THE MODERN MASS
The adaptation of liturgical forms to extra-liturgical
purposes; Mass; Requiem Mass--Stabat Mater; Magnificat; Te
Deum--Musical masses and the Roman service--Bach: ‘B minor
Mass’--Bach’s ‘Magnificat in D’; Pergolesi’s _Stabat Mater_;
Handel’s Te Deums; Graun’s ‘Prague Te Deum’; Haydn’s church
music--Mozart: the _Requiem_ and other masses--Cherubini:
_Requiem_ and other masses; Schubert’s masses--Beethoven:
_Missa Solemnis_; Weber’s masses--Berlioz: _Requiem_; _Te
Deum_; Rossini’s _Stabat Mater_; Liszt: ‘Graner Mass’ and
‘Hungarian Coronation Mass’--Gounod: ‘St. Cecilia Mass’ and
other masses; Dvořák: _Requiem_ and _Stabat Mater_; Verdi:
‘The Manzoni Requiem’--The masses of Rheinberger, Henschel
and others.
As polyphonic music developed with the expanding possibilities of the
contrapuntal art and the increasing splendor of the Roman liturgical
service, the old church composers seized upon certain portions of
the liturgy as being especially adapted for musical exploitation
and elaboration. The masters of the fifteenth and sixteenth century
ecclesiastical vocal counterpoint made the musical settings of these
parts of the holy office the object of their deepest consideration
and lavished on them their utmost artistic skill and profundity. The
parts of the holy office thus selected were those that were constant,
invariable from day to day; they were six in number and in the
following order: _Kyrie_ (in three parts, _Kyrie eleison!_ _Christe
eleison!_ _Kyrie eleison!_), _Gloria_ (Doxology), _Credo_, _Sanctus_,
_Benedictus_ and _Agnus Dei_. Since these were the principal musical
portions of the eucharistic office sung by the choir, they came to be
spoken of together as one composition, as Palestrina’s ‘Mass of Pope
Marcellus,’ Gounod’s ‘St. Cecilia Mass,’ and so on. In all musical
masses, ancient or modern, the same number and order of movements is
preserved, since the holy office itself is universal and unchangeable.
With the development of instrumental music in the seventeenth and
eighteenth centuries, opportunities were offered for combining various
instruments with the voices, and the mass with orchestral accompaniment
arose. When sacred music finally broke loose from ecclesiastical
control and came to be considered independent of the Church, composers
took advantage of the great poetic suggestiveness of the missal text
for constructing elaborate choral works with the combined resources of
instruments and voices. While many of the modern masses here considered
were written as liturgical music for actual church performance,
many must be considered apart from any ecclesiastical use, as pure
concert-music. The most prominent of these are probably Bach’s great ‘B
minor Mass’ and Beethoven’s ‘Mass in D.’
Among the liturgical forms that have been most employed for
extra-liturgical purposes as concert-music are the mass (_Missa
Solemnis_, consisting of the six numbers given above), the _Requiem_
(_Missa pro Defunctis_), _Stabat Mater_, _Te Deum_ and _Magnificat_.
These great religious poems of the Middle Ages and earlier, which were
either adopted into or were associated with the liturgy of the Roman
Church, have never ceased to stir the imagination of composers, some
of whom have been of the Protestant faith. The Protestant Church did
not adopt the Mass into its liturgy, though the early Lutheran Church
borrowed a modified form from the Roman Church and the Anglican Church
still retains many of the same musical texts (such as the Gloria, Te
Deum, Benedictus, and others) that were used in various parts of the
Roman service. The _Kyrie_ and _Gloria_ were formerly frequently used
together in the Lutheran service as the so-called short mass (_Missa
brevis_).
The Requiem Mass (_Missa pro Defunctis_) takes its name from the
beginning of the Introit, _Requiem æternam dona eis, Domine_, and
consists of the holy office celebrated in memory of the departed.
It may take place any day before burial, especially the third, or
on the seventh or the thirtieth day after death, or on the first or
any subsequent anniversary of the death. It is also celebrated on
All Souls’ Day, November 2, in memory of all the faithful departed.
As a form of musical composition, the Requiem consists of nine
parts: (1) The Introit--_Requiem æternam_; (2) _Kyrie_; (3) the
Gradual and Tract--_Requiem æternam_ and _Absolve, Domine_; (4) The
Sequence or Prose--_Dies iræ_; (5) The Offertorium--_Domine Jesu
Christi_; (6) _Sanctus_; (7) _Benedictus_; (8) _Agnus Dei_; and
(9) the Communio--_Lux æterna_. In addition to these the following
are sometimes added: (10) Responsorium--_Libera me_; and (11) the
Lectio--_Tædet animam meam_.
I
The _Stabat Mater_ is a beautiful mediæval poem, whose authorship is
generally ascribed to a Franciscan monk, Jacobus de Benedictis, though
some believe it to have been written by Pope Innocent III and still
others by St. Bonaventure. It was not a part of the liturgy and was
not at first used with music. It did not come into any large use as a
devotional poem until about the thirteenth century and gradually found
its way into the liturgy as a ‘sequence,’ though it did not even appear
in the Roman Missal until 1727, and was not sanctioned as a hymn until
some time after that. It is one of the finest and most popular of the
old Latin poems and has lent itself so well to musical setting that
many composers from Des Prés to Rossini have been inspired to set it.
It depicts the sorrowing mother, Mary, as she stood at the foot of the
cross and the desire of humanity to share with her this sorrow. The
initial words of the poem are
_Stabat mater dolorosa
Juxta crucem lacrymosa_,
a free translation of which is--‘The weeping, mournful mother stood
close to the cross.’
