Misuse and Abuse of the word "hymn" • a pet peeve
  • Charles in CenCA
    Posts: 2,416
    Oh, I'm gonna throw a big monkey in the wrench:
    As a prelude, does anybody remember after Vangelis' breakthrough synth work with COSMOS and CHARIOTS OF THE GODS he threw an inflated ditty into pop culture called "Hymne", which was, as I recall, the soundtrack for Napa wine?
    Okay then, take that conflated concept of music-as-stand-alone hymn and just buy the concept.
    Move forward in time to the opening of the famed Coen Brother's film "Fargo." Listen to the homophonic, four phrase statement unfolds from the harp up to the full tilt (with tympani) orchestral climax, and then tell me:
    "This is NOT a hymn."
    Not a word is heard or sung. (Whether Swedish, Norwegian or English.)
    Really think about this before shooting holes. It must be experienced.
    If you have trouble doing this, just think back to CHARIOTS OF FIRE, and recall "Jerusalem" without the text. Is it not still a "hymn?"
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 8,368
    A hymn is verbal text, specifically in praise of the object of worship. This hymn may be sungen to any number of tunes, metred or not, plainchant or not, or even set chorally or polyphonically, but whatever the music (or, heaven forbid, no music at all), it remains a hymn. Just as a prayer, say, 'To thee before the close of day', is a prayer whether sung to any of a variety of tunes or none at all... the prayer is the text, not the music. And so it is with hymns.

    Charles' example above of 'Jerusalem', played wordlessly in chariots of fire, has the music 'seeming' like a hymn only because of the near universal (in our culture) identification of this tune with a given text. Likewise, if we heard the tune 'Adeste fideles' we would think, only because of the text that we associate with it, that we were listening to a hymn, even though the hymn could concievably be sung to different music and remain the same hymn. Likewise, 'Hyfrydol'. If we heard only the tune, we would recognise it as a hymn tune, but not know whether the hymn was 'Love Divine..' or 'Alleluya, Sing to Jesus', or.... The hymn is the text.
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    Summation:

    The word 'hymn', because it employs such a widely varied use throughout the world, actually has no definitive meaning at all, and therefore, should be used with great discretion when speaking about forms of music or settings of text.

    I read the (2) definitions in my Harvard yesterday, both of which were exceedingly long and verbose. One was:

    Hymn (which had five subdivisions that were at least a whole paragraph long)

    and then

    Hymn, English (which had its own entirely separate altrucation in opposition to the first entry)

    So the confusion and the constant morphing of one definition into the next is not a new issue.

    From now on I am going to introduce pieces like this at the liturgy:

    "Let us all join in singing the metrical four-part homophonic setting for organ and voices of the prayer text O Come, O Come Emmanuel as it appears in the musical aid (not hymnal) we are presently using... please note, that the present version is an "alt" edition, otherwise known as a hyrmn."
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,500
    Yah, I still don't get what this discussion is about.

    Most entries in the dictionary have more than one plausible definition. I haven't looked up "hymn," but I'd be goshdarned if it prolly doesn't have a few options.

    The question is, what is at stake? Why is nailing down the precise definition important? Why is "abuse" of this poor word a pet peeve? What's the frequency, Kenneth?
  • noel jones, aagonoel jones, aago
    Posts: 6,605
    A praise song which in the first 8 lines has 6 "My"s and 1 "I" does not reflect the definition of piety.

    "The word piety comes from the Latin word pietas, the noun form of the adjective pius (which means "devout" or "good")."

    Instead it is someone bragging about their great relationship with God, as they perceive it.

    Pious? Definitely not.
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    Kathy 1 day ago
    .  
Francis, what do you think about this? Is it impious?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8welVgKX8Qo




     
    francis 1 day ago
    .  edit
I have programmed that song for our liturgies in the past when I led contemporary praise band music. Does it belong in Mass? You tell me.
    

    Kathy? Is it impious or not? Is it worthy of the liturgy?
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,500
    Oh gosh Francis, that was a question for you, silly!
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    Hmmm... I wonder who is silly?

