Confirmation Music
  • jonmclear
    Posts: 15
    Hi all,
    I think I'll just leave this here.
    https://www.rockforddiocese.org/pdfs/odw/Confirmation-Hymns-2014.pdf

    What are your go-to motets/anthems/etc for Confirmation. I have a small group of talented singers.

    Thanks!
    Jon
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,357
    TEXTOS DEL MISAL ROMANO QUE
    DEBEN SER RESPETADOS SIEMPRE


    I love that this only had to be said in Spanish.
  • donr
    Posts: 949
    We are going to do Veni Creator Spiritus by Asola this year. Alternating verses with the chant.
  • We're doing Veni Creator (chant), Veni Sancte Spiritus (chant), and "Holy Spirit, Lord Divine" (Worship Hymnal)- since the bishop decided to confirm the entire deanery at our parish this year...
  • rogue63
    Posts: 410
    Well, um, we sing my own settings of Veni Creator, St. Patrick's Breastplate/I Bind Unto Myself, and the Trisagion Prayers from the Divine Liturgy, so I guess I'm anathema in Rockford.
  • Adam,

    In most dioceses, there's no point in saying what at least the Spanish will listen to in the diocese here in question. The only word in the whole thing which most people understand nowadays is "respetados"
  • My Saturday parish is in the Rockford Diocese. It's a bilingual parish, and of all the stuff we did last year (in May 2014, I think, so before this came out), the only hymn we did that is on that list is "I Am the Bread of Life/Yo Soy el Pan de Vida." The pastor selected all the hymns. (I did manage to persuade him to let us use the organ and the organ loft instead of the piano downstairs.)

    The one thing that confuses me a little bit (and I'm not fluent in Spanish, though I do play for Spanish Mass) is that there don't appear to be any Holy Spirit-specific songs on the Spanish list. (Please correct me if I'm reading that wrong.)

    Then again, my parish won't have another Confirmation until (probably) next year. So I don't have to worry about this until then.
  • JulieCollJulieColl
    Posts: 2,438
    Our EF Confirmation celebration included these:

    VENI CREATOR SPIRITUS (G. Mattheo Asola) in alternatim with chant
    UBI CARITAS (Maurice Durufle)
    TIBI NOVAMUS (Pawel Bebenek)
    O SPIRIT OF LIFE, O SPIRIT OF GOD (instrumental)
    CONFIRMA HOC, DEUS (Gregor Aichinger)


  • benedictgal
    Posts: 798
    Why not try the Simple English Propers for Pentecost? These are relatively simple and are posted in the Musica Sacra site, along with the tutorials.
    Thanked by 1SrEleanor
  • CHGiffenCHGiffen
    Posts: 4,413
    Here are some motets that might work well.

    Tallis: If ye love me.
    Titcomb: I will not leave you comfortless.
    Giffen: Non vos relinquam orphanos/I will not leave you comfortless. Score, MP3, and score with keyboard reduction enclosed.

  • matthewjmatthewj
    Posts: 2,655
    Why not try the Simple English Propers for Pentecost? These are relatively simple and are posted in the Musica Sacra site, along with the tutorials.


    I'm not sure why you would do this when one could use the Lumen Christi chants for the Mass for the Conferral of Confirmation posted in a just-as-easy-to-find format here:
    http://www.illuminarepublications.com/scores/ritual-masses/
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 8,349
    Oh! Some of us seem to believe in a classless society.
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,217
    This list is moving in the same forward direction as the 1998 ICEL.

    No, wait, 1992 was even earlier.
  • JulieCollJulieColl
    Posts: 2,438
    I was just listening to the 100 Best Hymns in the car and wondered if this cheerful Wesleyan hymn might work for Confirmation:

    Soldiers of Christ, arise (St. Ethelwald)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Rf93cTsAn4

    1 Soldiers of Christ, arise
    And put your armor on,
    Strong in the strength which God supplies
    Thro' His eternal Son;
    Strong in the Lord of hosts
    And in His mighty power.
    Who in the strength of Jesus trusts
    Is more than conqueror.

    2 Stand then in His great might,
    With all His strength endued.
    And take, to arm you for the fight,
    The panoply of God.
    From strength to strength go on
    And wrestle, fight and pray;
    Tread all the powers of darkness down
    And win the well-fought day.

