25 February 2014

The Death of Sarum

One of the many big lacunae in my knowledge is Recusant Literature. And I wonder if, in Recusant Literature, there is any evidence of how the Catholic Squirearchy reacted to the replacement of the 'Sarum rite' by the Missal of S Pius V.

Of course, we all know that the difference between those two 'rites' is very slight. But that is the judgement of bookish people like us, considering principally text. As Adrian Fortescue put it, Sarum and the rest "are merely the Roman rite with quite unimportant local variations. They can indeed hardly be called derived rites; if one may take a parallel from philology one may describe them best as dialects of the Roman rite ... To distinguish the Roman, Sarum, and Mozarabic liturgies on the same plane is like classifying English, Yorkshire dialect, and French as three languages." Thoroughly true. But they do look rather different.

One has to admit that we cannot be absolutely sure what the Sarum use did look like in, say, 1570 or 1580. Sometimes usage may leave rubric somewhat behind. But, taking the texts as printed, I give one example:

When the priest had consecrated the Host, he did not genuflect. He 'inclined himself' ... one edition says that he adored It by bowing his head ... then elevated It by lifting It for the people to see. He did not 'adore' or 'incline' again, but went on to consecrate the Chalice. After that, he did not make any act of reverence, but lifted the Chalice 'as far as his chest OR over his head'. He then stretched out his arms 'in modum crucis' for the first part of the Unde et memores.

I would have thought that the Tridentine ceremonial, familiar to us, would have seemed rather strange to those brought up on Sarum. And one could make the same point from the beginning of Mass to the end.

Fortescue (pp 202-3 fn 4) tells how Dr Lawrence Webb arrived from Rome at Douay in December 1576 and taught the young men how to do the new rite. He cites Records of the English Catholics under the Penal Laws, London, 1878, p118. Does anybody have that to hand? Are then any suggestive details?

Anybody have any actual evidence about how the laity reacted? Is there any bibliographical evidence about the survival of Sarum or the introduction of S Pius V? And Fortescue had been told, but had been unable to verify the claim, that some priests brought Sarum back into use in the happy reign of our late Sovereign Lord King James II. Anybody know anything?

21 comments:

Mark said...

Might Éamon Duffy maybe be able to answer your question, Father?

Gregor Dick said...

Records happened to be a few floors below me, so I took the opportunity to look up that citation. Not much to go on, I think: the text is a diary of the English College at Doaui, and after a good many preceding entries listing ordinations and first Masses, the entry on p. 118 for 23 April concludes:


Igitur spatio quinque mensium ex nostris theologis facti sunt sacerdotes 20. Atque hi omnes sacrum quotidie secundum ordinem Romani missalis a Pio V. editi celebrant, ritus ejusdem missalis accurate et diligenter edocti a venerabili presbytero D. Laurentio Webbo, qui ipse Romæ aliquando existens, omenem ejus ordinis rationem et ceremoniam probe et ad amussim didicit.


I now notice that it is in fact online! Here we are: https://archive.org/stream/firstseconddiari00engl#page/118/mode/2up

Pastor in Valle said...

Documentary evidence is very slight, I'm afraid. Like Fortescue, I have only hearsay evidence for any of it. Hearsay says that Sarum was to have been used at St Edmunds, and in Westminster Cathedral, but neither I nor Fr Schofield, Westminster Archivist, have managed to find anything written down. In the library of the Oxford Oratory is a missal used (if my memory serves me rightly) during later recusant times; there you can find the propers for English saints lifted wholesale from the Sanctoral of the Sarum Missal and just slightly adapted for the Roman Use.

Nicholas Hinde said...

I have read somewhere that at the restoration of the English hierarchy (1850) Rome offered the Sarum rite but Wiseman refused. Can this, with any reasons, be confirmed?

Patruus said...

Page 118 of what may be the 1878 publication to which you refer is available here -

http://www.mocavo.com/The-First-and-Second-Diaries-of-the-English-College-Douay-and-an-Appendix-of-the-Unpublished-Documents/286550/234

A passage relating to Dr Lawrence Webb occurs in the paragraph commencing "Igitur".

dmw said...

