• 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

Offertory Compared • “Ave Maria” (4th Sunday of Advent) vs. “Ave Maria” (Immaculate Conception)

Jeff Ostrowski · December 10, 2020

ATHER DOMINIC JOHNER (d. 1955), a student of Dom Raphael Molitor, studied briefly with the monks from Solesmes in Appuldurcombe (Isle of Wight) circa 1904. His religious name is a little confusing because it was “DOMINICUS”—so he could be called Dom Dom. Johner. His name before religious life was also confusing—“Franz-Xaver Karl”—because he could be called Fr. Fr. Johner. In any event, here’s what Dom Johner wrote about the Offertory for the Immaculate Conception: “We have here the rare instance where a new melody has been composed for the Mass text of a later feast. The melody was written by the Benedictine Dom Fonteinne and adapted by his confrère Dom Pothier. Fervor, delicacy, and sublimity combine to effect an harmonious whole. Comparison of today’s Ave Maria with that of the fourth Sunday in Advent will be very instructive. The final phrase of that composition is lacking here. The fact that mulieribus there is not final—as it is in the present case—would make the use of its melody for today impossible. This may also have occasioned the new composition for this feast.”

Watch Out! It’s not identical to the Offertory for the 4th Sunday of Advent:

*  PDF Download • COMPARISON CHART
—“Ave Maria” (4th Sunday of Advent) vs. “Ave Maria” (Immac. Concep.).

The Proprium Missae for the feast of the Immaculate Conception had no consistency until 1883, when Dom Joseph Pothier adapted the melodies we know today from the Gregorian repertoire. The Offertory he took from Dom Fonteinne, Dom Guéranger’s precentor who also served as choirmaster at Solesmes Abbey before Dom Pothier. 1 Dom Fonteinne composed many Neo-Gregorian melodies, and some are still sung today, such as his “Stabat Mater,” which was included in the Editio Vaticana. In the Ordinary Form, we are used to feasts with numerous “options” for the Propers; can we see the beginning of this in the Proprium Missae for the Immaculate Conception? Prior to the publication of the Editio Vaticana in 1908, the texts for the Immaculate Conception had no consistency and the melodies were completely different, in different modes even!

Offertory • “Beata es, Virgo Maria”

Consider the Offertory for the feast of the Immaculate Conception as found in Le Graduel Romain published in the year 1800, nine years before Napoleon Bonaparte kidnapped Pope Pius VII. Notice the text (“Beata es, Virgo Maria”) is not the same as the Editio Vaticana text:

Offertory • “Concupiscet Rex Decorem”

If we go back a little further, to the Graduel De Paris, Noté Pour Les Festes Et Les Dimanches (1738AD), we see the text for the Immaculate Conception (“Concupiscet Rex Decorem”) is different:

Offertory • “Beata es, Virgo Maria”

Going to 1825AD, we see the familiar text (“Beata es, Virgo Maria”) from 1800AD, but the melody in the Graduel Romain (Tarascon, 1825) is not exactly the same:

Offertory • “Misit Deus Misericordiam Suam”

When we examine Father Michael Hermesdorff’s Graduale, published in the year 1863, we see that the Offertory text for the Immaculate Conception (“Misit Deus Misericordiam Suam”) doesn’t match any of the others!

Offertory • “Ave Maria”

In the year 1865, Friedrich Pustet published the Graduale Romanum Cantum Gregorianum Ad Missale Romanum Et Proprium Coloniense Continens, and the Offertory for the feast of the Immaculate Conception (“Ave Maria”) matches what we have today in the Editio Vaticana of 1908:

Offertory • “Beata es, Virgo Maria”

Let’s head over to Paris, now, and see what the Offertory for the Immaculate Conception is according to the Graduel Romain: Nouvelle Edition (Jacques Lecoffre, 1871). The melody and text are familiar from the examples above:

Offertory • “Ave Maria”

Another publication appeared in the same year: Graduale De Tempore Et De Sanctis: Juxta Ritum Sacrosanctae Romanae Ecclesiae Cum Cantu Pauli V. Pont. Max. Jussu Reformato (Friderici Pustet, 1871). We see the familiar “Ave Maria” text, taken from the 4th Sunday of Advent but with the ending chopped off:

Pustet reprinted—but with a different typeface—his Graduale in 1896, and you can see that nothing was changed:

Offertory • “Ave Maria”

The famous Reims-Cambrai Edition of the Graduale (1887) did exactly what Pustet did. That is to say, the Reims-Cambrai took the Offertory from the 4th Sunday of Advent and chopped off the ending. By the way, the ending was “chopped off” so it would match the Gospel reading, as you can see here:

Offertory • “Ave Maria”

Dom Pother chose a different route: viz. adapting an “Ave Maria” composed by Dom Fonteinne. This he included in his Liber Gradualis of 1883:

In all subsequent Solesmes publications, this version was included. For example, here is the Liber Usualis from 1896:

Offertory • “Ave Maria”

The official edition of the Church (“Vatican Edition”) was published in 1908: the mighty Editio Vaticana. Dom Fonteinne’s Offertory for the Immaculate Conception was included, as you can see in this 1957 reprint of the Vatican Edition, with rhythmic signs added by the monks of Solesmes:

Offertory • “Ave Maria”

Following the Second Vatican Council, the Roman Gradual generally speaking avoided Neo-Gregorian compositions, but they broke their rule for the feast of the Immaculate Conception, as we can see in the Gregorian Missal (Solesmes, 1990):

The reformers justified these Neo-Gregorian compositions as follows:

Translated into English, that means:

In putting aside the later Neo-Gregorian imitations, especially those found in the feasts of saints, only the authentic Gregorian melodies are retained, although it is always permitted for those who prefer them to sing those Neo-Gregorian compositions, since none of them has been deleted from the GRADUALE ROMANUM. Indeed, a number of them have been accepted for universal use (e.g., the solemnity of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, the feast of Christ the King, and the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary). No others have been substituted, but in other instances chants have been chosen from an authentic repertory and the same texts used whenever possible.


NOTES FROM THIS ARTICLE:

1   If you want to learn more about Dom Fonteinne cf. page 16-18 in The Restoration of Gregorian Chant: Solesmes and the Vatican Edition (Dom Pierre Combe, Dr. Theodore Marier, Dr. Robert Skeris, 2003).

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

Follow the Discussion on Facebook

Filed Under: Articles Tagged With: Editio Medicaea, Immaculate Conception Feast, Mass Propers Proprium Missae Last Updated: March 5, 2021

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

    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

“At the hour for the Divine Office, | as soon as the signal is heard, | let them abandon whatever they may have in hand | and hasten with the greatest speed, | yet with seriousness, so that there is no excuse for levity. | Let nothing be preferred to the sacred liturgy.”

— Rule of St. Benedict (Chapter 43)

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