Ship of Fools: Hymnals and Song Books

Thread: Hymnals and Song Books Board: Oblivion / Ship of Fools.

To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=024784

Posted by Amos (# 44) on :

Having just done a search and failed to find our previous discussion on hymnals, I would like to start a new one.

In my churches when I arrived I found several hundred copies of 'Hymns Ancient and Modern' (a small words-only version dating from about 1950) and about a hundred and fifty copies of the Combined Words Edition of Volumes 1, 2, and 3 of 'Songs of Fellowship,' which last was purchased by my immediate predecessor. One parish has an organist and choir and occasionally a pianist, bass guitarist and drummer. One has an organ, electric piano, guitar and wind instruments. One has an organ. None use projectors. I have just splashed out on the New English Hymnal and put all the Ancient and Moderns in the vestry bookcase. Nearly everyone is extremely happy and, judging by Sunday's services, the congregational singing has improved. HOWEVER: that still leaves the problem of what to do with the 'Songs of Fellowship,' and how to keep the more Evangelical members of the flock on board. What hymnals do other people use, in and out of the CofE?

[ 21. November 2011, 10:15: Message edited by: Amos ]

Posted by Laxton's Superba (# 228) on :

You could always advertise the books you don't want on your diocese's website, or your own - you never know who might need a few books. Or sometimes Bible colleges and the like will take them.
Our place uses the orange Kevin Mayhew book but some of the alterations are a bit too PC for my liking, and pointless, as the congregation will sing the words they are expecting in any case.

The place I've been at on placement use OHPs for everything but I think they must come from "Jesus is my Boyfriend" vol. XXII

Posted by seasick (# 48) on :

Methodism produces an authorised hymnal so most places tend to use it. We've been using Hymns and Psalms since 1983 and this year a new one - Singing the Faith - has just come out. I'm pleasantly surprised by it, in particular in bringing us some of the more modern Catholic material and some material for singing in the liturgy.

Quite a number of Methodist churches use Songs of Fellowship as a supplement and I'm familiar with the combined volumes 1,2,3 book to which Amos refers. There is some good stuff in it, but I find you have to spend a lot of time wading through, erm, less good material to find it. I think I would find it extremely limiting to use as the only book.

Posted by Tubbs (# 440) on :

My small Baptist church in a large village uses "Songs of Followship". I think it's the most recent edition available and bought quite recently as the books are in very good nick. (I think there are some copies of the Bapist hymnal floating about as well).

Rev T programmes a mixture of traditional hymns and choruses in an attempt to ensure that everyone gets something they like. However, we only have two people who can play the piano. One can play pretty much anything whilst the other is happier with the more traditional material and that does have an impact on what we sing. [Biased]

Songs of Fellowship has a mixture of traditional hymns and choruses, it isn't all evangelical arm wavers or Jesus is my boyfriend icky-ness. As it was bought quite recently, you could always use both sets of books in tandem so they both last longer. But, if you really can't face it, I'm sure that there are plenty of churches that would be grateful for some new second hand copies.

Tubbs

[ 21. November 2011, 11:07: Message edited by: Tubbs ]

Posted by Amos (# 44) on :

Yes, the difficulty was in using 'Songs of Fellowship' as the principal hymn book. Both it and the ancient Ancient and Modern have very small print, which was difficult for a number of people, and I also found I very quickly found and used the hymns and songs in 'Songs of Fellowship' which people in the congregations actually knew and could sing.

At the moment I'm expecting to keep it in two parishes as a supplement. The third wants to get rid of it and then throw a party. Bear in mind, these are CofE parishes which, up until 2007, had a fairly High tradition.

[ 21. November 2011, 11:08: Message edited by: Amos ]

Posted by dyfrig (# 15) on :

According to a cogent and finely argued article on this site (see the second column, article called "Songs of Fellowship" which links to a pdf), S&HoF contains much that is suitable for Catholics because of its many references to "celebrate" (which is what Catholics do with a Mass) and "Jubilate, everybody" is High Church.

I love the internet. It has so improved the quality of public discourse.

Posted by Amos (# 44) on :

Couldn't find it, Dryfig. Was distracted by 'Shocking Schoolteachers' on the same site. I know you could be really helpful if you wanted. [Razz]

I shall sing a chorus of 'Oi, Oi, Oi,/We just wanna praise you, Lord!' and hope that you will post again.

Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on :

This might grate the teeth and stick in the craw, but it might be time to think of getting projectors and screens. Particularly if your two bands are any good, it will give them the freedom to introduce material that isn't in your current books. Who knows. Perhaps they might write some new stuff themselves.

Besides, whatever others may say, if ones musicians aren't riddled with prejudices either way and determined not to co-operate, traditional and modern material mix well. Our experience is that the widely held prevailing wisdom that all the music in a service should be either traditional A&M NEH style or SoF MP is wrong - provided one doesn't let heavy metal or drummers in perspex boxes anywhere near the front.

Posted by dyfrig (# 15) on :

There are many interesting and insightful articles on that site, Sibling Amos - I was particularly intrigued by the analysis of the clearly evil Mr Bruce Forsyth.

Anyway, perhaps I should try to be more helpful.

The basic problem is that hymnbooks are either very tradition-specific or, where attempts have been made at a wider selection, usually terrible (cf. "Hymns Old & New" in its various guises).

Enoch is right that it doesn't all have to be from one source, but handing someone both NEH (a fat little book) and S&HFA (a large book*), as well as the notice sheet and the liturgy is going to get silly.

The ability to use many hymns under a CLA licence makes life easier, but only works if you have a screen and a sympathetic way of incorporating that into your church (the best use of putting stuff on screen I came across was at an Orthodox liturgy at Greenbelt.)

Of course, not everything is covered by CLA (they don't control "Tell Out My Soul", for example; you have to ring +Timothy D-S up and ask for permission directly. And there's more Catholic stuff that they don't handle.)

* The large print version of S&HoF is one of the few that has a decent font. However, being over 1,000 hymns long, it comes in three volumes, all of which are the size of a Welsh market town.

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :

quote:
Originally posted by dyfrig:

The ability to use many hymns under a CLA licence makes life easier, but only works if you have a screen and a sympathetic way of incorporating that into your church (the best use of putting stuff on screen I came across was at an Orthodox liturgy at Greenbelt.)

Why use a screen when you can print the words out on your service leaflet/ bulletin?

Posted by Coffee Cup (# 13506) on :

\Continuing the tangent....

quote:
Originally posted by dyfrig:
There are many interesting and insightful articles on that site, Sibling Amos - I was particularly intrigued by the analysis of the clearly evil Mr Bruce Forsyth.

