Christian hymnody is indeed one of the most simple and unpretentious components of the rich cultural heritage of the Christian church. Viewed from a high literary point of view, its texts are often not admirable verse and, measured by standards of resplendent music, its tunes are frequently unpretentious. Not one of the famous hymns of the church was written by a front-rank poet, and the foremost composers of hymn tunes are not among the great composers of music. While creating hymn texts and tunes, poets as well as composers must shy away from exhilarating flights of imagination and fantasy, and both are obligated to neglect techniques which furnish evidence of expert craftsmanship. Alfred Tennyson is known to have remarked shortly before his death: “A good hymn is the most difficult thing in the world to write. In a good hymn you have to be commonplace and poetical. The moment you cease to be commonplace and put in any expression at all out of the common, it ceases to be a hymn.”[1]

Despite what has been said, the church accords a place of honor to Christian hymnody. Churchmen and church historians have maintained repeatedly that Christian hymns, more than religious literature and ecclesiastical documents, mirror faithfully the life and character of the church and her people and reflect either their integrity or their infirmity. Though written by individuals, the most significant hymns of Christendom reflect the corporate mind of the church rather than personal opinions of their authors. They indicate to what extent the Holy Spirit has succeeded in persuading their authors and composers to express what He wanted them to say. Martin Luther’s Ein’ feste Burg illustrates vividly what has been said: Both text and tune have the earmarks of a Martin Luther, but both have to an even greater extent the birthmarks of the Holy Spirit and His holy, catholic church. Though of Lutheran origin, this great hymn, like most truly great hymns of the church, is not specifically denominational; it may well be sung by Roman Catholics, but its second stanza should not be sung by those who deny the deity of Jesus Christ, who, in Luther’s words, is the Lord Sabaoth, the Valiant One, the Man of God’s own choosing.

In Christian hymnody the Holy Spirit accommodates Himself to the needs and standards of people. He permits men to be eclectic, mediocre, or even vulgar that they may accomplish His purpose, lead men to Christ, and through Christ to eternal salvation. Christian hymnody must function under the jurisdiction and surveillance of the Holy Ghost and His Holy Scriptures; like Christian art and music, Christian hymnody must serve the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and it is from this Gospel that it derives its most noteworthy power and beauty.

Christian hymnody rallies to the support of Christian truth. When we study its history, we soon discover that Christian hymnody concerns itself largely with the work of the Holy Trinity and enables us to sing exultant doxologies to the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Christian hymnody is cognizant of the fact that Jesus Christ is coequal with the Father and the Holy Ghost; Christian hymnody asserts boldly that Christ is of one substance with the Father and incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary, and that this same Jesus Christ will come again with glory to judge both the quick and the dead and that His kingdom shall have no end.

On the other hand, history discloses also that the archenemies of the church have repeatedly clothed themselves in sheep’s clothing in order to disseminate falsehood through the use of unbiblical and deceptive hymnody. The foes of Jesus Christ are fully aware of the power and potentialities of corporate hymnody in particular. They realize far better than we how easily man is swayed by what is corporate and how man has an innate desire to go and to sing with the crowd. These foes know that there is power in popularity and that popular song can be an effective implement for weaning people away from the eternal truths of God’s infallible and redeeming Word.

I

Hymnody in the Early Church

The Rev. W. H. Frere began his famous Introduction to the Historical Edition of Hymns Ancient and Modern[2] with the two following short but significant sentences: “The Christian Church may be said to have started on its way singing. The earliest witnesses from within and from without alike bear witness to this.”

The early church took its cue not only from the singing of psalms by the church of Old Testament times, but also from the life of Jesus Christ. Matt. 26:30 we read: “And when they had sung a hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives.” Jesus fought many a battle during His life; all His battles, including His 40-day stay in the wilderness, were preparatory for the decisive battle which now confronted Him. He entered into this battle with a hymn, likely with the singing of the invigorating Hallel-psalms of the Old Testament Psalter. In this battle He fought with Satan, of whom He had once said: “He was a murderer from the beginning, and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks according to his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies.”[3] Christ Himself, therefore, used a hymn in order to ready Himself for His final battle against Satan, the father of lies, perversion, and falsehood.

In two well-known passages, Col. 3:16 and Eph. 5:19, St. Paul exhorts that we let the Word of Christ dwell in us richly as we teach and admonish one another in all wisdom and as we sing psalms and hymns and spiritual songs with thankfulness in our hearts to God. This Word of Christ whereof St. Paul speaks is the Word of truth, and we are to be imbued with this truth as we sing our hymns to God. To gainsay and triumph over falsehood and error, God’s truth should not only be spoken and preached; it should also be sung to achieve this purpose. This is usually ignored by those who frown upon the use of doctrinal and didactic hymnody; their attitude may evince, therefore, not only indifference to sound doctrine, but also a rather narrow regard for the functions and objectives of the hymnody of the church. They thus join the ranks of those who restrict the use of Christian hymnody and who perhaps accept Augustine’s definition of a hymn: hymnus cantus est cum laude Dei –“a hymn is a song in which we have the praise of God.” Many hymnologists of our day reject this definition because it is too narrow; we reject it because it does not take the words of St. Paul (Col. 3:16) into consideration.

