# What are the manliest-sounding classical religious songs/sacred music?



## Jordan Workman

What are the manliest-sounding classical religious songs/sacred music? Songs like Verdi's Requiem and Mozart's Requiem, etc., what else? I am looking for something with either an intense, dark, serious or other form of masculine sound/quality to it. I know "manliest-sounding" is subjective and it is not necessary to have a long discussion defining what exactly this means--just post sacred songs that you subjectively perceive as sounding masculine or that fit the above or similar criteria.


----------



## Manxfeeder

To me, masculine can mean loud and aggressive. Bruckner's Te Deum is loud and aggressive.


----------



## Jordan Workman

Manxfeeder said:


> To me, masculine can mean loud and aggressive. Bruckner's Te Deum is loud and aggressive.


That piece sounds excellent and masculine to me as well. Thank you!


----------



## Jordan Workman

Anyone else care to respond? Would appreciate responses.


----------



## Rogerx

The Russian and east block countries .


----------



## Jordan Workman

Rogerx said:


> The Russian and east block countries .


Thank you. What pieces from those countries come to mind?


----------



## Rogerx

No 1 from Spain also.
I will look for other ones try browsing by yourself :

https://www.prestomusic.com/classical/search?search_query=chant gregorian
other shops available


----------



## RICK RIEKERT

For its sheer virility and barbaric splendor, Janáček's Glagolitic Mass.


----------



## ORigel

Mendelssohn's Paulus:

And Saul Made Havoc of the Church

And the many that believed were of one heart

Then they ran upon him; Stone him!


----------



## josquindesprez

If you like the Baroque at all, try Zelenka's Miserere, mostly the first and fourth movements. And not sure that it's exactly religious music, but maybe Respighi's St. Michael Archangel, from Church Windows.


----------



## starthrower

RICK RIEKERT said:


> For its sheer virility and barbaric splendor, Janáček's Glagolitic Mass.


The Ancerl recording in particular.


----------



## hammeredklavier




----------



## david johnson

I do not regard sacred music in terms of masculinity/femininity. I don't think it's 'built for that'.


----------



## Andante Largo




----------



## Rogerx

Russian Easter

St.Petersburg Chamber Choir, Nikolai Korniev

anon.: Alliluia, se zhenikh gryadet
Bortnyansky: Sacred Concerto No. 15 - Priidite, vospoim lyudiye
Chesnokov: Amin'. Khristos voskrese iz mertvïkh (The Paschal Hours)
Chesnokov: Angel vopiyashe (Paschal Hymn to the Virgin)
Chesnokov: Da molchit vsyakaya plot' (Let all mortal flesh keep silent), Op. 27 No. 1
Chesnokov: Razboinika (The Wise Thief), Op. 40 No. 3
Dekhtaryov: Dnes' vsyakaya tvar' (Today all creation)
Grechaninov: Vecheri Tvoeya taynïya 'Of thy mystical supper', Op. 58, No. 7
Grechaninov: Vnushi, Bozhe, molitvu moyu (Give Ear to My Prayer), Op. 26
Kalinnikov, Viktor: Svete tihiy
Vysotsky: Plotiyu usnuv (In the flesh Thou didst fall asleep)

By all means, _this_ is manly.


----------



## Kreisler jr

"The lord is a man of war", a duet for two bass voices from Handel's "Israel in Egypt". Also most of his Dixit dominus is highly dramatic (despite the great duo here being sopranos or soprano/alto?) and the Dettingen Te Deum (lots of military timpani and brass).


----------



## science

The majority of European art music seems to me to try to avoid manliness -- it celebrates elegance and refinement rather than violence, violence is really the only thing that I can identify as generally and consistently masculine.

(That is not necessarily a bad thing: IMO violence is underrated in our society, we are not entirely honest with ourselves about its necessity, and that is part of the [so-called] "crisis of masculinity" proclaimed by some of our noisiest worriers. But this question takes us too far afield! Probably best to pursue it in a group if anyone's interested in it.)

One of the exceptionx might be Kodaly's _Psalmus Hungaricus_. I wish that work were far better known.


----------



## joen_cph

science said:


> The majority of European art music seems to me to try to avoid manliness -- it celebrates elegance and refinement rather than violence, violence is really the only thing that I can identify as generally and consistently masculine.
> 
> (That is not necessarily a bad thing: IMO violence is underrated in our society, we are not entirely honest with ourselves about its necessity, and that is part of the [so-called] "crisis of masculinity" proclaimed by some of our noisiest worriers. But this question takes us too far afield! Probably best to pursue it in a group if anyone's interested in it.)
> 
> One of the exceptionx might be Kodaly's _Psalmus Hungaricus_. I wish that work were far better known.


That's an interesting line of thought, and there's no doubt an element of trying to discipline various forces in society via the institution of classical music, both as a culture-maintaining and -nourishing factor. But I think that, among other things, it's an underestimating of the heroic or even revolutionary content of many classical works, especially the tradition that has been so exemplified by the 'fighter' Beethoven, and later many others. That uplifting content of his masculine identity is partly a reason for his later popularity in society, I think. Let's say, the 'Eroica' aspect, a crisis in masculinity that is overcome.


----------



## Parley

This one sung by Jon Vickers might be a contender!


