• 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

My Response to Dr. Weaver’s Latest Article

Jeff Ostrowski · December 1, 2023

N HIS INTRIGUING article of 25 November 2023, Dr. Charles Weaver wrote about what he describes as “a perfect example of the idea that Gregorian melody is influenced by the tonic accent.” Dr. Weaver is a full professor at the famous JUILLIARD SCHOOL OF MUSIC in New York City, where Josef Lhévinne (d. 1944) taught and where Charles Welles Rosen (d. 2012) enrolled when he was just six years old. [Rosen later left to study with Moriz Rosenthal, one of Liszt’s most celebrated pupils.] In the past, my colleague has discussed the chant theories of Abbat Joseph Pothier, appointed by Pope Saint Pius X as president of the Vatican Commission on Gregorian Chant. A few years ago, Dr. Weaver even provided a PPP recording (that is, sung according to “President Pothier’s Principles”). But I’d like to highlight something I haven’t explained sufficiently in the past. In my view, we cannot always assume people’s musical principles remained unchanged their entire life. Obviously, sometimes that is the case. For example, one can listen to certain etudes by Chopin as recorded by Alfred Cortot early in his career. Listening to the same etudes recorded in the 1960s by the elderly Cortot, one discovers his basic conception did not change. But when it comes to plainsong principles unfurled by Pothier during the 1870s and 1880s, can we really assume those were his “final” thoughts on interpretation? Consider the following quote by Dom Prosper Guéranger, written in 1855:

“A comparison of all the manuscripts of the Middle Ages with the Gothic editions of plainchant leads us to the conclusion that in earlier times there was no concern at all for short syllables in ecclesiastical chant, and that there was no problem whatsoever about elaborating them with several notes, often a great number. A fortunate change, which has the force of law today, has modified this usage of the weak penultimates, and it would be a barbarous archaism to adopt this ancient custom in our time.”

I share such quotations to show that people can change their minds! I believe Abbat Guéranger later embraced wholeheartedly the so-called “misplaced melismata.” (Readers probably know that certain editions—e.g. Nivers and the MEDICAEA—brutally truncated Gregorian melismata.) Is it fair to forever bind Dom Guéranger to what he wrote about “barbarous archaisms” in 1855? Similarly, I don’t think it makes sense to assume everything Dom Pothier wrote about interpretation in the 1870s necessarily applies to the EDITIO VATICANA (published 1905-1912).

Pars II
A Challenge For Dr. Weaver

In his article, my colleague says the PROPRIA MISSAE for the 24th Sunday after Pentecost illustrate perfectly “the idea that Gregorian melody is influenced by the tonic accent.” I agree 100% that the PROPRIA (for the 24th Sunday after Pentecost) demonstrate what he claims. My “issue” or “problem” or “question” has to do with the thousands of examples which demonstrate the opposite. Consider the OFFERTORY for the third Sunday of Lent:

I could easily cite thousands more examples like that.

Gregorian composers didn’t have “one way only.” Rather—as century after century rolled on—numerous approaches were adopted. Moreover, the Gregorian composers often looked beyond the accent of each single word to concentrate upon the phrase as a whole.

Pars III
Jeff’s Chant Conundrum

In his article, Dr. Weaver also says: “The intimate connection between the melody and the Latin accentuation is one reason why translating Gregorian chant into modern languages is usually so unsatisfactory.” If every piece of Gregorian Chant were like the propers for the 24th Sunday after Pentecost, I think Dr. Weaver’s assertion vis-à-vis vernacular plainsong would be unassailable. However, as I’ve already explained, the repertoire of Cantus Gregorianus contains thousands of examples—too many to count!—which do the opposite of the examples cited by Dr. Weaver. One cannot thumb through the pages of the GRADUALE ROMANUM without running into a billion examples like this one, from the 2nd Sunday after Pentecost:

There are many instances where the EDITIO VATICANA has melismata of twenty or thirty notes on “unimportant” words like ET, DE, A, IN, CUM, or PRO.

Chant Conundrum • That being said, I have a confession to make. I cannot accept “sloppy” or “unnatural” or “clumsy” adaptations of plainsong into English. In my experience, some of the worst adaptations are done by Anglicans. Consider the following example, taken from the 24th Sunday after Pentecost. Specifically, consider the grotesque emphasis on the word “the” in this 1965 Anglican adaptation:

Jeff’s Preoccupation • I know readers probably think I’ve developed a preoccupation for the official rhythm (i.e. “singing the official edition the way it was intended to be sung by its creators”). Nonetheless, I must point out that the Anglicans who created the PLAINCHANT GRADUAL in English were totally ignorant (!) of the MMV (“melismatic mora vocis”). How can such a thing be? They admit the pitches and notation of their edition are based upon the EDITIO VATICANA, which they refer to as “the typical edition of the Chant of the Latin rite” and “the current official edition of the Latin Graduale.” Yet, throughout their 700+ pages, they demonstrate over and over again they are clueless when it comes to the morae vocis. Notice how they don’t add enough blank space (pink highlights) where the elongations are supposed to be (yellow highlights):

