I. THE LUTHERAN CHORALE

A. General Characteristics

Recently the Lutheran Church Quarterly had an excellent article, entitled: "What Sort of Hymnal Do We Want?" In that article, Paul Ensrud,[1] organist and choirmaster of St. John’s Church in Allentown, Pennsylvania, discussed "some of the causes of poor congregational singing," and, with penetrating insight, he emphasized, among all the causes that he mentioned, this one: "Poor spiritual condition." Unless that condition is relieved, congregational singing will experience little improvement, and all our efforts in regard to the chorale will likewise be of little avail.

A healthy spiritual condition, a sound Christian philosophy—these are basic and indispensable for our success in church music. Given capable musicians who have produced great music (and our Church has been lavishly blessed with such men), church music will take care of itself if all the persons concerned are saturated with the elements of Christian philosophy, a philosophy which calls for human self-abasement and its related act: glorification of God alone.

We may correctly assume that one of the reasons why we in the Lutheran Church are giving more attention to the Lutheran chorale is that the world has brought the chorale to our attention, or at least to our increased attention. The Lutheran chorale has never received such admiration and even adulation as it has in our own age.

There is much good in that development, but there can easily be much harm in it. This change in attitude toward one of the great treasures of our Church may be flattering to our sense of patriotism but fatal to our powers of analysis. The widespread endorsement and vigorous acclaim which the Lutheran chorale has received in recent years may cause us to take that treasure for granted, without asking: "Wherein lies the worth of the choral?" and without ever probing into the depths of this treasure trove and discovering the source of its greatness.

The recent rise in popularity of the Lutheran chorale is a great and thrilling story in and for itself, one that deserves thorough investigation on the part of every Lutheran. But we need to ask for the reason. We must ask: Why did the Presbyterians, about twelve years ago, announce that their new hymnbook would include many hymns fashioned after the chorale? Why did the Methodist Church, in 1932, include many Lutheran chorales? Why did even a Catholic hymnal for young people (!) include forty hymns of the Lutheran Church? Why is it that Dr. C. S. Phillips of Cambridge said only a few years ago: "From a purely musical point of view it would be hard to deny to the hymns of Lutheran Germany pride of place over all others"?[2] Why is it that Dr. Richard Terry, writing on Catholic church music in England, stated: "Only the Lutheran Church has a mass of really magnificent hymns"?[3]

It is because, as Dr. F. L. Humphreys stated, "these Choraele are so elevated and at the same time so simple and devotional that they are beyond question the most perfect models of hymn tunes."[4] It is because, as the late Dean Peter Christian Lutkin of Northwestern University declared, "these justly famous hymn tunes are marked by devotional earnestness and great dignity. Some seem to have been hewn from solid rock, so strong and massive are they, while others are of a more intimate and appealing nature."

Now, these are all fine tributes. But, as a rule, one misses in them and in others like them the main reason for the greatness of the Lutheran chorale. If you were to ask me for the chief reason that accounts for the uniqueness and the supremacy of the Lutheran chorale, I should prefer to answer in the German statement: "Der lutherische Choral ist das in die Musik uebersetzte Wort Gottes," the Lutheran chorale is the Word of God translated into music.

The Lutheran chorale proclaims Bible teaching, nothing more, nothing less. That it does so, is due primarily to the great Reformer, Martin Luther, himself.

Luther had the spiritual equipment to lead congregational singing in a wholesome direction. His spiritual equipment was twofold: it consisted of deep theological insight on the one hand, and of a profound religious experience, on the other.

Because of his theological knowledge and his rich religious experience, Luther, a good musician, could do what many church musicians are unable to do: he could write church music correctly. He knew whereof he wrote. He himself had experienced the crushing fears and the exalted, triumphant faith of the human soul that has found refuge in the wounds of Jesus Christ.

But the miracle is that although Luther wrote personally, he also wrote objectively. Thus he wrote not only correctly, but also representatively. His hymns express the needs, the hopes, and the beliefs of the whole Church, and his music reflects this bigness of conception, this grandeur and majesty of thought.

That is why the Lutheran chorale has achieved that desirable and essential virtue: universality.[5] It fits every need in every age. And it is the sure answer to every problem.

Because of the nature of its growth and development, the Lutheran chorale speaks with an authentic voice (representing the whole Church) and with an authoritative[6] voice (expressing divine assurance and dependability). There is nothing wavering, either in the thought of the words or in the melodic or harmonic structure of the music, in the Lutheran chorale, as in the subjective, unstable hymns of other groups. The Lutheran chorale is spiritual truth, expressed with certainty.

Yes, the Lutheran chorale is "a strong tower; the righteous runneth into it and is safe,"[7] for this chorale is Biblical, whether composed by Luther or his contemporaries or the writers of the following century. All of them had the same goal. Georg Kempff, Director of Music at the University of Erlangen, calls attention to that fact, and also states the reason for it, when he says:

What is the result of the policy which was followed in the production of Lutheran chorales? The result is that they are, what Kempff so aptly calls them, "maennliche Lieder des Gottvertrauens,"[9] virile songs of trust in God.

But why are they strong? Wherein lies their power? Here is a point which all of us should see clearly. Unless we do, our analysis and appraisal of the chorale will be miserably weak and faulty.

The answer lies in the term "Gottvertrauen." The secret of the strength in the Lutheran chorale lies in the fact that it is Godward!—that it is focused toward God, that it directs man away from himself and cultivates the upward look,—and only in the upward look is there strength! It teaches man to "look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen; for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal."[10]

Thus the chorale is, in its truest sense, hinwegreissend. I know of no word which describes it better than that one. The Lutheran chorale tears man away from himself and brings him to God.

Do you want to go to God? Let me say with all the emphasis at my command that the intrinsic value of the Lutheran chorale will not appeal to anyone who does not want to get away from his own ego and go to God.

Of course, if you like to contemplate yourself, then you will choose music that is full of blandishments, that is sweet and flattering, that "makes you feel good" because it leaves you as you are and requires no change.

Many other kinds of so-called church music can serve the purpose of self-exaltation. Nor is music necessarily destructive of self merely because it is old. Catholic music, too, as we shall see, gives prominence to man; in fact, that it does so lies in the very nature of the case.

But the chorale has no room for man’s vanity. It speaks, also in its musical language, of the wonderful works of God, and points man away from himself to God, and arouses his admiration for the greatness of God and of His deeds.

What becomes of man’s pride? It is excluded. There is no room for it in the Lutheran chorale. The chorale speaks the language of divine exaltation. It knows only one theme: Soli Deo Gloria, based on Sola Gratia and Sola Scriptura.

Thus, the more we devote ourselves to a contemplation of the chorale’s message, the farther do we move away from man’s puny powers and his foolish pride.

The chorale purges of ambition and of other impure motives. I mention ambition because it is the most common in church work, together with selfishness. The chorale has no room for ambition. Self-centeredness is foreign to the true chorale, for it proclaims the Word of God, and "is not His Word like as a fire, and like a hammer that breaketh the rock in pieces,"[11] that crushes pride and levels haughtiness and causes "every mountain and hill to be made low"?[12] That is the function of the Word of God, and of the chorale, which proclaims that Word. This wholesome, purging influence of the chorale is needed by all, but especially by theologians and educators and church musicians!

Is there, then, no beauty in the chorale, but only destruction? nothing affirmative, but only negation? Far from it! Like the Word of God, the chorale is precious chiefly because of its beauty.

Like the Word of God, however, the beauty of the chorale, too, has a hard, rough, coarse outer shell. I have said that the intrinsic value of the chorale will not appeal to anyone who does not want to get away from his own ego. Now we must add to that and say: The intrinsic value of the chorale will not appeal to anyone who does not despair of his own ego! That is what we need! Church music that will make a man feel small! Why? Because the truth is: "When I am weak, then am I strong."[13] That is what the Lutheran chorale does: it makes a man feel small. In fact, it hastens the process! And the result is—beauty! When a man despairs of his own ego, then, and only then, will he not only look at Jesus, but lovingly contemplate Him as the Beautiful Savior, the Fairest among the children of men, and rapturously hail Him: "Jesus, Priceless Treasure!"

