Chapter 18 of 28 · 8866 words · ~44 min read

CHAPTER X

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_.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.’