Moving toward “The Generic Harp”

Did the Sacred Harp Publishing Company and their 2025 Revision Committee move The Sacred Harp 2025 Revision towards words with less explicitly Christian meaning? I believe so (and, whether carelessly or deliberately is a question to consider).[i] I analyzed the texts/words of the new songs added to The Sacred Harp 2025 (as well as the old songs removed from The Sacred Harp 1991) and divided the texts of these songs into 3 categories: (1) texts that might be generally accepted in principle as true by singers with any religion or no religion; (2) texts that might be generally accepted in principle as true by singers who believe in some idea of “God” or a higher power, though not necessarily the Christian God; (3) texts that could not be generally or readily accepted in principle as true by those who are not Christians. Here are the specific songs categorized and the results/conclusions from that. (You should hopefully be able to select the images and enlarge them for reading.)

Old songs that were added to The Sacred Harp 2025 (32).

32 songs from older/other sources were added to the 2025 Edition of The Sacred Harp.

• 3 with “Category 1” lyrics; this is 9% of the old songs added.
• 14 with “Category 2” lyrics; this is 44% of the old songs added.
• 15 with “Category 3” lyrics; this is 46% of the old songs added.

53% of the older songs that were added have somewhat generic texts, that could be more acceptable to non-Christians.[ii]

New songs that were added to The Sacred Harp 2025 (81).

81 songs by 49 living composers were added to the 2025 Edition of The Sacred Harp.

• 12 with “Category 1” lyrics; 15% of the new songs added.
• 38 with “Category 2” lyrics; 47% of the new songs added.
• 31 with “Category 3” lyrics: 38% of the new songs added.

62% of the new songs have somewhat generic texts, that could be more acceptable to non-Christians.

Considered together, 59% of the total songs added to the 2025 Edition have somewhat generic texts, that could be more acceptable to non-Christians.

Songs that were removed from The Sacred Harp 1991 (77).

77 songs that were in the 1991 Edition of The Sacred Harp were removed in order to make way for 113 songs added to the 2025 Edition of The Sacred Harp.

• 9 removed songs with “Category 1” lyrics; this is 9% of the songs removed.
• 15 removed songs with “Category 2” lyrics; this is 19% of the songs removed.
• 53 removed songs with “Category 3” lyrics; this is 69% of the songs removed.

These actions show favoritism toward removing explicitly Christian words over more generic ones.

Conclusion.

Of 113 newly added songs in 2025, 15 have “Category 1” lyrics and 52 have “Category 2” lyrics (a total of 67). This is 59 % of the songs added, exhibiting a tendency toward favoring songs that can be considered less explicit in the Christian message they contain.[iii] When comparing added songs to removed songs, the choices exhibit removing more songs with more explicitly Christian texts, while adding more songs with more generic texts. 59% of the newly-added songs have somewhat generic texts. 69% of the removed songs have somewhat more explicit texts.

This analysis is enough to raise serious questions and heighten further concerns about the theological and cultural “drift” of The Sacred Harp, its songs, and its message. These concerns should not be dismissed with a hand wave, but considered and addressed by a community whose tradition is based in and fed by Christianity. Overall, the Sacred Harp Publishing Company failed its trust.

---

[i] For example, was the committee (or some members of it) complicit in favoring song texts that would be less-offensive to non-Christian and anti-Christian singers? (If you do not believe there are anti-Christian singers, see footnote 3.) Was the committee careless in not articulating a committment to explictly Christian texts for an explicitly Christian songbook? How will these questions be answered?

[ii] As a plurality, the total old songs added slightly favor Category 3, but the total of Categories 1 and 2 favor generic readings. That fits well in the overall situation of past versus present, seeing that the older composers would have been less likely to specifically desire generic texts in the same way or for the same reason that modern non-Christian composers would choose them.

[iii] This is not to say they are not Christian hymns, but that the texts appear to have been picked in order to favor hymns or stanzas of hymns that are not as explicit in directly speaking of Jesus Christ, his atoning blood, his bodily resurrection, salvation through Christ alone, the exclusivity of the gospel, and so on. In past times, Christian singers would just understand all the songs from within their Christian worldview. The current participation of many non-Christians who like the music but not the theology turns that once-common understanding on its head. Shockingly (in his audacity), one composer who has a song in the 2025 Edition wrote on Bluesky that “Christianity isn’t morally acceptable.” (Perhaps it is not that audacious, since he hides cowardly behind a pseudonym.)

Questions for the Revision Committee

The following thoughts and questions about the latest Sacred Harp Publishing Company songbook revision were addressed to two members of the 2025 Sacred Harp Revision Committee. First, after the October 2025 Board meeting, the committee’s music editor offered to answer questions about the revision committee music selection and editing process. However, after receiving the specific questions, he declined to answer but instead directed me to listen to remarks made at the symposium in Atlanta in September 2025 – none of which videos that are available directly address my questions. Some of the videos (even if they do answer the questions) are still not even available online over nine months after the fact. Failing in that effort, I next addressed the questions to the revision committee chair. His reply offered no answers. After reading the reply four times, I came away with the feeling that – written between every line was the mantra “we could care less about the singers who have concerns about the new book.”

