I don't believe it is objectively accurate to characterise metrical hymnody as inherently music oriented, whereas plainchant isn't.

I was not clear enough. There are plenty of hymns which are well-written, and during the FIRST verse (only) the music illustrates the text very well.

there are quite a number of plainchant tunes in which the thrill is as much in the music as it is the text. This is not inherently evil - it is human. Examples might be Veni Creator Spiritus, Te Deum,

Both of those, of course, are hymns--not Propers, nor Ordinaries.

Nor is it bad to enjoy the musical half. We all do this, regardless of metrical or plainchant genres. St Augustine (of Hippo) wrote of this tendency, felt somewhat guilty about it, but still enjoyed it. So should we! It is a gift of God. We love plainchant, and, if we're honest, must admit that we are stirred by it

Agreed, wholeheartedly. But there's something to be said for the explicitly-demanded balance between "mind AND hearts" formulated by Pius X regarding sacred music.

By the way, we both look askance at those who find NO place for hymnody during or around the Mass. Assuming that the Propers have been sung and that time allows, a well-selected, well-written hymn is fine after Communion, or certainly as a recessional. One could also preface the Mass with a hymn, reserving the Introit for the entry of the priest and servers. And of course, there is the Dies Irae, the Veni Sancte Spiritus, and the Easter Sequence (hymns all) which are specifically indicated.

I can see it go either way, but I think it makes more sense to the hymn first.

In high school, I was trained by a progressive liturgist type, who always referred to it as the Gathering Song. Even having matured in my view to traditional sacred music, I think that concept works conveniently for the restoration of the Introit. The people "gather" to the "Gathering Hymn" and then begin Mass with the priest entering to the Introit.

As Francis says, most here are probably meaning metrical hymnody that is of modern (post XVI. century) origin when they speak of hymns. Of course, hymns in the plainchant repertory are, also, metred verse and the distinction 'metrical', then, becomes rather arbitrary if not meaningless. What is objected to is hymnody to metrical tunes, which are somehow considered ipso facto beyond the pale of liturgical appropriateness. One can, and some do for that matter, sing Tantum ergo or Veni creator spiritus to metrical tunes. One can also sing modern hymns which have an appropriate metre to plainchant tunes. I, for one, am very fond of singing Mortal Flesh to one of the rather florid plainchant hymn-tunes. The distinction, then becomes ultimately rather meaningless: is it hymnody in toto to which one is objecting, or is it just metrical tunes which just might magically turn one into a Protestant. Mere metricity does not in and of itself signal a lack of spiritual or word-centred nature. Both are vehicles of the text to those who are allowing them to be. And each are obstacles for those (such as chant-phobes or hymn-tune-phobes) who make them such. Another example: I have done the Trinity office hymn Immensa et una Trinitas (in both Latin and English) to its mode viii plainchant tune and to 'Winchester New'. Each has a distinct aesthesis, each is marvelous to sing and hear, and each brings the words wonderfully to life. People who don't like fine modern hymnody are just like those who don't like chant: neither one of them really 'gets it'.

A further comment: there are some who would never want to sing 'hymns' at mass because they are 'replacing' propers. I share their vision and do believe that a mass with its propers most faithfully represents the Roman Rite in all its integrity. However, using hymns at mass is Not 'replacing' the propers. It is exercising a quite valid and legitimate option which, in the hands of a wise choirmaster, can yield yet another benificent and spiritual light upon the Roman Rite. As much as I love plainchant, I would not want ever to have nothing but chant and never sing hymns and anthems. This would be an awful robbery of the riches which are our inheritance.

We're in the time of year when we can sing Come, Ye Thankful People, Come--a hymn with about 150% more of the Gospel in it than you'll find in your average homily. Verse 2 is a basically a chunk of Mark chapter 4, versified. So I'm having a hard time being a hard-liner on the propers just at the moment.

Are the following hymns part of the Mass? Or extrinsic?
All Glory, Laud and Honor
Ubi Caritas
(and the Sequences)

Kathy

We have been singing CYTPC.

We sang the Offertory Proper this past weekend from the Arbogast at four different Masses.

…hard to find a hymn with this content though.

"There was a man in the land of Hus, whose name was Job, simple, and upright, and fearing God, whom Satan besought that he might tempt: and power was given him from the Lord over his possessions and his flesh; and he destroyed all his substance and his children, and wounded his flesh with a grievous Ulcer."

This is not too popular with the ordinary church way of thinking, if you get my drift.

Singing the propers really drives the point home and brings a beautiful gravity to the liturgical celebration.

