# Der Lutheraner_St. Louis Missouri_1853 05 10_S124
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

124

arose congregational singing in the Lutheran Church, and it is accordingly rhythmic in its root.

But lest anyone fall into the foolish thought that Luther took the rhythmic melodies only out of necessity and for want of other solemn, thoroughly slow songs with nothing but equal notes, I will only remind you that it is indeed a high art to create a beautifully articulated whole, a melody which presents itself like a flower with beautiful, gradually unfolding, natural petals, but not at all difficult, rather very easy, to put together a formless mass of tones. It would have cost the wise man only a few strokes of the pen to destroy the whole rhythm of all the chorales as thoroughly as it is now destroyed through ignorance and abuse. This Luther, however, not only did not do, because he knew very well the high worth of a beautiful, naturally flowing melody, but he also took over some songs from the old measureless Gregorian manner and set them into an orderly rhythm and measure, e. g. the melody "Christum wir sollen leben schon" and others.

If, therefore, dear reader, anyone should again try to make you believe that the proper manner of the chorales is the now customary, slow one, consisting of nothing but equal notes, and that it arose out of the measureless and unrhythmic Gregorian singing, then excuse his ignorance. Here is the fact of the case, which all ignorance and all obstinacy will not overturn.

So one must regard the rhythmic chorales not as something newly introduced, but as something ancient, and at bottom no further recommendation of them should be needed than the certainty that one possesses in them the unadulterated melodies of the age of the Reformation.

But one is not yet content with the historical proof. One has all manner of scruples against the reintroduction of those old and original tunes. "So let me, dear reader, briefly answer some of the commonest objections against the rhythmic chorales.

One says, the rhythmic singing is worldly. Now I will not dispute that the rhythmic chorales, by virtue of their livelier movement, could possibly be sung in a manner that does not befit the sanctuary of God, and does not promote edification but hinders it.„ And it is doubtless certain that those who give instruction in rhythmic singing must not proceed unwisely to work. If the rhythmic hymns are sung in a worldly tone, this is not the fault of the rhythm, but either want of skill on the part of the teachers, or the world in the hearts of the singers. Abuse does not abolish right use; and everyone sees that what is original alone must be the genuine, and therefore also the best. This experience also confirms. For if it is sung in the right manner, the rhythmic chorales bear, even in the lively passages, a holy earnestness, a solemn dignity about them, not the least of worldliness or frivolous manner. One can very well tell from the tone of the melody and from its movement whether its content is a song of praise, a dying song, whether sorrow or joy, but it is always a reverent praise of the highest Majesty, a joy that never forgets that the Bridegroom of the soul is at the same time the Judge of all flesh. — What is often not observed, and what necessarily robs rhythmic singing of a part of its solemn dignity, is the insufficient emphasis on the long notes which stand either in the middle or at the end of a stanza. Many think that a melody is rhythmic only if all the notes are sung with the greatest swiftness, as though nothing in it might be slow. But on the contrary, rhythm becomes so moving and impressive only by this, that, as with a mighty, enrapturing orator, the swift passages are as it were held in rein and moderated by the slow and dignified ones. Therefore give the long notes, where they occur, their due emphasis, and hasten not over them as if one lost something thereby; sing the rhythmic chorales altogether well and as they want to be sung, and it will occur to no one any more to find anything worldly in them. Our fathers, who first sang them, were sworn enemies of all worldly ways, and to their chorales it is not proper. —

Another objection is this: the rhythmic chorale comes from the Union. Now whoever can say that, indeed, cares little whether folly or wisdom speak out of his mouth. A more foolish assertion could hardly be made than this. Precisely in the time when one departed from the way of divine, pure doctrine, when the Union and its root, unbelief, became dominant, singing also fell into decay, and out of the beautiful old noble melodies there came a monotonous, howling monstrosity, which can make an impression on the mind only through the dignity of so great an assembly and through the remains of original beauty and power which, in spite of the destruction of the rhythm, still dwelt in the chorales. As proof of this serves an old chorale book of 1732, in which Dretzel, organist at St. Aegidien in Nuremberg, has set down many chorales in a threefold different manner, namely two melodies which were sung in his time, and the third, a rhythmic one, which he calls the proper melody, as the composer made it, and as it properly ought to be sung.

An unnecessary change of good old ceremonies — is this perhaps the introduction of rhythmic chorales? A change it is, where they are introduced again, that is true; a change of old ceremonies besides; but — of good old ceremonies? Can that then be good which comes from an evil source? If we want good old ceremonies, we must not take them from the time of the decay of church life, but from the best time. And if we want not merely what is old, but what is original and unadulterated, as in the text of the hymns so also in the melodies, then we shall certainly have to resolve upon a change. A change from the worse to the better, — to this no one should ever be too old! It is a sign of spiritual decrepitude when one is so much the enemy of all change that one will no longer accept even the best, nor lay aside the most perverse. A simple, childlike, fresh mind gets easily over such small scruples.

The rhythmic chorales are said to be hard to learn, say many. But experience testifies precisely the contrary. The great applause which rhythmic singing has found here and there in Germany, especially in Bavaria, the enthusiasm with which, wherever spiritual life awakened, one learned and sang again also the old original melodies, is proof that they are very easy to learn. Everything natural is easy and lovely, only the unnatural is hard and ugly. The melodies, in their original form, have for the most part an easily grasped, characteristic form, impressing itself upon the ear at once, so that one distinguishes them from one another as easily as men of different features. In many cities of Germany, where rhythmic singing was done for the first time, the whole congregation joined in at the second or third verse, and sang the hymn, as it had never heard it before, rhythmically to the end with hearty joy. Children sang again of their own accord spiritual songs, as of old.

Nevertheless many believe that it is impossible to introduce the rhythmic chorales; the whole matter, they say, is new and uncertain. Well, dear reader, my opinion is, good things take time. Let it grow! The power and beauty of the old hymns in their original dress will make their own way, as indeed it has already done in many congregations of this country, where one now sings again with heart's delight and devotion the old rhythmic chorales, and, besides the blessed possession of the old, pure and unadulterated doctrine and of the heart-refreshing old hymns, rejoices also in the moving and beautiful old churchly melodies! —

G. Sch.