So, here are the questions asked, presented for public consumption. I have changed the formatting somewhat in order to make it easier viewing for the reader. If there was nothing done unethically in or wrong during the process, why are the questions so hard to answer?

Submissions. The committee reported to the Sacred Harp community that 1155 song were submitted for consideration. 

• How many of the 1155 were new compositions and how many were previously published/old songs?
• Are there any statistics on how many songs were submitted per composer – that is, not how many did each individual submit, but perhaps an upper number (the largest amount submitted by a composer), a lower number (presumably one), and an average?
• Of these 1155 songs submitted, how did the committee arrive at the 113 chosen?
• Did the committee select songs based on what the song itself was, or what they envisioned it could be (considering the kind of editing that was done to some of them)?

Blind selection process. The Sacred Harp community and composers were assured that only the committee chairman knew the names of the songs and their composers. I have no doubt that the chair sincerely envisioned it that way. But perhaps such an ideal was a pipe dream from the start, considering the digital age in which we live. There were so many variables -- such as songs being printed in The Trumpet, submitted to FaSoLa Songwriters, the New Harmony Facebook group, YouTube, SoundCloud, composiums, other songbooks, on various websites, and such like. With all this, managing to keep the process “blind” not only to the committee but even to others singing at trial singings must have been an impossible challenge. Songs written by the committee members were obviously known to themselves.

• I have found 75 tunes that are publicly available and that could possibly have been known by the revision committee through various means (twenty-five are on Jesse’s site, SacredHarpTunes.com, so obviously  he knew those). 
• Considering the disconnect between what we were told and what was the situation, what assurances do we have against the appearance of conflict-of-interest, and that all composers were treated equally and respectfully?

Editing process. One of the more shocking revelations to some of us outsiders is the heavy editing of the songs that were selected for the new edition. I know you are aware of the situation with Linda Sides’s song, and you may be aware that she has demonstrated how her song was edited without her collaboration, then sent to her with a week’s notice to sign off on for inclusion in the book. This is when I first began to take close notice of the process. Other credible reports have surfaced of songs receiving the same or similar treatment, and of possibly one other composer refusing to sign off on the edited product. 

• Who decided that songs should be edited? (Not talking about fixing errant notes and typos, but changing the songs themselves.)
• Who decided which songs would be edited? Who did the editing? Did the entire committee approve the process both before and after editing?
• Of these 1155 songs submitted, were there not more songs that were deemed good enough substantially “as is” without having to edit possibly 50% (per Mike Hinton) or more of the songs to make them worthy to include in the book?
• What was the time frame of editing the songs?
• Were all composers given only one week to accept the edits proposed for their songs (in a process that overall covered nearly seven years)?
• Or did some receive preferential treatment? (For example, on a recent podcast, one composer said that after he submitted his songs, the revision committee reached out to him to say one of them had potential. So, he worked on it, and eventually his song made the cut.)
• I also noticed there are three songs in the 2025 edition whose composition dates are after the time for submitting songs was over.

Removal of songs. 

• What method or methods were used for removing songs that were not among the bottom 77 songs?
• For example:
• The song FEDERAL STREET ranked 187th overall, out of 554 songs. It was sung more than 367 other songs over the course of 30 years. It was removed.  
• The song CHARLTON ranked 552nd overall, out of 554 songs, over the course of 30 years. That is, this song was down near the very bottom among the least used songs. It was not removed.
• The old B. F. White arrangement SOFT MUSIC (ranked 293) was removed, while the weird THE BRIDE’S FAREWELL (ranked 545) was kept.
• How do you explain these kinds of choices?

I realize that the revision committee took on an enormous task beyond the scope of previous revisions (particularly in the number of songs submitted), and can appreciate that fact. However, I think that fact actually calls for all the more transparency, not less.

Search After Happiness

I found the following in some old files, which I apparently wrote in June of 2020.

The Search After Happiness

The following hymn is an excerpt from A Search After Happiness: A Pastoral in Three Dialogues, written by “A Young Lady” (Hannah More), in 1762/1773.[1] In the second edition, the title was changed to The Search After Happiness: A Pastoral Drama, and this portion of the poem was expanded to seven 4-line stanzas.[2] The poem/hymn as used in The Sacred Harp and other shape-note books has some word changes, and only six stanzas (the third stanza is not used).

In later printings, the “Preface” explains the purpose of the “Pastoral Drama”:

The object of the following Poem, which was written in very early youth, was an earnest wish to furnish a substitute for the very improper custom, which then prevailed, of allowing plays, and those not always of the purest kind, to be acted by young Ladies in boarding schools. And it has afforded a serious satisfaction to the Author to learn that this little Poem, and likewise the Sacred Dramas, have very frequently been adopted to supply the place of those more dangerous amusements. If it may be still happily instrumental in promoting a regard to Religion and Virtue in the minds of young persons, and afford them an innocent, and perhaps not altogether unuseful, amusement in the exercise of recitation, the end for which it was originally composed, and the author’s utmost wish in its re-publication, will be fully answered.

