A Brief Explanation of Lutheran Hymnody: For the Lutheran who asks regarding the Beautiful Hymns of His church

Three weeks ago, we published a lengthy post entitled, An Explanation of Lutheran Worship: For the Lutheran who asks the Meaning of the Beautiful Liturgy of His church. The body of that post contained a full Explanation of the Common Service — the order of Divine Service beginning on “page 15” of The Lutheran Hymnal which was published by the Synodical Conference in 1941. An English-language harmony of sixteenth century Lutheran liturgies published in 1888 by the General Council of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, it still serves as a benchmark of liturgical excellence. Indeed, in our recent post, Lutheranism and the Fine Arts: Dr. P.E. Kretzmann and the Necessity of Continuing Catechesis, we quote Dr. Kretzmann referring to the Common Service as “unsurpassed in the entire history of the Christian Church.”

The Explanation we published two weeks ago was taken directly from catechetical materials developed by the General Council for the distinct purpose of educating Lutherans regarding the doctrinal integrity and catholicity of genuine Lutheran worship. Indeed, this Explanation of the Common Service, published in 1908, was dedicated to the “Young Lutheran who asks the meaning of the beautiful liturgy of the Lutheran Church.” In our introductory remarks preceding the explanation, we marveled at this. Lutherans these days don't educate their youth about Lutheran worship, and if they do, they don't do so in a way that extolls it's beauty as a work of Fine Art, nor do they do so in a way that reinforces its doctrinal integrity, nor do they do so in a way that embraces its catholicity. One of the bright shining exceptions to the lamentable reality that contemporary Lutherans no longer value their heritage of worship enough to bother passing it down to their youth, is the LCMS-affiliated organization, Higher Things. Outside of this organization, the best one can hope for is a one- or two-lesson explanation of Lutheran worship which neither extolls its beauty nor places value on its doctrinal integrity and catholicity, but uses the opportunity to deride our heritage by vaunting its status as “an adiophoron” and setting it on equal footing with just about any form of Sectarian Worship imaginable – as long as one wears the appropriate set of blinders as he goes about imagining. Yeah, sure, you can do it, but why would you want to? In answer to this one needs but a “reason,” and in the world of adiaphora that merely means “opinion.” Thus one “reason” is as good as another, and anything one can “justify” has open license attending it.

But we further asked the reader to notice the use of language this Explanation employed. It was not written for functionally illiterate Lutherans who find reading and understanding anything written above the sixth-grade reading level to be a hopeless struggle. On the contrary, being dedicated to the “Young Lutherans,” it was written to Lutheran Youth, and plainly assumed that they had command of their own language. If it was written above their level, then it served the noble purpose of lifting them out of their immature literacy and colorless task-oriented-use of language, through the rich vocabulary and precise grammar employed in the distinctive and enculturating language of the Church. Contemporary Lutherans, it seems, no longer value the uplifting qualities of higher literacy, either.

Regardless of what the so-called wise-men of contemporary times insist upon, I am not ready to succumb to such disrespect for others that my operative assumption is that they are all functionally illiterate. I don't think all, or most, or even a significant minority of educated Lutherans are just a bunch of dumb-dumbs who can't read. Some very-well may refuse to read anything more complex than a comic book, but that is a separate matter – a matter of sinful obstinacy, and perhaps even rebellion. It is not a matter of literacy. So today, we are going to continue our use of materials having high-literary quality to provide a brief explanation of Lutheran hymnody.

What is a Hymn? A Canticle? A Carol? An Anthem?
We begin with the source pictured at the top left: The Handbook to the Lutheran Hymnal, by W. G. Polack – who was the chairman of The Lutheran Hymnal committee. This work first appeared in 1942, essentially accompanying the publication of The Lutheran Hymnal, and went through several revisions thereafter. It is a book which catalogs all of the hymns used in The Lutheran Hymnal, identifying their authors and sources, providing a history of the circumstances under which the hymn was written (if notable), reproducing the hymn in its original language alongside the English version which appeared in the hymnal and identifying (sometimes justifying) alternate readings from the original composition. It is considered a classic in the field of hymnology.

“What was missing in my life was Absolution”: One Christian's Journey from Evangelicalism to Confessional Lutheranism

On Tuesday, we published a short blog post highlighting the research of Rev. Matthew Richard (CLBA), who is working on a doctoral degree at Concordia Seminary - St. Louis, entitled, 'Crucible Moments' and 'Becoming Lutheran'. Afterward, while perusing his blog, PM Notes: Evangelizing Moral Therapeutic Deists; Comforting Post-Evangelicals; Strengthening Monergists, I stumbled across one of his posts from last December: Confessions Of A Former Evangelical (Encore). It is a brief post, featuring only a broadcast from Chris Rosebrough's Fighting for the Faith, regarding which he comments:

A wonderful message from Chris Rosebrough on his journey from Evangelicalism to Lutheranism. A close friend and Baptist blogger posted this sermon on his blog saying that it was "Perhaps the Best Defense of the Gospel You'll Ever Hear (From a Lutheran)". Please listen, it is well worth your time.

I recall this episode from Fighting for the Faith, and agree: It is well worth your time. I've included it in this post, below. Give it a listen.

Incidentally, that post, linked to from Rev. Richard's blog to his Baptist friend's blog, is no longer there. Perhaps his Baptist friend was just cleaning up old posts, but nothing before January 2013 is available. However, maybe this following fact is pertinent. On February 28, 2013, his Baptist friend, a Baptist minister, announced that he has left the Southern Baptist Convention. He has many very interesting, and familiar, reasons for doing so. Please read his post: Why I’ve Left the Convention.


A Journey From Legalistic Pietistic Evangelicalism to the Cross
delivered at the First National BJS Conference, February 2009
by Chris Rosebrough

 

