Views from the Choir Loft

The Pope Who Had … A Child?

Jeff Ostrowski · January 17, 2016

OPE GREGORY XIII was a great supporter of Palestrina, who returned the favor by frequently dedicating musical scores to him. Palestrina also dedicated compositions (on occasion) to the pope’s natural son. Wait…his son?

Yes, it turns out that—during his early life—Gregory XIII had a son (Giacomo Boncompagni) with an unmarried woman. Someday, I’d like to learn more about this, because it must have been hard for Gregory XIII to encourage Catholics not to break the 6th Commandment, considering his past. For the record, Palestrina seems to have been a very holy man.

The Diario of 1594 records an interesting anecdote about Pope Clement VIII. The pontifical choir sang “In diademate capitis” by Giovanni Maria Nanini. This motet seemed to displease Pope Clement, and he asked whose composition it was. They told him it was Nanini.

Because Nanini was known as a great composer, ¹ the pope attempted to soften his criticism, declaring that it was the words of the motet he objected to. However, the maestro di cappella responded that these words came from the Bible…and Pope Clement fell silent!

NOTES FROM THIS ARTICLE:

1 I’m told Nanini was even a colleague of Palestrina at a special music school.

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

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).

“Entrance Chant” • Christ the King

Download the ENTRANCE ANTIPHON in English for the Solemnity of Christ the King (24 November 2024). It mimics the Mode III Latin version in a truly spectacular way. Corresponding to the vocalist score is this free organ accompaniment. If you’re someone who enjoys rehearsal videos, I attempted to sing it while simultaneously accompanying my voice on the pipe organ.

—Jeff Ostrowski

“Music List” • (33rd Sund. Ordinary Time)

This coming Sunday—17 November 2024—is the 33rd Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year B. Some have expressed interest in perusing my “ORDER OF MUSIC.” If such a thing interests you, feel free to download it as a PDF file. You’ll notice we’re learning Moreau’s “Congregational Polyphonic Enhancement” for the OUR FATHER. For the record, our opening hymn is particularly beautiful. So is the Mode 6 ENTRANCE CHANT.

—Jeff Ostrowski

Lectionary Errors

If you look at the official Responsorial Psalm (PDF) for this coming Sunday, you’ll notice the current Lectionary has the wrong refrain. Why is this a big deal? Why even mention such a thing? Everybody makes mistakes, right? Here’s why it matters. The USCCB—which makes money by selling the sacred liturgical texts—has historically been ruthless when it comes to such matters. When various publishers point out errors to them, their response has been: “If you dare to correct the error, we’ll sue you.” These errors are not a matter of nuance; e.g. sometimes the previous (English) edition of the Lectionary got them right! Bottom Line: mandatory, indulgenced, liturgical texts shouldn’t be sold; they should be freely available to all Catholics.

—Jeff Ostrowski

The Breviary in the Life of the Laity

Recently I have been enjoying looking through the inaugural (1927) edition of a 20th-century liturgical magazine called Orate Fratres. The July 1927 issue included an excellent article by a Chicago laywoman named Ellen Gates Starr entitled “The Delights of the Breviary: From the Point of View of a Lay Woman.” As we in the 21st century have recently undergone a (blessed!) re-translation of the missal into English, and as we await with joyful hope (please God, before Jesus comes back!) a similar re-translation of the breviary, the opening of her article reminded me of that old saying, “the more things change, the more they stay the same.” Nearly a hundred years ago, she penned words that could just as easily have been written today: “It is indeed a privilege to be allowed any participation, however slight, in the liturgical movement in the Church – the movement to bring back the classics of devotion, the Missal and the Breviary, into general use by the laity. The wonder is that they should ever have fallen into disuse. Nothing can take the place of these great universal prayers of the Church, the prayers of the Mass and the divine Office. One has only to know them to find them indispensable. And alas, how few of the laity know them!” I know that I have been tremendously nourished by regular praying of the breviary as of late, and my wish is that you and I, dear reader, may continue to nourish our interior lives with the official prayer of the Church, which present to us (in the Mass) and extend (in the Office) the fullness of Christ’s greatest gift to us – the gift of Himself – in the Most Holy Eucharist.

—Daniel Tucker

Principles vs Preferences

I ran into this idea recently: principles vs. preferences in planning out a curriculum or music lineup. In this idea, it is imperative to not misconstrue personal preferences into principles—that the music (or subject matter) is great because: “I have good taste, and I like it.” De gustibus… Education, study and docility to the Magisterium of the Church on matters of liturgical music must be present in those who make the music at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and the Hours. Who knows? Maybe you might start to prefer the music that is fitting according to the principles Catholic Sacred Music?

—William J. Fritz

Liquescent Notes in the Official Edition

The official edition—the EDITIO VATICANA itself—is somewhat inconsistent when it comes to liquescent notes. If you wish to see a perfect “apples-to-apples” comparison, click here. Such “inconsistency” was not owing to ignorance on the part of Abbat Pothier: the manuscripts themselves are inconsistent when it comes to liquescent notes.

—Jeff Ostrowski