A Study Document for Students of Church Music

Luther Among the Musicians

A STUDY DOCUMENT FOR STUDENTS OF CHURCH MUSIC

BETHANY LUTHERAN COLLEGE

2 3 LUTHER AMONG THE MUSICIANS

Hezekiah became king when he was twenty-five years old; And he did right in the sight of the Lord, according to all that his father David had done. In the first year of his reign, in the first month, he opened the doors of the house of the Lord and re- paired them. And he brought in the priests and the Levites, and gathered them into the square on the east. Then he said to them, “Listen to me, O Levites. Consecrate yourselves now, and consecrate the house of the Lord, the God of your fathers, and carry the uncleanness out from the holy place. For our fathers have been unfaithful and have done evil in the sight of the Lord our God, and have for- saken Him and turned their faces away from the dwelling place of the Lord, and have turned their backs. They have also shut the doors of the porch and put out the lamps, and have not burned incense or offered burnt offerings in the holy place to God of Israel. My sons, do not be negligent now, for the Lord has chosen you to stand before Him, to minister to Him, and to be His ministers and burn incense And they brought seven bulls, seven rams, seven lambs, and seven male goats for a sin offering for the kingdom, the sanctuary, and Judah. And he ordered the priests, the sons of Aaron, to offer them on the altar of the Lord. And the priests slaughtered them and purged the altar with their blood to atone for all Israel, for the king ordered the burnt offering and the sin offering for all Israel. He then stationed the Levites in the house of the Lord with cymbals, with harps, and with lyres, according to the command of David and of Gad the king’s seer, and of Nathan the prophet; for the command was for the Lord through His prophets. And the Levites stood with the musical instruments of David, and the priests of David, and the priests with the trumpets. Then Hezekiah gave the order to offer the burnt offering on the altar. When the burnt offering began, the song to the Lord also began with the trumpets, accompanied by the instruments of David, king of Israel. While the whole assembly worshiped, the singers also sang and the trumpets sounded; all this continued until the burnt offering was finished. Now at the completion of the burnt offerings, the king and all who were present with him bowed and worshiped. Moreover, King Hezekiah and the officials ordered the Levites to sing praises to the Lord with the words of David; and Asaph the seer. So, they sang praises with joy, and bowed down and worshiped. Hezekiah and all the people rejoiced over what God had prepared for the people, because the thing came about suddenly.1

Cleaning, repairing, opening, reconstruction, reconsecration, singing. These words describe the startling reformation of King Hezekiah, and they also appropriately portray the Lutheran Reformation of the sixteenth century. Both were times of renewal when God’s Word was restored to its rightful place at the center of life and worship. For Hezekiah this meant that the temple sacrifice and the observance of the liturgical calendar were reinstated. For Luther this meant that the pure sacrifice of Law- Gospel preaching was renewed, and the sacraments were once again administered to the people of God in their fullness. For both Hezekiah and Luther this re-introduction and renewal was accomplished by a glorious flowering of the musical art. This verdant flowering among the Lutherans of the sixteenth century continues to astonish and challenge, especially when it stands in stark contrast to certain modern trends in Lutheran worship.2

1 II Chronicles 29, selected verses (NASB). The similarity between Hezekiah’s reform and the renewal of the 16th century was not lost to Lu- ther, as he writes in the German Mass, 1526 (LW 53, p. 90): “in short, this or any other order shall be so used that whenever it becomes an abuse it shall straightway be abolished and replaced by another, even as King Hezekiah put away and destroyed the brazen serpent, though God Himself had commanded it to be made, because the children of Israel made an abuse of it (II Kings 18:4). For the liturgy must serve for the promotion of faith and love, and not to be a detriment of faith. As soon as it fails to do this, they are invalid, dead, and gone…” 2 Contemporary worship among Lutherans, especially in the United States, continues to lose its identity in a society that is overwhelmingly Protestant. Despite the successful efforts of many of the Lutheran colleges in the land, where music departments strive to produce trained musicians for the church, “Christian” radio, televangelism, and suburban evangelicalism (in the tradition of Moody and Graham), are the “religion of the people.” The liturgical service and its preoccupation with the sacramental mysteries of absolution, preaching, Baptism, the Lord’s Supper, and its consequent formal and aesthetic structure are not immediately appealing. Indeed, they cannot be, for their very exis- tence is drawn from the reality of the Incarnation; a reality in which God becomes form and matter for the salvation of fallen form and mat-

4 The way of reform was clear to Luther. The Word of God must be given its pre-eminent place in the lives of the faithful. This Word must play a primary role in theological discussion and in orthodox worship. Theological tract, sermon, hymn, motet, and artwork were all considered legitimate vehicles for the dynamic Word of God. Luther was not content, nor was he allowed to merely reform the schol- arly/theological aspects of the church. He was vitally concerned that the worship forms used by the people from day to day reflect the pure teaching of God’s Word. Luther realized that it was in the liturgical service, perhaps more than at any other place or time, that God and man came into contact. Here God came to serve man, and this liturgical service of God included the sermon, the sacrament, the read- ings of scripture, the hymns of the choir and congregation and the artwork in the church. The forms used in this liturgy were not commanded in scripture, and therefore they could be chosen in a spirit of Christian freedom. Indeed, no form save the Lord’s Prayer, the Words of Institution, and the Baptismal formula had divine mandate. Consequently every evangelical parish was free to use whatever forms it thought profitable and worthy; choosing from a vast wealth of Christian ceremony, art, and music that which was pure and beautiful. To begin with, we must repeat the prefatory statement that we do not abolish the Mass but religiously keep and defend it. In our churches Mass is celebrated every Sunday and on other festivals, when the sacrament is offered to those who wish for it after they have been examined and absolved. We keep traditional liturgical forms, such as the order of the lessons, prayers, vestments, etc. In a long harangue about the use of Latin in the Mass, our clever opponents quibble about how a hearer who is ignorant of the faith of the church benefits from hearing a Mass that he does not understand. Appar- ently they imagine that mere hearing is a beneficial act of worship even where there is no understanding. We do not want to belabor this point, but we leave it up to the judgment of the reader. We mention this only in passing in order to point out that our churches keep the Latin lessons and prayers. The purpose of observing ceremonies is that men may learn the Scriptures and that those who have been touched by the Word may receive faith and fear and so may also pray. Therefore, we keep Latin for the sake of those who study and understand it, and we insert German hymns to give the common people something to learn that will arouse their faith and fear. This has always been the custom in the churches. Though German hymns have varied in frequency, yet almost everywhere the people sang in their own language. No one has ever written or suggested that men benefit from hearing lessons they do not understand, or from ceremonies that do not teach or admonish, simply ex opere operato, by the mere doing or observing. Out with such pharisaic ideas!3

We gladly keep the old traditions set up in the church because they are useful and promote tranquility, and we interpret them in an evangelical way, excluding the opinion which holds that they justify. Our enemies falsely accuse us of abolishing good ordinances and church discipline. We can truthfully claim that in our churches the public liturgy is more decent than in theirs, and if you look at it correctly we are more faithful to the canons than our opponents are. Among our opponents, unwilling celebrants and hirelings perform Mass, and they often do so only for the money. When they chant the Psalms, it is not to learn or pray but for the sake of the rite, as if this work were an act of worship or at least worth some reward. Every Lord’s Day many in our circles use the Lord’s Supper, but only after they have been instructed, examined, and absolved. The children chant the Psalms in order to learn; the people sing, too, in order to learn or to worship. Among our opponents there is no catechization of the children at all, though even the canons give prescriptions about it. In our circles the pastors and ministers of the churches are required to instruct and examine the youth publicly, a custom that produces very good results. Among our opponents, there are many regions where no sermons are preached during the whole year, except in Lent. But the chief worship of God is the preaching of the Gospel.

ter— a doctrine which has never survived because of its popular appeal. The way of worship, then, is rarely as rich, beautiful, or Gospel- ori- ented as it might be. 3 The Apology of the Augsburg Confession, Art. XXIV, P. 1-5. The young Lutheran Church desired the liturgy to teach intelligibly the doctrines of the faith. The Torgau Articles, written in 1530, contain the following article regarding singing in the vernacular (The Augsburg Confes- sion: A Collection of Sources. J. M. Reu, Concordia Seminary Press, Ft. Wayne, Indiana, #9770, p. 90): “Since ceremonies now ought to be of service for doctrine, some have adopted German singing, that by this practice men might learn something, as Paul also teaches, I Cor. 14, that in the Church nothing unintelligible should be spoken or sung. Yet no command to that effect is made, and Latin also is always sung for the practice of the young. The things thus far stated are concerning external ordinances and customs.”

5 When our opponents do preach, they talk about human traditions, the worship of the saints, and similar trifles. Thus the people rightly despise and walk out on them after the reading of the Gospel. A few of the better ones are now beginning to talk about good works, but they say nothing about the righteousness of faith or about faith in Christ or about comfort for the conscience. In their polemics they even attack this most salutary part of the Gospel. In our churches, on the other hand, all sermons deal with topics like these: peni- tence, the fear of God, faith in Christ, the righteousness of faith, comfort for the conscience through faith, the exercise of faith, prayer and our assurance that it is efficacious and is heard, the cross, respect for rulers and for all civil ordinances, the distinction between the kingdom of Christ (or the spiritual kingdom) and political affairs, marriage, the education and instruction of children, chastity, and all the works of love. From this description of the state of our churches it is evident that we diligently maintain church discipline, pious ceremonies, and the good customs of the church.4

At the same time every pastor and parish was bound to serve the neighbor in need of the Gos- pel with whatever ceremony, art, or music it could so that God would be glorified and Christian brothers and sisters could gather in a spirit of love and mutual consolation. What, then, are we to think about Sunday and about similar rites in our churches? To this our teachers reply that it is lawful for bishops or pastors to make regulations so that things in the church may be done in good order, but not that by means of these we make satisfaction for sins, not consciences are bound so as to regard these as necessary services. It is proper that the churches comply with such ordinances for the sake of love and tranquility and that they keep them, in so far as one does not offend another, so that everything in the churches may be done in order and without confusion. However, consciences should not be burdened by suggesting that they are necessary for salvation or by judging that those who omit them without offense to others commit a sin.5

Luther’s principle for worship reform was surprisingly conservative, especially when we realize that the idea of liturgical reformation was not unique to Luther. Others had prepared “purified” worship forms even before Luther began his work in earnest, and throughout his life Luther was con- fronted by radical reforms of the centuries-old service of worship. The Lutheran reformation consis- tently maintained that an abolition of the old way of worship was an unnecessary jeopardizing of the faith of those who needed the Word in singing, art, and ceremony to assist them on the way to faith.6 “We are free to use whatever is not clearly contrary to or prohibited by the Word of God, as long as it is not disorderly, or confusing”… This, the Lutheran way of worship reform, was a stark contrast to the more radical Reformed way which allowed “only these things clearly commanded by God in the public worship service.” Hence the Lutherans sang newly composed texts in Latin and the vernacular, the Re-

4 The Apology of the Augsburg Confession, Art. XV, P. 38-44. In a discussion of the worship traditions of Lutheranism, the Confession of the Church (those documents which bear witness to the truths of Scripture in such a way that all Lutherans gladly subscribe to them, and join in confession, “This, we too believe and confess’’) are a very revealing window, for through them we see what was done to the old service, what was retained, and most importantly why changes and retentions were made. However, the liturgical practices described in the Confessions are still free because they are not of the central essence of Lutheran Christianity. “Those portions of the Symbols (the Lutheran Confessions) which refer to humanly established ceremonies and institutions are not binding in the sense that such ceremonies are of the essence of the Lutheran Church (procedures at elections, consecrations and ordinations; the pericopic system; the ecclesiastical year; the relative dignity of feasts; head covering for female worshipers; the ancient collects and chants; Eucharistic and other vestments; candles; the use of Latin in the service; chanting the Psalter; the sign of the holy cross; the customary ceremonial at the Mass; folded hands; solemnization of marriage in front of the church; exorcism and the white chrisom at Holy Baptism; Baptism by immersion, etc.) But the doctrinal implications that may underlie such humanly established ceremonies and institutions are binding (for example, the necessity for a rightfully constituted ministry, individual absolution as an individualization of the generalized proclamation of the Gospel, the designation of the blessed Virgin Mary as Mother of God to safeguard the dogma of the Incar- nation, and the availability of Holy Communion to meet the needs of the people). On the other hand, references to such humanly instituted ceremonies and institutions in the Symbols may legitimately be cited to demonstrate their complete consistency with sound, historic Lutheran doctrine and practice (for example, self-communion of the celebrant, a celebra- tion of the Holy Eucharist at the main parochial service(s) every Sunday, episcopal polity, reading the banns of marriage in advance, definition of the term “sacrament” to include more than Holy Baptism and Holy Communion, fasting before receiving Holy Communion, and private confession).” A. C. Piepkorn, “Suggested Principles for a Hermeneutics of the Lutheran Symbols” Concordia Theological Monthly, Vol. 29, January 1958, pp. 1-24. 5 The Augsburg Confession, Article XXVIII, pp. 53-56. 6 Who are the weak in faith? All who need the Word and Sacrament and their ordered, formal proclamation and administration. Luther realized that there was a way of worship for the “mature” in faith, those who would not need the order of the church year, the lectionary, or art; however, he had no desire to start or seek out such a congregation. (LW, 53, p. 64)