The _Magnificat_ is the Song of the Blessed Mary, _Magnificat anima
mea Dominum_ (‘My soul doth magnify the Lord’), and appears as the
central point of musical interest in the Vesper service. During the
period of the exclusively vocal service, it was sung antiphonally,
sometimes as a plain-song melody, with choral response in several
voices. In the second half of the sixteenth century, however, this was
discontinued and only the first versicle was intoned by one voice,
and the other eleven were sung by the choir. This was finally changed
into the antiphonal singing of two choirs. With the development of the
organ, this instrument began to take a place in alternating with the
voices, giving a different antiphonal effect. Thus from the sixteenth
to the eighteenth century we find many so-called ‘Organ Magnificats.’
Later a deterioration began by combining the plain-song with secular or
irrelevant matter, and this custom gradually led to the substitution of
a good secular melody as a _cantus_, in place of the plain-song chant.
In this style Orlandus Lassus produced some of the most charming _a
cappella_ compositions extant. In the Anglican Church, the Magnificat
also assumed free and elaborate proportions and it consists of combined
solo and chorus passages with organ and, sometimes, orchestral
accompaniment. Bach, Mendelssohn and other modern composers have
treated the Magnificat in elaborate oratorio style with orchestral
accompaniment and complex voice-writing.
The _Te Deum Laudamus_ (‘We praise Thee, O God’) seems to owe its
origin to Nicetas, Bishop of Remesiana in Dacia (about A. D. 400), and
it was at once used as an important part of the Nocturns or Matins.
Music was used with it from the beginning, in fact the words were used
with chants already existent. It is in three parts or sections. The
praise of the Trinity occupies all of the first section; ‘Thou art the
King of Glory’ begins the second section, which ends with two verses
of prayer, ‘We therefore pray Thee’ and ‘Make them to be numbered.’
The third section begins with ‘O Lord, save Thy people and bless Thine
heritage.’ It was at first sung to a free chant but was later developed
into complex settings for solos, chorus and elaborate accompaniment.
While it is a part of the service of both the Roman and the Anglican
Churches, the finest examples of this great canticle seem to come from
England, that by Purcell, written for St. Cecilia’s Day, 1694, and
published in 1697, being one of the earliest large ones, and indeed one
of the greatest Te Deums. This was doubtless the model for Handel’s
‘Utrecht Te Deum,’ written in 1712, which is even a nobler work than
that by Purcell. These, together with the ones of Macfarren and
Sullivan, that of Dvořák in 1896, Stanford’s, performed at the Leeds
Festival in 1898, and Parry’s, performed at the Hereford Festival of
1900, are the most famous Te Deums of modern times.
II
The decadence in church-music that began to set in early in the
seventeenth century and that soon caused the glories of the ‘Palestrina
style’ to disappear, may be traced, not so much to the monodic
revolution and the consequent change in the style of writing it
entailed, but primarily to the fact that the composers of church music
in the main wrote at the same time for church and theatre. Blinded
by the greater brilliance of the stage, they were not able to keep
separate these two widely divergent styles and the operatic mode of
speech soon found entrance into the church service, and later there was
very little to distinguish the one style from the other. This condition
continued uninterrupted until the movement for the restoration of
Catholic Church music was started near the middle of the nineteenth
century by Kaspar Ett (1788-1847) and Karl Proske (1794-1861), and
further developed by Franz Witt (1834-1888) and the Cecilian Society.
Before this period of reform set in (and it is by no means carried
to full fruition as yet) a few great composers wrote masses of solid
musical worth for the Roman Church service, though seldom in the real
spirit of the liturgy. Haydn wrote 13 masses and much other church
music, but we miss the ecclesiastical note in his bright, sunny music.
Mozart composed the great Requiem, 15 masses, 4 Kyries, 9 Offertories,
a Te Deum, and other pieces. But of his church music, Dr. Heinrich
Reimann, in a criticism of Jahn’s ‘Life of Mozart’ says: ‘His masses
are unequal in value, but even the best are, in spite of manifold
excellences in other respects, so narrowly conceived, so entirely
adapted, not merely to certain local conditions, but also to the taste
of individual clerical dignitaries and general convention, that the
composer who otherwise knew so well how to fit the tone to the word,
here often appears thoughtless, so little does he trouble to render the
meaning of the text in his music.’ Franz Witt, certainly a competent
authority from the standpoint of their adaptability to the Roman
service, rather severely says: ‘Whoever desires to serve Art (where
instrumental music is in use), let him perform Mozart’s 8th and 9th
Masses (in F and D, Köchel Nos. 192 and 194) and let him disregard
_all_ the rest!’ From the same standpoint, Dr. Karl Weinmann, in his
‘History of Church Music’ (p. 192), judges Beethoven’s two Masses in
C and D as too secular and extravagant in expression for the church
service and adds (p. 193): ‘Whoever has penetrated deeper into the
spirit of the Catholic liturgy, within whose framework the performance
must after all take place, will see that between the seriousness of
the liturgic act and the gaiety of these compositions (of Mozart,
Haydn, and Beethoven), an abyss yawns which is not to be bridged!’
Cherubini’s masses, of which we possess eleven, likewise come under the
condemnation of being un-ecclesiastical in character, notwithstanding
all their inherent qualities of nobility and dignity as sacred music.
And here again we encounter the distinction, to which attention has
been called in an earlier chapter, between church-music and religious
music.
Among the earlier composers whose music was well adapted to the Roman
service, Dr. Weinmann mentions Michael Haydn (1737-1806), brother
of Joseph, as the one who ‘approached perhaps most nearly to the
requirements of church art, at least in his works written without an
orchestra, of which the _Tenebræ_ and the two _Missæ Quadragesimales_
are the most famous.’ Under the influence of the Cecilian Society
movement, Catholic composers, such as Moritz Brosig (1815-1887) and
Joseph Rheinberger (1839-1901), have made noteworthy contributions to a
regenerated church-art.
