• 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

Cardinal Cupich Publicly Demands Greater Use Of Latin & Gregorian Chant At Chicago Masses

Jeff Ostrowski · November 2, 2021

IS EMINENCE, Blase J. Cupich, yesterday published an article (8 paragraphs) which he calls “The Gift of Traditionis Custodes.” His article has been widely shared on the internet. In a nutshell, Cardinal Cupich condemns diversity, demanding rigid uniformity when it comes to liturgical praxis. Some have pointed out that his proposal contradicts Vatican II, which said: “Even in the liturgy, the Church has no wish to impose a rigid uniformity in matters which do not implicate the faith or the good of the whole community” (Sacrosanctum Concilium, §37).

What Did The Cardinal Say? Blase Cupich is currently the Archbishop of Chicago, and has been a cardinal since 2016. In his article, Cardinal Cupich condemns what he characterizes as “division” which seeks to “undermine the reforms of the Second Vatican Council through the rejection of the most important of them: the reform of the Roman Rite.” In other words, Cardinal Cupich says everyone must accept the liturgical reforms called for by Vatican II; in his verbiage we must adopt “a unitary celebratory form.”

We’ve Already Been Told:  So what exactly are those reforms? Well, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to determine them. The Second Vatican Council told us what it wanted.

Some unequivocal Vatican II mandates:

Gregorian Chant:
Vatican II said Gregorian Chant was to be given “first place in liturgical services” (SC §116). There is no confusion whatsoever as to the meaning of Cantus Gregorianus.

Choirs Diligently Promoted:
Vatican II said “choirs must be diligently promoted” (SC §114). Needless to say, choirs must sing music for choirs. Choral music has nothing to do with goofy Broadway songs promoted by companies like OCP.

Liturgy Of The Hours:
Vatican II said “the Latin language is to be retained by clerics in the divine office” (SC §101). Even a small child can understand the meaning of this unambiguous directive.

More (!) about the Liturgy of the Hours:
Vatican II said: “By the venerable tradition of the universal Church, Lauds as morning prayer and Vespers as evening prayer are the two hinges on which the daily office turns; hence they are to be considered as the chief hours and are to be celebrated as such” (SC §89a). Vatican II said: “It is, moreover, fitting that the office, both in choir and in common, be sung when possible. Pastors of souls should see to it that the chief hours, especially Vespers, are celebrated in common in church on Sundays and the more solemn feasts. And the laity, too, are encouraged to recite the divine office, either with the priests, or among themselves, or even individually” (SC §100). As far as I know, only Extraordinary Form parishes are doing this!

Preserved AND Fostered:
Vatican II said “the treasure of sacred music is to be preserved and fostered with great care” (SC §101). Dishonest liturgists often act as though preserved and fostered with great care actually means “forbidden and made illegal.”

Greater Than Any Other Art:
Sculptors and painters get angry about this one, but Vatican II said: “The musical tradition of the universal Church is a treasure of inestimable value, greater even than that of any other art” (SC §112). Only a brain-dead person would claim that Vatican II made that statement so that Catholics would destroy and denigrate this great treasure.

Sacred Polyphony:
Vatican II specifically recommended polyphony (SC §116) for liturgical celebrations. No sane person disputes the meaning of polyphony. No sane person would claim that tunes by Marty Haugen, David Haas, or Rory Cooney constitute polyphony.

Congregations Must Learn Some Latin:
Vatican II said: “steps should be taken so that the faithful may also be able to say or to sing together in Latin those parts of the Ordinary of the Mass which pertain to them” (SC §54). Father Louis Bouyer—one of the most important reformers and a close friend of Pope Paul VI—said these are the parts “which everybody can learn by heart and sing: Kyrie, Gloria, Credo, Sanctus, Agnus Dei.”

Latin Not Optional:
Some people really hate this, but Vatican II said “the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites” (SC §36). The wording of the document makes it clear this was a command, not a suggestion.

More About Latin!
Vatican II said the local bishop can “decide whether, and to what extent, the vernacular language is to be used” (SC §36). Notice the document specifically says the local bishop can decide whether the vernacular can be used. Yet dishonest people pretend that Vatican II somehow eliminated the use of Latin!

Private Masses:
After Vatican II, the question arose whether priests were allowed to say private Masses in the vernacular. That’s because when it comes to the vernacular, Vatican II said “the limits of its employment may be extended” for Masses with the people (SC §36). That is one reason why an important document called Inter Oecumenici—which was promulgated on the feast of Saint Jean de Brébeuf in 1964—specifically said: “Missals to be used in the liturgy, however, shall contain besides the vernacular version the Latin text as well.” To my knowledge, the question of whether priests are allowed to say private Mass in the vernacular was never officially resolved.

Pipe Organ:
Vatican II said: “In the Latin Church the pipe organ is to be held in high esteem, for it is the traditional musical instrument which adds a wonderful splendor to the Church’s ceremonies and powerfully lifts up man’s mind to God and to higher things” (SC §120).

You can learn more about the history of Vatican II by visiting these articles.

Conclusion: Vatican II did not oversee a liturgical reform. The actual reform happened half a decade later, when many of the important people who took part in it (such as Monsignor Higinio Anglés and Dom Placide Bruylants) had already died by the time the Novus Ordo Missæ was released.

Addendum: For the record, Vatican II never mentioned any of the following: Altars facing the people; Female Altar servers; Lay Catholics proclaiming the readings inside the Sanctuary; Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion; Communion received in the hand; the complete elimination of the Gregorian Propers (which are extremely ancient); new Eucharistic Prayers; destruction of Altar rails; goofy secular music during Mass; the list goes on and on!

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

Follow the Discussion on Facebook

Filed Under: Articles, Featured Tagged With: Archbishop Blase J Cupich, Louis Bouyer Oratorian Priest, Sacrosanctum Concilium, The musical tradition of the universal Church is a treasure of inestimable value greater even than that of any other art, Traditionis Custodes Motu Proprio, What Vatican II Actually Said Last Updated: July 13, 2023

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

    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

“Père Joseph Gelineau represented everything that had gone wrong with the Church since the new liturgists had gained control.”

— Jean Langlais

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