    Whose face is on the coin?
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,500
    Are you Jesus, Francis?
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    No, just one of his followers, silly!
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,500
    And has he given you some sort of special mandate, or are you under the same "judge not lest ye be judged" rubric as the rest of us?
  • noel jones, aagonoel jones, aago
    Posts: 6,605
    If we follow that mandate, the church would be full of guitarists and the organs and organists out sitting on the curb with all the choir members.

    Judgement is the job of a musician.
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    No different than you. Just asking you the same question you asked me. I gave you my answer, now you give me yours.
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,500
    You didn't answer, actually. Is it impious? That's my question.
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    No, it's not impious... that is an obviously baited question.

    This piece is what it is. Simple, somewhat 'me focused', but has a heartfelt pulse. I am very comfortable with you singing this song in your home, or a youth gathering, or personal prayer, or in your car. Go for it!

    Does it belong in the liturgy? Does any of this genre/style of music belong in the liturgy? That is an entirely different question that begs discussion. So let's discuss it!

    Do you want to start the thread or shall I?
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 8,368
    Altrucation?
    What tune do you use for that?
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,500
    Thank you, Francis, for giving me permission to sing In Christ Alone in my car. I appreciate it.

    I still don't think this discussion has yet to reveal its meaning. It was supposedly begun with this premise in mind:

    "I still see an awful lot of confusion with regard to the word "hymn" on this forum"

    What confusion? I see nothing but a word with a variety of applications developed over time. So... Misuse? Abuse? Could anyone (Jeffrey O) just come out and say what they are objecting to, and frankly being rather bossy about?
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 8,368
    It seems uncomplicated to me:
    I thought JMO's goal was to determine precisely what is and is not a hymn.
    We have had several conflicting offerings attempting to answer that.
    It seems to me to be a profitable exercise allowing as how an awful lot of awful stuff gets labeled defaultly as hymns that are not hymns at all - even by some more liberal understanding of the signifer.

    And, I await an answer from Francis an answer to the question above!
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    MJO

    Which question above? Do you mean Altrucation? (Altercation)
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    So Kathy, are you not going to tell us what YOU think about the appropriateness of the 'hymn' you suggest? You are quick to demand an answer of others but you yourself always evade questions directed to you. Who is being bossy?
  • CHGiffenCHGiffen
    Posts: 5,151
    Hmmm ...

    Are Sequences hymns?
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    CHG... everything we sing is a hymn to God. (TIC)
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    v
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    my final plea
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 8,368
    Not to be dogmatic, but here is this from Thos. Aquinas:

    'A hymn is praise of God with song;
    a song is the exultation of the mind dwelling on eternal things,
    bursting forth in the voice'.

    CHG - are Sequences hymns?
    That's, to me, 'up in the air' - they are not all alike. Some are pure praise, others tell a story, others are meditations.

    Of the four in current OF use:
    1) Victimae paschali - initially exhorts us to praise, and proceeds to tell a story: that of the 3 Marie's Easter discovery.

    2) Veni, Creator Spiritus - begins as a prayer, then proceeds to outline the Spirit's attributes and gifts. (This one, in my opinion, is the only one that is really a hymn - others may disagree.)

    3) Lauda Sion - begins as an exhortation to praise the source of our salvation, then proceeds as a lengthy and detailed account of the Last Supper, continuing with some points of eucharistic theology, and, finally, ending as a prayer to the 'feeding Shepherd' that we might share in the graces of the Blessed Sacrament. It is the lengthiest and most complex of all.

    4) Stabat Mater - is a meditation on the pain and suffering on the part of our Lady over the Passion of her Son.

    5) Dies irae (licit in the EF) - is almost an essay on the nature of the Day of Judgement: its horrors for some, and its blessings for others.

    6) It's too bad that we don't have more of the historic Sequences in current licit liturgical use. We should certainly be doing the ones for the Christ Mass, Epiphany, Ascension, Trinity, and Christ the King. Perhaps having one for every solemnity would be fitting.