6 formed could not. The Lutherans used candles, incense, the vestments, the Reformed could not. The Lutherans could sponsor the work of painters like the Cranachs, the Radical Reformed were duty bound to destroy all church art and every image that transgressed the law of Moses. Let this be said about images strictly according to the law of Moses. The meaning is not that I wish to defend images, as has been sufficiently indicated. Rather murderous spirits are not to be permitted to create sins and problems of conscience where none exist, and murder souls without necessity. For although the matter of images is a minor, external thing, when one seeks to burden the conscience with sin through it, as through the law of God, it becomes the most important of all. For it destroys faith, profanes the blood of Christ, blasphemes the Gospel, and sets all that Christ has won for us at nought, so that this Karlstadtian abomination is no less effective in destroying the kingdom of Christ and a good conscience, than the papacy has become with its prohibitions regarding food and marriage, and all else that was free and without sin. For eating and drinking are also minor, external things. Yet to ensnare the conscience with laws in these matters is death for the soul. From this let every man note which of us two is the more Christian. I would release and free consciences and the souls from sin, which is a truly spiritual and evangelical pastoral function, while Karlstadt seeks to capture them with laws and burden them with sin without good cause. And yet he does this not with the law of God, but with his own conceit and mischief, so that he is not only far from the Gospel, but also not even a Mosaic teacher. And yet he continually praises the “Word of God, the Word of God,” just as if it were therefore to become God’s Word as soon as one could say the Word of God. Usually those who make great ado in praising God’s Word do not have much to back them up, as unfortunately we have pre- viously experienced under our papistic tyrants. However to speak evangelically of images, I say and declare that no one is obligated to break violently images even of God, but everything is free, and one does not sin if he does not break them with violence. One is obligated, however, to destroy them with the Word of God, that is, not with the law in a Karlstadtian manner, but with the Gospel. This means to instruct and enlighten the conscience that it is idolatry to worship, or to trust in them, since one is to trust alone in Christ. Beyond this let the external matters take their course. God grant that they may be destroyed, become dilapidated, or that they remain. It is all the same and makes no difference, just as when the poison has been removed from a snake. I have myself seen and heard the iconoclast read out of my German Bible. I know that they have it and read out of it, as one can easily determine from the words they use. Sow there are a great many pictures in those books both of God, the angels, men and animals, especially in the Revelation of John and in Moses and Joshua. So now we would kindly beg them to permit us to do what they themselves do. Pictures contained in these books we would paint on walls for the sake of remembrance and better understanding, since they do no more harm on walls than in books. It is to be sure better to paint pictures on walls of how God created the world, how Noah built the ark, and whatever other good stories there may be, than to paint shameless worldly things. Yes, would to God that I could persuade the rich and the mighty that they would permit the whole Bible to be painted on houses, on the inside and outside, so that all can see it. That would be a Christian work.7

While the Lutheran way was liturgically conservative and even at times seemed to support the old way of worship, it unhesitatingly condemned those elements of divine service that were contrary to the Word of God and that annulled the life and work of the Second Person of God the Trinity. Chief among these perversions was the Canon of the Mass. Because this liturgical element had such far-reaching consequence for the church of the Lutheran Reformation, one version follows:

7 LW 40, p. 79ff. “Against the Heavenly Prophets” Within the Lutheran movement, even at Wittenberg, there were those who thought Luther had not gone far enough fast enough in im- plementing the work of reformation. Some of these dissenting voices became especially adamant in the matter of liturgical externalism. They no doubt wondered, “How can we claim to be evangelically minded and yet retain so many of the trappings of Rome? Isn’t this confusing to the people? Doesn’t God’s Word demand that we destroy all the idols in his temple?” These “radical” Reformers wanted to see all art, especially music, statuary, organs, vestments, candles, paintings and other material aids to worship cast out of the churches in a violent purge. Their emphasis on pure spiritual worship ultimately led them to an extreme mysticism and spiritualism which denied the presence of God in absolution. baptism and communion. This denial of God’s Presence in the material world also and finally led to a denial of his destricted presence in the inscripturated Word. This denial of the incarnation caused Luther to write one of his most colorful and venomous tracts. “Against the Heavenly Prophets” was especially bitter since it was aimed at the erstwhile colleague, companion and friend of Luther, Andreas Boden- stein von Karlstadt. This work is especially interesting to those who seek to determine a “Lutheran” position on the aural and visual arts. See also: Art and the Reformation in Germany. Carl C. Christensen, Athens: Ohio University Press, 1979.

7 CANON OF THE MASS (The celebrant bows low over the altar and says silently:) Therefore, most merciful Father, we humbly beg and entreat you through Jesus Christ your Son, our Lord, to accept and bless these gifts, these offerings, these holy and spotless sacrifices which we offer you first for your holy Catholic Church, that you may grant her peace and protection, unity and direction throughout the world, together with your servant Our Holy Father, and N., our Bishop, and all faithful guardians of the Catholic and Apostolic faith.

Remembrance of the Living Faithful Remember, O Lord, your servants N. and N., We pray for those whom we wish to remember. and all here present, whose faith and devotion are known to you. For whom we offer, or who themselves offer, to you this sacrifice of praise, in their own behalf and in behalf of all who are theirs, for the re- demption of their souls, for the hope of their salvation and protection from harm, and who now offer their promises to you, the eternal, living, and true God.

Remembrance of the Saints In the unity of holy fellowship, and venerating the memory, first of all, of the glorious and ever-virgin Mary, Mother of our God and Lord, Jesus Christ, then, your blessed apostles and martyrs, Peter and Paul, Andrew, James, John, Thomas, James, Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Simon and Thaddeus; Linus, Cletus, Clement, Sixtus, Cornelius, Cyprian, Lawrence, Chrysogonus, John and Paul, Cosmas and Damian; and of all your saints, through whose merits and prayers grant that we may be strengthened by the help of your protection. Through the same Christ our Lord. Amen.

The bell is sounded as the celebrant extends his hands over the bread and wine. We therefore beg you to accept, O Lord, this offering of our worship and that of your whole household. Regulate the days of our lives so that they may be spent in your peace; spare us from eternal damnation and help us to be numbered in the fold of your chosen. Through Christ our Lord. Amen.

The celebrant blesses the offerings three times, then the host and wine separately. We beg you, O God, be pleased to make this offering wholly blessed, to consecrate and approve it, making it reasonable and acceptable, so that it may become for us the Body and Blood of your most beloved son, our Lord Jesus Christ.

THE CONSECRATION Who, on the day before he suffered death, took bread into his holy and venerable hands, and lifting up his eyes to heaven, to you, O God, his almighty Father, and giving thanks to you, he blessed it, broke and gave to his disciples, saying: Take, all of you, and eat of this: For This is My body.

As the priest elevates the Sacred Host, which is the Body of Christ, we as members of Christ’s Mystical Body unite our sacrifice with His. The bell is sounded three times. The sacrifice of Calvary is renewed, the most sacred action possible to man. In like manner, when he had eaten, taking also the blessed cup into his holy and venerable hands, and again giving thanks to you, he blessed it, and gave it to his disciples, saying: Take, all of you, and drink of this: For this is the chalice of my blood, of the new and everlasting covenant; the mystery of faith; which shall be shed for you and for many others unto the forgiveness of sins.

The celebrant genuflects in adoration and says: As often as you shall do these things, you shall do them in memory of me.

As the chalice is elevated, we raise our eyes in adoration, making our own Christ’s sacrifice through the priest, for we are Christ’s community, His “holy people.” The bell is again sounded three times.

Remembrance of the Passion We your servants, O Lord, and with us your holy people, calling to mind the blessed passion of this same Christ, your Son, our Lord, and also his resurrection from the grave, and glorious ascension into heaven, offer to your supreme majesty, of the gifts you have bestowed on us, a perfect, holy, and unblem- ished Victim, the sacred bread of everlasting life and the chalice of eternal salvation.

Offering to God the Father Be pleased to look upon these offerings with a gracious and kindly countenance, and accept them as it pleased you to accept the offerings of your just servant Abel, and the sacrifice of our father Abraham, and that which your great priest Melchisedech offered to you, a holy sacrifice and a spotless victim.

Humbly we implore you, almighty God, bid these offerings be carried by the hands of your holy angel to your altar on high, before your divine majesty, so that those of us who by sharing in the sacrifice at this altar shall receive the sacred Body and Blood of your Son, may be filled with every grace and heavenly blessing. Through the same Christ our Lord. Amen.

Remembrance of the Faithful Departed Remember also, O Lord, your servants N. and N., who have gone before us with the sign of faith, and rest in the sleep of peace. We recommend to God those for whom we wish to pray. To them, O Lord, and to all who rest in Christ, we entreat you to grant a place of comfort, of light and peace. Through the same Christ our Lord. Amen.

Striking our breasts, we pray for our sinful selves. To us also, sinful servants, who trust in your boundless mercy, graciously grant fellowship and a place with your holy apostles and martyrs, with John, Stephen, Matthias, Barnabas, Ignatius, Alexander, Marcel- linus, Peter, Felicitas, Perpetua, Agatha, Lucy, Agnes, Cecilia, Anastasia, and all your saints. Into their company, we beg you, admit us, not weighing our unworthiness but freely granting us forgiveness. Through Christ our Lord. It is ever through him that all good gifts, created by you, O Lord, are by you sanctified, endowed with life, blessed and bestowed upon us.

At the end of the Canon of the Mess, the celebrant elevates the chalice and Host together from the altar raising them up to God as on oblation. This action is called the little Elevation. Through Him, with Him, and in Him all honor and glory is given to you, God almighty Father, in the unity of the Holy Spirit. World without end. Amen.8

The Canon of the Mass spawned innumerable misunderstandings and confusions as far as the Lu- theran Reformers were concerned. If a priest could sacrifice the body of Christ to placate the anger of God and achieve forgiveness for sinners, this sacrifice could be put to lucrative use for the sake of any number of church growth or expansion programs, private masses could be sold on behalf of the living and dead, and the mass was said innumerable times each day solely for the sake of benefactors who were not present.9 In short, the selling of masses was good business, but it led to spiritual bankruptcy and a liturgical system based on performance rather than participation. The Lutheran Reformation was crystal clear in its assessment of the Canon and the private Mass. The Mass in the papacy must be regarded as the greatest and most horrible abomination because it runs into direct and violent conflict with this fundamental article. Yet, above and beyond all others, it has been the supreme and most precious of the papal idolatries, for it is held that this sacrifice or work of the Mass (even when offered by an evil scoundrel) delivers men from their sins, both here in this life and yonder in purgatory, although in reality this can and must be done by the Lamb of God alone, as has been stated

8 Daily Missal of the Mystical Body, ed. by the Maryknoll Fathers, New York; P. J. Kennedy and Sons, 1961, pp. 703-715. It is especially easy and dangerous for Lutheran teachers to caricature the liturgical reformation of the sixteenth century. It is important that we understand the minor but profound renovation the Lutheran fathers performed for the liturgical service. Not one of the Wittenberg Reformers (Luther, Melanch- thon, and Bugenhagen) desired to destroy the liturgy of the church. The love and Christian charity which they felt toward the brothers and sisters in the faith, including the faithful who once upon a time had created the liturgical forms, did not permit them to act harshly against the sacred eternal truths proclaimed by the liturgical structure. There were, consequently, specific and pointed aspects of the liturgy that needed to be changed; the vast majority of the ordinary and proper were left intact. The assumption that the early Lutherans did not, or were not, able to break away from their Romans roots is a myth that is not historically tenable. A further discussion of the Canon and its relationship to the Lutheran liturgical renovation may be found in Luther’s Liturgical Criteria and His Reform of the Canon of the Mass by Bryan Spinks, Grove Books, Bramcote, Notts., June 1982 (ISBN 0 907536 24 7) 9 Contemporary pragmatic theologians will have a difficult time condemning the practice of the private mass. They kept the clergy employed, the laity involved (especially the rich), and they brought a great deal of money into the church’s coffers that could be used for any number of worthwhile programs. It is hard for us to imagine the depths of empty formalism to which the church and her pastors had sunk. The practices of indulgences, the private mass, simony, and clerical sexual indiscretion in sixteenth century Germany portray Christianity in all of its worldly perversion. The number of masses per year in Wittenberg alone was scandalous. “By the close of the second decade of the sixteenth century the liturgical calendar at the Wittenberg Castle Church had thus become very complex. (By 1520) the number of Masses had reached a total of 1,138 sung Masses per year and 7,856 read Masses.” V. H. Mattfeld. Georg Rhaw’s Publications for Vespers, New York: Institute of Medieval Music, 1966, p. 33. The Lutheran Reformers, thus, substantially reduced the number of Masses by holding the Chief Service only once each Sunday and Feast Day.