    3 Leave no unguarded place,
    No weakness of the soul;
    Take ev'ry virtue, ev'ry grace.
    And fortify the whole;
    That having all things done,
    And all your conflicts past,
    Ye may overcome thro' Christ alone
    And stand complete at last.
  • What a difference a tune makes!
    One has always associated this hymn with the dreadful, rather sillily struting pomp of Silver Street (See no. 552 in the 1940).
    How commendably spiritual seems the text when sung to St Ethelwald! This more gracious tune commends the text as kindly and civilised advice, rather than as one of those old Christian war-cries of the 'Onward, Christain Soldiers' ilk.
    And, yes, it would be well-chosen as a hymn at confirmations. Even ordinations!
    Thanked by 1JulieColl
  • JulieCollJulieColl
    Posts: 2,438
    It really is an appealing tune, and yes, you're right, the text is far more pleasing in this setting--- I could easily imagine it as an ordination hymn, though I wonder what poor Mr. Wesley would think if he knew his hymn was being sung at an ordination like this. LOL.

    image
  • Why would one use a Protestant hymn at a Catholic ordination or confirmation?

    Please: those who are simply going to pour scorn on the question should avoid doing so. Protestant theology should be taken seriously on its own terms. If someone accused C.S. Lewis of being Catholic, he would most strenuously have denied it. I have the sense that he would be offended to hear people say that he was a great Catholic writer.

    Since Protestants deny the sacraments of confirmation and ordination, why is it not demeaning to them to use their work at Catholic sacramental celebrations? Furthermore, why would Catholics intentionally use that which was written from an expressly non-Catholic, anti-Catholic world view in Catholic worship?

  • JulieCollJulieColl
    Posts: 2,438
    That is actually a very good question, and I would say that the theological content of hymns by Protestant authors ought to be considered on a case-by-case basis since not all of them are acceptable for use at a Catholic liturgy.

    That being said, I've also come across hymns in Catholic hymnals that I don't think are theologically acceptable from a Catholic point of view, so it might behoove one to be careful with "Catholic" hymns as well. One example of that is "We Rise Again from Ashes" which I heard with my family for the first time this Ash Wednesday. My 22 y/o son showed me the lyrics afterwards and said he thought it was heretical, and I had to agree.

    Regarding the hymn above by Charles Wesley, which is based on Eph. 6, 10-18, I can't see anything in it that's objectionable from a Catholic point of view. In fact, I think it's a very admirable "call to arms" to go out into the world and be prepared spiritually and psychologically to defend the Faith.

    Do you see anything there that might be harmful or deleterious to Catholics? What exactly is harmful or problematic about singing a hymn that was composed by a Protestant? I'm not being snarky, I just want to know what the exact issue is. I don't remember ever reading in any Church document that Catholics can't sing music composed by Protestants, so please enlighten me as to where the problem lies in doing so.
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 8,349
    A fair point: these soldier-of-Christ hymns were probably not written with confirmation in mind.

    If you want to use it, better find out whether the soldier image is used in instructing the candidates. If it's not, the confirmandi will wonder what it has to do with anything.

  • JulieCollJulieColl
    Posts: 2,438
    I guess I just have that Baltimore Catechism soldier imagery indelibly imprinted, esp. after teaching six kids the same question every year:

    What is the character of Confirmation?

    The character of Confirmation is a spiritual and indelible sign which marks the Christian as a soldier in the army of Christ.
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 8,349
    Of course that's a long-standing theme. It's used in the Catechism of the Council of Trent, though it's not in the canons of the Council of Trent. Maybe it was part of the "spirit of the Council of Trent". :-)

    The Catechism of Pope St. John Paul II doesn't use that image, but speaks of the same effects of confirmation:

    III. The Effects of Confirmation

    1302 It is evident from its celebration that the effect of the sacrament of Confirmation is the full outpouring of the Holy Spirit as once granted to the apostles on the day of Pentecost.

    1303 From this fact, Confirmation brings an increase and deepening of baptismal grace:
    - it roots us more deeply in the divine filiation which makes us cry, "Abba! Father!";
    - it unites us more firmly to Christ;
    - it increases the gifts of the Holy Spirit in us;
    - it renders our bond with the Church more perfect;
    - it gives us a special strength of the Holy Spirit to spread and defend the faith by word and action as true witnesses of Christ, to confess the name of Christ boldly, and never to be ashamed of the Cross:

    Recall then that you have received the spiritual seal, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of right judgment and courage, the spirit of knowledge and reverence, the spirit of holy fear in God's presence. Guard what you have received. God the Father has marked you with his sign; Christ the Lord has confirmed you and has placed his pledge, the Spirit, in your hearts.

