The Hymnal 1940 for an EF Parish
  • Hello,

    I was hoping to hear some thoughts around possibly using the Episcopal Hymnal 1940 for a diocesan EF Parish. My thoughts are as follows:

    1. The hymnal is awesome on it's own merits, musically, lyrically, presentation-wise. All around awesome.
    2. The hymnal can be considered as part of the body of Catholic musical literature, as many ordinariate parishes use it as their hymnal.
    3. A bunch of the hymns are Catholic hymns anyway, and is much more orthodox than many "Catholic" hymnals on the market now.
    4. I can obtain them fairly inexpensively.

    I know that many bristle at the mention of anything protestant, and when I discussed this with my wife, we both had to admit that were we not in "the know," and were we in a Catholic Church only to see a ::gasp:: Protestant hymnal, we might be a tad upset. I think a possible solution to that particular aspect might be to just tear out the front page which makes that so obvious.

    Thoughts?
  • Moderntrad,

    Protestantism (both the modern and the 16th century versions) is incompatible with the Catholic faith. Therefore, to intentionally use a Protestant hymnal, as such, is to introduce that which is foreign to Catholic faith and worship into it.

    If the purpose is to use vernacular hymnody, it couldn't be used from the donning of the chasuble to the Last Gospel.

    Ordinariate parishes (like eastern rite parishes) may do things within their rites which are not right or proper, or meet, to use in a Roman Rite parish. Using Aramaic prayers, for example, is right and proper to the Maronite Rite, but not to the Roman.

    I'm a convert, and so I grew up using Hymnal 1940, and then Hymnal 1982. Nevertheless, as an organist at an EF Mass, I don't use music from it ___unless the tune or the text is originally from outside of Protestantism.

    I would avoid introducing it. Use, instead, whatever is identifiably Catholic and in the public domain.

  • CharlesW
    Posts: 9,854
    I am getting older, so the memory cells don't always remember their sources. I seem to remember the Anglican Use Ordinariate getting approval to use the Hymnal 1940. If so, it is now fully Catholic. That hymnal is still in print, and it seems Cokesbury is the source for it, although used copies are still available on Amazon last time I looked. Where's Jackson because he would know?

    And you are right, it is more Catholic than many of the approved hymnals.

    BTW, I keep a copy at the organ and play interludes from it.

    An added note: In looking at the listing of hymns for our EF mass from the Adoremus hymnal and our GIA hymnal for the OF masses, we discovered something. We are often using the same hymns for both forms of the mass, and those hymns are often also in the Hymnal 1940. It is either ecumenism, or the 1940 has some fine hymns.
  • Hi Chris,

    I couldn't agree more with you - much of Protestantism is absolutely not compatible with the Christian Faith. Seeing as much of the contents of the '40 finds it's source in Catholic hymnody, it might be a bit of a stretch to call it "not right or proper, or meet." We might have to avoid a couple of hymns, but don't we have to do that now with (much more of the contents of) Catholic hymnals anyway?

    I think a consideration should also be made that the Ordinariate is a part of the Roman Rite of the Church. It's a Use proper to Roman Catholicism. Seeing as that is the case, wouldn't that mean that it might be proper to use within the context of a Roman Mass?

    My intention was to possibly use it for entrance and recessional hymns for the congregation to sing. And I can get it for the price of shipping alone - which is a definite consideration for a parish with limited means.

    Just some thoughts.
  • JulieCollJulieColl
    Posts: 2,437
    At our diocesan EF Mass, we take just about every opening and closing hymns from the 1982 Hymnal and could not be happier about it. : )

    In fact, the Hymnal 1982 was given to us by the priest in charge of the Latin Mass community in our diocese. Of course, one must be selective. For instance, we don't sing 'Amazing Grace' or other "iconic" Protestant tunes, but we have discovered so many other beautiful hymns which are perfectly appropriate, liturgically speaking, and find the hymnal overall a great font of spiritual wisdom and glorious music.

