Hymns and the Visitor, Any suggestions? Options

[Barry Williams]

Whenever I am called upon to play items such as "What a friend we have in Jesus", I use the superb arrangements in 'Sixty Songs from Sankey' by Charles Cleall. These versions impart musical dignity to the otherwise trivial harmonies that detract from the sense of the words.

Many are now 'classics', on the lines of 'O Lord my God', which often appears in a debased form in certain hymnals. (It is entirely a modern item and has no relation to any Russian or Scandinavian piece, despite certain claims made.) These items are certainly much better than many that are published as being 'modern' in hymn books often discussed on this board.

Barry Williams

[Stephen Barber]

Many are now 'classics', on the lines of 'O Lord my God', which often appears in a debased form in certain hymnals. (It is entirely a modern item and has no relation to any Russian or Scandinavian piece, despite certain claims made.)
Barry Williams

Are you sure, Barry? Wikipedia (I know, not necessarily greatly scholarly!) has a very impressive and detailed account of the hymn's origins:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_Great_Thou_Art_%28hymn%29

The original Swedish words are (allegedly) here:
http://everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=1118653

[Barry Williams]

I have looked at my notes, which I should have done before! I am grateful for the correction. It shows the danger of writing from memory. I heard a lecture about the piece at a meeting of the Baptist Church Music Society in 1967, when many such numbers were very carefully analysed, including the offerings of Mr Beaumont.

The 'sham' of the piece is not the words but the oft quoted origins as a Russian Contakion. There are several hymn books which attribute both music and words to Stuart Hine, when, quite clearly, he wrote neither, (save the tawdry, sentimental verses that stand apart in paucity of expression.)

It is interesting to note that Stuart Hine often claims the entire copyright of a work that is well beyond any copyright and that the original version is much finer than his. The only copyright that can appertain is the translation and even that looks, on the basis of the Wiki article, suspect. At least the piece is more effective in its orignal pitch, rather than the re-harmonised and transposed versions that now abound in many publications.

What a pity it is that Stuart Hine's modern paraphrased version has acheived the fame that should rightly be attributed to others. The copyright licensing authorities take every penny they can on the incorrect basis that Mr Hine wrote the lot when the work is far from original. (The same could be said for Sidney Carter's 'Lord of the Dance' - another piece owing much elsewhere, yet often attributed as an original these days.)

Thank you, Stephen, for your timely correction.

Barry Williams

[klavierkat]

Hello organists! I've never looked at these threads before, normally restricting myself to adult learners or viva piano - being my areas. However I do sing in a church choir and have loved reading the threads about selecting supposedly popular modern happy clappy "worship songs" etc to appeal to the young and unchurched. Our new-ish vicar has installed a screen the the "family Service" and each week I see people cringe as they raise their embarrassed faces to the large font screen embellished with child-like illustrations. Give me a well written tune and words that need a little pondering anytime.

[Stephen Barber]

..must say it is an improvement on Camberwell!

Talking of Camberwell: I HATE the practice of lurching up a semitone or tone for the last verse of a hymn, however I have made an exception for Camberwell. (No more than it deserves!)
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/18692176/Last%20ve...0Camberwell.pdf

[Barry Williams]

..must say it is an improvement on Camberwell!

Talking of Camberwell: I HATE the practice of lurching up a semitone or tone for the last verse of a hymn, however I have made an exception for Camberwell. (No more than it deserves!)
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/18692176/Last%20ve...0Camberwell.pdf

I am with you, Stephen, about taking the last verse of an hymn up a semi-tone. However, the exception proves the rule, for one of my favourite CDs is of a professional octet at St John The Divine, New York, with Dorothy Papadakos on the organ. She accompanies exquisitely and improvises up a semi-tone for each of the last three verses in Adeste Fidelis. It is done brilliantly and is spine tingling, but this is not a just few chords - they are proper interludes.

"....each week I see people cringe as they raise their embarrassed faces to the large font screen embellished with child-like illustrations."

Should anyone be made to cringe in this way? Is someone, somewhere, telling the clergy that this is the way to fill churches and convert souls?

Barry Williams

[Swell Box]

"....each week I see people cringe as they raise their embarrassed faces to the large font screen embellished with child-like illustrations."

Should anyone be made to cringe in this way? Is someone, somewhere, telling the clergy that this is the way to fill churches and convert souls?

Barry Williams

This practice, and the use of appalling hymns 'songs' is becoming so widespread and consistent I can only think it is being driven by clergy training colleges. Does anybody know? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/unsure.gif)

Maybe those responsible live such cloistered lives they just don't have a clue what is happening in the parishes. Of course, anyone who only ever works/worships in cathedrals could be forgiven for thinking that all was well.

