To read the preview, click on the title of each article.
ORTHODOX CHURCH MUSIC — Volume Two, Issue One — Summer-Fall 2026
Editorial: The Virtues of Analysis — Vladimir Morosan
Reflections on Orthodox Hymnody — Archpriest John Breck
Serbian Orthodox Chant as Concept and System — Protopresbyter Ivan Moody
The “Other” Boris Ledkovsky (1894–1975): Parts II and III — Elizabeth A. Ledkovsky & Katya Ermolaeva
Boris Ledkovsky’s Great Vespers — Maria Kiryushina
My Musical Career and My Thoughts about Church Music — Alexander Kastalsky
Fr Paul (Stetsenko).The Nuts and Bolts of Conducting Technique — Reviewed by Alice Hughes
Antiochian Orthodox Music in North America — Michael G. Farrow
Nurturing the Next Generations of Orthodox Church Musicians — Valerie Yova
In Memoriam: Protopresbyter Ivan Moody (June 11, 1964–January 18, 2024) — Alexander Lingas
Editorial: The Virtues of Analysis — Vladimir Morosan
What differentiates an extraordinary musical performance from one that is mediocre or “insensitive”? The first mysteriously and ineffably penetrates through the hearer’s ear and mind, into the heart, to the very core of one’s being. The other, even if it doesn’t overtly offend by being sloppy, out of synch, or out of tune, leaves one unresponsive and unmoved. It simply “goes through the motions.”
In our present line of inquiry, it matters not whether the “performance” is in church in the context of a Divine Service or in a secular setting such as a concert hall—or, indeed, if it’s a recording. The genres and the intent of the music may be vastly different, but the degree and the substance of excellence that engages or fails to engage the listener is the topic at hand. How does that excellence manifest itself? How is it achieved?
These are questions that occupy (or certainly ought to occupy) the mind of every musician who undertakes to publicly perform a piece of music—any piece of music, whether it is a simple church hymn in one of the Eight Tones or a symphony. The “burden of excellence” is especially relevant to those in the position of preparing, interpreting, and leading others in performance: church choirmasters and other conductors. They must first internalize an awareness and understanding of the various components of a piece, and then convey that to the singers or instrumentalists they are leading—“directing” or “conducting”—so that the results reach and move the listener.
This prelude, as it were, brings me to the central thesis of this editorial: the importance and virtue of analysis—a topic that is touched upon in several articles in this issue of Orthodox Church Music. It is, however, a topic that, sadly, a great many church musicians have never had the occasion to consider. They may know the order of service; they may know how to give the starting pitch; they may know how to give a downbeat and a cutoff. But the musical content—the shape, nuance, and phrase structure of the music that follows that downbeat, or the emotional meaning and expressive impact of the music coupled with the sacred text—oftentimes escapes their attention. Indeed, they may have never been taught what those elements are or how to manage them. <…>
Reflections on Orthodox Hymnody — Archpriest John Breck
The hymns of the Church are verbal images or “icons” by which we affirm, proclaim, and celebrate our faith. Using the unique yet universal language of music, they enable us to express personally and communally the saving truth of the gospel message, to bear witness to that truth to others, and to offer praise and thanksgiving to the One who renders that truth forever accessible to us. Orthodox hymnody, then, has an essential “soteriological” or “saving” function. Like the proclamation of the gospel itself, it actualizes and communicates its content within the Christian community through the presence and power of the Holy Spirit.
If we look at church singing in this way, however, it becomes clear that we have to accept certain canons or norms, laid down by Tradition, regarding both the words and the music of our hymns. Authentic hymns are “theology in music,” just as an authentic icon is “theology in color.” This means that inappropriate music, even if well sung, distorts the message of the hymn. Like “bad” iconography, it feeds us with deception rather than nourishing us with the truth. But the converse is true as well. The purest Znamenny chant is incapable of communicating grace and truth if the message it transmits is not centered upon the saving work of God fulfilled in the person of His Son, Jesus Christ. Musical form is an essential vehicle that conveys the Christ—that conveys the substance of our faith. While it needs to be continually adapted to changing cultural situations by an ongoing process of creation and translation, the music of the Church, like the words it bears, must express divine reality in human language. And it can express this divine reality only insofar as it reflects the living and life-giving content of Tradition. <…>
Serbian Orthodox Chant as Concept and System — Protopresbyter Ivan Moody
Introduction
In this article, I wish to try to situate Serbian chant as a repertoire in terms of its acceptance as a chant system of value and interest, independently of any idea of it as merely a corrupt offshoot of Byzantine chant. This seems to me to be necessary because it is both underrepresented and little understood outside Serbia, quite apart from it being the object of frequent polemics within Serbia itself.