I do use metrical vernacular hymns, but to me they are inferior to Gregorian chant, spritually and musically. They are not the text of the Mass, they are commentaries of individuals when they are used in Mass. Even if they are chosen by the most wise music director, they cannot surpass the chosen text by the Church.

English is a syllabic language, so it might fit better with the metered music. But metrical music cannot transcend like Gregoriant chant does. If a parish needs a commentary in Mass, I guess you need vernacular metrical hymns too. And if the parishioners are not familiar with Gregorian chant, I guess you have to use vernacular hymns. But there are also people who want to experience the liturgy without commentaries, the liturgy that trascends the time and space, which is supported by the music that highlights it.

"What active role did the apostles play at the Last supper? They let the astounding events enfold them, ...
"if I do not wash you, you have no part in me." (Mosebach, Heresy of Formlessness)

What part do we play in His sacrifice and how much commentaries do we need for His sacrifice?

I'd like to share the following I read recently. Even if you don't agree, it might help you to think twice before you promote vernacular metrical hymns in Mass. ( 'hymn' refers to vernacular hymn in the following quote, not hymns such as Gloria, Sanctus... )

"vernacular hymns have played significant part in the collpase of the liturgy. Just consider what resulted in the flowering of hymns: Luther's Reformation was a singing movement, and the hymns expressed the beliefs of the Reformers. Vernacular hymns replaced the liturgy, as they were designed to do; they were filled with the combative spirit of those dismal times and were meant to fortify the partisans. People singing a catchy melody together at the top of their voices created a sense of community, as all soldiers, clubs and politicians know. The Catholic Counter-Reformation felt the demagogic power of these hymns. People so enjoyed singing; it was so easy to influence their emotions using pleasing tunes with verse repetition. In the liturgy of the Mass, however, there was no place for hymns. The litrugy has no gaps; it is one single great canticle; where it prescribes silence or the whisper, that is where the mystery is covered with an acoustic veil, as it were, any hymn would be out of the question....
Still they were there: the sound of hundreds of people singing smothered the liturgy and obscured what was going on at the altar. It was clear that something needed to be done; but as we know, it was the hymns that were victorious, not the liturgy..."' (M. Mosebach)

Mia, may I ask you, why do you use vernacular, metrical hymns at Mass? Is it required, or do you see a need to do this in your situation?

I've heard chant that sounds like what Mosebach is describing in his (obviously biased) characterisation of metrical hymnody at its utter worst. This is an unfair caricature. And an unfortunate one by an intelligent and respected scholar. He does not seem ever to have heard such hymnody as sung by English cathedral choirs (Catholic and Anglican) and hundreds of Anglican churches throughout the world. One who has a soul cannot but be inspired by the dread majesty of the Most High God and His liturgy when listing to and participating in such singing, such Anglican chanting, and such masterful organ playing, such anthems. Who would be so callous, so narrow and myopic, that he or she would think that God is not glorified by such musical offerings? My listening this week is to plainchant by Chanticleer, and Anglican chants and hymns by St Thomas' Church, Fifth Avenue. My soul is greatly - deeply - moved by both, and I know that a mass using either of these musics would be one of profound reverence, in which one was 'worshipping the Lord in the beauty of holiness'.

We know, do we not, that anything can be done well and holily if one wishes; and that the same thing can be done wretchedly to present a false impression.

There are some who should take lessons in hymn playing from the nearest Anglican Cathedral choirmaster, learning registration, moving CF from voice to voice,
making the hymnody an intelligent encounter and experience with the text and with God. Learning to play hymnody in such wise that it does become an integral part the the liturgy.

Diatribes about what went wrong with our liturgy and why are often well founded and contain varying alloys of truth. The culprit, though, is not hymns. The culprit (whose name might be said to be 'legion') is a variety of types of what may be said with a treasure house of generosity and charity to be spiritual songs, which somehow came to be called 'hymns'. SO! What went wrong was Not hymns. It was an invasion of the Paris mob with street music, sacred street lyrics, and a determination to drive out not only chant, but also genuine hymnody. So Mosebach is somewhat off mark to condemn hymnody on the basis of the gross excesses of the Reformation and the job done on the church by varieties of sacro-pop and sacred street music in church. He really did not discuss genuine hymnody respectfully or intelligently. He does show a profound sense and reverence for the holiness and sanctity of the mass; and speaks convincingly about the role of chant. Unfortunately, he is another person who has never experienced and does not know hymnody that can be as sancitfying as chant - just as it can be as annoying as poor chant can also be.

deleted

DELETE. sorry I keep clicking the wrong tab.

delete (if an administer sees this, please take them out? I don't think I can do it. I'm still not used to "whisper." Thank you)

Here is the section of the GIRM that outlines what is to be sung at certain parts of the Mass. I am outlining the parts of the Mass where hymns have been typically sung.

