Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- All Categories 13.8K
- General Category 10.9K
- General Announcements 184
- Faith Issues 3.4K
- Coptic Orthodox Church 2.5K
- Personal Issues 1.4K
- Prayer Requests 423
- Random Issues 1.8K
- Introductions 294
- Non-Orthodox Inquiries 232
- Youth Corner 606
- Hymns 2.5K
- Hymns Discussion 2.5K
- Technicial Difficulties 368
- Technical Topics 368
Who's in the wrong?
We have this one deacon that knows EVERYTHING, you name any hymn, tune, praise, doxology, etc. and he knows it- he even memorized the entire creed in coptic. Don't get me wrong, I personally love the guy, he's very nice person and funny to.
But here's the problem, he loves saying all the long hymns. Especially during Kiahk he wants to say the long kiahk hoas, the great teoi en-hikanos, the long psalm 150, and no one else sings along with him because we simply don't know it, and the rest of the congregation tunes out. I personally don't mind him saying any long hymn (i just listen to the melody of tune, which is so beautiful and moving, or I pick up a book and do some reading). However, MAJORITY of the people get "bored" quickly and eventually leave- and some don't want to come again because of the deacon (I quote, "be aw-ew too much"). Last week we didn't even have time to finish and had to omit "Amdah fel batool" :'(, and he skips the long esmo ephcois and shere maria (which nearly all the deacons know), so that he can have time to say the rest of the praise.
So is it worth saying these long hymns to revive them, at the expense of people leaving and in extreme cases HATING the churches hymns all together???
But here's the problem, he loves saying all the long hymns. Especially during Kiahk he wants to say the long kiahk hoas, the great teoi en-hikanos, the long psalm 150, and no one else sings along with him because we simply don't know it, and the rest of the congregation tunes out. I personally don't mind him saying any long hymn (i just listen to the melody of tune, which is so beautiful and moving, or I pick up a book and do some reading). However, MAJORITY of the people get "bored" quickly and eventually leave- and some don't want to come again because of the deacon (I quote, "be aw-ew too much"). Last week we didn't even have time to finish and had to omit "Amdah fel batool" :'(, and he skips the long esmo ephcois and shere maria (which nearly all the deacons know), so that he can have time to say the rest of the praise.
So is it worth saying these long hymns to revive them, at the expense of people leaving and in extreme cases HATING the churches hymns all together???
Comments
However that's no excuse for love of praise and showing off, a common mistake learned deacons fall in..
Oujai
the reason why people go "extra" slow, because they learned it that way, they learned it from a moalem, and the molem says it slow, but the moalem says it slow to teach, because he's a teacher (moalem) but when we actually sing it and praise it, we need to feel what we are saying, not go that slow.
also another thing about long hymns... when the hymns were composed, it was at a time when the music was slow, and people enjoyed it... for example in recent time, a song by om kalthoum would take up to a few hours, and people would listen and enjoy it... but now, if you make a song that long, not many people will be able to stand it. hence why I urge every church to keep a balance between the "long", and regular songs or hymns... and not forget to keep the upbeat tune, keeping the attention of all the attendants...
I disagree with what you urge churches to do.. hymns are another way of praying, so what we're doing these days is instead of urging the faithful to pray more, or longer than we are used to, we pander to their wishes of an express service, being a Liturgy or praises.. oh yes of course, I forgot that church leaders are reminded to keep a certain number of attendees...
Oujai
If keeping the attention of all on prayer is achieved by saying hymns upbeat then that's what should be done. It's better to actually pray for less than an hour rather than standing aimlessly and saying 20 minute hymns in a slow rythm. Now I love alhan a lot and learn a lot an I think we have probably the best tunes and hymns ever, but we must look out for the rest of the people, set aside another opportunity for those who enjoy long hymns to say long hymns
I see a lot of truth in what you say, some long hymns can really throw of ones contemplation. It makes sense an upbeat would keep the attention of the people, but my problem is that how would we know what is the correct upbeat if most recordings are too slow? Like u said most Cantors do the recordings for education so they go slower than usual. So do we have a source that praise with the correct upbeat?
ophadece,
So you'd rather chant all the long hymns even though the majority of the people don't have a clue what's going on? Am not asking for an express service, but rather a service that has majority of the people praying and participating. Like Amdah said, we can another time, for all the really long hymns to be said.
