Some thoughts on the hymnody of Lutheran Book of Worship: context, issues, and legacy.

It is a common observation that of the three books that historically have been most influential in developing and nourishing Lutheran piety--Bible, catechism, and hymnal--it is the hymnal that, for many, has been of most lasting influence. Bibles may go unread and catechisms set aside as a regular part of Christian education, but it is the hymnal, it can be argued with some justification, that, encountered on a regular basis Sunday after Sunday, has had the most significant effect on the piety of American Lutherans.

It is appropriate, therefore, to describe the context in which the Lutheran Book of Worship (LBW) took shape and the procedures that shaped the content of the hymn portion of the book, and to assess the impact and legacy of its hymnody on the piety of American Lutherans.

The LBW was the end product of the invitation of the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod (LCMS), extended in 1965, to all Lutherans in America to join together in the production of common worship resources. The 1965 resolution of the LCMS convention clearly envisioned liturgical and hymnic materials "under a single cover." (1) As far as hymnody was concerned, the wording of the resolution of 1965 envisioned "a common core of hymn texts and musical settings" and "a variant selection of hymns, if necessary...." (2) The following year the Inter-Lutheran Commission on Worship (ILCW) was formed, consisting of eight members from the Lutheran Church in America (LCA), seven members each from the American Lutheran Church (ALC) and the LCMS, and one each from the Synod of Evangelical Lutheran Churches (SELC) and the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Canada (ELCC). Its Statement of Purpose described the ultimate goal of the ILCW: "the production of a new, common liturgy and hymnal for the participating churches." The work of the Commission was delegated to four standing committees--on Liturgical Texts, Liturgical Music, Hymn Texts, and Hymn Music. Membership of these four committees was apportioned among the participating church bodies. (3)

Uniting a variety of pieties

The major challenge of the hymn committees was to fashion a collection of hymns that would be acceptable to the wide variety of Lutheran pieties represented in the groups involved in its preparation. The partners in this new venture brought to the table the books they were presently using. The LCA and the ALC brought the Service Book and Hymnal (SBH, 1958), at the time of the formation of the ILCW in use for only a few years; the LCMS brought The Lutheran Hymnal (TLH, 1941) and, a few years later, Worship Supplement (WS, 1969), the fruit of the work it had already done on its unilateral revision of TLH.

Neither SBH or TLH was without its critics. By the early 1960s there had already developed "serious internal criticism of the SBH," then only a few years old, much of it apparently directed toward its hymnody. (4) TLH, in use for almost a quarter of a century, had its own faultfinders whose disapproval was especially directed to the musical settings of the hymns and liturgy.

Both the SBH and TLH, at the time they appeared, were the latest in a number of hymnals produced as a result of the consolidation of various smaller Lutheran bodies, a consolidation that had begun already in the latter part of the nineteenth century. (5) But, for the most part, the previous Lutheran hymn collections in the first part of the twentieth century--such as The Lutheran Hymnary (1913), the Common Service Book and Hymnal (CSB, 1917), the American Lutheran Hymnal (1930), TLH (1941), and even the SBH (1958)--brought together groups of Lutherans of largely similar ethnic backgrounds, pieties, or ideologies. While there were, of course, disagreements among those who participated in shaping these earlier hymnals, those who came together to produce them came with largely similar backgrounds and assumptions as to the general contents of the books they were preparing.

Nevertheless, even some who participated in the preparing of these earlier hymnals were dissatisfied with the final results. As early as the CSB--the joint work of the General Synod, the General Council, and the United Synod of the South--the lack of sufficient Scandinavian hymnody was noted. Typical of such comments was one which complained that

the committee rigorously guarded the hymnal against the introduction of renditions of Norwegian, Swedish or Danish hymns as found in The Lutheran Hymnary, persistently ignoring these translations.... The commission, whether by design or inadvertence, is a disappointment to the Scandinavian-American Lutherans. (6)

While such comments can be expected from any group that does not receive the due it believed to be its own, they reflect the difficulties encountered in any attempt to unite a wide spectrum of pieties.

