2 C HAN TIN G I N FR E E R HYT H M

made to move in fetters, or in a strait waistcoat , or dril l ed ,

‘ ’ ‘ ’

against nature to keep s t ep wi t h the m easured tread of m e t rica l

,

m usic and by prote sts on beha l f of the so l e m n tone and state l y

rh yth m of the Psal m s against the u n di gn i fi ed j ingle of m any
,
‘

Ang l ican chants .

The secret of their failure i s to be found in the point fro m

which al l existing p o in t ed Psa l ters start, viz , that , the chant .

being what it is , t he words o f the Psa l m s m ust be m ade to con

for m to it .
‘
The Ang l ican chan t is a f ac t, they say, an d it is
’‘

a m elody of seven ( or fi v e) bars ; in other words i t is a

'

m etrica l tune l ike a hy m n tune , except as regards the reciting

,

n ote and so m e deny even this ex c eption .

B u t there i s nothing sacred about an Anglican chant If i t .

co m es into col l isi o n with another fact str o nger and m ore u m
a l terable than i t se l f, it m us t either conform thereto, o r m ake
way fo r so m e t hing else and tha t o ther fact is this —that the
Psa l m s and Can t icles are non metri c al they are in what i s called
-

f r ee rh ythm, or rhy t h m ic pr o se , the grandest form of poet i y , bu t

not in m etre . And they and t heir poe t ic form ar e sacred and
una l terab l e , except with a vi o lence which is sacri l ege It is the .

hitherto constant strugg l e betwee n the tyrann y of t h e rigid

m e t rica l chan t , and the free born , but fett ered , Psa l m rhyth m ,
-

t hat has caused , without being genera ll y detected, t he di ssat i s

fac t i o n and m urm uring abou t Ang l ican chan t ing An d t he .

re m edy m ust be found in a di ff eren t concep t i o n fro m t hat c om

m on ly entertained as t o the true nature an d fo rm of the Chant ,
and i t s rela t i o n to t hat of the Psal m this Psa l ter is n ot, there
fo re m ere l y one m ore en deavour to rep o int the Psalm s , i e to
,
. .

i m prove the usual pointing in particu l ar passages ; it is an

at t e m pt t o reconsider the m atter afresh ; to g o back to fi rs t
princip l es, t o h istorical precedents, and to early Eng l ish ex
am p l es
.

It is not necessa ry, of course , to insist upon t he fi rst principle

of al l , — t hat church m usic i s who ll y fo r the g l ory o f God and
the he l p of m an in w o rshipping H i m ; it is en o ugh to begin
with the princip l e e m bodied in our m o tto , Vox ancilla verbi ,
‘ ’

Mus ic the hand m aid , no t the m istress, of t he w ords an d to

re m e m ber tha t , as far as chanting is concerned , the w ords are
not on l y fi xed for us by the Church but consecrated , in their
,

fo rm as well as thei r Spiri t, as pa rt of H oly Writ A n d the .

12 C HAN T I NG I N FR EE R HYT H M

a m easure true , excep t wi t h high l y trained ch o irs and dai l y

se r vice B u t supposing it to be s o, is w eal harm o ny s o absolu t ely
.

n ecess ary fo r all pa rts of church w o rship as to righ tl y override

,

a due regard fo r t he t ru e fo r m an d rhyth m of the w ords &

Especial l y i s it necessary for chanting & One cann o t wonder
that there i s a n evident l y gro w ing t en den c v towards unisonous
chantin g with orga n harm onies The great au t h o ri t y of
.

D r H o pkins , and o f D r E G M o nk and Sir F A G O u seley,

. . . . . . .

who have pub l ished coll ecti o ns of chan t s expressl y fo r use in

this W ay, an d t h e advocacy o f sever al o t her experienced
organists an d ch o irm asters , a l l point in this direction An d .

it m ay wel l be re m e m be red that chants are the ol des t form

of church m usic z t ha t he y were in possession fo r ages befo re
—
d a a T oHat in c o untries w here t heir
c
’

reign h as been unbroken t hey have m ain t ained their unisonous

si m p l icit y, grandeur, and f reedom ; t hat in E ng l and only, and
after an al m o st t ot a l collapse of chanting and other church
m usic for a genera t ion , i n the seventeen t h century, and during
i t s long period of weak l y convalescence , they sub mitted to be
bro u ght by degrees under the bondage of ( barred) harm o ny .

