I would be glad to do 4-part harmonizations of this or other hymns for you; I can send you the results in Finale 2012 or pdf.
However, what in particular do you find lacking in the harmonization you have given?

Hello, friends! I like harmonizations that are not "stagnant" — i.e. that "keep it moving" especially with stepwise bassline movement. I also prefer a variety of chords, as opposed to the same two or three for the whole piece.

In the one I posted, the Emphasis on Eb Major chords goes on for way too many measures: so boring!

Here are a pdf and midi file of the harmonization I have written for you. Opinions on what it is useful for are welcome; it has some interesting parts to it.

If you want to know, four-part harmonizations in the spirit of Bach's chorales are something which I enjoy creating; I think this is No. 21 for me. They range from pieces which are meant to be useful as a standard accompaniment to those which are very chromatic/modern. Eventually I hope to publish them as a collection.

Wow, I think I might start using UNDE ET MEMORES again!

With all do respect of Dr Monk, "stagnant" harmonizations (as Mr O. has so wonderfully put it) have kept me away from certain hymns. I never liked the orginal harmonization for this tune, and haven't used it since I became DM at my parish 6 years ago!

I feel the same way about AURELIA, which, unfortunately, I have to play every Wednesday as part of a weekly novena to St Jude. I've taken to playing a last-verse harmonization for the whole thing, slightly altered, of course, to make it less "big".

First: Your own melody differs from the William H. Monk tune. I assume that's an accident.

Second: May I ask, just what is wrong with JonathanKK's new harmonization posted above? It has the vaunted stepwise bass that you seem to extol here and elsewhere.

Third: While a valid and often appealing method of constructing bass lines, whether in harmonizing hymn tunes or in other compositions, stepwise motion is not the only method; moreover, it is a method that needs to be used judiciously – which generally means not pervasively – to achieve a pleasant, balance, and wholesome effect. When used almost to the exclusion of other methods of harmonizing a hymn tune, it runs the danger of calling attention to itself at the expense of the melody and inner voices.

This is not to say that stepwise motion in a bass (or other) part is a bad thing in and of itself; in fact, it is often quite appropriate in carefully thought out counterpoint in various sorts of compositions. But in hymn and other writing where one part – especially the melody – should be dominant, the other parts have a subservient role, even though the bass in traditional 4-part homophonic writing is generally regarded of importance second only to the melody (although not always, if there is an inner countersubject).

Finally: Except for the melodic accident at the end, what don't you like about your own harmonization? We are dealing with questions of aesthetics and perception here, and different people have different takes on such issues.

My own viewpoints are just that: my own viewpoints. I only raised them because they reflect a certain "all things in moderation" approach that I was taught – not only in life, but in music.

Amusingly enough, it has taken me over an hour to write this note: (a) Part of that time was spent toying with a way of arriving at a "stepwise motion" scoring system that scores individual parts and also arrives at a combined score, which, for instance, considers balance between melody and bass (for instance, both contrary and parallel motion ameliorates the situation to some extent, and stepwise motion that "turns around" or moves with unequal note duration is similarly ameliorated). Those ideas are still not well-formed and so are not ready to be expounded – if at all, for it seems that such ideas skirt thorny questions of trying to codify aesthetics and beauty. (b) I examined some fifty or so hymns, including my own better attempts, with a view to citing examples, having found all sorts of exceptions that prove – and disprove – the rule, and I did not wish to start a "let's all cite our favourite examples" war that would be out of place here. Our time would be better spent simply by looking at our own feelings and reaching our own, individual conclusions as to whether they apply in our own work.

Chuck

I like the original harmonization the best. Simple, perhaps, but a classic example of excellent hymn writing.