PipeChat Digest #3412 - Wednesday, January 29, 2003
 
Re: Anglican hymnals
  by <quilisma@socal.rr.com>
Czech Organ music
  by <lindr@cch.com>
Losing Patience - Losing Patients
  by <TubaMagna@aol.com>
Re: PipeChat Digest #3411 - 01/29/03
  by "John Foss" <harfo32@hotmail.com>
Joe Utterback msuic at OHS
  by "MARAUDER" <kmoyer@marauder.millersville.edu>
Help! Pauol Manz piece needed
  by "Jonathan Orwig" <giwro@earthlink.net>
Re: Help! Paul Manz piece needed(THANK YOU !)
  by "Jonathan Orwig" <giwro@earthlink.net>
Re: Transcriptions - was re cameron carpenter (AND Holtkamp)
  by "Jim Clouser" <CromorneCipher@hotmail.com>
Anglican hymnals
  by "Jonathan B. Hall" <jonathan@jonathanbhall.com>
 

(back) Subject: Re: Anglican hymnals From: <quilisma@socal.rr.com> Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 12:13:23 -0800       "Emmons, Paul" wrote: > > >The 1933 revised edition of The English Hymnal is the standard by which > all others are judged. RVW was the musical editor. The original edition > was 1906. > > Bud, can you tell us, or speculate, as to why the English Hymnal = contained > the minor propers (words only, no music) with hymn numbers?   At least some churches that used the English Hymnal in the old days referred to the numbers in the bulletin, rather than printing the texts.   > > There are, or were, canons in the American Episcopal Church to the = effect > that the Book of Common Prayer should be used for orders of worship, = except > that hymns from the authorized hymnal could be added at such-and-such = points > (which happened to include, roughly, where we sing the introit, gradual, > offertory, and communion verses). Similarly, texts of choral music had = to > come from the Bible, the Prayer Book, or the hymnal. Many of the minor > propers didn't come directly from any of these sources, so their use = was, > strictly speaking, illegal.   Hmmm ... have to disagree with you there, Paul. Our rector requested that the scriptural citations be printed along with the text of the "minor" propers in our service-bulletin. Since I type it, I'm the one to look them up. VERY rarely are they from anyplace BUT Holy Scripture, though some of them ARE pretty obscure (grin).   Offhand, I can only think of a few ... "Gaudeamus", the Introit for All Saints' Day and various other Saints, and some of the texts of the more-rarely-used Marian Masses.   I'm not aware of that canon ever being strictly applied ... for instance, non-scriptural texts were sung in the cantatas of Bach, and others. In my experience, it was only used when a rector or organist wanted to block the use of "O Promise Me" or "I Love You Truly" at weddings (grin).   However, if they were put in the HYMNAL, then > they could legally serve as the texts of choral pieces, or even of > congregational and priestly utterances for that matter.   The English Hymnal was an anglo-catholic book; that was undoubtedly the thinking, despite the fact that England HAD no "official" hymnal.   I remember reading somewhere that the justification for having the MISSAL on Anglican altars in England was that the pre-reformation Code of Domestic Canon Law was never repealed by Parliament (!). > > This might have made perfect (if devious) sense in the U.S. if it ever = had > come to pass, and I used to assume that this was why it was done in the > English hymnal. However, I don't know whether the Church of England is > actually governed by any such canonical premise. In the 19th century, of > course, the bishops personally had a lot of power over what parishes in > their dioceses did, and if a bishop was determined to stamp out any > strayings in Popish directions, he could probably do it or at least = cause > much trouble, hymnal or no hymnal.   Queen Victoria was one of the principal opponents of the Tractarian Movement, resulting in the infamous "Black Rubric" passed by Parliament at her behest. > > So why were the words of the minor proper put in the English hymnal? = Was it > mere convenience? It's difficult to see how it can serve convenience or = an > obvious practical purpose when there is no music with them. > > Paul >   It's well to remember the state of the Tractarian Movement in 1900 ... I can't say for sure, but it may well be that the complete Altar Missal hadn't been PRINTED by then ... the texts would not have been readily available in English. I don't know the date of Burgess' English Gradual II, but I assume by the primitive character of the music, and also that it PROVIDED for the alternate texts of the English Hymnal, that there was SOME kind of Altar Missal available by the time it came out.   Cheers,   Bud    