III
Possibly the finest illustration of the essential difference between
church-music and religious music is to be found in Bach’s incomparable
B minor Mass. It is church-music in no sense of the word, for it was
written without any reference to the liturgic significance of the
text or to the fitness of the music for church service, and it has
never been used as real liturgic music. It is the expression of Bach’s
individual conception of the tremendous religious meaning of the
words, expressed in musical terms that are wholly emancipated from all
ecclesiastical restraint or ritualistic consideration. Though he used
the same words that are found in the Roman Mass, Bach, as a devout
Lutheran, was wholly out of sympathy with the Roman service itself, of
which these words form so vital a part. And yet as a piece of religious
music, it probably has no equal among choral masterpieces, unless it be
Beethoven’s ‘Mass in D.’ It touches the most exalted religious emotions
and voices the common spiritual hopes and aspirations of humanity; it
is religious music, but it is non-sectarian.
This colossal work was written between 1733 and 1738, the _Kyrie_
and the _Gloria_ having been completed in 1733 and the other parts
by 1738. The work was conceived on stupendous lines which outclassed
any previous effort either of his own or of any other composer of
masses. Bach gave one or two parts of this mass now and then at some
of the regular services at Leipzig and these occupied as much time as
could be allotted to the musical portion of the service, for, indeed,
in this work each portion had in itself the dimensions of a cantata.
Unimportant texts were developed into large arias or complicated fugal
choruses, and the variety and abundance of musical material used is
incredible.
Entirely apart from its complexity, stands the fact that Bach’s
musical structure is most expressive, and even if the hearer loses a
word here and there, he cannot fail to catch the spirit, especially in
such passages as the joyous _Gloria_ and the calm _Et in terra pax_. It
is true that Bach’s works, in his own time as now, required a somewhat
trained listener, but his themes are so characteristic of the verbal
ideas expressed in the text that they are in themselves an eloquent,
yet simple, commentary on it. The _Kyrie_ alone consists of three
elaborate parts, the first of which ends in a five-part fugal chorus.
The second part, _Christe eleison_, is a duet sung by two sopranos.
It has a simple, childlike quality of entreaty and is followed by the
third part, _Kyrie eleison_, again fugally treated in four parts. The
following number, the _Gloria_, which, with the _Credo_, stands at the
summit of choral-writing, consists of eight musically complete parts,
the last of which, _Cum sancto spiritu_, written for five-part chorus,
is one of the most powerful and exalted of the entire work. The _Credo_
is set on the same vast lines as the _Gloria_. Beginning with a theme
taken from a Gregorian chorale, the composer develops it fugally after
it has been announced by tenors, basses and altos. The _Credo_ also
consists of eight parts, the choral first part being followed by a most
elaborate soprano and alto duet (_Et in unum Dominum_), after which
follows the five-part fugal chorus (_Et incarnatus_). The _Crucifixus_
is one of the most remarkable portions of the entire work. The bass
theme, appearing thirteen times in succession, gives a remarkable
background, and with the other choral parts, which move freely over it,
creates an atmosphere of mingled pain, sorrow and consecration. _Et
resurrexit_ is taken up by the five-part fugal chorus, which is full
of joy. _Et in spiritum sanctum_ is a bass aria introduced by the oboe
d’amour and the _Confiteor unum baptisma_ closes this group with an
intricate five-part double fugue. The _Sanctus_ is a massive six-part
chorus, the _Osanna_ is an eight-part chorus, the _Benedictus_ is a
tenor solo with violin obbligato, and the _Agnus Dei_ an alto solo. The
last chorus (_Dona nobis pacem_) is in four parts and this brings this
monumental work to a close. Its great difficulty has militated against
its being as frequently performed as it certainly merits. Complete
performances of it have been given at intervals since its complete
production at the Berlin Singakademie in 1835. Its first performance in
America was the one given at Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, in 1900, at the
Bach Festival under direction of J. Frederick Wolle.
IV
Bach’s ‘Magnificat in D.’--The first performance of this great work
(called the ‘Great Magnificat’) was given on Christmas, 1723, at the
evening service in the Thomas Church at Leipzig. It is characterized
by powerful choruses which are elaborated with all of Bach’s technical
resources. It calls for a five-part chorus with accompaniment of organ
and orchestra and, in its feeling of largeness, foreshadows the future
work of this wonderful genius.
The _Stabat Mater_ of Pergolesi (1710-1736) is supposed to have been
written at Pozzuoli, where he went in 1736 because of ill health, and
at the request of the Brotherhood of Saint Luigi de Palazzo to replace
the work of A. Scarlatti which had been performed there regularly on
Good Friday. Some writers, however, think it was written much earlier,
in fact, soon after leaving the Conservatory at Naples in 1729. The
date 1736, however, seems the more authentic and it is likely that he
wrote it while living in the monastery at Pozzuoli, where, however,
he did not devote himself by any means wholly to sacred writing, but
to his favorite _opera buffa_ as well. While the work is not rich in
large ideas--rather is it made up of many short though melodious themes
which, like all of Pergolesi’s, border on the sentimental--it has
always held a high place in Italy.
Handel’s Te Deums.--The _Utrecht Te Deum_, written in 1712 to
celebrate the signing of the peace of Utrecht, was avowedly composed
in the same form as Purcell’s, though Handel’s work was characterized
by greater brilliancy, especially in the orchestral coloring. The work
antagonized his patron, the Grand Duke of Hanover, whose affairs were
by no means furthered by the council of Utrecht, and it therefore
recalls a rather dark hour in Handel’s history. The _Dettingen Te
Deum_, on the contrary, brought outwardly more gratifying results. The
unexpected victory of George II over the French at Dettingen brought
great joy and gratitude to the English people and Handel, who then
was at the Chapel Royal, was requested to write a Te Deum for the
thanksgiving service to be held Nov. 27, 1743, in St. James’s Chapel.
It was begun July 17th and completed some time before the 30th of that
month. The work is rated as one of the greatest by this composer and
the joy and thanksgiving of the whole nation is depicted in a style
that is more grandioso, but less rich in contrapuntal resources, than
the _Utrecht Te Deum_. He achieved his massive effects, not through any
theatrical means, but by combining the note of triumph and exultant
joy with a measured dignity, the effect of which is most compelling.
The fanfare of trumpets and drums which ushers in the opening chorus
has never been surpassed in its magnificence for the expression of
thanksgiving.