Addendum • Dom Eugène Cardine’s former boss 1 once told me: “In neumatic composition, as in all melismatic pieces, the ancient plain-chant composers often ignored the tonic accent when they were concentrating upon the musical line of the phrase as a whole.” Indeed, Dom Joseph Gajard, writing in the 1950 volume of REVUE GRÉGORIENNE said: “One does not compose in order to set every word to music, but in order to translate into music a single idea expressed in a number of words.” In a musical phrase “each element is a part of the whole and must take its own place in that whole, for instance the word coeli in the SANCTUS of Mass IX, or the word Dómini in the BENEDICTUS of Mass XI, and so forth. Here, the melodic line must be given first place, according to the ancient adage: Musica non subjacet regulis Donati. […] If the function of Gregorian music is to enhance the expressive power of the holy words and even to go further, it becomes clear that it will be under no obligation to be perpetually moulded by them.” How can anyone who has carefully examined plainsong disagree what Dom Gajard has written?

1 For the record, this particular scholar of plainsong was extremely skeptical of the various theories Dom Cardine came up with. Subsequent decades of scholarship seem to have vindicated his concerns—although I suspect some of my colleagues would disagree passionately with my assertion!

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

Filed Under: Articles Tagged With: Abbat Joseph Pothier, Abbot Joseph Pothier of Solesmes, Dom Eugène Cardine, Dom Joseph Gajard OSB, Gregorian Semiology, melismatic morae vocis, MMV melismatic mora vocis, Sémiologie grégorienne Last Updated: December 1, 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

    Why A “Fugue” Here?
    I believe I know why this plainsong harmonizer created a tiny fugue as the INTRODUCTION to his accompaniment. Take a look (PDF) and tell me your thoughts about what he did on the feast of the Flight of Our Lord Jesus Christ into Egypt (17 February). And now I must go because “tempus fugit” as they say!
    —Jeff Ostrowski
    New Bulletin Article • “12 October 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 12 October 2025) talks about an ‘irony’ or ‘paradox’ regarding the 1960s switch to a wider use (amplior locus) of vernacular in the liturgy.
    —Jeff Ostrowski
    “Reminder” — Month of October (2025)
    Those who don’t sign up for our free EMAIL NEWSLETTER miss important notifications. Last week, for example, I sent a message about this job opening for a music director paying $65,000 per year plus benefits (plus weddings & funerals). Notice the job description says: “our vision for sacred music is to move from singing at Mass to truly singing the Mass wherein … especially the propers, ordinaries, and dialogues are given their proper place.” Signing up couldn’t be easier: simply scroll to the bottom of any blog article and enter your email address.
    —Jeff Ostrowski

Quick Thoughts

    “American Catholic Hymnal” (1991)
    The American Catholic Hymnal, with IMPRIMATUR granted (25 April 1991) by the Archdiocese of Chicago, is like a compendium of every horrible idea from the 1980s. Imagine being forced to stand all through Communion (even afterwards) when those self-same ‘enlightened’ liturgists moved the SEQUENCE before the Alleluia to make sure congregations wouldn’t have to stand during it. (Even worse, everything about the SEQUENCE—including its name—means it should follow the Alleluia.) And imagine endlessly repeating “Alleluia” during Holy Communion at every single Mass. It was all part of an effort to convince people that Holy Communion was historically a procession (which it wasn’t).
    —Jeff Ostrowski
    “Canonic” • Ralph Vaughan Williams
    Fifty years ago, Dr. Theodore Marier made available this clever arrangement (PDF) of “Come down, O love divine” by P. R. Dietterich. The melody was composed in 1906 by Ralph Vaughan Williams (d. 1958) and named in honor of of his birthplace: DOWN AMPNEY. The arrangement isn’t a strict canon, but it does remind one of a canon since the pipe organ employs “points of imitation.” The melody and text are #709 in the Brébeuf Catholic Hymnal.
    —Jeff Ostrowski
    Did they simplify these hymn harmonies?
    Choirs love to sing the famous & splendid tune called “INNSBRUCK.” Looking through a (Roman Catholic) German hymnal printed in 1952, I discovered what appears to be a simplified version of that hymn. In other words, their harmonization is much less complex than the version found in the Saint Jean de Brébeuf Hymnal (which is suitable for singing by SATB choir). Please download their 1952 harmonization (PDF) and let me know your thoughts. I really like the groovy Germanic INTRODUCTION they added.
    —Jeff Ostrowski

Random Quote

“Indeed, we may not hope for real Latin poetry any more, because Latin is now a dead language to all of us. However well a man may read, write, or even speak Latin now, it is always a foreign language to him, acquired artificially. It is no one’s mother tongue. Does a man ever write real poetry in an acquired language?”

— Rev’d Adrian Fortescue (d. 1923)

Recent Posts

  • Why A “Fugue” Here?
  • “Three Reasons To Shun Bad Hymns” • Daniel B. Marshall
  • “Puzzling Comment” • By A Respected FSSP Priest
  • New Bulletin Article • “12 October 2025”
  • “Reminder” — Month of October (2025)

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.