9 above. There is to be no concession or compromise in the article either, for the first article does not permit it.10

This article concerning the Mass will be the decisive issue in the council. Even if it were possible for the papists to make concessions to us in all other articles, it would not be possible for them to yield on this article. It is as Campegio said in Augsburg: he would suffer himself to be torn to pieces before he would give up the Mass. So by God’s help I would suffer myself to be burned to ashes before I would allow a celebrant of the Mass and what he does to be considered equal or superior to my Saviour, Jesus Christ. Accordingly we are and remain eternally divided and opposed the one to the other. The papists are well aware that if the Mass falls, the papacy will fall with it. Before they would permit this to happen, they would put us all to death. Besides, this dragon’s tail—that is, the Mass—had brought forth a brood of vermin and the poison of manifold idolatries.11

In addition, the Lutheran Reformation followed the leadership of Luther in its rejection of the no- tion that acts of worship, solely by their legislative observance, could place one in a more favored position with God. Fasting, festivals, and traditions, though not in themselves evil, became evil when they were required as necessary for forgiveness and life everlasting. This subject of traditions involves many difficult and controversial questions, and we know from actual experience that traditions are real snares for consciences. When they are required as necessary, they bring exquisite torture to a conscience that has omitted some observance. On the other hand, their abrogation involves its own difficulties and problems. But our case is plain and simple because our opponents condemn us for teaching that human traditions do not merit the forgiveness of sins, and they require so-called “uni- versal rites” as necessary for salvation. Here Paul is our constant champion; everywhere he insists that these observances neither justify nor are necessary over and above the righteousness of faith. Nevertheless, liberty in these matters should be used moderately, lest the weak be offended and become more hostile to the true teaching of the Gospel because of an abuse of liberty. Nothing should be changed in the accustomed rites without good reason, and to foster harmony those ancient customs should be kept which can be kept without sin or without great disadvantage. We further believe, teach, and confess that the community of God in every place and at every time has the right, authority, and power to change, to reduce, or to increase ceremonies according to its circum- stances, as long as it does so without frivolity and offense but in an orderly and appropriate way, as at any time may seem to be most profitable, beneficial, and salutary for good order, Christian discipline, evangelical decorum, and the edification of the church. Paul instructs us how we can with a good conscience give in and yield to the weak in faith in such external matters of indifference (Rom. 14) and demonstrates it by his own example (Acts 16:3; 21:26; I Cor. 9:10). We believe, teach, and confess that at a time of confession, as when enemies of the Word of God desire to suppress the pure doctrine of the holy Gospel, the entire community of God, yes, every individual Chris- tian, and especially the ministers of the Word as the leaders of the community of God, are obligated to confess openly, not only the words but also through their deeds and actions, the true doctrine and all that per- tains to it, according to the Word of God. In such a case we should not yield to adversaries even in matters of indifference, nor should we tolerate the imposition of such ceremonies on us by adversaries in order to undermine the genuine worship of God and to introduce and confirm their idolatry by force.12 For here we are no longer dealing with the external adiaphora which in their nature and essence are and remain of themselves free and which accordingly are not subject either to a command or a prohibition, requiring us to use them or to discontinue them. Here we are dealing primarily with the chief article of our Christian faith, so that, as the apostle testifies, the truth of the Gospel might be preserved (Gal. 2:5). Any co- ercion or commandment darkens and perverts this article because the adversaries will forthwith publicly demand such matters of indifference to confirm false doctrines, superstition, and idolatry and to suppress the pure doctrine and Christian liberty, or they will misuse them and misinterpret them in this direction. At the same time this concerns the article of Christian liberty as well, an article which the Holy Spirit through the mouth of the holy apostle so seriously commanded the church to preserve, as we have just heard. As soon as this article is weakened and human commandments are forcibly imposed on the church as

10 The Smalcald Articles, Part II, Article II, The Mass: The first article: “Jesus Christ, our God and Lord, was put to death for our trespasses and raised again for our justification. He alone is the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world.” 11 Ibid. 12 Apology of the Augsburg Confession, Article XV, pp. 49-52, and Formula of Concord, Solid Declaration, Article X, Church Usages, pp. 9-10. There are times when the observance of a simple external form, in itself of little notice or merit, makes a great deal of difference for life and destiny. One may consider the simple yellow star imposed upon the Jewish population by the Nazi regime in our own century. In itself a simple, harmless swatch of cloth, in that terrible time it became a symbol of identity, with the power to change the course of life. So also, certain simple forms in the liturgical life of a community of faith may take on a substantial power in a time when confessional integrity is at stake. In our own time when the sacramental presence or God in Word and Sacrament is questioned from all sides, the role of the pastor in absolution and the reality of Christ’s presence in his written and read word and in the sacrament of the altar may call for liturgical usages that emphasize and confess the reality of that presence. Indeed, it may not be amiss in these days to reinstate the practice of kissing the Holy Scripture and elevating the Sacrament, since God is truly and substantially present in both, despite the protestations of the world. Even so, our use of music and musical style may ally us or separate us from the cause of truth and doctrinal purity.

10 necessary and as though their omission were wrong and sinful, the door has been opened to idolatry, and ultimately the commandments of men will be increased and be put as divine worship not only on a par with God’s commandments, but even above them.13

The Lutheran Reformation did not hesitate to cast out filth and decay as it cleaned the holy place, nor was it afraid to repair and polish the old forms which were hallowed by the Word of God and centuries of use. Thus an attitude of scrutiny and respect tempered by freedom characterized the Lutheran reform of the liturgy. Though Luther never prepared an official book of liturgical rites for use in the churches, he did es- tablish a precedent that placed the responsibility for worship renewal squarely on the shoulders of the parish pastor who was to make a careful appraisal of the situation and then to implement changes, most of which were based on two outlines prepared by Luther, J. Bugenhagen, and J. Walter.14 Luther’s pastoral sensitivity led him to suggest one line of liturgical development for the city (academic, multi- lingual) parishes and another for the rural (vernacular) parishes. In many respects we see parallels of these two situations in the Lutheran church today, and it is instructive and pertinent for us to examine the worship practices and musical life of both of these parish situations.

I. WORSHIP AND MUSIC IN THE CITY OR ACADEMIC LITURGY The city parish was expected to maintain a rigorous schedule of daily worship, even though the private Masses were abolished. The chief service, or Mass, was celebrated as before, with the deletion of the Canon and the addition of many vernacular hymns. The Latin language was retained, as were the vestments, the church year, and most of the other external elements of the service. The choir was maintained, its function of offering fine contrapuntal music and ancient chant for both the Proper and the Ordinary was retained, and it was given the added duty of teaching the “new” hymns to the congregation (a job not easily accomplished considering the fact that few if any of the parishioners had hymnals, and that the response to learning new and challenging liturgical music was probably no more palatable to the 16th century laity than it is today). The sermon, of course, became important once again, and it was delivered both in Latin and the vernacular. In addition, both the Body and Blood of Christ were distributed to the laity with the resulting distribution providing a new forum for liturgical

13 The Formula of Concord, Solid Declaration, Article X, Church Usages. pp. 14-15. At the time this article was written, Lutheranism was expe- riencing an identity crisis. On the one hand the Reformed were trying to make their claim on the Lutheran lands and liturgy; on the other, the Roman party was attempting to gain political and liturgical power. Lutheranism, of course, was not naturally drawn to either camp. There- fore, some theologians advocated a softening of certain liturgical practices and positions for the sake of civil and liturgical peace. There were those within Lutheranism, however, who realized that to relinquish certain “minor” or “insignificant” points or practices was to betray the truths of Scripture and the Lutheran teaching. Adiaphora, things that had not been clearly prescribed by Scripture, especially in the realm of worship (i.e., the use of the organ, vestments, the sign of the cross), suddenly became important, and even carried with them confessional baggage. (Note: Adiaphora, or things not prescribed or prohibited by the Word of God, are not “things that don’t matter” or “unimportant” or “ir- relevant.” The Adiaphoristic controversy of the sixteenth century, the “New Measures” of nineteenth century American Lutheranism, and the contemporary “Church Growth” movement teach us this.) 14 The two outlines were the “Formula Missae” of 1523 and the “Deutsche Messe” of 1526. It is true that in Luther’s day much of the responsibility for liturgical legislation fell on the shoulders of the civil government. In our day and in our country, despite the fact that the Lutheran synodical constitutions frequently provide specific liturgical directives, the fact remains that in practice the parish pastor exercise the greatest control over liturgical form or the lack thereof in the typical Lutheran parish. Hence a liturgical revival must be a pastoral movement directed by the principles of love and freedom rather than legislation. Just as the Roman church of the middle ages allowed for some variety in custom and ceremony, and the Lutheran church of the sixteenth century did the same, so also Lutheranism today must be sensitive to the liturgical needs and abilities of time and place. To do this demands a high degree of pastoral sensitivity and ability, include a grasp of liturgy and music.

11 music. This chief service, following an outline similar to the Formulae Missae, was held every Sunday and Holy Day for at least the first two hundred years of Lutheran observance.15 Our opponents do nothing except to slander us and say, ‘Luther has indeed destroyed the papacy, but he can’t build a new church,’ that is, can’t introduce new forms of worship and new ceremonies. These wretched men think that building up the church consists of the introduction of some sort of new ceremonies. They don’t realize that building up the church means to lead consciences from doubt and murmuring to faith, to knowledge, and to certainty.16

Then Melanchthon declared that he had heard it said by many that our ceremonies are so arranged that the people think that no change has been made in comparison with former usage. Yet these ceremonies possess great solemnity, he said, unlike the deformed ceremonies of the Swiss, who communicate while seated at table; soon after the consecration the minister departs, leaving the communicants at the table. Thereupon Luther said, “It would be good to keep the whole liturgy, with its music, omitting only the Canon.”17

In our churches, thank God, the neutral things are such that when a layman who could not understand our sermon would see our mass, organ, choir, bells, chasubles, etc., he would have to say, ‘This is indeed a Roman Catholic church.’ There is no difference, or at least no more than they have among themselves.18

The choir, kantorei, or schola cantorum was composed of boys and men drawn from the academic community.19 The fact that so many youngsters were involved in leading the service, points to the fact that the liturgy also had an important catechetical or instructional purpose. The singing youth of the