(back) Subject: Czech Organ music From: <lindr@cch.com> Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 15:13:30 -0600             I hope people on this list are PLAYING Czech organ music and aren't just LISTENING to it! I didn't get involved in this music until c. 1982. I = lived in Evanston, IL, where Karel Paukert taught and played, but I never heard him or met him at that time. What a pity. Once I got the Czech bug, I got in touch with Supraphon, and they sent me some free volumes of organ = music, for which I am eternally grateful. I also started buying various things = and have played a lot since. And I did get to hear Paukert when he came back to Northwestern University to play a recital in the mid 80s. He played a B.A. Wiedermann work that evening (the E Minor), and that started my quest for his music. My latest find in the Czech world is the organ music of = Jiri Ropek, and I can't wait for my music dealer to get these to me. I've ordered the Prelude and Fugue in A, the Toccata and Fugue, and an entrancing Meditation (I hope I have the title right) for violin and = organ.   A CD of Ropek's organ and choral music (with these 3 pieces played by = James Kibbie, John Scott, and the composer) is available at Berkshire Records (they have a website) at a greatly reduced rate. Worth a listen!   Bob Lind              
(back) Subject: Losing Patience - Losing Patients From: <TubaMagna@aol.com> Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 17:00:41 EST   Dear Listers: Once again, discussion has turned to whether or not we should welcome = the bizarre, the new, and the unconventional in order to revive our dying = field and dwindling audience. One list member brought up the fact that pianos are still pianos, = violins are still violins, and well-played, exciting music from the established repertoire continues to thrive with standard conservatory techniques and = very few jarringly mannered performances. Pianos, violins, oboes, and flutes are all instruments with only ONE stop. Yet we play instruments with many stops, with rarely exhausted combinations, and great literature that comes with very, very specific instructions on how to use them. Our literature goes back centuries before =   Mozart, Beethoven, and Brahms, and most great composers were also = organists. Organbuilding, especially in America, is at an amazing level. If the failure isn't the instrument and isn't the repertoire, and = isn't the lack of good composers, are we still looking in the wrong place?   Sebastian M. Gluck New York City  
(back) Subject: Re: PipeChat Digest #3411 - 01/29/03 From: "John Foss" <harfo32@hotmail.com> Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 22:04:16 +0000   Hey! You don't put a lady's age in a recital program without her asking! What is the world coming to?       www.johnfoss.gr         _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=3Dfeatures/virus    
(back) Subject: Joe Utterback msuic at OHS From: "MARAUDER" <kmoyer@marauder.millersville.edu> Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 16:36:25 -0500   Reading _Organists' Review_, a wonderful British monthly, I came upon an = ad regarding Dr. Joe Utterback and was reminded that Dr. Susan Hegberg of Susquehanna U., Selinsgrove PA, will be playing an Utterback work "I Want Jesus To Walk With Me" on her demonstration recital on the 1904 Moeller in St. Peter's Church, Freeburg PA next June.   The ad includes reference to two CDs done on the Mander at St. Ignatius Loyola in NYC. Malcolm, comments when we need them, please?   I'd be interested in comments on Utterback's music in general and = perhaps even on this piece in particular, if anyone has played any of this, including re. degree of difficulty.   Thanx.   Karl E. Moyer Lancaster PA  
(back) Subject: Help! Pauol Manz piece needed From: "Jonathan Orwig" <giwro@earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 14:20:21 -0800   This is a multi-part message in MIME format.   ------=3D_NextPart_000_002C_01C2C7A1.8E519AD0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable   My copy of Paul Manz's "God of Grace and God of Glory" is buried under = =3D a stack of boxes in storage (most of my music is so stored during the =3D remodel of our facility)   I need to have it for TONIGHT to play at another church.....   If someone could fax it to me at (909)683-7657 I'd be very grateful....   Thanks,   Jonathan   ------=3D_NextPart_000_002C_01C2C7A1.8E519AD0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=3D"iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable   <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD> <META content=3D3D"text/html; charset=3D3Diso-8859-1" =3D http-equiv=3D3DContent-Type> <META content=3D3D"MSHTML 5.00.2920.0" name=3D3DGENERATOR> <STYLE></STYLE> </HEAD> <BODY bgColor=3D3D#ffffff> <DIV><FONT face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2> <DIV>My copy of Paul Manz's&nbsp; "God of Grace and God of =3D Glory"&nbsp;&nbsp;is=3D20 buried under a stack of boxes in storage (most of my music is so stored = =3D during=3D20 the remodel of our facility)</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>I need to have it for TONIGHT to play at another church.....</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>If someone could fax it to me at (909)683-7657 I'd be very=3D20 grateful....</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>Thanks,</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>Jonathan</DIV></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>   ------=3D_NextPart_000_002C_01C2C7A1.8E519AD0--    