In the drama this portion is sung by the character Florella, a young shepherdess.

1. While beauty and youth are in their full prime,
And folly and fashion affect our whole time;
O let not the phantom our wishes engage,
Let us live so in youth that we blush not in age.
 
2. The vain and the young may attend us a while,
But let not their flattery our prudence beguile;
Let us covet those charms that shall never decay
Nor listen to all that deceivers can say.
 
3. I sigh not for beauty, nor languish for wealth,
But grant me, kind Providence, virtue and health;
Then richer than kings, and far happier than they,
My days shall pass swiftly and sweetly away.
 
4. For when age steals on me, and youth is no more,
And the moralist Time shakes his glass at my door,
What pleasure in beauty or wealth can I find?
My beauty, my wealth, is a sweet peace of mind.
 
5. That peace! I’ll preserve it as pure as ’twas given
Shall last in my bosom an earnest of heaven;
For Virtue and Wisdom can warm the cold scene,
And sixty can flourish as gay as sixteen.
 
6. And when I the burden of life shall have borne,
And death with his sickle shall cut the ripe corn,
Reascend to my God without murmur or sigh,
I’ll bless the kind summons, and lie down and die.

The third stanza that Florella sings is:

How the tints of the rose, and the jess’mine’s perfume,[3]
The eglantine’s fragrance, the lilac’s gay bloom,
Tho’ fair and tho’ fragrant, unheeded may lie,
For that neither is sweet when Florella is by.

This is the stanza not used in songbooks. The other six stanzas are used with the tune Morality, number 136 in The Sacred Harp. It is in other shape-note tune books as well, such as The Southern Harmony. It can be found on YouTube sung at Waycross Primitive Baptist Church.

Hannah More was born February 2, 1745 in the village of Fishponds in Gloucestershire. She was a daughter of Jacob and Mary Grace More. He was a schoolmaster. She was taught by her father, then attended a girls’ school of her oldest sister Mary. Hannah later taught at the school, and wrote A Search After Happiness circa 1762.[4] She left teaching and earned most of her living through writing. After a religious conversion she became close friends of John Newton and& William Wilberforce. She was one of the most successful writers of her time. She died September 7, 1833 and is buried at All Saints Churchyard in Somerset, England.

---

[1] A Search After Happiness: A Pastoral in Three Dialogues, A Young Lady, Bristol: S. Farley, 1773, pp. 30-31. The “Advertisement” in the Google version purported to be printed in 1773 strongly suggests that this is the first printed/book version of A Search After Happiness.
[2] The first printed version had 26 lines rather than 28 lines.
[3] The first version appears to have jessamine (jess’mine’s), while later versions change this to “jasmine.”

[4] The scan of the book at Google Books does not have a date printed, but it is believed to be from around 1762. However, Google Books dates it as 1766.

Ethics and Sacred Harp 2

Unethical editorial practices are real and widespread. When a reader recently noticed “undisclosed conflicts of interest in the peer review” of a paper, it set off a chain of events leading to the publisher Frontiers “retracting a batch of 122 articles across five journals.” Examples of other articles expressing such concerns may be found HERE, HERE, and HERE. The last demonstrates that the concerns are not just recent. Universities and/or their libraries such as those at Emory, Flagler, and West Georgia often provide resources about ethics and academic integrity.[i]

As we saw in the previous post yesterday, unethical means “not adhering to proper rules of conduct or standards of a profession.” In the Sacred Harp context, this raises the question, “What are the proper rules of conduct for or standards of revising The Sacred Harp tunebook?”[ii] For help in that regard, we might look at general ethical standards used in business, industry, and education, as well as specific accepted ethical standards used in editorial processes. Finally, considering that The Sacred Harp is a Christian book, reflect on Christian Bible-based ethical standards.[iii]  There is a lot of overlap in the three categories, but it might be helpful to sort them this way. Some general ethical standards may vary according to context, while biblical standards will be objective and absolute.[iv]

General ethical standards found in business, education, etc.

• Avoids any conflict of interest
• Exhibits fairness, impartiality, and neutrality
• Prohibits retaliation
• Provides honesty and integrity
• Refrains from undue influence of familial relationships
• Seeks no unfair advantage
• Shows respect and gains trust
• Shuns secret agendas that conflict with the publicly expressed agenda

Specific ethical standards used in editorial processes

• Allows for corrections and enhancements
• Applies the same standards equally
• Encourages toward improvement
• Maintains proper attribution
• Protects the original intent/substance
• Quashes plagiarism
• Rejects misrepresentation and lack of transparency
• Requires collaboration between parties
• Respects original content and intellectual property

Some Bible-based Christian ethical standards

• Luke 6:31 And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise.
• Leviticus 19:11 Ye shall not steal, neither deal falsely, neither lie one to another.
• Romans 12:9 Abhor that which is evil; cleave to that which is good.
• Romans 12:10 ...in honour preferring one another
• Romans 12:16 Mind not high things, but condescend to men of low estate. Be not wise in your own conceits.
• Romans 12:17 Provide things honest in the sight of all men.
• Proverbs 16:3 Commit thy works unto the Lord, and thy thoughts shall be established.
• Proverbs 20:10 Divers weights, and divers measures, both of them are alike abomination to the Lord.
• Galatians 6:1 Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted.
• Jeremiah 6:16 Thus saith the Lord, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths…
• Colossians 3:16 …teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord.

