Mundelein Psalter
  • mjballoumjballou
    Posts: 994
    Now that this volume has been out for a while, I would like some opinions on its usefulness for non-clerics who want to chant the office privately or in a small group in English. I've already read (over at NLM) all the pros and cons of the revised Liturgy of the Hours vs. the earlier Breviary, of Latin vs. English, of newly-composed psalm tones vs. Gregorian. For my purposes, these points are neither here nor there.

    Before I suggest to people that they shell out some serious money (or before I do so myself), I'd like some collective wisdom. How does it rate for "usability" and dignified simplicity?
  • Jeffrey TuckerJeffrey Tucker
    Posts: 3,624
    I like it very much! I grant that points of all the critics, but....it is still a wonderful achievement! To me it is an amazing thing that it has taken this many years to get the first edition of a sung breviary out there. what a world.
  • Regis
    Posts: 9
    My wife and I use it every day together and really love it. It's really straightforward and easy to use. Yes, the music is quite simple, but it's also very dignified-- something that was truly needed in the field of vernacular church music I think.
  • G
    Posts: 1,397
    I am delighted that the Mundelein Psalter is being found useful.
    I wish so much we could use it on the rare occasions when our parish does LotH.
    But I use it personally, and really find my prayer life enriched by it.

    (Save the Liturgy, save the World)
  • mjballoumjballou
    Posts: 994
    If anyone is interested in acquiring this book, now might be a good time. They're on sale for $40 (a 20% saving).
  • Jan
    Posts: 242
    We were just talking about the Mundelein Psalter at schola rehearsal this week. Tx for the positive comments. I'll be sure to give it a whirl.
  • Skitalets
    Posts: 25
    I like it, but having used real Gregorian psalm tones and antiphon/hymn melodies previously, I found that after daily usage the Mundelein tones wore on me. They're very simple and get old.

    A fantastic achievement, desperately needed, but it has its limits IME.
  • Jan
    Posts: 242
    Someone told me of a confirmation group of 75 kids who sang 'compline' from the Mundelein Psalter & in
    the same night, a guest group sang compline from the LU. They knew the kids where listening 'cause of the
    tremendous rustle of pages turning!
  • mahrt
    Posts: 517
    I think we should give the publishers and the editors of the Mundelein Psalter credit for a major effort. I was quite happy to see, for example, the Gregorian tones for the hymns; this is quite an improvement on the English Breviary normally used. Still, I have some reservations: there are no antiphons. I contend that a principal purpose of the antiphon is musical: the psalm tones give a neutral setting of the whole psalm, without the singer having to pay much attention to the technicalities of the singing; then the melodiousness of the antiphons complements that. To sing the antiphons on the psalm tone is a non-starter. The psalms could have better been sung to Gregorian tones. The Gregorian tones have an essentially ascending motion in the first half, and this is a profoundly important of their psychology as prayer; prayer ascends; the Gregorian psalm tone rises to a peak and makes a brief but reflective pause at that peak; then it descends again. Too often, the Mundelein tones have too much descending motion, this can be a "downer."
  • mjballoumjballou
    Posts: 994
    I agree that the absence of antiphons is a serious shortcoming. However, for domestic use or with a crowd of untrained singers, antiphons could be intimidating. I suppose the problem could be remedied in parish use with a separate "antiphonale," used by a schola/choir.
  • Gilbert
    Posts: 106
    I have a question about the hymns in the Mundelein Psalter. It's my understanding that the hymns are taken from the Latin Liturgy of the Hours, with english translations to fit the melodies which are identical to the ones in the Liber Hymnarius. Is this correct? Does this book contain all of the hymns which you would find in the Liber Hymnarius for Lauds, Vespers, and Compline, in Ordinary Time, and for each Season, for both the Proper of Seasons and Proper of the Saints, as well as the Commons?
  • Jeffrey TuckerJeffrey Tucker
    Posts: 3,624
    It has about 40 hymns. I do they that they should be published online separately. they aren't doing much good buried in this massive tome.
  • mjballoumjballou
    Posts: 994
    I agree with Jeffrey that the hymns are buried - and that they should be published separately. Imagine singing these instead of wanna-be Broadway ballads.