The greatest truth of the Christian religion concerns itself with Him who referred to Satan as “a liar and the father of lies” and who alone could say of Himself: “I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life; no one comes to the Father but by Me.”[4] The church and her people make Him who was and is in truth the only-begotten Son of God both the theme and the recipient of their glorious hymnody. This was done already in the days of the first century of the Christian era. Valid proof may be found in the famous letter which Pliny, the governor of Bithynia, sent to Emperor Trajan; in this letter Pliny reported that the Christians sang carmen Christo quasi deo dicere invicem secum, that is, they sang an antiphonal song unto Christ as unto God. Some scholars believe that this song was a morning hymn which later became the Gloria in Excelsis and its majestic Laudamus Te, the great Christ-centered canticle of our liturgy.

Already in those days Christian people were compelled to realize that the Christian church is of necessity a church militant. Hymns were employed not merely to make Christian worship more enjoyable, but also to offset the onslaughts of vicious heretics who sought to dethrone the Christ. Many Christians belonged to the lower strata of society, and illiteracy was not uncommon among them. It was known that texts containing Scriptural truth could be memorized and impressed upon the minds of the people more quickly when sung; through singing hymns people learned to love both the texts of these hymns and the great truths which they expressed. Heretical sects soon became aware of the power of hymnody and began to use hymns to deny the Christ and to liquidate the church. The Gnostics Marcion and Valentinus prepared hymn texts which were to be sung to melodies which were popular among Christian people. In the second half of the second century, Bardesanes and his son Harmonius prepared a psalter of 150 hymns which was Gnostic in character and thus added to the confusion which had already prevailed among many Christian people. Often Christian texts were retained, but with alterations made here and there to convert Christian theology into Gnostic theology and to beguile simple and credulous people. In the following century Ephraem of Syria reversed the process in order to win people over to Christianity. All these efforts related themselves to the person and work of Jesus Christ: while the Christian church stressed the deity and redemptive work of Jesus Christ in her hymns, Gnosticism used hymns to reject the Christ and to seduce men into misbelief and doctrinal fallacy. Through its hymnody Gnosticism sought to destroy the doctrine of the Trinity, while Christianity employed hymns to confess and uphold this important doctrine.

The Arians continued where the Gnostics left off. To put across his anti-Trinitarian views, Arius used popular tunes with his heretical texts. The Gnostic psalter of Bardesanes and Harmonius encouraged others to write new psalms which were called psalmi idiotici; in view of the fact that very many psalmi idiotici were heretical, the Council of Laodicea, which met between A. D. 343 and 381, forbade their use. St. Ambrose of Milan and the so-called Ambrosian School prepared hymns which stressed the doctrine of the Holy Trinity. While in earlier years much hymn singing in services of worship was done by choirs, St. Ambrose stressed congregational singing that the people themselves might confess their Trinitarian and Christ-centered faith through the medium of song. It is well known that A. D. 398, when St. Chrysostom became Bishop of Constantinople, the Arians were required to worship outside the city walls. However, they assembled in public places on Saturday evenings, on Sundays and festival days, and there sang Arian hymns. They attracted large crowds of people and seduced many. To counteract this, St. Chrysostom organized nocturnal processions for the singing of hymns; crucifers headed these processions, and lighted torches were used to impress the people. Riot and bloodshed often resulted, and the final upshot was that all corporate hymn singing by Arians was forbidden by law.

We are therefore not at all surprised to note that already in those early years of the Christian era the church formulated not only her Christocentric Gloria in Excelsis Deo and its thoroughly evangelical Laudamus Te, but also the Trinitarian Trisagion and Tersanctus. Trinitarian doxologies began to appear, and the Gloria Patri et Filio et Spiritui Sancto was likely a creation of these early years of the New Dispensation given to the church by God through Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who had been begotten of His Father before all worlds, who Himself was God of God, Light of Light, Very God of Very God. The Christ-centered Kyrie eleison enjoyed widespread popularity among Christian people, and this entire development related itself intimately and eucharistically to the blessed Sacrament of the Altar, which enabled them not only to profess their Christian faith in the everlasting Son of the Father, but also to partake of the body and blood of Him who, to redeem mankind, had become incarnate. Early Christian hymnody was part and parcel of all these developments within the church. It expressed the confessional character of the church and was far more than an ornament in the worship life of the body of Christ.

