NLY ONCE in all the years I knew him did I see Father Valentine Young truly angry. But there was a time he became exasperated, when someone kept mispronouncing the Latin word Spirítui. They kept saying “Spiri-TOO-ey,” which caused Father Valentine exclaim: “Please stop; you’re making my Latin ears bleed.” Father Valentine was rare among priests because he was fluent in Latin. Most priests—if they know Latin at all—can ‘fake it’ if given access to a LATIN-ENGLISH DICTIONARY. But Father Valentine was fully fluent, and was known to take delight in conferences wherein all the participants spoke to each other in Latin.
Alma Redemptóris • Today, I’d like to speak about the simple form of the Alma Redemptóris Mater. (The “simple” version seems to be the most popular, although Dom Gregory Murray composed a beautiful organ interlude on the “solemn” version.) First of all, below is a harmonization I wrote for it—corresponding to the MARIAN INSERT stickers I mentioned recently—along with my attempt to accompany myself while simultaneously singing the melody:
* PDF Download • ORGAN ACCOMPANIMENT
—Includes the singer’s score as well as a metrical version.
(1 of 3) French Approach To Latin • I’m certainly not a spectacular linguist, but since 1995 I’ve dealt with Lingua Latina on a daily basis. For decades, I’ve experienced Latin spoken by priests and seminarians from all over: France, Belgium, Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Australia, Mexico, Poland, New Zealand, and so forth. The French—when speaking in their own tongue—place the accent on the final syllable of each word. Naturally, this has an impact on how French priests pronounce Latin:
(2 of 3) French Approach To Latin • Starting in 1880, Dom André Mocquereau began studying linguistic theories by scholars like Henri Weil (d. 1909) and Louis Benloew (d. 1900), attempting to prove that the accent of Latin words should be shifted to occur on the final syllable, as it does in French. One of his disciples, Dom Joseph Gajard, believed in the theories of Dom Mocquereau with fanatical adherence. In 1935, Gajard summarized what Mocquereau had to say about the Latin accent: “In the golden age of the language, the Latin tonic accent was not a strong syllable as opposed to a weak one, but a high syllable (‘accentus acutus’) as opposed to a low one (‘accentus gravis’). […] In the classical age the accent was exclusively melodic and short, with practically no intensity.” But his theory failed to gain acceptance.1
(3 of 3) French Approach To Latin • We must be aware of his theory, because Dom Mocquereau’s rhythmic system favors adding an emphasis to the final syllable. About this, the 1962 LIBER USUALIS says: “This is often the more excellent way for those who are musically alert.” And Dom Gajard wrote in 1935:
“Our own theory normally
places the rhythmic ictus
on the last syllable of
the isolated word.”
(For the record, some dispute that Dom Mocquereau’s ictus constitutes a true “accent.”)
Practical Effect • Gregorianists like Professor Joseph Gogniat went back and forth regarding the precise amount of elongation ending syllables should receive. Therefore, Gogniat tried to ‘hedge his bets’ by saying that a TROCHEE before a bar should be halfway between lengthened and not lengthened. Needless to say, his approach is not practical. A better solution (perhaps) would have been to adopt the “Dom Johner Rule,” which says a TROCHEE should only be doubled before a full bar or a double bar. According to my colleague, William Fritz, the Norbertines did adopt Dom Johner’s method. As things stand in the year 2025, those who follow of Dom Mocquereau’s rhythm shift the accent, whereas the ‘German school’ emphasizes the Latin tonic accent:
Notice how the official edition does not ‘micromanage’ each rallentando.
Dr. Peter Wagner clearly felt the ‘tension’ of the final TROCHEE, and suggested that folks purchase his editions in modern notation in order to decipher the Gregorian notation. But Abbat Raphael Molitor found such a ‘solution’ totally absurd, asking in a 1904 pamphlet:
“What singer will buy a KYRIALE when he finds he must purchase a second book as a key to the first? Even a choirmaster would scarcely do so.”
Those who carefully examine the modern notation editions by Dr. Peter Wagner (Commissionis Pontificiæ Gregorianæ Membrum) will notice he switches back-and-forth regarding TROCHEE length within the self-same strophic hymn. In my view, that is bonkers. If I could invent a Time Machine, I’d love to go back 100 years and see whether the Germans actually followed that.
German Method • I could easily produce thousands of examples demonstrating beyond the shadow of a doubt the “German Approach” to elongation for a TROCHEE that comes before a bar line—but my time is somewhat limited. Therefore, the following example must suffice:
* PDF Download • GERMAN APPROACH (“Final Trochee”)
—From a 1928 “Vesperbuch” published in Cologne (Köln) with an IMPRIMATUR dated 17 November 1928.