Next to the Word of God itself, nothing can make a man feel so small as the Lutheran chorale! Nothing can speak like this to the soul. Try it!

Do we really want beauty in this manner, by this method? Or are we afraid of it, because it will crush us too severely—and after all, I really do have some merit: I can wear such nice clothes, I know my theology, my church music, my educational methods,—and you should see me pour tea at a bridge party!

That is the philosophy of the Lutheran chorale: it glorifies the attraction, the pulling power of the love of the Savior, who, being lifted up, draws all men—helpless men!—to Himself.

Do we want to go to Him? Or do we merely want to fool around in church and do a little pretending?! Or be somewhat serious, but not too serious, and not break entirely with the world?! If so, then we shall, of course, look for music with "pretty" effects.

But what is the key word of our present life? Permanence? Or preparation? If the latter, then let us act accordingly! Then let us prepare! Then let every part of our church service focus us toward God. Then—and this is what children and adults need to learn repeatedly and to remember—then we have no time in church for music which is sentimental and merely entertaining. If our purpose in this life is to prepare for the next, and if that purpose is supremely important, then every part of the church service must serve that purpose.

That is why the chorale is so "hinwegreissend"! That is why it is so intent on drawing us away from the world and from our sinful ego to Christ. The chorale is serious about this work, because there is so much joy in it. The chorale is in earnest about it, because there is so much pleasure in it:

B. Specific Features

1. No Asceticism

Some people insist that they do not want their children to learn and adopt the viewpoint of the Lutheran chorale. They find its philosophy too severe.

Objections of this kind are raised even by some Christian parents. We may at first be puzzled by such paradoxical action, but investigation usually shows that these parental fears result from confusing the self-denial of the Lutheran chorale with asceticism,—and from that philosophy the chorale is sharply separated.[16]

Before discussing the influence of asceticism, however, it may be important to observe that Roman Catholic church music has rightfully been charged with the opposite characteristics: of being too external, and even frivolous.

Who has brought those charges? Well, many persons have. One of the most interesting statements of this kind occurs in an essay by Richard Wagner.

Wagner certainly knew the Catholic Church. Originally antagonistic to Christianity, he gradually became favorably inclined to Catholicism, largely because of the influence of Schopenhauer and Liszt. In later years, however, he abandoned this position and was drawn to Lutheranism. There were several reasons for this change. In writing Die Meistersinger, Wagner had studied the life and work of Hans Sachs, who had praised Luther in a poem entitled: "The Nightingale of Wittenberg." Another factor was Wagner’s growing familiarity with the work of Albrecht Duerer. Most important of all was his increasing devotion to the church music of Bach. As a result, although he did not become a Lutheran, Wagner, like many men of today, induced his wife Cosima to join the Lutheran Church. He himself made it a point, however, to emphasize his Protestant views at every opportunity, with great pride and decisiveness.[17]

In the light of these facts, it is interesting and significant to find that Wagner, in his Beethoven essay of 1870, declared one of the characteristics of Lutheranism and of the Lutheran chorale to be its tendency toward internalizing. Both Lutheranism and the chorale are "tief und innerlich." But that is not all. By virtue of this fact, says Wagner, the Lutheran chorale is in sharp contrast "zu aller frivolen Lebens- und Geistestendenz," to all frivolous philosophies of life, and the chorale is furthermore a protest "gegen alles aeussere Wesen," against all externalism. In fact, says Wagner, there is an essential and fundamental conflict between the Lutheran chorale and the entirely foreign spirit of Catholicism, the latter being based—who would have thought it?—on frivolity, and finding its fullest realization in externalism!![18]

This tendency toward externalism and frivolity in the Catholic Church need not surprise us. It is the natural outcome of Catholic emphasis on human activity and human deeds. It may very well surprise us, however, that a man like Wagner is needed to direct our attention to the "essential and fundamental conflict between the Lutheran chorale and the entirely foreign spirit of Catholicism."[19]

This contrast between the externalism of Catholicism and the internalism of Protestantism has never been more eloquently stated than in a brilliant and memorable passage by the historian Taine:

Lutheranism and Lutheran music are a matter of the heart. Sie sind "tief und innerlich."

But now note: The Lutheran chorale is not the music of a recluse. It preaches self-denial, but not asceticism. No one has said this better than—Nietzsche! In a letter dated April 30, 1870, he wrote:

"The music of the denial of the will, without any suggestion of asceticism." Self-denial as proclaimed by the Lutheran chorale is not negative, but positive; furthermore, it is not only strengthening, but stimulating; it incites to action in the arena of life, yes, to heroic deeds in the battles of life. This truth has been vividly stated by Cosima Wagner. Replying to Nietzsche, she makes this remarkable observation:

The Lutheran chorale preaches self-denial, but—let everyone note well!—cheerful self-denial. Es ist die Hingabe an Gott, der menschenfreundlich ist, der die Menschen liebt.

The Lutheran Church teaches children—and adults—the art of complete and unreserved and joyous devotion to God, who loves them. They are drawn to Him, because they are convinced that He alone is the worthy object of their unrestricted love. Their hymns of consecration are joyous.

Catholic music, even in its more cheerful moods, is often permeated by a gloomy undertone. The simple truth, as Philo Buck has pointed out, is that asceticism "carries a cost of certain suppressions that will also in the long run create serious losses. One does not need to read far in some of the ascetic literature of the Middle Ages to discover the heavy price many of those who had turned their back on the world paid for their austerity."[24]

One of these losses is the lack of cheerfulness. Much Catholic music is unrelieved by the wholesome influence of healthy joy. It is the lament of celibacy, the cry of thwarted and frustrated ascetics, whose outlook on life was darkened and distorted by fragmentary living and delusive unreality.

By way of contrast, consider the joyousness of Luther! No man practiced more self-denial and self-abasement and self-sacrifice; yet what vigorous virility and irrepressible cheerfulness characterized his life and his work! No church music is the equal of "Ein’ feste, Burg" in joyous heroism and Kampfeslust. Nietzsche mentions "die Heiterkeit Luthers,"[25] his happiness, the pleasant, sunny, cheerful disposition which the Lutheran chorale does nothing to oppose but which it preserves, stimulates, and exalts.

2. No Extreme Emotionalism

The Lutheran chorale, far from suppressing Christian sentiment, fosters the sanctified and purified emotions of the Christian heart; in fact, it awakens and calls into being many that had not existed there before, and develops them.

Moreover, the Lutheran chorale provides an outlet for human emotion. It supplies Christian sentiment with a means and a mode of expression which is better than the average Christian could have devised or imagined by himself.

One thing, however, the Lutheran chorale refrains from doing: it does not let human emotions rule. In other words, it excludes emotionalism and subjectivism.

The bane of much Protestant hymnody has been its emotionalism, its subjectivism. The fact that it is a bane has been recognized by Reformed Protestants themselves, and has never been stated more emphatically than by their own writers.

This development was to be expected, for subjectivism in the long run becomes intolerable, and the reason is that there is no greater tyranny than self-determination. Humanism, the philosophy of many so-called enlightened intellectuals of our day, is the author of human bondage, and no less so when humanism takes the form of subjectivism.

Consideration of self must be done in the light of the Word of God. Otherwise it becomes arbitrary and destructive subjectivism. To be rescued from that fate, it must follow the pattern of divine thought, which alone leads to freedom. Not by subjective introspection, but by continuing in the message of the chorale, the message of the divine Word, shall we know the truth which makes us free.

The Lutheran chorale avoids the pitfalls of subjectivism. Luther, says Dr. Henry Smith,

What Dr. Smith deplores was not limited to Reformed churches in England and America. It was present also in the Lutheran Church, because of the influence of Pietism.

