Ah yes, I believe that Mass is by Robert Kreutz.

Jeffrey, I agree with the sense of your post, and further with the point that a sung Mass with propers and ordinary is ideal and would be authentic Catholic liturgy.

However, I submit respectfully, I take offense that you could construe one's choice--and appreciation, by extension--of this hymnal as "quite pathetic." For the record, I do not consider it a "conservative" hymnal; rather, it was very liberal as it completely discarded Latin. I, however, am not liturgically or musically liberal, and I did not say that I accepted the book's contents wholesale. I said I liked select pieces. "Quite pathetic" is a brush stroke that is too broad and, frankly, dismissive.

And I'll add that many of the ecumenical hymns ARE the hymns of the hours - how many of us sang "Hark a Thrilling Voice is Sounding" during Advent? Unless we have any Episcopalians here, unfortunately no one. Yet this is an office hymn for Advent. Even "At the Lamb's High Feast" is used infrequently in Catholicism. That is a huge problem.

Well, my judgment is against anyone who like People's Mass book; I would trade it in for what I have to use. I'm just saying that it is an indication of the decline that we are inclined to think that it is a good hymnal. So there is no reason for taking offense.

I find most hymnals limiting in one way or another... I'd rather have a "file/folder" type of "hymnal", where hymns and Mass Ordinaries (etc!) could be added to it easily.

I agree with Mr. Tucker's sentiments insofar as I would prefer to see the Mass Propers sung instead of hymns, but I still see a place for hymns (and I think Pius XII's document on sacred music sees a place for them too) - I just think that we need more authentically "liturgical" hymns. It would be nice, for instance, to see hymn book compilers delving into the riches of the different liturgies of the Church (not just the Roman tradition) to find appropriate seasonal hymns.

When I was a seminarian in the 1960's, I was deeply nurtured by the best texts, tunes, and accompaniments in the People’s Mass Book: Hendrik Andrissen, Richard Cross, Claude Goudimel, Oswald Jaeggi, Marinus de Jong, Jan Kern, William Koninkx, Marius Monnikendam Flor Peeters, Robert J. Schaffer, Stephen Somerville, Guido de Sutter, Han van Koert, and Chrysogonus Waddell.

A few years ago I was asked to evaluate the PMB for the new edition. I submitted the attached assessment, if anyone cares to read it.

Count me as well, as one who would not like to see the complete elimination of hymnody from the Mass.
I don't see why there isn't a place for what I now know is correctly called a "low Mass."
Thank you, Dr Ford, I'll enjoy reading that when my computer gets over the snit it's in about pdfs.... (yes, yes, I overworked it over Christmas, but its needs Ordinary time, in needs to get back in harness just as we do.)
I think my parish had white paperbacks when I was growing up, would that have been the PMB?
There is hardly a hymnal no matter how lousy (Glory and Praise, anyone?) that doesn't have one or two works of some value.
"I'd rather have a 'file/folder' type of 'hymnal', where hymns and Mass Ordinaries (etc!) could be added to it easily."
I heartily concur, I have a "psalter", hymnal, etc. each in 3 ring binder and sheet protectors, (although I'm loathe to admit it in the presence of one of the posters here who refers to that sort of arrangement as a "trailer park hymnal."
I believe as a follow up to the Mundelein (sp?) Psalter a Mundelein Hymnal of the Hours is in the work, which would have the best translations of all the Office Hymns.
A British hymnal, "The New English Hymnal" has quite a number (certainly more than any of the Big Three's mass market hymnals.)

Save the Liturgy, Save the World!

Leland, it's really not polemics . . . you may not be familiar with the magisterial (that is, authoritative) Vatican documents that propose very specific guidelines for the music to be used during the liturgy. The church's official music is indeed Gregorian chant, from the Roman Gradual. Hymns are permitted but hardly the ideal.

Mary

You're right, Mary, I am not particularly well informed about the details of the guidelines, but I am sure they neither deny the Catholicism of St. Ambrose nor abrogate St. Paul's admonition to sing hymns; if they do, then they impoverish rather than enrich the church. I am not sure that Gregorian chant and hymns are mutually exclusive, either. I believe that Gregory himself is credited with a hymn or two (or at least they're traditionally ascribed to him). Of course as a Baptist (hovering somewhere over the angelic minefield between heresy and separated siblinghood ;-) ) I am not any sort of authority on this stuff, so I'll happily withdraw my use of the term "polemically motivated". Still, what I'm saying about the catholicness and scripturalness of hymns, I stand by that. ;-)

Leland

Just as I interject when people say "Latin Mass" when they mean "Extraordinary form of the Latin Rite" or "modern chant notation" when they mean "five-line stemless (or stemmed) notation," I have to urge people to break the habit (which unfortunately has been reinforced by so many publications and workshops) of saying "liturgy" when what then mean is "Mass." Hymns are part of the Church's official liturgy. However, they are generally not (except for Palm Sunday, Holy Thursday, Good Friday, and probably a few others I'm forgetting) among the texts prescribed for the Mass.

We Byzantine Catholics have the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom and we don't do mass. Mass is the Latin Church equivalent, but it developed in Rome rather than Constantinople. We also have hymns in the eastern churches, both Catholic and Orthodox. Ours typically are communion hymns, or carols appropriate for the seasons. Yes, I would agree that chant needs to be restored in the west, but hymns belong there, too. My biggest fear has been that the chant purists are going to push so far in that direction, that it will cause a backlash among the people against chant. That could kill the chances for a genuine restoration of chant to its proper, but not exclusive, place in the mass. It isn't the only music allowed for mass.

We should ask ourselves: with all this emphasis on chant and polyphony, what are we doing to foster hymnody? The descriptions of the Church from the 1st century onward is as a singing Church. Even in the 16th century, Luther said that after morning prayer a Christian should go to work singing a hymn or a psalm. Today this is cause for many to roll their eyes, and yet I walked down the street today with some young fellow walking along listening to an iPod shouting out some rap garbage words. I'm not saying we should be running around yelling out Christus Vincit everywhere. Specifically I recall a description of the protest against an "anti-Catholic" play at some college. People gathered, prayed, and SANG HYMNS! Now I find the idea of protesting a play ridiculous, but how wonderful that the hymns served as encouragement and a show of faith!!

So you may have your chant right with the ictus properly placed and sounding like "angel's footsteps". But if your congregation is silent for your 2 verses of "To Jesus Christ our Sovereign King" after Mass, I say you have a LOT of work to do to promote good musical culture in Catholicism!

Yeah, I think we are missing the delineation between music and words here. Those of us who are promoting chant do so for two really big reasons. First, it is the highest form of musical prayer according to our Church and second, it is linked to the words of the propers of the Mass. A "hymn" is a liturgical item as incantu so ably reminded us. It belongs liturgically in certain places -- mostly the Divine Office. I don't get the desire to keep replacing propers texts with, especially non-liturgical hymns. If one wishes to promote a closing hymn or the use of one during communion after the antiphon is finished, I'm OK with that, but we already have that. If you want better hymns, program them.