Quotes from Chris Rosebrough's “Plenary Speech” compiled for those of who won't listen to the podcast, who haven't been through the transition of “Evangelical” to “confessional Lutheran,” who don't know what a genuine Worldview Crisis really is (See our recent post, 'Crucible Moments' and 'Becoming Lutheran' for more information on “transition” and “Worldview Crisis”.) They've completely transformed the church service. It's no longer a pastor who is an undershepherd of the Good shepherd, feeding God's sheep with God's Word, making disciples, giving them Word and Sacrament, proclaiming and announcing the forgiveness of sins won by Jesus Christ on the Cross. Instead, it has been turned into a psychological freakshow. How about this from Saddleback Church: “When you're running on empty, learn the ancient secrets from God's Word for a less stressful, more relaxing, lighter and free-er lifestyle.” Now here is the fun part about it. All of these churches... when these guys launch -- four, five or six hundred people. They are marketing experts, they are running circles around us. And the people coming to their churches, are they hearing the Gospel? Not at all... All of these guys "claim" that they are doing these things to reach the lost for Jesus Christ, and to give them the Gospel, and that they are not compromising. HOGWASH! What are the results of all this? ...After 20 years, 40% of their people don't believe in salvation by Grace... 57% don't believe in the Authority of the Bible... 56% don't believe Jesus is the Only Way to Eternal Life. Former Evangelicals, they're like ex-smokers... So you can say that, at that time, I was "On fire for the Lord!" -- and you bet I was, because I was told if I wasn't, I was going to burn in Hell. There was no Grace. There was no forgiveness. Only an endless rat-wheel of good works with no assurance that I was even meeting the lowest standard necessary for me to be saved. That's the thing about the Law: How do you know when you've done it enough to please God? I did everything I could to stand out as a Christian among Christians, and at the time if you were to ask me if I was going to heaven when I died, my answer would have been. “I hope so... I hope so.” Beneath the Christian facade was a young man who was struggling with his sin, and who knew he wasn't winning that battle. And I knew that I was not good enough to be saved. “We believe that 'Entire Sanctification' is that act of God, subsequent to regeneration, by which believers are made 'free from original sin, or depravity,' and brought into a 'state of entire devotion to God', and 'the holy obedience of love made perfect'. It is wrought by the baptism with the Holy Spirit, and comprehends in one experience the cleansing of the heart from sin and the abiding indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit, empowering the believer for a life of service. 'Entire Sanctification' is provided by the Blood of Jesus, is wrought instantaneously by faith, preceded by entire consecration into this work and state of Grace, the Holy Spirit bears witness. This experience is also know by various terms representing its various phases, such as 'Christian perfection', 'perfect love', 'heart purity', the 'Baptism of the Holy Spirit', the 'Fullness of the Blessing', 'Christian Holiness', and 'Second Blessing of Holiness.'” Perfection... and that's really the Material Principle of Pietism... Modern day Evangelicals, the center of their preaching is 'the changed life', and, their Formal Principle is 'The Bible as Guidebook for Living.' That's what they preach for. Life change. I was literally fed a steady stream of tactics and practical methods for 'living a God-pleasing life'... But there was no peace for me, no assurance, no hope, my sin problem wouldn't go away, and I knew that I would face shame and rejection if I had to stand before Jesus and give an accounting of my life. Because that's all they were preaching: an Accounting. “Be ye perfect, as your Father in Heaven is perfect.” “If you love Me, you will keep My commandments.” Yeah, but I wasn't... I obviously didn't love God... I came to [my pastor] for Grace, and he gave me more Law. Looking back on it I now realize, the teaching and preaching of my church literally cut me off from all hope of salvation. I diligently searched God's Law for little shreds of hope and tiny crumbs of sunlight that could tell me that I would be okay. But there is no comfort in God's Law. There is no forgiveness offered in God's Law. A person can only live under despair for so long. And that is what this kind of teaching produced in me: utter despair. I was literally withering under the heat of God's Law. But what I didn't know, is that that is exactly what God's Law is supposed to do to us. What was missing in my life was Absolution. There's no way he can make it into heaven, he's not even trying! He comforted me with Christ's shed blood on the Cross, he told me over and over again that Jesus' Blood was shed for me, for my sins, all of them, FREE, even the one's I've committed today. I'd never heard a Christian talk this way before. And I'm telling you, there are millions of Evangelicals who've never heard a Christian talk this way before. They don't know the Gospel! He openly confessed his overwhelming need for a Saviour and his utter dependence on Christ's shed Blood on the Cross for his sins. “But now the righteousness of God has been made manifest apart from the Law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it, the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe, for their is no distinction: for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God and are Justified freely by His Grace as a gift through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.” I had stopped my incessant worrying about whether I was good enough, holy enough, or perfect enough to be saved. Instead, I was asking a far more important set of questions: “Was Jesus Christ good enough?” “Was Jesus Christ holy enough?” “Was He perfect enough to save me?” “Did Jesus' Blood, which He shed on the Cross, cover all of my sins? Or just some of them?” These texts show that it is all about Jesus Christ [not ME]. His obedience, His ministry, His perfection, His righteousness, His taking my sin and suffering my punishment for me, on the Cross!

 

'Crucible Moments' and 'Becoming Lutheran'

Becoming Lutheran
It is very likely that most readers of Intrepid Lutherans have not been following this research, if they even knew about it, but Rev. Matthew Richard (CLBA), who is working on a doctoral degree from Concordia Seminary - St. Louis, has finished the research stage of his dissertation. The title of his dissertation is Becoming Lutheran: Exploring the Journey of American Evangelicals Into Confessional Lutheran Thought, and the research consisted of three surveys whose participants were once active Evangelicals that have made the transition to confessional Lutheranism, or those who are in the process of making that transition. I was one of the survey participants (along with hundreds of others).

The first two surveys (quantitative and qualitative surveys, respectively) have been published:

Results of Survey #1 (quantitative)
Results of Survey #2 (qualitative)

It is unknown to me if he will be publishing the results of the third survey, which concerned advice for Lutheran pastors with respect to prospects or parishioners who are going through the transition.

Rev. Richard has been compiling the results of his research on his Research Journal blog. In addition, he was the subject of a very interesting interview on Worldview Everlasting TV after the results of the first survey were released last February.


Having personally been through the lengthy transition from “Evangelical” to “confessional Lutheran,” and having done so reflectively (that is, I wasn't just jumping from one Evangelical church to another, like so many Evangelicals tend to uncritically do), I find that his results describe very well the process that we endure, and that they also help explain why many of us who've made the transition as adults (again, reflectively and deliberately) cling so tenaciously to sound and genuine Lutheranism and warn so vigorously against anything that smacks of contemporary Evangelicalism. Indeed, both Rev. Richard and Rev. Fisk discuss this very thing in the interview, above. Unlike those Lutherans who have become enamoured with sectarianism and adjure their brothers to “just give it a chance,” we've already “given it a chance,” already know very well the ruin to which it leads, and, rejecting it, urge others not to even dabble in it. Just as there are no non-smokers like former smokers, there are no non-Evangelicals like former Evangelicals. I'm one of them. I highly recommend looking at his research.

Crucible Moments
In the first survey issued by Rev. Richard, “Fear” and “Anger” emerged as two themes repeatedly observed. These two emotions were explored in the second survey – certainly for the sake of gaining a deeper and more objective understanding of these two factors, but, it seems reasonable to think, perhaps also seeking a way of “easing the process.” With the results of the second survey now published, however, I think it is pretty clear that these “emotions” are necessary aspects of the process, and that if a person does not endure them then it seems difficult to say whether a genuine transition to confessional Lutheranism has been made (assuming they actually believed the Evangelical teaching they had previously imbibed over the years).

Worldview Change is Repentance from Falsehood

This result (which may be surprising to some) reminds me of a statistic reported by Josh McDowell in his book, Right from Wrong: 90% of one's values are developed by age 13, while the rest develop mostly between the ages of 13 and 18, and remain essentially fixed through the rest of his life – barring what McDowell called “crucible moments” during adulthood, or moments of ideological or worldview crisis. These “crucible moments” force a person into deep reflection, like no other kind of life experience can, and often result in either a change to, or a significant reinforcement of one's worldview. For any such change to occur in adults, whose values are essentially fixed, worldview crisis is necessary for the change to occur.

As the rest of Rev. Richard's research seems to show, the journey from contemporary pop-church Evangelicalism to genuine confessional Lutheranism is a very definite worldview change. I can personally attest to this fact. If “alleviating” or “easing the process” means hiding distinctive Lutheran teaching and practice in order to avoid “offending” prospects, or to soft-pedal the Second use of the Law in order to avoid “offending” the unregenerate, or to hide the Sacrament for fear of “offending” visitors, then the only effect “easing the process” might have is to attenuate the genuine change itself. That would be unfortunate. Perhaps it is best to simply be aware that individuals making a journey from “Evangelicalism” to “confessional Lutheranism” are struggling through internal conflict, and merely receive it as an explanation for what a given pastor observes as he brings disaffected Evangelicals through adult catechism? Perhaps it is best for a pastor to simply offer direct Scriptural support for every doctrinal claim he makes during the process, instead of trying to practice some form of “armchair psychology,” and leave the prospects to wrestle with the clear statements of Scripture on their own and arrive at their convictions through the Holy Spirit's working? I ask these questions rhetorically, of course, while agreeing with Rev. Richard in the interview, above, that, at the very least, confessional Lutheran pastors ought to patiently stick with disaffected Evangelicals who are in the midst of a worldview crisis.

Anyway, I think that the final product of Rev. Richard's research (which won't be published for several months it appears) will make for interesting reading – as will the many journal articles it will no-doubt produce. For now, I hope our readers will use the links above to give his raw research a look, and I hope that they find something interesting or beneficial in it.