That site is a thing to behold. I notice that one is forbidden from downloading the articles on it in the rider at the bottom of the .pdf - not sure how that restriction works given you have to have downloaded the pdf to read it...

But what I really want to know is this: is the dancing pants song which he quotes real? Or is the entire site a parody and I'm just a bit slow today?

Posted by dyfrig (# 15) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
Why use a screen when you can print the words out on your service leaflet/ bulletin?

Oddly, that had never crossed my mind. Duh. Indeed - if the collect and readings for a Sunday get printed out, why not the hymns?

[ 21. November 2011, 12:46: Message edited by: dyfrig ]

Posted by Amos (# 44) on :

I don't see why one couldn't print song lyrics on the Weekly Sheet if one had copyright permission! I'd rather not go down the road of creating a fresh Order of Service booklet for each parish every Sunday, though.

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :

quote:
Originally posted by dyfrig:
According to a cogent and finely argued article on this site (see the second column, article called "Songs of Fellowship" which links to a pdf), S&HoF contains much that is suitable for Catholics because of its many references to "celebrate" (which is what Catholics do with a Mass) and "Jubilate, everybody" is High Church.

I love the internet. It has so improved the quality of public discourse.

So true, Dyfrig! Who is that pillock? He claims to have a PhD or is it a DD and he can't even write English.

Posted by Amos (# 44) on :

Dr Wright's article has certainly given me plenty of material to bring before my PCC this evening, if I dare. He writes a bit like E.J. Thribb.

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :

Dr Thribb if you please.

Posted by dyfrig (# 15) on :

I know of places that put the readings, psalm and collects on an A4 sheet; you could do that and put the hymns on the back. Thus all a person needs is the liturgy booklet and the sheeet for the day.

Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :

Sure, but (i) someone's got to do it (and it takes time); and (b) you have to watch copyright issues - as you do when projecting, of course.

Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on :

Couldn't someone get Dr Wright to enlist? Somebody as opinionated as he is ought to fit in well and be a happy addition to our crew - or perhaps he already is.

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :

He reminded me of our late-lamented Coiled Spring.

Posted by Arch Anglo Catholic (# 15181) on :

We use the truly nasty Hymns Old and New Green version. It is, in my humble opinion, truly bad.

Whenever there is a choice between a truly excellent and a banal harmonisation, guess which one they go for...

The removal of gender specific words renders some verses unbearably clunky and offends some of the congregation (particularly women I should add) because it suggests that they are unable to distinguish between man, woman and mankind.

New English Hymanl is good and for other informal use we have a small, privately printed and copyright authorised hymnal with words and music for new worship songs, carefully checked to make sure they are theologically appropriate and decent musically!

Posted by ken (# 2460) on :

We are another Songs of Fluffiness shop. It does have nearly all the older hymns you might want, and at least it doesn't eviscerate the words the way Kevin Mayhew does.

quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
Why use a screen when you can print the words out on your service leaflet/ bulletin?

Cos we'd have to go over the one folder sheet of A4 that we use at the moment. As it is we can barely get the liturgy on there. If the vicar wasn't addicted to Eucharistic Prayer H we'd have to leave the Confession and the Creed out.

Posted by St.Silas the carter (# 12867) on :

We currently (RC) use the third edition of the Worship Hymnal, but with the news mass translations, we have to get another. The new edition of the Worship hymnal is out of the question though. Formerly, it was a good 80% classic, traditional hymns, or new texts set to older tunes.

They've decided that the new edition is to be mostly contemporary, with a lot of mucking around with texts and harmonisations. A good 2/3 of the texts and tunes are new compositions. We're moving to the St.Michael Hymnal , though ubfortunately it won't arrive till after Advent, so I don't know what we'll do till then.

Posted by Jengie Jon (# 273) on :

Having spent the last two years worshipping with a congregation who uses Songs of Fellowship one, two, three (combined) and four (on sheets). I would, bin 1,2,and 3 and buy 4.

Anything worth singing in 1,2 and 3 should be in your hymnal (most of the stuff the congregation I was with sang from 3 were traditional hymns that had not made it into the earlier ones, 1 and 2 are so old that modern hymn books had access to them when compiled).

Four I find really interesting, there does seem to be a maturity in four that I have not found in earlier SOF. There also are some modern settings of classic hymns. It makes a pretty good supplement, gives access to new charismatic worship songs (anything earlier is either in the hymnal or if desperate covered by copyright licenses) and is a bit more sophisticated than earlier books.

Plus it will confuse the hell out of your evangelical wing.

Jengie

[ 21. November 2011, 18:04: Message edited by: Jengie Jon ]

Posted by ken (# 2460) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Jengie Jon:
Anything worth singing in 1,2 and 3 should be in your hymnal

SOF123 is our hymnal. Well, its the only hymbook we've used for years. Before that it was Mission Praise.

Book 1 is OK - its very much like an abbreviated MP. Book 3 has, as you say, a lot of old stuff they missed out the first time round, as well as most of the most popular of the songs from the Redman/Hughes/Townsend stable. Its 2 that is cringeworthy. It reads like it was the kids Sunday School songbook from the Brighton NFI circa 1985.

Come to think of it I know a bloke who was likely to have have compiled a CCK kid's songbook in the 1980s. And he went on to work for Kingsway... perhaps I should ask him...

Posted by Pancho (# 13533) on :

My parish uses United in Christ - Unidos en Cristo, a hymnal published by OCP. The hymnal is a paperback that gets republished every couple of years and the music (ordinaries and hymns) are about equally divided between those in Engish and those in Spanish with a good number of bilingual hymns (and a little bit of Latin somewhere). The front of the book with the Order of Mass and Ordinaries are in each language on facing pages. This is also true for the missalette that accompanies this hymnal (i.e. reading in English facing the same reading in Spanish)

As far as I know we will continue to use it. I think the next edition would've of come out this Advent anyway which is very convenient for the new English translation, though the vast majority of our services are in Spanish.

At another parish I often attend they use OCP's Today's Missal which comes out several times a year. Besides the Order of Mass and readings it also contains seasonally appropriate hymns. They use the edition with the Spanish supplement. They also use the "Music Issue", a yearly hymnal that accompanies Today's Missal and has a collection of ordinaries as well.

As far as I know they'll be continuing with this missal and hymnal as well. That's the advantage of these seasonal and yearly hymnals, changes are relatively easy to make. Interestingly though, they did not go with an OCP setting of the Mass for the new translation at the Mass I've been attending.

