Draft Article - Traditional Hymns are better
  • hartleymartin
    Posts: 1,447
    I'm working on an article to pass around to convince people that traditional hymns are better than contemporary worship songs. I'd appreciate your input in improving it before publication.

    7 Reasons Why Traditional Hymns are better than contemporary "Worship Songs"

    1.) They are free.

    Traditional hymns are public domain. Contemporary worship songs require licensing in order to use them in public worship, or risk thousands of dollars in fines for breaching copyright.

    2.) Easy to sing.

    Traditional hymns have a regular and fairly predictable meter. Contemporary worship songs often have highly syncopated rhythms, a wide vocal range and difficult intervals to sing in tune.

    3.) Connecting Generations.

    Traditional Hymns were sung by your parents and grandparents, and probably some generations of your family before you. Can you imagine how wonderful it is to join your voices with generations of Christians before you, who sang the same songs?

    4.) Congregations Know Them.

    The points of hymns in liturgy is for congregational participation in singing. There are at least 20 hymns I could name which nearly every parish church will know. Contemporary Worship Songs come and go according to popularity, and often they are not used for more than a few years at time. New songs come and go. Traditional hymns live on in the minds and memories of congregations for years to come. There are few things more discouraging to an organist than having little to no response from the congregation when playing a hymn.

    5.) Easier to play.

    Traditional hymns can be sung either in voice parts or accompanied on the organ. Contemporary Worship Songs are usually written to be played with guitars, drums, keyboards, etc. Many parishes have a shortage of skilled musicians. You only need one organist and a couple of singers, rather than a whole worship band (often several people) to achieve the same (but usually better) standard of music.

    6.) Mix-n-match Words with Tunes.

    Traditional hymns are written to set meters, such as 8686 (Common Meter), 8888 (Long Meter), 6686 (Short Meter) or other combinations such as 7676, 7777, 8787, etc. This means that you can mix-and-match hymn tunes with the hymn words. Some hymn tunes are easier to play than others. As long as you know at least one in each meter, you can sing almost any hymn words to any hymn tune. Contemporary Worship songs are set with the words fixed to a particular tune and each one must be learned.

    7.) "Church" Sound.

    Traditional hymns sound unmistakably "churchy." Contemporary Worship Songs sound just like most pop and rock that you can hear on the radio or at parties. You want dance music for dancing, party music for parties, relaxed music for relaxation, etc. Why would you want anything that doesn't sound like "church" when you go to church? Would you play relaxation music for a dance party?
  • GavinGavin
    Posts: 2,799
    My input? Don't write it.

    It will invariably offend a lot of people. You're basically telling them why their taste in music (one of the most personal factors) is dead wrong. No one likes being told that, and you don't have to make that case.

    TRUE FACT: I believe beer is better than wine. Superior in every respect. Yet I do not browbeat my oenophile friends based on their tastes, or try to deprive them of wine. But they do know that my fridge is filled with all varieties of beer, and that if they join me for dinner they will be offered their choice of high-quality craft beer. (Actually, I will buy wine for friends, but that's beside the point)

    And you use a rather foolish word, "better". Better? What does that even mean? If you said the composers of one style of music have a better grounding in compositional techniques than those of another style, we could debate. If you said one style is more conducive to religious sentiment than another, you can make your case. Saying "mine is better!" just sounds petulant and intellectually insecure.

    It would be more effective in furthering your promotion of sacred music at your parish (see what I used instead of "better"???) to make a different case. Explain why traditional hymns WILL be used at your parish. Or explain why YOU prefer them. Or put out the reasons that you believe they are more APPROPRIATE to the liturgy than other genres.

    Or better yet, don't write anything. Besides offending people, you sound like you NEED to make the case. I don't know why you do. You're (presumably) in the position of planning music, so plan music the best you can and let that be that. Writing such an article communicates to people "this is up for debate; this is something I can be convinced away from."
    Thanked by 5Adam Wood mrcopper CHGiffen Liam futurefatherz
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,482
    Propers.

    Propers. Propers. Propers.

    Chant.

    Chant. Chant. Chant.

    ------------------------

    The revitalization of liturgical tradition cannot be based on Low Mass or on Protestant practice.

    Swappping random songs that people like with random songs people don't like is not an improvement.


    When I attend Mass at places that claim to have a "traditional" service, and that turns out to be - essentially - a typical Mass like anywhere else, but with all hymns that happen to be old and played on the organ, you know what it feels like?
    Boring.