The appearance of “Serbian national folk chant—that is, srpsko narodno crkveno pojanje, or karlovačko pojanje (Karlovci chant)—as the music commonly sung in the churches of Serbia (and also the related chant in Romanian Banat, to which I will return below) is a well-documented phenomenon. Serbian church music moved from being Byzantine to this new condition during the time of the Ottoman domination of the country, becoming an oral repertoire that was written down (in staff notation) only from the nineteenth century onwards. This was in spite of endeavors to maintain links with Byzantine repertoire and to improve musical standards. As Vesna Peno has noted,
On account of the efforts of Metropolitan Mojsije Petrović (1677–1730) and Vikentije Jovanović (1689–1737), singers were given the opportunity to engage with the post-Byzantine singing tradition. It is important to note that these bishops, the main agents of pro-Western cultural tendencies in contemporary Serbian society, tried to maintain the balance between Russian (i.e., baroque) and Greek (i.e., Eastern) influences in church art. The Cathedral Church in Belgrade was the best witness to this trend during the 1840s. The services were celebrated by Serbian priests, Greeks sang, and Russians preached.
But the reality was that this repertoire developed in a different way, giving rise, as occurs with oral musical traditions, to a great number of variant melodies and, naturally, to chanting of various levels of competence. <…>
The “Other” Boris Ledkovsky (1894–1975) — Parts II & III — Elizabeth A. Ledkovsky and Katya Ermolaeva
Part I of this article, published in the previous edition of this journal, explores details of composer and conductor Boris Ledkovsky’s life through photos, letters, scholarship, and even Nazi archives. Presented here are Parts II and III.
Part II, co-authored by Dr. Katya Ermolaeva, addresses Boris Ledkovsky’s reputation in light of the totality of his creative output, including recently discovered unpublished manuscripts, which reveal a multifaceted and dramatic side of Ledkovsky’s musical creativity. Part III reflects on the Ledkovsky legacy, postulating a shared bequest to scholars and musicians and considering what could be done next to further the fruits of this inheritance.
Part II: Defying the Stereotype
Revisiting “A Reputation for Simplicity”
Part I of this article presents an in-depth biography of Boris M. Ledkovsky, offering
an intimate history of one of the most influential Orthodox composers of the twentieth century. The nature of that influence has been explored extensively. In fact, Ledkovsky and his effect on liturgical singing in the Orthodox Church of America (OCA) is the topic of another article in the same journal. That study discusses Ledkovsky and his creative output, describing his harmonizations as “practical and singable… ‘accessible for performance by small church choirs.’”
This description captures the widely held estimation of Ledkovsky’s oeuvre: simple (but not simplistic) chant-based harmonizations in the spirit of the Moscow School, suitable for even the humblest of ensembles. Johann von Gardner, the preeminent scholar of Russian Orthodox music in the twentieth century and a close friend of both Boris and Marina Ledkovsky, described BML’s compositions as “melodious, lyrical arrangements that are easily accessible for any small choir and for relatively inexperienced choir singers.” It probably is fair to say that the accessibility of his most basic works for the most basic parish choirs helps to explain why BML’s harmonizations have been so widely adopted, especially in the OCA.
It quickly becomes clear, however, that the stereotype of Ledkovsky as “simple,” “humble,” and even “boring” (!) is hardly accurate when one considers the fullness of his published works, especially those issued exclusively in Slavonic. <…>
Boris Ledkovsky’s “Great Vespers” in the Liturgical Singing Tradition of the Orthodox Church in America — Maria Kiryushina
<…>
Great Vespers: Composition and Context
Great Vespers by Boris Ledkovsky was published as a standalone collection in 1976 by St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, a year after the composer’s death. Most of the hymns comprising Great Vespers are English versions of works originally composed in Slavonic, found in the Obikhod (All-Night Vigil), published in 1959, and in the Volumes 2 and 3 of Ledkovsky’s Collected Sacred Works, published in 1972 and 1982, respectively, in Jordanville; some were also included later in St Vladimir’s Seminary Press’s English-language editions of 1980 and 1982 (Holy Week, The Divine Liturgy, and The Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts). Ledkovsky himself did not undertake the adaptation of his Church Slavonic works into English; instead, he relied on the expertise of his colleagues David Drillock, Helen and John Erickson, and Rosemary Yevich, who adapted the musical material into English. The adaptations were primarily based on texts used by the American Metropolia (as the OCA was called before its autocephaly). According to a letter from Fr John Erickson to the author, many English translations initially drew on Isabel Hapgood’s work. However, by 1967, a commission of the Russian Orthodox Greek-Catholic Church of America (i.e., the Metropolia) had developed its own English translations for the Divine Liturgy, Vespers, Matins, and other services. As Erickson notes, these translations were “based on the original Greek texts, while also considering the practices of the Russian Church.”