II

Hymnody in the Era of the Reformation

Though our consideration of developments during the first four centuries of the Christian era has been cursory, what has been said indicates that in these important years, in which the New Testament church established herself, the Christian hymn played a most important part in the life and growth of the church. Christian hymnody was enlisted in the service of the Gospel, it helped to vanquish the foes of Christendom, and through its battles for a type of hymnody which stressed both Trinitarian content and Christological purity it rallied to the support of Christian theolo­gians by providing for the church a solid and lasting foundation, which has endured to the present and which will continue to endure until heaven and earth pass away. This compels us both to smile and to frown when proud spirits belittle the hymns of the church and speak of them as being trivial and unessential intrusions. We again think of the author of Eph. 5:19 and Col. 3:16, when he wrote to the Corinthians: “God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise, God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong, God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are, so that no human being might boast in the presence of God.”[5]

Martin Luther was aware of the God-given potentialities of Christian hymnody. While the same may be said of Huldreich Zwingli, John Calvin, John Knox, and other reformers of the 16th century, Luther cautiously avoided the unfortunate mistakes made by these men, whose integrity and sincerity we in no wise question. Unlike these men, Luther related Christian hymnody to the liturgical worship practices of the church; just as he refused to reject liturgical worship and brand it as something intrinsically papistic, so did he likewise refuse to discard noteworthy medieval hymns; he did not brand the Leisen and their Kyrie Eleisons as sinnlose und papistische Fremdkörper.[6] Unlike other reformers of his day, the Nightingale of Wittenberg did not put Christian hymnody into a straitjacket which would stifle originality and prevent free composition; he refused to suppress and dispel all possibilities of relating the hymnody of the church to changes of time and circumstance. In his Geschichte des deutschen evangelischen Kirchenliedes, Wilhelm Nelle said: “In Luther ist der Kirchengesang seiner Zeit gleichsam verkörpert” (“In Luther church hymnody of his day is, so to speak, personified”).[7]

Luther was indeed a heroic soldier of the cross. He was courageous and unafraid because he was convinced of the efficacy of the holy Bible and its blessed Gospel. He put his trust not in men but in God, and sang his faith wholeheartedly. This same faith enabled him to tell the church of his day boldly that her theology and her teachings were saturated with error and that her hymns accorded greater honor to the Virgin Mary than to her Son. However, Luther did not only find fault and criticize; he at the same time took steps to remedy matters. In a letter which he sent to Ludwig Senfl on Oct. 4, 1530, he said: “. . . the prophets cultivated no art so much as music in that they attached their theology not to geometry, not to arithmetic, nor to astronomy, but to music, speaking the truth through psalms and hymns.”[8]

In 1524 Luther wrote to Georg Spalatin: “Following the example of the prophets and fathers of the church, we intend to collect German psalms for the people so that through the medium of song the Word of God may remain among the people.”[9]

In his publication Die Christologie in Luthers Liedern, Klaus Burba begins his foreword with the words: “Es gibt kaum eine Darstellung der Christologie Luthers, in der nicht vereinzelt auch ein Liedvers zitiert wird” (“There exists hardly a discussion of Christology written by Luther in which a hymn stanza is not quoted sporadically”).[10]

The Christological character of Luther’s hymns is so widely known that it seems almost superfluous to call attention to this trait. However, today we need to stress that Luther found it practically impossible to divorce a healthy and live Christology from evangelical hymnody and song. We quote Luther once more to illustrate. In the famous foreword he wrote only a year before his death for Valentin Babst’s Gesangbuch, Luther said: “If any would not sing and talk of what Christ has wrought for us, he shows thereby that he does not really believe and that he belongs not into the New Testament, which is an era of joy, but into the Old, which produces not the spirit of joy but of unhappiness and discontent.”[11]

The entire Lutheran Reformation of the 16th century related itself to the Christology of Christian worship. There lies the heart of this great movement, and that is why Christians must take the Reformation seriously. The Reformation was the climax of the Renaissance; its hymns are frequently referred to as the new song of the New Testament era. To Luther, it was self-evident that both the services of worship and the hymns of the church must be Christocentric, soteriological, kerygmatic, and eschatological. The more worship and hymnody ignore their task of proclaiming salvation through Christ, the more do they depart from the saving truth; such negligence easily reduces the praise of God to mere platitudes. Much medieval hymnody, notably that of the late Middle Ages, was fallacious and even noxious because it focused attention not on Christ crucified and risen again, but on the blessed Virgin Mary, whose glorious Magnificat expresses that she was aware of her low estate and unworthiness; according to Mary’s own words, she rejoiced not in her merit, but in God, her Savior. We all know that Martin Luther himself edited otherwise precious hymns of medieval times, erased from them what was untrue, and in them focused attention on Christ, the one and only Savior of all mankind. Instead of rejecting their tunes, as did the Reformed theologians, Luther retained them; in addition, he and his followers added fitting tunes from the realm of secular song, and it is said that Luther asked nonchalantly: “Why should the devil have all good tunes?” Despite much trial and vexation, his writings reveal on almost every page that he retained a sense of balance, good humor, and cheerful sobriety; this cannot be said of other reformers of his day.

