Abstract

Although the traditional Roman wedding mass (beginning with Deus Israel) remained consistent from roughly 1570 to (roughly) 1970, its history on either side of that timeline is complex and rich. This project explores wedding masses as recorded in 219 liturgical sources from 17 countries from 983-1617. The project analyzes sources (the liturgical books, such as a missal), propers (the variable parts of the mass, such as the epistle), and incipits (the first lines of the propers). We will explore what wedding masses looked like before Trent, and if Trent described (i.e. simply codified the most commonly used wedding mass) or prescribed (created a new votive mass). The results give us a glimpse into the life and history of a votive mass and major life event experienced by most Catholics across the centuries.

Introduction

Imagine: it is the summer of ’62. You are in Italy, observing the ecumenical council. In an already turbulent environment, certain cardinals are lobbying for a drastic revision of the mass. The changes would remove centuries-old readings from the mass, and replace them with rarely-used, perhaps even unpopular texts. Ever at the forefront of theological innovation, the liturgical reformers argue that these changes are pastoral; the Mass will now emphasize the role of Man in worship, rather than a remote and inscrutable Trinity.

It is 1562, and you are watching the Council of Trent debate the wedding mass.

(Legal disclaimer: The above scenario is obviously a fictionalized account.)

This project will discuss three ‘eras’ of Catholic wedding masses: pre-1570, 1570-1970, and 1970-present.

1570-1970: The traditional wedding mass. If you were planning a traditional Roman Catholic wedding mass, your priest would use the wedding mass in the Missale Romanum.¹ In the Missale, the wedding mass has the following mass readings:

Table 1. The wedding mass in the 1570 Missale Romanum

The Trent Deus Israel wedding mass was codified by (very roughly) the aforementioned 1570 Roman Missal, in the wake of the Council of Trent. This wedding mass remained in effect until (very roughly) the 1970 Roman Missal.

1970-present: The current wedding mass. If you were planning a Roman Catholic wedding mass in the United States today, your priest would use The Order of Celebrating Matrimony.² In that book, you would notice that the wedding mass is less so one concrete mass, like the one above, and more so a bundle of options for each mass reading. For example, the second reading is Ephesians 5, followed quickly by well over a dozen alternate options. Even the Ephesians 5 reading comes with options: you can choose the long form (starting with Wives, be submissive to your husbands) or the short form (skipping that provoking verse and starting with Husbands, love your wives). This phenomenon has been nicknamed ‘option-itis.’ Rather than a set votive mass with a set identity, the mass turns into a menu of options. You do have the option to pick the 7 readings from Trent – thus partially emulating a traditional wedding – but you must go out of your way to do so. In practice, no two Catholic wedding masses are the same.

Put simplistically, our current wedding mass (sort of) comes from the Second Vatican Council and (sort of) the subsequent 1970 Roman Missal, and our traditional wedding mass from the Council of Trent and the subsequent 1570 Roman Missal. Much has been written about the dramatic changes to the wedding mass from the traditional to the new missal -but what about the wedding mass before 1570?

This may seem like a niche question, but it has significant implications for our understanding of liturgical history. The liturgical reformers of the twentieth century had a habit of justifying their reforms by pointing to the Council of Trent. Trent, they argued, had not merely codified, but had made a new missal, with its new texts and sweeping reforms. Trent, they insisted further, imposed a novel level of uniformity to ceremonies that had been rich with options and local variations. Did not Modern Man require a revised missal too? Through at least the 1960’s-90’s, ‘tridentine’ became a weaponized epithet of sorts. If Trent changed the mass, then we can change the mass too, and we must not become frozen in the Tridentine era.

It is difficult to interpret this position charitably. As one scholar said,

My university students were always shocked to open Dom Hesbert’s Antiphonarium Missarum Sextuplex or the llth-century Gradual of the Roman basilica of St. Cecilia, only to find there, on the same days, the same Proper chants than the ones printed in the Liber Usualis of 1950.³

At the same time, it is true that Trent ushered in a new degree of uniformity in certain areas. Before Trent, many cities had their own Missals in effect. Sometimes the missal variations were minor, such as celebrating a saint’s feast day on November 5, while the neighboring city celebrated it on November 6. Sometimes the variations were substantial, such as a votive mass having completely different readings in a Parisian missal versus a Viennese missal.

Regarding the wedding mass before Trent…which is it? My interest in this question was piqued when I read:

In the early medieval West, the Gregorian Sacramentary became standard throughout the orbit of Roman influence. Furthermore, the epistle lections that most frequently came to be read with that venerable mass set were either 1 Corinthians 6:15-20 or 1 Corinthians 7:32-35. Yet the central biblical theme for the nuptial blessing is the Ephesians analogy, studiously unread in the mass. It is interesting to note that this pericope takes over in the 1570 Missal. ⁴ [emphasis added]

In other words, before Trent, almost everyone used 1 Corinthians 6 or 7 as the epistle for their wedding mass. Curiously, Trent selected Ephesians 5 as the epistle for the wedding mass, which almost no one used. This suggests that Trent did something beyond mere codification for the wedding mass.