To answer the question “What are the proper rules of conduct for (or standards of) revising The Sacred Harp tunebook,” we can look for help by considering general ethical standards, specific editorial ethical standards, and Christian Bible-based ethical standards. What is past is past, but we can look to the future with hope. Looking to the future begins with acknowledging past problems, remediating those that can be remediated, and then firmly establishing a goal and will to proceed by nothing less than ethical standards going forward. Let us call for and expect only this.

---

[i] For example, Emory expects all employees to avoid actual or perceived conflicts between their personal interests and their responsibilities; to maintain the highest ethical standards in all conduct and decisions; and to avoid retaliation.
[ii] From the beginning of the revealing of the new 2025 Sacred Harp book, the main objections concerned questionable ethics, a premeditated agenda, and the lack of promised impartiality in how the revision played out. Noticeably, the committee denied having a preset agenda. “The committee has no preset agenda other than to produce the best possible revision that will satisfy the singing public for the next 25–30 years.” Revision-Music Committee Status Report, July 2020. At what point does the editing process change from ethical to unethical? Ethical editing allows for and includes minor corrections and enhancements (corrections of typos, errant notes, grammatical mistakes, for example), suggestions for improvement, respect of the original content and context, clarification, proper attribution, and/or informed consent. Unethical editing involves and includes misrepresentation, removing important content and context, lack of transparency, and/or falsifying information. A distinction between ethical and unethical may often depend on whether the editorial changes mislead the audience and distort the truth. One concerned party summed it up this way: “Don’t lie about who wrote the song. Don’t rewrite people’s work without their consent. Don’t treat certain composers with preference in the rewrite process.”
[iii] Speaking in principle, ethical behavior is right for everyone. Nevertheless, the ethical behavior of each one will be based on his or her standards of right and wrong. Acting in ways consistent with one’s view of right and wrong will (or should) for the Jew be based on the understanding of the Old Testament, on the Holy Bible (OT & NT) for the Christian, the Qur’an for the Muslim, the Bhagavad Gita for the Hindu, and so on. (These might have some problematic results when badly mixed!) Since the United States of America is neither Jewish, Christian, Muslim, nor Hindu, the ethics of the U. S. as a nation generally must be based on its Constitution, laws, community standards, etc. – proceeding in ways consistent with those. Since The Sacred Harp is a Christian songbook published in the United States, the ethics of the revising of the songbook should be consistent with not only U. S. standards, but especially consistent with a Christian worldview based on the Holy Bible.
[iv] For example, in a family business, it would not be unethical for the owner to promote his child to the highest-ranking position in the company, while it could be unethical for the CEO of large and diverse corporation to do so.
[v] Considering there was at the least perceived partiality toward insuring the inclusion of non-Christians, we might be reminded of the biblical standard, “Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers” 2 Corinthians 6:14.

Ethics and Sacred Harp 1

unethical, adjective. Not adhering to proper rules of conduct or standards of a profession.

In past posts I have considered unethical practices that occurred in the 2025 revision process of the 1991 Sacred Harp. (For examples, see HERE, HERE, HERE, and HERE.) This brings up the questions, “What are the proper rules of conduct in revising a traditional shape note songbook” and “Have they been followed in the past?” We might question whether, in addition to the present, some things in the past were handled unethically.[i]

Three examples.

There are examples of past odd and/or unethical behavior that perhaps laid the groundwork for present excuse of unethical behavior. These seem to fall in a category of misattribution or false attributions.

A well-known and oft-repeated history of The Sacred Harp is the alto misattributions in the 1911 J. S. James Original Sacred Harp. This book adds alto to some 300 to 400 songs, and attributes them to someone other than the actual composers of these altos.[ii] Ironically, this long-standing affront was finally addressed in the 2025 edition by adding the correct names of alto composers.[iii] 

Another practice of misattribution was the arrangement of songs by old New England composers (such as Abraham Maxim, Samuel Holyoke, and others) either without acknowledgment of the composer or even attribution to Sacred Harp composers/singers.[iv]  

The third oddity is a deliberate misdirection or misattribution by the composer to some other person who did not write the song. This practice has been styled by some as “dedicatory attributions” – that is (evidently) that another person is credited as the composer as honor or dedication. In Makers of The Sacred Harp (p. 82), Warren Steel writes: “There is one additional form of authorship that I have rarely encountered outside the Sacred Harp tradition. A few songs are credited to an individual as a form of tribute or dedication, but are actually composed by another person, perhaps a well-known Sacred Harp composer who already has many tunes to his credit. This has the effect of recognizing a person for his or her service to the cause of Sacred Harp singing by transferring credit for a given song, while modestly reducing the share of songs credited to any one author.”[v]

In consideration.