    The Mundelein Psalter just hasn't been able to "get traction," as they say. Why? I don't know. The established position of the Meinrad tones for English post-VII psalmody with professional liturgists and diocesan worship offices? The price of the book? Musical objections to the tones and the lack of separate melodies for the antiphons? It appears to be too simple for some critics; too complex for others.
  • Jeffrey TuckerJeffrey Tucker
    Posts: 3,624
    The why is that it is not online. This is a problem of vision, I'm sorry to say. The author would be thrilled to see it all available.
  • Jeffrey TuckerJeffrey Tucker
    Posts: 3,624
    In other words, right now it is only the specialists who are weighing in. Of course they will be critical. It needs a broader audience.
  • I love the Mundelein Psalter. I had previously prayed the Liturgy of the Hours for many years simply reciting it. I had long wanted to be able sing the office but didn't know how: there are so few resources available for singing the office. Indeed, whenever I attended a celebration of Evening Prayer in a church, I inevitably found that the psalms were replaced with contemporary hymns from a hymnal. This, to my mind, is not really the Liturgy of the Hours and has always left me feeling let down. I wanted to sing the office using the psalter but clearly even most parsish music directors don't know how to do that anymore. I was on my own in learning how to do that. And since I am not a musician, any resources I might have found wouldn't have helped me much. I was left high and dry longing to be able to sing the office but having neither the tools nor the skill to do so.

    And then the Mudelein Psalter was published!

    Suddenly I had a tool for praying the office and it provided music and musical notation that I could learn and use without the support of "real" musicians. Using the Mundelein Psalter, a few guides to square note notation easily found on the internet, the recordings from the Mundelein Psalter website and a collection of diatonic harmonicas that I can use to model the melodies, I was able to teach my self to read the notation and to chant the melodies. I was able to fulfill my long time desire of being able to sing the office.

    After a little over a year of using this psalter I can almost sight read the gregorian notation - at least the simpler notation as found in the Mudelein Psalter. I certainly can't easily read the notation found in the Gradulae Romanum, but I can manage the notation in the Parish Book of Chant. I am no where near being able to sight read standard notation.

    Did I mention that I am not a musician? In a little more than a year I have acquired more musical skill using the simple modal music offered in this Psalter than I have in all my years trying to sing the standard repertoire found in most parishes. One surprise benefit that I seem to have received from using these melodies is the clearing up of a lot of residual tone deafness. There seems to be something about this kind of music that teaches you to hear musically. I don't know how to say or describe it better than than that but the results are clear. I hear more accurately now and, as a consequence, I can now sing more accurately. The Mundelein Psalter provided an important first step for me to begin acquiring more sophisticated musical skills. I am not going to be performing at the Met anytime soon, but I am a better singer now than I was a year ago and I can credit that to the this psalter and to other simple chant resources that I have discovered.

    I have learned enough now that I am ready for greater challenges but I am glad that the Mundelein Psalter provided the wonderful first step it has. Even though I am ready to tackle bigger challenges I have not yet grown tired of the psalter and continue to use it daily.

    Is the music in this psalter simple? You bet it is - but that is a huge advantage to non-musician like me who will often find that they have to learn this material largely without the support of real musicians.
  • mjballoumjballou
    Posts: 994
    I think this what the folks who put together the Mundelein Psalter hoped for. In addition to providing a vehicle for sung prayer in seminaries, they wanted "lay use." And everyone knows the shortcomings of "Christian Prayer" - four-line psalm tones in the back of the book, a poor selection of hymns, and confusing directions for anyone who isn't a devotee of liturgical handbooks.

    And I think Jeffrey is right about distribution - only the crabby experts have copies of this book. I'm not sure I've ever seen it in a Catholic bookstore (maybe in Chicago?). How it could be successfully promoted and distributed online is outside my expertise. I don't think LTP has much interest in the book - at least not on a sustained basis. And one priest-liturgist of my acquaintance grumped that, "It was just Cardinal George's ego trip."