The pernicious results of this trend in the Lutheran Church have been ably set forth by Dr. Kliefoth, in his famous Liturgische Abhandlungen. I shall attempt to translate his excellent account:

What evaluation must we place on that development? Kliefoth reminds us:

"In the beginning it was not so!" The truly Lutheran chorale is predominantly sacramental, instructive, objective. Paul Ensrud refers to the objective character of Lutheran hymnody, when he says:

Indeed it does, as Dr. Kliefoth, in another connection, points out when he says:

Dr. Kempff points out that Luther’s Communion hymn, "O Lord, We Praise Thee,"[32] is a case in point. Its emphasis is on the meaning of the Lord’s Supper, its gifts and benefits. In fact, it is a general truth, says Dr. Kempff, that

To be sure, there is a subjective element in the Lutheran chorale, but it is something radically different from subjectivism. Even in the days and in the chorales of Luther the subjective element was present and expressed,[34] but it was heard even more frequently in later years. It was found already in the transitional stage (of which Johann Heermann is a typical representative) between the period of doctrinal hymns and the period of hymns of edification, as well as in the more subjective period represented by Paul Gerhardt. But it is a subjective element founded on Biblical truth!

Dr. Wiesenhuetter says:

This idea, that emotion in the Lutheran Church is the product of the divine Word, so brilliantly set forth by Dr. Wiesenhuetter in the foregoing quotation, has been acutely observed and accurately expressed by Taine in an equally notable statement:

This excellent analysis, setting forth Reformation religion, is at the same time an accurate description of the function of the Lutheran chorale. The chorale proclaims the Word of God. Whatever emotions are aroused are the product of that proclamation. The chorale does not seek primarily to arouse human emotions. It is concerned about proclaiming divine truth. For that reason it does not employ ear-tickling tunes or cloying harmonies. The chorale does not wish to attract attention to itself, grand, majestic, and notable though it is. It is willing to be a servant, a vehicle, a medium, a means for that which is supremely important: the great and eternal truth of God’s Word.[39] Just as the Lutheran minister employs oratorical skill for a winsome presentation of the Gospel, so the chorale employs superlative craftsmanship to set forth the exalted message committed to its care. But just as the Lutheran minister will defeat his assumed purpose as soon as he employs oratorical tricks and becomes enamored of his own oratory, so the Lutheran chorale, if it were to attract attention to itself by cheap devices, would merely be getting in the way of the message which it bears.

To be a message-bearer is a humble occupation. Unwillingness to continue in that humble role is what helped to bring about compositions of inferior merit. Dr. Albert Schweitzer traces the weakness of later Lutheran church music to its source, when he says:

Before leaving this section we ought to observe that shoddy music resulting from extreme emotionalism is not limited to Protestant groups. It is found also in the Catholic Church. Dr. Kempff declares:

Taine makes a similar statement. He is writing about early English hymn tunes, but since English Reformation hymnody possessed much of the character of the chorale, his words are appropriate here.

3. Outstanding Musical Merit

We have observed Luther’s almost apostolic spiritual equipment for his work as a reformer of church music. We need to be aware also, however, of his prodigious musical gifts which enabled him to set and achieve a standard of the very highest and noblest kind for Lutheran church music.

Although there is much that might profitably engage us in that connection, I shall pass over that important topic and refer, instead, to Professor Walter Buszin’s splendid article in the January, 1946, number of the Musical Quarterly. Those who read German will also be delighted by the book Martin Luther, der Kuenstler, written by the noted German scholar Hans Preuss.

We do need to remember, however, that it is because of Luther’s, great musical ability, and because Luther associated himself with professional musicians of the highest order, and because in later centuries, under God’s marvelous grace, the Lutheran Church continued to have the benefit of native sons with normative musical ability, men of towering genius, which culminated in the works of Bach, whose gigantic figure stands at the apex of Lutheran musical art,—that it is for these reasons that the Lutheran chorale possesses outstanding musical merit.

Music critics and hymnological authorities seem to vie with one another in extolling the musical merit of the chorale. At the beginning of this discussion we heard the high tribute paid by Dr. Phillips of Cambridge in a very recent survey of hymnody. Dr. Richard R. Terry has said: "Our English hymns are poor enough. Only the Lutheran Church has a mass of really magnificent hymns."

The musical poverty of Reformed groups has been vividly expressed by Dr. A. T. Davison in the statement:

What is the reason for the dismal contrast offered by the hymnody of the Reformed Church? The reason is twofold. It is partly historical and partly national.

Anglican hymnody, in the days of King Henry VIII, was on the way to a rich development. Dr. Phillips says:

Truly, the saddest words of tongue or pen are those few words: "It might have been"!

The story of Calvin’s antagonistic attitude and restrictive influence in regard to the Protestant hymnody of France and England has often been told and need not be repeated here. The devastation in England was almost complete. "During the two centuries that followed the Reformation, the Church of England had practically nothing to show in the way of congregational hymnody, apart from metrical versions of the Psalter."[45]

To be sure, English hymn writing was enthusiastically taken up by the Wesley brothers, John and Charles, in the middle of the eighteenth century, but this revival came too late. Protestantism had passed the heroic age of the Reformation.[46] England, like Germany, had had its days of heroism in the sixteenth century. One of the most thrilling accounts of English Protestant martyrdom is that by Taine. It deserves to be read and remembered. But hymn production was not coincidental with it, as in Germany.

Now, there can be no denying the influence of an age on its products. A recent writer, pointing out that "art is social in all its consequences," has declared that "the form society assumes at a given moment is reflected in the art of that moment."[47]

It is true, of course, that we have religious heroism in our own day. Thousands of persons are the victims of religious persecution, some of it overt, in foreign lands, some of it subtle, in American offices and factories. There is much courageous loyalty to the Christian faith. But this heroism is not concentrated and universal enough to influence the production of art forms.

The passing of the heroic age, however, was not the only reason for the inferiority of English hymnody. Another historical fact is that Wesley was unable to enlist the services of musicians of the caliber that had produced the Lutheran chorale. Dr. Lawrence Erb points out:

There is, however, also a national reason, in addition to the historical one, for the mediocrity of English hymn tunes. The truth is that England, as a nation, is not very musical. Let me hasten to add that England has, of course, other claims to greatness. It has outstanding diplomatic and administrative ability. Hence it rules the world—or has ruled it until recently. "Rule, Britannia! Rule the waves!" is more than the title of a song. It is a factual statement. On a somewhat more microcosmic scale we find the same evidence in numerous American store signs: the local hardware store will be owned, not by Schroeder and Smith, but by Smith and Schroeder. Smith is the administrator. Schroeder provides industry and skill. He is usually a poor diplomat. These are, of course, generalizations, and therefore subject to much criticism. But there is much truth in them.

The absence of strong musical feeling in the English make-up has been pointed out by many writers. One of them is Hugh Reginald Haweis, himself an Englishman, who has made the following observation:

This view was supported by the noted music historian, critic, and composer of the previous century, Dr. Frederic Louis Ritter. He regarded it as "on the whole correct, in its general estimate of English musical aspiration."[50] He felt that it was a little severe in its appraisal of the Elizabethan period, but in regard to the age that followed he said:

It is obvious that this national reason, the comparative mildness of musical feeling in England, is related to the historical one, in its significance for the quality of English hymnody. The national trait provides an important answer for the historical question: "Why did Reformed communions in England permit themselves to be deprived of the hymn for so long a time?" The question may be answered in the following manner: The reason why Lutheran Germany did not permit itself to be deprived of hymns lies in a distinctly national German trait—an irrepressible desire to sing. That desire had existed among Germans, and had asserted itself, long before the Reformation. When Bernard of Clairvaux had proclaimed the message of the Cross at the Rhine River, his companions, who were about to be sent to other regions, told the Germans: "Our principal regret was that when we left German territory, we no longer heard your ‘Kyrie’ and no one was left to sing to God. For the Romance peoples do not have their own songs in the manner of your countrymen, songs in which the people thank God for every single wonder."[52]

It would be absurd, of course, to say that English people had no songs. But what a difference in character! There were songs, indeed, but, as St. Bernard’s co-workers said to the Germans, they were not "in the manner of your countrymen." They were, as has already been pointed out, ballads, or songs of that class. This preference for the ballad type greatly influenced and, in fact, determined the direction taken by the development of the English hymn.