Harm ony, then m agnifi cen t discovery as i t was — carrying al l

,

before it and even sweeping away fro m the grea t fi e l d o f secular

music a l l the old M o des but tw o , because they w o uld not
’

readil y sub m it to its de m ands — neverthe l ess fel l back respect

fully befo re the ol d si mple church chant , and , excep t in m odern
E n gl and , left it untouched , because it recognized its clai m to
a freedo m of utterance which v o cal harm o ny coul d not fo ll o w .

The rule , not indeed without exceptions fo r festal settings , d own

to the end of the six t eenth centu r y in England also
have be en unisonous chanting ( Hey w ood) .

A further and very practica l ly conclusive reason against voca l

h ar m ony in chanti n g is that i t is inc o m patible w ith an t iphonal
chanting of any k in d, excep t in those few churches w here the
choir can a l ways m uster a full and equal co mp l e m ent of all
pa rts on b oth sides .

Is it then unreasonable with the whole of the rest of the

—

Prayer B ook open t o harm on y— to ask exe m ption for the Psa l ms,
an d fo r the Can t icles when chan t ed
B u t an objecti o n has been raised which we cannot jus t ly pass
over It is p l eaded wi t h so m e reason that with u n isonous singing,
.
22 C H AN TI NG IN FR EE R HY T H M

Instead of this , in this Psalte r the last sy l lable of the ver se

i s a ll o w ed to s t retch itse l f over the t w o fi nal no t es , of which t he
fi rs t , and not t he second , is ac c ented ; thus

II In a t
s range land

I] s h all ne evr f all

Bu t the use of ordina ry di aeresis in the precedin g i n fl ex i on
o ften obviate s thi s need t hu s
l In o God
’
3 .
‘
T h er e Is .

4 . Worm s an d feathered f owls .

Whe n the necessity fo r it does occur, it produces no di mc u lt y

to the singer, be cause , having got as far as t his p o in t , it is
i m possibl e to d o other than sing the last word rightl y The .

grea t er nu m ber of these cases are du e to m is t akes in the

Pr ayer B ook di vision and grouping of verses and are m ost ,

satisfactori l y m et by correcting this ; and in this Psa l ter these

verses and a few others w here i t i s n ecessary for antiphonal
,

reasons, to be explained present l y, are given ( as al t ernatives

o n l y) in a corrected fo rm but as this m ay be th o ught by so m e
,

inad m issib l e , every such verse is given in its usua l form also,
and the di fficulty dea l t w i t h as above .

( ii ) The other cases ( not so rare ) which dem and thi s for m of
diaeresis are th o se where the last syl l able being a str o ng o ne ,
and b oth th o se prece ding it too w ea k to bear the heavy pen
ultim ate accent it w ould otherwise be n ecess ary t o go back
,

to th e fourt h o r even fi fth syllabl e an d cro w d t hree or four

together on the penu l ti m ate n ote , e g we sh o u l d have t o point ,
. .

b e w hiter t han snow which is bad ; therefo re we poin t ,

’
-
,

be whi t er th an s n bw Th i s u se of diaeresis i s not new

it is borro w ed from Gregorian Psa l ters in which it is used ,

largely .

( iii ) There are a l so a few cases in which this fi nal diaeresis is

used t o prevent a fa l se or enforce a t ru e , accent , as in t he
,
—

Te D eu m dc c r y prai se Th ee
7 . a l ue o f D i aere sis i n re g ar d t o E m ph as is o n o t her
T he V
W or ds — I t i s a very i m po rtant point in fav o ur o f t he free use
of diaeresis , that it enables us to escape al l the false e mphase s