A letter's relevancy...

[ChiRho]

January 23, 1883

Honored Sir,

This morning I received your worthy letter, written on the 19th of the month. In your letter you ask for my opinion on whether it is advisable to introduce the singing of Methodist songs in a Lutheran Sunday School. May what follows serve as a helpful reply to your questions:

No, this is not advisable, rather it is very incorrect and pernicious.

1. Our church is so rich in hymns that you could justifiably state that if one were to introduce Methodist hymns in a Lutheran school this would be like carrying coals to Newcastle. The singing of such hymns would make the rich Lutheran Church into a beggar which is forced to beg from a miserable sect. Thirty or forty years ago a Lutheran preacher might well have been forgiven this. For at that time the Lutheran Church in our country was as poor as a beggar when it comes to song books for Lutheran children. A preacher scarcely knew where he might obtain such little hymn books. Now, however, since our church itself has everything it needs, it is unpardonable when a preacher of our church causes little ones to suffer the shame of eating a foreign bread.

2. A preacher of our church also has the holy duty to give souls entrusted to his care pure spiritual food, indeed, the very best which he can possibly obtain. In Methodist songs there is much which is false, and which contains spiritual poison for the soul. Therefore, it is soul-murder to set before children such poisonous food. If the preacher claims, that he allows only "correct" hymns to be sung, this does not excuse him. For, first of all, the true Lutheran spirit is found in none of them; second, our hymns are more powerful, more substantive, and more prosaic; third, those hymns which deal with the Holy Sacraments are completely in error; fourth, when these little sectarian hymnbooks come into the hands of our children, they openly read and sing false hymns.

3. A preacher who introduces Methodist hymns, let along Methodist hymnals, raises the suspicion that he is no true Lutheran at heart, and that he believes one religion is as good as the other, and that he is thus a unionistic-man, a mingler of religions and churches.

4. Through the introduction of Methodist hymn singing he also makes those children entrusted to his care of unionistic sentiment, and he himself leads them to leave the Lutheran Church and join the Methodists.

5. By the purchase of Methodist hymn books he subsidizes the false church and strengthens the Methodist fanatics in their horrible errors. For the Methodists will think, and quite correctly so, that if the Lutheran preachers did not regard our religion as good as, or indeed, even better than their own, they would not introduce Methodist hymn books in their Sunday schools, but rather would use Lutheran hymn books.

6. By introducing Methodist hymn books, the entire Lutheran congregation is given great offense, and the members of the same are led to think that Methodists, the Albright people, and all such people have a better faith than we do.

This may be a sufficient answer regarding this dismal matter. May God keep you in the true and genuine Lutheran faith, and help you not to be misled from the same, either to the right or to the left.

Your unfamiliar, yet known friend, in the Lord Jesus Christ,

C. F. W. Walther
St. Louis, Missouri

(translated by Matthew C. Harrison)


So Theologica Crucis-Confessional Lutherans, is this relevant today?

[Flipper]

Interesting.

My Methodist husband knows all the same hymns we sing. Maybe the Methodists started using Lutheran hymns?

[PurpleBunny]

I think it's very relevent.

I'm still surprised there wasn't an uproar in my church when the Sunday School kids sang, on Open House day, during our regular service, "I Have Decided to Follow Jesus".

Normally I choose the music the kids sing during the Sunday School opening (from what is available to me) and I try to choose the songs that are Bible verse paraphrases. Occasionally we sing hymns that have been jazzed up into faster songs 'cause I like to get the kids standing up and doing actions (otherwise they look like they're comatose ... of course that is how the Sunday School opening makes me feel too...).

[SPALATIN]

I think it's very relevent.

I'm still surprised there wasn't an uproar in my church when the Sunday School kids sang, on Open House day, during our regular service, "I Have Decided to Follow Jesus".

Normally I choose the music the kids sing during the Sunday School opening (from what is available to me) and I try to choose the songs that are Bible verse paraphrases. Occasionally we sing hymns that have been jazzed up into faster songs 'cause I like to get the kids standing up and doing actions (otherwise they look like they're comatose ... of course that is how the Sunday School opening makes me feel too...).

