The fun factor in modern hymnody
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,500
    A couple of summers ago I took a summer course on teaching hymnology. The instructor, a very knowledgeable Calvinist, said that there is very little paradox in hymnody. He thinks that the reason for this lack is the brevity of the form. Lines of hymns are ordinarily short; more crucially, by convention hymn writers are conservative about dividing phrases among multiple lines.

    My sense is that my teacher did not go back far enough in time to the older Latin hymns, in which paradox is very common.

    Right now I’m translating a 10th c. hymn for the Ascension called Aeterne rex altissime. The Latin of vere 4 is sublime in its treatment of the word “flesh.” The Pauline flesh is here, as is its opposite, the Johannine, and then the actual fact of Jesus’ current situation caps everything:

    Tremunt videntes angeli
    versam vivem mortalium
    culpat caro, purgat caro,
    regnat caro Verbum Dei.

    my initial translation:

    The angels tremble at the sight.
    How altered is the human plight!
    For flesh has sinned, but flesh atoned,
    And God in flesh is God enthroned.

    An older translation:

    Yes, Angels tremble when they see
    How changed is our humanity;
    That Flesh hath purged what flesh had stained,
    And God, the flesh of God, hath reigned.

    When I see one of these abundant instances of paradox in the old hymns, I feel as though we are nowadays a very prosaic people. Current hymns, for example, are usually very straight-messaged. They don’t stop and wonder; hymns never gaze. They often preach. We make no puns…
  • G
    Posts: 1,397
    I have nothing to say, but that was an irresistible post title.

    Actually, I do find myself objecting to the pun in "I Received the Living God" (kneaded/needed,) but as it is attributed to "anon" I don't know if that is a "modern" hymn or not.

    Save the Liturgy, Save the World
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 8,368
    Admirable perspicacity!
  • Donnaswan
    Posts: 585
    I have to say I am hard-put to think of a current hymn writer who makes as much impression as George Herbert or Charles Wesley, John Henry Newman or any of a dozen writers in past centuries.
    Donna Swan
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,934
    I agree on the great talents who wrote hymns in earlier times. More than paradox in hymnody, it seems to me there is a Calvinist interpretation on playing and singing hymns, at least in my area. This area was settled by Scottish Presbyterians, and even to this day, Catholics are only around 4 percent of the population. I have attended local workshops and seminars on hymn playing which were dominated by Calvinist church musicians. I tend to look more toward an Anglican model for singing and playing hymns in my Catholic Church job, not toward a Presbyterian one. That they do things differently, I can easily hear. But it's harder to explain.
  • G
    Posts: 1,397
    an Anglican model for singing and playing hymns... a Presbyterian one.
    That they do things differently, I can easily hear. But it's harder to explain.


    Could you try?
    This sounds interesting.
    (Save the Liturgy, Save the World)
  • IanWIanW
    Posts: 756
    It really does, CharlesW. Please try.
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,934
    It's a bit hard to describe. The local Presbyterians are more exacting and precise in their tempos and articulations, while the Anglicans are a bit more lyrical about such things. Perhaps it's just the local players or where they studied, but Anglican playing and singing can have a more "chant" like melody line. The accompaniments tend to have a more "cathedral" sound than I find in the local Presbyterian churches. Given, I am referring to the major churches in the area, not the smaller ones. The smaller ones can be all over the place, depending on what musicians they can get to work for the much lower pay. As I said, it's hard to describe, but easier to hear.
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 8,368
    CharlesW -
    A very succinct and fair assessment of the Anglican style of hymnody, not to mention choral interpretation in general.
    It is less 'driven', less primitive in rhythmic style, more fluid - more artful, more musical, more sacral, more sensitive
    than that of most any other church.
    Admirable perspicacity!
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,934
    Exactly. I think you have expressed better, what I was trying to say. There's no question that the Anglicans have mastered hymnody. I look to them as the model to imitate, rather than the Calvinist and Lutheran traditions.
Add a Comment