There is a draft of Divine Worship: The Gradual, circulating around ordinariate circles, which is a revised edition of the Burgess psalm-tone Propers arranged according to the Ordinariate Calendar & Divine Worship the Missal. It is in square notes, and edited by Burt circa 2017. The presumption is that the Chancery was looking to add this to the growing number of official ordinariate books. However, the recent publication of The Anglican Use Gradual, Second Edition, of which I do not have a copy but which I presume is the finalized version of the so-called Divine Worship: The Gradual is highly suggestive that this project was nixed by the chancery. If that is the case, I would not be too unhappy, as it seems silly to me to promulgate an official graduale of psalm-toned propers, when the most obvious choice would be to edit the Plainchant Gradual according to Divine Worship.

I do know that the US ordinariate hymnal in its later stages of evolution, so perhaps the project of the graduale was put on the backburner in order to work on the hymnal instead.

Other than the difference in notation with the St. Peter Gradual, and the welcome restoration of latin incipits (which the St. Peter left out), the draft of Divine Worship: The Gradual contains a complete set of votive masses, as well as all of the special antiphons for various feasts such as the entrance rites on Palm Sunday, various Triduum chants, the entrance right of Candlemas, Sprinkling rite antiphons, the Advent and Lent Prose, the O Antiphons for Sapientiatide, etc. I assume these made it into the Anglican Use Gradual, Second Edition as well.

I do know that the US ordinariate hymnal in its later stages of evolution, so perhaps the project of the graduale was put on the backburner in order to work on the hymnal instead.

I find it strange to publish yet another hymnal when the 1940 Hymnal used in the Episcopal Church would fill the gap with great ease.

I imagine they're trying to get away from using hymnals which are literally protestant hymnals, despite the gems they may contain. In my area, less in-the-know folks are often confused about what exactly the Ordinariate is. Using a hymnal from a prominent American protestant denomination probably doesn't help distinguish them as Catholic. I know I would feel more comfortable singing from a difinitively Catholic hymnal, and conversely I would feel strange always singing from an Episcopalian book. This is total speculation on my part though; maybe their reasons are wholly unrelated to this.

I know I would certainly be interested…

There are some weaknesses I have noticed in the 1940 other than the awkwardness of of singing from a denominational hymnal, which will hopefully be addressed by a diocesan hymnal for the ordinariate

1. There is a dearth of Marian hymns
2. The communion hymn section does not express the full riches of Catholic eucharistic theology, except for the few notable translations of office hymns such as Adoro Te, etc.
3. There are no gregorian masses in original latin

In addition, the new hymnal would include settings of the english office hymns in Divine Worship: The Office so that the office can be more easily sung.

I really don't trust the Ordinariate to produce a hymnal because they have a habit of appointing priests to do things at which the priests are amateurs, where they should be appointing lay professionals. This is a perennial problem of the contemporary Catholic sphere--in generations past, plenty of priests existed who had specialization and subject matter expertise in various professions. Now, however, this is rare, but the structure of having the clergy do everything is still in place.
It has been passed on to me that the selection process for the ordinariate hymnal just involved doing things like emailing clergy and asking for their favorite hymns. This is a far cry from the processes that put together the 1940 and 1982 hymnals, both of which are excellent. The only problem with 1982 is the bowdlerized texts, as one can simply ignore the modern tunes--otherwise it is an excellent publication. Scruples about getting the ick for a pRoTeStAnT hYmnAl are able to be relegated easily to the basket of irrelevance. There is also a high degree of inside baseball about the four part harmonic style choice programs of the 1940 vs the 1982 hymnals which are discussed in some articles from ca. 1980. (1940 used a uniform four part and tonal style while 1982 did some rewriting to shift some aspects of tonality--this is in places where it isn't obvious--I'm not talking about including the weird isorythmic chorale tunes) ((see what I mean...inside baseball))
As for chants for the Mass, several projects by lay people were going on. You can write to me at ordinariatechants (at) gmail.com if you're interested in full gradual melodies for DW:TM. The chancery was not. Compiling them word by word, note by note also uncovered some interesting clerical issues with not so much DW:TM but the hundred year old source material (traceable to the 1906 English Hymnal, though the +Lopes incorrectly insists that the English Hymnal was not a source (it was, in fact, the source for the source)).

I'm sorry to rant on a three year old post but I was looking for something else, this thread came up, and I figured I'd give an update.