SB

[randomsabreur]

I'm a relatively recent churchgoer- started going last November, but been every possible week (barring weddings at the wrong end of the country and being away on holiday) since about May, the quality of the music is massively important to me, and I would certainly attend far less regularly at a church where the music was either ropey or too modern (and probably would only have gone out of duty before getting married, rather than out of a desire to go...). The music isn't the only reason for going now, but before I really felt at home in the church, it was something to look forward to.

We're very lucky that our church (sadly not our parish church) has a fantastic organist (recent voluntaries include Mulet Carrillon-Sortie), excellent choir and a stunning acoustic. The director of music is also one of the churchwardens, so is clearly very involved in the parish. I also get the feeling that the Priest in Charge has a strong musical background, from the quality of his singing at evensong and where singing is required in the communion service.

This church isn't a Cathedral (but there are probably smaller cathedrals around) and is in a small town (approx 12,000 inhabitants, but regularly gets 100+ at the main family service (probably nearer 200 other than during the summer when the choir is on holiday!). Most of the hymns used are traditional, few are recent and with the choir are generally well sung. Think there might be a pattern here (although the town is pretty traditional - being famous for "killing" a Macdonalds by not using it...)

[Barry Williams]

"..although the town is pretty traditional - being famous for "killing" a Macdonalds by not using it..."

You cannot hide your light under any bushel. The town is indeed famous for finshing McDonalds off: http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article...healthy-town.do

Equally it is famous for a fine standard of church music that is inclusive. The choir is huge and happy, (but not clappy). It is wonderful to read about it. (Choir as well as McDonalds!)

Barry Williams

[mel2]

We're very lucky that our church (sadly not our parish church)

<snip>

Think there might be a pattern here (although the town is pretty traditional - being famous for "killing" a Macdonalds by not using it...)

I wonder if you would explain the first bit? Are you choosing to attend a church that isn't your parish church, or do you mean your church has a more classical music tradition than the parish church?
Do you attend the church where you enjoy the music or are there other factors in your choice of church?

The fact that it is a 'traditional' town means it will attract incomers with a certain outlook who will, as I think jod implied in another thread, buy into Church of England PLC and the associated 'heritage' stuff (although it sometimes backfires and you find those who enjoy traditional architecture but object to things like church bells and cockerels crowing!)

I prefer traditional too, but even my OH feels excluded and sidelined if I drag himhe accompanies me to a cathedral service and a choir sings the psalm etc.

[randomsabreur]

Difficult to explain - Tavistock is the church we're getting married in in about a year... and it's about 25 miles away, so it's not our parish church. But it's the first church I've really felt a connection to (I considered myself "C of E by tradition" through schooling and going to church at festivals as a child). Initial choice was partly motivated by the gridlock that adding 50 cars to the usual parking chaos of our "town" would cause, and also by the local church being between vicars, part of a parish with services rotating between 4 churches, so seemed to lack a real community feel. Tavistock church very much feels at the centre of the Parish whereas our town's doesn't really. Although it's a pretty church, somehow it didn't feel right and after going to a service or two I didn't feel comfortable (no idea why) but did at Tavistock (so I've finally got to the point of going to the family service on my own when OH can't make it due to work and not feeling uncomfortable). I expect to continue going to Tavistock after the wedding, although we will try and visit our parish church when OH is working (as Tavistock is a little far for on call) at some point before we need to sort out banns...

I do think Tavistock balances traditional and inclusive particularly well - the psalm is sung by the choir with congregation singing the response (at the morning service).

As for quality of music influencing my choice of church, I think it would influence me in a negative way - I wouldn't choose a church because the music was the "best" in the area (although I appear to have inadvertently done so..) but would be unlikely to continue to attend a church with music I disliked (too modern/ badly played). I also feel that the quality (or at least the volume) of singing at a service tends to reflect the character of the congregation a little - even at the remembrance day service in my local church (which was packed) the hymns were mumbled rather than sung! But even if the music was fantastic, I would still need to feel welcome.

Hope that makes some sense...

[mel2]

But even if the music was fantastic, I would still need to feel welcome.

Hope that makes some sense...

Interesting to hear your perspective; thanks. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Swell Box]

We visited a church in a fairly well off area north of Newcastle yesterday (Saturday) for an organ lesson. The church was already open for the Northumbria Historic Churches Steeplechase day, and as we entered we were greeted by the sweet and unmistakable smell of incense hanging in the air. I should say at this point that I knew nothing about this church or its traditions, but had never noticed the smell of incense there before.

One of the Wardens who was on duty spoke to us as we were about to leave, and told us how much he enjoyed hearing the organ being played. As the conversation continued he mentioned that they had a new Vicar, and that he was bringing a lot of new people in to the church, including several young families. He added that things had been 'really bad' for a while, and that a lot of people had left the church to go elsewhere.