    I would also add that many Anglican hymns are excellent pedagogical tools and contain much Biblical insight and teach the virtues.

    As I've said before, it seems that the wonderful old Anglican hymns are a Christian repackaging of the Roman virtues: pietas, humilitas, gravitas, sobrietas, felicitas, veritas, dignitas, auctoritas, etc.

    If it's good, true, beautiful and holy, then it's Catholic.
  • Charles,

    If you can get your hands on a source for that approval, I would be forever grateful to you!

    All I want is beautiful, good, and true music for the Holy Sacrifice.
  • I think that it is really mean and myopic in the extreme to make such a fuss over whether or not Protestant hymnody is appropriate for Catholic use. A wise musician will disect content, not source. Why, even if the Dalai Lama were to write a hymn that expressed and did not contradict Catholic teaching it would be, by virtue of that, Catholic. We have discussed this, it seems to me, in several other forum conversatiions. My purposeful opinion is that if something contains no heresy, and does express truth, it is, ipso facto, sui generis, Catholic. Whatever is true is Catholic. And, Charles is spot on: the Ordinariate is a use of the Roman rite. Its approved hymnaries, then, are quite suitable for Catholic worship. Now, then: we must admit that there are some hymns in 'the 1940' that are best avoided because their very dated social gospel content and lack of objectively worshipful themes, lacking solid theological content, are inappropriate for mass (though they may or may not be appropriate for extra liturgical devotional use). 'Hymns' such as 'Once to every man and nation' and other such we of the Ordinariate know well, and scrupulously avoid. One might note that even GIA's vaunted Worship IV, likewise, contains really quite too many such hymns that should leave anyone with an ounce of liturgical sense red-faced to be singing at mass. Finally, there are, in fact, Catholic churches here and there whose priests have unabashedly opted for 'the 1940' simply because, even with its modicum of best-avoided songs, there is not its equal as an orthodox compendium published by any Catholic publisher. It is chock full of Catholic gems. (Where else will you find Dulce Carmen recommended to be sung as a final hymn as the last Alleluya before Ash Wednesday? Why Catholics haven't even heard of this! Humph! Protestant, my foot!)
  • Julie, Moderntrad,

    I don't doubt that, modernly speaking, the Episcopal ecclesial community has superior resources to those of the major American Catholic publishers. Hands down. That's partly because the American Catholic publishers have (so it seems) sought out mediocrity in music. Only in the Hymnal 1982 did the editors intentionally follow a similar (but not identical) policy.

    Nevertheless, I think it imprudent to dabble in Protestant hymnody as such. So, hymns which began life as Catholic hymns can be rescued from their Protestant matrix (or jail cell, if you prefer), and used. Hymns which, due to editors' crayons, have been rendered unintelligible could be restored.

    Faith of our ancestral parental units. (Imagine singing "Faith of our Fathers, Mary's prayers shall win all England back to Thee")
    Good Christian folks rejoice.
    You spectators and you everypersons.

    Any hymn from which "thee" and "thou" have been removed.


  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,283

    Faith of our ancestral parental units. (Imagine singing "Faith of our Fathers, Mary's prayers shall win all England back to Thee")
    Good Christian folks rejoice.
    You spectators and you everypersons.

    Any hymn from which "thee" and "thou" have been removed.


    This is relevant to a conversation about THE HYMNAL (1940) how, exactly?
    Thanked by 1Gavin
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,283
    You spectators and you everypersons.


    The problem with hyperbole is that it makes everything TEN BILLION TIMES MORE STUPID.
    Thanked by 1Gavin
  • Adam,

    Hyperbole, as you point out, makes everything TEN BILLION TIMES MORE STUPID.

    I don't have the H1982 in front of me, but, speaking as a convert, part of what drove me away from the Episcopal ecclesial community was its willingness to cave to the demands of the world, one of which was inclusivism. Didn't like the new Prayer Book, either.

