However, coming 350 years before Pius X, there was another voice speaking similarly of music. Instead of merely accentuating the role of music to the liturgy, this individual insisted that music was a servant of God's Word and theology. In his profound remark, Martin Luther emphasizes the immense value of music, stating, "Next to the Word of God, the noble art of music is the greatest treasure in the world." This quote encapsulates Luther's profound appreciation for the power and significance of music in society. Even more profound, however, is Luther's other quote. "Music is a handmaid of theology." Luther's Latin preface is in some respects an expanded version of his "Frau Musica" poem, in prose rather than verse. Of the Protestant reformers around his time, it is only Luther unhesitatingly commended the use of music in the life and worship of the church and who articulates something that might be presumed from some in Rome but had not been addressed in such way before.
Do you suppose Pius X read it first in Luther? Were they both drawing on similar points within the theological and liturgical tradition of the West, each in their own time? Or could it be that each saw this differently and separately but articulated it in remarkably parallel terms and ways. In any case, their successor communities of faith seem to have forgotten these words. For some in Rome, the hymn either does not matter all that much at all and can be disposable song. The great hymns of Roman tradition and the great hymns of the Christian West overall have been replaced with pop songs and eminently forgettable hymns written not as handmaid to either the liturgy or theology but reflections of the moment which can and probably should be forgotten as time goes on and the song is replaced. For others in Rome, the congregational hymn has no place at all in the liturgy (Latin Mass folk). For Lutherans it is not much different. Those who separate style from substance find cause to introduce pop songs for the moment and musical styles that agitate against their sacred usage because they are not all that important after all and those who insist that only the Lutheran chorale should be used have narrowed their acceptable choice to a very small pool because they are too sacred to be added to in the present day or to borrow from anyone outside the Lutheran tradition. In either case, both Rome and Wittenberg seem to have forgotten Pius and Luther.
2 comments:
I suppose this topic can be argued into oblivion, and churches and denominations can find points of agreement, and areas of dissension. It is true that Christian music should harmonize with fundamental theology and good doctrine, and not merely convey emotion apart from the Gospel message. I think the choral selections for liturgy in particular should require closer attention to doctrine because it is congregational and set apart for worship. Since I do like country Gospel music, many delightful hymns of old, and songs of the faith that witness to the personal nature of the love of Christ, I see it from the viewpoint that there is room for both forms of music inside and outside of the church service. Most of the Psalms, written to be praise music, contain a rich well of emotion and reverence for God, appealing to His omniscience, mercy, and love for His people. Our Lord Jesus openly expressed emotion. We who were created in God’s image also express emotion. In music we petition God, express our trust in Him, and our belief in His word and His promises.We also show our need to draw close to Him as we walk this often sorrowful and uncertain journey through besetting trials and tribulations. It is true that Luther loved music, so much that he wrote nearly 200 hymns. Music is indeed the handmaiden of faith and worship. We Christians of all stripes have loved the hymns since the beginning. Often we habitually sing along to these great hymns loudly or quietly to ourselves when we hear them on the radio or internet. They wake us up out of the doldrums of an otherwise dull or melancholy mood as one hears memorable songs of the faith. It reminds us that we are not only doctrinally attached to Our Lord, wherein is our trust and confidence, but emotionally as well. And that is a good thing indeed.
Soli Deo Gloria
Including “quotes” from Martin Luther without reference to the source simply sets off alarm bells. And sure enough, as in other cases, the alleged Luther “quotes” are bogus. The “quotes” are simply generalized summaries of Luther’s opinions on music and then attributed as a “quote” from authors writing centuries after Luther.
What Martin Luther actually wrote is in his Foreword (originally in Latin) to Georg Rhau's Collection, “Symphoniae iucundae" (_D. Martin Luthers Werke_, Weimar, Vol. 50, pp. 368-374) (https://archive.org/details/werkekritischege50luthuoft/page/368/mode/1up). The following excerpt is from pp. 370-1:
"Hoc vnum possumus nunc afferre: Quod experientia testis est, Musicam esse vnam, quae post verbum Dei merito celebrari debeat, domina et gubernatrix affectuum humanorum (de bestiis nunc tacendum est) quibus tamen ipsi homines, ceu a suis doninis, gubernantur et saepius rapiuntur."
ChatGPT translation: “This one thing we can now assert: that experience bears witness that music alone is the one art which, after the Word of God, ought rightly to be celebrated, as the mistress and ruler of human emotions (to be silent now about beasts), by which nevertheless human beings themselves are governed, as by their masters, and are often carried away.”
From _What Luther Says_, Vol. 2, p. 982, No. 3103, Ewald M. Plass gives this translation: “We can now adduce only this one fact: Experience testifies that, after the Word of God, music alone deserves to be celebrated as mistress and queen of the emotions of the human heart (of animals nothing is to be said at present). And by these emotions men are controlled and often swept away as by their lords.”
Later in his Foreword, Luther writes: “Qui vero non afficiuntur, nae ilii vere amusi et digni sunt, qui aliquem Merdipoetam interim audiant vel porcorum Musicam.” (“But those who are not affected by it are truly without music and deserve meanwhile to listen to some dung-poet ("Merdipoetam") or the music of pigs.”)
Another translation and a lengthy discussion of the historical machinations of Luther’s original Latin Foreword are given in a February 15, 2021, Red Brick Parsonage article, “Martin Luther’s Praise of Music (Latin)” (https://redbrickparsonage.wordpress.com/2021/02/15/martin-luthers-praise-of-music-latin/).
Post a Comment