    Thanked by 6Salieri rogue63 Gavin AndrewK Ralph Bednarz Ben
  • Torculus
    Posts: 44
    In more and more places, a "traditional" service means "Gather Us In, " "On Eagle's Wings," Pan de Vida," and "City of God." At least that has been my experience when travelling.
  • SalieriSalieri
    Posts: 3,177
    I have to say right from the beginning that number one is false: There are MANY hymns that I would consider "traditional" written by composers in the last century such as Vaughan Williams, Howells, Willan, et al., that are still under copyright protection; not to mention that there are many awful hymns that are public domain - look at all the Victorian twaddle. Just because it's PD doesn't mean it's good.

    Also, I would hardly suggest that "traditional" hymns are easier - RVW's SALVE FESTA DIES is rather difficult.
    Thanked by 2ronkrisman Gavin
  • Arthur Connick
    Posts: 496
    The point of hymns in liturgy is for congregational participation in singing.
    Aside from this not really being true, don't you see that going down this road leads you right back to where you are?
  • melofluentmelofluent
    Posts: 4,160
    I would say the natural, egotistical tendency we all have to try to fashion the universe, as a demiurge (δημιουργός,), is even stronger within the liturgisphere, from true aesthete/scholars down to the critic in the pew. I'm not saying Martin's schema is pointless, but I would suggest that how we frame what we "want" to declare "ideal" should also evidence in equal measure humility along with whatever discipline we propose will "solve our problems."
    Practically speaking, the imposing of our personal tastes however informed by tradition, legislation or whatever upon the externals of worship arts will always fall short of the mark if we attend them with either emotional reactions ("boring") or from the POV of our own whims and sensibilities (like when a priest says don't sing the antiphon "Requiem in aeternum" as he enters the sanctuary from the sacristy before a funeral because "it isn't a part of our rites anymore.")
    I believe this is what HHFrancis was driving at earlier this week when he explained that each of us must abandon any preoccupations at Mass and enter into the "theophany" of what we believe is transpiring within the dimensions of true worship. Yes, I personally believe that certain artistic expressions, such as Adam Bartlett dubbed iconic in his wonderful Cafe article yesterday, are better suited to aid us to take in with our limited intellect and senses this theophany, and experience what glory is beyond the veil. But whether a beautiful melismatic passage is attending that or a banal, sing-songy refrain in 6/8 done poorly, doesn't relieve each of us the responsibility to remain committed to the mystery. And, if you have reached the surety and courage of your convictions, do what Ed Schaefer did years ago, and what Fr. Kocik wrote of this week at NLM, and make your choice and live it in real time, not cybertime.
    So, as Indiana Jone's dad said, "Choose wisely," when you're going to re-invent the wheel of how we should go about our business.
    Salieri's right, by the way. Not all hymns are created equal.
    Thanked by 1Ralph Bednarz
  • hartleymartin
    Posts: 1,447
    This is a small part of a much larger plan for liturgical music for a particular parish.

    At the moment, I'm trying to wean people (the "choirs") off the contemporary worship music. They basically want us to go with the protestant mega-church model of music, and I'm putting a stop to it.

    There has been very favourable feedback from the clergy and most of the congregation over my selections of a mixture of traditional and good modern hymns. The next stage is to get some of the propers put back in their proper place.

    I am also quite aware that there is such a thing as "old trash" and there is a list of old music that I avoid. I'm not blind in a philosophy of "older is better."


    Propers. Propers. Propers.

    Chant. Chant. Chant.

    Swappping random songs that people like with random songs people don't like is not an improvement.


    You are telling someone who carries a Gregorian Missal in his "gig bag" and regularly sings from both this collection and the SEP.

    I'm dealing with the reality that people are used to the idea that all music should be congregationally sung (ironic, as contemporary worship songs are anything but congregational.) I'm actually in a Cathedral Choir. The parish work is a project of mine to improve the standard of liturgical music in the diocese.
    Thanked by 1Andrew Motyka
  • hartleymartin
    Posts: 1,447
    Further on the comment about liking and not liking "random songs:"

    The fact remains that the congregation does indeed like traditional hymns, precisely for some of the reasons that I outlined above in the draft article. I find that it is usually a very small number of people with great enthusiasm, but no formation who push the idea that contemporary worship songs are somehow going to draw people into church.
  • noel jones, aagonoel jones, aago
    Posts: 6,611
    I find that it is usually a very small number of people with great enthusiasm, but no formation who push the idea that contemporary worship songs are somehow going to draw people into church.


    Amen.
    Thanked by 1francis
  • Chris Garton-Zavesky
    Posts: 6,902
    Hartley, Noel, others,

    Sarcastic, brief, rant warning:
    Did you know that no one younger than about 75 ever wants the Extraordinary Form, nor can, because Vatican 2 banned it?


