Is Worship IV a Catholic Hymnal?
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 8,921
    Suffice it to say that the faults were not all on one side.
    Thanked by 1Gavin
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,428
    To Frs. Jim and Ron (and anyone else):

    This is an open forum. It happens to be hosted by CMAA, but the individual posters are expressing their own opinions. While the dynamics of online communities are such that there is an identifiable cluster of people who post more than anyone else, this group of "insiders" at the forum is no more "the CMAA" than anyone else. And the fact that among the group of "regulars" there is a contingent that seems (or is) hostile and unwelcoming should not be considered a reflection on the rest of the constituency 'round these parts.

    Please don't judge the forum as a whole based on the behavior of a few of its more active participans. And don't judge CMAA based on the forum. And don't judge the RotR movement based on CMAA. And don't judge traditional sacred music based on the RotR movement.
    Thanked by 2CHGiffen Gavin
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,431
    What Adam says is true. This forum is only lightly moderated, and each person speaks for him/her self. It is not an ideological platform. Divergences of opinion often occur. The subject of hymns is quite a hot potato. While we probably all use them, many of us move towards propers, and sometimes the rhetoric can seem to be against hymnody all together. I've learned not to take that too seriously, especially when I've seen Jeffrey belting out the hymns.

    But some of the comments there can come across as uncharitable and narrow-minded. So, be prepared! I've been "burned" a number of times. But I do hope that you continue to offer comments and insights there, as will I when so moved.


    What is ironic about this note is that it is virtually identical to emails I and others have sent to RotR-minded folks who comment on the PrayTell forum. Except for Adam, who is not likely to be dogmatic really, everyone I know has been burned. It happens every day. While this thread was continuing, it finally happened to Liam.

    I see these colleagues of mine bravely exposing themselves to an establishment that will only ridicule them in the end. They do so, not to defend themselves, but to try to make a space for dialogue. They enter into it in a conciliatory frame of mind. They truly wish to dialogue. In the end, it becomes quite clear that they are not welcome. This has happened to me many, many times, and for much less momentous reasons than the publication of a new, major hymnal.

    Two wrongs don't make a right, and I have retracted remarks of mine here that, while true, were unkind. Furthermore, I would like to thank Fr. Chepponis for his substantial contributions here and elsewhere, for his musical contributions to the life of the Church, and for his gentlemanly manner. I wish you would come to Colloquium some time and get to know us better. As you probably have experienced, friendships are formed best in person, rather than in the oftentimes misleading world of electronic communication.
    Thanked by 3Adam Wood MHI CHGiffen
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,428
    Except for Adam, who is not likely to be dogmatic really, everyone I know has been burned.


    Well, there is this one poster who keeps raking me over the coals with regards to copyright...

    Which actually brings up a good point.

    Kathy has attacked enthusiastically debated my opinions and philosophy on copyright.
    Noel and MJO, and others, have ridiculed fraternally corrected my opinions about the use of piano in liturgy.
    Just about everyone here (as far as I can tell) thinks I'm a looney liberal respectfully disagrees with me over my opinions regarding inclusive gender language in liturgical texts.

    I subscribe to the Robustness Principle:
    Be liberal in what you accept, and conservative in what you transmit.

    My opinion is that if I have been offended or hurt, that's on me.
    If I have offended or hurt someone else, that's on me too.

    The other thing is I don't feel like people need to agree with me for me to like them. I come here because I like the people- even when they annoy me. (Honestly- all the help and advice and practical/spiritual aide pales next to the real reason I come here: you people get my jokes.)
    Thanked by 4jpal MHI Heath CHGiffen
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,431
    Except for Adam, who is not likely to be dogmatic really, except regarding open-source issues... [edited]


    (I still don't know how to make things purple without an easy button.)
    Thanked by 1Adam Wood
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,431
    Regarding Fr. Chepponis' contributions, long before I knew what a proper was, he was writing proper-style, antiphon-Psalm processional chants. His classic ordination composition Go Up to the Altar of God was published in 1986. To put this into perspective, in 1986, Pope John Paul had only been Pope for 8 years. This was very early on in the recovery of liturgical sensibilities, prophetically and far-sightedly so.
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,674
    We are not all alike and we have different work situations and applications. That's a good thing. And yes, CMAA is very loosely structured, by design, I think.

