Fr. Krisman,

Your overall impression of "incoherence" certainly surprises me, as the idea for introducing this text here came from your exultation in a hymn that takes the form of a "litany" or "catalog aria." That is what this text is meant to be, a kind of joyous list. I am not sure you understand that style in a WIV text but not in one of mine. Interesting.

I will answer each of your criticisms in turn, and would appreciate your response. This is #1.

2. The sanctification of the human race comes up in line 3 of verse 2 and is the entire theme of verses 3 and 5.
It is not a randomly placed line. The Exultet itself follows this form. Why does this holy building shake with joy? Why is it truly right to acclaim the Eternal Father and His only Son? Because of our redemption.

Ah, but there is a great difference in the two texts. The Dufner text is litanic, mentioning a list of things but not attempting to develop any single one of them into a separate stanza. And the readings and ritual actions of the Easter vigil provide the framework for the development of images in Sr. Delores' hymn.

I don't view my participation in this discussion of your text as a "debate" where one of us is trying to score points in front of an audience of onlookers who themselves are not participants.

If we are the only participants, let's carry on the conversation off line, shall we? You know how to contact me.

I don't understand. Is there some problem with discussing things in public?

My favorite line: "By crucifixion and by death we rise"

Haha, that is my least favorite line. It sounds clunky to me.

About vain and slain, true.

I was going to say that SINE NOMINE introduces caesuras into the middle of my words, but actually the caesuras are there with ENGELBERG, just less noticeably so.

Suggestion:
add a second "Alleluia" and sing it to SINE NOMINE

This suggestion does not work for me. ENGLEBERG and SINE NOMINE are not always interchangeable. The first musical phrase of SINE NOMINE, with a dotted half note on the fourth syllable, seems to call more for a text with this meter: 4 6 10 10 with alleluias. How's text does have 2 words which do not conclude on the dotted half note (vs. 3 soldiers; vs. 4 communion). But in Kathy's text the fourth syllable in each stanza does not conclude the word it is part of.

If an organist played, or a congregation sang, SINE NOMINE as if the first four syllables and the six that follow are two separate lines, I'm pretty sure I'd have to find another parish. In fact, if I had to guess, I'd say this is probably the number one reason for the decline in attendance at Mainline Protestant congregations.

Adam,

I don't think you are understanding my point. It has nothing to do with singing the four syllables and the six syllables any differently.

With Kathy's text sung to SINE NOMINE the first stanza in particular is not pleasing:

Let East-er al---------- le-lu-ias.... (I'm exaggerating the length that "al-" is held, but that's the problem area.)

Kathy,

Have you considered using your text (adding two more ending "Alleluias") to the tune FREDERICKTOWN? I was introduced to this fine tune during our Worship IV committee meetings, and find it hauntingly beautiful. The tune is in Worship IV at #971, and would take care of the caesura issue. Also, the rising melody of the first part of the second phrase of this tune would serve your text quite well.

FREDERICKTOWN was also the tune used for the text "When In Our Music, God Is Glorified" in the 1978 Lutheran Book of Worship. In the 2006 hymnal Evangelical Lutheran Worship, "When In Our Music" is printed twice, once with ENGELBERG and once with FREDERICKTOWN.

Speaking of tunes of this meter (10 10 10 with alleluias/refrain)... there was a wonderful article in the July 1993 journal, The Hymn (published by the Hymn Society) written by Austin Lovelace, entitled "Which Is the Right Tune?" Austin discusses FIVE different possible tunes for the text "When In Our Music," commenting on how the five tunes do or do not serve the text. Very interesting reading!

Maybe it's because I like SINE NOMINE at c. ♩ = 144

Well, Kathy and I do agree!

Who woudda thunk?

Haha.

One of the reasons we agree, I think, is because we're at the same zoom level. Up till now, I think, one of us has been talking about details whenever the other has been talking about the big picture. Apples and oranges.

NOTHING in church should be at 144. Now, if you want to take the the half note at 72....

Or the whole at 36.....

My metronome is not accurate down at 36. Best to keep it at least at 72, but 144 would add a bit of percussion.

Chicken pot pie

You take the bird and put it in the pan
just let it simmer, leave the lid on, man,
and when it's cooked, remove and let it stand
for about a quarter hour!

Just take the chicken, thaw it out and then
Be sure to rinse (you don't know where it's been)
And chop the veggies, garlic, and on-yen
Alleluia!

Unroll the dough onto your baking dish
then put the stuff in, anyway you wish
and cook until it's good and golden-ish
Alleluia!

And in the meantime, make the crust for pie
prebake it at three hundred sev'nty-five
when golden brown remove and set it by
till the filling's ready!

unsurprisingly, yours is way better.
But you did cheat: "pie" and "five"; "pan" and "stand"

Maybe I should get over my rhyme issue...

