ECAUSE PAPER was so very scarce, each liturgical book in the early church was made according to the person who would be using it. Before the Second Vatican Council, this arrangement existed, although most people were unaware of it. Before Vatican II the choir had the GRADUALE, the subdeacon had the EPISTOLARIUM, the Deacon had the EVANGELIARIUM, and so forth. Each book contained only what was needed for each person, except that the SACRAMENTARY eventually morphed into the MISSAL so priests could celebrate Low Mass. (If you want to learn about how the “Roman Missal” came about, look up Missale Plenarium—“missalia plenaria”—in Fortescue.) Generally speaking, the pre-conciliar textual disagreements between Graduale and Missale were insignificant. ¹

The 1970s reformers returned to the “book-for-the-person-using-it” arrangement, possibly because the reformed lectionary was so massive it would make the Missale too heavy and bulky. Therefore, after Vatican II we have the LECTIONARY (25 May 1969) for lectors, the SACRAMENTARY (3 April 1969) for priests, and the GRADUAL (24 June 1972) for singers. The reforms of the 1970s introduced gargantuan textual disagreements between Graduale and Missale, which will be examined in the article below.

Some might feel that it makes sense to spend hours trying to understand why and how the situation came about, but that’s probably a waste of time. Indeed, the official explanation is garbled because—for example—Matthew 6:33 doesn’t become “easier to understand” when it is replaced by Psalm 159:7. (SEE BELOW.)

If the problem is to be solved, we must deal with things as they are. It’s silly to pretend we can invent a Time Machine to stop it from happening. Let’s find a way forward.

Gargantuan Textual Disagreements

Let’s consider the Communion Antiphon for last Sunday, which was the 20th Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year A. We can examine the feast in Latin, or we can open up the Jogues Missal and see how the feast appears in English:

*  PDF Download • Readings and Propers in English
—Taken from The Saint Isaac Jogues Illuminated Missal, Gradual, and Lectionary.

Notice the discrepancy:

Why aren’t the Missal Propers (“Spoken Propers”) and the Graduale Propers (“Sung Propers”) identical? That question has already been exhaustively explained. The above chart demonstrates the truth of Bishop Donald Trautman’s (November 2007) statement:

“Recent research…has made it clear that the antiphons of the Missale Romanum, which differ substantially from the sung antiphons of the Roman Gradual, were never intended to be sung.”

It may seem crazy, but it’s incontrovertible that the Church modified the Gradual Propers when they were placed in the Sacramentary (for “private” Masses and “Masses without music”). The 1970 General Instruction of the Roman Missal clearly said:

Communion Chant:
Only if none of the above alternatives
is employed and there is no Communion song,
is the antiphon in the “Missal” recited.

It’s difficult to see any advantage of the Missal Propers over the Gradual Propers for the 20th Sunday in Ordinary Time:

Graduale • Communion Antiphon (Year A)
The first section seems to perfectly match the First Reading (“I will make them joyful in my house of prayer” etc.), while the second part (“everyone who asks here, will receive” etc.) seems to perfectly match the Gospel Reading.

Graduale • Communion Antiphon (Year B)
The connection with the Gospel is obvious.

Graduale • Communion Antiphon (Year C)
Without question, this antiphon “matches” the message of the Second Reading and the Gospel in a deep way—but not in a superficial way.

Before we go further, it’s important to recognize that the “20th Sunday in Ordinary Time” basically has the same Proprium Missae (Introit, Gradual, Alleluia, Offertory, and Communion) as the 14th Sunday after Pentecost:

We can trace the Gradual chant thousands of years into the past, whereas the “Spoken Propers” were created in the 1970s:

Examples of Musical Settings

1964 Arbogast Propers • Father Paul Arbogast, in his English musical settings of the Gradual, sets the Gradual text: Prímum Quaérite Régnum Déi. His collection was published with IMPRIMATUR (13 November 1964) by Most Rev. Ackerman, bishop of Covington, Kentucky. It’s obvious he couldn’t set the “Spoken Propers” because they wouldn’t exist until 1970:

+1 for Graduale texts.

1965 Palmer/Burgess • George Herbert Palmer and Francis Burgess (Anglicans) published an English version of the Gradual texts in 1965:

+1 for Graduale texts.