    My congregation, for example, will tolerate Latin chant Ordinaries during Lent and Advent, but not year-round. They get tired of them and want to sing something else. I seldom use offertory propers, because I have difficulty fitting them in. I don't plan on changing that. I like hymns - again I LIKE HYMNS. For an English speaking congregation with English liturgies, they can work well. Although my parish offers one EF mass per week, it is mostly an OF congregation and the majority of our masses are OFs done well. The EF is not my ideal, and I am not working to make the OF a copy of the EF.

    There is no perfect hymnal on the market. Worship IV is a pretty good multi-purpose hymnal. Does it contain some trash? Yes, and that trash probably appeals to someone, somewhere. Don't like "Gather Us In?" Neither do I, in fact I hate it! Do what I do and don't program it. Choose something else. As the great organist Marie Claire Alain said when an organist told her he could not play Bach on a particular instrument, "Play something else." She went on to say that the integrity of an instrument should be respected. I have been in this business long enough to realize Church music is not all about me and what I like. There's a room full of people in the building, too, as well as a pastor who knows music inside out.
  • kevinfkevinf
    Posts: 1,138
    This thread really interested me as I 1)have had a little more time to read and comment as choir season is over,2) am in the process of looking at hymnals for purchase next year and 3)trying to make sense of the scene as it is offered in the American market. Yes, I read Praytell and every other blog I can when my time allows and I see the biases on both sides of the coin.

    I went to an ecumenical divinity school (yes, there are 6 of those in US) and the dialogue at times was fierce and difficult. Liberals were just as difficult as they made conservative folks out to be. And being Catholic in the group only made it more interesting. But, you learned very quickly that you had to be knowledgeable and firm in your identity if you were going to dialogue. One of the Catholic professors said to me once, "If you are fully who you are, the dialogue will never overcome you."

    I am sorry that people of other stripes come and go on this blog (and any other blog such as PT), but you lay a question out there such as Kathy did and you are going to get strong answers. The question is: are you afraid you might get an answer that will change your mind. On more than one occasion I have been party to either : changing my mind or changing another person's mind.

    And Fr. Krisman, while gracious in his willingness to defend his work on WIV, has a right to speak his ideas and defend them. And to be queried for why the book is what it is. But the discussion is never easy. I am glad he has shown up here and I will encourage him to come back. But I do not think because the discussion got heated is a reason to say, "Okay, behave people...." Yes, think about what you are saying, but do not run away from difficult questions. That is how we learn. By far and away, American Christianity runs away from difficult questions, is attracted by the flashy quick response of televangelism (both Catholic and Protestant) and likes simple, reductionist answers.

    Be gracious, but don't run away from difficulty. Engage it and wrestle it.

    Okay, back to Bonaventure for me.....

    from the bourbon lands
  • MHIMHI
    Posts: 324
    .
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,674
    Not sure that there's anything's available for that ...


    Back to my original point, neither you nor I are the sum of Catholic music. There is much more to it than either of us. Or as I tell my students when they ask the why of something beyond my control, "I didn't make the world!"
    Thanked by 1MHI
  • MHIMHI
    Posts: 324
    .
  • Ted
    Posts: 190
    The Church, like society, is badly divided on fundamental issues as we all know. These blogs can reflect that division passionately at times, especially when discussions are not face to face, but in the form of pure words coming at you onto a screen from somewhere-land. The fundamental presuppositions of the parties are different, so there is really very little to start discussions from that will lead to any fruitful agreement. In this case it is a fundamental disagreement over ecclesiology as someone mentioned, not helped by some of the ambiguities and tensions in the Vatican II documents. On the one hand we are told that Gregorian Chant is to have first place in the liturgy, and then the "buts" follow. Some folks take the first place of Gregorian Chant seriously, while others see the use of Protestant hymns as valid liturgical alternatives. For guidance perhaps we have to look to Rome as has often been the case to see what is done there. But of course others will argue that this is USA etc....

