matthewj: the copyright page says

Published with ecclesiastical approval.

By the way, it's fine for people involved in the hymnal's development or in other CCW projects to post here about it.

It is fine for them to post about it. Maybe they really like it that much. I am free to believe or not believe them.

I'm glad to finally see some spirited discussion of the Brebeuf Hymnal on this forum!

I think I share many of the same praises that others have given, yet questions that others have raised, so I won't go into that. BUT, I do have some legitimate questions that I don't believe have been addressed yet. Perhaps someone from CCW could give some insight?

1. Does anyone know exactly who was on the editorial committee? I've always found it helpful when hymnals release this information, as most GIA Hymnals and several others have. For me, it helps give an idea of the ideological bent of the entire team, and assures me that every decision was indeed argued over, and not simply because of one person's preference, as many would say was the case with the V2 Hymnal. At the risk of sounding uncharitable, some quirks in the Brebeuf seem characteristically Jeff Ostrowski, and his apparent secrecy over the committee has me wondering who actually did most of the work for this hymnal.

2. Who exactly is the publisher? Was an effort made to erase the name of CC Watershed completely from the hymnal? What is the John Paul II Institute for Liturgical Renewal? What is Nicolas Viel Publications? Do they do more than serve as a shell company for the sole purpose of printing this hymnal? Everything about the publishing just seems fishy here, including the vague "ecclesiastical approval" without stating who gave it, something that even the mainstream hymnals do.

3. Who is Peter Lejeune? Richard Clark, Kevin Allen, and Jeff Ostrowski, the other composers of new hymn tunes are all names I recognize, and names that are rightly well-respected in the church music community. For the record, I think Mr. Lejeune's work both here and other places on CC Watershed is superb, I just legitimately wonder who he is. The footnotes say he was born in 1991 and is the organist at St. John Vianney Catholic Church in Springfield. Massachusetts? Illinois? A quick Google search reveals that there are no St. John Vianney Catholic Churches anywhere in a locality known as Springfield. Does anyone know Peter? I just would like to know more about his background, as I really admire his hymn tunes!

4. This has been briefly discussed, but I think the "credits" at the bottom of each hymn, while exhaustive, raise some editing eyebrows. Has anyone else noticed that the melody or text source is often listed as "The St. Jean de Brebeuf Hymnal"? Many sources are credited as being from the Vatican II hymnal, but surely they've appeared in other places before that.

Woof. I sound angry. I promise I'm not. I very much appreciate the work that went into this hymnal, and it has proved an excellent edition to my collection so far in terms of scholarship, new melodies, and interesting information about some well-known hymns and hymn authors. I really would appreciate a follow-up to these questions, if anyone has answers!

Thanks.

Some info here, though I note some folks might compose some of their works under a nom de plume (not necessarily the case in this instance, but just saying):

http://www.ccwatershed.org/media/pdfs/18/10/02/02-27-40_0.pdf

This has been briefly discussed, but I think the "credits" at the bottom of each hymn, while exhaustive, raise some editing eyebrows.

I went through a couple of references / footnotes and noticed a couple of things:

First, the footnotes generally tend to give more information than other hymnals usually do. I appreciate that. As I use this hymnal mainly as a source material, these footnotes give me the opportunity to critically evaluate the tunes printed. Some hymnals have this information at the back in an index, or even in a separate compendium, but here it's right at the bottom of the page. Wonderful!

That positive point being made, I found some issues.

The music source doesn't always mention the earliest location of a hymn tune. As an example, for William Monk's tune MERTON (#655), the earliest given source is the New Westminster Hymnal (1939). But MERTON was published as early as 1850 in The Parish Choir. Why Hymns, Psalms, and Spiritual Canticles (1983) and the New Westminster Hymnal are specifically referenced remains unclear to me.