I think the reason that people didn't cause an uproar is because even though the hymn is theologically as incorrect as you can get many don't want to upset the children and think that it is a nice gesture to follow Jesus even though there really is no decision to be made there. It comes down to correct catechesis and many laypeople just haven't had that in their lives.

[KagomeShuko]

Okay, I don't agree with this at all. I agree with not using hymns that aren't correct in what they say about doctrine and sacrament, but this is quite ridiculous.

The Lutheran hymnals themselves are made from hymns from MANY different denominations. So, to say "Oh, using a Methodist hymn is bad" is just somebody being judgmental IMHO.

Think about how many denominations sing "A Mighty Fortress." Should they quit singing it?

According to this, we should quit singing many of the hymns that we sing. I don't like this letter at all.

Stein Auf!
Bridget

[RedneckAnglican]

from a Lutheran hymnal site:

The Church's one Foundation 473

Lord of the Living Harvest 492

I lay my Sins on Jesus 652

all written by Charles Wesley...John's little brother...I was actually looking for "O for a thousand tounges to sing"...not in there...oh well...

this is the site... www.lutheran-hymnal.com/

[DogMom]

But since there are so many hymns written by Methodists in the Lutheran church already, why would we need to bring in a "Methodist Hymnal"?
I feel the need to ask if those of you condemning the introduction of a "Methodist hymnal" have seen one lately. I have, because I believe that it's necessary for me to continue to examine what I believe, how I worship, and why - so I have read (and own) at least one Methodist hymnal, one "Roman" hymnal (hymn book), several different denominations' "liturgy" books, and several denominations' "statement" books, including the Book of Discipline.

And I have to tell you, I wouldn't use any hymnal but ours. Our hymns, in general, are expressions of our beliefs, doctrines, and theology. They're Scripture and theology set to music. You might be surprised, if you looked past the music into the message and words themselves, how much Scripture is actually in those hymns, and how deep and intensely theological they really are. They're not just something to break up the service; something to give the congregation to do to keep them entertained. They're statements of faith. And, as such, they're not feel-good-Christianity, they're not Top-40-Pop-Gospel-Praise songs. While those songs have a place, I just don't believe that it's in a church service. "Jesus is great, praise him praise him" is a wonderful sentiment and all, but it's not a statement of faith.
*Note: this is not to say that all other denominations have nothing but vapid praise songs in their hymnal. I'm not saying that at all. But you do run the risk of introducing a lot of that sort of song if you don't have some sort of theological control over the songs you introduce. And, quite frankly, some of their hymnals do contain some of that type of song. Some hymnals even have those as a major percentage of their "hymns". But I am not trying to start a denomination war here, and I'm NOT saying they have useless music.

Using "their" hymns in our hymnals is one thing - that way they get subject to a scrutiny of theological and doctrinal statement before they're added. The hymns we have in the Lutheran church, whoever they originated from, have been checked for doctrinal and theological correctness, and have been "judged" to be doctrinally and theologically correct. Methodists, Presbyterians, Romans, etc. - are NOT evil, useless, stupid or non-musical. It's not like they have nothing to offer the Christian community. To say so is, quite honestly, unChristian!

However, using their hymbooks in our services would be ridiculous. For one thing, why would we want to or need to? Our hymnals have a rich variety of hymnody in them already.
For another, we have no guarantee that the hymns in a hymnal from any different denomination will be doctrinally and theologically correct. You're trusting someone, or a group of someones, not of your own doctrinal or confessional beliefs, to put together a bunch of songs that are doctrinally correct according to your, not their beliefs.
And that just ain't gonna happen.

(The fact that they use hymns written by Bach, Luther and other prominent Lutherans is just evidence that they, like we, know a good hymn when they hear it.;))

[KagomeShuko]

DogMom, of course theliturgy and worshpi service is going to be different. It's not Lutheran. However, that is not what is in the OP. The OP states singing a Methodist hymn in Sunday School. Being we already haver so many "Methodist" hymns in the Lutheran hymnals, anyway, what it is saying is that we should not sing those hymns. There's nothing about replacing the liturgy or lessons or teaching different beliefs.

