MUSICA

MUSIC. — The philosophical concept of music, which in antiquity had a predominantly ethical character and in modern times falls within the broad framework of aesthetics, can be expressed, apart from contingent particularities of time and space, by giving music first of all a religious value, and then a highly educational purpose (cf. *Sum. Theol.*, 2a-2ae, q. 91, a. 2).

In the body of theories prior to the advent of Christianity, the aesthetics of music did not find significant development, except in the Greek world. Among the Hebrews, in fact, as philosophy had little place, so too was it for the theory of music, which they willingly preferred to the practice of that art. Among the Greeks, on the contrary, both the practice and the theory of music were cultivated, both of which were then inherited by the Christian world. For the Greek philosophers, music had a threefold value: religious, moral, and therapeutic. For the first interpretation, mention should be made of those thinkers who, following in the footsteps of the Egyptians, Assyrians, as well as the Hebrews, considered the teaching of music a mission reserved for priests: among them are Plutarch, Plato, and in the Roman world, Censorinus, Quintilian, Horace, etc.; for the second, one can still cite the authors of the first current, Plutarch and Plato, to whom are added Aristotle, Aristoxenus, and others; for Aristotle there was a division of musical modes according to the psychic effect they produced and, therefore, a threefold ethos: weakening, exciting, and calming. Finally, in the group of thinkers who attributed a therapeutic value to music, one can recall those who followed the Aristotelian concept of catharsis, according to which music had a soothing efficacy: among them is again Plato, who in the *Charmides* affirms that the care of the body began with the care of the diseases of the soul, then Theophrastus, who suggested curing hip pain with Phrygian music, and again Plutarch, who reports the case of Thales of Crete who freed Sparta from the plague with music.

From the very beginning of the Christian era, as will be seen further on, music held particular importance in the life of the Church, and sacred song came to occupy an independent position, while still retaining notable elements derived from Hebrew, Greek, Gnostic, and other melodies, as well as a liturgical functionality that made it the soul of the rite in prayer. For almost the entire first millennium, Christian liturgical song, in its various forms deriving from the rich and ancient traditions of Ambrosian, Gallican, Mozarabic, and Byzantine chant, remained rigidly monodic, even though some indications suggest the beginnings of polyphony in the *Schola cantorum* of Rome or elsewhere. Codified by St. Gregory the Great (q.v.), Latin chant spread throughout the West, thus forming the foundation of all music, the primary source from which European sound art drew for several centuries. Indeed, upon the framework of Gregorian melodies, the first tentative polyphonies were woven around the year 1000, and against their rich thematic backdrop, the grand architectures of Palestrina’s polyphony were constructed in the 16th century.

In considering the formation of this vital sap, the conceptual position of the musical problem is of no small importance, arising not first as an aesthetic problem but as an ethical-social problem, or even with a mystical-ascetic character. In the thought of the early Fathers of the Church, music, as an echo of a pagan world in dissolution, was harshly condemned, while the rise of song as homage to God in the Christian temple met with the greatest favor and encouragement. The Fathers, grafting their conception onto the ethical current of Greek thinkers (Pythagoras, Plato, Aristotle, Theophrastus, Aristoxenus, Stoics, and eclectics) and onto the mystical tradition of the Alexandrian school (Philo the Jew, Plotinus), attributed to song that ethical-religious function which was to continue throughout the Middle Ages, culminating in that doctrine of modal ethos that still extends today, not entirely extinguished, into the distant branches of ancient thought.

By the end of the first millennium, characterized by monody and homophony, in which liturgical expression dominated the art of music, there succeeded (in the 9th–16th centuries) the era of polyphony, which, initially announced as heterophony (9th–14th centuries) with laws not yet well defined, then unfolded in the splendid lines of true vocal polyphony. Its flowering, predominantly sacred in the forms of the Mass and motet, but also secular in the madrigal, was due to the Flemish, Roman, and Venetian schools (15th–16th centuries).

Immediately after the year 1000, another important aspect emerges in the history of musical manifestations: namely, the rise, with the formation of national languages or “vulgar” tongues from the Latin root, of new musical forms with a popular and secular character that developed distinct lines from country to country. It was the Ars nova, with the rondeau, the *virelai*, and the *ballade* in France, and with the madrigal, the ballata, and the caccia in Italy—forms all of distinctly secular vein and lively polyphonic texture—that grafted itself onto the trunk of the Ars antiqua, which was eminently liturgical and had produced the *conductus*, *clausulae*, and *organa* through Leoninus and Perotinus, masters of the Paris cathedral. Just as the Romance languages branched off from the mother Latin in relation to it, so from the Gregorian chant stem there derived and branched off forms akin in a certain sense to a musical “vulgar,” such as tropes, sequences, and sacred drama; and there flourished the *troubadours* and *trouvères* in France, the *Minnesänger* and *Meistersinger* in Germany (the former with lesser, the latter with greater technical and formal derivation from Gregorian chant). These idioms share a common source of life but already speak new tongues and set out on new paths toward new goals.

On the threshold of 1600, after a new style had been heralded by the predominance of the upper voice, monody prevails, though no longer with the pure melodic linearity of Greek or Gregorian chant, for it is steeped in centuries of harmonic experience. Of the connective tissue of polyphony, only a harmonic backdrop remains, distilled into the instrumental accompaniment from which it is called accompanied monody. Typical forms arise, such as the aria, the cantata, the melodrama, and the oratorio. In the 18th century, new forms, especially instrumental ones like the sonata and the symphony, take on new developments and characters, while existing forms are transformed through the Romantic current to assume, up to today, ever-renewing aspects in time and across different lands.

The development of musical aesthetic thought after the year 1000 can be briefly summarized in a few main trends. In Humanism there was a revival of philosophical fervor in the renewed interest in ancient treatises, which were exhumed and translated, and in the Renaissance the influence of ancient thought manifested itself in a flourishing of writings that, starting from mathematical and astrological insights and addressing the problems of the philosophy of nature, brought music to a greater rigor of experimental inquiry; through the natural-psychological conception (Leibniz) that, from arithmetic, leads music to the world of absolute will (Schopenhauer), the aesthetic theory of music elaborated, in the eighteenth century, that doctrine of the affections («Affektenlehre») which, through the pre-Romantic period, arrives at an evaluation of feeling that unites in its various phases the thought of all.

appello: the maghribah, a kind of powerful syringe. The silver trumpets were played by the priests and not by the Levites, the true musicians of the Temple. For the dedication of the Temple, Solomon assembled 120 silver trumpets. The large flute and the small flute are represented by the hālīl and the 'āghābh; the double flute by the 'ālāmōth. The drum, timpani, and cymbals represent the category of percussion instruments, used especially in joyful, religious or secular festivals; they were obligatory in religious dances. After the destruction of the Second Temple, instrumental art fell into oblivion. Vocal tradition, however, was preserved in the synagogues.