Did Trent codify, i.e. write down the wedding mass everyone in Christendom had already been using for 1500 years (except for the epistle)?
Did Trent pick the most popular introit, gospel, etc., and combine them into a mass that was technically new but highly recognizable?
Did Trent make a brand new wedding mass?

The goals of this project are to survey wedding masses before Trent, to catalog the propers and incipits, to compare those results with each other, then to compare those results to Trent’s traditional wedding mass.

Methods

A few caveats about terms:

The history of the 1970 Roman Missal is an enormously complicated topic. Even focusing on just the wedding mass is fraught: there have been revisions in 2016, 1991, 1970, and 1969. For this project, I have grouped all of these under the umbrella of the ‘current wedding mass.’

Similarly, there was not a simple, clear history directly from the calling of the Council of Trent to the publication and implementation of the 1570 Roman Missal. For the purpose of clarity, I use “Trent” as shorthand for the 1570 Roman Missal and that chapter of history.

The traditional wedding mass has a number of Latin names, such as the missa pro sponsis or the missa pro sponso et sponsa, or the missa sponsalibus. For clarity’s sake, I will use the phrase “wedding mass.” When distinguishing between variations of the wedding mass, I will add on the first line of that mass’ introit. Trent’s wedding mass is therefore the “Deus Israel wedding mass.”

This project hinges on three key terms: sources, propers, and incipits.

1. Source: a liturgical book or manuscript, such as a missal, ritual, or pontifical
2. Proper: a mass reading or part that changes according to the date, feast, or occasion. The propers for this project include the introit, epistle, gradual, sequence, alleluia, offertory, and communion
3. Incipit: the first line from a proper, such as Uxor tua [Psalm 127], the first line of the gradual in Trent’s wedding mass

The incipit is the building block of this project. Any study of Biblical texts will need to reckon with the issues of verse numberings and textual translations. When we look at the sources in this project, many different incipits come from 1 Corinthians 6. Do I consider them all one and the same thing, and risk superimposing a modern numbering system? Do I treat each incipit as separate, even though they all came from 1 Corinthians 6, and risk losing a bigger picture? I wanted a system that was exact (the most faithful to the original sources) but broad (so as to trace trends and say something meaningful). Cataloguing by incipit gave me the right amount of granularity. You are welcome to download my data with attribution (CC-BY) and approach it from a different angle.

I selected sources that met the following conditions:

1. It was indexed in the website Usuarium
2. It had a conspectus (a detailed table of contents)
3. The conspectus included at least one proper from a wedding mass
4. That proper was either the introit, epistle, gradual, alleluia, gospel, offertory, or communion

I extracted the following data points from Usuarium and its conspectuses:

• country
• region
• introit incipit
• epistle incipit
• gradual incipit
• alleluia incipit
• gospel incipit
• offertory incipit
• communion incipit
• sequence incipit
• link to book in Usuarium
• date as recorded in Usuarium
• title of book as it appears in Usuarium
• genre of book as it appears in Usuarium

Then I added more data points, including but not limited to:

• options; for example, did the book offer more than one option for the Communion proper?
• completeness: are all 7 propers included?
• title of wedding mass, if given
• is there a Gospel issue (Matthew and Mark were occasionally mis-recorded)
• is there musical notation?
• are there interesting illustrations?
• notes
• what percentage of the wedding mass matches Trent’s Deus Israel wedding mass?

Results

The data for this project is available under a CC-BY license. You are welcome to browse, download, and reuse the data at the link above, as long as you provide attribution.

In the tables, all Trent incipits are marked with an exclamation mark at the end of the phrase. In the charts, all Trent incipits are color-coded yellow.

Sources

219 sources met my criteria.

The sources covered 17 countries and 165 cities. Almost half of the 219 sources came from France, which will naturally affect the data trends. Borders have changed since the publication of these sources, so I have also represented the data as a map. The geographically inclined will likely spot some regional trends immediately.

The earliest source was from 983; the latest, 1617. 4 sources were published after Trent, so we can take a look, albeit a small one, at how quickly Trent’s Deus Israel wedding mass was adopted. Most sources I catalogued were from 1490-1530.

About 70% of sources can be classified as missals. Because we are discussing a votive mass, we would expect to see that most sources are missals. It is nevertheless interesting that 30% of the sources are not missals. A wedding mass actually includes several separate ceremonies: the Rite of Marriage (a rite), the wedding mass (a mass), and possibly the blessing of the bedchamber (a blessing). Rites, masses, and blessings were theoretically organized into separate liturgical books. In practice, at least for weddings, it made sense to combine them. A ritual with the Rite of Marriage might also contain the wedding mass. A missal with the wedding mass might also include the rite of marriage and the blessing of the bedchamber.

20 sources had illustrations of some sort, 10 sources included musical notation, and only 1 source had both musical notation and at least one illustration.