    Don't have H1940 in front of me either, although I own copies of both H1940 and H1982.

    As I recall, though, H1940 adapts the text (FOOF) to avoid a reference to Our Lady.

    In any event, the conversation wasn't (at this point) only about H1940, but had included H1982, which is why I investigated the Bag End.
  • Liam
    Posts: 3,662
    "Protestantism (both the modern and the 16th century versions) is incompatible with the Catholic faith."

    "Therefore, to intentionally use a Protestant hymnal, as such, is to introduce that which is foreign to Catholic faith and worship into it."

    The second sentence actually doesn't follow from the first; there are unstated middle terms that are questionable.

    "Nevertheless, as an organist at an EF Mass, I don't use music from it ___unless the tune or the text is originally from outside of Protestantism. I would avoid introducing it. Use, instead, whatever is identifiably Catholic and in the public domain."

    Your choice, but not what the Catholic Church obliges.
  • francisfrancis
    Posts: 8,100
    The Church has an official hymnal. Ask Adam. Stick to IT.

    I love the musicality of the 1940, but it lacks one thing; the patronage of the Church.

    Question: (and this is an honest one, because I can't remember...) Does the 1940 have hymns honoring the Blessed Mother, or texts in Latin?
  • Liam
    Posts: 3,662
    Again, your choice, as the Church does not oblige us to stick to IT to the exclusion of other hymns.

    The 1940's use of Latin is macaronic (as in Angels We Have HEard on High) and it does have Sing of Mary (specifically for Annunciation). If memory serves, the 1982 hymnal is more generous.

    The 1940 Hymnal has much to commend it, but it wouldn't be my first choice. I merely object to the overkill about it, which is poorer witness than it wishes to be - it begs to be dismissed out of hand.
    Thanked by 1Gavin
  • David AndrewDavid Andrew
    Posts: 1,191
    Well, I suppose if you find the hymn texts of Frederick W. Faber and John Henry Cardinal Newman, or the translations of Latin texts by Edward Caswall to be problematic, then I suppose one should dismiss the value of the Hymnal 1940 in its entirety because it's Protestant and therefore incompatible with Catholic Teaching.

    By the way, Faber was a Roman Catholic priest, and Caswall was a convert to Catholicism.

    I seem to recall Newman was kind of an important figure in the Catholic Church as well.

    But by all means don't touch that evil and useless 1940 hymnal.

    (I forgot to put on the purple font toggle, so sue me.)
  • I hadn't thought of the obvious lack of Marian hymns, however there is the one, and there are several that are included to be used on various Saints' days. If you wanted that in an Anglican Hymnal, you'd probably want to go to Hymns Ancient and Modern, or The English Hymnal - which brings a good point: while The English Hymnal would be cost prohibitive, I could get copies of Hymns Ancient and Modern for about the same rate as the 1940.

    Benedict XVI's creation of the Ordinariate kind of made it so that these resources are the patronage of the Church, no?

    And if I recall, the conversation began solely about the 1940, and did not include the 1982... if I wanted to sing "I am the Bread of Life," I would just obtain Gather, or something along those lines. It would be nice to expose Catholics to timeless hymns, such as "Praise, my soul, the King of Heaven," and "All hail the pow'r of Jesus' Name," and the like. How can you argue with hymnody like that? I would argue that, while the 1940 is by no means perfect, you have much less to worry about than if looking through a modern Catholic hymnal. And you hyperbole is much more relevant to Catholic hymnals than even to the 1982. The hymnody in the 1982 is still pretty solid... I feel like every time I look at the source of a tune or text I see "tr. Latin," or "Katolischekirche Gesangbuch," (or something like that anyway...) or "St. Thomas Aquinas," and the like! How many of those do you see in Breaking Bread?