    1304 Like Baptism which it completes, Confirmation is given only once, for it too imprints on the soul an indelible spiritual mark, the "character," which is the sign that Jesus Christ has marked a Christian with the seal of his Spirit by clothing him with power from on high so that he may be his witness.

    1305 This "character" perfects the common priesthood of the faithful, received in Baptism, and "the confirmed person receives the power to profess faith in Christ publicly and as it were officially (quasi ex officio)."
  • My sense, as always, is, is there any falsehood in it, does it express the truth, is it worthy literature, is the tune worthy music? If the answers are yes, then it is, sui generis, Catholic. Whatever is true is therefore Catholic.

    It may not sound like it, but I do respect Chris' position, at least the Catholic zeal from which it arises. However, I also believe that this view (and Chris is far from alone in holding it) is essentially myopic and denies the fact that the Holy Spirit does, in fact, quite obviously inspire both beauty and truth outside the Catholic camp, in other Christian ecclesial bodies. We should rejoice in this and not be afraid to avail ourselves of something true and beautiful just because a Protestant wrote it, or crafted it. Julie is right: everything, whether written by a Catholic (maybe even especially if by a Catholic these days) or by a Protestant, should be judged on its own merits. If, thanks to Donatus, we can have decided long ago that an unworthy priest can perfom, ex opere operato, a valid sacrament, then we can certainly sing a beautifully crafted hymn which beautifully expresses what is true, no matter who wrote it, because it is obviously the work of the Holy Ghost, who 'goeth whithersoever he will', working in such a person.

    We have this discussion over and over from time to time. Truth, from any source, is truth, and, thus, Catholic. I am Catholic precisely because I received the Catholic faith from my Anglican heritage and from many devout Anglican priests. I am grateful for that heritage, which is alive, well, and in even fuller bloom in the Ordinariate of the Chair of St Peter.
    Thanked by 2JulieColl CHGiffen
  • It occurs to me as an afterthought that we, if we follow the logic of Chris, et al., should as well be offended at Protestants who operate soup kitchens, who feed the poor, and do untold good works as commended by our Lord, and hold that the poor are not actually being fed, and that these good works are null and void because they are performed by Protestants. Sadly, I have actually heard 'Catholics' hold such perverse views. The logic is the same as that being applied by some of our esteemed colleagues in objection to Protestant hymnody that is Catholic truth.

    (In fact, if I had a choice between singing a certain maudlin and syruppy 'Catholic' eucharistic hymn and Schmucke dich, I would take Schmucke dich. Further, on some days (not all, but some rare ones) I might even choose Schmucke dich over Adoro te. The mystical imagery and spiritual affect of each is unarguably orthodox, essentially Catholic. I would not want to be deprived of either one.)
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • Adam, where did you find that precious rubric, "The text of the Roman MIssal ought always to be respected"?

    In case anyone is wondering, they are:

    58.
    INTRODUCTORY RITES

    Ezekiel 36:25–26
    I will pour clean water on you and I will give you a new heart, a new spirit within you, says the Lord.

    COMMUNION RITE

    See Hebrews 6:4
    All you who have been enlightened, who have experienced the gift of heaven and who have received your share of the Holy Spirit: rejoice in the Lord.

    59.
    INTRODUCTORY RITES

    See Romans 5:5; 8:11
    The love of God has been poured into our hearts by his Spirit living in us.

    COMMUNION RITE
    Psalm 34:6, 9
    Look up at him with gladness and smile; taste and see the goodness of the Lord.
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 8,349
    Adam got that Spanish phrase from a document from the Rockford diocese (linked above), about music for confirmations. It lists several "texts of the Roman Missal which must always be respected", the Kyrie, Gloria, Holy, Our Father, Lamb of God.
  • ah
  • Julie, Jackson Osborn,

    Thank you, first of all, for taking the question seriously.

    A priest friend of mine once taught his students, following his own seminary education: "Text, without context, is pretext". Consider, therefore the following sequences, from Scripture:

    Cain killed his brother Abel...... Go thou and do likewise.