I am about to be a teacher in an Ordinariate school ( part-time) and they handed me the Hymnal 1940 and the DW/TM books. I promptly handed the 1940 hymnal back to them and said we would learn the Roman chants in Latin and English and the students would use the Parish Book of Chant as their primary textbook for learning solfege and neume reading. There are some good pieces in the 1940 but really, no Latin, no Marian stuff. Its Episcopalian for goodness sakes! Ordinariates are confused about their state of things.

Soul of my Saviour is NEH305; it is in the REH but I don’t know what number.

The New New English hymnal is ok but wouldn’t replace an existing stock of either of the previous ones with it, and I certainly wouldn’t buy it for use as the principal hymnal of a Catholic parish, Ordinariate or otherwise, not least because of the acres of modern Anglican stuff which is of no use to us. Reproduction licenses and a bit of time with your programme of choice will provide you with what you need, if you don’t mind the occasional “see sheet”, or put everything together so people don’t need to switch between books/cards/bits of paper.

It does have the Martin Shaw Anglican folk Mass (which doesn’t sound like its name suggests) which is good to have in the mix, though I don’t know how well-known it is the other side of the Atlantic.

The English Hymnals and I suppose the 1940 were conceived of and resourced as nationwide projects; if you mentally scale down an Ordinariate hymnal to a diocesan publication it will be as good or bad as those ever are. I guess the question is, if you had RVW (and the peculiar Dr Dearmer) overseeing the EH, and Anthony Caesar et al on its revision, who are the kinds of people who should be in charge of an Ordinariate hymnal? (I note that at least one of the REH team has subsequently become a Catholic).

'...Ordinariates are confused...

Methinks not. There is, to be sure, an embarrassing amount of dross in your Hymnal 1940. We have lived with it for a lifetime and know how to separate the wheat from the tares. I will commend just one hymn which children love, No. 307, 'Most High Omnipotent Good Lord' - it is chant-like and is best sung without the accompaniment. It is St Francis' Hymn of Creation. Since the 1940 has a dearth of hymns for the BVM we simply import them from other sources when needed

I think that it was, to put it quite mildly, impolite of you to shovel the 1940 back into Fr's. hand and announce to him the book you will use instead. The 1940 is, for the nonce, THE hymnal of the POCSP in the US. It behooves you make good use of the 1940 because it is the hymnal of the Ordinariate.

Now, the children do obviously need tutoring in Latin and Latin hymnody, etc. There are a number of such books from which to choose. I would never use the PBoC because the English translations provided cannot be sung - and worse, they are poor, artless English, which is bad to give as examples to children.

You are lucky you still have your 'job' after refusing to accept our hymnbook
And, 'Ordinariates are' NOT 'confused about their state of things'.

I hope you keep your job and flourish at your new church - Whose name is???
I suggest that you and Fr have a long and friendly talk about our Anglican heritage and patrimony.
There is far more to us than our inspired approach to liturgy.

Godspeed!

Until recently I was quite involved in an Ordinariate parish in Canada in regards to the music for the liturgy and education. I'll add a few quick thoughts. The musical patrimony is diverse enough to meet the realities of musical resources available. Musically, there are easy and legitimate places to start with the propers (St. Peter's Gradual) and grand places to work towards (Burgess).

In regards to an Ordinariate Hymnal, I haven't heard anything for two years. At that time, a prominent American musician who clearly understood the musical patrimony, and particularly the American musical patrimony was in charge of the project, I believe as editor. I have no clue if the same kind and competent gentlemen is still involved but I hope he is.

I was asked to contribute my suggestions, which I did. The problem with a continental hymn book that would be imposed on all communities in North America is that it couldn't possibly recognize the established patrimony of regions and communities, especially an American book for Canadians.

Patrimonially, Canadians have always taken their cue from England (not America), musically and otherwise. There are exceptions of course "Love Divine" sung to Hyfrydol for instance and "Sing of Mary" must be sung to Hermon, says the Canadian author of "Sing to Mary". etc. I've also been witness to demoralizing Christmas Eve masses where the hymns chosen by the priest were the established English canon for Christmas Eve and thus no one sang because they simply didn't know the carols and the Canadian congregation got smaller each Christmas Eve. This paragraph is admittedly "confused".