    I also realize that the Church has an official hymnal... Being an EF parish, we sing from it every Sunday. But if we wanted to leave it at that, we shouldn't worry about singing motets either, right? Or polyphonic Mass settings? I mean... hymn singing is a good thing, right?

    Romans 15:9 But that the Gentiles are to glorify God for his mercy, as it is written: Therefore will I confess to thee, O Lord, among the Gentiles, and will sing to thy name.
  • stulte
    Posts: 227
    Good grief! Why are people so into hymns?! Look, I'm glad to sing a hymn here and there. They have their place. But really, if this is for an EF Mass, get rolling with the chant. Some more details about the situation would be nice to know.
    Thanked by 1eft94530
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 9,854
    I suspect one would have to get in touch with the Ordinariate to find the actual approvals for the hymnal. The approvals for the liturgical books came from the CDF and Congregation of Divine Worship.
  • Julie, do you just use the contents of the 1982, or do you actually have the books in the pews? That was really my main concern - whether or not to put books in the pews.

    Stulte, we chant all of the propers at our parish (a High Mass every week, with plans to have a monthly Solemn High, i believe). Just looking for thoughts on a hymnal. We don't have much in the way of monetary assets, and, having worked for the PECUSA for several years, I have a contact that can give us Anglican (HAaM, 1982, and 1940) hymnals for the cost of shipping. I'm new in the role, and the parish being an EF community is also new (only about 3 weeks older than my tenure there). One of the questions that I received from those who were members of the church prior to it being an EF parish was whether or not there would be a place for them to sing. It is quite a change to go from singing the 4 hymn sandwich to nothing at all, along with a "new" liturgy to come to know. We don't now sing hymns very often. Processions and recessions are done to organ music, but from time to time we will sing a hymn...
  • Some of the attitudes expressed (I shant say which) by some of the persons (I shant say whom) in this conversation remind me of what is known in the geo-political sphere as ethnic cleansing. And, they are just as mean. We are so beyond the 16th and 17th centuries - at least, some of us are.
  • francisfrancis
    Posts: 8,100
    The question isn't whether or not to use hymns out of the hymnal. It is should I put the 1940 in our pews? Huge dif.

    What is the page that needs to be "torn out"? What does it say? (Specific language)
    Thanked by 1eft94530
  • francisfrancis
    Posts: 8,100
    The Episcopal religion is not an ethnic group - I believe the Church holds it to be either heretical or schismatic.
  • a_f_hawkins
    Posts: 1,247
    It is quite a change to go from singing the 4 hymn sandwich to nothing at all,

    Why are they not singing the Ordinary? My enthusiasm for chant is rooted in school masses in the 1940's where we all sang with gusto.
    Incidentally my copy of the Westminster Hymnal from the same era makes it clear that in general hymns are only for Benediction and the Office, but adds (of the Latin hymns)
    some of them might well be sung by the congregation at Mass in place of the customary motet
    Where in the Mass was the "customary" motet?
  • I don't think the H1940 would be a comprehensive resource of congregational song, of course (and I'd hate to see so many copies mutilated in order to be stuck in the pews). That being said, it is a wonderful collection. Even if you are a purist, it is still a lovely go-to source for "approved" hymn texts unbutchered by the Big Three.

    It is, however, devoid of Latin ordinaries, of much Marian music (although I recall 1982 containing some rather striking Marian music that I loved), and in general would not suffice for a congregational songbook, especially in an EF parish.

    That being said, I would take advantage of how many of the H1940's contents are in the public domain, and print your own resource for the pews. Use as much of the 1940 as you would like to, incorporate other Catholic music to supplement, put the ordinaries in the front, send it off to your Ordinary, get the stamp, and put it in the pews.