    More seriously:

    The position of someone charged with executing music in a parochial setting is to avoid being parochial.

  • rich_enough
    Posts: 1,048
    I think the basic point of the "sarcastic" comments is that there's little that you (or anyone else) might write and pass around that's going to change anyone's taste - which is basically what's at issue here. If you "argue" on their terms - that this song or style is "better" than that one - they can always come back at you with a counter "argument." So the discussion will basically be about what people like, or feel is appropriate.

    At best, yours a pretty good case for some traditional hymns. But even if they buy into what you're saying, what's to stop them from arguing for P&W songs ("OK, some traditional hymns are fine, but we have to get the kids involved, too," or "we need something upbeat," etc.)

    In the end you haven't changed the conversation much at all.
    Thanked by 2melofluent noel jones, aago
  • rich_enough
    Posts: 1,048
    I understand that your arguments for traditional hymns are, as you say, only "a small part of a much larger plan for liturgical music for a particular parish." But I would encourage you to make the focus of your "catechesis" be the liturgy - what it is and what kind of music is appropriate for it, based on the Church's guidelines and directives.

    As people have already suggested, this is done not so much through words and explanations (though these have some part to play) but what you - and the pastor - decide to do, and the attitude with which you pursue it. People "get" and will appreciate good liturgy not so much at a verbal level as at the level of wonder, beauty, and delight.
    Thanked by 2melofluent francis
  • JulieCollJulieColl
    Posts: 2,465
    Hartley, did you ever see Fr. Dwight Longenecker's extensive defense of traditional hymns? It reminded me of your article.

    When the glorious old standard hymns are combined with chant and polyphony at a sung mass, I think the three genres have a synergistic, complementary effect upon each other and provide a mini-spectrum of sacred music.

    The thing I love about the standard, metered hymns along with their beautiful texts are how they seem to encapsulate the natural moral virtues. They just seem to embody order, dignity, majesty, dignity and goodness and nothing can beat the experience of singing them in church with your family in their Sunday best and the morning sun streaming in. It may sound like a scene from the Waltons, but there it is and maybe a little more of that might be a good thing.

    I'm always reminded of the list of the old Roman virtues when I look through my Anglican Hymnal: simplicitas, pietas, auctoritas, veritas, gravitas, dignitas, salubritas, sobrietas, felicitas, virtus.
  • Liam
    Posts: 5,092
    Of course, metered hymnody as we know it was, for a long period of time, a radical and new thing once...
    Thanked by 2Adam Wood melofluent
  • noel jones, aagonoel jones, aago
    Posts: 6,611
    Think of church like being a bar.

    New manager comes in, changes the music to something she likes and know is better music, people stop coming in, owner fires manager.

    Another manager comes in, gradually changes the music without telling anybody why except in a private meeting with the owner, some people stop coming in, others hear about the changes and start coming in. There is a transition period, but manager and owner are patient. This new group spends at least as much or even better than the ones that left.

    Manager keeps the job.

    [I have a friend who has a nice, slightly upper level restaurant. Plays jazz at all times. Waitresses complain that their friends won't come in because of the music. Owner says, "What makes you think I want your friends coming here?"]
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,482
    [I have a friend who has a nice, slightly upper level restaurant. Plays jazz at all times. Waitresses complain that their friends won't come in because of the music. Owner says, "What makes you think I want your friends coming here?"]


    This is an awesome story.
  • PaixGioiaAmorPaixGioiaAmor
    Posts: 1,473
    This whole article reminds me of something that I'd see linked to when I check my e-mail, alongside 10 other lists - "10 reasons a female doctor might be better for you than a male doctor," "The 3 days of the week you should NOT buy a new car," "8 reasons that dense shrubbery is better than sparse."
  • JulieCollJulieColl
    Posts: 2,465
    If I may add just a few more words In defense of congregational hymn singing which even Pope Pius XII encouraged in Mediator Dei as a valuable way to reach the hearts and minds of the people:

    "We also exhort you, Venerable Brethren, to promote with care congregational singing, and to see to its accurate execution with all due dignity, since it easily stirs up and arouses the faith and piety of large gatherings of the faithful. Let the full harmonious singing of our people rise to heaven like the bursting of a thunderous sea and let them testify by the melody of their song to the unity of their hearts and minds, as becomes brothers and children of the same Father."

    I imagine the Holy Father envisioned Catholics singing their hearts out in church much like this congregation did at the close of Margaret Thatcher's funeral: (Hymn starts at 00:35)

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Prg-KwqPYQs
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,979
    Those thundering English organs are magnificent! Don't you wonder how a nation of people who chronically mumble can sing such clearly distinguishable words? LOL.

    Great hymn!
Add a Comment