Perhaps in the past some questionable situations were handled with “kid gloves” (at best, explained discreetly) because of respect for the tradition and respect for those persons who acted unethically.[vi] Into the early 21st-century the standard explanation for the 1911 alto misattributions was how easily two people might write the same alto for a song that already had three parts.[vii] To not straightforwardly deal with issues allows them to fester and get worse – which we see in the latest revision.

Also, we must carefully consider one thing that has changed dramatically in recent times. That one thing is the explosion of the number of people who composed and submitted what they believed were songs in the Sacred Harp style. In the past, to a great degree, the revisers of Sacred Harps have been composers who were adding their new songs to the book. “Our book, our songs,” so to speak. In the 20th century, the nature of the beast, so to speak, was that people who composed and submitted songs were small in number and somewhat limited in a tight circle. That changed a bit with the 1991 revision of the Sacred Harp Publishing Company. Then (I think) there were around 100 songs submitted, according to committee member Raymond Hamrick – from what was probably a pool of about two dozen composers. Contrast this with the 2025 edition, which had 1155 songs submitted that were written by over 200 composers (a large portion of those living composers). Because of this difference, the 2025 revision committee placed a great emphasis on the idea that none of the composers were known to anyone but the committee chairman.[vi]

Thoughts.

I do not think having a book and having a procedure of “it is our book and we will put our songs in it” is unethical. However, to make a pretense of neutrality, equality, and fairness but then actually proceed with “it is our book and we will put our songs in it, and do whatever we want” is unethical. To pretend that one’s agenda is not one’s agenda is unethical. To project that someone who did not write a song wrote the song is unethical. To steal someone else’s song or song idea and then claim it as one’s own is unethical. It is possible that how to revise a Sacred Harp has not been properly marinated in ethical thought.

• Past unethical practices should not provide a pattern for current, ongoing, or future unethical practices.
• Ethical guidelines should be thought out, agreed on, understood, and followed.

To be concluded, Part 2 tomorrow.

---

[i] If so, it does not excuse or erase what recently happened.
[ii] A large portion of the alto came especially from the 1902 Revised Sacred Harp by W. M. Cooper. Cooper sued James over the theft, but lost the suit. The loss seems to come over a bad technicality imposed by the judge – yes, James did take altos from Cooper, but the alto part is not so important as to matter legally. Also, the trial was carried out on what might be considered James’s “home turf.”
[iii] In 1991, the revision deleted the references to names of alto composers. Warren Steel acknowledged some of this and recognized some of the composers in Makers of the Sacred Harp.
[iv] Some of the 19th-century cases – particularly the writing down of melodies that were passed along orally – exhibit a different concept of authorship (that is, the person who was capable of putting it in music on paper was considered the author). A few cases seem to be an accidental attribution to the person who submitted (rather than composed) the song. Most of these historical misattributions have been corrected.
[v] Steel notes a few of those in the “Biographical Sketches of the Composers” section of his book (pp. 119, 141, 171). David Wright discusses some of this in “The Variety of Influence: Forms of Craftsmanship in the 1960 Edition,” as does Jesse Karlsberg in “Raymond C. Hamrick’s Contributions to Sacred Harp Singing and Scholarship.”

[vi] None of us are guiltless, generally. The best of men are men at best. All have sinned

[vii] A few close calls, yea. Hundreds of times? No way, Jose! Only the wide-eyed enthusiasts could actually believe that. Or perhaps the ostrich with head buried in the sand.
[viii] Until 1991 there was no pretention of neutrality (as far as I am aware, in other words, “our book, our songs”). In 1991, at the public singing and recording of the songs, all reference to the names of composers was removed. However, it is clear that only the public and not the committee were operating under this constraint, since a committee member mentioned the deliberate intent “to give our northern and western singers an interest in the book to be published.” Additionally, a composer shared with me that one of the committee members told him (at the public singing) that he recognized his songs by his writing style.

Two for one, Sacred Harp history

In researching a composer of a song in the 1911 J. L. White Sacred Harp, A. O. Jackson, I was not only able to identify him, but also Mattie Pope of the 1902 W. M. Cooper Sacred Harp, who I had previously failed to identify.

Jackson, A. O. Andrew Orestes Jackson was born August 20, 1888 at Glenwood, Alabama. He was the son of Andrew Jackson and Mary Ann Richburg. He graduated from the Alabama Polytechnic Institute in 1916 with a Bachelors of Science degree,[i] served in World War I, and afterward married Martha Matilda “Mattie” Pope (1889–1947) on September 7, 1919 in Luverne, Crenshaw County, Alabama. They were active in singing conventions in this area. Mattie is credited with arranging The Blessed Lamb in the Cooper Revision of The Sacred Harp. She taught music, including piano. A. O. Jackson served on the “Examining Committee” of the Sweetwater Musical Convention (1912), Secretary of the Luverne Annual Singing (1924), and in other offices A. O. worked at several occupations, but primarily as a teacher. He advertised as a piano tuner in Luverne in the mid-1920s. They lived in Luverne, Mountain Creek, and Montgomery in Alabama, and Miami in Florida (and perhaps other places). After Mattie’s death, A. O. Jackson married Germa Blanton in 1949. He died April 30, 1982 in Brooks County, Georgia. A. O. and Mattie are buried in the Laurel Hill Cemetery in Thomasville, Thomas County, Georgia.