If the subsequent work on the SBH (1958)--which comprised an even broader spectrum of pieties--attempted to address such objections, it was still not sufficient for the Danes, who were among the participating groups. J. C. Aaberg, a member of the committee who had produced the Danes' Hymnal for Church and Home (1927), complained that the book "contained more hymns from Catholic sources than from the land of Luther." (7) Two years later, in 1960, the Danish Lutherans published a supplement of 28 Danish hymns that had not been included in the new book. That one of the chief architects of both the CSB and the SBH was prominent Lutheran liturgical scholar Luther D. Reed concerned some who wished to see a greater emphasis on Reformation hymnody.

To a lesser extent such criticisms also were made of hymnals that joined together groups of greater similarity and background. But with the goal of the ILCW to prepare "a common core of hymn texts and musical settings" the task was even greater. For the hymn committees of the ILCW, attempting to satisfy the often conflicting views of "high church" Swedes, Norwegians of both high and low inclinations, those who followed the lead of Reed, anti-clerical Haugeans, and doctrinally concerned Missourians, in the process of producing a selection of hymns that would be useful yet would reflect a Lutheran concern for the role of hymnody in worship, the task was a daunting one.

Apart from the matter of a wide dissimilitude of pieties, the task was complicated by somewhat different understandings of the role of hymns in worship. LCMS participants brought as a primary concern that hymns, as the Handbook to TLH stated, "be pure in doctrine." (8) The principles of the selection in the SBH, which clearly stated that they should be in agreement with the teachings of the Word of God, nevertheless placed great importance on the criteria that "the hymns should be devotional rather than didactic or homiletical" and that the "hymnal must have the highest standards of literary excellence." (9) If the Reformation chorales were anything, they were didactic and homiletical. Moreover, it was precisely the emphasis on literary excellence that had been used by earlier committees to disqualify many of the translations from German, Norwegian, Danish, and Finnish heritages in the late nineteenth and early twentieth-century American Lutheran hymnals. (10)

One additional factor contributed to the conversation. The earlier hymnals of the participating churches were generally of two kinds: those intended specifically for use in corporate worship, and those designed for use in church, school, and home. Such titles as the General Council's Church Book (1868) and Kirchenbuch (1877), Grabau's Evangelisch-Lutherisches Kirchen-Gesang-Buch (1842), C. F. W. Walther's Kirchengesang-buch (1847), the CSB (1917), and the SBH (1958) all suggested that their primary, if not sole, purpose was for corporate worship. Other books such as hymnals "for church and home," the German Liederperlen, and various Scandinavian collections that featured more personal hymns from the nineteenth-century revivals--such as the "Andeliga Sanger" ("spiritual songs")--were intended for a broader use. These latter materials, while particularly useful in family and private devotions, were often viewed by many as inappropriate for use in corporate, liturgical worship. These approaches often vied with each other in meetings of the hymn committees.

In many instances, treasures of one group were unknown to the others. I recall one meeting where heated conversation occurred regarding a particular hymn ("On Our Way Rejoicing"), a hymn unknown to me at that time, though one obviously highly treasured by many others. I am certain that the situation was the same in the case of many of the sixteenth-century chorales. This, then, was part of the context in which the hymn committees were to do their work.

The makeup of the hymn committees

The two hymn committees--the Hymn Texts Committee and the Hymn Music Committee--consisted of nine members each, three members each from the LCA, the ALC, and the LCMS. (The members and their length of service is noted in the accompanying charts.) In addition to their expertise in language, several of the members of the Hymn Texts Committee were also familiar enough in the area of music to be alert to musical concerns that might be raised in connection with the choice of particular texts. Even more important, and certainly new in American Lutheran hymnal-making experience, was that a significant number of the members of the Hymn Music Committee were theologically trained. This rather new situation made for a lively give-and-take between the members of the two committees that continued through the decade of its existence.

What was not anticipated was the genuine collegiality that quickly developed within and between the two groups. Decisions regarding various issues before the committee and regarding specific hymns were almost never taken along what might be assumed to be the "party lines" of the church bodies. Members could and did, often vehemently, disagree. The strengths and weaknesses of conflicting views were frankly and honestly debated, the final result the better for it. It was an example of collegiality at its best.

