The early Reformation era practice of the
German speaking churches must be distinguished from the later, mid 16th
century German church practice. Hughes Old explains that the sources of
Reformed psalmody and hymnody are to be traced back to four main cities:
Strasbourg, Augsburg, Constance, and Geneva. The first three cities are
relevant in this analysis because they were German speaking and their practice
of praise in worship in the early days of the 16th century Reformation
did vary from the practice which would take hold in Geneva under Calvin. Strasbourg,
having a strong claim on being one of the earliest German speaking Reformed
churches, deserves attention first. Bucer, the reformer of Strasbourg, held the
line, early on, when it came to the content of worship song. The first several
Strasbourg Psalters contained only inspired canonical songs. Apparently, Bucer’s
position was coherent enough and consistent enough on this point, that Old is
able to conclude that Calvin took over his position on worship song from Bucer
(p.260). However, honesty requires us to mention that the 1537 Strasbourg
Psalter does contain, for the first time, some human compositions which were
used for newly approved holiday services, Christmas, Good Friday, Easter, and
Ascension. The newly revised practice of Strasbourg would be short-lived however
as the city was sacked by imperial forces and returned to Papal control in the
late 1540’s. As for the German speaking church at Augsburg it did not follow
the early pattern set by Strasbourg, and as early as 1530 had included roughly
20 man-made hymns. Finally, we must note the rather obvious inclusion of a
large number of hymns in the Constance Hymnbook of 1540 (p.260). Johannes Zwick
and Ambrosius Blarer were so committed to the use of man-made hymns, that Old
reports they made an argument for their practice in the preface to their
hymnal. Conscious of a need to support their argument from the early church,
they appealed to Tertullian’s comment that some brought songs of their own
composition to church and to the example of Ambrose of Milan who is known for
having composed a number of his own hymns for worship. Old’s comments at this
point are instructive, as he points out that though it was legitimate,
historically speaking, for them to appeal to Tertullian and Ambrose as support
for the claim that the practice of Constance conformed to examples of the early
church, it was also fraught with its own difficulties since “Tertullian and
Ambrose represented the minority opinion in the ancient Church. From the middle
of the second century until at least the end of the fourth century most churches
confined themselves to hymns and psalms taken from Scripture” (p.261). It is
not a great obstacle to the thesis presented in this post to note that
Constance maintained such a liberal policy on man-made hymns since the
Reformation was suppressed in Constance in 1548. That means, whatever worship practices
emerged in the German Reformed church of the mid 16th century are
not necessarily tied by genealogical succession to the practice of Strasbourgh,
Augsburg, or Constance, since the work of Reformation had largely been terminated in
these areas.
Now comes the distasteful part, which is to relate in brief, the DECLINE of
psalm-singing in the German Reformed Church. Whether it occurred by the mid 17th
century or by the early 18th century, there seems to be no dispute
among historians that the practice of the German church changed from exclusive psalmody
to a position that is very similar to the Lutheran practice. How and why that
change took place is not all that difficult to nail down. Good tells us that
though the practice of psalm-singing had been the norm for the first 100 years
of the German Reformed, the winds of change did begin to blow and those winds
were fanned by rise of German Pietism. Perhaps a sampling of quotes from Good
at this point will serve well to capture what caused the reversal in practice:
Now if it had not
been for revival of Pietism, who knows but we might still be singing the Psalms
in the Reformed Church?
We therefore have
Pietism to thank for our hymns…
Strange as it may
appear to us, the introduction of hymns was bitterly opposed in many parts of
the Reformed Church as an innovation, as the old Reformed people had become
greatly wedded to the Psalms…
They held that God’s
word (the Psalms) and not man’s words (the hymns), should be sung in God’s
worship. And in their Psalms they aimed at the literal rather than the
rhythmical translation, so that God’s Word might be changed as little as
possible.
For many years
Neander’s hymns were not permitted to be sung in the churches. They were,
however, used at private meetings, at conventicles and prayer meetings. But by
and by they became so popular that they won their way into the churches, for
the Church could no longer afford to pass them by.
