The Substack column is up – go there, read, and comment if you’re subscribed.
I just have a couple more notes to add here.
First, something I learned about from Ken Canedo’s book was that in 1967, the music editor of America magazine arranged a concert of Catholic folk music at, yes, Carnegie Hall.
It was recorded on three albums.
You can listen to the complete first album here, at archive.org.
Half of it is posted on YouTube here.
There is a third, but a quick search turns up no track listing, only an ebay listing. I’m sure more time unearth more.
I’ve found a couple of images of liner notes, but they are too small/blurry to be readable. Give it a shot if you like.
From an article about Mary Lou Williams, who played at the concert:
Beginning in the late 1960s, believing that the future of jazz was in jeopardy, Williams educated audiences via “history of jazz” performances, demonstrating what she defined as the four eras of jazz: ragtime, spirituals, Kansas City swing, and bebop, often accompanied by her manager, the Jesuit priest Fr. Peter O’Brien, SJ. An early concert version of her musical teaching appears on the live recording, Praise the Lord in Many Voices. The album documents a Carnegie Hall concert of the same name that was sponsored by the New York Jesuits in 1967. Emerging out of Vatican II–fueled debates regarding what types of music were suitable for liturgical use, the Jesuits took the bold step of commissioning six composers – including Williams – to write new religious works for the Carnegie premiere. Williams began her portion of the program with a mini trio set where she demonstrated her “eras of jazz” at the piano while Fr. Clement McNaspy, SJ, verbally outlined each era with a script written by Mary. Continuing with her three new choral works, especially her exquisite setting of the Lord’s Prayer, Williams illustrated how the richness and beauty of jazz could deepen sacred texts.
Secondly, just a comment from that very convenient position which gives us 20/20 hindsight.
There are a number of striking, weird aspects to this corner of history, but one of the most pressing questions to me is why the course taken for the sake of lay “active participation” and the cause of restoring ancient forms completely ignored the Eastern liturgical tradition which involves a relatively high degree of possible lay participation, is musical (chanted) from beginning to end, and is, yes ancient.
Of course Latin churchmen still at that time undoubtedly harbored disdain for the East and since the agenda was centered on ModernNewProgressSignsoftheTimes I guess dudes in crowns chanting behind icon screens didn’t exactly fit that model, but still.
One more road – one more – not taken. Tragically.
Charlotte was Both 
“I guess dudes in crowns chanting behind icon screens didn’t exactly fit that model, but still. ”
The dudes in front of the iconostasis were also chanting, though in Church Slavonic. The irony here is that following and through Vatican II’s actual heritage the Eastern Rite churches started becoming more Eastern (and less Latinized). They also moved to the vernacular (traumatic for many of the faithful) and, I think, it is easy to argue that many Eastern Rite “churches” developed into the very type of liturgy envisioned by the Council Fathers. (Of course you might miss the opening of the football game because the liturgy takes longer :-).)
You also might check the history of the persecution of the Eastern Rite churches in the States, at least, by the Latin Rite bishops. I doubt there was much sympathy in the ’60s available for something non-Latin to be used as a model.
Oh, absolutely. I’m very familiar with that history.