The comparison of the Hebrew melodies traditionally preserved with the Oriental melodies still in use today among Muslim peoples or in the Greek, Jacobite, Nestorian, or Maronite Christian confessions confirms the similarity of the musical systems with respect to the following points:

a) The method of composition is analogous; the freedom and originality in the creation of new melodies consists above all in knowing how to arrange differently the small motifs already in existence and embellish them. A category of motifs combined together is called a mode; modulation passes a motif from one mode to another.

b) Rhythmic freedom exists in melodies of a sacred character; they are treated like ornate recitatives. In songs that accompany a dance, the music receives a metrical framework suggested by the poetic text sung. Oriental music avoids sustaining a note that is not embellished.

c) The tonal system admits quarter tones; there can be 24 degrees in an octave; but among the four main scales, two are diatonic and similar to the Greek Phrygian and Dorian scales.

d) Harmony is totally unknown to Orientals: their aesthetic pleasure lies (as it does for the Hindus) in hearing a pure melody and its ornaments. Instrumental accompaniment, when it exists, repeats the melody itself, perhaps with its own embellishments.

e) The popular character of Oriental music is revealed by the brevity of musical phrases, the frequency of refrains, and the simplicity of melodic invention.

f) Finally, Oriental music was not written down but was learned by memory and transmitted orally. The Jews attempted to fix the traditional modes in writing; the result was the transcription of the Bible according to a complete system of accents and mnemonic signs in the 9th century A.D. The melodic intervals are not transcribed one by one, but suggested in shorthand; the same applies to variations in tempo and intensity. These signs are known by the name of tē'āmim or nēghīnōth (“notes,” “tones”).

Each of the Sacred Books used in liturgical service had its own characteristic formulas. Thus, the Pentateuch, the Prophets, the Psalms, the Lamentations, Job, Ruth, Esther, etc., each had its own special “mode.” The expressive value of this mode, not to be confused with a scale, is related to the content of the part of Holy Scripture for which it is intended. Thus the mode of the Pentateuch expresses dignity and lofty spirit. Though lesser, the mode of the Prophets, sung on a scale equal to the Greek Phrygian (10th Gregorian mode), is imbued with hope and tenderness. The influence of the surrounding culture is recognized in the variants of the same mode. The mode of Esther offers an example of transformation due to local circumstances. Originally the Book of Esther was read in the Phrygian or Dorian scale with very few inflections. The German Jews (Ashkenazim) saw in the story of Mordecai an opportunity to manifest their bitterness against their persecutors; gradually the primitive form of biblical reading was enriched with emphatic formulas. Alongside the melodies for readings there existed another group of prayer songs, with texts taken from Holy Scripture. In the Talmudic period many prayers were composed by the rabbis; however, biblical examples inspired their content and form. These prayers, which have remained in use, are classified into various groups: songs of adoration, praise, petition, penitence, lamentation, and hymns.

II. RELATIONS BETWEEN THE HEBREW MUSIC AND GREGORIAN CHANT

Musicologists who have studied the origins of Gregorian chant have not doubted the dependence of early Christian liturgical chant on Hebrew chant. Gastoué does not hesitate to call Jesus Christ the First Singer of the Church, and indeed the Gospel reports two instances in which the Lord sang Hebrew melodies: for the reading of the prophecy of Isaiah in the synagogue of Nazareth and for the celebration of the last Passover of the Old Testament with the singing of the psalms of the great Hallel (q.v.).

The structure of some liturgical hours, partly identical in Christian and Jewish liturgy, allows us to suppose that some Hebrew musical pieces were also used by the first Christians in Palestine and then passed down to posterity. It has been suggested that some elements of the Easter Gradual Haec dies may be of ancient Hebrew origin. However, the coincidence of Gregorian podatus with a similar Hebrew musical sign is not a decisive argument (cf. A. Gastoué, p. 79).

The comparison of traditional Hebrew melodies in Idelsohn’s collection should yield clearer results. The mode of the Pentateuch would be found in certain formulas of the 3rd Gregorian mode (e.g., in Kyrie 111 Deus sempiternae). The mere coincidence of some notes does not demonstrate a direct influence: the identity of certain modal scales in Hebrew music and in Hellenic and Gregorian music is sufficient to explain the melodic similarity. The fact that the ornate melodies of the Kyrie do not appear until after the 6th century invites caution against readily accepting other identifications made by Idelsohn himself, the undisputed specialist in Hebrew music. With this reservation in mind, one may note: psalmodic formulas such as that of the 2nd tone are rather similar to psalmodic motifs of the Sephardic tradition (Spanish Jews expelled from Spain in 1492); recitatives of the Lamentations according to the Babylonian Jewish tradition resemble certain Lamentations of the Latin Church. Some formulas of the 4th Gregorian mode (antiphon Quid faciam) show a marked affinity with the tephillah mode of the Talmudic period, in the traditions of Yemen, Syria, and Sepharad. In the 5th Gregorian mode, the Easter and Pentecost Invitatory is compared with melodies of the ‘Ashkenazi synagogue, which is linked to Yemen; the hymn Iste Confessor, in its first verse (Liber Usualis, Tournai 1950, p. 1177), echoes an ‘Ashkenazi chant. But a further reservation is in order here: this is almost a matter of imitation, not merely a material similarity of a few notes; yet it is unknown in which direction the undeniable influence occurred: the hymn existed at the end of the 7th century, whereas the date of the Hebrew chant of Germanic tradition is unknown!

Material similarity does not reveal whether an influence occurred or in what direction. The hymn Gloria Laus, sung on Palm Sunday, shares common points with a secular Arabic song; yet it is impossible to know whether the Arabic melody existed when Theodulf, Bishop of Orléans, composed it, or whether he had heard II. A similarity is also noted by some between the intonation of the Sanctus (XVII in the Vatican edition) and a song of adoration (called ‘Alēmī), widely spread during the period of the Crusades.

