HE SECOND Vatican Council solemnly declared: “The liturgy is the summit [culmen] toward which the activity of the Church is directed; at the same time it is the source [fons] from which all her power emanates.” Let us please remember what Vatican II did not say. Vatican II didn’t say: “The liturgy as we have it now is hugely defective and must be radically changed.” Vatican II didn’t say: “We desire for the sacred liturgy to be modified beyond recognition; once that happens it will become the source and summit.” Vatican II didn’t declare: “The current liturgy we have isn’t the source and summit because it’s profoundly deficient—but after it’s been massively overhauled we want the faithful to participate in it, although many of us won’t live to witness or approve these changes.” [We recall that major liturgical changes weren’t introduced until almost a decade after SACROSANCTUM CONCILIUM.]
Not Radical • It’s true that Vatican II said: “The rite of the Mass is to be revised.” For example, it suggested certain rites could be “simplified”—precisely what one would expect after a major council. I personally believe the fathers of Vatican II wanted to make parish Masses more like a PONTIFICAL MASS AT THE FALDSTOOL (where the different parts are performed by different ministers) and less like a monastic Missa Lecta (where the priest basically reads everything himself). The self-same document calling for a revision also declared: “There must be no innovations unless the good of the Church genuinely and certainly requires them.”
Our Goal • Our endeavor here at CORPUS CHRISTI WATERSHED has been to—in our own small way—promote authentic sacred music. For myself, I’ve been writing harmonizations for the antiphons prescribed by the Church. Below is my attempt to sing this week’s ENTRANCE CHANT while simultaneously accompanying myself on the pipe organ:
* PDF Download • Singer’s Score (Treble Clef)
* PDF Download • ORGAN ACCOMPANIMENT (2 Pages)
Here’s the direct URL link.
(1 of 2) “Sung” Vs. “Spoken” Propers • Years after Vatican II ended, a priest named Adalbert Franquesa Garrós made it his personal mission to replace the Proprium Missae (insanely ancient liturgical prayers) in the priest’s SACRAMENTARY. The statements he made publicly make him come across as a lunatic. For instance, without any evidence, Dom Franquesa declared: “The whole world agreed without difficulty that in Masses without music the offertory antiphon could be omitted.”
Deeply troubling were Dom Franquesa’s views on Sacred Scripture. He said publicly that verses from the Bible are “meaningless” (his word) without the Gregorian melodies. His statement seems to approach heresy. After all, Sacred Scripture does not “lose almost all its meaning” just because it isn’t sung to a particular melody. Dom Franquesa was able to stealthily insert his project into the liturgy by claiming his revisions were only intended for private Masses (or Masses without music). However, this distinction was lost for many years. Indeed, in November of 2007, Bishop Donald W. Trautman—at that time the CHAIRMAN of the USCCB’s Committee on Liturgy—made the following statement:
“Recent research, confirmed by unofficial discussions with officials of the Holy See during the past several years, has made clear that the antiphons of the Order of Mass were never intended to be sung, but are provided without notation to be recited whenever the Graduale Romanum or another song is not sung. The antiphons of the Missale Romanum, which differ substantially from the sung antiphons of the Roman Gradual, were never intended to be sung.”
Dr. William Mahrt, a professor at the University of Stanford, wrote in 2015:
“Worse, composers are now setting the introits of the missal [instead of the Graduale Romanum] to music—even to chant—though these texts were explicitly for spoken recitation only.”
(2 of 2) “Sung” Vs. “Spoken” Propers • Nobody has been able to determine why Dom Franquesa decided to annihilate some of the most memorable and ancient prayers from the Mass. For instance, he called the famous propers for Holy Trinity Sunday “inappropriate” but gave no explanation as to why he felt that way. I could easily give numerous examples, but let’s just consider one. Below is the COMMUNION ANTIPHON for the 24th Sunday in Ordinary Time:
Notice how Dom Franquesa stealthily (without explanation) annihilates the traditional notions of:
(a) The Mass as a sacrifice;
(b) The idea that we should adore God at Mass;
(c) The injunction to take up our cross;
(d) The focus on sin and repentance.
Never Voted For That • It goes without saying that such alterations to the liturgy were never mandated by the fathers of Vatican II. Indeed, it reads like a “Top Ten List” of favorite hits from the 1970s progressives. For instance, Paul Inwood has said publicly: “The Mass is not about adoring.”
Conclusion • I can still remember lyrics I heard as a kid:
Here’s the story
of a lovely lady
who was bringing up
three very lovely girls.
All of them had hair of gold
like their mother
the youngest one in curls.
I literally haven’t thought about those lyrics in 30 years. That shows the power of music.
Saint Paul tells us we must “work out our salvation with fear and trembling” (Philippians 2:12). Let us take music seriously. And let us serve God by doing our best to restore authentic sacred music.