Posted by Amos (# 44) on :

This is all interesting and useful, thank you. I've just been told that the Worship Group feel that if they're not playing ALL the music at a service, and if ALL the music isn't from Songs of Fellowship, they don't think it's worth showing up.

Posted by Sober Preacher's Kid (# 12699) on :

This is a Pond Difference.

In North America most denominations, including the Anglicans, produce their own hymnal which is approved for use by the denominational authority. Most churches stick to their denominational book.

Hymn books are an affirmation of denominational identity here, not a party-line affiliation like in the CoE.

Sometimes churches will co-operate on joint hymn books, for instance the Anglican Church of Canada and the United Church of Canada jointly produced The Hymn Book of 1970, aka "The Old Red Hymn Book". We went our separate ways in the 1990's, the Anglicans produced the Book of Common Praise and the United Church came out with Voices United.

On the plus side hymn books over here are as much worship resources as song books, Voices United has the Revised Common Lectionary in the back cross-referenced with hymn appropriate to the day and all kinds of service music designed to augment our Service Book, Celebrate God's Presence.

Posted by dj_ordinaire (# 4643) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:
This is a Pond Difference.

A sub-pond difference... The Church of Ireland operates on the same policy, although my current parish prints the words out on the weekly sheet. I'm not sure why, but I guess it because they occasionally have things from other sources including hymns in the Irish language or from some of the African countries from which our choristers hail.

Posted by seasick (# 48) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Amos:
This is all interesting and useful, thank you. I've just been told that the Worship Group feel that if they're not playing ALL the music at a service, and if ALL the music isn't from Songs of Fellowship, they don't think it's worth showing up.

Sermon series on humility coming up?

Posted by Graven Image (# 8755) on :

May I suggest that your local jails and prisons might very much appreciate a donation of matching hymn books. In my chaplain days I tried to make do with a few of each by giving out page numbers like this. If you have the Baptist red book you will find the hymn on page 123, If you have a Methodist green book the hymn is on page 456, and if you are using the lighter green Salvation Army song book it is on page 789, and if you did not get a book please look on with your neighbor. We sang Amazing Grace often.

Posted by Carys (# 78) on :

That sounds frustrating Amos. I suppose the best approach given that is to use SoF once a month (or whatever frequency works for the church) with the band and to stick to organ and NEH for the other weeks.

We use ;Hymns Old and New: One Church, One Faith, One Lord which was bought about 6 years ago to replace AMR.* Someone went through the index and decided it contained the bulk of the trad hymns we wanted and the organist only expressed his concerns as 'why do we have to change from AMR?' rather than pointing out the issues with the odd harmonisations and no-one noticed the changes to the words. As a result, the current choir (almost entirely new in the past 5 years) aren't keen on the book we have but we're stuck with it because of the sunk costs in it. We do sometimes revert to AMR especially for evensong, though less so under current choir director than previous.

Carys

*I believe Mission Praise was sometimes tried, but not appreciated by the (mainly student) choir.

[ETA for code and to make it clear I was responding to Amos' post having not refreshed the page before replying]

[ 21. November 2011, 23:11: Message edited by: Carys ]

Posted by Circuit Rider (# 13088) on :

quote:
Originally posted by seasick:
Methodism produces an authorised hymnal so most places tend to use it. We've been using Hymns and Psalms since 1983 and this year a new one - Singing the Faith - has just come out. I'm pleasantly surprised by it, in particular in bringing us some of the more modern Catholic material and some material for singing in the liturgy.

I brought both of these back from England, as well as Hymns Ancient and Modern. I am looking forward to borrowing from these.

American Methodism uses The United Methodist Hymnal (1989), and my smaller church still uses the older Methodist Hymnal (1964) and the Cokesbury Hymnal, published since 1923 and still a favorite in many churches.

Posted by bib (# 13074) on :

For some years we used the Australian Hymn Book as well as the NEH, but the Anglican church in Australia, for some brainless reason, decided to give us Together in Song. It is an appalling production full of very badly done political correctness and several very laughable hymns. My church has gone back to AHB and NEH, but most of other other Anglican churches use TIS. I feel like saying, if it isn't broken, don't try and fix it.

Posted by dyfrig (# 15) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Amos:
I've just been told that the Worship Group feel that if they're not playing ALL the music at a service, and if ALL the music isn't from Songs of Fellowship, they don't think it's worth showing up.

Was it John Milton who said, "New music group is just old choir writ large"?

Posted by ken (# 2460) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Amos:
This is all interesting and useful, thank you. I've just been told that the Worship Group feel that if they're not playing ALL the music at a service, and if ALL the music isn't from Songs of Fellowship, they don't think it's worth showing up.

OK this is what you do. You get your church to buy half a dozen copies of a little book by John Bell called The Singing Thing. And even more importantly you buy half a dozen of its sequel, The Singing Thing Too. Unfortunately they are rather expensive for such small books, but sometimes you have to buy the bullet.

Give the minister/vicar/priest/whoever a copy of the first book, and also give one to those in the church who are pissed off by the attiutude of the music group. Meanwhile give the main members of the music group copies of the second book and ask them to read that.

Assuming they read it and understand it, job done. All you need to do now is get music group and their opponents to go to a music planning meeting and sit down together... also stand up and sing together.

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :

John Bell is wonderful! Gareth Malone in Billy Connolly's body.

Posted by Chorister (# 473) on :

We use 'Common Praise' which seems to combine the best of the English Hymnal and Hymns Ancient and Modern with a few hymns from the nonconformist tradition and the most widely known of the Graham Kendrick era. Which is quite far enough along the worship song route for most of us (in our fairly traditional country town church) to handle.

There has been talk of developing an in-house supplement, containing the best known of the more modern worship songs, plus songs the children would know from school - so the supplement can be tailored to be of use in family / children / occasional churchgoer orientated services. But, what with having extra churches recently join our team and other staffing difficulties, this has been put on the back burner for a few months.

The reason an in-house supplement was suggested was that none of the published hymnals or song books appeared to meet our needs exactly. But of the ones I've looked at, this seemed to be the best new one on the market, especially as it was initially conceived to be a supplement to 'Common Praise' which we already have.

Posted by Sober Preacher's Kid (# 12699) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Circuit Rider:

quote:
Originally posted by seasick:
Methodism produces an authorised hymnal so most places tend to use it. We've been using Hymns and Psalms since 1983 and this year a new one - Singing the Faith - has just come out. I'm pleasantly surprised by it, in particular in bringing us some of the more modern Catholic material and some material for singing in the liturgy.
I brought both of these back from England, as well as Hymns Ancient and Modern. I am looking forward to borrowing from these.

