Views from the Choir Loft

Translations By Non-Catholics In A Catholic Hymnal?

Jeff Ostrowski · September 27, 2017

OR A LONG TIME, Catholic hymnals categorically refused to include translations by Protestants. The fear was that Protestant translators might taint or distort the theology contained in the ancient Catholic hymns—and in some cases this fear was justified. However, Fr. Adrian Fortescue disagreed, writing in 1913: “After Dr. Neale’s beautiful poetic translations of nearly all our hymns it seems vain for anyone else to try to rival them.”

This prohibition—at least for American hymnals—seems to have softened in the 1950s. The Mediator Dei Hymnal (1955) contains many translations by non-Catholics, such as the following:

The New Saint Basil Hymnal (1958) also contains many translations by non-Catholics, such as this one by Athelstan Riley:

The Catholic Hymn Book (1998) by the London Oratory contains a translation by someone considered by many to be a “virulant anti-Catholic,” viz. Percy Dearmer:

FOR MYSELF, I HAVE NO ISSUE with English translations by Protestants, so long as theological truth is not damaged. Before agreeing to help with the St. Jean de Brébeuf Hymnal—which is turning out fantastic, by the way!—I made it clear that we should accept translations by non-Catholics if they are excellent and fully correct from a theological standpoint.

On the other hand, it is sad to see that John Henry Newman’s prediction has come to pass:

“Liberalism in religion is the doctrine that there is no positive truth in religion, but that one creed is as good as another… It teaches that all are to be tolerated, for all are matters of opinion. Revealed religion is not a truth, but a sentiment and a taste; not an objective fact, not miraculous; and it is the right of each individual to make it say just what strikes his fancy. […] Men may go to Protestant Churches and to Catholic, may get good from both and belong to neither.”
—Bl. John Henry Cardinal Newman (May of 1879)

To disguise the real differences between Catholics and Protestants, some now refer to “different traditions”—as if Catholics have one tradition and Baptists another. But JESUS CHRIST was quite clear about what happens to anyone who corrupts his teaching—so perhaps we should reflect carefully on that.

Opinions by blog authors do not necessarily represent the views of Corpus Christi Watershed.

About Jeff Ostrowski

Jeff Ostrowski holds his B.M. in Music Theory from the University of Kansas (2004). He resides with his wife and children in Michigan. —(Read full biography).

“Entrance Chant” • Christ the King

Download the ENTRANCE ANTIPHON in English for the Solemnity of Christ the King (24 November 2024). It mimics the Mode III Latin version in a truly spectacular way. Corresponding to the vocalist score is this free organ accompaniment. If you’re someone who enjoys rehearsal videos, I attempted to sing it while simultaneously accompanying my voice on the pipe organ.

—Jeff Ostrowski

“Music List” • (33rd Sund. Ordinary Time)

This coming Sunday—17 November 2024—is the 33rd Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year B. Some have expressed interest in perusing my “ORDER OF MUSIC.” If such a thing interests you, feel free to download it as a PDF file. You’ll notice we’re learning Moreau’s “Congregational Polyphonic Enhancement” for the OUR FATHER. For the record, our opening hymn is particularly beautiful. So is the Mode 6 ENTRANCE CHANT.

—Jeff Ostrowski

Lectionary Errors

If you look at the official Responsorial Psalm (PDF) for this coming Sunday, you’ll notice the current Lectionary has the wrong refrain. Why is this a big deal? Why even mention such a thing? Everybody makes mistakes, right? Here’s why it matters. The USCCB—which makes money by selling the sacred liturgical texts—has historically been ruthless when it comes to such matters. When various publishers point out errors to them, their response has been: “If you dare to correct the error, we’ll sue you.” These errors are not a matter of nuance; e.g. sometimes the previous (English) edition of the Lectionary got them right! Bottom Line: mandatory, indulgenced, liturgical texts shouldn’t be sold; they should be freely available to all Catholics.

—Jeff Ostrowski

The Breviary in the Life of the Laity

Recently I have been enjoying looking through the inaugural (1927) edition of a 20th-century liturgical magazine called Orate Fratres. The July 1927 issue included an excellent article by a Chicago laywoman named Ellen Gates Starr entitled “The Delights of the Breviary: From the Point of View of a Lay Woman.” As we in the 21st century have recently undergone a (blessed!) re-translation of the missal into English, and as we await with joyful hope (please God, before Jesus comes back!) a similar re-translation of the breviary, the opening of her article reminded me of that old saying, “the more things change, the more they stay the same.” Nearly a hundred years ago, she penned words that could just as easily have been written today: “It is indeed a privilege to be allowed any participation, however slight, in the liturgical movement in the Church – the movement to bring back the classics of devotion, the Missal and the Breviary, into general use by the laity. The wonder is that they should ever have fallen into disuse. Nothing can take the place of these great universal prayers of the Church, the prayers of the Mass and the divine Office. One has only to know them to find them indispensable. And alas, how few of the laity know them!” I know that I have been tremendously nourished by regular praying of the breviary as of late, and my wish is that you and I, dear reader, may continue to nourish our interior lives with the official prayer of the Church, which present to us (in the Mass) and extend (in the Office) the fullness of Christ’s greatest gift to us – the gift of Himself – in the Most Holy Eucharist.

—Daniel Tucker

Principles vs Preferences

I ran into this idea recently: principles vs. preferences in planning out a curriculum or music lineup. In this idea, it is imperative to not misconstrue personal preferences into principles—that the music (or subject matter) is great because: “I have good taste, and I like it.” De gustibus… Education, study and docility to the Magisterium of the Church on matters of liturgical music must be present in those who make the music at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and the Hours. Who knows? Maybe you might start to prefer the music that is fitting according to the principles Catholic Sacred Music?

—William J. Fritz

Liquescent Notes in the Official Edition

The official edition—the EDITIO VATICANA itself—is somewhat inconsistent when it comes to liquescent notes. If you wish to see a perfect “apples-to-apples” comparison, click here. Such “inconsistency” was not owing to ignorance on the part of Abbat Pothier: the manuscripts themselves are inconsistent when it comes to liquescent notes.

—Jeff Ostrowski

“The following few hints on the selection of voices may be useful: (1) Reject all boys who speak roughly, or sing coarsely; (2) Choose bright, intelligent-looking boys, provided they have a good ear; they will much more readily respond to the choirmaster’s efforts than boys who possess a voice and nothing more; therefore, (3) Reject dull, sulky, or scatter-brained boys, since it is hard to say which of the three has the most demoralizing effect on his more willing companions.”

— Sir Richard Runciman Terry (1912)