The general procedure was that texts submitted for consideration were reviewed by the Hymn Texts Committee and, upon their approval, were sent to the Hymn Music Committee for the selection of a tune and ultimately a musical harmonization or setting. It was not unusual for the Hymn Music Committee to return a provisionally approved text to the Hymn Texts Committee for reconsideration in the light of what the Hymn Music Committee judged to be a theologically deficient text. The Hymn Texts Committee sometimes returned the favor.

Preliminary forays

One of the important discussions in the early years of the committees was whether a regular hardcover hymnal was a realistic goal for the future. The late 1960s and early 70s were times of great experimentation and upheaval in hymnody (and liturgy). It was a time when so-called "disposable hymnody" was the rage, that is, hymns written not for lasting use but for a particular situation or occasion, to be disposed of when the occasion passed. Whether the ILCW should even envision a traditional hardcover book was an issue raised by some. The clear indication of the LCMS in its resolution of 1965 favored cooperative work toward liturgical and hymnic material that would appear "under a single cover." It was not until several years had passed that a consensus had been reached that this was indeed what was needed and called for. In the meantime, the committees prepared two provisional fascicles. The first to be published was a general collection of new hymns: Contemporary Worship 1: Hymns (1969), containing 21 hymns (four with two tunes or settings). The second, Contemporary Worship 4: Hymns for Baptism and Holy Communion (1972), was a group of baptismal and eucharistic hymns, two areas where the consensus was that more, newer, and better hymns were desirable. Both collections were intended as provisional collections "intended to supplement those already in use in the participating churches." (11) Ultimately, 13 of the 21 hymns (62 percent) in Contemporary Worship 1 found their way into LBW. The contents of Contemporary Worship 4 fared better, 25 of its 30 hymns (83 percent) winding up in LBW.

Specific questions before the Hymn Music Committee

A basic question before the ILCW, and particularly the Hymn Committees, was that of the format of the hymns in the new book. Both SBH and TLH had appeared in a full-music edition, that is, four-part keyboard settings with some of the stanzas interlined between the music and additional stanzas in stanza form below, usually referred to as the "traditional American hymnal" format. (12) The SBH was also available in a text-only format. Worship Supplement, following the example of the German and Scandinavian hymnals of the time, appeared in a tune-text format in which only the melody appeared with one stanza of the text under the melody, the remaining stanzas in stanza form below, the accompaniments to be found in a separate volume. Contemporary Worship 4 also appeared in tune-text format. There was considerable discussion about the best format. At one point, the ILCW apparently determined to follow the tune-text format for the pew edition, but ultimately reversed course after pressure from the publishers in favor of the typical American hymnal format prevailed. (13) The pew edition of LBW appeared only in the full-music edition.

Another matter was the organization of the hymnal. SBH followed the long tradition of Lutheran hymnals, beginning with the church year. TLH began with sections on "Opening of Service," "Lord's Day," "Close of Service," then moving to the church year. The matter was ultimately decided by adopting the traditional Lutheran model as in SBH, although not without opposition even by some who were already using SBH.

An equally important decision, which significantly affected the selection of hymns to be included in the new book, was the adoption of the Hymn of the Day in the liturgy of Holy Communion. (14) The use of the Hymn of the Day (de tempore hymn) had been promoted since the late 1950s as a replacement for the more protestant tradition of the Sermon Hymn. Its adoption for use in LBW was the first time in American Lutheranism that the Hymn of the Day was officially an integral part of the liturgy. Two listings of hymns were prepared, the first a contemporary adaptation of the traditional Lutheran de tempore series, the second, a series designed for the three-year lectionary. (15) This action meant that at least 52 hymns had to be included that reflected the intimate connection between the Scripture readings, the sermon, and the Hymn of the Day.

A matter of greater importance to many on the hymn committees had to do with the melodic form of the Reformation chorale. The constituents of the LCA and ALC came from traditions that--to the extent the sixteenth-century chorales were sung at all--used the isometric, or even-note, form of the sixteenth-century chorales that developed during the period of Pietism. The entire history of the LCMS, however, was intimately tied to the use of the original, rhythmic forms developed at the time of the Reformation. LBW ultimately included 26 such chorales, most in their historic rhythmic form. This infusion of historic Lutheran texts and melodies was erroneously interpreted by some as a concession to pressure from the LCMS. (16) The support for use of the original rhythmic forms of the chorale melodies actually cut across synodical lines and was the overwhelming, although not always the unanimous, choice of the music committee. In some cases (for example, "A Mighty Fortress Is Our God" or "Wake, Awake, For Night Is Flying"), the melodies appear in both rhythmic and isometric forms. The recovery in LBW of a significant number of early Reformation chorales together with their original rhythmic melodies, and the official use of the Hymn of the Day, constituted probably the most significant hymnic contributions of LBW."