 

An Explanation of Lutheran Worship: For the Lutheran who asks the Meaning of the Beautiful Liturgy of His church

Last week, we published an article entitled, Lutheranism and the Fine Arts: Dr. P.E. Kretzmann and the Necessity of Continuing Catechesis. It stood in stark contrast against the depraved junk being pushed by the Church Growth Movement (CGM), which, though vaulting the latest in “scientific methodology”, nurtures anti-intellectualism as much as it promotes mediocrity, turning its back on the preaching and teaching of sound doctrine and repudiating the hard work of rigorous catechesis in order to make Christianity more outwardly attractive to the unregenerate who despise Christ and the teaching of His Word. Another term for this among CGM advocates is, “Evangelism.”

But most importantly, that post emphasized the need not only for rigorous catechesis, but of a broad catechesis that includes more than just Bible study. In that post, Dr. Kretzmann and the Walther League strongly encouraged complementary catechesis in areas of Church History, of Christian Missions, of Distinctive Lutheran Doctrines, Customs and Usages of the Lutheran Church, of Church Art, of Science, and of Literature. And within the category of Church Art was included the very important topic of Liturgics.

In fact, the catechesis of the Lutheran Worshiper was the topic of another recent post on Intrepid Lutherans, The Catechesis of the Lutheran Worshiper: An antidote to the “itching ears” and “happy feat” of CGM enthusiasts?. In that post we drew the distinction between those who favor so-called “contemporary worship,” as those who Congregate before Entertainers, with those who retain a wholesome catholicty and still embrace the distinctive practices of historic Lutheran liturgy, as those who Congregate before the Means of Grace.

But what is such “wholesome catholicty”? What is the “distinctive practice of historic Lutheran liturgy”? Do American Lutherans of the 21^st Century even have such a thing? If so, is it at all in general use? Maybe they do, maybe they don't, but one thing is for sure: they certainly had such in the 19^th and 20^th Centuries, AND they had catechetical materials to go along with it for the purpose of teaching successive generations about Lutheran worship.

Lutherans of these bygone times highly valued the wholesome catholicty of their historic Lutheran worship practices, that served to starkly contrast them with the American sects which surrounded them — which had in many cases been given over to the evangelical revivalism of Charles Finney, and to practices emanating from the Holiness movements within American Methodism (as discussed in our recent post, The Church Growth Movement: A brief synopsis of its history and influences in American Christianity). Even in confessional Lutheran churches in America, the allure of the Anxious Bench became increasingly difficult to resist, and Methodist hymnals were, distressingly, in growing demand (as Dr. C.F.W. Walther laments, in our post, C.F.W. Walther: Filching from sectarian worship resources equals “soul murder”). It was within this environment that the confessional and liturgical movements of the 19^th Century grew, and worked toward the establishment of confessional unity among Lutherans in America, and to distinguish and insulate American Lutheranism from the poison of sectarian influences.

In 1908, the General Council of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America published an Explanation of the Common Service – a harmony of sixteenth century Lutheran liturgies published in 1888, in the English language. This is the same Common Service found in The Lutheran Hymnal, which was published by the Synodical Conference in 1941, and which is still used in many Lutheran congregations even today. It is my understanding that, in many circles, this liturgy of the Divine Service is still referred to as a benchmark of liturgical excellence. Indeed, in our recent post, Lutheranism and the Fine Arts..., Dr. Kretzmann refers to the Common Service as “unsurpassed in the entire history of the Christian Church.” Sadly, however, though many Lutherans still use it, most Lutherans, and nearly all young Lutherans, are completely ignorant of this fine and beautiful liturgy, having never had the privilege of being consistently guided through worship under the rubrics of this Common Service.

Interestingly, the Explanation published in 1908 by the General Council of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, was dedicated to this very group of people, to the “Young Lutherans who ask the meaning of the beautiful liturgy of the Lutheran Church.” As you read this Explanation, notice its use of language. Consider the fine education and catechesis “Young Lutherans” must have enjoyed a century ago, which was deliberately reinforced by the church in books such as this. Do Lutheran publishing houses have such respect and concern for the youth of today? Certainly, they target young people with a great deal of material, so concern unquestionably exists — but does the quality of these materials generally rise to this level? Does it specifically advocate and reinforce Confessional practice? Does it refer to the liturgy as something “beautiful” and as something to be valued? I don't believe I've seen this sort of thing coming from the main Lutheran publishers.

Therefore, in the interest of those who would otherwise never have the opportunity to know, the following Explanation of the Common Service is offered. It explains Lutheran worship according to what has been considered the definitive Lutheran liturgy yet produced – a liturgy which is nevertheless disappearing under the short-sighted tyranny of “contemporary relevance,” and an explanation whose need has long been disregarded as counterproductive to progress and to the future of Evangelical church practice.

Note: the reader may recognize this Explanation as having appeared on Intrepid Lutherans in the past. In fact, it was published as a series in the Summer of 2010, as follows: Intrepid Lutherans: Explanation of the Common Service — Part 1 Intrepid Lutherans: Explanation of the Common Service — Part 2 Intrepid Lutherans: Explanation of the Common Service — Part 3 Intrepid Lutherans: Explanation of the Common Service — Part 4 It is offered, below, in a single unbroken post. Note also that this explanation, though long out of print, is now available in book form from Emmanuel Press, one of the fine confessional Lutheran publishers listed in the right-hand column of this blog.

---

Lutheranism and the Fine Arts: Dr. P.E. Kretzmann and the Necessity of Continuing Catechesis

“Competent art is hard to come by these days. True, there are many who have been trained in the techniques of their particular art form, or who have practiced on their own, and have developed an impressive skill. But the execution of technical skill alone is not art. The most that such accomplishes is to showcase the skill of a work's creator, while reducing the measure of art’s usefulness to the act of gratifying consumers. True art has little to do with either the artist or his immediate consumers, but centers on a subject which is external to both. More than just centering on a subject matter, compelling art succeeds at drawing the viewer, reader or hearer of it into a conversation regarding the subject. And this is no small task for the artist! In a single work, he must initiate a conversation and say everything he intends in a way that holds his end of the conversation throughout the inquiries and developing thoughts of those who may engage in it. If the artist is to avoid babbling, this requires that he have such a thorough familiarity with his subject that he can anticipate questions or objections associated with his expression of it, and respond to them while also reinforcing areas of agreement. Sometimes, the subject is simple and the conversation is short. Other times the conversation is longer. Sometimes, the artist points toward or draws conclusions. Other times, he only questions. Sometimes he is speaking for himself. Other times, he represents the voice of others. Regardless of the type of conversation, enduring art is that to which its viewers, readers or hearers return again and again, to admire how the conversation is carried out by the artist, or even to renew it again for themselves. Thus, in addition to technical skill, true, compelling and enduring art requires an abundance of creativity.”

With these words, I opened the blog post, Music for the Twelve Days of Christmas, Part 2: Heinrich Schütz ... and other thoughts to ponder over the New Year Holiday..., which used the story of the Lutheran composer Heinrich Schütz as a pretense for discussing the nature of Fine Art and its sources. The attentive reader of that post can't help but notice the stark contrast that is drawn between what the Church has always prized as genuine and uplifting artistic expression, and what passes for such these days: the highest, yet least appreciated forms of art finding a place in today's contemporary pop-Church rise only to some expression of folk art, while those most highly sought after are among the lowest forms of expression, the mere spectacle of entertainment art which serves only to “gratify consumers” without requiring much thought from them. We saw clear examples of this in our recent post, Real? Relational?? Relevant??? O THE HORROR OF IT ALL!!!.

The notion that artistic expression ought to center about the observer of it – his feelings, his emotions – or worse, ought to draw observers into the “experience of the art” itself by exploiting human passions, is a distinctly post-Baroque idea that is absent from our most cherished Lutheran music which comes to us largely from the “Age of Lutheran Orthodoxy” (coinciding with the Baroque Era) and centers on the objective message of the Gospel. On the contrary, such notions find their root in the Enlightenment myth of “human perfectibility,” a myth which serves to drive people away from recognizing their fundamental need for Divine Grace. Indeed, such notions were, notably, repeated by enemies of the Church as a means of deriding both the Church and Christian contributions to the Fine Arts. This fact was touched upon in a following blog post, Music for the Twelve Days of Christmas, Part 3: Johann Sebastian Bach. Such ideas ought to have no place in considerations leading to artwork that is created in the name and in the service of the Church.