Graun’s ‘Prague Te Deum.’--Though he had written some very acceptable
music for church service while a mere boy, Graun (1701-1759) achieved
his first fame as a composer of operas. This led to his appointment as
chapel-master to Frederick the Great, and not long before his death he
wrote two sacred works which have established his permanent fame, the
‘Passion’ and the so-called _Prague Te Deum_. The latter was written
to commemorate his royal patron’s victory at Prague in 1756, but was
not performed until 1762 at Charlottenburg, at the close of the Seven
Years’ War. It was, therefore, really performed as a peace celebration.
It is one of the finest Te Deums in existence and certainly the most
celebrated of Continental settings.
The first important work that proclaimed Joseph Haydn a vocal writer
was the _Stabat Mater_, written in 1771. It follows the prevalent
Italian style and reminds somewhat of Pergolesi, with only a few
suggestions of the Haydn that was revealed in the ‘Creation.’ The
second of his two Te Deums (written in 1800) is a noble composition
which is still much used in church service. Though Haydn’s masses (he
wrote thirteen) are not conceived in the real spirit of the Roman
liturgy and are lacking in dignity and austerity, they are still among
the most frequently used by German Catholic choirs. The freshness and
cheerfulness which pervade his church as well as his secular music
cannot be attributed to lack of seriousness on Haydn’s part, but rather
to fundamental traits of character which looked at God and His whole
universe through eyes that saw only joy and hope. He is said to have
confided to his friend Carpani that at the thought of God his heart
leaped for joy, and he could not help his music doing the same. Among
the most famous of his masses are No. 2 in C (the numbering follows
the Novello edition); the _Paukenmesse_ (_in tempore belli_); No. 3 in
D, the ‘Imperial’; No. 4 in B-flat, ‘The Creation’; and the _Theresien
Messe_ in B-flat.
Hermann Kretzschmar[81] says that ‘between Mozart’s last mass and his
"Requiem" there lies a whole lifetime,’ and indeed this noble work, the
completion of which was cut off by the master’s death, is considered
one of the great choral compositions of all time. Doubtless its wide
appeal is due somewhat to the pathetic and romantic circumstances
surrounding the period of its composition. One never thinks of it
without recalling the mysterious, long black figure of the stranger
who commissioned Mozart to write it, and the apprehension of the sick
and discouraged composer and his pathetic desire to live to see its
completion. The mysterious stranger was later revealed as Count Franz
von Walsegg of Ruppach, who was possessed with the idea of posing as a
composer and who desired to perform a Requiem in memory of his wife who
had died a short time before. It was his plan, which he later carried
out, to let this Requiem be known as his own. Mozart died on Dec. 5,
1791, before completing this work, which occupied his thoughts up to
his last conscious moments. His widow, who was most anxious to have the
‘Requiem’ ready for delivery on the day that it was due, commissioned
Süssmayer to complete the work. Süssmayer was a composer of some
repute and, as a close friend and a pupil of Mozart, was intimately
acquainted with the composer’s ideas regarding the ‘Requiem’; then,
too, his handwriting was so much like Mozart’s that the widow was the
more ready to entrust the completion of the task to him, since he could
preserve the external resemblance to the fragments. So successful was
Süssmayer in writing in his master’s style that for many years the
_Benedictus_, which was entirely his own work, was considered the gem
of the whole. The parts that were written in Mozart’s own hand were the
_Requiem_ and the _Kyrie_ complete, the voice parts, organ and part of
the accompaniment of _Dies iræ_ (68 measures); _Tuba mirum_ (62); _Rex
tremendæ_ (22); _Recordare_ (130); _Confutatis_ (40); _Lacrymosa_ (8);
_Domine_ (78); and _Hostias_ (54).
[Illustration: Mozart rehearsing his Requiem (shortly before his death)]
_Painting by Munkacsy_
This work, when completed and delivered to Count von Walsegg, was
copied by him and performed as his own on Dec. 14, 1793, but after
many years the manuscript, as turned over by Süssmayer, was found
and placed in the _Hofbibliothek_ in Vienna. That Mozart strove to
emphasize the churchly character in his ‘Requiem’ is particularly in
evidence in the Introit (_Requiem æternam_), also in his use of the
Gregorian chorale and in the simplicity of his themes. The picturing
of the approach of the Day of Judgment (_Dies iræ_) is dramatic and
reveals a heaviness which is further augmented by the restlessness
of the orchestra; notwithstanding this, however, Mozart introduces
a spirit of resignation and the whole passage becomes peaceful and
expressive. The _Kyrie_ is a beautiful, ornate double fugue developed
from the two themes to which the words _Kyrie eleison_ and _Christe
eleison_ are set. The _Rex tremendæ_ is another example of elaborate
as well as effective contrapuntal writing--here in four-voiced canon
form. Its close is delicately contrasted with the body of the movement
by the introduction of the prayer, _Salva me, fons pietatis_. The
_Recordare_, sung by a quartet of solo voices with an independent fugal
accompaniment, is one of the most exquisite portions of the work and
by many is considered the finest. It is rich in beautiful melodies and
is worked out in most delicate detail. The touching _Confutatis_, sung
antiphonally by men’s and women’s voices, is another effective portion
of this great work, which Jahn speaks of as ‘the true and legitimate
expression of his (Mozart’s) artistic nature at its highest point of
finish--his imperishable monument.’
Masses.--Mozart had mastered this form of composition, according to
the standards of the time, while still a mere boy; but probably his
best mass, the one ranking closest to the ‘Requiem,’ is the sixth,
the Mass in F, which is very contrapuntal and contains some masterly
writing. In the _Credo_ of this mass he used material from the
‘Jupiter’ Symphony, as he did also in the _Sanctus_ of the B-flat or
‘Credo’ Mass. The Mass in D is a close second to the one in F above
mentioned and in these two he expressed himself freely, while in the
following five, which are unfortunately his best known, he was obliged
to write more artificially in order to satisfy his display-loving
patron, the Archbishop of Salzburg.