It is well known that Luther’s first original hymn was like Nun freut euch, liebe Christen g’mein[12] and that this hymn was also the first hymn of the famous Achtliederbuch of 1524, the first hymnal of the Lutheran Church.[13] Nun freut euch is a hymn version of the life and work of Christ. For reasons already given this hymn is so significant that we find it difficult to understand why the editors of a Lutheran hymnal published recently omitted both text and tune of this historically famous Christ-centered and joyous hymn. Klaus Burba says: “Ohne Frage ist das Lied Nun freut euch, liebe Christen g’mein seit seinem ersten Erscheinen im Achtliederbuch (Januar 1524) zu dem beherrschenden Lied des reformatorischen Gottesdienstes geworden” (“Ever since the time of its first appearance in the Achtliederbuch of January 1524 the hymn “Dear Christians, One and All, Rejoice” unquestionably became the dominant hymn of the services of worship of the Reformation Era”).[14]

Shortly after making this statement, Burba repeats his claim and says that Nun freut euch “ist zweifellos das Hauptlied der Reformation und eigentliches Christus-Lied” (“Dear Christians, One and All, Rejoice” is undoubtedly the chief hymn of the [Lutheran] Reformation; it is in truth its Christ-hymn”).[15]

In the midst of his discussion regarding this pivotal hymn of the Lutheran Reformation, Burba asks: What may have prompted Luther, in his letter of 1523 to Spalatin, to refer not to Nun freut euch but to Aus tiefer Not schrei’ ich zu dir[16] as a typical example of the type of hymnody Luther had in mind for Christian congregations and their people? Nun freut euch was already known to the people; why now refer to a new and unknown hymn, to a hymn which is penitential besides? Burba’s reply is both deductive and logical. He points to the fact that in 1523 Luther was compelled to see the dangers of religious enthusiasm and iconoclasm more clearly than ever before. He distrusted Thomas Münzer and did not approve of the doctrinal content of the hymns written by this zealot, whose liturgical activities he regarded with utter disdain; while the weaknesses of Münzer’s liturgical productions consist largely in this, that he forced German texts into music in a most unfortunate manner, the weaknesses of his hymns were of a doctrinal character. In 1526 Luther published his Deutsche Messe to offset the zealotic influence of Münzer in liturgical matters; but the danger which was imminent in Münzer’s liturgical endeavors was not as grave as that which Luther found in the hymns of Thomas Münzer. Just as Roman Catholicism diverted attention away from Christ to His mother, so did Münzer employ in his hymns a Christology which diverted attention away from Christ’s work of atonement and away from the pro vobis, away from the “for you” of His blessed Gospel to the exemplary character of Christ’s life. While this exemplary character is important, it follows after and does not precede in importance the redemptive character of Christ’s work, just as, according to Christian theology, sanctification does not precede but follows justification.

Rather than refer Spalatin to his Nun freut euch, a hymn which abounds in evangelical joy, Luther referred him to his new creation, Aus tiefer Not, a hymn based on a penitential psalm.[17] Luther thus indicated that one must first empty oneself completely and, like Christ, make “himself of no reputation”;[18] one must become aware of one’s own incompetence and embrace Christ in faith before one can truly rejoice in the Christ. For this reason Aus tiefer Not must precede Nun freut euch. This is God’s own sequence. A Christian is not a person who, to gratify his own emotions, ignores God’s mode of procedure through the Holy Ghost and intoxicates himself in religious ecstasy; he is not a person who gives way to religious frenzy and to anticultural iconoclasm, as did the Anabaptists under the leadership of Thomas Münzer. To quote from the psalm on which Luther based his Aus tiefer Not, the Christian is one who “waits for the Lord more than watchmen for the morning”; he knows that “with the Lord there is steadfast love and . . . plenteous redemption.”

When we examine the text of Martin Luther’s Aus tiefer Not, we see clearly how Christological his thinking was; no hymn writer, including Isaac Watts, knew better how to newtestamentize the Psalms, to relate them directly to Christ’s work of redemption and imbue them with a profound evangelical spirit. The zealotic iconoclasts of the 16th century were unable to curb fully the evils which the church had inherited from medieval times because they resorted to force and applied the sword. This was no way in which to battle for truth against error, because radicalism and the sword appeal to the flesh and not to the spirit. Luther’s penitential Aus tiefer Not breathes an altogether different spirit; it makes no mention of fire and brimstone, but stresses rather love, grace, hope, trust, and mercy.

Some relate Luther’s hymns chiefly to his battles with Rome. However, a sane and healthy ecumenical spirit permeates his hymns. As already stated, his Ein’ feste Burg may be sung also by Roman Catholics. In his Ein neues Lied wir heben an,[19] from which has been derived the hymn Flung to the Heedless Winds,[20] Luther is utterly frank and calls a spade a spade, but he does not rant and rave. This hymn was written in 1523, while Luther was beset by foes from all sides. However, while in Ein neues Lied he is more acerb than otherwise in his hymns, we ought not to overlook that Ein neues Lied, which is likely Luther’s first hymn and hence is older than Nun freut euch, is actually a ballad and not a hymn; in a ballad more acrimonious language has its place. Taking into consideration that Ein neues Lied was written because two young Augustinian monks had been burned to death at the stake in Brussels because of their Lutheran faith, we are amazed that Luther did not actually become vitriolic in his condemnation of what had happened. Even in his Erhalt uns, Herr, bei deinem Wort, which he wrote as a Kinderlied as late as 1542,[21] Luther showed no excessive acerbity; his words “und steur’ des Papsts und Türken Mord” are factual and not sharp or bitter; they are certainly not as acrid as are sundry statements made in the imprecatory psalms of the Bible. Luther also explains the petition he makes in this hymn. Immediately after he begged that God “steur’ des Papsts und Türken Mord,” he explains: “die Jesum Christum, deinen Sohn, wollen stürzen von seinem Thron.” His reason is, therefore, a Christological one, surely a most valid reason; when once we find in the Psalms the strong Messianic character which they actually have, we begin to realize that Luther followed in the footsteps of the authors of the Messianic psalms, but that he expressed himself far less forcefully than did the authors of these psalms. Men who try to destroy God’s plans and aims to redeem the world through the work of His Son, Jesus Christ, commit the most heinous type of sin which can be committed; this was realized by both the psalmists and Martin Luther.

