UR CURRENT rite of Mass is comprised of three books: [a] SACRAMENTARY (for priests); [b] GRADUAL (for singers); and [c] LECTIONARY (for lectors). After Vatican II, however, a “glitch” worked its way in, causing colossal confusion. The decision was made—seemingly at the prodding of a Benedictine priest in Spain named ADALBERT FRANQUESA GARRÓS (d. 2005)—to introduce Spoken Propers. When Mass was offered privately (or without music) Dom Franquesa felt there should be a different version (!) of the propers “for recitation.” The Sung Propers come from the GRADUALE ROMANUM and have an ancient history. The Spoken Propers were created circa 1968, and appear in the MISSALE ROMANUM (for the convenience of priests celebrating Mass in private).
Bizarre History • For decades, Catholics have tried to figure out why it was deemed necessary to add a “spoken” version of the propers. In 2020, my colleague ANDREA LEAL produced an English translation of a 1970 document which helps explain this matter. The document was written by Dom Franquesa and published in NOTITIAE, the newsletter of the Consilium Ad Exsequendam Constitutionem De Sacra Liturgia. Mrs. Leal then released her translation to the world.1
(1 of 6) Dom Franquesa’s Errors • Even though Andrea translated that document in 2020, I only recently found time to study it. Dom Franquesa makes numerous statements that are bizarre and contradictory. For instance, Dom Franquesa says of Gregorian Chant:
“the melody is so essential in many of these texts, and it confers such an intensity and a life so characteristic, that without it they lose almost all of their meaning.”
What a reprehensible statement! Most of the lyrics of Gregorian Chant come directly from the psalms or the New Testament. Dom Franquesa argues that Sacred Scripture itself is “meaningless” without the Gregorian melodies. His statement is not only foolish, it approaches heresy! Sacred Scripture does not “lose almost all its meaning” just because it isn’t sung. Furthermore, his statement demonstrates ignorance of Gregorian adaptation (which Willi Apel calls “re-employment of melodies”) … to say nothing of psalm tones.
(2 of 6) Dom Franquesa’s Errors • Dom Franquesa claims that “Gregorian composers did not hesitate to improve the texts for melodic purposes. This explains the variety that we frequently find in the pieces of the GRADUALE ROMANUM.” As I said above, most Gregorian Chant lyrics come from the psalter or New Testament. Normally they’re taken verbatim, although sometimes one finds minor discrepancies (“de Ægýpto” vs. “ex Ægýpto”). In a handful of chants, a phrase will be repeated for dramatic affect: e.g. “Jubiláte Deo” (Dominica II post Epiphaniam). The claim Dom Franquesa makes is false, blameworthy, and indefensible.
(3 of 6) Dom Franquesa’s Errors • Dom Franquesa declared: “The whole world agreed without difficulty that in Masses without music the offertory antiphon could be omitted.” Such an imbecilic statement was, unfortunately, characteristic of the 1960s. The reformers felt they knew better than all the Catholics of the past. They believed they were the “adults in the room.” They regarded men like Saint Thomas Aquinas, Don Bosco, Father John Brébeuf, Father Isaac Jogues, and Saint John Vianney as “well-meaning but unenlightened.” Dom Franquesa then makes a statement so idiotic it takes one’s breath away, declaring without shame: “The offertory antiphons rarely offer a text of pastoral worth.”
(4 of 6) Dom Franquesa’s Errors • In spite of the ancient tradition of the Church, Dom Franquesa says he eliminated any Communion antiphons “which do not relate in some manner to the Eucharist.” His notion betrays a damnable ignorance of the sacred liturgy; e.g. consider the traditional COMMUNION ANTIPHON for Saint John, the Apostle whom Jesus loved (27 December). Indeed, Dom Franquesa contradicts his “Eucharistic litmus test” constantly in his own document!
Dom Franquesa declares: “These antiphons have been conceived with the object of offering a certain thought (!) or creating a special atmosphere.” Who can understand such gobbledygook? Moreover, the Second Vatican Council wanted to lead Catholics to a deeper understanding of the liturgy. Vatican II never said: the liturgy can be destroyed and modified if some random Spanish monk desires to introduce a “certain thought.”
(5 of 6) Dom Franquesa’s Errors • Over and over again, Dom Franquesa makes clear his revisions apply only to “recitation” (Masses without music). Yet, inexplicably, he writes: “Wherever the opportunity is created, nothing impedes these antiphons from being alternated with verses of some psalms, between the Schola Cantorum or the cantor and the people.” Why does Dom Franquesa make reference to cantors and the Schola Cantorum? Doesn’t he realize a Schola Cantorum is for singing, not recitation? Is he trolling us?
(6 of 6) Dom Franquesa’s Errors • In America, we have a colloquial term: “cheek.” Dom Franquesa demonstrates an enormous amount of cheek. He deems the propers for TRINITY SUNDAY “inappropriate”—yet has the cheek to offer no explanation whatsoever for why he feels that way! He says In splendóribus, the ancient COMMUNION ANTIPHON for Christmas, is “impossible” (his word) to translate into the vernacular, yet has the cheek to omit any explanation for his declaration!
Who Was Dom Franquesa? • What do we know about Dom Franquesa? I’ve been able to find very little. (Perhaps people fluent in Spanish can discover more?) We know that he was a close friend of Hannibal Bugnini and was one of the first consultors for the Consilium. Indeed, Dom Franquesa served on a staggering number of Consilium committees during the 1960s. He was secretary for COETUS 19. He was also secretary for COETUS 16. He was a member of COETUS 10, and served on many other post-conciliar committees. From the magnificent church historian, Yves Chiron, we learn that Bugnini wrote to Dom Franquesa from his new post in Iran on 6 January 1976, adding the following handwritten lines:
“Oh! how rare true friends are! We added ‘Ubi caritas est vera’ in the famous hymn but oh! how rare it is in the Church. I hope to find more of it among the Muslims…”
Yves Chiron mentions also makes reference to “unpublished letters that Bugnini wrote to Dom Adalbert Franquesa […] preserved in the Catalan abbey of Montserrat.” Somebody needs to get busy translating those and posting them online!
1 It’s worth pointing out that Andrea’s knowledge of Spanish is perfect. Unlike some, she’s not a “faker.” She’s 100% fluent in Spanish—as are several of my colleagues here at Corpus Christi Watershed.