    As for Worship IV, the local rural parish near me that started using it is very disappointed with it, and regrets its purchase. There are not enough traditional Catholic hymns, no Propers including no Gospel Alleluias, no Eucharistic prayers, too many theologically misleading if not questionable hymns, and in too many cases what sounds like computer generated music. The parish was in a hurry to get an all purpose service book and hymnal when the new Missal translation came into effect as their Missalette term was to expire and they did not want to continue with those disposables. They actually did seriously consider the Vatican II hymnal, even though the weight of going with the well established Catholic publishers was strong. What finally did it was the size of the print of the readings which is smaller in the Vatican II hymnal, and Worship III was already being used in other churches in the area without complaints. But times have changed. In hindsight, they would have gotten the St Michael's hymnal, but the new edition was not available at the time, and it is now too late after having spent so much money.

  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,428
    MHI:

    What you just descibed.
    Sacred music and liturgy according to the relevant ritual books and legislation.

    Pick one.
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,674
    I agree, MHI. A council of the Latin church occurred in my early years, and it decided the liturgy needed revisions. Then those revisions were administered by what I have sometime thought of as a bunch of goofs - looking at the actual implementation and its effects. The process was not managed well at all. So, here we are now.

    I can work with Worship IV, because I want it for hymns, psalms, and readings. The pastor wants all that in one book, which is a decision maker. Propers are something I give to the choir and cantors, and the congregation hears them, but doesn't see them. The congregation doesn't need to see them to begin with. The congregation doesn't need copies of the gospel acclamations, either. Those are simple enough that they can sing what they hear.
  • melofluentmelofluent
    Posts: 4,160
    This topic and thread comments has generated an incredible amount of foresight and even more hindsight. Kathy's question, as framed, shook me to my cognitive core, it was magnificent. It should have provoked a number of ecclesial issues in our hearts and minds about Catholic self-identification. It wasn't a "Spruce Goose" question (look it up) as it got off the ground quite well and Ron Krisman was on board.
    And I agree with Adam on principle, none of what then progressed ought to be ascribed to the being and nature of CMAA, but we all know in truth that it will be perceived as such. I'm not bothered by that. And I agree even moreso with Kathy's account of what goes on with RotR's over at the loyal opposition blog, and have the scars to prove it. I'm not bothered by that.
    What I am bothered about is that the debate, such as it was, ended nearly as fast as it began. Fr. Krisman, through the hindsight of the Chepponis email, must've brought his parachute as he bailed out before anyone had any opportunity to assuage (which we should, rather than attack) him otherwise. He apparently believed my comments, obtuse and obfuse as always, were crowding him. And by the time I typed my explanations that was a misconception, I was seeking a way for him to articulate what should constitute a Catholic service book from his rather unique perspective, he was GONE.
    Everyone who is a regular here knows that in philosophy and practice I have to function more like AdamW than Gavin, but we share some visions of how we can cooperatively work with the institutional publishers through technology and persuasion to have them help move the engine of worship closer to the PARADIGM. And this opportunity was squandered. And frankly, that breaks my heart.
  • francisfrancis
    Posts: 9,931
    melo

    I don't agree that this opp was squandered. It is only that if the participants refuse to continue the conversation. Good and great things do not come easy whether it's wine, music or anything else worth sweating over. Those who walk away from the subject at hand are either afraid to face the music or are just out to drink the wine to feel good. There are great minds here and I suspect all eyes are still glued to this thread. I challenge us all to rise above our ruffled feathers and get on with the responsibility of actually creating a Catholic Pew Resource that works. Adam and Jeff have begun to forge that frontier, but we have a lot still to be accomplished. Let's figure this out!