American Methodism uses The United Methodist Hymnal (1989), and my smaller church still uses the older Methodist Hymnal (1964) and the Cokesbury Hymnal, published since 1923 and still a favorite in many churches.

When I was growing up the current hymn book was the Hymn Book of 1970 but smaller and rural churches often doggedly hung on to The Old Blue Book, The Hymnary of 1930.

The Hymnary had several 1800's revival and praise songs which the Congregations still loved but had gone out of fashion in more elite quarters and the editors of The Hymn Book left them out. The Hymn Book also had a miserable excuse for a psalter. The Old Blue Book had been in use since 1930 and was dearly loved. A bit old and worn by the end, but dearly loved.

Voices United brought back some of those old favourites and added in Amazing Grace which had been left of The Hymn Book. It also has a large and excellent psalter which was the top request. It even runs into canticles, I have put some of the canticles based from Isaiah in the hymn line up for Advent. Genevan 42nd here we come!

There are five settings for Sung Communion in the 900's section. By sung I mean the Sanctus, Memorial Acclamation and Great Amen, etc. and I typed up an appropriately matched Great Thanksgiving from the service book, Celebrate God's Presence.

The minister likes it and I think we may do the Sung service next Sunday. Of course since the Communion music is in the pew hymn books we'll likely have the whole congregation sing the communion music.

Posted by Qoheleth. (# 9265) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
of the ones I've looked at, this seemed to be the best new one on the market

.. [for clarity: "this" = Sing Praise]

This is what we've just bought as a supplement to NEH, as being better than New English Praise and also more likely to be approved by TPTB. Check out the contents list and it might well meet your needs. Various hefty grants currently available, too.

Posted by Metapelagius (# 9453) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
John Bell is wonderful! Gareth Malone in Billy Connolly's body.

quote:
As a regular Radio 4 listener, I find there is no more discouraging phrase currently in use than 'John Bell of the Iona Community'.

Charles Moore, Spectator's Notes, The Spectator, October 15th.

You pays your money and takes your choice, I suppose. Moore swam the Tiber in 1994, a fact which might colour his feelings. The Church Hymnary 4th ed. does contain a few pieces not written or re-harmonised by John Bell (our organist really doesn't get on with the latter). After using it for a while one cannot help getting the feeling that there can be too much of a good thing. [Roll Eyes]

Posted by Alex Cockell (# 7487) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
Sure, but (i) someone's got to do it (and it takes time); and (b) you have to watch copyright issues - as you do when projecting, of course.

Agreed. On the copyright issue - blanket licences under CCLI and Calamus come into their own.. I gather that life is made harder in the States due to the multiple collections agencies - whereas the PRS work closely with churches to make things easy..

Over use of data projectors etc - it does mean that as well as less paper being issued, you can also rapidly change song lists, orders etc... sometimes the Holy Spirit may want to take the service along another tack.

THIS is where you need close liaison between service leader, musos and techies... and where if your techies have a good ear and a solid knowledge of the music used, they can somewhat predict what is likely to be played, and therefore have the lyrics ready to play out...

It's quite an art, doing video presentation for charismatic worship...

Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Amos:
This is all interesting and useful, thank you. I've just been told that the Worship Group feel that if they're not playing ALL the music at a service, and if ALL the music isn't from Songs of Fellowship, they don't think it's worth showing up.

Brilliant- so THAT's how you get rid of them!

Posted by A.Pilgrim (# 15044) on :

A problem with using a data projector to provide the words of hymns, songs or liturgy is that it creates a single point of failure. There's nothing so effective in bringing a service of worship to a grinding halt as the breakdown of your projector.

Also the person operating it has to be absolutely on-the-ball with split-second timing and meticulous accuracy. They are the most critical person in the building for the smooth running of the service. If you've ever been to a service where the operator puts the next verse of the song up half-way through the first line, or gets the verse mixed up with the chorus so the worship group and the congregation sing different words, or any other variety of cock-up, you'll know just how effective this is at destroying an atmosphere of coherent worship. (Been there, experienced that. [Frown]

)

Posted by Right-Believing Queen (# 16832) on :

The New English Hymnal isn't bad and is certainly far better than most of the travesties out there — my college chapel features, for reasons passing understanding, horrible copies of 'Hymns Old and New' bound in some substance unknown to Nature and Nature's God, presumably on the grounds that the binding should be of similar quality to the contents— but I'm not sure it was necessary. The number of good hymns written in the years between 1906 and 1986 is negligible. What's more concerning is that the editors of the New English Hymnal made several dubious changes, many of them documented in this admirable blog. My particular pet peeve, other than the inexplicable decision not to follow the English Hymnal's practice of including original titles (except in the case of Latin hymns), is the fact that the editors seem to have had a problem with the word 'Paraclete' and gone to great lengths to avoid it. Other changes are also very dubious: why is the woodland in 'Hail, thee festival day' not gay with leaves but instead green with them, which seems somewhat self-evident.

My preference, then, would be for the English Hymnal, supplemented judiciously with selections from the English Catholic Hymn Book. I can, however, live with the New English Hymnal. One pretty much has to these days. I would grow very uneasy indeed, however, were I to enter a Church of England parish and discover a hymnal other than either the EH or the NEH in the pews. Fortunately, this such and event is usually avoidable.

Posted by ken (# 2460) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Right-Believing Queen:
The number of good hymns written in the years between 1906 and 1986 is negligible.

You've counted them?

And which ones from 1986 and since do you think are up to the standards of the great Victorians?

Agreed about Hymns Obfuscated and Negligble though. An unusable book. Misses out some of the must-have songs (though I expect my list is different from yours) and mercilessly bowdlerises those it does have. Like most of the Kevin Mayhew books its just so bland. Also I have an innate suspicion of a hymn book that comes out in Catholic, Anglican, and non-demominational editions. What is being hidden from the rest of us?

Posted by seasick (# 48) on :

I understand that the panel that decided what was going in Methodist hymns old and new had no Methodists on it! I think it's a good rule of thumb to avoid hymn books published by Kevin Mayhew.

Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on :

Yet the blasted Hymns O&N seems to get everywhere. Why? How? It's as much of a mystery as Radio 4's annual recommissioning of Quote Unquote. Everyone knows it's crap: no-one likes it; but it still survives. Only explanation I can think of is that Kevin Mayhew have hacked into the secret archives at Lambeth Palace, the RSCM, Methodist Church House, etc, and have something 'on' large numbers of clergy and choirmasters, which they will keep quiet in return for bulk purchases of their horrible books.