Table 2. The “what”: genre of the sources

Table 3. The “where”: regional origin of the sources

Chart 1. The “when”: date of publication of the sources

Propers

78% (170 sources) had what I refer to as a ‘complete’ wedding mass: i.e. the mass had all 7 propers: the introit, epistle, gradual, alleluia, gospel, offertory, and communion. I catalogued sequences, but I did not include them as a requirement for a complete mass.

Pontificals and rituals were the most likely source genres to have an incomplete mass. 20% (43 sources) had options, which could include one or more options for an incipit, or an additional complete wedding mass. When analyzing trends, I did not factor in the additional options. The alleluia was the proper most likely to be absent, and the most likely to have multiple options.

Table 4. What sources had a complete set of nuptial propers?

Table 5. How frequently was a proper missing from a wedding mass?

Incipits

To see the complete list of all incipits, see the Appendix.

While we will see a dominating Biblical theme in the incipits, we can still see a variety of incipits. In all, across the seven nuptial propers, I found 83 unique incipits from 16 different books of the Bible. The alleluias were the most diverse, with 18 different incipits used at different times and places.

Nearly 80% of all incipits came from Tobit, the Psalms, 1 Corinthians, or Daniel. In fact, nearly 50% came just from Tobit or the Psalms. At the other end of the spectrum, there was one occurrence each for Revelations, Ephesians, Romans, and Isaiah.

Table 6. For each proper, how many different incipits did I find?

Table 7. What book of the Bible did the incipits come from?

Chart 2. What book of the Bible did the incipits come from?

Charts 3-9. Nuptial incipits by decade

Sequences

Special mention must be made of the few but remarkable nuptial sequences. Of the 219 sources, 19 of them included a sequence in the wedding mass. I believe there were four unique sequences: Alma chorus, Benedicta semper sancta, Benedicta sit beata, and Veni spiritus consolator. Some of the sequences may have been optional; for example, the rubrics might say only to use the sequence during Eastertide.

I first recorded the sequence incipit exactly as it appeared in the Usuarium conspectus. When I cross-referenced that information within the source itself, the sequence landscape began to resemble a Monet painting.

Alma chorus occurred six times exclusively in the United Kingdom, and Veni spiritus consolator occurred three times across Hungary and Croatia.

The Benedicta sequences were much murkier. To the surprise of no one except myself, there were many sequences beginning with “Benedicta,” and they were referred to in the sources and in the conspectuses in various ways. I used the information in the source, in Usuarium, and in the multi-volume Analecta Hymnica⁵ to make a reasoned guess which Benedicta was which. Some of my guesses may have been wrong, but we can say with confidence that various regions of northern France used a Trinitarian-themed nuptial sequence.

Table 8. Sequences present in wedding masses from 983-1617

Discussion

To my knowledge, this is the largest and most granular study of pre-Trent wedding masses.

So, was anyone using the Deus Israel wedding mass before Trent? In short, no. Of all 219 wedding masses – plus 43 options – not a single source used all seven incipits from Trent’s Deus Israel wedding mass.

What about considering the incipits individually? With the exception of the Gospel, Trent’s choices were astonishingly rare before Trent. Trent’s gospel was used at least in 72% of sources (81%, if you group in the equivalent incipit from Mark- see appendix). Trent’s offertory appeared in 17% of sources. Trent’s introit and gradual each appeared in 14% of sources. Trent’s communion appeared in 12% of sources. Trent’s alleluia appeared in 11% of sources. Most dramatically, Trent’s epistle Mulieris viris [Ephesians 5] was used only once. It bears repeating: Trent’s choice for a nuptial epistle was used one time, across 219 sources and seven centuries. Indeed, this incipit was “studiously unread”!

Even placing the incipits together in different combinations does not change the picture. 57% of sources used only one Trent Deus Israel wedding mass incipit; 26% of sources used no Trent incipits at all.

Trent neither codified an existing mass, nor selected the most popular wedding propers. Trent went out of its way to select uncommon propers that had never been placed together before. At the risk of delighting the twentieth century liturgical propagandizers, Trent created a new votive mass for weddings.

Table 9. How frequently did Trent’s incipits occur?

Table 10. How many sources used any of Trent’s incipits?

If no one was using Trent’s Deus Israel wedding mass, what were they using instead before 1570? Here are a few examples.

The Benedicta sit wedding mass

Briefly, most regions repurposed some or all of a votive mass for the Trinity for their wedding mass. Some sources even called the wedding mass and the Holy Trinity mass the same thing, or placed them in each other’s respective sections in the missal.

The table below is a Benedicta sit wedding mass from Paris in 1218. Of the 219 wedding masses I found, a full 27% (60) had the exact seven incipits below. 57% (124) of sources used the Benedicta sit as their wedding introit.

Table 11. The Benedicta sit wedding mass

The Sicut oculi wedding mass

A Sicut oculi wedding mass, with the exact 7 incipits below, occurred in 3% (6) of sources, across Germany and Poland. Sicut oculi as an introit appeared in about 8% (17) of sources. Interestingly, the alleluia Domine refugium pulled double duty as an introit in 8 other sources.

