alan29 wrote:Not only the Catholic Church either. Wasn't the English Hymnal compiled partly as an antidote to sentimental Victorian hymns. Happily the publishers were able to call upon RVW to both root out the worst, and in his own tunes, lead by example. But such attempts at moulding taste never last long ..... just consider the huge number of "I look at Jesus and he looks at me" kinds of choruses and hymns that are to be heard in Anglican parishes. It ever was so. People may not know much about music or liturgy, but they know what works for them in the context of their worship. For some it will be Byrd, for others a Wesley hymn, and for some it will be a simple modern song.
True, Alan. No group is immune to this temptation (though the state of parish liturgical music in the Church in this country gives us little scope for criticism of others). That's not surprising, given the twin elements of religion and music. However, similar observations can be made about the liturgies that religious groups develop as they move on from charismatic sect to recognisable, developing tradition. The Church guards the textual content of our liturgy and its development with great care precisely because it is so central to our faith and, left unguarded, susceptible to passing enthusiasm. We do not say: oh, use the liturgy or not as you feel happy or comfortable. Why should we not take the same care with its music, which is, as the Council Fathers taught us, an integral part of liturgical prayer?
alan29 wrote:And for many it will be something that doesn't get in the way of worship by demanding technical accomplishments they don't have or want.
I would direct you to my remarks to Martin, above, on Aunt Sallies and begged questions.
best wishes,
Ian Williams.