15 The Chief Service, or Lutheran Mass, was observed with solemnity and works of musical worth at least until the death of J. S. Bach in 1750. Since that time it has been struggling to re-emerge as a center of the great music-making of the culture. The following description of Easter Mass in Wittenberg in the year 1543 or 1544 illustrates the important role of artistic and cultured music in the life of the congregation. It is most likely that this description was recorded by Justus Jonas. THE EASTER MASS 1. The Canticle of Zacharias (Blessed be the Lord, the God of Israel) and its antiphon, in Latin. With Choir, Cantor, and organ. 2. The Introit, in a choral setting for Cantor and Choir, possibly by Walter. 3. The Paschal Kyrie, in a setting for organ and choir, by Galliculus 4. The Gloria in excelsis. Choir (contrapuntal setting), organ verses. 5. The salutation and collect sung in Latin and German by the choir and congregation. 6. The Epistle, sung in German. 7. The Easter sequence, macaronic (mixed language) in a setting for organ, choir, and congregation: Organ: Victimae paschali, verset Congregation: Christ Jesus Lay in Death’s Strong Bands (vs 1) Choir: Soprano, Alto, Bass: Agnus redemit oves.... Tenor: Christ ist erstanden.... etc., until all seven verses of the chorale “Christ lag in Todesbanden” and choral “Christ ist erstanden” with choral “Victimae paschali” is sung; organ versets are played at least three times. 8. The Holy Gospel. Sung by the choir, German, polyphonic setting. 9. The Creed. Intonation (Latin) by pastor; Latin Creed sung by the choir. Afterwards Creed paraphrase sung in German by congregation and choir (Wir Glauben all....). 10. The Sermon 11. Choir and congregation: “Jesus Christus, Unser Heiland,” “Jesus Christ Our Blessed Savior,” alternately by congregation (unison and unaccompanied) and choir (Contrapuntal setting), while pastor prepares the bread and wine for the communicants, who proceed to the choir (chancel). 12. The Preface is sung by the pastor and choir. 13. The Sanctus is sung by the choir and organ. 14. The Lord’s Prayer sung in German by the pastor. The people respond with a sung “Amen.” 15. The pastor sings the Words of Institution in German. (Following the consecration of each element, there was an elevation and the bells were rung, until 1542) 16. During the distribution, the choir sings a macaronic setting of the Agnus Dei, with strains of the “Christ ist erstanden.” The Choir also sings “Pascha nostrum,” and Josquin’s motet “Congratulamini mihi, ones, qui diligitis dominum” (no longer extant). 17. At the end of the distribution, “O Christ, Thou Lamb of God” in German. 18. The pastor prays (sings) the collect of Thanksgiving and the Blessing (Aaronic), and the congregation responds “Amen.” (See “Die Reformatische Gottesdienst in der Wittenberger Pfarrkirche von 1523 an,” Part II, by Adolf Boes, in Vol. 6, 1961, pp. 49-61 of Jahrbuch für Liturgik und Hymnologie. Kassel.) 16 Table Talk No. 3323b (LW 54, p. 195) 17 Table Talk No. 4676 (LW 54, p. 360) 18 Luther in a letter to G. Brück, April 4, 1541 (WA Br 9, 357) Translation from The Lutheran Cyclopedia, Revised Edition, St. Louis, 1954/1975, p. 523. 19 These singing organizations were a necessary part of every city and court chapel. Princes and Electors took great pride in their “Kantoreien,” and that they were not is banded by the Lutheran reformers is no surprise, especially when we consider the continued emphasis placed upon art music in the liturgy. The groups were not large. Mattfeld indicates that the Wittenberg tradition included two groups, one composed of eight choral scholars and six choirboys, the other composed of four choral scholars and six choirboys. (p. 29)

12 16th century provide today’s academic parishes (i. e., parishes with a parochial school) with a stirring and noble example. In addition to the chief service, the theologians, teachers, scholars, and choristers continued to gather each morning and evening to sing the Lutheran Matins and Vespers; part of the medieval daily office which had been retained and expanded by the city parishes of the Lutheran Reformation.20 The

20 Daily Matins and Vespers in Wittenberg: MATINS Sunday: 1. The Latin Catechism read verse by verse antiphonally by the choir. 2. Two or three Psalms and the Antiphon are sung (Latin) 3. Three Lessons from the New Testament (Latin) 4. The Responsory is sung (Latin) 5. A German Lesson is read. 6. A Chorale is sung with the people, during which the choir enters the nave to listen to the Sermon. 7. The Sermon, based on the Catechism. 8. The German Catechism. 9. The Exhortation to Prayer. 10. The Chorale is sung, during which the choir re-enters the chancel. 11. The choir sings either “Te Deum Laudamus” or “Quicunque Vult Salvus” and the appropriate antiphon. 12. Versicle, Collects, and Benedicamus Domino.

Weekdays (Monday, Tuesday, Thursday, Friday): 1. Two or three Psalms and antiphon are sung by choir. 2. Three NT Lessons (Latin) 3. Responsory 4. One Lesson (German) 5. The “Benedictus” and its Antiphon are sung by the choir. 6. The Kyrie, Our Father, Versicle, Collect, and Benedicamus Domino are sung by the choir, after which the choristers leave the church to begin their study for the day. 7. The pastor then delivers the Sermon to the people. 8. Then follows a brief exhortation to prayer. 9. The pastor and the sexton shall lead the congregation in the singing of a German Psalm and Chorale.

Wednesday: 1. Two or three Psalms and Antiphon (Latin) 2. Three Lessons (Latin) 3. Chorale sung by choir and congregation (German) 4. Sermon, always based on a reading from The Gospel According to St. Matthew. 5. Exhortation to Prayer. 6. The Germany Litany is sung by the choir and congregation. 7. Collect, Versicle, and Benedicamus Domino.

VESPERS Saturday: 1. Two or three Psalms and Antiphon (Choir, Latin) 2. Three boys sing three Lessons from the OT (Latin) 3. The Responsory is sung (Choir, Latin) 4. A choirboy reads a lesson in German. 5. A Latin Hymn is sung. 6. Sermon based on St. John. 7. Exhortation to Prayer. 8. The Latin Litany (Choir) with Agnus Dei and Pater Noster. 9. Versicle, Collect, Benedicamus Domino are sung by the choir.

Sunday: 1. Two or three Psalms and Antiphon (Choir, Latin) 2 Three Lessons (Latin) 3. The Responsory 4. One German Lesson 5. A Latin Hymn (choir) 6. The German Te Deum, sung by choir and congregation. 7. Sermon based on Epistle for the Day, or other text. 8. Exhortation to Prayer. 9. Magnificat (German, choir and congregation, sung to “tonus peregrinus”) and German Antiphon sung by the choir: “O Christ, our Savior, Son of the Eternal God and Mary, we praise Thee forever. Amen!” 10. The Nunc Dimittis is sung by the choir and congregation (German) 11. Versicle, Collect, Benedicamus.

Monday, Tuesday, Thursday, and Friday: 1. Two or three Psalms and Antiphon (Choir, Latin)

13 chant, old contrapuntal settings and new compositions adorned these sung services. The congregation was invited to participate, via the addition of the chorale, and vernacular teachings, both Matins and Vespers retained their nature as choral services. Where did the music come from? The Lutheran Reformers held the art of music in highest esteem. Luther’s own view of the art of music is well known, and Melanchthon even went so far as to suggest that wherever singing and religious music ceased, the doctrine of the church would be endangered.21 The role of music in scripture and the background of Renaissance humanism supported this view of the origin and purpose of music: 1. Music is of divine origin. It is a gift from God, and should be dealt with responsibly. Humankind is a steward, not creator, of the art. 2. Music exists to glorify God. The art, by virtue of its nature and source, is reflective of the divinity. The art may, by its power, lead mankind to an appreciation of God’s natural revelation or manifestation. (This divinely reflective art, like theology, existed as an objective reality that could be studied on the basis of re- vealed truth and reason. Here one could judge “good” music in much the same way as one separates “good” theology from “flawed” theology, based on the acquisition of tools necessary to make that judgment.) 3. Music serves the Word of God. The powerful art with its divine origin is most nobly used when it is proclaiming the truths of Law and Gospel. There is nothing closer to the Word of God than music. Since speech and singing are so closely related, music is a logical vehicle for the Word of God.22

While there is nothing specifically Lutheran about these three points, it is obvious that the Luther- ans sought to continue and re-capture the spirit of early Christianity in its music-making. Conse- quently, the church was drawn to that time-proven music of the church, the chant, and the finest new art music being produced by composers (the “figured” or polyphonic music) for use in the divine service.

2. A Hymn (Latin, choir) 3. Three Lessons (OT, Latin) 4. The Responsory (Latin, choir) 5. One Lesson (German) 6. Magnificat and Antiphon (Choir, Latin) 7. Kyrie, Pater Noster, Versicle, Benedicamus Domino 8. Nunc Dimittis (Choir, Latin) On Wednesday afternoons Vespers were not sung, since the choristers had sung that day for the regular Wednesday noon Mass.

The Catechism Office: Four times in the year for two weeks the regular Vesper order was suspended for the teaching of the Catechism. This order was used on Monday, Tuesday, Thursday, and Friday during those weeks: 1. One Psalm and Antiphon (Choir, Latin) of text. The power of monophonic music is held up as one of the assumed principles of ancient Greek music-making. The Florentine Camerate, the Baroque Recitative, and the through-composed music drama of Wagner and Strauss illustrate this principle. 2. Three Lessons (Latin) 3. The Responsory (Choir, Latin) 4. One Lesson (German) 5. The Chorale "These are Thy Holy Ten Commands" sung by the choir and congregation 6. The Catechism Sermon, or Instruction 7. The Chorale "Man, Wilt Thou Live a Blessed Life" 8. Magnificat and Antiphon (Choir, Latin) 9. Versicle, Collect, Benedicamus Domino

In the service orders listed above the important role of the choir is made obvious. The Latin Canticles, their Antiphons, the Latin Hymns, the Antiphon to the Psalmody, and the Responsories were always sung in artful contrapuntal settings (figuralis). The Latin Psalms, versicles, Benedicamus and Amens were sung to simple four-part choral settings. The choir would usually sing verses of the German chorale in alter- natim settings with the congregation. These settings were also in figured style, although they tended to be more homophonic and less compli- cated contrapuntally than the Canticles, Hymns, and Responsories. The preceding information may be studied in the article "Die Reformatische Gottesdienste in der Wittenberg Pfarrkirche von 1523 an" by Adolf Boes, Jahrbuch für Hymnologie und Liturgik, Vol. 4, 1958-59, pp. 1-40. Kassel. 21 "The Editorial Practice of Georg Rhaw" Leo Schrade in The Musical Heritage of the Church, Vol. IV, 1954, p. 36. “Melanchthon went even so far as to say that where and whenever singing or religious music ceases, it is to be feared that the holy doctrine will die. The singer, the musician, is, in fact, the preacher of the Gospel." 22 Schrade, pp. 31-42

14 The chant melodies used in the church trace their origin to a number of different roots, some of which were ancient. The chant was a most effective means of communicating a text when it was performed well, for there was a pristine purity in the single melodic (monophonic) presentation of a text.23 The chant was an aid to textual retention and remembrance, and some of the chant melodies, by virtue of their textual association,24 were a means of doctrinal preservation as well as a great source of comfort to the singing and listening believers. A second source of the liturgical music was the vast literature of the polyphonic composers who were active at the time of the Reformation and in the previous century. Chief among these composers was Josquin Des Prez, whose motets and settings of the mass were frequently performed in Witten- berg, where the ceremonies associated with Divine Service are performed with the greatest devotion. On all the festivals a worthy setting of the service is sung with polyphonic settings of the Introit, Kyrie, Gloria, Alleluia, Sanc- tus, Agnus Dei, and Communion. No one partakes of the Most Blessed Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ without first receiving absolution from the priest. How I wish that [the work of Reformation] were thus carried out in all the world!25

In fact, the casual observer would have noticed little change in the way of worship, with one notable exception. The entire congregation was now called upon to act as a choir in the offering of a newly de- veloped form of liturgical music-making, the chorale. The seeds that would grow into the Lutheran chorale had been planted before the Reformation, both it remained for Luther and the congregations of the Augsburg Confession to bring this congregational musical offering to fruition. The chorale (from “choralis” - to be sung in unison w/o accompaniment, like the ancient chant) had three musical sources. 1. The Chant. Luther drew heavily from the treasury of liturgical melody already available and in use in the church. “We all Believe in One True God” and “Isaiah, Mighty Seer” reflect this tradition.

2. Medieval Religious Folk Songs. We instantly may think of “Michael Row the Boat Ashore” when we hear “folk” music, but the medieval folk songs used by Luther were culturally more related to “folk” music like the Christmas carol “Angels We Have Heard on High” or “Good Christian Men Rejoice.” “We Now Implore” and “These are Thy Holy Ten Commandments” were both medieval pilgrimage songs. They were called “leise,” since each verse ended with the prayer “Kyrieleis” — Lord, have mercy, and they were readily adapted to the Lutheran way of worship.

3. Original Compositions written in the artistic style of the day. These compositions were not bar songs or theater music; rather, they followed the tradition of the court composers. The courts, like the modern opera house or concert hall, were the scene of much serious music-making. Luther borrowed from this school of composition to create works like “A Mighty Fortress” and “To Jordan Came Our Lord.”26

23 Time and time again in the history of western music composers have been drawn to the idea of monody as the ideal and most dramatic proclamation of text. The power of monophonic music is held up as one of the assumed principles of ancient Greek music-making. The Flor- entine Camerate, the Baroque Recitative, and the through-composed music drama of Wagner and Strauss illustrate this principle. 24 A specific melody, hummed, whistled, or played on an instrument had the power, because of its textual association, to proclaim the teaching of the church. Without a doubt the “Victimae paschali laudes” and the “Veni Sancte Spiritus” carried a doctrinal association, even as today the melodies “Easter Hymn” and “Adeste Fidelis” have an unmistakable seasonal and doctrinal association. This idea of melodic association between melody and text opened the door for the creation of much chorale-based instrumental music that had a legitimate kerygmatic role in the Lutheran liturgy. 25 Sixt Dietrich in a letter to Boniface Amorbach, May 29, 1543. From Sixt Dietrich: Hymnen, 1545, St. Louis, Concordia Publishing House, 1960. Preface, p. xix. 26 Further discussion concerning the genesis of the chorale may be found in LW 53 and in Routley’s Panorama of Christian Hymnody and The Music of Christian Hymns, GIA Publications, Chicago, Illinois.