So after will nigh a
century and a half of psalm singing, the General Synod of Julich, Cleve, Berg
and Mark issued a new hymn book in 1738 (pg.404).
Clearly, Good writes as one who supports the change caused by Pietism,
but he also makes it abundantly clear that the change from psalms to hymns
marked a radical and not minor change in practice. He points out that the radical change was more
about what was pragmatic than principled. Notice the principle of the old
German practice as Good says, “They held that God’s word (the Psalms) and not
man’s words (the hymns), should be sung in God’s worship,” but now, the German
church does what became “popular” through use in the private meetings and
conventicles. In other words, the false piety of German Pietism actuated the
change in practice not the discovery of a command in the word of God to sing
man-made hymns.
This new policy was far from the old one not only in practice but also in
tone and ethos. Again, a quote from Good, no advocate of exclusive canonical
psalmody either, which implicitly contrasts the original German Reformed commitment to Biblical
worship with the new captures the difference:
The Reformed in many
places closed the organs and introduced the singing of the psalms into the
churches. Many of the old hymn books contained nothing but psalms…these psalms
sustained the Reformed in persecution and linked their hearts more fully to God’s
word. The early Reformed Church was Puritanic in her churches and her services (pg.453-4).
What is striking about Good’s observation is that the psalms were for a
time when the church endured suffering and persecution for the sake of the
gospel, and the hymns were for a time of ease, after the blood had been spilt,
and the sweat and pain of the previous generation of builders had provided them
a church where they could take rest in comfort. Perhaps the key to
understanding the rise and decline of psalmody in the Reformed churches is
found in this off-handed insight of Good. When the church suffers it looks to
the word of God for relief, but when the church is at rest it looks to the
opinions of men to sustain its comfort and ease. In a sense though, that may be
the silver lining in the story for those who desire to see the church return to
faithfulness in worship since our age is growing increasingly hostile toward
true Christian faith. It may just well be that as the church in our age begins
to endure more significant forms of persecution from an increasingly hostile
culture that the syrupy, feel good worship that prevails everywhere today, even
in Reformed and Presbyterian churches, will be replaced with the worship
prescribed in God’s word. However, our prayer should not be that God would send
sufferings so that we may be obedient in our worship, rather, our prayer ought to be that God
would send us the Spirit of obedience, and that out of gratitude for salvation
and a desire to glorify His name we may return to the kind of worship which God
commands.
On the Necessity of Reforming the Church by John Calvin:
If it be inquired,
then, by what things chiefly the Christian religion has a standing existence
amongst us, and maintains its truth, it will be found that the following two
not only occupy the principal place, but comprehend under them all the other
parts, and consequently the whole substance of Christianity, viz., a knowledge,
first, of the mode in which God is duly worshipped and, secondly,
of the source from which salvation is to be obtained. When these are
kept out of view, though we may glory in the name of Christians, our profession
is empty and vain.
I know how difficult it is to persuade the world that God
disapproves of all modes of worship not expressly sanctioned by His Word. The opposite persuasion which cleaves to
them, being seated, as it were, in their very bones and marrow, is, that
whatever they do has in itself a sufficient sanction, provided it exhibits some
kind of zeal for the honour of God. But since God not only regards as
fruitless, but also plainly abominates, whatever we undertake from
zeal to His worship, if at variance with His command, what do we
gain by a contrary course? The words of God are clear and distinct,
"Obedience is better than sacrifice." "In vain do they worship
me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men," (1 Sam. 25:22; Matt.
15:9.) Every addition to His word, especially in this matter, is a lie.
Mere " will worship" is vanity. This is the decision, and when once
the judge has decided, it is no longer time to debate.
J.I. Good, The Origin of the Reformed Church in Germany (Reading, PA:
Daniel Miller, 1887).
Hughes Oliphant Old, The
Patristic Roots of Reformed Worship (Zurich: Theologisher, 1975).
Westermeyer, Paul. German Reformed Hymnody in the United States. The
Hymn 31 (1980): 89-94.
No comments:
Post a Comment