He's dead and the song is still being sung.

Well...I feel better now.

I'm not so sure you should because those last two paragraphs were every bit if not more of the rash judgment you think Fr. Brunner was guilty of.

"Sons of God" would be much less bad if it were set to some decent processional tune.

Oh, yeah, and telescope the "allelu, etc." into a single "alleluia".

This is an example of brewing a tempest in a teapot. Were this the only drippy hymn from the Victorian era hymnals to survive to this day, it wouldn't make a dime's bit of difference. Refer to Gavin's First Principle of Particle Hymnic Physics: ya don't like it, don't sing it.
Honestly....

I agree, M.

Imagine living in a world where women are only allowed to be nurses, store clerks, secretaries and organists. Where there are two kinds of priests, those you really, really admire and those, the minority, were difficult, snarky and ones that people avoided - You'd see two lines for confession and you'd know that the long line was the good priest...the other line was for people who really, really had to go to confession and also had to get home...of course, some of those people also enjoyed betting verbally beat up by a priest.

During the 1950's a Catholic woman's life was family and the church. Few women worked because few people would hire a woman.

When civil disobedience became popular in the 1960's, things began to change for African-Americans and European-American Catholic women as well.

Quite a few priests at that time worked to remove and destroy statues of the saints and of Mary in and outside of the church, deriding those little old women who would kiss the feet of Mary as they would pass the statue. I saw it, I know the seminarians who who paid to abduct the statue and chuck it into the East River, NYC. If you like, I can go point out where it probably lies under the muck. At that times, as a young musician, I thought this was rather cheeky. But at that time, quite a few seminarians were rich kids, in seminary only to avoid the draft.

The church was so male-focused that there was little music that honored women, so over years and years hymns to female saints and Mary filled a need in the hearts of women living in a male dominated society. But hymns were written to fill a need for music outside of Mass and there was no form to follow - which may be why they tended to be in more popular, metric styles to fit religious poetry.

I worked 7 days a week for 7 years with 2 priests in parishes at that time and never experienced a "bad" pastor, but a lot of assistants who'd been sheltered and prepared to go to seminary for high school and on - who could be very difficult.

The older priests were forced by the weekly network television presence of Fulton J. Sheen to be rated by people to how they stood up next to him. I think that this helped the church a lot at this point.

The question:

Q. According to the “White List” the “St. Basil’s Hymnal” is on the list of disapproved hymnals; however, it is the only hymnbook which contains “On this day O Beautiful Mother”, which is much loved hereabouts. Would you tell me whether that piece is suitable?

Reeks of being planted to give Brunner and chance to preach. A hymn people like is only found in a black-listed hymnal. Why would anyone ask this question unless they had an agenda.

JMO does not have a mean bone in his body, he posted this because in his research he came across it. I would have undoubtedly done the same thing. If I had published a hymnal to be used in current times, I would have included it because of its use in honoring Mary and its place in the hearts of many women. As a result many people would not buy the hymnal. JMO is not creating hymnals to replace OCP, and others, he is creating hymnals to lead the church.

Now read the awful text that Brunner derides:

There is the problem of the verse — some of it atrocious as to form, some of it equally atrocious as to content.

Hodie, o pulchra cum matre!
Amor autem tibi hodie;
Prope te, Madonna, exosculabatur nos tabernus,
confidentes tua leni cura probare.

Hodie participationem petimus, carissima mater,
tuo dulci curae:
Nos iuvare umquam, pedes nostros erranti, aberramus a
tua ducentia via.

Regina Angelorum digneris audire te delectorum,
filiorum humilis di superi;
Iuvenes corda lucrum, O Virgine purum, suave
ad te ipsum pelliciunt.



Latin courtesy of GOOGLE Translate...

On this day, O Beautiful Mother!
On this day we give thee our love;
Near thee, Madonna, fondly we hover,
trusting thy gentle care to prove.

On this day we ask to share,
dearest Mother, thy sweet care;
Aid us e'er, our feet astray,
wandering from thy guiding way.

Queen of Angels, deign to hear,
thy dear children's humble pray'r;
Young hearts gain, O Virgin pure,
sweetly to thyself allure.


Reading this and Brunner's words it appears that he may have had a problem, not with this hymn, but with women.

None, whatsoever...I've not even played a psychologist on TV.

I apologize to all whom (who?) I may have offended. The reason behind his writing may be so tangled and twisted, that it it may be generally difficult to give a straightforward answer to the psychology behind it.

I wonder what he thought of Immaculate Mary?

"Reading this and Brunner's words it appears that he may have had a problem, not with this hymn, but with women."

And if you don't like gospel music at Mass, you must be a racist. Anyone can play this game.

Thank you. Now I know what caused that pain in my side!

What, Francis, you don't find the sound and image of "lithping child-wen" quaint? Have you no heart, man? The text writer was a precognitive, s/he (I don't care to look that up) knew that a century later ALL CHILDREN would qualify for some medical diagnosis that "disables and marginalizes" them and their self-esteem, and used that adjective in a prescient way to foreshadow how the BVM has got their back, even when congress won't listen to their pleas....
Oh, and let's be honest, even by comparison to GUI, "On this day" only gets a ten on a secular holiday that happens to fall in May.
Can we find some fine hymns to critique now, please?

