F YOU EXAMINE page 47 of the GRADUALE PARVUM—which is a collection of “Englished” plainchant by Father Guy Nicholls published by the John Henry Newman Institute of Liturgical Music in 2023—you’ll notice the Easter Sunday ENTRANCE CHANT is in Mode 7. That’s different than the (astonishingly ancient) original, which is in Mode 4. In the book’s INTRODUCTION, Dr. Nicholls justifies this modification by saying the original modality “probably sounds too austere and difficult for such a joyous piece on the greatest morning of the liturgical year.” Believe it or not, it might have been better for Father Nicholls to refrain from giving an explanation. In a moment, I’ll explain why I say this.
Modal Mixture • The ENTRANCE CHANT for this coming Sunday (27 October 2024) employs a bit of modal mixture, and doesn’t match the Mode 2 original. I suspect the explanation is to be found in this chant’s provenance. In calendric changes after Vatican II, this Sunday’s ENTRANCE CHANT was “borrowed” from the Thursday after the 4th Sunday of Lent.1 Its text is quite joyful (and it was in LAETARE week) but the mode is rather “somber” or “austere”—perhaps because it came right before PASSION SUNDAY.
See if you agree that a happier (“brighter”) melody matches this Sunday’s text:
* PDF Download • Singer’s Score (Treble Clef)
* PDF Download • ORGAN ACCOMPANIMENT (2 Pages)
(Part A) They Don’t Sit Down • Needless to say, performing dignified music poorly is better than allowing disgusting, reprehensible, goofy music into the Holy Mass. Every so often, I see samples of music promoted by big companies such as OREGON CATHOLIC PRESS (“OCP”) and I’m dumbfounded. I don’t have words to describe how heinous their “songs” are. They are monstrous. How anyone in the galaxy could think such music is suitable for Mass is beyond me. GIA PUBLICATIONS also sells some nightmarish junk, but that shouldn’t really surprise us. After all, GIA PUBLICATIONS is owned and operated by a non-Christian family—so what can we expect?
(Part B) They Don’t Sit Down • At the same time, the ‘traditional’ faction (for lack of a better term) also has room for improvement. I probably sound like a broken record—because I’ve mentioned this so frequently—but it really hurts me to observe Catholic choirmasters who take shortcuts. Some are unwilling to spend hours, days, months, and years sitting at the feet of the masters, yet they spend hours online posing as sacred music “experts.” When others ask for a demonstration of how their choirs sound, they demur. [I won’t insult the readers intelligence by explaining why they demur.]
But we have an obligation to sit at the feet of the masters. I’m talking about meticulously studying the great composers. The adolescent Mozart spent hours copying Bach’s Well-Tempered Clavier to learn counterpoint; are we greater than Mozart? I spent hours of my youth memorizing music by great composers: Bach, Scarlatti, Mozart, Debussy, Dvorak, Liszt, Chopin, Schumann, Prokofiev, and so on. Sometimes I didn’t particularly care for this or that composer—but that made no difference, and we never admitted such things to our professors. My job was to shut my mouth, sit at the feet of the masters, and spend thousands of hours learning from them. A professor of MUSIC THEORY took me under his wing, and I’d often arrive at the university before 5:30am to go through scores with him. Together, we’d spend all day going over scores, and we wouldn’t stop until past midnight. When I say “we wouldn’t stop” I mean literally. We wouldn’t stop for any reason—even for breakfast, lunch, or dinner.
(Part C) They Don’t Sit Down • When Catholic musicians fail to sit at the feet of the masters, they are unable to tell what sounds good. That’s a problem. Church music shouldn’t sound bad; it’s supposed to sound good. Indeed, hearing Church music should be a delight, and there’s nothing sinful about that. When a normal person hears Church music, he should say: “That sounds beautiful.” However, the musician who takes shortcuts will produce music that sounds junky. Or, they will sing Gregorian Chant in a lifeless, mechanical, dull, boring way. When the congregation isn’t moved, such a musician will reply: “Well, that’s just because they’re uneducated philistines who don’t know anything.”
(Part D) They Don’t Sit Down • I have been teaching my choir the ENTRANCE CHANT each week, such as the one above. I have my females sing it, and I accompany it with the pipe organ. I have to admit, the effect is spectacular. It’s just so beautiful; it pierces the soul. I realize we are singing plainsong in English (instead of Latin), but all I can say is: it’s really beautiful. Maybe someday I can have a professional recording made, to give readers a “taste” of how it sounds.
(1 of 2) Msgr. Schuler & Piccoluomini • Monsignor Richard J. Schuler had term he used constantly: “Piccoluomini.” By piccoluomini, Msgr. Schuler meant people who considered themselves “experts” but knew very little. By piccoluomini, Msgr. Schuler meant people who had an exaggerated opinion of their own knowledge and greatness. By piccoluomini, Msgr. Schuler meant people who “got beyond their skis.”