(back) Subject: Re: Help! Paul Manz piece needed(THANK YOU !) From: "Jonathan Orwig" <giwro@earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 14:55:14 -0800   Crisis averted..... you guys are great   no more faxes, please....   <G>   Jonathan ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jonathan Orwig" <giwro@EARTHLINK.NET> To: <PIPORG-L@listserv.albany.edu> Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 2:20 PM Subject: Help! Pauol Manz piece needed     > My copy of Paul Manz's "God of Grace and God of Glory" is buried under = =3D > a stack of boxes in storage (most of my music is so stored during the = =3D > remodel of our facility) > > I need to have it for TONIGHT to play at another church..... > > If someone could fax it to me at (909)683-7657 I'd be very grateful.... > > Thanks, > > Jonathan > > :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: > Note: opinions expressed on PIPORG-L are those of the individual con- > tributors and not necessarily those of the list owners nor of the Uni- > versity at Albany. For a brief summary of list commands, send mail to > listserv@listserv.albany.edu saying GET LSVCMMDS.TXT or see the web > page at http://www.albany.edu/piporg-l/lsvcmmds.html . > ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::    
(back) Subject: Re: Transcriptions - was re cameron carpenter (AND Holtkamp) From: "Jim Clouser" <CromorneCipher@hotmail.com> Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 18:08:17 -0500   This is a multi-part message in MIME format.   ------=3D_NextPart_000_0014_01C2C7C1.662A77F0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable   I think that it's fine to transcribe (OCCASSIONALLY) a piece of =3D orchestral/chamber music for the organ. In fact, I would encourage that = =3D kind of thing if the piece was something that was really worth hearing =3D on the organ. Look at the Bach arrangments of the Vivaldi concerti for = =3D example, they're wonderful pieces! However, when you transcribe a piano = =3D etude for organ, you're only asking for attention. I don't know about =3D the rest of you, but I think that Mr. Carpenter (has he really changed =3D his name from Tyler?) wants to be the Hollywood icon of the organ world. = =3D Either that, or he has some wires loose upstairs. You know what they =3D say, "genius and insanity is a hairline difference."   By the way, Thanks to all of you who gave me advice about my church's =3D Holtkamp. I had two of the guys come in and they found out that one of = =3D the rectifiers that they replaced last April was more powerful than the = =3D one that they replaced it with! The organ just wasn't getting enough =3D power. On that note, I started wondering how powerful the rectifiers =3D are on the Riverside Organ! (I have a picture of it sitting here on a =3D brocher for the POE in NYC this year.) :) =3D20   Jim Clouser BM Candidate, Cleveland Institute of Music Music Director/Organist Reformation Evangelical Lutheran Church Eastlake, Ohio =3D20     ----- Original Message -----=3D20 From: Gfc234@aol.com=3D20 To: pipechat@pipechat.org=3D20 Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 2:43 PM Subject: Re: Transcriptions - was re cameron carpenter     I am less than thrilled by the pieces they chose to transcribe.=3D20 greg ------=3D_NextPart_000_0014_01C2C7C1.662A77F0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=3D"iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable   <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD> <META http-equiv=3D3DContent-Type content=3D3D"text/html; =3D charset=3D3Diso-8859-1"> <META content=3D3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1126" name=3D3DGENERATOR> <STYLE></STYLE> </HEAD> <BODY bgColor=3D3D#ffffff> <DIV><FONT face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2>I think that it's fine to = transcribe=3D20 (OCCASSIONALLY) a piece of orchestral/chamber music for the organ.&nbsp; = =3D In=3D20 fact,&nbsp;I would encourage that kind of thing if the piece was =3D something that=3D20 was really worth hearing on the organ.&nbsp; Look at the Bach =3D arrangments of the=3D20 Vivaldi concerti for example, they're wonderful pieces!&nbsp; However, =3D when you=3D20 transcribe a piano etude for organ, you're only asking for =3D attention.