In a most remarkable study on this relationship between English ballads and English hymnody, Dr. Ritter, the noted music authority, points out that these ballads, rather than Gregorian chant, gave English hymnody its character.

By way of contrast, the Lutheran chorale was privileged to develop from a twofold source of unusual, if not unique, richness: the exalted character of Gregorian chant and the intensely musical feeling of the German people, expressed in their folk songs. Dr. Ritter says:

It is well to remember the debt that the Lutheran chorale owes to Gregorian chant, particularly in regard to exalted and solemn tone. But its debt to the indigenous quality of German folk song and to the native German sense of what is proper, is equally great, and perhaps greater.

The contribution which the genius of German folk song made to the music of the Lutheran chorale prevented the latter from being austere. Dr. Ritter declares:

The Lutheran chorale is more appealing than Gregorian chant, which often seems not only austere but remote. What is the reason for this difference? It is the personal nature of German folk song, with which the chorale is closely related.

Protestantism is a personal religion. It emphasizes, not a system, but the individua1.[57] It was natural that the early Protestants turned for musical expression to the folk song, which is likewise personal, as Dr. Nohl points out:

From the folk song the music of the Lutheran chorale obtained that personal ring, that quality of intimacy, which is so excellently expressed in the almost untranslatable German term "innig." Dr. Nohl calls attention to this delightful characteristic when he says:

This blending of Gregorian grandeur and exalted solemnity, on the one hand, with the personal and intimate flavor of folk song, on the other hand, has given the music of the chorale an eminently desirable quality. It represents an achievement in church music of the very highest order. "These beautiful old sacred melodies," says Dr. Ritter, "possess a charm and a grandeur unreached by any modern effort."

When we speak of the blending of Gregorian and folk song, however, we must think not only of a process which took place during the Reformation period. The interaction between Gregorian and folk song antedates the Reformation. It took place, on the continent (not in England), already in the Middle Ages. Dr. Ritter says:

This influence of Gregorian chant on continental folk song is, of course, one reason why love songs could become chorales. It is what Dr. Nohl refers to when he says that "these old secular songs originated at a time when the general frame of mind of European civilization was religious.[61] Those who are disturbed by the historical background of tunes like those for "O Sacred Head, Now Wounded" (L. H. 172) and "Now Rest Beneath Night’s Shadow" (L. H. 554) should be able to dismiss their fears after examining the development of continental folk song and discovering its roots.

The successful manner in which the Lutheran chorale blended Gregorian majesty and folk song intimacy involved yet another human factor: the musicianship of the men who did or directed the work. The story of Luther’s ability as a musician and composer, his wisdom in calling in a man like Johann Walther, as well as the musical proficiency of contributors in later eras—that story need not be repeated here. Suffice it to say that the Lutheran chorale was produced by men whose musical stature is recognized by the world. It is interesting to look into a publication like the Gramophone Shop Encyclopedia of Phonograph Records, an imposing volume of 500 pages. There, listed among the great musicians of various times, are the names not only of men like Luther, but also of Crueger, Franck, Nicolai, and others, to say nothing of men like Pachelbel and Buxtehude. And the entries for J. S. Bach are the most numerous of all composers listed in the book. Where are the Dykeses, the Lowell Masons, and the Barnbys?!

It is an unmistakable blessing of God that both the men and the materials needed for work of a high order were at hand when the Lutheran chorale came into being. The men found themselves provided with ideally suitable materials, were determined to fashion them for no other purpose than to proclaim the Eternal Word, and were professionally equal to the task which they had set before themselves. Their efforts resulted in a superlative product—the unique music of the Lutheran chorale.

There is a kind of tragic irony in the fact that the very element which helped make the Lutheran chorale great kept Reformed hymnody from attaining that greatness. Luther and his followers wisely and shrewdly avoided the austerity of Gregorian chant, and drew from that source which was bound to ensure enduring greatness for the chorale: continental folk song. Reformed hymnody, on the other hand, also came from the people, but still was unable to achieve distinction. The reasons, of course, are that the chorale, in its indebtedness to popular song, is allied with continental folk song (a descendant of Gregorian chant), and also that the chorale was fashioned by master craftsmen into a form befitting religious expression. English hymnody is the child of the ballad and was written either by the common people or by musicians of spiritual inadequacy or of musical incompetency.

In the Lutheran chorale an attitude of deep reverence for the Word and the ability of professional musicians to express that attitude in a popular manner without striking a vulgar level were blended successfully and produced congregational song of outstanding musical merit.

The specific points of merit in the music of the Lutheran chorale, as well as their distressing counterparts in English hymnody, will be included in Part II, in the discussion suggesting how these features may be brought to the attention of the child by the instructor.

4. Suitability for Children

Thus it is evident that the Lutheran chorale[63] provides the ideal[64] medium of hymnological expression. It enables Christians to sing and speak of the deeds of God and of the needs of man in a musical language which is suitable because dignified, stately, reverential, yet appropriately joyful because—strangely enough—despairing of itself; in short, it is "hinwegreissend."

These things being so, what shall we do? Surely, the natural thing is to use these chorales! Do we want "majesty, grandeur, intensity," heaven-focused language? Then let us use it and give it to our children.

a.

A language, of course, needs to be learned. The chorale is the language of reverence, of "Gottesfurcht" of "Ehrfurcht vor dem Wort Gottes." Cosima Wagner heard in the chorale-saturated St. Matthew Passion "die erhaben ernste Gottesfuerchtigkeit" of Lutheranism. Now, such reverence for the Word of God takes long to develop. One must, like Bach, gradually become saturated with it.

For that, of course, the Bible is the chief means. The Catechism and the religious writings of great men are next in importance, as is evidenced again in the case of Bach, whose library included, in addition to the works of Martin Luther, the marvelous Biblia Illustrata of Abraham Calov, the Examen of Martin Chemnitz, and a number of other notable works, including sermons and devotional writings.[66]

But the chorale is important, not only as a supplementary means, but to enable children to associate a reverential spirit with church music! Some people are devout and respectful during the sermon and during prayers, but they feel little need of that quality in hymnody.

Now, the chorale can teach children to use the language of Heaven while singing! The chorale breathes the very spirit of reverence, of self-abasement, of glorification of God. From the chorale, children can learn both content and form, both matter and manner; the chorale, proclaiming the wonderful works of God and applying them to the needs of men, speaks of all this in the language of Heaven.

Thus children will learn to speak of spiritual things as fittingly as possible, also in their musical and hymnological utterances, as in other expressions.

Let us be sure, of course, that Lutheran music educators themselves know the language of the chorale. The Lutheran music educator must, therefore, like Bach, have the right approach to a study of the chorale. He must avoid the purely musical approach.

We have had too much of the purely artistic approach to the chorale. Such an approach is utterly insufficient to show the meaning of the chorale, to plumb its depth, and to set forth its beauty.

We have had too much of the work of those who approach the chorale from the outside, as though it were merely, or mainly, a work of art, when as a matter of fact it is a spiritual expression.

For its proper appreciation the instructor requires a high degree of spirituality. His inner eye must be opened. His mind must be enlightened by the Holy Spirit. Otherwise he will not be able to perceive or to comprehend what the chorale endeavors to convey. For, let us note well, the message of the chorale is the very truth of God: the utter helplessness of man and his complete dependence on the most glorious divine work for man—redemption through the blood of Jesus Christ.