    This is not just an interest or a hobby for me. I, personally, am committed to finding a good solution.

    BTW... The solution must be grounded in the sound knowledge (historical foundations, traditions and philosophy) of authentic sacred music.
    Thanked by 2melofluent CHGiffen
  • Liam
    Posts: 4,605
    This was not a good conversation about the topic. It was a poor conversation about the topic. (And, lest one mistake me as overly irenic in my conversational goals, that's not what I am saying.) A conversation of this sort requires a great deal more prep at that meta level, and ideally at the authentic relationship level, in order to become a fruitful one (which is one element of being a good conversation).
    Thanked by 1Gavin
  • rich_enough
    Posts: 931
    At the risk of beating a dead horse - it was not just a matter of one of the participants "refus[ing] to continue the conversation" because he's "afraid to face the music." In any discussion there's bound to be red herrings, unfair comments, the regular flotsam and jetsam of fallen human nature. I would hope that any participant in an online discussion can handle this. But when I saw a personal comment that went beyond the issues at hand I found it hard to blame one of the participants from leaving.

    There is a very important issue at stake here - why is the flagship resource of one of the major Catholic music publishers almost completely devoted to hymns? Is this what Vatican II envisioned? Is this what the Roman Missal lays down as normative? Is this what the tradition and sensibility of the Church demands? To me this is the fundamental issue. The fact that so many of the hymns are written by non-Catholics (shorthand, as I take it, for saying that they are off-center in terms of a full Catholic understanding of the liturgy) is only a symptom of the underlying problem.
    Thanked by 1MarkThompson
  • Kathy wrote:
    I would like to thank Fr. Chepponis for his substantial contributions here and elsewhere, for his musical contributions to the life of the Church, and for his gentlemanly manner.
    Kathy also wrote:
    Regarding Fr. Chepponis' contributions, long before I knew what a proper was, he was writing proper-style, antiphon-Psalm processional chants. His classic ordination composition Go Up to the Altar of God was published in 1986. To put this into perspective, in 1986, Pope John Paul had only been Pope for 8 years. This was very early on in the recovery of liturgical sensibilities, prophetically and far-sightedly so.

    Kathy, thank you so much for these nice comments. I appreciate your kindness.

    "Go Up to the Altar of God" will always have special meaning for me, as the first time I actually heard it sung was as I processed up the aisle at our cathedral when I was ordained a priest on May 11, 1985!

    Yes, it is sort of a proper-style piece. But the first time I actually composed some "real" propers was about a year ago. One of the editors at MorningStar Music asked me to write a set of "Entrance Antiphons for the Advent Season." The task was to use the antiphons from the Roman Missal, and make them accessible to the congregation. It was quite a challenge, as a few of the texts are somewhat lengthy. So, I experimented with what I think might be a new model: dividing the antiphon into sections, and having the assembly simply repeat after the cantor. Although repeating the text may have its limitations, it does provide a way for the assembly to sing the proper text without even having any printed material in their hands, as they simply repeat after the cantor. There are other options for the antiphons as well. A PDF and sound clip can be found here:

    www.morningstarmusic.com/viewitem.cfm/item_id/80-009

    I hesitate to post this here, as I don't want to use this forum as a place to promote my own music. That is not my intent. Rather, I'd be interested in hearing from folks if the model I used is workable or not.

    Any thoughts? Thanks.
  • Ben YankeBen Yanke
    Posts: 3,115
    I think those introits are quite nice. It's an interesting new model that I haven't seen used with propers before, but could be quite useful in some situations where a more typical arrangement, such as SEP or GR, might not work as well.
  • Ben YankeBen Yanke
    Posts: 3,115
    Father, I've added these to my extensive listing of propers resources on my website.