The influence exerted by Hebrew chant on Christian liturgical music is recognized in a general way in some very ancient forms of psalmodic chant, especially in the responsorial form. The Psalter was the prayer book of the Church as it was of the Temple and the synagogue, and in the Gregorian repertory traces are found of the three ways in which the assembly responded to the soloist’s chant: a) the soloist sings the first half-verse of the psalm, which is then repeated by the assembly after each psalmodic verse; b) the cantor performs each verse in full, of which the people repeat only the final part; c) the cantor, called precentor as in the West in the Middle Ages, divides the verses into short phrases that all can then repeat without error; this last system was used especially for teaching the Bible to the young.

Some other elements of Roman liturgical chant may be of ancient Hebrew provenance: the procedure of centonic composition, that is, the art of using pre-existing formulas to create new compositions, almost musical mosaics in which originality lies in the ability to stitch together and ornament already known phrases; but this procedure is not peculiar to the synagogue: it belongs in a certain way also to Hellenic music, in which the formulas were called nōmoi.

Two characteristics of Oriental music passed into Christian music: the use of melismas on the final syllable of a phrase or phraselet or word, and the absence of long-held notes; the voice never remains still and, if it must dwell on the same pitch, lightens it with repercussions or trills or turn figures, etc.

The persistence in the liturgical chant of all Churches of Hebrew words is testimony to the original dependence of Christian liturgy on the liturgy of the Temple and the synagogues; yet it is not possible to say that the musical motifs on which the words Amen, Alleluia, Osanna are sung, nor even the melodies attached to the letters ‘aleph, bēth, gimel, etc. of the Lamentations, are of Hebrew source. On the other hand, attention must be paid to the rhythmic diversity that individualizes each music. For example, religious Hebrew music originally knew nothing of measured rhythm; the chant of the oldest Latin Christian hymns — the hymns of St Ambrose — are of metrical rhythm with 12 beats per line. Religious Hebrew music was of free rhythm, and the Gregorian melodies on changed texts are also of free rhythm; but the difference is great between the two, given that in the latter the primary beat is indivisible, in the former it is divisible.

III. EVOLUTIONS OF HEBREW MUSIC FROM THE MIDDLE AGES
UNTIL THE 20TH CENTURY. — The expansion of the repertoire of religious Hebrew music until the 7th century had been accomplished with the greatest respect for ancient formulas. The blossoming of a properly Western music — from the flourishing of tropes and sequences to the delineation of polyphony — brought the European Jewish tradition face to face with new currents, to which it long resisted. It is true that infiltrations of ecclesiastical and profane themes are recognizable in some cases; more certain is the fact that the tonal system is transformed, losing intervals smaller than a semitone and seeking to give a major character to motifs previously known in minor mode. Yet a large part of the traditional melodies was preserved through the work of the ḥazzān. This precentor of the Israelite community, who had originally been a janitor, rose to the function of reader and cantor, an assistant to the priest. In the course of time his liturgical function did not always suffice; sometimes he even gave secular concerts, much to the indignation of the rabbis. His vocal skill explains his prestige and influence, such that at times he could obtain from the community what was denied to the rabbi.

In 1500 a new era seems to open for Hebrew music with the rise of new tendencies among Jewish musicians in Italy; they especially cultivated madrigalistic music. The most famous, Salomone Rossi (d. 1628), wrote not only symphonies and galliards but also Psalms and prayers in multiple voices. A new edition was made by S. Naumbourg and by V. d'Indy (Paris 1877). The novelty precisely lies in the introduction of polyphony into Jewish worship. Leone da Modena triumphed over the opposition of traditionalist rabbis; choirs were founded in Ferrara, Venice, Mantua, Padua, and Casale Monferrato. But all too soon the Austrian invasion, with the capture of Mantua in 1630, cut short this first attempt to adapt Jewish musical culture to the evolution of art. In 1724–27 Benedetto Marcello went to the great synagogue of Venice to hear the ancient melodies revived anew. In reality, among the themes (ca. 12) that Marcello took from Hebrew chant for his 50 psalms, only one can be called truly traditional, and only in German synagogues (Sōphēt kol hā-āreš, p. 167).

To explain the resumption of modernization in Hebrew

In the last century, one must recall the great ferment of ideas in Europe in the second half of the 18th century. Many Israelites were influenced by the ideal of emancipation propagated under the names of liberty and equality. For them, everything that distinguished Jews from their Italian, German, French, and other fellow citizens had to be abandoned. In the temple built by Jacobson in Seesen in Westphalia (1810), hymns modeled on Protestant chorales replaced the old Jewish chants; the Bible was read without vocal inflections; music inspired by the classics of the 18th century was entrusted to a choir; the organ also played its part. In 1817, an ultra-reformed temple was erected in Hamburg; in 1842, another in Berlin. Collections of songs were published by Goldberg and Freudenthal in 1843, by Rosenstein in 1849, and the Hamburg Hymnal in 1845. It is curious to note, however, that the composers called for this reform were mostly Christians.

A reform was also carried out in the Orthodox synagogue, but through the work of Jewish musicians. The first in chronological order, and the one that would have a decisive influence, was Salomon Sulzer (1804–90). He became cantor of the Vienna community in 1825. He founded an excellent choir; composed hymns and polyphonic works; followed the example of Israel Lovy, who in Paris in 1822 had abandoned the three-part choir (boys' voices, bass, and hazzan, i.e., tenor) and introduced four parts. While classical harmony and style are the foundation of Sulzer’s compositions, he nonetheless grasped the general character of traditional musical language; he returned to the brevity of ancient phrases; clothed the melody in dignity and seriousness, which had been lacking in many religious compositions of the 18th century. Sulzer’s great popularity among Jewish circles of the time is explained by the power and flexibility of his tenor voice, but also by his resolute stance against the encroachment of the German manner, and it is here that the great difference lies with the other reform movement led by the Hamburg temple. Alongside and after Sulzer, several names shone in Germany and France: Maier Kohn, Samuel Naunbourg, Hirsh Weintraub, Israel Japhet. The most illustrious was Louis Lewandowski, born in German Poland in 1823 and died in Berlin in 1894.

