Questions to Ask About the New Hymnal Resources Project

Gracia Grindal

 

WordAlone was founded in response to the agreement of the ELCA with the Episcopalians on ministry. We argued that the new agreement violated Lutheran theology because it required something more than the Christ for unity with the Episcopalians: the historic episcopate. Since that time, the ELCA has been embroiled in debate over two other questions which go as deeply into our understanding of Scripture and Lutheran theology as any other:  sex and worship. 

 

WHO IS WRITING THIS NEW HYMNAL?

The ELCA’s nominating process tends to find only those people who agree with the commitments of the leadership.  Now a new hymnal is being proposed that has been prepared by a group of people who all agreed on CCM and the basic liturgical assumptions buried in CCM. 

 

WHAT ARE THEIR LITURGICAL

ASSUMPTIONS? 

The major theologian of this project, Gordon Lathrop, of the Lutheran Theological Seminary in Philadelphia, is a devotee of the liturgical revival who strongly approved of Called to Common Mission (CCM).  CCM, with its emphasis on who can do the sacrament, elevates the Lord’s Supper as the central mystery of the church and denigrates preaching (thus the widespread use of lay people to preach, but not to do the sacrament).  The new worship resources fully support this emphasis and are going to make visible and permanent this new theology in its new liturgies and hymns.  There is a rule liturgical experts repeat frequently, “how you pray will become the way you believe—lex orandi, lex credendi.”  If you can capture the hymnal and get your theology into it, it will, after some generations, become the theology of the people.  After some years, our people will have forgotten what true evangelical worship is all about because the new practices will become the content of their theology. 

 

WHAT IS RENEWING WORSHIP?

This project, called Renewing Worship (RW), involves more than the hymnal, it also includes new, revised worship services for the Lord's Supper, Baptism, Marriage, Funeral, Morning and Evening services, among others.  The changes being proposed for these services are major and deserve attention because they represent a departure from Lutheran theology and practice which, traditionally, has focused on God as the one acting in the service, not us (i.e., The Gospel is sheer gift.  We do nothing to make it happen).

 

MORE QUESTIONS

Here are some questions that need to be asked:

 

1. Why did the committee decide to sanctify the water in baptism, i.e., make it holy?  For example,

 

“At this font, holy God, we pray:

Breathe your Spirit into this water…” 

(see RW Volume 3, “Holy Baptism and Related Rites, p. 16; online at www.renewingworship.org/resources/baptism  )  .

 

In contrast, Luther, in his Small Catechism (see Baptism question #3, “How can water do such great things?”), clearly teaches that it is the Word that has the power, not the water.

 

2.  Why is the Lord’s Supper referred to as a covenant “characterized by self-giving love” between human beings and God?  (see RW vol. 4, “Life Passages:  Marriage,

Healing, Funeral,” p. 3; online at www.renewingworship.org/resources/life_passages )

 

This is troubling because a covenant requires that both sides keep their word and if I’m expected to be an equal partner with God in this relationship – I’m doomed.  Luther taught that the Lord’s Supper was Christ’s testament, i.e. the passing out of the inheritance of Christ to His heirs.  Lutherans believe that the sinner brings nothing to the Supper but a repentant heart (see “Small Catechism,” Holy Communion question #4).

  

3. Why has the committee added to the traditional prayers for baptism and how much longer a service will babies and their parents have to endure with this extra language?  For example:

 

“Holy God, holy and merciful, holy and mighty,

You are the river of life

You are the everlasting wellspring

You are the fire of rebirth.

 

Glory to you for oceans and lakes, for rivers and creeks,

Honor to your for cloud and rain, for dew and snow.

Your waters are before us, around us, above us,

Our life is born in you.

You are the fountain of resurrection.

 

Praise to you for your saving waters:

Noah and the animals survive the flood,

Hagar discovers your well

The Israelites escape through the sea,

And they drink from your gushing rock.

Naaman washes his leprosy away,

And the Samaritan woman will never be thirsty again.  Etc. etc.”    (from RW vol. 3, “Holy Baptism and Related Rites,” option E,  p. 16)

 

4.  It is possible, using the options, in the new proposed marriage service to avoid any mention of Genesis 1 or 2 (male and female he created them) or Mark 10 (“a man leaves his father and mother and cleaves to his wife”).  Is this gender-neutral language, with its lack of scriptural references, a preparation for a service of homosexual marriage?  For example, note the optional vows:

 

    I, name, give myself to you, name.

    By the grace of God,

    I promise to support and care for you.

    In the love of Christ,

    I promise to love and cherish you.

    With the Spirit’s help,

    I promise to be faithful to you,

    as long as long as we both shall live.

 

(from RW vol. 4, “Life Passages:  Marriage, Healing, Funeral,”  VOWS, option C,  p. 14.  See also marriage Supplemental Materials:  “Introduction,” options B and D, p. 12;  “Declaration of Intention,” Couple option C and Assembly option B, p. 13)

 

5. Why are so many hymns in the new resource book about what we do in the sacraments, i.e., “Break now the bread of Christ’s sacrifice,” (RW Songbook #177) instead of proclamations of the saving work of our Lord Jesus?

 

6.  Why did the committee decide to rid many hymns of any references to Christ as King, Lord, or God as Father?  As in “All Creatures of our God and King” (LBW #527) changed to “All Creatures, Worship God most high! Sound ev’ry voice in earth and sky”  (RW “Congregational Song: Proposals for Renewal,” p. #8)? 

 

Or the proposed change of “Praise to the Lord, the Almighty, the King of Creation” (LBW_543) into inclusive language for God:   “Sing Praise to God who has shaped and sustains all creation” (RW “Congregational Song: Proposals for Renewal,” p. #67)?

 

7.  There are no songs by John Ylvisaker in the Renewing Worship Songbook?  Why is that?  Which ones will be included in the new hymnal?

 

You might have many other questions, but these questions will get at the theological and hymnological issues at the heart of the controversies in our church today.   In the next issue, I will look at some of the reasons we are having these conversations about hymnody and worship in the ELCA today.

 

Editor’s note:  What can we do?   

   +  Bring these questions to your:

           worship committee, pastor, bishop

 

   +  Study the materials:    See box below

       for sources

 

   +  Study this subject.  Additional ideas

       in “Further Reading” at right.

 

   +  Offer feedback to the RW committee.     

       See below for contact info.

 

 

Gracia Grindal is Professor of Rhetoric at Luther Seminary in St. Paul, MN

 and a member of the Board for WordAlone

 

 

Further Reading:

• “Open Letter to the New Worship Hymn Resources Committee of the ELCA” - by  Grindal

             online at www.luthersem.edu/ggrindal/OpenLtr_GG_Dec2003.pdf

 

• “What is a Lutheran Hymn?” - by Grindal

              at http://wordalone.com/archives/daily_posts/2003_dailys/daily_12_19_03.htm