Genuine artistic expression is a potent means of substantive conversation, of engaging the mind of one's fellow conversant through the language of art; and as such, it represents the highest stage of human learning: the Rhetoric Stage. Thus, genuine artistic expression requires genuine education. Moreover, for those who would meaningfully engage such works of art, an understanding of art's idiom is also necessary if it is to be properly appreciated. And, such understanding is also a product of Education, requiring the effort of catechists in the Church toward this end.


Recognizing the Need for Continued Catechesis of Lutheran Young People
The Walther League recruits Dr. Kretzmann
Enter Dr. Paul. E. Kretzmann – Educator (Ed. D.), Theologian (D.D), Historian (Ph. D.). We posted a blog entry about this very important figure of 20^th Century American Lutheranism in our post, Dr. P. E. Kretzmann: Standing on God's Word when the World opposes us. In 1894, a grassroots Lutheran youth organization, called the Walther League, was formed, focusing on youth who had completed their catechism and had been admitted to communicant membership of their local congregations. Their purpose was as follows:

“The purpose of this association shall be to help young people grow as Christians through


WORSHIP — building a stronger faith in the Triune God;
EDUCATION — discovering the will of God for their daily life;
SERVICE — responding to the needs of all men;
RECREATION — keeping the joy of Christ in all activities;
FELLOWSHIP — finding the power of belonging to others in Christ.”

From Rev. Cwirla's Blogosphere: Walther League and Higher Things

This sounds like a good thing, does it not? Whatever happened to this organization? The Lutheran Church – Missouri Synod (LCMS) blog, Witness, Mercy, Life Together, writes concerning the Walther League: “The league eventually disbanded in 1977 as a result of painful but formative doctrinal discussions.”

Sometime during the 1930's, long before its eventual demise and probably during the period of its peak involvement, and before his departure from the LCMS, Dr. Kretzmann was asked to write a little book for Walther League Chapter leaders, that they could follow as a guide to the continuing catechesis of Lutheran young people. Printed by Northwestern Publishing House, the name of this little book was Knowing and Doing, and the need for it was expressed in its Foreword by Rev. Paul Prokopy. He justifies the need for continuing catechesis, and for this little book, as follows:

“It goes without saying that our Lutheran young people should know very definitely what the Lutheran church stands for and just why they are Lutherans, and that in all cases they should be ready and able to present the doctrine of their church and to defend it intelligently and ably against attacks. Yet we find that our young people are ofttimes at a loss to testify clearly and sometimes they are even ashamed to confess boldly that they are Lutherans, the reason being that they are not sufficiently informed and that they have not an intelligent understanding of the very important issues involved...

“Knowledge certainly is power, and if this applies anywhere, it applies to church activity... Placing first things first, Bible Study stands at the head, followed by study of Church History and Missions, the Study of the Distinctive Doctrines, Customs and Usages of the Lutheran Church, and [the study of] Practical Questions and of Church Art...

“But it is not enough that our young people know, they must also do – Knowing and Doing, as the title [of this little book] indicates, must go together... We must have a well-informed, intelligent and efficient [laity].”

It is interesting to know that only a generation ago the idea of “a well-informed, intelligent and efficient laity” was founded on the basis of broad KNOWLEDGE – not just of the Scriptures, although this was most important and stood at the head of all areas of study, but included other important areas of study, as well: Church History, Missions, Distinctive Doctrines, Customs and Usages of the Lutheran Church, Church Art... The full listing of the Table of Contents includes these, and other important areas of study and of practice:

PART I: KNOWING
Chapter 1: Bible Study
Chapter 2: The Study of Church History and Missions
Chapter 3: The Study of Distinctive Doctrines, Customs and Usages of the Lutheran Church
Chapter 4: Practical Questions
Chapter 5: Church Art
Chapter 6: Science and Inventions in the Light of Scriptures
Chapter 7: Literature in the Light of the Bible

PART II: DOING
Chapter 1: The Work of Young People within the Home Congregation
Chapter 2: The Work of Young People in the City and District
Chapter 3: The Work of Young People in the Church at Large

Dr. Kretzmann's thoughts in Chapter 5, on teaching Lutheran Young People how and why to appreciate the rich treasure we Christians have in the gift of Church Art, is most helpful as we contemplate the important role of the Fine Arts in Lutheran church-life. It is reproduced here, in its entirety.

---

Appreciating Fine Art in Service to the Church
An Important Aspect of the Young Lutheran's Catechesis
Few members of the Lutheran Church realize what a splendid heritage is ours in the field of the arts. The work of Luther and his collaborers was not one of senseless destruction, as that of many self-styled reformers in his days and since, but it was a true reformation of the Church, both toward the inside and toward the outside. It is true, of course, that he eliminated all false doctrine from the teaching of the Church. It is true, also, that he removed, or attempted to remove, all that savored of false doctrine, even in the external usages of the Church. But he never became a mere iconoclast, just as he never degenerated into a mere demagogue. He never tore down merely for the sake of seeing things fly. And if he found the superstructure rotten, he carefully examined the foundation, lest he spoil something that was fundamentally good and had only been contaminated and sullied by false doctrine. Carlstadt and the Zwickau prophets, followed by practically the entire Reformed branch of the Church, attacked and destroyed many things which were in themselves not dangerous or which contained a germ of splendid value. Luther and his coworkers preferred to keep the kernel, even if the shell had to be discarded.

Lutheranism and the Fine Arts“But especially in sacred song has the Lutheran Church a grand distinctive element of her worship. 'The Lutheran Church,' says Schaff, 'draws the fine arts into the service of religion, and has produced a body of hymns and chorals, which, in richness, power, and unction, surpasses the hymnology of all other churches in the world.' 'In divine worship,' says Goebel, 'we reach glorious features of pre-eminence. The hymns of the Church are the people's confession, and have wrought more than the preaching. In the Lutheran Church alone, German hymnology attained a bloom truly amazing. The words of holy song were heard everywhere, and sometimes, as with a single stroke, won whole cities for the Gospel'” (Krauth, C. (1871). Conservative Reformation and its Theology. Philadelphia: Lippincott. pp. 152-154) As quoted by Intrepid Lutherans: Music for the Twelve Days of Christmas, Part 1: Michael Praetorius

In pursuing this course, the Lutheran reformers set a good example to all who bear the name of the true Reformer himself, and we should be proud to follow in their footsteps. Luther himself stated that he was in no sense an enemy of the arts, but that he desired to see them all in the service of the Gospel. His interest in the field of art, therefore, was profound. That he was a powerful poet and writer we all know. He was also a musician of no mean ability, he was well versed in liturgics, and he took an intelligent interest in other branches of art as it concerned the work of the Church.

What the fathers of the sixteenth century began the Lutherans of the next century continued; what Luther and Melanchthon and Bugenhagen and others advocated, the latter preserved. It is true that the riches of the Church in the field of Christian art have been largely lost during the age of Pietism, followed by that of Rationalism, but it is fortunately also true that the Lutheran Church of America is awakening to an appreciation of the heritage of the reformers and that proper steps have been taken and are being taken to reintroduce the precious monuments of art which the Church possessed in the sixteenth century.

All this is not being done in the desire for innovations, nor is an enthusiastic minority trying to foist something unwelcome upon a suspicious majority. The Word of God tells us: “let all things be done decently and in order,” (1 Cor. 14:40). A very clear word is that written by St. Paul: “Let every one of us please his neighbor for his good to edification” (Rom. 15:2). And again, the same apostle writes: “Whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by Him,” (Col. 3:17). Moreover, we have evidence that it is by no means displeasing to the Lord if we, in a proper way, and without omitting the more important matters pertaining to the spread of His Kingdom here on earth, take an intelligent interest in Christian art and adorn our houses of worship in a manner befitting the majesty and beauty of Him who is fairer than the sons of men. When Mary of Bethany had poured out over Him her pound of ointment of spikenard and Judas, with a great show of interest in the poor, protested against the waste which was practiced by the deed, Jesus calmly took Mary's part, bidding the assembled company let her alone (John 12:7).