Types of settings

The kinds of settings to be fashioned for the hymns of LBW had to take into account whether they would be sung in unison or in parts--or at least have the capability of being sung in parts. While some looked for a one-kind-fits-all solution, the actual hymnody reflected a more complicated situation. In certain periods of Lutheran history (sixteenth century), hymns were sung in unison and unaccompanied; in later periods (seventeenth and eighteenth centuries), keyboard accompaniments gradually became the norm; some hymns of the English tradition, for example, required unison singing, while others suggested singing in harmony. In certain cases, specific harmonizations had become associated with particular hymns.

The hymns of TLH contained simple four-part chordal settings that were largely indistinguishable from one another; their note-against-note character meant that they could easily be sung in parts by the congregation, but they almost never were. The SBH reflected a greater diversity of musical settings. Since the initial thrust of the hymn committee's work in its early years centered on more experimental material, the Hymn Music Committee encouraged a broader range of musical accompaniments than previously found in either of the predecessor hymnals. As a result, a number of the musical settings in LBW reflect less-usual harmonies, some settings are in three parts instead of four, thinner-textured accompaniments are used for chant melodies, and so on. The general conclusion of many who have used these less-usual accompaniments over the years in parish worship is that, in spite of the initial enthusiasm for the variety that they represented, they have largely proved to be ineffective in leading congregational singing.

The question of whether to include harmonizations by J. S. Bach was another issue. The SBH included a significant number of them. Bach harmonizations were, after all, it was argued, part of the Lutheran heritage of song. (They were certainly part of historic Lutheranism's choral tradition, but not its congregational song tradition.) The view that Bach's chorale harmonizations were essentially choral settings not intended for congregational singing prevailed, and one finds only two included in LBW.

An issue that came up late in the project was the possible inclusion of guitar chords for certain hymns-a response to the times in which the guitar had become the ubiquitous instrument of choice for many young people. Despite the obvious fact that the guitar is an ineffective instrument for accompanying congregational singing, some 39 tunes included guitar chords. I have yet to hear any of these hymns sung by congregations accompanied with guitar. In retrospect, the decision seems to have been a gratuitous gesture in the direction of relevance and contemporaneity. The one hymn that was an obvious choice to be sung with guitar--"Silent night, holy night"--was left chordless!

Every hymnal, including LBW, reflects the understandings of those who shaped it--their understandings of what the relative balance should be between the church's heritage of congregational song, both texts and tunes, and the impetus to move that heritage along through new expressions from its own time. While, for the most part, of the "new" songs from each generation relatively few find their way into the more permanent treasury of the church's song, and far fewer into the immediately subsequent hymnals, that in no way abdicates each generation's obligation to sing its own song. What hymnals can do is chart the progress (or regress) of that responsibility. In so doing they give us a more realistic view of the situation. Songs heralded by a new generation may or may not ultimately prove to be musically or theologically appropriate. Hymnals help to sort out the enthusiasms of a given time from more substantive contributions.

What the future holds for the successors of LBW--in all the church bodies who contributed toward its shaping-is difficult to say. The reciprocal enthusiasms and cautions that shaped LBW will no longer be in place in quite the same way. What every new Lutheran hymnal or revision must surely reflect is a continued grounding in the hymnic heritage of the Reformation and a balanced view of the contributions of each new time. That is a necessary mission for every hymnal committee. But it will be neither an easy task nor, in many circles, a popular one.

