LL OF US HAVE probably encountered priests who “ran the full gamut” (using plainsong terminology). While teaching high school in Texas, I met a very lax priest. He baptized a baby who was dead, and later gave a HOMILY justifying his actions, claiming: “That baptism was for the family not the child.” On the opposite side of the spectrum, as someone deeply involved in the TLM movement since the early 1990s, I met hundreds of TLM priests from all over the world: France, Germany, New Zealand, England, Ireland, and so forth.1 I’ve met my fair share of rigid TLM priests. For instance, one claimed publicly that anyone who failed to do “a serious and heavy penance” on every single day of Lent was guilty of mortal sin. (Perhaps he’d never read Mt 23:4.) More than twenty years ago, I provided music for the sister of a “super rigid” priest. She asked me to play music from a television show as her WEDDING PROCESSIONAL. I appealed to her brother, saying: “Father, you’ve always stressed how sacred the Mass is; do you really want me to play music from a television show?” I’ll never forget his response: “In this case, yes—because that’s what my sister wants.” I was gobsmacked.
In a moment, I’ll explain why I’m talking about laxity and rigidity. But first, let me be very clear: When it comes to WEDDINGS and FUNERALS, just because a choirmaster programs certain songs, that doesn’t mean he necessarily wants to. (See below.) Recently, in preparation for a wedding, I created a booklet for the singers. Some of you might enjoy looking it over:
* PDF Download • BOOKLET FOR SINGERS (Wedding Mass)—28 pages
It mixes modern polyphony, accompanied plainsong, unaccompanied plainsong, Renaissance polyphony, hymnody, and so forth—all things I’ve spoken of so often in the past.
(1 of 3) Laxity Vs. Rigidity • Let’s say you’re hired to provide music for the funeral of the uncle of a lady named “Lucy.” Suppose Lucy usually hears sacro-pop (to use Father Skeris’ phrase) each Sunday where she attends Mass. In other words: music composed in a secular, undignified, off-Broadway style more suited to a toothpaste commercial than Holy Mass. How do you proceed? Let’s say you sing a bunch of music Lucy absolutely hates at her uncle’s funeral. Have you done your job?
(2 of 3) Laxity Vs. Rigidity • In my view, WEDDINGS and FUNERALS present a unique challenge to the conscientious choirmaster. We ardently desire to follow the example of Father Valentine Young (d. 2020), who each morning asked the Holy Ghost to help him follow God’s Will. Is it truly God’s Will to fill the funeral of Lucy’s uncle chock-full of music she absolutely hates? Is it likely this will help Lucy fall in love with authentic sacred music? On the other hand, is it God’s Will to allow improper music at Mass?
(3 of 3) Laxity Vs. Rigidity • I do not pretend to have the “correct answer” to all these questions. In light of the current crisis in the Catholic Church, it seems reasonable—in my humble opinion—to have some flexibility when it comes to WEDDINGS and FUNERALS. What does “flexibility” mean? Sometimes one can be creative; e.g. a song which has awful lyrics can perhaps be played (not sung) on the pipe organ as prelude music. It seems like this is something we must pray about.
(A) Rigid Rubrician • Indeed, many who brag about being “very rigid” are misinformed. For example, some priests condemn others harshly because they “don’t follow the rubrics.” Yet these same priests insist upon an extra CONFITEOR before Communion, although the 1962 rubrics couldn’t be more clear:
503. Quoties sancta Communio infra Missam distributur, celebrans, sumpto sacratissimo Sanguine, omissis confessione et absolutione, dictis tamen Ecce Agnus Dei et ter Dómine, non sum dignus, immediate ad distribtionem sanctæ Eucharistiæ procedit.
(B) Rigid Rubrician • I’ve also met priests who claim to follow “the real rubrics from before Pius XII reformed Holy Week.” I ask them: “So that means you never celebrate Mass in the afternoon or evening, right?” They reply: “No, I make an exception for that.” I then ask: “So during Holy Week, you don’t use incense unless you have Deacon and Subdeacon, right?” They reply: “No, I make an exception for that.” Then I press them further: “So when you celebrate Holy Week, you celebrate Holy Thursday Mass and the Easter Vigil in the morning, right?” They reply: “No, I make an exception for that.” Still not satisfied, I ask: “Regarding feasts 100% invented by 20th-century popes—such as the feast of Christ the King—you don’t celebrate those feasts, right?” They reply: “No, I make an exception for that.” I continue further still: “You don’t preach or distribute Holy Communion at a Solemn Requiem, right?” They reply: “No, I make an exception for that.” I ask them whether they allow vernacular hymns to be sung all throughout Low Mass—even during the readings!—as was widespread in the olden days. They reply: “That’s a traditional practice, but we don’t allow it.” I ask whether they allow the congregation to recite (at Low Mass) the Introit, Gradual, Alleluia, Offertory, Communion antiphon, and Pater Noster along with the priest. They reply: “I realize the rubrics explicitly allow that, but I do not.” Finally, somewhat exasperated, I demand to know whether they allow anyone (except the CELEBRANT himself) to receive Holy Communion during a High Mass—something almost never done in the old days. They reply: “No, I make an exception for that.”
(C) Rigid Rubrician • Maybe someday I will write an article pointing out 100 ways “rigid rubricians” aren’t following the rubrics. And what would be the point of such an exercise? Simply to remember that even the most rigid rubricians make exceptions constantly—although some would cut off their right arm rather than admit it. Although I could be wrong, it seems logical to allow certain ‘exceptions’ when it comes to WEDDINGS and FUNERALS—for the sake of charity. If you have a different opinion, I’d love to hear it!
(D) Rigid Rubrician • I would argue that—because God gave us a brain—there are certain times the rubrics should not be followed. For examples, the committee that reformed Holy Week in the 1950s moved the MANDATUM ceremony from where it traditionally belonged into the Mass itself. But they overlooked the fact an identical Communion antiphon (“Dóminus Jesus Postquam Cenávit”) is also used during the MANDATUM ceremony. If one follows the rubrics with rigidity, that same antiphon is sung twice in the space of a few minutes. This is clearly a mistake; but the “rigid rubrician” is only interested in what it says on paper. For the “rigid rubrician,” there’s no such thing as following the spirit of the law.
Addendum • In spite of “synodality,” the last few years have witnessed a reprehensible persecution of Catholics who have been helped in their spiritual lives by the Traditional Latin Mass. Some have attempted to justify this persecution. They claim the TLM must be eliminated because they have an issue with particular people who attend it. But this makes no sense. For one thing, there are ‘rotten eggs’ who attend the NOVUS ORDO, too—does that mean we must get rid of the NOVUS ORDO? Furthermore, one must address the issue; not some other issue. Similarly, if clerics at the Vatican have a problem with the ideology of certain people, they have an obligation to address that issue, not some other issue. What they’re doing makes as much sense as cutting off one’s elbow to “fix” a sore foot.
1 I was privileged to act as MASTER OF CEREMONIES for leaders of that movement—such as Father Arnaud Devillers and Father Josef Bisig—and I’ve frequently been in charge of music for TLM ceremonies celebrated by bishops.