Posted by Saviour Tortoise (# 4660) on :

When it comes to hymn books we still use a combination of A&M Revised, One Hundred Hymns for Today and (oddly) Songs of God's People.

However... we have a CCL licence and just print other hymns as and when we want them. Sometimes in the notice sheet, sometimes on a seperate sheet if there's too many to fit on the notice sheet. I have a copy of the Hymnquest software at home which means I can find the texts to all mainstream hymnbooks (plus quite a few wierd and wonderful ones.)

I don't see us buying another hymn book when we can print hymns whenever we like. Perhaps copies for the choir maybe, but then, we have the CCL music reproduction licence as well.

With regard to mixing trad and modern music styles - I think it depends on context. At my Uni chapel (where I was organ scholar) I would happily finish conducting the choir in a piece of Tallis or Stanford or whatever, and then go and pick up my Sax to play in the music group (which was stacked with highly talented musicians.)

In my current church, which is in a city, the music is more monochrome (basically choral, trad, but with a bit of modern thrown in to keep things fresh.) I think that city churches tend to be more monochrome because people will travel go to a church with fits the niche which they prefer. In a village (or a university for that matter) where you're trying to cater for a broader community within one establishment, variety is easier to implement and, I think, more likely to be tolerated.

[ETA - I agree about Hymns O&N - the selection of hymns is okay, but the word changing annoys the sh1t out of me, and the musical arrangements are dire.]

[ 20. December 2011, 12:32: Message edited by: Saviour Tortoise ]

Posted by Mark Wuntoo (# 5673) on :

Sorry to see that so many advocate printing hymns / songs.
The best reason for using a projector and screen (given the warnings above) is the saving of forests.
Please!

Posted by dyfrig (# 15) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Saviour Tortoise:
One Hundred Hymns for Today

Is that the one with "God of concrete, God of steel" in it, with a cover designed to match the 1976 Daily Office Revised?

Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :

This one, I presume.

Posted by Saviour Tortoise (# 4660) on :

quote:
Originally posted by dyfrig:

quote:
Originally posted by Saviour Tortoise:
One Hundred Hymns for Today
Is that the one with "God of concrete, God of steel" in it, with a cover designed to match the 1976 Daily Office Revised?

Oh yes indeedy. [Smile]

It's not all terrible. It's got "And didst thou travel light" for example, which can be done very effectively to the RVW version of Kingsfold (otherwise known as Dives and Lazarus)

Actually, come to think of it, I like quite a lot of that Hymn Book, but there are some real stinkers too.

Posted by Right-Believing Queen (# 16832) on :

quote:
Originally posted by ken:

quote:
Originally posted by Right-Believing Queen:
The number of good hymns written in the years between 1906 and 1986 is negligible.
You've counted them?

'Thine be the glory' is an obvious one (written before 1906, but not translated until the 1920s). I'd be tempted to include 'Morning has broken' and 'Lord of all hopefulness', if only out of nostalgia for my schooldays.

I'm struggling to think of many others. Certainly the collective efforts of every hymnographer working in the twentieth century produced far fewer hymns of quality a J.M. Neale did individually. Of course, Neale's contributions are primarily translations, but writing a good verse translation is as much an art as writing a new hymn (and an art at which even Neale occasionally, as with his curiously lifeless translation of 'Corde natus ex parentis').

Posted by venbede (# 16669) on :

Also "Lord of the boundless curves of space" which someone who claims to understand cosmology tells me is dodgy science. Also lots by Fred Pratt Greene, who was probably a lovely man, but whose hymns strike me as platitudinous and bathetic.

Posted by venbede (# 16669) on :

My last post crossed with RBQ. I was referring to 100 Hymns for today.

"Lord Jesus Christ, you have come to us" is a sound eucharistic hymn.

"Tell out my soul" irritates me. It manages to omit both our Lady and the revolutionary politics - the rich are no longer sent away. And the tune is so hearty.

Posted by Right-Believing Queen (# 16832) on :

quote:
Originally posted by venbede:

"Tell out my soul" irritates me. It manages to omit both our Lady and the revolutionary politics - the rich are no longer sent away. And the tune is so hearty.

What part of

quote:
Tell out, my soul, the greatness of his might!
Powers and dominions lay their glory by.
Proud hearts and stubborn wills are put to flight,
the hungry fed, the humble lifted high.

Is not revolutionary? As for Mary: well, one is supposed to know the authorship, just as one is supposed to know that 'Thou bearer of th’eternal Word' refers to the Theotókos in 'Ye watchers and ye holy ones'.

Mind you, 'Tell out my soul' suffers from overuse by churches that would never dare use a hymn like 'Hail, holy Queen enthroned above' (which happens to be one of my favourites, and not only because it warms the heart to see ministers removing their birettas for every 'Maria').

Posted by Saviour Tortoise (# 4660) on :

quote:
Originally posted by venbede:
My last post crossed with RBQ. I was referring to 100 Hymns for today.

"Lord Jesus Christ, you have come to us" is a sound eucharistic hymn.

"Tell out my soul" irritates me. It manages to omit both our Lady and the revolutionary politics - the rich are no longer sent away. And the tune is so hearty.

I think that's a bit mean. I agree it doesn't convey all the meaning of the Magnificat, but I think it's a good hymn in it's own right.

We use the tune for other words as well. ("Go forth and tell", for example.)

"Lord of all hopefulness" is in there too. "All my hope on God is founded" - wouldn't be without that.

In general, I think it's a pretty good book marred by some real dreadfulness.

Posted by Belle Ringer (# 13379) on :

quote:
Originally posted by A.Pilgrim:
A problem with using a data projector to provide the words of hymns, songs or liturgy is that it creates a single point of failure... breakdown of your projector...operator puts the next verse of the song up half-way through the first line, or gets the verse mixed up with the chorus so the worship group and the congregation sing different words, or any other variety of cock-up, ...destroying an atmosphere of coherent worship. (Been there, experienced that. )

Last Sunday choir sang from hymnal, congregation from projector. Hymnal had 4 verses, projector operator pulled the hymn's words from the web and had 3 verses, his 3rd verse didn't match any of the hymnal verses.

Lots of things can go wrong when using projectors.

But another issue is: all that expensive re-sellable equipment means the hall has to be kept locked at all times. No dropping in for prayer, no all night vigils with perhaps only one person at times, too risky that a thief might come in the night bop the one person praying on the head and make off with the audio-visual system.

If the church is kept locked anyway, no big deal, if it's traditionally kept open sometimes other than during a scheduled program, potentially huge change in how people relate to the church.

Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on :

quote:
Originally posted by venbede:
Also "Lord of the boundless curves of space" which someone who claims to understand cosmology tells me is dodgy science. Also lots by Fred Pratt Greene, who was probably a lovely man, but whose hymns strike me as platitudinous and bathetic.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks that about Fred Pratt Green. I've always felt a bit guilty about disliking his hymns as much as I do. I think his poem 'The Old Couple' (in the Oxford Book of C20 English verse) is rather better than most of his hymns, though.

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Right-Believing Queen:
Other changes are also very dubious: why is the woodland in 'Hail, thee festival day' not gay with leaves but instead green with them, which seems somewhat self-evident.

I would have thought the reason for the change is self-evident!

The trouble with NEH is that it is neither one thing nor the other. It came out before Common Worship so that the liturgical section, in particular, is more or less unusable, and it does not relate well to the lectionary. I would prefer to use the old EH plus a modern supplement.

Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on :

I agree that the first half of the C20 + a bit was a relative dead period for hymns. There aren't even proportionately as many really dire ones from that period as either the C19 or the present day.

I realise that 1906 and 1986 are chosen as the dates of publication of the English Hymnal and its New successor, but I think 1986 is a bit late to mark as the end of the desert years.

Perhaps that's why, though, we now grumble about the quality of current hymn books. The older among us grew up when there was almost a canon of hymns. No one was producing much that might be worth singing but wasn't in the books already.

I'm puzzled by the criticism of 'Tell out my soul' for not mentioning Mary. I like it as a hymn but am never sure it quite catches the feel of the Magnificat. But 'My soul doth magnify the Lord' doesn't mention Mary either. The reason is simple and obvious. She's saying it. Most of us don't usually mention ourselves by name when we are speaking.

On the opportunity to come clean and admit which hymnwriters' work just don't do it for us, I'd confess that for me it's Fred Kaan. Again, I'm sure he was a very good man. Yet all of his hymns that I've encountered feel as though they are getting us to sing the worthy thoughts we ought to be thinking rather than expressing either where we really are or that we are coming before the King of Kings and Lord of Lords.

If it's time for confessions, another one. I dislike the hymn book we use. It's seriously weak in a large number of ways. But I don't want to suggest changing it, since at the moment it's so bad we have to supplement it with screens and handouts. If we spent all that money on new books, we'd be expected to tie ourselves to them. As far as I know, there isn't a decent book on the market that covers everything one needs, contains art least most of the traditional corpus, includes modern material but has resisted the temptation to wreck all its material written before about 1970.

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:

On the opportunity to come clean and admit which hymnwriters' work just don't do it for us, I'd confess that for me it's Fred Kaan. Again, I'm sure he was a very good man. Yet all of his hymns that I've encountered feel as though they are getting us to sing the worthy thoughts we ought to be thinking rather than expressing either where we really are or that we are coming before the King of Kings and Lord of Lords.

I think another writer in this category, despite my earlier praise for him as an inspirer and animator of singing, is John Bell. His texts are excellent reflections and meditations on the meaning of the Gospel, but seem a bit too laboured, and a bit too 'worthy' to be sung as hymns. I'm all for being politically radical as well as politically correct, but liturgy – as opposed to preaching – needs to express common ground rather than be challenging.

Posted by venbede (# 16669) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
/QUOTE] I would prefer to use the old EH plus a modern supplement.

Yes indeed, but some hope. I was at a church using the 1950s A & M when NEH was introduced and I was so glad to sing from it instead. I don't care a bit for "One in love and one in glory" in place of "Consubstantial coeternal".

I don't mind a bit of Graham Kendrick from time to time, honestly. (And yes, RTQ, the way "Tell out" is used rather than anything specifically Marian - and used when the Magnificat is the text in the subsequent gospel, - these are both reasons I don't care for it.)

Posted by Oxonian Ecclesiastic (# 12722) on :

I can't remember who it was who said that 'one in love and one in splendour' made the Sacred Trinity sound like the Beverley Sisters, but (s)he was spot on.

Although I am an Anglican priest, I think the best hymn book is the 1977 edition of 'Christian Hymns'. 'Sing Glory' is not bad as a modern collection, but I am changing my mind about modernizing the words to old hymns, and I think I am now broadly against it: although it is a policy which has brought substantial improvement to some texts, it has wrecked others; and no one will agree about which texts have been improved and which weakened.

'Common Praise' (the English one, not the Canadian one) has a good selection but is a disappointment because of the poor editing. What '61, 62' is about, I know not. And several hymns are in the wrong sections: a hymn which is exclusively about the Blessèd Virgin Mary is unaccountably in the 'Saints' section, and several hymns are in the Communion section which are better considered 'General'. But the biggest howler is the book's implication that Charles Wesley's 'Glory be to God on high' is a metrical Gloria.

Posted by venbede (# 16669) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Oxonian Ecclesiastic:
I can't remember who it was who said that 'one in love and one in splendour' made the Sacred Trinity sound like the Beverley Sisters, but (s)he was spot on.

Giggle. Love it.

[Big Grin]

Posted by Saviour Tortoise (# 4660) on :

Got to agree with the previous posts on Fred Kahn, Fred Pratt Green and John Bell. I use them, 'cause some people seem to like them, but good theology doesn't always make for good poetry. It can all be a little bit prosaic.

Posted by Saviour Tortoise (# 4660) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
Last Sunday choir sang from hymnal, congregation from projector. Hymnal had 4 verses, projector operator pulled the hymn's words from the web and had 3 verses, his 3rd verse didn't match any of the hymnal verses.

Lots of things can go wrong when using projectors.

But another issue is: all that expensive re-sellable equipment means the hall has to be kept locked at all times. No dropping in for prayer, no all night vigils with perhaps only one person at times, too risky that a thief might come in the night bop the one person praying on the head and make off with the audio-visual system.

If the church is kept locked anyway, no big deal, if it's traditionally kept open sometimes other than during a scheduled program, potentially huge change in how people relate to the church.

Sorry for the double post, but...

iPads for choir and congregation is the answer! [Big Grin]

Posted by Mark Wuntoo (# 5673) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Saviour Tortoise:

quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
Last Sunday choir sang from hymnal, congregation from projector. Hymnal had 4 verses, projector operator pulled the hymn's words from the web and had 3 verses, his 3rd verse didn't match any of the hymnal verses.

Lots of things can go wrong when using projectors.