That 16th-century Lutheranism, in its battles for a healthy Christology, did not lose her healthy ecumenical sense of balance may, perhaps, best be seen in stanzas 2–4 which Martin Luther added to that wonderful German hymn of the late Middle Ages: Nun bitten wir den Heiligen Geist.[22] Though he wrote this in the year 1524 and hence at a time when he was harassed not only by Rome but also by two radicals, Thomas Münzer and Andreas Bodenstein von Carlstadt, Luther retained his ecumenical balance and in his stanzas prayed not only “that we Jesus Christ may know aright” but also “that with hearts united we love each other, of one mind, in peace with ev’ry brother.” His reason was both Christological and ecumenical, and we are happy to note that his stanzas were even irenic. In the very midst of his battles and while writing his mighty hymns for use in battles against the foes of Christ and His church, Luther retained his composure; he did not resort to vain shadowboxing, and when he struck, he made his blows count by striking there where it mattered, there where the person and work of Jesus Christ were being obscured and jeopardized.

However, when we hear that Martin Luther wrote and prepared the majority of his hymns in the years 1523 and 1524 and that in those very years he experienced serious difficulties with the Schwarmgeister, that is, with the religious fanatics and zealots of his day, we are compelled to bear these circumstances in mind while we examine the content of his hymns. Thomas Münzer wrote his hymns to refine the people by pointing to Christ as their example; on the other hand, when Luther in his hymns referred to Christ, he stressed above all that Christ was made man not merely to serve as an example, but rather to save those who cried out with the psalmist: “Out of the depths I cry to Thee, O Lord! Lord, hear my voice.”[23] In order to justify and incite to fanaticism and anticlericalism, Münzer misinterpreted the precious doctrine of the royal priesthood and made of it a doctrine for angry mobs and gangs. However, even in the famous Invocavit sermons which he directed against the destructive iconoclasts after his departure from the Wartburg, Luther remained calm and refused to become impassioned against these hateful bigots. He followed the example set by God, who had said through Isaiah: “Come now, let us reason together.”[24] And when Luther discussed the doctrine of the royal priesthood, he refused to incite to schism and a vicious mob spirit; he pointed instead to the nobility of the Christian estate into which we enter through Holy Baptism.

This spirit of moderation coursed its way into Lutheran hymnody of the Reformation era and gave to the church the finest chorale texts and melodies we have. Hence we find in this hymnody a resolute and well-tempered submission to the Word, and not to the spirit of emotional distemper and hostility. Note the simplicity of the final stanza of Ein’ feste Burg; let us hear both its original German version and its English translation:

Das Wort sie sollen lassen stan,
und kein danck dazu haben,
Er ist bey uns wol auff dem plan,
mit seinem Geist und gaben,
Nemen sie den leib
gut, her, kind und weib,
Las faren dahin,
sie habens kein gewin,
Das Reich mus uns doch bleiben.[25]

The Word they still shall let remain
Nor any thanks have for it;
He’s by our side upon the plain
With His good gifts and Spirit.
And take they our life,
Goods, fame, child, and wife,
Let these all be gone,
They yet have nothing won;
The Kingdom ours remaineth.[26]

What could be more sober and simple? One is reminded of Luther’s wonderful interpretation of the Second Psalm,[27] a Messianic psalm, and we call special attention to Luther’s interpretation of the first four verses, where the psalmist says: “Why do the heathen rage and the people imagine a vain thing? The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together against the Lord and against His Anointed, saying, Let us break their bands asunder and cast away their cords from us. He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh; the Lord shall have them in derision.”

While Luther did not say that the Romanists and the zealots are pagans, yet did these troublemakers, through their errors and their madness, join forces with paganism and the Antichrist and render service to the destructive forces of hell. This is what caused Luther deep concern regarding their activities. However, no one knew better than he that, in battling against such forces, one must remain sober and vigilant and not intoxicate himself either with noxious fanaticism, blind enthusiasm, or with both. Luther himself could become very enthusiastic, especially about music, but in his hymns he remained temperate even when, as in Ein’ feste Burg, he became defiant and daring. In Ein’ feste Burg he could easily have ranted not only against the pope and his hierarchy, but also against Carlstadt and Münzer whose activities were well known to him at the time he wrote his famous battle hymn of the Christian church; however, as matters stand, even papists and enthusiasts can today sing and enjoy this great and powerful hymn. Bach’s magnificent Cantata No. 80, based on this hymn and named after it, was the first cantata of J. S. Bach to be performed in Rome!

