Ray Brown, of blessed memory, taught his GTS students that the asterisk at the end of a line in the psalms and canticles marks a shift in the melodic line of the chant when they are properly sung, not a pause when they are read.

Are we now to surrender his asteriskian orthodoxy once, for all, delivered to the saints to this new rampant liberalism that tears and rips and rends every piece of paper imprinted with Anglican Chant?

And what about the Song of Deborah?

O Tempora! O mores! We see again the fall of classical certainties to relativistic revisionism concerning our most treasured liturgical practices! As the true home of the chanting of the psalms and canticles is in an antiphonally divided choir, whilst using plainchant the verses alternate. The dean's side begins a new verse seamlessly as the cantor's side concludes it and vice versa. Hence the asterisk serves as the point where the singing side pauses to take a deep breath in order to finish the verse.

What is this new-fangled "Anglican Chant" of which you speak? :-D

Hi Deirdre,
Thanks for this reminder! You point to one of the features of Enriching Our Worship that has great potential--a proliferation of canticles to help us learn the songs and stories with which many of us are unfamiliar. Classically we Anglicans have used a small and restricted set of canticles; the Roman offices (particular as formalized by the recent (1911) renovations of Pius X) have always had more canticles than we have. The Song of Judith was traditionally sung on festal Wednesdays according to that scheme; ferial Wednesdays received another of my favorites, the Song of Hannah--another song that anticipates Mary's Magnificat.

Thank you, Derek.
And Paul, how many years did Ray Brown spend singing, or saying (when the choir was too small or tuneless) seven offices a day seven days a week, including Psalm 119 in its entirety daily, antiphonally in a monastic order? I would suggest that, blessed memory or no, his authority is limited.
Trust me, you pause at the asterisk, preferably long enough to pray silently "Jesu mercy." You do *not* pause at the period (Deirdre never suggests pausing at the period). The period, as Derek points out, is where the other side comes in, almost on top of the first side, catching the psalm as it is passed back and forth without letting a nanosecond drop between verses.

(Editor's note: Jules, we need your full name next time.

Oh, good grief. We're huffing and puffing about the meaning of *? Isn't to each his own good enough? I'm disheartened by this sideshow - seems to happen too often in the church.

The topic is the Song of Judith.

Oh c'mon, John--Paul wrote in jest and I responded in kind. And commented on the topic at hand. I see nothing wrong with a little liturgical banter as long as the main point isn't obscured...

I'm dense. My apologies.

I know it's silly and reactionary, but, you know: "An asterisk divides each verse into two parts for reading or chanting In reading, a distinct pause should be made at the asterisk, blessed Raymond Brown notwithstanding" (BCP p. 583 - whoops, the editor of my BCP seems to have left off that last bit.)

By the way, at OJN we pause at the asterisk for FOUR (long) seconds whether chanting or reading the Psalms. [That means one says "Lord Jesus" silently three times and then takes a breath.] And we "shingle" the end-and-beginning of verses.

Anglican Chant? is that something new that Akinola and Duncan are pushing?

(Hey, Father--say something about the Song of Judith or John will yell at us again!)

Off topic, oldie but goodie:

Anglican weather forecast,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4z2jwDcb9wI

I did not measure the pause.

In some districts it is rather dense.

John-Julian,

Ray Brown lived in the days of the traditional, orthodox 1928 Book of Common Prayer before such revisionist rubrics. In his day the plain and Anglican chanting of the psalms in the Chapel of the Good Shepherd rose to heights as described in the novel, "The Innocent Curate," as rivaling that of the Volga Boatmen.

Dear Dr. Deirdre, mea culp for a little Lenten silliness. Your article is a fascinating and welcome take on the Song of Judith.

Is there a Godly Play telling of the story of Judith?

Seriously, growing up in a strongly Evangelical environment and in a Sunday School where a lot of hair-raising stories got told to children, Judith's story never made the curriculum. Not her setting the enemy general up to think he was going to seduce her, not the storyteller's careful ambiguoity (did she sleep with him?), not his drunken stupor, and not her saying a prayer, summoning all her physical strength and behading him with his own sword.

Along with showing just how daring (and not pious or moralistic) the scripture writers and Hebrew tradition could be in honoring a truly fearless woman, the story puts a new face on Biblical heroism.

In contrast to the family values, conservative morals reading of the Bible, Judith's story turns purity on its head and makes a very good case for situation ethics.

I particularly like it that Judith returns from her victory to numerous marriage proposals. The text has already made clear that she was a very attractive woman. What's great about the additional storytelling detail is that all those suitors (whom she turns down) are moved by her heroism and her honor, so her heroic risk and probable personal sacrifice didn't dis-honor her at all.