    It occurs to me that a study of Sequences as a literary genre and the great variety of theological staements, stories, pure praise, prayer, and meditation to be found within it, would make a fine doctoral thesis for someone. (Perhaps this has already been done???)
  • CHGiffenCHGiffen
    Posts: 5,151
    MJO - your take on Sequences is not unlike my own! And I, too, wish more could be licit for liturgical use. I posed the question, because of frequently seeing the term "sequence hymn" which has always felt like a misnomer.
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    MJO

    Not to be dogmatic, but here is this from Thos. Aquinas:

    'A hymn is praise of God with song;
    a song is the exultation of the mind dwelling on eternal things,
    bursting forth in the voice'.


    This is a pronouncement by one of the greatest doctors of our faith. I don't think we can claim this as dogma per se, but it certainly holds a lot of weight.

    I think it is interesting that STA says that it is not just a text. Is also INCLUDES the song. And the song must fulfill the prescription that it exults the mind to dwell on eternal things and that it bursts forth from the voice. It does not say anything about instruments.

    That, my dear friends, IS the definition of a hymn (RC). You cannot separate the text from the music. It is the music that makes the text a hymn. Without music, it is just words. With music sung by the voice, it becomes the hymn. And the music must exult the mind as it bursts forth in song from the voice, from the heart.

    The majority of new music sung in our churches does not this prescription fulfill, and it is the unfulfilled responsibility of our shepherds that leave us subjected to that which does not belong.
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 8,368
    There is a similar saying by Augustine of Hippo, so alike that I wonder if Aquinas didn't have it in mind.
    Something like 'a hymn is praise + God + song'.

    CHG - Yes, I, too, have often encountered 'sequence hymn' and thought it a rather mongrel term.
    It is most often encountered in the Episcopal Church, where, in those churches that do not use
    the propers, any hymn sung between the Epistle and Gospel is called a sequence hymn; an obvious borrowing of function if not of substance (OH! there's that word 'substance' again! Does it remind you of.... )
    Similarly, a prayer-hymn sung at the end of communions or some other place is often called an orison hymn.
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,500
    So in other words, the word "hymn" is a general term, and a multivalent term. Use of it in a wide variety of ways does not constitute abuse, misuse, confusion, or sloppiness. Can we agree--and move on?
  • DougS
    Posts: 793
    "You cannot separate the text from the music."

    I don't get this insistence. Isn't separating the text from the music exactly what the Renaissance polyphonists did when they, for example, wrote mass settings based on secular tunes? Or settings of hymn texts with practically no reference to earlier chant versions?

    And I absolutely agree with Kathy about the multivalence of the word "hymn."
  • RagueneauRagueneau
    Posts: 2,592
    So in other words, the word "hymn" is a general term, and a multivalent term. Use of it in a wide variety of ways does not constitute abuse, misuse, confusion, or sloppiness. Can we agree--and move on?


    Kathy,

    Please read my initial post: you will see that the whole point is that the word "hymn" can mean different things.

    I also explain why sloppiness in using it causes so much unnecessary confusion.

    I think we would be in agreement.
  • Charles in CenCA
    Posts: 2,416
    But JMO, isn't that akin to the contention of a few months ago regarding exactitude in the meaning of the word "cantus" as translated by the current and former GIRMS?
    Did we "solve" that issue?
  • RagueneauRagueneau
    Posts: 2,592
    Charles, let us discuss this when I see you next. Deal? I look forward to it !!!
  • CHGiffenCHGiffen
    Posts: 5,151
    "Pange lingua gloriosi proelium certaminis" (in unrhymed verse) by St. Venatius Fortunatis(?) is thus, actually, a sequence (perhaps a "sequence hymn" as styled by Wikipedia) which has undergone substantial alteration, while "Pange lingua gloriosi corporis mysterium" (in rhymed accentual rhythm) by St. Thomas Aquinas is a hymn (for Corpus Christi) of pristine elegance. The former receives rather interesting treatment during the Adoration of the Cross on Good Friday: eighth stanza (Crux fidelis...) sung first, then this same stanza split into first 4 and final 2 lines used, alternately, as "refrains" to the remaining stanzas. Of course, the latter also sees divided use, albeit less draconian, in the splitting off of the final two stanzas (Tantum ergo...) for separate use. More interesting for the latter is its ABABAB rhyming scheme (unique to its era) and its poetic depth - a profound contribution to hymnody.