Stein Auf!
Bridget

[DogMom]

Sorry, I didn't make myself clear. I hadn't intended to imply that we'd use the liturgy. Of course not.
But, my point still stands. The message in the hymns themselves has been "vetted", so to speak, and passed a theological review if they appear in our hymnal.
To expect someone else's hymnal to contain only hymns that agree with our theology and doctrine in it is ridiculous.
And my point still stands - if we have the hymns from "THEM" that we like, and are doctrinally correct, then why risk getting an incorrect message from the hymns in their hymnal that are not theologically and doctrinally correct?

You're asking me "we use 10% of 'their' hymns, so what's the problem with using the other 90%?"
I'm saying "how can you justify using the other 90% based on the 10% we have?"
It's a case of Exceptions Do Not Make Good Rules. Just because some of their hymns are in our hymnal doesn't mean they all should be.

[PurpleBunny]

My church actually uses a Maranatha songbook during the service as well as the Lutheran hymnal. I don't have a problem with the songs we use out of it (most of them are rearrangements of songs that are in the Lutheran hymnal; the rest of the ones that we use are generally okay) but when flipping to the song that we're about to sing, I've come across some pretty strange songs.

Our church bought the hymnals to save money since they were photocopying more pages for the bulletin when the songs were being typed out (we print our entire service in the bulletin, something I've noticed is becoming more and more common, whether the service is good old DSII, the one preferred by my church when we have a traditional service, or a liturgical service that isn't in the hymnal, like we usually have).

[KagomeShuko]

IMHO, the leaders of the church need to be able to teach theological understanding of the Lutheran church. If they are going to let any hymnal get in the way simply because "it is there," there is a problem with the church - and not that it has another denomination's hymnal.

The hymnal itself should have no effect on the theology. There are always plenty of books. All of these books teach many different things. A person needs to know the theology. If they believe something that is not Lutheran, then they obviously aren't Lutheran. . .

Of course, Lutheran hymnals should never be replaced, but if leaders cannot pck out the proper songs from oterh hymnals and songbooks, that is their problem. To make everything critical about what is in a hymnal itself is to be in error of how to properly teach and shepherd people.

Stein Auf!
Bridget

[WildStrawberry]

The hymnal itself should have no effect on the theology. There are always plenty of books. All of these books teach many different things. A person needs to know the theology. If they believe something that is not Lutheran, then they obviously aren't Lutheran..

See, IMHO, the hymnal should be a reflection of the theology of the denomination. How are you supposed to teach the theology when you don't have the correct tools? When you have different theologies all mixed in together, it makes it hard for the average lay person to sort through and discern what is correct. It's confusing. Why would x be in our hymnal if we believe y?

I wouldn't want "I Have Decided" (by Amy Grant) in my hymnal because it isn't theologically sound. If you teach one thing and sing another, don't you think that people are going to be confused and at least SOME of your church is going to come to the conclusion that you have to make some sort of DECISION to believe in Jesus? And doesn't that go right along with works righteousness? Which is, correct me if I'm wrong here, not a Lutheran belief?

Berry

[DogMom]

Why should the leaders have to pick "proper" music from "other" hymnals? Why can they not just use...the LUTHERAN hymnals that are already in use in their church?

To make everything critical about what is in a hymnal itself is to be in error of how to properly teach and shepherd people.
That's rather unclear. Are you saying "we shouldn't be critical of the content of books". If so, why?

Or are you saying that teaching shouldn't rest solely on the hymnal? If so, yes, I agree - but to remove the hymnal or say that its content is totally irrelevant (as, quite frankly, you're doing here by saying that the hymnal and the hymns in it don't matter) is to remove one of the biggest and BEST tools in the pastor's teaching arsenal!
Luther himself said that music was one of the best tools for teaching - so he sat down and wrote hymns. Hymns that were theologically based.
I'm not saying "It's not OURS so it's BAD," and I think you're interpreting what I'm saying to mean that.
What I am saying is that it's not ours so we have no CONTROL over the CONTENTS of it, and therefore no guarantee that what is being taught through these songs, when they're used, is going to be theologically and doctrinally correct.
Music and song are used to teach. They're used everywhere to teach. To suddenly say that they aren't, or shouldn't, is just foolish.

