• 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

Seriously? • Bishop of Lexington Insists the Dominican Rite Never Existed (!)

Jeff Ostrowski · February 4, 2022

EFORE I GO ANY FURTHER, let me be clear. Our organization has one goal: to promote the Good, the True, and the Beautiful. Servite Domino in lætitia. Just because we promote authentic sacred music, that doesn’t mean we’re somehow “heroic.” Indeed, we are unprofitable servants; we have done that which we ought to do (Lk 17:10). It is not our mission to pick fights, snipe on Facebook, post “hot takes” on Twitter, or destroy anyone’s reputation. For all these years, we have been producing thousands and thousands of free liturgical resources—and we’ve only just begun!

Once In A Blue Moon: Every so often, however, something comes my way which I feel obligated to address—and it happened recently with a directive sent out by Most Rev’d John Stowe (bishop of Lexington, KY) on 2 February 2022. Bishop Stowe’s statement denies the existence of variations (a.k.a uses, forms, rites, and so forth) for the Roman Rite, which have existed for at least 800 years. No historian—as far as I know—would agree with these irresponsible assertions by Bishop Stowe:

*  PDF Download • Statement from Lexington’s Bishop
—Written Statement by Most Rev’d John Stowe • 2 February 2022.

The Catholic Faith: Nothing in the Catholic Faith says we must accept something we know to be false. In the future, I will speak more about this (if I can find the time). For instance, if a bishop declares the liturgical reform to be “irreversible,” we need not agree. After all, so many elements of the liturgical reform have already been reversed and “re-reversed.” None but a fool embraces demonstrable falsehoods. The leaders in the Catholic Church are not perfect; one of the first bishops (Judas Iscariot) betrayed Our Redeemer for thirty pieces of silver! We have a duty to pray for our leaders precisely because they make mistakes. Even popes make mistakes. In the history of the Church, there have been repugnant popes; Google “Cadaver Synod” if you don’t believe me. During some periods, decades went by without Catholics even knowing who the true pope was (on account of anti-popes). Even smart people like Bernard of Clairvaux made erroneous judgments vis-à-vis anti-popes. And some popes even committed horrible sins against the Sixth Commandment.

Oleaginous Sycophants: When Bishop Stowe denies the existence of historical variations (Sarum, Lyons, Paris, Ordinariate, Braga, Dominican, etc.) he’s incorrect. It is true that certain Roman Rite “variants” are insignificant; an example would be Franciscan modifications to the CONFITEOR. It is also true that some “variants” are so substantial they almost constitute a different rite. In other words, there’s an entire spectrum of rites, uses, forms, and variants—all under the umbrella of the Roman Rite. To suggest that the Dominican Rite is one of the Eastern rites … that’s just insane. The Dominican Rite is clearly a variant of the Roman Rite. The existence of these variants, uses, rites, and forms has never been considered deleterious to Church unity. Vatican II solemnly declared: “Holy Mother Church holds all lawfully acknowledged rites to be of equal right and dignity, and wishes to preserve them in the future and to foster them in every way.” How is it possible that Bishop Stowe made such assertions publicly? When a bishop is consecrated, someone usually reminds the new bishop that “nobody will ever again tell you the truth again.” In other words, craven “yes-men” exist. Obsequious sycophants exist. Fawning brown-nosers exist. I suspect Bishop Stowe was ill-served by a ghost writer. Regardless, these problematic assertions by Bishop Stowe will have to be withdrawn at some point.

Disagreements Are Okay: Directly on the PDF file (see above) I scrawled some thoughts. I have no idea how coherent my thoughts are… If you think I’m wrong, please let me know! Why do so many fear honest debate? Consider this quote by Dom André Mocquereau:

“Opposition has always been precious to me. It forced me to dig down to rock bottom and to leave nothing to possibility or even probability. Without the opposition, I might never have done all that work.”

Dom Mocquereau certainly made mistakes, but he was a tough character! He’d been a soldier in the Franco-Prussian War and got injured. If you think it was fun to be injured in those days, think again! Warfare back then was brutal. And during WW2, many of the monks of Solesmes Abbey were forced to fight against Hitler. At least seventeen—including the Prior, the Subprior, and even the organist—were captured by the Germans and spent time as prisoners of war. (Did they still pray their office?) Dom Turpault was killed at the Battle of Dunkirk.

Exsultabunt sancti in gloria; lætabuntur in cubilibus suis.

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

Follow the Discussion on Facebook

Filed Under: Articles, PDF Download Tagged With: Bishop John Eric Stowe, Bishop of Lexington, Dom Mocquereau, John Stowe Ad Orientem, John Stowe Bans Birettas, Solesmes Abbey, Traditionis Custodes Motu Proprio Last Updated: February 11, 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

    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

Don Fernando de las Infantas wrote to the Pope, trying to get him to stop Palestrina from corrupting all the plainsong editions: “The errors which certain musicians, in all good faith, think they have found in plainchant are not errors at all, but on the contrary contain some of the most beautiful musical passages ever written.”

— Don Fernando de las Infantas (1578 A.D.)

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