• 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

Archbishop Sample’s Letter on Sacred Music (5 of 8)

Richard J. Clark · June 20, 2014

RCHBISHOP ALEXANDER K. SAMPLE of Portland, Oregon, while bishop of Marquette, Michigan, composed this most comprehensive pastoral letter on sacred music:

      * *  Rejoice In The Lord Always • 2013 Pastoral Letter

Many of us had the good fortune of hearing him speak at the CMAA Colloquium in 2013. His words in person were highly consistent with this extraordinary pastoral letter. It is composed with clarity and conviction, but more importantly, imbued with a great sense of “sensus Ecclesiae” as spoken of by St. John Paul II. He understands well that sacred melody must express “the truth of the Mystery that is celebrated in the Liturgy.” (§12. Chirograph for the Centenary of Tra le sollecitudini )

But sadly, here lies the deep frustration: what he writes of may as well be a foreign language to most liturgical musicians and priests. This is not meant to be a criticism of clergy or musicians. Many, deeply devoted to the Church, are not well trained in sacred music. Furthermore, Archbishop Sample’s words are not a “foreign language” because of his writing style — it is direct and quite accessible. Yet, there is systemic misunderstanding:

HE BIGGEST LITURGICAL PROBLEM WE FACE — the most fundamental problem in Roman Catholic liturgical music is the prevailing misunderstanding of its very purpose. For example, how many clergy and liturgical musicians know what the propers are? Again, this is not a criticism! They have not been catechized. Our secular culture and our acceptance of it in the context of the sacred perpetuate misunderstanding. This is compounded by the rejection of our traditions. The rejection of our traditions leads to the notion of the Mass being up for personal interpretation. Such interpretation (a “Tower of Babel” in which individuals speak their own language but do not understand each other) leads to a systemic breakdown of the liturgy, which can bring about far worse than simple “misunderstanding.” The fundamental purpose of the mass then spirals out of control, leaving the sacred mysteries as secondary to personal desires. Sadly, this is not only common, but celebrated.

Of course, to understand well the purpose of sacred music, one must heed the words of Pope Saint Pius X, which Archbishop Sample quotes:

“The Church solemnly teaches us, then, that the very purpose of sacred music is twofold: the glory of God and the sanctification of the faithful.”

Therefore, the purpose of sacred music is not to entertain or to indulge our own personal tastes. (This cuts in every direction!) This is also not to downplay that certain music speaks to individuals for their own private devotions, a powerful tool in prayer. But our greatest prayer, the Mass, is directed by the entire community toward God. This act of communal praise strengthens the community — the “sanctification of the faithful.”

TO UNDERSTAND THE PROPER ROLE OF SACRED MUSIC, we must understand history, which Archbishop Sample discusses under “Some history and the nature and purpose of Sacred Music”:

“Since the psalms, part of Sacred Scripture, were meant to be sung, music was seen, ultimately, to be part of the very integrity of the Word of God. Furthermore, as Christian worship was moored to the Sacred Scriptures, music was seen as necessarily worthy of being preserved and fostered in the public worship of the Church.”

Most importantly, he adds:

”…the music proper to the Mass is not merely an addendum to worship, i.e., something external added on to the form and structure of the Mass. Rather, sacred music is an essential element of the worship itself.”

To illustrate that point somewhat, I often receive well-intended compliments that “the music was a wonderful addition to the mass.” Addition is often the key word. I politely, say “thank you” and do not dive into the Church documents then and there. But the prevailing notion of sacred music is that music at mass is there simply for its own sake. This can be a problem in any style including ambitious classical music, e.g. the Viennese masses of the late Nineteenth Century. Whereas, singing the mass, i.e., the acclamations and dialogues, the psalms and their antiphons, litanies, etc., is to sing the Rite itself – just as the cantor sings the Torah, an ancient practice as old as the Torah itself and reintroduced by Ezra after the Babylonian Exile.

That our sacred music is a descendant of such history is deeply profound. It is an imperative notion to grasp! Archbishop Sample addresses this very notion, that “the role of sacred music is to help us sing and pray the texts of the Mass itself, not just ornament it.”


ITH REGARD TO INTERPRETATION of Vatican II, let’s forget about Sacrosanctum Concilium. Forget Pius X’s 1903 Motu Proprio, Tra le Sollecitudini (“Instruction on Sacred Music”). Forget Archbishop Sample. Instead, let’s examine the 2007 US Bishop’s document Sing to the Lord: Music in Divine Worship. (SttL) We will see that in places, it too reads like a “foreign language” in its clear understanding of singing the Mass and not just singing at Mass. For example, with regard to the musical hierarchy of importance in what should be sung at mass, SttL is full of surprises! Why? Because of the pervasive misunderstanding of the very purpose of sacred music.

According to Sing to the Lord, here’s a quick summary of the most important to the least:
1 • Dialogues and Acclamations
2 • Antiphons and Psalms – this is in reference to not only the Responorial, but the Propers – the Entrance, Offertory and Communion Chants and their corresponding psalm verses.
3 • Refrains and Repeated Responses
4 • Hymns/Songs

It comes as a shock to most everyone that hymns and songs are considered least important while singing the very texts of the Mass are of the highest priority. We are also reminded that hymns are primarily the domain of the Divine Office. This is all very counter-cultural and revolutionary, but only because we have forgotten our traditions.

O, WHAT DO WE DO? Change everything all at once? When changing the culture, it is often best to look for progress, not perfection, at first. However, we must not be afraid to speak boldly about the dignity of the liturgy, as Archbishop Sample does in this pastoral letter. Furthermore, we must act with conviction as well. People must experience for themselves how their prayer might evolve and be nurtured through singing the mass, rather than reading words on a page on how this is accomplished.

As Ezra brought back the singing of the Torah after the Exile, may we too bring back the dignity of the Mass. The Mass is our greatest praise to God. Let this prayer be as beautiful as we can make it.


This is part of an 8-part series on Archbishop Sample’s historic letter:

FIRST REFLECTION • Jeff Ostrowski

SECOND REFLECTION • Aurelio Porfiri

THIRD REFLECTION • Andrew Motyka

FOURTH REFLECTION • Peter Kwasniewski

FIFTH REFLECTION • Richard Clark

SIXTH REFLECTION • Veronica Brandt

SEVENTH REFLECTION • Fr. David Friel

EIGHTH REFLECTION • Gwyneth Holston

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

Filed Under: Articles Tagged With: Archbishop Alexander K Sample, Singing the Mass Last Updated: January 1, 2020

Subscribe

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

* indicates required

About Richard J. Clark

Richard J. Clark is the Director of Music of the Archdiocese of Boston and the Cathedral of the Holy Cross.—(Read full biography).

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

“Naturally the accompaniment of the organ is merely tolerated during the office of the dead, but in fact, in nearly every parish this toleration has become a habit.”

— Henri Potiron, 1958

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