    Maybe LTP will come to their senses, put the item in CC copyright, and have the CMAA or Corpus Christi Watershed distribute it. Think of how thousands of dreary retreat experiences could be improved, youth group meetings, etc.
  • Gilbert
    Posts: 106
    A free Mundelein Psalter online??? That would be aMAZing!!!
  • I have also been using the Mundelein Psalter since it came out. My wife and I use it personally everyday to chant at least MP together. I have used it several times in parish or other settings such as EPII in Advent and Friday Vespers in Lent. I used to play the tones before each psalm, canticle, etc, but I stopped doing that. They are simple enough that people catch on. My biggest issue is what everyone else has mentioned. The book is big and relatively expensive. There is no way I am going to get my parish to shell out enough money for 20 copies. I also find that the flipping required for Advent and Lent is a real problem for people. I took to putting out a 'guide' sheet, with page numbers and ribbon colors (I set up up each psalter before the service.).

    What I've learned so far is to simply have one other person (my wife in this case) present to help the other half of the group. Then we just begin as we would if there were only two of us. People listen for a verse or two and then join in. If I try to give a quick tutorial before we start, or play the psalm tones as I noted above, the prayerfulness just gets lost.

    I've begun using the same tones (Meinrad) to chant the Benediction prayer and the Divine Praises. (We end Adoration with Vespers and Benediction.)

    Richard
  • Jeffrey TuckerJeffrey Tucker
    Posts: 3,624
    I complained about the absurdity of the "traditional" and "proprietary" nature of the publishing contract even before it came out. It was more than obvious to me, and would be to anyone but a stick-in-the-mud publisher, that you would sell more copies if it were made creative commons. As it is, it is stuck in copyright prison, for no good reason at all. If they made the whole thing free online--we donate all server space and donate prep time--the thing would take off as a consumer good. Immediately. But you can't talk sense into publishing committees. Such progressive steps are taken by individual decision makers. In the future, this will be more-than obvious. Trouble is that we don't have time to wait. Truly, it breaks my heart that such a wonderful effort could end up in the IP black hole.
  • It seems to me that the Mundelein Psalter needs to be available in a "Pew Edition" consisting of antiphons and psalms and canticles and not much else since this is the only material most people would need to have in front of them. People who are not leading prayer would be able to participate in, or follow, the readings, responsories and intercessions without having them in front of them. They would need the psalm texts though and that is what should be provided to them.

    The psalms in a pew edition could be listed in numeric order , i.e. Psalm 1, Psalm 2, etc.. The antiphons for different celebrations could be listed in a series of headers above each psalm. If necessary, psalms could be printed more than once with different psalm tones and different pointing to allow for greater variety. Three ribbons could be provided to allow people to mark the psalms and canticle to be used. Such a volume would surely run no more than a few hundred pages, considerably less than the 1300 page Mundelein Psalter. That should reduce both bulk and cost.

    Come to think of it, maybe what is really needed is a site similar to the Chabanel Resonsorial Psalm Project but focused on the psalms, canticles and antiphons of the Liturgy of the Hours. The Mundelein Psalter could then be used by by celebrants to lead the other parts of the office (readings, responsories, intercessions, prayer), but the psalms and canticles could be drawn as required from the psalter website, printed out and distributed to the people for singing.
  • mjballoumjballou
    Posts: 994
    On a parochial level, the Liturgy of the Hours has never really found a home. Some cathedrals and large churches do evening prayer during Advent and Lent or on feast days, using programs prepared for the event. Morning Prayer is sometimes read after weekday Masses. The suggestion above would certainly help with better psalmody in those cases.

    I think a large part of the problem is a peculiar mentality among Catholics (some, not all) that worship doesn't count unless it fills "an obligation." Going to a Mass gets your ticket punched. Anything else is seen as suitable for the hyper-devout, unless you dress it up with so much additional music that it qualifies as a performance. In the latter instance, it then becomes a another burden to the music director who has more than enough to do. And many of the clergy aren't interested in extra time in church. Consequently, no one wants to spend money on books that will see little use.