504       The Love of God

Pope, Mattie. Martha Matilda “Mattie” Pope was the daughter of George William Pope and Sarah Missouri Head of Crenshaw County, Alabama, born January 29, 1889. She arranged The Blessed Lamb, a song already in The Sacred Harp on page 454, when she was about 13 years old. The greatest part of the arrangement of this tune is the change of the initial section from 3/4 to 2/4 time. There are a few note changes as well. Minnie Floyd added the alto part. In her youth, Mattie was active in the singings in Crenshaw County. She served as secretary of the all-day singing at Luverne in 1908 (as well as other years). W. M. Cooper was among the “prominent visiting singers present.” Mattie taught music in school, and taught private piano lessons. She married fellow Sacred Harp singer A. O. Jackson at Luverne, September 7, 1919. They lived in Luverne, Mountain Creek, and Montgomery in Alabama, and Miami in Florida (and perhaps other places). Mattie died in Miami, Florida. A. O. and Mattie are buried in the Laurel Hill Cemetery in Thomasville, Thomas County, Georgia.

454       The Blessed Lamb (arranged)

 

Jackson, A. O.

U.S. Censuses 1900-1950

https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/176908845/andrew_orestes-jackson

“The Sweet Water Singing Convention,” Crenshaw County News, Thursday, August 8, 1912, p. 4

“Singing Convention at Campground,” The Luverne Journal, Thursday, July 29, 1915, p. 8

“Luverne Annual Singing,” Crenshaw County News, Thursday, June 5, 1924, p. 1

“For Piano Tuning,” Crenshaw County News, Thursday, July 3, 1924, p. 3

 

Pope, Mattie

U. S. Federal Censuses, 1900-1940

https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/176908826/martha-matilda-jackson

“News of Luverne,” The Montgomery Advertiser, Tuesday, June 9, 1908, p. 2

“Pope-Jackson At Luverne,” The Luverne Journal, Thursday, September 18, 1919, p. 1

“Mrs. A. O. Jackson Dies At Her Home in Miami,” The Montgomery Advertiser, Saturday, November 1, 1947, p. 8

---

[i] Alabama Polytechnic Institute is now Auburn University.

How far we’ve come

In a recent Facebook group post, I mentioned that the Texas State Sacred Harp Association sponsored a monthly publication called the Sacred Harp Monitor. At the September 1913 session of the United Sacred Harp Musical Association, they adopted the Sacred Harp Monitor as an organ “for Sacred Harp singers of the United States. This was the result of a formal resolution read and passed by the Convention at Atlanta, Ga., at its recent session. T. B. Newton, of Woodstock, Ga., moved its adoption…”

In the same issue of the “Monitor” where this is announced (October 1913, p. 7), the editor, Elder M. W. Miracle, did not shy away from talking about “religion” (as some modern singers suggest we must do). He wrote an almost two-page piece about “On Jordan’s Stormy Banks I Stand” by Samuel Stennett. He says, “Like the children of Israel of old time, who had drank the dregs of Egypt’s bitter and its sweets, the children of Spiritual Israel have been made to realize the vanities of their temporal Egypt, and their eyes of faith are set on Canaan’s fair and happy land…This old sinful nature hangs like a dark cloud between them and the ‘other shore.’ It clogs their weary steps and dulls their spiritual appetites. O but for the sustaining grace and guiding hand of God, they would never reach the right crossing and ‘be forever blest.’ It is sweet to feel that uplifting and guiding hand when we fall, knowing that we never fall so low that His tender hand is not under to raise us up again, and place us on Pisgah’s lofty heights, bidding us to look eastward, northward, southward, and westward and behold the vernal beauties to which we are legal heirs” (Sacred Harp Monitor, October 1913, pp. 8-9). Beginning on the same page as the United announcement (p. 7), Elder Miracle wrote about “Afflictions” (see picture below).

Affliction though they seem severe,
Are oft in mercy sent;
They stopped the prodigal’s career,
And caused him to repent.

How far we’ve come from Atlanta 1913!

Can Two Walk Together?

Can two walk together, except they be agreed?” (Amos 3:3). 

A Sacred Harp friend of mine hoped a new revision of The Sacred Harp book undertaken by the Sacred Harp Publishing Company would help bring unity between the Sacred Harp diaspora and the traditional Sacred Harp singers. I don’t doubt his sincerity, but I do doubt his sanity! I can’t imagine how he had come to that conclusion.