    And Noah took to himself a wife.....pitched inside and out.

    In the beginning, God created... a woman .... in adultery.

    Each one of these snippets is actually in Holy Writ.

    In case the connection isn't clear to the question I posed and your responses, the context of creation matters, but also the context in which something is used, when it is being put to use for the worship of God.

    When Pope Pius X reformed the use of Sacred Music, he noted several important principles. One of these was that music (and texts, and instruments) whose principle proper context was secular, operatic, etc... could not be included in the public worship of the Church. For this reason, the music of Giuseppe Verdi was excluded. His Holiness didn't declare Verdi evil, nor did he say that the music of Verdi was intrinsically bad. He merely noted that what we use for the worship of God should be fitting for the task, and not draw the attention of the assembled faithful to think about things other than God.

    So, to address the question: case-by-case or not? Yes, but based on sound and relevant principles. (Non-contradiction is a sound principle, but hardly relevant to this context, unless we're asking "does this text contradict Catholic teaching?")

    I completely agree that inclusion in a "Catholic" worship aid doesn't guarantee that something is doctrinally, musically or pastorally appropriate. That's why, even when I had contact with the Missal of Paul VI on a regular basis, I ignored the suggestions of the publishing companies.

  • BruceL
    Posts: 1,036
    Chris, while not disrespectful, I don't think your last comment really responded to anything anyone's been saying in the thread!

    I mean, the "worst" thing anyone's suggested is a Wesley hymn. Most of Wesley's hymns are direct paraphrases of Sacred Scripture that are very artfully combined. I daresay that it would be hard to find anyone (in union with Peter or not) who was more skilled at that art. Just look at Christ the Lord is Ris'n Today http://www.hymnary.org/text/christ_the_lord_is_risen_today_wesley

    I think it best, assuming one is willing to submit oneself to the mind of the Church regarding liturgy, to look at "picking music" like the parable our Lord gives us in Matthew 13:47-48!
  • Bruce,

    I'm glad that you didn't find what I wrote disrespectful, for I try not to be disrespectful. I'm not sure how you decided that I hadn't responded to the other commenters on the thread... but I'm willing to be corrected on this point.

    As to a Wesley hymn being a paraphrase of Scripture, On Eagle's Wings can make the same claim, as can The Lord Hears the cry of the Poor , as can Yahweh, I know you are near as can...... I am the bread of life, but none of these is suitable for use in the Catholic Mass, wherever else any of these might find a proper home.

    Of course I'm willing to submit myself to the mind of the Church, but evidently you and I read that mind differently. Having in mind the teaching of popes going back hundreds of years, I find that I've understood the mind of the Church reasonably well, if not perfectly.

  • CHGiffenCHGiffen
    Posts: 4,413
    Chris,

    Apparently you have ignored Bruce's key statements:
    Most of Wesley's hymns are direct paraphrases of Sacred Scripture that are very artfully combined. I daresay that it would be hard to find anyone (in union with Peter or not) who was more skilled at that art.
    The examples you cite as being unsuitable "for use in the Catholic Mass" do not rise to the level of Wesley's craft.

    To expand upon the example cited by Bruce, many (if not all) of the following hymns by Charles Wesley are widely sung by English speaking Catholics:

    "Christ the Lord Is Risen Today"
    "Christ, Whose Glory Fills the Skies"
    "Come, Thou almighty King"
    "Come, Thou Long Expected Jesus"
    "Father, I Stretch My Hands to Thee"
    "Hail the Day that Sees Him Rise"
    "Hark! the Herald Angels Sing"
    "I Know That My Redeemer Lives"
    "Jesus Christ Is Risen Today" (4th stanza, stanzas 1-3 by John Arnold)
    "Jesus, Lover of My Soul"
    "Jesus, The Name High Over All"
    "Lo! He Comes with Clouds Descending"
    "Love Divine, All Loves Excelling"
    "O for a Heart to Praise My God"
    "O for a Thousand Tongues to Sing"
    "Rejoice, the Lord is King"
    "Soldiers of Christ, Arise"

  • JulieCollJulieColl
    Posts: 2,438
    The examples you cite as being unsuitable "for use in the Catholic Mass" do not rise to the level of Wesley's craft
    .

