• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Corpus Christi Watershed

We’re a 501(c)3 public charity established in 2006. We have no endowment, no major donors, no savings, and run no advertisements. We exist solely by the generosity of small donors.

  • Donate
  • Our Team
    • Our Editorial Policy
    • Who We Are
    • How To Contact Us
    • Sainte Marie Bulletin Articles
  • 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

Bishop François Charrière Vs. Hannibal Bugnini

Jeff Ostrowski · July 5, 2025

OR ABOUT FIFTEEN years, I have been reading a little (each day) about the reform of the sacred liturgy undertaken during the 1960s. It goes without saying that we will never know everything that took place. On the other hand, a decent amount of documentation has emerged over the last twenty years revealing shameful tactics used by Hannibal Bugnini, whom Father Louis Bouyer labeled a “mealy-mouthed scoundrel.” Hannibal Bugnini pretended to speak for the entire Church. For instance, Bugnini’s CONSILIUM on 2 September 1964—pushing for radical changes far exceeding what Vatican II mandated—wrote to the pope as follows:

“we see no reason to
further postpone the reform
awaited and desired by all.”

Sycophants • Piero Marini (Bugnini’s secretary and devotee) published a book in 2007 which fawns over every decision Bugnini’s CONSILIUM made. Some of Marini’s statements are so sycophantic that he comes across as a lunatic. For instance, he claims—without evidence—that the Curia’s operating principle was “fear.” But when it comes to Bugnini’s CONSILIUM, Marini writes: “Not fear, but scholarly rigor and pastoral concern for the faithful’s active participation” constituted their operating principle. Fernando Cardinal Antonelli (who began the liturgical reforms with a secret document called Memoria sulla Riforma Liturgica) wrote a message to the pope saying that those who resist the liturgical reforms do so out of “indolence or lack of liturgical sensibility.” In other words, affection for the ancient Catholic liturgical tradition—according to Antonelli—means you’re either lazy or stupid.

Yet, consider the following message Bishop François Charrière sent to the Vatican in 1957:

We acknowledge that […] more or less substantial changes are being requested from Rome. But those who are pleased with today’s situation, those who live the Liturgy as given by the Roman Church, are not complaining, and do not say anything. Don’t we also have to consider the majority who are content? Isn’t their number as great, maybe greater, than the number of those who complain? We are being told of a desire, which then tends to become widespread, for a substantial modification of the Liturgy. What is really universal is the desire to see the faithful always participating in the Mass to a greater extent and to see the priests always living from their liturgical prayer. But as for how this better participation of the faithful and priests can be achieved, we do not believe that those who speak the more loudly, those who somehow impatiently keep asking for endless changes, do represent the majority.
En un mot, sur ce point comme les autres, nous nous rendons bien compte que, de divers côtés, on demande à Rome des changements plus ou moins substantiels. Mais ceux qui sont contents de la situation actuelle, ceux qui vivent vraiment la liturgie, telle que l’Eglise romaine nous l’a donnée, ne reclamant pas, ne disent rien. Ne faut-il pas tenir compte aussi, et largement, de ceux qui sont contents? Leur nombre n’est il pas aussi considérable, plus considérable peut-être que celui de ceux qui réclamant? On nous parle de désir qui tend à devenir universel en vue d’une modification massive de la liturgie. Ce qui est universel, c’est bien le désir de voir les fidèles participer d’une manière toujours plus active à la Messe, de voir les prêtres vivre toujours mieux leur prière liturgique. Mais quant à la manière de réaliser cette participation plus active des prêtres et des fidèles, nous ne croyons pas que ceux qui parlent le plus fort et le plus haut, ceux qui s’empressent avec quelque impatience parfois de solliciter sans cesse des changements, représentent réellement la major pars.
[Emphases in the original.]

If only more had been willing to heed the wisdom of Bishop Charrière!

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

Filed Under: Articles Tagged With: Annibale Bugnini Reform, Archbishop Hannibal Bugnini, Memoria Sulla Riforma Liturgica, Memoria Sulla Riforma Liturgica ANTONELLI Last Updated: July 5, 2025

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

    14th Sunday in Ordinary Time (Year C)
    Our choir is on break during the month of July. However, on the feasts website, the chants have been posted for the 14th Sunday in Ordinary Time (Year C), which is this coming Sunday: 6 July 2025.
    —Jeff Ostrowski
    Bugnini’s Statement (6 November 1966)
    With each passing day, more is revealed about how the enemies of the liturgy accomplished their goals. For instance, Hannibal Bugnini deeply resented the way Vatican II said Gregorian Chant “must be given first place in liturgical services.” On 6 November 1966, his cadre wrote a letter attempting to justify the elimination of Gregorian Chant with this brazen statement: “What really gives a Mass its tone is not so much the songs as it is the prayers and readings.” Bugnini’s cadre then attacked the very heart of Gregorian Chant (viz. the Proprium Missae), bemoaning how the Proprium Missae “is completely new each Sunday and feast day.” There is much more to be said about this topic. Stay tuned.
    —Jeff Ostrowski
    Luis Martínez Must Go!
    Sevilla Cathedral (entry dated 13 December 1564): The chapter orders Luis Martínez, a cathedral chaplain, to stay away from the choirbook-stand when the rest of the singers gather around it to sing polyphony—the reason being that “he throws the others out of tune.” [Excerpt from “The Life of Father Francisco Guerrero.”]
    —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

On October 14, 1968, our Holy Father, Pope Paul VI, in an address to the Roman liturgy Consilium, pointed out the abuse which wants to “remove the sacred from liturgical worship and replace the holy with the commonplace and the every-day.”

— Quoted by Roger Wagner in a 1970 article

Recent Posts

  • Bishop François Charrière Vs. Hannibal Bugnini
  • 14th Sunday in Ordinary Time (Year C)
  • “My First Year with the Latin Mass” • A Music Director’s Perspective
  • Boston Auxiliary Bishop: “In offering the Traditional Mass for the first time, after removing the vestments, I knelt in the back pew and wept.”
  • Now Available! • “Hymns of Cardinal Newman: Kevin Allen’s Legendary Choral Settings”

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