EW ITEMS created for the 1970 Missale Romanum have caused as much confusion as the Adalbert Propers. What are they? Why were they created? Fewer than 1% of Catholics can answer either question correctly. As a matter of fact, these propers were created by a Benedictine priest from Spain named DOM ADALBERT FRANQUESA GARRÓS in the year 1968. They were created explicitly for private Masses (Missae privatae) or Masses without singing (Missae lectae). That is why Dom Adalbert said his collection of propers “does not jeopardize the treasury of Gregorian chant in any way, which the Council mandated should be conserved wholly.” Several years ago, I translated from Spanish a seminal document from 1970 in which Dom Adalbert attempts to explain why he revised the antiphons for spoken ‘recited’ Masses.2
His Inexplicable Rationale • Even all these years later, Dom Adalbert’s explanation strikes me as grotesque, ill-conceived, and self-contradictory. In sentence after sentence, paragraph after paragraph, we encounter weird and inexplicable statements such as: “The offertory antiphons rarely offer a text of pastoral worth.” One thing is certain: the entire raison d’être of the Adalbert Propers deals only with private Masses and Masses without music. They were never intended to replace the ancient Graduale Romanum texts. (They were included in the SACRAMENTARY for the priest’s convenience when offering Mass in private.)
For those who don’t have time to read that
1970 document by Dom Adalbert, I have
assembled the following six quotations:
1st Quotation:
Pope Saint Paul VI, in an APOSTOLIC CONSTITUTION (3 April 1969) explained why he authorized the creation of the Adalbert Propers:
“The Entrance and Communion
antiphons have been revised for
Masses without singing.”
2nd Quotation:
Dr. William Mahrt,1 a professor at Stanford University, lamented how composers were setting the Adalbert Propers…
“…to music—even to chant!—although
these texts were explicitly for
spoken recitation only.”
3rd Quotation:
In 1983, Archbishop Annibale Bugnini pointed out on page 891 of The Reform of the Liturgy (1990) that the Adalbert Propers…
“…were intended to be recited, not sung.”
4th Quotation:
In November of 2007, Bishop Donald Trautman, chairman of the USCCB Committee on the Liturgy, made the following declaration:
“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 [Adalbert Propers], which differ substantially from the sung antiphons of the Graduale Romanum, were never intended to be sung.”
5th Quotation:
The General Instruction of the Roman Missal (since November of 1969) has said the Adalbert Propers are to be recited:
“only if none of the above
alternatives is employed and
there is no entrance song.”
6th Quotation:
Dr. Christoph Tietze, a professor at the Graduate Theological Foundation, noted in 2006 that the Adalbert Propers…
“…were intended only when there was no singing at the entrance or communion, Si ad introitum non habetur cantus, antiphona in Missali proposita recitatur. […] When a choir sings the Gregorian antiphon whose text may be different from the missal on that day, an uninformed priest will regard the Gregorian proper as the wrong text.”
1 At the time he wrote those words (SACRED JOURNAL MUSIC, Volume 142, No. 3), Dr. William Mahrt was president of the Church Music Association of America. Dr. Mahrt went on to explain: “The texts in the Graduale Romanum are not the same as those of the Missale Romanum, and it is those of the missal which are printed in the disposable missals used in the parishes. I have often been asked, ‘Where can I find the Gregorian chants for the introits and communions in the missal?’ The answer is, you cannot find them, because they were provided for use in spoken Masses only.” In that same article, Dr. Mahrt pointed out that Father Samuel Weber, OSB, was setting the Adalbert Propers to music, even though they “were explicitly for spoken recitation only.” Thus, according to Dr. Mahrt: “the link with the authentic Gregorian chants is broken a little more.”
2 As far as I know, mine was the very first English translation ever made of that historic document.
