• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Corpus Christi Watershed

Pope Saint Paul VI (3 April 1969): “Although the text of the Roman Gradual—at least that which concerns the singing—has not been changed, the Entrance antiphons and Communions antiphons have been revised for Masses without singing.”

  • Donate
  • Our Team
    • Our Editorial Policy
    • Who We Are
    • How To Contact Us
    • Sainte Marie Bulletin Articles
    • Jeff’s Mom Joins Fundraiser
  • Pew Resources
    • Brébeuf Catholic Hymnal
    • Jogues Illuminated Missal
    • KYRIALE • Saint Antoine Daniel
    • Campion Missal, 3rd Edition
    • Repository • “Spanish Music”
    • Ordinary Form Feasts (Sainte-Marie)
  • MUSICAL WEBSITES
    • René Goupil Gregorian Chant
    • Noël Chabanel Psalms
    • Nova Organi Harmonia (2,279 pages)
    • Roman Missal, 3rd Edition
    • Catechism of Gregorian Rhythm
    • Father Enemond Massé Manuscripts
    • Lalemant Polyphonic
  • Miscellaneous
    • Site Map
    • Secrets of the Conscientious Choirmaster
    • “Wedding March” for lazy organists
    • Emporium Kevin Allen
    • Saint Jean de Lalande Library
    • Sacred Music Symposium 2023
    • The Eight Gregorian Modes
    • Gradual by Pothier’s Protégé
    • Seven (7) Considerations
Views from the Choir Loft

An Ordinary-Form Missa Cantata (almost)

Aristotle A. Esguerra · March 4, 2013

Given the events that are taking place in the Church these days, I doubt that this post will receive much attention; however, as restoration of liturgical beauty has been a hallmark of Pope Benedict’s papacy, mentioning the local impact of his leadership seems noteworthy.

Saturday, March 23, marked the third consecutive time that I was asked to lead the Knights of Divine Mercy schola cantorum at the closing Mass of the Diocese of Madison‘s Men’s Lenten Retreat. This year’s Mass (an anticipated Mass for the Second Sunday of Lent) was as close as it has been to the Missa Cantata, the Sung Mass so desired by the Church to be the norm in the Latin Rite but so exceptionally rare in practice, especially in the Ordinary Form.[1] The Mass, which was celebrated by Msgr. James Bartylla,[2] the Vicar General of the Diocese of Madison, was sung a cappella or said in English unless otherwise specified:

Introductory Rites
Entrance Procession and Incensation of the Altar (Psalm 25: 6, 3, 22; 1–3; Glory Be; Simple English Propers, pp. 64–65): sung by the schola cantorum
Sign of the Cross: Missal, solemn tone
Greeting “Grace and peace…”: Missal, solemn tone
Penitential Act “Have mercy on us, O Lord…”: Missal, solemn tone
Kyrie: Mass XVI, Greek, sung by all
Collect[3]: Missal, solemn tone
Liturgy of the Word
First Reading (Gen 15: 5–12, 17–18): Missal tone for the first reading, sung by a server/reader
Responsorial Psalm (cf. Ps 27: 1a, Modal Responsorial Psalms, p. 39): sung by psalmist; response sung by all.[4]
Second Reading (Phil 3: 17–4: 1): Missal tone for the second reading, sung by another server/reader
Gospel Acclamation (“Praise to you, Lord Jesus Christ…”, Modal Responsorial Psalms, p. 39): led by cantor; response sung by all
Gospel (Lk 9: 28b–36): Missal, simple tone, sung by the Priest
Homily: spoken
Creed: spoken (the Missal provides two melodies)
Prayer of the Faithful: spoken (the Missal provides four melodic formulas)
Liturgy of the Eucharist
Preparation of the Offerings and Incensation (Psalm 119: 47, 48; Psalm 119; Simple English Propers, pp. 65–66): sung by the schola cantorum
Invitation to Prayer “Pray, brethren, that my sacrifice”: Missal, solemn tone
Prayer over the Offerings: Missal, solemn tone
Preface: Missal tone
Sanctus: Mass XVIII, Latin, sung by all
Eucharistic Prayer II: Missal tone
Mystery of Faith “Save us, Savior of the world…”: Missal tone
Doxology: Missal, solemn tone
Communion Rite
Lord’s Prayer: Missal tone for the Dioceses of the United States
Embolism and Doxology: Missal tone
Sign of Peace: Missal tone
Agnus Dei: Mass XVIII, Latin, sung by all
“Behold the Lamb of God” dialog: Missal tone
Communion Chant I (Matthew 17:9; Psalm 45; Simple English Propers, pp. 66–67): sung by the schola cantorum; Latin Gregorian antiphon sung by a solo cantor
Communion Chant II (John 6:51a; Psalm 23; English chant derived from the Latin original found in the Graduale Simplex): sung by a solo cantor
Prayer after Communion: Missal, solemn tone
Concluding Rites
Blessing: Missal, solemn tone
Dismissal “Go and announce…”: Missal tone
Hymn: “What Wondrous Love is This”