Another example: O Heiland reiß die Himmel auf (#659). Next to the original 1666 source for the tune (I would have added 'Augsburg'), three additional musical sources are given. But the way the tune eventually is printed in The Brébeuf Hymnal doesn't resemble any of them. The first reference is Gotteslob, to which the Brébeuf version rightly is the closest. The rhythm of this version is historically indeed the correct one. But Gotteslob has a time signature of 6/4, which is left out in Brébeuf and it subsequently employs another measure. But I'm really confused by the references to The Parish Hymnal (1957) and the Pope Pius XII Hymnal (1959). Here the rhythms and even meter are completely different and out of step with the original tune! These clearly couldn't have served as musical sources for the tune that is printed at #659. Why mention them?

@smvanroode: The answer to your query on tune sources is in plain sight: This is supposed to be THE MOST CATHOLIC-EST HYMNAL EVER!!!

Notice that the sources they do cite are Catholic. However, MERTON is an Anglican tune and The Parish Choir is a Church of England book; whereas O Heiland reiss is a Lutheran chorale, which is why they cite the Catholic Gotteslob, but don't give the origin of the 17th century original: the name of "Augsburg" should never be printed in a Catholic book, lest fire from heaven consume us, since it is the city of origin of the infamous 'Augsburg Confession' of the heresiarch Martin Luther.

Thank heaven that I never bothered to read the footnotes when I was young - I might have ended as a PROTESTANT!!!

I am resisting the urge to post a link to Lutheran Satire's 'We are the Protestants'...

Salieri please link it, I can’t find it

Liam, thanks, that was amusing.

I liked how that video missed the fact that they were comparing a German liturgical repertoire with an English folk repertoire, which created the basic differences between the two.

I find such source attributions & citations very disturbing indeed, especially in light of my extensive dealings with copyright issues for CPDL. Historical inaccuracy (especially in the form of lacunae) and apparent neglectful appropriation of material seem to be rife with this hymnal. Whatever happened to citing as accurate a historical source as possible and, following long time standard hymnal publishing practice, adding whenever necessary alt. (for altered texts) or arr. (for arranged melodies & harmonies)???

Jeff Ostrowski offers a commentary that addresses some of the topics discussed here:
http://www.ccwatershed.org/blog/2019/may/29/what-makes-catholic-hymnal/

Jeff makes a good point in distinguishing between text and melody. There are two sources which, I think, present more clearly and systematically criteria for texts and melodies of Catholic hymns.

As for the texts, I would like to refer to the criteria issued by the Dutch bishops in 2005 by which hymns should be judged. For songs other than the proper texts, they distinguish between three main categories:
1. biblical texts, either translated, paraphrased or alluded
2. texts from liturgical sources, translated or paraphrased
3. free text compositions; these need to be a) doctrinal sound, giving explicit expression to the Catholic faith, and should b) be suitable for their particular liturgical place and purpose

As for the melodies, I refer to what Pope Saint John Paul II wrote in his 1999 Letter to Artists and his 2003 Chirograph on Sacred Music, from which I quote at length (emphasis is mine):

12. With regard to compositions of liturgical music, I make my own the "general rule" that St Pius X formulated in these words: "The more closely a composition for church approaches in its movement, inspiration and savour the Gregorian melodic 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". It is not, of course, a question of imitating Gregorian chant but rather of ensuring that new compositions are imbued with the same spirit that inspired and little by little came to shape it. Only an artist who is profoundly steeped in the sensus Ecclesiae can attempt to perceive and express in melody the truth of the Mystery that is celebrated in the Liturgy. In this perspective, in my Letter to Artists I wrote: "How many sacred works have been composed through the centuries by people deeply imbued with the sense of mystery! The faith of countless believers has been nourished by melodies flowing from the hearts of other believers, either introduced into the Liturgy or used as an aid to dignified worship. In song, faith is experienced as vibrant joy, love and confident expectation of the saving intervention of God".

In summary: a composition that flows from the heart of someone who is steeped in the sensus Ecclesiae and imbued with a true sense of mystery is able to express the praise of God and nourish the faith of believers.

Hymnody shapes the faith of people. Texts and melodies should each be judged by their merits to kindle the praise of God, move to an eagerness to pray and excite piety in a way that is on par with Catholic doctrine.