1998 ICEL Sacramentary • This 1998 ICEL Sacramentary was never approved; it was rejected. Here is what ICEL came up with, corresponding to the “Spoken Propers” for obvious reasons:

+1 for Missale texts.

2001 Disposable Missalette (WLP) • Here’s a scanned copy of a 2001 publication by Mr. Jerry Galipeau who chose the “Spoken Propers,” yet calls the Communion Antiphon a “Communion Song”—which is interesting:

+1 for Missale texts.

2004 Father Socías Missal • The “Daily Roman Missal” by Father James Socías was given 2003 IMPRIMATUR by Cardinal George of Chicago. Notice it uses the “old” ICEL translation, just like Mr. Galipeau:

+1 for Missale texts.

2006 Anglican Use Gradual • In 2006, C. David Burt created very simple settings in English for the Gradual. For obvious reasons, he uses the Gradual texts:

+1 for Graduale texts.

2011 “Simple English Propers” • The Church Music Association of America “Simple English Propers” (Bartlett/Van Roode) chose the Gradual texts:

+1 for Graduale texts.

2011 “MR3” Roman Missal, Third Edition • The “new” ICEL translation of the Roman Missal (2011) uses the “Spoken Propers” for obvious reasons:

+1 for Missale texts.

2011 CTS Missal • The Catholic Truth Society includes the Latin (but no accents) and chose the “Spoken Propers” for their publication:

+1 for Missale texts.

2012 “Gregorian Missal” • The 2012 edition by Solesmes Abbey of the Gregorian Missal bears an IMPRIMATUR (3 June 2012) by Most Rev. Yves Le Saux, bishop of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Le Mans in France. They use the Gradual text, for obvious reasons:

+1 for Graduale texts.

2012 Laudate Dominum Communion Antiphons • Andrew R. Motyka published these interesting settings using the Gradual texts, and he provided wonderful Mp3 recordings to help people learn them:

+1 for Graduale texts.

2013 Lalemant Propers • The 2013 Lalemant Propers were approved for liturgical use on 15 July 2013, and use the Gradual texts:

+1 for Graduale texts.

2014 “Proper of the Mass” • In 2012, IGNATIUS PRESS published a book by Father Samuel Weber called The Proper of the Mass for Sundays and Solemnities: Chants for the Roman Missal in English. From what I can tell, Father Weber adopted the “Spoken Propers,” but not for the Offertory chants, because the Missal doesn’t contain the Offertory antiphons. (By the way, the Bishops’ Committee on the Liturgy in 1970 erroneously claimed the Missal contained the Offertory antiphons.) Something interesting: Father Weber eliminates not only the Gradual texts, but also the 2nd option from the Missale Romanum (viz. John 6:51-52):

+1 for Missale, but missing the 2nd option.

2020 American Gradual • The “American Gradual” by Bruce E. Ford is based on a Protestant translation of the Bible, as far as I can tell, but the Catholic Bishops of the United States have allowed it’s use by their 20 November 2012 decree. Mr. Ford uses the Gradual texts:

+1 for Graduale texts.

Conclusions

I don’t have an answer to the problem, but it seems ridiculous we have five (5) possible options for the Communion Antiphon! I suppose my own personal preference would be toward something like the Jogues Missal—which uses the Gradual texts—because it preserves the link with our traditional Catholic music that goes back 1,600 years. As an added bonus, it makes it easy to switch back and forth between Latin and English settings.

I would very much like to hear your thoughts on this matter.

P.S.

Father Charles Dreisoerner also set the “Graduale Romanum” to English, and that book (202 pages) can be downloaded as a PDF—but it’s incomplete.

One Final Thought

In the 1970s, it became popular to decide upon a “theme” for each feast, but we must remember that the relationship of Orations, Propers, and Pericopes does not—as a general rule—correspond to superficial notions of “theme.” Of course, there are glaring exceptions, such as major feasts. Regarding all of this, Father Fortescue reminds us that “any part of Scripture may be read with profit on any day.”

 

NOTES FROM THIS ARTICLE:

1   One major exception I can think of would be the Fourth Sunday after Easter. In the Graduale Romanum, the Communion Antiphon is “Dum venerit Paraclitus”—notice the Letter D. In the Missale Romanum, the Communion Antiphon is “Cum venerit Paraclitus”—notice the Letter C. Needless to say, a discrepancy like that makes locating that antiphon using an index difficult.