Among the foremost subjects to which the attention of the younger members of our church might well be directed is that of church architecture and ecclesiastical art in general. This interest is aroused and sustained by the very complete accounts of the building of the Tabernacle and the Temple of Solomon, together with the minute descriptions of the various appointments and pieces of furniture which were prepared at God's command in the wilderness and afterward copied by Solomon. If we add to the account of the Bible what has been found in the course of the last century concerning Oriental architecture, the subject becomes fairly fascinating. With our interest in the subject aroused in this manner, it is only natural that we desire to know more about the second Temple and then about that of Herod. Our admiration is aroused by the splendor and magnificence of the buildings crowning Mount Zion and many references to the Temple, not only in the Old Testament, but in the gospels as well, become clear to us.

However, our interest does not cease here. We are anxious to know in what kind of buildings the early Christians worshiped, when and how the first Christian churches were built. We study art of the early Christians as displayed in the catacombs and learn how closely their art was connected with, and expressive of, their belief. We view with surprise and misgivings the erection of the Byzantine cathedrals under Constantine and Justinian; we see the development of the Romanesque style until the limit of its possibilities was reached, only to find that the Gothic style practically removed all limits, making the erection of cathedrals possible which are marvels of human ingenuity and the very apotheosis of ecclesiastical art.

At the same time, we see that the pictorial and plastic arts are placed in the service of the Church, that the arts are, in fact, for centuries dominated by religion, that the greatest works of the greatest masters are performed largely in the interest of Christianity. Add to this the appeal of the minor arts, the work in tapestry and embroidery, in iron and brass and wood, the use of bells and the development of organs in the service of Christian worship, and we have subjects of such intense and absorbing interest as to challenge study, even with absorbing application... Possibly eight [one hour] illustrated lectures would be sufficient to give at least a proper idea of the subject.

Lutheran Worship and Artistic Expression: The Divine Service is NOT a Concert Performance“It may be conceded, of course, that the matter of organ music of every kind is an adiaphoron. There is no commandment of God which gives to the organ either a primary or a secondary position, or makes music either essential or subsidiary for divine worship. And yet, it is not a matter of indifference... A Lutheran congregation will strive to bring out its doctrinal position also in its cultus, and will avoid everything that may be misconstrued as though the Lutherans had abated one whit from their position toward the means of grace. The Word and the Sacraments must always occupy the most prominent place before the congregation, and everything that will detract the attention of the audience from these most important parts of the service must be avoided with the greatest care...” (pg. 406) “[A]ttempts at artistic playing were frowned upon. All efforts which savored of concert playing were not looked upon with favor. Motets or other strange pieces in the service proper were not permitted, the organ being strictly in the service of the congregation and its singing. The organist might give evidence of his art in the postlude... Above all, secular music was strictly taboo, secular songs and fantasies, as well as popular melodies being under the ban...” (pg. 407) “The organist will therefore prepare himself very carefully for each service. His music must be selected with the purpose of bringing out the lesson or the character of the day... The hymns must be studied both as to text and music to emphasize the spirit in them. All the shadings of joy up to the veriest exultation, all the blendings of sorrow, longing, repentance, and whatever other disposition is brought out in the text, must be correctly interpreted in the music... Above all, extemporaneous playing and improvising is inexcusable at the organ during regular church-services. An artist of the first rank may attempt it at a church concert, but for anyone else to test the patience of the congregation in such a manner is little short of an insult. The sacredness of public worship and the exclusive emphasis which we must place upon the means of grace forbid such performances...” (pg. 407) “A Lutheran organist will remember, above all, that the classical choral melodies of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries should always occupy first place in his repertoire.” (pg. 408) “The organ deserves special attention in its relation to the singing of church-hymns and the liturgy... [but] to educate the congregation in the ability to sing, the organ is neither needed nor is it adapted for that purpose; but it is good and appropriate for accompanying good church-singing, which is learned by singing and in no other way. And since the organ occupies this accompanying position only, it must be retained in this position... Long preludes, postludes, and interludes must be discontinued, but, above all, the insertion of self-composed fugues and other devices, by which the congregation assembled for services is changed into a concert audience.” (pg. 408) (Kretzmann, P. (1926). Christian Art in the Form and in the Place of Lutheran Worship. St. Louis, MO: Concordia Publishing House.)

We have a very similar case where we broach the subject of liturgics and hymnology. Luther very properly retained all that was in itself unobjectionable in the orders of service of his day, not only in the communion service, but also in the minor services and occasional sacred acts. In the many church orders, also, which fixed the order or worship in the various German countries in the sixteenth century, not to speak of the Scandinavian countries and England, the most beautiful sections of the ancient liturgy were retained. The Lutheran Church in America has very wisely selected the very best that was to be found in the sixteenth century liturgies, the result being a Communion Service which is unsurpassed in the entire history of the Christian Church [i.e., the Common Service developed by the General Council, and published in the old The Lutheran Hymnal of 1946]. But it ought to be studied and appreciated. – By the same token, the treasure of hymns which the Lutheran Church possesses is a special blessing of God's grace. Not only in the sixteenth century did the fountain of religious poetry flow in rich measure, but it has come down to us in a practically uninterrupted stream. There are hundreds of hymn-writers of the first and second rank, not only in Germany, but also in Denmark, in Norway, in Sweden, in England, in America, and elsewhere, and the products of their pens are numbered by the thousands and tens of thousands. To know the men and women whom God has gifted in such a remarkable manner, to study the hymns and songs which have imparted strength and consolation to untold numbers of Christians throughout the world, that is in itself a privilege which we have not sufficiently appreciated in the past. [As in the case of pictorial, plastic and architectural art that has been created in service to the Church], eight lessons should be devoted to the study of fundamental points of liturgics and hymnology, [as well].

Moreover, when the foundation has been laid and there is some understanding of the pricelessness of the heritage which we possess, the significance and the symbolism of the Lutheran form of worship may well be made a special topic of study. Every real piece of art is worthy of the most careful, detailed, and painstaking study, and we shall appreciate all the more what we have if we examine it in an intelligent manner. Eight lessons will barely suffice for this purpose. However, the interest of our people having once been properly aroused, most of them will surely want to know more about church music as such and about sacred music in general, including the history of the great Passions of Bach, the oratorios of a number of great masters, and the cantatas, motets, and choruses of scores of other musicians. Here again, eight hours or lessons are hardly sufficient, but they may serve to awaken the right kind of interest, which will direct reading and study into the proper channels.


(Kretzmann, P. (~1935). Knowing and Doing: A book of practical suggestions for young people and young people's societies, with special reference to Walther League Work. Chicago: Walther League of the Ev. Lutheran Synodical Conference [printed by Northwestern Publishing House, Milwaukee, WI]. pp. 36-41)

---

“In the case of Christian art, the creation of a compelling and enduring work is truly an amazing accomplishment. The subject matter of Christian art itself is generally despised by the World; and ambiguity, which is inherent to art and very often its most appreciated aspect, is at the same time a great enemy of Christian subject matter – fidelity to which requires clarity and closure. Thus, Christian art that remains beloved and acclaimed by all, over centuries and across cultures, which succeeds at engaging its viewers, hearers or readers in unambiguous conversation regarding the reality of Christ and the impact of His Gospel, represents skill and creativity towering over that which produces ambiguous works of profane subject matter for which people already have natural affinity. Why? Because it is an easy task to produce works of art having the World’s approval by appealing to fleshly desires and worldly sensibilities, relative to the task of producing generally acclaimed works which militate against what naturally appeals to man and which serves to lift up the offense of the Cross instead.”

