads has proven to be the organ accompaniment to “The Monastery Hymnal” (131 pages). This book was compiled, arranged, and edited by Achille P. Bragers, who studied at the Lemmensinstituut (Belgium) about thirty years before that school produced the NOH. Bragers might be considered an example of Belgium “Stile Antico” whereas Flor Peeters and Jules Van Nuffel represented Belgium “Prima Pratica.” You can download the hymnal by Bragers at this link.

—Jeff Ostrowski
15 February 2021 • To Capitalize…?

In the Introit for the 6th Sunday after Pentecost, there is a question regarding whether to capitalize the word “christi.” The Vulgata does not, because Psalm 27 is not specifically referring to Our Lord, but rather to God’s “anointed one.” However, Missals tend to capitalize it, such as the official 1962 Missal and also a book from 1777 called Missel de Paris. Something tells me Monsignor Knox would not capitalize it.

—Jeff Ostrowski
15 February 2021 • “Sung vs. Spoken”

We have spoken quite a bit about “sung vs. spoken” antiphons. We have also noted that the texts of the Graduale Romanum sometimes don’t match the Missal texts (in the Extraordinary Form) because the Mass Propers are older than Saint Jerome’s Vulgate, and sometimes came from the ITALA versions of Sacred Scripture. On occasion, the Missal itself doesn’t match the Vulgate—cf. the Introit “Esto Mihi.” The Vulgate has: “Esto mihi in Deum protectórem et in domum refúgii…” but the Missal and Graduale Romanum use “Esto mihi in Deum protectórem et in locum refúgii…” The 1970s “spoken propers” use the traditional version, as you can see.

—Jeff Ostrowski

Random Quote

When we say: “The people like this” we regard them as unable to develop, as animals rather than human beings, and we simply neglect our duties in helping them towards a true human existence — indeed, in this case, to truly Christian existence.

— Professor László Dobszay (2003)

Recent Posts

  • (Screenshots) • Proving Holy Saturday Took Place In The Morning
  • “Homily: Second Sunday of Lent” • Father Valentine Young, OFM
  • Part 2 • “Starting Your Own Traditional Latin Mass”
  • Is This Really The Same Church??
  • Solmization from the Inside

Copyright © 2021 Corpus Christi Watershed · Charles Garnier on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Corpus Christi Watershed is a 501(c)3 public charity dedicated to exploring and embodying as our calling the relationship of religion, culture, and the arts. This non-profit organization employs the creative media in service of theology, the Church, and Christian culture for the enrichment and enjoyment of the public.