Tra le Sollecitudini: The Reform of Sacred Music

Sacred music in the Catholic Church had drifted far from its proper purpose. By the turn of the twentieth century, many churches—especially in Italy—had become venues for what amounted to operatic performances. Orchestral Masses stretched longer than the liturgical action itself. Solo arias showcased individual singers rather than serving prayer. In some parishes, the music had become the main attraction: people came for the concert, not the Mass.

It was into this situation that the newly-elected Pope Pius X intervened with a document that would prove foundational for the entire Liturgical Movement. On November 22, 1903—the feast of St. Cecilia, patroness of sacred music—he issued the motu proprio “Tra le Sollecitudini” (“Among the Concerns”), a comprehensive instruction on the reform of church music.

The document’s opening lines established its fundamental principle: sacred music must be at the service of the liturgy, not a performance layered on top of it. Music in church exists to help the faithful pray, not to entertain them. From this principle flowed everything else.

The Birth of “Active Participation”

It is in “Tra le Sollecitudini” that we find the first magisterial articulation of what would become one of the most consequential phrases in twentieth-century Catholic history:

The original Italian text used “partecipazione attiva.” The Latin phrase “participatio actuosa”—which would later appear in Vatican II’s “Sacrosanctum Concilium”—is commonly associated with this teaching, though it represents a later Latin rendering of Pius X’s Italian formulation.

What did Pius X mean by “active participation”? The context makes clear that he was not calling for external busyness, visible roles for laypeople, or structural changes to the rite. He meant something far more fundamental: the faithful should be interiorly and prayerfully engaged in the Church’s public worship—helped by music that is truly liturgical, not theatrical.

The goal was that the faithful would “acquire the true Christian spirit” from the liturgy itself. Sacred music was the means: chant and polyphony that carried the prayers of the Church, rather than operatic performances that distracted from them.

The Reform Program

Pius X laid down concrete norms for what sacred music should look like. At the summit stood Gregorian chant:

❝

“Gregorian chant has always been regarded as the supreme model for sacred music… The more closely a composition for church approaches in its movement, inspiration, and savor the Gregorian form, the more sacred and liturgical it becomes.”

— Tra le Sollecitudini, §3

After Gregorian chant, the document elevated classical polyphony—especially the works of Giovanni Pierluigi da Palestrina—as a privileged reference point. Modern compositions were permitted, but only if they met strict liturgical criteria: they must be sacred in character, true art, and universal in form.

What was banned? Theatrical styles, concert-like performances, piano and percussion in church, compositions that showcased individual singers rather than serving prayer. The document also addressed the controversial question of women in liturgical choirs, restricting their participation in many contexts—a provision that would provoke practical objections, especially in the United States.

The Solesmes Connection

The musical reforms of “Tra le Sollecitudini” did not emerge from nowhere. They drew directly on the chant restoration work that had been underway at Solesmes Abbey for seventy years—the very monastery Dom Prosper Guéranger had refounded in 1833.

Under Guéranger’s successors, especially Dom Joseph Pothier and Dom André Mocquereau, the monks of Solesmes had undertaken painstaking paleographic study of medieval manuscripts, stripping away Baroque corruptions to recover the authentic melodies of Gregorian chant. Their scholarship provided the foundation for what Pius X now mandated for the universal Church.

❝

“Special efforts are to be made to restore the use of the Gregorian Chant by the people, so that the faithful may again take a more active part in the ecclesiastical offices, as was the case in ancient times.”

— Tra le Sollecitudini, §3

The practical fruit of this collaboration came in 1908 with the Vatican Edition of the chant books—an official, standardized edition that drew heavily on Solesmes scholarship. Guéranger had died in 1875, but his vision was vindicated: the Roman Church officially embraced the chant restoration he had championed.

Reception: Mixed and Uneven

How was the document received? The answer varied dramatically by country, local musical culture, and choir politics.

Where the Cecilian reform movement—a nineteenth-century German and Austrian effort to restore sacred music—had already taken root, “Tra le Sollecitudini” was welcomed as papal confirmation of what reformers had long advocated. These communities had been pushing back against operatic styles for decades; now they had the Pope on their side.

But in places where cathedral and parish music programs had been built around popular concert-like repertoire, resistance was fierce. Implementation was slow-walked or simply ignored. Existing choirs, paid singers, and entrenched local tastes all pushed back against reform.

In Belgium and France, implementation was often inconsistent—ironic, given that Belgium would become the launching point for the next phase of the Liturgical Movement just six years later. In the United States, practical objections arose especially around the women-in-choirs restriction, which many parishes found impossible to implement given their existing musical resources.

The key takeaway: “Tra le Sollecitudini” established principles that were widely acknowledged but unevenly applied. Its long-term influence came less from immediate enforcement than from the vocabulary and framework it established—above all, the concept of “active participation” that would echo through the century.

Seeds of Something Else

In 1903, “active participation” meant something clear and bounded: the faithful should pray the liturgy, not merely attend it while the choir performed. Music should serve this end by being genuinely sacred—carrying the Church’s prayers rather than substituting entertainment for worship.

But phrases have a way of outliving their original contexts. What Pius X meant by “active participation” and what later generations would make of it are two very different things.

Just six years after “Tra le Sollecitudini,” Dom Lambert Beauduin would stand before the Congress of Catholic Works at Malines and call for the faithful to be brought into the liturgy—using language that echoed Pius X but shifted the emphasis from music to pastoral formation. The phrase would continue to evolve, taking on new meanings with each generation, until by the mid-twentieth century it would be cited to justify structural changes to the rite itself.

Pius X sought to restore sacred music so that the faithful could pray. Later reformers would invoke his vocabulary while pursuing very different ends. The tragedy—or the irony—is that a phrase coined to serve the traditional liturgy would eventually be turned against it.