15 So it came about that the Wittenberg reformers established a pattern for Lutheran liturgical music- making that thankfully (as musical stewards) used ancient and modern art music for the choir as well as original and recast “popular” and courtly music to glorify God and to proclaim His Word. It is not surprising then, that we see in the Lutheran liturgy a magnet that would attract the great musical minds of the day, including musical performers, composers, and publishers. Luther had a cor- dial working relationship with any number of musicians — Johann Walter, the first cantor of Luther- anism, and Georg Rhau, the greatest music publisher the Lutheran Church has known, were perhaps the most influential human forces that insured the survival of Lutheran liturgical music for subsequent generations. Johann Walter (1496-1570) was the first composer of the Lutheran Church. He was especially help- ful to Luther during the preparation of the German Mass of 1526. He was thoroughly acquainted with the methods of composition and choral conducting and singing in the mid 16th century Germany. In 1524 he produced his Geistliche Gesangk Buch, a collection of polyphonic settings for 3-5 voices based on the hymns of early Lutheranism, all composed in the form of the tenor lied (the chorale melody was always assigned to the tenor voice). This collection was exceedingly popular, and it began a tradition of chorale-based choral compositions for the Lutheran church.27 Much of Walter’s life was spent in Torgau, where he established a fine tradition for subsequent Lu- theran cantors. His theological acumen was strong, and he remained a strong Lutheran after Luther’s death and upheld the Lutheran way of doctrine and worship even when others of great theological stature, notably Bugenhagen and Melanchthon, failed.28 From 1548-1555 he served in Dresden in a position that would eventually be held by Heinrich Schütz. Walter composed Latin motets, canticles, German passions, and instrumental fugues in addition to the German chorale settings. Walter’s settings were conceived of as works for liturgy, school, and home, despite the fact that they made use of some of the advanced contrapuntal techniques of the day. He was a composer who was indeed a gifted steward of this divine treasure of music, and his high compositional and theological standards were imitated by all subsequent generations of Lutheran theological musicians. Georg Rhau (1488-1548) was a most important publisher of music and theological books in Witten- berg. A graduate of the University of Wittenberg, he was for a time cantor of the St. Thomas school in Leipzig, and a lecturer in music theory at that city’s university. In 1520 he left Leipzig because of his evangelical tendencies, and finally he returned to Wittenberg in 1523, where he spent the rest of his life as a publisher of theological and musical works for use in the new church. He published works by Lu- theran composers, but his publications were by no means exclusive to Lutheran composers. In fact, his selection of music for use in the Lutheran liturgy from the best of the international composers of his

27 The Encyclopedia of the Lutheran Church. Augsburg Publishing House. See Appendix “A” 28 The Encyclopedia of the Lutheran Church. Augsburg Publishing House. See Appendix “A”

16 day set Lutheranism on a course of commitment to the highest standards of church music.29 Some of Luther’s greatest words of praise for the musical art were written to be published and circulated as prefaces to the collections edited by Rhau.

But the subject is much too great for me briefly to describe all its benefits. And you, my young friend, let this noble, wholesome, and cheerful creation of God be commended to you. By it you may escape shame- ful desires and bad company. At the same time you may by this creation accustom yourself to recognize and praise the Creator. Take special care to shun perverted minds who prostitute this lovely gift of nature and of art with their erotic rantings; and be quite assured that none but the devil goads them on to defy their very nature which would and should praise God its Maker with this gift, so that these bastards purloin the gift of God and use it to worship the foe of God, the enemy of nature and of this lovely art.30

Rhau’s collections found immediate acceptance and use by the church in Wittenberg and surround- ing areas. He had published festival settings of the ordinary of the Mass as well as responsories and canticles to be used in the daily liturgies of the Lutheran churches that possessed a Latin school and its consequent choir by bringing the music of the great masters to the Lutheran choirs. Rhau educated many future pastors and teachers in the standards that must be upheld by the church musicians in order to insure fruitful stewardship of the divine gift of music, proper glorification of the Almighty, and eloquent proclamation of the true Word of God. These standards of musical excellence and the theology that upheld them paved the way for perhaps the richest flowering of liturgical music the world has ever seen. A grand succession of theologi- cally trained musicians and musically trained pastors sprang forth from the work and example of Lu- ther, Melanchthon, Bugenhagen, Rhau, and Walter.31 These musicians and pastors worked within the confines of the traditional liturgy so that it may be said that for the years 1530-1750 Lutheran liturgical life in the city and academic parish continued to revolve around the weekly and festival service of Holy Communion (the Lutheran Mass) and the daily gathering for prayer, praise, and instruction in the Of- fice (Matins, Vespers, and the Catechism office).32

II. WORSHIP AND MUSIC AND THE VERNACULAR LITURGY How did the Lutheran Reformation address the problems related to worship in parishes where there were trained choristers, in congregations where few, if any, knew Latin, in churches where there were few organs and fewer organists? Could the academic-scholastic movement be translated into vernacular worship? These challenges did exist, and Luther was put to a test to meet the challenge.

29 The following listing of composers is typical. These composers were represented in the choral anthology “Symphoniae jucundae,” and repre- sent a cross section of the famous international composers of the day. Lutheranism was not afraid to teach fine music in the home and school, nor was it ashamed to bring the best music (even from non-Lutheran sources) as an offering of praise and thanksgiving in the liturgy. The biographical sketches were prepared for a modern study edition of the “Symphoniae jucundae”, Georg Rhau Musikdrucke, Vol. III, published jointly by Concordia Publishing House and Bärenreiter, 1959. pp. 193-202. See Appendix “B”. 30 “Preface to the Symphoniae jucundae” LW 53, pp. 321-324. This anthology contained 52 contrapuntal settings of sacred and secular texts, and was intended as house music, student music, and was also very likely used as liturgical music. The collection exists in a modern edition. See No. 29 above. 31 Classical Lutheran theological training included a very thorough study of the musical art and performance. Even so, the directors of music or Cantors were expected to possess a high degree of theological knowledge and acumen. This interchange of musical and theological knowledge is, unfortunately, no longer the case in the Lutheran educational system, as a brief perusal of theological seminary curricula will bear out. 32 Just as the Word of God was at the center of the divine liturgy, so also the liturgy was the center for the community of faith and education. As long as Lutheranism held the Word of God in high esteem, and education in that Word of primary importance, the liturgy was able to serve as a noble and beautiful framework. But when the Word of God came under attack (Rationalism) and education in that Word was placed in a secondary position (Pietism), the form and richness of the liturgy suffered.

17 Early in the 16th century a number of scholars attempted to create vernacular services.33 Luther was reluctant to try his hand at a vernacular service, for he realized a mere translation of Latin words and music would prove unsatisfactory. He knew that the vernacular service would be one of the great didactic productions of the Reformation; something “woody” and “ungainly” must not be given to the people. The vernacular liturgy must be a thing of beauty, grace, and clarity in both text and melody. So it was then that Luther, with the special aid of the musician Johann Walter, set out to create a vernacular setting of the divine service that was sensitive to quality as well as content. Luther did not abandon the high standards which the Wittenberg circle maintained at the city and academic parish. Rather, these standards led Luther to produce a liturgical program whose musical goals were even more ambitious than the multi-lingual liturgical program.34 For it was in the liturgy prepared for use in the envi- ronment bereft of choristers and scholars that the people (the priesthood of believers) would be called on to actively participate in every facet of the divine service. Here the entire congregation was called upon to perform the work of the choir. Here the congregation would sing the Ordinary and the Proper of the Mass. Here the congregation-tradesmen, farmers, parents, and children would sing the Matins and Vesper responsories and canticles. This was a most ambitious program of liturgical reform, unsur- passed even by the radical renovations imposed upon the Roman Catholic laity by the Vatican Council of the early 1960s.35 Luther was a linguist, and he understood the complexities of communication. The liturgical language would set linguistic standards (even as his translation of the Bible would do) of clarity; indeed the quality of the German Mass produced by Luther insured its use in both the academic and the non- academic setting, in both city and village, for the next two centuries. This linguistic clarity was essen- tial, so that “the young and the unlearned may be taught and challenged.”36 The catechetical facet of the liturgy was not lost to the Lutheran reformers. The liturgy of hymn, reading, and prayer taught. The liturgy of sermon and sacrament taught. Consequently, texts were carefully scrutinized, and Luther was very concerned that melodies chosen to accompany texts would serve well. A hackneyed re-working of the Latin melodies was not enough. The vernacular service needed melody that would serve and follow the accentuation of the language. The musical construction of the vernacular service was the object of a great amount of work by Luther and Walther; with the happy consequence that the high quality of the texts and the great worth of their Gospel proclamation precipitated the use of worthy, high quality music.37

33 LW 53, pp. 53-54. 34 The vernacular liturgy required the laity to learn the role of participation; and this participation was by means of musical forms that were of high standards; and these musical forms, for the most part, were memorized. The vernacular liturgy had high expectations for the presiding pastor or liturgist. 35 A study of the liturgy and music documents produced by, and in the aftermath of, the Second Vatican Council reveal the idealism of the church leadership along with an acute awareness that congregational music-making will not be an easy thing to introduce in many parishes. Twenty-five years after the council the work was yet to achieve successful status. 36 LW 53, p. 89. It is important to remember that the teacher, even in the liturgy, must challenge the mind and ability of the student so that he may grow in knowledge and ability. 37 Those who would argue that choosing music for the liturgy is largely a matter of personal taste are rarely schooled in the most basic aspects of music theory and history; nor do they have an understanding of the divine source of music, its objective, evaluative construction, and its important role as the servant of pure doctrine and good theology. The “musician” who seeks to compose in a musical style that will cause an immediate emotional, mindless reaction is rarely concerned with musical or textual integrity.

18 Whenever there was teaching, there was also a challenge. So it was that the vernacular service contained music that was challenging; music that would be studied, and through frequent use serve as an aid to textual retention and memorization.38 The vernacular Creed39 and Sanctus40 serve as fine examples of the Lutheran principles of liturgical and musical reformation. Both pieces have musical roots in the chant melodies of the pre-Reformation church. Both have texts that expand upon the traditional liturgical texts in paraphrases that explain and support the traditional framework of the liturgy and its relationship to the life of the individual and community. These chorales are difficult for today’s congregations (at least by contemporary “standards”), but when they are sung Sunday after Sunday after a period of introduction by the soloist or choir, then they become “the people’s music,” and they wed doctrine and life as they are sung in the corporate assembly and as they are remembered (even in the subconscious) throughout the week. Music that is easily learned is often easily forgotten. Music that must be taught, music that is challenging, will serve as a greater aid to memory. Such well-written music is a ready and eager servant of the Gospel. Such well-written music finds a place in the liturgy, for it will not grow tiresome with much use. Luther realized this property of well-written music, and the standards of quality and integrity exhibited in the vernacular service were easily equal to those of the Latin service. Without a doubt these - standards created the atmosphere within Lutheranism that led to the production of so many musical masterworks in the subsequent two and one-half centuries.41 Such musical and theological standards demanded theologians who were musically trained and musicians who were well versed in theology.42 As long as high musical standards and high theological standards were maintained the Gospel will be preached. The church must maintain these standards. When it has, it has been heal-thy and fruitful. When it has not, it has withered on the vine.