    I know that complaints should always be accompanied by proposed solutions. Well, since you don't need the clergy for the Liturgy of the Hours, perhaps a solution, not original to me, would be the formation of associations along the lines of old-style sodalities that made sung Hours their work.
  • I agree with mjballou especially in her second paragraph. I am often amused by the contortions our liturgy committee goes through whenever they attempt to conduct a vespers service. By the time they are finished folding, spindling, adapting and mutilating the service, it often bears little resemblance to the Liturgy of the Hours. Typically, for instancce, psalmody is replaced with hymnody.

    I think there are two reasons that so many liturgists struggle with the liturgy of the hours. The first is that few people, including many accomplished liturgical musicians, know how to do psalmody anymore. Not knowing how to do psalmody, they inevitably cast about for alternatives to the psalms. Typically, they fall back on hymns that may or may not have anything to do with the psalms they supplant. In fact, in general, I have found that the prescribed texts of the LOTH are ignored in favor of texts selected by the organizers of the liturgy, texts that are then arranged in an order that roughly follows the structure of the Liturgy of the Hours. In my mind, howerver, what we end up with, as nice as it may be, cannot really be called the Liturgy of the Hours.

    The second reason many liturgists struggle with the liturgy of the hours is that the Sunday mass has become the paradigm for all liturgical celebrations. When many liturgists attempt to put together a vespers service, they automatically try to make it as complicated and as sophisticated as a Sunday Mass. The swap out psalms and substitute hymns that are familiar but musically more ornate: they wouldn't think of attempting a vespers service without a full choir. They add ceremony in the form of pomp and circumstance and symbols that are nice but not required. They end up putting an enormous amount of energy into each and every celebration of the LOTH and therefore end up doing very few of them.

    I think this misses the point of the Liturgy of the Hours. The Liturgy of the Hours is meant to be celebrated daily or at least frequently. In order to be able to do that realistically, it needs to be kept simple. I like to use the following analogies. If Sunday Mass is like the larger family meals that many families have on weekends, meals which often include extended family and friends and other members of the community, the Liturgy of the Hours is like the weekday meals that we have in the midst of a busy life, meals often eaten with only our most immediate family and closest friends and often even some of these are missing (this is not a matter of being exclusive it's just the way life is). The weekend family meal needs to be more elaborate, include more dishes and more settings at table, be more festive and they take more time at table than do daily daily meals. They also require more preparation. Weekday meals, on the other hand, need to be simple, nutritious and satisfying, and they need to be easily and quickly prepared and require less time at table.

    As with weekday meals, so it is with the Liturgy of the Hours. If the LOTH is to be celebrated frequently it can't possibly be as complex as are Sunday Masses and that shouldn't be the target we are aiming for. If you want to be able to celebrate the liturgy of the Hours regularly you need to keep it simple. Adapt only when there is a real and obvious reason for doing so. Whatever you do, don't think you have to re-invent the wheel for every celebration. Keep to the texts prescribed and use simple musical settings that can be learned and used on the spot. Out communities need to relearn the art of psalmody, become familiar with psalm tones and use psalm tones of whatever variety suits them - gregorian (adapted or otherwise) or St. Meinrad's or Gelineau - whatever works. Just keep it simple. This doesn't mean there is no room for occasional elaborate celebrations of the Liturgy of the Hours. These are surely appropriate for major feasts and solemnities. But typically the celebration of the LOTH needs to be kept simple. If done in a parish, it should not be thought of as something that is only successful when the whole parish turns out for it. It should be thought of as something that the parish does often, even daily, and that any parishioner is welcome to attend. Whoever shows up, shows up: whoever doesn't, doesn't. It's still a work of the parish and the parish has still glorified God through it.