Table 12. The Sicut oculi wedding mass

The Domine refugium wedding mass

The Domine refugium mass occurred in 3% (7) of sources, without a clear regional pattern. It occurred in Italy, Poland, Czechia, France, and Germany. The Domine refugium mass in Aosta, Italy is one of the earliest complete wedding masses I found (1091-1100). It also includes Benedicta sit as a second option for the introit.

Table 13. The Domine refugium wedding mass

The Spiritus Domini replevit wedding mass

In all fairness, this Spiritus Domini replevit wedding mass occurred only once, in late 15th century Catalonia. Nevertheless, I find it to be representative of one of the most fascinating trends.

In Spain and southern France, 9% (20) of sources used either Veni Sancte Spiritus or Qualis Pater talis Filius for the alleluia incipit. The former incipit needs no introduction, but the latter is from the Athanasian Creed! Both incipits leave listeners in no doubt that there are theological parallels between a married couple and the Trinity.

It is well worth noting that the incipits for this wedding mass not only do not match Trent’s Deus Israel mass at all – there is practically no overlap with previously listed masses.

Table 14. The Spiritus Domini replevit wedding mass

The In voluntate tua wedding mass

Special mention must be made to the one occurrence of the wedding mass that used Ephesians 5 as its epistle.

Table 15. The In voluntate tua wedding mass

This particular introit – which I believe is taken from Esther – does occur in 2% (5) of sources. When looking at all 5 In voluntate tua introits, we notice even more interesting patterns (or non-patterns).

As mentioned, the source from Gurk, Austria is the only one with Trent’s Ephesians 5 as the epistle. That same source used Nuptiae factae sunt (John 2) as its gospel: one of the only sources in the entire project to use the Gospel of John. How odd that the Gurk wedding mass used Trent’s epistle choice but not Trent’s extremely popular gospel choice! We can also see that the Gurk mass is the only In voluntate tua wedding mass that uses Confortamini et iam (Isaiah 35) rather than Sicut in holocaustem (Daniel 3) for its offertory. Daniel was a perennial favorite Bible book for wedding incipits; this is the only time Isaiah is used in a wedding mass.

The Ephesians-less Deus Israel wedding mass

When we filter the data for Trent’s Deus Israel wedding mass incipits, we may note an almost comical resistance to the usage of Wives, be submissive (Ephesians 5) for the epistle. Almost 10% (20) of sources used every Trent Deus Israel wedding mass incipit except for the epistle. These masses span 8 different countries and 500 years. Truly a diverse resistance!

Conclusion

Laszlo Dobszay made the following point, which guided me throughout this project:

The Bible and the Gospels are holy to the very last letter. The very last “and” uttered by the Savior has meaning and conveys grace, simply because it was He who said it. Nobody has the right to select or omit the words of the Bible according to their perspective or taste. The Bible demands reverence and pious devotion, and it is only in its entirety that it has consecrating power. But another question is whether all parts of the Bible are equally suitable for becoming a pericope (in the sense defined above) — able to pervade, organize and characterize the liturgical day. When we discuss the choice of pericopes, it is not the biblical text that is criticized, and no distinction is made between the status of the various holy texts as part of Divine Revelation and doctrine. All we say is that one text is not as suitable to be a pericope as another. One section might be too abstract; another can only be properly understood in its full context (together with a following paragraph to be read the following Sunday). There can be commands or recommendations worthy of the deepest consideration, yet they can lack the striking effect needed for a pericope. Different descriptions of the same events may express the liturgical meaning on different levels of perfection.⁶

To explicate this point, we will make a brief detour from matrimony into the monastery:

The votive mass for the installation of a new abbot (missa os justi) is shot through with the themes of justice (expected) and desire (unexpected!). A few select propers from the missa os justi:

• Introit: The mouth of the just shall meditate wisdom and his tongue shall speak judgment [Psalm 36]
• Alleluia: The just shall flourish like the palm tree [Psalm 91]
• Gospel: Amen, I say to you…when the Son of man shall sit on the seat of his majesty, you also shall sit on twelve seats, judging the twelve tribes of Israel [Matthew 19]
• Gradual and Offertory: Thou hast prevented him with blessing of sweetness…Thou has given him his heart’s desire [Psalm 20]

These propers, deliberately selected, arranged, and enduring, tell us something about how Christ and the Church see leadership. Justice is so frequently pitted against the softness of mercy; the wielding of power is so frequently scorned or cautioned against. How interesting, then, to see this mass’ alleluia speak of the just flourishing, to see the gradual and offertory talk of longing and sweetness!

Of course, this way of thinking would be natural to medieval man. Dante, upon seeing the Beatific Vision, closed his Divine Comedy not with a lecture on theology or power, but an outpouring of desire:

Here vigour failed the lofty fantasy:
But now was turning my desire and will,
Even as a wheel that equally is moved,

The Love which moves the sun and the other stars.