    If you have any others you'd like to add (composed by you, or others), feel free to send me a private message, email me through the site, or post them here, and I'd be happy to add them.
  • francisfrancis
    Posts: 9,931
    Liam wrote


    Posts: 793
    This was not a good conversation about the topic. It was a poor conversation about the topic. (And, lest one mistake me as overly irenic in my conversational goals, that's not what I am saying.) A conversation of this sort requires a great deal more prep at that meta level, and ideally at the authentic relationship level, in order to become a fruitful one (which is one element of being a good conversation).


    Liam

    We are all certainly aware of the tensions between these two philosophies, and yes, this may have been a poor way to start, but we must move beyond the petty scuffles and get down to answering the difficult questions of what comprises an excellent CATHOLIC pew resource. In my mind there is SO much good content (old and new) it is difficult to make something that is comprehensive and that doesn't require a Missal stand, is easy to read and logical in it's approach to the liturgical year. It's a tall order, and it goes way beyond 600 hymns and 100 Responsorial psalms.
  • Liam
    Posts: 4,605
    I would strongly suggest that Internet discussion boards and blogs are a poor medium for such a task. They more typically serve to rally the like-minded, or demonstrate a clash of shibboleths, unless people strain heroically to take and maintain inventory of their cognitive-spiritual blindspots; more typically, erstwhile discussions between conflicting views tend instead to indulge such blindspots.
    Thanked by 1Gavin
  • It seems to me that if one doesn't want to comment on a thread, then one doesn't have to.
    I'd much rather discuss the topic at hand and its connecting points than have to sift through all the commenting about...
    commenting.
  • ronkrisman
    Posts: 1,367
    Big misunderstanding! So sorry that some of you spent time bemoaning my “departure” from the discussion, when other weekend duties pulled me away from the discussion.

    Just as I must have read Kathy’s post incorrectly on Saturday afternoon and thought that she was lobbing ad hominem’s my way, so some of you must have misread my subsequent comment, “Goodbye, everyone. I have a number of things I need to do in the next day or two. Hope to pick up on the discussion sometime on Monday.”

    In particular I want Charles Melofluent to know that I am extremely challenged when it comes to pop culture and pop music, in particular. So when I ask, “Huh,” I’m sincere and not trying to put you down.

    I’d like to address a few things in Kathy’s very first comments, when I have the time.

    Again, sorry for the misunderstanding.
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,428
    Fr. R.K.:

    This crowd has driven off many others in the past, so you can imagine the thought process around here, particularly among those of us (or is it just me) who grow increasingly wearied of the nattering nabobs of negativism.
  • francisfrancis
    Posts: 9,931
    Adam:

    Funny... you aren't driven off! How come!?

    'driven off' proposes that WE are in total control of this particular ether of cyberspace, and we decide who goes and who stays... it is the choice of each individual to stay or leave, to contribute or not... it's a 50/50 proposition as it is everywhere else on the net. Glad We didn't drive you off!
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,428
    Funny... you aren't driven off! How come!?


    I already said- you people get my jokes.

    Glad We didn't drive you off!


    If you can't beat 'em, join 'em.
  • CHGiffenCHGiffen
    Posts: 4,943
    You can fool some of the people all the time, and you can fool all the people some of the time ... but it's that intersection (that are always fooled) you have to watch out for. :)
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,674
    Sometimes I would rather beat them than join them - and I mean severely, too. LOL.
    Thanked by 1Gavin
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,431
    Francis is right, we don't drive people off. There's this one fellow, shows up now and again, usually his first or second comment is a complaint, then he keeps complaining, actually I'm not sure he has ever done anything except complain, and then he says he's had enough and leaves. And then forum members get all introspective and think about mending our manners, which is kind of sweet, if you think about it.