It's online via Google Books: http://books.google.com/books?id=pEFDAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA118#v=onepage&q&f=false

Faithful Crocker said...

Dr Fortescue has not taken Dr Routh's advice. p 118 of Knox, 'Records..' concerns April 1577. December 1576 is on page 113, but has nothing to say about the matter under discussion.

Matt H said...

We know King James II authorized the printing of an "Ordo baptizandi aliaque sacramenta administrandi...." in 1686, which according to "English Prayer Books" by Stanley Morison, page 141, was similar to the previous Jesuit manuals which contained some ceremonies from Roman sources and some from Sarum sources. Said Ordo is available for sale on Amazon (http://www.amazon.com/baptizandi-sacramenta-administrandi-ecclesiastica-peragendi/dp/124083313X/), so perhaps a reader with more Latin than I could confirm that.

Matt H said...

According to "English Prayer Books" by Stanley Morison, page 141, the "Ordo baptizandi aliaque sacramenta administrandi...." authorized by King James II in 1686 was similar to the previous Jesuit manuals which contained some ceremonies from Roman sources and some from Sarum sources. Said Ordo is available for sale on Amazon (http://www.amazon.com/baptizandi-sacramenta-administrandi-ecclesiastica-peragendi/dp/124083313X/), so perhaps someone with more Latin than I could confirm that.

Christopher said...

Thank you, Father, for asking this important question. Here is the one farthing that I am able to contribute:

William Byrd would have known the Sarum Use in his youth; some of his earliest compositions were written in the 1550s to adorn its ceremonies. A notable example is the setting of Psalm 113 which he wrote, in collaboration with Sheppard and Mundy, for the procession (lacking in the Tridentine books) during Vespers on Easter Sunday.

Later in his life - from about 1590 onwards - Byrd wrote a great deal of liturgical music, first his three Masses and then the great Gradualia project. His Masses, which set the complete text of the Mass ordinary, betray a post-Tridentine attitude to liturgical correctness quite unknown to earlier English composers, and the propers set in the Gradualia are those of the Roman Gradual, which he seems to have known in a Venetian printing.

So we see that during the course of Elizabeth's reign Byrd became accustomed to the Tridentine liturgy; presumably by his later years the Sarum Use was celebrated much less frequently in the recusant circles in which he moved, and he adapted his compositional practice accordingly.

Éamonn said...

https://archive.org/stream/firstseconddiari00engl#page/118/mode/1up

The text from the Records of the English Catholics can be found at the link above.

Claudio Salvucci said...

From the old Catholic Encyclopedia:

"After Elizabeth's accession no more Missals were published, but a little book entitled "Missale parvum pro Sacerdotibus in Anglia, Scotia, et Ibernia itinerantibus" was printed two or three times towards the beginning of the seventeenth century for the use of missionary priests. Its size allowed it to be carried about easily without attracting observation, and as it contained relatively few Masses, only those for the Sundays and the principal feasts, it recalled in a measure the "libelli Missae" of the Anglo-Saxon and Irish missionaries nine centuries earlier. Even at this date the peculiarities of the Sarum Rite were not retained and the Canon and Masses of this "Missale parvum" were all Roman with the exception of one special Mass of the Holy Name of Jesus which is described in the 1616 edition as "taken from the Missal according to the Use of Sarum"."

Claudio Salvucci said...

From the old Catholic Encyclopedia:

After Elizabeth's accession no more Missals were published, but a little book entitled "Missale parvum pro Sacerdotibus in Anglia, Scotia, et Ibernia itinerantibus" was printed two or three times towards the beginning of the seventeenth century for the use of missionary priests. Its size allowed it to be carried about easily without attracting observation, and as it contained relatively few Masses, only those for the Sundays and the principal feasts, it recalled in a measure the "libelli Missae" of the Anglo-Saxon and Irish missionaries nine centuries earlier. Even at this date the peculiarities of the Sarum Rite were not retained and the Canon and Masses of this "Missale parvum" were all Roman with the exception of one special Mass of the Holy Name of Jesus which is described in the 1616 edition as "taken from the Missal according to the Use of Sarum".