From Intrepid Lutherans: Music for the Twelve Days of Christmas, Part 2: Heinrich Schütz ... and other thoughts to ponder over the New Year Holiday...

The Catechesis of the Lutheran Worshiper: An antidote to the “itching ears” and “happy feat” of CGM enthusiasts?

As has been mentioned on Intrepid Lutherans many times, the problems of the Church Growth Movement (CGM) are not recently identified, nor has public discussion of them among WELS Lutherans begun only since the time Intrepid Lutherans first started publishing, in May 2010, when we “burst onto the scene” with the shocking declaration:

Many of us see our common enemy, the devil, threatening our unity as a synod, mainly through the backdoor of our practice. We sing and preach about unity, but it is becoming increasingly clear that there lurks among us a spirit of disunity. It is certainly not everywhere; but it is there. Let us acknowledge where the devil is mounting his assault so that, by God’s power and might, we may defeat him: worship practices that are inconsistent with confessional Lutheran theology; Church Growth theology and methodology; paying lip service to the Means of Grace while mimicking the practices of the churches that deny the efficacy of the Means of Grace; forfeiting our confessional Lutheran identity, either by neglect or by choice.

And hasn’t this ubiquitous “spirit of disunity” been amply demonstrated over the past two-and-three-quarter-years? We continued in that first post:

Many would like to simply agree to disagree on these matters rather than disturb the Church over them. That would be understandable if the issues revolved around personal preference. But the issues are theological, not personal. True spiritual unity is not preserved by ignoring theology. What we are advocating is an open theological discussion with solid theological conclusions. If we are misunderstanding one another, let us make things clear. If arguments have been built upon logical fallacies, let them be exposed. If any have strayed from confessional Lutheran doctrine or practice, let them take note and return. For our part, we have made a small beginning at such a discussion by creating this blog where we will be posting articles that promote and encourage confessional Lutheranism... Contribute what you can to the discussion... What we ask you not to do, dear brother, is absent yourself from the discussion as if there were nothing to discuss, as if it didn’t apply to you, as if you could close your eyes and shut your ears and pretend you have no responsibility to defend the synod you call your home from the devil’s divisive schemes. This is only a beginning, a first step (not to imply that we are the first or the best to speak about these issues). What we seek is unity – true confessional Lutheran unity within the WELS, a goal that only the Holy Spirit can bring about.

One of the predecessor forums to Intrepid Lutherans, run by WELS members, which treated of issues in WELS, was aptly named “Issues in WELS.” Now defunct, many laymen discovered through this organization that WELS wasn’t the paradise they were led to believe it was – not that they were especially successful at broadcasting their existence and distributing their materials; but a simple Google search with the words “issue” and “Lutheran” seemed to do the trick for many WELS Lutherans. For others, they either already knew, or figured out for themselves that something was amiss. Most, it would seem, are still oblivious – for better or worse. Another forum, run by WELS members, which also treated of issues in WELS, was the blog Bailing Water. Now relatively dormant, the blog owner continues to maintain it as a Confessional and historical resource. The reader, if he is unfamiliar with it, is encouraged to peruse that “resource,” to get an idea of the nature of discussion up to the time Bailing Water wound down its active life. In many ways, the nature of discussion on Intrepid Lutherans is made dramatically different by the requirement that commenters post under their real names. Thus, in commenting on Intrepid Lutherans, one puts his good name and reputation on the line, not only for his peers to evaluate, but their posterity. One result has been that commenters seem to more carefully measure their words when they post. Another has been that many simply will not allow their opinions, concerns or positions on certain matters to become publicly known.

“Contemporary” Worshipers Congregate before Entertainers or shall we more charitably say, “congregate before other worshipers.”

(top) Lakewood Megachuch, Houston, TX (bottom) Hillsong Megachurch, Sydney, AU

Regardless, many good and interesting discussions were had on Bailing Water, especially with respect to CGM, one of which is the subject of our post. A commenter in the Bailing Water post, Anything that isn’t unbiblical is fair game, makes some interesting points, though arguing that only the text matters in identifying hymns and liturgy as Lutheran or not, and ultimately expecting the act of worship itself to merit blessings from God:

Here’s another aspect of the discussion that I rarely see raised. When people talk about how contemporary services are more “engaging” than liturgical ones, I would argue that the problem is not the liturgy, but the liturgy done poorly. I have been in many WELS churches where the pastor mumbles through it as though what were going on were NOT special... was NOT opening the gates of heaven. I’ve been in churches where the Gloria, a joyful hymn given to us by the angels, was sung at the tempo of a funeral dirge.

To say that because the Western Rite shares the Word of God, then whether or not it is done well makes no difference, is to overstate the Scripture. Yes, the Word is how the Spirit works. But if I am a pastor (or a congregation) and my efforts to use the Word are so half-hearted, then I’m not sure why I would expect the Spirit to bless my efforts. To state it more succinctly, if the Western Rite is done badly, when it could be done well, why WOULD God bless it? The pastor and congregation’s half-hearted worship means they are luke-warm towards the Gospel that worship proclaims. Therefore, while confessional, their worship is an affront to him, as Jesus’ words to to the church at Laodicea makes clear.

Therefore, I’d like to see more WELS congregations doing what I know some are - looking at how they utilize the Western Rite. Where does the chant from TLH come from? It’s like 18th century Scotland? I honestly don’t know. But I can’t imagine that 18th century Scotland was a bastion of confessional Lutheranism. Therefore, let’s not be too emotionally attached to the chant. Perhaps there’s a better musical vehicle in which to couch the Gloria, Agnus Dei, Sanctus, etc. That’s VERY Lutheran - keeping the text, but updating the melody - as the vast number of hymns in the “Hymns of the Liturgy” section demonstrate.

To sum up, what I’d like to see is the Gloria sung in all our churches, but a version which might be a better vehicle than page 15 of TLH or page 16 in CW. Same with all five canticles of the Western Rite. I’d like to see them done in a style that - yes - enthuses people. No, I am not an enthusiast. I’m a musician, who finds bad, tired singing a stumbling block when trying to worship.

Maybe, if the Western Rite were done well, there wouldn’t be such a rush to contemporary services.

Another commenter responded, addressing the “way” worship is done, and whether it impacts anything. Not for a moment admitting that the “act of worship merits blessing from God” the way that the first commenter did, he did identify how careless, or even deliberate mediocrity distracts worshipers from the centrality of Christ in the congregation’s worship, just as much as “worship ministers” and other stage entertainers distract worshipers from the True Object of their worship, who serve to fixate the attention of worshipers first on themselves:

You state on 1/16, “I would argue that the problem is not the liturgy, but the liturgy done poorly. ...Maybe, if the Western Rite were done well, there wouldn’t be such a rush to contemporary services.”

Speaking purely in human terms, I agree that there seems to be a superabundance of, well, mediocrity in our worship. I see it when I travel, and it distresses me, as well. However, having spent nearly thirty years as a pop-church Evangelical and about three years as a praise-band guitarist, I can tell you for a fact that Contemporary Worship is no panacea – they struggle with the same problem. And what is that problem? Our own sin and weakness of faith.

Many Lutheran congregations in the 70's and 80's left behind their catholic and confessional heritage, thinking that the “more engaging” music and worship forms of the sectarians would better serve the interests of faith, by removing the “stumbling block” of forms that “fail to enthuse” (as you seem to put it). A disturbing percentage of these congregations (by my estimation) eventually left behind the Lutheran Confession entirely, failing to cure their sin and faith problems with the sectarian worship forms they imported from the heterodox, but having been taught by these forms, and the passions they engender, to trust their own acts of worship as Means through which with Holy Spirit works to strengthen faith. This is lex orandi, lex credendi in action. Under the guidance of then popular Lutheran leaders, like Rev. Larry Christiansen (a household name as I was growing up), the teaching of the Means of Grace was mutilated, most notably forcing a distinction between water Baptism and the Baptism of the Holy Spirit, in order to justify Worship as a Means of Grace, or specifically, a Means through which the Holy Spirit works to strengthen faith. I know the process...