    With respect to mjballou's third paragraph, I agree with that also. I am certainly grateful whenever clergy are available and interested in participating in and leading the Liturgy of the Hours, but my experience has been that laity cannot count on this. Clergy are busy enough and are seldom interested in assuming yet another duty (That is not a discredit to them: they really are that busy). This is something the laity will have to embrace for themselves and they may need to form associations in order to do so. In any event, there is something fitting about celebrating the LOTH in the midst of life rather than just in parishes and somewhat apart from life. Laity should be looking for opportunities to pray the LOTH with co-workers, neighbors and friends, in their homes, in their communities and at their workplaces. It could also be a real service of the laity for the often overburdened clergy. If we can assume the responsibility for organizing the celebration of the LOTH in our parishes and require the clergy only to show up and lead celebrations, perhaps we can do something to help sustain and invigorate and strengthen our clergy.
  • a1437053a1437053
    Posts: 198
    Just keep it simple. This doesn't mean there is no room for occasional elaborate celebrations of the Liturgy of the Hours. These are surely appropriate for major feasts and solemnities. But typically the celebration of the LOTH needs to be kept simple. If done in a parish, it should not be thought of as something that is only successful when the whole parish turns out for it. It should be thought of as something that the parish does often, even daily, and that any parishioner is welcome to attend. Whoever shows up, shows up: whoever doesn't, doesn't. It's still a work of the parish and the parish has still glorified God through it.


    What do you think about this:

    The Mundelein Psalter in the hands of the leaders.
    Christian Prayers in the hands of the people.

    The MP is too expensive. The CP is more widely available.
  • a1437053a1437053
    Posts: 198
    Also, according to this page, each week has the same psalm tone? It seems reasonable that we non-musicians would be able to pick it up?

    Oh, and one more thing: Benedictus/Magnificat and Pater Noster chanted in Latin.
  • incantuincantu
    Posts: 989
    The psalm tones are very very simple, the kind that are probably easier for non-musicians than for musicians (who tend to like to have everything written out).
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,198
    The Mundelein Psalter would probably be somewhat cheaper if it were printed outside the US.
  • Jeffrey TuckerJeffrey Tucker
    Posts: 3,624
    many wouldn't mind paying the price if it were also posted online.
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,198
    LTP's FAQ for the Psalter goes out of its way to say that the contents should not be copied. Among other reasons given, this is supposedly so that the people should sing from books of a suitable quality for the liturgy!
  • Jeffrey TuckerJeffrey Tucker
    Posts: 3,624
    Yes, I hear this suitable quality thing all the time. It seems like a conflation of several issues.
  • a1437053a1437053
    Posts: 198
    While I agree with Jeffrey's argument that it should be posted online, for liturgy, printed books offer some kind of unspoken dignity. At the very least, it helps institutionalize.

    For that reason, while many, many texts are available for download on CMAA, I persist, to my wife's dismay, on purchasing whatever I can get my hands on! Example: both downloading, AND PURCHASING, Rice's amazing books! I could see what I was buying, and I liked it, so I bought it! (And if our schola takes off, many future copies!)

    But asking again:

    What do you think about this:

    The Mundelein Psalter in the hands of the leaders.
    Christian Prayers in the hands of the people.


    To me, it seems the Psalm tones would be easy for the people to pick up without music NOR pointing? Has anyone done this?
  • Another reasonable option might be the Mundelein Psalter in the hands of the leaders and a pew edition of the Mundelein Psalter in the hands of the people. A pew edition wouldn't have to contain everything the Mundelein Psalter does since the people wouldn't need it. It wouldn't need to contain the readings, the intercessions or the prayers since the people could participate in these items without having the text in front of them. A pew edition might not even need the responsories. With experience people would find the responsory patterns predictable enough that they could probably learn to sing these also without having the texts in front of them. Printed psalm tones also might not be needed since these could be modeled by a cantor and picked up easily by the people.

    So what would a pew edition need? The Mundelein Psalter's hymnal and the the pointed psalm and canticle texts with a few ribbons should be adequate. The psalms and canticles could be laid out sequentially (psalm1, psalm 2, psalm 3, etc...) rather than in a four week psalter. This would remove unnecessary duplication and it would largely eliminate the need for including psalms and canticles in the commons and propers. In cases where a psalm or canticle might need to be pointed differently for use with different psalm tones, it could be duplicated as many times as necessary once for each particular pointing. The hymnal would need to be expanded to include the hymns from the commons and propers. This might make it possible to eliminate the commons and propers altogether in a pew edition.