CHART OF YEARS OF SERVICE OF HYMN COMMITTEES MEMBERS

Hymn Texts Committee

67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78

Bessie Coleman (ALC) L. Crosby Deacon (LCA) E. Then. DeLaney (LCMS) Gilbert E. Doan, Jr. (LCA) Gracia Grindal (ALC) Edward A. Hansen (ALC) Edward T. Horn III (LCA) Joel W. Lundeen (LCA) John Milton (ALC) Hilton C. Oswald (LCMS) Martin L. Seltz (LCMS) Gerald Thorson (ALC) George Utech (ALC) Jaroslav Vajda (LCMS) Marilyn Waniek (LCA) Stanley Yoder (LCA)

Hymn Music Committee

67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78

Charles R. Anders (LCA) Jan Bender (LCMS) Walter E. Buszin (LCMS) Paul Christiansen (ALC Jerry A. Evenrud (ALC) Paul Foelber (LCMS) Lam Houff (LCA) Frederick F. Jackish (LCA) Edward Klammer (LCMS) Ludwig Lenel (LCA) Ronald Nelson (ALC Ruth Olson (ALC Leland B. Sateren (ALC Carl Schalk (LCMS) Dale Warland (ALC)

(1) LCMS Convention Proceedings, 1965, p. 186.

(2) Ibid.

(3) The membership of the Hymn Texts Committee and the Hymn Music Committee, as well as the membership of the ILCW and its other committees, is given in Philip H. Pfatteicher, Commentary on the Lutheran Book of Worship: Lutheran Liturgy in Its Ecumenical Context (Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 1990), 515-16. The chart accompanying this article details the membership and length of service of each member of the hymn committees. I served as a member of the Hymn Music Committee throughout the process except for the first year. While the ILCW included a representative from the ELCC, that body was not represented on any of the hymn committees.

(4) Eugene Brand, "Liturgical Reconnaissance," in The Future of Worship in the ELCA: Exploring the Critical Issues, prepared by Paul R. Nelson and Frank W. Stoldt (Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 1999), 4.

(5) See Carl Schalk, God's Song in a New Land: Lutheran Hymnals in America (St. Louis: Concordia, 1995).

(6) Schalk, God's Song in a New Land, 162-63; emphasis added.

(7) Enok Mortensen, The Danish Lutheran Church in America (Philadelphia: Board of Publication, LCA, 1967), 265.

(8) The Handbook to the Lutheran Hymnal, comp. W. G. Polack (St. Louis: Concordia, 1942), xi.

(9) "Introduction to the Common Hymnal," Service Book and Hymnal, p. 286.

(10) By one count, the Common Service Book and Hymnal contained only seven such hymns, the Service Book and Hymnal only nine, while the Lutheran Hymnary had contained 21, the American Lutheran Hymnal 17, and The Lutheran Hymnal 30. See Schalk, God's Song in a New Land, Appendix E.

(11) From the Preface to Contemporary Worship 1: Hymns.

(12) This format was, in fact, a recent development on the American Lutheran scene as the primary format for the congregational editions of their hymnals. American Lutherans, as well as the Scandinavian countries and Germany, had followed the tune-text or text-only model until the late nineteenth century, with accompaniments in a separate volume for the organist.

(13) The role of the publishers as they influenced a variety of factors related to LBW has yet to be told. Their influence, then as now, was often prompted by fiscal concerns since hymnals and supplements accounted for, and continue to account for, a significant part of the income of all Lutheran publishers.

(14) For information on the origin and use of the Hymn of the Day, see Carl Schalk, The Hymn of the Day and Its Use in Lutheran Worship (St. Louis: Concordia, 1983).

(15) The initial compilation of both series was the work of Edward Klammer, member of the Hymn Music Committee. Unfortunately, while the terminology of "Hymn of the Day" has been quite generally accepted in parish practice, the title in Sunday bulletins often serves simply to mask what is essentially the old "Sermon Hymn" under a new guise.

(16) Eugene Brand notes, "I think of no concessions made on the basis of Missouri pressure alone. That is especially true in regard to the number of 'chorales' in the hymn collection." "Liturgical Reconnaissance," 13, note 29.

(17) "This inclusion and availability of a large number of early Reformation chorales in LBW can hardly be overstated. The otherwise highly regarded Church Book (1868) included only six, the CSB (1917) seven, the SBH nine, and now LBW contained 26. See Schalk, God's Song in a New Land, Appendix E.

Carl Schalk Distinguished Professor of Music, Emeritus Concordia University, River Forest, Illinois