Within the scope of this project, Trent’s Deus Israel wedding mass was nonexistent before Trent. Regarding both the selection and arrangement of texts, the Deus Israel wedding mass would have been seen as a new iteration of the wedding mass. Not once did all 7 of the Deus Israel wedding mass incipits appear together before Trent. Indeed, the 4 post-1570 sources in this project (spanning 4 countries from 1591-1617) adopted almost nothing from the Deus Israel mass. Only 17% of sources used more than one Trent incipit. Almost a third of all incipits came from either 1 Corinthians or Daniel – neither of which appear in Trent’s selections. 

This project is in no way an evaluation of the ‘best’ or ‘most correct’ wedding mass. Is it much more interesting to measure how much the wedding mass has changed over time, and why the Church saw fit to change it.

What occurs to us when we read the incipits from the Benedicta sit wedding mass, the most common wedding mass in this project? The Benedicta sit wedding mass is full of deep gratitude, joy, and worship; it repeats Blessed be God until it practically runs out of breath. It is particularly striking that Daniel 3, with Sidrach, Misach, and Abdenago in the burning furnace, was used so frequently as a wedding incipit.

The Deus Israel wedding mass, meanwhile, is full of hope and encouragement. It begins with a declaration of the nature of the sacrament (May the God of Israel join you together), looks to the future in hope (Your wife as a fruitful vine; May you see your children’s children) and asks for God’s protection (In thee O Lord, have I hoped; May the Lord send you help).

While there was something lost in the shift from regional, diverse wedding masses to one wedding mass filled with lesser-used readings, there was something gained: a votive mass with a unique and uniform identity. A key belief of the Protestant Reformation was that marriage was not a sacrament; the Church had to counter this swiftly and dramatically. Perhaps it was time for the wedding mass to assume a more distinct identity, one that emphasized that marriage was indeed a sacrament, an outward sign of God’s grace. What better way to do that than to proclaim that marriage is not simply a contract, but an institution created by God and in need of God’s protection?

Appendix: Map

Appendix: All Incipits

Appendix: All tables and charts

Table 1. The wedding mass in the 1570 Missale Romanum
Table 2. The “what”: genre of the sources
Table 3. The “where”: regional origin of the sources
Table 4. What sources had a complete set of nuptial propers?
Table 5. How frequently was a proper missing from a wedding mass?
Table 6. For each proper, how many different incipits did I find?
Table 7. What book of the Bible did the incipits come from?
Table 8. Sequences present in wedding masses from 983-1617
Table 9. How frequently did Trent’s incipits occur?
Table 10. How many sources used any of Trent’s incipits?
Table 11. The Benedicta sit wedding mass
Table 12. The Sicut oculi wedding mass
Table 13. The Domine refugium wedding mass
Table 14. The Spiritus Domini replevit wedding mass
Table 15. The In voluntate tua wedding mass
Table 16. A comparison of the Latin texts for Matthew 19 and Mark 10

Chart 1. The “when”: date of publication of the sources
Chart 2. What book of the Bible did the incipits come from?
Charts 3-9. Nuptial incipits by decade

Appendix: The Matthew and Mark Gospel incipits

The gospel and the epistle are tied for most regular mass part, as in, there was the least variation in incipits. For each, I found 9 different incipits. However, this does not paint the most accurate picture.

Of the 219 sources, about 5% did not have a wedding gospel. 6% used an incipit from John (John 2, 3, 14, 15, or 16). 8% used the incipit Simile factum from Matthew 22. The remaining 81% of wedding gospels used Matthew 19 or Mark 10, which are the same Biblical episode: Christ telling the Pharisees what God has joined together, let no man put asunder.

This is a remarkably consistent picture: throughout over 150 cities, over seven centuries, 8 out of 10 wedding masses used the same Gospel story for their wedding mass.

Trent chose Matthew’s version for their Deus Israel wedding mass, and I noted this in the spreadsheet. If a wedding mass used Mark 10 as its Gospel, I did not count it as Trent – even though it is the same Biblical episode.

For as confused as I got parsing the Gospels, it appears that the medieval scribes may have also gotten confused. 10 of the wedding masses have what I described in the spreadsheet as a ‘Gospel issue’: the Gospel incipit label does not match its given source, or it blends Matthew and Mark.

I created a table for myself to compare Matthew 19 and Mark 10, bolding and underlining some key unique words.

Table 16. A comparison of the Latin texts for Matthew 19 and Mark 10

In the first example below, the gospel label says Mattheum. The incipit is Exsurgens, which suggests Mark. In the second example, the gospel label says Marcum but the incipit is Accesserunt, which suggests Matthew.

A missa sponsalibus in a late 15th century missal from Paris, France. None of the readings match Trent’s Deus Israel wedding mass, except for possibly the Gospel. The gospel is ostensibly from Matthew; the incipit that follows matches Mark more closely. Also of note are the four different options for alleluias, at the top of the right column. Yellow marks the beginning of the mass; blue marks the gospel.

Missale Parisiense. Paris: Jean Dupré et Didier Huym. 1481. Holding institution: Bibliothèque Sainte-Geneviève. Shelfmark: BSG Paris, OEXV 228 RES. https://catalogue.bsg.univ-paris3.fr/permalink/33USPC_BSG/13g4rb9/alma991007776349705804.