‘Via Media’ • Those who examine my harmonization (above) will notice I chose a via media between the different methods. Some may ask: “Why not simply use the Dom Mocquereau version, since that’s currently the most popular?” I’m unable to do that because the version by Dom Mocquereau—to use Father Valentine’s expression—makes my Latin ears bleed. It goes without saying no choirmaster can teach a theory he doesn’t accept in a convincing & honest way. As we will see (below) not even Dom Gajard—the staunchest and most fanatical follower of Dom Mocquereau—follows his approach to the TROCHEE.
Challenge For Each Reader • I challenge anyone to play the Dom Mocquereau versions—such as the 1953 version by Dr. Eugene Lapierre, or the 1952 version by Father Percy Jones, or the version by Henri Potiron, or the version by Dr. Theodore Marier, or the version by Achille P. Bragers, or the version by Dom Jean-Hébert Desroquettes (who was organist at Solesmes Abbey under Dom Mocquereau)—with an open mind. Play through those versions and see whether you agree that treatment of words like “súmens íllud Áve” becomes bizarrely transformed into “suméns illúd Avé.” Do you agree that one who routinely sings according to such rhythm will end up very confused?
Gajard Did Not Follow! • I don’t believe it’s reasonable to expect musicians to follow Dom Mocquereau’s rhythmic system when it causes one’s Latin ears to bleed. Moreover, when we consider that the “simple” versions of the Marian antiphons were composed at a very late date, we might surmise that applying the GERMAN APPROACH seems much more probable in terms of the ‘authentic’ rhythm (from the standpoint of musicology). I do sometimes wonder if Dom Mocquereau genuinely believed all the accents on Latin words should be shifted. Deep down, I can’t shake the feeling that he invented his theory to justify singing Latin words as if they were French.
And guess what? If you listen carefully to the phonograph records conducted by Dom Gajard, you’ll see he contradicts the very editions he promotes:
Here’s the direct URL link.
The highlighted words show where Dom Gajard adopts the GERMAN APPROACH, contrary to the rhythmic markings of Dom Mocquereau!
TIKTOK Directors • We live in a “TIKTOK world” where certain people spend hours each day arguing over hypothetical things. For years, a certain man wrote me emails warning—in a very harsh and stern way—that I had an “obligation” (his word) to follow the performance instructions in the PARISH BOOK OF CHANT published by the Church Music Association of America. In a rather blunt way, I told him the instructions he referenced are gibberish. Here is the paragraph from the PARISH BOOK OF CHANT that speaks of the tonic accent in Latin words:
Finally, in order to achieve the sort of rhythmic “fluidity within solidity” demanded by plainsong, care must be taken when executing the Latin accent. […] Latin employs a “quality” accent, rather than one of quantity, either of weight or volume. Because this quality mostly involves lifting the pitch, it is difficult to apply to a text that has a fixed melody. However—and especially in cases of recitation, such as in Psalm verses and other passages with a single repeated note on several syllables—the sense of a lifted accent can be achieved through a slight heightening of the voice, both in strength and, to a lesser degree, duration. But this can never sound mechanical, and is best achieved when thought, more than sung.
For the record, the emphasis on the final words in that paragraph (“best achieved when thought, more than sung”) appear in the original. They were not added by me.
Those instructions (in my humble opinion) can only be described as “self-contradictory gibberish.” Nor are any citations provided to support their claims about the accent in Latin. I eventually stopped responding to that fellow, because I realized it was all a ‘game’ to him. Although he’s currently seeking employment, no one has hired him to direct a choir in 20+ years. Meanwhile, I live in the real world, and I deal with real Catholics in a real parish. Therefore, arguing with that man would be a colossal waste of time. There’s too much work to do!
Final Thoughts • I don’t wish to come across as unhinged, berserk, or sensationalist. I just feel that Dom Mocquereau’s obsession with adding elongations the final syllable—even for the simplest, most straightforward chants—goes against the proper pronunciation of the Latin words in a grotesque way. And we saw how not even Dom Gajard, a fanatical follower of Dom Mocquereau (who believed in Mocquereau’s method more than Mocquereau himself) doesn’t shift the accents when it comes time to sing the piece in real life! The PREFACE to the Editio Vaticana quotes Pope Benedict XIV: “In the first place, the text being sung must be understood clearly and correctly.” Indeed, the document issued by that pope (dated 19 February 1749) is called ANNUS QUI HUNC, and says:
Let chant and sound be grave,
pious, and distinct, and
suited for the divine praises
in the house of God, that
simultaneously the words
as well may be understood,
and those listening are
excited unto piety.
1 I’m not saying the truth of Dom Mocquereau’s theory about ‘shifting’ the tonic accent on Latin words rests upon whether a majority of scholars agree with him. However, I do believe his theory becomes impossible to justify in light of Latin poetry from the period in question.