III. CONCLUSION AND CHALLENGE Luther loved the Word of God, Luther loved music. He saw that both were gifts that came from the hand of a loving Father. He realized that humanity was to take both gifts and be gracious stewards of

The great bulk of “contemporary Christian” music must offend the musician who understands the divine source of music; its texts must also offend the theologian who understands the divine source of doctrine. Quality music is not emotionless. The carefully constructed composition, will by virtue of its ethical and moral power, strengthen the textual presentation, and will cause an intellectual and emotional response. 38 Lutheran parochial education has always placed a great emphasis on hymn memorization as a means of doctrinal preservation and teaching. Where this practice is abandoned, an inevitable result will be doctrinal indifference and a loss of the confessional tradition. Where the great hymns and chorales of the church are not taught, they are replaced by something else, other texts and melodies that will be memorized and will eventually supplant the doctrinal and musical tradition of the church. An examination of any educational material produced by modern Lutheran publishing houses for use in the Sunday School, day school, or vacation Bible school will reveal the fact that the chorale tradition with its high musical and doctrinal standards has been replaced by music and theology that is at best embarrassing and insulting and at worse false and inadequate. Nonetheless, the modern “ditties” are being memorized, with a resulting doctrinal erosion that is as de- structive as any of the modern anti-scriptural “isms” that are proceeding from pulpits and seminaries. 39 “We All Believe in One True God, Maker” “Wir glauben all an einen Gott, Schöpfer” 40 “Isaiah, Mighty Seer in Days of Old” “Jesaia dem Propheten” 41 Modern ears have become accustomed to hearing the cantatas and motets of Bach in the concert hall or the concert setting, at the same time forgetting that these great masterworks were produced for the Lutheran liturgy and its Sunday after Sunday procession of proper and ordinary. The Lutheran liturgy was the inspiration for some of the greatest music western culture has known. It may one day again be this inspiration, but we must first be brought back to the clear understanding of the source and role of music, as ably presented by the Scripture and the writings of the Lutheran fathers. 42 The Lutheran Cantorate from the 16th to the 18th century bears witness to this training: J. Walter, Scandellus, Schein, Schütz, Pachelbel, Zachau, Buxtehude, and J. S. Bach are some of the musical giants whose training in theology allowed them to produce their masterworks for the liturgy.

19 those gifts. When man was a good steward of these gifts, he would be blessed and happy. When man was fortunate enough to be a good steward of both of these gifts at the same time, he was doubly blessed. Lutheran stewardship of God’s Word implies care and concern for all points of doctrine and preaching. Lutheranism is concerned with orthodox teaching; teaching that glorifies God, who is the Fount and Source of all our Comfort and Hope. Lutheran stewardship of the musical art also demands scrutiny and training on the part of the musician. Music is not merely an ornament in the divine service.43 While music is not a means of forgiveness, it is a divine gift that possesses unexplainable ethical and moral power. The Lutheran steward of music seeks to place that power in the service of the Gospel. The musician, as a caretaker of this unique and powerful gift from God, must possess great skill both as a performer and an evaluator. The musician must be equipped with the proper tools to judge and perform the music that will be used in the service of God, (which, for the baptized Christian is all music that he will perform to the glory of God…in the concert hall, in the liturgy, in the home, and in the school).44 Our age and culture does not produce stewards. We place great emphasis on PRIVATE ownership and INDIVIDUAL creativity. The servile nature of the steward or caretaker is not attractive Our stewardship of theology and music is not what it should be. “Contemporary” theology and “contemporary Christian” music are designed and executed for personal convenience, instant gratification, and egocentric satisfaction.45 Where is concern for the powerful Word of God that alone can free us from our sin to live forever? Where is concern for carefully constructed music that will drive away the spirit of evil and discontent?46 Within the conservative church our institutions of learning have never been so well equipped for the work of education. But where are the stewards? How is it that today’s academic parishes with their computers, sound systems, organs, pianos, choirs, and all manner of instruments must, for the largest part, hide their faces in shame when compared to the standards of liturgical proclamation found in the academic parishes of the 16th century?47 Where is the steward who seeks to serve God with a responsi-

43 The understanding of “ornamental” music stems from pietistic dualism in which creation can only be of the most minor influence in the spiritual life of man. Creation is seen to be so thoroughly evil that its use in the work of Gospel proclamation is suspect. Music in the liturgy is tolerated by this view, but it can never be on the level of Gospel proclamation that proceeds from the pulpit. This pietism also turns the sacraments into spiritual footnotes. This “ornamental” view of music does not really take into account the power of music; consequently any emphasis on quality of musical or textual construction fades away. In modern practice this ornamentalism is expressed in comments similar to the following: “As long as the pulpit doctrine is pure, it doesn’t really matter what or how the children or adults are singing in the choir.” This attitude actually drives fine music and art out of the sanctuary and into the concert hall. 44 Christian vocationalism understands that all vocations are sanctified by the presence of The Word of God in the life of the individual. A11 legitimate vocations, then, become Holy Orders in which the individual serves God, whether that service consists of preaching, teaching, music-making, stock brokering, mothering, fathering, banking, mowing the lawn, etc., etc. All music offered by the baptized musician is therefore offered to the honor or disgrace of God. Consequently, the pursuit of quality and excellence in any field by the baptized Christian is an act of worship, whether or not that “field” has specifically Christian or churchly association. A concern for quality and excellence, then, is a justified concern for any vocation. 45 The fact that much “Christian” music is offered in the liturgy with taped orchestral accompaniment is ample proof of the egocentric, self- gratifying nature of this music. The artificiality imposed upon any genuine musician by being forced to follow taped accompaniment and even “back up” choral singing will not be tolerated. In fact, such “musical” performances are as unethical in the liturgy as singing from ille- gally copied music. There is a place in the liturgy for authentic electronic music, but the artificial orchestra readily available from any publisher of “contemporary Christian music” is a barrier to the real work of music making. 46 I Samuel 16:23. 47 There are many composers who are producing music that-is of the standard of the compositions published by Rhau; we need only to avail ourselves of their products. The Distler, Pepping, Bender tradition is one place to start. The Hillert, Proulx, Arnatt school of American composition is another. The modern parish must realize the important role of the parish musician, and they should not be afraid to support their

20 ble use of the divine gifts of music and theology? Where are the stewards who will cultivate these gifts in the parishes where lack of choir and musician make didactic and challenging worship an elusive goal? Where do we begin? In the first place we must learn to acknowledge the Source of all that is good, noble, edifying, excellent, and beautiful. To learn this we must look first to the crucifix, the scripture inspired by the Spirit, the font, the altar, and to the forgiving and absolving minister of the Gospel. We must look to the heavens, the mountains, the vast oceans, the trees and animals, the invisible molecules and atoms. In the second place we give thanks as we recognize that we too are part of an endless parade of creatures who proceed forth from a minute corner of the mind of God. In the third place we must learn that all of this—the Word and Sacrament, the universe and our world, and even our “own” bodies and minds are gifts from a greater Force or Power than we can imagine. We look to the lives of the saints, and realize that we are but a part of a countless host of minds, talents, and bodies who have lived to glorify God; an innumerable multitude who fall down in humble acknowledgement, “You are God. We Praise You. We acknowledge You to be the Lord!”48 In the fourth place we must take our vocation seriously. We are called to take care of the Lord’s treasury. Our stewardship, given in Baptism, allows us to recognize that we are caretakers in ALL we do. We are not “mere” caretakers. We are investors who also share the call to do the BEST and MOST with what we have been given.49 There is no room for egocentric satisfaction. There is room only for hard work and selfless sacrifice. There is room to pursue excellence. There is room for study and for practice. There is room for discussion and learning. There is room for quality and integrity. There is time to be challenged and to challenge. Finally, we recognize that the work and characteristics of the Reformation are relevant and practi- cal, even today. The Holy Place is always waiting for a Hezekiah. The sacred vessels must be polished. The trumpets must sound forth, and the people will sing. Over and over and over again the doors of the temple must be opened so that we, and all the people, can acknowledge in faith and amazement what God has done for us.

musicians, especially financially, for the work to grow. In this way even young talented musicians might consider the church as a place where they can practice their vocation. 48 The Te Deum Laudamus. 49 Christians, of all people, should not be afraid to pursue quality and excellence. The quest for quality and excellence will in itself serve the Gospel as others are drawn to our communities of faith and learning because of the example we set. Let us boldly dare to take the talents we have been given and develop them to the best of our abilities. Theology, music, and life exist to give glory to the Almighty. Let us joyfully return to God what He has first given us.

21 APPENDIX A The Encyclopedia of the Lutheran Church. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1965. p. 2452 WALTER, JOHANN birth to Hans, Walter's only son (1527-1578), who later became a musician. J. Walter (also spelled Walther; 1496-April 24,1570) the A high point came in Waiter's life when, on October 3, first composer (Ukomponist) of the Lutheran church and the 1S44, the chapel of the castle Hartenfels in Torgau was dedi- advisor of Martin Luther in matters related to music. He was cated. Luther preached one of his most famous sermons on born either at Kahla or nearby Grosspuerschuetz in this occasion. This chapel was the first church erected among Thuringia. Here he was reared by Hans Walter, a relative Lutherans. For this occasion Walter wrote a five-part motet who served as his foster-father, since Johann was an orphan, for seven voices which was based on Psalm 119 Beati im- his family name had been Blankenmueller. Apart from the maculati in via. Following the example set by the Torgau Kan- fact that he attended the Latin school of his native city, very torei, Walter, after 1548, organized and directed the little is known regarding his schooling. Neither is it known Hofkapelle of Elector Maurice of Saxony who had transferred where he received his musical training. Through the influ- his residence from Torgau to Dresden. Because of difficulties ence of Konrad Rupff (Rumsch) the conductor of the Alten- he had with his eyes and because he did not feel thoroughly burg Hofkapelle of Elector Frederick the Wise of Saxony, he at home in Dresden. Walter in 1554 returned to Torgau became a member of this organization in 1517. The Elector where he still owned his home and where his son Hans sought to maintain a first-class Hofkapelle; he modeled it lived, who had married the daughter of Rector Crodel. after that of Emperor Maximilian I at Innsbruck and at times However, many of his personal friends had died in the in- engaged eminent musicians like Adam of Fulda (1446-1506) terim and so had Martin Luther (1546). While Walter re- and Heinrich Isaac (1445-1517). Composers represented in mained faithful to Luther's teachings and even defended the repertoire of Frederick's Hofkapelle included Arcadelt, them publicly, he missed his friends and particularly M. Willaert, Morales, Despres, Okeghem, and Obrecht. Luther. His last composition was Das christlich Kinderlied D. In 1524 Walter published his first work, his Geystliche M. Lutheri Erhalt uns Herr bei deinem Wort (Jena. 1566); it was Gesangk Buchleyn which included a famous foreword by M. based on what was likely Luther’s last hymn. On April 24, Luther and was published during Walter's life in five edi- 1570 J. Walter was buried in the Church of the Holy Cross, tions (1524, 1595, 1537, 1544, 1551), each new edition an im- the burial place of the Torgau patriciate. provement over the one which preceded. In many respects, Johann Walter fondly referred to himself as the Cantor this hymnbook was his foremost opus. It was intended for of the Torgau Kantorei, was happy to dedicate his life and the church, school, and home, but not for congregational work to it, and through it established his name in church singing. The book served as a mode1 for practically all sub- music history. He was very modest about his ability as a sequent collections of music prepared for the Lutheran composer; this did not add to his prestige, neither did M. church and its people. It was independent of the three Lu- Luther’s silence regarding Walter as a composer. (While theran hymnals which had preceded it in 1504 and was the Luther waxed enthusiastic about Despres and Senfl, he said first collection of music to appear in Lutheran circles for next to nothing regarding the musician who had been of which the music was selected and arranged systematically, such great help to him.) Men of Walter's ability were not though not according to the liturgical church year. It con- uncommon in the 16th century and we are apt today to ad- tained 38 settings of 30 hymns; 23 of these were by M. Lu- mire his work more deeply than did his contemporaries. ther. The collection included also settings of five Latin Nevertheless, Walter did exert considerable influence, as hymns. The arrangements were for 3, 4, or 5 voices, the tenor may be seen from the works of those who followed him (Le singing the cantus firmus. Maistre, A. Scandelli, and many others) . Though we cannot In large part because of the excellence of this hymnbook classify Walter with the top ranking composers of music Walter became the musical consultant of M. Luther. To- history, we are more aware today of his genius. He was mas- gether with K Rupff, likewise a native of Kahla, he spent ter of all contrapuntal techniques of his day and he was the three weeks at the home of Luther and the three worked out first to use Luther's translation of the Bible and other texts in the liturgical music of the Lutheran church. At the close of the German vernacular. His music is content merely to con- this period, J. Walter, at the request of Luther, took the music vey worship texts in tone and does not try seriously to inter- home with him for further perusal. Though Walter insisted pret them. His approach was therefore thoroughly liturgical that Luther had composed the music, it is not known how and like that of medieval plainsong. His models were De- many of Walter's improvements may have found their way spres, Isaac, Adam of Fulda, Rupff, Senfl, and Rener. To our into Luther's settings, e. g., of the "Words of Institution" of knowledge he composed church music only. Composers of his Deutsche Messe und Ordnung Gottis Diensts of 1526. Luther later generations followed his illustrious example, though consulted Walter also when he prepared his hymns. Oddly they also progressed further. His work related itself to the enough, we have no hymn melodies by Walter, but in LH we theology of his church. This is proved not only by his com- have his Advent hymn-text Der Braeutgam wird bald rufen positions, but also by statements he made, some of which ("The Bridegroom Soon Will Call Us." a part of his long have been preserved for posterity by M. Praetorius. Of Wal- poem Herzlich tut mich erfreuen) and in SBH his hymn, "Thy ter's works one may truly say that the chorale was the core Word, O God, Declareth." and center of their vast majority. He used canonic devices to In 1526 Walter became the cantor of the Latin school in reinforce their presence and use. His counterpoint was more Torgau and thus the first cantor of the Lutheran church. This closely related to that of the Gothic era than to that of the school served as a model for later Lutheran schools. The Renaissance. Through his use of the Latin language he re- fathers of L. Schroeter and M Praetorius attended this lated his work to the music of the Renaissance, but through school, as did also G. Otto the teacher of H. Schütz. Runff his use of the German language he went even farther back disappeared from Walter's scene probably because he sided and related his music to the Gothic era and to the future, to with the iconoclasts A. Carlstadt and Th. Muentzer and for the music of Schuetz Bach, and the many others who may be this reason was dismissed by the Elector. On June 26, 1526, J. counted among his musical descendants. Among his other Walter married Anna Hesse (1500-1571) of Torgau. She gave works, the following deserve special mention: his Passions

