• 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

Reader Question • “Extra Verses” for the Propers

Corpus Christi Watershed · December 23, 2024

The following came from a
reader we’ll call “Mike Olsen.”
[We usually redact names for anonymity’s sake.]

EAR CCWATERSHED: I have a question regarding the CMAA Simple English Propers. The antiphons given in that book obviously come from the GRADUALE ROMANUM. But what about the psalm verses? Who decided which psalm to place after each antiphon (and which of its verses to include if it’s not given in its entirety)? I can see that whenever an antiphon itself comes from a psalm, the very same psalm is placed below it. But there are numerous antiphons which do not come from the Book of Psalms but for example from one of the Gospels. I’ve tried to contact Mr. Adam Bartlett on this issue but without success.

On 22-DEC-2024 Jeff Ostrowski
replied to Mike as follows:

ELIEVE IT or not, the answer to your question is bound up with the traditional fasting laws for reception of Holy Communion. I’ve broached this subject many times in the past—e.g. in this article, which was shared widely and reprinted in various publications—and repeating everything I already said might seem excessive. Therefore, I’ll try my best to be succinct, repeating only what’s necessary. For the record, much of the information contained below is courtesy of the 3rd edition of the EDMUND CAMPION PEW MISSAL, published by Sophia Institute Press.

Part 1
Due to a variety of factors—most especially the mandatory “midnight fast”—it was rare for the faithful to receive Holy Communion during Mass. Holy Communion was often distributed at a side altar while Mass was going on, or immediately after Mass, or (most especially) long before Mass began. I could produce tons of evidence showing this is the case, but for the moment consider this printed page from Saint Louis, Missouri, dated 9 April 1954. Once upon a time, Holy Communion was taken very seriously by the faithful. In a certain sense, we’ve lost that.1

Part 2
It was exceedingly rare for anyone to receive Holy Communion at a SUNG MASS except the celebrant himself. However, in 1918 Father Adrian Fortescue pointed out that such a thing was always technically possible. The most common time Holy Communion was given in the olden days seems to have been at the bedside of a sick person, who would recite the Confíteor, OUR FATHER, and Dómine, Non Sum Dignus. (That’s why the Dómine, Non Sum Dignus in Germany was only rarely said in Latin, even at Masses prior to Vatican II.)

Part 3
During the reign of Pope Saint Pius X, Catholics started receiving Holy Communion with greater frequency. Clerics began to feel it was “unbecoming” or “inappropriate” for another priest to approach the Tabernacle while another priest was saying Mass and remove the SANCTISSIMUM to distribute to members of the congregation at side altar. Indeed, a special section was added to the 1961 rubrics which strongly discouraged this practice. [On this, please cf. page 250 of the gorgeous third edition of the Campion Missal.]

Part 4
The 1958 INSTRUCTION promulgated by Pope Pius XII explicitly revived a practice which had been virtually abandoned for many centuries: viz. adding ‘extra’ psalm verses to the Introit, Offertory, and Communion antiphons. It’s noteworthy that the 1958 INSTRUCTION refers to the Offertory verse as an “antiphon.” I’ve argued that the Offertory verse is more of a “RESPONSORY” than an antiphon. One can see this by examining the OFFERTORIALE attributed to Karl Ott. [I say attributed because for 15 years I’ve searched without success for information about Carl Ott. I’m beginning to wonder if he really existed.]

Part 5
As I explained in a 2017 article, the section at the beginning of official liturgical music books—called De Ritibus Servandis in Cantu Missae—was modified many times since it was first promulgated by the “Vatican Commission on Gregorian Chant” (headed by Dom Pothier). It was sleek and succinct back in 1908 but became bloated with accretions as time passed. By 1961 it was quite lengthy, and incorporated the 1958 INSTRUCTION issued under Pius XII with regard to the ‘extra’ verses. That means if you examine a book such as the 1961 Liber Usualis, you’ll find these ‘extra’ verses praised in the front matter. The Saint Andrew Bible Missal (IMPRIMATUR 6 January 1965) includes the ‘extra’ verses for each Introit—but not for the Offertory or Communion. The same is true of the 1964 set of propers composed by Father Paul Arbogast.

Part 6
Nobody who had eaten or drunken anything since midnight—even a drop of water—could receive Holy Communion. There are stories from the 1940s of priests granted permission to offer Mass in the afternoon for prisoners. These priests sometimes had to go until 4:00PM before they were allowed to eat or drink. But starting in the 1950s, the mandatory Communion fast began to be made less severe. Regarding this whole situation, a 1957 publication from Solesmes Abbey—which provided ‘extra’ verses—stated matters rather succinctly:

The Church’s new legislation concerning the Eucharistic fast makes it possible for many of the faithful to communicate at a sung Mass. The singing of the Communion Antiphon alone, which sufficed at sung Mass when Holy Communion was not given, is insufficient under the new conditions, which moreover are merely a return to ancient usage.