That message, however, the message of the chorale, cannot be received unless it be spiritually discerned. Unless the church music educator’s mind is enlightened, unless his heart is regenerated and he is filled with a true reverence and a deep love for the Word of God, and unless he is so saturated with reverence for that Word that he, like St. Paul, regards himself as a servant to that Word and exalts it above everything, above everything in music,—he cannot truly teach the chorale.

He may do much talking, but he will miss the mark. His opinions will be equal in value to what a blind man says about color. Blind people of intelligence may be able to make remarkable statements about color. But what they say remains theoretical. It does not come from practical experience. An unregenerate person’s comments about the chorale suffer from the same deficiency.

There is furthermore no adequate substitute for regeneration in familiarity with the chorale preludes of Bach. A man may be able to analyze, in a measure, the structure of these glorious compositions. He may even detect the recurring pattern of certain motifs. But their essential character, their true value, their real significance will escape him, because that which they represent strikes no response in his heart. "Lo, they have rejected the Word of the Lord. What wisdom is in them ?"[67]

How can anyone who does not share Bach’s[68] profound reverence for the Word of God, his constant endeavor to exalt and proclaim the Word of God, his dominant aim to have his whole art serve, serve the purpose of glorifying God and teaching man—how can such a person, who is either unsympathetic to Bach’s, view or who, although himself a Christian, has developed in his heart only a very mild appreciation of the Word, an appreciation which, compared with Bach’s, is only a pale and fragile thing, unable to resist the glamorous appeal of "art" and easily overwhelmed by human demands and not at all like Bach’s sturdy, staunch, stalwart adherence and devotion to the Word of God—how can such a person give more than a superficial evaluation of either the chorale preludes of Bach or of the chorale, on which they are based?

These are the reasons why Dr. Kempff, in pointing out the qualifications needed for a correct understanding and appreciation of the chorale, mentions spiritual ability first and musical understanding second.[69]

b.

A language needs, furthermore, to be loved. Now the truth is, as H. C. Colles, late music critic of the London Times, has pointed out, that "congregations will always like what they know."

Let us remember, however, that the mere publication of a hymnbook of 700 hymns is virtually no guarantee that the musical language of those hymns will be known! Dr. Davison of Harvard University correctly points out that

And he adds: "The seeds of noble music cannot be too early planted."[71]

There is no better way to deepen the love of church members for the musical language of the chorale, no better way to have them make both the matter and the manner of that language their own, than to have them learn it as children. The capacity[72] is there. What is needed is only that someone enable them to take the language of the chorale into the depths of their being, and, in turn, to let it express those divine truths and convictions, those longings and desires which are in their heart (as the result of the Word that has entered there!).

To think that the common people can have no deep convictions is a mistake of the intelligentsia, heavily scored by Kliefoth, who says:

Dr. Harrington issues a similar warning. He says:

c.

It is not necessary to be an alarmist to say that if those principles were true for the growth of the Church and for the preservation of the individual in former times, they are even more true now.

Not only, therefore, to learn the language of the chorale in a general way, but specifically to meet the false appeals of our day do children need a thorough knowledge of those things of which the chorale speaks so eloquently and impressively.

We are living at a time when music has reached a stage of great advancement—in a twofold direction!

In the realm of classical music, composition has ventured into hitherto unexplored regions, and composers are pushing the potentialities of music to the ultimate, Popular appreciation of music in general has perhaps never been so widespread as today, and performance brings before us countless youthful prodigies.

But in the field of so-called popular music a similar development has taken place. There, too, the potentialities of music—of popular music—are pushed to the ultimate, the ultimate in suggestiveness and in sordid appeal, which leave little to the imagination. These products from a source called Tin Pan Alley, but more appropriately named the boiling cauldron of hell, are heard almost everywhere. They have invaded the Christian home. Parents let the radio play and think nothing of the depths of rottenness reached by some of the music.

But although the character of this music is sometimes ignored, it is by no means ineffectual. It exerts a powerful influence, and the devil, like his counterpart, Iago, stands aside and, gleefully observing its effects, says:

But even though others are unaware of that influence, we cannot disregard it. We must see that children today need, more than ever, the purifying and strengthening influence of the chaste musical language of the Lutheran chorale.

There is no better means of stabbing their consciences awake to the foul and putrid and soul-destroying character of much modern music than by acquainting them thoroughly with the noble and exalted language of Heaven spoken in the Lutheran chorale. An example of evil is best met by an example of purity.[77]

Those whose sensibilities have been dulled by frequent association with the cheap and vulgar and immoral are not easy to convince, but those who have heard the exalted cadences of the chorale and who have themselves learned to speak that idiom will the more quickly see the difference and recognize the conflict between the language of heaven and the language of hell.

But to resist the latter, youth needs strength. Therefore youth needs not only the purifying influence of the chaste language of the chorale, but also the strengthening effect of the power of the chorale, and it needs to learn the skill of using that power. These serious days are not the time to fritter away precious hours on lifeless tunes which produce anemic Christians!

Dr. Kempff sounds the right note when he says:

Failure to adhere to the source of power of which the chorales speak and which they offer, was the very reason for the decline and degeneration of Lutheranism in Germany. Dr. Kempff says:

d.

But is the musical language of the chorale suitable for children? Is it not expecting too much to ask them to listen to its phrases and even to sing them?

It is not at all true that the chorale offers only difficult forms of musical expression. Some of the chorales are actually easy.[81] Others are only moderately difficult. But some are undeniably hard to learn. What about them?

The answer is simple. Is the language of the chorales difficult? So is English—for someone who does not know it! So is German—ask the modern high school and college student! But the difficulty in the learning of any language, verbal or musical, is greatly reduced if the learning process is begun in the early years of life.

There is no logic in withholding the chorale from children because it is difficult and letting them develop their own taste and preferences. We don’t permit children to grow up by themselves in regard to verbal language. Why should we do it here? Paul Ensrud says:

To this we may add that if children grow up by themselves, a cockney dialect or some other regional aberration is the result. The revival hymn is a kind of musical cockney, notable not only for its incorrectness, but also for its impropriety.

The inability to find a proper and suitable selection of words addressed to God probably reached its nadir during the last war, in the notorious prayer which began somewhat like this: "Look, God, I’m a stranger to You."

Is that what we are coming to, musically, in our church language? The rollicking accompaniment to the melodies of the Fuller hour and the Youth for Christ antics seem to point that way.

There was a parallel development in Germany, Dr. Kempff informs us. He protests:

Some time ago a contributor to a newspaper sent the following poem:

This poem is a good illustration of what is wrong with many Reformed hymn tunes. The author of the poem was, no doubt, in great earnest and meant to be devotional. But the flavor and atmosphere of the poem are not of the sort that appeals to one who has learned what true reverence is. Whoever does not see that point will probably also not notice what is wrong with certain undesirable hymn tunes.

What argument can be brought to prove that the style of the poem is wrong? The error is too subtle to be easily defined. The problem recalls a statement by H. C. Colles in regard to propriety in a certain hymn tune.

Early training of children in the use of suitable, chaste, exalted language will help to prevent such improprieties, even though the learning of an appropriate musical language is somewhat difficult.