    Fr. Chepponis,

    Thank you for the link to your propers. I like them a lot, and I'm glad to hear that you're working on things like this!

    I wonder if you've seen my hymn tune propers around. I basically rearrange the entrance antiphon into Long Meter, rhymed, so it can be sung by congregations who are at a very basic level of musicianship, including daily Mass congregations and congregations in smaller churches. CH Giffen has written some smashingly good settings to them, based on Anglican chant.

    Others have set them too, including Clark Kimberling, who included a couple in a larger project. pis settings were supposed to be published by GIA, though I haven't heard about that project in some time. They're probably in a future catalog or something. You know how things are delayed sometimes. Not your problem--just thought I'd mention it. Certainly it would be the height of paranoia to wonder for a moment whether my associations with the Reform of the Reform might be responsible for scuttling a project. So I just figure the whole thing is on a back burner someplace.

    Regarding settings, although I'm an experienced music director, I'm actually more of a words girl. Hymns a specialty. I haven't honestly played anything out of Worship IV. I'm not a composer myself and there are details I can't see easily. The details of hymn texts, those are readily apparent to my eyes. The points I have made in previous comments here and in other threads, are about the texts of hymns and the process of selecting them, such as is knowable.

    To my knowledge, I haven't said anything that is incorrect, although I could sometimes be more polite and I'm always happy to learn.

    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • ronkrisman
    Posts: 1,367
    Kathy’s “set-up” for this discussion, in which she states that “the following things also seem true about the adoption of texts into this hymnal (Worship IV)” makes an initial statement about something which “seems true” to her, but which is not, followed by two more statements which seem true to her (and to me too) which provoke in me the response, “So what?” She writes that

    1) The sources for revisions to texts are earlier editions of Worship, and Lutheran and Episcopal hymnals.


    My actual words, under First Use of “Fertilizing” in a Hymn?, are: “Our committee compared original hymn texts (as far as we were able to determine), with various edited and altered versions in Worship II, Worship III and other hymnals (most often Lutheran and Episcopal ones).” Kathy’s version turns my list into a taxative one; it is not.

    2) Office hymns were not considered models of what the hymnal should be striving for.


    So what? I do not know why any hymnal/service book intended primarily for use at Eucharist should be geared toward the Liturgy of the Hours. Several other contributors have already stated this better than I. Why don’t we ask that ICEL, in its upcoming revision of the Liturgy of the Hours, restore many or most of the Latin breviary hymns, present them with music, and with marvelous new English translations?

    3) New texts for hymns of the day were largely the work of Protestant hymn writers, generally active in the liberal Protestant Hymn Society of the United States and Canada.


    So what? What’s really important is that every one of these hymn texts is doctrinally sound for Catholics and that they are appropriate for the Church’s liturgy. What’s really important is that each of these hymn writers is recognized throughout the English-speaking world as being an accomplished one. Hymnal editors of English-language Catholic and non-Catholic hymnals alike very much know the names and the texts of Troeger, Duck, Stuempfle, Bell, Pratt Green, Dunstan, and Daw. And more and more, they are getting to know those of Tice, Bringle, and Dufner, the latter of which I had the great privilege of serving as editor and persistent devil’s advocate during the preparation of her hymn collection published in 2011, And Every Breath a Song.

    I’ve previously addressed Kathy's putting my name on the list of hymn writers represented in Worship IV. I do not consider myself a hymn writer. Also Marty Haugen has no hymn text included in Worship IV’s listing of “Hymns for the Church Year.” However, he does have a great tune: SHANTI
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,431
    Fr. Krisman's initial point above is fair. I did not mean to misunderstand but it seems I did. Although I had to look up the word "taxative."

    For the rest, let me ask again:

    1. If the model for a Catholic hymnal for Mass is not the Liber Hymnarius, and it's not the Graduale Romanum, why not?

    2. Mightn't there be a richer "thinking with the Church" among those who receive the Blessed Sacrament?

    3. Are the Scriptures, the Sacraments, Jesus Christ, the Church, and other significant realities testified to by hymns seen in the same way by Catholics and other Christians?