The problem is that if you support hymns like "On This Day" at Mass BECAUSE OF the sentimental attachment some have to them, you've lost the moral high ground for not doing, for example, "On Eagle's Wings", which is also very popular for sentimental reasons. (believe it or not) There's no good reason to do sentimental, popsy-wopsy, theologically vapid hyms at Mass for 80 year olds but not for 40 year olds.

The question posed to Father Brunner in 1953 includes the statement that the St. Basil’s Hymnal was the only hymnal that contained “On This Day, O Beautiful Mother.” This is absolutely false. In 1953, the Catholic Youth Hymnal, was available from J. Fischer & Bro. of New York, which contains the hymn. Also, McLaughlin & Reilly of Boston had published The Catholic Chapel Hymnal in 1944 (with additions in 1954 and 1958), which also contains this hymn. The latter, as the preface reads, was a compilation of the most popular Catholic hymns based on a survey of U.S. Military Chaplains in World War II. They were asked, in the survey conducted by McLaughlin & Reilly, which hymns immediately resulted in spontaneous singing by the servicemen. “On This Day” and many others found in St. Basil’s appeared on the list. By the way, J. Fisher Bro. and McLaughlin & Reilly were the leading Catholic music publishing companies of the time.
I wonder whether Father Brunner was really asked this question. Often, columnists will make up questions—and then respond to them—because of a personal agenda or because they just don’t have questions to respond to (as paid or volunteer columnists).

For that matter, if people need it, print it on a sheet. Include it in the booklet for the May procession.

[I've deleted 20 comments from this thread.]

I wonder whether Father Brunner was really asked this question. Often, columnists will make up questions—and then respond to them—because of a personal agenda or because they just don’t have questions to respond to (as paid or volunteer columnists).

Knowing nothing about the columnist, that speculation is wildly uncharitable.

You can't argue with hate.

You can't argue with hate.

Since there is nothing that can be fairly characterized as hate in either Fr. Brunner's comments or anyone else here, I'm not sure to whom that was meant to be directed.

atrocious

Since we ought to extend good faith even to the late Fr. Brunner, we should assume that he had definition 3b in mind when he used that word:

b : of very poor quality

I don't think he is the type to speak colloquially

Using atrocious as "extremely wicked, brutal, or cruel : barbaric" doesn't make sense in the context. Neither does "appalling, horrifying". Maybe "utterly revolting : abominable"; but "of very poor quality" fits the best.

So far the only thing you have inarguably established is that "chrism doesn't like what Fr. Brunner said". Ok, fair enough. I concede that. Perhaps we can move on.

Oh you are right CH. You've caught me being this guy:



So I'll shut up now.

Could there possibly be an edifying discussion on Fr. Brunner's paragraph?

Ben, correct me if I am wrong, but I believe the way to "move on" is to simply ignore a threads that do not interest one. Am I correct? The only way to keep the thread going is for people to keep commenting. I follow a general rule: when I don't agree with a thread, or an article, or (in this case) a whole series of articles that deals with a broad topic, I simply ignore it. On the other hand, probably the best way to keep a thread going is to post comment after comment, etc.

As to the suggestion that learning what we can about Catholic tradition is not a good thing, I would strongly disagree with this assertion, and I shall continue to try to learn what I can about what has been written in the past concerning "sacred vs. secular" styles at Mass, high quality hymn texts, etc.

oldhymns,

I hope I don't regret admitting this ... but I actually really like "On This Day, O Beautiful Mother."

However, when it comes to the public worship of Almighty God, there are other aspects the Church asks us to take into consideration. Is the melody of a high enough dignity to be sung during Mass? Is the quality of the poetry "lofty" (to use the word of the saintly Pope Pius XII)?

I would be interested to read what others think regarding this topic.

Paul, on this particular hymn, I agree with you. There are many beautiful hymns to Our Lady (from St. Basil's, St. Gregory's, and many other "old" and "new" hymnals) that I would prefer.

This is one hymn, though, that people LOVE to sing. Our pastor likes it and requests it at least several times a year (the last being on January 1). This is one of few hymns in OCP that people will actually pick up the hymnal and sing--which is a good thing! This is readily observable from the choir loft.

oldhymns,

Years ago, one hymn I was forced to play was "Bring Flowers of the Rarest" and the pastor insisted I add chimes the whole time ... Not a good memory! I'm not a fan of that hymn.

The melody that I'm familiar with for "On This Day" sounds pretty close to something that, with other words, might be found next to "Daisy Bell" in a collection of 19th-century piano favorites. This is just a subjective impression, but perhaps a look at the chord progression and rhythmic patterns would support it.

If my impression is accurate, then maybe the tune is too worldly to draw the worshipper up into the heavenly liturgy, and thus a poor choice for mass. I often think about Isaiah 6:3-4 in this context:

And one called to another and said: "Holy, holy, holy is the LORD of hosts; the whole earth is full of his glory." And the foundations of the thresholds shook at the voice of him who called, and the house was filled with smoke

I wonder if Fr. Brunner's "unqualified" means that he opposed the use of this hymn for any purpose? He doesn't say.