Part 7
Where do the verses come from? One of the first efforts to revive them seems to have been MASS AND VESPERS (Solesmes Abbey, 1957), which had a special section attempting to add ‘extra’ verses for the Communion. Here’s a sample of how that looked:

*  PDF Download • EXAMPLE PAGE (Mass and Vespers, 1957)

A few years later, Solesmes Abbey published a book with a long title: “Versus Psalmorum Et Canticorum Ad Usum Cantorum Pro Antiphonis Ad Introitum Et Ad Communionem Repetendis Iuxta Codices Antiquos.” That book can be downloaded in its entirety as a PDF file.

Part 8
After Vatican II, the Mass was revised. The official Gregorian chants for the Novus Ordo Missae were published in the ORDO CANTUS MISSAE (Vatican Polyglot Press, 1970), with a decree from the Sacra Congregatio Pro Cultu Divino (“Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship”) signed by its secretary, Annibale Bugnini. They included the ‘extra’ verses for each Communion antiphon, as you can see:

*  PDF Download • EXAMPLE PAGE (Ordo Cantus Missae, 1970)
—Published by the Vatican Polyglot Press by order of the Congregation for Divine Worship.

The Graduale Romanum (Solesmes Abbey, 1973) reproduced the ORDO CANTUS MISSAE without any changes. That means if you look carefully in the 1973 Graduale, you’ll notice ‘extra’ psalm verses for each Communion antiphon (but not for the Introit or Offertory).

Part 9
Now let me answer your question in a very specific way. Each choirmaster can choose any psalm to “extend” the antiphons. Nothing prevents any psalm from being chosen. When it comes to the Communion antiphons, since those are given by the ORDO CANTUS MISSAE (1970), some feel it’s customary to follow those suggestions. At the same time, any verses from any psalm—especially Psalm 33—may be chosen. A variety of factors must be taken into account. When it comes to the Introit and Offertory antiphons, most choirmasters will simply “continue” whatever psalm is used by the antiphon.

Mike, you asked about antiphons which don’t come from the PSALTER. You’re correct that some antiphons come from the New Testament, Isaiah, or even Baruch. What is to be done in those circumstances? The third edition of the EDMUND CAMPION PEW MISSAL gives an elaborate history when it comes to your specific question. Let me briefly summarize:

(a) For the Communion antiphon, you can follow the ORDO CANTUS MISSAE. Or you can use Psalm 33. Or you can follow an ancient tradition: viz. choose the same psalm as the Introit used. Or you can use any psalm you wish.

(b) Holy Communion received by the congregation started becoming less frequent—broadly speaking—around 1100AD. Dr. Peter Wagner is utterly brilliant on this topic. The ‘extra’ verses began to disappear. Therefore, one must look at older manuscripts to see what was done. Not all the manuscripts indicate the same ‘extra’ verses—especially when it comes to antiphons from the New Testament.

(c) The third edition of the CAMPION PEW MISSAL provides the ‘extra’ verses for each Communion antiphon, and explicitly notates the specific manuscript source for each. I’m not aware of any other book that’s so helpful and meticulous in this regard—and this is quite important. For instance, Father Joseph Gelineau published a 1962 book called “Chant et Musique dans le Culte Chrétien.” His book is riddled with reprehensible mistakes—and even some “fairy tales”—because Gelineau failed to cite what he should have. The Campion Missal cites the source for each Communion antiphon, and makes note of the modern chants (e.g. Christ the King, Holy Family, and so forth) which cannot have ancient ‘extra’ verses for obvious reasons.

1 Nowadays, everyone receives Holy Communion at Mass (regardless of whether they’re in the state of grace) and very few make any serious preparation or thanksgiving. It seems like many Catholics receive Holy Communion “out of habit”—and one could argue this is not healthy. Moreover, the priest doesn’t recognize the members of his flock (which can make it easier for evil people to desecrate the SANCTISSIMUM).

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

Filed Under: Articles, PDF Download Tagged With: 1958 Pope Pius XII, Bugnini ORDO CANTUS MISSAE, Carl Ott Offertory, De musica sacra et sacra liturgia, De Ritibus Servandis, De Ritibus Servandis in Cantu Missae, Extra Verses Communion, Karl Ott Offertory Book, No Communion During High Mass, Offertory as Antiphon, Offertory as Responsory, On the Manner of Distributing Holy Communion, Simple English Mass Propers, Versus ad Communionem Last Updated: December 23, 2024

Subscribe

It greatly helps us if you subscribe to our mailing list!

* indicates required

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

Legitimate and necessary concern for current realities in the concrete lives of people cannot make us forget the true nature of the liturgical actions. It is clear that the Mass is not the time to “celebrate” human dignity or purely terrestrial claims or hopes. It is rather the sacrifice which renders Christ really present in the sacrament.

— Pope Saint John Paul II (20 March 1990)

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