The truth is, however, that the difficulty has been greatly exaggerated. The ability of children to learn is often underrated by adults. That point has been stressed by Dr. Davison. "A child may be deeply impressed by music," he says, "which in the superiority of adult wisdom we decree as too mature for his years."[86]

All those who train children in religious music and who must, therefore, attempt to make an appraisal of children’s capacity, should be thoroughly familiar with the views set forth by Dr. Davison in the following important statement:

"Nun danket" was included in the list mentioned at the beginning of this section as containing easy chorales. "Ein’ feste Burg" may seem like strong meat for children, even if we grant that Dr. Davison had in mind the less rugged and less difficult (but also less powerfu1[89]) form used in most American hymnals. But Dr. Harrington reminds us:

"The childish in music." The manner in which the chorale expresses faith and trust is frequently childlike, but not childish; kindlich, but not kindisch. We are reminded of the chorale’s suitability for children by the following emphatic statement of Dr. Bell:

All this is no mere theorizing. It is sound judgment, based on practical experience, as in the case of Paul Ensrud, who says:

Hundreds of persons can speak of similar experiences. In this connection I usually mention the case of Louise Ellis. Louise was not a Lutheran, but she was attending a Lutheran school.[93] She was in the sixth grade. Her parents were people of very, very modest means. Her mother was a member of the Methodist Church; her father was, nominally, a Baptist. Approaching the beautiful school building during the noon hour on a bright, warm spring day, I noticed Louise sitting on the front steps. She was playing with her jacks. Coming nearer, I observed that she was singing. What was the song? "We all believe in one true God"—Luther’s Credo, Hymn No. 251, sung by this girl, of Reformed parentage, according to the original tune![94] The tune is certainly not an easy one; some persons would even call it extremely difficult; some would regard it as unsuitable for children. But here was this girl, singing it, not under compulsion, but spontaneously, for sheer joy and as a pleasant pastime, and, incidentally, keeping perfect time with the rhythm as she bounced the ball on the concrete!

That incident has remained in my memory as a kind of summation of all the arguments that could be raised in support of the suitability of the chorale for children. It speaks much more convincingly than many statements about directed and supervised classroom activity. It shows that children are attracted to the grandeur, majesty, strength, and vigor of the chorale. And it proves the freshness, the lively joyousness of the chorale, as from a never-failing fountain. It was eminently fitting that this Credo was sung by a young child. It provides added significance and corroboration for Dr. Kempff’s penetrating observation in regard to this great chorale, which he called: "dieser ewig junge Hymnus."[95]

"With Thee is the fountain of life!"[96] Because the chorale draws, from the fountain of Eternal Truth, it remains continually young, fresh, and new. It has outlived thousands of inferior compositions of religious music.[97]

But more. Because of its enduring vitality, the chorale has a message for youth—far beyond the confines of the Lutheran Church! Once they are introduced to it and become familiar with its noble and compelling language, children and young people find it delightful, regardless of their ancestry and religious background.

A Presbyterian publication recently stated: "Nothing in music is more wonderful than the power and grip which the chorales have over all classes of listeners." And a recent book[98] for public school children, edited by a committee of public school teachers in Kansas City, Boston, Ithaca (N.Y.), and Appleton (Wis.), includes many Lutheran chorales and says of them that they are "very easy to sing," that their music "suggests architectural strength, boldness, and simplicity," and that "it is this staunchness and downrightness that makes these chorales so resounding. All ages can find stimulation in their hearty measures."

The amazing degree in which the chorale has been used in public elementary schools as well as in high schools and colleges, permits us to speak of the universality of the chorale and confirms Dr. Henry Sloane Coffin’s statement in his most recent book:

II. THE USE OF THE CHORALE IN CHILD LIFE

The basic principles just discussed are important, but they are not enough. To be of actual benefit to the Church they must receive utilization.

There is great danger that we content ourselves with enunciating principles. We hear much talk about "the glorious Lutheran heritage" of the world’s greatest hymn tunes, but much of the enthusiasm never gets beyond the verbal stage. Mr. Ensrud says:

When it is convenient or expedient for us to do so, we boast of our Lutheran heritage of church music. For the most part I fear that it is lip service or vanity.[l]

Let us stop merely talking about the treasures in the chorales! Let the coming generation usher in a new attitude, which is coupled with action!

A. The Importance of the Child

In making plans designed to bring about increased use of the chorale, it is proper that we emphasize the youth of the Church. Here there is hope for improvement. Among adults, there is little likelihood of finding or developing the right viewpoint. Luther’s comment regarding the relative hopelessness of dealing with adults, rather than with children, is well known.

The improbability of effecting any major change at the present time becomes clear when we realize that the term "adults" includes not only the laity, but the professional leaders of our Church—teachers, ministers, and professors.

At the Professors’ Conference held in Milwaukee last week (Aug. 20–23, 1946), Professor Buszin presented an excellent essay on the urgency of acquainting ministerial students with Lutheran church music. The response in this supposedly enlightened group was far from encouraging. Professor Buszin was called an enthusiast. He was charged with false doctrine, for having asserted that the music of the chorales speaks an impressive language.[2] He was accused of attempting to push back the educational clock, for having ventured to propose that a period in science, or in another subject, might be dropped to make, room in the curriculum for music in ministerial schools operated by the Church of Martin Luther,—the Reformer whose accurate knowledge of psychology induced him to place music, not at the bottom of the educational ladder, but next to theology! And the soundness of Luther’s educational views for the modern age is ably set forth in Professor Painter’s book, Luther on Education.

Evidently it will be a long time before we shall catch up with Luther in our views on the importance of music in general and of the chorale in particular.

How long is long, in this case? An estimate of 25 to 40 years is probably not wide of the mark. You and I will hardly live to see the widespread improvement envisaged by men like Dr. Theodore Hoelty-Nickel, Dr. Edward Rechlin, Mr. Martin Bangert, and many others, young and old, whose efforts in behalf of the chorale have been divinely blessed with fruitful results.

We dare not be distressed by the prospect of working for an improvement which will very likely not be realized to any great extent in our own time. Instead, we must pray for vision, for faith and love to work with a clear aim and with zeal undiminished by the rebuffs of ignorance and of malice.

Any other course is foolish. To expect extensive and intensive love for the chorale now is as unreasonable as it would have been to look for a man like Bach in 1600. Bach was the product of many, many decades. So, too, this development will take a long time. It cannot be hurried. If we are realistic, we shall less easily become discouraged.

A realistic view will futhermore take into consideration the most recent decades in the history of the Missouri Synod and of other Lutheran groups. It would be inaccurate, for example, to say: "We have emphasized the chorale for 100 years. What good has been accomplished?" The plain truth is that we have not been sufficiently faithful in our use of the great chorale treasures with which God has enriched our Church. During the past 40 or 50 years, especially, we have had a steadily decreasing emphasis on the chorale.

There has, of course, been a gratifying change here and there during the past five or ten years and, in a few isolated instances, for a longer period of time—a change which, be it said to our shame, was partly due to extraneous influence: discovery and appreciation of the chorale in non-Lutheran churches and in the concert world. It is a change which, we hope, is the beginning of improvement on a large scale.

Any observation of our activity during the past four or five decades, however, which is in agreement with historical facts, will reveal that we are just emerging from a period of widespread enthusiasm for Reformed hymnody.

This misplaced enthusiasm is not surprising. It was the almost natural and predictable result of the shift from German to English which occurred during the First World War and which involved a great number of our congregations. Many of our church members heard, for the first time, the ear-tickling tunes of the Reformed hymns. These "new" melodies were hailed and accepted as "surefire" remedies to bring about greater "consecration" in the Lutheran Church. With an irony which has been all too often characteristic of our Church, these tunes were "coming into their own" among us and were being adopted just at a time when they were being rejected by others, who were appreciating and appropriating the chorale!

The truth is that the recent adult generation in our Church is steeped largely in Reformed hymnody.

What is the reason? One reason is this that these people were not emphatically directed, as children, to the chorale. A typical instance comes to my mind. Twenty years ago, while attending Concordia Seminary in St. Louis, I substituted (or attempted to) for a teacher in the eighth grade of one of our large Lutheran schools in St. Louis. He gave me a few pointers in the morning, and when he noticed that I was planning to use "We Now Implore God, the Holy Ghost,"[3] in the morning devotions (for the eighth grade, not for the lower grades), he urged me to use a different hymn, saying: "Das ist zu altertuemlich." Not all teachers took his view, but there were too many like him.

Perhaps even more important is the influence of the Sunday school, which, until a number of years ago, was notorious for the kind of hymns made available and recommended for use.