    And a more experienced hymn-crafter would be hard to find. As Fr. George Rutler in his book, Brightest and Best, says of Charles Wesley:

    "Had the parents of Charles Wesley (1707-1788) been less generous and prolific, the world of sacred hymnody would be immeasurably impoverished. Or almost immeasurably so. For Charles was their eighteenth child and produced what are variously estimated to be somewhere close to sixty-five hundred hymns."

    Coincidentally, Fr. Rutler sees in the hymn Soldiers of Christ, Arise the image of a priest vesting for Mass and says: "These lines are as if they were written for vesting at ordinations. I vividly remember a tutor of mine being clothed to them during his consecration as an Anglican bishop in Texas. He was a worthy man, and I hope, is all gathered above now, but it would be far more impressive to sing this as a man is clothed in the vesture of a valid ordination."
  • CHGiffen,

    I didn't ignore them, but I didn't give them the weight that you did. Accordingly, let me address this directly.

    I did not assert that Wesley was a hack, a bad craftsman or any such thing. Indeed, the stuff that I cited as examples of paraphrases of Holy Write are just as I claim them, and I wouldn't call any of the works of art. In the hands of a true artist, even the pedestrian can be made beautiful (see the works of Mozart and Palestrina, among others).

    On the other hand, works of great beauty can be rendered unfitly (imagine someone playing the collected organ repertoire of Bach, or Brahms, or Messaien without skill).

    It seems to me self-evident, however, that the works of heretics and schismatics should be used (as I suggested earlier) with great care, on a case-by-case basis.

  • CHGiffenCHGiffen
    Posts: 4,413
    Chris,

    Indeed, you "did not assert that Wesley was a hack, a bad craftsman or any such thing." You simply dismissed him as a Protestant and thereby did not consider his hymns suitable for Catholic use at Mass.

    By that token, should we not also relegate "O Sacred Head Sore Wounded" to the trash-bin of Protestantism, since it is a Presbyterian's (James Waddell Alexader) English translation of a Lutheran's (Paul Gerhardt) translation of a Latin hymn, set to music harmonized by yet another Lutheran (J. S. Bach)?

    I'm with M. Jackson Osborn on this:
    My sense, as always, is, is there any falsehood in it, does it express the truth, is it worthy literature, is the tune worthy music? If the answers are yes, then it is, sui generis, Catholic. Whatever is true is therefore Catholic.

    ... the fact that the Holy Spirit does, in fact, quite obviously inspire both beauty and truth outside the Catholic camp, in other Christian ecclesial bodies. We should rejoice in this and not be afraid to avail ourselves of something true and beautiful just because a Protestant wrote it, or crafted it.
    I, too, appreciate and even understand something of your zeal, but I cannot seem to agree with your blanket application of it, case-by-case allusions aside.
  • rich_enough
    Posts: 802
    My sense, as always, is, is there any falsehood in it, does it express the truth, is it worthy literature, is the tune worthy music? If the answers are yes, then it is, sui generis, Catholic. Whatever is true is therefore Catholic.

    This is true as far as it goes, but it's a further question as to whether it should be included in the public worship of the Church. Anything sung at mass takes on a "normative" status, and this coupled with the fact that it will repeated over the years, means that the standard for its inclusion should be high as well.

    Even if a text or hymn passes the test given above, it can still fall short of expressing a true understanding of the Catholic faith with regard to grace, the Eucharist, Our Lady, the Church, our relationship to Christ, and other realities. Its emphases may be misplaced, it may leave things out, or express things in a vague or ambiguous way. None of this would make the text "false" but may make its use questionable within the context of the liturgy.

    This is the objection of some (including myself) to "Amazing Grace" - it's not that any one phrase in the text is strictly heretical, but it fails to express adequately the full Catholic understanding of grace, or better, it ends up distorting it. As it is, this text has become normative - many people, I would imagine, think of this text first when they think of grace, and I'm afraid the hymn has given them a rather truncated idea of it. The same could said of hymns which express a purely individualistic notion of our relationship to Christ - there's nothing positively heretical in them, but they does not adequately express the believer's connection to Christ, at least (or especially!) in the context if the public worship of the Church.

    I understand that no single text can "fully express the Catholic faith" on a given topic, but it must be Catholic, which is more than simply the fact that the text is well-written and expressed some truth without outright heresy. (And having the text written by a Catholic does not necessarily help here.)
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,357
    Adam got that Spanish phrase from a document from the Rockford diocese (linked above), about music for confirmations. It lists several "texts of the Roman Missal which must always be respected", the Kyrie, Gloria, Holy, Our Father, Lamb of God.