[KagomeShuko]

We should be criticla of th4e books we use. However, to let the theology that's bein gtaught depend solely on a bok in the church is not good. The leaders need to be abel to properly teach and shepherd so tha when these things ARE seen by others, it can be picked out what is wrong in that theology accordng to Lutheranism.

Stein Auf!
Bridget

[DogMom]

But, if that book is a major tool in the teaching of that theology, why should we deliberately introduce "bad" theology into our tools?
And, quite frankly, to say that we should have other denomination's hymnals in our church to "pick out what's wrong" is itself wrong, for two reasons.
#1: if you ONLY have them to pick them apart, then you're not focusing on what's GOOD and RIGHT in Scripture, you're focusing on "what that guy's doing wrong." Very Pharisaical.
#2: Steeping someone in what's RIGHT, not in what's WRONG-so-we-can-criticize-it, is the way to PROPERLY teach. Would you think a teacher is competent if he taught his students all the things that 2+2 does NOT equal? I would hope not.
Would you advocate your church bringing in, and using in worship, the Koran, the Book of Mormon, the Bhagvad-Gita? Even if it's to say what's wrong? Or do you want Scripture being read so you can know what is good and right?
Similarly, when bank tellers are trained in "counterfeit spotting", they are taught all about what REAL bills look like, feel like, what the security features are on a REAL bill, etc. This is so when a fake bill comes across their counter, it will feel WRONG to them.
We can't, and shouldn't, teach OUR theology by saying "the other guy is wrong here, here and there," because there's so MANY heresies out there that how could we? We CAN and SHOULD teach our theology using the tools we have that DO teach what we believe.
Again: OUR hymnals, because they teach what WE believe.

[revjpw]

I'm still surprised there wasn't an uproar in my church when the Sunday School kids sang, on Open House day, during our regular service, "I Have Decided to Follow Jesus".

Normally I choose the music the kids sing during the Sunday School opening

Then why on earth would you pick such a theologically inept song??? What are the kids learning from that?????

[revjpw]

Okay, I don't agree with this at all. I agree with not using hymns that aren't correct in what they say about doctrine and sacrament, but this is quite ridiculous.

The Lutheran hymnals themselves are made from hymns from MANY different denominations. So, to say "Oh, using a Methodist hymn is bad" is just somebody being judgmental IMHO.

Think about how many denominations sing "A Mighty Fortress." Should they quit singing it?

According to this, we should quit singing many of the hymns that we sing. I don't like this letter at all.

Stein Auf!
Bridget

It has to do with being doctrinally sound and correct, and not introducing heresy into the Church. It's as simple as that. Actually I am trilled that other denominations would sing "A Mighty Fortress." It is a doctrinally, Biblically sound hymn. Perhaps the other denominations should sing more Lutheran hymns so they could learn a thing or two.

If the hymns that you sing promote a false teaching, then I would hope and pray that you would quit singing them in the church.

Hymns that are published in the Missouri Synod hymnal MUST pass doctrinal review. If they do not pass it, they are out. Period. If they do, then it's OK to print them in the hymnal. And our hymnal does contain hymns that were not written by Lutherans, but are doctrinally correct.

There is a publication available from CPH that helps identify certain things to look for in a hymn. This would help a great deal in finding hymns in other books that are doctrinally sound. But to simply buy another hymnal just to make it easier is a really bad idea because it introduces that false teaching into the church.

[ByzantineDixie]

Then why on earth would you pick such a theologically inept song??? What are the kids learning from that?????

Actually, I got the impression from Purplebunny's post that she didn't pick the song but someone else picked it?

Peace

Rose

[PurpleBunny]

Actually, I got the impression from Purplebunny's post that she didn't pick the song but someone else picked it?


Yup, the Sunday School superintendant lady picked it. I was actually out of town when it was chosen, too... It got sprung on me when I got back.

[revjpw]

Yup, the Sunday School superintendant lady picked it. I was actually out of town when it was chosen, too... It got sprung on me when I got back.


Oops. My bad. :blush: :blush:

[DogMom]

THANK you, revjpw for stating so succinctly what I was trying to express!