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

Corpus Christi Watershed

“A much greater source of anxiety to Us is the style of action of those who maintain that liturgical worship should shed its sacred character, who foolishly say we should substitute for sacred items & furnishings ordinary common things in daily use.” —Pope Saint Paul VI (14 Oct 1968)

  • 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
    • 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

Bishops Care When Their Names Are “Tacitly” Used

Jeff Ostrowski · February 16, 2015

290 Tacit Approval ANIEL CRAIG recently published a landmark article providing important source documents which shed light on how the USCCB regards the General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM). Upon reflection, I find several statements disturbing.

A recurring theme appears throughout the USCCB correspondence. Time and again, the requirements of the GIRM are deemed “impossible” to obey. Consider the 2012 statement by Fr. Paul Turner, which the Secretariat of Divine Worship endorsed:

The approval of local bishops in the third and fourth options can be formal, but commonly bishops have given at least tacit approval to the use of songs appearing in published worship aids, if not songs composed by local musicians.

This statement is outrageously incorrect. As Mr. Craig explained in detail, both the “American” GIRM and the “Universal” GIRM specifically require episcopal approval for substitute texts.

Not once does the GIRM speak of “tacit approval.” Moreover, this statement essentially sets up a scenario where people are free to do as they please unless the local bishop hunts them down. That’s totally wrong. I’ve worked at cathedrals and interacted with bishops. Make no mistake: a bishop does care if his name and authority are used without authorization.

Perhaps an illustration will make this clear. More than twenty years ago, a priest in rural Kansas was trying to raise money for a new parish hall. In the parish bulletin, he wrote something to the effect of: “Bishop So-And-So supports our new parish hall and wants you to support it financially.” Somehow, the bishop found out and that priest got in tons of trouble. 1

If a local musician wrote a letter to his bishop saying the following, most bishops would be angry:

Dear Bishop, I’ve been replacing the official texts at Mass by means of your authority. I figured this was okay, since you’ve never specifically told me not to. Recently, someone asked which bishop gave me the required approval for a song text I wrote. I gave them your name, since I had your “tacit” approval—even though we’ve never discussed this.

In that same statement, endorsed by the Bishops’ Committee on the Liturgy, Fr. Paul Turner made this assertion:

It is hard to imagine a conference of bishops ratifying the contents of a hymnal song by song, culture by culture, but they have the authority to do so.

Do you see what he’s doing? He makes it sound silly to follow the GIRM. He makes it sound like he’s granting a generous concession by admitting that bishops can (technically) approve substitute texts. In fact, it’s not a question of whether Fr. Turner is capable of imagining something; episcopal approval is required. To better illustrate what he’s doing, consider how a similar assertion might have been received in 1970:

Certainly it’s true that Pope Paul VI has promulgated a new Missal, and without question a handful of priests will follow it, but it’s kind of hard to imagine the entire Latin Rite adhering to this new set of rubrics & texts. Most will continue to offer Mass just as they have been—as the Church has done for so many centuries. Those who choose, however, to follow the Novus Ordo should not be persecuted because (technically) they’re not forbidden to do so.

Totally bizarre, right? Yet, 96% of Catholic parishes de facto follow the suggestions of Fr. Paul Turner. Indeed, most have no idea they are violating the GIRM.

I DO NOT BELIEVE IT IS “IMPOSSIBLE” to comply with the GIRM. The assumption seems to be that the official texts—which have remained unchanged for 1500+ years—are somehow defective. Yet, the post-conciliar Gradual gives unprecedented freedom 2 to those selecting music for Mass … to say nothing of the chants in the Graduale Simplex!

When my family visited Malibu, we drove through the mountains, and the roads were sensational. Whoever built those roads did something remarkable, overcoming difficulties many would deem impossible. What does it say about the Catholic Church when we are unwilling to do something extremely easy, viz. obtain permission from the local bishop when we replace the official texts?

I take the completely opposite view from Fr. Paul Turner. I find the current situation absurd, because it allows every man, woman, and child—no matter what they know about the Church’s liturgy—to unilaterally replace what has been assigned by the Church. I have studied the liturgy for years, yet I feel uncomfortable doing this. That is why I always stick with the assigned prayers.

How glorious it is to observe that the Introit we sang yesterday—like every other assigned text—goes back as far as we have manuscript evidence:

294 Esto Mihi 296 Esto Mihi Introit Manuscript 298 Esto Mihi Introit Manuscript 299 Esto Mihi Introit Manuscript 300 Esto Mihi Introit Manuscript 301 Esto Mihi Introit Manuscript 304 Esto Mihi Introit Manuscript 305 Esto Mihi Introit Manuscript 306 Esto Mihi Introit Manuscript



NOTES FROM THIS ARTICLE:

1   If I recall correctly, he was removed from his parish—which shocked many of us. (His punishment seemed excessive.)

2   In spite of the fact that the post-conciliar rubrics permit the substitution of an “alius cantus congruus” for any assigned text, the 1974 Graduale constantly and excessively reminds the user that other approved chants may be substituted. For example, when it comes to Ordinary Time: “On weekdays through the year, any one of the thirty-four Masses is able to be said according to the pastoral usefulness of the texts.” The Preface, too, says: “It is permitted to substitute another text for that proper to the day in Masses of the proper of the time.” Moreover, at the various sections (Proprium de Tempore, Communia Sanctorum, Proprium de Sanctis, and so forth) they again make clear that any chant from that section may be substituted for any Mass. Regarding the so-called “Neo-Gregorian” compositions—which were supposed to be eliminated in the post-conciliar reform—they mention several times that these may continue to be used ad libitum. Moreover, when they made radical changes to feasts, such as the Feast of the Holy Family, there’s an Appendix which also gives an “alternate setting” with the original chants!

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, Traditionis Custodes Vernacular, USCCB approval Last Updated: October 15, 2022

Subscribe

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

* indicates required

About Jeff Ostrowski

Jeff Ostrowski holds his B.M. in Music Theory from the University of Kansas (2004). He resides with his wife and children in Michigan. —(Read full biography).

Primary Sidebar

Corpus Christi Watershed

President’s Corner

    “What Martin Luther Said…”
    My pastor asked me to write little columns for the bulletin each week. The article for 20 July 2025 has been posted, and it’s called: “What Luther Said…” Martin Luther (an ex-priest and apostate) was an infamous heretic whose ignorance of JESUS CHRIST was only exceeded by his filthy and disgusting vulgarity.
    —Jeff Ostrowski
    “Music List” • 15th in Ordinary Time (Year C)
    Some have expressed interest in perusing the ORDER OF MUSIC I prepared for the 15th Sunday in Ordinary Time (13 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 propers for this Sunday are also provided at the the feasts website.
    —Jeff Ostrowski
    15th Sunday in Ordinary Time (Year C)
    This coming Sunday—13 July 2025—is the 15th Sunday in Ordinary Time (Year C). All the chants have been conveniently assembled and posted at the feasts website. The OFFERTORY, Ad Te Levávi, is particularly beautiful.
    —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

“By a decree of the synod of the diocese of Exeter in 1284, no one should claim any seat in a church; but whoever first entered a church for the purpose of devotion, might choose at his pleasure a place for praying.”

— A work by Fr. Husenbeth (d. 1872)

Recent Posts

  • “Musicam Sacram” (5 March 1967) • Does It Apply?
  • “What Martin Luther Said…”
  • “Music List” • 15th in Ordinary Time (Year C)
  • Worship the Lord in Holy Attire
  • “How to Conduct 90 Vespers Services Each Year and Live to Tell the Tale.”

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