    Yes, along with the official Spanish translations of the same.

    I thought it was amusing that only in Spanish does one apparently have to specify that the Ordinary of the Mass has to follow a particular translation.
  • CHGiffen,

    I'm not dismissing music as bad. I'm "dismissing" someone as Protestant who clearly was, and who wouldn't want to be included as Catholic.

    As to the general principle of including hymns (regardless of authorship) in the public worship of the Church: each in its proper place. Hymns at Vespers.

    Alius Cantus Aptus is too broad a principle, without a definition of "APTUS".
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • JulieCollJulieColl
    Posts: 2,438
    Hi Chris,
    Just for the record, in the EF, vernacular hymns may be sung not only at Vespers but also at Mass within the guidelines of the liturgical documents, of course. In De Musica Sacra, the use of hymns was encouraged in order to keep the faithful from being "dumb and idle spectators."

    De Musica Sacra:

    "As we have written above, such hymns cannot be used in Solemn High Masses without the express permission of the Holy See. Nevertheless at Masses that are not sung solemnly these hymns can be a powerful aid in keeping the faithful from attending the Holy Sacrifice like dumb and idle spectators. They can help to make the faithful accompany the sacred services both mentally and vocally and to join their own piety to the prayers of the priest. This happens when these hymns are properly adapted to the individual parts of the Mass, as We rejoice to know is being done in many parts of the Catholic world".

    Of course, vernacular hymns may also be sung as processional and/or recessional hymns at an EF High Mass since this is outside the Mass itself. (cf. St. John Cantius' guidelines.)

    Re: the Protestantism of Charles Wesley, Fr. George Rutler notes in his book, Brightest and Best, that Charles Wesley, unlike his brother John, was an old-fashioned High Churchman, and was "Caroline in theology as well as name." He "eschewed denominalationism and separatism and remained an Anglican" at heart so perhaps that might make you feel better about his hymns. : )

  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,357
    Alius Cantus Aptus is too broad a principle, without a definition of "APTUS".


    I think we have a definition.

    "the more closely a composition for church approaches in its movement, inspiration and savor the Gregorian form, the more sacred and liturgical it becomes; and the more out of harmony it is with that supreme model, the less worthy it is of the temple."
    - Pope Pius X — Tra le sollecitudini (1903)
  • Richard MixRichard Mix
    Posts: 2,141
    It seems to me self-evident, however, that the works of heretics and schismatics should be used (as I suggested earlier) with great care, on a case-by-case basis.
    Not so self-evident is the implied corollary that Catholic authors should get a pass on any such scrutiny. Chris doesn't say that; rather he says above
    why is it not demeaning to [non-Catholics] to use their work at Catholic sacramental celebrations?
    It sounds a bit presumptuous to expect thanks from someone who has been blacklisted, even if the blacklister claims to be motivated by solicitous consideration of the blacklistee's allegedly tender feelings.
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 8,349
    There are numerous cases in which Protestants translated classic Catholic hymns into the vernacular for use in their services. It's easy enough to find them: flip through a classic Protestant hymnal and see how many works originated in the Katholisches Gesangbuch of Vienna, or Piae Cantiones (a 1582 Reformation song book with a lot of Catholic content).

    Those editors and translators thought that those Catholic hymns were perfectly good material for worship, and not at all disqualified by the non-Protestant doctrines their authors held. They were able to recognize that Protestantism and Catholicism differ in some things, but they do not differ in everything. They were able to focus on the substance of thought, on the content of a text, and not on the person who wrote it. That bespeaks the admirable quality of magnanimity.

    When we think of hymns which were written by Protestants, we should exercise the same virtue of magnanimity, and remember that everything good and true in those hymns is something they got from the Catholic Church, so it is not really alien to us.
  • Those editors and translators thought that those Catholic hymns were perfectly good material for worship, and not at all disqualified by the non-Protestant doctrines their authors held.


    I think you will find, however, that none of the doctrines the Protestants objected to were in the hymns in question. To the extent that the same texts did contain Catholic doctrine, they were excised, or taught to mean something they didn't mean. (Perfect example: Faith of Our Fathers.)