In Catholic and Anglican/Episcopalian liturgy, what are the differences between a High Mass and a Low Mass?
From the top of my head, it seems that the former is more elaborate than the latter, but I would like to know just how the former is more elaborate than the latter and what other significant differences there may be between the two. Are such distinctions still observed in Novus Ordo Catholic Masses?
WRS - Ite, missa est!
Looking at the subject line, I was going to say something about potential energy due to gravity.
-Fuji Kitakyusho, who knows nothing of religion.
In the Catholic church, the distinction between a **High Mass ** and a Low Mass was more formal under the pre-1962 missal (the Traditional Latin or *Tridentine * rite).
Basically, a mass could be said (low) or sung (high). The main distinction between the two was that in a sung mass, the priest was obliged to sing all the parts of the mass for which he was responsible e.g. collects, gospel, preface etc. As a result, all of the other parts of the mass (including the congregational responses, propers and ordinary) also had to be sung. The singing could range from the simplicity of a *recto tono * approach to a more elaborate polyphonic approach.
If it was sung with three sacred ministers (priest, deacon and subdeacon), the mass was known as a missa solemnis. If it was sung with just the one sacred minister (priest), it was known as a missa cantata. If it was simply read by the priest (by far the most common approach in your average Australian parish church), it was known as a missa lecta.
These distinctions are no longer formally observed under the Novus ordo rite, with far more latitude allowed in what is said and sung.