----------



## Kreisler jr

science said:


> The majority of European art music seems to me to try to avoid manliness -- it celebrates elegance and refinement rather than violence, violence is really the only thing that I can identify as generally and consistently masculine.


This is a very reduced view of "masculine" that was not characteristic for most of the European tradition. Even Plato (who apparently did fear an effemination effect of some music and poetry) left some kinds of music for the guardians of his ideal city, for relaxation and encouragement.
Neither is there necessarily a contradiction between refinement and violence. 17th and 18th century dandies wore lace, perfume and powdered whigs but in a duel they would put a rapier through your lungs without batting an eye.
Of course, any art is refined, otherwise it would not be art. Even the most barbaric steerhorn or bagpipe noise as military music is refined compared to roaring and beating your spear against your shield


----------



## Parley

science said:


> The majority of European art music seems to me to try to avoid manliness -- it celebrates elegance and refinement rather than violence, violence is really the only thing that I can identify as generally and consistently masculine.
> 
> (That is not necessarily a bad thing: IMO violence is underrated in our society, we are not entirely honest with ourselves about its necessity, and that is part of the [so-called] "crisis of masculinity" proclaimed by some of our noisiest worriers. But this question takes us too far afield! Probably best to pursue it in a group if anyone's interested in it.)
> 
> One of the exceptionx might be Kodaly's _Psalmus Hungaricus_. I wish that work were far better known.


It depends as well on how you define manliness. If you read the New Testament it is defined in somewhat of a different way to the violent society around it.


----------



## Kreisler jr

Even in pagan Graeco-Roman antiquity, self control, moderation, loyalty and obedience to law, gods, superiors, stoicism in the face of adversity, justice, even clemency towards the weak (although this was far less important than in christianity, to Nietzsche's chagrin) were all central masculine virtues. 
Whereas the ability or aptitude for "violent" behavior was more like a side effect needed for the courage to defend or attack if necessary. I don't think that excessive violence or violence per se was seen as positive in antiquity (maybe by the Assyrians but not by Plato or Seneca).


----------



## Parley

Kreisler jr said:


> Even in pagan Graeco-Roman antiquity, self control, *moderation*, loyalty and obedience to law, gods, superiors, stoicism in the face of adversity, justice, *even clemency towards the weak* (although this was far less important than in christianity, to Nietzsche's chagrin) were all central masculine virtues.
> Whereas the ability or aptitude for "violent" behavior was more like a side effect needed for the courage to defend or attack if necessary. I don't think that excessive violence or violence per se was seen as positive in antiquity (maybe by the Assyrians but not by Plato or Seneca).


I think if you read what these people were actually like you will see very few of these values practiced. The Roman society was incredibly violent. Read Tom Holland


----------



## Kreisler jr

I know Tom Holland (have not read his book but listened to lots of his talks and podcasts) and I think he is correct (and I knew most of this before it's not really secret knowledge, despite different pop-history narratives since Gibbon). 
But a difference between what is preached and what is practiced is not restricted to ancient Stoicism, it will also be found in medieval and modern Christendom.
The Greeks and Romans could be utterly brutal and clemency certainly was a bonus, not an obligation. But self control and moderation were very highly valued and the caricatures of the debauched emperors were obviously drawn by Romans themselves, like Tacitus, who thought that the old Roman virtues and ideals had been lost and bitterly deplored this.


----------



## science

The Romans didn't acquire and rule their empire with philosophy. They broke the bodies of men who opposed them.

They were not necessarily _more_ violent than their enemies, only more successfully violent.

I don't know whether we can bear to look at the world without euphemistic ideologies, but if we do we'll see that all human institutions ultimately rest on violence. There is, for example, no pretty concert hall without a police force to protect it.

But the classical music tradition on the whole does not seem to honor that. It is the music of a ruling class attempting to deceive itself and others about the realities underlying (and thereby in part provide a secular legitimacy for) their power, privilege, and wealth.


----------



## Parley

science said:


> The Romans didn't acquire and rule their empire with philosophy. They broke the bodies of men who opposed them.
> 
> They were not necessarily _more_ violent than their enemies, only more successfully violent.
> 
> I don't know whether we can bear to look at the world without euphemistic ideologies, but if we do we'll see that all human institutions ultimately rest on violence. There is, for example, no pretty concert hall without a police force to protect it.
> 
> But the classical music tradition on the whole does not seem to honor that. *It is the music of a ruling class attempting to deceive itself and others about the realities underlying (and thereby in part provide a secular legitimacy for) their power, privilege, and wealth.*




I think this is a generalisation but is true in much of what passed for opera seria etc. We then see Mozart being subversive with Figaro and the da Ponte operas. Others followed him. Beethoven despised the aristocracy while wanting to be one of them.


----------



## joen_cph

Parley said:


> I think if you read what these people were actually like you will see very few of these values practiced. The Roman society was incredibly violent (...)


As was, for example, the Christian Middle Ages, of course.


----------



## hammeredklavier

Jordan Workman said:


> Mozart's Requiem






Georg von Pasterwitz (1730~1803) - Requiem


----------



## Parley

joen_cph said:


> As was, for example, the Christian Middle Ages, of course.


As was the twentieth century's rationalism.


----------