Lutheran Worshipers Congregate before the Means of Grace

(top) St. Matthew Ev. Lutheran Church (ELCA), Wauwatosa, WI (bottom) Grace Ev. Lutheran Church (ELCC), Oakville, ON

So, what is the solution to sin? You know it – faith in Christ, and His completed work on behalf of all sinners. What is the solution to weakness of faith? You know that, too – the Holy Spirit, and his work through the true Means of Grace. Sectarian worship forms that take the focus off of Christ and shift it to the man in the pew, that exchange our catholic and christocentric forms for unavoidably anthropocentric forms, are nothing other than forms of robbery in which the Thief delights. Christ is diminished and one of man’s three great opponents rushes into the void – the lusts of his own flesh. Sectarian worship forms that themselves beguile the worshiper over time into a pursuit of pleasure, that by repeated experience displaces the true Means and supplants them with a counterfeit, are themselves forms of deceit spawned by the Father of Lies calculated to defraud us of our faith. Indeed, the Devil prowls about like a roaring lion seeking whom he may devour. We must be vigilant. Contemporary Worship is no friend of the Church. Although it may seem to for a time (and this is the danger of applying visible measures, like statistical trends, as measures of faith), it does not strengthen faith. Instead, it excites human passions in ways that mimic the fruits of faith, while in fact starving faith until nothing is left but striving works.

So, assuming that proper Gospel motivation is behind a desire to pursue excellence in worship, rather than remain content with mediocrity, are there practical things that a congregation can do to “do the liturgy and traditional hymnody richly” rather than “poorly?” I think that there are.

Instrumentation
Whenever instrumentation in the Divine Service draws attention to itself, it distracts the worshiper from his confession and from focus on Christ. Worship accompaniment is nothing other than a companion to the worship of Christians in the assembly. It melts in with the voices of the congregation, and serves only to assist in guiding the melody – much like the individual two pews over who sings a little louder than everyone else. Worship accompanists are nothing other than co-worshipers. That is what makes the organ so perfect as a worship instrument. Despite its kingly size and wide range, it is almost invisible to the worshiper – it fills the chamber so completely that it has no location, and coexists in unity with the single voice of the congregation. Rock 'n Roll “praise bands,” with their stage antics and entertainment presence, by their nature draw attention to themselves. Likewise do self-absorbed vocalists (men or women designated as so-called “Worship Ministers”), who launch into their own impromptu monologues and prayers in Representational capacity during the worship they are designated to “lead” (and, yes, I know for a fact that this happens in WELS congregations – I’ve seen it on St. Mark Depere’s website, and my own Pastor has indicated to me how upset he has been with a local WELS congregation which has embraced Contemporary Worship, where he has witnessed one of the female “worship ministers” preach her own exhortational mini-sermon, in front of the congregation, during the course of worship!). As distracting as this is, a poorly maintained organ, wheezing, anemic, and out of tune, is offensive to the ears. A poorly trained organist is worse. They draw attention to themselves and away from focus on Christ for negative reasons, and create aversion for the Divine Service itself. Organs, as a simple matter of stewardship, need to be maintained, and ought to be replaced when their service life is ended. Organists ought to be encouraged to continue their training, and I would think that continuing lessons ought to gladly be sponsored by the congregation.

Pastor’s Role as Liturgist
Pastors, one would think, would be so full of faith that, in their role as liturgists, they couldn’t fail to make obvious the significance of their Representation, and of the congregation’s corporate confession, through appropriate presence and tonal inflection. Sadly, I’ve heard far too many drones to make this assumption, [and worse, I’ve heard far to many clumsy lovers romance their congregations from the pulpit, “mouthing their verse and moaning their tragedy” – DL]. Pastors ought to make it a practice to examine how they express themselves in public, and make conscious effort to complement their words with congruent inflection, and to speak with the authority one would expect of a man who stands by the command and in the stead of Jesus Christ.

Catechesis of the Worshiper


Church Architecture Among the chiefest of Liturgical Devices

(top) A 19th Century color plate showing the “city scape” of Strasbourg, France. On the left is the Cathédrale Notre-Dame-de-Strasbourg, on the right, is Église Saint-Thomas (at that time referred to as “the Lutheran Cathedral,” as by then the Cathédrale, which lies to the northeast of Église Saint-Thomas, had returned to the control of the Roman Catholics.) Prior to the 20th Century, Christian church buildings were the most prominent man-made feature of European and American city-scapes and country-sides. Much more than four walls and a roof, these liturgical devices are full of meaning in their appearance, preaching Law and Gospel by their mere presence just as much as the liturgy itself – and broadcasting that message to everyone within view of them. (bottom) Considered one the of the most beautiful churches in Latvia, Velēna Ev.Lutheran Church is, at 115 years of age, a very young neo-gothic structure. It is pictured above in a photo by Gatis Pāvils linked from his website, Ambermarks.com

Again, assuming that worshipers are genuinely looking to their faith, and, motivated by the Gospel, genuinely aspire to excellence as they offer praise, thanks, and adoration before God, are there practical measures that a congregation can take to assist them to this end as they seek to do so within the context of the Western Rite and traditional hymnody and instrumentation? Yes, I think so. And I think the answer is catechesis.

I mentioned in a previous entry, above, that worshipers ought to be taught to think the words they recite and sing, to take ownership of those words as their own thoughts, and give them their due expression. They need to come to understand the gravity of the words they use, and the reason they are recited together with others.

Worshipers also need to be taught the meaning of what they are doing, and what the pastor is doing, as they are carried together by the liturgy through the Divine Service. Which parts of the service are Sacramental? Which parts are Sacrificial? When do the Sacramental and Sacrificial parts of the service take place, and where do they take place? When and how is the Pastor acting Representationally, and who is he representing at various points in the service? When is the Pastor to be absent from the Chancel and why?

Worshipers need to be taught the meaning of what they see. The appointments in the Nave and Chancel are liturgical devices, which communicate in the symbolical language of ecclesiastical art. For those blessed with stained glass, these works of art often speak for themselves. But what of altars, triptychs, lecterns and pulpits, fonts, vestments in their variety, paraments, crosses and crucifixes, candelabras, and various vessels of the Eucharist? What do they mean and why are they placed where they are? Why is the pulpit and lectern positioned off to the side? Baptist and Evangelical churches have a single “lectern/pulpit” mounted in the center. Baptist churches generally don’t have an altar. Why the difference? The language of these symbols needs to be taught if they are to be used beneficially.

Of course, the most prominent of liturgical devices is the architecture of the church building itself! The neo-gothic architecture is the product of centuries of experimentation, to perfect the functioning of the building with respect the Western Rite. Why is there a bell tower? Why is there a cross mounted on top? Baptist churches don’t have crosses, they have spires. Why the difference? Why is the Nave and the Chancel separated? Why are the Sacristies located where they are? Why is the organ and choir located in the rear? Baptist and Reformed churches have the organ and choir mounted in the front? Why the difference? (Related to these questions, unfortunately, is the painful topic of the utter tragedy of contemporary church architecture...).

The answer to all of these questions is, doctrine – which emphasizes the importance of teaching pure doctrine through our practice (lex orandi, lex credendi). [Indeed, Professor John Schaller himself notoriously emphasized the need to emphasize doctrine in relation to what Lutherans uniquely DO, especially compared to what sectarians DO! – DL]. One of the best books I have ever read on these topics is an old book, by Dr. P.E. Kretzmann, Christian Art, In the Place and in the Form of Lutheran Worship. In addition to these questions, it also covers the history of the liturgy, hymnology, heartology, and the content of Lutheran liturgy. Published in 1921, it is also available used, and via "print on demand" from CPH...