Some have ridiculed Paul Speratus’ chorale text Es ist das Heil uns kommen her— “Salvation unto Us Has Come,”[28] and have referred to it as “rhymed dogmatics.” While we admit that this hymn, when examined in its original entirety, is repetitious and perhaps not too well organized, yet is this hymn one of the truly great hymns of the Lutheran Reformation. It reflects both the temper and the spirit of the Reformation and deserves being placed aside of Martin Luther’s Nun freut euch, liebe Christen g’mein. In fact, Speratus wrote it shortly after he had seen Luther’s Nun freut euch. The repetitious character of Es is das Heil indicates how persistently the Lutheran reformers adhered to the core of the Christian religion, how conscientiously they tried to impress on the common people, most of whom were not well educated, that man is saved not by the deeds of the Law, but by faith in Jesus Christ, the Redeemer from sin, death, and damnation. Its ninth stanza in TLH says:

Faith clings to Jesus’ cross alone
And rests in Him unceasing;
And by its fruits true faith is known,
With love and hope increasing.
Yet faith alone doth justify, Works serve thy neighbor and supply
The proof that faith is living.[29]

These words are then fittingly followed by a doxology and its stress that all glory belongs not to man but to the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. This hymn has been called “the true confessional hymn of the Reformation” and the “poetical counterpart of Luther’s preface to the Epistle to the Romans.”[30] Miles Coverdale translated it for his Goostly Psalmes and Spiritualle Songes. In 1868 the prominent 19th-century theologian August Vilmar of the University at Marburg, a former skeptic and rationalist who later in life embraced a firm faith in Christ, remarked regarding Est ist das Heil: “...es doziert in dem Liede kein Schulmeister, sondern es singt eine Seele, die erfüllt ist vom Frieden des Evangeliums, von der groszen, eben wiedergefundenen Grundwahrheit des Christentums.” (“. . . we hear in this hymn not the dry teaching of a pedant, but rather the song of a soul filled with the peace of the Gospel and with the great, recaptured truth of Christianity”).[31]

In the 17th century the Pietists of Germany discarded this hymn for reasons which we can well understand; like the zealots and enthusiasts of the 16th and 17th centuries, they stressed the Christian life rather than the Christian faith, the example of Christ rather than the atoning work of Christ. They thus watered down the Christology of the Lutheran Reformation, and we are not surprised that many among them discarded Es ist das Heil entirely. Its theology accorded all glory to God alone and was therefore too theocentric for them. The age of Rationalism discarded this hymn even more drastically; this, too, we can well understand, for to the Rationalists the content of Es ist das Heil, like that of the holy Gospel to whose support it rallies, was both foolishness and a stumbling block. While we regret that such treatment was accorded this hymn in those years, we regret even more that this hymn too, like Nun freut euch, liebe Christen g’mein, was not included in a widely used Lutheran hymnal published in America recently.

III

Hymnody in the Era of the Counterreformation

Largely because of the theological instability of Philipp Melanchthon, Lutheranism became fearful during the era of the Counterreformation. It was attacked and beleaguered by Roman Catholicism on the one side and by crypto-Calvinism on the other. Though many among the Lutherans fought heroically and though God enabled them to produce the Formula of Concord, there was much trepidation and lack of the sturdy faith of a Martin Luther among Lutheran people and their theologians in the second half of the 16th century. Lutherans learned to resort to prayer more than ever before, and the result was that this became a great era of prayer hymns for the church. These prayer hymns were strongly eschatological; it was felt that the end of all things was at hand. The era produced the chorale version of the Dies Irae, namely, Bartholomaeus Ringwaldt’s Es ist gewisslich an der Zeit—“The Day is Surely Drawing Near”;[32] it produced also Ach bleib bei uns, Herr Jesu Christ—“Lord Jesus Christ, with Us Abide”[33] by Nikolaus Selnecker, an otherwise fearless theological hero of this generation, who did not hesitate to part company with Philipp Melanchthon, his former personal benefactor. Selnecker’s Ach bleib bei uns offers us a true picture of the spirit which prevailed among Lutherans who lived during the time between the death of Martin Luther and the Thirty Years’ War. Their greatest concern was the church’s retention of the Word of God in its truth and purity, because they knew that the Day of Judgment would be preceded by a falling away from the truth of the Word and by the revealing of the Antichrist, the son of perdition.[34] All this we find reflected in Selnecker’s hymn, where he pleads

1. That pure we keep, till life is spent,
Thy holy Word and sacrament.

3. Lord Jesus, help, Thy church uphold,
For we are sluggish, thoughtless, cold,
Oh, prosper well Thy Word of grace
And spread its truth in ev’ry place.

6. The haughty spirits, Lord, restrain
Who o’er Thy church with might would reign
And always set forth something new,
Devised to change Thy doctrine true.

Along more heroic lines, lines which breathe the spirit of the Reformation and its vigorous and joyful hymnody, we think of Philipp Nicolai’s famous hymn Wachet auf, ruft uns die Stimme,[35] a veritable monument of ecclesiastical hymnody. Though eschatological, this hymn says of the church:

Zion hears the watchmen singing,
And all her heart with joy is springing,
She wakes, she rises from her gloom.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Therefore will we Eternally
Sing hymns of praise and joy to Thee.

