SINGING THE RESPONSORY
Worship 38:3 (Feb. 1964), 169-174
In every age, in every rite, liturgical Bible readings have been prefaced or followed by song. In the present form of the Latin rite we have song after the readings of Matins and after the epistle of Mass. I will refer to these songs under the general heading of "responsory," meaning to include the gradual, alleluia, sequence, tract and other kinds of song which are used with the liturgical readings. The fact is, however, that these songs are rarely sung. At Mass one seldom hears the responsories sung in other than a psalm tone or a monotone. The pressure from the sanctuary and from the parking lot squeezes out all melodic expansion at this point.
In the Dominican solemn Mass the subdeacon prepares the chalice after the epistle. Whatever the disadvantages of this procedure, it has the fortunate effect of assuring the choir more than enough time to sing its parts before the gospel can begin. But apart from such exceptional cases, the more common practice is to curtail the singing of the responsory. As for the responsories of Matins, it might never occur to one who reads them that they were even meant to be sung.
Since this is the situation, I should like to consider: 1) the value of singing the responsory; 2) its ideal location in the liturgy; 3) the text and the music which might be used; 4) the persons who should sing it.
1) The Word of God is like a seed. It drops into the mind of the believer during the reading of the liturgy and, according to the disposition it effects or finds there, immediately begins to germinate in acts of faith, understanding and love. As the mind dwells upon it, this germ begins to pulse and grow. The liturgical readings fail in their purpose if they do not plant the Word of God in us, if, to speak precisely, they do not elicit or revive for a moment our understanding of and commitment to the substance of the reading.
Just as the careful planting of a seed takes time, so also the planting of God's Word. People will not understand the message and make it their own if we rush through the readings and leave no time for the lesson to sink in. Such precipitance would be like scattering seed on the ground and sweeping it up before it has had a chance to penetrate the soil. We cannot, of course, stop after each reading and wait for the Word of God to mature and bear full fruit; but we should take care that it be received joyfully and strike roots, so that it may continue its action during the rest of the liturgy and afterwards.
The sung responsory is intended precisely to allow for this penetration. In the liturgy the first reading ignites the flame. The responsory which follows is not another flood of words fueling the flame engendered by the reading. It consists of just a few words stretched out by the melody and rhythm of the music into a light breeze stirring the fire to greater intensity, until it is ready for the fuel of the next reading. Thus the responsory ideally is not a continuation of the reading, but an affective reflection upon it, a response to it. To be effectual it must be rendered leisurely and musingly.
The proper function of music is to express human emotions in sound. Our rational response to God's Word must extend also to our emotional life, and fittingly should include song. Thus the sung responsory is the most natural sequence to a reading, a liturgical moment allowing the Word of God to become vital in us.
A confirmation of the value of singing the responsory can be seen in certain forms of extra-liturgical Bible reading which have been developed not merely to supplement the readings of the liturgy, but more importantly, to make up for the defects of liturgical services in which the readings are quickly dispatched with no time allowed for reflection. The recently developed Bible vigils are an attempt to present the Word of God in a leisurely way, with time for explanations and applications and an opportunity to absorb and to taste it. Song plays an important part in these services. (1)
For a long time the private practice of spiritual reading has been another substitute for what is wanting in the liturgical readings of God's Word. In spiritual reading one reads the text slowly, ponders over it, makes application and gives free rein to any affective response and commitment the reading may evoke. This practice supplements the liturgy in that it enables one to benefit from parts of the Bible and from other writings which are not included in the liturgy. But its prominence today is due in large part to the fact that we have lost the solemnity of the liturgy of the Word, spiritual reading having been institutionalized to fill the gap.
By restoring the prominence of the liturgy of the Word, the forthcoming liturgical reforms will call attention to the importance of song in enhancing the solemnity and effectiveness of the readings.
2) Since the Church is now studying possible adaptations to give greater efficacy to liturgical forms, we are led to suggest a variety of possible positions of the responsory besides its present position in the Mass of the Roman rite.
It would be fitting to have in Mass, as in Matins, a responsory after each reading. This seems to be the reason which led the Mozarabic rite to place the alleluia after the gospel, a practice which never won acceptance in other rites. Historically, it seems that the gradual followed the first of three readings, and the alleluia the second, introducing the gospel. This is still the practice of the Ambrosian rite, which in addition has an antiphon following the gospel. The Chaldean rite is the only other rite to have a proper antiphon after the gospel.
While in all the Eastern and Western rites and in many Protestant orders of worship the first readings are followed by a responsory, the gospel is more commonly followed by a short doxology. In the Lutheran service this is expanded into a hymn which more nearly possesses the character of a responsory. (2) In view of time limitations it may sometimes be advisable to group the readings together so as to form one reading with only one responsory following. It would be futile to choose one fixed arrangement as the ideal. It seems, however, that the common rule should be to follow each reading with a responsory.