Thanks for your responses. If people don't want to learn long hymns, then why should we compromise and not pray them? Because people don't want to... oh yes, but we should have a better aim in our lives as deacons and servants - i.e. to teach people long hymns. We cover up for our mistakes or shortcomings by another mistake, don't we? If people DON'T want to learn, are too old to learn, are too young to learn, are too middle-aged to learn, are too busy to learn then we should skip some prayers and ignore others for the sake of people participating. OK, fair enough (not to me of course). If people decide one day to come to church to sing some Christian songs, then we should incorporate that in the Liturgy - well, it has already happened, why am I complaining?
Oujai qen `P[C
I disagree^
If keeping the attention of all on prayer is achieved by saying hymns upbeat then that's what should be done. It's better to actually pray for less than an hour rather than standing aimlessly and saying 20 minute hymns in a slow rythm. Now I love alhan a lot and learn a lot an I think we have probably the best tunes and hymns ever, but we must look out for the rest of the people, set aside another opportunity for those who enjoy long hymns to say long hymns
Amdah, don't take this personally. I'm only addressing your statement because this is what I heard from a lot of people.
The statement in question is, "It is better to say a 1 minute hymn everyone knows and can participate in then to say a 20 minute hymn that only one person can enjoy, while everyone else is miserable." At the surface this is a logical question. But it is also a very superficial way of looking at effect and result. It doesn't matter if a hymn takes 10 seconds or 10 hours. The only thing that matters is the net result. Before we jump the gun and say a 10 second hymn has an equal beneficial result than a 10 minute hymn, let's examine it.
If you were in the army and the staff sargent noticed 3/4 of your fellow soldiers can only do 5 push-ups while you can do 100, would he argue, "It's better to have them do 5 push-ups and get results than force the rest of the group to do 100 push-ups and leave the army."? I doubt he would say that. And even if the soldiers who can't do 100 push-ups left the army, would the staff sargent's decision to train his soldiers to do 100 push-ups be considered unethical or immoral? No. It's all about discipline.
People who get bored easily from long hymns have never learned how to discipline themselves and see the beauty of and pray melismatic hymns. People who complain that they want a hymn that everyone can sing along with, usually (although not always), would prefer an upbeat Protestant hymn over a Coptic hymn simply because of popularity. Is this the result we are looking for?
So again what is the net result of saying upbeat, short, hymns vs. long melismatic hymns? In my opinion, saying short hymns conditions the congregation to be physically intolerant of traditional melismatic praise. In addition to creating a very short attention span, they ignore their Coptic hymnological heritage and begin to introduce secular, foreign and most-often borderline-heretical hymns. And on top of this, they justify it by saying that's what the people want.
Running your life by what the majority wants is not always good. In fact, many times it's precisely because the majority is not disciplined that they want and ask for things that are below an appreciated standard of care. Sooner or later, the majority will want no hymns in our church. Come in at 11:35am, take communion at 11:36am and socialize till 4pm will become the norm. Forget hymns, forget the synaxarium, forget the readings, forget the Gospel, forget the sermon, forget fasting, and so on. Where does it stop. I'm being facetious but given the fact that I see people walk in to Church 10 minutes before communion and take communion, or mothers feeding their children 10 minutes before communion and taking communion, it's not so far-fetched.
Now on the flip side of the coin, it doesn't mean we should say long hymns every week to spite the congregation. A special service can done and communicated that it will include all these long hymns so anyone who wants to come shouldn't complain. And I'm sure attendance will be poor but it doesn't matter at this point. This way there is a good compromise. Regular tasbeha is not minimized to short hymns while long melismatic hymns are not completely abandoned. We all agree on this.
What is most important is for everyone to examine their hearts. If you are asking for short hymns because you can't tolerate long hymns, then the problem is in the person, not the hymns. And if the problem is in the person, then it symptomatic of the larger problem: Lack of discipline and increased frivolity on what it means to be Orthodox Christian.
I don't care what anyone says though I love some protestant songs, especially hillsong. Maybe it does not need to be forced to be sung in our church. Ofcourse our church hymns need to be given priority but hillsong music can be listened to somewhere else outside of church when you are together with your mates
It is very important to have music which has lyrics to glorify God.
But what could someone have against hearing someone sing a song truly from their heart just because it is made by protestants?