These leaders understood the importance of the assembly’s participation in liturgical singing; he was able to develop themes of ancient flavor in an original way, even admitting elements of German or Slavic folklore; the collection he issued after many years of waiting had the great merit of offering a complete repertory for all the gatherings of the year. On the 26th of Nisan in 1871, it supplanted in many places the *Strijin* of Sulzer, published in 1840–65. The freshness of style, which often recalls the German *Lied*, the reminiscences of the chants performed in eastern Germany by *hazzanim*, the vocal lines accessible without extraordinary technical preparation, and the skill with which the organ accompaniment (not obligatory) is treated, ensured Lewandovski’s sacred musical work lasting success. In his ideas, however, there was already a tendency that sooner or later would push moderate reform along the same path as musical reform, which in turn would relax its intransigence to the point of reintroducing readings in the traditional manner. He not only rejected the notion that the religious music of the dispersed people of Israel had to be one of weeping and sorrow, but he was also influenced by Sulzer, whom he had studied closely and had performed after his early years at the Berlin Academy of Music, where he won a composition prize at the age of sixteen. Now in Sulzer the forms of Catholic religious chant are lowered to the point of being recognizable by a good Israelite, even if a Christian cannot confess them. Lewandovski himself, in the preface to the *26 di primavera*, expressed the opinion that the choral parts of the chant could be created by non-Jews with non-Jewish melodic material: it was the starting point of Jacobson and the Hamburg Temple.

J. Collections of chants: A. Baer, Ba'al tefillah, Gothburg 1877; J. and M. Cremieux, Zeinroth Jisra'el, Chants hebraïques, Marseilles 1885; F. Consolo, Sepher Sire Jisra'el. Libro dei canti d'Israele, Florence 1891; M. Gaster, Su'ar haf-shamajin (Spanish and Portuguese Jewish songs), London 1904; A. Z. Idelsohn, Thesaurus of Hebrew-oriented melodies, 6 vols., Leipzig 1914 (it is worth noting that in 1918 a Catholic priest and scientist, Boschenstein, a sincere friend of the Jews, was among the first to attempt to collect traditional modes). The introductions to the collections of chants are a valuable contribution to the historical and scientific understanding of Jewish music.

2. Literature. It was not until the mid-19th century that serious studies on Jewish music began to appear; there were no Jewish theorists during the biblical period or afterward. Important material can be found in the Responsa of rabbis from the 8th century onward concerning questions of chant. The first music historian to attempt a coherent outline of the evolution of Jewish music was Forkel (d. 1801).

a) Journals: Liturgische Zeitung; Der Jüdische Cantor (Bromberg); Die Österreichische ungarische Cantore Zeitung; Die Wahrheit (Vienna); Das haunburger Familienblatt, etc.

b) Authors: F. David, La musique chez les Juifs, essai de critique et d'histoire, Paris 1873; F. Cohn, The rise and development of Jewish music, London 1888; E. Birnbaum, Jüdische Mütter am Hofe von Mautha von 1512 bis 1628, Vienna 1893; E. Breslauer, Studi originale Synagogen- und Volkslieduoi bei den Juden geschichtlich nachweisbar?, Leipzig 1898; A. Friedman, Lebesbinder berühmter Cantoren, 3 vols., Berlin 1918-27. Among Catholic authors: O. Fleischer, Neumenstudien, Berlin 1897, chaps. 1-2; D. Parisot, Rapport sur une mission scientifique en Yucatan, Paris 1899; A. Gastoué, Les origines des séminaires juifs, Paris 1907, chaps. 1; P. Wagner, Einführung in die gregorianischen Melodien, I, Leipzig 1910, chaps. 1; III, 1912, pp. 240, 367; H. Berl, Das Judentum in der Musik, Berlin and Leipzig 1926.

Pietro Thomas

II. SACRED AND RELIGIOUS MUSIC

I. Historical notes

The Jewish custom of accompanying chant with the exercise of worship was almost entirely adopted by the first Christians. Indeed, from the very rise of Christianity, there are references to chant in the Acts of the Apostles, in the Epistles of St. Paul, and in the early ecclesiastical writers.

But it was in the patristic era that music became firmly established as an integral part of Catholic worship.

On the one hand, the Fathers of the Church, the Popes, and the Councils took a stand against pagan music, while on the other they insistently offered advice, instructions, and even didactic treatises on the use of sacred song not only in the exercise of public worship but also in private devotion. The richest and most ancient musical heritage of Christian civilization is contained in Gregorian chant, so called after Pope St Gregory the Great (590–604). Gregorian chant is therefore the corpus of vocal music that flourished within the Church from its origins down to the Humanist period, when polyphony arose.

This chant, while forming the bridge between ancient and modern music, is the true source of all European music, both sacred and secular; and it is to the merit of the Catholic Church that it received, preserved, and wrought into artistic synthesis the scattered elements of ancient music.

Although Gregorian chant is essentially monodic, as early as the 8th and 9th centuries some melodies began to be embellished with a second part.

Thus a second note, sustained at the fifth above, was superimposed on the Gregorian line, or it was accompanied by parallel fourths and octaves; this procedure was called organum (q.v.) because it resembled the instrumental accompaniment of antiquity. A less elementary procedure was discant (q.v.), in which the principal Gregorian chant is accompanied by a second, more animated melody. The first form to arise from this combination was the motet (q.v.), and an allied form was the conductus (q.v.), in which all the voices are freely invented. Other procedures used by the English were the “gamel” (twin song), which consisted in accompanying the principal chant with an interval of a third, and the drone or continuous low note over which two melodic parts were performed. But with counterpoint the most daring procedures for combining voices were achieved. The basis of counterpoint (punctum contra punctum) is imitation, that is, the reproduction of a melodic design made by a
MUSIC — Angels Teaching Music to the Christ Child. Art book executed for a member of the Berthier family of Troyes (15th century) — Paris, Bibliothèque nationale, ms. lat. 924, f. 241.

It involves a voice added at a greater or lesser distance in pitch. To a second voice a third is added, and a fourth up to 18 real and 36 nominal voices.

Celebrated masters of counterpoint were Giovanni Ockhegem, from whose school emerged Josquin des Prés, Heinrich Isaac, Arcadelt, Giovanni Tinctoris, Philippe de Mons, Adrian Willaert. But the greatest of all the masters of the Flemish school is Orlando di Lasso (q.v.). A place of fundamental importance in the history of polyphony was held by the Sistine Chapel (q.v.), whose singers and masters, who formed the Roman school, attained perfection in the art of polyphonic music.