The Eras of Pietism and Rationalism

Like the epochs in which they were produced, the hymns of the eras of Pietism and Rationalism which followed the era of the Counterreformation illustrate that the church as well as her hymnody had lost much of the strength and virility which both had possessed in rich measure in the critical years of the Reformation. The theology of both of these eras became increasingly devoid of its theocentric character and their liturgical worship, their church music and their hymnody declined accordingly.

It is well known that the pietistic movement of the 17th century became strongly anticlerical and frowned upon the institutional character of the church. Following the example of Philipp Jakob Spener, who was not as radical as August Hermann Francke and other of his followers, they encouraged the development of collegia pietatis and of ecclesiolae in ecclesiis to foster the cause of devotions which were conducted in private homes (Privat- und Hausandachten). While other developments, including the sudden emergence of the pipe organ in Lutheran churches and the composition of organ music based on chorales used as cantus firmi, encouraged the use and writing of isorhythmic chorale melodies, the Pietists themselves insisted on isorhythm in order to simplify music for smaller worship groups which usually had no pipe organ at their disposal. For this same reason they also isorhythmicized chorale melodies written in previous eras and thus indicated that their attitude toward music and the arts had much in common with that of the Calvinists. Like the zealots of Luther’s day, they prepared subjective hymn texts which stressed personal sanctification. To a greater extent, however, these Pietists stressed human feelings and emotions; the result was that their hymnody, especially when addressed to Christ, became saccharine and sentimental, and the personal pronoun of the first person singular played a most important part in pietistic hymnody. Note the highly subjective and amorous character of the following stanza of a hymn written in the year 1661:

Nichts ist Lieblichers als du,
liebste Liebe,
Nichts ist Freudlichers als du,
milde Liebe,
Auch nichts Süszers ist als du,
süsze Liebe,
Jesu, süsze Liebe.[36]

Naught is lovelier than Thou,
Fairest Lover!
Naught is friendlier than Thou,
Gentle Lover! And naught sweeter is than Thou,
Sweetest Lover,
Jesus, sweetest Lover![37]

Special attention is called to the fact that the translation, prepared by an American, expresses even more affectation than the original German text. One no longer finds this hymn in the better Lutheran hymnals published today. In America this happened partly because many resent its affinity to highly amorous love lyrics which enjoy popularity outside the church and which are sung with a great deal of ardor and pathos over the radio and television as well as in locales which furnish worldly and even carnal amusement and hence counteract what the church seeks to achieve.

We need hardly say much regarding the hymns of the era of Rationalism. While sentimental hymnody is enslaved by human feelings, rationalistic hymnody is victimized by human reason. Rationalistic hymnody is usually deistic and unitarian and not Trinitarian; when it refers to Christ, it points to Him as an example but not as the Savior from sin, death, and damnation. Rationalistic hymnody thus actually dethrones the Christ. Much of it is an expression of natural religion and not of the revealed religion of the Bible. From a purely poetic point of view much of it is of high literary quality; but some is also crude and absurd, as may be seen from the following example:

Ach, wie würd’ es elend lassen,
wenn man sie* mit Händen fassen
und nach aufwärts ziehen müsste:
das bedenke, lieber Christe.[38]
* die Augenlider

Indeed, how miserable it would be
If we were obliged to take hold of them* with hands
And pull them upwards;
Give thought to this, dear Christian.[39]
* the eyelids

An examination of any hymnal published to propagate religious rationalism will reveal that hymns of this type are frequently trite; from a Christian point of view they are sterile and lack the dynamic power of truly Christian hymnody. Since the Word is to be disseminated not only through sermons but also through song, permit me to change one word in quoting 1 Cor. 1:18 before arriving at the conclusion of this discussion: “For the singing of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.”

Conclusion

Our discussion of the part played by the hymn in the life of the church has shown that Christian hymnody has sought to sup­port the Word of truth as revealed in the holy Bible, it has helped to acquaint the people better with her Christology, and it has expressed the faith and prayers of those who fought against the insidious attacks of the foes of the church. Though the liturgies of the church underwent notable changes during the 16th century in particular, they succeeded nevertheless in retaining their objectivity and dignity. Christian hymnody, on the other hand, gave fuller vent to the reactions of the laity of the church. While the liturgies included participation on the part of the people, they nevertheless included less congregational participation than they do today. This enabled the liturgies to remain more formal, while the hymns became less formal and also less restricted. Whereas the liturgies evince a spirit of refinement, the hymns, coming from the people, usually evince less refinement; they are less restricted, both rugged and homely, often childlike and naive. But there lay the strength of these hymns. They were neither elegant nor arti­ficial; they rang true and expressed the voice of simple and honest people during the battles of the church for Biblical truth. That they were written by people from many walks of life helps to prove that the Lutheran Reformation was a mighty religious movement in which not only the professional theologians and clergy but also the people participated and even played a leading role. While it was difficult for the people to be liturgically creative, Christian hymnody stimulated greater creativity among the people and provided future generations with cantus firmi which to this day serve as the foundation of a large part of the vast musical heritage of the church.