Claudio Salvucci said...

Here's an interesting tidbit that passed down via family oral tradition and made it into John Charles Cox's "Three Centuries of Derbyshire Annals" (1890, vol. 1, pg. 311):

http://books.google.com/books?id=AoBNAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA311&dq=%22Three+centuries+of+Derbyshire+annals%22+sarum&hl=en&sa=X&ei=fwsNU6jmOq2_sQTqpoCQCA&ved=0CCkQ6AEwAA

"Early the next morning [Dec 5th, 1745] Mass was celebrated at the marble altar of All Saints', it is said by a French priest, and from the same sources whence we procured the information in our last paragraph, we learn that much dissatisfaction was caused to a few Derbyshire recusants who were present because the Mass was celebrated after the Roman use (unknown save to those who were versed in Continental rites) and not after the modified Sarum use then in vogue amongst the Romanists of England."

Is this a vague tradition manipulated to suit the height of a ritualist/Sarum craze? Or does it genuinely reflect Sarum's survival into the mid 1700s?

Doubtless there are tidbits like this scattered all over obscure books and newspapers just dying to be collated by some intrepid researcher.

Geoffrey said...

Dear Father.A test message as some interesting posts have received no new (post 2011) comments - as they should do! Moreover those of the past few days. I am puzzled by this and this has been sent from a mobile 'pone.

With thanks and prayers for what you do as a priest.

Geoffrey

Alan Robinson said...

We have the Douay Diaries here where I work, both in their original and in the later re-printings. I really must look at them and see what is recorded.

Bernard Brandt said...

I have found that if one were to use Google Books to investigate "Records of the English Catholics under the Penal Laws", one would find a free reprint of the first volume of that book to be available.

Also, like the rumors of the demise of the author, Mark Twain, during his lifetime, I think that rumors of the demise of the Sarum Rite, or of Sarum Chant, are greatly exaggerated. If one were to investigate the Wikipedia article on Sarum Chant, one would find a wealth of websites with the Chant and its Rite readily available.

Agellus said...

Here is the relevant text from Records of the English Catholics Under the Penal Laws, which is an extract from the seminary's diary. Under the entry for April 23rd, 1577, one finds:

"Igitur spatio quinque mensium ex nostris theologis facti sunt sacerdotes 20. Atque hi omnes sacrum quotidie secundum ordinem Romani missalis a Pio V. editi celebrant, ritus ejusdem missalis accurate et diligenter edocti a venerabile presbytero D. Laurentio Webb, qui ipse Romæ aliquando existens, omnem ejus ordinis rationem et ceremoniam probe et ad amussim didicit."

Agellus said...

Here is the relevant text from Records of the English Catholics Under the Penal Laws, which is an extract from the seminary's diary. Under the entry for April 23rd, 1577, one finds:
"Igitur spatio quinque mensium ex nostris theologis facti sunt sacerdotes 20. Atque hi omnes sacrum quotidie secundum ordinem Romani missalis a Pio V. editi celebrant, ritus ejusdem missalis accurate et diligenter edocti a venerabile presbytero D. Laurentio Webb, qui ipse Romæ aliquando existens, omnem ejus ordinis rationem et ceremoniam probe et ad amussim didicit."

Alan Robinson said...

Pastor in Valle: I have read the serialized history of the music at St Edmund's College, Ware [published in The Edmundian magazine] and there is no indication that anything Sarum was ever used. An article expresses regret at changes in the office mandated by Pius X. Otherwise the perpetual theme is the constant disagreement between chant purists and those who wanted florid composed music in the Mass. It all seemed to change depending on who was in charge of music.

Anthony Howe said...

A study of surviving Sarum Missals might be fruitful here. I have in my collection a Missale Cenomanense (Le Mans) dated to 1494, which has been repaired with leaves from a later edition. These repairs and iterpolations, along with the state of the early 19th century binding complete with velum book markers indicate that this medieval book was clearly still being used right up into the 19th century. Therefore, if a Sarum missal were found to have the type of later (17th 18th century) manuscript additions that would relate to calendars etc, it might indicate their continued or at least revived use.