This year the schola cantorum was spread rather thinly, as only four men including myself were able to chant; others in the group were called to serve at the altar.

I think moving towards actually enacting what the Church asks in regard to the singing of the words of the Mass instead of relegating it to a printed book ought to be a primary objective, given the Year of Faith theme for our diocese: “Evangelization through Beauty”.[5]


[1] “For the celebration of the Eucharist with the people, especially on Sundays and feast days, a form of sung Mass (Missa in cantu) is to be preferred as much as possible, even several times on the same day.” Musicam Sacram Instruction on Music in the Liturgy, ¶27, emphasis added. Although some may argue that this instruction doesn’t apply to the current revision of the English-language Roman Missal, in fact the 2010 revision provides almost all of the resources needed for the priest to sing: the parts of the Mass proper to himself; many of the parts he sings with the faithful, e.g., the Sanctus; and the parts of the Mass that are better delegated to others, e.g., lector.

[2] From September to May as his schedule allows, Msgr. Bartylla celebrates a Latin Missa Cantata with Gregorian chant and vernacular readings on the first Tuesday of each month at noon; he celebrates an English Missa Cantata with Gregorian-inspired English plainsong on the third Tuesday of the month at noon. In the case of a scheduling conflict these Masses are usually transferred to the following Tuesday. All of these Masses take in the chapel of the Bishop O’Connor Catholic Pastoral Center [map].

[3] Why this was ever called the “Opening Prayer” in the defunct English translation mystifies me. Does not prayer occur from the beginning of the Mass? It’s more logical to understand the Collect as the closing prayer of the Introductory Rites.

[4] “Faith comes from hearing.” Thus, I propose that during the Responsorial Psalm and other liturgical texts that share its nature, audible cues—such as slowing down at the final line of a verse and maintaining a consistent breathing pattern—are better than visual cues at fostering actual participation, i.e., intentional listening and prayerful singing. No visual cues were used to prompt the people’s singing of the refrain other than psalmist’s looking up from the ambo, which was done in conjunction with the aforementioned audible cues.

[5] A friend recently relayed to me a question asked of her by another friend regarding the difference between the High Mass and the Low Mass (within the context of the Extraordinary Form). I quipped: At High Mass, all the texts that are supposed to be uttered in song are sung. At Low Mass, all the texts that are supposed to be uttered in song are…muttered. There are other differences to be sure, but given the weight Church teaching has placed on sacred music, I focus on that primarily. And the musical differences between High Mass and Low Mass also apply to the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite regardless of whether it is celebrated in its sacral languages.

Opinions by blog authors do not necessarily represent the views of Corpus Christi Watershed.

Filed Under: Articles Last Updated: January 1, 2020

Subscribe

It greatly helps us if you subscribe to our mailing list!

* indicates required

About Aristotle A. Esguerra

Aristotle A. Esguerra has served in the Diocese of Madison since 2009 as music director at the churches of St. Mary, Pine Bluff and St. Ignatius, Mount Horeb, and as the chant instructor to the Cistercian Nuns of Valley of Our Lady Monastery, Prairie du Sac.