The answer is "for fear of losing the Orthodox faith".
Oujai qen `P[C
But what could someone have against hearing someone sing a song truly from their heart just because it is made by protestants?
I always say that a building that is built on weak foundations (if any are there) will fall. The foundations of most protestants' faith is....how can i say this.....in complete rather than saying 'wrong'.....taking whatever comes out of that and mixing it into out Orthodox faith will not help anyone but will cause moer problems mainly in the long run rather than our current age.
another thing about self control, when saint Bishoy perfected his prayer by staying up all night to keep praying... he did not force all his children to stay up with him and pray... but if they chose to join, I'm sure he did not stop them... what I want to say is we have to acknowledge that this service for example in our church its five hours, then we have to keep to our scheduled time. pray long hymns, but keep them upbeat... lively... and pray short hymns, so that all would participate equally, and while there, they will hear a few long hymns and be able be exposed to the riches of the church's hymnology...
God forbid I say we cease the longs hymns, for it will always be hymns our church has sang, and our saints uttered... but what I still urge the churches, seek the meaning of the tunes, and do not become a parrot just repeating what was heard before... for example every service, I make sure I take a hymn, and try to understand why the composer composed it that way, why certain words are long, why certain words are high.. or low... and so on... if we understand the hymnology we will sing it how the fathers wanted it to be sung... and even a stranger to a song will feel the emotions that are being put to the song. for example a secular song, will be made composed and sang by a choir... then another choir could take the same song same composing same everything, but when they sing it, you feel more emotions, you feel it more, because they were able to feel the words and the music of the song.
That is by far the best post you have ever written on tasbeha.org.
I'll add 2 points to your credibility score. Good work!
Now if we take out protestant songs the following songs at tasbeha.org must be removed
If your tired and weary
How great thou art
Amazing Grace
Via Dolorosa
O Come O Come Emanuel
We three Kings
King of Kings and LORD of LORDs glory alleliua
Hark now hear the angels sing
and many more classics
believe me I'm never anti long hymns, but I'm anti ey... ey.... ey... 45 minutes later... ey... ey... ey... ooo.... when there are no meditation on what we are saying, people will feel this is a parrot repeating something he heard, and is reciting it for the sake of reciting it...
If one understands that music is a language in itself, independent of lyrics, and one has the spirit of prayer, then 45 minutes on the same letter is not enough. Meditation is not dependent on lyrics or time. It is dependent on spiritual discipline. People who feel this is a parrot repeating tells me they don't have the spirit of prayer to begin with. It will not matter if it is a 45 minute hymn on "ey" only or a 10 second hymn that sings the entire New Testament. I would refrain from sterotypical statements like this. How do you know Mulsims pray without emotion or knowledge? You are not talking about Islamic theology, you are talking about Muslim prayer practice. I won't agree or disagree with your statement. I think it's better not to make statements based on generalizations without evidence or reason. You're comparing a eremitic monk whose way of life did not depend on a central rule. Compare instead the coenobetic rule of St Pachomius or St Shenouda or St Basil. They did require a strict prayer regime. In fact, the typika of St Shenouda's liturgical prayers were quite extensive and long. And all the monks were required to observe them or force banishment outside the monastery. Regardless, even if the monastic life did or didn't require prayer rules, we are talking about non-monastic liturgical rules. We are talking about the general congregation's lack of discipline related to hymnological practice. If the church wanted to require a 10 hour prayer, she has the authority to do so regardless of what we think. And if such a rule was enacted, what kind of response would the general congregation give? Ok, now I understand what you're getting at. This is a nice compromise. I will caution that the idea of "upbeat" hymns may not be culturally acceptable as you think. Upbeat hymns work fine in many Western secular cultures. It may even work in many Christian cultures, but I don't think it works in an Arab, Arab-European, Arab-American, or Coptic/Egyptian culture - Christian, Muslim or Jewish. Many of the Russian, Greek, Maronite, Jewish hymns are very, very slow. Many include opera-like polyphonetics which is foreign to Coptic Orthodoxy and Islamic Arab sacred music. It is found in modern Arab and Western secular music. So I don't think upbeat or faster tempo is the solution itself. It may be completely foreign to the culture and it doesn't address any lack of discipline.
The rest of your post is fine. They are examples of spiritual discipline exercises to experience a more powerful musicological prayer. If one has the discipline, then one will automatically do what you described.