Most of the sixteen masses in the Breitkopf and Härtel complete edition
of Mozart’s works are supposed to have been youthful compositions,
which, though suggestive of other works of the master, fall far short
of his usual skill. According to Köchel, however, the masses published
by Novello are not all genuine; such are those in E-flat (Novello, Nos.
13 and 16), and in C (No. 17). Jahn and Köchel both agree in believing
that the one in B-flat (No. 7, Novello, but published originally by
Peters) is not Mozart’s and base their contention not only on the use
of the clarinets, which were not present in his Salzburg orchestra,
but on the fact that Mozart’s widow credited Süssmayer with being the
composer of the work. Other doubtful ones are two short masses in C
and G (Novello, Nos. 8 and 9), one in G (Novello, No. 12) and a short
Requiem in D minor which Köchel discards because of his certainty that
Mozart never wrote but one Requiem, his last, unfinished work.
The fact that Mozart’s compositions were circulated mostly in
manuscript form and that few of them were published during his
lifetime, may be largely responsible for the error of attributing these
masses to him and composers of small attainments may have used this
means for getting a hearing for their works. A Mass in C, known as the
‘Coronation Mass’ (why this name, is not known) was evidently patched
together from his opera _Cosi fan tutte_, though some authorities
believe that he himself compiled the opera from the mass. The
incomplete Mass in C minor is known to be genuine, though he afterwards
used a large part of it in his _Davidde penitente_. This mass was begun
in 1782 and was intended for performance as a sort of thank-offering
upon his marriage to Constance Weber and it had one performance on
Aug. 25, 1783, in St. Peter’s Church, Salzburg. He did not complete
it for the ceremony, however, and the missing numbers were supplied
by him with material from his other works. The work is uneven in
quality, some of it being very immature and almost trivial, while other
parts, such as the _Kyrie_ and _Gratias_, do not fall far below the
‘Requiem.’ Aloys Schmitt endeavored to complete the work in order to
make it available for church-service. As the _Agnus Dei_ was missing,
he repeated the music of the _Kyrie_ and, to complete the unfinished
_Credo_, he inserted unfamiliar sacred compositions of Mozart’s, thus
using the composer’s own material and inserting his own harmonies, here
and there, merely to connect the parts.
V
Cherubini’s Requiem Mass in C minor was composed in 1816 at the request
of Louis XVIII for a memorial service for Louis XVI, but it did not
gain much more than passing recognition until it was again performed
at the funeral service of Méhul in 1818. It was by all means the best
Requiem Mass produced in France in many years and one which deserved
not merely local but general recognition. The work is soulful and
expressive, though Cherubini was restrained in his utterance. He was
given to using short, simple themes, which, however, are not only
beautiful, but artistically expressive. The general tone of the work
is gloomy and sadly resigned, dwelling on the thought of death as
man’s inevitable destiny. The first ray of hope or light comes with
the words--_ad te omnis caro veniet_, but on the whole the dark tints
prevail throughout this masterful and artistic work and give it a
peculiar force which few other ‘masses for the dead’ have attained.
Cherubini’s second _Requiem_ in D minor, written in 1836, though not
unlike the first both as to musical material and coloring, is a far
less important work. The fact that it was written entirely for male
voices makes it somewhat individual in character, but although numerous
Requiems have appeared for male voices, they are no longer performed.
This one has been arranged for the usual mixed voices.
Masses.--The ‘D minor Mass,’ composed in 1821, is the best of his
masses and can easily be classed with his two famous Requiems. It is
dignified, impressive, and at times tinged with deep sorrow. As in
the Requiems, so also here, there is much impressive fugal writing,
so characteristic of Cherubini. There are also more passages for solo
voices, which at times employ a form of intonation which is almost
recitative. The work is not given as frequently as it deserves. A
fragment of another mass written in 1806 and known as the ‘Eight-voiced
Credo’ (_a cappella_) is heard much more frequently of late, though
it has by no means the power of the preceding. The close, _Et vitam
venturi sæculi_, is a masterpiece of contrapuntal writing which more
than compensates for the lack of content in the other numbers. The fact
that the form of liturgy used at the French court was peculiar to that
environment accounts for the fragments left by Cherubini, which were
evidently used in place of an entire mass.
With his usual fluency Schubert (1797-1828) wrote the first three of
his seven masses in one year (1814) and the finest of these is the one
in G, which is still used in the Roman Church, and of which the _Credo_
is particularly fine. These masses were heard, in Schubert’s time,
only in suburban Vienna churches, as the composer’s prestige was not
sufficient for a larger hearing. Two later masses by Schubert are given
now in concert form--the one in A-flat written in 1822 and the one in
E-flat written in 1828. These works were revived by Herbeck and Brahms
in Vienna and belong without doubt to the very best examples of this
style of writing--in fact, some authorities pronounce them the greatest
works of this mighty genius, excepting only the D minor Quartet.
Unfortunately the parts are not all equally great. The ‘Mass in E-flat’
has a larger instrumental development than the others, the orchestra
often announcing, augmenting, completing, or commenting on the text of
the choral parts, as is the case with Beethoven. Schubert’s tendency in
all his masses was to use themes which approach closely to the form of
the _Lied_ as he conceived it. The _Gloria_ of this mass, as also of
the one in A-flat, is the most magnificent part of the work.
VI
Of the two masses which Beethoven wrote, the first in C major, opus
80, is overshadowed by the second in D major, opus 123. While the
‘C major Mass,’ which was Beethoven’s first large choral work in an
ecclesiastical form, may be lacking in some respects, it is by no means
an unimportant or unworthy composition. Owing to the fact that he
departed from the style of Haydn and Mozart and approached the subject
from an entirely different standpoint, it did not find immediate favor.
Conflicting accounts are given as to the date of first performance
which took place in the chapel of Count Esterhazy, the occasion being
the birthday of the Countess. Kretzschmar gives the date as Sept. 15,
1807, while Grove names Sept. 8, 1807, both agreeing, however, that it
was in honor of the Countess’ birthday.