    Sometime, I should share how, some three dozen years ago, the hymn of St. Thomas Aquinas figured in what were good, evolving times for me, my wife and four children, only to become difficult and tragic times a few months later. Yet it was possible for us to chuckle when told that, as rather traditional Methodists, we were that part of Anglicanism that were really Catholics who simply hadn't found our way back to the Church yet.
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,500
    Jeffrey, I think you're manufacturing a controversy for no apparent reason. Is there a reason?
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    Kathy

    JO has not created the controversy. The church has allowed into its liturgy, under the guise of the word hymn 'or another song', music AND text that isn't a hymn at all. JO is just calling a spade a spade.
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,500
    Ok, good, now we're getting somewhere.

    So this is a thread about StLJesuits music, etc., are not hymns. Is that it?

    That's fine by me, if that's what is being said. But why is the original post about confusion on this Forum? It does not seem to me that anyone on this forum goes around saying that modern church songs of that type are a genre of hymnody, properly so-called.

    I just don't see the need to be policing each other here. And if there are criticisms, it seems to me that they should be much clearer, more direct, and less confusing.
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    Well, if we are the "knowledgeable ones" on the subject of Sacred Music, and WE cannot even agree on the outline on JO's page, that says to me that there IS great confusion even amongst ourselves as musicians and sad to say, the heirarchy itself much less the PIPS.
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    JO

    I don't necessarily agree with the difference you have stated between hymn and song needing accompaniment. I can sing many songs without accompaniment and they work just fine. Try "Yesterday" by McCartney. Perhaps there is something else you are speaking to? Also, chant with accompaniment works also.
  • RagueneauRagueneau
    Posts: 2,592
    Jeffrey, I think you're manufacturing a controversy for no apparent reason.

    I just don't see the need to be policing each other here.


    I'm wondering if a forum moderator could (perhaps) step in here.

    Being that my original post was a very clear statement that hymn texts and tunes are not synonymous, I don't really see a need for comments like these and I can't say I really appreciate them.
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,500
    There was no such clear statement in your original post, and no indication of which use (text, tune) constitutes the MISUSE or ABUSE to which the title of the post refers.

    I've asked about a dozen times for clarification on these points.
  • noel jones, aagonoel jones, aago
    Posts: 6,605
    Anglican Chant has a very tenuous connection to Gregorian Chant

    It is usually sung in parts, GC is never sung in parts.

    No one would ever confuse AC with GC.

    Sequence hymns are hymns because the text was created and is not scripture, and this form eventually became, like Anglican Chant, driven by harmonic movement rather than relying upon melodic movement.

    Early "hymns" were chant but that form evolved, as shown by the English Hymnal, into harmonic hymns.

    Bad "hymns" rely upon external rhythm and they trudge along above it. They are not hymns but rather songs in masquerade, with cheap plastic masks from Walmart instead of hand-wrought ones from Venice that we have packed away in a trunk.

    True hymns are never confused with "bad" hymns by people who have heard the difference.
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,500
    In the absence of any clarification of a) what is being "misused and abused," and b) where there has been "confusion" on this forum, and in spite of many interesting and intelligent comments, I suppose this thread is best just ignored.
  • noel jones, aagonoel jones, aago
    Posts: 6,605
    I get a sinking, sinking feeling....
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    Noel... I'll never let go...
  • CHGiffenCHGiffen
    Posts: 5,151
    Well, FNJ, by the same reasoning, one would never confuse Latin with English.

    I thought we had established that not all sequences are hymns - perhaps the "Dies irae" fails to be a hymn.

    In the Eastern churches, some chant is harmonized, some is not.

    All in all, I agree with Kathy, though. :)
  • noel jones, aagonoel jones, aago
    Posts: 6,605
    "one would never confuse Latin with English."

    I've never encountered that problem!
Add a Comment