But another issue is: all that expensive re-sellable equipment means the hall has to be kept locked at all times. No dropping in for prayer, no all night vigils with perhaps only one person at times, too risky that a thief might come in the night bop the one person praying on the head and make off with the audio-visual system.

If the church is kept locked anyway, no big deal, if it's traditionally kept open sometimes other than during a scheduled program, potentially huge change in how people relate to the church.
Sorry for the double post, but...

iPads for choir and congregation is the answer!

Spot on. But ahead of your time! [Big Grin]

[ 20. December 2011, 18:33: Message edited by: Mark Wuntoo ]

Posted by Spike (# 36) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Saviour Tortoise:
Got to agree with the previous posts on Fred Kahn, Fred Pratt Green and John Bell.

[Pedant mode]
It's Fred Kaan
[/Pedant mode]

Posted by Saviour Tortoise (# 4660) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Spike:

quote:
Originally posted by Saviour Tortoise:
Got to agree with the previous posts on Fred Kahn, Fred Pratt Green and John Bell.
[Pedant mode]
It's Fred Kaan
[/Pedant mode]

Sorry - always have been a useless speller. And I appreciate pedantry. Pedantry is good. [Smile]

Posted by Metapelagius (# 9453) on :

quote:
My particular pet peeve, other than the inexplicable decision not to follow the English Hymnal's practice of including original titles (except in the case of Latin hymns)

RBQ

I couldn't agree more. The Church Hymnary, now in its fourth incarnation, continues as before to print the original opening words of all translated hymns. You appear to take a dim view of Calvinists, but on this point at least they maintain your scholarly standards ... [Two face]

Posted by Jengie Jon (# 273) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Right-Believing Queen:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by venbede:

Mind you, 'Tell out my soul' suffers from overuse by churches that would never dare use a hymn like 'Hail, holy Queen enthroned above' (which happens to be one of my favourites, and not only because it warms the heart to see ministers removing their birettas for every 'Maria').

Of course not, "Tell out my Soul" is close enough to a paraphrase of a Biblical text! "Hail, Holy Queen throned above" draws on little biblical material even for me.

Similarly these churches will often actually sing "Lord Jesus Christ, you have come to us" which is according to my Roman Catholic friend a Marian hymn because has Jesus as much as "Mary's son" as "Son of God".

Protestants don't choose hymns because they are or are not Catholic but because they fit with their own tradition. Part of the genius of "Tell out my soul" is it fits with our tradition as well as the Catholic.

Jengie

Posted by venbede (# 16669) on :

Jengie - I think there's some wire crossing going on here.

I can imagine "Tell out my soul" working well as a general hymn - apart from the tune: see below.

However I (and probably RTQ) have never come across it used like that. It rolls up, almost inevitably, for feasts of Our Lady or occasions associated with her, like Advent 4 when I heard it recently. It seems a bit apologetic and unimaginative to use it nearly every time.

Tune - originally in Public School Hymn Book and knowing that it sounds ever so hearty to me, redolent of cold showers and cross country runs.

Liturgical use - I've come across it as a metrical Magnificat at Evening Prayer, which is OK.

Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Venbede
Tune - originally in Public School Hymn Book and knowing that it sounds ever so hearty to me, redolent of cold showers and cross country runs.

That's well guessed. Look at this.

Mind, he had some distinguished pupils.

Posted by St.Silas the carter (# 12867) on :

Well, I got a look at the parish's new hymnal yesterday (The St.Michael hymnal). It's a nice solid, hardbound book in blue. The pages are a nice heavy weight. The hymns are in alphabetical order rather than topical or seasonal, and I actually find that to be easier.

The hymn selection is wonderful and very broad, something it has as an advantage over the Adoremus hymnal. (Which ha a nice selection but it woefully small.) That said, I'm sort of sad to see our old red hymnals go, even if the texts often aggravated parishioners and the tunes aggravated the choir members.

Posted by John Holding (# 158) on :

quote:
Originally posted by St.Silas the carter:
Well, I got a look at the parish's new hymnal yesterday (The St.Michael hymnal). It's a nice solid, hardbound book in blue. The pages are a nice heavy weight.

To introduce a tangent:

So...not many elderly people or people with arthritis in your congregation, I guess. Heavy hardcover books are the very devil to hold and sing from if you have any issues with your hands.
And most elderly people, and those with arthritis, do have such issues.

Your congregation/parish/church is in the majority on this, of course, so my comment is not actually aimed at you specifically.

John

Posted by PD (# 12436) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
Yet the blasted Hymns O&N seems to get everywhere. Why? How? It's as much of a mystery as Radio 4's annual recommissioning of Quote Unquote. Everyone knows it's crap: no-one likes it; but it still survives. Only explanation I can think of is that Kevin Mayhew have hacked into the secret archives at Lambeth Palace, the RSCM, Methodist Church House, etc, and have something 'on' large numbers of clergy and choirmasters, which they will keep quiet in return for bulk purchases of their horrible books.

I have a suspicion that its popularity may have something to do with the unfailing ability of committees to eliminate anything of merit. Hymns O&N is not bad, it is far worse than that, it is mediocre! Any committee confronted by it is going to start wetting itself with enthusiasm because it has compromise written all over it.

PD

[ 26. December 2011, 22:38: Message edited by: PD ]

Posted by venbede (# 16669) on :

I went to Midnight Mass (well 11.30, we're C of E) to a church which used A & M New Standard and I spent sometime before the service looking through it.

I have to say that compared to Sydney Carter and (at his best) Brian Wren, dear old Fred P Green sounds like Patience Strong.

464 is a bit unfortunate, ending:

Here, in this day's dedication,
all we have to give, receive.
We, who cannot live without you,
we adore you, we believe.

What strikes me is that in conversational modern English "we believe", particularly at the end of a sentence, doesn't so much imply confident affirmation, as a suspicion of doubt. ("He's gone to Brighton, I believe" implies I'm not totally certain.)

Posted by ken (# 2460) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Right-Believing Queen:

I'm struggling to think of many others. Certainly the collective efforts of every hymnographer working in the twentieth century produced far fewer hymns of quality a J.M. Neale did individually.

Certainly that is not true! There are hundreds of hymns worth singing from the 20th century.

They might not be to your taste but what about "The Old Rugged Cross", or "How Great Thou Art", or "Because He Lives", "There Is a Redeemer", "Be still for the presence of the Lord", "Lift High the Cross"?

Or for songs that didn't become well-known until married to new tunes in the 20th century, we have "Here is love, vast as the ocean" which is from 1873 in Welsh but only appeared in English in 1900 or "Guide me O thou great Jehovah" is 18th century - but only became a popular hymn in English when sung to Cwm Rhondda, a tune published in 1907. Or others such as "For all the saints", "Come Down, O Love Divine", "All My Hope on God is Founded".

