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

Corpus Christi Watershed

We’re a 501(c)3 public charity established in 2006. We have no endowment, no major donors, no savings, and run no advertisements. We exist solely by the generosity of small donors.

  • Donate
  • Our Team
    • Our Editorial Policy
    • Who We Are
    • How To Contact Us
    • Sainte Marie Bulletin Articles
  • 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
    • 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

“No Approval Needed for Substitute Songs” says USCCB • Exclusive Documentation

Guest Author · February 9, 2015

N 20 November 2012, the Secretariat for the Bishops’ Committee on the Liturgy wrote that songs replacing the assigned Entrance Chant require no approval. This statement contradicts §48 of the “American” GIRM which specifically and explicitly requires 1 approval by the bishops’ conference or diocesan bishop for any substitute songs. It also contradicts the “Universal” GIRM, which says:

48. For the Entrance Chant, one could use either the antiphon with its psalm as found in the Roman Gradual or in the Simple Gradual, or another chant—congruent with the theme of the sacred action, day, or time—whose text has been approved by the Conference of Bishops.   (SOURCE)

Correspondence with the Bishops’ Liturgy Committee (SEE BELOW) deals with this contradiction. I intended to share it sooner, but events—including the birth of our first child—delayed my doing so.

This is no mere academic pursuit. Elimination of the assigned Mass texts—often replacing them with questionable 2 songs—affects every Catholic, perhaps more than any other post-conciliar change.

FROM APRIL THROUGH OCTOBER OF 2013, I sent more than 70 letters to the Bishops’ Committee on the Liturgy (BCL), but these messages met with a certain reticence, which I attributed to busy episcopal schedules. Each time I wrote, all committee members were included.

This topic can get into the weeds very quickly, so I will be as lucid as possible. The whole matter centers around one question, which I asked over and over:

* *  PDF • Copy of Letter (24 August 2013)

For a deeper understanding, please read the so-called 20 NOVEMBER CLARIFICATION by the BCL. Their statement is troubling because it says “local musicians” can lawfully sing music which has never been approved so long as it does not appear in a collection. On 25 June 2013—three months after my initial inquiry—I received a letter from Msgr. Hilgartner, spokesman for the BCL. His message was somewhat muddled, leaving my question unanswered, and only two parts are germane to our discussion. First, he confirmed that the statements attributed to him were “not inaccurate.” Second, he wrote:

“The situation remains somewhat complicated because of the lack of a centralized process and the custom that had been in place prior to the Roman Missal, Third Edition (2011), and the General Instruction of the Roman Missal (2003).” —Msgr. Rick Hilgartner, 25 June 2013

I could not accept such a response. 3

356 envelopes I FELT FRUSTRATED because the committee had failed to address my question. Somewhere along the line, I began carbon copying bishops who weren’t even on the committee, and two archbishops (Kurtz & Sample) kindly replied. The tone of my subsequent letters became distraught:

* *  PDF • Copy of Letter (11 September 2013)

After six months and 70+ letters, I received a response from Archbishop Aymond (BCL chairman):

* *  PDF • Copy of Letter (20 September 2013)

My reaction is contained in a subsequent letter:

* *  PDF • Copy of Letter (2 October 2013)

Archbishop Aymond—at last!—started backing away from the 20 NOVEMBER CLARIFICATION, but stopped short of addressing my question. Of course, much more 4 could also be explored. Indeed, the whole history of permission to replace official texts could be examined. 5

BUT WHAT ABOUT the 1996 statement Fr. Paul Turner used to justify the assertion (SEE ABOVE) in his 2012 book? He erred in citing it, because that statement is doubly defunct. First, it’s expired, having been superseded by the new GIRM (circa 2002) and Roman Missal, 3rd ed. (circa 2010). Second, that 1996 statement justifies its conclusions by citing legislation from the late 1960s, which expired a few years later, being superseded by documents like the 1975 GIRM. If we start down the path of expired legislation, where do we stop? The Council of Trent?

What did I hope to accomplish by sending all those letters? A response such as the following—which takes into consideration present circumstances—would have satisfied me:

* *  PDF Example • A fictitious response I could accept

Should I continue sending letters until my question is answered? As a new husband, young father, and full-time accountant, I’m afraid that’s out of the question. However, if anyone is able to obtain an answer, please let me know (SEE BELOW).

My efforts seem not to have been completely fruitless. For decades, the following statement has appeared on the first page of most Catholic hymnals:

Published with the approval of the Committee on Divine Worship
United States Conference of Catholic Bishops

This approval, however, never applies to any music or hymnody inside the hymnal, which is astonishingly counterintuitive. I’m told the BCL recently stopped using this wording, perhaps as a result of my correspondence. 6

If I might be permitted a few final thoughts:

(1) Having read my article, Catholics will better understand why they’ll hear something other than the assigned texts for Entrance, Offertory, and Communion in most churches.

(2) I have great respect for Msgr. Hilgartner, but I strongly disagree with an assertion he’s made many times. He contends that it would be “impossible” to abide by the requirement in the GIRM, whereas I believe it is possible. Moreover, it is not within the competence of the BCL to pass judgment on which sections of the GIRM are possible.

(3) In my work as an accountant, I’ve observed that relevant laws are provided freely and never kept secret. Should not the same qualities characterize the work of the USCCB, and should it not provide an unambiguous statement concerning the veracity of the 20 November Clarification?

Albert Einstein supposedly said, “Beware of those offering simple solutions to extremely complex problems.” In this particular instance, however, I feel many of our present difficulties would vanish if we simply followed the GIRM.