We thus see that the battles of the church for Scriptural truth are in many respects more constructive than destructive. This is true especially when they employ Christian hymnody, Christian truth, and Christian unity in the faith, but also when they help to unify Christians as a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, and as a unique and distinguished people.

Many battles have been fought by Christian churches of America. All claimed they were fighting in the interest of Biblical truth. However, have these battles not been fought largely among the theologians of the churches? Have we heard the voices of the people resound in these battles? If so, have the people participated as intelligent Christian people who were imbued with the spirit of Christ, or have they participated in a manner which reflected little Christian insight and even less Christian spirit? We shall not attempt to answer these questions at this time, but we shall say that the very means which God has put at our disposal to rally to the support of His Word and to unify His people in spirit and in truth have not been applied as they should be and deserve to be in order to integrate God’s children. Battles and controversies of the church are only half fought and half won as long as they do not reach the people and as long as the entire field of Christian culture is brushed aside as though it were nothing more than a luxury or an ornament, or even a mode of entertainment, which is not needed by the church for what she should seek to accomplish. Experience has shown repeatedly that hymn contests do not produce great hymns; however, the history of the church shows clearly that the contests (battles) of the church in the interest of the glorification of God and the propagation of Scriptural truth do produce noteworthy hymns when the people participate in the performance of this task and when Christian hymn writers of many walks of life are given the opportunity to participate not only in the battles of the church, but also in her life-giving work of serving Christ and His blessed Gospel.

Cited References and Notes

1. Quoted by C. S. Phillips, Hymnody Past and Present (London, 1937), p. I.
2. London, 1909, p. IX.
3. John 8:44 RSV.
4. John 14:6 RSV.
5. 1 Cor. 1:27–29 RSV.
6. Cf. Theophil Bruppacher, Gelobet sei der Herr (Basel, 1953), p. 176.
7. Leipzig & Hamburg, 1928, p. 37.
8. The Musical Quarterly (MQ) (New York, January 1946), p. 84. In Luther on Music, by Walter E. Buszin, pp. 80–97.
9. Ibid., p. 87.
10. Gütersloh, 1956.
11. MQ, p. 83.
12. The Lutheran Hymnal (TLH) (St. Louis, 1941), No. 387.
13. Cf. Facsimile edition published by the Bärenreiter-Verlag of Kassel; included in Jahrbuch für Liturgik und Hymnologie, edited by Konrad Ameln, Christhard Mahrenholz, and Karl Ferdinand Müller (Johannes Stauda-Verlag, Kassel, 1957).
14. Op. cit., p. 20.
15. Op. cit., p. 21.
16. TLH, No. 329.
17. Ps. 130: De profundis.
18. Phil. 2:7.
19. Cf. “Ein’ feste Burg ist unser Gott.” Die Lieder Luthers in ihrer Bedeutung für das evangelische Kirchenlied. Von Friedrich Spitta (Göttingen, 1905), pp. 274–277.
20. TLH, No. 259.
21. This is the date suggested by Hans Joachim Moser in his Die Melodien der Lutherlieder (Leipzig and Hamburg, 1935), p. 85. This hymn was published for the first time in the Klugsche Gesangbuch of 1543, the date usually given for this hymn. TLH, No. 261, indicates that it was written in 1541.
22. TLH, No. 231.
23. Ps. 130:1.
24. Is. 1:18.
25. Cf. Dr. Martin Luthers deutsche Geistliche Lieder. Herausgegeben als Festschrift für die vierte Jubelfeier der Erfindung der Buchdruckerkunst von C. von Winterfeld (Leipzig, 1840), p. 65.
26. TLH, No. 262.
27. Luther’s Works, Volume 12, edited by Jaroslav Pelikan. Concordia Publishing House (St. Louis, 1955), pp. 4 ff.
28. TLH, No. 377.
29. TLH, No. 377.
30. Cf. The Handbook to the Lutheran Hymnal. Compiled by W. G. Polack (St. Louis, 1942), p. 271.
31. Quoted in Die Lieder unserer Kirche, by Johannes Kulp, Arno Büchner, Siegfried Fornaçon (Göttingen, 1958), p. 379.
32. TLH, No. 611.
33. TLH,No. 292.
34. 2 Thess. 2:3.
35. TLH, No. 609.
36. By Johann Flittner, 1618–1678. Cf. Kirchengesangbuch für Evangelisch-Lutherische Gemeinden ungeänderter Augsburgischer Konfession (St. Louis, Mo., 1889), No. 252.
37. Translated by J. A. Rimbach, 1903. Cf. Evangelical Lutheran Hymn-Book (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1912), No. 89.
38. Quoted by E. Sperber in his Evangelischer Schul-Liederschatz (Gütersloh, 1901), p.290.
39. Translated literally by Walter E. Buszin.

Concordia Seminary
St. Louis, Mo.

From The Musical Heritage of the Church, Volume VI (St. Louis, Mo.: Concordia Publishing House, 1963). Copyright Concordia Publishing House. Printed by permission. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior permission of Concordia Publishing House.