&nbsp; I=3D20 don't know about the rest of you, but I think that Mr. Carpenter (has he = =3D really=3D20 changed his name from Tyler?) wants to be the Hollywood icon of the =3D organ=3D20 world.&nbsp; Either that, or he has some wires loose upstairs.&nbsp; You = =3D know=3D20 what they say, "genius and insanity is a hairline =3D difference."</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2>By the way, Thanks to all of you who = =3D gave me advice=3D20 about my church's Holtkamp.&nbsp; I had two of the guys come in and they = =3D found=3D20 out that one of the rectifiers that they replaced last April was more =3D powerful=3D20 than the one that they replaced it with!&nbsp; The organ just wasn't =3D getting=3D20 enough power.&nbsp; On that note, I started wondering how powerful = the=3D20 rectifiers are on the Riverside Organ!&nbsp; (I have a picture of it =3D sitting=3D20 here on a brocher for the&nbsp;POE in NYC this year.)&nbsp;&nbsp; =3D :)&nbsp;=3D20 </FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2></FONT><FONT face=3D3DArial =3D size=3D3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2>Jim Clouser</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2>BM Candidate, Cleveland Institute = of=3D20 Music</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2>Music Director/Organist</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2>Reformation Evangelical Lutheran=3D20 Church</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3D3DArial size=3D3D2>Eastlake, Ohio&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=3D20 <BR><BR></DIV></FONT> <BLOCKQUOTE=3D20 style=3D3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =3D BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <DIV style=3D3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV> <DIV=3D20 style=3D3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =3D black"><B>From:</B>=3D20 <A title=3D3DGfc234@aol.com =3D href=3D3D"mailto:Gfc234@aol.com">Gfc234@aol.com</A> </DIV> <DIV style=3D3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =3D title=3D3Dpipechat@pipechat.org=3D20 href=3D3D"mailto:pipechat@pipechat.org">pipechat@pipechat.org</A> </DIV> <DIV style=3D3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, January 29, = =3D 2003 2:43=3D20 PM</DIV> <DIV style=3D3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: Transcriptions - = =3D was re=3D20 cameron carpenter</DIV> <DIV><BR></DIV><FONT face=3D3Darial,helvetica><FONT size=3D3D2>I am less = =3D than thrilled=3D20 by the pieces they chose to transcribe. <BR>greg</FONT>=3D20 </FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>   ------=3D_NextPart_000_0014_01C2C7C1.662A77F0--  
(back) Subject: Anglican hymnals From: "Jonathan B. Hall" <jonathan@jonathanbhall.com> Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 15:31:24 -0800 (PST)   Me again!     Sorry, Bud comes across in a very definite, convincing way, but he's still wrong. Entertaining, but wrong. <Grin,> <grin>, and more <grin>, but still wrong. And now he's back on PipeChat, spreading ill will and religious tension again.   I'm not going to go point by point through what he correctly calls his "rant", but, again, I'm going to stick up for my denominational hymnal where I feel it's being unfairly attacked.   You have to know, first of all, that Bud is NOT--repeat, NOT--a member of the Episcopal Church. He belongs to a splinter group called the Anglican Catholic Church in America, a sect that is NOT in communion with the Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church USA OR with Archbishop of Canterbury. They look and feel kind of old-line Episcopalian, with a dash of old-line Catholicism; but they are very definitely their own distinct operation, answering to no one else in the world but themselves.   They're sort of comparable to the Old Catholic Church, the Old Roman Catholic Church (the Ultrajectines), the various splinter "continuing" Anglican ecclesial bodies, the Society of Pius X, The Ave Maria Chapel of Westbury and Father Gommar De Pauw, The Church of France, and other frankly dubious spin-off churches. I don't personally trust them because they are too small, too particularized, and too sure that they have THE TRUTH.   But hey, it's a free country, and they're entitled to believe that they alone, a handful of conservative Republicans in California, understand the teachings of a blue-collar Jewish rabbi of two thousand years ago. Why not. It's California.   BUT...Given that Bud isn't a member of the church he's criticizing, but of a small sect that amalgamates Tridentine Catholicism and 1940 Prayer Book worship (and a bit of Baptist tremolo) to its own particular liking, it's a little unfair of him to keep pitching a bitch over MY denomination's hymnal. He left my church; that's his privilege. But I wish he'd stop trying to 'bust' us for alleged 'sins' against faith and worship. It's all a bunch of nonsense.   