A wedding mass after 1218 in a pontifical from Paris, France. None of the readings match Trent’s Deus Israel wedding mass, except for possibly the Gospel. The gospel is ostensibly from Mark; the incipit that follows matches Matthew more closely. Blue marks the gospel.

Pontificale Parisiense. Paris: France. Publication: 1218 (after). Shelfmark of library: BU Méd. Montpellier, H 399. https://usuarium.elte.hu/book/1029/view

Appendix: Select wedding masses

A missa pro sponso et sponsa in a late 15th century missal from Salzburg, Austria. All of the readings match the Deus Israel wedding mass, except for the epistle. The yellow highlight is the beginning of the wedding mass; the blue highlight is the Epistle.

Theologische Sammelhandschrift. Place/publisher: Ohne Ort. Date: 1000-1099. Holding Institution: Osterreichische Nationalbibliothek (Austrian National Library). Shelfmark: Cod. 1832 HAN MAG. http://data.onb.ac.at/rec/AC13959077. Usuarium link: https://usuarium.elte.hu/book/883/view

A missa pro sponso et sponsa in a late 15th century missal from Salzburg, Austria.  All of the readings match the Deus Israel wedding mass, except for the epistle. The yellow highlight is the beginning of the wedding mass; the blue highlight is the epistle.

Missale Salisburgense. Place/publisher: Nürnberg: Georg Stuchs für Johann Rynman. Date: 1498.08.13. Extent: 270 Bl. Worldcat Identifier: 239741904. Holding Institution: Munchener DigitalisierungsZentrum Digitale Bibliothek. https://mdz-nbn-resolving.de/details:bsb00032991. Usuarium link: https://usuarium.elte.hu/book/35/view

A lovely missa pro sponso et sponsa in a 16th century missal from Rodez, France. None of the readings, save the gospel, match the Deus Israel wedding mass.

Missale secundum usum ecclesie Ruthenensis. Date: 1540. Holding institution: Médiathèque-Ludothèque de la ville de Rodez. Shelfmark: BM Rodez, RES A 5842. https://mediatheque.ville-rodez.fr/detail-d-une-notice/notice/954847415-1205

A missa pro sponso et sponsa in a 13th century pontifical from Lyon, France. Typical of wedding masses in medieval pontificals, only an epistle [1 Corinthians 6] and a gospel [Matthew 22] were provided, but we do find a beautiful Trinity illustration. Yellow is the epistle; blue is the gospel.

Pontifical à l’usage de Lyon. Date: 1285. Holding institution: Bibliothèque Inguimbertine de Carpentras. Shelfmark: Ms. 96. https://data.biblissima.fr/w/Item:Q235343. https://usuarium.elte.hu/book/949/view

A missa de Sancta Trinitate vel missa nuptialis in a 15th century obsequiale from Esztergom, Hungary. The layout is one column, rather than the typical two we see throughout the other sources. All of the readings, save the epistle, match the Deus Israel wedding mass.

Obsequiale seu Baptismale ecclesiae Strigoniensis. Printer: Stuchs, Georgius de Sulzbach (Nürnberg, 1484-1518). Date: 1494-1502. Holding institution: Jagiellońska Biblioteka Cyfrowa. Shelfmark: Jagiell. Kraków , Inc. 2091 (a). Identifier: NDIGSTDR010839. https://jbc.bj.uj.edu.pl/dlibra/publication/edition/277698. Usuarium link: https://usuarium.elte.hu/book/252/view

A missa de nuptiis in a 15th century missal from Siguenza, Spain. The readings mostly match the Benedicta sit mass. A notable exception is the alleluia, Qualis pater talis Filius, from the Athanasian Creed. An uncommon but tantalizing choice of reading for a wedding mass, this Athanasian alleluia appeared in 14 total wedding masses, strictly in Spain (9), Portugal (1), and southern France (4). Another popular choice for wedding alleluias in Spain was the Veni Sancte Spiritus.

Missale ad usum ecclesiae Seguntinae. 1552. Holding institution: Palacio Real Madrid. Shelfmark: PAS/3140. https://usuarium.elte.hu/book/808/view

A missa de nuptiis in an early 16th century missal from Bayeux, France. Two epistle options and two gospel options are given. For the epistle: 1 Corinthians 6 or 1 Corinthians 7. For the gospel: Matthew 19 or Mark 10.

Missale secundum usum ecclesiae Baiocensis. 1503. Printer: Violette, Petrus (Rouen, 1500-1517). Shelfmark: BM Caen, RES A 329. Usuarium link: https://usuarium.elte.hu/book/107/view

A missa de sponsalibus in an early 16th century missal from Arras, France. Save for the gospel, none of the readings match the Deus Israel wedding mass, but look at that beautiful Trinity illustration!