    4. Are hymns a significant aspect of worship? If so, the question isn't a low-bar, "there is no heresy in them." It's a high-bar, "they are in conformity with the liturgical texts, promote a liturgical and mystical ethos, within an atmosphere of visible as well as invisible communion, with the full breadth of the perennial Catholic apostolic teaching."
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,428
    Kathy's points 1 and 4 seem to call into question the very existence of Catholic hymnals.
    Is that your intention?

    If so, then your issue is not with Worship IV (or III, II, or I) but with (essentially) all hymnals everywhere.

    If not, what do you imagine a hymnal ought to look like? A metrical Graduale?
    Thanked by 1Gavin
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,428
    That is to say:
    If Worship, or Gather, or any of the other hymnals that exist-
    If they were essentially the same but with BETTER HYMNS, full and rich expressions of orthodox theology.
    And all the tunes were better- no jaunty folks songs, but only dignified traditional melodies...

    But, the essential organizing concept of the hymnal remained the same (by which I mean: a collection of loosely organized arbitrary texts which may be selected at the discretion of local musicians for inclusion into a liturgical celebration....)

    Would that do it for you? Or is there something else you are getting at?
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,431
    Adam, not at all sure why you think any of those things. They do not follow at all from what I wrote. (responding to your first comment just above)

  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,428
    I hope my second comment sheds some light on your confusion.
    Does it?

    I'm not saying I therefore disagree with your points (uncomfortable implications are not an argument against truth)- I'm just wondering what you imagine a Catholic hymnal (that isn't some version of a Gradual) would look like, and how it would be different than what exists today, other than a simple improvement of the contents.
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,431
    Responding to your second comment,

    Basically, yes. Then it would be what I would consider a Catholic hymnal. Not a missal, obviously, but a Catholic hymnal, expressing and promoting, richly, the Catholic faith.

    A new hymnal could be The New Evangelization. Imagine!

    I don't really blame people who haven't done this. We live in confusing times. But nor do I think the People of God should be saddled with lame-o texts.
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,431
    Resonding to your third comment,

    TYPE SLOWER (read like it's in purple)
    Thanked by 1Adam Wood
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,428
    So you aren't taking general issue with the concept or organizational paradigm of hymnals such as Worship IV (et al), but specifically with the contents?
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,431
    Yes.
    Thanked by 1Adam Wood
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,428
    (That sounded like an prosecutorial leading question.... like my next post will be "Ah HA!"
    Not my intention- I just wanted to make sure I understood you, because apparently I didn't before.)
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,428
    Yes.


    I get it now....

    You want a hymnal with GOOD hymns in it.
    I don't think that's a thing.
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,428
    I was right. Not a thing.

    http://isitathing.com/a-good-hymnal
    Thanked by 2Kathy Gavin
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,431
    lol. "So you admit you were there on the night in question!!"

    No, I mean, I'm one of the awkward hymn people in the CMAA. I'm all about hymns. We all use them, we all love singing them, but with our propers-focus, we don't really talk about them much. I talk about them all the time, and would love to do so more.
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,431
    TYPE SLOWER
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,428
    I'm a fan of hymns, myself.

    In fact- even in chant-land, I'm all about hymns. I could take or leave melismatic graduals and all that (don't tell anyone), but I LOVE Gregorian hymns.
    Thanked by 1Kathy
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,428
    TYPE SLOWER


    No.
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,431
    Adam, sit down in an armchair. Put. The laptop. Down. Open Worship III on one knee, and Worship IV on the other knee. In Worship III you will see a few lame texts. In Worship IV you will see a lot of lame texts. That is not progress. It's a thing.

    I can't make a website that says its a thing, but it's a thing.
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,431
    Is our argument right now ecumenical?