The new revision has not brought unity – though I don’t think it technically brought division. Rather it has exposed a deep but veiled division that already existed – a deep oozing wound over which we have been draping a towel while pretending it did not exist. The revision ripped off the towel for full disclosure.

The restroom rhetoric coming from some of the Sacred Harp conventions demonstrates that the Sacred Harp world is divided into two camps that cannot continue to walk together. The Covid clamoring is another controversial topic that reveals we are not headed in the same direction.[i] These are some of the nicer topics, and time would fail me to write about the “Queer Convention” scheduled for New Orleans in February.

A fair number of singings at points beyond still require a negative Covid test (and/or proof of vaccination, etc.) in order for attendees to be “welcomed and affirmed” at their singing conventions.[ii] After five years these folks cannot get beyond COVID-19 fears and restrictions, or…

One wonders whether it could be a clandestine method assured at keeping the most conservative of singers at arm’s length – we welcome everyone (but we don’t want you here)![iii] Tell me it’s not hypocrisy while at the same time explaining to me that 600-700 singers – many from “off summers” where they require publicized Covid policies – piled into Atlanta, Georgia to sing at the United Sacred Harp Musical Association with nary a mention of Covid precautions!

The “restroom rhetoric” is carefully catered to a certain left-leaning worldview. In all the houses in which I have lived in my life, each has had only had one restroom for everyone.[iv] You just go in and lock the door. We didn’t have to dub it as “gender-neutral” – it was just “the bathroom.” I don’t have a problem with that, just with the mindset that must meddle in politics over practicalities in order to force others into agreement, at least tacitly if not in fact.

According to Google AI a “gender-neutral bathroom, also called an all-gender or unisex restroom, is a restroom that can be used by anyone, regardless of their gender identity or sex. These facilities provide a safe and inclusive space for transgender and non-binary individuals…”

Therefore, it seems that the emphasis on “gender-neutral” is a subtle suggestion that transgender and non-binary individuals are affirmed, while conservative Christians still holding to the biblical teaching and worldview of only two genders might not be as welcome.[v] At least their views are not welcome inside and must be left outside the door, effectively demonstrating the intolerance of tolerance!

Can two walk together, except they be agreed? Nay. The only way the two camps have been able to “walk together” thus far, is for the Christian camp to keep their heads down, their mouths shut, and their pens silent. Some of us are no longer willing to suffer it to be so. While men slept, the enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat (Matthew 13:25), but it is high time to awake out of our sleep and rise to the challenge of defending the Christian nature of the hymns and traditions of The Sacred Harp.[vi]

Perhaps Pastor Kent Brandenburg’s portrait of the larger societal picture can help point us in the right direction:

“The only way to combat the cultural reality in the United States, I believe, is by boldly asserting the biblical and historical belief and practice, and then not back down.”[vii]

---

[i] There is also a third camp trying to straddle the fence; trying to hold hands with two sides that are walking in different directions. They will eventually have to make up their minds to go one way or the other.
[ii] “When you arrive at the registration desk outside the auditorium, we will check you in and confirm your proof of negative COVID-19 rapid test. We will have tests available for those who are not otherwise able to test the morning of each day of the sing. If you are waiting on a test result, we will ask that you remain outside the auditorium until it is complete.” (New England Convention, 2025). “COVID information ● We will have HEPA air purifiers running throughout the singing. ● Masks are welcome, but optional. We respect all who choose to mask! ● Please stay home if you’re not feeling well. If you feel ill after the singing, let us know so we can send an email to the group. (We’ll keep your name anonymous.)” (NC Shape Note Singing Convention, October 2025). “Day-of negative rapid test required; extra tests will be available. Vaccination required.” (Berkeley Weekly Singing, 2025). “We ask that attendees be vaccinated against COVID-19 and that each attendee provide a same day negative COVID test” (Vermont All-Day, March 2024).
[iii] There has also been the shift from the hospitable “Everyone is welcome” to appeal to various groups that they are specifically welcome: “Whether you are drawn to shape note singing for spiritual, secular, communal, artistic, historic, or other reasons—all are invited! All ages, levels of musical ability, faith traditions, and life experiences are welcome in the ‘hollow square.’” (NC Shape Note Singing Convention, October 2025) “The New England Sacred Harp Convention is a weekend of joining our voices in song to create sacred harmonies. We represent a breadth of identities related to age, religion, gender, sexual orientation, race, nationality, ethnicity, education, ability, class, and political affiliations. We also recognize that our tradition has historically given power to certain identities while marginalizing others.” (New England Convention, 2019).
[iv] With the possible exception of the earliest houses of my infancy that I do not remember, which may have only had “one long path.”
[v] “There are men’s and women’s restrooms on the ground floor, each with one accessible stall. Since these two are public restrooms, we regret that we will be unable to make them gender neutral, and encourage folks to use the bathroom that feels most comfortable to them. There are additional inaccessible restrooms on the third floor, which we will be able to designate as gender neutral.” (New England Convention, 2025) “There are gendered accessible restrooms on the main level. Single-stall, gender-neutral restrooms are located down a flight of stairs. Singing will take place on the main level.)” (NC Shape Note Singing Convention, October 2025). “Toilets are downstairs. There are accessible toilets, gendered toilets and gender neutral toilets available.” (Manchester All-Day, 2025).
[vi] Most of us “slept through” and/or had no knowledge of the scholarly paper “Reorienting Space: Queering Sacred Harp Singing” by Jonathon Smith, University of Illinois, presented at the Society for Ethnomusicology 64th Annual Meeting, 2019. According to Google AI, “Smith’s work explores how LGBTQ+ individuals engage with the traditional American shape-note singing practice of Sacred Harp, interpreting it as a way of ‘queering’ the space and its practices” and that “LGBTQ+ singers and communities reinterpret or reshape the meaning and social dynamics of Sacred Harp singing. This involves more than just their physical presence; it’s an act of reorienting the practice itself toward more inclusive, affirming, and personally meaningful ends.” The author and presenter is a Sacred Harp singer and well-known to members of the 2025 revision committee of the Sacred Harp Publishing Company. (These views are presented at greater length in Smith’s dissertation, “Imagined Space in Sacred Harp Singing.”) Also mark (Romans 16:17) The Hymn Society in the US and Canada as an “aider and abettor” of “queering” Christian music. Note, for example, their “Songs for the Holy Other: Hymns Affirming the LGBTQIA2S+ Community.” Shape note singers pitched in: “On Monday, January 13, 2025, the Baltimore Shape Note Singers met at Four Hour Day Lutherie for an evening that combined tradition with a focus on inclusion. The group sang ‘Love Astounding’, a poem by Jeanette M. Lindholm set to the tune ‘Holy Manna’ from The Sacred Harp. This performance was part of the Songs for the Holy Other: Hymns Affirming the LGBTQIA2S+ Community project, recorded in the traditional Sacred Harp style.”
[vii] https://kentbrandenburg.com/2025/08/18/can-anyone-take-a-biblical-conservative-cultural-position-in-the-united-states-today/