This paragraph is addressing the Entrance Rite. Notice that songs and hymns are the lower options.

48. The singing at this time is done either alternately by the choir and the people or in a
similar way by the cantor and the people, or entirely by the people, or by the choir alone. In the
dioceses of the United States of America there are four options for the Entrance Chant: (1) the
antiphon from the Roman Missal or the Psalm from the Roman Gradual as set to music there or
in another musical setting; (2) the seasonal antiphon and Psalm of the Simple Gradual; (3) a song
from another collection of psalms and antiphons, approved by the Conference of Bishops or the
Diocesan Bishop, including psalms arranged in responsorial or metrical forms; (4) a suitable
liturgical song similarly approved by the Conference of Bishops or the Diocesan Bishop.55

Here concerning the Responsorial Psalm.

61. ...Songs or hymns may not be used in place of the responsorial Psalm.

Here concerning the Preparation of the Gifts.

The procession bringing the gifts is accompanied by the Offertory chant (cf. above, no.
37b), which continues at least until the gifts have been placed on the altar. The norms on the
manner of singing are the same as for the Entrance chant (cf. above, no. 48).

Here concerning Communion, the first entry concerns the Proper.

86. While the priest is receiving the Sacrament, the Communion chant is begun.

87. In the dioceses of the United States of America there are four options for the Communion
chant: (1) the antiphon from the Roman Missal or the Psalm from the Roman Gradual as set to
music there or in another musical setting; (2) the seasonal antiphon and Psalm of the Simple
Gradual; (3) a song from another collection of psalms and antiphons, approved by the United
States Conference of Catholic Bishops or the Diocesan Bishop, including psalms arranged in
responsorial or metrical forms; (4) a suitable liturgical song chosen in accordance with no. 86
above. This is sung either by the choir alone or by the choir or cantor with the people.
If there is no singing, however, the Communion antiphon found in the Missal may be recited
either by the faithful, or by some of them, or by a lector. Otherwise the priest himself says it
after he has received Communion and before he distributes Communion to the faithful.

NOTE: In the section concerning the concluding rite, there is no expectation of music at all in the GIRM.

{{All Citations:

Copyright © 2003, United States Catholic Conference, Inc., Washington, D.C. All rights reserved.
General Instruction of the Roman Missal
Including Adaptations for the Dioceses of the United States of America

Concordat cum originali:
Msgr. James Patrick Moroney
Executive Director, Secretariat for the Liturgy
United States Conference of Catholic Bishops

The English translation of the General Instruction of the Roman Missal (Third Typical Edition) ©
2002, International Committee on English in the Liturgy, Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this
document may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or
mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval
system, without permission in writing from the copyright holder.

This text is confirmed for use in the Dioceses of the United States of America. Persons from
other nations should consult the local Episcopal Conference regarding the appropriate text for
their nation.}}

Exactly my point too, Paix. Many times we speak about ideals on this forum, and what happens in reality is quite different for the present moment. But that still does not exempt us from the ideal.

Kathy,

Sorry. I think you misunderstood my comment. By prescribed hymns, I was referring to those such as "Gloria, Laus, et honor tibi sit", etc, used in certain Masses. As for my personal preference of hymns, I was agreeing with your assessment of the "post-Communion hymn of praise, and the "recessional hymn," about which the GIRM is silent but which folks have expected for decades if not centuries."

Noel:

It has never been my practice to base a music repertoire on what happens inside the Vatican (since I have been alive). B16 has greatly curtailed the errors on that account, but he certainly can't stop it all in one fell swoop. Like I said earlier, abuses sometimes are perpetrated from within the walls of the church and it has to be addressed by someone else at some point. I believe CMAA did this for a long time... but it fell on deaf ears.

Frogman,

I'm confused as to which view you are trying to advance.

Your title says: "What follow is an untenable claim....."

But your writings suggest that you agree with what is written afterwards.

"I mean no disrespect, but this conversation is getting a bit weird.

Bottom line (for me): Go look at some worship aids printed for liturgies celebrated at St. Peter's Basilica. How often are THEY using ONLY the propers at masses that the Holy Father himself presides at? You might be surprised."

I am having trouble finding any worship aids at the Vatican and am very interested in what they are doing in light of the very good restrictions on guest choirs...what is a good link or two to find them, please?