I asked how the new Vicar had managed to increase the numbers attending the church, expecting the usual response (i.e. happy-clappy hymns and sloppy 'inclusive' liturgical language). To my surprise the Warden said that the new incumbent had made the church much 'higher' than before, and liked to use traditional language. Music wasn't really mentioned, except to say that the new chap liked 'proper hymns', but didn't seem to pick many of Wesley's for some reason, although nobody was too sure why.

I accept that the reasons behind the increasing attendance could be manifold; but I found the Warden's comments interesting as they show that (even leaving music aside), the use of traditional words does not frighten people away, or make them feel excluded; on the contrary, traditional words and forms of worship may actually increase numbers.

SB

[Barry Williams]

We visited a church in a fairly well off area north of Newcastle yesterday (Saturday) for an organ lesson. The church was already open for the Northumbria Historic Churches Steeplechase day, and as we entered we were greeted by the sweet and unmistakable smell of incense hanging in the air. I should say at this point that I knew nothing about this church or its traditions, but had never noticed the smell of incense there before.

One of the Wardens who was on duty spoke to us as we were about to leave, and told us how much he enjoyed hearing the organ being played. As the conversation continued he mentioned that they had a new Vicar, and that he was bringing a lot of new people in to the church, including several young families. He added that things had been 'really bad' for a while, and that a lot of people had left the church to go elsewhere.

I asked how the new Vicar had managed to increase the numbers attending the church, expecting the usual response (i.e. happy-clappy hymns and sloppy 'inclusive' liturgical language). To my surprise the Warden said that the new incumbent had made the church much 'higher' than before, and liked to use traditional language. Music wasn't really mentioned, except to say that the new chap liked 'proper hymns', but didn't seem to pick many of Wesley's for some reason, although nobody was too sure why.

I accept that the reasons behind the increasing attendance could be manifold; but I found the Warden's comments interesting as they show that (even leaving music aside), the use of traditional words does not frighten people away, or make them feel excluded; on the contrary, traditional words and forms of worship may actually increase numbers.

SB

All of this accords with the accepted knowledge and wisdom and many decades. It is not associated with churchmanship, (high or low,) nor music. It is about properly conducted services of substance and weight.

I suspect that the vicar in this case also undertakes parish visiting - a rare phenomenon these days, but one known to build a congregation.

Barry Williams

[jod]

We visited a church in a fairly well off area north of Newcastle yesterday (Saturday) for an organ lesson. The church was already open for the Northumbria Historic Churches Steeplechase day, and as we entered we were greeted by the sweet and unmistakable smell of incense hanging in the air. I should say at this point that I knew nothing about this church or its traditions, but had never noticed the smell of incense there before.

One of the Wardens who was on duty spoke to us as we were about to leave, and told us how much he enjoyed hearing the organ being played. As the conversation continued he mentioned that they had a new Vicar, and that he was bringing a lot of new people in to the church, including several young families. He added that things had been 'really bad' for a while, and that a lot of people had left the church to go elsewhere.

I asked how the new Vicar had managed to increase the numbers attending the church, expecting the usual response (i.e. happy-clappy hymns and sloppy 'inclusive' liturgical language). To my surprise the Warden said that the new incumbent had made the church much 'higher' than before, and liked to use traditional language. Music wasn't really mentioned, except to say that the new chap liked 'proper hymns', but didn't seem to pick many of Wesley's for some reason, although nobody was too sure why.

I accept that the reasons behind the increasing attendance could be manifold; but I found the Warden's comments interesting as they show that (even leaving music aside), the use of traditional words does not frighten people away, or make them feel excluded; on the contrary, traditional words and forms of worship may actually increase numbers.

SB

Funnily enough, that has been my experience too.

The problem I have with inclusive language being used to 'doctor' hymn words is no anything against inclusive language per se, which as far as I'm concerned can be used throughout the Parish Magazine and the notice sheet, but in the fact that it wrecks the poetry. The authors wrote their words as poems in the day when he or men or mankind applied to men and women. I do not get offended at these so-called male words applying to both se.xes. I'd rather they remained as they did. The reflect the Zeitgeist of the time of writing, and it implies we are superior to the saints who have gone before.

As far as traditional language is concerned, again I'm a fan, however I do like going to see Shakespeare and Restoration Comedy in the theatre so I would say that. Modern Liturgy written in good modern language is fine, however there are some who like the more lyrical qualities of the more traditional words. I don't think it puts off the young either who do study texts written before 1900, and therefore are not totally unaware about this being an English they recognise. It is not as if the services are written in the English of Chaucer!

What I like musically and liturgically is for it to be good. There is good modern stuff around. Unfortunately it has not had the filter to time to remove the rubbish. In a dash to be 'trendy' too many Clergy and eager parties are not making value judgements. They just want to appeal to the masses. well in the 1970s Pot Noodle and Smash sold to the Masses, that did not mean they were good!