If we are going to take out the beautiful songs made by hillsong we better replace them with something which is equally or more intense songs from the heart
Now if we take out protestant songs the following songs at tasbeha.org must be removed
If your tired and weary
How great thou art
Amazing Grace
Via Dolorosa
O Come O Come Emanuel
We three Kings
King of Kings and LORD of LORDs glory alleliua
Hark now hear the angels sing
and many more classics
Way ahead of you: http://tasbeha.org/content/community/index.php/topic,10823.msg131862.html#msg131862 ;)
Doc Rem,
That is by far the best post you have ever written on tasbeha.org.
I'll add 2 points to your credibility score. Good work!
I second that! And an awesome analogy to!
but to what you said, a little before you quoted me I said, and since you mention the parrot is a lack of faith, there is a story that was mentioned by the pope, it goes along these lines, a monk came to pray the agpeya... he prayed everything just repeated all the prayers, went through it without feeling what he is saying, but prayed it due to memorization of the prayer, and he just went through it, like a parrot... in the end of the night an angel came to him and asked him why has he not prayed, upon being asked this, he understood God's message. my beloved, we have become parrots, we have classes teaching the tune, but no one sits and talks about the meaning of the tune, and some do not even know the meaning of what they are saying to begin with... its a hymnology... a study of the hymn... to study a hymn, you study the tune the lyrics, the history, and everything to do with that hymn to understand everything about it! I studied the tunes in Islamic recitation, and the rules... hence I speak of knowledge and not stereotype/generalization... the way a person would recite the quran is due to throat muscles, and how the words come out, emotions and feeling have no place on what they say, and according to a friend Imam, a person should not involve his emotions and feeling to what he says, or he would be distorting the word of Allah... so what they believe, or what the rules of recitation says, is the tune was given to them, and the quran should be recited just by these tunes, so people would learn the quran, and not the emotion of the reciter to the quran. but I agree with you, we are talking about Christianity, so I apologize for that statement.
the church in her wisdom is seeking her children to come and participate, and not to be driven away by putting rules that will surpass the capability of her children... if you have five children, three can eat bread, and two can only drink milk, for the two, even though a minority, you do not force bread down their throat and seek them to grow and be as like the others who are grown, which will end up killing them, but rather you slowly feed them a little bits of bread, until they grow and are able to join the their grown siblings. but I will ask you this, if they all drink milk, and the grown eat bread along with the milk, do any of them lose? so if we pray a prayer that will appease everyone, with a few long hymns, as bits to feed the "babes" of the congregation, while having those who can stand and pray for hours have on another day a sahra (an all night) prayer for them to grow... which will also give an opportunity to those who want to grow to come and strive a little by little through the all night praise, until one day they will be able to stand the whole time and pray with the rest. does anyone lose?!
on the last note, I will repeat myself and say, by upbeat, I do not mean drums, or making the song too fast... by upbeat, I mean make the hymn lively, which will happen if we feel what we are saying... the hymns are upbeat in festal tunes, but if we say it too slow as a cantor would, we would be changing an upbeat festal happy tune, to sound sad, hence why I say study the tune, and understand it... to not make everything long (by long I mean extending the tune according to the singer) while forgetting the tune is suppose to be upbeat (happy, louder, stronger), because as I originally said, sometimes I enter kiahk praise (happy) and I think I mistakenly entered a paschal service (sad).
my beloved, when you quote, quote the full statement and emphasize on what you want from that statement... but if you quote a part of the statement, and emphasize on it, its picking and choosing which could change the whole meaning of what was quoted. forgive me, I just had to mention this, because after reading your post, I was like who is jerk supermanbam who doesn't like long hymns...
Supermanbam, I greatly apologize for misrepresenting your statements. I think in the end we might be coming to the same conclusion on two different paths. Everything you say about studying a hymn is absolutely correct. I pray we all have such a wonderful praying spirit. My only insertion is that such a wonderful praying spirit only comes from discipline and training. It is not an inherited trait and I feel most people believe that the little tolerance to hymns is what God gave them and that's all they're going to do. You were speaking about the goal of a praying spirit. I was speaking about the means and obstacles. No one will lose if they followed the discipline you describe. If I had 5 children and two can only drink milk, I would give them milk of course. However, experience tells us, the two who can only drink milk will refuse solid food because that is all they are accustomed to and do not want to change. This is why St Paul admonishes the Hebrews who should be teachers but wanted "milk" only (spiritually immaturity) saying, "For everyone who partakes only of milk is unskilled in the word of righteousness, for he is a babe. But solid food belongs to those who are of full age, that is, those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil." Heb 5:13-14. And in 1 Cor 13, he writes, "When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child; but when I became a man, I put away childish things."
