www.byzcath.org Forums Mysteries: The Life of Worship The Kliros HIgh or Low Liturgy?

In the 1965 grey pew book with music and later the 1976 green pew book with music both have references to "High Liturgy Only". The altar liturgikon does not refer to skipping these areas, though I have recordings of weekday liturgies where those "High Liturgy Only" items are skipped. I was under the impression that in the Byzantine Churches there was no "high" or "low" Divine Liturgy.

How then did this come to be in the gray and green books if there is no rubric for that practice specified in the liturgicon? It would seem to have entered the mainstream by it's publication, and use in the 1965 (Divine Liturgy with music) book? or is there earlier precedent for this practice?

Was this a local practice that became wide spread through the use of these books?

Steve

(Yes this is related to the cantor, which is why I posted it in the Kliros forum though if it should be moved, please PM first.)

Glory to Jesus Christ!

This is, indeed, a "cantor's" question, since the books in question pertained to cantor and congregation, not to the priest.

The simple answer is: These two publications (the "grey" book and the "green" book) were a ratification of the way that the Divine Liturgy was celebrated in many parishes of the Metropolia, published by the Liturgical Commission of those days, with eparchial approval. The comments about "high" liturgy et al. were NOT taken from the 1965 Liturgikon.

The terms "high" and "low" are in fact English Roman Catholic terms (which lost their significance after the liturgical reforms of the Second Vatican Council). It is true that, in the Galician eparchies, there were official rubrics about the "spoken Divine Liturgy." Those never applied to the Carpatho-Rusyn eparchies in Europe, and were not valid for the eparchies of the Byzantine/Ruthenian Catholic Church in the USA, either.

Prof. J. Michael Thompson
Byzantine Catholic Seminary
Pittsburgh, PA

The Low Mass rubrics found in the Ruthenian Altar Missals never applied south of the Carpathians, so far as I know. But the most incredible concoctions were on offer by way of various efforts at "Low Mass" which are seared into my memory.

Incognitus

I have heard many Byzantine Catholics refer to the early morning Liturgy, as "Low Mass". (Sung with a cantor), and the later Liturgy with a choir as "High Mass". I guess they grew up with Latin Rite Catholics who had now idea what the word "Liturgy" meant.

The weird thing is that other than the names High Liturgy, Low Liturgy and omitting the use of incense the distinctions have nothing to do with Latin practice. They simply seem to be abbreviations without rhyme or reason.

One should note that the Ordo Celebrationis does provide for a Simple as opposed to Solemn Liturgy but the only changes are omitting the use of incense and omitting the procession to and blessing of the apsidal throne.

Fr. Deacon Lance

I have seen several references to 17th/18th century Kievan praxis, where daily Liturgy after the Counter-Reformation mode was adopted - in which each priest would serve the Liturgy individually, each day - and that, since quite a few things were said quietly by the priest, they were omitted by the people; incense was hardly used, and so on. (Certainly the "altar missal" style, with everything the priest needed to celebrate ALL the liturgy in one book, was part of this trend, which the Ruthenian reforms of the 1940's fought against by loudly dispensing with such combined books.)

I think there's a discussion of it in the 3rd part of Uspensky's _Evening Worship in the Orthodox Church_, which addresses the adoption of Latin theology and practice in the East.

Well what do you know?

Here all the while I thought it was called High Mass simply because the choir sang high up in the choir loft.

Ya learn something new every day!

Dear Pavloosh - actually, you were getting warm. The original meaning of "High Mass" was that it was sung out loud, therefore in a "high" or raised voice!

Incognitus

I'm puzzled. So, was the "low" Mass/Liturgy a common practice among Ruthenians prior to, or after, 1942? Was it particular to US or to the Rusyns? While there are no rubrics it was nevertheless published and apparently used in that form in the Passaic Eparchy. With all this discussion of Liturgical changes, this strikes me as an unusual anomaly.

I'm just curious as to how this usage appeared in an officially approved booklet if there has been so much 'fidelity' toward the 1942 recension.

Steve,
Cantor who is still learning to limit the subjects he comments on.

Fascinating! Thanks!

Alice

Dear Alice,
You are most welcome. We aim to please!

Incognitus

Jeff, there is a certain amount of truth to that. In that time period a Typikon of a coenobitic monastery derived from the Studite, such as Sarov, Vysha, Sanaxar, Pecherska Lavra, etc. would often direct that an "early Liturgy" be celebrated in another smaller chapel and the primary communal Liturgy in the katholikon.

This "early Liturgy" was often due to the requests from benefactors for memorial Divine Liturgies, etc. and there were more priests present in the cenobium than in a smaller monastery.

This "early Liturgy" was celebrated immediately after Matins, when the few monks given the obedience to assist at that Divine Liturgy would leave the cenobium at the end of Matins with a blessing of the Hegumen.

The remainder of the monks would either still be chanting the First, Third and Sixth Hours as well as often a memorial Litia for the benefactors of the monastery before the beginning of Divine Liturgy, or would return to the kellia for a period of rest after First Hour before the beginning of Third and Sixth Hours and the Divine Liturgy.

This "early Liturgy" was never referred to as "low" but certainly the solemnity and chant were more subdued as only a handful of monks would be present to assist. Simplified melodies arose from these celebrations that one can find here and there still in existence.
FDD

I have a vague recollection of the distinction between "High" and "Low" Masses in my home parish during the 50s. I have always assumed that this was an application of Roman Catholic terminology to a distinction in practice that was an idiosyncratic pastoral adaptation by local pastors.

I have heard that when parishes still had Matins on Sunday Morning, it would sometimes be referred to as the "Low Mass" with the Eucharistic Liturgy referred to as "High Mass." I am never sure how reliable such reports and remembrances are, but it seems credible to me.

Jumping into this discussion late...

When I was younger we had a "low mass" that was the english DL 9:00 AM...Incense was not used...tropars, kondaks, and prokeminon were unheard of...the priest would not go behind the altar for blessing the bishops throne...that was the extent of the "low mass" it would cut out 5 or 10 minutes...

The Hungarian Liturgy at 11:00 AM was the "high mass"...all of the above were added back...those who had been around would not tolerate "cutting things from the DL"...

I hope my memory is correct...it was that way until I was probably about 10 years old...and RC terminology was utilized ("high mass" and "low mass")to help people understand why things were different...I also remember my father and his parents speaking about how a candle or 2 were lit on the altar for the "low mass" not the candleabres...but that is before my memory...

Chris

Low Mass can refer to many variations of the less than full Divine Liturgy. In some parishes it may refer to the fact that the Liturgy is recited rather than chanted, more often encountered in Ukrainian Churches but it happens elsewhere as well. The Ordo Celebrationis allows for Liturgy with Simple Rites that allows for dispensing with the incense and the procession to and blessing of the apsidal throne. Those are the only official abbreviations allowed. The Grey/Green Book of the Metropolia has insturctions for many more abbreviations labelling several parts: "High Mass Only" Basically cut out are: all Litanies except the first and the troparia, prokimen and epistle and couple other odd parts here and there. I would be surprised to see anyone using this form anymore but it is certainly possible as the books are still out there.

Fr. Deacon Lance