The _Missa Solemnis_, already referred to as the ‘D major Mass,’
belongs to Beethoven’s third period and is, therefore, characterized by
remarkable freedom of treatment and by depth and richness of musical
content. Although it was begun in 1818 and planned for the installation
of the Archduke Rudolph, his pupil (to whom he was very devoted), as
Archbishop of Olmütz on March 20, 1820, it was not completed until
1823, three years after the event for which it was intended. It is
a sort of spiritual relative of the ‘Ninth Symphony,’ sketches of
which had been begun as early as 1815. The two works are in the same
key and grew side by side in the composer’s thought. Three movements
of the mass occupied a place on the program of the memorable concert
(May 7, 1824, in Vienna) at which the ‘Ninth Symphony’ received its
first performance, when the audience went into ecstasies of enthusiasm
at the sublime grandeur of the music and the pathetic figure of the
deaf creator of such moving sounds. The mass was not performed entire
until 1824 in Petrograd. An illustration of his habit of making the
form subservient to the thought-content is the introduction of warlike
music into the _Agnus Dei_, in order to afford contrast to the thought
of peace around which the other thoughts are centred. The _Credo_ is
exceedingly difficult for the singers, because of the excessively
high range of the voice-parts and the complicated interweaving of the
themes. The _Benedictus_ is one of the most beautiful ever written
and is made particularly effective by the use of the solo violin,
descending from the highest register, in a melody of beautiful
simplicity--a movement whose loveliness is still more enhanced by
the subdued chorus and accompaniment. The difficulty of the work
as a whole prevents its frequent performance. The least difficult
parts are the _Kyrie_ and the _Sanctus_, and the former is given a
unique effect through the accompaniment, which is for organ and brass
instruments only. This work, like Bach’s ‘B minor Mass,’ requires
strong adjectives for a just valuation and when W. H. Hadow[82] speaks
of it as ‘gigantic, elemental, Mount Athos hewn into a monument, scored
at the base with fissure and landslip, rising through cloud and tempest
beyond the reach of human gaze,’ he merely sums up graphically the
general critical estimate of this great work, which, like the great
Bach Mass to which alone it can be compared, must be regarded, not as
church-music or liturgical music merely, but as religious music in a
universal sense.
Weber’s masses, like many others of this early period, are now seldom
given, though there is much good writing in them. The one in E-flat
major, known as the _Jubelmesse_, was performed at Dresden in 1818,
which was the fiftieth year of the reign of the king of Saxony, and, as
it was an occasional work, it embodied the pomp and importance of this
festal event. The one in G, written a year later for a family festival
in the King’s household, was more intimate in character. Weber wrote to
Rochlitz: ‘I mean to keep before me the idea of a happy family-party
kneeling in prayer and rejoicing before the Lord as His children.’ Both
works manifest a devotional spirit.
VII
Hector Berlioz’ ‘Requiem,’ written during 1836-37 at the request of
the French government, was performed Dec. 5, 1837, in the Invalides
in Paris at the memorial services for General Damrémont and the
soldiers who had perished in the storming of Constantina in Algiers,
the government paying the composer four thousand francs for the work.
The original purpose of the commission, however, was to have been a
memorial for those who had fallen in the July Revolution of 1830.
Berlioz had completed his work and rehearsals had begun, when the
Minister of the Interior who had commissioned Berlioz was succeeded
by one who was of a different mind and the July festival took place
without music. But the taking of Constantina offered Berlioz a second
chance for his work. Berlioz arranged performances of it in several
cities of Germany, but its wide hearing came only recently. The work
is colossal, but so realistic, so almost savage in its coloring that
the hearer is fairly awed. It is also so complicated and makes such
tremendous demands upon both the orchestra and the singers, that only
few organizations can give it adequate presentation and then only by a
large addition of instruments to the full orchestra and by arranging
them in groups in various parts of the auditorium. The directions call
for four brass bands and sixteen drums in addition to the regular
orchestra. Extraordinary and often well-nigh impossible demands are
made upon the human voice, but, notwithstanding these drawbacks, it
remains the composer’s most mature work, full of originality and
coloring.
The most remarkable part of the work--the most original and
theatrically impressive--is the _Dies iræ_, in which the composer
has used every possible tonal resource to picture the terrors of the
Day of Judgment. After the choral passage beginning with _Quantus
tremor est futurus_ has twice reached a forceful climax, the orchestra
softens down for a few measures, when it suddenly bursts out with a
crash like a thunder-bolt, coming not only from the main orchestra on
the stage, but from the above mentioned bands in various parts of the
auditorium. A more vivid and theatrical description of the awful day
cannot be imagined, and at the climax the basses thunder out the _Tuba
mirum_ amidst a new outburst from the orchestra, strengthened by many
kettle-drums. So overwhelming is this volume of sound that it became
the butt of the ridicule of the critics, who declared that no such
outburst of noise had been heard in Paris since the storming of the
Bastile! A great sense of relief comes with the quiet _Quid sum miser_,
which Berlioz directed in the score should be sung ‘with an expression
of humility and awe.’ _Rex tremendæ_ again brings in the voice-parts
_fortissimo_, accompanied by crashing thunderbolts in the orchestra.
This continues up to the last few measures, _Salva me_, which are sung
almost in a whisper. One of the finest portions of the work is the
_Lacrymosa_, which also abounds in striking contrasts, and contains
broad, massive harmonies and flowing melodies.
A _Te Deum_ was written by Berlioz in 1835 as a fragment of a larger
work planned in honor of Napoleon. In writing it the composer pictured
to himself the hero, returning from the victorious Italian campaign, at
the moment when his entry at Nôtre Dame would open the service. This
heroic picture and the possibilities of the great cathedral inspired
Berlioz to use, besides orchestra and organ, three choirs, including a
large male chorus and three hundred children. In the theatrical, not
to say spectacular, plan of the whole, Berlioz lost the import of the
words and thought only of tremendous effects; hence it became even
more sensational than the _Requiem_. From the standpoint of musical
color-effects, it is a remarkable work, which is given oftener now than
during the first decades after its birth. Although written in 1835, it
had to wait until 1853 for its first performance, which took place in
London. Thirty years later (in 1883) it had its second performance,
this time in Bordeaux--the first time in France.
