Chanting in Public Worship

Status
Not open for further replies.
Romans922

Romans922

Puritan Board Professor
We use the Book of Psalms for Singing in our worship and there are as many of you know Psalms made out to chants.

I wonder about this because chanting is not commanded in Scripture to be done in public worship whereas singing the word to one another is....

Any help with this?
 
I think the idea is that chanting is a form of singing. Some would posit that chanting is more ancient a form of singing than our metrical psalm singing, but I don't know the history.
 
Jake is correct. Chanting is a form of musical interpretation which is older than metrical singing, which developed out of secular folk music during the reformation. The reason why many of the reformers (though not all) switched to metrical singing was that chant had developed into a highly complex form that was difficult for non-professionals (ie: congregations) to master. There was a simplified polyphonic form of chant that developed in the Protestant world (now known as Anglican chant) but in general the more rhythmic forms of metrical singing, which Luther and the Genevan Psalter helped to popularize, came to predominate.
 
Metrical psalms were chosen for the specific reason that they could be sung by ordinary folk. Musical style has developed to the point where singing and chanting have become different things. We are at a stage now where one would have to do something which does not come naturally in order to chant. Hence it is not "singing" as we know it. Chanting also encourages choirs, which is contrary to congregational singing.
 
MW said:
Chanting also encourages choirs, which is contrary to congregational singing.
Click to expand...
In the Anglican tradition the opposite is true. Both Plain Song and Anglican Chant are simple enough they do not require a choir or an organ. Many Psalms that are sung to hymn tune almost require a piano or organ to follow the melody.
 
yeutter said:
Both Plain Song and Anglican Chant are simple enough they do not require a choir or an organ.
Click to expand...

This is correct. I have sung both from notes printed on the page without accompaniment. That said, Rev. Winzer is correct that having a few people who know how to set the key is rather helpful, but that's just as true for metrical singing.
 
Philip said:
but that's just as true for metrical singing.
Click to expand...

How hard is it to sing to a tune like Jackson or St. Fulbert? With just one basic common metre tune it is possible to sing through the whole Psalter if need be.
 
I wonder if the idea that there's a distinction between singing and chanting might reflect a cultural bias. In the Western world, music has evolved to the point that the two are distinct. But in many other cultures today, especially those with tonal languages, what I call "chanting" might be standard singing—or at least a common form of singing.

Perhaps a Hebrew scholar can tell us how much chanting and singing are different things in the ancient Hebrew mind and language. But without solid evidence that they are significantly different, I'd be very hesitant to say one is commanded and the other disallowed. There might be good reasons why one is preferred in some cultural settings, but that's a different issue. For example, I find metrical tunes easy and conducive to congregational singing, but if one is singing in a tonal language it is much harder. The words become unintelligible, which surely violates a key principle of Christian worship.
 
Last edited:
MW said:
How hard is it to sing to a tune like Jackson or St. Fulbert?
Click to expand...

Pretty hard if you don't read music and don't have someone leading who can keep pitch. For that matter, it's hard to make "happy birthday" sound decent without someone leading who can sing in tune (note: I am not advocating the singing of "happy birthday" in worship).
 
In the culture in which we live the preferred congregational music is chanting, whereas choirs do conventional music. The chanting is antiphonal, with the leader chanting a new phrase each time and the congregation replying with one set phrase, like the psalm with "His mercy endures forever."
 
Romans922 said:
We use the Book of Psalms for Singing in our worship and there are as many of you know Psalms made out to chants.

I wonder about this because chanting is not commanded in Scripture to be done in public worship whereas singing the word to one another is....

Any help with this?
Click to expand...

I would imagine for much of human history, in most cultures and religions (Christianity included) that chanting was the form of public vocal expression. Plus, chanting has a mnemonic power that few can match. I am all for singing Psalms over hymns (though I am not EP) but the EP argument could be strengthened if the argument were that we should chant the psalms. That's probably closer to the biblical model than the Yoda-like structure of the psalms today.
 
Chant - to make melodic sounds with the voice; especially : to sing a chant.

As a lover of Exclusive Psalmody, I would LOVE to learn how to chant so I could "sing" prose and would not have to have two Psalters in my Bible (the book of Psalms in the middle & the SMV in the back)!

My kiddos and I sing the SMV of the Psalms everyday so I agree with Rev. Winzer that singing the of the SMV of the Psalms "can" be extremely easy. (Then again, we tend to make things far too complicated.)

I find that singing the Scottish Metrical Version of the Psalms is far easier [and far more edifying] when done with my children [at home where we stick to a handful of tunes that we know and avoid the more complex tunes] than it is in corporate worship where there is an unnecessary pressure to sing through every tune found in the split-leaf Psalter.

Maybe it's just me but the tunes are simply meant to facilitate the singing of Psalms be it the metrical tunes (to sing Psalms in Metre) or the chants (to sing Book of Psalms in my copy of the Authorized Version of Scripture).

