• 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
    • Repository • “Spanish Music”
    • KYRIALE • Saint Antoine Daniel
    • Campion Missal, 3rd Edition
  • 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
    • Feasts Website
  • 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

Sneaky “Salicus” Statements by Solesmes

Jeff Ostrowski · March 18, 2023

HE WORLD-FAMOUS 1961 edition of the LIBER USUALIS—having first reproduced the PREFACE of the official edition—makes this statement: “The place of honour in this Solesmes Edition of the Vatican Official text is given to the Vatican Preface. Its wise counsels and general Principles of interpretation are embodied, elucidated, and enlarged upon in the RULES given further on.” It gives me no pleasure to say it—and makes me rather uncomfortable—but this is a deceptive statement.

Deceptive Statement • Their rules do not “embody, elucidate, and enlarge upon” the Editio Vaticana rules. Rather, the monks of Solesmes obfuscate and contradict the Editio Vaticana rules. Let us consider the SALICUS. According to the official edition, the SALICUS is distinguished from the SCANDICUS by a (very narrow) blank space after the first note. The following is taken from the official edition:

Please note: It’s almost impossible to recognize a SALICUS in editions which are printed in tiny fonts. On the other hand, the SALICUS is incredibly rare the official edition.

At first, Dom Mocquereau adopted this “blank space” to differentiate the SALICUS from the SCANDICUS. Here is what Dom Mocquereau wrote in December of 1905, when they first released the “Solesmes version” of the Editio Vaticana KYRIALE:

The English version by Dom Mocquereau—which also appeared in December of 1905—says:

Observe the difference in the old notation between the SALICUS and the SCANDICUS. The first note of the SALICUS is separated from the next note, which means that the ictus is on the second note, not on the first, as in the SCANDICUS.
Prior André Mocquereau (December 1905)

To banish all doubt, Dom Mocquereau added a little note right before he signed his PREFACE:

N.B. Blank spaces in this edition never indicate morae vocis, but only the separation of groups, except the space after the first note of a SALICUS, whereby it is distinguished from the SCANDICUS.
Prior André Mocquereau (December 1905)

Deception Enters In • However, the Solesmes monks got in trouble with the Vatican for modifying the official edition. In an attempt to get in less trouble, Dom Mocquereau decided to ‘detach’ his rhythmical signs from the notes. But this caused a crisis when it came to the SALICUS, so Dom Mocquereau decided that—as far as he was concerned—the SALICUS would henceforth be differentiated by a vertical episema (“tick mark”). The 1961 LIBER USUALIS suggests that Dom Mocquereau would have preferred to use a horizontal episema—but that proved “too difficult to write,” as they explain in the introduction:

But Wait … There’s More! • Are you confused yet? Even more deception enters in. When the Solesmes monks printed their “rules” in 1921, they pretended there was extra “blank space” in the example they gave. In other words, they pretend like they are merely clarifying what is already a SALICUS in the official edition.

What they are doing is introducing a SALICUS where none exists. Indeed, they do this hundreds of times. The SALICUS is extremely rare in the official edition, but one would never know that if one uses Dom Mocquereau’s editions:

A Bizarre Aberration • We have seen how the 1961 LIBER USUALIS (most likely written by Dom Gajard) claimed that Dom Mocquereau would have preferred to have a horizontal episema for the SALICUS “but it was too difficult to write.” If one looks at the 2 February ALLELUIA, one will see this statement contradicted:

*  PDF Download • ALLELUIA (2 February)

Specifically, one sees horizontal episemata which constitute an anomaly:

I have often remarked that the Abbey of Solesmes never changed any of the ICTUS markings that Dom Mocquereau added in 1908, even in their most recent ICTUS publications (such as the 2014 Gregorian Missal). But if one examines that 2 February ALLELUIA, one notices that later on they added several instances of the SALICUS which Dom Mocquereau had not.

Patrick’s Assertion • In a recent article, my colleague Patrick Williams made the following assertion about your humble correspondent:

Below are the precise words of the document issued under Pope Pius XII (3 September 1958):

The signs, called rhythmica, which have been privately introduced into Gregorian chant, are permitted, provided that the force and meaning of the notes found in the Vatican books of liturgical chant are preserved.

Clear As Day • Is there anyone who would be willing to claim (publicly) that Dom Mocquereau’s modifications “preserve the force and meaning” of the notes of the official edition? Can this be maintained, for example, when it comes to the billions of illicit elongations in the February 2nd ALLELUIA we examined above? Oh, surely not!