Primary Sidebar

Corpus Christi Watershed

President’s Corner

    PDF Comparison Chart • “Serious Problems with the Lectionary Translation”
    EARS BEFORE truly revolutionary changes were introduced by the post-conciliar reformers, Evelyn Waugh wrote (on 16 August 1964) to John Cardinal Heenan: “I think that a vociferous minority has imposed itself on the hierarchy and made them believe that a popular demand existed where there was in fact not even a preference.” We ask the kind reader— indeed, we beg you—to realize that those of us born in the 1940s and 1950s had no cognizance of Roman activities during the 1960s and 1970s. We were concerned with making sure we had the day’s bus fare, graduating from high school, taking care of our siblings, learning a trade, getting a job, courting a spouse. We questioned neither the nuns nor the Church.1 Do not believe for one instant any of us were following the liturgical machinations of Cardinal Lercaro or Father Bugnini in real time. Setting The Stage • To never question or resist Church authorities is praiseworthy. On the other hand, when a scandalous situation persists for decades, it must be brought into focus. Our series will do precisely that as we discuss the Lectionary Scandal from a variety of angles. We don’t do this to attack the Catholic Church. Our goal is bringing to light what’s been going on, so it can be fixed once and for all. Our subject is extremely knotty and difficult to navigate. Its complexity helps explain why the situation has persisted for such a long time.2 But if we immediately get “into the weeds” we’ll lose our audience. Therefore, it seems better to jump right in. So today, we’ll explore the legality of selling these texts. A Word On Copyright • Suppose Susie modifies a paragraph by Edgar Allan Poe. That doesn’t mean ipso facto she can assert copyright on it. If Susie takes a picture of a Corvette and uses Photoshop to color the tires blue, that doesn’t mean she henceforth “owns” all Corvettes in America. But when it comes to Responsorial Psalm translations, certain parties have been asserting copyright over them, selling them for a profit, and bullying publishers vis-à-vis hymnals and missals. Increasingly, Catholics are asking whether these translations are truly under copyright—because they are identical (or substantially identical) to other translations.3 Example After Example • Our series will provide copious examples supporting our claims. Sometimes we’ll rely on the readership for assistance, because—as we’ve stressed—our subject’s history couldn’t be more convoluted. There are countless manuscripts (in Greek, Hebrew, and Latin) we don’t have access to, so it would be foolish for us to claim that our observations are somehow the ‘final word’ on anything. Nevertheless, we demand accountability. Catholics in the pews are the ones who paid for all this. We demand to know who specifically made these decisions (which impact every English-speaking Catholic) and why specifically certain decisions were made. The Responsorial Psalms used in America are—broadly speaking—stolen from the hard work of others. In particular, they borrowed heavily from Father Cuthbert Lattey’s 1939 PSALTER TRANSLATION:
    *  PDF Download • COMPARISON CHART —We thank the CCW staff for technical assistance with this graph.
    Analysis • Although certain parties have been selling (!!!) that translation for decades, the chart demonstrates it’s not a candidate for copyright since it “borrows” or “steals” or “rearranges” so much material from other translations, especially the 1939 translation by Father Cuthbert Lattey. What this means in layman’s terms is that individuals have been selling a translation under false pretenses, a translation they don’t own (although they claim to). To make RESTITUTION, all that money will have to be returned. A few years ago, the head of ICEL gave a public speech in which he said they give some of “their” profits to the poor. While almsgiving is a good thing, it cannot justify theft. Our Constant Theme • Our series will be held together by one thread, which will be repeated constantly: “Who was responsible?” Since 1970, the conduct of those who made a profit by selling these sacred texts has been repugnant. Favoritism was shown toward certain entities—and we will document that with written proof. It is absolutely essential going forward that the faithful be told who is making these decisions. Moreover, vague justifications can no longer be accepted. If we’re told they are “making the translations better,” we must demand to know what specifically they’re doing and what specific criteria they’re following. Stay Tuned • If you’re wondering whether we’ll address the forthcoming (allegedly) Lectionary and the so-called ABBEY PSALMS AND CANTICLES, have no fear. We’ll have much to say about both. Please stay tuned. We believe this will end up being the longest series of articles ever submitted to Corpus Christi Watershed. To be continued. ROBERT O’NEILL Former associate of Monsignor Francis “Frank” P. Schmitt at Boys Town in Nebraska JAMES ARNOLD Formerly associated w/ King’s College, Cambridge A convert to the Catholic Church, and distant relative of J. H. Arnold MARIA B. Currently serves as a musician in the Roman Catholic Diocese of Charlotte. Those aware of the situation in her diocese won’t be surprised she chose to withhold her last name.
    1 Even if we’d been able to obtain Roman journals such as NOTITIAE, none of them contained English translations. But such an idea would never have occurred to a high school student or a college student growing up in the 1960s. 2 A number of shell corporations claim to own the various biblical translations mandated for Roman Catholics. They’ve made millions of dollars selling (!) these indulgenced texts. If time permits, we hope to enumerate these various shell corporations and explain: which texts they claim to own; how much they bring in each year; who runs them; and so forth. It would also be good to explore the morality of selling these indulgenced texts for a profit. Furthermore, for the last fifty years these organizations have employed several tactics to manipulate and bully others. If time permits, we will expose those tactics (including written examples). Some of us—who have been working on this problem for three decades—have amassed written documentation we’ll be sharing that demonstrates behavior at best “shady” and at worst criminal. 3 Again, we are not yet examining the morality of selling (!) indulgenced texts to Catholics mandated to use those same translations.
    —Guest Author
    “Music List” • 17th in Ordinary Time (Year C)
    Some have expressed interest in perusing the ORDER OF MUSIC I prepared for the 17th Sunday in Ordinary Time (27 July 2025). If such a thing interests you, feel free to download it as a PDF file. As always, the Responsorial Psalm, Gospel Acclamation, and Mass Propers for this Sunday are conveniently stored at the the feasts website.
    —Jeff Ostrowski
    Communion • “Ask & You Shall Receive”
    All of the chants for 27 July 2025 have been added to the feasts website, as usual under a convenient “drop down” menu. The COMMUNION ANTIPHON (both text and melody) are exceedingly beautiful and ancient.
    —Jeff Ostrowski