22 according to St. Matthew and St. John; his poem Lob und Preis der loeblichen Kunst Musica (1538); Ein schoener Geistli- Bibliography: Besides the standard musicological works: K. Ameln cher und Christlicher neuer Berckregen (1539); Magnificat octo and C. Gerhardt, Johann Walter und die aeltesten deutschen Passionshis- tonorum (1557), Ein neues Christliches Lied (1561). At the pre- torien. n.d.—J. D. v. d. Heidt, Geschichte der evgl. Kirchenmusik in Deutschland. 1926.—W. E. Buszin, “Johann Walter: Composer, Pio- sent time the Baerenreiter Verlag of Kassel and Concordia neer, and Luther’s Musical Consultant” in Th. Hoelty-Nickel ed., Publishing House of St. Louis are making available jointly a The Musical Heritage of the Church. 1946. G. Reese, Music in the Renais- Gesamtausgabe of J. Walter’s works. The task was begun in sance. 1959. 1943 by Otto Schroeder, since the time of his death (1946) it WALTER E. BUSZIN is being continued by Max Schneider.

APPENDIX B Rhaw, Georg. Musikdrucke aus den Jahren 1538 bis 1545 in praktischer Neuausgabe. Vol. III. Kassel: Bären- reiter-Verlag; Saint Louis, Concordia Publishing House, 1959.

Antonius (Antoine) Brumel probably came from the France, was active therefore in Orleans and Blois. At the French region of Flanders, where he was born about 1460. close of 1511 or the beginning of 1512 he died in Blois. In 1483 he was engaged as a singer with very definite du- Though he was one of the more important masters of his ties (precentor for certain horary worship services) at the time and his works were widely disseminated, hardly cathedral at Chartres. He was already then a clergyman. anything concerning his life has so far been ascertained. After he had been a canon in Laon, he became director of B. Kahmann, “Fevin (Févin), Antoine de,” MGG IV, cols. 142-146. the boys choir at the cathedral of Notre Dame, Paris, in 1498, but remained there only until 1500. In 1505 Duke Georg Forster was born in Amberg (Upper Palatinate) ca. Alfonso I. of Ferrara. tried to draw Brumel, sojourning 1510. About 1521 he was taken into the choir of the Hei- delberg ducal choir as a choirboy. Here he also attended then in Lyon, to his court as maitre de chapelle. To this day it has not been definitely established whether the com- the university. In 1531 he began to study medicine in In- poser accepted the very generous offer. Likewise the year goldstadt; in 1534 he attended the University of Witten- and place of his death are unknown. It is generally sup- berg and there came into personal contact with Luther and Melanchthon. He completed his studies in 1538 and went posed that he died at the latest in the 1520s, but this cannot give a clue to the place of his death. to Amberg to practice medicine. After a brief stay Joseph Schmidt-Görg, “Brumel.” MGG* II, cols. 398-402. (1541/42) in Würzburg he became physician in ordinary to Count Palatine Wolfgang. In Tübingen he received the Benedictus Ducis came supposedly from the region of degree of doctor of medicine. From 1545 to 1547 he was Constance on Lake Constance and was very likely born the city physician of Amberg and then settled perma- between 1485 and 1495. He lived for some time in Austria nently in Nürnberg, where he died in 1568. Forster is and Styria, but we do not know what position he held. In known above all as editor of a five-volume collection of 1532 an exiled or escaped Protestant. he looked for a pas- German part-songs, the first volume of which appeared in torate in Ulm. In 1533 he received one in Stubersheim near 1539. His significance as composer has been only partially Geislingen, Steige, but already in 1535 he became pastor of explored (from his own polyphonic compositions). His a parish at Schalkstetten. near Ulm, where he died at the creations of spiritual songs are practically unknown and close of the year 1544. therefore have not been critically evaluated. Hans Albrecht, “Ducis, Benedictus.” MGG. cols. 858-164. Kurt Gudewill. “Forster, Georg,” MGG IV. cols. 568-574. Hans Albrecht. Benedictus Ducis, Zwei Psalm-Motetten. Introduc- tion. (Musik alter Meister, Beiträge zur Musik- und Kultur- Lupus Hellinck came from the diocese of Utrecht. Date geschichte Innerösterreichs. Herausgegeben von Hellmut Feder- and place of his birth have so far not been ascertained. hofer. Fascicle 6.) Graz, 1957. From later data (e. g., on his change of voice) one can con- clude that he must have seen the light of the world about Matthias Eckel was a ducal revenue officer in Dresden in 1495. In 1506 he was taken on as a choirboy at the colle- 1516. Individual pieces by him give 1513, 1529, and 1537 giate church St. Donatian in Bruges. In 1511. he could as the years of their origin. So far neither the dates nor the leave Bruges (because his voice had changed) and engage places of his birth and death are known. Perhaps a student in study. Already in 1513 he was given a minor clerical matriculated at Leipzig in 1492 as “Matthius, Heckel de office at St. Donatian at Bruges By 1519 he was a priest Redwitz” is identical with Eckel, who would in that case and was installed at the church as a clergyman. have been from Redwitz. But all this is questionable. In In 1521 he transferred to the Notre-Dame Church in 1537 he composed a choral work (of which only a frag- Bruges as precentor. In 1523, however, he was given an ment has been preserved) commissioned by Duke Henry important musical office (Succentor) again at St. Donatian. of Saxony, who had early tone over to Lutheranism. Eckel, Here he remained until his death no doubt, belongs to the early Lutheran composers. Most On January 14. 1541, Hellinck was one of the best known of his compositions have been preserved only in individ- Netherland musical personalities of his time. This ac- ual voices or have completely disappeared. counts for Georg Rhau’s interest in his compositions, of Hans Albrecht, “Eckel, Matthias,” MGG III, cols. 1090 and 1091. which the widely used Holy Communion motet is found Antoine de (Antonius) Fevin was supposedly born in in the present collection. Arras about 1470. He served principally King Louis XII of Rhau. however. published no fewer than eleven polyphonic arrangements of hymns by Hellinck (1544). How * the composer—as precentor at a large Flemish church— Only the newest writings are given and only to the extent to which they came into the possession of these hymns and why he gave are fairly conveniently accessible to the users of this edition (MGG = „Die Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart“. Bärenreiter-Verlag). them a polyphonic setting at all is still not cleared up. It is

23 not impossible that Rhau commissioned Hellinck to do sur-l’Escaut. To this place he retired at a very advanced these pieces. age. In this small place on the Scheldt he is supposed to Hans Albrecht, “Hellinck, Lupus,”MGG VI. cols. 105-113. have died on August 27, 1521. Josquin is one of the all- time great masters in European musical history. His works Henricus Isaac according to his own statement, came from must have been a flawless model for his contemporaries Flanders and must have been born there about 1450. and especially for the younger generation after him. Nei- Though in German documents the German form of his ther before nor after him has the method of polyphonic first name (Heinrich) appears and elsewhere he is called setting so completely achieved a blending of lithesome. “Germanus” or “Tedesco.” he was not a German. He is almost floating melodies with a plastic use of motifs of the mentioned for the first time in 1474 and in Italy. He was a most tender expressiveness, something which is admired pupil of the famous Antonio Squarcialupi. organist at the in many of his masses and motets. baptistery (San Giovanni) in Florence. Already then Isaac Hellmuth Osthoff. “Josquin Desprez,” MGG VI, cols. 190-214. was recommended to the Duke of Milan as an excellent organist. Soon he had connections also with the court of Lafaghe (also de la Fage) is an almost entirely unknown Ferrara. It cannot, it is true. be proved that he was active composer. who was active in probably the first half of the there 1480-1482 with the famous promoter of music, Duke 16th century. We know him only from a few of his compo- Ercole I. d’Este. Perhaps the youthful musician became sitions, preserved in manuscript and printed collections of organist at San Giovanni, Florence, as early as 1475, after the 16th century. the death of Squarcialupi. Probably about 1480 he entered the service of the great Lorenzo de’ Medici (il Magnifico), Erasmus Lapicida is thought to have been born between instructing his sons in music. It is certain that at the begin- 1450 and 1460. To date it has not been determined whence ning of the 1480s Isaac was organist at San Giovanni and he came. He possibly was a native of the Austrian region then at the dome itself (Santa Maria del Fiore). After the adjacent to Northern Italy. He probably lived most of his death of Lorenzo and the expulsion of the Medicis from life in Italy, in the so-called Trentino. His closing days he Florence the composer went to the court of the German seems to have spent in the Schotten monastery in Vienna. emperor Maximilian I in Innsbruck, respectively, Vienna. Since he attained a great age and could have died only He was engaged as court composer, not as court Kapellmei- after 1544 or shortly before 1550, the time of his sojourn in ster. Hence, he enjoyed comparatively much freedom, was Vienna was not very brief. It is doubtful that he was ever often in Florence (he had found his wife there) and in known as Steinschneider (stone cutter) and according to other cities (Ferrara 1503-1505). His three-volume Opus, humanistic custom translated his name into Latin (once Choralis Constantinus, shows that he had personal connec- generally accepted as certain). Lapicida belongs to the tions in a German city (Constance). Isaac died in 1517 in earlier group of German masters, among whom also the Florence, and according to his wish he was buried in the famous musicians Adam von Fulda and Heinrich Finck Santa Maria dei Servi church. Isaac is one of the “great are numbered. The fact that his compositions were known Netherlanders” of the decades about 1500, whose early in Italy is accounted for by his having been creatively ac- creations are still rooted in the polyphony of the middle tive in Italy for a time. It is, after all, a most infrequent 15th century. We meet up with his works very frequently exception that works by German masters of the 15th and in German sources, also in manuscripts of the late 15th early and middle 16th centuries were known beyond the century, e. g., the so-called codex of Master Leopold of German-speaking regions. Innsbruck, Munich, Bavarian State Library, Mus. MS. Hellmut Federhofer, “Biographische Beiträge zu Erasmus Lapicida und Stephan Mahu,” Die Musikforschung, V (1952), 37 ff. 3154, or the manuscript from the Halberstadt Dome, Mus. MS. 40021 in the former Prussian State Library, Berlin. The Petrus de la Rue (Pierre de la Rue, de Larue), it seems was connection “naturally” was formed through Isaac’s close born about 1450. The place of birth is probably Tournai. associations at the emperor’s court and the German cities The translation of his name back into the Flemish van (the best known evidence in his song “Innsbruck, ich Stracten is found. In 1490 and 1491 he is said to have been musz dich lassen”). His creative work continued in an a member in the choir of Onze Lieve Vrouwen in ’s Herto- unbroken and direct transmission beyond the middle of genbosch. At this time he was a chaplain; in 1501, how- the 16th century. ever, he became a canon at the cathedral in Mechlin, that Hans Albrecht, “Isaac. Henricus,” MGG VI, cols. 1417-1434. is, he received the income of this benefice. From 1496 on

Josquin Desprez was born supposedly about 1440 in a he was in the service of Philip the Fair, duke of Burgundy, village not far from Cambrai and therefore came from a with whom he lived in Spain in 1502 and 1503 and where he was active in the choir of Valladolid. In 1503 he was French-speaking region. He was a choirboy at the Colle- given a prebend in Courtrai, but from about 1510 to 1514 giate church at St. Quentin and as early as 1459 was accepted as a qualified singer into the choir of the cathedral he was in Mechlin, later, for a short time, in Termonde. of Milan. Here he remained until 1472, and here began the From 1512 on he was one of Margarete of Austria’s favor- ites. She was the well-known regent of the German em- long Italian period in the life of this master. Only in his peror in the Netherlands. Several manuscripts de luxe at older years did he resume his residence in France. From 1473 to 1479 he was a member of the very famous chapel- Brussels and Vienna are a monument to her love of music. choir of the Sforza family of the dukes of Milan. From 1486 Pierre de la Rue died on November 20, 1518, at Courtrai. With Josquin Desprez, Jacob Obrecht, and Heinrich Isaac to 1494 he was connected with the papal chapel in Rome. he belongs to the chief representatives of the so-called Thereupon he was for a time in the service of Cardinal Ascanio Sforza. (Hence, also known by the name of Das- Netherlands polyphony. Especially famous were his canio, in Josquin’s composition in this Rhau edition.) In masses. He is considered one of the outstanding contra- puntists of his time. His very ingenious compositions are the years 1501-1503 the master was active in France. and in always cited as patterns for the art and skill evident in the 1503 he went to Ferrara. to the renowned Court of the Muses of the Este family. How long he remained there has “Netherlands riddle canons.” His great mastery in this so far not been learned. In any case he received in his field is the cause of the assertion (so far not substantiated) that de la Rue was a pupil of the great contrapuntist Jo- fairly advanced age a benefice as provost (dean) at Condé- hannes Ockeghem.