    A little pricier, but a good alternative in the same vein, is The Catholic Hymn Book, from the London Oratory.
    Thanked by 2CHGiffen moderntrad
  • francisfrancis
    Posts: 8,100
    Nihil

    I totally concur. I have often said here on this forum that the 1940 is the best (vernacular) resource for hymnody, but hymnody should not be the main body of music at the Mass.
  • JulieCollJulieColl
    Posts: 2,437
    I would take advantage of how many of the H1940's contents are in the public domain, and print your own resource for the pews.


    That's what we do. I make a handout every week with the text of the hymns (from public domain sources), the ordinary of the Mass and the readings, and the notation for the Introit and Communion antiphons.

    P.S. For example, this is tomorrow's lineup for our EF Missa Cantata:

    Opening: All people that on earth do dwell
    Propers from the Graduale Romanum
    Mass VII, Missa Rex Splendens
    Credo I
    Offertory Motet: Ave, Regina Caelorum (Aichinger)
    Communion Antiphon: Panem de caelo (with verses)
    Communion Motet: Ave, Verum Corpus (Byrd)
    Marian Antiphon: Salve, Regina
    Closing: Sing we of the Blessed Mother (verses 1, 4)
  • The 1940 is more catholic than most of the music currently sung in the Catholic church NO masses today.
  • francisfrancis
    Posts: 8,100
    ...which shows you how far from authentic sacred music the publishers have wandered.
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 9,854
    The 1940 is a hymnal, not a missal. Put it in the pews and use the most excellent hymns. You can always get mass ordinaries elsewhere. Don't listen to the new-order-Amish posters on the forum who don't like hymns (yes, we even sang hymns BEFORE Vatican II, and every week at that!) Sing an extra one or two in their honor. Let them rend crinolines and gnash teeth over it. LOL.
  • JulieCollJulieColl
    Posts: 2,437
    I'm going to look into the possibility of getting these for our chapel. It seems to me that if we owe congregational hymn singing to the Protestants (or at least they are the ones who have mastered it and turned it into an art form and therefore worthy to be included in Catholic worship) then we ought to celebrate that fact and give credit where credit is due, in a true ecumenical spirit. After all, any time an organist plays a grand Bach organ prelude at an EF Mass, he's borrowing that from a Protestant composer as well, so what's the difference?

    I think you can say that at the time of the Second Vatican Council, the liturgical reformers took it upon themselves to borrow elements from the Protestant liturgical tradition to incorporate into the Roman Rite so they had at their disposal these options:

    From the Protestants:
    Beautiful, classic, orthodox hymnody
    Anemic, mediocre liturgical elements

    From the Catholics:
    Anemic, mediocre hymnody
    Beautiful, traditional, received liturgy

    So what did they choose?

    I don't think I'm alone in thinking that if they had just borrowed a few Protestant hymns and preserved traditional Catholic worship things might have turned out a lot better all around.
  • SalieriSalieri
    Posts: 2,338
    We'll see how far you can get this Christmas without "protestant hymns"

    98% of the Parish: "Can we sing 'Hark! the herald angels' this Christmas?"
    You: "It's protestant""
    Parish: "Well, what about 'O little town of Bethlehem'?"
    You: "It's protestant."
    Parish: "'While shepherds watched their flocks'?"
    You: "Protestant."
    Parish: "'Joy to the wo...'"
    You: "Protestant."
    Parish: "'It came...'"
    You: "Protestant."
    Parish: "What can we do?"
    You: "'Adeste Fideles'."
    Parish: "Oh, good. Can the Choir sing David Willcocks descant?"
    You: "No. It's protestant."
    Parish: "They did it at the Cathedral."
    You: "They're Modernists."
  • JulieCollJulieColl
    Posts: 2,437
    My sincere apologies for popping up again, but it seems to me that the reason our Protestant brothers and sisters created such spiritually and emotionally satisfying, substantive hymns may have been to compensate for their 'skeletal" liturgy, purposely stripped of much of its "Catholic" content. Their hymns became the embodiment of Biblical faith and wisdom and are what sustained them for centuries.