While these translations intersected with Hapgood’s, they aimed to simplify the syntax for greater clarity. Communication with Moscow was restored only in 1970, with the granting of autocephaly to the OCA by the Moscow Patriarchate. While using common English translations of scripture, such as the King James Version (KJV) and the Revised Standard Version (RSV), Old Testament texts and allusions were often modified to align with the Greek Septuagint. The translation principles employed in the above translations of scripture English-language were also followed in liturgical publications of the OCA, employing archaic verb forms and pronouns (e.g., “Thou hast,” “Thou art”) for addressing the persons of the Holy Trinity and modern ones (e.g., “you have,” “you are”) for addressing the Mother of God and saints. This usage is reflected in the texts used in Great Vespers. <…>
My Musical Career and My Thoughts about Church Music — Alexander Kastalsky
Newly translated by Vladimir Morosan
Translator’s introduction and commentary on Kastalsky’s style:
Alexander Kastalsky (1856–1926) was undoubtedly the seminal figure of his generation of Russian Orthodox church composers, the acclaimed founder of a new style of choral writing—one that employed compositional principles and techniques of part-writing derived fundamentally from the “raw material” of liturgical chant, rather than from Western European theory textbooks. His approach was taken up and developed more broadly by such prominent composers as Alexander Gretchaninoff (1864–1956), Pavel Chesnokov (1877–1944), and Sergei Rachmaninoff (1873–1943), along with a host of others, who collectively formed what came to be known as the “New Direction” (novoye napravleniye) in Russian Orthodox music.
In 1913, at the height of his musical career, as Director of the Moscow Synodal School of Church Singing, Kastalsky was invited to contribute an autobiographical article for the new journal Muzykal’nyi sovremennik[The Musical Contemporary]. Although an English translation of this article appeared in 1925 in the British journal The Musical Quarterly, the centenary of the composer’s death seemed like an appropriate occasion to produce a fresh, new translation, one in which the numerous references to various personages, terms, and events mentioned in the article are annotated and clarified for the modern-day reader. <…>
Having joined the Synodal School of Church Singing in 1887 as a teacher of piano, I first became acquainted with the distinctive discipline of working with a church choir; it was directed by Vasily Sergeyevich Orlov, who later became quite famous, and with whom we had been well acquainted since our Conservatory days—it was thanks to him that I was accepted into the “Synodalka,” as the school was sometimes called. Among other things, I was invited to try my hand at harmonizing some traditional chant melodies, but these attempts were deemed unsatisfactory, because at that time the prevailing opinion—which I believe belonged to S. I. Taneyev—held that our church melodies should not be harmonized but rather treated contrapuntally, in the manner of the Western masters of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. I naturally had no such technique, although I sometimes tried to apply various contrapuntal tricks to our church chants. In 1891 I was invited to become Orlov’s assistant with the Synodal Choir.
I became a church composer—indeed, even the “founder” of an entire school—quite unexpectedly, both to myself and to others; just as accidentally as I had entered the Conservatory while preparing for a career in agriculture. Once in 1896, while looking through and selecting various pieces with V. S. Orlov for the Synodal Choir’s repertoire, I tried comparing the melody of one “Dostoino” [It is Truly Meet] in a Serbian chant with the original melodies in the Serbian chant obikhod and noticed that the composer had evidently been unable to handle a single one of them properly. Vasily Sergeevich suggested that I harmonize one of these melodies. My harmonization, and indeed the “Dostoino” chant itself, struck me as somewhat ornate and affected—this prompted me to make an arrangement of the “Milost’ mira” [A Mercy of Peace] found in the same Serbian collection in a much simpler manner.
Although these harmonizations of mine were liked by everyone and are still in use in church choirs to this day, I attached not the slightest artistic value to them. But their success encouraged me to take a closer look at the traditional chant melodies. <…>
BOOK REVIEW: Fr Paul (Stetsenko). The Nuts and Bolts of Conducting Technique (St Tikhon’s Monastery Press, 2023)
Reviewed by Alice Hughes
The Nuts and Bolts of Conducting Technique by Fr Paul (Stetsenko) is a textbook for learning conducting. It was specifically written to address the needs of choir directors in the Orthodox Church. That said, it approaches the art of conducting from a much broader place, while also breaking down specific techniques into bite-sized pieces. Much of the book would be useful to any musician studying to be a conductor.