The final point of the second commenter, above, the point titled Catechesis of the Worshiper is vitally important in my opinion, and probably one of the most conspicuously neglected aspects of Lutheran liturgical life. And it was this point which was very ably addressed by Rev. Michael Berg (WELS), at our 2012 Conference of Intrepid Lutherans, Church and Continuity. He not only lectured on the Western Rite itself, and the relevance of historical practice with respect to it, he also walked through the catechetical materials he wrote and uses in his congregation – some of the finest materials I think I’ve encountered. It is with his presentation that I leave the reader, and urge our pastors to consider. I’m sure that Rev. Berg could be contacted, and would be willing to share his materials.


Conference of Intrepid Lutherans: Church and Continuity ~ June 1-2, 2012
Bethlehem Lutheran Church ~ Oshkosh, WI
The Beauty of the Western Rite, Part 1
The Beauty of the Western Rite, Part 2
by Rev. Michael Berg (WELS)

Daily Prayer and Meditation Resources

Below is a portion of a pastor's newsletter I just delivered to my congregation. In it, I offer some resources for prayer and meditation at home. The suggested devotional format includes the Daily Lectionary from Lutheran Service Book, and since the Bible readings start over on Ash Wednesday, I thought this was the perfect time to introduce it. The suggested Psalms, however, are my own suggestions, based on the Daily Lectionary and the Psalms assigned for the Sundays in the historic lectionary. The portion of the Small Catechism we're beginning with follows our Sunday School plan, so it kind of starts in the middle.

The Treasury of Daily Prayer essentially includes all the same material. Why not just suggest they all purchase a copy of the Treasury of Daily Prayer? Two main reasons. One, this simple format breaks down the Small Catechism into weekly portions and puts the whole devotion onto one 5-1/2" x 8-1/2" card. Two, after using the Treasury for over a year, I think it's a great resource, but I feel disconnected from the Bible as a book when I use it. (Maybe it's just a personal preference.) So I'm distributing three bookmarks with these resources (Old Testament, Psalms, New Testament) with the Bible references printed out on them for three months at a time so that members can continue to use their own Bibles.

I'll include below some links to PDF files of the daily prayer resources for this week and the bookmarks for the next three months. If anyone finds these resources helpful, let me know and I can link the weekly updates that I'll be including in my local service folder.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Quinquagesima 2012

And taking the twelve, [Jesus] said to them, “See, we are going up to Jerusalem, and everything that is written about the Son of Man by the prophets will be accomplished. For he will be delivered over to the Gentiles and will be mocked and shamefully treated and spit upon. And after flogging him, they will kill him, and on the third day he will rise” (Luke 18:31-33).

Even with plain words like these before them, Jesus’ disciples didn’t understand what Jesus was telling them. But by the gracious working of the Holy Spirit through the Word of God, we do. And because we do, we set aside every year a season called “Lent” in order to slow down from our busy-ness and reflect on the battle our Lord waged for us against sin, death and the devil, a battle that culminated in his crucifixion, his burial, and his resurrection from the dead. His victory is our victory, and the victory of all who trust in him.

Lent begins this Wednesday, February 22nd. It’s a season for reflection, repentance and renewal. It’s a season for reevaluating our walk as Christians and for recommitting ourselves to the message of the cross and to the way of the cross, to the daily self-denial to which our Savior calls everyone who would follow after him.

It’s also a season in which the Church intensifies its emphasis on catechesis – the instruction in the Word that has as its primary goal the creation and sustaining of faith in Christ, and how that faith expresses itself in the Christian life – the baptismal life. Catechesis is not a one-time, learn-this-and-be-done-with-it kind of instruction. It’s lifelong, from baptism to the grave. So catechesis is for children, but it’s not only for children. It’s for all who would be Christians.

In addition to the regular weekly opportunities for catechesis already offered (Sunday morning Bible class and Divine Service), I would like to invite all of our members to participate in two other opportunities for intensified catechesis, one for the church, one for the home.

As usual, we will be offering Wednesday evening prayer services during the Lenten season, beginning with the Divine Service on Ash Wednesday, continuing with Vespers (“Evening”) services on the five Wednesdays between Ash Wednesday and Palm Sunday. In these special services, we will be reviewing the Psalms sometimes referred to as the “penitential” Psalms, as well as a portion of Luther’s Small Catechism and Luther’s six catechism hymns.

The other opportunity I want to set before you begins now during Lent, but does not end there. In fact, the idea is that this would be the beginning of a routine that would never end. It’s an opportunity to make prayer and Bible reading a daily part of your family’s schedule. I have not urged this among you as I ought, and I confess that even I, as a pastor, have, until now, failed to implement this properly in my own home, and for that, I am sorry. But since Lent is for reflection, repentance and renewal, I invite you to join me today in reflecting, repenting, and, with the comfort of God’s forgiveness, making a change for the better.

Maybe you and your family have already been using the Meditations booklets put out by Northwestern Publishing House. Maybe you have been using a devotional format from the hymnal. This is good, and I do not want to discourage it in the least. I would simply like to suggest something more comprehensive.

So I offer you the following resources:

• A very short and simple format for morning, mealtime and bedtime prayer, adapted from Martin Luther’s own suggestions in the Small Catechism.


• A pattern for Daily Prayer and Meditation to be used every day in family devotions.

Most of the elements of Daily Prayer and Meditation are set up to be repeated each day for a week, changing every Sunday, so every Sunday the order for Daily Prayer and Meditation will be printed on the back of the service folder (or offered as a separate insert). It will also be available for download on our website. The Scripture readings that make up the Daily Lectionary change daily, so they are printed on three bookmarks (for Old Testament, Psalm, and New Testament) which you can keep in your Bible at home. The references for the Daily Lectionary are from Lutheran Service Book, starting over each year on Ash Wednesday. You can use whichever Bible translation you wish. I recommend the English Standard Version or the New King James Version.

Families that follow this daily routine will read through about 1/3 of the Old Testament and almost all of the New Testament every year, and the Book of Psalms will be prayed through at least twice a year. The entire Small Catechism is relearned each year as well.

Luther says in his Preface to the Large Catechism, “I am a doctor and preacher. Yet I act as a child who is being taught the catechism. Every morning—and whenever I have time—I read and say, word for word, the Ten Commandments, the Creed, the Lord’s Prayer, the Psalms, and such. I must still read and study them daily. Yet I cannot master the catechism as I wish. But I must remain a child and pupil of the catechism, and am glad to remain so.”

Let us all remain “children and pupils of the catechism.” The resources I am setting before you are not the only possible Lutheran resources that can be used. They are intended to be a useful discipline for keeping our families constant in prayer and firmly rooted in the Scriptures and in the Small Catechism. Putting this discipline into practice as a congregation can only serve to bring us closer together around the truth of God’s Word. As for me and my house, we will begin using these resources today.

Morning and Bedtime Prayer
Mealtime Prayers and general format for Daily Prayer & Meditation
Daily Lectionary Bookmarks - Lent through Easter 2012



* Additional resources (all from Concordia Publishing House):

• ESV Children’s Bible – Lutheran Edition (Includes the full Bible text, plus several pictures, key doctrinal summaries, and summaries of the Six Chief Parts of Luther’s Small Catechism)


• ESV Deluxe Reference Bible – Concordia Edition (Includes Luther’s Small Catechism)


• The Lutheran Study Bible (ESV)


• Treasury of Daily Prayer (Has the Daily Lectionary readings all printed out in one book, with brief orders for devotions and additional readings from the Church Fathers)


• Lutheran Service Book (Has most of the same hymns as Christian Worship, but fewer gender neutral translations. It also features richer orders of service and, in my opinion, better devotional material.)


• My First Hymnal (a collection of 51 hymns especially suitable for children, accompanied by colorful illustrations for the church year)


• Concordia: The Lutheran Confessions (especially for reading the Athanasian Creed, Large Catechism and Augsburg Confession at home)