 

346 Dan Craig USCCB Dan Craig graduated from Franciscan University of Steubenville and currently lives with his wife and daughter in Texas, where he works in the field of accountancy. His interests include the Liturgy, singing Gregorian chant, and playing percussion. His family is associated with the Society of Our Lady of the Most Holy Trinity.

Dan Craig can be contacted at dan.craig90@gmail.com.

 


NOTES FROM THIS ARTICLE:

1   This precise wording has been in use for 46 years and is contained in the original 1969 GIRM. Notice that the “American Adaptation” to the GIRM allows a local bishop to approve substitute songs, whereas the “Universal” GIRM gives this power to episcopal conferences only.

2   If parishes used “another chant, congruent with the theme of the sacred action, day, or time” this issue would not be as pressing; but in many cases the substitute texts—frequently composed by non-Catholics—are troubling from a variety of standpoints.

3   I couldn’t help but chuckle, because that same phrase (“it’s complicated”) is used on Facebook for a tricky relationship status!

4   For example, why are the assigned Propers—Entrance, Offertory, and Communion—almost always replaced, while the assigned Responsorial psalm seldom is? The rubrics allow both. For instance, the Responsorial psalm can be replaced by a seasonal psalm or “an antiphon and Psalm from another collection of Psalms and antiphons, including Psalms arranged in metrical form.”

5   Vatican II desired that the official texts (not “something else”) be sung by the people. On 5 March 1967, paragraph 32 of Musicam Sacram refused to condemn a practice formerly allowed in some localities—which replaces the official texts with devotional hymns—yet placed heavy restrictions on it. The 1969 GIRM, which was concealed from the other curial offices before promulgation, went further by allowing episcopal conferences to approve substitute texts. As we’ve seen, the “American Adaptation” went further still, allowing an individual bishop to approve substitute texts.

The BCL interpretation of the “American Adaptation” allows even more freedom, maintaining that one bishop’s approval applies to all USA dioceses in perpetuity. To justify this, they interpret “the local Ordinary” as “the Ordinary where the composition is published.” The BCL policy seems to date back to 1970, but was first made public in 2008 as far as I can tell.

6   This was a peripheral issue mentioned in some of my correspondence with the BCL. I’ve only discovered one exception to this rule, which comes from June 2003.

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

Filed Under: Articles Tagged With: Hilgartner 20 November 2012, Hymns Replacing Propers, substituting hymns for propers, Traditionis Custodes Vernacular, USCCB approval Last Updated: February 17, 2025

Subscribe

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

* indicates required

Primary Sidebar

Corpus Christi Watershed

President’s Corner

    “Yahweh” in church songs?
    My pastor asked me to write a weekly column for our parish bulletin. The one scheduled to run on 22 June 2025 is called “Three Words in a Psalm” and speaks of translating the TETRAGRAMMATON. You can read the article at this column repository. All of them are quite brief because I was asked to keep within a certain word limit.
    —Jeff Ostrowski
    “Music List” • Pentecost Sunday
    Some have expressed interest in perusing the ORDER OF MUSIC I prepared for Pentecost Sunday (8 June 2025). If such a thing interests you, feel free to download it as a PDF file. Because our choir is on break this week, the music is relatively simple.
    —Jeff Ostrowski
    “Truly Great Processional” • (Pipe Organ)
    I stumbled upon this live recording of a PROCESSIONAL I played on the pipe organ in 2002. It’s an excerpt from a much longer composition by Sebastian Bach. In those days, there weren’t sophisticated recording devices allowing one “fix” wrong notes. (Perhaps they existed, but we didn’t have machines like that.) So it was necessary to play the entire piece from beginning to end. If you’re a church organist, feel free to download the PDF score. I suppose it’s only a matter of time until some joker uses “artificial intelligence” to play music at church … but there’s something so satisfying about playing an organ in real life.
    —Jeff Ostrowski

Quick Thoughts

    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
    When to Sit, Stand and Kneel like it’s 1962
    There are lots of different guides to postures for Mass, but I couldn’t find one which matched our local Latin Mass, so I made this one: sit-stand-kneel-crop
    —Veronica Brandt
    The Funeral Rites of the Graduale Romanum
    Lately I have been paging through the 1974 Graduale Romanum (see p. 678 ff.) and have been fascinated by the funeral rites found therein, especially the simply-beautiful Psalmody that is appointed for all the different occasions before and after the funeral Mass: at the vigil/wake, at the house of the deceased, processing to the church, at the church, processing to the cemetery, and at the cemetery. Would that this “stational Psalmody” of the Novus Ordo funeral rites saw wider usage! If you or anyone you know have ever used it, please do let me know.
    —Daniel Tucker

Random Quote

Impelled by the weightiest of reasons, we are fully determined to restore Latin to its position of honor, and to do all We can to promote its study and use. The employment of Latin has recently been contested in many quarters, and many are asking what the mind of the Apostolic See is in this matter. We have therefore decided to issue the timely directives contained in this document, so as to ensure that the ancient and uninterrupted use of Latin be maintained and, where necessary, restored.”

— Pope John XXIII (22 February 1962)

Recent Posts

  • PDF Download • “Text by Saint Francis of Assisi” (choral setting w/ organ: Soprano & Alto)
  • “Yahweh” in church songs?
  • “Music List” • Pentecost Sunday
  • “Participation” • Recovering its Receptive Dimension
  • “Breathtaking Photographs” • First Mass of Father Michael Caughey, FSSP (Muskegon, MI)

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