As a reviewer, the first question I had was, “Can you teach conducting from a book?” Fr Paul actually addresses this question in his introduction to the book, “Why Technique?” The short answer is decidedly negative. To learn the art of conducting, one needs the regular feedback and coaching of a mentor and an ensemble with which to work regularly. A mentor is necessary to point out incorrect or confusing gestures and to help the student grow. The longer answer is no—but you can learn a lot about conducting from a book. Fr Paul has a remarkable ability to break down specific techniques into smaller pieces to learn specific aspects of conducting gestures. He is actually quite scientific in his approach. He also creates exercises that a budding conductor can use to learn and practice these techniques. Partway through chapter 2, “The Seven Basic Strokes of Conducting,”I was struck by the need for a series of short learning videos as a companion to this book. As I read further, the idea of a video series to accompany the book stayed with me as the obvious next step.
Each chapter of Nuts and Bolts moves the reader to a new technique or a new understanding of how to conduct a particular musical idea.<…>
Nurturing the Next Generations of Orthodox Church Musicians — Valerie Yova
As part of a continued effort in this column to explore the topic of beauty as it relates to Orthodox liturgical worship, I reached out to conductor Juliana Woodill and asked her a few questions on this subject. I will share more thoughts from Juliana in a future issue of Orthodox Church Music because she had lots to say on this topic.
As I write this, Juliana is preparing to move from Virginia to Pennsylvania to serve as the new director of the music program at St Tikhon’s Monastery. She will be stepping into her new role just as St Tikhon’s prepares to receive a new group of students in its one-year Music Residency Program. Given that, I wanted to highlight the training program at St Tikhon’s and Juliana’s role as its new head.
Below are Juliana’s answers to three questions that give us a glimpse of her perspective, vision, and priorities for training the next generations of liturgical musicians.
Beauty and Dedication
VY: How do you define or recognize beauty in Orthodox worship?
JW: You know it when you hear it, and you definitely know when it is absent! I think some of the beauty of our liturgical music is that we are giving back to God using only the bodies and gifts He gave us. Instruments were made by man, but voices were made by God. As we are called in so many ways to give our first fruits, we should also be reminded that our first fruits are the sweetest and most beautiful—and therefore require the full dedication of our time, effort, practice, and growth as musicians. It does require “work” outside of the liturgy: regular practice, musical development, etc. But when this work and preparation are done consistently, with love, joy, and training, somehow the music of the liturgy can transform singers and all who are present. <…>
In Memoriam: Protopresbyter Ivan Moody (June 11, 1964–January 18, 2024) — Alexander Lingas
The death at the age of 59 of the Very Rev. Dr Ivan Moody, founder of the International Society for Orthodox Church Music, was deeply shocking for anyone who had experienced at first hand his seemingly boundless energy and enthusiasm. For decades he had maintained intersecting careers in academic, ecclesiastical, and musical spheres as a composer, conductor, editor, pastor, scholar, teacher, and translator. Fr Ivan sustained this activity by regularly crossing confessional, ethnic, linguistic, and national boundaries. In so doing, he built and maintained a dense network of personal and professional relationships. When I met him in the late 1980s, this meant keeping in touch mainly by post. Later he quickly adopted new communication media as they appeared: faxes, email, websites, electronic bulletin boards and listservs, instant messaging, Facebook, and finally Zoom and other forms of live video. The cessation of this stream of communication has left a void, still keenly felt, in the lives of Fr Ivan’s friends and colleagues. Yet the passage of six months since his repose has also offered an opportunity for preliminary reflection on the magnitude of his achievements in multiple fields. Even a cursory glance at the versions of his biography and curriculum vitae available on the internet is enough for one to conclude that a comprehensive assessment of his legacy as a musician, scholar, and cleric is a project that will take scholars years to achieve. I will therefore limit myself here to a brief tribute concentrating on Fr Ivan’s activities relating to the musical traditions of the Eastern Orthodox Church.
Fr Ivan Moody on the day of his ordination to the priesthood (October 7, 2007)
Ivan William George Moody became an Eastern Orthodox Christian soon after receiving his B.Mus degree from Royal Holloway, University of London, in 1985. By this point his parallel interests in the musical inheritances of Western and Eastern Christianity were well established. To perform their historical and contemporary repertories he founded in 1984 a vocal ensemble known alternately as Voces Angelicae and the Kastalsky Chamber Choir. He demonstrated a commitment to exploring the wider cultural contexts for Christian liturgical music in his Three Poems of Anna Akhmatova (1985), a work for high voice (soprano or tenor) and string sextet that won the Royal Holloway College Prize for Composition. This was an artistic orientation he largely shared with Sir John Tavener (1944–2013), who had been received into the Orthodox Church in 1977 and who, during Fr Ivan’s final year as an undergraduate student, began to offer him private composition lessons.<…>