Quick Thoughts

    Pope Pius XII Hymnal?
    Have you ever heard of the Pope Pius XII Hymnal? It’s a real book, published in the United States in 1959. Here’s a sample page so you can verify with your own eyes it existed.
    —Corpus Christi Watershed
    “Hybrid” Chant Notation?
    Over the years, many have tried to ‘simplify’ plainsong notation. The O’Fallon Propers attempted to simplify the notation—but ended up making matters worse. Dr. Karl Weinmann tried to do the same in the time of Pope Saint Pius X by replacing each porrectus. You can examine a specimen from his edition and see whether you agree he complicated matters. In particular, look at what he did with éxsules fílii Hévae.
    —Corpus Christi Watershed
    Antiphons Don’t Match?
    A reader wants to know why the Entrance and Communion antiphons in certain publications deviate from what’s prescribed by the GRADUALE ROMANUM published after Vatican II. Click here to read our answer. The short answer is: the Adalbert Propers were never intended to be sung. They were intended for private Masses only (or Masses without music). The “Graduale Parvum,” published by the John Henry Newman Institute of Liturgical Music in 2023, mostly uses the Adalbert Propers—but sometimes uses the GRADUALE text: e.g. Solemnity of Saints Peter and Paul (29 June).
    —Corpus Christi Watershed

Random Quote

The Latin language, “far from being held in little regard, is certainly worthy of being vigorously defended.”

— Pope Saint Paul VI (15 August 1966)

Recent Posts

  • PDF Comparison Chart • “Serious Problems with the Lectionary Translation”
  • “Music List” • 17th in Ordinary Time (Year C)
  • Flor Peeters In A Weird Mood?
  • Communion • “Ask & You Shall Receive”
  • Jeff’s Mother Joins Our Fundraiser

Subscribe

Subscribe

* indicates required

Copyright © 2025 Corpus Christi Watershed · Isaac Jogues on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Corpus Christi Watershed is a 501(c)3 public charity dedicated to exploring and embodying as our calling the relationship of religion, culture, and the arts. This non-profit organization employs the creative media in service of theology, the Church, and Christian culture for the enrichment and enjoyment of the public.

The election of Pope Leo XIV has been exciting, and we’re filled with hope for our apostolate’s future!

But we’re under pressure to transfer our website to a “subscription model.”

We don’t want to do that. We believe our website should remain free to all.

Our president has written the following letter:

President’s Message (dated 30 May 2025)

Are you able to support us?

clock.png

Time's up