The prince of the Roman school was Giovanni Pierluigi da Palestrina (q.v.). His predecessors were Costanzo Festa and Giovanni Animuccia; his contemporaries included the two Nanini, Giovanni Maria and Giovanni Bernardino, followed by Felice and Giovanni Francesco Anerio, Ruggero Giovannelli, Francesco Suriano, Luca Marenzio, Giorgio Allegri, Francesco Foggia; the Spaniards Cristóbal de Morales and Luis de Victoria of Ávila. In the Venetian school the names of Giuseppe Zarlino and the two Gabrielis, Andrea and Giovanni, shine forth. Polyphony developed not only in the vocal genre but also in the instrumental; especially in the instrument proper to the Church, which is the organ (q.v.).

Just as from the trunk of Gregorian chant there sprang polyphony and popular religious song, so from these both the Protestant Reformation with its chorale in the vernacular and the Catholic Reformation with its spiritual lauds drew excellent advantage.

From further progress and new orientations there arose opera or “dramma per musica” of both secular and sacred character. The first sacred melodrama was the Rappresentatione di Anima e di Corpo by Emilio de’ Cavalieri. Beside opera there appeared the oratorio, which preserves an essentially polyphonic form, to which monodic sections are appended. These new developments in extra-liturgical sacred music exercised a harmful influence on liturgical music, which gradually lost the hieratic spirituality of Gregorian chant and the severe monumentality of classical polyphony. Externally too signs of this degeneration are to be seen: the choir, which formerly had a truly and purely liturgical function and was therefore composed of clerics and situated in the sanctuary, is formed of secular singers and even of women, and supported not only by the organ but by other instruments. In liturgical functions Latin, the official language of the Church, is joined, increasingly, by the vernacular.

The cause of this decline is perhaps to be sought in the fact that the clear distinction between sacred music (liturgical and extra-liturgical) and religious music was not maintained. It is not, moreover, infrequent even today that these terms are used interchangeably. In reality, sacred (Catholic) music is the musical interpretation of the rites, forms, and prayers of Catholic worship; and although it is only vocal, instrumental organ music is also admitted. And since there are sacred liturgical and extra-liturgical functions in worship, so too sacred music will be liturgical or extra-liturgical according to whether it musically interprets the one or the other, following the established norms. Whoever violates these norms writes anti-liturgical sacred music, even if he intends to musically interpret the rites, formulas, and prayers of Catholic worship.

The genres of sacred music are Gregorian chant and popular chant, the classical polyphony of modern music. The forms of liturgical music are principally the Mass in its fixed and variable parts and psalmody in its various elements (psalm, antiphon, hymn, verse). The forms of extra-liturgical music are choral compositions of various kinds that interpret texts in Latin or the vernacular relating to the different extra-liturgical sacred functions. The instrumental part of the liturgical and extra-liturgical music, besides accompanying vocal music, is developed in pieces of various forms and denominations intended to connect the different moments of the liturgical or extra-liturgical action.

Religious music, on the other hand, is the free vocal and instrumental interpretation of individual or collective religious sentiment: such are oratorios, cantatas, sacred symphonies, Passions, etc. In this respect, anti-liturgical music may also be qualified as religious even if, while not conforming to the spirit and requirements of Catholic worship, it musically expresses truly religious sentiments. Thus, the monumental Mass in B minor by J. S. Bach is undoubtedly a profoundly religious work, while it cannot be called liturgical music inasmuch as, among other things, its vast proportions far exceed the liturgical function it intends to interpret. Similarly, the dramatic spirit of the Missa solemnis by L. van Beethoven and the Requiem Mass by G. Verdi places these works among religious music, but not among liturgical music.

II. THE CHURCH AND SACRED MUSIC

It should not be surprising that ecclesiastical authority exercises normative power over sacred music, since it is an integral part of Catholic worship, the regulation of which is obviously the exclusive competence of the Holy See. It must, however, be clarified that ecclesiastical authority does not impose aesthetic canons upon sacred composers; rather, while leaving them free to choose technical and artistic means, it indicates to them what must be the animating spirit and functional characteristics of their works, to which they must conform for the dignified celebration of Catholic worship. General and particular prescriptions on sacred music are found from the very beginnings of the Church’s life. Passing over, for the sake of brevity, the countless provisions of synods and councils, we shall limit ourselves to recalling the most important papal documents on the subject. Scant are the references to the prescriptions of the early popes on sacred music; notable, however, after the great reform of St. Gregory the Great, is the severe letter of Leo IV, who ordered, under pain of excommunication, Honorius, perhaps abbot of Farfa, to adhere to the Gregorian tradition of sacred chant. But a fundamental document on the subject is the apostolic constitution *Docta Sanctorum Patrum* of John XXII, issued in 1324–25 against certain abuses that had infiltrated sacred music through the indiscriminate use of the new procedures of musical technique of the time. In this constitution the Pope sets forth the two principles upon which all sacred musical legislation rests. First, he demands that the music performed in worship not only not be in contrast with the spirit of the liturgy but support and enhance II. Second, he admits into sacred music the innovations that time brings to musical language, provided they do not depart entirely from ecclesiastical tradition. These principles are fully realized in classical polyphony, and therefore the Council of Trent on 17 September 1562 (Session XXII, *De Reform.*) neither prohibited nor censured this form of sacred music but merely prescribed that those musical pieces, whether for organ or for singing, which contained lascivious or impure elements be banished from churches. Also important is the apostolic constitution *Piae sollicitudinis studio*, issued for Rome on 23 April 1657 by Alexander VII, who prescribed, under pain of excommunication and fines, that the liturgical text set to sacred music be none other than that prescribed and approved by the Sacred Congregation of Rites. The Alexandrine constitution was later supplemented by two further ordinances of the Vicar of Rome, dated 30 July 1665 and 20 August 1692.

In occasion of the Jubilee of 1750 Benedict XIV issued on 19 Feb. 1749 the encyclical Annus qui, in which, recalling with great erudition for Rome the preceding pontifical prescriptions, he added particular norms on the use of instruments in church. The Benedictine encyclical was also supplemented by the edicts of the Vicar of Rome of 4 March 1749 and of 1756. Vigorous was the reforming action on sacred music in Rome during the 19th century. On 20 Dec. 1824 Cardinal Vicar Placido Zurla published an edict “On divine worship and on respect for the Church” with particular norms for sacred music, later reconfirmed by Cardinal Odescalchi with his notification of 31 Jan. 1835.