Anyway, here are a few reasoned and well-informed criticisms of Bud's very doctrinaire inaccuracies.       >It's a given that each succeeding Episcopal hymnal seemingly MUST offer a new system of "improved" pointing, and the Hymnal 1982 is no exception. But why change the pointing of the familiar Canticles? Right or wrong, those parishes that continued to sing Morning Prayer were going to sing the Venite the way they KNEW it.   --But if "each succeeding Episcopal hymnal" MUST offer a new system of pointing, how does this make the 1982 especially bad? Is Bud going to go back to 16th century sources to make sure he's getting "the real thing?" Is Bud absolutely and totally sure--as a "professional typesetter" and NOT as a scholar!--that the old book is right and the new book is wrong? Is there a single *fact* given here besides "I don't like new things?" And anyway, parishes have in fact come along very nicely with the new system.       >I'm not big on conspiracy theories,   --Oh, heaven forbid!     >but my more cynical side suspects that the Canticles were re-pointed and made more difficult to read (10 or 11-point type??!!) in order to force the issue of the Eucharist as the proper principal service on Sundays.   --You must be joking. The Eucharist is indeed the proper principal service on Sundays. That is the LAW of the church! And what about the NEW EUCHARISTIC MUSIC--how does that encourage a comfort level with Eucharist? How can you accuse the church of this kind of cynicism? EVERYONE was asked to change in 1979 and thereabouts, and your group decided it wouldn't. Fine--it's a free country. But drop these ridiculous arguments!       >Now, I'm in AGREEMENT that the Eucharist SHOULD be the principal service,   --Now he tells us! Then what's the problem?   >but one of the selling points of the new Prayer Book and Hymnal was that they (supposedly) allowed congregations the CHOICE of retaining familiar language and music, as well as Morning Prayer in those low-church parishes where it was well-beloved.   --Selling points? Who's selling anything? You have over and over and over again, well past the point of ad nauseam, lectured three different Lists on the internet about the Holiness of Obedience to Higher Church Authority. That's when you're feeling Catholick, at least. Why don't you bow your head to church authority now? Selling points?! Anyway, there IS still a choice, and this nonsense about small print is laughable.     --And what does ANY of this have to do with your announcement that you were a "professional typesetter" for years? Oh, whatever.       >Now ... on to the CONTENTS: first of all, Canon Douglas must be spinning in his GRAVE at what they've done to the plainsong.   --Hogwash. A pesky fact from a pesky Pisky: Canon Charles Winfred Douglas, the guiding force behind the 1940 Hymnal and an indisputably great scholar and churchman, WAS NOT INFALLIBLE! Maybe if the Anglican Catholic Church in America doesn't recognize Papal infallibility, it shouldn't insist on Douglas' infallibility either. Maybe scholarship has improved, maybe other styles and practices in this big church of ours (not yours) have informed these decisions. Maybe the good Canon's decisions didn't need to stand for all time. Often enough, I choose to point the psalmody myself. You got a problem with that?       >In discussing on another list what notation I should use for my Gradual Psalms, the most frequent complaint about the ones issued by Church Hymnal Corp. was the German note-head-only notation. Amateur volunteer choirs (who make up the BULK of US Episcopal choirs) find it EXTREMELY difficult to read;   --I don't know who's complaining over on Anglican-Music besides you, but the complaints are SPECIOUS. My volunteers have not the slightest problem reading this system. It's quick, easy, and intuitive. Bud is making, as usual, a mountain out of a molehill!     >organists trained in the Solesmes rhythmic method find it difficult or impossible to find the ictus so as to know when to change the chords, since the note-head-only notation gives no indication of what the original neums were. The same complaint was leveled against the plainsong notation in the Hymnal 1982.   --Rot! There are phrase marks all over the place to suggest the original neums, and the Liber and Kyriale are still in print for the truly curious. But chant does NOT require any particular harmonization, AND the Solesmes method is largely DISCREDITED by recent scholarship! Can't you see? Bud is throwing a big word at you and hoping you won't ask any questions!   For the record, the full-blown Solesmes system, which I know very well, is a great way to learn the French Romantic esthetic, but NOT the plainchant! It's downright fanciful! The ictus system is essentially 19th century. Doesn't Bud know this?       >Consider this: our eyes instinctively read BLACK note-heads (absent any kind of flags or stems) as QUARTER notes; we read WHITE notes as HALF notes or WHOLE notes; yet in the notation employed in the Hymnal 1982, we are to read the BLACK notes as EIGHTH notes, and the WHITE notes as QUARTER notes. VOLUNTEER choirs have no IDEA what to do with THAT.   --Rubbish. We do no such thing. Eighth notes have black heads too, if you'll recall; and chant is rhythmical but not metrical, so a white head is not necessarily exactly double a black head. As I said above, the note-head system is easy and intuitive. Bud is just back to his old mean trick of attacking the mainstream Episcopal Church with made-up stuff, as he does on more lists all the time. Do we really have to put up with much more of this from him?     >I discovered one particularly jarring oddity when I was making a congregational edition of Missa Marialis ... the Hymnal 1982 happened to be handy, so I took the Sanctus melody from there. When I handed out 8 1/2 x 11 copies to the choir, and we ran through it, we discovered it was different BY ONE NOTE (!). WHY?   --I don't know, Bud, and obviously you don't care enough to find out! It's that "WHY" you asked that could have led to your greater credibility as a church musician, had you bothered to find an answer. Tell you what--I will personally find out why the note was changed, OK?   --Here. Listen. I've just been on the phone with Roy Kehl, FAGO, a member of the 1982 Hymnal Committee. What a shame you've never cultivated an acquaintance with these smart people. His comments have to do with improving the textual underlay of "Heaven and earth" and the subsequent text--quite a bit more than one note, actually.   If you disagree, why not talk to Bruce Ford, who did the new underlay? He's a brilliant man, deeply grounded in the chant tradition. Why cut yourself off and make a fool of yourself by complaining, and misstating the "problem"?       >Fortunately I hadn't printed the congregational booklets (grin). Congregations who KNOW Missa Marialis know Canon Douglas' transcription.   --Oh, the infallible Canon Douglas again. I should have known. You ascribe to him a wisdom you deny to everyone else in the world. He didn't write the chant, he just transcribed and adapted it. As the text changed to include the Benedictus qui venit, Ford came up with a better adaptation. Are you mad that nobody consulted you on this?   AND it's not really the 'Missa Marialis!' It's properly called the 'Missa IX Cum Jubilo.' Douglas made up the new name. What do you say to that? Actually, the Ford re-write is essentially the Missa Cum Jubilo Sanctus restored! So are you Catholic or not?       >The same thing is true of the Scottish Chant Gloria in excelsis. Yes, I KNOW that the V-I "amen" at the end isn't CORRECT, but congregations who continued to sing Scottish Chant are NOT going to switch over to the new pointing of the last phrase just because the editors put it into the Hymnal 1982. They're going to sing it from MEMORY.   --Who says? And which side are you on, Bud, the side of accuracy and correctness or the side of pastoral comfort? You switch sides as it suits your argument. If the V-I Amen isn't CORRECT, why do you support it? Have you NEVER forced a weird liturgical thingum on your parish because it's MORE CORRECT than those Heathens in the Episcopal Church? I have a STACK of your old emails that BRAG of just that.       >I'm not going to join the battle about altering older hymn texts to fit current ideas of political correctness / inclusive language. We use the Hymnal 1940; we don't DO it. I'm ALL FOR *new* hymn texts being written in inclusive language, if that's what's wanted; but time and again I've heard congregations sing what they KNOW ("Good Christian MEN, Rejoice") rather than what's on the printed page ("Good Christian FRIENDS, Rejoice"), which leads to confusion, to say the least.   --No, let's not go there. I have some issues with this too. My congregation knows how to read, and they don't usually screw up the texts in the hymnal, even if they're unfamiliar...one exception being the admittedly unfortunate "Angels We Have Heard on High." I do really dislike that version.   --In short, Bud, it doesn't sound like you have a whole lot of reasonable complaints against the 1982 Hymnal, except you are too stubborn and too proud to accept it. You seem to have a lot of baggage against the Episcopal Church--which is understandable and OK, only don't hide it under false scholarship. I stand by my recommendation and endorsement of the Hymnal 1982 of the Episcopal Church.     >End of rant (grin).   ---Is that a promise?     >Cheers,   Bud, who's just a simple village organist, and perhaps doesn't understand these things   --Agreed!   Jon, a big city organist who's studied his butt off and DOES understand these things.     I'll stop if you will! :)