To put it another way, making every other note twice as long (or three times as long) is clearly not preserving the “force and meaning” of the notes. Notes have a meaning. Were that not so, somebody could publish an edition like this:

Such an edition would certainly reproduce correctly the pitch of each note; but it would not have been viewed as “preserving the the force and meaning” of the notes of the official edition.

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

Filed Under: Articles Tagged With: 1962 Liber Usualis Solesmes, blank space salicus scandicus, Gregorian Rhythm Wars, horizontal episema, vertical episema Last Updated: March 19, 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

    New Bulletin Article • “21 September 2025”
    My pastor requested that I write short articles each week for our parish bulletin. Those responsible for preparing similar write-ups may find a bit of inspiration in these brief columns. The latest article (dated 21 September 2025) discusses some theological items—supported by certain verses in ancient Catholic hymns—and ends by explaining why certain folks become delirious with jealousy when they observe feats by Monsignor Ronald Knox.
    —Jeff Ostrowski
    Cheap! Cheap! Cheap!
    It’s always amusing to see old diocesan newspapers—in huge capital letters—advertising the Cheapest Catholic Paper in the United States. The correspondent who sent this to me added: “I can think of certain composers, published by large companies in our own day, who could truthfully brag about the most tawdry compositions in the world!” I wonder what she could have meant by such a cryptic comment…
    —Jeff Ostrowski
    PDF Download • Dom Murray Harmonies
    Along with so many others, I have deep respect for Dom Gregory Gregory Murray, who produced this clever harmonization (PDF) of “O SANCTISSIMA.” It’s always amazed me that Dom Gregory—a truly inspired composer—was so confused when it came to GREGORIAN CHANT. Throughout his life, he published contradictory statements, veering back-and-forth like a weather vane. Toward the end of his life, he declared: “I see clearly that the need for reform in liturgical music arose, not in the 18th and 19th centuries, but a thousand years earlier—in the 8th and 9th centuries, or even before that. The abuses began, not with Mozart and Haydn, but with those over-enthusiastic medieval musicians who developed the elaborate and flamboyant Gregorian Chant.”
    —Jeff Ostrowski

Quick Thoughts

    Karl Keating • “Canonization Questions”
    We were sent an internet statement (screenshot) that’s garnered significant attention, in which KARL KEATING (founder of Catholic Answers) speaks about whether canonizations are infallible. Mr. Keating seems unaware that canonizations are—in the final analysis—a theological opinion. They are not infallible, as explained in this 2014 article by a priest (with a doctorate in theology) who worked for multiple popes. Mr. Keating says: “I’m unaware of such claims arising from any quarter until several recent popes disliked by these Traditionalists were canonized, including John XXIII, Paul VI, and John Paul II. Usually Paul VI receives the most opprobrium.” Mr. Keating is incorrect; e.g. Father John Vianney, several centuries ago, taught clearly that canonizations are not infallible. Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen would be another example, although clearly much more recent than Saint John Vianney.
    —Corpus Christi Watershed
    Vatican II Changed Wedding Propers?
    It’s often claimed that the wedding propers were changed after Vatican II. As a matter of fact, that is a false claim. The EDITIO VATICANA propers (Introit: Deus Israel) remained the same after Vatican II. However, a new set of propers (Introit: Ecce Deus) was provided for optional use. The same holds true for the feast of Pope Saint Gregory the Great on 3 September: the 1943 propers (Introit: Si díligis me) were provided for optional use, but the traditional PROPRIA MISSAE (Introit: Sacerdótes Dei) were retained; they weren’t gotten rid of. The Ordo Cantus Missae (1970) makes this crystal clear, as does the Missal itself. There was an effort made in the post-conciliar years to eliminate so-called “Neo-Gregorian” chants, but (contrary to popular belief) most were retained: cf. the feast of Christ the King, the feast of the Immaculate Conception, and so forth.
    —Corpus Christi Watershed
    Solemn “Salve Regina” (Chant)
    How many “S” words can you think of using alliteration? How about Schwann Solemn Salve Score? You can download the SOLEMN SALVE REGINA in Gregorian Chant. The notation follows the official rhythm (EDITIO VATICANA). Canon Jules Van Nuffel, choirmaster of the Cathedral of Saint Rumbold, composed this accompaniment for it (although some feel it isn’t his best work).
    —Corpus Christi Watershed

Random Quote

The local church should be conscious that church worship is not really the same as what we sing in a bar, or what we sing in a convention for youth.

— Francis Cardinal Arinze (2005)

Recent Posts

  • New Bulletin Article • “21 September 2025”
  • How do you pronounce this word in Latin?
  • Cheap! Cheap! Cheap!
  • Children’s Repertoire: “3 Recommendations”
  • PDF Download • Dom Murray Harmonies

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.