Ministers must bear a large part of the blame for the failure of many of our members to appreciate the chorale. During the past thirty years many pastors have caused their congregations to sing, Sunday after Sunday, a predominant number of Reformed hymns, rarely, if ever, selecting a chorale. Those who have opportunity to visit churches in various parts of our country can testify that in many a Lutheran church the service, as far as congregational song is concerned, is indistinguishable from a Baptist or Methodist church.

I wonder how many of our pastors know that in many communities people (both Lutheran and non-Lutheran!) are complaining bitterly about the tunes they are asking people to sing, tunes which are musically inadequate and unequal to the words, as in hymns like "Rock of Ages" and "My Faith Looks Up to Thee."[4] I know of a girl in Cleveland who, after patiently attending many services in several of our churches, gave up in disgust because of the Reformed hymnody (although she herself had been an Episcopalian) and joined the Roman Catholic Church. Happily, I also know of a lady in Milwaukee who joined one of our congregations because, as she told me in a letter, she was impressed by "the glorious music of the Lutheran Church."

But the point is that our members who were children thirty years ago are now men and women, forty and fifty years of age. They have grown up, not under an emphasis upon the Lutheran chorale, but under neglect of it. It is too late to do much with them. They are represented by the forty-ish husband and wife (both from "good Lutheran stock") who told me, as I entered their house: "Oh, you should have been here a few minutes ago! The radio was playing a Lutheran hymn." "Which hymn was it?" I asked. The answer was: "Come, Thou Almighty King."

Thus, in view of the fact that a process of the kind we are considering takes long to bring about and that we, as a Church, have done little to instigate or hasten its development, we cannot expect great results within the next few years. We must look for substantial improvement, under divine blessings, in the more distant future. We must, therefore, center our attention on the child.

Dr. Davison states the case correctly when he says:

B. The Equipment of the Educator

To bring the chorale into the life of the child we must provide the child with educators who have been properly equipped for their task.

1.

It is of the utmost importance that the music educator realize the seriousness of his work. He must share the views of Dr. Bell, who said:

"A song," says H. Giles, "will outlive all sermons in the memory." This influence of music has been expressed in the well-known saying: "Let me write the songs of a people, and you can write their laws."

Dr. Kliefoth, writing of the view of the Lutheran Church, says:

Thus the religious song has an important function to perform, and the music is to support the words in the work they have to do.

The music educator must realize, however, that music will not necessarily fulfill its great obligation simply because it is called "religious music." Church music will not automatically serve its proper purpose merely because it is allied to religious words and heard in sacred precincts. Sir Walter Parrat reminds us:

Referring specifically to children’s songs, Dr. Bell points out that "incalculable good or harm may be done by the music that children sing in their most impressionable years."[10] Dr. Davison rightfully complains about certain hymns that have "gone on vitiating the taste of generations of children."[11]

It is true, as Dr. Kliefoth points out above, that many a poor sermon has been supplemented by a richly instructive hymn. In fact, no pastor should be surprised to have a parishioner tell him: "I got more out of Hymn Number So-and-so than out of your sermon." For that reason congregations should be permitted to sing generous portions of long hymns. But it is also true that the influence of many a fine sermon has been offset by the devastating effect of a tune which is too frivolous or otherwise incompatible with profound religious sentiment.

Many people are unaware of the negative influence of inferior music or are unconcerned about it. Some may deny or ridicule the statement that certain tunes counteract the Gospel message. But the music educator must be deterred by neither ignorance nor indifference. He must see sharply and clearly that music continues to exert an influence of one kind or another, regardless of what people may say about it, and that, in the case of inferior hymn tunes, "their" only lasting influence lies in a subtle corruption of the tastes of countless thousands of unthinking singers."[12]

2.

All of this the music educator must realize. But to be aware of it, he must himself be able to discriminate between good and bad church music, lest he come under the censure expressed by Dr. Davison:

The music educator must realize that much of the clamor for the use of chimes and vox humana stops comes from a desire for entertainment rather than for edification, and that vestments and choir processionals are requested by many who are totally indifferent to the music sung by choir or congregation. He must be able to discern, as Mr. Ensrud did when he said: "I am afraid that there are within our midst some who may mistake enthusiasm and noise for worship."[14] And he must emphasize underlying causes and fundamental principles, as Mr. Ensrud does in the statement:

3.

It is not enough, however, that the church music educator recognize and endorse the principles of good church music. He must, furthermore, have the courage of his convictions.

The music educator who attempts to acquaint children with high standards of church music is apt to meet with strong opposition, not on the part of the children, but on the part of adults. Dr. Davison mentions a case in point. He received complaints because of the music he used in a Sunday school.

It is a strange phenomenon: where people should not speak of a tabula rasa, they do: in religious education; where the idea of a tabula rasa may be applied, it is not: in musical education! There they suppose that children are utterly limited by certain inborn abilities, tendencies, and endowments, even though the capacity of children to appreciate good music has frequently been demonstrated.

Why this discrepancy? It is the result of wishful thinking, in both cases.

In religious education, people like to believe that the child is naturally good and has an inborn capacity for piety, because the general principle is flattering to them (the people). Even though the principle were applied only to the child, it still serves as an indirect compliment to the parents.

In musical education, people like to believe that the child has no natural capacity for improvement and that it has certain fixed tendencies which incline it toward inferior music, because (1) they themselves want to hear that kind of music; and because (2) giving the child other training (on the basis of the principle they themselves advocate in religious education), will (a) undermine their prestige and be un-flattering to them and will (b) make them uncomfortable because they will have to learn new tunes and make various other kinds of adjustments.

Thus the merry-go-round goes on.

Who will break this vicious circle? Only the music educator who has vision, inspired by lofty principles and noble ideals, and who has the courage of his convictions to bring exalted standards into the life of the children with whom he is privileged to deal for a few years.

Occasionally the music educator will meet people who admit that the music used in the past is not good enough for today. Mr. Ensrud, for example, takes that position. He says:

This intelligent attitude, however, is not frequently found. The music educator will more often experience criticism, the result of an ignorant or inimical attitude. Hence he will need courage and will need to show not only the tolerance, but also the firmness displayed by Dr. Davison in the statement:

4.

To develop that courage, the Lutheran music educator may well take his cue from Bach, observing that great master both in his actions and in the principles underlying his practice.

Bach devoted his life not to self-advancement, but, as one writer has said, "to glorify the Lutheran chorale." Superficial observers of Bach’s life will say that it was natural for him to make a choice of that kind. He was steeped in Lutheranism, and he was a church organist most of the time. It would have been unnatural for him to follow any other course.

But let us look around a bit. There were many abnormalities in Bach’s day! What about men like Mattheson, Keiser, and Telemann? These three men, musicians of great authority, prominent and prolific composers, wielding an extensive influence, openly declared their contempt for congregational song and for the chorale. They called it a "malady of melody."[19] Mattheson, especially, raised his influential voice to denounce the chorale as a "cold, lazy, sleepy" thing. He condemned congregational song as something which was to be tolerated only because of the weak and uncultured; he asserted that art song (as we know it in arias and other forms) is the only form of song commanded by God in Scripture.

Mattheson’s view seems absurd to us, but he was, nonetheless, a man of great power. In his Critica musica he declared: "It is just as improper to say that chorales are musical as it is to say that people who sing in church are musicians." Mattheson went so far as to paraphrase several of the chorales in a sacrilegious and blasphemous manner. "When in the Hour of Utmost Need" became a minuet; "How Lovely Shines the Morning Star," a gavotte; "Lord Jesus Christ, Thou Highest Good," a sarabande; "Sink Not Yet, My Soul, to Slumber," a bourree; "I Call Upon Thee, Jesus Christ," a polonaise. The melody of each of these chorales was retained note for note, but the rhythm was altered.

The result of all this activity was that the chorale was not only reduced to a subordinate position in cantatas and oratorios, but that it was crowded out of the church service and removed from the hymn boards; organ accompaniment for the chorale was very carelessly provided.