Rossini’s _Stabat Mater_ belongs to the large class of eighteenth
and nineteenth century church-music that was dominated by operatic
models and in which the devotional and serious spirit was almost wholly
absent. The _Stabat Mater_ was written in 1832 at the request of a
Spanish friend and dedicated to the Abbé Valera with no thought of
its being published. However, when some rather romantic circumstances
brought it before the public in 1841, Rossini revised it and since
then, unfortunately, it has been one of the most popular of sacred
works--‘unfortunately,’ because it is almost wholly irreligious in
feeling and theatrical in mode of expression. As music, divorced
from its text, its melodies are gay, brilliant, sensuously beautiful
operatic pieces, but wholly out of place with sacred texts. The most
famous of these misplaced melodies are the _Quis est homo_ for soprano,
the _Inflammatus_ for soprano obbligato and chorus, and the _Cujus
animam_ for tenor. The nearest approach to the religious spirit is the
bass aria, _Pro peccatis_.
The _Missa Solemnis_ (‘Graner Mass’) of Liszt, who seemed to love
composition of sacred music above all else, brought to his conception
of the mass a consecration which, even had he been less of a genius,
would have assured devotional music. The so-called ‘Graner Mass’ was
written for the dedication of the Cathedral of Gran, which took place
on August 31, 1856. A noble atmosphere pervades the entire work and it
is made especially interesting through the use of leading motives, the
first instance of the kind in the history of the mass. It is not the
‘leading motive’ of the later Wagner type, but rather the employment
of themes, transformed according to context and varied connection,
as Liszt had developed it in _Les Préludes_ and his piano concertos.
Thus the trumpet-like phrase at the beginning of the _Gloria_,
reappears in the _Resurrexit_, the _Hosanna_, and the _Dona nobis_. The
orchestration is rich and the music always appropriate to the text.
Liszt spoke of the music as having been ‘rather prayed than composed.’
While the work shows the influence of Beethoven, it is more akin to
Wagner, in that the instrumental accompaniment has a larger share in
the action; this and his unusual use of thematic material give to the
work added historical importance. The performance of the mass caused
a controversy as to its merits and tendencies that raged for several
decades. Liszt, in all that he attempted, was a reformer. His object in
the field of church music was to bring about ‘an ecclesiastical musical
style that should bring the liturgy of the Roman Church nearer to an
intellectual and emotional expression of the age, should be in closer
sympathy with existing artistic ideals as they were actually manifested
in music.’[83]
‘Hungarian Coronation Mass.’--This work, which Liszt wrote in 1867,
though also beautiful and interesting, is by no means as fine as the
‘Graner Mass.’ Possibly it was written more hurriedly; certainly it is
not as strong as the earlier work. Both masses contain unusual effects,
through the frequent employment of unison vocal parts.
VIII
In addition to the religious music already mentioned and much liturgic
music, Gounod wrote four masses, of which the first _(Messe solennelle
à Sainte Cecile_) is the most important and the most popular. The
second (_Angeli custodes_) was written in 1882; the third (_Messe à
Jeanne d’Arc_) was performed at the Cathedral of Rheims in 1887 and the
fourth appeared in 1888. The ‘St. Cecilia Mass’ was an early work and
its unusually enthusiastic reception by the English public when several
movements were performed at a concert in London on January 13, 1851,
first called the attention of the musical world to the young composer’s
great ability. It was not performed entire in Paris, however, until
Nov. 22, 1855, at one of the annual St. Cecilia celebrations at the
church of St. Eustache. The London success was repeated at the Paris
performance and this mass, among Gounod’s religious music, shares the
same popularity as does his ‘Faust’ among his operas. It is pervaded
by an atmosphere of simplicity that offsets the dramatic painting
of Berlioz. In addition it possesses grace, nobility and charm,
though its melodies are frequently cloying with their sweetness. The
finest numbers are the devotional _Kyrie_, the powerful _Credo_, the
familiar _Sanctus_ with its fine tenor melody which recurs at the
close, delivered with full chorus in pompous, jubilant tone; and the
_Benedictus_, which is treated in old ecclesiastical chant style for
soprano solo and organ accompaniment, which is later softly repeated by
a six-part chorus.
Dvořák’s _Requiem_ was written for and performed at the Birmingham
Festival in 1891. The most beautiful portion is the _Agnus Dei_, but,
while the music throughout is sad and soulful and shows excellent
workmanship, it is not as strong as the composer’s _Stabat Mater_,
revealing much imitation of Berlioz. Throughout the score (in vocal and
orchestral parts) he makes frequent use of a short, poignantly incisive
motive compressed within the compass of a diminished third, sometimes
with soul-shattering effect.
The _Stabat Mater_, written in 1876 and performed by the London
Musical Society on March 10, 1883, on the other hand expresses much
more the strongly individual style of the composer and in consequence
has found a much stronger hold and bids fair to continue long in public
favor. It begins with a breadth and force which distinguish it from all
other settings of this poem. It is conceived from a modern romantic
viewpoint and is full of effective tone-painting. The portrayal of the
sorrowing Mary at the foot of the cross is touchingly but majestically
drawn, and the opening quartet and chorus, _Stabat mater dolorosa_, has
a certain dramatic force. The composer then turns away from the dark
tones--the lament and sorrow--and lets the music fittingly express the
loveliness of the mother of the Saviour. The _Eia, mater_ suggests a
funeral march, with the principal motive in the bass; and the _Fac me
vere tecum flere_, for tenor solo and chorus preceded by a forceful
orchestral introduction, is one of the most dramatic portions of the
work. The last number, _Quando corpus morietur_, is quite similar
to the opening number, and the Amen, artistically wrought in double
counterpoint, brings the whole to an effective close.