    Why isn't that all the more reason to borrow these gems of faith and wisdom if we can and use them to adorn our traditional Catholic liturgy? Why not annex the beautiful, sustaining, satisfying Protestant tradition of hymn singing onto the traditional Catholic Mass? What's not to gain from that? You instantly gain all the wonderful advantages of the Protestant tradition of hymn-singing in addition to all the wealth and grandeur of the traditional Roman rite.
  • SalieriSalieri
    Posts: 2,338
    Yes, Julie, exactly! I wish I could thank you more than once. (Maybe 10 times.)

    A few years ago a number of seminarians and priests from the FSSP came to my parish to sing a Solemn Mass. The schola director and a number of the seminary schola members (and my parish cantors) chanted the propers, my choir led the chanting of the ordinary. And we starting the whole thing off with a rousing rendition of "Praise my soul the King of heaven" with between-verse interludes and varied harmonies...all the verses. It did nothing but encourage congregational singing: you should have heard Mass XI being sung antiphonally between the choir and congregation!* I do believe that they might not have joined in the ordinary that fervently if they weren't 'invited' to sing with a processional hymn that 'everyone knows'.

    *The people sang the ordinary? Heresy!
  • Lol, Salieri!
  • If you have time, study hymns from the late 1800's, many which have stayed the course and appear today.

    You will be amazed how many were written for and sung in Catholic churches.

    Catholics have always sung hymns, until prayer services (Novenas with Benediction) were replaced by the one-size-fits-all NO Mass.

    Novenas solved a problem of how to integrate various cultures within a parish. Ethnic groups had Novenas, they all had Mass...which was in Latin.

    By dumbing down the Mass by putting it in the majority local language and eliminating novenas with benediction tons of people felt rejected, which just one of the reasons churches are being closed.

    The Novus Ordo is the Novus Coke.

    The dislike for Hymns at Mass has nothing to do with hymns, but with the music that was substituted for hymns that is sung today.

    It does not matter, as CharlesW said, what hymnal is in the pew. It's not a missal.

    Thanked by 1eft94530
  • francisfrancis
    Posts: 8,100
    Like I said before, the question is not the content of the hymns in the 1940 (musically and theologically heads and shoulders above anything else in the vernacular), it's "should we put the hymnal in the pew of a Catholic Church?" That is a whole 'nother issue brothers and sisters!

    I have the 1940 on my computer and use its music all the time. But putting an Episcopal hymnal in a Catholic Church can cause issues that perhaps many of you are not thinking about.
    Thanked by 2Jahaza eft94530
  • The Hymnal 1982 is in the stalls at St. John's Abbey in Collegeville (among numerous other resources). I doubt anyone accidentally thought they were in an episcopal church...
    Thanked by 1M. Jackson Osborn
  • Marc,

    Probably not, but then it was St. John's Abbey in Collegeville....
    Thanked by 3Jahaza BGP eft94530
  • Liam
    Posts: 3,662
    No, I don't think it seriously indicates indifferentism.
  • But putting an Episcopal hymnal in a Catholic Church can cause issues that perhaps many of you are not thinking about.


    That was my main question in all of this. Before the Parish was established as an EF center for the diocese, I printed sheets that had the hymn to be sung on them. But it seems a tad more... what do I mean... like we're established, in that we've put a hymnal in the pews... maybe I'm crazy?

    As far as the page to be taken out, it is the title page, which states "THE HYMNAL of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America." We thought, perhaps, that by taking that page out, we might avoid any real issues of confusion or scandal.

    It should be said that the congregation does sing the ordinary. We're starting to vary the chant ordinary a tad to teach them new music, so they're not as comfortable as they might be with a hymn. Maybe I'm wrong.

    It should also be said that the parish has many Edmund Campion Missals/Hymnals so the body of Marian/Latin hymns that are missing from the '40 are contained there.