Re: "now"

We both used the word "just" as a placeholder in verse 1

We both used the word "just" as a placeholder in verse 1

well, when I submit it for publication in the next edition of Hymns, Psalms and Culinary Songs, I'll spend a little more time on it.

duffel, muffle, and ruffle

Hymns, Psalms and Culinary Songs,

This is what biblical scholars call a "redaction."

But cooks call it a "reduction."

Fr. Chepponis, I'd like to read the article too.

A few thoughts about this hymn (the real one, not the chicken pot pie alt. text). Kathy, you may chalk any points of approval up to your talent, and any any disagreement up to sexism.

First, what did I like?

1. The rhymes are great and do not seem forced. "Again" is the clear exception; I assumed you included it to make your hymn sound like it was written in the 1880s, but maybe this was just an error. In particular, you do not rely on any unnatural inversions to jimmy a rhyming word into final position in a line.

2. I liked the reference to resurrexit sicut dixit. I also appreciated the apparent reference in the final line of v. 4 to Rev. 5:12; I think this could be improved by replacing "praise" with one of the things actually mentioned in that verse. Perhaps not easy to do, meter-wise.

3. And I liked the notion in the final line of the hymn of "a living sacrifice of praise." Of course, the concept of sacrifice is implicit in many of the other references in the text, but it might be nice to see one other concrete reference to "sacrifice" to have something to connect this last line back to.

4. All in all, it is a solid, traditional-sounding hymn. It contains nothing trite, frivolous, or extraneous, which is in itself a great victory.


What didn't I like so much?

1. Even before reading Fr. Krisman's comment, I thought, "This is out of order," and I came up with the exact same suggested ordering of stanzas: 1, 4, 2, 3, 5. In particular, the reference to "the stone and soldiers" seems to come much too late. And I have to disagree that there is anything litanic in the slightest about this hymn text. I happen to find the text pretty coherent, but even if it were incoherent, a mere series of unconnected references does not a litany make.

2. "That we might follow where our Master led." A sentence fragment.

3. "The path of glory": I think that for many literate people this will be hard to read without mentally supplying as the rest of the line, "lead[s] but to the grave." Kind of the opposite of what you had in mind. A change as simple as "path to glory" would fix the problem, and indicate as well that "glory" is the destination.

4. In v. 4, ll. 2-3, I do not care for the double usage of "once." This is particularly so as I read their meanings differently: the "once" in "once risen" as meaning "already, before," and the "once" in "once slain" as meaning "one time only." If I were you, I would find a way to eliminate the first instance.

5. "Come quickly, Jesus": this phrase seems very out of place -- it sounds like it's from an Advent hymn. I know, I know; you are talking about the Second Coming. That doesn't change the fact that this really sounds like it's from an Advent hymn.

Just remember we love our old California hippy!

Thanks, Mark.

For me, persistent dismissiveness of the only two women on the blog with whom I've ever noticed you interact, and never of men, seemed sexist. Repeatedly, I would make a point which, even if you didn't agree with it, was thoughtful and worthy of respect. And you just smacked them down. So whatever that was, I hope it doesn't happen again.

But water over the dam, unless you want to redress, which is understandable.

***

Thanks for your very kind words.

About the problems:
1, 4 and 5. I realize that this is the odd duck in the herd. There are ways in which it's the weakest of the verses--the lame (but commonly accepted, I think) rhyme, the two onces. But, there are ways in which it's the strongest verse. Line 1 has the only real turn of an image in the hymn (the stone keeping watch), and a reference to Wesley that I think is clear even if I didn't keep explaining it.

It plays with time:
line 1: we see the empty tomb of the Gospels
line 2: we hear the apostolic preaching (Romans 6:9)
line 3: the voices of the redeemed sing their praises to the Lamb (Rev 5:12). Which leads right into the first line of verse 5, which is also from Revelation, the voice of the Church in the second to last verse of the whole Bible.


2. The previous line ought to end with a comma. My bad.

3. Seriously? I mean, I was aware of this poem, but it's not something I've memorized. Have a lot of people? In any case, the quote would be "paths of glory." Is this really in a lot of people's minds? (Show of hands?) If I thought it were super necessary, "path to glory" would be okay as a substitute, but you lose something important. The path of glory is itself glorious. Glory isn't a destination, it's a road. Already it shines, see?

Something that is probably obvious but which I might as well state is the strong sense of connection between the resurrection and the eschaton. It seems to me that what Timothy T'ingfang Lew calls "The final consummation/ the glory of all things" is present, in seed form, in the resurrection. We all have to buy into it to be part of it, but that heavenly song of the redeemed is already a given fact. Just because it hasn't happened in fullness yet, according to our point of view in time, doesn't make it any less present or real.