Under Gregory XVI Gaspare Spontini prepared a vast project for the reform of sacred music which was then utilized by Cardinal Vicar Costantino Patrizi in his edicts of 16 Aug. 1842 and of 18 Nov. 1856. But also outside Rome, in Italy and in other Catholic nations, a broad movement for the reform of sacred music took shape through conciliar and synodal prescriptions of great theoretical and practical importance. Thus on the occasion of the Vatican Council Cardinal Rario Sforza, archbishop of Naples, together with the suffragan bishops, proposed severe penalties against ecclesiastics who neglected to learn Gregorian chant. Likewise the German bishops, gathered in Rome for the same Council, requested the establishment for Germany of a Pia Association, similar to the Roman Congregation of St Cecilia, for the implementation of the reform of sacred music. This Pius IX granted with the apostolic constitution Multum ad movendos animos of 16 Dec. 1870.

These Cecilia Associations, which immediately spread also to other nations, played a most important part in the legislation on sacred music, inasmuch as they brought to light existing abuses, pointing out also the appropriate remedies, and prepared the ground for an organic reform. It was in fact in response to the wishes expressed at the Italian Catholic Congress held in Naples in 1883 that the Sacred Congregation of Rites issued on 25 Sept. 1884 a complete Ordinatio quoad sacram musicam followed by another, less fortunate, on 7 July 1894. With blessed Pius X the legislation on sacred music – even before the Code of Canon Law – found its wise and prompt codifier; in the same year of his election he issued the motu proprio Inter pastoralis officii sollicitudines which he himself defines as the juridical Code of sacred music. The CIC (can. 1262), after recalling the general principle established by the Council of Trent, refers to the particular liturgical laws on sacred music. Pius XI then, following the celebrations in honour of Guido d’Arezzo held in Rome and the twenty-fifth anniversary of the promulgation of Pius X’s motu proprio, almost in response to the wishes received, on 20 Dec. 1928, with the apostolic constitution Divinitus cultus sanctitatem, gave precise practical norms relating to the implementation of the pontifical prescriptions on mu

Sacred music. Finally, Pius XII, in the encyclical *Mediator Dei* of 20 November 1947, while recalling and reaffirming the previous prescriptions on sacred music issued by Pius X and Pius XI, laid down wise principles concerning popular religious song and contemporary sacred music.

III. ECCLESIASTICAL LEGISLATION

1) It belongs solely to the Holy See to regulate liturgy and sacred music (can. 1257; CA, beginning, D. 1134: for abbreviation V. BIBLICA.). 2) Liturgical laws on sacred music bind all, and the norms established for liturgical music must in themselves be observed also for extra-liturgical music, unless the prescriptions in question, by their very content, refer only to liturgical music (RR no. 30).

3) Against transgressors of these laws, local Ordinaries may impose canonical penalties in accordance with can. 2378; 2222; 2201 no. 10, 12° of the CIC.

4) Sacred music, as an integral part of solemn liturgy, must possess to the highest degree the qualities proper to sacred liturgy, namely holiness and goodness of form, excluding all profanity not only in itself but also in the manner of its performance. It must be true art, for otherwise it cannot have that efficacy upon the souls of the hearers which the Church intends to achieve. Yet it must be universal in this sense: that while admitting in compositions those particular forms which constitute in a certain way the specific character of the music of each nation, these must be so subordinated to the general characteristics of sacred music that no one of another nation, on hearing them, should experience an unfavorable impression (MP no. 2).

5) Since these qualities are found to the highest degree in Gregorian chant, the more a composition for the church is sacred and liturgical, the more its inspiration and structure approach Gregorian melody; and the less worthy of the temple it is, the more it departs from II.
6) The ancient traditional Gregorian chant must therefore be widely restored in the functions of worship and in the use of the people, so that the faithful may take a more active part in ecclesiastical offices (MP no. 3).

7) The Gregorian chant, which is to be performed in every church, is that restored in fidelity to the ancient codices and proposed by the Church in the typical Vatican edition (CA IV).

8) The printing of Gregorian chant in modern notation is permitted, provided that care is taken to eliminate any danger of the order of notes and neumes being in any way altered (D. 4166 ad VII).

9) Enriched editions with rhythmic signs are permitted, provided that the original text is not thereby altered (D. 4178-4529).

10) The classical polyphony proper to the most solemn functions of the Church, such as those of the Sistine Chapel (MP no. 4), must also be used in solemn functions celebrated by a cardinal.

11) Modern music is also admitted in church when it offers compositions of such excellence, seriousness, and gravity that they are in no way unworthy of liturgical functions, but rather contribute to the splendor of the sacred rites, to the elevation of souls, and at the same time to true devotion (MP no. 5; LE no. 188).

Therefore, they must contain nothing profane, nor anything reminiscent of theatrical motifs, nor should their external forms be shaped according to the style of secular pieces.

They must not be unsuitable for the holiness of the place, nor derive from a vain search for extraordinary and unusual effects (MP no. 5; LE no. 188).

12) Modern works of sacred music intended for worship must be approved by the diocesan Commission for Sacred Music; unless they have already been approved by the Saint Cecilia or Saint Gregory Association (RR. 19). Neither authors nor publishers may claim any fee for the performance of sacred music works during liturgical functions (Instruction of the Sacred Congregation of the Council, 25 Feb. 1932: AAS, 24 [1932], p. 72 ff., can. 1160).

13) The proper language of the Roman Church is Latin; therefore, in liturgical functions, any vernacular singing is forbidden (MP no. 7). Likewise, in solemn processions with the Most Holy Sacrament, vernacular songs alternated with liturgical hymns are not permitted (D. no. 3975 ad V). Any contrary custom, if introduced in some places, must be eliminated (D. 3827 ad I; 3113 ad I; 3230; 3994 ad I; Ordin. SRC a. 1884 art. 3; Ordin. SRC a. 1894 art. 7).

14) It is permitted to sing in the vernacular approved texts: 1° in Low Masses, provided that they are not properly liturgical texts, which must not be sung except in Latin (D. no. 4235 ad VII-VIII; 3880). 2° Before the Most Holy Sacrament exposed, provided that they are not the Te Deum or other liturgical prayers, which must not be sung except in Latin (D. 3537 ad III, 4237 ad VII; 4268 ad X). 3° After the Eucharistic blessing (D. 2698; 2791 ad II).

15) Since for every liturgical function certain texts are determined in music and the order in which they must be presented, it is not lawful either to confuse this order, or to change the prescribed texts for others of one’s own choice, or to omit them entirely or even partially, except as provided in article 38 (MP no. 8; D. 3624 ad IX).

16) The liturgical text must be sung as it stands in the books, without alteration or postponement of words, without undue repetitions, without breaking up the syllables, and always in a manner intelligible to the faithful who listen (MP no. 9).