    I'm not sure about the best way to handle the antiphons, especially the antiphons from the propers and commons. Can people just repeat the antiphon from memory after hearing it sung by the cantor? This probably wouldn't be a problem at the beginning of a psalm but I'm not sure they would remember the antiphon at the end of the psalm unless it was repeated several times throughout, an option that I don't really care for. Suggestions anyone?

    Laying out a pew edtion of the Mundelein Psalter in this way would reduce both cost and bulk. In the end I suspect that a pew edition could be reduced to a few hundred pages at most. This is in contrast to the approximately 1300 pages of the Mundelein Psalter as it stands currently. This layout would go a long way toward making this psalter a practical and affordable option for parishes and other groups while retaining the quality of the book used for public liturgy.

    Of course the publishers would also need to be convinced of the merits of this approach.
  • mjballoumjballou
    Posts: 994
    When people talk about buying pew editions of the Mundelein Psalter, I think they're often thinking in terms of having several in each pew.

    Unless your experience with the Liturgy of the Hours in parishes is far better than mine, I don't think we're talking about those numbers. Fr. Jeffrey Keyes, C.PP.S. has been successful in implementing Morning and Evening Prayer (combining the latter with Adoration) and his numbers run about 15-25.
    Maybe a couple of cases would do the job for many parishes.

    I agree about the dignity of books for worship, living as I do in the land of the newsprint throwaways. And I'm not overly fond of pamphlets put together by the church office. Some parishes have someone with the flair and the time; many don't.

    But, LTP doesn't really seem to care if anyone uses these books of theirs - just so long as they don't copy them.
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,198
    FWIW, LTP charged me full price for the Psalter even though I picked it up in person at their facility. I could have saved time and money by ordering it on-line. And I wouldn't have been tempted to buy the other things I bought! :-)
  • Jeffrey TuckerJeffrey Tucker
    Posts: 3,624
    What if the dignity of a book means that it is kept offline or that it is too expensive for people to buy? I have mixed feelings about this. I love the PBC because it is so great in its binding etc. but look at the financial risk involved and inventory costs. It is not viable to do this with more than one or two books -- at least for us. In the meantime, isn't it more urgent that the material get out there? our weekly liturgy programs don't have much inherent "dignity" in their intrinsic properties but they are pretty. Does dignity always have to mean hardback and acid-free paper? I know that we all prefer fancy to throw away but is there really a liturgical imperative here? I'm thinking of several books that remain completely obscure solely due to this dignity point, such as the sung Missal in English, which is nearly unaffordable. A cheap edition could be made but the author/publisher refuses. I'm not sure that dignity is worth it if the price is near non-existence, if you know what I mean.
  • In an earlier post, I indicated that I believe that the LOTH is something that should be celebrated in parishes regularly, even daily if possible. Of course it is unrealistic to expect that large numbers of parishioners will be present for such celebrations. If 15-25 people showed up regularly for Morning or Evening Prayer, as they do for Fr. Jeffrey Keyes, I would consider that a stunning success - so, yes mjballou, a couple of cases probably would be more than sufficient for most parishes.

    As for the dignity issue - I agree that throw away pamphlets are not desirable, but with appropriate copyright provisions, It would be possible for many parishes to produce and bind their own "pew editions". Editions like this could be distributed as PDFs and hard copies could be produced as required. Of course these editions wouldn't be hard cover with acid free paper. But spiral bound books printed on good paper and using high quality cardstock or plastic covers would be dignified enough as far as I am concerned. When they get worn, it would be easy enough to replace them. The only thing stopping me from taking this approach right now is concern for copyright.
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,198
    The new encyclical speaks of non-material and cultural obstacles to development, and one of them is in excessive claims of intellectual property:

    Para 22: "...On the part of rich countries there is excessive zeal for protecting knowledge through an unduly rigid assertion of the right to intellectual property, "
  • chonak - haven't read the new encyclical yet but that is an interesting point. Although I believe in, and respect, intellectual property rights I agree that some claims are excessive and some are clearly innapropriate. I agree with much of what Jeffrey says about copyrighting liturgical texts - even in the form of approved translations. To me that is unconscionable. The texts belong to the people and the people should be free to use them anytime, anywhere without charge - at least for liturgical purposes.