Missale ad usum insignis ecclesie Atrebatensis. Publisher: Martin Morin (Rouen), Jean L’Agache (Arras). 1508. Bibliothèque nationale de France, département Réserve des livres rares, B-27899. Identifier: ark:/12148/bpt6k857684w. Usuarium link: https://usuarium.elte.hu/book/171/view

A missa de sponsalibus in a late 15th century missal from Meaux, France. In a rubrical note preceding the mass (top of the left column), it reads, “In the celebration of marriage, according to the custom of the diocese of Melk, the entrance to the mass is repeated twice.” As is typical for this era and region, only the gospel matches the Deus Israel wedding mass.

Missale Meldense. Paris, Jean Du Pré. 1492. France, Meaux, Médiathèque Luxembourg. Identifier: ark:/63955/md8605744m6r. Usuarium link: https://usuarium.elte.hu/book/372/view

A missa in benedicta Sancta Trinitatis in a late 15th century ritual from Naples, Italy. It appears that the gradual, Benedictus es domine, is mislabeled as the offertory.

Manuale baptisterium diocesis Neapolitanae. 1494. Stephan Planck. Wurttembergische Landesbibliothek. Shelfmark: Inc.qt.10717b. http://digital.wlb-stuttgart.de/purl/bsz348418868. Usuarium link: https://usuarium.elte.hu/book/397/view

A partial wedding mass in a 10th century sacramentary from Switzerland. The famous Hornbach Sacramentary, dated before 983, contains the oldest (partial) wedding mass I catalogued. The epistle is Nescitis [1 Corinthians 6], and the gospel is Simile factum est regnum [Matthew 22].

Solothurn, Domschatz der St.-Ursen-Kathedrale, Cod. U 1: Hornbach Sacramentary (https://www.e-codices.unifr.ch/en/list/one/dss/U0001). DOI:10.5076/e-codices-dss-U0001. https://usuarium.elte.hu/book/4000/view

A partial wedding mass (epistle and gospel only) in an early 14th century missal from Cambrai, France. The mass is labeled missa de trinitate but it is placed in the marriage rituals, making it clear that it is the region’s wedding mass. Yellow is the beginning of the mass, blue is the epistle, and green is the gospel.

Misselde Cambrai, avec notation musicale. Liste de membres de la confrérie de N. D. de Cambrai (263v). 1300-1325. Bibliothèque nationale de France. Département des Manuscrits. Latin 17311. Identifier: ark:/12148/btv1b10033768b. Usuarium link: https://usuarium.elte.hu/book/3288/view

A wedding mass in a 16th century ritual book from Astorga, Spain. Only the Gospel matches the Deus Israel wedding mass. Somewhat typical for the region is the alleluia Qualis pater, from the Athanasian Creed. Yellow is the beginning of the mass; blue is the alleluia.

Manuale s’m consuetudinem astoriceñ. ecclesie quam optime ordinatum nouiter impressum. Harvard Library. Shelfmark: Houghton Cambridge, Typ 560.26.262. HOLLIS number: 990029601210203941. http://id.lib.harvard.edu/alma/990029601210203941/catalog. Usuarium link: https://usuarium.elte.hu/book/172/view

Appendix: Select wedding masses with sequences

A wedding mass with the sequence Veni spiritus consolator in an early 16th century missal from Zagreb, Croatia. Blue marks the beginning of the sequence.

Missale secundum chorum et rubricam almi episcopatus Zagrabiensis ecclesiae… Printer: Liechtenstein, Petrus (Venezia, 1497-1528). Date: 1511. Shelfmark: OSZK Budapest, RMK III 0176. Usuarium link: https://usuarium.elte.hu/book/92/view

A missa nuptiarum in an early 16th century missal from Lisieux, France. Not only does this wedding mass have a sequence, which is rare, but it is the only instance of the full text of the sequence being provided. The sequence is Benedicta sit beata trinitas, not to be confused with Benedicta semper sancta.

Ordinatio missalis secundum usum ecclesiae Lexoviensis. 1504. Printer: Regnault, Petrus I. (Caen, 1489-1517). Shelfmark: BNF Paris, B- 27923. Usuarium link: https://usuarium.elte.hu/book/340/view

A missa sponsialorum in an early 16th century missal from Chalons-en-Champagne, France. The sequence is Benedicta semper sancta, not to be confused with Benedicta sit beata trinitas.

Missale ad usum insignis ecclesiae Cathalaunensis noviter emendatum ex iussu reverendi in Christo patris et domini domini Aegidii de Lucemburgo episcopi ac comitis Cathalaunensis parisque Franciae. 1509. Printer: Estienne, Henricus I. (Paris, 1502-1520). Shelfmark: BNF Paris, FOL- T- 686. Usuarium link: https://usuarium.elte.hu/book/108/view

A truly remarkable wedding mass in an early 16th century ritual book from Salisbury, England. It is the only instance I found of a fully musically notated mass. 6 options for the Alleluia are given – a record in this project! Also notable is the Creed; later rubrical reforms would remove the Creed from the wedding mass. Highlighted in yellow is the sequence Alma chorus, typical for the region.

Dear reader, if you have made it this far, please enjoy the last research finding: tucked in the margins, a doodle of a married couple resting in bed.