17) The custom by which canons and mansionarii assigned to the choir, in conventual Masses and even in pontifical functions, neither sing nor recite in a low voice the parts of the Mass, but leave everything to be done by the organist, is an abuse to be eliminated (D. 3786).

18) In the singing of the Passion, the text of the Gospel cannot be sung by the organist, even if he is a minor cleric or subdeacon (D. 3110 ad X).

19) The priest celebrating a conventual Mass, in which the choir is required to sing the Creed, cannot continue the celebration during the time in which the Creed is being sung by the choir (D. 1936, 4242).

20) After the singing of the Offertory, it is permitted to occupy the remaining time until the Preface with the performance of some motet on words approved by the Church (MP no. 8).

21) During the Elevation of the Host and the Chalice, as well as during the blessing with the Most Holy Sacrament, the singers must remain silent and stand in adoration (D. 3827; 2464; 27-22 ad III; 3058 ad II, 3530 ad II).

22) The Benedictus must be sung after the Elevation; it is then permitted to perform a Eucharistic motet up to the Pater noster.

23) The psalms must be sung by the choir and by the canons, beneficiaries, and other members of the Chapter themselves in the Gregorian tone and chant with gravity and decorum, in such a way that their words are intelligible to all (Caerem. Episc., Lib. I, c. I, no. 8; 521).

24) In particular, in the singing of the psalms, care must be taken both for the precision of the tones with their proper middle and final cadences, and finally for the full harmony of the declamation of the psalm verses and the strophes of the hymns (C. A. III).

25) The antiphons at Vespers must be pre-intoned either to the bishop or to the canon by the more dignified canon after the dignity or by the master of the school or by the one to whom it pertains according to custom (2216 ad III). If singers cannot be had, the Lamentations and the Lessons from the 2nd and 3rd Nocturns must be sung by the canons, beginning with the youngest (379).

26) Where custom exists and the number of choristers is insufficient, it is lawful that some verses, while being simply recited in choir, may be supplemented by the organ.

27) Sacred music must preserve its choral character at least in the greatest part (MP 12); however, solo voice is not entirely excluded, provided it never predominates but has the character of a simple melodic suggestion and is closely tied to the rest of the choral composition (MP 12). Since singing must always take precedence, the organ and instruments must merely support it and never overwhelm it (MP 16). It is not permitted to precede the singing with long preludes or to interrupt it with intermezzo pieces (MP 17).

28) The individual parts of the Mass and the Divine Office must also musically preserve that concept and form which ecclesiastical tradition has given them and which is very well expressed in Gregorian chant. The manner of composing an Introit, a Gradual, an antiphon, a psalm, a hymn, the Gloria in excelsis, etc., is therefore different (MP 10).

29) In particular, the following norms must be observed: 1° The Kyrie, Gloria, Credo, etc., of the Mass must each maintain the unity of composition proper to the text. It is therefore not permissible to compose separate pieces so that each of these pieces forms a complete musical composition and, as such, detaches itself from the rest and replaces them with another (MP 11, lett. a). 2° The Gloria and the Credo, moreover, according to Gregorian tradition, must be relatively brief (MP 22). 3° In the office of Vespers, Gregorian chant must ordinarily be used for the psalmody (MP 11, b). The so-called "concerto psalms" are always excluded (MP 11, b). In the hymns of the Church, the traditional form must be preserved. The antiphons of Vespers must ordinarily be proposed with their own Gregorian melody (MP 11, d). If, however, in some particular case they are sung to music, they must never take the form of a concert melody nor the breadth of a motet or cantata (MP 11, d).

30) In every choir, whether of canons or religious, a competent person must be chosen as cantor or choir director, who, while overseeing the observance of liturgical rules and choral singing, corrects in practice the defects of individuals and of the entire choir (CA IV).

31) The true and genuine ecclesiastical tradition of sacred music is that: 1° the entire assembly of the faithful joins in the singing of the liturgical functions, performing those parts of the text assigned to them; 2° a special Schola cantorum alternates with the people and proposes the other parts of the text richer in melody and more especially reserved to it (MP 3, 12, 27; RR 1).

32) Church singers, even if secular, properly take the place of the ecclesiastical choir and exercise a true liturgical office in the church (MP 12, 13).

33) The chapel of the church must be composed of men of known piety and probity of life, who, with their devout and modest demeanor during liturgical functions, show themselves worthy of the holy office they exercise (MP 14). It is forbidden to heretics, schismatics, and Jews to sing in Catholic churches (cf. Collect. S. Congr. de Prop. Fide, n. 1845, 1851). It is forbidden to choir directors, organists, and singers to belong to associations alien to the Catholic Church or to serve in heterodox churches or chapels, or to perform musical services in any way that may result in contempt for religion or morality, or even merely discredit the office of church singer (RR 66).

34) It is fitting that singers, while singing in church, wear the cassock and surplice (MP 14); if, however, due to a lack of clergy, they are employed in the choir, they may not use the pluvials (D. 38 ad IV).

35) It is desirable that the choir loft not be situated above the entrance door of the church, but rather on the side of the altar, where the Sacred Mysteries are celebrated (Ordin. SRC a. 1884, art. 40). If, moreover, the choristers are found in choir lofts too exposed to the public gaze, these should be protected by grilles (MP 14; cf. also no. 5283).

36) In processions, the choristers dressed in surplices must proceed after the Cross, before the canons or in a place pleasing to the bishop (Caerem. Episc., I, c. 2, no. 4; 931; 948).

37) When the high voices of sopranos or contraltos must be employed, these should be sustained by boys, according to the most ancient usage of the Church (MP 13). Schools for boy choristers are therefore established not only in cathedrals, but also in minor and parish churches, and they should be educated in singing by chapel masters (CA VI).

38) Women may not sing in sacred functions except insofar as they form part or represent the people (RR 12). Nevertheless, the diocesan Ordinary may permit girls and women, from their assigned places in church, to sing the parts of the Mass and Office, or, outside strictly liturgical functions, hymns and popular songs; provided that: they do not stand out from the rest of the people; except for the separation of men from women, where this praiseworthy custom is preserved. Where choral service is held, the singing of women alone is not permitted unless for a grave reason recognized by the Ordinary with due consideration to avoid any disorder (D. 4210 ad II).