When you hear the metrical tunes being sung incorrectly on a regular basis, chanting sounds more and more like music to your ears!

In summary, chanting is singing and can't be much harder than trying to sing the metrical versions of the Psalms with an entire congregation of people that are musically illiterate.
 
Recently I've been practicing (privately!) singing the Psalms through chanting, if you want to call it that- the term itself tends to be off putting. It is singing, just in a much simpler style. It's very rewarding since the Psalms can be sung straight from the text this way. I don't know if it's realistic to think that Western congregations could embrace it, but it seems like that could be a very useful thing. I came across this from William Law recently: http://www.worldinvisible.com/library/law/seriouscall/scch15.htm Evidently, the practice of chanting the Psalms in private prayer was alive and well at that time!
 
Jeri Tanner said:
Recently I've been practicing (privately!) singing the Psalms through chanting, if you want to call it that- the term itself tends to be off putting. It is singing, just in a much simpler style. It's very rewarding since the Psalms can be sung straight from the text this way. I don't know if it's realistic to think that Western congregations could embrace it, but it seems like that could be a very useful thing. I came across this from William Law recently: William Law:A serious Call To A Devout and Holy Life.Chapter 15 Evidently, the practice of chanting the Psalms in private prayer was alive and well at that time!
Click to expand...

William Law was a non-juror Anglican. The practice of chanting the Psalter has always been part of the Anglican tradition. It is noteworthy that he was not successful in influencing John and Charles Wesley to adopt the practice.
 
Outside of worship, chant 'structure' is still a very relevant expression in western society in general. From cheers at sporting events to regale and rap music, the underlying element is a chant basis. These expressions, although basic, would all be considered musical and accessible.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
The 1973 RPCNA Psalter says this on p440.

“ Chanting has several advantages over metrical Psalmody, stemming from the fact that in chanting, the music completely serves the text. The music is not interesting or difficult in itself, but has character and meaning only in conjunction with words. The meaning of the text is thus more immediate , and the parallel structure of Hebrew poetry is more apparent. The difficulties of translating ancient non-metrical poems into sensible English rhyme are rendered unnecessary. Chanting encourages the use of entire Psalms rather than selections”

I have listened to good quality Anglican chants on the way to work and found myself singing along (in Coverdales version) and learning the Psalm fairly quickly. The advantages spoken of above I have found to be true. You can apply an Anglican Coverdale chant to KJV or any other translation very easily. The Bible then becomes your Psalter! In reference to the original question I think most people would see little difference between Anglican chanting and singing. There is no sharp line between them.

After hearing Anglican chant I wondered why Calvin used metrical psalmody for his Psalter instead of Anglican chant. After reading more about the state of church music in his day I can see that there were good practical reasons for reforming worship with metrical psalmody first. The Anglicans took a long time after Calvin to develop their chanting to what it is today.
 
If you look at this lsb.cph.org/samples/LSB_Sampler.pdfon page 24 you will find easy instructions and easy chant tunes.

This is from a Lutheran Service Book, so be forewarned. I only post it because it was so helpful to me in finally understanding simple chant.

I had always wanted to know how to sing the Psalms. I saw this in the service book and my husband showed me how simple it was to use these little tunes for Psalm-singing/chant.
 
Some have provided this link before, but here it is again- mp3 samples of Psalm tones for all 150 Psalms, also courtesy of the Lutherans. http://www.llpb.us/Canticles-Psalms-Ants.htm. (The singer uses the Lutheran flourishes before and after the body of the Psalm he is singing, I just wait those out.)

Singing in this style removes performance as an issue is singing the Psalms. As others have said, it gets the music out of the way, making it subservient to the text. The longer I've considered it, the more I do believe that willing Western congregations can embrace it (I think congregational chanting may be best done antiphonally? which is lovely considering Ephesians 5:19 and Col 3:16). The Genevan melodies were akin to a chant structure- I am not sure if the French Psalm translations were rhymed. I appreciate the metrical translations and had much rather sing them than any other uninspired songs. But they lose a good deal. On learning to chant the Psalms, just remember that parallelism is the way the Psalms "rhyme", and it will help.
 
I really am enjoying those Lutheran chants of the Psalms (with the caveats others have mentioned). As has been said - it does get the "music out of the way". Thank you all for sharing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

D
  • Locked
EP only in corporate/public worship?
Replies
18
Views
3K
richardnz
R
V
  • Locked
The Public Worship of God
Replies
0
Views
2K
VirginiaHuguenot
V
TexanRose
  • Locked
Congregational Chanting of Psalms?
Replies
8
Views
5K
au5t1n
A
NaphtaliPress
  • Locked
Is there Scriptural Warrant for Composing Uninspired song for use in public worship
3 4 5
Replies
141
Views
19K
kceaster
kceaster
NaphtaliPress
  • Locked
John Brown of Wamphray: Singing of Psalms, Hymns & Spiritual Songs in Public Worship
Replies
0
Views
2K
NaphtaliPress
NaphtaliPress
Back
Top