Posted by venbede (# 16669) on :

quote:
Originally posted by ken:

They might not be to your taste but what about "The Old Rugged Cross", or "How Great Thou Art", or ... "Be still for the presence of the Lord", "Lift High the Cross"?

All of which I really like and would be very pleased to sing rather than the Songs of Praise stuff that is my regular fare.

Sort of thing we'd sing at Walsingham.

If RBQ had said late C20 he might have had a point (all ken's examples are early C20) but I'd be glad to be proved wrong.

Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:

quote:
Originally posted by Venbede
Tune - originally in Public School Hymn Book and knowing that it sounds ever so hearty to me, redolent of cold showers and cross country runs.
That's well guessed. Look at this.

Mind, he had some distinguished pupils.

Interesting to note that the other one which uses 'Woodlands'- that archetypal public school hymn 'Lift up your hearts' - was written by HM Butler, who cleaned up Harrow after the scandals which flourished under Vaughan. Makes all that stuff about 'the level of the former years/ the mire of sin, the slough of guilty fears' and 'the deeds, the thoughts that honour may not name' seem very pointed.

Posted by Perkin (# 16928) on :

I seem to remeber a revision of the Public School Hymn Book - Hymns for Church and SChool. It used to be found as an extra hymn book at Durham Cathedral.

I think the idea there was that it had sufficiently different hymns to their standard fare - but can't recall what that was.

NEH is good, but thin on Responsorial psalms which are in greater number in its supplement. However it is still snooty about some great popular hymns, and so maybe another book is needed. But then that gets to three books - NEH, supplement plus a n other.

Posted by FooloftheShip (# 15579) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Mark Wuntoo:
Sorry to see that so many advocate printing hymns / songs.
The best reason for using a projector and screen (given the warnings above) is the saving of forests.
Please!

When the trumpet shall sound, all projection equipment shall be consigned to the nethermost parts of hell.

Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on :

As I've said before, proper churches can't use projection equipment because where you want to put the screen there is a rood screen/ reredos/ English Altar/ Royal Arms & Ten Commandments/ great big central pulpit/ set fawr, according to denomination &/or churchmanship.

And quite right too.

Posted by Panda (# 2951) on :

We are very close to bullet-biting and replacing our hymnbooks, so that at last the two churches in the parish will both have the same book (currently A&M NS and NEH) and the vicar will have a much easier time choosing hymns without worrying about which hymns aren't in both books.

I think we're looking at Common Praise. However, we're also looking at Sing Praise, although I realise that one's not a book to have on its own, as such.

So, not quite relatedly - How useful are melody editions: the mid-size version with just the tune?

The other church in town that uses CP gives out words editions but has melody ones in the choir, for use during choral evensong.

ISTM that if we did get Sing Praise as well we would have to get melody editions, because so many of the tunes are new or new-ish.

You could argue that if people are able to read music they're probably in the choir, in which case everyone in the congregation should be fine with a words-only. However, we don't have that sort of regular choir (we have a gang who come together to sing an anthem every few weeks but are part of the congregation the rest of the time). And it seems a bit mean to me not to provide music, but then, I do read music.

If everyone always has a melody edition, will the congregation as a whole pick up a new hymn faster?

Posted by Chorister (# 473) on :

We've found 'Common Praise' works well. A lot of the music is already familiar but, for churches without choirs, have you thought of providing some melody books, available on request to members of the congregation - with a few good singers dotted around the pews, who have access to the printed tune, the rest of the congregation should pick up the melodies much more easily.

Posted by daviddrinkell (# 8854) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
We've found 'Common Praise' works well. A lot of the music is already familiar but, for churches without choirs, have you thought of providing some melody books, available on request to members of the congregation - with a few good singers dotted around the pews, who have access to the printed tune, the rest of the congregation should pick up the melodies much more easily.

I think Common Praise is the best choice for normal Anglican worship unless the churchmanship is such that English hymnal would be more suitable. CP is well produced, has an excellent selection and hasn't messed up the texts.

I believe all hymnals should have melody lines, apart from those with full music. More people than would admit it can follow a printed melody to some extent. The last Church of Ireland hymnal issued a melody edition rather than words-only, but the idea was messed up because the book was far too big.

Posted by Jengie Jon (# 273) on :

Actually I would second David Drinkell's recommendation that all have melody editions. But I would, I am URC and we have had them for years. Even my mum who would never claim to read music* can understand that when the notes go up you go up.

Jengie

[eta * my mum is more musical than mean but less musically literate]

[ 18. February 2012, 21:31: Message edited by: Jengie Jon ]

Posted by bib (# 13074) on :

I have always intensely disliked hymns projected on a screen and will avoid any church that uses same. It always feels to me that the object of worship often becomes the screen. Also some members of the cong can't read the screen when sitting at the back of the church like good Anglicans. However, my main reason for disliking projected hymns is that I like to hold a book in my hand and to peruse the entire hymn. I have been fairly happy with the NEH, much less so with Together in Song which in my opinion is only fit for the council tip. I will not play so called choruses in my church as they are often trite and repetitive.

Posted by Manipled Mutineer (# 11514) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
As I've said before, proper churches can't use projection equipment because where you want to put the screen there is a rood screen/ reredos/ English Altar/ Royal Arms & Ten Commandments/ great big central pulpit/ set fawr, according to denomination &/or churchmanship.

And quite right too.

Or, even better, crossed keys and papal tiara...

Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on :

That too!

Posted by Fr Raphael (# 17131) on :

Please don't attack me for a genuine enquiry, I know this sort of thing can upset but, here goes [Smile]

Is there a good modern hymn book which uses inclusive language and has quality hymnody?

Posted by Beeswax Altar (# 11644) on :

Voices Found is decent but doesn't have enough material to be anything other than a supplemental hymnal.

Posted by Curiosity killed ... (# 11770) on :

You're UK, aren't you?
Common Praise - updated version of Hymns Ancient and Modern with ...
Sing Praise

Posted by Fr Raphael (# 17131) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
You're UK, aren't you?
Common Praise - updated version of Hymns Ancient and Modern with ...
Sing Praise

Thank you Curiosity Killed. I had not come across Sing Praise.

I remember that Hymns for Today's Church amended traditional 'thee' kind of talk. I don't know what it's successor is. It is something like that which has a more inclusive approach that we would like.

This is as a resource to draw on, not to replace our current books. That would be too pricey.

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0