39) Nuns, who are permitted, in accordance with their constitutions or liturgical laws or with the permission of the local Ordinary, to sing in their own church or public oratory, shall sing from a place where they cannot be seen by the people. However, it is forbidden for nuns and their pupils to sing alone, and they are exhorted to prefer Gregorian melodies in Masses and Vespers, executed as far as possible by the internal community (RR 12). Nevertheless, it is never permitted for nuns and their pupils, even if they form part of a pious sodality, to accompany solemn cardinalitial functions with singing (D. 4404). Nuns may not sing the part of the crowd in the Passion during solemn Masses celebrated in their churches (D. 2169).

40) In the sound of the organ, one must avoid that mixture of sacred and profane music which, on the one hand through the initiative of builders and on the other through the bold musical effects of some organs, threatens the purity of the music that the organ is destined to perform in the church (CA, VIII). Therefore, it is not permissible to add to the organ the so-called “tubular bells” and profane instruments (D. 4344), nor to use in divine worship the gramophone records (SRC 25 Sept. 1939). Plans for the restoration or purchase of new organs, whether from the technical or artistic standpoint, as well as for the placement and construction of choir lofts, must be submitted to the Diocesan Commission for Sacred Music (RR 332). Where it is not possible to have a pipe organ, the use of the harmonium is permitted. When women sing in church, it is permitted to place the harmonium among them to accompany their singing, played by one of them.

41) The electrophone organ and the so-called “auto-organ” may be introduced into the church only with the consent of the local Ordinary (SRC 15 July 1949; 27 Feb. 1948, n. 1917/48).

42) The task of the organ in sacred functions is to accompany the singing or to play when the voices are silent (MP 18; CA VIII), and its sound must not only be conducted according to the nature proper to this instrument, but must also partake of all the qualities proper to truly sacred music (MP 18).

43) The church organ may be played: 1° on all Sundays and feast days of the year; 2° at the entrance and exit of a bishop who is celebrating or merely attending Mass (ibid., n. 3); 3° at the entrance into the church of an Apostolic Legate, a Cardinal, or an Archbishop or Bishop, until they have prayed and the Mass has begun, and at their exit (ibid., n. 4); 4° at the beginning of Matins, which is solemnly celebrated on major feasts, and likewise at Vespers (ibid., n. 5); 5° to accompany Gregorian or polyphonic chant, except during the liturgical functions of Holy Week and the intonations of the celebrant (4267; 4287, MP n. 12 [4009]); 6° at a Low Mass, during those times when the priest does not recite the prayers aloud or read the Gospel.

44) The sound of the organ is forbidden in church during the time of Advent and Lent, except in the following cases: 1° the Third Sunday of Advent (“Gaudete”) and the Fourth Sunday of Lent (“Laetare”), both at Mass and at Vespers, but not at the other canonical hours (2245); 2° Holy Thursday at the *Gloria in excelsis*, for a short time after its intonation, and also, according to custom.

until the end; however, not for the entire duration of the Mass, despite any contrary custom (D. 3515 ad IV; 4067 ad VI; 35-37 ad VII); 3° during the exposition of the Blessed Sacrament in the afternoon of Holy Thursday or in the morning of Good Friday, during which it may be tolerated, where an ancient custom exists, that motets be sung with organ accompaniment (3804 ad II); 4° on Holy Saturday at the *Gloria in excelsis Deo* (Caerem Episc., lib. I, c. 28, n. 2); 5° on days when it is necessary to celebrate solemnly and joyfully for a grave reason or a public cause of the Church (Caerem Episc., ibid.; 235 ad XII; 3922); such as on the feasts of St. Matthew, St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Gregory the Great, St. Joseph, the Annunciation, and similar (Caerem Episc., I, c. 28, n. 2; 3448 ad IX); 6° on the occasion of the First Communion of children (3448); 7° during votive Masses of the Blessed Virgin Mary, which are celebrated solemnly on Saturday, and likewise during the litanies of the Blessed Virgin Mary, which are sung after Vespers (4244 ad IV); 8° in the month of March in devotion to St. Joseph (3448 ad XI); in the offices of the dead; while in sung Requiem Masses, only the singing may be accompanied (Caerem Episc., I, c. 28, n. 13; 4243); in the singing of the *Praefatio* and the *Pater noster*, as well as in other liturgical accents and recitatives of the celebrant and ministers; in the votive Mass of the Passion (with violet vestments) which in some places is customarily celebrated during the year on Fridays (3922, 4, n. 2); in the Tenebrae Matins; during the singing of the *Passio*, the Lamentations, the Responsories, the *Miserere*, and other liturgical parts; nor may the use of the harmonium and other stringed instruments or the harmonium alone be tolerated, despite any ancient custom (3804 ad II; 4044 ad I; 4156 ad II).

45) No instrument, however excellent and perfect, can surpass the human voice in expressing the sentiments of the soul, especially when this employs it to raise praises and prayers to God (CA VII). Therefore, music with instrumental accompaniment is not considered by the Church as a more perfect form of music or better suited to sacred functions (CS VII). Hence, more than instruments, it is the human voice itself that must resound in sacred places: namely, the voice of the clergy, the singers, and the people (CA VIII).

46) In addition to organ accompaniment (MP 15), in certain particular cases, within due limits and with fitting considerations, stringed instruments (violins, violas, cellos, and double basses) may also be admitted alongside the organ, but always with the permission of the Ordinary (MP 15; Caerem Episc., I, c. 28, n. 11).

47) The use of the piano in church is forbidden, as are noisy or light instruments. Only in special cases, with the consent of the Ordinary, may a limited and proportionate selection of wind instruments be admitted to church, provided that the composition and accompaniment performed are in a grave style, suitable, and in every way similar to that proper to the organ (MP 20).

48) Bands are strictly forbidden to play in church (MP 20), but outside the church in processions their use may be permitted by the Ordinary, provided they do not perform any secular pieces. It would be desirable that on such occasions the musical performance be restricted to accompanying some spiritual hymn in Latin or the vernacular, proposed by the singers or the pious congregations taking part in the procession (MP 21).

49) Since sacred music is part of the liturgy and its humble servant, it is to be condemned as a most serious abuse when, in ecclesiastical functions, the liturgy appears secondary and almost at the service of music (MP 23).

50) It is not permissible, for the sake of singing or music, to keep the priest waiting at the altar beyond what the liturgical ceremony requires. The Sanctus of the Mass, according to ecclesiastical prescriptions, must be completed before the Elevation, and therefore the celebrant must also have regard for the singers at this point (MP 22).