Should the responsory following the gospel precede or follow the sermon? Again, it would be difficult to fix an absolute rule. But since the sermon in Mass should properly continue and apply the thought of the readings, it could be considered a unit with the last reading, with the responsory coming afterwards. This, at any rate, is the case in Matins, where the patristic homily follows immediately upon the abbreviated reading of the gospel. Nevertheless, if the sermon happens to digress from the immediate thought of the gospel, it may be better to put the responsory immediately after the gospel.
It should be considered, however, that the credo already partly fills the need for a responsory after the gospel and sermon, since it is a profession of faith in the Word of God which was just read. But the credo does not have the meditative character which a responsory must have if it is to foster the fulness and variety of response which God's Word stimulates in its hearers.
3) It is very likely that if the bishops decide to introduce the vernacular for the readings, the responsories will be put into the vernacular too. Also, should the bishops revise the pericopes to be used in the readings, the selection of texts for the responsories will likewise be affected, although there is less need for variety in responsories, since the same one can be used appropriately with many different readings. We may suppose, however, that psalms will remain the basic source from which responsories will be selected, since the texts of even the best Catholic and Protestant hymns are too inferior in comparison to the psalms to justify their general use as responsories.
If psalms are kept as the basic text of the responsories, the ordinary metric hymn tunes cannot, of course, be used. Nor would it do simply to put English words to existing Gregorian chants, although it seems that with some adaptation the melismatic chants can be fitted to English words. In adapting these chants, one would have to be guided first of all. by the broad melodic pattern, and not slavishly preserve every note.
Secondly, one would have to avoid distortion of English words, which do not lend themselves to the expansion of secondary syllables as do Latin words. We would do Gregorian chant an injustice to ape its accidentals in translating it. But if we could retain its spirit while combining its essential elements with originality, we would be preserving one of the glories of the Latin rite, and indeed of Western civilization.
Yet Gregorian chant need not be our only source of inspiration in composing the music for English responsories. If Gregorian chant achieved such remarkable perfection as liturgical music in places where Latin was spoken, the forms of music used in other places have also been highly successful. The Northern countries were the source of the chorale and of polyphony. The Middle East, India, the Far East and Africa have also developed forms of music which are very apt for worship.
If we look for the reason which makes Gregorian melismatic chants so successful, we will find that it is not in their neat and snug fitting of the music to the words, as is the case with Gregorian antiphons. Graduals and alleluias are often very poor in dramatizing the text. The reason for their success is that they express so well the elements of mind and heart which should go into the recitation of the text. This is the principle of success for all liturgical music, no matter what forms it takes.
If this principle is true, it would not be at all improper to derive inspiration from Bach and classical polyphony in composing music for responsories. Much modem music has done this with originality and utilization of modern harmonic and rhythmic developments. Also, modem Western culture is not so closed that we should bar all non Western elements from our music. Most Americans have become attuned enough to the more common idioms of non-Western music that it would not be a complete shock for them to hear strains of it in church. The essential thing we should demand of the music is that it authentically express the emotions which are appropriate to the text and to a rational response to God's Word.
4) The responsory, in its entirety at any rate, should not be sung by the congregation. One reason is that the common hymn tunes, which are easiest to learn, will not fit the non-metrical psalm texts. Secondly, even if the congregation could learn some simple psalm settings, such as those of Gelineau, these are not the most fitting setting for a responsory, although they are valuable for other parts of the liturgy. They are too much like a psalm tone, whereas the responsory should be more lyrical and meditative, with fewer words and more play given to the music.
The more elaborate setting, which incidentally is not the most primitive but is called for by the purpose of the responsory, could only be done by the choir or by a soloist. Moreover, tradition has reserved the responsory to the choir, schola, or soloist.
Nevertheless, an early form of responsorial singing consisted of a dialogue between the choir and the congregation, the choir singing the psalm verses and the congregation answering with a simple refrain. This refrain was the congregation's response, from which we get the name "responsory." It would be very fitting if this response were restored to the congregation, not indeed in the present manner of joining the choir in the last word or bar of music, but with a refrain especially designed for the congregation, such as "Alleluia," "Glory be to the Father," "For his mercy is forever," and the like.
The use of English in the liturgy, when it becomes a reality, will be a challenge to liturgists, pastors, preachers and musicians. It is to be hoped that as they have achieved so much within the framework of former liturgical law, they will put forth effort to achieve even greater success with the new opportunities which Vatican II is offering us to increase the efficacy of the liturgy in its role as "the primary and indispensable source of the true Christian spirit."
1. "If time is pressing, the homily should be curtailed, not the psalm" Joseph M. Connolly, "Bible devotions, principles and sample," Worship 36 (January 1962), 117.
2. The Service Book and Hymnal (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1958), adopted officially by all Lutheran churches in North America, has after the epistle the usual gradual and alleluia. The gospel and creed are joined into a unit, and this is followed by a hymn. Then the sermon is preached, and the offertory and communion service, if it is held, follows. Cf. pp. 3-5, 24 ff.