A final anecdote: In the beginning there was an Ordinariate gathering in Houston. I went with many Canadians. It concluded with Benediction at the Shrine. The text for the Tantum Ergo was printed and quite American in style. Not the traditional English I'd been brought up on in Canada. The tune was utterly forgettable. Hardly anyone sang American or Canadian. After it had concluded a grand elderly lady close to me said to her companion in a Texas accent, "I'm too old to learn a new tune."

I don't have solutions, except maybe to say, that it is too soon for such a project.

Troy -
What hymnal is currently in use in the POCSP in Canada?
If the promised hymnal ever becomes reality it would be nice to have tunes from both the US and Canada. This would be mutually enriching. And, then we could sing Braenwern down here!

The New English Hymnal started with a poll of parish priests

It may be a worthwhile starting point, but not the only thing one or two people have to go by. I agree with most everything you have to say here, Roborgelmeister. Any of these hymnals should be treated like any respectable anthology put out by a university press. It takes time, care, and academic rigor by professionals, not opaque curial afterthoughts.

The reality is that the kids probably don't need the music teacher to use the 1940 as the primary source, no matter what one feels about it or how this attitude is expressed. Not all of the kids are necessarily in the Ordinariate or attending Mass there on Sundays, and all of them belong to the Latin church.

Also, I mean, look: it's a valid opinion to think that perhaps the material of the 1940 should have been repackaged long ago (certainly the public-domain portions) or that preparations should have been made to do so now that public-domain day is annually observed, so that by a date sometime in the future, the whole hymnal is available. I do not think that most people consider the question, but for those who do, I don't think that they have "twee scruples". It is a first-order question, as baptizing the patrimony doesn't mean baptizing the actual book. You can see why Catholics would revolt at that. That's not being scrupulous, even if one is relatively well-informed and more or less supportive of the Ordinariate.

What hymnal is currently in use in the POCSP in Canada?

I couldn't say definitively, but I think mostly the 1938 Book of Common Praise and the New English Hymnal.

This thread is very interesting to me. I have been working on a hymnal that serves the traditional community for numerous years. You have to realize that different pockets of the traditional camp approach hymn music differently from Parish to Parish. And I’ve heard the saying that “local tradition is why we do this here.” I can understand some of that. I was DM in one parish years ago that sang the roof off of the church. They used Worship 3, and they also sang five of the masses from the Kyriale. Yes, and they did it well. And to put the icing on the cake, they had just purchased Pasi Opus V.

I will preface the following comments by stating that this is my own perception having been a Catholic Musician for over 60 years… 60 of the most tumultuous years in the church and in the sacred music profession.

I have two other positions now. One is a Novus Ordo school that is semi attached to the parish. The children all sing from the Kyriale for the ordinary every Friday. They also sing the best of hymns which I have (musically) plucked out of the 1940, but I use all the original texts of all the hymns.

I then have another position as organist at a traditional parish that is quite strict and following the 1903 Motu. No English is used during mass. However, during the processional and recessional, we do sing English hymns. The people do not sing anything during mass as the choir sings everything. There is no music resource in the pews. The people are not expected to sing.

It all kind of revolves around local custom and whatever particular “flavor” of Catholicism is installed and whatever musical resources are available. (Our choir practices three times a week for one Missa Cantata… it really is amazing.)

As per the Ordinariate, I personally struggle with a lot of aspects mostly from a theological perspective. That is all I will say about it here.

It is very interesting to me that one can have “flavors” of religion at our point in time. In my mind, there are three separate theologies that are manifest at this crossroads in history… TLM (the Latin Church), Novus Ordo (The New Church), and Ordinariate (The English Church) a lot of which cannot overlap. And yet, we musicians float between one and the other. The TLM and the Ordinariate are the poles and the Novus Ordo is a free-for-all. JMHO.

All in all, we are all sharing in this time of confusion, and what some of us call diabolical disorientation. So I would be kind in my perception of my colleagues next door. Your particular flavor of music and theology is going to conflict with somebody no matter what.

So, what kind of chameleon (or should I say schizophrenic?) are you?!

Matthew. Are you familiar with the NOH?

Convert from the Church of England mid 1990's. Found Catholic parish liturgy and music a cross to bear for many years, with some exceptions to which I had to travel (including occasional Traditional Latin Mass). I've now moved somewhere that has a small Ordinariate group and I feel much more at home. Liturgy is Catholic, with more elevated English and elements of our patrimony that are in keeping with the Faith. And we sing the gradual, rather than a responsorial psalm.