Again, we are saying the same thing. Spiritual growth requires "milk" at first but eventually they must choose to grow up. When it comes to hymnology, I see too many people choose "childish" things: only songs in their first language, only songs that are ultra popular, only songs that are less than 60 seconds, only songs that are not Coptic, and so on. If the general population gave up these childish things like St Paul speaks of, we wouldn't be having this discussion. So it goes back to lack of discipline and increased frivolity. (And not just the general congregation but most deacons and muallameen)
Take a pair of scissors, cut the microphone wire, and the problem is solved.
Just be sure to reimburse the church for damages.
Take a pair of scissors, cut the microphone wire, and the problem is solved.
ILSM, while I appreciate your quirky mannerisms you seem to identify the problem exclusively with the deacon practices and not the congregation practice and beliefs. This is where we will disagree. Take out the microphone and have the "true, humble" deacons sing the long Kiahk hymns. Will this solve the general dissatisfaction with long hymns? No. It's only a bandage covering up the real problem: that lack of discipline and increased frivolity occurs in both the diaconate and the laity. The clergy tend to respond by pampering to the laity while policing the diaconate.
I think TITL solved the second part of the problem. Take those same pair of scissors and cut all books (and web pages) with Protestant hymns used in the Coptic Church. I'll add to the list Arabic hymns and popular hymns that are said outside of their respective rite and proper place within the rite.
And finally, everyone must learn Coptic. Period. No exceptions. ;D
And finally, everyone must learn Coptic. Period. No exceptions. ;D
Remenkimi for President! ;D
If a building is so big that the voice of the priest cannot be heard then perhaps the congregation is too large and several congregations should be formed to aid a sense of close community, and to facilitate mission.
St John Chrysostom and St Severus, the greatest preachers of all time, ever used microphones and both preached in major cathedrals. If no-one had been able to hear them they would not have been popular.
I have to admit to not understanding why a microphone is necessary. I have never used one. Our fathers never used them.
If a building is so big that the voice of the priest cannot be heard then perhaps the congregation is too large and several congregations should be formed to aid a sense of close community, and to facilitate mission.
St John Chrysostom and St Severus, the greatest preachers of all time, ever used microphones and both preached in major cathedrals. If no-one had been able to hear them they would not have been popular.
I think it might be related to the antagonism of mosques in Egypt who at least 5 times a day are blurting their prayers out, deafening everyone in the cities. The churches in Egypt certainly, often need them so that the people can hear the prayers over the mosque that is never more than 100m from the church.
I have to admit to not understanding why a microphone is necessary. I have never used one. Our fathers never used them.
If a building is so big that the voice of the priest cannot be heard then perhaps the congregation is too large and several congregations should be formed to aid a sense of close community, and to facilitate mission.
St John Chrysostom and St Severus, the greatest preachers of all time, ever used microphones and both preached in major cathedrals. If no-one had been able to hear them they would not have been popular.
our beloved father, St. John Chrysostom and St. Severus had small churches, and through the years, through the grace of God our numbers grew... we are taught to speak with a gentle voice, we are taught to be calm. Don't get me wrong, I agree with you, but to an extent though... for example God blessed/cursed me with a loud voice, hence why I cannot use a microphone, or I have to keep a great distance between me and a microphone, even though our church is a quite big, but my voice is loud enough for people sitting all the way in the end will still hear me clearly. but for example I just finished listening to the pope's lecture as I read your post, and all I thought is, imagine the in that Cathedral giving a sermon without a microphone.
I think God graced us with technology to spread the faith... and to better the prayer to everyone attending the church.
I do totally agree however that the microphone should not be a cause for boasting or pride. I merely credit it's practicality.
I am not convinced that technology has a place in our liturgy indeed it seems always to debase and cheapen it. Those things which not even catechumens should see are now posted on youtube.
There will be no microphones or videos in my own church.