Mississippi Sacred Harp

Sacred Harp Sings, by W. B. Allison

“Old Sacred Harp Singings,” of common occurrence in the comparatively early days of this region, were almost abandoned for a considerable period but in more recent years have been revived with great fervor. So marked is their return to popularity in the rural districts that, during the early summer, a singing is held within the territory contiguous to Meridian on practically every Sunday and some residents of the city, devotees of the older sacred music, make a practice of attending them all.

The name is derived from that of the song book or hymnal in general use, i.e., the “Sacred Harp,” a very old collection (a revision dated 1902 is generally accepted as few of the original books survive). “The Harp” and “Old Harmony” (Christian Harmony, published in 1873) are considered the only books appropriate for use at a real “Old Harp” singing.”

The old Liberty Church, three miles from Duffee, Newton County, has for a number of years held as an annual event, a Harp singing, on the second Sunday in June, and, as the traditions and conventions are carefully observed, their latest service may be considered as typical. Liberty Church is situated in an oak grove on top of a fairly high hill, allowing, on one side, an extensive view, but enclosed by woods on three sides, and, from it, a path descends steeply through the woods to a fine spring. The age of the church is uncertain but a former member states that he moved into the community and, with his wife, attended services there in 1871. The building is small, about twenty-five by forty feet, but, so great is the interest through the country round that a crowd of more than five hundred persons of all ages gathered to attend the service. The singing started at ten o’clock and continued without pause until twelve, when a recess was taken, and, for an hour, the invariable bountiful dinner was the center of attraction. At one o’clock the singers reassembled and continued with strong voices and unflogging zeal until nearly four o’clock.

There was not instrumental accompaniment. The singing is led by two, three or even four co-leaders who sound the key note and sing a chord in unison. The entire song is then run through in chorus, “by note,” after the method of the old country singing schools, now a thing of the past. That is, instead of using the words, each note is sung by syllable as—

 

Thereafter the number is sung through, words and music in the usual way but the complete formula is observed with each selection. The leaders are almost without exception most capable conductors who know their books by heart, after calling and singing through number after number from either book without so much as a glance at it. All parts are carried with the utmost accuracy and fervor, and it is indeed beautiful to see the rapt expression which comes upon the faces of many of the singers to whom music is truly a voice of and to the soul.

W. B. Allison was a researcher for the Works Progress Administration. On June 14, 1936, he attended and described a singing at Liberty Church in Duffee, Newton County, Mississippi. I believe the author W. B. Allison is probably this person – William Bartlett Allison.

The community of Duffee was first known as Liberty, as was the Baptist Church (i.e., Liberty Baptist Church). It was later called Rue, with a post office by that name existing from 1902 to 1906. In 1906, it was renamed Duffee for a railroad surveyor when a railroad was built through the community at that time. Duffee is about 20 miles northwest of Meridian, Mississippi.

A Place Called Mississippi: Collected Narratives, Marion Barnwell, editor. Jackson, MS: University Press of Mississippi, 1997, pp. 261-262.