(2 of 2) Msgr. Schuler & Piccoluomini • I suggested earlier that Father Nicholls shouldn’t have provided an explanation for changing the mode. Those who really know Gregorian Chant won’t need an explanation. But when it comes to the piccoluomini, no explanation will ever suffice. One of the smartest men I ever met used to say: “A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.” The piccoluomini have a little bit of knowledge, and they will go to their graves with that knowledge. The piccoluomini will (for instance) attack the ENTRANCE CHANT above because it uses modal mixture—but by doing so they show ignorance.
Indeed, the field of plainsong seems to have a disproportionate amount of piccoluomini. For instance, KYRIE IV is a particularly ancient chant. It ends on A-Natural, even though plainsong usually terminates on D-Natural (modes 1 and 2), E-Natural (modes 3 and 4), F-Natural (modes 5 and 6), or G-Natural (modes 7 and 8). The piccoluomini would say that KYRIE IV is “wrong” because it doesn’t conform to their limited and warped understanding of modality. By doing so they demonstrate ignorance.
Unforgivable Error • Anybody can make a mistake, and I make errors all the time. But the piccoluomini (inadvertently) reveal they’re out of their depths whenever they speak. For instance, someone who says Chopin was born in 1809 has made a slight error, but somebody who thinks Chopin was born in the 14th century has made a piccoluomini error. There’s an “Internet Catholic” who pretends to be—among other things!—the world’s greatest Thomistic scholar. He films himself all day long, and uploads his videos to YouTube. Somebody showed me a recent clip, and he kept mispronouncing VETUS ORDO. Now, why is that a big deal? It’s important because it shows he doesn’t know Latin. Even more importantly, it shows he’s never been anywhere where Latin is pronounced—and that’s a major problem for somebody pretending to be a Thomistic scholar.
(1 of 3) Gregorian Semiology • In my articles, I’ve made clear I’m highly skeptical of the claims put forward by semiologists. Don’t worry, I’m not going to bring up that whole thing again! My basic argument is: they overemphasize a handful of manuscripts while discounting thousands of ancient manuscripts which contradict their theories. Semiologists always talk about “the word.” That’s their idée fixe: the word, the word, the word. And yet, I can’t help but notice how many of them don’t know Latin. One semiologist (considered preëminent) constantly mispronounces Latin words. For example, the university syllabus he produces has the wrong accent on the Latin phrase for Holy Week! Talk about taking shortcuts… The first thing (!) one must do is learn how to pronounce Latin. Can you imagine someone posing as a professor of mathematics who never learn basic algebra?
(2 of 3) Gregorian Semiology • Let me give a classic example of what I’m talking about. Semiologists consider Carl Ott’s 1935 OFFERTORIALE “deficient”—so they produced an edition with adiastematic notation (from one or two manuscripts) added. Yet, these masters of “the word” couldn’t even correct inaccurate accents. The following is supposed to be: “Magnus et metuéndus super omnes, qui in circúitu ejus sunt.”
I don’t blame Carl Ott for making a typo in his edition. Even a genius like Adrian Fortescue sometimes overlooked typos. But I do blame the “masters of the word” for their ignorance of how to pronounce a very common Latin word. It’s as if they tried to challenge Michael Jordan after studying basketball for a total of 15 minutes. Indeed, what they produced reminds me of the English phrase-book published in Portugal (mentioned by Monsignor Knox) called: English as she is Spoke.
(3 of 3) Gregorian Semiology • My point is not complicated. If people are going to set themselves up as masters of “the word” (which is what they call themselves), the very least they should do is learn basic pronunciation. I remember studying with Cardine’s boss in Washington D.C. When he spoke of semiologists, a particular look came over him. He mentioned that many prominent semiologists had abandoned religious life. He said to me: “Jeff, these people consider themselves masters of THE WORD. But did they not take vows? Are those not words? Should we not be faithful to our vows?” I had no answer for him. [For the record, Dom Eugène Cardine never abandoned religious life; and he got along with my teacher just fine.]
Why Some Contributors Are Annoyed • I’ve been struggling to sing Spanish at my new job, even though I played at Spanish Mass in Texas each week for years. Sometimes it’s even necessary for me to set music to Spanish. I’ve been pestering many people—including some of our contributors—who are fluent in Spanish. I fear that several might be getting a little annoyed at my constant questions, but I have no choice. These people have something of infinite value to me: they know Spanish. They don’t have to think about it. They don’t have to consult a dictionary. They’ve lived with it their entire life. It’s similar to someone asking me whether Chopin was born in the 14th century. I don’t even have to think about it.
1 I’m told that Dr. William Francis Pohl vehemently opposed taking ferial Lenten days for Sundays, but not everyone agreed. For the record, the “original origin” of Laetetur Cor may have been the Ember days of September.