    Another plus, from my point of view, is that the '40 is in 4 part harmony, which is why I'd like to have another true hymnal apart from the EC Missal. Also, getting our ordinary to put his stamp of approval on anything for us is going to be difficult.
  • francisfrancis
    Posts: 8,100
    That is all I was saying about the original question that moderntrad was proposing, but once again, everyone jumps to the the extreme and is accusatory. Jeesh!

    This really reminds me of the treatment of those who say they are 'open minded and ecumenical'. It usually goes for everyone except the one who stands for what is traditionally Catholic.
    Thanked by 2moderntrad eft94530
  • Francis,

    Yes, I'll modify my position to agree that the introduction of a Protestant book is a bad idea, not that everything in it must be kept out of Catholic worship.



    This really reminds me of the treatment of those who say they are 'open minded and ecumenical'. It usually goes for everyone except the one who stands for what is traditionally Catholic.


    Absolutely!
    Thanked by 1francis
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 9,854
    This really reminds me of the treatment of those who say they are 'open minded and ecumenical'. It usually goes for everyone except the one who stands for what is traditionally Catholic.


    Ah, but what is traditionally Catholic? Are we looking at European models in the great cathedrals, or what was traditional in Catholic churches in the U.S.? Not the same, and never was. There is a strong tendency among some "traditionalists" to create a perfect world of "traditionalism" that never really existed outside the monasteries and the great churches of Europe. If you get a negative reaction to that, it is understandable.
  • matthewjmatthewj
    Posts: 2,582
    I know of a Catholic parish that put the SSPX hymnal in its pews and printed out a disclaimer sticker that was put on the page where the introduction began that said something like "while ______ parish does not agree with everything written in this introduction, we value this hymnal for its musical excellence."

    If one wanted to put the 1940 in the pews of their church, perhaps such a sticker could be created.
  • Such a sticker should be un-necessary. (Double meaning intended).
  • francisfrancis
    Posts: 8,100
    Yes, like I have said over and over on this forum, the 1940 is my go to hymnal for VERNACULAR hymnody. The voice leading is impecable, the collection is practically stellar.

    BUT

    The "author" is a descendant from Cranmer and there is no escaping the fact that the NO is the incarnation of his dreams. If vernacular HYMNS were the only music that was meant to fill the liturgy, you couldn't do better.

    But a "hymnal" puts forth a philosophy that hymns is the main thing we should be singing when in reality it is the LAST option of what should be sung at the Mass. (See GIRM)

    The primary elements for the congregation are:

    1 the dialogues
    2 the ordinary
    3 hymns

    Then the primary elements of the schola/choir/cantorum are:

    1 propers (where hymns have usually been sung)
    2 polyphony (where hymns have usually been sung)
    3 Latin hymns (chant style)

    Because the priorities were literally turned upside down over the past decades, (putting hymns as number one and everything else underneath of it) the mentality and philosophy needs to be changed completely.

    The concept of a hymnal is on its way out, and the concept of a missal is on its way in as is trending with Bartlett, Ostrowski, Weber, etc.

  • CharlesW
    Posts: 9,854
    The concept of a hymnal is on its way out, and the concept of a missal is on its way in as is trending with Bartlett, Ostrowski, Weber, etc.


    I wish them well with that, of course. However, that has not been my observation. Hymnals are doing quite well and easily outselling missals.
    Thanked by 1Liam
  • francisfrancis
    Posts: 8,100
    ...yes,
    as most the world is stuck
    in the hymnal sandwich...
    It is our responsibility
    (who know the real deal)
    to lead them to
    the full fledge meal.
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 9,854
    I think the real problem is that most of the world is not looking to us for leadership. They seem too caught up in doing as they please.
    Thanked by 2Liam Andrew Malton
  • francisfrancis
    Posts: 8,100
    Yes Absolutely,
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,283
    Bartlett and Ostrowski have both produced hymnals. Weber's stuff is published by a company that also produces hymnals.

    Just sayin'.