Verdi’s ‘Manzoni Requiem.’--On May 22nd, 1874, the City of Milan
held a memorial service at St. Mark’s Cathedral, commemorating the
first anniversary of the death of the great poet Alessandro Manzoni,
and commissioned Italy’s greatest composer, Verdi, to write a Requiem
for the occasion. The work was written mostly during the summer of
1873 while the composer was in France, Verdi utilizing for its last
number the _Libera me_ which he had five years previously written for
the projected Requiem for Rossini, in collaboration with twelve other
Italian composers, a project which was finally abandoned. A gentle,
devout and thoroughly ecclesiastical spirit pervades the work, which
is, however, conceived in the Italian style, therefore in lighter vein
than is the case with most of the great Requiems of history; yet its
orchestration and use of musical material show clearly the modern trend
instituted by Wagner. Although it had a number of hearings in Europe
and in America, it is, unfortunately, seldom given now. It is conceived
in the mood in which most of the great Italian composers in this form
have viewed death. There is the simple, childlike faith peculiar to the
Italian people, mingled with a combination of sadness and peace--yet
it is strong, expressive, and at times intensely dramatic, and always
constructed with the master’s unerring intuition for fine musical
effects. While the unsympathetic German, Hans von Bülow, condemned
it as ‘an opera in ecclesiastical costume,’ the world generally
acknowledges that it is sincere, lovely, though dramatically strong and
effective, music. The Italian wealth of melody is everywhere present.
It opens with a quiet Introit in elegiac mood (_Requiem æternam_),
which suddenly changes in the _Te decet_, where, with an unexpected
shift of key, the basses give out a fugal theme which gradually
leads over to the _Kyrie_, which is sung by quartet and chorus. One
of the strongest numbers is the _Dies iræ_, which is a chorus of
almost startling power, whose effects, however, are obtained through
legitimate musical means. Notably strong is the _Tuba mirum_ which
enters dramatically and works up to a tremendous climax. In striking
contrast is the beautiful trio, _Quid sum miser_; it begins softly
with luscious melody and maintains its subdued tone throughout, until
suddenly interrupted by the _Rex tremendæ_, which with quartet and
chorus rises through sharply contrasting _pianissimo_ and _fortissimo_
passages to a most dramatic climax, continuing through the _Salva
me_. In the _Agnus Dei_ an original and unique effect is obtained by
letting the soprano and mezzo-soprano solo voices sing the same melody
an octave apart throughout. The solo voices enter unaccompanied and
the chorus joins in here and there. The most powerful number in the
entire work is the _Libera me_, which begins with a soprano solo in the
free, unmeasured intonation of old ecclesiastical psalmody, repeated
in like manner by the chorus in full harmony. The solo soon leads
into the _Dies iræ_ and the introductory _Requiem æternam_, which are
followed by a magnificent fugue in strict form on the words _Libera
me_. After this there is a repetition of the solo chant and the closing
unison tones in the chorus are sung with softest possible tone (marked
_pppp_), leaving an effect of absolute peace and repose.
IX
Joseph Rheinberger, whose work includes almost every form of musical
composition, wrote twelve masses, one of which, the ‘Mass in E-flat’
for double choir dedicated to Pope Leo XIII, obtained for the composer
the order of knighthood of Gregory the Great. He wrote also a _Stabat
Mater_, a _De Profundis_ and much other music for the church service.
All of these, and especially the masses, are beautiful both as music
and as examples of the best modern liturgical writing, and a deep
religious fervor pervades them. His appointment in 1877 as director of
the Court Church music at Munich inspired him to write prolifically for
the service of the Roman Church, to which he has contributed some of
its finest modern numbers, thoroughly liturgical in spirit and in mode
of treatment. For this reason they are extensively used in the Roman
Church and are not well known to the concert-goer.
Henschel’s _Requiem_, opus 59, had its initial performance in Boston in
February, 1903, and has since been frequently heard both in Europe and
America. It was written in memory of his wife, Lillian Bailey Henschel,
who was one of his most distinguished pupils and who concertized with
him with signal success, especially in duet-singing. It is a grateful
work, adapted everywhere to the voices and at times strongly influenced
by the song-form. It begins in deep sorrow, which is gradually lifted
through the comfort of the church. Especially strong is the first part,
which is an artistic masterpiece.
Henschel’s _Stabat Mater_ was brought out at the Birmingham Festival
in 1894, on which occasion the composer also sang the part of Saul in
the oratorio of this name by Parry, thus appearing in two important
capacities at the festival, that of composer and interpretative artist.
Besides the _Stabat Mater_ and the above mentioned _Requiem_, he wrote
a number of sacred works in large form, among them a Te Deum, opus 52.
All are grateful and effective compositions.
* * * * *
The number of masses written for liturgic and concert use is very
large, and extended enumeration of them here would be futile for
present purposes. Several notable ones, however, might well be added
to our list. Among these will be found the easy and much-used ‘Mass in
B-flat’ by Henry Farmer (1819-1891), a self-taught English musician;
‘Mass in C’ by the Dutch pianist and composer, Eduard Silas (born
1827), which won a prize of a gold medal and one thousand francs in
an international competition of sacred music held in Belgium in 1866,
in which there were seventy-six competitors of twelve nationalities;
‘Requiem Mass’ by Robert Schumann (1810-1856), melodious and
non-liturgical in spirit; ‘Requiem Mass’ by Charles V. Stanford (born
1852), in memory of Lord Leighton, produced at the Birmingham Festival
of 1897 and thoroughly ecclesiastical in style and feeling; and the
‘Mass in G,’ a Stabat Mater, and a Te Deum by the same composer.
FOOTNOTES:
[81] Kretzschmar, _Führer durch den Konzertsaal, Kirchliche Werke_, p.
266.
[82] ‘Oxford History of Music,’ Vol. V, p. 168.
[83] Richard Aldrich in the Preface to the Schirmer edition of the
‘Graner Mass.’