24 J. R. Sterridale Bennet. “La Rue, Pierre de,” Grove’s Dictionary of Already before 1521 he was in the service of Queen Anna., Music and Musicians, 5th ed., London. 1954. wife of Ferdinand I, as trombonist. From 1528 Mahu was W. Rubsamen, “La Rue, Pierre de,” MGG VIII. cols, 225 ff. (is not in the service of both. By 1532 at least he was assistant evaluated). director of music. Also in 1539 he is mentioned as such. Matthieu Lasson (first name not used in all the sources) After 1541 his name no longer occurs. Since he had bound was a choirboy in Cambrai and there received a stipend in himself to Ferdinand for life, he could have hardly 1517 to study at the University of Louvain, where he re- changed his position. He must, then, have gone into remained only one full year. Until now nothing concerning tirement shortly after 1541. The date of his death is not the year of his birth and his origin is known. From about definitely established. Among his compositions Lamenta- 1525 on he was a conductor for the dukes of Lorraine. In tiones Hieremiae especially attracted attention. They are 1544 he is mentioned as such in the service of Francis of found in the printed collection “Novus Thesaurms Musicus” Lorraine, it seems at the church of Bar. Further details by Pietro Giovannelli. Modem students have designated have so far not come to light. Nor is it known when and this work a forerunner of the Palestrina, style. That this where Lasson died. He doubtless belongs to the genera- impression rests on a traditional principle, which was ap- tion of composers born about 1500. Very little of his works plied to compositions based on the Lamentations of has been transmitted. It is all the more surprising that one Jeremiah (all other compositions of Mahu are pretty far of his compositions with his name is found in a number of removed from the Palestrina style), is today unquestioned. German sources. Rhau certainly erred in ascribing this The motet published in our collection also confirms this piece to Verdelot. judgment. Hellmut Federhofer, “Biographische Beiträge zu Erasmus Lapicida Johannes Lapi (Jean or Jeannet Leleu) came perhaps from und Stephan Mahu,” Die Musikforschung. V, 37 ff. Cambrai and. was born there in 1506. He was a choirboy at the cathedral of this city and in 1521 received a stipend Johannes (Jean) Mouton was a native of the vicinity of because he had come into the age of puberty (change of Boulogne-sur-Mer, very likely the village Samer. It is supposed that he was born there ca. 1475. About 1500 he was voice) and was now ready to take up his university stud- director of the boys’ choir at the cathedral of Amens. (His ies. In 1522 he was granted free quarters at the University of Louvain. He continued his studies there until 1526—a civilian name, by the way, was Jean de Hollingue.) Sup- rather long time in those days—and then returned imme- posedly he was a pupil of Josquin. But documentary evidence is lacking. During 1501 and 1502 he was active in diately to Cambrai, where he was given a curacy at the Grenoble, then later in Paris as a singer in the royal chapel. cathedral. Already in 1527 the “honorable young man,” only 21 years old, was named director of the chapel-choir. Here Willaert became his pupil. Mouton died on October During the next twelve years. up to the time of his death, 30, 1522, at Saint-Quentin. Even in his lifetime this master enjoyed great fame and a great reputation, and both have something is repeatedly said of his mistakes and his re- endured to this day. Mouton is one of the most important missness, and several times he was relieved of his post but always reinstated. Only ten days before his death he once personalities of the generation which was active between again resigned his office. On December 20, 1539, death the time of the Josquins, Obrechts, Pierre de la Rues and Isaacs on the one hand and the Willaerts, Gomberts, Ar- released him from an apparently chronic illness. Lupi cadelts, and Senfls on the other. His works were dissemi- must have been an excellent musician and choirmaster, and the cathedral authorities were reluctant to forego his nated in all the countries where music flourished at that services. In his thirty-three years the deceased created an time. His craftsmanship and the peculiar character of his style have again and again fascinated historical and musi- astonishingly large number of works, of which a consider- cological research, and at certain intervals new attempts able portion in the form of masses, motets, and secular songs has been preserved. Probably several of these com- have been made to fully appreciate him. Even though the positions are nor by Lupi from Cambrai, but by another attribution to him of only one of the two pieces named in our edition seems to be justified, this one is a characteristic master with the same name, perhaps an Italian. The most witness of the high quality of Mouton’s compositions. prominent of all French music publishers, Pierre Attaing- Charles van den Borren. Geschiedenis van de Muziek in de Nederlan- nant of Paris, issued a separate volume of compositions by den (Antwerp, 1948), I, 249/250. Lupi. the first edition of which probably appeared in the P. Kast. Zu Biographie und Werk Jean Moutons in Bericht über den master’s lifetime. We have, however, only one single copy Internationalen Musikwissenschaftlichen Kongreß Wien 1956, of the second edition (1542). In this printing we find also Graz-Kö1n 1958. S. 300 ff. the Mary Motet (No. 13), which Rhau erroneously as- cribed to Verdelot. Rhau, therefore, did not know of Ar- Johannes (Jean) Richafort supposedly came from Hainaut taingnant’s Lupi edition (including many motets in four to and is said to have been born about 1460. Accordingly, he eight parts). As did Lupus Hellinck, with whom because was a contemporary of Mouton. From 1507 to 1509 he was of similarity in name he is often mistakenly identified maitre de chapelle at St. Rombout in Mechlin. In 1531 we (Lupi—Lupus), so Lupi belongs to the class of able com- meet him as singer in the service of the regent of the Neth- posers whose best works were internationally known and erlands. Mary of Hungary, sister of Charles V and widow were spread over the musical world of their time. of King Louis of Hungary, who drowned in the battle near Hans Albrecht. “Lupus Hellinck und Jokannes Lupi,” Acta Musi- Mohács. She was a special Maecenas of music. Commis- cologica, VI (1934). 54. sioned by her Thomas Stoltzer, active at the court of Buda probably since the beginning of the 1490s, wrote his poly- Stephan Mahu is one of the many persons in German phonic German Psalms based on Luther’s translations. musical history of the 15th and 16th centuries to whom From 1542 to about 1548 Richafort was the singing-master research has given little attention. Both birthplace and at the church of St. Gilles in Bruges. It is supposed that he origin are entirely unknown. It is not even certain of died in 1548. which nationality Mahu was. That his name is very likely Charles van den Borren, Geschiedenis von de Muziek in de Nederlan- not German need not be pointed out. Mahu may have den (Antwerp, 1948) I, 249 f. belonged to one of the Slavic tribes living in regions which had come into the possession of the German emperor. Ludwig Senfl came from Switzerland (perhaps Zurich) and was a pupil of Heinrich Isaac while he was a member

25 of the imperial Hofkapelle. He was accepted when he was Hans Joachim Moser. Paul Hofhaimer, Stuttgart und Berlin. 1929. only a boy. He conducted the choir from 1517 to the death Philippe Verdelot, it is widely assumed, was a native of of Maximilian I. in 1519. The date of his birth is still not Flanders. But latelv it is maintained that he was a French- known, but it must be fixed at about 1490-1493. After a stay in Augsburg—probably very brief—where his name man. Of his ancestry nothing is known. At any rate. he was registered in 1520, he became Kapellmeister and com- spent the greatest part of his life in Italy. Here he was at first a singer under Willaert at San Marco in Venice, poser for the dukes of Bavaria in Munich. He discharged whence he went to Florence. There he became director of the duties of this position for two decades and died in 1543. He was recognized as the most important composer music at San Giovanni, the famous baptistery. No doubt of his time within the regions of German culture. Gener- Verdelot died before 1568. His first work appeared in print in 1526. This fact and the length of time he sang un- ally known are his connections with the duke Albert of der Willaert permit the conjecture that he was born either Brandenburg, the reformer of Prussian lands of the Order of Teutonic Knights, and, above all, with Martin Luther, shortly before or after 1500. Charles van den Borren, Geschiedenis von de Muziek in de Nederlan- who on October 4, 1530, from Coburg wrote him a letter den (Antwerp, 1948) I, 279f. which has become famous. The master responded to Lu- ther’s request for a motet on dying with the motet Non Johann Walter (in the sources contemporary with him, moriar sed vivam. most often: Johannes Waltherus or Walther) was a native Walter Gerstenberg, Introduction to volume 13 of Erbe deutscher of Thuringia, and according to an opinion, not unsup- Musik and to Fascicle 62 of the collection Das Chorwerk. ported, came from the vicinity of Kahla, where he was

Claude de Sermisy (in the sources almost throughout: born in 1496. He was Thomaskantor in Leipzig until he Claudin) was born shortly before 1490. His place of birth is was admitted to the Kantorei of the Elector of Saxony at Torgau as a bass singer. Already in 1525 he took over the still unknown. In 1508 the master was a canon at the Sainte-Chapelle du Palais in Paris, but he left, it is not es- conductorship of this choir. From 1548 to 1554 he held the tablished when, to take a position in the royal choir. Here, same position in Dresden for Maurice of Saxony, and then from 1532 to his death, he was assistant maitre de chapelle. returned to Torgau. where he lived in retirement until his death, April 24, 1570. In 1524 he made contact with Wit- In addition he was given the benefice of a canon at the Sainte-Chapelle and was once, in between, in Ferrara with tenberg and became Luther’s closest musical co-worker which court he kept up connections. He is one of the mas- and adviser. With his Geystlich Gesangk Buchleyn, 1524, he ters of his time, the sacred and secular works of whom are produced the basic collection of polyphonic setting of hymns. This was reprinted several times, each time en- represented by one or more examples in a number of sources. His chansons were world famous. Among his larged and altered until it boasted also an abundance of Parisian colleagues he was the acknowledged authority. Latin motets. Walter is recognized as the Lutheran “Ur- François Lesure, Anthologie de la Chanson Parisienne (Les Remparts Kantor.” His musical creations, insofar as they appeared [Monaco]. 1953). Notices. S. V. in print, were published by Georg Rhau. Wilibald Gurlitt, “Johann Walter,” Lutherjahrbuch, 1933. Crispinus a Steppen belongs to the representatives of the oldest generation within the Symphoniae iucundae. In the Adrian Willaert was born about 1480 in Bruges or in last quarter of the 15th century he was a member of the Roeslare, in any case, in West Flanders. He studied in papal chapel. His name already appears in Paris, became acquainted with Jean Mouton, and was in- Petrucci’s’earliest printings. About his origin nothing is structed by him in music. He soon gave up the study of known. But he must have come from some region in the law, returned for a time to Flanders, and then went to Italy Netherlands. On his life, too, no data have been transmit- (Rome, Ferrara, Urbino). In 1522 he was in the service of ted. the duke of Ferrara. In 1527 he was brought to Venice and made musical director at San Marco. In 1542 and 1556 Ruprecht Unterholtzer (most often: Rupertus Unterholt- Willaert revisited his homeland. He died in Venice on zer) came perhaps from the region of Salzburg. Of his life, December 8. 1562. Among his pupils are the famous Cyp- too, nothing is known. We know only this that he is de- rian de Rore and the most important authority on musical scribed as a pupil of Heinrich Finck. He very likely stud- theory of that time, Gioseffo Zarlino. ied with this master when he was choirboy at Salzburg Charles van den Borren, Geschiedenis van de Muziek in de Nederlan- and Finck was in the service of the bishop of Salzburg, den (Antwerp, 1941) I, 251 ff. hence shortly after 1520. Unterholtzer was a contemporary (Translated by Elmer E. Foelber). of Senfl, therefore born about 1490.