Every hymn text? Well, of course you only mean the ones in English; but literally?

I've been reading Jeff's blog post from yesterday. What hymn tune is Altona? I can't find it on hymnary, and google is little better.

like altering every single hymn text in the book to eradicate any content the panel deemed "un-Catholic".

The "panel".... Do we know who was on this editorial board? I'm not trying to be uncharitable, it just seems fishy to me- I'm genuinely curious who (if anyone) was on the mysterious, unnamed panel.

"The Tune Book of Pollok St. U.P. Church" ... the italicised stuff is "Pollok Street United Presbyterian Church" (in Glasgow). Perhaps that explains the ALTONA moniker. You can Google the book to see the score and attribution to Martin Luther. Besides, that was published in 1866.

Just give the people the Cantus Selecti or the Parish Book of Chant and be done with it.

I seriously considered doing this EXACT SAME PROJECT years ago, but gave it up for good because of this logical conclusion... why would we perpetuate the faults (anomalies, distractions, novelties, divergence, compromise) of VII? Authentic sacred music does not necessitate a hymnal be in the pew for the Mass.

But even in English Parish churches in the 18th & 19th centuries, hymns (as we know them today) were never sung but rarely. Take a look at the West Gallery repertoire (your picture shows a gallery band and quire): What you find are tunes for use with metrical psalms, which were sung before or after services, not during; plus Anthems, and settings of the canticles (Mag, Nunc, Jubilate, Benedictus), all by local musicians, and sung in particular parishes or regions, many with interesting home-grown harmonies. You will also find some books put together by Cathedral musicians for parish use with "correct" music, mainly consisting of the same old Psalm-tunes (like WINCHESTER, OLD HUNDREDTH, FLAVIAN) with an added basso continuo line; and some simple Anthems with organ accompaniment.

Until the Oxford Movement the only hymnals were those used by the Non-Conformists. Before then, in the Established Church, the words came from three approved sources, the Book of Common Prayer for liturgical texts, and the Sternhold and Hopkins 'Old Version' of the Psalms and the Brady & Tate New Version of the Psalms for the metrical psalmody (words only!), no hymnals as we know them today were published for use by the congregation. Choir books were, but generally the Parish Clerk (who ran the village quire and band) would buy one copy of a published book, and then pass it round to the instrumentalists and singers to copy into their MS tune books. The musical diet of many Cathedrals and collegiate churches were about the same until the late 19th century. (Don't forget that it was Eric Milner White, A.H. Mann and Boris Ord who basically invented King's.)

It was the Tractarian/Oxford Movement's influence in Liturgical matters coupled with the Methodist hymn tradition that created the 'Anglican Hymn Tradition' that we know today. Here's an interesting article about the flagship Anglican Hymnal: Hymns, Ancient and Modern. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hymns_Ancient_and_Modern

Neither Catholic nor Anglican liturgical books afford a significant place for hymns.

My Graduale has 13 Hymns and 5 Sequences (it also has the 2 Benedictine) a Sequence is a type of Hymn and we can add in the Gloria. So while Hymns are not numerous in this Liturgical book, when the Hymns are used shows they do not lack significance.

The Antiphonale, Vesperale, and Nocturnale have many more Hymns! Once again they are significant part of these Liturgical books.

So why do both Catholic and Anglican churches have hymnbooks in their pews

Catholic Churches had Hymn books in the pews mainly for use at the various devotions, such as Benediction, May Processions, etc. Of course modern churches have Hymn books to give the congregation something 'active' to do, because too many people these days think that if you are not jumping and shouting, you are not participating.

I suggest that the 'authentic' musical tradition of both is dominated by cathedrals and monasteries, and so parishes have had to develop their own methods.

The mediaeval manuscripts do nothing to back up this statement... In more recent years do remind me where George Malcolm was before he was poached by Westminster.

Also consider that parochial life as we tend to conceive it in our time is an artifact of the revival of European demographics and therefore church & state organization around the turn of the last millennium.