Manuale ad usum insignis ecclesiae Sarum. 1506. Printer: Pynson, Ricardus (London, 1492-1530). British Library London. Shelfmark: c.52.g.2. Usuarium link: https://usuarium.elte.hu/book/565/view

Appendix: Commentaries on the sequences

All quotations are from: Dreves, Guido Maria, and Clemens Blume. 1886-1922. Analecta Hymnica : Medii Aevi. Leipzig: R. Reisland

On Alma chorus:

“Die interessante, wahrscheinlich in Frankreich oder England entstandene, vom 11. Jahrh. an wirklich internationale Sequenz, hört auffallender Weise im 12. Jahrh. in Deutschland vollständig auf, und auch schon vorher ist ihr Vorkommen in Deutschland ein von den anderen alten, dort gebräuchlichen Sequenzen sehr verschiedenes. St. Gallen, Reichenau, Rheinau, Bamberg sind nicht vertreten. Hat man da irgendeinen Grund, an Notker als Auctor noch länger zu glauben? — Liturgischer Gebrauch vorwiegend per octavam Pentecostes, vereinzelt auf Trinitas, in England für die Brautmesse; auch als Dominicalis fand sie Verwendung (so in y und n).” 

On both Benedicta sequences:

“Ein anderer Titel ist “Benedicta” nach dem Anfangsworte der Sequenz. 81b Benedicta sit beata trinitas (Anal. Hymn. VII, Nr. 96). Den dort benützten Quellen aus St. Martial resp. aus Limoges u. Narbonne seien folgende ältere der vielen Quellen aus Frankreich, England nebst einer aus Spanien u. Belgien beigefügt, durch welche der Ursprung der Sequenz aus St. Martial mindestens als fraglich erscheinen mufs: Die allerdings zahlreichen, aber belanglosen Varianten verlangen keine Änderung an dem 1. c. gebotenen Texte, weshalb wir sie übergehen. Nur ist zu bemerken, dafs auf Grund vieler Quellen wahrscheinlich zu lesen ist: 3b, 2 patriam cedit serenam. — 5b, 5 post funera socia. — 6b, 4 visio nostra et salus aeterna. — 8b, 3 eis pro bonis. Das Schema est abermals “Trinitas”, jedoch gekurzt. Da England die Sequens “Benedicta semper sancta” ablebnte, dafur aber diese andere vom 10. Jahrh. an uberall in liturgischen Gebrauch nahm, so its letztere vielleicht englischen Ursprungs. Beide Sequenzen dienten anfangs fur die Missa votiva de ss. Trinitate, spater fur das Fest Trinitatis und dann auch fur andere Feste Christi, in England fur die Brautmesse.”

On Benedicta sit beata only:

“Mel. der Sequenz dieselbe wie: Benedicta semper sancta unter Auslassung des Chorals 6 und 8 jener 8 Prose.”

On Veni spiritus consolator:  

“Bei der verschiedenen Gestaltung des Textes in den verschiedenen Landergebieten Suddeutschland, Flandern, England, Bohmen halt es sehr schwer, den richtigen Urtext festzustellen. Sichtlich haben wir die Umdichtung des Hymnus Rabans “Veni creator spiritus” zu einer Sequenz vor uns. Wie der Hymnus, so scheint auch die Umdichtung zur Sequenz deutschen Ursprunges zu sein. Dabei lag es nahe, dafs allmahlich immer mehr Reminiszenzen aus dem sehr gelaufigen Hymnus in die Sequenz eindrangen, nicht umgekehrt. Daher durfte es das Richtige sein, wie es geschehen, den am meisten vom Hymnus text wegruckenden Quellen Deutschlands zu folgen; es sind das auch die altesten. — Beachtenswert ist, dafs die Melodie fur Str. 1 der Sequenz “Sancti spiritus assit nobis” entnommen wurde.”

References

1. as found in: the Missale Romanum. Any edition from 1570-1962 will work as a reference, because the missa pro sponso remained essentially unchanged during that time. ↩︎
2. as found in: Catholic Church, and the Catholic Church United States Conference of Catholic Bishops Committee on Divine Worship. 2016. The Order of Celebrating Matrimony = Ritual Del Matrimonio : For Use in the Dioceses of the United States of America. Collegeville, Minnesota: Liturgical Press. ↩︎
3. Dobszay, László. 2003. The Bugnini-Liturgy and the Reform of the Reform. Front Royal, VA: Church Music Association of America. ↩︎
4. Stevenson, Kenneth. 1987. To Join Together : The Rite of Marriage. New York: Pueblo Pub. Co. ↩︎
5. Dreves, Guido Maria, and Clemens Blume. 1886-1922. Analecta Hymnica : Medii Aevi. Leipzig: R. Reisland. ↩︎
6. Dobszay, László. 2003. The Bugnini-Liturgy and the Reform of the Reform. Front Royal, VA: Church Music Association of America. ↩︎

CC-BY: This license enables reusers to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the material in any medium or format, so long as attribution is given to the creator.