All this serves to emphasize the distinctiveness of Bach. We must alter our opinion of him if we have been accustomed to thinking that it was easy and natural for him to devote himself to the chorale and that he lived in an "old-fashioned" age, anyway. The truth is that Bach had to face the criticism of the leaders! He deliberately and courageously chose to disregard their false standards.

But why did he do it? To find the reason underlying his action we must look for the fundamental principles to which Bach held. These have been well stated by Charles Sanford Terry, who has emphasized that it was piety which controlled Bach’s art.

Truly, an exalted principle for the church musician! To this high view Bach held all his life. Temptations to "mind high things,"[22] to achieve fame as an artist, or to become wealthy (one of his friends declared that his unprecedented skill could have been a gold mine for him anywhere in the world), he resisted, remembering the divine injunction: "Seekest thou great things for thyself? Seek them not."[23] He neither sought the blandishments of a flattering world nor did he flinch under the attack of those who opposed his principles. He was convinced of the rightness of his course in "glorifying the chorale," and he courageously refused to abandon his position in favor of false standards of church music.

The source of Bach’s courage lay, besides the Bible and other important religious books in his library, in the very chorale which he championed! One of his biographers speaks of Bach’s well-thumbed hymnbook (sein zerlesenes Gesangbuch).

There is the cue for the Lutheran music educator of today. He, too, must live with the chorale! It must not be a stranger to him. Nor must it be merely a part of his professional activity. It is not enough that he plays the chorale in church and school or that he practices it with children and adult choir groups. He must find time for his own devotional playing of the chorale, either at home on the piano or in church on the organ. Busy? Well, we are all busy. We must make a selection in our activities. It is unwise to let great, fundamental, and edifying activities be crowded out by less important ones.

The music educator must take time to savor the chorale. He must, furthermore, make the chorale his regular fare and help himself to large portions of it. He himself will need to develop his taste for the chorale.

Having done this, he will find that his need of the chorale will increase. The chorale has, through the divine message which it bears, created greater depths of religious experiences and has also awakened a desire to have these more profound emotions satisfied by the sturdy and substantial message of the chorale.

Thus need will beget love. The music educator will prize the chorale for its unique intrinsic worth. And since it is a characteristic of love to beget courage, the music educator who has learned to love the chorale will be ready to use the chorale both in his own life and in the life of children entrusted to his care, regardless of criticism.

5.

Where shall we get music educators of that kind? They must be trained at our colleges and seminaries. That is why it is extremely important that the music departments at these institutions be staffed by instructors who hold fast unswervingly to the principles of Lutheran church music.

It is gratifying to know that these very principles are being inculcated at River Forest and at Seward. Let us pray that the instructors at these schools will be sustained by the vision of a coming era which will bring a new and joyous appreciation of the chorale in the Lutheran Church.

We have made only a beginning at our seminaries and ministerial preparatory schools, but it is encouraging to know that many of the St. Louis Seminary students are under the influence of Dr. William B. Heyne, whose efforts in behalf of Lutheran music standards have caused many of the students to become familiar with the musical treasures of the Lutheran Church and have achieved a noticeable improvement in the outlook of our younger ministers in regard to church music.

Since not all of our church musicians receive their training at our synodical schools, institutions like Valparaiso University have an important mission to fulfill. I do not hesitate to say that there is a danger in having our churches served by musicians who are not graduates of our synodical schools, but I am just as ready to express my joy at the fact that Valparaiso music students are being trained by instructors who are working under the leadership of Dr. Theodore Hoelty-Nickel. His presence at Valparaiso is reassuring to all of us, and I know that he meets with sympathetic understanding from the university’s president, Dr. O. P. Kretzmann, who is a music critic in his own right. Other schools are similarly showing an increasing devotion to the chorale and its principles of church music.

Unless we provide our future music educators with an opportunity to become thoroughly familiar with what is good and what is inferior in church music, we cannot hope that they will be proper guides for children. They will be blind leaders of the blind. Dr. Cook says:

Thus it is that the direction given to the child will depend in large measure on the equipment of the music educator.

C. Suggested Methods

l.

How much time should be devoted to the chorale in the children’s music hour? Dr. Kempff insists on using no less than half the regular music period for instruction in the chorale.

Not all music educators will be able to endorse or to adopt Dr. Kempff’s view, but those who are interested in substance and in efficiency will give careful thought to his words.

The morning devotions in Lutheran parish schools offer splendid opportunities for utilization of the chorale. If these opportunities are not conscientiously used, one of the best means of familiarizing the child with the chorale will have been lost. It is disturbing that parish school graduates report that they have never sung "If Thou But Suffer God to Guide Thee" (L. H. 518) and similar hymns. We may, of course, take their statements with a grain of salt, but such testimony cannot be disregarded altogether. It shows, at least, that these chorales were not prominent in the daily fare used in school devotions. It should go without saying that teachers will give preference to the chorale wherever possible. If the teacher can use either "Alas! and Did My Savior Bleed" (L. H. 154) or "O Dearest Jesus. What Law Hast Thou Broken" (L. H. 143) for an opening devotion and there is no urgent reason for using the former (since the thought content is almost identical in the two hymns), he should certainly have the children sing the latter, which is immeasurably more eloquent and therefore more beneficial in its musical language.

The alert teacher will, of course, use not only the morning devotions and the regular music periods for the chorale, but will employ every other opportunity, as, for example, the history lesson, the reading lesson, and, particularly, the religion lesson.

The new Instructor’s Manual for Luther’s Small Catechism provides a wealth of suggestions and indicates a variety of opportunities for utilization of the chorale in connection with every part of Christian teaching. Not only does the list of suggested hymns contain a preponderant number of chorales, but the phonograph records listed make it possible to bring the chorale to the attention of children in various forms. No instructor is expected to use all, or even many, of the phonograph records listed. If one suggestion is used in religious truth, the list will have served its purpose.

This method is not new! Dr. Kempff speaks of using it in his confirmation class.

Incidentally the fact that this chorale had to be re-introduced in Wittenberg may be heartening to music educators who are distressed by the musical ignorance of the parish which they serve.

The point to be remembered here, however, is that almost every part of Christian doctrine has one or more specific chorales that fit it. It is, of course, only natural that this is so. The chorale proclaims Christian truth! It should be used by the instructor as often as possible to deepen the impressiveness of the instruction.

This method will throw new light on the chorale. Children will discover its rich content. They will learn to prize both the pertinency and the propriety of its language.

The eventual purpose, of course, is not to glorify the chorale, but to show that the chorale is what it is and what is said of it: it is "das in die Musik uebertragene Wort Gottes."

2.

The music educator should call attention to the twofold character of Lutheran hymnody: its sacramental and its sacrificial hymns. He should show how the Lutheran chorale expresses the whole body of Christian truth—the sacramental hymns containing the divine message of Law and Gospel, the sacrificial hymns the divinely wrought works in man: prayers of petition and praise.

The teacher should unfold all this to the class and should show that the manner in which the Lutheran Church has emphasized sacramental hymns shows its attachment to the divine Word, its insistence upon the heavenly message! He should show, as Dr. Kliefoth points out, that the Lutheran Church has an unshakable faith in the efficacy of the divine Word and Sacraments.[28] He should help the class to see that the emphasis in the chorale on the great objective truths of heavenly redemption is not due to an idealistic detachment from man’s everyday needs and problems, but to a clear realization of the fact that the heavenly message is what enriches man’s inner life and enables him to produce those results of which we sing in the so-called hymns of sanctification.[29] Thus the emphasis on sacramental hymns represents not a loss, but a gain, not indifference to man’s problems, but the more truly human viewpoint, which takes cognizance of man’s greatest and deepest need.

The teacher will do well, therefore, to let the chorale be the basis of his instruction at times. We use this method in sermons, basing the sermon on a text, of course, but permitting the chorale to be the basis of our commentary on the text. If we te